ariel alba

You have introduced a new detail ignored by me in my initial comment. It's true. Many, if not all, BLs are supported by these cosmetic companies. That is another of the characteristics of these audiovisual productions: one of their main objectives is to sell, to serve as advertisements for companies of all kinds, including cosmetics, juice and soft drink production, etc.
I remember that in "Bake Me Please" Shin, one of the protagonists, played by Ohm, dedicated a lot of time on screen to advertise a well-known Japanese car production company. Even an actor representing a worker at said company (maybe even a real worker at the same company) was repairing his car, changing tires, etc.

Why is the age of majority relevant? I will initially answer you with another question: Why do the laws of all countries without exception establish both the age at which people are considered to be of legal age, as well as the minimum age of sexual consent? Establishing a minimum age of sexual consent aims to protect adolescents from abuse and the consequences that they may not be fully aware of when participating in early sexual activity. On the other hand, when people turn 18 they are of legal age. Therefore, they acquire the capacity to exercise their rights, and can therefore freely dispose of their person and property. Minors have the capacity to enjoy themselves, but due to a lack of physical and psychological fulfillment, the law restricts their capacity to exercise them and creates special rules to protect them, for example, parental authority.
I have said it at other times, but I will continue giving my opinion: The relationship between Toki and Sahara is NOT an unhealthy relationship. This relationship is NOT characterized by one of its members exercising power over the other, as one is a student and the other is his teacher. The two protagonists agreed to wait for each other. What are you waiting for? Why don't you give free rein to your love? Why don't they kiss in the corners of the school or in the park, away from it? Why don't they have sex in a hotel room, if they both want each other? Wouldn't theirs be consensual sex? Isn't Toki 17 years old? Don't the laws in Japan state that the age of sexual consent is 17? Doesn't Toki live today in a period in human life in which boys fantasize about sex all day? Isn't that the age at which you dream of losing your virginity, if you haven't already? What then prevents them from having sex in the corners? They both wait for Toki to finish graduating from high school and go to university to be an “adult” and thus be able to help Sahara in a life together, as the young man stated to his lover in the infirmary after the incident on the stairs.
That is, they wait for Toki to come of age. Toki is now of age to have consensual sex, but they do not want to violate the situation and so wait until he is of age. Even the proposal to wait did NOT come from Toki, but from his teacher. Sahara gives Toki all the space and freedom so that he can decide when they will make their relationship official.
The series even goes as far as NOT to violate their relationship, when the agreement to wait for each other is NOT sealed with a kiss, with sensual hugs, with genuine expressions of love, as anyone would expect. They sealed it with a fist bump and a smile. It was a dispassionate agreement, without conveying emotions. That is the purpose of the series: we are NOT faced with a power relationship. The teacher does NOT exercise any authority over the student.

Hello. This is one of my first reviews for MDL. I will take your comments into account.

Hello. Colorism is defined as “prejudice or discrimination against individuals with a dark skin tone, usually among people of the same ethnic or racial group.” As we can see in Thai BL productions, it is not colorism, but pure and simple racism, since prejudice or discrimination occurs between people of different ethnic or racial groups. We never see a black or dark-skinned character in a BL or series in general from this country. And when they appear it is to play roles of workers in the sun, or doing agricultural work or other tasks rejected by white-skinned people, poorly paid jobs, slaves, servitude, etc. But also, it is the message of constant racism in the opinion media. Television, cinema, print, radio and digital press are responsible for the perceived public image of dark-skinned people. Therefore, the representation of dark-skinned people in the media contributes to society's overall perception of these ethnic or racial groups. In Thailand they treat “colored” people the same way they have been treated throughout the History of Humanity. Only if racism and racial discrimination have somehow been overcome in many countries, in Thailand the belief that maintains the superiority of one ethnic group over others, which leads to discrimination or social persecution, as well as ideology or political doctrine based on racism, is growing by leaps and bounds today.
Taking all this into account, it is very naive to think that dark skin will become the trend.

Yes, Jeff beat us to it. I don't know what he saw in him that I don't have. I would have given him the world. Hahaha.

