Hello readers,

  I know you’ve taken the time out of your day to step into this world I've created, and I want to thank you for that. This story—my story—has been one of brutality, moral ambiguity, and intense philosophical exploration, and I’m sure many of you have felt its weight as you journeyed through the pages. Whether it was the graphic violence, the dark themes, or the challenging questions I’ve posed, I know some of you appreciated the raw, unfiltered nature of it all. Others might’ve found it too grim, too dark, or even too "edgy" for their tastes—and honestly, that’s okay. Everyone has their own perspective. But today, as I stand at the end of this long and brutal journey, I have to admit that saying "The story has ended" is a difficult thing for me. It's hard because this story has been with me for so long, a concept I’ve nurtured, shaped, and lived with for years. And now, it’s finally coming to a close.

  We’ve all witnessed the chaos that has unfolded throughout these chapters: the merciless brutality, the philosophical explorations into the darkest corners of the human soul, and the raw, uncomfortable truth of the violence we've encountered. I know that some of you have found these themes difficult to digest—rape, torture, murder, genocide, cannibalism,tramua—and I’m sure many of you have asked yourselves, "Why include all of this? Why subject us to these harrowing and graphic depictions?"

  Well, I’m here today to address that very question.

  These aren’t just shocking elements for shock's sake. These are the tools I’ve used to carve out something deeper, something more profound. When you step into a world this brutal, when you witness such extremes, you’re forced to confront the darkest aspects of human nature—both in the characters within the story and within ourselves as readers. Every act of violence, every moment of suffering, is an attempt to explore what it means to be human in a world that doesn’t shy away from the harsh realities of existence. These acts aren’t just about brutality for the sake of spectacle; they’re about revealing the underlying darkness of the human condition. The complexity of morality, the struggles we face in the face of power, the choices between survival and sacrifice—these are all woven into these moments of agony and loss.

  You might argue that some of these elements are overused, and maybe in some ways, they are. But I think there's a reason they’ve been explored over and over again in literature and storytelling. It’s because these are the extreme limits of human experience—things we often shy away from in real life, but that have a significant impact on our psyche when we confront them in fiction.

  And it’s not about glorifying these things, either. It’s about the questions they raise. Why do we commit such atrocities? Why do people act in such monstrous ways? And, perhaps most importantly, why do we choose to keep going in the face of it all? It’s about pushing the boundaries of understanding, forcing us to question not just the characters in the story, but the very nature of morality itself. What is justice? What is vengeance? And how do we find meaning in a world that can sometimes seem so cruel?

  So yes, the journey has been dark and unsettling. It’s been hard to watch, hard to read, and maybe even harder to think about. But that’s exactly the point. Sometimes, the most brutal of stories are the ones that force us to take a deeper look at who we are as individuals and as a society.

  I know this won’t be for everyone, and I accept that. But for those who have stuck with it, who have endured the violence and the pain, I hope you’ve come away with more than just a story. I hope you’ve come away with something that challenges your thinking, something that makes you question the nature of good and evil, right and wrong, and the complexities of human behavior.

  Thank you for walking this brutal, morally ambiguous road with me. It wasn’t easy, but it was necessary.

  And with that, I say farewell. The story has ended. But the questions it raises? They linger.

  Rape

  Rape is a violent act that is often committed against men, women, and children, typically as a way to gain power over others, assert dominance, and feel powerful. The act is fueled by the need to control and degrade, not just for physical pleasure. The reason why straight men might rape other men, for example, is rooted in the desire to assert power and dominance. This applies across all genders and ages—rape is an act of violence and control, not mere lust.

  Characters in my story, like Jigoku Ma Tori, the embodiment of envy, commit rape as a way to punish those who are happier, living in peace, and harmony. He was created as a weapon of destruction, and his envy pushes him to ensure that no one else can experience happiness. He seeks to dominate and strip others of their peace.

  Similarly, Toya Kurai, representing lust, commits rape driven by both his desire for power and sexual gratification. His unrestrained lust is a dangerous force—he frequently cheats on his wife and abuses her because his desire knows no boundaries, reflecting the destructive nature of uncontrolled desire.

