Just to make one thing clear, it's not illegal for a German officer, let alone an undercover cop to carry a knife. I don't know how this anon came to this conclusion but it's just not true. You're not allowed to carry a certain type of knife or knives with a long blade but even that doesn't apply to people who have a proper reason for carrying such knives. And even if he had such a knife, being an undercover cop who needs it to protect himself is a proper reason for carrying knife with a long blade (I think it was longer than 12cm).
Cops usually don't use knives because, you know, guns are normally better than knives but it wouldn't be illegal for them to have a knife.
Seriously, that's one of the weirdest discussions I've ever witnessed.
Reading through some of the discussions here I can't help but wonder what purpose "reading" the raws even has. It's one thing to look at them when a story is just jokes and sex but we have an actual plot here. You don't know what is truly going on or what the characters think until you really read it. Just looking at the drawings is useless when it comes to things like this.
People look at the drawings, they make up their own story based on them and when the translation is released they're already so biased that they barely care about what's actually written anymore (as long as it doesn't contradict their pov completely).
Look at the comments. Every single person who (passionately) defends Yanek is someone who "reads" the raws. On the other hand the people who only read the translation feel at best sorry for him but that's it.
When you discuss the raws even though you can't read them you're basically having a discussion about a series based on fanfiction. And not even the same fanfiction because everybody sees something (at least slightly) different in the drawings.
Having a proper discussion under these circumstances is almost impossible because we don't read the same story.
By the way this isn't just a problem here. This happens all the time especially with webcomics and it almost always has a negative effect on the overall discussion.
It has gotten so bad that makes me happy when there are no raws available.
This is getting an anime. It's supposed to air this year but they haven't announced a season yet.
I wrote a long text with detailed spoilers but then I accidentally deleted it. I'm too lazy to write all of it again so here's the short version.
Doochi (Hakdo's friend he has a crush on) is single again but Hakdo acknowledges that they shouldn't start a relationship because they have nothing in common. Generally speaking the atmosphere between Hakdo and Sangho has gotten more romantic over the last few chapters. Sangho's ex seems to really want Sangho back and tries to be less of a jerk (with varying success) and he seems to plan something.
Sangho reflects a lot on what he wants from a relationship and how he behaves.
Ahhhh I really really need see it! I’m dying, I can’t wait any longer ╥﹏╥
Why do we have to go through this every other week?!
Stop spoiling the story without any warning. Is it really that hard to understand? Is it really too much to ask to write "spoilers" at the beginning of your post?
Even if I avoided the comments here (which is something I do btw. I don't participate in the discussion anymore because of all the people who spoil the story) I still stumble across them at the front page. I don't know how often some anon has spoiled the story for me just because I forgot that I can't even look at the feed anymore without getting spoiled.
This week it happened again.
At least some people mention the chapter now, which is similar to a spoiler warning, but we still have other anons just spoiling stuff within the first sentence of a new topic without any warning at all.
So to all the people who think it's okay to post spoilers all the time:
Stop being so selfish. Stop spoiling the story and ruining the discussion for the people who only read the English translation (on a site that only offers the English translations) just because you think writing "spoilers" is too much of a hassle.
Stop discussing chapters that are not uploaded here . You want to discuss the Korean chapters? Then go on a site that actually has the Korean chapters. Go to a Korean site and discuss it there.
No spoiler warnings, anons posting spoilers from the Korean version in discussions that are clearly about the English chapters and endless topics made by people who make assumptions based on the things they saw in the raws (because they can't read Korean). How in the world are you even supposed to discuss the series like this? From the moment you decide to read the comments you get spoiled without a warning from people who looked at the raws.
This is the same as people posting manga spoilers in an anime discussion.
This, please.
I don't really have a theory right now but I just remembered the last few panels of season 1. We see Ein and Diesel in the bathtub talking about love and Diesel asked if they should go to Siberia too but Ein thinks it's too risky. He ends the conversation with "no matter what's out there" and then we see a snowy landscape with probably two werewolves in it.