Sorry for replying late. I've been complicated. Aunkue is not exactly my profession, I have been doing film criticism for several years. In my MDL profile you can read, if you are interested, a criticism of Twins with the title “Sprite, the 'Trojan Horse' of the BL series or the debate around homosexuality in sports”
You understood that First and his friend had a sexual or at least romantic relationship beforehand. I don't believe it. Of course, I will answer you from subjectivity. I think they were just friends. One transferred to another school and they split up. They never talk about breaking up. The verb used is “separate”, which is correct because it is evident that both boys had to separate under these circumstances. The boy tells First because First was his friend. “When I left school you and I separated.” By leaving for another school, the boy separated not only from First. He also did the same with the rest of his classmates, teachers, etc. But For me, First and his friend, who we didn't even know his name and he didn't reappear again in the remainder of the series (demonstrating his weak role in the plot and was only used at the last minute to give a dramatic twist or waste an hour of footage adding reasons to momentarily separate the two protagonists) spoke about the subject for the first time, although not even First recognized his sexuality. This new boy is the one interested in reintroducing himself into First's life, but not as a friend, but as a lover. First listens to his statement and only thinks about Sprite. He sees him sitting in front of him, holding hands, despite the two of them being upset and separated at that moment.
I have said it before. For me it is only important if First had a boyfriend before, the fact that if true then they did not describe the character well to us. We don't know the character well, since we believed for 11 episodes that he was heterosexual until he fell in love with Zee/Sprite, only to reveal an important element of his personality at the last minute.
Let's assume for a moment that we are in the shoes of First and his friend. Would it be logical for a young man who abandoned his boyfriend without explanation some time later to summon his ex to tell him that he likes him and wants to return? Would it be logical that in this case the ex-boyfriend hears once again the declaration of love that he supposedly heard some time ago when they declared their love for each other? Would it be logical for the betrayed and abandoned ex not to show any sign of anger, discomfort, or anger towards the ex-boyfriend who left him? Would it be logical that there is no sign of regret on the part of the boyfriend who abandoned the other? Would it be logical for the boyfriend who abandoned the other to ask him to resume the courtship and pretend that nothing happened here? Would it be logical for the boyfriend who abandoned the other to come now and ask him, “Let's start over because I like you a lot. Let's make a clean slate”?
When he heard the boy's statement, First remained impassive, as if it were not with him. And he only managed to ask her: “Do you really like me? I'm curious. Because you like me?". If they had been dating in the past, wouldn't First know why he likes her? Wouldn't First know the answer to that question? Wouldn't they talk in the past about what each other likes at the time when they declared their love?

Way is a traitor to Babe, no matter how much he loves him. He never stopped being faithful to Tony and lied to Babe, Alan and the others. Kenta is an instrument, a toy in Tony's hands. He will surely break up with that despotic being soon. Way could redeem himself and then I might like the Pete and Way option. Pete at various times has reached out to Way. They have a connection. This connection does not exist between Pete and Kim. They don't even know each other. Only 3 episodes left. It would be very hasty to develop this relationship. Kim and Kenta is another option. Kenta has stopped, he has hesitated, when he has had to hit, capture, etc., Kim.

I don't think Charlie died either. I wrote a comment, number 7859, about it. It must be a ploy to hide him from Tony and then have free rein in his actions. Jeff and himself must have planned to fake his death. Everyone on the team acts like he's really dead. That is, others are not involved. But the body? How to outwit the doctors? Are they in cahoots too? Who was buried then? Did they throw stones in the coffin? How could they not realize that the body in the morgue or in the emergency room really "has not passed away?

Both the house, the bed and, especially, Alan I saw them first.

Did Charlie really die? Could it be a ploy to hide it from Tony? Whose idea is it? Everyone on the team acts like he's really dead. Did Jeff and Charlie plan to fake the latter's death? If so, how did they outwit the doctors? Are they in cahoots too? How to fool Tony, who seems to know everything, but goes from failure to failure? What role does Kenta play, when he doesn't put one in? Why is Kim's reappearance next after Charlie's funeral? Will there be plans to pair him with Babe? If Dean broke just the brakes, who cut the oil line? Does Dean use the justification that he only broke the brakes because he thinks his action could not cause a fatal accident? Dean put two hammer blows on Babe's head and he acted like it was nothing? Well, yes, a trickle of tomato puree running down… And they released Dean instead of handing him over to the Police? Didn't he try to murder Babe? This alone could cost him years in prison. Wouldn't Tony's involvement in Charlie's death be the evidence they need to bring him to justice? Will those who want so much to take revenge for all the damage caused by Tony, especially Babe, Alan and Jeff, miss the opportunity? It is not logical: The Police discovered that the oil pipe was broken. That is to say, the Police have been investigating Charlie's death and discovered an abnormality in the car he was driving. Didn't you continue the investigation and leave everything in the hands of the members of the X Hunter team so that they could investigate?

