HI QUEEN!!!! thoughts on the vision morgause showed to arthur and her motivations/was she lying/ should Arthur have killed uther?

AHHHHHH IVE BEEN WANTED TO BE ASKED THIS AND I DIDNT EVEN KNOW IT

alright so i think the first thing that needs to be considered is what her intentions were when she showed him the vision. i think the main consensus is that she wanted Arthur to kill Uther, and while i agree, i think Morgause deserves a few more layers than that. i genuinely think Morgause wanted the truth to be known.

imo, from what we've seen, Morgause is extremely similar to Morgana. in the early seasons, Morgana is justice with kindness. Morgause is justice without. Later, we watch Morgause slowly "corrupt" Morgana and watch her lose her kindness, turning her into the heartless villain she is by season five.

i think Morgause, while not out of the deep goodness of her heart, saw the injustice, and wanted it to be corrected. this manifested mostly in the form of Uther's death, but i do believe a small part of her just wanted the truth to be known :)

whether or not she was lying is something we will never truly know, but she could have been lying about two different things, and i want to attack them separately.

i 100% believe she wasn't lying about Uther using magic for Arthur's birth. i've wondered A LOT how the fuck she knew though, because sorry, who told her?? and merlin is the show it is, so it doesn't tell you these things, but there are enough breadcrumbs left behind so that we can assume she was a pupil of Nimueh's and learned of it from her.

but whether it was actually a vision of Ygraine? i really don't know. i'm not going to lie, the first time i saw the scene, it gave me all the wrong vibes. the ghost of Ygraine is able to meet her son for >5 minutes and one of the maybe two things she says to him is about how Uther used magic to birth Arthur and it killed her?? i don't know. it's strange.

but we also have to remember that we actually don't know anything about Ygraine! honestly, the fandom and fics tend to mention her x10 more than the actual show does. Arthur hardly speaks of her, as well as Uther, and we have to remember that this is the man who essentially killed his wife and is forced to live with that every goddamn day and is 100% romanticizing the woman she was—and then all Arthur has ever heard of her is this romanticized version from his father, and this is the dead mother he's never met. he's going to do some embellishing of her own.

so, for all we know, Ygraine was a terrible person. we really don't know. so i have no conclusive answer to whether or not Morgause was lying about it being a vision, and i think the show actually intended it that way. because that doesn't actually matter. what Ygraine said—that's the truth. the cold, honest truth. whether it actually came from his mother or from a false mimicry of her doesn't actually matter.

another thing i find really interesting is that while Morgause was obviously trying to provoke Arthur with this information and was clearly manipulating him, she really didn't take any extreme steps to ensure he killed Uther. this was also her first step to bring down Uther. it's almost like she tried to find the most moral option she could that dealt the fairest form of justice, and only when it failed was she forced to resort to more gruesome, hands-on approaches.

it also really doesn't seem like she has anything against Arthur in the beginning, which is so fascinating to me, but moving on lol.

now for the BIG one:

should Arthur have killed Uther in The Sins of the Father?

god, this one is hard, because you have to consider it from all angles.

from an objective, justice-based standpoint, you could say that Morgause was absolutely in the right in all of this, and that after learning this information, it was Arthur's duty to kill his father. his father killed his own wife due to his desperation for an heir, and then spent half a lifetime destroying an entire culture and group of people in an attempt to stem his guilt.

so, yes. Arthur should have killed his father, if we're viewing this from the eyes of pure justice.

but for Arthur's own conscious? from a political standpoint? absolutely the fuck not. it would have destroyed Arthur. even when Uther died season four, he was a wreck, so imagine if it has been Arthur. dear god.

and then imagine being an average citizen of Camelot, for whom Uther was probably an alright to not great king, but no one who deserves death, and learning that your beloved Prince Arthur committed patricide and his now king? jesus. that's not how you establish good subject-monarch relations.

and if enemy kingdoms heard about it? god, all the knights must be horribly divided, because most of them swore themselves to Camelot and its royalty, but who the hell do you stand with when your two royals tried to kill each other and one of them was successful? enemy kingdoms would attack, and with their armies as divided as they'd be, who knows how that'd go.

so overall, no. i genuinely believe Arthur shouldn't have killed his father. but that doesn't mean that Uther didn't deserve death.

anyways, i think that's all! this was a lot of fun, and tysm for the ask once again <3

Pick your most unpopular opinion about each of these shows (only if you want to!!): Degrassi, OTH, Gilmore Girls, Friends, Riverdale, That 70s Show, and Dawson's Creek :)

Degrassi:

This is so difficult because I feel like I've stated so many opinions in the past. Okay. I think the Degrassi nudes arc was theoretically really interesting from a psychological standpoint as well as how a survivor would cope after going through a very public sexual assault trial with the details of what happened to them being well known. Because it feels like something so human and yet so misguided, I don't view Zoe's role in it as harshly as others do. To be fair, the writers lost the plot. Literally. It got really sensationalized with blackmailing and cheerleader dolls and fake hostage situations. I also really hate how it turned into a Zoe vs Frankie situation with zero nuance. Their past involving Frankie being an unsupportive friend who victim blamed Zoe multiple times was never brought up once in lieu of Frankie being turned into Zoe's victim. So while I wouldn't say I like the arc itself, I feel like it had potential. The writers just weren't committed to seeing it through and let Zoe down as a character. The aftermath was really underwhelming and made the whole story line irrelevant.

OTH:

Even though I like the shooting episode for what it is, it's a pretty mediocre depiction of characterizing a school shooter. Following Jimmy's suicide, the writing consistently expects the audience to feel sympathy for him and remember him as a good guy who did one bad thing. It's to the point where the entire school ends up signing his high school yearbook. To be fair, a lot of the Jimmy romanticism came from Mouth, who had weird morals himself considering he was the show's resident incel. But beyond that, Jimmy quickly stops being the villain of the episode to orchestrate a scenario where Dan just happens to stumble upon Keith and a gun, giving him the opportunity to murder him. Also, every other scene features monologues given by the characters that are blatantly trying WAY too hard to be deep and profound. Not to mention this episode marked the official return of romantic Lucas/Peyton, but because Peyton was bleeding and supposedly didn't know any better she can't possibly be held responsible for selfishly making a move on her best friend's boyfriend in what she believed to be her last moments. Sorry, fuck that. Your last moments shouldn't include complicating things for two people you claim to care about. Especially not when you were the one who helped ruin their relationship the first time around, and you know for a fact that your best friend still has trust issues over what happened.

Also, Brooke was the love of Lucas's life. I'll die on this hill. Blame Chad Michael Murray's inability to stop giving his ex-wife heart eyes even during scenes post-Brucas, but it is what it is.

Gilmore Girls:

It's difficult to know what is or isn't popular in the Gilmore Girls fandom. I guess I'll say that Rory dropping out of Yale was the right decision? The way I see it, nothing bad was ever going to come out of that. Rory was in a transitional place where she was questioning a lot of her life decisions. She didn't currently feel up to attending school, so she took some time off. It was completely understandable, yet the narrative insists that this was indicative of Rory going down a bad path. I can understand Lorelai wanting Rory to take some time to make sure this was what she wanted but if anything, Lorelai's overreaction probably made Rory take even more time off from school. Had Rory had her mother and best friend in her corner, maybe she would have realized by the beginning of the next semester that she was emotionally ready to return to Yale. Just.. everything with Lorelai, Richard and Emily feeling as though they could force Rory to go back to school as though she was suddenly going to lose her place and never be able to return was stupid. Out of the two of them, Lorelai was the pettiest and most in the wrong during their estrangement. Lorelai was the parent. Lorelai chose not to tell her daughter she was engaged. Rory shouldn't have ever felt as though she couldn't come home until she basically did everything her mother wanted her to do. Considering Lorelai's own history with Emily, you'd think she'd realize that. But again, the writers made sure we knew how badly Rory was ruining her life and making bad decisions for committing the crime of taking a leave of absence from school and daring to try other things in the meantime.

Friends:

My opinions on the Ross/Rachel infamous "break" are all over the place. Technically, I think Ross is right that their relationship was no longer intact when he slept with another woman. Their communication absolutely sucked during this story line. No attempts at clarification were ever made. Ross just walked out when Rachel said she wanted a break, and Rachel let him. Honestly, I don't even think Ross sleeping with someone else so soon after splitting up from Rachel, in whatever form you consider that to be, makes him an asshole. In an ideal world where everyone makes rational decisions all the time, Ross wouldn't have coped with intense heartbreak by immediately sleeping with someone else. But it was a human reaction, and I don't fault him for that. What I do fault him for is hiding it the next day, running around town trying to stop other people from telling Rachel. It's all but admitting that Ross and Rachel were still emotionally connected and in the mindset of being in a monogamous relationship. Even if they technically weren't. What I also fault him for is being so stubborn and adamant on being right that he never admits fault or owns up to causing Rachel pain for several years after that. So what if he didn't technically betray Rachel? To Rachel, it felt like one. Sometimes, when you love someone, you have to be understanding of the complexities of emotions and just take the fucking L, even if you're technically faultless by definition. And honestly, Rachel was part of the problem, too. What kind of relationship or connection do you really have if you're having the same, obnoxious argument for eight years, never able to get on the same page? Like, I know it's a comedy, but Friends wasn't playing up the comedy angle during this arc. Anyways, they definitely shouldn't have ended up together if they were going to keep getting tripped up over one argument for eight years.

Riverdale:

I don't know how unpopular this actually is, but Veronica is extremely underrated and never gets the love and appreciation she deserves. Looking across the entire series, including time jumps, different universes, and eras where the characters literally had powers, Veronica was consistently the most selfless and considerate character on the show. Half the time, she was the mean girl in name only. There were countless occasions where Veronica forgave even when she shouldn't have and/or should have held out for more remorse and effort from the person that wronged her. The attempt to compare Veronica kissing Ginger Judas in the pilot after knowing Archie and Betty for two seconds to Betty doing it three years into Varchie's relationship is.. it has some nerve. Anyways, Veronica was wonderful, ambitious, and everyone on that show was better for having known her. Sadly, she was underappreciated more often than not, rarely ever getting her due. I really wish anyone but Archie had been the love of her life, because he really didn't deserve her by the end.

That '70s Show:

Sometimes, Hyde gets way too much of a pass for his treatment of Jackie. I feel like he's overall the most popular character on the show with his relationship with Jackie being the most popular, resulting in a lot of his questionable behavior getting swept under the rug. Obviously Hyde had issues he needed to work through stemming from his childhood and struggled to let other people in. But Jackie was consistently a pretty great girlfriend for him, going out of her way to show love and affection, only for him to not 100% reciprocate. Fuck Danny Masterson (and honestly Mila at this point too), but a lot of what made that relationship what it was is the chemistry between Danny and Mila and how they chose to demonstrate the love between those two characters. Hyde was still miles ahead of Kelso and Fez and had great moments with Jackie. But it still needs to be said. Hyde put Jackie through a lot.

Dawson's Creek:

While not perfectly written, most of Andie's fall from grace during season 3 makes a lot of sense. I even think Andie cheating on Pacey was in character. It's a controversial take because no one wants to believe that season 2 Andie would have ever done such a thing. But the reality is, Andie had a literal mental breakdown. She says it herself. When Andie went to get mental health help, she was no longer the same girl Pacey fell in love with. Andie was in a dark, lonely, vulnerable place, and she met someone else. This guy understood parts of Andie's mental health struggles that Pacey couldn't, and it led to a friendship that became an emotional affair. They made their own world together, and then had one, impulsive slip up. It doesn't cheapen Andie's love for Pacey, but it's still understandable that Andie crossed a boundary of Pacey's that couldn't be uncrossed. After this, Andie's attempts to recuperate post-breakup, including her treatment of Pacey and even stealing the test were pretty consistent based on how desperately Andie wanted to appear normal and as though everything was under control. However, I also think early season 3 stacked the deck too far against Andie, resulting in her character leaving the show early. The supposed "false accusation" meant to make Andie look bad from a misogynistic, ableist showrunner took it too far. I personally think even during that episode, there are enough hints, including Rob's desperation to shut Andie's story down when she hadn't even gone to the authorities, indicates she told the truth. Seriously, his happy ass was all cocky when Pacey confronted him, but once he sobered up he practically sprinted to Joey's house to use Andie's mental health against her, even manhandling Joey multiple times to force her to listen. But whatever. The intent was obvious, and I still hated it. Anyways, Andie McPhee was great, and I wish people would still appreciate her at her worst. After all, it's what led to season 4 Andie, probably the strongest iteration of her character even though she sadly wasn't around for long.

I'm probably one of the few who finds the bits we got from Aegon as a character—while "inconsistent", disorganized and tonally a whirlwind—compelling, fascinating and worth inspecting and exploring (and maybe romanticizing and sexualizing :P). And this includes the textual sexual violence, and the heavily implied child sexual assault (whether pedophilic in nature or not aside for now). And though I understand people creating a fanon version expunging these sociopsychologically horrific, and fictionally hard to stomach aspects of his character, I can't say I even want to! I find him compelling because of these aspects, wanting the presentation of it may be for now.

His narrative, arc, symbolism and themes, and not to mention TGC's performance so far, are all just too compelling for me to pass on! Obviously biased, but frankly it's difficult to believe someone would read f&b and not realize the potential of his character and the entailing entertainment... On this note, I do have to say I find the complaints of certain fandom parts (they happen to be Aegon stans, and both team green and team black) about the choice to centre Alicent (both in the narrative and in Aegon's life) pretty disagreeable. It's wack, trite, and bitter. There are clear timeline oopsies and confusions due to the changes, and behind the complaints are genuine arguments to be made for an Update House of The Dragon that could have been, but the game ain't always fair... Just accept you are stanning a minor character, cast villain, stuffed like a pigeon with turkey filling, and eat your 10 minutes of beady eyed screentime. And just make everything about him? When someone takes a sip of wine, it's secretly about Aegon btw. All windows are about Aegon, when they are not about Alicent. Every dragonbond is secretly about Aegon/Sunfyre if you squint hard enough, George told me himself.

