Mailyn

She is not 'dumb' at all but rather intelligent. She just has issues which make her reckless. Being kidnapped, forced into a life of slavery and criminal behaviour, being tortured, etc., will do that to anybody. She may not know martial arts but she is an extremely strong willed person. If you don't watch it purely because she has no martial skills, I think you'll be missing out on a good drama. There was a time when the FL was always a damsel in distress. Now many people expect every FL to be a badass fighter. Yes, she needs rescuing quite often but not because she is a typical 'damsel' as was once depicted in older dramas.

redd1469: I take it that you have read the novel? I have seen a couple of posts referring to her identity as a princess but wondered how they knew.

I just put in the title "..." and "episode 17-8 trailer" in the search bar (Edge) and it came up on You tube.

Bunnycaamp: Could you please mark your post as a spoiler, please?

How do you know? Do they all have to be the same? This is a drama and is not even based on fact so dropping it because you don't like it is understandable but because he allowed someone to be familiar? Just out of interest - which episode and scene was it in particular - I would like to have a look?

Bixia was just one word meaning 'Your / His Majesty'. In the Song Dynasty, the emperor was often addressed as Guanjia 官家 'Official House' or 'Imperial Household'. Shengshang 聖上, 'Holy Highness', was used in the Tang Dynasty to address the emperor but later became a title just for use in documents. Note these are forms of address. They do not mean emperor which is Huangdi 皇帝 (amongst others).

I'm all for strangling wicked sisters (and all that)! Very up close and personal :)

Fair enough. One can see as the drama goes on that he does not feel that he has to be in charge of her and he does repect her choices (ahem...in most areas) but that is irrelevant. You know what you will and won't watch.

WM@ If you intend to drop it after ep. 2, how can you say with certainty that he is as you say he is with regards to the FL (unless there is a novel and you have read it)?

Stardust: Not having 'this' kind of relationship is irrelevant. Even if they were, a woman (or a man) can not be called selfish for refusing to have sex. But, yes. I get your point. (Did you note that the poster was a man?)

My rhetorical question was not stupid but valid. I was showing that your example led to an absurd conclusion (reductio ad absurdum). In reply to YOUR rhetorical question, I was proving that A is true but B is false. My counterexample only needs to show that A does not always imply B. That is, Your claim: If A (willingness to die), then B (romance) is absurd and a non-sequitur.
Your claim that my analogy was stupid (and therefore false) is called 'moving goalposts'. When shown a counterexample, you rejected it because it was not the same relationship type. You 'dodged' my logic by focussing on irrelevant specifics. A counterexample does not need to be identical — it only needs to break the claimed rule. You are confusing 'counterexample to a general rule' with 'parallel example of the same situation'.
Thirdly, your initial assumption was an example of confirmation bias.

Really Gig 911? How like a male to find this selfish!

So, Gig911. If I am prepared to die for my children, should I 'sleep' with them first?

Must you appear everywhere to dish out your usual crap, Badger INFREMO? If you found it unwatchable it would be because, duh, I don't know, YOU didn't like it. That does not make it trash. (That would be like me calling the Mona Lisa 'Trash' just because I can't see the appeal.) Just how many brain cells do you have? Do you LIKE anything that you watch?

I may give it up too, but anyway, in my opinion the two leads deserve each other and I don't quite mean that kindly.

JKatt778: I'm wondering if stupidity is supposed to be the point of the drama. Both the ML and the husband are also incredibly stupid - as is the 2FL, but she doesn't count because her stupidity follows the usual trope and is of a different kind.

I wonder, too, whether the writers intended it to be a clever or insightful poke at human folly but lacked the writing intelligence to execute it.

Congratulations to the translator who wrongly translated 'accessary' as 'accessory' in episode 19. I would not usually point out spelling mistakes - MDL abounds with them - but the incorrect rendition here was hilarious and, depending on one's point of view, very apt.

That comment by the emperor made me wonder whether he knew that the ML is the real crown prince and should be emperor - and wants to protect him - but I could be wrong on both counts.

@Virginia: Some of these people are collating 'minor' with 'age of consent'. In the UK one is not an adult until one is 18 - at which time one can marry - but minors can have sex at 16. A citizen of one country cannot say that something is wrong (illegal) in another country - however immoral or distasteful it seems. In China the age of consent is 14 - but laws about using minors in the filming industry are in place to protect them. But they also forget that throughout history many girls were married at a very young age to much older men. So if it is offensive to see a male character / actor paired with a female actress / character, with a ten year age difference they should not watch the drama.

Really? Do you actually believe your own uninformed rhetoric or do you get off on manipulating those not capable of independant thought?