Racism and classism have been established in Thailand for decades. The elite of that country sports white skin, and this is reflected in the television programs or media that people consume. Thailand today is experiencing a phenomenon similar to what the West experienced in times past, in which dark skin was related to manual labor and field work, and consequently to belonging to a lower social status.
The walls of the Bangkok subway and shopping malls in the capital and other cities in the country are covered with numerous advertising posters advertising all kinds of skin lightening treatments. Television constantly broadcasts advertising spots that promise success for women based on their skin tone: "if I were white, I would win" or "eternally white I feel much more confident about myself."
In the famous Seven Eleven, the most popular supermarket chain in the country, creams, masks and serums are offered that promise whiter skin or even the reduction of melanin. There are also many aesthetic centers that offer injectable Glutathione treatments, a substance that serves to lighten the color of the epidermis by several tones.
Many cosmetic brands hide a racist undertone, using slogans in their advertisements such as “show off bright skin” to look better, when in reality they mean “show off white skin to look better.”
In 2016, an advertisement for the Seoul Secret brand caused an avalanche of criticism throughout the country for being considered a racist spot. The advertisement sold the Snowz cream from the aforementioned cosmetics company as a guaranteed skin whitening product for women, in a country where there is an obsession with clear and luminous skin that makes a person considered beautiful.
The ad said that being white is enough for you to succeed. The video, just 50 seconds long, shows the same woman in two different situations. The first, a happy version after having undergone the treatment, and a second unhappy version when he has not yet had the treatment and his complexion has the original color.
These images, as well as the statements of the well-known Thai actress and singer Cris Horwang, the protagonist of the spot, caused an avalanche of criticism on social networks that denounced the racist nature of the advertisement and the discrimination against the black race. Popular pressure forced the company to withdraw the ad and issue a public apology.
This is not the first nor the last time that an advertisement sparks controversy due to its racist content. Already in 2013, a whitening cream company organized a photography contest in which university students who published photographs of people “with white skin” were awarded a scholarship of 100,000 euros. Citra, the Thai subsidiary of Unilever, which launched this contest, later apologized.
Today a new movement is gaining strength, also made up of upper-class women who publish photos showing off tanned skin on their social networks. The objective is to somehow tell society that they are cosmopolitan, that they look like Western women and that they have the money to afford to spend time sunbathing on the beach. This is another way to differentiate yourself from the lower classes.
Even the porn consumed in Thailand comes from or takes its cue from Japanese porn, in which the women are small, thin and extremely white. This is because many Thai women are socially and economically dependent on men and want to physically resemble those women that their boyfriends and husbands attract.
I think about all this while watching episode 8 of Cooking Crush. Around minute 27, friends Prem, Dy and Samsi arrive at the latter's parents' restaurant in Suphanburi.
Samsi's parents immediately come out to greet them. In the scene you can see a child (child exploitation) wearing a work uniform and apron. There is another worker, hidden, at the back of the establishment: a black person who does not stop his work while the celebration is organized. It is possible that this is the same person (I don't know if it is a professional actor) who appears around minute 40 arriving at the hospital, injured and complaining of pain. I have no doubts about what was stated in the first paragraph: Racism and classism have been established in Thailand for decades...
When have we seen an actor with brown or black skin in a Thai BL show? If they come out, what role do they play?

There are good analyzes of the "problem" in MDL. Please, if you are interested, you can search for them and analyze them, excuse the redundancy.
The series assures that between Toki and Sahara there is a difference of only three years. Nor is this a relationship in which one of its members imposes his power (as master) on the other. They are these two young people who have given themselves the time for the younger one to grow, become an adult, graduate from college and help their partner in life. Even that agreement was not celebrated with kisses, hugs or a sexual date in a hotel, as expected, but with a fist bump and a smile. I worry more about the violation of human rights in the country of the Rising Sun. I worry more about the situation of discrimination towards LGBT+ people in Japan. Wouldn't it be a priority to worry about Japanese people having the possibility of equal marriage, civil union, homoparental adoption and "solidarity pregnancy" (non-profit surrogacy), among other rights that today are denied by a Constitution enacted? On November 3. 1946 and came into force on May 3, 1947 in which it establishes, in article 24: "Marriage shall be based solely on the mutual consent of both sexes and shall be maintained through mutual cooperation with equal rights between husband and wife as one base.