I think the major reasons why he comes off as deeply unlikable to the casual viewers (not even addressing the green/black tribalism for now) are due to unflattering framing and POVs that position him as either a gross nuisance, obstacle or clear antagonizing force. Some of this is due to needing certain characters covering certain aspects of a certain themes. How do the royals treat their servants? Good—bad is a big spectrum. Sexual violence is on it, and it happens to fall into Aegon's realm. And while considering the many other unflattering characteristics, u could argue this is overkill or unfair to Aegon, I gotta counter that's a deficient way of looking at fictional narratives. This character-lasered reading misses the forest for the trees. Not every character has to be likeable, relatable, or sympathetic from the get-go. And honestly, I think the many atrocities Aegon is collecting like Pokemon balls to be amusing and kinda compelling.

In another narrative, a character like Aegon's would b a byronic obsession in someone's romantic/gothic story, or a horror villain, or a god harassing poor mortal souls. There are very fun bits and pieces stuck in this guy and even in this age of many studios bucketing under fanbacklash, a guy can just hope the writers find him worthwhile enough a character. And rant into ur lovely inbox ofc.

And at the end of the day, people are just not gonna like a guy LOL. No amount of screentime or birthing scenes or dragonriding can make me find Rhaenyra compelling, and no lack thereof can make me find Alicent, Helaena, or Baela less compelling, speaking of female hotd characters only.

Okay almost.

Being they plan to introduce golden boy turned war criminal Daeron, I believe a both fun and horrific decision would be to make him compassionate towards Aegon's plights and woes and thus give the audience an entry into sympathizing with Aegon, which the writers clearly want us to do, all interviews and panels considered, cope and seethe as I have!

Are we even going to get a Daeron/Greenfam interaction? LOL What a deeply unserious show.

I would like to start off by thanking you for leaving such an interesting ask in my inbox! I think this conversation is a little overdue, since there’s been perhaps an emergence of the school of thought (lol) that suggests that greens upset or critiquing Aegon’s extra dark portrayal in the show are somehow whitewashing him or woobifying him. IMO that fundamentally showcases a divergence in people’s priorities in storytelling and how they interact with this fictional universe. I, myself, am very intrigued by dark!Aegon in fics and most of the works I enjoy tend to deal with taboo topics, so it’s a little unfair to paint everyone with the same dismissive brush.

However, I’m not just a HotD show watcher, I have been engaging with ASOIAF one way or another for over a decade now and I think I can mount a workable interpretation of how this series operates. One of the reasons I actually love it so much is because it has internal thematic logic and because, generally speaking, the characters that inhabit it are appropriately rewarded or sanctioned by the narrative (or at least it seems to be heading in this direction re: its endgame). Believe it or not, I was thinking of answering this ask by ranting about Ned Stark, but I decided not to, because we’d be here all day. 😅

Anyway, point is that I’m not very willing to sacrifice that aspect for the sake of character exploration that contradicts with the main themes and messages of the story. People are certainly free to disagree with me on this, of course. 

I imagine it is a tricky business for authors, trying to decide exactly which and how much of a flavour of awful to assign to a character without ruining the rest of the story. Some might start with an outline or a feel for where they want the story to go, but, if you happen to create a character that veers off your intended path or seems to write itself in a direction you never planned for, it would be honest for you as a writer to acknowledge that and accommodate that accordingly in your story. Which isn’t truly a possibility here, as we need the characters to hit certain beats in the narrative and, ideally, they should do it in a believable way. This is often a problem I have found with Fire and Blood and lord knows I’ve already dissected it enough times here, if anyone cares to take a gander - the fact that characters are sometimes prevented to grow organically, because George needs them to perform certain actions in order to move the plot along. So, ideally, a good story would find a balance between these two scenarios. 

So to me my main anti-argument is that the Dance was never a story just about Aegon, this is not the exploration of a fucked-up psycho rapist and why he does the things he does and how he thinks the things he thinks. While that certainly might be an interesting avenue, I am not super convinced the Dance of the Dragons could offer the appropriate space in which that kind of exploration could be pursued in a satisfying manner. This is an ensemble piece, and while Aegon is an important part of it, he also exists in relation to other characters. This exaggerated degradation of his would inevitably bring down his entire “side” with him and that, in turn, ultimately throws off the balance of the entire story. 

Let’s stop for a minute and take a look at what they decided to go with in the show. Rhaenyra has consistently received the framing that her “mistakes” amount to (at most) victimless crimes (she is absolved from murdering Vaemond and the show makes no effort to explain the havoc caused by screwing up inheritance laws). Whereas what do we have for Aegon? 1. raping and terrorizing servants to the point of panic attacks; 2. enjoyer of the child-fighting sport; 3. implied sexual assault of children. This is beyond caricature. The addition that he enjoys watching his own children fight and that they file down their teeth to make them more formidable, stuff that wasn’t even in the books, is just downright infuriating. 

These are not traits you endow a character with because you’re interested in exploring the deep dark depths of human depravity. That task was always impossible in the first place with a character who has so little screen time anyway and I would argue it was never really a priority anyway. The intention was always to make Rhaenyra look good by comparison and that’s not something I can respect from a storytelling perspective. 

Note that this is the starting point for Aegon and Rhaenyra. This is supposed to show how they behave before the war, in a relatively stress-free situation, when they’re unburdened by war trauma and their family dying - explanations that could be given as reasons for their later ruthlessness. But nothing show!Rhaenyra (or even book!Rhaenyra) has ever done could ever hope to amount to the trifecta of awfulness that they assigned to show!Aegon. 

So, what exactly are we doing here? The point of Aegon and Rhaenyra as direct adversaries was always that they inhabit a similar plane. It’s not even about Aegon being likable or sympathetic, it’s about the fact that it separates him too much from Rhaenyra and it positively sanctifies Rhaenyra by comparison. You could certainly prefer one over the other, but their differences are meant to inspire conversation; they cannot be so completely removed from one another as to operate in different leagues of morality. If we monsterize Aegon too much, we don’t even have the space to properly explore that in the story and it would mess too much with the way his character needs to evolve in order to hit the particular narrative beats that George decided are set in stone. So giving him these massive transgressions as a starting point and turning him basically into the Antichrist throws the rest of his arc off balance for me and the thematic parallels become too off-kilter for me to be able to enjoy it. 

To me Rhaenyra’s story is very reminiscent of (white) feminism, very “rights for me but not for thee”: a rich, white, privileged woman fighting for her own advancement and not caring about the plight of anyone else. The Dance of the Dragons is meant to inspire conversation and debate, both on the legal front and on the political utilitarian front. Is male primogeniture fair, even if it maintains stability in the realm? Can we change that? How? Does shifting to simple primogeniture when it comes to royal succession engender progress in some way? Should royal succession reflect inheritance laws for the rest of the population? How are laws changed in a medieval common law system? Is it fair for the King to change laws however he wants, at the drop of the hat, or should the lords have some say? What can/should the King do if his vassals refuse to abide by his choices? When it comes to waging a destructive war to replace one “unworthy” candidate for the throne with another “unworthy” candidate, where do we place that on the moral spectrum? Is the population thriving/not dying in war more or less important than maintaining male primogeniture? Is it really worth it just to have a nominal female successor that won’t really bring about systemic change? These questions are really worth exploring and there are no straightforward answers to them, but if Aegon is Satan on Earth, none of these questions matter anymore, because Rhaenyra automatically becomes the better option and no price is steep enough to pay to get rid of Aegon. And the point never was that Rhaenyra would make a better ruler than Aegon or is even a better person than Aegon; trying to shoehorn her into that narrative only hurts the story overall.

There’s something to be said for the fact that in the last stages of the war, Aegon’s and Rhaenyra’s journeys inversely parallel each other: while Rhaenyra is rejected by the population and kicked out of King’s Landing while she’s occupying the Iron Throne, Aegon manages to convince people on Dragonstone to fight for him and he takes the castle with little resistance. There is something to be said for the fact that it’s Aegon who gets to kill Rhaenyra, not the other way around. That he’s the one who gets to live that little while longer. The author could have simply chosen for them to have one last battle and end up killing each other, but he doesn’t. And IMO we would not be able to get to that point in the story in a way that feels true and organic to the internal logic of this fictional universe if we corrupt Aegon’s development and make him so reprehensible to begin with.

TLDR: I take issue with HotD’s portrayal of Aegon in direct comparison with the text of Fire and Blood, but I am open to dark!Aegon explorations in fic. However, I do not feel like this is appropriate in canon, as it messes too much with the balance of the story and corrupts the wider themes and messages, both of the Dance of the Dragons and of the ASOIAF series in general.

No one hates OUAT more than those of us in the fandom who actually watched it and/or followed it long enough to fully realize just how disappointingly awful, hopeless, and ridiculous the writing became in the piss poor excuse for canon the show devolved into the longer it went on, even though it was supposed to “be fun” and “give us hope.” At least all of its beautiful wasted potential became an outlet for far superior writing in our headcanons and fanfiction, though, no matter how shitty the actual show got.

I always feel so bad for newbies in the fandom who haven’t yet uncovered the horrific clusterfuck of bad writing this show ultimately devolved into. A part of me always feels like telling new fans to just spare themselves the pain, and to just quit watching after the Neverland arc. The majority of those of us in the OUAT fandom agree that the show’s writing ultimately devolved into a painfully biased, cheaply shocking, cheesy, wildly inconsistent, melodramatic, nonsensical, pandering, repetitive, and wildly ooc unsalvageable mess of bad writing that made us feel angry, betrayed, bored, and disgusted more often than not after that.

However, even after the show’s writing went completely off the rails beyond all salvaging, there were still those gold nuggets of wasted potential for characters, relationships, and storylines that could have and should have been amazing, if Kitsowitz and these writers actually had been able to be consistently competent and professional at their jobs. Particularly when looking back at the first two-and-a-half seasons of OUAT, I feel a great sense of disappointment at just how much beautiful and interesting potential they ultimately wasted in these characters and relationships in favor of blatantly biased, cheaply shocking, contrived, nonsensical, mutually toxic, wildly ooc, repetitive, and thus, character destroying magical soap opera melodrama.

There’s always this deep sense of disappointment in me over the amazing show that canon OUAT ultimately could have and should have been whenever I see all of those golden nuggets of tragically wasted potential Kitsowitz and these writers showed us in those moments when they were actually being competent show-runners and writers, particularly in S1-2A before they show got too distracted by the next big contrived magical thing to actually let the characters slow down, talk to each other, hang out with each other, and grow and react like in-character and relatable human beings. If only they were able to ultimately write and stick to a consistent, relatable, gradual, realistic, and organic course of character development that actually would have ultimately made these characters, happy endings, redemption arcs, and/or regression arcs actually feel well-earned and satisfying in the end.

Instead, they ended up erasing, minimizing, and/or outright romanticizing certain bad behaviors and choices of their characters at certain points and the negative consequences and/or effects they had in regards to those they hurt and/or victimized.

Instead, they ended up outright derailing most of their characters normally and/or consistently previously established complex, intelligent, and sympathetic characterizations and/or positive development at one point or another in order to rerail them over and over and over again more and more post S3 in increasingly abrupt, cheaply shocking, contrived, disappointing, flanderdized, horrifying, melodramatically toxic, and nonsensical ways that made them suddenly come across as uncharacteristically unsympathetic and stupid out of nowhere.

Instead, they created absurdities out of nowhere to inorganically force the characters to regress in ways that contradicted all previously established canon characterization, continuity, and previously established logic on the show.

Instead, they selectively bent, broke, and contradicted their own rules of magic with less and less fairness, rhyme, or reason as every season passed the first.

If only they had consistently and fairly stuck to their own rules and limitations of what magic could and couldn’t do. If only they treated their characters as complex and relatable human beings and equals with compelling, consistent, and realistic personalities, flaws, conflicts, regressions, redemptions, and resolutions that drove their stories consistently, gradually, organically, and realistically because of who they were and/or developed into as people, rather than because nonsensical asspulled twists and/or magical macguffins demanded that these characters suddenly become whatever they needed them to become a certain way to create cheap shock value, suspense, drama, and repetitive storytelling, regardless of all previously established characterization, continuity, development, and logic in their own canon.

Instead, they decided to cherry pick favorite characters and/or ships to frame as “redeemed” in the narrative, even though they may not have actually done anything to earn it and/or regressed without any negative consequences for doing so, just because Emma and the Charmings accepted them as “family.”

Instead, they ended up slapping increasingly biased, petty, meaningless, and shallow “hero” and “villain” labels on all of their characters, regardless of how objectively and needlessly harmful their choices, behaviors, and reactions may have been to others, in spite of being on the “right” side.

But we all ultimately sustained ourselves in the OUAT fandom by imagining just how amazing these characters, their relationships, and their storylines could have and should have been, trying to disregard the character assassinating bad writing in the piss poor excuse for canon that OUAT ultimately devolved into, taking Kitsowitz and these writers golden nuggets of tragically wasted potential for these characters, their relationships, and creating far superior works of art with those golden nuggests of wasted potential in canon with our headcanons and fan fiction.

OUAT isn’t a show that stuck with most of us because we were impressed by its writing in canon. In fact, most of us are fully aware that there were writing choices in the piss poor excuse of canon OUAT our favorite characters and relationships on the show that were inexcusably awful, biased, cheesy, cheaply shocking, gross, offensive, inconsistent, nonsensical, tone-deaf, wildly ooc, and/or repetitive at one point or another. Honestly, if the main character and/or relationship lasted past S3 in the main cast, then Kitsowitz and the writers destroyed your favorite character and/or ship with bad writing at one point or another.

After the writers unceremoniously killed off Bae/Neal, and resurrected Rumple from the show’s most consistently relatable, realistic, sympathetic, and well-earned two-and-a-half season redemption arc from S1-3A, it became clear thet they ran out of story to tell after wrapping up the Neverland arc, and had no idea where else they were supposed to go with Emma, Regina, Hook, Rumple, Belle, Snow, David, and even Henry’s individual characters or relationships anymore.

