I found out that Becca is a love interest after reading a tumblr post about it. Nathan flirts with MC even after she tells him that she is with someone else. MC is spending every single chapter with Nathan. Becca appeared only once in book 4. Her development was butchered in TSM1 because she had to be taken down a peg. Name one of Nathan’s flaws. Too supportive? Too good to be true? This interaction itself is not that deep but the general pattern is insulting and upsetting.
Hi anon thank you for your comment.
I’m not sure what you meant by general pattern being insulting and upsetting. Did you refer to PB’s pattern of making some characters do/say something mean or bad just to make another character look good?
Because that’s what I’m talking about in my post about Becca’s and Nathan’s interaction. My point is not about my favourite characters being written out as a meanie or a bitch.
My point is PB tries to convince us that they are all about inclusiveness; diversity and sexuality and stuff *yet* sometimes they demonise female characters to make a male LI look good in some scenes in some books.
Everytime something like that happens, we the fans end up fighting among ourselves.
Alana got called out so bad and so was Priya. I bet Priya will be written to look bad again while MC will be protected by a certain male LI once more.
Let me talk bout Alana vs Damien in Perfect Match. The scene where Alana’s being mean to Damien was not necessary.
As a writer and a huge fan of Game of Thrones. It hurts my feelings. Alana ain’t my fave character. In Game of Thrones, everyone has flaws. No one is from “the Light side.” It’s even more obvious in those 5 big ass Game of Thrones books which I read regularly and religiously. And the villains from Game of Thrones never do anything bad *just to make other characters look good*They do bad things because they think those bad things they do will get them closer to their goals. Their bad actions align well with their bad goals.
The scene where Alana became mean to Damien all of a sudden was random and unnecessary in my opinion. Was she written to be mean so it would give Damien a diamond scene where he chopped barks shirtless while being upset? Without Alana’s being mean, would it be harder to bring out his vulnerability in a convincing way?
Alana did not have to be mean. Her presence alone could make Damien reminisce about their romance in the past. He could convincingly become vulnerable without PB’s making Alana a mean bitch in that chapter.
Are some of the male characters of PB allowed to be vulnerable without being upset by someone else who is being mean to them?
Let me talk about Priya a bit.
Someone posted, “if Priya fans have double standard in game, imagine real life.” And this bloody post got over 200 notes which aren’t opposing it.
Someone posted on their blog, “but Priya is so relatable. She’s always late and on the phone all the time.” And this OP didn’t even compliment her or anything yet someone called OP out just for mentioning Priya. That was uncalled for.
These are a few examples of what I meant when I said, “we the fans end up fighting among ourselves.”
The good guys must have flaws. It’s a basic rule in every scriptwriting/how to write a novel book. I’m sure you know this. I think sometimes PB forgets 😫 The villains can have depths. Depths don’t justify their actions but the audience will understand why and how the villains do what they do.
And as long as PB goes with this pattern of demonizing a character to make another character look good, the fight among the fans will go on. And I don’t want us to fight or hate one another. Not because it’ll be a fight over fictional characters, but because hate will separate us.
Isn’t it weird that we all play games about including diversity and sexuality yet we exclude one another because we think people who like characters that we don’t, deserve to be insulted or attacked on the internet?
What a way to defeat the game’s purpose.
What’s the point of accepting one’s outer appearance and sexuality if we can’t accept them for who they are on the inside? And yet we keep saying; what matters is on the inside.
