I really don't understand why the ACOTAR fandom comes up with these "It's a fantasy series! They're fictional characters!" as a means to condemn those of us who like to think critically. Like, I get where they're coming from, but do you know how many fantasy series I've read that are inspired by events in WW1 or WW2? Or how many fictional characters are inspired by real-life people?
Take The Witcher, for example, which is heavily inspired by WW2 and its aftermath, drawing direct and indirect parallels to the conflict and its devastating consequences in Poland. The story is set in a world built on historical allegories, and the political landscape, the occupation of lands, and the oppression of certain groups mirror events from this period and the subsequent Stalinist era. It's virtually impossible to separate The Witcher - a fantasy series - from real-life politics, and the fandom hates it when people try to do so.
LOTR was inspired (or influenced) by J.R.R Tolkien's experiences in WW1. The Chronicles of Narnia was inspired by WW2. Both (more-so LOTR) are heavily political, and the fandom openly embraces that, so I don't understand why the ACOTAR fandom condemns those of us for talking about the real-life political aspects of ACOTAR.
Rhysand may be a fictional character, but he worked with Velaris-run businesses to enact Jim Crow segregation laws against the CoN. Were they labeled in the narrative as "Jim Crow segregation laws"? Of course not, but that's what they were. So why should we stan someone who supports laws like that? "The CoN are backward and savage and evil!" Isn't that the exact mentality that inspired America's Jim Crow segregation laws? ACOTAR may be a fantasy series, and Rhysand is a fictional character, but the narrative is talking about real-life history.
It's like saying, "Keep politics out of dystopian novels!" But isn't that the whole point? The author took one aspect of real-life society and ran with it. These futuristic stories tend to become real-life at some point. You literally can't take politics out of the genre.
Even when it comes to ACOSF and Nesta, yes, it's a fantasy book and yes, she's a fictional character, but the book was sold as a healing mental health journey, even though that's not how you're supposed to treat someone struggling with mental health. But, since it's a published book (even though it's fantasy), people think that's how people struggling with mental health are supposed to be treated. This fantasy book is going to get real-life people killed. Nesta, a fictional character, is a perfect representation of real-life depression, yet she's hated by the fandom for it, which begs the question: how would the people in the fandom treat a real-life friend struggling with depression? Fantasy stories can have real-world consequences.
ACOTAR is the only fandom I participate in that actively discourages brain activity. And it's not the entire fandom, but rather the pro-Feyre/IC side, which begs the question: what is it about these characters that makes their stans not want to think critically? Why do people stan characters who treat 90% of their court like they're barbaric savages who are second-class citizens (kinda sounds like real-life history class to me)? You can't even make an argument about Lucien being less problematic than Feyre and the IC without people being like, "It's a fantasy series. These are fictional characters. Calm down." God forbid some of us use our brains to actually think about things.
People aren't meant to shut off their brains when they read or watch fantasy stories (or any fictional story, really). Authors want their readers to think about the narrative and the characters. Fantasy is often used as a vehicle to get people to think about real-world events and understand those events from a new perspective. It's not just fantasy, and they're not just fictional characters but rather a different perspective on real-world circumstances and people.