I congratulate you, first for understanding the "problem" when many are not able to even realize the depth of what is being debated, and then for, based on your understanding, contributing the enormous amount of arguments that you provide in your comments, as well as the way you present your ideas, always objective, with humor and sarcasm when appropriate and relevant. I reiterate to these people who see incest and pedophilia where there is no need to worry more about the violation of human rights in the country of the Rising Sun, about the terrible situation of discrimination towards LGBT+ people in Japan and the world. That they be concerned that the Japanese have the possibility of equal marriage, civil unions, homoparental adoption and "solidarity pregnancy" (non-profit surrogacy), among other rights that a Constitution promulgated on November 3 denies them today. 1946 and entered into force on May 3, 1947 in which it clearly establishes that marriage only occurs between a man and a woman.
Specifically, Article 24 of the Japanese Constitution, approved after the Japanese defeat in World War II, states: "Marriage shall be based solely on the mutual consent of both sexes and shall be maintained through mutual cooperation with equality of rights of husband and wife as a basis.

In your country the age of majority may be 21 years old, but in Japan the age of majority is 18 years old. In June 2018, the Japanese Parliament approved the reduction of the legal age of majority from 20 to 18 years, with the aim of promoting the participation of young people in society in the face of the growing aging of the population.

I read opinions in MDL that the relationship between Toki and Sahara is unhealthy because this is a relationship in which one has power over the other, as one is a student and the other is his teacher. The series shows us the love of the two, especially that of the student towards his teacher. It also shows us how they agreed to wait for each other. What are you waiting for? Why don't you give free rein to your love? Why don't they kiss in the corners of the school or in the park, away from it? Why don't they have sex in a hotel room, if they both want each other? Wouldn't theirs be consensual sex? Isn't Toki 17 years old? Don't the laws in Japan set the age of sexual consent at 17? Isn't that an age when kids fantasize about sex all day? Isn't that the age at which you dream of losing your virginity, if you haven't already lost it, which is the safest thing? What then prevents them from loving each other “as God commands”? They both wait for Toki to finish graduating from high school and go to university to be an “adult” and thus be able to help Sahara in a life together, as the young man stated to his lover in the infirmary after the incident on the stairs.
The series even goes as far as NOT to violate their relationship, when the agreement to wait for each other is NOT sealed with a kiss, with sensual hugs, with genuine expressions of love, as anyone would expect. They sealed it with a fist bump and a smile. It was a dispassionate agreement, without conveying emotions. That is the purpose of the series: we are NOT faced with a power relationship. The teacher does NOT exercise any authority over the student.
There are many examples of loving relationships between students and teachers, both in real life and in film, television, or radio and written literature. The media took it upon themselves a long time ago to erase the stereotypical image of the self-absorbed professor hiding behind glasses. That version was artistically transformed by one centered on the stereotype of the intellectual, serious and captivating professor who falls in love with his student who, in most cases, is a minor.
An example of these real affairs is the relationship between the current president of France, Emmanuel Macron and his wife Brigitte Trogneux. They fell in love when he was a student. Brigitte was his high school Drama teacher, divorced by the way. They got married and today they live happily, surrounded by seven grandchildren. He had barely turned 16 and she was 39 when they began their love story that endures today.
In the biography 'Emmanuel Macron: 'A Perfect Young Man', he remembers that his parents at first tried to separate the teacher from the then future French president. Although they never wanted to accuse her before the Police, they sent Macron away from Brigitte, to the Lycee Henri IV school in Paris, to continue his studies. That's how they thought they would end the romance. But, in the best French style, the opposite happened: Macron swore to his teacher that he would return to marry her and she, equally in love especially with her student's intellectual capacity, waited for him.
