It is hard to avoid this in drama. I think 3 out of 5 drama about secret divorce agreement, FL will tell someone…
I'm on episode 14. She is not as annoying as the comments suggested because the ML is equally annoying, but the thing I mentioned did strike me as quite odd.
The FL is so dumb in episode 13. Why did she have to mention her divorce agreement in front of a stranger? Whatever problems the leads have should be kept between them. If she shares it with someone else, and the information somehow reaches the Empress Dowager, both of them could be harmed.
The daughter is so annoying, like hell. She’s acting like her mother is a toy and being so petty about it. It’s her mother’s life—she can decide who she wants to date, and Mi Rae shouldn’t be a roadblock in their lives. If you want to be angry at your father then be angry at him but don't order your mom and brother to do the same if they don't want to.
And I'm really tired of the mansplaining and 'moral' virtual signaling going on and your false equivalence and…
Oh, pulling the ‘You Have No Argument’ card again, I see. How original! It's fascinating how you keep shouting that my argument is non-existent while ignoring the actual points I’ve raised. The fact that this thread is mostly ‘bitching’ about female leads proves my point more than it disproves it—yes, female characters do get criticized, but it’s the way that MLs are held to different standards for the same actions. And here you are, accusing me of making it up as I go along. Classic.
Now, let’s talk about the ‘reading comments’ bit. I’ve seen the complaints about Yuan Mo and how his every small fault gets magnified. Meanwhile, Ah Shu can do whatever she wants, throw a temper tantrum, and somehow it’s an act of ‘independence.’ But if the ML reacts with even an ounce of frustration or jealousy, suddenly he’s a ‘walking red flag.’ So, no, I haven’t missed those comments; I’ve just noticed how the reactions are incredibly skewed depending on the character’s gender. But I guess calling out double standards now makes me an expert in ‘gaslighting,’ right?
Oh, and that ‘disgusting female viewers’ line—seems like that really hit home. Funny how you keep bringing up ‘chauvinism’ like it’s your get-out-of-argument-free card. I get it, the word’s a convenient catch-all when you don’t want to actually engage with the substance of the debate. I called out inconsistencies and boom, now I’m a chauvinist. What a plot twist.
So, rather than labeling me with buzzwords like ‘gaslighting’ and ‘bloviating,’ maybe try addressing how these female characters can act irrationally and it’s considered ‘strong character development,’ but MLs who dare to have emotions are immediately scrutinized as being problematic. Or are we just going to keep playing the strawman game where any criticism of an FL is automatically sexist? I'll wait patiently for that actual argument I haven't seen yet.
And I'm really tired of the mansplaining and 'moral' virtual signaling going on and your false equivalence and…
Ah, the ‘Mommy’s Candy’ excuse—how charming. It’s truly a spectacle to see you deflect from the real issues by bringing up personal anecdotes. If you find my arguments so ‘lame,’ it’s odd that you keep circling back to them instead of offering something substantive.
Your insistence that there’s no double standard and that male characters are critiqued just as harshly is laughable. If comment sections are so rife with critiques of male characters, why does it seem like the female characters get a free pass? It’s almost as if the ‘disgusting female viewers’ you deride are only part of a broader trend of overlooking inconsistencies.
You claim my argument is non-existent while ignoring the fact that your responses avoid addressing the crux of my points. If you’ve really ‘addressed’ my arguments in your first post, it’s a shame it wasn’t more effective. So, let’s cut through the personal attacks and actually debate the issues if you’re capable. Until then, enjoy spinning in circles while I continue to challenge the inconsistencies you seem so keen to ignore.
And I'm really tired of the mansplaining and 'moral' virtual signaling going on and your false equivalence and…
Interesting pivot to the ‘Language Skills’ critique—always a classic move when the arguments run dry. If my responses seem repetitive, it’s probably because your replies haven’t directly addressed the core issues I raised.
Instead of tackling the substance of the critique, you’ve chosen to question my comprehension, which is a convenient way to avoid engaging with the actual discussion. If you can’t or won’t address the arguments, maybe it’s time to step back and reconsider your approach. I’m here for a debate, not a personal evaluation, so let’s stick to discussing the points if you’re up for it.
Is anyone else having subtitle issues with this drama? Sometimes, conversations between characters get hidden or cut short due to special words, such as character names, places, or song lyrics. Is there any solution to this problem?
And I'm really tired of the mansplaining and 'moral' virtual signaling going on and your false equivalence and…
Oh, the irony! You’re absolutely right—I must be the villain for suggesting that the FL’s actions should be scrutinized as harshly as the ML’s, and for having the audacity to question why female characters get a ‘free pass’ while male characters are grilled over every minor flaw. Your indignation is truly inspiring, especially considering you’re defending a system where any critique of female characters is automatically deemed ‘chauvinistic.’
It’s adorable how you claim I’m imposing ‘faux morals’ while completely ignoring the fact that my comments were aimed at highlighting double standards in character portrayal. And yes, let’s ignore the fact that my critique was about balancing the narrative, not creating some utopian world where women are surrounded by flawless men.
