So I am just curious: What do you think is wrong Chloe's writing?
Inconsistency. And an inability to commit.
The show kept zigzagging where they stood with Chloe. Was she an absolutely terrible person with no redeeming qualities? Or was she a sad rich kid who genuinely wanted to be liked and just didn’t know how to deal with people because of her trashy mom and overly indulgent father? Both things can be true, but the problem is that ultimately neither was. Chloe sucks at being both so she fails at being either.
The show couldn’t seem to make up its mind which of these camps Chloe was supposed to be in and didn’t commit to either option. Furthermore, Chloe wasn’t even the one moving between these camps—she stayed in place, it’s just the line was being moved UNDER her to have her be positioned wherever the narrative wanted her in a specific moment.
So we had zigzagging moments where Chloe was generally horrible and was “whatever” about it vs some really jarring moments where Chloe was sad and we were clearly supposed to feel for her and think she was capable of being more except she did nothing and learned nothing and was still consistently horrible with little to no accountability or repercussion.
The thing is that this duality can be done well. These characters exist. It is fully possible to have a character that can be both horrible but sympathetic. Zuko in Avatar. Grace and Simon in Infinity Train. Ash and Avocato in Final Space. Caine in The Amazing Digital Circus. Anakin Skywalker in Star Wars. Odysseus in Epic the Musical.
But knowing the reason why someone does what they do does not in any way detract from the fact that what they’re doing is still horrible.
We need to acknowledge the actions are horrible. We need the story’s narrative to acknowledge the actions are horrible. Not laugh them off. Not dismiss them. Not ignore or forget that they happened. Not describe them as being “not that bad“ or “just how they are”. Not deflect by using other characters and especially not by consistently pointing at a character who doesn’t act with the sheer malice and lack of remorse the way this one does and acting like their actions are in any way the same.
Chloe, like Lila, is a tool. The narrative’s stance concerning her and who she even is depends on the scene and who is writing her at the time. But the writers can’t seem to agree and they can’t seem to commit to any one stance, so Chloe is all over the place. She’s horrible without her horrible acts taken seriously as the problem they are and she’s viewed sympathetically without actually being sympathetic.
Just a reminder: we as the audience were called idiots for thinking she was ever supposed to be redeemable when the writers were the ones who consistently made light of her horrible actions and put in so many of these scenes showing her as a sad, sympathetic character with no control of her situation.
[Hot Take] Chloe Bourgeois is One of the Most Consistent Characters in MLB
(warning: this post contains opinions you might not agree with. proceed with caution. Before you scroll, please here me out.)
Chloé Bourgeois is one of those characters who feels inconsistent to many viewers because her behavior escalates, but escalation is not the same thing as contradiction. When you track her arc from Season 1 through Season 5, what you actually see is a remarkably stable psychological profile: a girl whose entitlement, insecurity, and craving for validation drive every choice she makes. The show never presents her as someone who grows out of these traits despite her nonexistent redemption arc.
Now, this isn't to say that the people saying that this is bad writing are wrong, because they aren't. MLB is rife with writing inconsistencies, narrative framing, and poor character dynamics. Not in the ways you think anyway, but I'll get back to that later. But seeing people saying that Chloe is acting out of character and is behaving worse than usual makes me scratch my head, because she isn't exactly doing anything new.
From the very beginning, Chloé’s behavior is rooted in the same three impulses: (1) protect her status, (2) punish anyone who threatens it, and (3) cling to the people she believes define her worth. In Seasons 1–3, she expresses this through petty bullying, manipulation, and constant demands for attention. She wants to be admired, feared, and obeyed, and she lashes out when she isn’t. Her fixation on Adrien, her jealousy of Marinette, and her desperate need for her mother’s approval are all early indicators of the same emotional engine that drives her later actions. Nothing about her core motivations ever changes.
What does change in Seasons 4–5 is the narrative framing of her behavior, not the nature of it. Despite Chloe being written as a spoiled bully with attitude problems who excessively bullies her classmates for little to no reason, her poor behavior was always framed as gag humor and not taken seriously, often just a device to get the akuma of the week. But after Miracle Queen, the gag humor lens was removed, Chloe is still portrayed as a malicious bully, the only difference is that both the narrative and people within the story are treating her like one. Which is where I think the tonal whiplash and bad writing allegations are coming from. The allegations are right of course because from the beginning, Chloe should've been framed and treated more seriously, because bullying is no laughing matter, especially when said bully has the ability to ruin the lives of her victims and avoid consequences because of her extremely powerful and wealthy father.