  Dr. Machinist, as the symbol of pride, commits rape as an assertion of his superiority. His cybernetic body has led him to believe that he is beyond human, and his ego makes him feel entitled to strip others of their dignity and autonomy. For him, it’s a twisted act of reinforcing his own pride—asserting control because of his belief in his own superiority.

  Law 1: The Law of Irrationality

  Rape, in this context, is driven by raw, uncontrolled emotions—envy, lust, and pride—forces that overpower any sense of reason or logic. When these emotions take control, the person committing the act is no longer thinking clearly. They are consumed by an urge that clouds judgment, leading them to act without regard for morality, empathy, or the consequences of their actions. In these moments, the individual becomes a slave to their own feelings of inadequacy, frustration, or need to dominate. Rape becomes a method of exercising control, fueled not by thought but by the irrational drive to assert power, to retaliate against perceived wrongs, or to fulfill deep-seated emotional voids. The rational mind is set aside, and the emotional state takes the wheel, guiding these destructive actions. In these cases, reason and morality are abandoned, making the act an extension of irrational emotions rather than calculated choice.

  Law 2: The Law of Narcissism

  Dr. Machinist, as the embodiment of pride, exemplifies the extreme manifestation of narcissism in human behavior. His rape is not just about desire; it’s about power. It’s about maintaining control over those he perceives as weaker or inferior. In Dr. Machinist’s mind, his superiority, bolstered by his cybernetic body, gives him entitlement—an entitlement that feeds his ego. He believes that by exerting control and dominance over others, he is reinforcing his place above them, affirming his self-image as invincible and powerful. Narcissism here is about more than self-love; it’s about the belief that one is so superior that the autonomy and dignity of others are secondary, even irrelevant. His actions aren’t driven by a momentary lust but by the need to assert his inflated sense of self-worth, to remind others that they are beneath him, and in turn, bolster his own fragile ego.

  Law 10: The Law of Envy

  Jigoku Ma Tori, representing envy, is a tragic figure driven by a destructive need to tear down what others have. His envy is not limited to material wealth or status but extends to the very essence of happiness and peace. As someone who was created solely for destruction, he harbors a deep hatred for those who have found peace and harmony in their lives. In his warped view, happiness is a luxury only afforded to others, and he resents this fact deeply. His rape becomes an extension of his envy—a way to punish those who have what he can never experience. He seeks to strip others of their joy and force them into suffering, believing that no one should enjoy a life he will never have. The toxic desire to control and destroy the peace of others becomes a method of leveling the playing field in his mind, asserting his dominance through violence because he believes that those who are content have no right to exist peacefully while he suffers.

  Law 16: The Law of Aggression

  Rape, in the extreme, is an act of violent aggression—an exercise of power over another individual. It is about inflicting harm, asserting dominance, and controlling through brutality. At its core, aggression is a natural human instinct—one that arises from a desire to dominate, to conquer, to prove one's superiority. In this case, rape is not merely an act of physical violation; it is a manifestation of this deep-seated aggression. The person committing the act uses violence to subjugate the victim, stripping them of their autonomy and reducing them to an object of control. The aggressor’s need to dominate overrides any consideration of consent or humanity, and the act becomes a means of asserting power through sheer force. This is not a crime committed in the heat of passion but one rooted in the desire to break another’s will and enforce submission. The violent nature of the act speaks to the darker side of human nature, where aggression becomes a tool of control, pushing another person into submission through raw force and brutality.

  Torture: A Tool of Sadism or Punishment?

  Torture is a deeply controversial and morally ambiguous tool that appears in various forms throughout Kowareta Shonen. It is often depicted as an act of sadism and pleasure, particularly when carried out by villains. However, the same practice can be recontextualized on the anti-hero side as a form of punishment or justice. But why is it that when certain characters like Dr. Machinist (Pride), Doku the Poisonous Lord (Greed), Aliyah (Wrath), Akuma (Sloth), and Jigoku Ma Tori (Envy) use torture and kill innocents, they are considered evil? And yet, when anti-heroes—such as the South American Anti-Hero Organization (S.A.A.H.O)—use torture and violence against criminals, they are seen as "good" or at least justified in their actions?

