TheMinorityReport

This post is to highlight how drawing parallels with a book scene and real world situations doesn’t generally work because it’s a false equivalence. Tl;dr main stuff in bold as usual. Warning: includes some consent / rape discussion.

I. The background of the consent topic and double standards: So, going back for quite some time, there has been this impression in some parts of the fandom that M coerced C to have sex with him and it was technically noncon/dubcon because she couldn’t consent theoretically. At the time, I thought the concern for C’s consent was coming from a good place - after the defensive outrage and insistence on propagating that narrative despite my debunking posts and the author’s own words, it seems to be a bit more complicated. Especially since dubious consent only seems to be an issue with Mircea, never with Cassie or Pritkin who did factually commit more violations of it, and if we are claiming that C’s consent is invalid, then so is P’s consent and C’s consent in most of their scenes which are under the threat of death, and without comfy ideal other options Tomas can’t be blamed for his actions either, and M didn’t technically consent to sex either, so as we can see it just gets ridiculously out of hand if we apply the same standards evenly, but it’s just disingenous if we cherry-pick only Mircea to complain about. It’s all or nothing, can’t have it both ways is all I’m saying.

But you know, I do get it to some extent - it is probably easy to look at the TtD scene as draw parallels with consent discourse and real life rape situations. However, that’s a simplistic jump to a conclusion, and upon actual inspection, that’s not what’s going on in the book at all - just like Cassie slapping Pritkin twice when she disagrees with his actions isn’t an actual example of domestic violence and nobody wrote outrage posts about that.

II. The consent topic as a false equivalence rather than a parallel: So the new angle I’m trying to highlight here in the hopes of brining enlightenment to the topic, lol, is that it may be tempting to draw a shortcut from the book to other situations in the real world, but it’s not even remotely the same thing so any conclusion will be based on a flawed premise. For example nobody says ‘Madame President, you need to choose a White House employee to lay with, because the safety of the free world requires the powers unlocked by your magic hooha, powers which you may also find useful for your personal goals.’ Lol 1) First of all, I don’t think any of us have magical vajayjays that have the ability to qualify for a job that could save the community. 2) On that note, real women aren’t the equivalent of Jesus Christ, equipped with divine power to effect a change and save the world from the bad guys. 3) Rapists don’t usually ask their victims who they would prefer to have sex with. 4) And rapists most generally do not violate women for the good of the community.

So nonconsensual sex is usually done for the benefit (usually sexual gratification) of the aggressor, against the interests (safety and freedom) of the victim. On the other hand, the sex in TtD was in Cassie’s interest for avoiding getting killed by Myra and getting incarcerated/assassinated by the Circle, and in a large community’s interest by saving LC, Radu, prevent a war with Rasputin, etc, not because Mircea wanted his itch scratched at the expense of Cassie’s comfort. So there is scarle little to tie the books to real life dubcon/noncon issues, other than that the Pythian ritual happened to involve sex too.

III. That consent is unnecessarily projected into a misrepresented scene: Not to mention the earlier points already articulated by KC in the Read for Pixels video chat, which were that 1) Cassie’s issue was getting the Pyhian power, not sex with Mircea - the sex was just the conduct because old magic was often sex magic 2) Mircea didn’t have to force Cassie because he knew Cassie would agree with doing the best thing for herself, which was to accept the power - again the sex was just the bonus button that made that possible 3) That Cassie chooses to have sex with Tomas for the same reasons even after time to think about it - she had a bad day which is why Mircea had to spell it out for her in TtD 4) The threat to Cassie wasn’t of Mircea’s making, her life was in danger because of Myra already, he was just pointing out her options. All of these are KC’s points which everybody can check in the video btw, and I have them somewhere among my posts too.

So basically, we have a case of good old cost-benefit analysis here. Cons of becoming eligible for the Pythian power (incidentally by having sex) on the one side: a) I don’t really want to be Pythia I guess. Pros of becoming eligible for the Pythian power (incidentally by having sex) on the other side: a) I get to help my dad b) I get to avoid getting killed by crazy sybil c) I avoid being handed over to the Circle who want me dead d) I improve my power position against the vamp senate by becoming Pythia e) I can save people, if sympathy factors in at all f) I get to ride this hot guy I’ve had a crush on for years. And Cassie chooses the option that servers her interests most.

