Originally Posted by
KrayZ33
I don't understand why we don't take the scenes for how they are portrayed.
We don't know what the parents did.
We know that the parents tried something (the scene when they tried to talk with him), we know that they fed him and bought him games and toys and all he needed. We know that he didn't want to talk about it.
They went along with it for ~15+ years.
When his younger brother(?) came to his room after the funeral, it was actually *MC* who attacked first, obviouly he himself knew what was going on and why they are here, but honestly? The fact that he attacked first in conjunction with the scene where he bumped the wall with his fist real hard made me think that this is how he acted around when his parents tried to do something too. You know, as if he'd funnel his anger towards the wrong person in a heartbeat if he could make himself feel less bad in this situation.
He watched porn instead of having the decency to go to the funeral of his father who took care of him for 34 years.
Even if they failed to handle this situation correctly, we can't say anything about them being "bad" parents, only the opposite.
Ifs and buts go both ways. What IF they actually did something. What IF they were actually nice. What IF they actually went to the police but they didn't do anything. What IF they contacted the school but they didn't do anything. What IF they tried to talk him into going to a different school but his anxiety kept him from going out.
We saw him being a shitty person. That's just it. And we are actually supposed to believe that - which is why we actually believe it.
The more subtle things start to tell us that he actually *isn't* or that he has redeeming qualities.
The more subtle things also show us that he himself knows that he did things wrong in his previous life and that there are regrets.
And at the same time, that doesn't turn the parents into the bad guys. Rofl.