  The difference lies in perspective, justification, and context. The villains in Kowareta Shonen, like Dr. Machinist and Jigoku Ma Tori, are driven by twisted motivations rooted in their own sins—pride, greed, wrath, envy, and sloth. Their actions are not only about asserting dominance or satisfying their desires but are an extension of their need to impose their own version of order on the world, regardless of the cost. They believe their own self-interest and desires are paramount, and in their eyes, innocents are collateral damage in their pursuit of power, control, or revenge. Torture, for them, is a method of sadistic pleasure or a cruel demonstration of their supremacy, often lacking any meaningful justification or higher moral code.

  On the other hand, the South American Anti-Hero Organization (S.A.A.H.O), which operates as a military force funded by international organizations like NATO and the UN, employs torture and violence as part of their larger mission to protect North and South America from criminal organizations and terrorists. While their methods may still be brutal, they are framed as a necessary evil in the face of rampant criminal activity. Their mission is to protect innocent civilians from the atrocities committed by groups like the Tori No Ichizoku Cartel (TNI) or the New Generation Tori No Ichizoku Cartel (NGTNI), which are infamous for their violent and heinous acts, including torture, rape, and murder. For S.A.A.H.O, torture becomes a tool to extract information, neutralize threats, and protect the greater good, even at the cost of some moral compromise.

  In the case of the Tori No Ichizoku Cartels, torture is not used for any noble cause but as a means of intimidation, control, and profit. They kill and torture innocents to fuel their drug trade and weapons sales, reveling in the power they wield over the lives of others. These cartels are portrayed as nothing more than monstrous organizations driven by greed and cruelty, without any higher moral justification for their actions. They exploit violence and fear to maintain control, selling misery for their own gain.

  So why does torture, a morally reprehensible act, appear to be justified when used by S.A.A.H.O and vilified when used by villains or cartels? It all comes down to the lens through which it is viewed. When it is employed by those perceived as "good" or "just," it is seen as a necessary means to an end—a tool for maintaining order, protecting innocents, and upholding justice. On the other hand, when it is wielded by those driven by selfish desires or sadistic tendencies, it is seen as evil—a manipulation of power that dehumanizes others for the benefit of the aggressor.

  Torture, in these contexts, serves as a reflection of the moral ambiguity that runs through the heart of Kowareta Shonen. It’s not just about the act itself; it’s about the reasons behind it, the intentions of the perpetrators, and the consequences of their actions. Is it still wrong if it's done in the name of justice? Or is it evil no matter the cause? This ambiguity plays a significant role in the characters’ motivations, and their choices raise fundamental questions about the nature of good and evil, morality, and the complexities of justice.

  In the end, torture remains a morally ambiguous tool—one that can be twisted and manipulated to serve both good and bad ends. It challenges our perceptions of justice and power, forcing us to confront the difficult truth that the line between right and wrong is often not as clear-cut as we might hope

  Murder

  Murder, much like other extreme acts of violence, exists in a gray area, a space where morality is constantly in flux. It’s a powerful tool in storytelling that forces readers to dig deep into their own moral beliefs and question where their boundaries lie when it comes to life and death. The complexities of murder in narrative often show us that not all killings are created equal. It's not simply a matter of good versus evil; it's about the context, the motivations, and the circumstances surrounding it.

  This tale has been unlawfully obtained from Royal Road. If you discover it on Amazon, kindly report it.

  In stories, murder is often used as a reflection of the human condition—the darkness that resides in all of us. It's easy to see murder as an inherently wrong act, but stories that delve into moral ambiguity make us question that assumption. What if murder is committed to protect someone you love? What if it's in the name of justice, or even survival? When the character's intentions are pure, does it change how we view the act itself? And what about when a character we like, or even root for, commits murder—does it diminish them in our eyes? Or do we find ourselves justifying their actions, even when the act itself is irredeemable?

  Consider a scenario where murder is committed not out of malice or hatred, but out of mercy—a character decides to end someone’s suffering, knowing that their life is about to end anyway. The act of murder in this case, though still the act of taking a life, is done with the intention of bringing relief. It challenges our notions of what makes a "good" or "bad" person. When does the act of murder cross into the realm of being acceptable, if ever? And how does this idea compare when the victim of murder is someone who poses a direct threat or is responsible for countless others' deaths?