I'm pretty sure that's somehow connected to the story that is currently going down but I have no idea how. I know that back when it was released some thought they were Diesel's parents but we know now that this isn't possible. Does anybody have a new theory on who they are?
I don't like talking about pedophilia on the internet but I feel like it's time to talk about it seeing how nobody seems to understand the psychological aspect of it or the laws concerning pedophilia and know only the definition of it.
Is pedophilia a crime?
No, it's not. Pedophilia is a sexual preference. You don't commit a crime by simply having it (although I don't know the law of every single country in the world).
When does a pedophile commit a crime?
It's illegal to have sex with children because (as far as we know) children can't give consent. Therefor having sex with a child is automatically rape. This means that even when an adult manages to manipulate a child into thinking that they want it, it's still rape and a crime.
You should also keep in mind that children have no sex-drive (as far as we know) which is another reason why having sex with children shouldn't be allowed.
(I'm not gonna talk about classifying and owning child pornography because it's too hard to explain and not important right now.)
Is it a mental disorder/mental illness and why?
Yes, it is. A mental disorder is, to put it simply, something that influences they way you think, feel etc. in a way that affects your everyday life so dramatically that it causes serious problems for you. Being attracted to children means never being able to have sex, watch porn etc. without committing a crime and that's a serious problem.
That's why ephebophilia doesn't have to be one. In the USA for example the age of consent can be somewhere between 16-18 (or even lower) which means that it would be legal for a 40-year-old to have sex with a 16-year-old (as long as they have sex in states where this is legal). The 40-year-old doesn't have any significant problems because of it and therefor doesn't suffer from a mental illness.
Why is someone a pedophile?
I can't really answer that because we don't know yet. Actually, there's barely anything that can be said about human sexuality with certainty.
However, that doesn't mean that every pedophile is the same and a lost cause anyway. There are ways to help them (e.g.the country I live in has a nationwide program that teaches them how to live without committing a crime). Most of them don't like being a pedophile, are fully aware that having sex with children is wrong and suffer because of it but they can't ask for help because it would ruin their lives to be a known pedophile. Some even go as far as to chemically castrate themselves to kill their sex-drive.
Of course, there are also people who have this kind of preference because of something that happened to them and then it can be "healed".
However, those kind of people are only easier to treat on paper because there's one big problem: In order to help someone they have to acknowledge the problem and be willing to receive help.
In my opinion, a sexual predator who continuously harasses people and doesn't stop because he sees nothing wrong with it is a bigger threat to society than a pedophile who doesn't want to be one because he knows how wrong having sex with children is and seeks help.
And to write at least a few sentences about the webcomic:
That's why I despise blondie so much. He hasn't changed at all. He still sees nothing wrong with his behavior and he still has no interest in adults. I don't care how nice he sometimes acts. I want to see true regret, a true change of heart. I want him to realize what he did. And no, simply starting a relationship with his adult friend wouldn't be enough.
I didn't drop this story because it didn't treat the predator like most other BL stories. The last thing I want to see right now is the typical "I was healed by having a relationship" nonsense.
One last thing: Saying it doesn't matter whether he's a pedophile or an ephebophilia is not the same as saying harassment is the same as rape.
Because the first one is not a crime while the latter one is. It's more like saying a psychopath is the same as a sociopath.
"saying it doesn't matter whether or not he's a pedophile or an ephebophile is not the same as saying harassment is the same as rape"- But it is, because you left out a crucial piece of information here. In EVERY definition of pedophilia you'll find, it specifies "prepubescent children". Pedophilia is aimed SPECIFICALLY at prepubescent children. Ages 13- refers to the fact that, generally speaking, puberty hasn't started yet at that age range. Pedophilia is a SPECIFIC thing, targeting an age range. Rape is a SPECIFIC thing involving SPECIFICALLY forced penetration. Both are SPECIFIC things with people trying to include things in them. Involving ephebophilia in pedophilia makes no sense as ephebophilia 1. Isn't classified as a mental disorder like pedophilia. And 2. Is targeted at ages 15-19, well after puberty has started.