Alternatively, I suggested earlier to maybe look at the TtD dilemma as a non-sexual button labeled ‘become Pythia’ that Mircea argued Cassie should push for the best of everybody involved - as the sex was in the ‘bonus benefit’ column for Cassie - maybe that view might help avoid confusing the issue. Or like this post, just to highlight that there is nothing in common with the concept of dubious consent or real life non-consensual sexual acts and C+M getting it on in TtD. So the TtD sex was coerced, or dub-con, or Mircea is a rapey creep or whatever narrative clearly doesn’t hold up - especially when as I mentioned applying consent issues only to this case doesn’t work, and would invalidate the majority of the books including most of C+P interactions that never get doubted.

After reading through a bunch of RtS reviews last week, one comment in particular got me thinking. The reviewer (rating RtS pretty low) said that “it was like getting book one Cassie back, but with depression and anxiety” and that she no longer enjoyed the series as she did the earlier books. So I looked back at early Cassie to see how she compares to more recent Cassie, and the results were pretty interesting... So let’s take a look at early Cassie in TtD:

1) She was already compassionate and willing to risk herself for others. ○ She was so appalled at the suffering Tony caused others than she gave up her own security to live on the streets rather than be a part of it any longer. ○ Then even decides to acitvely risk herself and face Tony’s wrath just to go back and stop his operation. ○ When she sees her agent’s death, she actually calls Tony’s guys to talk them out of it, even knowing that she’s likely being tracked, as she is. ○ When she knows she will be shot and killed within the hour, instead of making sure she’s safely away, she goes to the club to make sure Tomas will be safe, knowing that the hitmen could easily find her there, as they do.  

2) She already stood up for herself and others. ○ When her agent was about to get killed, she phoned Tony’s goons to threaten them with the Senate. ○ When that doesn’t work, she warns the FBI ○ Even while meeting the Senate for the first time, while Tony’s pitching his story to the Consul, she speaks up and confronts him on his bullshit and delivers a condemning speech. Lol. 

3) She already didn’t let herself be used or manipulated. ○ Instead of feeling as a helpless teenager not being able to do anything, she refuses to be part of Tony’s schemes, and only returns to take him down. ○ While she would’ve been into Mircea as she says repeatedly, she still doesn’t agree to sex until she gets the full picture. ○ Even then, her reasoning for going along with it isn’t coercion, but that she wants to be able to use the Pythian power to help herself. ○ When Mircea tries to persuade her to return with him, she simply says no, and is outta there.

4) She already showed initiative, confidence and did what she wanted. ○ She ran away, to live on her own, as a teenager, not once but twice, because Tony’s actions were morally abhorrent to her. ○ She knowingly goes back and conspires with the feds to take Tony down. ○ Instead of relying on witness protection, she makes her own way on the streets. ○ Even when the Senate makes it clear they want her to stay at MAGIC, she doesn’t care, escapes the wards, steals a car, and mounts a solo operation (well, with Billy) to go after Jimmy.

5) She already lost most people and it didn’t get her down. ○ She knew about her parents’ horrific death, and she saw it in a vision. ○ She has seen Eugenie mutilated and murdered after she tried to take Tony down. ○ She has seen loads of crazy violent shit either in visions, from ghosts, or heard about them at Tony’s. Yet after all that, she leads a mostly normal life, works two jobs, donates clothes to charity, and looks after Tomas the stray street kid.

Normally, one would expect a character development that’s progressing as the series goes along, yet Cassie in later books actually becomes a worse heroine than she used to be. So while the scope of the story expanded, Cassie’s character didn’t really develop much (that was another common complaint in the reviews).

Sure, she has more people to look after now, like her court, Tami’s lot, etc. but she’s always looked out for others and showed compassion so it’s not something she developed on her journey.

She had to face death before as well, but now seeing Rhea die sends her into panicky fits of feeling incompetent and a failure. Apart from losing Mac, and I guess a few reporters she only met that day, the war is going irrationally well for her and yet she’s complaining about how useless she is.

She never asked for anybody’s permission, but now gets deeply upset when people question her or don’t yield to her, or tell her what to do.  She ignored whatever anybody said and did her own thing, yet now she has several breakdowns in one book, requiring other people’s validation and motivational speeches.

