Do you think if Lotor had broken his cycle of abuse, would you like his character? I mean I know you haven't seen s8 and have no means to (totally understandable) but in the second episode Lotor tries to make an alliance with a planet, works with them as their equals, then Zarkon yells at him like the imperialist bitch he is and lights on fire the whole planet as punishment.
see… i don’t like the way this is worded, and i’m gonna first of all address how this is phrased. because ‘would you like Lotor more if he broke his abuse cycle’ carries a certain implication: namely, that my issue with Lotor is that he’s ‘doing recovery wrong’, or that i’m gatekeeping abuse survivors and reserving sympathy only for those who have ‘broken the cycle of abuse’, or reached a certain arbitrary point in their recovery where i deem them ‘worthy’ of my sympathy. and that’s really not what i’m about. this is not about me and my feelings towards abuse survivors in real life, because IRL i can be sympathetic and understanding to anyone with a history of trauma and abuse, regardless of how far along they are in their recovery or how much that trauma might affect their current actions. i can be sympathetic even whilst i’m gently-but-firmly challenging them on harmful and unhealthy behaviours.
this is not about real life abuse survivors ‘breaking the cycle of abuse’ or my capacity to feel empathy for real people dealing with traumatic childhood experiences. maybe that’s not what you mean by the question, anon (i suspect it’s not because the second half of your ask talks about the writers, which i’ll get to below). but i’ve seen this attitude bandied about the fandom that if you don’t like Lotor you’re somehow a big evil meanie or whatever, and i’m gonna just confront that here and now. this isn’t about empathy or compassion for survivors or any other hotbutton issues that fandom wants to hang on this. it’s about bad writing, plain and simple.
the reason i object so much to this phrasing of the question is that Lotor is not a real person. whether or not he ‘breaks the cycle of abuse’ has nothing to do with Lotor, an individual person making choices - because he isn’t a real person getting to choose how he deals with a traumatic past. he’s just a made-up character in a show. the reason why Lotor didn’t break out of that abuse cycle is because the showrunners wrote him that way. that’s literally the only reason. there is no moral judgement on his character or personality. my dislike for Lotor isn’t me turning my nose up at someone for being ‘too weak’ to recover from their trauma - i just don’t fucking like how the whole issue was handled and i don’t like how his character was written on the show. and i think it’s really really important to keep sight of that distinction.
which brings me to the second part of your ask:
I’m not trying to justify anything he does later on, I’m just talking about what he does before being exiled and at least in that given moment, he had good intentions, I’d say redeemable even. Do you think if v slur had better writers and eps who don’t lack self-awareness, Lotor wouldn’t have gone through “the abused becomes the abuser” trope and would not get a unnecessary romantic plot device but an arc where he gets to break the cycle?
here is my entire issue with Lotor and his whole storyline: Lotor did not get the angsty abused-as-a-child backstory because the showrunners genuinely care about abuse survivors and want to represent us in the best way possible and give us powerful and meaningful stories about trauma and recovery and hope for better futures. he got the abuse backstory because LM and JDS think it’s ‘edgy’, and a quick-and-dirty way to make the character seem ‘morally grey’ and ambiguous. that’s the reason.
this kind of behaviour is part of a pattern that happens in both fandoms and canon works: sexy male villain with a British accent gets angsty child abuse backstory as a way to generate sympathy for the character, excuse their horrendous behaviour, or make them appear complex and nuanced. this is a pattern that takes the narrative of abuse and survivorship out of the hands of actual abuse survivors, and remoulds it into a cheap backstory mod that can be tacked onto thirst-bait antagonists without thought or consideration for the message it sends. we, the actual survivors, do not get to control the narrative around what a survivor looks like, and what recovery looks like, and how people respond to trauma and overcome it. that power is taken away from us, because people look at our life stories and all they see is “free angsty back story real estate”.
