reygrey666's Topics (50)

Wait there’s no baby for sure?

Yep, I remember the story ended right after mc and ml confessing their feeling to each other for the first time. No lovey dovey, no wedding, no any child, no side story. Just ended like that :(

No in chapter 99 he found out he was pregnant, so the pregnancy is confirmed but for now it ended after confessing...just no baby or baby bump shown

I think you're right. Reading raw make me missed some point. :(

Missing script ? This whole damn manhwa is missing the script entirely lol

I think this is why novel adaptation mahwa is better than original story manhwa :(

WHAT?? SO HE HIRED A SIDE CHICK BECAUSE HE WAS JEALOUS yea thx for saving me i'm not reading this

No, not really. Before seme sleeps with uke, it was seme's (and many other demon alpha) routines to visit that "red light district" bar and sleeps with omega prostitutes. Seme often had drinks while cuddling with prostitutes while uke only drinking alone at bar counter from afar.
Weirdly, after he had many sex with uke, they eventually visit that bar and seme just "imma go drink over there" and comfortably and unconsciously called omega prostitutes to accompany him like always.
After he said uke is "his omega" and uke already told him before that he hate alpha who sleeping around, idk why tf he let his playboy's instinct to did that idiotic shit, accidentally make uke jealous and uncomfortable and leave with beta.
What right does seme have to be all jealous while he surrounded by bitches himself?

Ok lol uke had to still pretend he wasn't omega that why they had to act normally in the bar wtf lmao. No one could find out they were together hence the bitches at the bar. Did we read the same story?

However the story was still annoying af! It would have been great if the story was as good as the art! Ugh...

Oh, I think it's my fault. Sometimes i fast read some dialogue when the story sucks but still wanna know the ending. Yeah i agree with you

I was about to comment this. It's funny lmao. Playboy seme and Virgin Uke. Saying the uke is his omega but still cuddling with women in the bar. I should have read further in the comment section before reading this.

Understandable when there's an annoying trope sometimes blurrin past the bullshiiiizzzzz is the only way to make it to the end without just given up on it!

I mean they weren’t together and neither confessed to each other when he went back to the bar.

What glasses dude?

Oh, I think he's not appear yet. I forgot which chapter tho

I wanna know too.

You got me laughing with this then I go read it too. And you're right they fkd up. Haha. Good for me since I found it somewhere with the right summary.

Do you mind eating bad food? or when the food is bad, you just say the food is bad? Or you look for excuses for the ones who gave you e-coli? You don't need to be an artist to know if you like an art or not. In the same you do need to be cook to tell if your food is bad or good.

In short, Appeal to emotions is a fallacy and fallacious arguments are not valid. Critics are okay, hate speech is not. Nuance.

It's okay to criticize anything, but I wanna give 2 reason why I don't like their critics about the art.
1. The art is good, if you compared it with many free comic on webtoon (I can't even draw with the same quality like this mahwa tbh)
2. Criticize the art on illegal site sounds like "choosing beggar" to me
Bad free food gave you diarrhea for sure, "bad" free art gave you nothing but a little discomfort in your mind

I apologize if it is too long. You can just read the first sentence and last paragraph of each point for further concision.

1. Disagreement on matters of taste is natural and subjective; it is not like you are right or they are wrong. The argument that one’s skills in a particular area should disqualify them from offering criticism is flawed. Competence in execution is not a prerequisite for valid critique. For instance, gastronomic critics aren’t Michelin chefs, yet their insights are valuable. Similarly, voters need not be economists to critique economic policies; fair critique depends on reasoning, not mastery. Judges assess performance based on its execution and quality, not the effort or sacrifices behind it. While hard work is admirable, it doesn't exempt anyone from critique or elevate a subpar result.

Personally, I kinda like the art and I can draw. My skill here has nothing do to with me finding the art remotely decent. Expertise or skill can inform perspective but doesn't dictate taste.

As long as they partake on respectful rhetoric and does not slander individuals, critics are fair. If people unable to draw are not qualify to critic art, what makes you qualify to assess it as good then? You can't draw. What would you know about good art? Sounds unfair?

2. Whether food is acquired fairly or unfairly has little to do with its quality; access and quality are separate issues. Access does not determine whether the food is good. People debate the quality of the food itself. Dismissing someone’s opinion based on how they accessed something undermines your own, as you likely accessed it similarly.

If you spend time criticizing others for their opinions on art, you’re doing the same thing you accuse them of—rendering judgment. Feeling irritated at their dislike is no different from their displeasure with the art itself. Perhaps it’s better to ignore them, as they’re merely sharing their views, not targeting you. Just as you can say the art is good, they can say it’s bad. No one holds the moral high ground here.