"why is someone a pedophile? We don't know"- Yes we do... Pedophilia is targeted at a specific age range, meaning, if your affection is targeted at children within that age range then you're a pedophile. You're creating myths yourself. Your problem is that you left out the age range, literally the most important part.
I hope everybody sees that youraedthiswrogn misunderstood what I wrote again. I don't see the point in explaining what I wrote to them again because doesn't matter how often I do it they seem to be incapable of understanding my posts (like how they confuse the cause of pedophilia with the definition). Besides I already told them that I didn't want to have a discussion with them and they blocked me anyway so I really don't understand why they still try to talk to me whenever they can.
Should anybody else have problems with understanding what I wrote I'll happily answer every question they have. English isn't my mother tongue so it's possible that some of the things I wrote are hard to understand.
I didn't "misunderstand" anything. You left out the age range because you want to make the argument that anyone older hitting on a minor isn't pedophilia.
I didn't "misunderstand" anything. You left out the age range because you want to make the argument that anyone older hitting on a minor is** pedophilia.
Also, you keep mentioning that i blocked you, but you can still respond fine. It's useless information unless you're trying to defame me with it. Is that it?
with pedophilies and ephebophilies they can both be classified as someone who is sexually attracted to a MINOR... whether theyre 8 or 15 you should not be having any sexual attraction to anyones who is not an adult. the fact that the author included how struck seunghee was by realizing the gravity of the situation, emphasizes just how wrong it really is, no matter whether the age group.
That isn't the point. Yes, both are bad, one is worse and despite what people want to believe, words are important. Especially important words that don't need watered down like pedophilia.
That's true and I agree that the author wants us to dislike him. Another user, Yurricane, wrote a pretty good analysis about his character a few days ago http://www.mangago.zone/home/mangatopic/3658689/
That's basically how I see him as well.
And that's also why think that when we talk about this story we should separate being attracted to children from being attracted to under-aged teenagers because it would've been written differently if he had been an actual pedophile.
E.g. Blondie can be way more open about his preference than a pedophile. His friend might stop him when he goes too far but the chatrooms he uses to prey on lonely minors aren't illegal and actually quite normal.
He can also be a lot more subtle when it comes to manipulating his targets.
Besides, I'm pretty sure there wouldn't be that many people feeling sorry for him if he targeted children instead of teenagers. And that's important because in my opinion blondie is supposed to show us that a predator is still a predator even when he looks and acts pitiful.
However, I can understand why people are getting tired of hearing about the difference between pedophilia and ephebophila. Everybody who's brought up the difference between them did it (at least at some point) to defend the blonde guy and not because the difference is actually important to them. Even the person who first brought it up, admitted that they had to google it. So basically nobody here knew the difference between them until they could use it to defend a character and now they're complaining about the people who only know the word pedophile like they were any different a few days ago.
We all know that people only use the word pedophile because "Ephebophilia" is not part of their vocabulary. Let's stop acting like we don't know what they actually mean.
Alright, youraedthiswrogn is now trying to spread misleading information.
I can't reply to because they blocked me. If anybody's interested here's a link
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-age-of-consent-in-Korea-in-a-position-of-trust
The second most important part:
Consequently, even though the ACT ON THE PROTECTION OF CHILDREN AND JUVENILES FROM SEXUAL ABUSE clearly states that it is considered rape when a person who is older than a juvenile engages in a sexual intercourse with the juvenile,[63] many Westerners are misinformed about this law because of ambiguous translations. Again, the ACT ON THE PROTECTION OF CHILDREN AND JUVENILES FROM SEXUAL ABUSE clearly states that a person who is under 19 and will not turn 19 in the year in which the act is committed is considered a juvenile. (Korean age reckoning is never used in South Korean laws therefore the age of consent in South Korea is 20 in Korean age.)
The MOST important part:
In South Korea, judges have right to interpret the law and this is how the majority of judges interpret the ACT ON THE PROTECTION OF CHILDREN AND JUVENILES FROM SEXUAL ABUSE.