fandom started doing this with Lotor as early as S3, when highly questionable metas offered up Lotor’s ‘hypervigilance’ and his tendency to sit with his back to the wall as ‘proof’ that he was clearly an abusive survivor and therefore nothing he did was actually that bad and we couldn’t hate him. and let me tell you, as an actual real life abuse survivor who had to live through the entire abused-as-a-child backstory, for real, in real time, for my entire childhood and adolescence… lemme tell you, that time after S3 was a trip. the more the show went on the more fandom embraced Lotor as a troubled survivor just desperately trying to do the right thing, so that when the Colony reveal happened people began slandering Romelle and acting like none of this could be real etc. the Lotor sympathy died down for a bit after S6, but now the show is over and i’m seeing a resurgence of “Lotor did nothing wrong, ever, he just wanted to be loved!” and i’m like “….remember when he killed Narti haha fun times” and no, i still don’t like him and i still don’t want him as my rep, thanks.
a huge part of the issue with Lotor is - as you suggest - inconsistent writing. specifically i think the issue is that two conflicting versions of Lotor co-exist in canon, as if one half of the writing room wanted to write him as “charismatic evil schemer with his own agendas whomst you cannot trust but is cool and interesting to watch” and the other half insisted on writing him as “sad abused baby Doing His Best™ whomst everyone should feel sympathy for and forgive because he’s morally grey uwu”. Lotor’s characterisation swings wildly between these two incompatible takes, and the end result is both offensive and narratively messy. the year is 2019 and we really need to stop conflating abuse survivors with psychopaths, thanks very much.
to me, Lotor is not a good pick for abuse survivor representation, because he falls into that same pattern i described earlier: violent charismatic asshole who lies and schemes and manipulates… but wait! he’s actually the victim! feel sorry for him! even though he’s literally also a murderer… excuse the murder! he did it cos he’s big sad! and like… yes, trauma recovery is messy and many of us are deeply maladjusted, but… “yelling at your friends or leaving them on read for six weeks because you don’t know how to trust people and get close to them” is not morally or ethically equivalent to murder. there’s “be patient and empathetic with abuse survivors because we learn a lot of unhealthy behaviours from our abusers and often need help unlearning them” and then there’s “murder doesn’t count his parents were mean to him” and those two stances are not remotely equivalent or comparable. people excusing Lotor’s violence and manipulation and general awfulness are not expressing their deep and abiding support of abuse survivors, they’re just making excuses for a hot twink because he has a British accent and that’s a -12 to common sense checks.
“but abuse survivors relate to him!” YES BECAUSE WE NEVER GET ANYONE ELSE, BRENDA. because this is a pattern, and it plays out time-and-time again, in multiple fandoms and canon works. and abusers are very good at making their victims feel like it’s all our fault and we deserve mistreatment and we don’t deserve love or friends, and we’re bad people who have brought the abuse upon ourselves. and then you step into a fandom and the only character with a widely-accepted abuse backstory is… the villain. when you already feel like the villain because of childhood trauma, of course it’s easy to latch onto the only person in the narrative who seems to be the same as you. but the year is 2019 and it’s about fucking time we addressed just how fucked up and toxic and harmful it is to survivors to constantly reserve the abused-as-a-child backstory solely for antagonists and/or assholes, and to constantly equate trauma recovery with villain redemption arcs. it’s not the same thing. abuse survivors don’t need a redemption arc so we can ‘earn’ love and sympathy and care. the fact that we sometimes push people away or don’t open our mail for 3 months does not place us on the same moral low ground as a guy who used his people as quintessence batteries. can we all collectively stop acting like these are remotely the same situation.
