Frankly, whether it’s Joss or any other conventionally attractive Thai actor with a perfect body, and there are countless of them, Earth still stands out. His physique is one of the best out there. He is not overly bulky, which is exactly why it works. The muscle is built in just the right proportion, lean, defined, and incredibly well balanced. His body fat level looks ideal, so everything sits exactly where it should. The lower abdomen especially looks almost unreal, like a mannequin carved to precision. Abs can come and go on anyone, but from his chest down to the navel, that whole line looks less like gym work and more like sculpture, as if it were shaped with deliberate craft rather than just trained.
ps. Someone needs to tell Gawin to stop rolling his eyeballs and raising his eyebrows. He does that way too much and its looks awkward and literally feels fake.
considering there's been exactly one victim of each gender, i don't think you can make this statement yet? and…
I actually understand, and I don’t disagree with the core of it. Gender *is* a significant vulnerability when it comes to sexual exploitation, and historically, women have borne the brunt of systemic abuse while also being dismissed, disbelieved, or trivialized. That reality shouldn’t be diluted or denied.
But I think what I was pointing to is slightly different. It’s not about claiming that male victims are *more* marginalized or that they require greater validation than female victims. It’s about how narratives, especially in fiction, *code* victimhood differently depending on gender. The issue isn’t who suffers more; it’s how suffering is recognized and framed.
In this case, the female character’s coercion is made legible in a very explicit way, while the male character’s situation is presented with a degree of ambiguity that risks being misread as agency. That doesn’t negate the reality that women face disproportionate risk, but it does highlight how male vulnerability is often obscured or rendered invisible unless it fits a very narrow, recognizable form.
And I agree with you that support systems are deeply inadequate across the board. But that’s precisely why representation matters. If both are already operating in a space where real-world support is close to zero, then portraying one form of coercion with clarity and the other with ambiguity doesn’t just reflect reality, it subtly reinforces whose pain is easier to acknowledge.
So for me, the point isn’t competition or hierarchy between victims. It’s about consistency in how power, coercion, and lack of consent are depicted, because those dynamics don’t change based on gender, even if the way we perceive them often does.
What I absolutely loathed—and it’s a stigma that exists across industries and countries whenever stories like this are told, is how selectively exploitation is framed. What this drama is trying to expose is important, but the way it frames exploitation feels deeply inconsistent. It leans into the familiar imagery of female suffering, tears, visible resistance, emotional collapse, so the audience immediately recognizes coercion. But when the same power dynamics are applied to a male character, the narrative becomes strangely muted. His hesitation is diluted, his lack of agency is blurred, and the situation is staged in a way that can be misread as participation rather than pressure.
That contrast is not just a storytelling choice, it reflects a broader discomfort in acknowledging that coercion does not always look the same, and that men, too, can be subjected to systems of control, manipulation, and transactional exploitation. Silence, numbness, or compliance under pressure are not signs of consent. They are often survival responses.
If a story claims to engage with themes like power, access, and sexual exploitation, it carries the responsibility to treat them with equal clarity across the board. Otherwise, it risks reinforcing the very hierarchies it is trying to critique, where one form of victimhood is validated and another is quietly dismissed.
We’ve seen in real life, across industries and scandals, that exploitation thrives in imbalance, not in gender alone. Power structures do not discriminate in the way they exert control; they simply exploit vulnerability wherever it exists. When narratives selectively humanize one experience while aestheticizing or normalizing another, they don’t just fall short, they contribute to the erasure of uncomfortable truths.
A story like this has the potential to confront those realities with honesty. But that requires the courage to portray coercion as coercion, regardless of who it happens to, and regardless of how visibly it is expressed.
so he had a double accident? one at 19? and one at recently the present, I know my be he is lying to make him fall for him, but is it what the plot is for now!