We know canon OUAT became a shitshow of inexcusably bad writing. We know it became horrifying and stupid. However, most of us didn’t actually remain in this fandom because we agreed with the writing on the show. We latched onto it so strongly because of its amazing main cast. We latched on to it so deeply because it showed us how to not completely fuck up amazing, relatable, and compelling individual characters, their relationships, and their storylines with biased, hypocritical, ableist, classist, homophobic, racist, sexist, petty, cheaply shocking, gross, wildly ooc, flanderdized, melodramatic, pandering, repetitive, and nonsensical lazy plot-driven writing. Granted, these problems were starting to show up in canon OUAT’s writing as early on as S1. However, after 3A, the show’s writing completely went off the rails for everyone in the remaining main cast that lasted past S3, and these characters and their relationships never fully recovered what made them at all coherent, compelling, magical, relatable, and enjoyable to watch and get invested in in canon from S1-S3, in spite of their obvious flaws.

Most of us have remained in the OUAT fandom because the show’s shitty writing choices and wasted potential inspired most of us to tell far better stories than Kitsowitz and their team of hacks ultimately did.

Ramblings related to my fic “Aerospace Accident” under the cut

With all this Villainous stuff back on my dash, I can’t stop thinking about how much I used to love the show and, by extension, the fic I used to work on for it. It’s been almost two full years since I last worked on it, but g-d, I never really stopped fully caring about it or the fandom as a whole. I think that with the content drought, I just got discouraged from continuing on with my writing, plus I unintentionally wrote myself into a corner by making a decision I regret, ie Kenning revealing his identity on live TV so soon after taking back up his superhero persona in the fic.

On top of that, while I love the fic/AU, there’s a lot of decisions I regret making writing-wise, most of which are pretty personal to me. The two biggest regrets I have is 1, writing Harold the way I did, as I believe him to now be too cartoonishly evil to portray as the abusive stepfather I wanted him to be in my fic, and 2, the entire “homeless” arc that I wrote absolutely fucking glorified/romanticized a very real trauma that thousands of teenagers are forced to undergo each and every year, especially LGBT+ teens.

Even with all the negative stuff being on my mind, I still really love some of the concepts and ideas behind the fic; I especially loved writing for Flug, Terra, Goldheart, and Metauro’s characters, and I wish I’d had more time to have fun with the whole thing. Not only that, but the fic just means a lot to me in general, being one of my longest projects and my sort of “escape” from my life, as I was going through a lot IRL at that time.

I think if I ever do go back to this fic, I might just up and rewrite the whole damn thing, but Christ, that would be a hell of a project to undergo, and in all honesty, I’d hate to give up on certain scenes I wrote, particularly the cafe scene between Black Hat and Terra as well as most of chapter 4 (even if I think I should’ve had a much slower build up throughout the fic, making the idea of rewriting it even more daunting).

All in all, I’ve got AA on my mind again, and the more I think about it, the more I miss it. It has a lot of glaring issues in hindsight, but with a bit of reworking, I think it could be a lot better. Just some food for thought.

Omg give us ur rant abt hating d*rklina as a ship.. im petty

Okay Anon, so i saw this the other day and I wasn't in the right headspace to answer but i am now!

So to start off, I am firmly in the ship and let ship category. You like a ship, i don't care. That doesn't mean i won't rag on the ship itself but I don't send hate, I don't really engage with shippers from ships I don't like, and I am liberal with the block button and the blacklist feature. Cultivate your tumblr/online experience, y'all. You don't owe anyone on this hellsite (or any other) a damn thing.

However, I REALLY do hate d*rklina as a ship, and I have a big problem with the way the shippers talk about it, so I hope you were being serious about wanting a rant because here it goes.

As for the ship itself, i feel like the reasons I dislike it are pretty obvious and standard. It's abusive. He is her abuser. He manipulates her. He spends months grooming her and gaslighting her, intentionally trying to get her under his control so that when he literally enslaves her it will go over easier. He never actually loved her, he wanted to use her for her power. It's not complicated, it's not really 'up for debate', that is the way its written, and the author has explained that that was the intended interpretation of her work. I mean he literally sexually assaults her in the second book, and straight up tells her he's going to kill everyone she loves so that she has no choice but to fall to him because she is completely alone in the world. He threatens to skin her alive in the second book when they're on the boat, he has no problem torturing her to get Mal to do what he wants. That's not love. He does not love her. It's pretty black and white, its explicitly written as an abusive relationship. The point was to show how easily powerful men can manipulate and abuse young naive women who don't know any better and try to see the best in people. Alina 'fell' for the version of Darkles Sparkles that he intentionally created to try to control her. Nothing he told her was true, from his backstory, to them both being 'the only one like [each other]' (hello, baghra), to using Genya to convince Alina that Mal had abandoned her, everything he did was manipulation so that he could get her under his control. It is not a romance, it is not 'a ship war', d*rklina is not written as romantic. He is her abuser. Full stop.

There is also the point about him being just a generally horrible person all around. He's not morally grey. He just isn't. He sold an 11 year old into sex slavery, forced her to stay in that situation so he could use her, and then mutilated her when she defied him. He also groomed and abused Zoya, because he saw that she was exceptionally powerful and wanted to use her the way he wanted to use Alina. He enslaved Alina. He blinded and mutilated his own mother. He is a genocidal maniac. He shows no remorse, he doesn't care about anyone but himself and his own power. He is not the type of character that should be romantically shipped with anyone. If you like him, that's absolutely fine! One of my fave characters ever is Kai Parker from TVD. Dude was a straight up psychopath. He tried to kill multiple pairs of toddlers. He brutally murdered his pregnant sister AT HER WEDDING. He is a HORRIBLE person. But I think he's a brilliant character. But do I think he's a good guy, do I want him anywhere near any characters in that show in a romantic way (ehem b*nkai)? Absolutely fucking not. Being a fan of a villain character is fine, but fucking own that shit. Villains can be SUCH good characters, but they're still villains. Erasing the bad they've done so you can justify putting them in situations where they WILL harm the people around them because you can't level with yourself about the bad things they've done doesn't make you 'woke', it just makes you look like you don't understand the media you're consuming.

Which leads me to why I have such a problem with the way D*rklina shippers engage with the ship. They simultaneously wanna say "oh we know it's toxic/bad/abusive/etc., that's why we like it!" and then also they try to claim that it should be endgame, they romanticize scenes where he is abusing her (and by romanticize I mean they literally try to frame his abuse as romantic, not like "oh yeah my ship is interacting!!". those are different things. You can be excited about ship interactions without trying to say that things he is doing to her are actually romantic), they try to argue that he is morally grey/misunderstood/etc., and they straight up try to lie and say he's not her abuser.

If you wanna ship an abusive ship, own it. Be straight up about why you like it. It's okay to be into dark shit, y'all. It does NOT make you a bad person to be into dark shit. But this idea that fiction doesn't impact real life, and that people can't call the ship out for what it is is a problem is a very troubling trend in fandom. Nobody is saying you can't ship it, do what you want. But this idea that these people are 'oppressed' because fans of the show/book continue to point out the facts about the way the story was written and how the relationship is actually presented is fucking insane. Someone saying that D*rklina is abusive is not calling you out, they are stating a fact. It's the story as it was presented. You trying to say it's not makes it look like you have no reading comprehension. And this idea that 'well i'll be on the lookout for evil shadow wizards in real life lol' is such horse shit too. His shadow wizard powers aren't the issue. He is a powerful man who grooms and abuses young women. You're telling me you lived through the Me Too movement and you wanna act like thats not a real threat that young women face every day? You're telling me that you can't see that the actual real life connection you're supposed to be making here? Okay, well you should maybe deal with that and come back to me, because that's an issue.

Fiction is meant to teach us lessons. Darkles is meant to teach us something. He is meant to show us that sometimes, powerful men lie to, manipulate, groom, and abuse young women, and we should be aware of that. The story is about a young woman who is sucked into an abusive situation, and then she breaks free and in the end she is able to defeat her abuser. That is a really powerful story, and one that millions of real life women can relate too. To pretend that that story doesn't have real life connections makes you look insensitive and frankly, kind of cruel.

So basically, in the end, my biggest issue is that D*rklina shippers love to spout this nonsense about 'knowing' it's bad and that he's a villain, and 'that's why they like him', and then turn around and try to say that he's not actually the villain, he's not actually bad, and the things he does to Alina that are abuse are actually romantic and sweet. You wanna ship an abusive ship, you do you, but lets not pretend it's anything other than what it is, but romanticizing and normalizing abuse tactics so you can feel, what? morally superior? Cool? edgy and different? That has real life impacts. You are normalizing abuse. Real people will engage with that rhetoric, and it will make it difficult for them to see abuse when it happens to them or the people around them because they believe its romantic or normal to be treated that way.

You wanna be a villain stan? You wanna ship dark ships? Good on ya, but fucking own your shit, y'all.

sorry if this is a loaded question, ofc you don’t need to answer! what’s your take on the argument that dark content is harmful to reality, and that it romanticises traumas? personally i like reading some dc, but when i see posts about how it’s harmful to both survivors and readers (smth to do with psychologically normalising it) it kinda makes me feel guilty, like i’m doing something wrong? when i know i can distinguish between fiction and reality?

hey! so i’m going to keep this under a read more to avoid upsetting anyone - also because this is literally - and i mean, literally - an essay LMAO. i had a lot to say!

any anon hate will be deleted and blocked, but you’re free to engage me off anon (and kindly on anon) if you want to! anon, you’re also free to come chat with me in dms if you want to speak more freely about this :) 

warning for rape mentions, murder / mass murder mentions, dub / noncon mentions.

so, i want to preface this by saying that i don’t think that anyone is obligated to like or be comfortable with dark content. it truly is your prerogative not to be interested in it and you are valid if it makes you feel uncomfortable. so nothing i’m saying here is to convince people that anyone should like it or is wrong for not liking it.

but i don’t agree with the argument that people should be shamed for liking or writing it, that it romanticizes trauma, etc. i understand why people feel that way 100%, but i don’t agree.

sometimes, it feels arbitrary. “dark content” has become a pseudonym for dub/non-con fic, but is the the only type of dark content there is? dark stories can include murder, horror, gore, etc. yet, despite us knowing that murder (for example) is a crime and morally wrong, most people don’t bat an eye when a chara in a fic does it and is still protrayed as attractive or is the reader’s lover. we go crazy for mafia aus where characters kill and show power --- we love those characters, those scenes where they kill and go take their lover all covered in blood. i mean, even in the jjk fandom, one of the most popular characters is a cursed spirit whose first words in the series are about massacring women and children. and we love him. more than that, we love the gory, arguably dark world he comes from - we hypothesize about these characters, we sympathize with them, and we lust over them.

so it’s hard to reconcile that with telling fans who write dub/noncon that they are impacting people’s sense of reality. we’re all experiencing this series together - if written fan fiction is what desensitizes morality, what about the images from the anime and manga? would we make the same argument for banning it? would we say that the people who like sukuna are romanticizing mass violence or that gege is normalizing it for us psychologically by making the character who does it hot and engaging or showing/referencing it so much in the manga?

i just don’t think we would. i think we all understand that those things are wrong and like him knowing that, and can readily say he’s a villain or that the things we’re seeing is wrong. so, i don’t think there’s a black-and-white argument that seeing x in media will make you think y is a-okay or make you more comfortable with it in real life.

i do get that there’s a difference here: a big part of this argument is the sexual aspect of non/dubcon - it’s hard to feel like it’s not normalizing rape when people find a scenario like that hot (whereas no one is like...lewding a mass murder scene, haha). but i think that, at the end of the day, brains do what brains do and people just have dark fantasies. like it’s really as simple as that. rape fantasies in particular are common and talked about by psychologists all the time and i have never been able to find a common thread of them condemning people having them or even writing about them. what they DO talk about is the fact that consent is actually key to the fantasy - that the person fantasizing is the person controlling the situation, that the fantasy, despite being “dub/noncon”, is inherently exactly what they want because THEY are creating the situation, and that, in the end, it’s the absence of actual danger that makes it. ultimately: there is a difference between real life rape and an imagined fantasy or roleplay. so much so that it might not even be fair to call them “rape” fantasies at all.

“It’s crucial to recognize that real-life rape is anything but erotic for a woman. Being at the mercy of someone who’s so outrageously violating your will, holding you down, threatening you with bodily harm (or even death), and physically forcing himself upon you induces arousal all right. But not that of sexuality, but of utterly petrifying anxiety and panic. Contrast this to most imagined rape scenes, which are so electrifying precisely because they’re expressly designed by their female creator to stimulate the illusion of danger—which can, in fact, be positively arousing.”

>  from this article.

to me, this is ultimately what dub/noncon fic is. people writing out those fantasies for people who share those fantasies to process those fantasies.

you can make the argument that that it’s harmful to survivors, but that has its own issues when doctors have reported that some survivors have rape fantasies or find comfort in acting out those rape fantasies (and writing, in my opinion, is a form of acting that out). like are they not valid victims because they are contextualizing their trauma into something that they can control and can process on their own terms? i think the issue there is that the argument uses survivors as a monolith to make an argument on their behalf; but every individual survivor is valid in what they think about this because no two survivors process what happened to them in the same way.

i myself am a survivor and have no real issue with dark content (obviously). i don’t read it often and only write it now because of sukuna; but when i do read it, i draw the line at certain things because i personally cannot stomach it. but would i demand that person delete it from existence because of that? no, i wouldn’t. because again, at the end of the day, that’s the entire basis of the fantasy. i control what i’m fantasizing about, and if something that i do not want to happen to “me” as the reader occurs, i do not read it. i don’t consent to that experience or that fantasy, so i stay away. but at the same time, that other person’s fantasy isn’t mine to control or infringe on and it doesn’t make me a better person than them for not sharing the fantasy.

