We see in the story, in the literal chapter before this how haejoon wanted to have his father around and he was sad he wasn’t. Ntm in earlier chapters it shows that haejoon does not see his father in a positive light. I don’t think it’s crazy to assume that it’s impacted him negatively. I used context clues
I think you misinterpreted something?? I used aave, going hard for someone is not the same as that. It means that you’re vehemently defending someone pls look it up
Anyways not being there for his son means he sucks as a father so I don’t like him. And yes he couldve gone the legal route, may I remind you the reason he has no money is also his own fault? Does that give him leeway to abandon haejoon?
Anyways it’s genuinely not that serious, we just have different interpretations …
I am taking a step back to say a few things. I believe you are too, so we can have a calmer conversation.
Haejoon also very clearly said that he didn't need a father and that he was happy with just his mother. And I'm being clear that we have reason to doubt him. He was a young child under pressure from his mother at the time. And, as you said, there are other context clues.
However, it is nevertheless still your assumption that he has been negatively impacted by the absence of his father. You say context clues. I say yes, those context clues exist. I am not denying that. That is still explicitly an assumption. I want you to recognize that and the contradictory nature of your words, where you say you're not going to what if but then you do what if.
The reason he has no money is his own fault? Wow, that's a really horrible take. He had a business, and the business went under. So that means the reason he has no money is his own fault? Not like it couldn't just be, I don't know, bad luck? I am explicitly going to the extreme, but you basically justify saying anyone poor is poor because of their own fault. That is what you justify. Economic collapse of the country? Your fault.
This is a major assumption that you make, and yet you still act like you're not what if-ing.
And here's a point I had hinted at but didn't explain well previously. Imagine he had
some money and did pursue a legal battle against the mother. The mother, explicitly, had cut off ties and had wanted no communication with him. That is not an assumption; that part was stated. However, a reasonable assumption, however, would be that in any legal battle, Haejoon would be harmed. You can see a lot of children of divorced couples who see their parents fighting over custody, fighting over the child. The child believes they are fighting BECAUSE OF the child. Haejoon could've been scarred by the fight, especially when the mother very explicitly didn't want to deal with the father amicably.
As a direct result, even if the father had money to fight in court, the father could have very reasonably thought something like Haejoon is being taken care of by his mother, so it is better to avoid scarring Haejoon with a fight involving him, especially when the mother doesn't want the father in their lives.
And again, let me be clear. You might disagree. Based on your previous posts, you probably think he should've still fought. But again, that doesn't make this position unreasonable. Haejoon's father could've reasonably thought the above.
In sum, you do have quite a few assumptions, and some of those assumptions are pretty bad. You blame Haejoon's father for not having money when you actually don't know what happened with his business. Even if it turns out that it was his fault, right now, we don't know that, yet you're still assuming. That's really bad.
And then for the rest of it, it is still you not seeing that people can be reasonable even if you disagree with them.
And to be clear, my whole statement from the very beginning was that we don't really know yet whether he is good or bad. We don't have enough details. I don't think he's good. I don't think he's bad. Not enough info, and you saying he's bad is based on your assumptions of that info.