Another case of love between a student and his teacher is that of Hannah Arendt, a brilliant philosophy student recognized for her book 'The Banality of Evil'. At the end of 1924, at the university, she began one of the most famous relationships in history with her professor and impossible love, Martin Heidegger. He was one of the most important thinkers of the Nazi era and defender of Adolf Hitler's fascist ideology. She was then 17 years old and he was 35. For years they were lovers. If the relationship did not last, it is not due to the age difference or because she was a minor when they met and began to love. He was a married man. He was clear with her from the beginning: he told her that he was not willing to lose the stability of his home. She accepted it. The fundamental cause of their separation is due to the fact that there were substantial differences of thought between them: she came from a Jewish family and he was anti-Semitic. The relationship between the two continued only through letters until Heidegger's death in 1976.
The love between a student and his teacher dates back to ancient times. The American essayist and critic William Deresiewicz wrote in an essay 'Fall in love with your teacher' the story of how in the symposia held by the philosopher Socrates in Athens, one of his most promising students, Alcibiades, fell in love with “the ugly old teacher.” .
Deresiewicz wrote in his work: “(...) It was not the kind of love that his beloved disciple imagined, and then Alcibiades complained about how that mature man, after seducing him with his heavenly verb, refused to touch him. (...). In the end, Alcibiades tells us that he managed to stay alone with Socrates (sort of outside of 'class time') only to discover that all his teacher wanted was to continue talking. Although the love of Socrates and Alcibiades is legendary, what Socrates wanted to teach in his talks, says William Deresiewicz, is that the beauty of the soul surpasses that of the bodies.
Deresiewicz recounts this and several examples of affairs between student-teacher. His objective is to explain that “teachers are not attracted to the bodies of their students but to their souls. Young people maintain their curiosity about ideas, they still believe in their importance, in their redeeming force.”
I think the issue is knowing the limits and NOT crossing them. So why is the relationship between teacher and student still frowned upon or unethical?
Minors must be protected. The laws of each country speak of violations of sexual rights against minors. The internal regulations of secondary schools and universities even talk about this. This includes when a teacher is the rapist in the educational field. The rules prohibit teachers from carrying out or executing actions or conduct with their students that violate their sexual freedom and modesty, or from sexually harassing their students.
However, the laws themselves do not specify anything about consensual relationships, agreed upon between teachers and students, neither in schools nor in universities.
In Japan the age of sexual consent for a child is set at 17 years old, but until June 2023 it was only 13 years old. Japan does not escape the existence of cases in which underage girls become involved with adults, become pregnant and become teenage mothers. The United Nations Population Fund, UNDP, recognizes in its periodic reports that “around 19 percent of young women in developing countries become pregnant before the age of 18. Two million of the 7.3 million births of adolescents under the age of 18 that occur each year in developing countries are births of girls under the age of 15.” Other reports speak of abortion at that age.
We are not shocked when we see a 16-year-old girl with her 30-year-old teacher, but if we see a 16-year-old boy dating a woman or a man who could be his mother or father, we immediately brand the boy as a gold digger. , of wanting to take advantage of the teacher's attention or other similar comments, while the teacher is labeled a pedophile and abuser. My concern is whether in the exercise of the teaching profession there is abuse towards the partner, towards the student. This is not the case with Sahara and Toki.