SO ALL OF THIS TO SAAAY: i don’t think you should feel bad for enjoying dark content. i don’t think the argument about whether or not you’ll know how wrong it is in real life anymore really applies because you could make the claim that any type of fiction runs the risk of distorting people’s perception of reality and making them desensitized to something. and i don’t think that’s what people’s struggle with this is. 

what it boils down to, to me, is that people can’t understand why anyone would find dub/noncon arousing, and think that they condone rape because of it. which, again, is understandable. rape is a horrible fucking thing to experience - it isn’t sexy, it isn’t hot, it isn’t arousing and it’s hard to see any nuance when you see “noncon” and “wow this was so hot” in one post. but based on the way psychologists talk about “rape” fantasies, i think the two things (the fantasy and the real life act of violence) can typically be distinct for people, even survivors, and it just comes down to whether or not it’s a fantasy you share. if you don’t, completely your right! block the tags, block the writers, do whatever you have to do to protect your peace and your limits! but the discourse about it always seems to go into the realm of shame or arguments about someone’s moral compass, which i think is unfair. 

hopefully this helps and wasn't an annoying thing to read! like i said, don’t mind talking about it more if need be!

Different anon… Here is the thing though, Drogo/Dany isn’t a parallel to sansan. People who make that comparison either lack severe reading comprehension, which is not surprising for this fandom, or they want to use it to validate sansan. (Tyrion was the older guy Sansa was forced to marry. Dany and Sansa have opposite journeys and their marriages are a part of that.) But sansan’s mirror is Jorah/Dany. Book!Jorah is an older guy who has a creepy obsession with a teenage girl. He dumps his trauma on her, he projects onto her. But he is also her advisor, her confidante early on, his protector. There are also the same BaTB elements sansans love to talk about. She even refers to him as her bear. But he was lusting after her ever since they met and then he assaulted her. He forced himself on her. She is uncomfortable with his actions, but she doesn’t possess the necessary language and she doesn’t understand consent (we know this because of how she frames her relationship with Drogo but also how she expected Lhazareen women to be ok, even be thankful for being married to their rapists, and her dubcon relationship with Irri) so she recontextualize what happened and chastise Jorah for kissing her not because she is a teenager and he shouldn't and she didn’t consent to but because she is his Queen. That's the language she has, so she expresses her discontent, disapproval, rejection with that. Sandor was verbally, psychologically, physically abusive to Sansa but he also occasionally protected her in King’s Landing. He lusted after her, made sexually inappropriate comments to an 11 year old child but he was also the only one in KL to have honest conversations with her. Then he assaulted her, held her at knife point. She was afraid of him kissing her, killing her, she had nightmare about the assault which she clearly registered as a sexual one despite what his fans claim his intentions were. Sansa has a habit of romanticizing/redefining these things. Sansa thinks Arys Oakheart was preferable, that he was kind because he beat her less hard than the other Kingsguard. She remembers Tyrion as someone who were kind to her, someone better than Joffrey even though he molested her and she had him in her nightmares too. She separates Littlefinger and Petyr in her mind because just like with the other men before him the thought of her sometimes-protector at the same time being her abuser is too much for her. Just like Dany she recontextualizes what the Hound did to her and turns the assault into a song to cope with it.

These two pairings has the same dynamic, the difference is fandom’s response to it. (The slight differences are that Dany had actual amiable feelings for Jorah -not romantic love or sexual feelings but friendly, sisterly love for him- and she as a Queen had a lot more agency than Sansa as a prisoner had. She isn't as powerless as Sansa, she could have easily banished him, punished him, even ordered his death.) But no one in fandom writes essay after essay why and how could and should Jorah and Dany end up together. It’s an outrageous suggestion. Dany is a main character, she is the heroine. She is a Queen. Why should she ever end up with someone as lowly as Jorah? Someone as old, as ugly as Jorah? But Sansa, meh she is not an important character. And she needs to be punished, first because she was a child making childish mistakes. Secondly, she is shallow, she refused to be raped by her older, ugly husband. So she needs to end up with an older ugly guy to humble her. Even when the author expressed his distaste of the trope of a noble girl running away with a lowly guy in medieval stories, nah that doesn’t matter here. Sansa being of high nobility, a princess won’t have any factor at all who she’s gonna end up with. They had to keep assuring themselves that she is not a main character so she could even end up with a villainous character, that she is not a Stark so she could end up with people who hurt/fight against her family. The hypocrisy of this fandom, and their selective reading is most clear when it comes to these two “couples”. Almost all sansans (whether it is the actual shippers or those who think it’ll happen because well it’s Sansa what else she’s gonna do besides being a reward bride for some hideous guy) hate Jorah/Dany (as they should) while trying to justify how and why Sansa should end up with the hound. Let's forget the abuse and pedophile, let's assume those never happened, even then it makes no sense. There is not a narratively satisfying way, a logical reason how Sansa could be with Sandor. But they ignore all that because it doesn't fit in with their vision, with their interpretation of the books and characters. Because admitting Sansa is a main character and more than a reward for their pedo fave has a ripple affect, it challenges all their theories, they all crumble. And they just can't let go of their 2 decades old theories, they just have to be right, they must be right. That's why they all took the show's ending as a personal offense, especially the QiTN Sansa. I just can't wait for the books!

Yeah, agreed. jorah and sandor are mirrors of each other. I mean I hope they both die without any glory or honor, personally. I don't really care if they have sacrificial deaths for the greater good - or whatever framing the show had intended - jorah and sandor were also whitewashed and made more pitiable/likeable.

Whenever dany x dr*go is used to validate literally ANY pairing, I am suspish. In particular when we acknowledge that dany absolutely couldn't consent - she was 13 iirc - and was sold off by her abusive brother to a man twice her age, but Sansa reimagining her trauma about Sandor's assault to something less traumatic is considered being hateful to Sandor because he's unattractive. (And I never really listen whenever ppl give me shit or deny it was assault; pertaining to my job, I'm pretty fucking aware what assault or intention-to-assault looks like, and I think most ppl do to, they just seem to lose awareness when it comes to their ships or certain characters).

I think it has to do with Sansa being the archetypal "Pretty Popular Girl" - the one who like feminine things, sort of fussy, likes feminine colors and just in general is feminine. She seems to remind people of the classic mean popular girl we saw popularized in 1990s-2000s high school movies - the one who gets her comeuppance in the end when the non-feminine girl somehow triumphs in whatever way, or she's the one who learns her lesson and stops being quite so feminine, or hooks up with a most-popular guy. The Mean/Pretty Popular girl has to be humbled in some fashion. Fans who don't like her, tend to view this as a way for her to pay for the error of her ways.

Like being a prisoner of war. Or not wanting to fuck tyrion. Or not wanting to run away with sandor.

I mean...all of asoiaf, beyond the politics and magic, is all about trauma and the human response to it - which is varied and depends on circumstances, personalities, and a lot of other things. One of the more vile things GOT did was whitewash jorah and tyrion the way they did imo. Jorah was a predator, circling Dany, regardless of whether she thought of him fondly, he just happened to not be violent towards her - she cries when he forces a kiss on her. Tyrion was a predator who molested her when he acknowledged she was a child "but he wanted her anyway". I've seen a lot of ppl react more sympathetically towards Dany. I haven't seen much recrimination against dany for refusing him the way we see sansa being hated for not wanting tyrion or sandor, hell, even petyr.

But - Sansa, imo, in the larger or at least circles of the fandom that have been around longer, is a more ideal whipping girl for the outlet a lot of ppl crave. See again the popular girl trope. She can't fight, she has no magical creatures, she is not a Chosen One of any kind. She has her wits and her ability to observe and adapt who has no choice but to navigate survival surrounded by people who have more agency and power than she does. That's it. I guess in a world of amazing abilities and magic and warfare, this is very boring, particularly when she doesn't weaponize her femininity or sexuality, where she's beautiful without being dangerous or magical or erotic. And I guess ppl feel that because of that, she needs to be punished for not being as extraordinary as she should be, OR, because she was the "Mean Popular Girl" (she wasn't) she must be humbled, and the ones to do it are the ones she refuses.

It's really delicious knowing they don't get "to have her" 🤢. Hopefully they just both fuck off to the ends of the world or die, idc they deserve zero thought.

Sometimes I'm like broooo how did leigh make such good books with soc and ck with such good characters and plots and wordbuilding but she had made a (very entertaining) trilogy but with so many grating 2D characters and sometimes the plot was just ... not it

Like soc and ck obviously have their flaws too but not to the same extent as the trilogy

Like did you feel leigh was very unnecessarily sympathetic to the darkling and treated Nikolai as a mostly good character in the text even though he did sooooo many shitty things

And that zoya was treated (unknowingly) with a lot of misogyny in the narrative which has caused many people in the fandom to hate her

And alarking and nikolina were romanticised in the books and in the fandom far too much

???

YES OKAY so this is a Big Thing for me. very controversially, i prefer tgt to soc solely because i find it much more enjoyable to read. HOWEVER, there's no denying that leigh's writing definitely improved from tgt to soc, i agree.

while i think that leigh clearly portrayed the darkling as a villain (she didn't tamper down his crimes or make them seem less horrific), i agree that the narrative was definitely (arguably too) sympathetic towards him. i could use a lot of examples for this, but none work quite so well as:

“Once more,” he said. “Speak my name once more.” He was ancient, I knew that. But in this moment he was just a boy – brilliant, blessed with too much power, burdened by eternity.

“Aleksander.”

His eyes fluttered shut. “Don’t let me be alone,” he murmured. And then he was gone.

leigh's choice to have alina, one of the people who suffered most at the darkling's hands, sympathise with him and even grant him his last wish, was a bad one. this man is a thousand year old p*dophilic mass murdering sex trafficker and she had the nerve to describe him as "just a boy" and "brilliant [...] blessed [...] burdened". of course you can argue that this is the residue of his grooming of alina, but i just think that after all the shit he'd done by this point, after a whole book of alina talking about how manipulated she felt and how much she hated him, these few words offer him clemency from the narrative that he does not deserve. all he did to earn alina's kindness (not forgiveness, to be fair to leigh) was die.

and yes, nikolai was hero worshipped by the text for absolutely no reason. even though we see both alina and mal put up a lot of resistance to him + the shit he pulls (punching him, criticizing him etc), the narrative basically shoves their eventual "pity" and "admiration" for nikolai down the readers' throats.

“[...] Nikolai might never have made it out of the Grand Palace.” It hurt me to say it, but I forced myself to speak the words. “He could be dead.”

and

The too-clever fox. Even once he’d abandoned his disguise as Sturmhond, that’s who Nikolai had been to me, always thinking, always scheming.

and

[to nikolai] “I’m just happy you’re alive,” I said, hastily blinking my eyes clear.

imo this sympathy + romanticisation is much worse and much more prominent throughout the latter half of s&s and the whole of r&r than the sympathy with the darkling, purely because the bad things nikolai does are essentially never acknowledged. there is (unsurprisingly ig) no talk of his imperialism, no talk of his pursuing alina when she's a minor, no talk of his racist remarks and generally very little talk of him being an asshole (particularly to mal).

moreover, i agree that nikolina + darklina were too romanticized by the text. i have a very complicated relationship with leigh's portrayal of alarkling, because a lot of alina's earlier feelings and sympathy for the darkling stem from his grooming and manipulation of her, which i think this quote from the start of r&r shows pretty well:

Even now, after everything he’d done, I wanted to believe the Darkling, to find some way to forgive him.

but then we get the whole mental house call thing that alina + the darkling do, in which they can visit each other and no one else can see the other. that was a mistake narratively. the ability to do this implies a sort of deeper bond, and even though the darkling then uses this bond to show alina the corpse of the only mother figure she'd ever known, it still carries almost romantic connotations with it throughout the rest of the book(s) for some reason. this dynamic is similar to a lot of "soulmate bonds" in mainstream ya (namely sjm's mating bonds), which helps to explain why so many people ship darklina; it is written & coded the same as the majority of (abusive) ya relationships, so readers pick up on this as a sign of romance rather than some attempt at narrative foils or something (bc in reality zoya is alina's foil). this isn't even mentioning the repetition of alina's desire to forgive the darkling and her confusion over her "feelings" for him, which once again just reinforces darklina as a viable ship in a lot of readers' minds.

as for nikolina, as a less prevalent ship in the series it gets less attention in the fandom. most often, i see people turn to nikolina because they don't like malina or the darkling, or because they wanted alina to become queen (to which i remind everyone that alina never wanted to be queen). at first i was alright with leigh's portrayal of them because alina punches nikolai + is angry with him for kissing her non-consensually etc, which is the closest the narrative ever comes to condemning him for his actions. but later on alina seems to forget all this and considers marrying nikolai, even joking with him a little when he proposes:

[during nikolai's marriage proposal]

“Stop that,” I said, still grinning.

“What?”

“Saying the right thing.”

there is zero acknowledgement of how predatory nikolai is, and instead the narrative goes on to sympathise with nikolai and have alina feel guilty for rejecting him. imo alina's characterization (her initial disdain for nikolai, which was much more in character) was sacrificed to raise up nikolai, and also show him to be a plausible and "likable" love interest for zoyalai, which is where leigh obviously intended for nikolai to end up (zoya is even mentioned during nikolai's proposal).

finally - yes, zoya in tgt is basically a manifestation of leigh's internalised misogyny. from alina's initial slut-shamey disdain for her, to leigh weaponising her against malina (repeated sexual encounters with mal), to zoya being seen as evil & a bitch by the other female characters just because she's powerful + isn't "nice", zoya's character was assassinated before it even had chance to materialize. even though zoya was also a victim of the darkling and is, as i mentioned before, alina's narrative foil, alina has very little sympathy for her and assumes that she's an evil bitch. tbf, this gets better with each book, but even in r&r there's a lot of tension between zoya and the other characters because she's seen as unlikable and difficult. i can't speak to her characterization in kos or soc, because i haven't read one and don't really remember the other, but i have heard that it improved from tgt to kos.

anyways this has been a long ass rant and i'm very sorry to anyone who scrolls past it on their dash. fuck the darkling, fuck nikolai lantsov, and stan malyen oretsev

Hey! Just read your hot take on novel!wangxian and I absolutely agree. I'm gonna have to say here that I believe it boils down to the fetishization of homosexual men in a lot of the fandom culture that surrounds mlm shipping, as you said it's a space for a lot of women to experiment with their desires and whatnot, but I think therein lies the breaking points between reading novel!wangxian as a good, healthy relationship vs. reading it as a very flawed and toxic one. As an LGBT person, reading the way the author dealt with their relationship made me extremely uncomfortable, it just really feels like something that is written by someone who is more invested in using her queer characters for satisfying her and her reader's own pleasure than a well-built, strong relationship between two characters. Not to take away from the novel in some other aspects, I believe that novel!wwx is a much better, much more nuanced character than what he is in cql, but when it comes to wangxian, I think the intentions are very different for each of them. To each their own, I guess, but I do find it very troubling that some people in the fandom have a really hard time admitting that novel wangxian is not even remotely healthy.

