bruh

I think ppl are mostly surprised that the love rival is a lesbian like we don’t really see that often.. totally agree with you on the consent part tho

oh yeah absolutely..! I love the fact that the rival is a lesbian as well but to just gloss over the fact that she kissed abigail without her consent just because she's a woman is just ridiculous to me.

I absolutely agree with you that if it were a man people would be pissed for me personally I feel it’s the troupe itself needs to die instead of all the vitriol towards the second love interest and especially since it’s a woman giving her the predatory lesbian stereotype is so fucking annoying to me as a bisexual my self and the author not allowing these characters to know what boundaries are but other then that Nadia does seem to be an interesting character and I hope that they don’t ruin her further and hopefully redeem her fingers crossed

THIS WHAT I BEEN SAYING. Waiting for Nadia to get her bitchass outta here

I agree! I understand that Abigail is too nice for her own good and thinks that bc she kissed her it broke the spell which explains why Abi is so kind to her, BUT no it's not ok to do that. I did hear rumors of nadia finding another lover tho?? ⁄(⁄ ⁄·⁄ω⁄·⁄ ⁄)⁄

True, make her fishass get lost. She in-universe uses the fact that Abigail is confused too and hugs and flirts with her all the time too, like come on, who does it to an unknown unwilling person, she's just an annoying horny homewrecker with grabby horny arms, she is one age rating away from slipping into Abigails's bed with no consent while she's sleeping or something

nah. Can't speak for anyone else but i'm unbothered by it because it's giving a teen who just hit maturity having her first major crush (especially with her mentioning her mom would kill her, and her running away from home just screams YA seeking independence to me), but the receiver of her affections is an actual adult. And she's a whole other species with probably a more brash/aggressive way of courting (at least that's the common thread I see in shows and books with mermaids and sirens). Yes the kid's aggressive but it's not malicious. I just would like the adults in the room to firmly state their boundaries (physical and otherwise), and be clear on what their relationship will be with her (instead of just leaving it up in the air and mumbling diplomacy lol).

Well sure but I mean if the mermaid was a boy instead, we would be seeing a whole different comment section imo.

I'm just saying her being a brash female doesn't excuse the fact that she just kissed someone without their consent. Of course they would be mumbling about diplomacy since they're the king and the queen and has to think about the country before their personal feelings.

It's giving letting the spoiled child do whatever they want just because they don't know how the world works.

again i can't speak for anyone else but I really do believe young adults and teenagers should be given more grace in situations like this where it's still pretty surface level and clearly no malicious intent. 'Cause unfortunately this isn't stuff we are all taught growing up and even for some who do come in contact with consent and boundary info it takes some time and effort to override and do better than the programming and behaviour you grew up seeing and are actively seeing the "respectable/mature" adults enact. But in real life, once an adult is 24/25+ and didn't grow up in a bubble....Grace who? lol

Well then let's suppose I don't speak for anyone else when I say; let's assume that grace shouldn't be given when it's willful ignorance.

There's a hard line that is drawn between maliciousness and what I would label as informed/willful ignorance.

In your argument you consider the stance here is viewing ariel as malicious, and in the main proposition, the opinion (I've come to understand) is that there is no difference between a woman and man coming to harass someone. In this case let's dumb it down to badgering to disassociate the attribute of maliciousness. In this circumstance, it is still not being treated in the same light as a man badgering a woman, rather it has clearly been given a pass for the fact it's a woman badgering a woman.

Young or circumstantial upbringing, Ariel can easily be informed by the queen's and king's abnormal reactions that her behavior is clearly not being taken well or should be viewed as unaccepted, yet clearly is choosing to remain ignorant to the line that should be drawn. Rather if anything she is, again, choosing to continue and make the queen uncomfortable whether under the guise of "blinded" love or the fact she's been raised in a different manner (doubtful of the latter!).

In the argument that she could lack acknowledgement of social cues; if a man comes screaming into a room practically saying why are you touching my wife, I don't believe that should be labeled as Ariel's ineptness of social cues. It's rather blatant, and is rather clearly willful ignorance. In the case of the Queen acting clearly uncomfortable, yet still continuing to badger her. It is again, in my opinion, willful ignorance.

In these cases, Ariel really deserves no grace so to speak, especially not because of her gender. Regardless of "severity" so to speak.

My response is deadass unserious tbh, it's 2am and I was just giggling at the fact I could write so much on this bs and wanted to see how far it could go

ngl I was impressed at how long you wrote lmfoaooa

fair enough. You made a lot of great points. I wasn't being completely objective since I have a YA in my life and most of the situations involving YAs in my direct environnment are uninformed. While the over 30 adults say and do heinous shit while being fully aware of consent and boundary discourse.

love that