hestia stans are so hilarious to me because theyâre trying to do feminist discourse about one of the most misogynistic stories ever just to defend the absolute shitty writing they love đ itâs literally not the criticsâ fault that your precious story built hestiaâs entirely on her dehumanizing another woman and then refused to interrogate it. hestia is a misogynist because the story itself is misogynistic. the entire point of her arc is that she cannot cope with being in this world, she wakes up in a reality she thinks she understands, a story she read where Diana was supposed to be the saintly, perfect female lead. but when she actually encounters Diana, she realizes sheâs just⊠a person. and instead of processing that like a normal human being, hestia spirals.
her entire breakdown comes from the fact that Diana did not meet the expectations hestia projected onto her. hestia wanted the saintly heroine she read about. she wanted the perfect woman who would save everyone and validate the story she believed in. when that illusion collapses, hestia decides someone must be responsible for her misery and the tragedy around cael and that someone becomes Diana.
and hereâs where the misogyny kicks in: Diana becomes the main victim. VICTIM. hestia stops treating her like a person and starts treating her like a failed character. in hestiaâs worldview, Diana isnât a woman navigating a complicated political world anymore, sheâs the âfake saint,â the woman who ruined cael, the embodiment of everything that went wrong. every action diana takes gets filtered through that narrative. she is no longer allowed to be a flawed human being with her own trauma or perspective. she becomes the thing hestia needs her to be so her revenge fantasy works.
and the story? the story lets it happen. it never seriously confronts the fact that hestia is projecting her instability onto another woman and actively harming her. hestia humiliates Diana socially, undermines her politically, manipulates situations to make her look incompetent, and constantly frames her as undeserving. there is no real moral collapse, no meaningful confrontation, no sustained moment where hestia has to reckon with the fact that sheâs dehumanizing another woman.
it doesnât even matter what Diana did or didnât do. she can be cold, flawed, politically naive, hypocritical, emotionally distant, or literally perfect, it wouldnât matter. the story clearly decides whose suffering matters, and spoiler, itâs not hers. the orchus family plot is the perfect example: Diana was abused and kidnapped by the orchus family, yet the story barely explores how that trauma shaped her actions or thinking. meanwhile cael massacres the entire dukedom and the narrative treats him as sympathetic, lets him be sad about it, and even rewards him with wealth. hestia literally argues he deserves the orchus dukedom as payment for killing them, which is politically insane. by that logic anyone could wipe out a noble family and claim their assets.
but because itâs cael, the story shrugs. because itâs Diana, every decision she makes becomes proof sheâs terrible. cael wipes out an entire dukedom and faces zero consequences, while Diana is dragged for every political, personal, or moral choice she makes. logically that massacre shouldâve shaken the entire kingdom, alliances collapsing, nobles resisting, political chaos, but none of that matters. the story only cares about validating hestiaâs perspective.
so hestia reducing Diana to an object isnât just a character flaw, itâs fundamental to the narrative structure. the story validates it. it flattens Diana, and turns her into a tool for hestiaâs revenge arc. it pretends these characters are real when it wants emotional weight, but treats Diana like disposable fiction whenever hestia needs someone to blame. the logic collapses. either these people are real, in which case dianaâs dehumanization should matter, or theyâre fictional props hestia can manipulate without consequence. the story tries to argues the first one with no introspection of how Diana fits.
so yes, hestia is misogynistic, but she couldnât exist without the story being misogynistic first. the narrative gives her the power, the platform, and the moral vacuum to weaponize another womanâs flaws and trauma, all because that woman failed to live up to the saintly fantasy hestia read onto her. then it pats itself on the back for hestiaâs âgrowthâ once the romance stabilizes her.
thatâs not complex character writing. thatâs misogyny. the story wants readers to cheer when hestia cuts Diana down, but it refuses to examine what it means for a woman to cope with existential panic by dehumanizing another woman. Diana becomes an emotional punching bag whose humanity doesnât matter once she stops being useful to hestiaâs arc.
discoholicmusic
andulkaphoto
janainaart
romaincrisis
stormborns
baratheonpilled
snowghoul
2087