Lotor is terrible representation for abuse survivors. and that is a hill i will fucking die on. what message does his story send to actual IRL survivors trying to find our way in the world? nothing good. nothing hopeful. the message of Lotor’s story is “abuse inevitably turns people into violent sociopaths who kill their friends and have no regard for the sanctity of life”. it’s “the best you can hope for is a grey morality and no friends you can really trust”. it’s “you can live for ten thousand years and you’ll still never escape the damage of your trauma, recovery is impossible, you will remain forever trapped in a cycle of bad behaviour because even if you lived for literal millennia there’s no hope of ever changing your unhealthy coping mechanisms”. everything about that is awful. it’s also not true, which is partly why i object to it so much. Lotor’s storyline is one that perpetuates some of the worst stigmas and stereotypes about abuse and survivorship: that we are all irreparably damaged by what we’ve been through, that we can never get better, that we will always be bad people who deserve to die alone, that abuse turns people into psychopaths, that the only thing preventing us from going on violent murder sprees is just circumstances because we’re all inherently violent and vengeful and fucked up beyond all hope for happiness and joy.
those messages were present in the narrative before S8. they were there before Lotor got melted to a chair. they were there even before the Colony reveal. when you present a character who’s 10,000 years old and tell the audience “yes he’s a manipulative dick but he was abused as a child so you know. that’s the reason” what you’re saying is that you think recovery from abuse is impossible. this guy had ten thousand years to fix up and get his life back on track, and he was apparently unable to do so. he’s still stuck in behaviours that people insist are “survival tactics” even though thousands of years have passed. in all that time he somehow never managed to escape his circumstances and live a healthy and happy life? that’s fucking bleak, man. that’s not representation. that’s just reinforcing the worst fears of abuse survivors. and the fact that it’s done for cheap melodrama is really fucking offensive.
it is possible to write stories about abuse survivors who are antagonists or do villainous things but turn it around and find recovery and redemption. AtLA did it with Zuko. She Ra is currently doing it with both Catra and Adora. i’m able to watch both those stories as a survivor and not feel hurt or offended by the messages. but it’s because they are approached with nuance and care, by writers who care about survivors and want to tell those stories with love and sympathy. VLD managed none of those things. VLD’s showrunners viewed “abused as a child” as a cheap way to be edgy or try to make out that Lotor is morally grey and interesting and a nuanced character with depth. instead they just ended up with a hot mess of offensive implications.
could the show pull off a good abuse survivor arc for Lotor? it would require a complete shift in how the character is portrayed and framed. too much of Lotor’s early characterisation seems designed to get the audience to mistrust him and suspect him of deeper, mysterious motives. take, for example, the scene where he goes to see Zarkon and Honerva in the throne room, and as he turns away the audience is privy to his knowing smirk whilst his parents remain oblivious to it. that scene lets the audience see a side of Lotor the other characters aren’t seeing, and it’s a moment just between Lotor and the viewer. it’s used to tell us that Lotor isn’t as upset as he pretended to be; that he feels confident and in control of the situation, despite earlier appearances. if we are to feel sympathy for Lotor as a survivor, moments like that should be used to showcase Lotor’s vulnerability and inner conflict - to show the audience a side of Lotor he never lets anyone else see. we should see Lotor appear composed and coolly unconcerned when talking to his parents - and when he turns away, we should see him looking pained and conflicted, and deeply hurt by his parents’ rejection. there are plenty of opportunities to change the narrative around Lotor and frame him in a more complex and sympathetic light, but the story missed them. i suspect that happened because of conflicts in the writers room about how Lotor should be portrayed - but whatever the reason, the end result is that Lotor comes across as manipulative and cruel, and most of the “inner conflict” over how he “feels so bad” comes from fandom projection.
could Lotor be redeemed? would i like him better if he was? those are rather nebulous and hypothetical questions, and i don’t have a good answer for them. i don’t actually hate Lotor - it’s just that i vastly prefer his ‘cool interesting asshole villain’ characterisation over his ‘uwu soft sad baby uwu he only did a murder cos he’s so upset’ characterisation. and i’m generally of the opinion that abuse backstories should not be attached to villains unless you’re prepared to commit to the complexity and nuance that requires. i am an abuse survivor, and i want to see myself in stories - but not as a murderer. not as a manipulative sociopath who kills his friends and views people as objects to be used. either commit to making Lotor an abuse survivor and put in the thought and care that storyline requires - or let him be the charismatic asshole villain and drop the abuse storyline all together. pick one, not a weird hybrid mix of both that’s an offensive hot mess.