So could someone like blondie end up in jail for having sex with someone like the MC? The answer is probably yes, unless they're judged by someone who doesn't agree with the majority.
I literally provided a case, you're just misinterpretting the laws. I can understand why, it says one thing and works out another way.
It's your word vs the local law student i provided. I trust the local and the case proving everything i said.
Read again and then reply because the case you posted doesn't contradict what I posted.
Oh, and either block me and don't reply to me or don't block me and reply to me because what you're doing right now is extremely disrespectful. You want to reply to my posts but I'm not allowed to reply to yours.
You replied to me 1st... And you can reply to yourself to reply to me.
Read your own source, the person even admits in the short answer "the age of consent is 13".
The rest is technicality. If the accused can give definitive proof it was consensual, that's it.
You have to read everything. There's more than just the short answer there's also
The second most important part:
Consequently, even though the ACT ON THE PROTECTION OF CHILDREN AND JUVENILES FROM SEXUAL ABUSE clearly states that it is considered rape when a person who is older than a juvenile engages in a sexual intercourse with the juvenile,[63] many Westerners are misinformed about this law because of ambiguous translations. Again, the ACT ON THE PROTECTION OF CHILDREN AND JUVENILES FROM SEXUAL ABUSE clearly states that a person who is under 19 and will not turn 19 in the year in which the act is committed is considered a juvenile. (Korean age reckoning is never used in South Korean laws therefore the age of consent in South Korea is 20 in Korean age.)
The MOST important part:
In South Korea, judges have right to interpret the law and this is how the majority of judges interpret the ACT ON THE PROTECTION OF CHILDREN AND JUVENILES FROM SEXUAL ABUSE.
Do you know what "the short answer" means? It means it's a condensing of the long answer.
But I can only reply to you when you're not the one who made the topic. Do you not see why it might come off as disrespectful when you don't want me to reply to you're topics but you still reply to mine? Of course I could block you as well but that's not something I do.
But i feel like you're going to start spamming my comments... You just did with my last and you just made a separate topic to respond to me.
Well I responded to your comments. That's how it works. Replying to what you write is not spamming.
I'm sorry but this ends her. I'm running out of patience with you. The article clearly says that having sex with a minor can be considered illegal although it doesn't have to be but most judges rule that way. The short answer given doesn't make the rest of the article wrong because it doesn't contradict it.
I don't get why you don't understand it and I don't know any other way to make you understand or how to explain to you that you have to read the entire article and not just the first sentence.
Sure (￣∇￣")
You weren't up for discussion, what i mean by spamming is that i dont want you arguing with me at every chance you get.
I didn’t really want to reply to all of this, because you keep bending your arguments in a way that are hard to argue against, and arguing about morals is hard, but I have a debate in class soon so this’ll be good practice. This is going to be long.
Ok, maybe he isn’t a “pedophille”, maybe in the legal aspect of all this he didn’t do anything wrong and wouldn’t be put in jail. But does that make what he’s doing, ok? Is it ok to manipulate and groom teenagers? You seem to interpret his intentions as out of love, instead of anything deviant, so let’s talk about his intentions then, since you seem so adamant on defending this guy.
At first you agree that blondie isn’t a great guy, and that it’s horrible that he sent a dick pic to a middle schooler, but then you go on to say that his intentions might be good? It is proven that he likes younger boys, he sent a dick picture to a kid, legal or not, they’re still a kid if they’re in middle school in South Korea (12-15). Why would you send a sexually explicit photo of yourself to someone (in this case a child) if you don’t want to engage in some sort of sexual conduct with them. But let’s ignore that, since we’re focusing on MC and blond guy here. Ok, then why did blondie go after MC? Well Chapter 63 spells it out for us, “Oh. That nephew you met for his innocence?” He went after MC because of his childish naivety and ignorance, does that spell healthy to you?