Has KKM already decided his fate as villain??? I was happy that he finally played 2 positive roles back to back, but then he go back again to play villain roles!!!
it is so awkward whenever JJ pops in between suddenly, it clearly feels he is just there to fill the vacuum but even his presence doesn't make any difference. Poor twins, can only act on cringey written comedy and bad timings.
when they will get caught specially Tim, he will not have a 0.0000% reason to make any excuse but to bear the consequences, but I do hope...Pai gives him one hell of a time, brutal torture, tatse of his own medicine, not physical (physical also ok) but mental torture to the core...and if forgiveness comes easy then no meaning for me...
it is as typical as it can be...so predictable, so unapologetically copy paste of several plot lines pout in together nothing new, hate ML backstory, hate his cliches sadness, real fucking life isn't that dramatic, even oif it is dramatic purposes it is still not what they depict, and certainly not the entire fucking universe circles their problems, gosh, wanted to punch ML...i feel 0 connection with their sadness and sobbing stories....lol her BF was pathetic cheater bastard.
how did theu resolve the cheating lawyer plot. Did her husband find out but take her and not his baby back.
it is not progressed and part of story, she is divorcing him and he agrees to divorce despite he wanted to stay with her. last episode we will find if they actually divorced it or reconciled later on.
I absolutely hate the daughter-mother blame game here…specially here when scenario of her birth is much different, I know the child feels she was wronged but her mother did nothing wrong, she is even a bigger victim of the evil happens to her, so that always why abandon me, and I thought you would recognize me bullshit is so cringy and worthless…lol do mothers have magical antennas that they can recognize their lost child who suddenly happen to demand the validation of their existence. that is just so stupid, motherly love and bond is Al true but to befuxking honest a child who a parent thought was dead suddenly ask them to recognize when they are full ass grown good for noting exiting matter is just out of line…
this is just so good…and I love Dean,you go after the man you betrayed or did what which we will get to know, and as for Jack he is miserably stuck with Dean and his biggest problem is he is unable to express fully and take things for granted which I think is the reason Dean and he fell apart the first time, and all of them are not righteous, everyone got their third leg stuck somewhere they have no business so I can’t judge a single person…and Boston is here to mess things up…I like this one!!!
No wonder ML surname is Feng, I remember there was a person name Lei Feng, who was used as a huge propaganda prop to promote CCP as well as other Party activities and there was literally a term "Learn from Lei Feng as a Model" or "Follow the examples of Comrade Lei Feng" that was heavily instilled in people and he was used to promote socialist values, and he has several burst, measures to this day in China.
FMY personality is exactly like him, for example, uneducated but shown as highly intelligent, no greed, always helping, labeled as hero, living in frugality, prioritizing others, upholding socialist values, and so on...
In the EP21 or 22 where they showed Gang of Four has been dealt with and the country is on progress and they started Boluan Fanzheng to reinstate people to their class.
People who don't know, it was a super intelligent move by DXP (who was a real power holder despite any official position and he shaped what China is today) to punish Gang of Four to reestablished China's image by blaming all the wrongs on them, and they were indeed wrong, but in doing so they protected Mao, as they couldn't blame him for anything as he was a face of CCP adn hey were afraid if they labelled him as anything but hero, the country wouldn't survive, so what they did to settle the score, they blame the 10-years wrongs that plunged people to their lowest by blaming, Mao's last wife and her three associates.
Having said this I mean no diss, as it is not for me to make a judgment, but the history is also written by men, what is in the history it is not always true. Truth and facts can be distorted anytime, by anyone. Men after all, is master of all corruption.
Can anyone explain Fang Muyang Parents situation ..I know what is black cat. five via google but why they were…
Professors weren’t “safe” in the Cultural Revolution. If anything, being an intellectual could put a target on your back, and once a family got labeled (like 黑五类 / bad class background), the stigma often spread to relatives too. Intellectuals were frequently labeled as “bourgeois,” “reactionary,” or politically unreliable, especially if they had overseas ties, “wrong” family background, or were associated with “old ideas.”
Being sent “to the north” usually means 下放/劳改 style re-education or forced labor in remote, harsh places. Later, when the political wind changed after the late-70s, many people got 平反 (rehabilitated), were allowed back to the city, and could regain work-unit housing, so the parents returning with a house actually fits the timeline.
So common punishment was being sent away for 劳动改造 (laogai / labor reform) or 下放 (sent-down re-education), often to remote areas with tough living conditions. It wasn’t always “prison” in the usual sense, it could be forced labor + political supervision.
Also, when people say “Black Five Categories” (黑五类), that refers to class labels like landlord/rich peasant/counterrevolutionary/bad element/rightist. In practice, the label could spread to family members (so a whole household could be treated as “problematic”), and it could be applied broadly, sometimes based on rumors, past jobs, or a single accusation.
