Jax's psyche is now the main focus of the show, and we're supposed to coo over a rebirth to womanhood "less than one minute old" 🎵 before tragic suicide allegory. Her abusive misogynistic behavior is framed as part of her egghood, and isn't unpacked. She just kinda dies for her own sins and half-repents at the last second - which is enough to redeem you if you're Christian, but not if you're a good writer. I'm aware Goose has said somewhere in her million tweets that she wrote/views Jax as unredeemable, but IMO her writing is not sending that message.
I hate to pull the "as a trans person" card, but Jax is not good trans rep (good rep, not positive rep. Note my wording.). This is "we should excuse abusive people because we don't know what they've been through," relabeled as a more reasonable "let trans characters be real, morally complicated people, too! Transitioning is messy!"
Morally complicated characters (or even straight up evil ones) take good writing to pull off properly, if your audience is to feel meaningful sympathy for them. I'm not saying Jax was written "too evil" and should've been written to do less harm, but that writing harmful characters takes a careful balance of framing by the writer. Framing that doesn't baby the audience by jumping from horrible actions straight to an uncomplicated redemption with little to no buildup, and unrealistically positive reactions from the cast (or even none at all). Or, in the opposite emotional direction, framing that doesn't rely on tugging heartstrings with a tragic backstory as a full replacement for well-written explanations and consequences of their character's behaviour.
Gooseworx has somehow done both of these things in her framing of Jax. We're shown purposeful social isolation and gaslighting of someone to the point of driving them to suicide - but only from the abuser's POV. Then a primary focus on how the abuser is trans, was abused, and is suffering sooooo much. The message from this framing is that we should feel bad for her first before thinking about the harm done, because we didn't know what she was going through. A flashback iMovie top ten highlight reel and therapy dog audience insert character's exploration of Jax's Amazing Digital Mind Palace replaced any invitation to reflect on how we actually felt about her character up until the crazy lore drop. We are only invited to feel what the lore drop and feel-bad sequence tells us to. Therapy dog jester gets violently choked out and has little to no reaction to that or anything in JADMP apart from wanting to just be there for him :(((((. The closest we get is the abuser giving an "oh, cruel world" lament that feels more genuinely self-pitying than reflective, ironic, or consequential.
"We've 💖 all 💖 done bad things." Imagine that line being written with full authorial sincerity in Bojack Horseman. It'd feel off as hell, because the audience of that show is actually trusted to feel sympathy for the protagonist without excusing his behaviour. The framing of that show says yes, he was abused, that's horrible, but fuck that guy. We invite you to reflect on the information you've been shown about his actions, personality, patterns of behaviour, and ongoing development. Think about it yourself when other characters react differently, messily, and reasonably by leaving Bojack behind, distancing themselves, or even dying as a consequence to his actions - no iMovie feel-sad clip telling you what to think. "We've all done bad things" lmao fuck right off with that nothingburger platitude. Pomni is a Sith.
Jax's abstraction was not framed as a consequence of her abusive behaviour, and the link between the two is removed by one degree: abstraction -> because egghood and trauma -> abusive also because egghood and trauma. Goose's framing was not a clear: abstraction -> because she's abusive - so the narrative never primarily confronts or invites discourse about Jax's morality. Which is the selling point of writing morally complex (especially main???) characters. The narrative pretty much skips to "We've 💖 all 💖 done bad things” and asks us to focus on The Amazing Digital Transfem Experience.
Tell me how a transphobe would watch this and not feel justified. Here's a physically abusive trans woman who actively targets vulnerable AFAB* people. It's framed so that we're supposed to feel sorry for her even when watching a highlight reel of her doing it. A trans woman wrote this narrative and tweets questionable things with an invisible load-bearing “/s”. Kids watch the show. Insert TERFy spiralling about saving the women and children from dangerous perverted trans women. Sure, TERFs aren't the best measure of whether or not something is good trans rep (they tend to hallucinate beliefs into existence the way AI does), fuck respectability politics. But this isn't respectability politics. This is bad representation, and bad representation is harmful. A trans person creating popular media (labeled as progressive trans rep) that reinforces transphobic beliefs/stereotypes with its framing is definitely something to unpack.
*Is AFAB a TERF dogwhistle? I don't know 100% if that's something commonly agreed upon now.
This show turned into accountability-free sympathy bait for a character with lower EQ than... a baby less than one minute old. Woobify your abusers, bury your gays, get a Netflix deal. Go figure.