As for the relationship between Toki and Sahara being unhealthy because this is a relationship in which one has power over the other, as one is a student and the other is his teacher. The series shows us the love of the two, especially that of the student towards his teacher. It also shows us how they agreed to wait for each other. What are you waiting for? Why don't you give free rein to your love? Why don't they kiss in the corners of the school or in the park, away from it? Why don't they have sex in a hotel room, if they both want each other? Wouldn't theirs be consensual sex? Isn't Toki 17 years old? Don't the laws in Japan set the age of sexual consent at 17? Isn't that an age when kids fantasize about sex all day? Isn't that the age at which you dream of losing your virginity, if you haven't already lost it, which is the safest thing? What then prevents them from loving each other “as God commands”? They both wait for Toki to finish graduating from high school and go to university to be an “adult” and thus be able to help Sahara in a life together, as the young man stated to his lover in the infirmary after the incident on the stairs.
The series even goes as far as NOT to violate their relationship, when the agreement to wait for each other is NOT sealed with a kiss, with sensual hugs, with genuine expressions of love, as anyone would expect. They sealed it with a fist bump and a smile. It was a dispassionate agreement, without conveying emotions. That is the purpose of the series: we are NOT faced with a power relationship. The teacher does NOT exercise any authority over the student.
There are many examples of loving relationships between students and teachers, both in real life and in film, television, or radio and written literature. The media took it upon themselves a long time ago to erase the stereotypical image of the self-absorbed professor hiding behind glasses. That version was artistically transformed by one centered on the stereotype of the intellectual, serious and captivating professor who falls in love with his student who, in most cases, is a minor.
An example of these real affairs is the relationship between the current president of France, Emmanuel Macron and his wife Brigitte Trogneux. They fell in love when he was a student. Brigitte was his high school Drama teacher, divorced by the way. They got married and today they live happily, surrounded by seven grandchildren. He had barely turned 16 and she was 39 when they began their love story that endures today.
In the biography 'Emmanuel Macron: 'A Perfect Young Man', he remembers that his parents at first tried to separate the teacher from the then future French president. Although they never wanted to accuse her before the Police, they sent Macron away from Brigitte, to the Lycee Henri IV school in Paris, to continue his studies. That's how they thought they would end the romance. But, in the best French style, the opposite happened: Macron swore to his teacher that he would return to marry her and she, equally in love especially with her student's intellectual capacity, waited for him.
Another case of love between a student and his teacher is that of Hannah Arendt, a brilliant philosophy student recognized for her book 'The Banality of Evil'. At the end of 1924, at the university, she began one of the most famous relationships in history with her professor and impossible love, Martin Heidegger. He was one of the most important thinkers of the Nazi era and defender of Adolf Hitler's fascist ideology. She was then 17 years old and he was 35. For years they were lovers. If the relationship did not last, it is not due to the age difference or because she was a minor when they met and began to love. He was a married man. He was clear with her from the beginning: he told her that he was not willing to lose the stability of his home. She accepted it. The fundamental cause of their separation is due to the fact that there were substantial differences of thought between them: she came from a Jewish family and he was anti-Semitic. The relationship between the two continued only through letters until Heidegger's death in 1976.
The love between a student and his teacher dates back to ancient times. The American essayist and critic William Deresiewicz wrote in an essay 'Fall in love with your teacher' the story of how in the symposia held by the philosopher Socrates in Athens, one of his most promising students, Alcibiades, fell in love with “the ugly old teacher.” .
Deresiewicz wrote in his work: “(...) It was not the kind of love that his beloved disciple imagined, and then Alcibiades complained about how that mature man, after seducing him with his heavenly verb, refused to touch him. (...). In the end, Alcibiades tells us that he managed to stay alone with Socrates (sort of outside of 'class time') only to discover that all his teacher wanted was to continue talking. Although the love of Socrates and Alcibiades is legendary, what Socrates wanted to teach in his talks, says William Deresiewicz, is that the beauty of the soul surpasses that of the bodies.
Deresiewicz recounts this and several examples of affairs between student-teacher. His objective is to explain that “teachers are not attracted to the bodies of their students but to their souls. Young people maintain their curiosity about ideas, they still believe in their importance, in their redeeming force.”
I think the issue is knowing the limits and NOT crossing them. So why is the relationship between teacher and student still frowned upon or unethical?
Minors must be protected. The laws of each country speak of violations of sexual rights against minors. The internal regulations of secondary schools and universities even talk about this. This includes when a teacher is the rapist in the educational field. The rules prohibit teachers from carrying out or executing actions or conduct with their students that violate their sexual freedom and modesty, or from sexually harassing their students.
However, the laws themselves do not specify anything about consensual relationships, agreed upon between teachers and students, neither in schools nor in universities.
In Japan the age of sexual consent for a child is set at 17 years old, but until June 2023 it was only 13 years old. Japan does not escape the existence of cases in which underage girls become involved with adults, become pregnant and become teenage mothers. The United Nations Population Fund, UNDP, recognizes in its periodic reports that “around 19 percent of young women in developing countries become pregnant before the age of 18. Two million of the 7.3 million births of adolescents under the age of 18 that occur each year in developing countries are births of girls under the age of 15.” Other reports speak of abortion at that age.
We are not shocked when we see a 16-year-old girl with her 30-year-old teacher, but if we see a 16-year-old boy dating a woman or a man who could be his mother or father, we immediately brand the boy as a gold digger. , of wanting to take advantage of the teacher's attention or other similar comments, while the teacher is labeled a pedophile and abuser. My concern is whether in the exercise of the teaching profession there is abuse towards the partner, towards the student. This is not the case with Sahara and Toki.

