Harapeko Oyako to Motokare Yanushi - Ch. 30

[finalm]

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5705583/#R14

You can find the research sources at the bottom.

"Although most children fare well in stepfamilies, children in stepfamilies are at an elevated risk of experiencing adjustment problems." the articles go into the fact that step families have adjustment issues biological families do not have.

"In cases, stepparents and children foster a relationship over time that is unique and beneficial as stepparents enter into an “intimate outsider” mentoring role for their stepchildren (Papernow, 2013, p. 160)."
it's pretty normal for there to be a disconnect.

The article also goes into how the transition from elementary school to middle school is an important time period for the relationship dynamic to be enforced as it's the time period when children develop social clic cohesion.

So yeah sorry, blood ties to matter to children in real life. Now I suppose you'll "treat me like an adult." Whatever that means.

Yes, I will. These are better sources than I expected. Tough admittedly, I'm used to expecting nothing but doubling down on sophisms like "common sense", "natural order" etc...

 

[Argon2409]

Not that simple, social cohesion develops towards the later years of childhood. Sure if a young child gets a step parent they don't have a developed idea of social cohesion and normalcy so they can simply asert the parental clic onto them easily, especially if there's no present parent to conflict with the step parent.
Whenever the child is in their later childhood when they have developed social normalcy that's when it gets harder, its obviously a spectrum as well some kids may not care even if they're older and bond easily while some kids may be younger and never get that parental bond.
Everything I've presented is also present in attachment theory, as in attachment theory the younger age of the child is when relationship are more open to change. By early adolescents it paternal bonding becomes harder as this is the start of the transition of independence from dependence.

There are of course other factors as you say, biological parent being abusive then having a supportive step parent can obviously influence a paternal relationship but this goes both ways if there was a supportive biological parent who died or disappeared even if the step parent is equally as supportive and loving this can make it harder for the step child due to the previous attachment and the tendency is to focus on them not being the "real parent" due to blood in thartcase. These are social factors that play into it, blood ties are a part of social ties.

Also comparing human social connections to animal ones just doesn't work, we have the most advanced idea of social structures of any animal and it's not even close. Animals don't have the same family units as humans do the closest I can find is probably beavers. Humans are also sentient unlike animals, a cat doesn't know it's a cat, it doesn't have a concept of a cat so if it's around dogs and acts dog like it makes sense because it doesn't know what it is. Humans know what we are and we have a concept of humans and specific animals, it's why using animals an example falls apart because we just have far more advanced ideas and concepts of self identity than any animals we are aware of. (Elephants and dolphins may have this self identity with how smart they are but we have no way to communicate.)
It's also not that blood ties are irrelevant in the animals, in fact they're more relevant, hundreds of baby animals are killed by adult males of the same species so they can replace the infant with their own young.

 

[ynt311]

What holes? People have been inventing conflicts because they want the cozy slice of life story to be more tragic than it actually is.

I will repeat. Did the manga answer why she did not reach out to her family/husband's family/closest friends and chose MC instead?

Why is this important? Because it is unnatural that the person she would turn to is a person whom she NEVER contacted for X years instead of the people she HAD BEEN in contact with for that X years. This is the "questionable stuff". Without explanation, the premise seems forced.

Spoiler: continuation

It is more natural to seek help from her family first or spouse's family or relatives especially when it is something that concerns her family/child. It is odd that a stranger, a mere acquaintance whom she had no contact with is the one she turned to.

You might argue "he is still her ex". So? If MC had a family of his own, which is a likely thing to happen in that X years span, wouldn't it be very odd to see him now unaanounced, if you look at it from her perspective?

You might argue "she's simply that carefree and thoughtless to even think about it". This is the most believable explanation I can accept given the personality that she showed. But unfortunately that only reinforces the idea that "she's taking advantage of MC" because of how she's grown used to thinking that way.

You might argue "MC accepted her anyway so it doesn't matter". Look at it from her perspective, not MC. Be the person showing up one's residence unannounced. Be the person not contacting a friend for a long time then only reach out when you need help. Reverse the roles then do a self-reflection afterwards.

You might argue instead "well obviously she tried to seek help from her husband's family, it wasn't just mentioned". Sure, that's a plausible scenario. You will argue "because those details are not important and the readers are left to figure it out". Again. That's exactly why we are having this argument. Because there was no clarification made. So let people make assumptions to fill those gaps. That's why people saying "she's taking advantage of MC" is a valid assumption. It is grounded on the facts that were already presented in the manga.