  The blurred lines between justice and revenge also play into the moral complexities of murder. A character might kill in an attempt to exact vengeance for a wrong that was done to them or their loved ones, yet that same act of revenge may lower them morally, creating a cycle of violence that becomes harder to justify. The temptation to "right a wrong" by taking another’s life can push people to rationalize their actions, questioning whether it was worth it or whether they have become just as bad as the person they sought to punish.

  The environment in which murder takes place plays a crucial role in shaping its perception. In dystopian or lawless settings, where survival is paramount and death lurks around every corner, the morality of murder often takes on a different hue. In these worlds, murder might be seen as just another tool to ensure one’s survival. In these cases, the line between the necessity of death and the wanton disregard for life becomes nearly indistinguishable, causing readers to ponder whether survival itself justifies taking another life.

  This exploration of murder as a narrative tool reveals how violence, even when necessary or justified within the context of a story, complicates the concept of good and evil. It forces characters and readers alike to ask difficult questions about life, death, and the cost of decisions. Is it still murder if it’s done for the greater good? Is it justified when the character committing the act feels they have no other choice? Or does the act of taking a life always carry an inherent darkness, no matter the reasoning behind it?

  Ultimately, murder in storytelling isn’t just a plot device; it's a lens through which we examine the complexity of human nature. It invites us to challenge our own views on right and wrong, making us confront uncomfortable truths about the darkness that lies within all of us. It asks us to consider how we justify our actions when we cross the line, and whether we can ever truly come back from it. By exploring murder through different perspectives, stories create a space where readers can grapple with their own moral compass, forcing them to question where they draw the line between justified violence and pure evil.

  Genocide

  Genocide is one of the darkest, most devastating crimes humanity can commit. It's the systematic and deliberate extermination of a particular group of people, usually based on their race, religion, ethnicity, or other defining characteristics. But beyond the horror of the act itself, genocide is drenched in moral ambiguity. In storytelling, genocide isn't just a plot point; it is the embodiment of the worst aspects of human nature—hatred, fear, prejudice, and the ultimate dehumanization of others.

  In stories, genocide is often used as a representation of unchecked power and the destructive potential of ideology. It's the point where a group or an individual goes beyond merely subjugating others to completely erasing them, physically and culturally. The characters committing genocide often justify it in their own minds, claiming it’s for the "greater good," "racial purity," or "religious salvation," even as their actions reduce other human beings to mere numbers, to be wiped out or exploited.

  In fictional narratives, genocide is frequently a reflection of the ultimate manifestation of oppression. When an oppressive regime or leader seeks to eliminate a group of people, it demonstrates how far evil can go when the value of life is stripped away and when people are treated as less than human. The moral ambiguity here arises from the fact that, in certain contexts, genocidal acts are often justified by the perpetrators with their twisted beliefs. The question then becomes: What is the line between the "justified" killing of one group and the sheer horror of eradicating an entire population? In these stories, genocide forces us to examine our values and the extent to which we would go to uphold those values, even at the cost of others' lives.

  But in some stories, genocide is depicted as the tragic result of conflict or revenge. The perpetrators might initially be fighting for what they believe is survival or a righteous cause, but over time, the violence escalates, and the line between justice and cruelty becomes blurred. These stories challenge the audience to ask themselves: If we were in that position, might we commit the same atrocities in the name of survival, vengeance, or fear? Does the act of genocide become easier to stomach when it’s presented as an inevitability in a world where survival is at stake?

  In these morally ambiguous tales, genocide serves as a warning about the dangers of extremism and the consequences of dehumanizing others. It forces us to reckon with the cost of hatred and the ultimate destruction of not just lives, but cultures, memories, and entire ways of existence.

  Cannibalism

  Cannibalism, the act of consuming the flesh of one's own species, is often depicted in stories as one of the most taboo and gruesome acts a person can commit. However, much like genocide, it is deeply rooted in moral ambiguity, often used as a vehicle to explore the extremes of human desperation, survival, and depravity.