She never had illusions about the Senate, and she references that she knows exactly that Mircea and her are negotiating, discussing terms, etc. and evaluates and decides pragmatically; now she has a self-pity party about Mircea not having been in love with her (I already pointed out that she knews this very well since TtD).

She got almost killed by vamp hitmen, taken to MAGIC, introduced to the Senate, almost killed again, traveled through time to relive traumatic memories, and still had her shit together to escape, go to Dante’s and pursue her goal in finding Jimmy. Yet now her bodyguard doing his job and saving her life sends her into depressed longing as she just lies there sniffing his bed.

As a teenager tries to trap Tony with the feds in time, because it had to be done, even despite the risks to herself or Eugenie or Rafe or anybody who might suffer if it goes wrong. Yet now she is crying and begging Pritkin to not try to save the world, which needs to be done, because she can’t live without him.

Who is your favorite Chance-verse character?

This is hard, but Louis-Cesare pipped Pritkin to the spot of ultimate favourite character.

Why?

He got me with his truly tragic backstory, his complete adoration of Dory, and his very humanness when must vampires are far from it. He’s unique in vamp culture and not ashamed to be himself when he finally accepts his love for Dory.

When did s/he become your favorite?

Hmm, Death’s Mistress I think, right at the end, showing him doing a terrible thing for the best reasons and accepting his punishment with dignity and grace, sigh I love that completely fictional vampire!

Could the character do anything to get knocked out of their top spot in your heart?

Unlikely, killing any of the major players might do it, but he’s firmly on the good team that it would be a destruction of his character to do so. Karen is fantastic at keeping characters in line.

Anything to add?

Read the Dory books and tell me you’re not a little bit in love with him by the end!

Even though I couldn’t reblog this directly, I felt like sharing this because it’s great in showing some appreciation to KC’s more overlooked series (Dory ftw) and more overlooked characters (go, LC)!

As promised, here’s me pointing out exactly what I base my claims in my other post on. In any case, as I point out in my other post, if the above is enough to launch somebody’s attack alarms and victim-complex, then that’s most certainly not an interest in conversations, discourse or gaining insight. And that’s cool, let’s just please not pretend that you are.

This relates to the fandom and the dominant narratives; and as usual, this does not apply to every single fan or the fandom as a whole, just a group within it; but this one was so over the top I had to respond, in the spirit of intellectual integrity, as always. 

@overlycaffeinatedwarmage wrote: ‘I got a troll/hater last night [...] Don’t bother to leave a negative comment, it’ll be deleted. If you want to talk about the series with me, by all means comment or send a message! I would love to read what you have to say and have a conversation. Even spirited, but respectful, debates are fine and quite enjoyable! We don’t all have to agree. People with differing points of view make me look at characters and situations differently and lead to new insights.’

So, I don’t know what the troll/hater said or what it was even about, but the following endorsement of discourse seems somewhat disingenuous. I can’t recall ever seeing any discourse on this site between two people (other than me) who have a conversation when they disagree on something, or look at characters differently after others highlighted different viewpoints (if there are any examples of this, please anybody, as always, point me at them). Discourse about Pritkin in particular is exceptionally rigid, and views on Mircea similarly rarely change even when presented with evidence from the books, or KC’s own response to the questions.* Quite the contrary, discussing any character flaw in relation to Cassie and Pritkin is a taboo topic**, and any reply/comment made about the merits of Mircea is considered an attack.

That it’s @overlycaffeinatedwarmage who celebrates discourse in her post is quite ironic. I distinctly recall (but here’s the link) that you most certainly do not keep an open mind about discourse, nor welcome comments or posts or conversations that go against your own beliefs. So ‘I’m fine with discussions, even if spirited’ seems just wrong - I recall you making similar promises of ‘I like discussions and I’m a good arguer’ but then claiming to be under attack the first moment people do post an argument (based on facts, supported by quotes as usual) that does not conform to your own views. 