Likewise, the assumption that "she isn't taking advantage of MC" is also valid. You are free to handwave as much as you want if that makes it enjoyable for you to read. But straight up denying the opposite and spinning it as "inventing conflicts" is the problem. The lack of clarity makes both statements valid and grounded.

Just to add on "questionable stuff": It is very odd that she did NOT notify MC beforehand.

Spoiler: continuation

It's common courtesy to do so.

What if MC had a live-in partner or already had a family on his own? It's very thoughtless of her, don't you think? Her suddenly showing up with a child, carrying their belongings just seems so odd. It's like telling the MC "we're already here and we went all the trouble of traveling so it won't be nice of you to reject us now". Somehow she already knew where MC lived, so knowing how to reach him or even meeting him personally beforehand to explain the situation isn't too much to ask, right?

You might argue "maybe she didn't have time". Her reason was that her apartment was being renovated. I'm sure she was notified about the renovation at an earlier date and had plenty of time to talk to MC. If it was really that urgent, why choose MC's place that's far away instead of a friend's home near you or maybe a relative's?

You might argue "she lived in a place far from everyone and MC's place is the nearest". Okay, we can keep going and make it even more complicated. But using Occam's razor, the simplest explanation is that she never really gave it any thought and just intended to show up out of the blue.

But oh. Those details are "not important" so let's ignore it then. It is not a "plot hole" because they're not important. But why I am not allowed to make assumptions that would paint her character in a negative way because of the missing details? Why is making assumptions based on common sense "inventing conflicts to make the story tragic"?

I completely understand that there's a number of people who don't question those stuff and see it a normal thing. Maybe showing up in one's residence uninvited isn't as big deal as it is to you. Maybe asking for a living space from someone you've not talked to for years is just a normal everyday thing to you.

But it is not true for everyone. That's what I want you to understand. I don't find it normal too. That's why I think people saying bad things about her have valid grounds for doing so.

If this wasn't about "A Hungry Mother and Daughter and Her Ex-Boyfriend Landlord" then maybe I could agree with saying "people are inventing conflicts". But the thing is, "her living in MC's house" is a core part of the story so it's not that easy to just ignore details that lead to it.

Do you mean the story acknowledging the past as a way of contrasting with their current situation?

Confronting the past to progress the current instead of pretending there's no problem. But this in particular is something I've come to terms with and I don't mind if we have a separate discussion just for it.

Also, something that I only recently realized is the time gap is to make it so that Take's and Minori's relationship starts at zero.

It could be done without the "no contact" and odd breakup details. Those were unnecessary if there was zero intention to make it tragic. Again, author's fault, not the readers.

 

[jojoka]

Yeah real good straw-man bro, not looking at the evidence and sources I sited or making an argument against my statements like I did with yours. Good job, take away nuance out of a conversation and simplify a complex subject you have no idea about.

 

[Argon2409]

Yeah real good straw-man bro, not looking at the evidence and sources I sited or making an argument against my statements like I did with yours. Good job, take away nuance out of a conversation and simplify a complex subject you have no idea about.

Consult the image

 

[jojoka]

Consult the image

Dont care for straw man arguements if that's your arguement you're not worth indulging anymore.

 

[jrocker]

Just adopt her already and then the mom can tell you the truth about the father!

 

[meesk]

A lot of you have never once been outside or spoken to people in person and it really really shows.

 

[Kagimizu]

Or maybe because the manga didn't give a definitive answer to the questions "Why not her family, her husband's family, relatives, closest friends, people she's been in contact with recently and instead chose him, her ex whom she never contacted for X years? Why can't she leave the daughter's care to her husband's family?"

If someone you've never seen and talked to for many years suddenly came asking for help, naturally you'd wonder why they would come to you instead of the people closest to them. It's also common courtesy for one to explain their situation first before asking for favors. The manga just casually does it without asking too much questions. I won't judge you if were the kind of person who would give money to someone immediately without asking any questions just because they asked you and you were acquainted. However, not at all people are like that. It's not that hard to imagine why some see her taking advantage of him.

Simple explanations like "She no longer had any relatives alive", "Her friends were all too busy with their own lives", or even "MC lived right next to her workplace" would be enough. It's the manga's fault for having a controversial premise then be like "who cares, this is just a comfy story so stop asking unnecessary stuff". Reality works differently. But hey, this is fictional story, so should we just stop with the criticisms and accept the story and characters as they are?

