Idk abt you people...

The fact you just described the racist elements to this and you still can't see it is crazy, but let me spell it out for you:
Monkey = common insult for black and brown ppl (I really don't know how this wasn't obvious to you)

Plus making him a have a huge dick which feeds into the BBC stereotype which is harmful and dehumanising.

I hope this helped, if not you could always Google it.

The problem isn't that the plushie is brown. It's that monkeys have a long history of being used as racist caricatures against Black people. So when the monkey becomes a dark-skinned man and is also given features commonly associated with racist stereotypes, people are going to make that connection. Looking at each trait separately misses why people are uncomfortable it's the combination of those choices that's the issue.

you know why it looks like racism to you ppl? it's because you think of it that way...you put way too much meaning to it...again if ever the monkey was purple should the human counter part be purple? There are quite a few mangas/manhwas out there where their human counterparts stays true. One more thing to point out, was there even a word of insult directed to him at the point of story that his looks are bad or that his dark skinned?

That's not really how racial imagery works. People aren't "making it racist" by recognizing historical stereotypes. Context matters. If the plushie had been purple, there isn't a long history of purple people being compared to monkeys or portrayed with exaggerated physical traits. Dark-skinned people, especially Black people, do have that history, which is why the comparison carries different implications and no, a story doesn't need to have a character explicitly call him a slur or insult his skin color for the imagery to be questioned. Visual stereotypes can exist without anyone in the story acknowledging them. That's why people are criticizing the design itself, not the dialogue.

Also It's not about putting too much meaning into it. It's about recognizing that certain imagery has a long history behind it. People aren't adding meaning that wasn't there they're recognizing associations that have existed for a long time. If multiple people immediately make the same connection, it's worth asking why instead of dismissing them as overly sensitive. Historical context doesn't disappear just because you personally don't make that connection.

that's the point of putting too much meaning unto it...the story is pretty simple...as a brown skinned person i'm not even bit insulted and don't even recognize it as something racist or elements with racism...only a person who thinks too much and think highly of themselves thinks so that its racist...the elements might have coincides cauz its brown, do think outside the box and see the bigger picture rather than accuse the work as something racist just because it coincides to some historically racist event. I've already said if ever the monkey plushie is purple should the person be purple/brown/white which would be anatomically best suited? If the monkey is brown but turned white would'nt that be questionable? All i'm saying its staying true to what it should be anatomically, the author/artist maybe didn't mean to it to be a monkey, they maybe even liked monkey plushies.

side note: we evolved from apes (scientifically proven)

You just don't want to see it, you can make up all kinds of bullshit reasons for why this isn't racist all you want. I suggest you go and educate yourself on the history of racism and negative stereotypes associated with black and brown people. You're telling us to think outside the box but we are... That's why you can't identify that this body of work is racist, you keep thinking of the contents of the manhwa and not the whole thing together. The author had a choice, they did not need to make this, but they CHOSE to make something racist like this, they CHOSE to be ignorant, they CHOSE to use stereotypes associated with black men when making this character, this character did not just pop up somebody CHOSE to make this character and it wasn't "just a coincidence" that they thought it was okay to have monkey plushie turn into a melanated man, and that is what you're NOT seeing. Think outside the box.

You don't see it clearly because you're a shallow thinker, you don't think bellow surface level. Please change that character flaw of yours.

You're focusing on the author's intent and whether the design is "anatomically accurate," while people criticizing it are talking about the imagery and the historical associations it can carry. Whether you're personally offended isn't the point. I'm Black, and I can understand why some people recognize those connections and find the imagery uncomfortable, even if others don't have the same reaction. Different people within the same communities can have different perspectives. A story being simple doesn't mean people can't have valid criticisms or feel uncomfortable with certain imagery in it. The issue isn't whether the story itself is complicated; it's whether the imagery used can evoke certain associations for people. Your lack of offense doesn't invalidate someone else's discomfort, just like their criticism doesn't automatically mean the creator had harmful intentions. The point is to understand why that imagery can evoke those associations instead of dismissing people as "thinking too much" or simply looking for something to be offended by. Recognizing those connections isn't overthinking; it's acknowledging that imagery can carry meanings beyond the surface level. By insisting that it's "just a simple story," you're reducing the discussion to the surface-level plot while ignoring the deeper context behind the imagery people are responding to.

The fact that humans share evolutionary ancestry with apes isn't really the point being discussed. Nobody is saying that apes or monkeys are inherently negative. The issue is about the historical context of using ape/monkey imagery alongside certain depictions of Black people, because those comparisons have been used as a racist tool to dehumanize Black communities. Recognizing that history doesn't mean denying science or saying monkeys are bad; it means acknowledging that the same imagery can carry different meanings depending on the context in which it's used.....Dude, it feels like you're having a hard time understanding where the people who are genuinely upset in the comments are coming from. I'm not trying to be passive-aggressive or attack you I'm genuinely trying to explain why some people are interpreting it this way. Whether you personally see it or not, the imagery can carry racial undertones because of the historical associations connected to it. The point isn't that everyone has to feel offended, but that there is a reason why some people recognize those connections and are uncomfortable with it.