So, back to your post, I literally started my reply with “What I really like about KC is that she has several great characters that we see different sides of.“ Then I write about the concept of an unreliable narrator, of how Pritkin has his own biases and that I can very much understand those, but the importance being that every character will have a unique view on things (as KC shows us) and that reading them like absolute truth misses out on a lot as it’s going to be character-subjective instead of book-objective. Wow. Such radical. Much negative. Very rudeness. Wow. Jokes aside, I will post the quote (here), as always, to show what I base my statements on. The result? You block me because I was allegedly pushing a ‘Pritkin is as bad as Mircea’ narrative:

“Last night I finally had to block someone on here who keeps rehashing the “Pritkin pushed her off the cliff so he’s just as bad as Mircea” argument.”

As I address the issue in my reply, obviously starting off with a strawman argument, claiming that others say something they never actually said, and the victim-narrative that you spun around that event just screamed hypocrisy, especially when it was based on you not understanding what was actually said. So this is why your current post about being dedicated to discussions prompted this post of mine. Because if a perfectly reasonable text post about the novel triggers you so much that you start blocking people who respond with fact-based views on the books, you certainly aren’t open to discussion or comments or other viewpoints or anything that you claim you are. It’s far more likely to be a case of liking ‘discourse’ when that means sharing the same appreciation for the same characters:

“I am very thankful to have found a group of people who love it as much as me who also want to chat about it often. People who get it.”

As I wrote in my other post, in which you directly say ‘This is why I love you guys, you see this,’ this only shows an interest of ‘discussing’ things with people who ‘get it’ meaning that they have the same conclusions that you do, people who ‘see this’ the same way that you do. And you know, it’s your right to be biased and to hate anybody who disagrees with you, but let’s not pretend that you do the opposite because your ‘discourse is so great’ post is so hypocritical it’s just insulting to the fandom.

((*Referring to my post-back-and-forth with @windsurfingthroughhell and @pritkinsprettydick about the TtD sex scene not being coerced or non-con/dub-con, which resulted in me getting blocked, while KC later confirmed that yep, it wasn’t coerced or non-con/dub-con, which was a similarly entertaining ironic scenario.

Just a highlight from my earlier longer post, because ain’t nobody got time fo’ dat, but I think this is an important consideration in assessing Mircea’s implied blackmail in his gift to Cassie at the end of RtS, and as usual see bold for the tl;dr version, lol.

The claim:

I already argued in my other posts that his actions aren’t villainous, but as for the actual threat, I’d argue that not much of a threat at all.  Why? Isn’t it obviously blackmail? Isn’t it a direct threat on somebody that he knows Cassie loves? Isn’t that evil? Well, see below, this is why:

The argument:

1) He isn’t threatening Pritkin. He could, but he isn’t. As a 600 yo Senator, first-level vampire, master of many vamps and the owner of the hotel where Pritkin is passed out. So what’s the big threat, this oh-so-evil blackmail attempt? He tells Cassie that he will let others know who Pritkin is. Wait what? Yeah that’s it. He’s not threatening to inflict harm on him, he’s not threatening to impale him until he squirms to death over three days so Cassie can know the fate that Elena had to go through. (And lol, I know, that’s extreme, just making a point; plus that’s more like the threat I’d expect from an allegedly vicious vampire with ‘Basarab ruthlessness’ as Marlowe puts it).

2) So it isn’t about doing something extraordinary; it’s about offering to refuse to do something regular. Wait what? Yeah it sounds weird but that’s it. Mircea isn’t threatening to do something extraordinary to Pritkin unless Cassie complies, he is offering to not tell the Senate about Pritkin as he normally would if Cassie helps him. The identity of Merlin? A potential game-changing figure in the magical community, in the middle of a war no less? A valuable strategic info that the vampires now are aware of? Hell yes they would pounce on that, you can almost hear Kit salivating at the thought, lol. And Mircea is offering to go against what he would normally would do, what everybody expects him to do, and instead keep it quiet.

3) So is he using somebody Cassie loves against her to get what he wants? Yes, but not like that. If Cassie wasn’t in the picture at all, you can bet that Pritkin’s identity would become a pawn in the Senate’s strategy calculations at the first opportunity. But Mircea knows Cassie cares about Pritkin, therefore his telling or not telling the Senate holds value for her. He didn’t single out Pritkin as the pressure point to inflict the most damage on Cassie, his knowledge of Pritkin just happens to be an asset that he would normally pass on, but is now holding onto.