What is irrelevant because "no one" touched it here?

I really liked that the full understanding of how much Karam loves him and for how long, Achi did not know it through his magical power, but through his memories, tying up loose ends, discovering the “magic feather” treasured by Karam since a long time ago.

In reality, we do not know the ages of Sahara and Toki, but this does not matter, in my opinion based on Japanese and universal laws and pedophilic disorder. But it is still good to access the debate, to continue giving elements or arguments. Just the idea that one is a teacher and the other a student is enough to set off alarm bells for some. Many times they are homophobes interested not in the debate, but in denigrating homosexuals. Other times they are people who don't like the series because they prefer another country (it happens a lot in the case of Thai BL fans who maliciously criticize Chinese, Taiwanese, Korean, Filipino beings... just for fear that these They are better than the Thai ones and have better positions in the rankings or some other absurd reason. I watch BL from all countries and they excite me when they should excite me and I criticize them when they deserve to be criticized, but I am not blind. For example, when I say that in Thailand discriminates against homosexuals and homosexuality is illegal, they generally say that I'm lying, that what I'm saying is not true, and they only manage to give as conclusive proof a list of Thai series in which one boy kisses another and they are happy forever.
Returning to the topic at hand: Toki must be 16 or 17 years old. This can be inferred from the data that is revealed to us about the protagonists. In the first episode, Sahara takes Toki to the classroom where he studies Todo and introduces him as a third-year student. Sahara tells Toki that Todo is one (school) year older than him. So, Toki is in his second year of high school. In Japan's secondary schools, young people between the ages of 15 and 18 study. The age of majority in Japan is 18 years old. Furthermore, the age for consensual sex in Japan was recently raised from 13 to 16. According to Japanese laws, if Toki were only 16 years old, she can have consensual sex.
Has Toki repeated a year for being a bad student? If so, he would be older than supposed. He could then be in his last year of high school, and even have finished it. Has Sahara already graduated from University? Isn't he at school as a substitute teacher? He may not have graduated yet. Undergraduate courses in Japan are generally 4 years long, with the exception of Medicine and other cases in which the duration is 6 years. The Teaching degree (it seems to be Sahara's) lasts only 4 years.

Has Aof realized the dramatic potential of blindness and visual impairment to bring us a story on the subject? The social image of blind people has gone through different phases and, to a certain extent, has been overcoming the usual negative and stereotypical attitudes. Television is also responsible for the perceived public image of disability. Therefore, the representation of blind people in audiovisual programs contributes to the general perception that society has of this group.
Will it be Day's destiny to inspire pity, compassion and marginalization? Will the story focus on his struggle to overcome his limitations? Will the series focus on the aspect of his rehabilitation from a more hopeful perspective? Is it intended to offer the image of a person who rehabilitates himself and lives a life that tries to get as close to normal as his circumstances allow? Will a story prevail in which the blind character seeks social integration? How to make a story with these characteristics, when in current filmography it is rare to see the person with a disability like any other person? Isn't it due to the fact that audiovisual productions show disability as a medical issue rather than from a social perspective? How to succeed in the process?
Aof has drawn on the changes produced in the way visual disability is represented in film and television. He also knows how society has evolved in its understanding of disability.
Taking into account everything mentioned above, it would be appropriate to ask ourselves: to what extent does the series portray a blind character from a positive perspective? To what extent does it represent, and therefore promote, the progressive inclusion of visually impaired people in society? Is one of the purposes of 'Last Twilight' to contribute to enhancing the general perception that society has of disability? Does Day have a fully developed personality, or is her character fundamentally defined by her disability? Does the series reflect Day's character as a unique and distinctive personality, or is his disability the main focus of the plot? Is Day's personality unique because his character expresses the desire for independence and not wanting to be pitied?
What is Day's level of inclusion in the community? (considering that this includes areas such as inclusive education, employment, residential environment, community participation, recreation and social activities. What are Day's interpersonal relationships with the people around him? Will his character move away from the stereotypes with which the visually impaired have been reflected in cinema and television?