Just in case you don't know, there are single mothers who would use pity and sympathy to take advantage of someone's kindness. It's not limited to them, of course. Single dads, orphans, disabled people, beggars/homeless people and even normal people can do so. Of course, that isn't true for all. But that makes it perfectly reasonable to question and criticize the woman's actions.

To be wary at the start is understandable, even if the MC himself is not. But I reiterate: she has a job. Until the MC told her it was no big deal, she was actively looking for new apartments. The fact that she went to him after 17 years of no contact is odd, yes, and the manga will almost certainly address that in due time. But if she were truly a shameless leech like some of these comments like to accuse, she wouldn't be working to make her own money. She wouldn't have been making an active effort to guarantee that this was a temporary arrangement. And, using chapter 1 as an example much like you did, mother and daughter both jumped into helping make dinner without even needing to be asked. It was the MC who insisted on cooking after realizing neither of them had the needed experience.

And the very first page of the second chapter shows the mother being outright surprised he's willing to allow them to stay, temporarily or otherwise. She even checks to make sure he hasn't been scammed or taken advantage of by others due to his kindness (which he subsequently calls her out for). I'm sure if I had both the energy and desire I could sift through every page of every chapter to find every ounce of evidence that proves she is not (intentionally, at least) manipulating or taking advantage of him. But to continue genuinely believing she's doing nothing but stringing him along so she can suck him dry of money while having a free place to stay even at this point is not simply blind ignorance, but active misogyny malice.

 

[MandrakeKing]

You might argue instead "well obviously she tried to seek help from her husband's family, it wasn't just mentioned". Sure, that's a plausible scenario. You will argue "because those details are not important and the readers are left to figure it out". Again. That's exactly why we are having this argument. Because there was no clarification made. So let people make assumptions to fill those gaps. That's why people saying "she's taking advantage of MC" is a valid assumption. It is grounded on the facts that were already presented in the manga.

Likewise, the assumption that "she isn't taking advantage of MC" is also valid. You are free to handwave as much as you want if that makes it enjoyable for you to read. But straight up denying the opposite and spinning it as "inventing conflicts" is the problem. The lack of clarity makes both statements valid and grounded.

Just to add on "questionable stuff": It is very odd that she did NOT notify MC beforehand.
It's common courtesy to do so.

What if MC had a live-in partner or already had a family on his own? It's very thoughtless of her, don't you think? Her suddenly showing up with a child, carrying their belongings just seems so odd. It's like telling the MC "we're already here and we went all the trouble of traveling so it won't be nice of you to reject us now". Somehow she already knew where MC lived, so knowing how to reach him or even meeting him personally beforehand to explain the situation isn't too much to ask, right?

You might argue "maybe she didn't have time". Her reason was that her apartment was being renovated. I'm sure she was notified about the renovation at an earlier date and had plenty of time to talk to MC. If it was really that urgent, why choose MC's place that's far away instead of a friend's home near you or maybe a relative's?

You might argue "she lived in a place far from everyone and MC's place is the nearest". Okay, we can keep going and make it even more complicated. But using Occam's razor, the simplest explanation is that she never really gave it any thought and just intended to show up out of the blue.

The simplest explanation would be that she was telling the truth and just forgot. You want to bring up Occam's razor, but Hanlon's razor also applies: Do not attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. She has been portrayed as an airhead from the beginning, so it's in line with her character that she would fuck something up.

The simplest rundown of her situation without assuming ill intent would go as followed:
1. She gets a notice that her apartment is going to be rebuilt and that she'll need a new place to stay in the meantime
2. She runs through her whole contact list asking people to let her and her daughter stay with them, but for one reason or another, they all say "No".
3. As the deadline draws near, she remembers Takaharu and his offer
4. Because she's now in a rush, she forgets to actually message him about her situation, only realizing once they were at his doorstep

Though, it's clear that you won't accept part 2 unless the author gives a full easy on each and every person's reasoning for declining her, and if they don't, it's a "plot hole". Truth is, it doesn't actually matter what the author tells us, because y'all would ignore it like how people are still calling her a leech even those she's been confirmed to be paying rent since chapter 8.

But oh. Those details are "not important" so let's ignore it then. It is not a "plot hole" because they're not important. But why I am not allowed to make assumptions that would paint her character in a negative way because of the missing details? Why is making assumptions based on common sense "inventing conflicts to make the story tragic"?

