This is what i want to see. Not everythime someone say8ng wom is a pedo... Imagine being in won's position and someone sheltered you.
This is what i want to see. Not everytime someone saying won is a pedo... Imagine being in won's position and someone sheltered you.
The term isn’t being misused. Yes, it’s psychological like many others are, but it does not deter the fact that it is pedophilia. If you are attracted to someone who is younger than 18 years old, that is what’s characterized as pedophilia. Although there are specific terms for specific age ranges. Like yes, he was infatuated with him due to the fact that he was the only one who showed him kindness while he was being abused but that doesn’t matter. Once that scene where he made the older brother wear his younger brothers clothes to imagine and fulfill a sexual fantasy when Jinha was like wat 14? That’s exactly what it became…. pedophilia. Both of these things are true lmao it’s clear what the deeper analysis of the story is but that doesn’t make it not pedophilia everybody knows this.
won is a pedo lol. won is attracted to someone who’s a middle schooler when they first met and he continued to sexualize him all throughout his teenage years. “erm actually… etymologically it means PRE-pubescent so technically it isn’t pedophilia
so just because you were abused that means you get to jerk off to a 14 year old? as a grown man in university? i love the way y’all think lmaooo HES A PEDO
It's not pedophilia, if it was; the moment Jinha matured into a young adult, as he is, in the current timeline. Won should've already lost interest in him, he did not. Because he's in fact not a "pedophile," he was never interested with underdeveloped bodies. He may not be attracted to children but he was indeed a sexual predator. They may be mutually inclusive, but they aren't synonymous.
Yeah, technically it's not pedophilia but we aren't here to argue about semantics. We both know what we meant. Won is indeed showing signs of predatory behavior, but he wasn't preying on him specifically because he was a child.
Cop murders a black man ≠ cop is racist. Both events may happen at the same time, but it doesn't mean that the two are homogeneous. Cop may murder a black man because he was racist but just because a cop murdered a black man he is then racist.
Looking back at Won, he was indeed preying on his savior, Jinha. Jinha maybe a middle schooler, but he did not prey on him specifically because he was a middle schooler. Both events may happen at the same time but they aren't equivalent.
When someone can't argue, they hurl insults at the other party then make up scenarios and speculations to antagonize them. Just so they are "right" in their little heads and the other party is unreasonable and evil. Not taking any external criticism, because they are 'superior' and therefore infallible.
So where do you draw the line with that? Even when he turned the 14 yr old into a sexual fantasy u don’t consider that phedophilla so what do you call that tho? Would u have the same attitude if he was 9 instead of 14?? I feel like his circumstances still doesn’t negate the fact that it’s pedophilia. Like I need to know where you’re coming from.
i did not insult you lmaooo you just don’t have anything else to say
but he IS preying on an actual child. like, the person he’s actively preying on is a child. he is a child predator.
it’s more like, cop murders black man = cop is a murderer. the cop quite literally, actually took a life. he killed someone. he might not have killed that black man because he’s black, but he did kill him.
non-pedophiles don’t actively continue to have sexual feelings about someone once they learn that person is a child. they STOP pursuing that child. PEDOPHILES do not. that’s the difference here.
they’re not coming from anywhere they probably just want to justify won’s actions in their head to be able to continue to ship them with a clean conscience lol. like i genuinely don’t get this. “he IS preying on a 14 year old, but he isn’t doing that because of the fact that he’s 14. calling him a pedo is where i draw the line!!!!!”
LMFAOO that’s what I thought too like girl we can agree the man’s a pedo we understand the circumstances but that doesn’t change the facts like. u can still read the story dawg…..
he’s TECHNICALLY not a pedo tho!!! even tho if he had acted on his desires and had a relationship with a 14 year old jinha, we would’ve been found guilty in a court of law, he’s not a pedo!!!!! same brand of flawed thinking as saying “nooooo! u can’t say you’re anxious if you don’t have a clinical diagnosis of anxiety from a board certified psychiatrist!”
Man, this new generation of kids is pure insanity. What has happened to deeper comprehension, and a comparative assessment of literature?? Won is not a "pedophile". From the etymology itself, pedophile, it is attraction to pre-pubescent children. I'm not defending the author nor the character, this is analysis of the context. Won has not shown any tendencies with being attracted to any children. Won is attracted with the existence of the person that has shown him kindness during the darkest period of his life, which is unfortunately Jinha. He doesn't like kids, he's not sexually attracted to undeveloped bodies. It was pure coincidence. It could be anyone, a senile man, a cute puppy, a busty lady. It didn't matter. Jinha just happened to be there.
Pedophilia is a mental disorder that is diagnosed. Not because you 'think' or 'feel' it is. Just because someone is coughing and showing signs of asthma; he has asthma. You are not a doctor. These overused of medical terms is becoming a huge issue.