You know it’s honestly hilarious how Miyako has had multiple people explain to her, with literal illustrations, how Viola is toxic, and her reaction is “that’s nice, but I want her to gaslight me more.”
I saw a discussion in regards to soyo's relationship with her mother and it was pretty disheartening to see people downplaying it and not viewing it as "real" abuse.
emotional incest happens when a parent relies on their child for emotional support that belongs in an adult relationship. It’s a dynamic that crosses developmental boundaries and is considered a form of emotional abuse, even when there’s no harmful intent.
this whole scene perfectly shows why the relationship between soyo and her mother is emotional incest. everything soyo is saying to her mother is what a mother would say to their child. "I'll warm up your food," "go take a bath in the meantime and I'll get started on the laundry," the way she finds comfort in soyo's lap, and soyo just strokes her head comfortingly. soyo has been put into a caretaker role by her mother, whether it's intentional or not.
This scene alone could prove my point, but there's much more;
• soyo's official profile states "at school, she is a "motherly" figure who listens to everyone's problems and supports others when they are in trouble" she's so used to being in a caretaker role at home and putting herself second that it's literally in her nature to be in such a role for everyone around her
• soyo is also described as mature
• the reason why soyo was so broken up over crychic disbanding was because she was afraid of being alone again, which is the result of her mother's neglect from always working and the one-sided nature of emotional incest
• we can see that soyo puts her mother's opinion before her own when they move into their new apartment after her parents seperation. her mother asks her what school she wants to go to, and soyo looks like she's thinking about it, but then asks her mother what she thinks. she's even hesitant about going to tsukinomori, but when she realises that it's what her mother wants, she agrees.
and no, I don't think soyo's mother is a bad person, and I don't think her behaviour is intentional. me and my mother's relationship while I was growing up was slightly similar. everytime she had a problem, she'd come to me, sometimes even crying and asking me to validate her competency as a mother, and as a result, I never pondered or spoke about my own problems and was expected to balance my mother's issues as well as my own. It caused many issues for me later in life.
and while I did feel it at times, I don't hate her, and I know she didn't do it intentionally and she cares for me. the same goes for soyo's mom.
this dynamic has clearly affected soyo in more ways than one, and I wish more people took emotional incest seriously as a form of abuse.
In addition, avemygo were the most emotionally heavy series of the franchise. they was meant to provoke deeper conversations. the writers made it clear that this dynamic affected soyo. they shouldn't need to write it out for you step by step for you to understand.
We all know we're getting s5 no matter how much Michael widows cry about it, but I'm tired of seeing them, so I'm gonna help them pack it up before the end of 2026. It can be one of their late New Year's resolutions!
Arguments related to the book
1. "It's not book accurate."
The whole series isn't book accurate. A few examples;
• Daphne was in her second/third season in the books.
• Benedict should've been season 3, not season 4, if we're going off of book order.
• Anthony did not propose to Edwina in the books.
• Queen Charlotte doesn't have a huge role like she does in the show.
Why is book accuracy suddenly an issue when it comes to Franchaela? (That's rhetorical, we all know why).
2. "But what about Francesca's infertility storyline?"
It happened. What do you think happened in season 4? It was adequately addressed. The only way you wouldn't have seen it is if you were watching season 4 with your eyes closed.
2.5. "It's a main part of her storyline"
Not according to Julia Quinn!
3. "Michael was the best character in the books"
Is this your goat?
I understand the bar for the men in Bridgerton is low (and that's why they made the men more likeable in the show), but I've never understood this obsession with Michael. He's a rake, just like the other men. At least we'll get something more interesting with the gender swap. Also, Michael's "love" for Francesca comes off as obsession and lust. It's not romantic in the slightest.
4. "Justice for John"
Justice for the man who was present for 2 chapters in the book? The show gave John way more than the book did, and therefore, I can understand why people got attached to John.
However, I know for a fact that (some) franjohn shippers are Michael Widows because they just can't stand the thought of Francesca being with a woman.
They showed Francesca loved John. The usually quiet Francesca standing up to her mother to defend her and John's relationship shows that. They showed it in the way she treasured and appreciated the little things that he did such as love her for who she is.
5. "But Francesca has kids in the book."
In an epilogue. Julia Quinn even said the thought of Francesca having kids didn't even cross her mind. She said that her story felt "complete." If the readers didn't beg for it, she likely would've felt content with closing Francesca's story with no kids.
6. "Changing the story is so disrespectful to Julia Quinn."
This Julia Quinn?
Julia Quinn has been nothing but supportive. I fully understand that Francesca's journey with infertility is based on Julia Quinn's own experiences. If she had an issue, she would've said so. She agreed to this change herself. Jess said it, and Julia Quinn said it herself. Shondaland didn't have a gun to her head - she willingly agreed to the change.
Arguments about historical accuracy
1. "It's not historically accurate"
I have to question when Bridgerton fans started caring about historical accuracy. There are historical inaccuracies throughout the whole series. They literally danced to "BRAT" last season, so I will have to ask you to be so for real.
The level of racial diversity we have in Bridgerton would not have been a reality in 1800s England, either. Bridgerton has never claimed to be a 1:1 of England during that time. Chris Van Dusen, one of Bridgerton's producers, made it clear that Bridgerton is not a history lesson, but them combining history and fantasy.
With all that in mind, a queer couple is not the end of the world. As Hannah said, Queer people have always existed.