Even if blondie’s intentions are now because he truly loves MC, there is no way, that this can be a “healthy” or “good” relationship. MC has been groomed and conditioned into believing that blondie can do no wrong, there is an extreme power dynamic set in place here from the start, and that is not healthy. If you need proof, going back to chapter 63, “He loves everything I give him.” Or even moreso chapter 62 when MC refuses to believe blondie preys after young teens. Which is yes, is considered a bad thing and is framed as a bad thing in the story, regardless of consent age in Korea, the story CLEARLY views it as disgusting.
Regarding on your opinion that this could ok because it’s out of “love”, let me ask you and let chapter 63 ask you, “Does the content change if you wrap it up like that?” Even though it’s unhealthy, is it ok because you’ve wrapped a pretty little bow on it called love? Or are you saying that, without mentioning age, this specific relationship is perfectly healthy? Remember MC has never been in a relationship before, as a angsty gay 17 year old with no friends and shitty family, when someone older man just pops outta nowhere and gives you validation, of course you would easily cling to that. Whether or not that’s healthy is your opinion, but something like that is not a relationship out of love for the other person. People hate the guy not just simply because he’s breaking the law, and yes I know he’s technically not breaking the law in Korea, they hate him because he’s preying on naive and impressionable teens. Something you have a hard time understanding despite the fact so many people are telling you.
Oh, and I have a question about who you consider to be a pedophille. I thought a pedophille was someone who is sexually attracted to children, but according to you he’s not because it’s a mental illness, and he doesn’t have this mental illness because he has shown restraint? So if I have depression but I control the urges to kill myself, I am not depressed? You’re not making a lot of sense here. I just hope you were kidding when you said you were studying law and were just trying to use fake ethos to validate your argument.
Yeah, none of this^ is what i was saying at all and you replied to words you put in my mouth so... I wasn't even the one who 1st started pointing out that, by definition, he isn't a pedophile. I have said as much because i agree, but that isn't really my argument. It's just that people keep calling him a pedophile, which isn't accurate as pedophilia is a mental disorder aimed specifically at children ages 13-. He aims for young men, not children. What he has is ephebophilia, which isn't classified as a mental disorder. This means it is a sexual preference. Preference can be changed, disorder can't. Hence those of us wondering how he feels about Seunghee. I'd like to go ahead and clarify that i'm not "defending" him in the sense you're implying. I acknowledge that preying on minors is disgusting. My argument is that, while he started out preying on Seunghee, he might not be now. It looks as though, over time, he might have developed feelings. IF he IS in love with Seunghee and isn't preying on him, i don't see the problem. Seunghee is 17, they can wait a year if sex is the problem, though i believe a 17 y. o. has the mental faculties to reason out whether they should or shouldn't have sex. I base this on my own experience, i was very mature at 17, probably because of my shitty childhood. I had sex at 15 (no penetration) with a 19 y. o. guy, did or do i view him as a predator now? No, because i approached him and wanted it. People are arguing even if he fell for Seunghee, that he's automatically disgusting for falling for a minor, while as i know from personal experience that that isn't always the case. I'm trying to make a distinction, ephebophilia and pedophilia aren't the same, one is just plain morally wrong, the other is case sensitive. Epobophilia isn't inherently "preying on minors" like pedophilia is. In the blond's case, he WAS preying, i'm not arguing that, i'm wondering if he no longer is. His past interaction with Seungtaek was wrong, but not all of his interactions were. Seunghee was looking through his account, the guy was just talking with minors and giving advice until he sent a dick pic to Seungtaek. He's shown that he has control when he refused to spend time with Seunghee to get him to spend time with friends. Again, this shows it isn't a disorder, he doesn't feel compulsed to attack young men, it a preference. One he put aside here because he started to empathize with Seunghee.