Ignoring the tone of the story being told and assuming ill intent from the characters with zero evidence is not applying "common sense". We literally had people speculating that Minori was the product of rape and that her father was actively hunting them down because the idea of a single parent household was too much of a reach for them.

If you have to come up with conspiracy theories to have a conflict, you are not "making assumptions based on common sense"

I completely understand that there's a number of people who don't question those stuff and see it a normal thing. Maybe showing up in one's residence uninvited isn't as big deal as it is to you. Maybe asking for a living space from someone you've not talked to for years is just a normal everyday thing to you.

But it is not true for everyone. That's what I want you to understand. I don't find it normal too. That's why I think people saying bad things about her have valid grounds for doing so.

You seem to forget that this is a work of fiction and that it automatically applies by different rules from real life. I'm not nearly as trusting as Takahara, but I'm also not the protagonist in a romance story. I can brush off the lack of details because I understand how these stories tend to play out.

 

[ynt311]

The simplest explanation would be that she was telling the truth and just forgot. You want to bring up Occam's razor, but Hanlon's razor also applies: Do not attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. She has been portrayed as an airhead from the beginning, so it's in line with her character that she would fuck something up.

This is perfectly valid. I am more inclined to believe it is also supported by her behavior until the latest chapters and also the most convincing explanation so far.

3. As the deadline draws near, she remembers Takaharu and his offer

This is false. She can't remember an offer that MC made because she has never contacted him before. This event is impossible. Unless of course, she makes things up because she's an airhead.

Spoiler: continuation

Or if you are talking about an offer made X years ago while they were still a couple that was mentioned in the manga. If such offer was made and there was proof to it, I would accept that it is my mistake for missing that detail and my argument is no longer valid. However, based on the reaction of MC it seems no such offer was made beforehand, so I am inclined to believe that your claim is false.

4. Because she's now in a rush, she forgets to actually message him about her situation, only realizing once they were at his doorstep

If we go by the "complete airhead" explanation, there's no refuting this. I can't argue on something that doesn't work on logic or common sense.

Ignoring the tone of the story being told and assuming ill intent from the characters with zero evidence is not applying "common sense".

No? In case you are not familiar with Usagi Drop, it had a very controversial end because it went a different way. It still remains to be a slice-of-life but had a different tone when it ended. The same could happen to this. Assuming with zero BASIS is not applying "common sense". The story can unfold with "she's a leech" premise while continue on the same tone. It is not an absurd, baseless assumption like "She's a murderer" that would completely change the tone of the story. But you act like it is and group them all as "ill-intent" because it does follow your assumptions.

We literally had people speculating that Minori was the product of rape and that her father was actively hunting them down because the idea of a single parent household was too much of a reach for them.

That is what I would call baseless and "inventing conflict". It is very much different from saying "she is a leech" which stems from the peculiarity of her decisions and lack of clarity on the questions I raised.

If you have to come up with conspiracy theories to have a conflict, you are not "making assumptions based on common sense"

So questioning why "choosing the ex you had zero contact of for help" leads to a conspiracy theory? Aren't you blowing it out of proportion? Do you want to tell me that the majority of the people would turn to a person they never spoke with for a long time for help as their ultimate option? Is that common sense to do so? Wanting to know "why she chose that option instead of the other more natural and obvious ones" is wanting conflict?

In case you ask what "more natural and obvious ones" are:

Spoiler

A. Contact your family and stay at their home.
B. Leave the daughter's care to your family while you find a place near your workplace.
C. Find a friend's place nearby and stay until you can find a more permanent solution.
D. Find a willing neighbor to let you in until you can find a more permanent solution.
E. Stay at a nearby cheap hotel/inn until you can find a more permanent solution.

Let me remind you that the situation was urgent and she was with her daughter. I don't know how "choosing a place who knows how far it is of an ex whom you've never contacted for X years as the option" strikes off as common sense to you. Choosing the least obvious option suggests there is a strong reason for it. But okay, let's dismiss that again using the "airhead" explanation.

You seem to forget that this is a work of fiction and that it automatically applies by different rules from real life. I'm not nearly as trusting as Takahara, but I'm also not the protagonist in a romance story. I can brush off the lack of details because I understand how these stories tend to play out.

It is a work of fiction. There is no reason why only one line of reasoning apply in the absence of concrete proof. I take issue on the fact that you reject the opposite argument as if yours is truth or the only valid line of reasoning. I would believe if you were the author.