Absolutely.

And can I just say how glad it makes me to see that not everyone is praising this book for it’s lgbt representation...

But I guess that’s also why I just occasionally feel the need to scream my frustrations into the void or try to make sense of the novel.

And why I try to be understanding and accepting of people’s opinion of the novel and not take it ‘personally’ (in the sense of sitting there thinking “holy shit this is how they view ME, this is what they think of ME” etc).

I was in fandoms back when they were really a place dominated by straight (homophobic) women and realism or lgbt representation wasn’t on anyone’s mind (and the occasional dude butting in to say that’s not how sex works or bottoming is experienced was ignored or told to get out). I experienced this change to fandoms being more of a lgbt space, of people becoming aware that media can shape your views of groups of people, of people becoming aware of their fetishizing of fictional gays vs. their prejudice against real life lgbt people etc.

And tbh MXTX just writes like one of those, she writes wangxian like everyone wrote their gay relationships around 2005 and earlier; clear power imbalance, clear roles and attributes that are divided into ‘manly’ and ‘feminine’, certain physical attributes (like the female self insert character aka the bottom being pretty and slight and weaker and shorter), men/the penetrating partner can’t really be raped so anything the woman/bottom tries isn’t really ‘bad’, the male love interest is forceful and self centered but ONLY because he’s so in love and since he’s emotionally stunted he has to express that through sex, men/tops NEED sex and it’s rude/mean to deny them that, the girl/bottom isn’t THAT horny or in charge of their own sexuality but wants to please their partner and what they really get out of it is the emotional aspect, decisions need to be made for them because the dude/top just knows better, the girl/bottom is childish and flirty and the guy/top suffers through it until he finally snaps and shows the girl/bottom who'sboss etc etc. (honestly homophobia and misogyny is so tightly knit in this kind of fiction, if it wasn’t so frustrating it would be very interesting).

Tbh I disagree with novel!wwx being more nuanced (despite a lot of ppl whose opinions I really respect also feeling this way), because I simply cannot seperate him from the wangxian relationship. All I see are tropes and stereotypes applied to make him ‘work’ in the context of the wangxian relationship instead of an actual personality...

To me, in CQL WWX is clearly the main character and you love his interactions with LWJ and want more of them and value them, wheras in the novel most of the time WWX plays second fiddle even when a scene should technically be about him and LWJ’s presence is incredibly suffocating, because he’s always being controlling or at the very least influencing WWX.

I also don’t feel like WWX has much of a character arc/growth. We’re essentially told he had one but the only thing that really actually changes is him hating himself a bit more and letting LWJ smash..., and I guess: he’s less independent than ever, he’s more isolated that ever...

I’ve called novel!wangxian a relationship between an abuser and his victim, because you can find evidence of that in the text. Not because I think the author wanted to portray an unhealthy gay relationship. Like you said, she was fetishizing and wrote for a similar crowd. But to me that ‘realization’ helped...I still don’t see how people can call it a masterpiece but I can at least understand hyping something you like up...

And like, badly written gay relationship or not; gay/straight,man/women, I see how people can find it hot. Exploring your sexuality through fictional characters isn’t necessarily a strictly straight girl phenomena. I probably have read fic that was exactly like this, I can’t judge anyone for it. But no one prints out the last PWP they read and goes, “this is ideal lgbt representation and nothing will ever be this good, the fact that it includes rape makes it so realistic” like????

(Is that part or an effect of the woke and purety culture? you can’t say ‘i like this book but it has flaws’ or ‘i’ve enjoyed this but it’s not up the feminism or lgbt acceptance that i preach/live’ so you have to pretend it’s flawless?)

And like, I do think novel!wangxian is a nightmare when it comes to lgbt representation and I do believe this is largely due to a cishet woman writing about gay men and fetishizing them (the fact that a lot of peoples arguments why novel!wangxian ‘is better’ boils down to ‘there’s kissing and sex’ is also pretty telling). And I am frightend and worried by some peoples response to it.

But is it really fair to see it as just that? It’s a problem sure, but that same thing happens in straight media (which I am admittedly not well versed in). Stephanie Meyer didn’t set out to write Edward Cullen to be a creep and non of the teenage girls that went crazy over him viewed it as such...Reylo fans (aside from some of them proclaiming Finn to be the real villain and saying it’s racist and misogynistic to not find Kylo Ren hot) found a way to view him threatening her as romantic and sexy, Loki fans that didn’t ship him with Thor usually fell into the camp of “he would be a perfect boyfriend” or “what if this OFC was his slave and he raped her everyday <3″... like ignoring/glorifying/romanticizing behaviours or exploring what kinks you might have through the safety of fictional characters and fictional settings isn’t JUST happening when it comes to ‘the gays’...

And not just specifically in fandom spaces either, a lot of ‘romantic’ movies include inappropriate touching, the boy/guy knowing better than the girl what she wants etc. And I absolutely do believe that that’s something that normalized these things for a lot of young girls and guys (I don’t want to get into this too much, I’ve really seen a change in the past few years, but before that it was pretty common for young boys to believe they need to keep pursuing and pressuring a girl that has said no, girls truly thought boys could die of blue balls, girls thought it was their duty as good girlfriends to let their boyfriends fuck them even when they weren’t in the mood, that they couldn’t talk about what they want in bed or what they don’t find enjoyable because ‘sex is for boys and girls get a relationship in exchange’ etc.).

And in much the same way movies have only relatively recently begun being called out for that, it’s also still pretty recently that they’re being called out for having their one queer coded character be a pedophile and a murder or whatever...Like, society as a whole becoming aware of these issues.

But do authors that publish their work with a specific target audience in mind have a responsibility to think about the effect it might have on them? (And I can already hear loud screams of ‘no way, it’s not your fault if your audience isn’t smart enough to understand that this bad thing is bad’, but I actually do believe in a way they do. That doesn’t mean you can’t or shouldn’t write whatever you want, just maybe take a look at HOW you bring your point across. (We do KNOW people are influenced by what propaganda they’re consistantly fed. I mean, you wouldn’t write a pro-drugs childrens book...) )

What if the author isn’t aware of their bias and prejudices? Or their target audience isn’t their actual audience?

And do we, society and media, judge female and male authors differently when it comes to romance and sex in fiction? (The answer is yes btw) But also, where do we draw the line at calling something ‘badly written’ and calling it toxic? Can it be both? As I’ve said before, a lot of people claim that only the physical intimacy scenes of novel!wangxian are bad, because they’re badly written and OOC, some say the book as amazingly written and only the wangxian relationship is bad because the author doesn’t know how to write gay men. In my ‘hot take’ I essentially said that’s not necessarily bad writing so much as it’s simply an (okay, unintentional) toxic relationship. And would this relationship still come across as toxic (or badly written, whichever you want) if we didn’t know the author to be a cishet woman? Or if a gay man had written it? (my personal, eloquent answer for this is: yes, but differently.)

Which was really all just a rambly way to get to my point of: it’s not just fetishizing of gay men, it’s also the homophobia and self-inserting in a safe situation.

You can literally replace WWX in the novel with a female character and it wouldn’t change a thing. The author takes such an effort into building up this power imbalance in every aspect of their life that if WWX were a heroine nothing would change in this (sexist/ancient society) setting.

(And clearly this is something that appeals to people if you look at the amount of female!WWX fics...)

Not even the sex scenes. There are maybe two allusions in all of them combined that WWX might also have a dick but like, you can’t be sure and it sure as hell doesn’t need stimulation.

(and again, that could be written as a kink...but it’s just not.)

CQL is a gay love story. MDZS at it’s core is none of that.

But I also very much agree with your ‘to each their own’, like here I am criticizing and trying to find explanations and whatever, but at the end of the day it doesn’t matter why someone might like (or write) a book like this, I vastly prefer CQL!wangxian but people have their own reasons for not doing so.

The ‘problem’ really only lies in, as you said, people not being able to accept that it’s not a healthy relationship. Or claiming it to be perfect lgbt rep.

And because my brain can’t shut up today:

I also can’t stop thinking that the way some people ‘glorify’ the book as due to their age and ‘inexperience’.

When I was a pretty young kid and got into fanfiction, there was nothing but completely OOC!whump to be found in the first two fandoms I was in. And I loved it. It was YEARS later that I thought I might like to read something with the characters being...in character. What I’m trying to say, in different stages and phases of your life you might enjoy different things, for different reasons...and obviously, in that moment, you won’t think about ‘what appeals to me here/should this appeal to me/etc’.

I don’t mean inexperience as ‘sexual inexperience’ here, though of course that could be part of it, but also like, inexperience with this genre (is this the first book like this you read, or did you just read 50 in a row that all had the same unhealthy vibes?), with lgbt people and issues (do you know any lgbt people or is your only image of them either the cute boy you can’t have and don’t want to see with another girl or grown men in full kink gear in front of children during CSD? and also: do you think ‘i like this’ and that’s the end of it or do you notice how many people idolize this objectively unhealthy relationship and won’t allow critique on it...)  

I...just wanted to say thanks really.

I just can’t stop rambling apparently and I know I mostly just repeated what you said or what I already said but in longer... I just really do feel very strongly about novel!wangxian and the perception of them and have actually at times felt very personally...worried/affected, by people’s acceptance and love of them and I just... have to try and make sense of it...

folklermore spn finale: the last great american dynasty

Okay so this post took forever to write for a couple reasons. 

First of all, this one is special in that it has two readings for my grief.

The first one is terrible and heartbreaking and honestly I don’t want to spend a lot of time on it. I see Andrew Dabb as THE great villain of Supernatural, and he truly had a marvelous time ruining everything. The sarcastic nature of the song goes in to speak to the fact that I feel legitimately crazy for how much I blame him. It’s sad and heartbreaking. I think about it sometimes when i hear this song and instantly force myself to stop thinking about it and go back to the other view. 

So the other view is more what you might expect with the vibe of the song... but it is SO HARD for me to put into words, I found. So I’m sorry if this is messy and disjointed and all over the place. 

I spoke in cardigan’s post about how I’m not the fan the show wanted and there’s a large part of the narrative in the folkermore-spn-finale feelings for me that expresses not being the fan the narrative wanted or needed.... Most of the time this is brought up in this, it’s angry, or sad, or whatever... but this time... this time it celebrates it.

I had a marvelous time ruining everything.

Putting this under a cut because it’s very long. I didn’t mean for this to get this long rip.

I let myself sink into the feelings of wonder and awe I felt when I first fell in love with the show and then let myself find the conclusion that IF I did in fact “ruin everything” (aka the show) by not being the fan the show needed me to be to enjoy it, at least I had a good fucking time!

From that first bit where Taylor sings that Rebekah’s salt box house took her mind of St. Louis.... Supernatural took my mind off my life too. I remember when I first watched the show, I was 20 and I’d just failed out of school (the first time). I was lying to my mother and her husband (who I lived with) about going to school. I rode the city bus at the time because I didn’t have my license yet. I’d leave the house and say I was going to the bus stop down the street. Instead, I hid in the woods that separated my neighborhood from my grandfather’s back yard. I worked at his house “after school” every day from 4-6, taking care of his house, doing light cleaning and cooking, helping him adjust to being a double amputee so it worked out nice. Every night I pre-loaded 5 hours of episodes on my computer so I didn’t need the internet and every day I would sit in the cold on a log and put my computer on a slightly bigger log and curl up in my warm coat for a day of Supernatural before heading inside to Pappou’s house at 4. Sometimes, I just waited until the afternoon when I knew my mom would be gone and I could go home where it was warm and I had wifi. Sometimes though I got wrapped up and I just stayed there.. all day. 

Supernatural is, what I would consider, one of the last great american TV shows. Like... It’s right there with Grey’s Anatomy as the last TV shows that have an actual following where people watch it and it’s a thing that haven’t been corrupted by the streaming world. Television is so important to me, it’s my favorite medium of storytelling and it’s been lost. Streaming destroyed it. People say we’re living in a “golden age” because there’s “so much good TV” but there’s NOT! What we have is high production quality on a lot of mini-series and long-format movies that have been randomly split up into “episodes” but don’t make sense if you space them out in any way. The episodic serial format of television has been LOST and that’s heartbreaking... 

But to me... this song... it’s about The Last Great American TV Show, The Last Great American Fandom, The Last Great American Dynasty over my life, my fandom, my relationship with tv, and my world view. 

The line “How did a middle class divorcee do it?” also just... First of all there’s something so distinctly American about it... We all know Supernatural is itself a sort of lover letter to Americana... it’s the aesthetic of Nowhere USA which is part of what makes it so effective and heartbreaking. The line in the song is about how Rebekah was just... boring, average, a little sad. Someone unremarkable you feel a little pity for. That’s the Nowhere USA of the aesthetic of the show... THAT’S the heartbeat of “Americana.” It’s boring, average, unremarkable, a little sad, you kinda pity it, it shouldn’t be that deep, but it is. It’s when the unremarkable accomplishes the remarkable. And that’s the whole myth they fed us as kids, isn’t it? I could never explain the beauty of this line inside or outside the context of Supernatural to someone who isn’t US American so I’ll just stop trying... but it’s just kljasfkd 

Anyway, the point I’m trying to make here is that first stanza in the first verse... When I fell in love with Supernatural, I was boring unremarkable, a little sad... and the show was a wealth of possibilities... but also I was at a point where I was getting over the main fandom I’d had for the past year and a half (Buffy) and I had just fallen in love with Sherlock and I had nothing but time. I wasn’t bogged down with the anxiety of school, I got to devote my whole life and existence to this show. I was also a wealth of possibilities, and as we know the show was also boring, average, unremarkable, and a little sad. Both me and the show were Bill and both me and the show were Rebekah.

