奶油夹心兔

@chenluox

🇨🇳。 After Kang Mincheol oppa mated with beasts, they gave birth to the misogynistic Kang Mincheol fans who love putting chastity locks on women.

People's Republic of China Katılım Mart 2022

180 Takip Edilen406 Takipçiler

Sabitlenmiş Tweet

奶油夹心兔@chenluox·4d

Hi everyone, welcome to take a look at what Korean readers in the original webtoon comment section really think about Kang Mincheol. These are all normal Korean readers who have actually read the webtoon~

English

6.6K

奶油夹心兔 retweetledi

蒜蓉鱿鱼须@suanrongyouyuxu·1d

我觉得全红婵被霸凌这件事至少说明一点，就是你是否被霸凌跟你是否优秀没有半毛钱关系，无论做得多好都没用的。讨厌你的人永远能找到理由。你的优秀是你的罪证，你的缺点更是他们合理化自己行为的借口。霸凌本质是一个逻辑封闭的系统，无论输入什么最后得出来的结论都是“你有问题”。寄希望于自己变得更好来摆脱霸凌，这种策略从根本上就是无效的。

中文

1.6K

71.1K

奶油夹心兔@chenluox·19h

我最该对自己确认的事，是我是否问心无愧，如果我做的是我认为对的事，至少我不该分出我的一部分站在指责我的对立面，又连同所有指责我的人一起对我本身实施一场围剿。如果我拿自己作为盾牌去抵挡飞来的刀，最后在刀飞向别人的那一刻，我该记住的是“刀在谁手里，谁就是凶手”，而不是“我的盾不够硬不够大保护不了所有人”，更不是“对方是个见人就乱砍的疯子所以我所做的是徒劳的也是牵连他人的” 人总是倾向于把愤怒发泄在“安全”的对象身上，因为直面真正的施暴者意味着要战斗、要承担风险、要承认自己也在恐惧中沉默了太久，一旦我会反思，会内疚，我将会是那个可以被扣帽子的人，安全、并且不需要任何代价但反击是我的本能自卫，即便我迎下一击并扇了回去，这也不叫公平，因为我本没有想要争斗，主动去冒犯的不是我，我只是被迫需要挡下；换来对面更狠更卑劣的、甚至误伤队友的攻击，而之所以对面能这样疯狂加码，是因为被一次次还手时的“我不吃这一套”打痛了，这是他们选择的报复路径，不是我策划的误炸，更不该怪罪我的徒劳，因为哪怕在孤身一人的时候我也从未选择沉默谁是麻烦的制造者，谁又是麻烦的发现者，站在暴风雪下点一束火，火灭了，我要说的是因为暴风雪太大了，还是因为火不够热，至少所有事情，问完自己以后我比谁都更清理这说明我还没被暴徒所驯服，在还手的那一刻我不是想让结果变轻，而是在告诉自己我没有接受这个结果，是在过程中不断创造意义去否认那所谓的结果，哪怕暴徒在乱砍中因为伸手的阻挡而砍得更凶，亦或是不伸手他只是砍两下再走——我为什么要用正常人的思维去推算一个疯子的下一步，又为什么要因为赌输了一次去认定我当时不该伸手是，没人要求我站出来，但别人求我去做的，那叫任务，而我看不下去、忍不了、觉得不该这样，于是去做了的，这叫良知。不是“被要求而行动”，而是“没人让我做，但我觉得不对，所以我做了” 我从来没有被压回过沉默里，所以我不会再听任何指责我的声音

中文

690

奶油夹心兔@chenluox·21h

Why some camera angles can make me feel uncomfortable: The clip from the first image is taken from Don't Talk to Strangers, exposing the brutality of domestic violence and its harm to victims. The camera is aimed almost entirely at the abuser, capturing his actions, expressions, and words, forming a complete and brutal portrait of him. What the audience remembers is the violence of the abuser. But when the camera focuses on the victim, all we see is a woman being humiliated—her pained face, exposed skin, her trembling in fear without the strength to resist. Everything is magnified by the lens, laid bare before the public eye. What the audience remembers is the suffering of the victim. The camera that could be directed at the cruelty of the perpetrator instead fixes on the vulnerability of the victim, transferring pain and a shaming gaze onto the woman, using close-ups to turn her into an object of humiliation for consumption. That is the source of the discomfort. The camera has its own language. Whoever the camera focuses on is whom the audience looks at. When the camera lingers on the victim’s pain, while the abuser is only briefly mentioned or not even in the frame, the camera itself is doing something cruel: turning the victim’s suffering into a consumable spectacle while allowing the abuser to remain invisible. Under such camera work, the audience’s attention is drawn mostly to “how much the victim suffers” rather than “how evil the abuser is.” This kind of focus on the victim is not a judgment of the perpetrator, but a gaze upon the victim. A reasonable portrayal of violence should focus on the abuser’s hands, expressions, and posture, making the audience feel that the sense of oppression and fear originates from the abuser—not merely making viewers feel the victim’s pain from across the screen. Of course, as some might say, other comics have even more of these tropes, yet I only mention this one. So let me ask you: if someone is beaten, would you say, “But others are killed in the world, so why are you crying over a beating?” If someone says, “The water here is dangerously deep,” would you step in and say, “The sea over there is deeper, and you’re ignoring it”? As long as something worse exists in the world, does that mean no one is allowed to complain about what’s right in front of them? As if pain is a competition, where you only get to speak if you win a medal. The reason I chose this particular work is that I’ve been a reader of it for a long time, and it’s the only one I know well. I am not obligated to rank all the comics in the world by “severity of harm” before I earn the right to speak. I don’t need to compare every other comic you tell me contains even worse elements just to conclude which one is more problematic. I only need to tell you: “I’ve only read this one, and it made me uncomfortable. Because I saw it, I spoke.” Moreover, in this comic, I probably don’t need to say much more—over nearly a hundred chapters, how many romanticized shots are focused on the ex-husband who humiliates this woman, showcasing his “savior” image from his student days? And how many people have even used that as a defense for his violent actions?

奶油夹心兔@chenluox

The worst thing about this manhwa is the author's constant narrative of putting female characters through suffering and the glorification of trashy characters. The camera of misery is always focused on women — that's what you should be concerned about, not her body shape.

English

681

8.3K

1.1M

奶油夹心兔@chenluox·22h

"Other comics have more scenes like this, but you don’t mention them."— that’s not reasoning. That’s using other people’s suffering to silence someone. As if, just because there’s something worse in the world, you don’t have the right to cry out about the bad thing right in front of you. Pain is not the Olympics. You don’t need a gold medal to be allowed to speak. As for the other comics you mentioned, I've never been their audience. But the one I'm talking about—I've been a legitimate reader of it for nearly a year, and I've made multiple paid purchases for merchandise and commissioned fan creations.

koko@k0k0mys

Gente pesadaaa, pero a los bl si hay vi/olaciones y cosas con menores no dicen nadaaa

English

668

奶油夹心兔

Keşfet