I can brush off the lack of details because I understand how these stories tend to play out.

I would do the same if the premise was focused on something else entirely. In this case, it's not that easy to do so especially when there's extra fluff related to it. This is a story of the life with "her living in his home". If this was about MC having superpowers, then the details of "her ending up living in his home" is entirely dismissible.

Though, it's clear that you won't accept part 2 unless the author gives a full easy on each and every person's reasoning for declining her, and if they don't, it's a "plot hole". Truth is, it doesn't actually matter what the author tells us, because y'all would ignore it like how people are still calling her a leech even those she's been confirmed to be paying rent since chapter 8.

You think that I won't accept and I will ignore it because you think my goal is to "make her out to be a leech". That's the problem. In fact, if more evidence came up proving it otherwise, I will be arguing against the side calling her leech.

I have been stressing out the entire time that my point was: "We need to understand why people call her a leech" and not "We need to call her a leech".

When you don't provide a suitable explanation or concrete proof to dispute a claim, I am more inclined to accept both sides as a valid, rather than accept one side as truth. It's not like people are making completely baseless claims like "She is a murderer.". Their intention might be to cause conflict, but as long as their claims remain grounded, there is no reason to reject it.

she's been confirmed to be paying rent since chapter 8.

Because it isn't just about money.

Spoiler

If the story isn't headed towards "MC eventually taking them as if they're his own family and raising the daughter as if it was his own" then maybe it really is just money to him. MC has lingering feelings towards her and she is raising a daughter. If I knew that no such heavy responsibility will be pushed onto a person, that it is just a relationship forming without heavy consequences, then I wouldn't make such a big deal out of it.

Even the "airhead" excuse will not work here. But if the author and MC will accept it and view it completely as an innocent act, then who am I or we to decide what it is.

The topic of "raising someone else's child" isn't a simple matter that I can swallow like normal everyday food. The manga takes that issue very lightly and uses stupidity to avoid questions if we go by the "airhead" logic. It may be fiction, but it is a slice-of-life story which means it's supposed to be grounded on reality and have a reasonable premise.

If you think that because it is fiction that we shouldn't be taking it too seriously and we should view it detached from reality and common sense, then if it goes on a controversial route like MC develops a relationship with the daughter, would you still think the same?

Finally, if the counterarguments will all be supported by the "airhead" explanation, then no amount of logic and reason will refute it. So I will completely back down on my points and keep that in mind while reading instead.

 

[ynt311]

To be wary at the start is understandable, even if the MC himself is not. But I reiterate: she has a job. Until the MC told her it was no big deal, she was actively looking for new apartments. The fact that she went to him after 17 years of no contact is odd, yes, and the manga will almost certainly address that in due time. But if she were truly a shameless leech like some of these comments like to accuse, she wouldn't be working to make her own money. She wouldn't have been making an active effort to guarantee that this was a temporary arrangement. And, using chapter 1 as an example much like you did, mother and daughter both jumped into helping make dinner without even needing to be asked. It was the MC who insisted on cooking after realizing neither of them had the needed experience.

And the very first page of the second chapter shows the mother being outright surprised he's willing to allow them to stay, temporarily or otherwise. She even checks to make sure he hasn't been scammed or taken advantage of by others due to his kindness (which he subsequently calls her out for). I'm sure if I had both the energy and desire I could sift through every page of every chapter to find every ounce of evidence that proves she is not (intentionally, at least) manipulating or taking advantage of him. But to continue genuinely believing she's doing nothing but stringing him along so she can suck him dry of money while having a free place to stay even at this point is not simply blind ignorance, but active misogyny malice.

I understand your points. But it is not simply an issue of money when you include the matter of raising a child. If you think having a job resolves it, what about looking after your child? What about not affecting someone's private life and private time? For someone she never talked to for a long time, she's shoving a lot of that burden onto him without giving any thought. That "lack of thought" could be stemming from either malice or as the another commenter put it - plain stupidity. That's where I take issue.

You might argue "MC accepted it so it's okay". Maybe it is, if we remove the fact that he has lingering feelings towards her. If they were strangers and remained to be, it can easily be dismissed as pure acts void of malice, no ulterior motives at all from both sides. But the story isn't written that way. Like I said, the tiny details only make the story worse and appear less how it is intended to be. That's the author's fault, not the readers.