So when the wedding between me and the show was charming, if a little gauche it made sense cause there’s only so far new money goes. For me, this represents 2012-Mishapocalpyse: The Golden Age... Look... It’s no secret 2012 was my favorite year of all time... Tumblr was small and fun and hadn’t been corrupted by wanting or trying to be “cool” or “edgy” or “interesting.” I chose the mishapocalypse for the end of this era to me because that was the last time I felt like I could come on tumblr and really just LET GO into insanity. Almost instantly people were shit talking it as if it was not the single most fun 24 hours this website had ever had. In 2013, we saw the rise of YFIP and people trying so hard to “””prove””” they were “”””cool”””” unlike ~those~ tumblr people!!! It was pathetic. But in 2012, we just... had fun. And it was charming, if a little out there. But there really is only so far that the youthful innocence of an online community that’s new goes. 

But I picked out a home on tumblr. And our parties were tasteful if a little loud. Tumblr in 2012/2013 was..... Fun. From mapcrunch to the mishapocalpyse. Some would argue about taste, but I’d say... “if a little loud.” I really just can’t separate the fun I had on tumblr back then from spn and I can’t separate spn from the fun I had back then. 

But then of course, we all need to settle down some times because the fun doesn’t last forever. In this line, I hear myself in both Bill and Rebekah and I hear the show in both Bill and Rebekah. Both of our hearts gave out and the other way to blame. 

So then the chorus... “who knows if she never showed up what could have been?” I CHANGED because of the show, I don’t know who the hell I’d BE without it! And likewise, I don’t think *I* personally changed the actual show, but the show WAS changed by each one of us. The show itself is folklore, changed and shaped in each retelling. There’s a creative freedom to the chorus that lives in that love.

So then there’s the second verse. After the rose colored glasses came off, Rebekah gave up on the Rhode Island set forever and I gave up on the greater spn fandom forever. I dropped the hellers and joined the tight knit Dean stans. This verse is about living in spite. It’s that wild American rebellion mixed with a little bit of sensual romanticism. In season 9, it was us against the world. And the reality is we were angrier than this verse gives and less free and fun... but looking back, it felt like A Time. I don’t know how to put it into words really but it was like... We found ways (and continue to find ways) to celebrate Dean when we weren’t supposed to. Fuck everyone else Dean is perfect. 

And then in the second verse, we celebrate that rebellion. The change from “the maddest woman” to “the most shameless woman” in the chorus is so important here... In the first chorus, Rebekah and I were mad and crazy and wild. In the second chorus, we had no shame. We lived IN SPITE of the state of the world around us and fucked anyone who had anything to say about it. 

In the first chorus, “who knows if she never showed up what could have been” paired with “maddest” has this creative potential. Like who knows who I would have been without spn and who knows what the show would have been without us, the fandom. And in the second chorus, that line changes to this destructive force. Like the show and I were both shameless to just exist, you know? because we would have been better without each other... but even as it acknowledges that, it’s still... sweet.

So then we have the time I left the fandom. Here we only hear bits and pieces of Rebekah’s life and Rebekah’s time in Holiday House. She was only seen “on occasion.” And on occasion, you could find me reblogging some Dean stan posts, getting into spats with Sam stans, posting about how the writers suck, calling out a heller. But 7 years is a long time and my fandom sat quietly in the history of my blog... And then it was picked up by me. 

Rebekah, in the song, refers to my past. My previous relationship with the show. Taylor’s part refers to my current relationship with the show. 

Who knows if I never showed up what could have been? If I never came back, what would my life look like? It would have been healthier, I’m sure. But then again - I needed this. And if the show hadn’t came back who would I be? 

But there goes the loudest non-woman this fandom has ever seen. I will scream from the ROOFTOPS! and what I want to scream is EVERYTHING from the past but with my full grown adult context. I know now more than I knew then that I had a MARVELOUS TIME ~ruining everything~!!! And I get to CELEBRATE THAT! I get to let go and have fun. I get to sit and think of Nov 5 and how that night, I relived those parties that were tasteful if a little loud. And then every day since I relived flying in the Bitch Pack friends from the city. I get to CELBRATE!

I may not have been the fan the show wanted. I may have fucked shit up. I may have lived in spite of this show even when I lived because of it. But damn I had a marvelous FUCKING TIME Ruining. Everything. Everything this show built it wanted me to see and love and appreciate with these toxic fucking relationships and the destruction of Dean Winchester can KISS MY ASS cause I had a MARVELOUS time fucking that shit up. Everything this show wanted from me that I refused to give it. Every SPEC of growth and learning and fun and enjoyment I have had from this show.... was toxic. It ruined it. Because it was not the growth and learning and fun and enjoyment the show WANTED ME TO HAVE. But damn did I have fun. 

The show and I are the last great American dynasty full of rebellion and spite and damn is it fun. 

I'm actually very ship and let ship so long as you're doing so like, with your eyes open about what you're doing. So when TFA came out and r*ylo became a thing I thought "I personally hate this but at least we can have some good conversations about why we see a white man being violent to a woman onscreen and instinctively parse that as romantic." What a clown I was, huh? Years later all the "Ben is a cinnamon roll uwu" discourse has turned me entirely off Star Wars. Let alone the damn kiss.

Oh, you're preaching to the choir.

I've long grown accustomed to people shipping the weirdest or even outright abusive ships, but I stayed in my lane. I realized fairly early on that no matter what you say to these people, pointing out how toxic or abusive a relationship is, that they'll bury their heads in the sand and outright ignore you, oftentimes shouting about how I (and others) are "ruining their fandom experience".

That's why how I found myself in the "Anti" community (if such a thing exists). I started tagging my posts condemning these horrible ships appropriately, and they (the shippers) still came for me, often trying to use their own history of past abusive relationships as justification for supporting the ship. To which I usually responded with "to each their own" while scratching my head as to why, if they suffered that kind of abuse, would they support a ship that repeats that behavior.

I stay in my lane, but these people don't take any criticism of their ships well. It always baffles me as to why they go looking for posts that criticize something they love, but that's an overarching fandom problem that I don't have any kind of an answer to.

Circling back to R*ylo, I've said it on my blog many times before, but I originally liked Kylo. I thought he could have been one of the best villains in the Star Wars franchise. When I left the theater after The Force Awakens, I was hopeful. I left that theater knowing that Finn was the male protagonist/lead of the new trilogy and under the impression that Finnrey was going to be the big romance. But then Johnson and Kennedy did The Last Jedi and everything went downhill after that. They just reinforced the stereotype that all bad (white) guys (they're always white) actually suffered some horribly tragic backstory and therefor they're just "lashing out" and are totally justified in their irrational anger.

Someone said it better than I could, but (and I'm paraphrasing here) the reason so many of these villains or antagonists are romanticized or immediately forgiven (both by the narrative and the fandom) is that we're used to the POC being the bad guys, so when a white guy is the villain, the white guy writing him feels a kinship and says, "well they're not bad, they're just misunderstood".

For the record, I'm a diehard Finnpoe supporter. I thought John and Oscar had amazing chemistry together and within the confines of the story, it would have taken minimal effort to make that relationship happen. That being said, this is Disney, and I never actually expected that to happen. I, like many others who watched the movies, were certain they Finn and Rey would end up together, but sadly that didn't happen.

Speaking of Finn, the fandom's complete erasure of him as a character and lead is what made me be so anti R*ylo, because more often than not, when trying to woobify Ren, they systematically dismantled Finn's character and gave his backstory and redemption and nice qualities to Kylo, thereafter calling him Ben Solo. This all-encompassing notion that a black man couldn't be seen as a viable love interest for the white female lead is obnoxious and leads into a further discussion of why fandom, despite constantly calling for more Characters of Color, often overlook them, especially when they're in main and/or leading roles.

(I mean, we know that they only want the diversity if it's in a subservient role to the white people, but they don't know that we know, so we're not going to talk about it. Well feign ignorance a little longer.)

But this problem of cannibalizing a hero of color to enhance a white character isn't new. Anyone who's been to my blog in the last few weeks knows that I've been dealing with a particular Anon who absolutely loathes Scott McCall, a Mexican-American character and the titular character of the show Teen Wolf. That fandom (probably the most toxic I've ever encountered) had continuously gone out of it's way to demonize the protagonist to prop up his best friend/sidekick, often by stripping Scott of his good qualities and draping them around Stiles in an attempt to make the character more palatable.

I used to be very much a "ship and let ship" person, but I draw the line at the erasure/demonization of the characters of color in an attempt to make those crack ships happen.

(PS: sorry I took so long to get to this. Tumblr is... well, Tumblr, and I haven't been getting the notifications that I've gotten mail.)

TRoS Speculation: Maybe It Was Intentional…

All right, since the subject obviously doesn’t let me go, new speculation on my side. WARNING: this is a longer post.

 Ever since the 80es, Star Wars has become a universal phenomenon with millions of fans all over the world. And while fans often agree, they more often than not disagree about the characters, the themes, the different turn of events etc. Star Wars touches very many different kinds of people deep down due to the emotions it provokes. Many of us have grown up with the saga, some with one trilogy, others with another. Others have read the EU novels or watched the TV shows first. The saga’s themes are so many that they appeal to all kinds of people, and the approaches are varying. There are very many topics on which we will never make everybody agree. Being the foundation for many fan’s view of the world, the root to a lot of their ideals, the source of many a dream, the saga has become a hugely personal matter. No wonder viewers all over the world can quarrel about it so venomously and get downright aggressive if you only introduce a new line of thoughts. Many fans feel that the saga belongs to them and not to the man who created it and the creative studios who are now employing it to develop new stories.

We have made our mistakes in our fandom, too, in the years since The Force Awakens came out. We were so excited in what we believed was investing into a redemption arc, love story and happy ending, connecting all kinds of dots throughout the saga and analyzing it from almost every angle. Some of us simply thought that who didn’t think like us was stupid. But many other fans believe that this saga is only about Good against Evil and not about human feelings. They keep seeing it as some superhero story, a comforting world where to retire when reality got too much, a place where bad things happen but then the hero eventually comes to take care of it. They stick to their conviction that the good guy (or the one you root for even if he’s a villain) is the one who’s the coolest. Many of them love the OT above all and plainly refuse to see anything positive about the PT or ST because they always expected to see the New Adventures of Han, Luke and Leia. Some of them have waited for literally decades for the OT’s continuation. We, who also love the other trilogies (or at least the sequels) were at times disrespectful and arrogant looking down on them and believing that they simply don’t know what the saga actually is about. And all of us need heroes. We apply our own problems, needs and expectations to them and wait for them to fix the problem as an example for us. That’s also why we expect them to get their happy ending.

I have seen videos and read articles about how highly divisive The Last Jedi was. Some fans (a few of them even with tears in their eyes) openly declared that the saga was ruined for them. Similarly to us, who identify with Ben Solo and / or Rey, they had often found courage in the examples set by their heroes and it was offensive and hurtful to them to see Luke Skywalker reduced to a hermit who drinks green milk, rejects the ways of the Jedi and was personally responsible for his nephew’s fall into his abuser’s clutches. They were entitled to their feelings of disappointment and inner numbness as we are now. I know of people who actually survived many ugly periods in their lives finding solace in the saga. Some in one part of it, some in another. And we all got duped and let down, each by one chapter of the sequel trilogy, like some naughty, sadistic kid was kicking apart our favorite doll house a few days before Christmas.

I assume now that The Last Jedi was an experiment to gauge the audience’s reaction. It touched many a sensitive issue. My personal approach is that in order to like it, you don’t only have to be a fan of the sequel trilogy and its characters in general, or a hopeless romantic who wanted to see Rey and Ben Solo’s love story. You have to accept in the first place what the prequel trilogy painstakingly tried to explain to us (though it wasn’t actually said but more shown): that the Jedi were no heroes but got destroyed by their own hubris, and that Anakin Skywalker was largely a victim and not someone who became a villain because he enjoyed being evil, like the typical Batman or Superman villains. The prequels are not a fairy tale like the original trilogy but a cautionary tale following the lines of “society creates its own monsters.” It was only logical to deduce that if the Jedi were so perfect and the Old Republic so idyllic as Obi-Wan described them to Luke when they first met on Tatooine, Vader’s rise and the creation of the Empire couldn’t have happened in the first place. This was never said as clearly and concisely as by Luke to Rey during their second lesson on Ahch-To:

“Now that they’re extinct, the Jedi are romanticized, deified. But strip away the myth and look at their deeds: the legacy of the Jedi is failure, hypocrisy, hubris. At the height of their power they allowed Darth Sidious to rise, create the Empire and wipe them out. It was a Jedi who was responsible for the training and creation of Darth Vader.”

This is the message of the prequels in a few sentences, and a pivotal change to the “superhero approach” to the Jedi which might qualified if you only watch the OT and never question its themes on a larger scale. If you accept the Jedi’s failure for a fact, all of the rest falls into place - Vader being but a broken, sad old guy, Luke’s disillusion, his decision to give up the ways of the Jedi, his first lesson teaching Rey that the Force is not some kind of superpower, his forgiveness towards his nephew, the glimpses of goodness we saw foreshadowing Ben Solo’s redemption. The prequels also make much more sense this way than watching them expecting to see the Jedi being super-cool heroes and Anakin becoming Vader because he thought it might be fun.

But many fans chose not to see or accept what The Last Jedi actually was trying to say: that things couldn’t continue the way they did, because the Old Republic and the Jedi (though they didn’t actually have bad intentions) were deeply flawed. Leia tried to build another republic without any major changes that we are aware of, and Luke wanted to rebuild the Jedi Order without effectuating the considerable changes their Code would have needed. Both failed. It was e.g. never explained why Luke spirited his students away to a lonely planet for their training, but the fact that they were taken from their families when they were too small to make a choice and stick to it - Ben e.g. wanted to be a pilot like his father and not a Jedi - already shows the same pattern. Luke had not learned from the faults of his teachers until his exile. Logically, Episode IX ought to have continued these themes and showed the ST protagonist finding a new and better approach to the Force. Instead, what we got was another (in my opinion: redundant) Ultimate Battle of Good Against Evil, in other words some kind of superhero film which largely ignores the themes of its predecessor.