To go on a side tangent, one of the biggest problems of MLB is that handles bullying poorly because the show often punishes the wrong people and protects the wrong characters. Marinette is a clear example: instead of being supported for standing up to Chloé, she’s constantly compared to her bully as if they’re “two sides of the same coin.” The narrative pushes back whenever Marinette shows frustration or anger, even though she’s been dealing with Chloé’s harassment for years. This directly contradicts the show’s own message that “evil triumphs when good people do nothing,” because every time Marinette does something—calls Chloé out, refuses to tolerate her behavior, or sets boundaries—she’s treated like she’s overreacting or being unkind. Meanwhile, the adults who actually enable Chloé’s behavior—André, Bustier, and Damocles—are never held responsible. André spoils her and excuses everything she does, Bustier preaches kindness while refusing to protect her students, and Damocles is the principle and show be protecting all of his students, yet he doesn't until the last second. Yet the show frames them as sympathetic or harmless instead of acknowledging that their inaction is the reason Chloé’s bullying got so bad. By refusing to hold the adults accountable and by framing Marinette’s justified reactions as “too harsh,” the show ends up sending the message that victims should stay quiet, bullies deserve endless patience, and authority figures bear no responsibility for the harm they allow.
The show has also poisoned the way fans view what is and isn't an acceptable reaction to bullying. When Chloe's nonexistent redemption was teased, the writers had Marinette doing the lion share of the work. She had to change how she saw Chloe, she had to give Chloe more grace even when she was actively hurting her, and she had to give endless chances lest she be scolded by the narrative. They've done this for so long, that when the writers suddenly decide that hey, Marinette shouldn't have to bear the burden of dealing with Chloe, it comes too quick and sudden and is at odds with what they had portrayed before, which obviously led to the fandom crucifying Marinette for not being a doormat therapist and "refusing to learn that she has to be kind to people she hates". Never mind that up until this point, Marinette was probably the kindest non enabler person to Chloe and tried to drag a half decent person from her before she defected to Hawkmoth. But no, she's awful for being tired of having to deal with someone who wants to destroy her, I guess. The is the fault of the writers because they should've made it 100% clear that Marinette shouldn't have to help her long time bully Chloe be a better person and that role should be Chloe's and Chloe's alone.
I don't want to name names, but I saw a post on here that said that Bustier was a better person than Marinette because she's willing to be patient with Chloe to help her grow. I saw another comment that said that Marinette has no right to be upset over Lila trying to take the class rep position away from her because Marinette did nothing to stop Chloe's cheating and bullying 💀. My guy, Bustier is an adult and a teacher. It's literally her job to handle problem students and work with them. She's likely had extensive training for that. Marinette is a child and also Chloe's victim therefore she owes her nothing. Also, I don't know what schools you guys are attending, but in my experience, class reps are not held responsible for the wellbeing of students or tasked with punishing students for bad behavior and being their therapist. That typically the teacher's job. You know, the actual adult. There are many fanfictions that show Bustier treating Marinette as an assistant teacher and foisting off her work on her, but lowkey, the fandom treats her that way too.
When Ladybug stops indulging her, when Adrien pulls away, and when the class stops tolerating her cruelty, Chloé doesn’t suddenly become a different person—she becomes a more desperate version of the same person. Her tantrums become more dramatic, her schemes more reckless, and her alliances more dangerous because she’s losing the social power she once took for granted. This is exactly how someone with her personality and upbringing would react: by doubling down, not by reflecting or improving.
Not to mention, a lot of the behavior and decisions that she exhibited in seasons 4 and 5 are a direct callback to what she does in earlier episodes:
In Horrificator (Season 1) and Queen Banana (Season 4), the parallels are almost identical. In both episodes, the class is trying to make a student film, and Chloé immediately hijacks the project to make it all about herself. In Horrificator, she demands to be the star, refuses to follow directions, and throws a tantrum when she doesn’t get her way. In Queen Banana, she repeats the exact same pattern but with higher stakes—she forces her father to fund a movie where she plays the lead, bullies the crew, and melts down when Zoé is chosen instead. The only difference is that Season 4 gives her more power to abuse, but the behavior itself is the same.
Zombizou (Season 2) and Sole Crusher (Season 4) also mirror each other perfectly. In both episodes, Chloé sacrifices someone else to save herself from an akuma attack. In Zombizou, she literally grabs Sabrina and shoves her in front of herself as a human shield. In Sole Crusher, she sacrifices the entire Dupain-Cheng family. These moments show that Chloé has always been willing to let others suffer as long as she stays safe. Season 4 doesn’t “ruin” her character—it just repeats the same selfish instinct she’s always had. Granted, she does feel guilty about this in Zombizou, but she only apologizes to Bustier, her biggest enabler after her father 🙄.