You might think it's misogynistic of me to criticize her alone. No, I am criticizing MC too as "taking advantage of her husband's loss". I take issue on both characters. But we can have a separate line of discussion on that.

 

[MandrakeKing]

This is perfectly valid. I am more inclined to believe it is also supported by her behavior until the latest chapters and also the most convincing explanation so far.


This is false. She can't remember an offer that MC made because she has never contacted him before. This event is impossible. Unless of course, she makes things up because she's an airhead.
Or if you are talking about an offer made X years ago while they were still a couple that was mentioned in the manga. If such offer was made and there was proof to it, I would accept that it is my mistake for missing that detail and my argument is no longer valid. However, based on the reaction of MC it seems no such offer was made beforehand, so I am inclined to believe that your claim is false.

Reread chapter 14

No? In case you are not familiar with Usagi Drop, it had a very controversial end because it went a different way. It still remains to be a slice-of-life but had a different tone when it ended. The same could happen to this. Assuming with zero BASIS is not applying "common sense". The story can unfold with "she's a leech" premise while continue on the same tone. It is not an absurd, baseless assumption like "She's a murderer" that would completely change the tone of the story. But you act like it is and group them all as "ill-intent" because it does follow your assumptions.

From my understanding Usagi Drop completely changes direction part way through. It wasn't like Oreimo where they set up the undertones from the get go. "She plans on draining his finances with no intention of helping out" is a very different tone from "She's in a bind and he's helping her out".

So questioning why "choosing the ex you had zero contact of for help" leads to a conspiracy theory?

Once again: People were assuming she was on the run from a violent boyfriend/husband with zero evidence. Even when there were implications that "Dad" was never in the picture to begin with. And once again, we still have people trying to make Takaharu and Minori blood related, with people suggesting that Kyou was lying about Minori's age. Also, remember when people were crying "bait & switch" when it was confirmed that "Dad" was never an actual plot point? The story never implied that he was going to matter in any way, but people were CONVINCED that he was important to the story

Aren't you blowing it out of proportion? Do you want to tell me that the majority of the people would turn to a person they never spoke with for a long time for help as their ultimate option? Is that common sense to do so? Wanting to know "why she chose that option instead of the other more natural and obvious ones" is wanting conflict?

In case you ask what "more natural and obvious ones" are:
A. Contact your family and stay at their home.
B. Leave the daughter's care to your family while you find a place near your workplace.
C. Find a friend's place nearby and stay until you can find a more permanent solution.
D. Find a willing neighbor to let you in until you can find a more permanent solution.
E. Stay at a nearby cheap hotel/inn until you can find a more permanent solution.

Let me remind you that the situation was urgent and she was with her daughter. I don't know how "choosing a place who knows how far it is of an ex whom you've never contacted for X years as the option" strikes off as common sense to you. Choosing the least obvious option suggests there is a strong reason for it. But okay, let's dismiss that again using the "airhead" explanation.

[They had nowhere to stay while their apartment was being rebuilt] implies that the other options were not available. It was stated in the first chapter. Once again, you are assuming that she didn't try anything when she may have very well tried every other option first.

I have been stressing out the entire time that my point was: "We need to understand why people call her a leech" and not "We need to call her a leech".

They're calling her a leech because they want to see her as a leech. It's as simple as that.

When you don't provide a suitable explanation or concrete proof to dispute a claim, I am more inclined to accept both sides as a valid, rather than accept one side as truth. It's not like people are making completely baseless claims like "She is a murderer.". Their intention might be to cause conflict, but as long as their claims remain grounded, there is no reason to reject it.

You seem to misunderstand how claims work. When you make a claim, YOU are supposed to be the one providing evidence for said claim. All that you've been doing in citing the lack of confirmation as evidence in and of itself. In some cases, even ignoring evidence that was provided. Your claims are being dismissed because [reasonable assumptions] make your claims unlikely at best. We are waiting for YOU to provide a suitable explanation or concrete proof for any of the claims against Kyou.

 

[ynt311]

Reread chapter 14

This is a good proof. While it does not answer why he was ultimately chosen, it clarified why MC was an option.

From my understanding Usagi Drop completely changes direction part way through. It wasn't like Oreimo where they set up the undertones from the get go. "She plans on draining his finances with no intention of helping out" is a very different tone from "She's in a bind and he's helping her out".