4 
1 
2 
1 
1 
ps. Someone needs to tell Gawin to stop rolling his eyeballs and raising his eyebrows. He does that way too much and its looks awkward and literally feels fake.
But I think what I was pointing to is slightly different. It’s not about claiming that male victims are *more* marginalized or that they require greater validation than female victims. It’s about how narratives, especially in fiction, *code* victimhood differently depending on gender. The issue isn’t who suffers more; it’s how suffering is recognized and framed.
In this case, the female character’s coercion is made legible in a very explicit way, while the male character’s situation is presented with a degree of ambiguity that risks being misread as agency. That doesn’t negate the reality that women face disproportionate risk, but it does highlight how male vulnerability is often obscured or rendered invisible unless it fits a very narrow, recognizable form.
And I agree with you that support systems are deeply inadequate across the board. But that’s precisely why representation matters. If both are already operating in a space where real-world support is close to zero, then portraying one form of coercion with clarity and the other with ambiguity doesn’t just reflect reality, it subtly reinforces whose pain is easier to acknowledge.
So for me, the point isn’t competition or hierarchy between victims. It’s about consistency in how power, coercion, and lack of consent are depicted, because those dynamics don’t change based on gender, even if the way we perceive them often does.
That contrast is not just a storytelling choice, it reflects a broader discomfort in acknowledging that coercion does not always look the same, and that men, too, can be subjected to systems of control, manipulation, and transactional exploitation. Silence, numbness, or compliance under pressure are not signs of consent. They are often survival responses.
If a story claims to engage with themes like power, access, and sexual exploitation, it carries the responsibility to treat them with equal clarity across the board. Otherwise, it risks reinforcing the very hierarchies it is trying to critique, where one form of victimhood is validated and another is quietly dismissed.
We’ve seen in real life, across industries and scandals, that exploitation thrives in imbalance, not in gender alone. Power structures do not discriminate in the way they exert control; they simply exploit vulnerability wherever it exists. When narratives selectively humanize one experience while aestheticizing or normalizing another, they don’t just fall short, they contribute to the erasure of uncomfortable truths.
A story like this has the potential to confront those realities with honesty. But that requires the courage to portray coercion as coercion, regardless of who it happens to, and regardless of how visibly it is expressed.
i loved it!
it was great show but in the end it just average.
FMY personality is exactly like him, for example, uneducated but shown as highly intelligent, no greed, always helping, labeled as hero, living in frugality, prioritizing others, upholding socialist values, and so on...
In the EP21 or 22 where they showed Gang of Four has been dealt with and the country is on progress and they started Boluan Fanzheng to reinstate people to their class.
People who don't know, it was a super intelligent move by DXP (who was a real power holder despite any official position and he shaped what China is today) to punish Gang of Four to reestablished China's image by blaming all the wrongs on them, and they were indeed wrong, but in doing so they protected Mao, as they couldn't blame him for anything as he was a face of CCP adn hey were afraid if they labelled him as anything but hero, the country wouldn't survive, so what they did to settle the score, they blame the 10-years wrongs that plunged people to their lowest by blaming, Mao's last wife and her three associates.
Having said this I mean no diss, as it is not for me to make a judgment, but the history is also written by men, what is in the history it is not always true. Truth and facts can be distorted anytime, by anyone. Men after all, is master of all corruption.
Being sent “to the north” usually means 下放/劳改 style re-education or forced labor in remote, harsh places. Later, when the political wind changed after the late-70s, many people got 平反 (rehabilitated), were allowed back to the city, and could regain work-unit housing, so the parents returning with a house actually fits the timeline.
So common punishment was being sent away for 劳动改造 (laogai / labor reform) or 下放 (sent-down re-education), often to remote areas with tough living conditions. It wasn’t always “prison” in the usual sense, it could be forced labor + political supervision.
Also, when people say “Black Five Categories” (黑五类), that refers to class labels like landlord/rich peasant/counterrevolutionary/bad element/rightist. In practice, the label could spread to family members (so a whole household could be treated as “problematic”), and it could be applied broadly, sometimes based on rumors, past jobs, or a single accusation.
Hope that answers your question!