Any fan is entitled to his opinion. If someone hates the PT because it shows a stagnant society and the Jedi as highly flawed, because they didn’t get to see Darth Vader becoming over-the-top cool but were confronted, in Anakin, with a deeply compassionate person crushed by expectations he never could meet in the first place, if they judged him a whiny brat instead of an intelligent guy who clearly saw through the flaws of the society he was forced to live in and simply didn’t find the right words to express it: they’re entitled to it. Same goes for not feeling the tension between Rey and Kylo in the ST, for judging Kylo quickly (again) as a whiny brat instead of a complex, tormented character, for not appreciating new characters like Rose on account of not being Star-Wars-y enough. These feelings mostly stem from the fans’ long-standing wish to see an actual continuation of the original trilogy, not a new instalment where a new generation takes over and the old heroes are relegated to the background and, additionally, their characters and past decisions are openly criticized.

We may claim that fanbros are simply too stupid to understand what the saga is actually about. Well, maybe they are, or they are just too lazy to look at the bigger picture. But they have a right to that.  Of course, it doesn’t entitle them to harass the studios, directors, creative team or actors the way they were, mind you: what e.g. Kelly Marie Tran, Ahmed Best and Jake Lloyd had to endure was a disgrace. There are very many fans who disagree with the PT and ST without getting bitter or even vicious.

This doesn’t mean I have changed my mind. I still believe that the Jedi were everything but heroes, that Darth Vader is a tragic figure, that the main themes of the saga are family, hope and new beginnings and not “the coolest ones win, ka-boom, the end”; that what it means to say is that human feelings are in the end more important than power, even an enormous power like the one the Force can provide.

We who are angry and disappointed with TRoS now like to blame how it went that way due to the influence of angry white dudebros, misogyny, Calvinism, racism, the overall political situation, the Mouse only wanting to make money etc.

But we ought to consider that The Last Jedi, which was so deeply controversial, hit theatres only two years ago. Have mentalities, politics and social structures and Disney’s overall approached changed so considerably, in so short a time, to produce two so radically different approaches to the saga within the scope of two years?

Sorry, I can’t believe it. it doesn’t really make sense.

The Mandalorian is met with universal acclaim, no doubt partly due to the fact that it’s a standalone story without the huge dynastic weight the saga has on its shoulders. Being a TV show, it had more time to introduce characters and situations and develop them. And it worked out fine. It had all the Star Wars themes - a lot of action scenes, sure, but it was also about belonging, family, redemption, protectiveness, friendship. Meaning that the studios didn’t lose track or are too dumb to think up a good story.

The Rise of Skywalker seems to bring the saga to a closure, but it could also be a wholly new beginning; the beginning of what I was foreseeing and still believe was in the cards - a new galaxy with a new and better political order kept together by a common belief in the Force as a whole; a new Jedi order where Force-sensitive children are not torn away from their families but can choose whether they want to become Jedi or not; and where Jedi are not taught emotional detachment. This would mean balance at last, a balance from which everyone would benefit. I have no idea how Ben Solo could be revived but I still am certain that he would be an excellent father figure, the perfect foil to his grandfather; and that the best thing for Rey would be to take care of children who are lost and abandoned the way she once was. And with Rey being a Palpatine, there is an interesting ground from which to explore her character’s tendency to the Dark, mirroring Ben’s. The basic approaches for this kind of development were all there in The Last Jedi. But a project like that would be something completely different from the original saga, and it would take a lot of time. Maybe that’s why the studios dropped it in favor of appeasing the angry fanbros who didn’t receive The Last Jedi well at all.

Anyone has the right to think that the original trilogy is the one and only and that the rest is rubbish. But the heroes of that story had their friendship, their family, their adventures, their successes, their happy ending. Even the heroes of the prequel trilogy had their moments, including Anakin Skywalker. Our heroes didn’t. That’s why this ending is so bitter for us and so hard to stomach. Essentially, we were right - we knew that Ben and Rey belong together, that Ben would redeem himself and make peace with his family, that balance would come. What we didn’t get was our happy ending.

The Force Awakens was still more or less accepted, because despite the many new themes and choices it wasn’t subversive and controversial in its approach. The actual wasps’ nest was stirred with The Last Jedi. No argumentation could convince antis that it is actually a well-made film and that their personal approach on the saga is too narrow-minded to appreciate it. They wanted the same villains, the same settings and costumes, the same heroes (or at least rehashes). And they had a right to want that, exactly as we had the right to expect a better development and ending for our new heroes. The hardcore OT fans wanted and expected The New Adventures of Han, Luke and Leia kicking ass. Well, it seems The Rise of Skywalker took care of that, finally giving them what they wanted and ignoring or “correcting” the course of events from The Last Jedi.

So, that’s it now. The OT fanbros got “their” Star Wars. I hope they’re finally appeased. They can ignore anything that happens next. That the saga is finished does not mean that the Star Wars universe came to a standstill.

If fans of the original trilogy felt entitled to ask for The Last Jedi to be removed from canon, or at least to be “fixed” in some way, so can we. In case you didn’t see it yet, the petition is already there: https://www.change.org/p/lucasfilm-continue-ben-solo-s-story

Let’s tell the studios to keep TRoS the way they prefer, but that we wish to have our Star Wars now. Let us not steep down to the level of who made the lives of actors who played characters they disapproved of a living hell (see above) or say over and over “Star Wars is dead” when we don’t know what’s in store for the future. With the Star Wars universe, you always have to be patient. In the meantime, we can write and read fanfiction and other stories and purse our own lives, telling our own happy endings.

Happy New Year everyone. Feel free to reblog. 😊

  P.P.S. On a side note: Rey’s last scene shows her where Luke used to be, on Tatooine watching the suns set. The twin suns. In A New Hope, this was shortly before he met the other half of his soul who had been separated from him right after birth - his twin sister. Considering that it was explicitly said that Rey and Ben Solo share the same soul, it might be a hint about the future. I’m not trying to make false promises or to fuel wrong expectations here. Just sayin’. 😉

This is going to be a long post about why I think this season of Supergirl has been less than satisfactory. And no, it has nothing to do with supercorp not being canon.

First of all, the writers totally retconned Lena as a character. While she has always shown sign of being morally grey, she also always wanted to be better than her family. She's also too smart to think that the stupid non nocere and taking away people's will would be the answer to make people stop hurting each other. I'm all about the conflict between Kara and Lena, I just think it has been poorly handled. Sure, we had some great scenes so far, including the reveal at the Pulitzer ceremony and the confrontation in the fortress, but again, they could have those, they could have Lena swaying to a world of hurt and anger and betrayal without making her have that stupid plan and completely assassinating her character.

Now forgetting this whole Lena and Kara conflict, we have Leviathan. A hero tv show is only as good as their villain and last season with Lex was proof of that. And this season, is honestly anyone interested in Leviathan? This plot is moving too slowly, no one cares about them and that doesn't make good television.

We have beloved characters being sidelined or, in Kelly's case, being demoted to only serve the purpose of being the love interest (which is what happened with Floriana, probably why she quit the show and the writers keep repeating the same mistakes). Nia is a very talented journalist and powerful hero and I feel as if we hardly seen her this season. Kelly probably had a total of 5 minutes screentime so far. And what happened to the heart of the show, Kara and Alex' relationship? I miss their sisterly camaraderie. I do gotta give props for the Brainy direction however, Jesse Rath is an amazing actor and his arc of joining Lex seems like the only interesting arc so far.

Another bad thing? Recycling storylines. Last season we had Lex pretending to be Earth's hero, people buying it and Kara doing whatever she can to expose him. This season we have, you guessed it, Lex pretending to be Earth's hero, people buying it and Kara wanting to expose him. Jon Cryer is amazing and he portrayed the best live version of Lex Luthor IMO, but this was not to best way to bring him back.

Then we have the whole William thing. Sure, it turns out he's not the bad guy we all thought he was and he was only a jerk so that he could get close to Andrea, but he still treated Kara like sh*t. And Kara told him that she would not forget his actions even if they were pretend. By trying to force them together, The CW is perpetuating the trope that women like and are attracted to guys that mistreat them and that is not a good example to set to their young audience. It's one thing to make Kara understand his reasoning and joining forces, it's another completely different story to make her forget everything William's put her through. Also their romance just feels forced, if the writers wanted so much to bring another LI couldn't they have at least developed their relationship first?

But what has bugged me about this season the most has been their treatment of Kara. She has lost so much, has been through hell more times than anyone could handle and the writers don't explore that. They hardly show that she has some deep issues. After watching Argo burn again the writers had the perfect opportunity to explore Kara's mental issues and anger but instead, it was treated like a mundane event. Sure, Argo was restored, the Earths were merged, but she still watched everything turn to dust, Kara remembers it, and as far as she knows, there is only one Earth left now, and just like that it's back to normal? You figured she'd need some therapy after everything that she has seen, Kara is an empathetic character and knowing how many lives are gone would take a huge toll on her. Legends of Tomorrow was the only show post crisis so far to have a character (Sara) show signs of PTSD, and yes, Legends - the show that is always making fun of itself was the one that handled the issue better.

Edit: I don't think #BoycottSupergirl is the answer, or acting entitled. We are fans and we need to respect the creative decisions of the writers, producers and show runners. If you're not enjoying the show, stop watching it or you can let them know, as long as you do it politely. Entitlement, bullying and hatred never got anyone far.

You know people with no power of the direction the show takes? Actors. I get that David Harewood has taken some things personally and is feeling attacked by the fandom, but that is only happening because of the vocal few that decided to blame him and as a consequence tarnished the entire fandom in his eyes. Is he also acting like a petty teenager? Yes, but because of that the fandom should be better. Another person not deserving of any hatred is Staz Nair, he has always been about female empowerment, was always sweet with the fans he engaged with. He is NOT to blame for the romance between Kara and William.

So please, if you want to have your voices heard, appeal to the producers and writers on Twitter, send letters to them. Just don't demand anything. When you make your case, be polite, tell them that the show is no longer about feminism. Tell them that they are encouraging a pattern of romanticizing toxic relationships, tell them anything really. Just don't be rude.

And remember, this whole boycott thing, if it works, could maybe get the show cancelled and there are a lot of young girls who still watch the show, some who have Supergirl as a way to escape the real world. We need to think of them and try to make the show better for them.

The Toxicity of Kylo Ren and Reylo 

It’s no secret that the newest villain of the Star Wars franchise, Kylo Ren, is a polarizing figure. In fact, there’s a large fanbase that don’t think of him as a villain at all (despite confirmation from cast and crew). If you take issue with that statement, look at the marketing: it’s Rey, Finn, and Poe at the center of the franchise. Not Kylo. Instead, he’s framed as a misunderstood underdog that is undeserving of the criticism he faces.

Now, that’s not to say that Kylo Ren can’t be appreciated as a character. It’s completely possible to appreciate him as a character and not as a person — after all, thinking someone is interesting or well-written isn't an endorsement of their behavior, or a claim that they deserve the benefit of the doubt.

People can be drawn to characters for all sorts of reasons. A lot of people enjoy rooting for the villain simply because they’re a villain. You can appreciate a character's potential, or their personality. It could even be as simple as thinking Adam Driver is good looking, or appreciating his portrayal of Kylo, with that being the reasoning for being drawn to that character. 

Despite all of this, there’s an interesting (and troubling) phenomenon happening with people who have decided to “stan” Kylo Ren — not his potential as a villain, or because Adam Driver is talented, but the character himself, so much so that there is a fundamental misunderstanding (or willful ignorance) of his actions and motivations. 

I’m not apprehensive to call this kind of fanservice toxic, because that’s what it is. There’s something really unnerving about stanning someone who has commited genocide, runs labor camps, and has direct, not-at-all subtle parallels to Nazism. 

Ignoring Canon

The main theme here is that Kylo is somehow “misunderstood,” and not only that, but deserving of a full redemption (and a girlfriend in the form of Rey, but I’ll get to that in a bit). The narrative and what we know about Kylo in canon is a stark contrast to how fandom sees him. There’s this image of him as a down on his luck, unloved, victimized person who has been wronged by the people in his life, which simply isn’t true. 

Kylo is the ultimate example of privilege. He arguably has the coolest parents in the world in the form of Han and Leia. He was, at the time of his turn to the dark side, being taught by Luke Skywalker (his uncle). From the get go, he had the support and resources that we rarely see someone have in the Star Wars universe. 

And for those who like to counter with the argument that Han left Leia and is somehow a deadbeat dad — he did so after Kylo killed the entire group of Jedis Luke was instructing and abandoned his family willingly. You can dislike that decision all you’d like, but it had no bearing on Kylo’s turn to the dark side. 

A more fitting criticism would be towards Luke, who admitted that he sensed something disturbing in his nephew and briefly thought about killing him. I’ll admit that this is fair enough, but for Kylo to react with murdering numerous Jedi students and then immediately joining the space fascists? I’d say this side of him has been lurking under the surface for a while. 

Also consider — was Luke wrong? Dude literally built a device specifically to commit genocide. 

This romanticization of a hard life that never existed is even more disturbing when you consider that there’s another character whose backstory fits this narrative: Finn. 

Finn’s storyline is what certain fans desperately want Kylo’s to be. Finn was kidnapped at a very young age, forced to become a stormtrooper and was embedded in the hateful doctrine that Kylo is such a fan of. Despite being raised in that toxic environment and being indoctrinated with propaganda from such a young age, Finn — of his own volition, before he met Rey or Poe or anyone else — made the decision to resist and break free of the Empire. 

He did this because he felt it was morally correct, at great risk to himself and his well being. He’s been in that environment for his entire life, so he knows exactly what happens to traitors. Despite all of this, he does it anyway. 

Unwanted and Unearned Redemption

There’s also this strange need to advocate for Kylo’s redemption, something that is very clear he doesn’t deserve or want. 