-continuation-
You're also misunderstanding my argument of legality, my argument isn't "it's legal so it's okay", it's "it's legal, which is indicative of cultural differences". What may seem gross here might not give a 2nd thought over there. This actually seems to be the case if you look over the reddit link i provided above. You misunderstood something else as well, i never said i was a law student. I said there is a local Seoul university student studying this exact topic within the reddit link i posted, this student lays out the reality of the laws there very well and goes over the clauses. There is also a case linked in the reddit that shows how this all works out. The defendant was judged not guilty after having sex with a 13 y. o. girl because he had definitive proof that it was consensual.
youraedthiswrogn never said they were studying law, they give redditt and quora sources without reading the entirety of their own source. They are just simply in denial about how wrong they are and are stubborn to admit to differing opinions that are in the right
No argument? Okay.
@Perlita: You've stopped arguing since i posted that reddit link because your argument of legality fell apart.
I literally responded to that, you giant oaf of a wannabe know-it-all. You don’t even know how to properly hold your argument and your sources literally contradict you and you don’t defend yourself and can only say stuff like “you didn’t respond to me blah blah” or “good one, make that a topic” and are just being an egotistical bigot who can’t understand what a crime is
No, you didn't. You started responding to @nickname and started insulting me.
Was I talking to you, sweetie? No. And I’ve already said all my arguments to you that obviously won’t get through your thick bigoted skull
Are you really going to use "i wasn't talking to you" in this context? You were talking about me...
Thought I saw somewhere when you replied to someone with a “UM ACTUALLY I studied law SO.” That’s my bad.
I’ve already explained why this relationship wouldn’t be good. Your personal experience with this makes a lot of sense as to why you’re defending him so much. Did you stay in that relationship with that 19 yr old? Did it go well? But that’s none of my business.
And I think you’re misunderstanding something. I’m aware of this cultural difference, and that’s why I said it hard to argue about morals, I’m saying, WHETHER OR NOT people in Korea think it’s ok for an adult to be dating a minor, or just because the sex is supposedly consensual, doesn’t necessarily mean that they would be a healthy couple, especially THIS SPECIFIC COUPLE which I talked about. I know what your argument is and I very cleary address that in my reply.
But I’m not going to continue to argue like this, I’m not going to start a 100+ reply thread with you. It’s just a webtoon. You’re inclined to believe what you want.
You're the one who said you were up for a debate, and considering you "understood my argument", you sure did a good job of making it sound like i'm arguing something else entirely... You can say you addressed my argument, but you really didn't. Disagreeing without stating reasoning isn't "addressing". You literally just said "well that doesn't mean that". I didn't really want to get into this for the umpteenth time tbh, it's just, when you misrepresent my argument THAT bad i want to clarify. Anyways, bye?
Also never said that quote, idk what you're even talking about.
Here are spoilers for the latest translated chapters
Sangho's ex confesses and he's trying really hard to not be an arrogant asshole. It doesn't work the way he wanted it to (he grabs Sangho by his shirt, is pretty rude and yells his confession while occasionally blaming other people for his behavior) but he's aware of it (when he recognized that he screwed up he told Sangho to think about it, to answer later and ran away) and to be honest, it's getting harder and harder for me to stay mad at this guy. He's clearly still an arrogant asshole but not as bad as he used to be.
On top of that nobody takes that guy seriously. He's barely more than a joke in the story at this point. They all think the way he acts is pathetic or embarrassing and that he's a horrible guy. Even Sangho doesn't seem to be very impressed by him anymore. Him being portrayed in this way actually makes me warm up to him a little bit.
He's so comically unsuccessful with his methods that it makes him look less like a manipulative narcissist and more like the rival from "Following Namsoo to the Bathhouse".
I definitely don't want him to end up with Sangho but I wouldn't mind him getting together with someone else (who can handle a guy like him).
But that's just the first half of the chapter. The second half is mostly about Hakdo's sister and how she's trying to come to terms with people around her being gay. She can logically understand it but she also admits that she has a problem with understanding it on an emotional level. There's a short flashback showing how she constantly tried to convince herself that Hakdo isn't gay. She knows he's gay now, it seems more like she doesn't know what to make out of it. At the end of the chapter she wondering whether Sangho is also gay and asks him if he likes her brother. It ends with a cliffhanger.
You kind soul...thank you
You're welcome :)