One thing I've noticed is people pointing out the fact that toxic male characters are still liked b/c they're hot MEN whereas toxic women characters are immediately villainized (may not apply to gl). Which I do completely agree with it. But I feel like an unintentional consequence of people tryna reverse this misogynistic mindset is by trying to superficially sympathize/simp over fls that are purposefully written to be unlikeable. like saying omg "she's too pretty to do this" sounds a bit idk fake...? it's probably more right to try holding toxic shitty mls/fls to the same standard instead regardless of gender. Like for ex: Yoona is obv written to be unlikeable or maybe a misunderstood character in this scene of the story.
rmbr it's OKAY to dislike female characters written to be unlikeable without u being misogynistic/not a "girls girl" (whtv the new tiktok slang is). Now ofc alot can be said about some authors who continuously making women "pick me"/"bitchy" but that's a diff issue.
OR maybe some people (me ngl) just like all well-written villlian characters regardless of gender, then this would not apply Lmfao
Real feminists and mature women will understand that women are not perfect. We are different individuals, any kinds of generalizations, even "good" ones, are misogynistic. If anyone tells you you're wrong for disliking a toxic or unlikable female character, they are just simply being an asshole. They're most likely young teenagers as well going through a phase. Good comment!
not reading all that but i support women's wrongs too
Besides the gender ordeal, it's just pretty privilege, nobody would stay near them irl even if they simp for them like crazy.
I also like villains, men or women, but I like them for having brains or principles (yesh, I can't relate with toxic villain srry). If I'm to justify evil, then first there must be a just cause or a brilliant mind.
But bfr, Yoona is just petty and petty villains don't make the cut with their IQ. If their only redeeming feature is their face than it's a really bad character.
YES! You managed to convey what I was trying to explain in a much cleaner and concise way, thank you :))
I know exactly what you mean! Nicely written and complex villian characters are so fun and interesting as opposed to the angel character imo. And, I agree that Yoona doesn't really fit that archetype and seems a little more shallow in her "villainess."
No this is so real cause all of this Yoona hate for what when Seyeong is more of an annoying ass bitch
If you think about it, they're only together like this because they're stuck in a shared environment and share similar circumstances (like many highschoolers). But what incentive to meet will they have once they graduate? As their relationship stands, once Haejoon goes off to some prestigious college and Eunyung finds local work, their paths have no reason to cross. It just so mf unfortunate to think about...
NOO DONT REMIND MEEEE
I WANT THEM TO BE FRIENDS TOGETHER FOREVER
the recent chapter already hurt me so bad, stop adding more salt to the wound
I think that's how the story ends tbh :( both will find their own path. The only thing that could get them together again are their common friends. Like, if they'll do a bbq or something, they'll surely invite both of them.
Yeah I could see that! And they'll probably hear about each other's lives through other people. But especially from our reader's perspective, it hurts SO much that they won't be each other's support system anymore
So true
this is just is so sosososossosos unfortunate... and the worst part is Eunyoung catching on almost instantly because of his own home life. It also surprised me when Haejoon took Eunyoung's suggestion seriously and immediately called his dad. All these awful circumstances that bring these two together is heartbreaking to say the least. It's in moments like these where you wish they'd lean on each other a bit more.
Nagasena (Buddhist philosophy): a chariot isn't constituted by just any single part (e.g., wheel, axle), nor the pile of parts, nor the assembly. "Chariot" is a conventional label applied by an observer. This is the idea of anatta (no-self): the self is equally a convenient label, not a thing with inherent existence (e.g., the myth of a soul). Thus, if selfhood is observer-dependent, then who you are is constituted by how you're perceived.
In that case, it inverts Descartes philosophy: instead of self-certainty grounding existence (I think therefore I am), others' cognition of you grounds your existence. Leading to author Mayuzuki’s quote: “He thinks therefore I am” (Kowloon Generic Romance, vol. 7, ch. 59).
Consider this. Nagasena asks: Is the chariot real if no single part is the chariot? The manga literalizes this: Reiko is an exact copy of a dead woman, living someone else's life, with no memories of any existence before Kowloon. She is assembled from parts of another person. So is she a chariot (a real person), or just the parts of one?
Kudou is the one who built the generic Kowloon: the city only contains things he knows about. He literally willed the world Reiko exists in into being (“he thinks”), so Reiko's existence is not just perceived by Kudou (the observer), but it is constituted by him (“therefore I am”). She does not merely become herself through his gaze, without it, she would not exist at all.
Thus, Reiko has no self to speak of except the one designated by another.