3. The expression "choosing beggar" is both misleading and problematic. The phrase unfairly implies that those in need should accept anything without question, as though they lack the right to agency or basic standards. It doesn’t highlight a supposed moral failing in the recipient but rather underscores their lack of access to options.

I was surprised when a beggar once refused some of my extra groceries, but it hit me: just because something is free and they’re in need doesn’t mean they’ll take anything. It was presumptuous to assume what I find decent would suit everyone.

Legally and ethically, everyone, including those experiencing poverty, has the right to dignity. No one is obligated to accept substandard offerings, and even if they do, they are not required to ignore its flaws or displeasing state.

Nah, this is illegal porn site. I think this isn't the right place to talk about dignity here. And if you want criticizing the art, better go to artist's twitter and give your piece of mind about it. But imagine if you got criticism from ppl who got your work illegally, feeling sh*t right? Worse than your displeasure about the art you see for free.
I'm very thankful for everything I got here. And bc I don't contribute anything to the artist, the only think I can do is to never criticize their arts. I think I don't have any right to do that. :(

Since you state having no right, don't complain at all. At least, they complain about something, instead of people. Right now, I have an issue with this flimsy case of yours; I don't even have an issue with the art.

You can criticize the Joconde without ever paying for the Joconde and going to the Museum. You know why? Because there is no need to conflate access and appreciation. The right to criticize (free speech laws) has little/nothing to do with the right to access (IP laws). You might get in trouble for the later, but not the former, unless you partake in hate speech, harassement and diffamation-like issues.

You last two sentences are actually incorrect, legally speaking. In this case, by not contributing anything to the artist, what you don't have the right to do is to consume their work. Again, IP laws and speech laws are two different issues. Besides, laws allow the use of copyrighted materials for purpose like criticism—you know, those little "Fair Use" that y0tub3ers use in their disclaimer. Moreover, free speech (including criticism) is warranted by the Article 19 of the Human Rights (UDHR). So, the real problem here is not criticism (Speech) but consumption (IP). There is no legitimate ground to stop critics.

Instead, what you are trying to do, it is attempting to POLICE SPEECH BY CANCELLING NEGATIVE REVIEWS (or those which disagree with your perception of things)—clearly, not very open-minded of you. And since you have no rights, per your words, for starters, you are even less legitimate reasons to police speech unless in violation of guidelines. Currently, you are just forcing your values on others.

Furthermore, your argument also leans toward hypocrisy:
- You can't draw. So you are not qualified to judge art.
- You are here. So you are not entitled to your own opinion.
- You discourage critics. Yet you fuel critic-ception.
- You police speech. Yet here you are expressing yourself freely.
- You condemn a crime. Yet you are thankful for the crime.
- You suggest people to address critics to the author directly. Yet, you are displeased with people criticizing her work to her face as they got it on their own accords.

This is the recipe for an argument to invalidate yourself. Since you came with the premise of having no rights, this self-defeating stance conveniently absolves anyone from engaging with the argument, as it disqualifies itself from the outset. Well, typical of moralists. If people wanna criticize, they will and they shall. If you don't like it, well too bad. At the end of the day, by your own logic, you don't have the high moral ground. Hypocrites rarely do anyway.

And the dignity clearly applies to the misused saying: "choosing beggar". Since you have a thing for legality, I was simply putting the saying in legal frame. Beggars have right to dignity. If dignity does not apply here, use better expressions, because beggars have agency—fewer options, but they can still choose.

Finally, this leads us to you relinquishing one of your fundamental human right and expecting others to do so as you believe to be self-righteous. If you find the nature of this website scandalous, maybe you should worry more about your consumption here rather than the critics—one is clearly more problematic than the other.

Sigh.

Well, I can't argue with that tbh ¯_(ツ)_/¯
But lemme give you my last reason, not only this manhwa, but before, I stumbled upon many comments about people's dissatisfaction about the art in other comics like "the arts so generic, why many artists keep drawing like this nowadays?". I can't understand, the arts are so good, (even if I can draw or not).
I don't know how many high end quality art they ever consumed to think like that. That's kind of comment always irks me, no matter what.
Able to make a whole comic like this are highest level of "I can draw anime people". The comic like this need ultimate determination, more energy, helper and months even years to be finished, and people goes on like that, in illegal site at that?.
Nope, I am total hypocrites who can't accept to see that kind of criticism. Never. :(

Personally, I don't mind the art. It is pretty standard. I even find some characters pretty.