As you've said, the tones can change. The story can be dramatic at the start and become completely lighter at the middle and the end. I don't see why it wouldn't happen and work for this story. So "ignoring the tone to make assumptions" isn't unreasonable as long as it remains grounded. Assumptions that don't fit the current tone isn't automatically an assumption made with ill-intent.

In fact, this is a drama manga so I don't get why you don't see it as an element of drama and instead say things like "wanting to create conflict". It's not like readers don't want to see changes in the characters. They can start in a bad way because the story wanted to but still make them lovable and relatable at the end.

Once again: People were assuming she was on the run from a violent boyfriend/husband with zero evidence.

Her being on the run isn't the thing I am trying to argue about. It is specifically about people seeing her as a leech. Don't lump them as one as if my arguments also apply to them to make your point.

They're calling her a leech because they want to see her as a leech. It's as simple as that.

Okay. I'm not going to persuade you anymore if you choose to close your mind about it. I'll respect that decision.
I'll just say that some people are prejudiced, some people think based on logic and experience. I refuse to simplify them all as one and the same because while they may arrive at the same conclusion, they have their own reasons.

You seem to misunderstand how claims work. When you make a claim, YOU are supposed to be the one providing evidence for said claim. All that you've been doing in citing the lack of confirmation as evidence in and of itself. In some cases, even ignoring evidence that was provided. Your claims are being dismissed because [reasonable assumptions] make your claims unlikely at best. We are waiting for YOU to provide a suitable explanation or concrete proof for any of the claims against Kyou.

Can you clarify what claim I need to show proof of? I'd like to remind you, my claim is not "she is a leech".

Raising questions is not making claims. That's the probably part where you got it mistaken. It's easy to miss that when you are too fixated only on proving whether she is a leech or not. As a fellow human, I understand.

Instead, I will show you why I am giving her doubts. MC directly asks whether she has ulterior motives when she appeared with her daughter. She responds "who knows". If it was really nothing, there was no need to be vague about it. Again, this was intentional. This was inviting interpretations. Simple response like "Because you promised" or "Because you are kind and trustworthy" would still fit the narrative without changing the tone. Author's fault.

One more thing, my grounds for thinking that she is taking advantage of MC is less about the financial matters but more on the responsibility of raising the child. Hence why all of my questions revolved about "why choose him over her relatives" instead of "why not pay MC for cooking food, looking after her child, etc".

Finally, I just need to state a few points. The more I think about it and discuss, the more I realize that one could take the perspective that they are mutually taking advantage of each other and mutually benefitting in one way or another that works for both so it balances things out. Also, that raising a child may be viewed less as a responsibility but more as a reason for living which in this case might be how MC sees it.

I want to say one more thing so you don't end up thinking I'm just being stubborn and desperate to win some internet points. This discussion has been very long and I appreciate you giving time to continue it.

 

[MandrakeKing]

This is a good proof. While it does not answer why he was ultimately chosen, it clarified why MC was an option.

Once again, chapter 1 saying she had no where else to stay implies she had no other options left.

In fact, this is a drama manga so I don't get why you don't see it as an element of drama and instead say things like "wanting to create conflict". It's not like readers don't want to see changes in the characters. They can start in a bad way because the story wanted to but still make them lovable and relatable at the end.

Because their predictions clash with the tone that was established. If the author wants to go in that direction, fine. I don't take any issue with that. People claiming that the author WILL go in that direction based on nothing sets false expectations. The longer these false expectations are not addressed, the more they poison the interpretation of the story. Once again, remember how people were crying "bait & switch" regarding Minori's father?

Can you clarify what claim I need to show proof of? I'd like to remind you, my claim is not "she is a leech".

Your claim is that "She is a leech" is a valid interpretation.

Instead, I will show you why I am giving her doubts. MC directly asks whether she has ulterior motives when she appeared with her daughter. She responds "who knows". If it was really nothing, there was no need to be vague about it. Again, this was intentional. This was inviting interpretations. Simple response like "Because you promised" or "Because you are kind and trustworthy" would still fit the narrative without changing the tone. Author's fault.

This is what I mean about needing things spoon fed. The author isn't responsible for the reader's lack of reading comprehension or media literacy.

One more thing, my grounds for thinking that she is taking advantage of MC is less about the financial matters but more on the responsibility of raising the child. Hence why all of my questions revolved about "why choose him over her relatives" instead of "why not pay MC for cooking food, looking after her child, etc".

You are also operating under the assumption that she did choose him over her relatives.

 

[Kaitensatsuma]

STAHP