You’ve managed to turn my call for consistent standards into a grand crusade against all things feminist. Bravo! If defending the portrayal of female characters by dismissing any critique as ‘chauvinistic nonsense’ is your idea of advocacy, then I’ll happily take my place in the realm of ‘disgusting male viewers.’ Keep championing the unblemished portrayal of female leads while avoiding any real discussion about narrative fairness. The ‘Virtue Squad’ would be proud.
And I'm really tired of the mansplaining and 'moral' virtual signaling going on and your false equivalence and…
Ah, the classic ‘I’ve Seen It All’ defense—how original! It’s almost poetic how you twist my critique into a grand display of chauvinism while avoiding the actual points. Accusing me of ‘dictating’ female character behavior while you champion the flawless female leads is quite the irony. I guess holding female characters to the same standards as their male counterparts is a revolutionary idea that’s too radical for your taste.
It’s adorable how you’ve turned my frustration into a moral crusade, conveniently ignoring the fact that I’ve criticized both male and female characters. Your tireless defense of female writers sounds like it’s straight out of a fan club meeting where no one is allowed to question the script. And yes, I did mention ‘Virtue Squad’—a nod to the fact that any critique of female characters is apparently forbidden in your utopia.
It’s clear that any criticism that doesn’t fit your perfect narrative is met with outrage. So here’s to your bubble of flawless female portrayals and your endless lectures on how any deviation is a crime. Thanks for making it clear that honest discussions about character flaws are only allowed if they align with your self-righteous script. Bravo!
https://x.com/livingtribunel/status/1834830437782352206?t=ByTNYMR_JPF50c5Y690-XA&s=19
https://x.com/dramapotatoe/status/1834078733298180331?t=eH_o0-u-o2fSSCbxkd_TKA&s=19
Now, let’s talk about the ‘reading comments’ bit. I’ve seen the complaints about Yuan Mo and how his every small fault gets magnified. Meanwhile, Ah Shu can do whatever she wants, throw a temper tantrum, and somehow it’s an act of ‘independence.’ But if the ML reacts with even an ounce of frustration or jealousy, suddenly he’s a ‘walking red flag.’ So, no, I haven’t missed those comments; I’ve just noticed how the reactions are incredibly skewed depending on the character’s gender. But I guess calling out double standards now makes me an expert in ‘gaslighting,’ right?
Oh, and that ‘disgusting female viewers’ line—seems like that really hit home. Funny how you keep bringing up ‘chauvinism’ like it’s your get-out-of-argument-free card. I get it, the word’s a convenient catch-all when you don’t want to actually engage with the substance of the debate. I called out inconsistencies and boom, now I’m a chauvinist. What a plot twist.
So, rather than labeling me with buzzwords like ‘gaslighting’ and ‘bloviating,’ maybe try addressing how these female characters can act irrationally and it’s considered ‘strong character development,’ but MLs who dare to have emotions are immediately scrutinized as being problematic. Or are we just going to keep playing the strawman game where any criticism of an FL is automatically sexist? I'll wait patiently for that actual argument I haven't seen yet.
Your insistence that there’s no double standard and that male characters are critiqued just as harshly is laughable. If comment sections are so rife with critiques of male characters, why does it seem like the female characters get a free pass? It’s almost as if the ‘disgusting female viewers’ you deride are only part of a broader trend of overlooking inconsistencies.
You claim my argument is non-existent while ignoring the fact that your responses avoid addressing the crux of my points. If you’ve really ‘addressed’ my arguments in your first post, it’s a shame it wasn’t more effective. So, let’s cut through the personal attacks and actually debate the issues if you’re capable. Until then, enjoy spinning in circles while I continue to challenge the inconsistencies you seem so keen to ignore.
Instead of tackling the substance of the critique, you’ve chosen to question my comprehension, which is a convenient way to avoid engaging with the actual discussion. If you can’t or won’t address the arguments, maybe it’s time to step back and reconsider your approach. I’m here for a debate, not a personal evaluation, so let’s stick to discussing the points if you’re up for it.
It’s adorable how you claim I’m imposing ‘faux morals’ while completely ignoring the fact that my comments were aimed at highlighting double standards in character portrayal. And yes, let’s ignore the fact that my critique was about balancing the narrative, not creating some utopian world where women are surrounded by flawless men.
You’ve managed to turn my call for consistent standards into a grand crusade against all things feminist. Bravo! If defending the portrayal of female characters by dismissing any critique as ‘chauvinistic nonsense’ is your idea of advocacy, then I’ll happily take my place in the realm of ‘disgusting male viewers.’ Keep championing the unblemished portrayal of female leads while avoiding any real discussion about narrative fairness. The ‘Virtue Squad’ would be proud.
It’s adorable how you’ve turned my frustration into a moral crusade, conveniently ignoring the fact that I’ve criticized both male and female characters. Your tireless defense of female writers sounds like it’s straight out of a fan club meeting where no one is allowed to question the script. And yes, I did mention ‘Virtue Squad’—a nod to the fact that any critique of female characters is apparently forbidden in your utopia.
It’s clear that any criticism that doesn’t fit your perfect narrative is met with outrage. So here’s to your bubble of flawless female portrayals and your endless lectures on how any deviation is a crime. Thanks for making it clear that honest discussions about character flaws are only allowed if they align with your self-righteous script. Bravo!