The conclusion:

So it’s not ‘Do that thing or I will do this thing!’ more like ‘I’d normally do this thing, but since it matters to you, how about a trade?’ Therefore, the whole note situation is far closer to being a ‘favor for a favor’ rather than an evil blackmail or threat.

Appendix:

So the above is the gist of why I suggest that the terrible mean blackmail isn’t all that mean or terrible. In my other post I also addressed a few more things of note that I won’t go go into too much here, because I think the above is enough. But I’m inlcuding them in a short from as it might be also useful to note that:

Continued here, and as usual this is about facts, claims, statements, and narratives in the fandom, not about anybody’s feelings or who people ship or whatever. So here goes the rest, the ‘villain’ judgment and its basis.

6) ‘The real reason he gets put in the villain category is twofold. First is because his motivations for wooing Cassie finally come to light this book.’

Just a small note on the fact that RtS actually showed that Mircea never intended to 'woo' Cassie in the 'yucky' manipulative sexual entanglement sense that many readers keep claiming. Wooing in the non-romantic non-sexual sense could apply, just thought to clarify the semantics to make sure we're on the same page regarding the word's usage.

Onto the villainy of it though: why are his motivations villainous? From book one, we knew he had a reason, and his motivation for seeking the Pythia's favor seemed overtly political, exclusively-vampire-interest-serving, never for a moment altruistic or romantic, and Cassie knew this since TtD. Mircea didn't get in touch with her because he was looking to reconnect with his crush and didn’t want a Pythia because she's a really cute girl and a delightful woman and he had feelings for her. Since TtS she knew also that he's been scheming about something Pythia-related for centuries; 'he sought my favor because he loved me' never once gets considered a possible explanation, I don’t think any read thought that either, so the two options were politics or personal ambition. We now find out that the motivation was not for power, position, or world-domination, but to save somebody else - surely that's an improvement over the initial assumptions? Mircea wanting to save his wife whom he loved in the past may be disappointing for Cassie (who btw in the present fell in love with her bodyguard while claiming to love Mircea so the value that she puts in love and her actions aren't really the best benchmark) but that doesn't make it villainous.

7) ‘The second reason I put him in the villain category is the conclusion and his little “gift.” Instead of trying to talk to Cassie or even doing his normal bribery route, he goes straight to threatening the one person she’s been trying to save and protect.’

I'm not even going to elaborate very long on the three points; about the high-stakes high-pressure circumstances of him being just about to enter a suicide mission, without any other shot at this than Cassie agreeing right now. Or that Cassie was going to trade the making of an army, the only plan of the war effort to save the world in exchange for a potion she needed for her own quest before. Or how Cassie's track record of talking to people is, evidenced by bailing on him even when he does try to talk. Because all three reasons above pale in comparison to the point that saving Elena is never actually made an issue of, as Cassie disregards the Pythian rules consciously to meet her own parents and save her own lover, and she immediately proved that she would do it for the right motivation in return - she agrees to saving Elena on the spot, in exchange for the Tears. So at this point, it's not a question of whether she'd go ahead with it, they're only negotiating the price. 

Bringing up 'one person she's been trying to save and protect' is once more a sign of the judgments resting on personal preferences rather than evaluation. Because Cassie loves Pritkin, so how dare Mircea bargain with Pritkin's identity? I mean, didn't he get the memo that he's in a book in which the feelings of the protagonist should dictate every character's thoughts and actions? Jokes aside though, the world does not revolve around the bestest feelings and wishes of Cassie and Pritkin. Is it a scummy move? I'm sure it seems so from her perspective. Is it desperate? Sure is. Is Cassie right to be pissed? Debatable, but a step back from hypocrisy would certainly be nice. Is Mircea a villain? Still nope, sorry.