2. "But she can't inherit the title"
Historically, women in Scotland in the 1800s could inherit a title, as long as the original grant of the title allowed women to inherit and its succession terms were met, including where there were no qualifying male heirs. The only thing Michaela couldn't do was sit in the House of Lords. Regardless, we've already established that Bridgerton isn't that focused on historical accuracy.
The only reason you guys are saying this is because you have a stereotype of Lesbians in your head, and Francesca doesn't fit it.
Eloise is rebellious, has no interest in marriage, and is outspoken about the issues women faced in society at the time. But we all know that when a woman displays those traits, she's seen as a "man hater" and it therefore makes her a Lesbian. That's exactly why people are saying Eloise should've been queer.
I've seen people say that Francesca is "too pretty and quiet" to be the lesbian character, and I have to ask you what the fuck does that mean?
1.5 "Benedict should've ended up with a man instead."
But then that wouldn't be book accurate. Or Historically accurate, as you guys like to argue. Ah yes, I forgot, all of these things suddenly don't matter because it's a man.
2. "We already have Benedict"
Ah yes, you guys don't see queer people as human - you see a quota to be filled. "Well, there's one queer character so the "woke" crowd can shut up and leave us alone."
Their season is not even out yet and it's brought so much joy. Black Lesbians feeling represented by Michaela, people realising that they may be Lesbian because they see themselves in Francesca. THIS is what it's about. Queer people deserve representation beyond a single character, and queer women (especially POC) deserve proper representation.
(Also Benedict being queer is tolerated because he ends up with a woman. )
3. "What if it was a lesbian couple switched to a straight couple?"
There are 8 Bridgerton kids. 8 stories. All heterosexual. If Francesca's book was originally a queer story and they made it a heterosexual one in the show, yes, it would be an issue.
Queer people are a marginalised group. Heterosexual people are not. You can argue that there are plenty of queer stories, but are all of them good? There are plenty that are poorly written and/or perpetuate stereotypes (cough cough xo kitty). Do they include non ambiguous POC characters? And also, are the queer couple the centre of the show, or are they just secondary characters?
4. "I'm not homophobic/racist, I just think x."
When you see a character has been gender swapped, resulting in a lesbian couple, and your first reaction is to say, "I won't be watching!" What are we supposed to think? That you're simply "upset"?
"Masali doesn't have the right look for Michaela." we all know what you guys truly mean. If I ask why every fancast is a white or light skinned actor and not a dark skinned actor, I won't get a straight answer. What you guys truly want to say is, "I don't think a dark-skinned black woman is pretty enough for this role."
And this extends beyond the show. You guys haven't kept your harassment to Shondaland/Netflix (which I don't agree with either, to be clear). You bums have gone as far as to camp in Masali and Hannah's instagram comments. It's harassment.
I would also like to remind you that you guys have also went as far as starting a petition for someone (Masali) to lose their fucking job because "wah wah, I didn't get what I wanted".
5. "Franchaela is just Jess' self-insert"
Because you guys cannot relate to a queer storyline, you resort to this. You wouldn't be saying this if it was Michael.
6. "Francesca needs time to grieve"
So you guys wanted Francesca to grieve for a whole season? That's fucking ridiculous. There is going to be a 2 year time skip, and navigating grief (alongside Michaela) will be a part of her story. Once again, I guarantee this wouldn't be an argument if it was Michael.
We see in real life that women are constantly shamed for moving on, but men seem to get a pass.
7. "I don't like Michaela because she's rude and disrespectful"
You guys want that "Angry black woman" trope so bad.
We'll split this into 2 parts;
7.1 Francesca and Michaela have differing personalities. (and it's also why they work so well together. Remember Violet saying she wants someone to bring Francesca out of her shell? That's Michaela. Francesca will be the person to make Michaela stay still and confront her feelings. She'll ground her. They bring out something different in each other)
It's no surprise that they clashed at times. "Michaela overstepped" but Francesca overstepped a few times, like when she introduced Michaela to Lord Taylor after John explicitly told her not to. No one painted Francesa as Satan reincarnated (she isn't, of course. She had no ill intentions).
7.2 Michaela left because she was scared.
I thought this was common sense but it seems not. Michaela wanted to stay. You can tell she wanted to. But when Francesca held her hand, all those feelings came rushing in all at once, and she freaked out. You can see it in her face. It was then she realised that she couldn't handle it as much as she thought, and that she couldn't stay as much as she wanted to.
Yes, she shouldn't have promised to stay, but she's grieving too. Her cousin just died, she was slowly developing feelings for his wife, and she was navigating her grief at the same time. I think anyone would freak out.
There is a constant focus on Francesca's grief, but not Michaela's. John was her cousin, and the only person who truly knew her beyond the surface. Just like that, she found herself alone. That's scary.
(Also, Michael left in the books, so... I'm pretty confused about why #they had an issue).
this was probably one of the heaviest episodes of the so far.
I think it captured how abusers manipulate their victims really well - they control you, and make you think that what they're telling you to do is what's best for you, and so you don't question it. they tell you want you want to hear, to make you feel good, to make you let down your guard and become pliant and submisive, and you eventually lose sight of yourself. you start to lose who you are, who you were before that person.
and miyako recognises this. we see her mind flash back to moments that match what ritsu is saying, but she wants to truly believe that viola means every word she says. when she says "without her, I..." I truly believe she was about to say something along the lines of "without her, I'm nothing".
viola has even made made miyako turn against the people that love and care about her.
germansingergirl
izzy806
blakekathryn
romaincrisis
theartofmadeline