Her episodes as Antibug, Queen Wasp, and Miracle Queen also show a clear pattern that continues into later seasons. In Antibug (Season 1), she becomes akumatized because she can’t stand Ladybug correcting her. In Queen Wasp (Season 2), she abuses the Bee Miraculous to show off and prove she’s better than Ladybug, even if it puts people in danger. In Miracle Queen (Season 3), she escalates this by trying to take control of the entire city to force Ladybug to acknowledge her. These episodes all revolve around the same idea: Chloé wants power, attention, and superiority, and she lashes out when she doesn’t get them. Seasons 4–5 simply continue this pattern by showing her trying to regain the power she lost.
Another strong parallel is between Despair Bear (Season 2) and Penalteam (Season 4). In Despair Bear, Chloé tries to host a party to make herself look good, but she treats everyone terribly and only tries to be nice because she wants Adrien's friendship back, not because of any growth on her end. In Penalteam, she does the same thing during the class sports tryouts—she mocks her classmates, refuses to follow rules, and throws a fit when she doesn't want to play soccer. Both episodes show that Chloé’s need for control and status has always been more important to her than teamwork or fairness.
A final parallel appears between Malediktator (Season 2) and Revelation (Season 5). In Malediktator, Chloé demands that her father punishes the entire school because she feels disrespected for being called out as a train crasher, showing how quickly she uses her privilege to hurt others. In Revelation, she does the same thing on a bigger scale by teaming up with Lila to spread lies, frame innocent people, and turn the school environment toxic. Both episodes show that Chloé has always used authority figures—or anyone with power—to get revenge on people she thinks have wronged her. Season 5 doesn’t change her; it just gives her a partner who encourages her worst traits.
Specific episodes aren't even needed for this analysis. Her alliance with Lila in Season 5 is a perfect mirror of her Season 1–3 behavior. In the early seasons, Chloé gravitates toward anyone who reinforces her superiority—Sabrina, her mother, Ladybug when she was indulging her, even Hawk Moth when she thinks he admires her even though he's just grooming her. In Season 5, Lila fills that same role: someone who flatters her, validates her grievances, and encourages her worst impulses. Chloé isn’t acting “out of character” by teaming up with another manipulator; she’s acting exactly as she always has, seeking out relationships that protect her ego and punish her perceived enemies.
Even her cruelty in later seasons is consistent with her earlier patterns. In Seasons 1–3, she humiliates classmates, abuses her father’s authority, and weaponizes her privilege. It's simple cause and effect. Her behavior escalates because the consequences escalate. When she loses the Bee Miraculous, she becomes vindictive. When the class stops tolerating her, she retaliates. This is the same Chloé who only now she’s cornered, and cornered people lash out harder. She mimics Audrey’s elitism, her disdain for others, and her belief that status equals worth. In Seasons 4–5, when Audrey reappears and reinforces these values, Chloé regresses even further. Her worst behavior is always tied to her mother’s influence, and the later seasons simply push that dynamic to its extreme.
Chloé is one of the most consistent characters in Miraculous Ladybug precisely because she never changes. Her behavior in Seasons 4–5 doesn’t contradict her early seasons—it completes them. It shows what happens when a character built on entitlement and insecurity finally loses the scaffolding that once held her up.
Look, I don’t mind the way Marinette treats Chloé. Chloé bullied her for a long time, Marinette doesn’t owe her anything, let alone a second chance with the fate of the goddamn city after Chloé already put several people at risk the first time.
But I can’t stand the way the narrative and, let’s be honest, Astruc, treats Chloé outside of the universe. She’s still a fictional teenage girl whose trauma and emotional abuse/neglect they are constantly watering down or dismissing.
Y'know... some Chloe stans would have a point about potential sexism in her writing...
...if they weren't apply such double standards towards Marinette by proxy. Like apparently it's all support women's wrongs until it's not their blorbo. I might've preferred Chloe's could've been redeemtion but I've come to appreciate how her downward spiral was written as well as to recognize how the story doesn't hate her. It just wants to make a point with her about those who actively choose badly.
And this whole stalking thing is only ever applied to Marinette. Never Chat Noir when he was such a flirt with Ladybug or even getting pushy about their relationship. It was always his side taken in Season 4 yet never any consideration for Ladybug trying to be Guardian to powers that could DESTROY THE WORLD in the wrong hands.
Hey, you know how many claim that the narrative went too easy on Felix compared to Chloe? Y'all go too easy on Adrien compared to Marinette. Who's the hypocrites now? Can characters be multi-dimensional or can't they be? Can character do morally questionable stuff for those they love or not?
I think the fandom needs more Chloe salt along with Audrey what about you?
It’s not really the Chloe redemption arc that I’m against. I’m just against it being used in the same stories that make out Alya or Adrien or any other classmates out to be irredeemable, when Chloe has done far worse in canon than what salt writers make them do in those fics.