I’ve noticed a lot of fans who are desperate for his redemption call him Ben — his given name — which is both hilarious to me and makes no sense. He literally chose to change his name to Kylo Ren. He doesn't want to be Ben anymore, and he’s made that very clear. 

Leia and Han clearly wanted him to abandon his position in the First Order and come home during The Force Awakens. During his showdown with Han towards the end of the film he’s given a shot at redemption, which he rejects violently by murdering his own father. After this happened it was speculated that this was a sacrifice Kylo had to make to rise up in the First Order, or to prove to Snoke his loyalty to infiltrate the First Order better and ultimately turn against it. 

This was pretty easily disproven in The Last Jedi when he also attempts to kill his mother, Leia, who barely manages to survive. At the end of that same film, he’s also responsible for the death of the definitive hero of the franchise, Luke Skywalker. 

If the theory about Kylo proving himself to Snoke was true, the tendency to murder his own family (and consequently the people offering him redemption after all he’s done) would have ended with Han.

After all of this, he’s given yet another chance to redeem himself, this time by Rey. He turns down this opportunity like he did the others. 

As mentioned before, even without his violence towards those who want to help him, his actions are enough to completely eliminate the possibility of redemption. He’s overseen and advocated for genocide. He’s a member of an actual fascist organization. At this point, there’s no plausible way that he could be redeemed, nor should he be. 

Romanticizing Abuse 

This leads me to the discussion surrounding Rey and Kylo, or “Reylo,” an incredibly convoluted and twisted way to look at romance. 

Reylo fans desperately need Rey to be the one to “save” Kylo, a textbook example of an abusive and toxic relationship. This is the Star Wars version of “She can change him,” making Rey the bearer of Kylo’s emotional labor when he has no interest in changing at all. 

It’s not Rey’s responsibility to bring about his redemption. A true redemption needs to happen organically, of his own volition, and not because he’ll get rewarded with a girlfriend if he does. And, let’s be honest, it’s not a realistic expectation. If he only changes for Rey and not because he realizes that genocide is morally wrong, that’s profoundly disturbing and also selfish. 

Here’s some advice: if someone says they’ve changed only for you and because of their love for you, that’s a red flag. They aren’t changing for reasons that are morally correct, or for anyone’s benefit; they’re changing because their feelings and their feelings alone matter. If Kylo changes because he loves Rey, that is a self serving act for his benefit only. 

Further, what happened to Kylo torturing Rey in The Force Awakens? He kidnapped her, holding her captive, and entered her mind without consent. That’s as clear a metaphor for abuse you can find, and that’s not even my only example. 

In The Last Jedi, Kylo attempts to persuade Rey to join him on the dark side. He tells her that she’s “nothing,” but not to him. To him, she matters. This is very commonly touted as a romantic moment, but the emotional manipulation is more than obvious. 

Kylo doesn’t care about Rey. He says she’s “nothing,” that none of her friends care about her, that she’s worthless to them. By tearing her down then building her up by saying that she’s not nothing to him, he’s enforcing the idea that the only way she can have significance is with him. 

I don’t even mean “with him” in the romantic sense — he pretty transparently only wants her on the dark side for her power. Kylo is a terrible jedi, and he’s witnessed Rey’s prowess a number of times. He only wants her power and skill, not her as a person. 

He murdered her father figure, Han, in front of her, and nearly killed her best friend, Finn; he’s tortured her and manipulated her — it’s never been more obvious that he doesn’t care about her at all. 

If anyone knows anything about abusive relationships, this is the first thing that abusers do. They alienate their intended victim from their friends and family, ensuring that they alone are the only source of comfort. It ensures that if things ever get bad, the victim has nowhere to go and no one to turn to but right back to the abuser. 

What message would it send to little girls and boys if Rey were to end up with Kylo after all of that? Deal with his violence and manipulation long enough and he might change? If I have to spell out why that’s dangerous, I don’t know what else to say. 

In addition — what does this say about how people view Rey? Do you really want her to be with someone who has tortured her, betrayed her, and manipulated her? The answer is that people who want Reylo to be together only care about Kylo, not Rey. 

Toxic Masculinity 

Despite these specifics, the general acceptance of Kylo’s behavior is surprisingly rampant in fandom. His actions aren’t simply excused, but romanticized. He has obvious anger issues, control issues — that scene in the beginning of The Force Awakens when he lashes out and destroys the control panel with his lightsaber? That may as well have been a shot of an abusive, angry man throwing around furniture and punching walls because he has no emotional control. 

Sure, people like Kylo. They’re allowed to. But there’s a clear difference between liking a character and blind endorsement of that character's actions. I know plenty of people who like Kylo as a character, but the difference is if they meet someone like Kylo in bar or see one of his outbursts, you’d call the fucking cops. You wouldn’t ship him with your best friend. That's the dividing line here.

Kylo Ren is a direct parallel to real-world men who lash out because they’re filled with anger and frustration that’s turned into something truly ugly. They lash out at the people who are willing to help, all because they feel themselves robbed of things they think they deserve. Kylo wants power, he wants control, and he cares about nothing else. 

Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker hits theatres internationally on December 19, 2019.

Why do people say that Aegor raped Calla when she was a child? Daemon betrothing his oldest daughter to Aegor does not mean the marriage was consummated when she was a child. Sadly, Daemon himself was betrothed as a child. His grandmother Daenaera was married when she was 6 and his grandfather Viserys II was 12 when he wed and 13 when he had his first child, only a year younger than Daemon when he had his. Usually, it is custom to wait to consummate if the bride is a child.

Furthermore, the people who hate the Blackfyres try to frame it as Daemon selling his daughter to be raped, but I doubt that is why he betrothed her to Aegor since he already has Aegor’s unconditional support. Calla and Aegor never had children, per GRRM, so Aegor championed his nephews and nieces, essentially dedicating his life to his brother and his family. Daemon didn’t need to sell his daughter to Aegor for support, so that was not the reason for the betrothal. (2/3)

My point is that GRRM is wildly inconsistent with his child brides (and grooms). He uses Unwin Peake’s nameless daughter dying in childbirth at the age of 12 as a reason for why he is so despicable (and that is despicable). But then has Aemma Arryn consummate her marriage at age 13 and paints her father, grandparents, uncle, and husband as decent people. Daenaera is then married at age 6 but doesn’t consummate until age 15 or 16. It’s due to Aegon’s depression instead of custom. (3/3)

Thank you for the very thorough ask, tiger. I hope that I have successfully responded to all of your questions. Calla, as with all Blackfyres (and many non-Targaryen women), has certainly gotten a raw deal when it comes to page time/character depth; her only mention is in twoiaf: “Whatever the case may be (for Aegor’s anger at the Targaryens and Bl00draven), Aegor Rivers soon began to press Daemon Blackfyre to proclaim for the throne, and all the more so after Daemon agreed to wed his eldest daughter, Calla, to Aegor.” As Yandel doesn’t make any further comments, I assume the people who believe Calla was raped as a child exist in fandom rather than on page. Rape is a very sensitive subject, and I’m trying to keep the fanwank a bit quieter, so my response will be under the cut.

Why do people say Aegor raped Calla as a child? This actually involves several leaps in logic I don’t find convincing, so I’ll try to break it down:

We are first introduced to Aegor in the Dunk and Egg novellas via mention by some Blackfyre supporters, who are the natural antagonists of the Targaryens; the protagonist, Dunk, is best friends with the Targaryen prince Egg. Many of the Blackfyre supporters are minor antagonists to Dunk, especially in The Mystery Knight when they attempt to kill him (Alyn Cockshaw) or kidnap Egg (Tommard Heddle). Meanwhile, Bittersteel is a legendary hero to Blackfyre admirers (such as Osgrey), at least an important hoped-for ally to the Whitewalls conspirators (Gormon Peake needed some quick victories so Aegor would have faith in his and Daemon II’s rebellion), and a threat Bl00draven takes as seriously as the Blackfyre sons themselves. As an important member of a faction which has members that tried to harm the protagonist Dunk, people see Aegor as a villain. 

The problem with seeing him as a villain (as opposed to simply an antagonist, which he undoubtedly is if you consider the Targaryens protagonists of the story) is that, due to lack of page-time and because he’s not that bad, he never actually does anything too villainous. Urging someone to rebel is at the end of the day just words. He took Bl00draven eye out in battle, but that appears to be an accident and doesn’t seem to have slowed him down. Leading the Golden Company to sack Qohor for failing to honor a contract is severe, but its only mention is in a non-canonical app that few people read. When his chief rival Bl00draven is a canonical child-murderer, child-crippler, kinslayer, deserter, head of a secret police organization, tyrannical overlord, etc...Aegor’s “evil deeds” don’t appear to add up to much. He might even seem more sympathetic than Bl00draven! But that cannot be, so fandom has to headcanon villainous behavior for him, because he must be a villain antagonist.

But what sort of villainous behavior should he do? In order to root for Bl00draven against him, it must be something terrible. GRRM often uses rape to signal how terrible a male character is (and how awful Westeros can be). The most evil villains in the main series are serial rapists: Gregor Clegane, Ramsay Bolton, Euron Greyjoy, Craster; even Tywin Lannister, Roose Bolton, and Petyr Baelish have raped or enabled the rape of young women and girls. When the age of the victim is specified, she is often a preteen/young teenager to make her rape even more evil. The lone exception is Joffrey Baratheon, and that is only because he is 12 (he still molests Sansa repeatedly). Fandom rightly criticizes GRRM using sexualized violence against women as shorthand for “irredeemably evil” or window dressing for a dark fantasy. Yet when Aegor, a character who shows no sign of being a sexual predator (look at Shiera’s SSM, the Dunk and Egg books, and Yandel’s commentary on Aegor’s anger at Bl00draven: one-sided Aegor/Shiera has even less evidence of being real than Daemon/Daenerys), needs to commit villainous actions, some in fandom fall into the same trap as GRRM and imagine him raping women.

Then Yandel tells us that Daemon “agreed to wed his eldest daughter Calla” to Aegor shortly before the Rebellion. As Calla was not a triplet of his eldest sons Aegon and Aemon, the oldest she could possibly be was 11, still a child even by later GRRM standards. The phrase “agreed to wed” is at most a promise; it’s not an official betrothal, it’s certainly not an actual wedding, and it’s absolutely not a consummation. If it had been a consummation, that certainly would have been mentioned, as Yandel has repeatedly recorded rumors just for the purpose of making Daemon look bad (the 14 year old newly acknowledged landless natural son petitioned the king for a polygamous marriage with a princess and an Essosi noblewoman? sure...) Considering Daemon died at the end of the Rebellion and Aegor was now a landless, penniless rebel dependent on his goodsister Rohanne’s mercy, and how the Blackfyres needed to find more allies, I think any talks of marrying Calla was silenced. She married someone else, whereas he remained a bachelor for life and championed the cause of Haegon and his son Daemon III (not necessarily the others, as seen with Daemon II and Aenys, and he did not crown any of Daemon III’s brothers). 

Whatever I headcanon, 2018 GRRM’s comment that he doesn’t think Aegor had any offspring pretty much puts the nail in the coffin of Aegor having consummated any wedded relationship, let alone with Calla. If a male character is promiscuous, GRRM raises the possibility of them having sired natural children; with Aerion Brightflame in Lys, and Brandon Stark in the North, and even Tywin Lannister, he says, “I suppose they could’ve sired bastards” (or in Tywin’s case, gives a non-answer). That he gave a straightforward NO regarding Aegor’s potential children indicates that he feels it would be out of character for Aegor to have a sexual relationship, whether in marriage or outside of it. I hope that when people headcanon Aegor as a serial rapist, they take GRRM’s comments and fandom criticism of sexual violence to heart.

My point is that GRRM is wildly inconsistent with the ages of his child brides (and grooms): I would disagree to the point that in his earlier works, underaged girls forced to wed old men was universally portrayed as terrible and a feature of a corrupt character. Hoster regretted his actions toward Lysa on his deathbed, but it led to their estrangement and her susceptibility to Littlefinger’s manipulation; Sansa Stark’s marriage to Tyrion showed the breakdown of societal norms under Lannister rule; Jeyne’s forced marriage and immediate consummation to Ramsay moves Theon to try to rescue her. Although the marriage wasn’t consummated, GRRM found it difficult to write the Tyrion/Sansa scene because of her horrific abuse. But then The World of Ice and Fire and Fire and Blood are published and older man/younger woman marriages and relationships are outright romanticized by the authors themselves (Elio Garcia said 37 year old Daemon Targaryen’s relationship with the 16 year old Nettles was a true romance; GRRM said that 56-year-old Alyn Velaryon was the great love of 21-year-old Elaena Targaryen’s life) Perhaps the lack of PoV in these works distanced the male writers from the female characters’ emotions and allowed them to envision Rhaenys (16)/Corlys (37), Corlys (61)/Marilda (17), Thaddeus (56)/Floris (14), and Aemma (11-13)/Viserys (16-18) as mutually romantic couples with sympathetic men; but then in the same works the authors use forced relationships with young girls to villainize other men Unwin Peake (daughter died in childbirth at age 12) and Aegon II (was receiving a blowjob from a 12 year old when his father died). The double standard seems to imply that a teenage girl can consent to a relationship with a man old enough to be her father/grandfather if she is genuinely in love with him, which is disturbingly close to real-life defenses of statutory rape. I hate the way that the supplemental material has suddenly decided to defend these couples with “the girls wanted it”, and I can only hope this doesn’t start appearing in the main series that people actually care about.

One type of underaged pairing seems to have a consistent portrayal: child grooms don’t seem to be granted the same mutually happy relationship as child brides. Both Viserys (12) and Larra’s (19) and Androw (17) and Rhaena’s (25) marriages ended in tragedy (and death, in the case of the latter). This makes me...unsettled when thinking about how the authors will write Daemon (14)/Rohanne (older). But to stay within the bounds of your question, I don’t think they will depict an Aegor/Calla marriage due to it making little political or characterization-based sense; so fortunately it will neither villainize nor romanticize Aegor. Although an antagonist to the Targaryens, he has consistently took the higher road over Bl00draven and has the potential to be a tragic and multifaceted character.