I think a lot of people are confusing portrayal with glorification.

The story is set in a difficult historical period, and naturally that means uncomfortable topics, power imbalances, and social attitudes from that era may appear in the narrative. Simply including those elements does not automatically mean the author supports or glorifies them.

From what we've seen so far, the story hasn't presented these issues as something admirable or romanticized. It feels more like the author chose a specific time period and is trying to build a detailed world around it. The attention to historical details, culture, environment, and setting is actually one of the things I appreciate about the story.

It's also worth remembering that only one chapter has been released. We don't yet know the full direction of the plot, the characters' development, or the themes the author intends to explore. Judging an entire story based on a single chapter can lead to assumptions that may not reflect the author's actual intentions.

People are free to dislike the story, but criticism should be based on what is actually shown in the work rather than on conclusions drawn before the story has had a chance to develop.