  In narratives where cannibalism is central, the act isn't simply about eating another human being—it's about the breaking point of a character’s morality. The question often posed is: what would push someone to such a horrific act? Is it born out of pure necessity—survival in a world where food is scarce—or does it reflect a deeper moral decay? The ambiguity comes from the tension between survival and humanity. On one hand, cannibalism is often portrayed as a desperate choice in an unforgiving world, particularly in dystopian settings where food is scarce, and the lines between necessity and barbarism blur. Characters who resort to cannibalism may do so out of sheer survival instinct, the need to live in a world that no longer holds any rules. This creates a scenario where the morality of their actions becomes subjective: if survival is at stake, does it make the act acceptable?

  In these stories, cannibalism often brings forward a deeper philosophical question: when does survival transcend humanity? How much of one’s soul is lost when they partake in an act so horrifying? Can a character who turns to cannibalism for survival be redeemed? Or does it reflect an irreversible corruption of their morality, marking them as forever changed by the act?

  Cannibalism also holds a symbolic weight. In some narratives, it represents the ultimate breakdown of social order and civility. When characters resort to eating other humans, it’s often a sign that society has fallen apart and that the rules of civilization no longer hold sway. It’s not just a physical act; it’s the erasure of the last vestiges of humanity. In these cases, the depiction of cannibalism is meant to disturb and challenge the reader’s sense of normalcy—forcing them to question how far someone can go before they lose their humanity entirely.

  On the darker side, some stories depict cannibalism as a method of control or terror. Villains or groups might use it to assert dominance over others, turning the act into a perverse form of power. By consuming others, they’re not just taking life; they’re symbolically asserting their absolute control over another being. In this context, cannibalism takes on the role of sadistic violence and an assertion of dominance, a means of breaking people physically and mentally. The victims in these scenarios are not just murdered but are consumed, making their deaths even more grotesque and final.

  However, cannibalism, much like genocide, forces us to confront the question of moral justification. Can we truly condemn someone who resorts to cannibalism in a life-or-death situation? What about those who use it as an act of dominance or cruelty? It becomes a way for the story to force the audience to examine the nature of morality itself, questioning how we view acts of extreme violence when survival or power is at stake.

  In these morally ambiguous scenarios, both genocide and cannibalism act as mirrors to humanity’s capacity for cruelty, survival, and corruption. They are potent tools in storytelling, not merely because of their shock value, but because they force readers to grapple with the complex, uncomfortable realities of human nature, survival, and morality. When these acts are committed, whether by the villain or the anti-hero, they challenge us to rethink what is "acceptable" and what is not, blurring the lines between good and evil, right and wrong.

  Trauma and Its Role in Kowareta Shonen

  In the world of Kowareta Shonen, trauma is a central theme that shapes almost every character, whether hero, anti-hero, or villain. The characters are deeply scarred by their pasts, and it’s through their trauma that we see the divergent paths they take—one of redemption and protection, the other of destruction and chaos.

  For the anti-heroes, trauma is a driving force, but it's channeled in a way that aims to protect others. These characters have experienced intense suffering—loss, betrayal, abuse, and destruction—but rather than allowing these experiences to consume them, they use their trauma as motivation to guard the innocent, to prevent others from going through the same hell they did. Their trauma becomes a catalyst for their protective instincts. They are marked by their pain, but they rise above it, embodying resilience and the desire to break the cycle of suffering. In many ways, they reflect the idea of using one's darkness to illuminate the world, taking the power of their trauma and turning it into something positive. For them, it’s a constant struggle—will they slip into the abyss of their past, or will they use their brokenness to fight for a better future?

  In contrast, the villains of Kowareta Shonen are defined by their trauma, but they let it consume them. The pain they’ve endured isn’t a catalyst for growth or protection, but a justification for their evil acts. Instead of using their suffering to protect others, they project their pain onto the world, creating more destruction, violence, and fear. The villains’ trauma serves as the breeding ground for their malice, poisoning their every action. They are trapped in their past, unable or unwilling to escape the cycle of vengeance, manipulation, or hatred. This trauma-driven evil is not a product of brokenness in the same way that the anti-heroes’ pain is—it’s a product of unchecked rage, fear, and a thirst for power. The villains’ trauma is like a virus that spreads, infecting others with their worldview and reinforcing their destructive behavior.

  Then, there’s Jigoku Ma Tori, who stands apart. Unlike the other characters, Jigoku is not a creation of brokenness, nor is he a victim of trauma. He is pure evil, created as a machine designed for chaos and destruction. Jigoku’s existence is not the result of personal suffering but of intentional malevolence. He is not “broken” in the way the anti-heroes or villains are; he was never human to begin with. Instead, he is the embodiment of cruelty, created by forces that have no regard for life, or even the idea of redemption. There is no layer of vulnerability in him, no tragic backstory to explain his actions. He is simply the manifestation of evil, a machine designed to tear down everything in its path. His lack of trauma makes him uniquely terrifying because he represents an evil that is not born from pain but is an inherent part of his design—something that cannot be reasoned with or redeemed.

  Trauma as a Tool for Growth vs. Destruction

  The contrast between the anti-heroes, the villains, and Jigoku highlights the duality of trauma—it can either break you or shape you into something stronger, depending on how you choose to deal with it. The anti-heroes use their trauma as fuel for their actions, protecting others because they don’t want others to suffer as they have. They understand the pain of loss and suffering, and in some way, they wish to ensure that others don’t have to go through it. For them, trauma is a reminder of what’s at stake and an understanding of the human condition. They empathize with others, even if they themselves are still broken. They are defined not by their pain but by how they decide to use it—either for good or evil.

  The villains, however, are consumed by their trauma. It turns into a weapon that they use against others. Instead of finding healing or resolution, they project their suffering onto the world. Their actions are motivated by a need to inflict the same pain they have experienced onto others. They believe that by making others suffer, they can somehow alleviate their own pain. This is the tragic flaw of their characters—they are stuck in their trauma, unable to escape the cycle of pain and vengeance. The villains see the world as cruel because it has been cruel to them, and so they seek to bring that cruelty to others, perpetuating a cycle of destruction.

  Then there is Jigoku, whose lack of trauma makes him unique. He’s not bound by human emotion, pain, or a need for revenge. His lack of personal history or suffering makes him a terrifying force—a pure instrument of destruction. His evil is not a reaction to his experiences but a core part of his existence. In his world, there is no hope for redemption, no understanding of humanity or its vulnerabilities. He’s a relentless, emotionless force of chaos, and his existence poses the question of whether evil can exist without the need for pain or trauma. What does it mean for someone to commit atrocities if they have no emotional attachment to the acts they commit?

  The Influence of Trauma on Morality

  The theme of trauma in Kowareta Shonen forces readers to confront difficult moral questions. Can someone who’s experienced intense suffering ever be truly “good” again, or will their pain always shape their actions? Does trauma justify violence, or is it simply an excuse? The anti-heroes wrestle with these questions constantly, struggling to overcome their pasts while fighting for a better future. They are haunted by their experiences but try to use them as a means of ensuring that others don’t suffer as they did. In doing so, they highlight the possibility of redemption, even for those who have experienced deep pain.

  The villains, on the other hand, represent the darker side of trauma—when it consumes a person completely and leads them down a path of destruction. They are trapped in their own pain, and rather than finding a way to heal, they use their trauma to justify their evil actions. Their lack of willingness to heal or seek redemption makes them morally irredeemable, showing the darker consequences of unchecked pain and rage.

  Jigoku stands as a stark contrast—a force of pure evil with no connection to trauma. His creation and actions highlight the terrifying possibility of evil existing outside of human emotion, where morality doesn’t even come into play. His pure malevolence serves as a reminder that not all evil stems from personal suffering—it can exist without any emotional justification at all.

  In the end, Kowareta Shonen shows us that trauma shapes us, but how we react to it defines our path. It’s a story of brokenness and healing, of finding purpose in pain, and of how the deepest wounds can either destroy us or drive us to become something better. But the true horror comes from those who, like Jigoku, are simply evil, with no trace of vulnerability or humanity to hold them back.