I mentioned that at most, it could be considered an antagonistic action, but that’s it. And to be honest, I think there’s great potential in the topic. If the fandom were a bit more balanced, there could be great posts made about how Mircea's bargain of 'saving Elena' in exchange for 'secrecy about Merlin Junior' could be the plot prompt that will launch a potential 'Pritkin's identity' story arc which might involve him accepting himself and his parents' legacy, coming to terms with his place in the magical world and finding a reason and purpose to exist. The whole 'ooh nobody can know about Merlin' hints from earlier books always seemed to be proof to me that it will happen in future books, and Caleb's reaction in HtM as well as the revelations in RtS teased the impact that it could have on the story. The same way all the 'ooh a less powerful woman couldn't have sex with me' was obviously a hint, or I assume every reader knew (already around CbS-EtN-CtD-ish at least) that Pritkin and Cassie were eventually going to do it at one point. So there could be great discussions about the potential of that hypothetical story arc, the impact that could have on the war, or whether such a thing could even be kept secret with Pritkin's combination of powers, especially considering the consequences of demon sex and power exchange might have for Cassie or him, etc.

Or there could also be posts about how Cassie returning from her long quest to save her own lover adds to these storylines a great poetic layer by using said lover as a prompt to save Mircea's own ex. Or there could be posts about the amount of dedication a person owes, really,  to keeping a secret about the bodyguard of their lover - whom their lover has been chasing after, falling in love with, and having sex with - when that secret directly relates to the person's job, their organization and the current conflict that they are in. There could also be discussions about morality and value systems, and whether the emotions of a lover should have higher priority than one's own emotions and duties to one’s family and organization? Or there could be posts about how offering to keep a secret that would normally be immediately shared with others and exploited as a major asset in one’s war strategy is more like a favor for a favor than a threat of doing something that would go beyond normal actions.

Instead, we're stuck with the 'Mircea hurt Cassie's ego, he's a villain' narrative, so meh. Lol.

Like my facts vs opinion post, I will directly cite examples of what I mean when I talk about problematic claims; that might seem nitpicky, but I think that helps to pinpoint the problem areas and show exactly what I refer to when I talk about getting carried away with a narrative. As usual, this is not an attack on an opinion, I only address the ‘argument’ that the narrative is based on not anybody’s feelings.

A Chanceverse reader wrote: 1) “The villain that I’m going to “appreciate” is Mircea.” 

So 'villain appreciation' is already used as the means of writing a non-appreciative complaint post about a non-villain. And that’s a right, and so is my right to consider it a good example of what I mean when I talk about big parts of the fandom being a bit too dedicated to their biases. But posts like these are great for highlighting that separating legit points from false claims actually helps to support one's side of the argument.

I've mentioned the protagonist-centered view of morality before, in which morally dubious actions are forgiven only if it's done by the hero or somebody who loves the hero and that seems to be quite frequent in the fandom. The number of posts cheering on Rosier, who is far closer to an actual villain who tried to kill and sabotage Cassie, while complaining about Mircea should highlight that. I was genuinely surprised how few posts of Rosier villain appreciation popped up, and it seems all it took to become a fan favorite was to pat Cassie on the head a few times and not stand in the way of the Prissie ship, if all the Rosier support is anything to go by which was interesting to see.

2) ‘“But he’s not a villain!” you say’

Yeah, because he's not. 'Villain' has a definition, and 'character I dislike' is not it. At best, Mircea could be considered an occasional antagonist, but only marginally - perhaps one out of his ten actions clashes with Cassie's decisions, but for the majority, they share the same goals they work towards - win the war, without everybody dying pls, thanks. I'm all for redefining terms through living language, but this is an instance of using a word as an ideological brand to propagate a narrative. This goes back to my earlier point about using attitudes to the protagonist as the basis of making moral judgments, and comes up in the following too.

3) ‘I almost softened my attitude toward him for helping Cassie save Rhea, because I love Rhea so much.’

So this ties in the themes above as well - evaluating actions and people based on one's own attitudes towards other people is part of this ideological mis-moralization for lack of a better word. 'Evaluating people's actions based on one's attitude to them' goes against 'basing one's attitude to people on the evaluation of actions' as it should justly be. This is made clear by refusing to give credit where credit is due just because the action is performed by a character one dislikes.

4) ‘But that wasn’t all Mircea.  IMO, that was mostly Cassie with him assisting a bit from the sidelines. Cassie is the one who said this world has taken enough from her, it’s not taking anymore.  And then took Rhea back.  He was ready to throw in the towel.’

So, Cassie, helplessly trying to wish Rhea back into life is mostly what did it? Not Mircea, who wa almost died in FK, passed out from having no power to spare, but still responding to Cassie's distress by seeking her out through a god spell that she put on him, and trying to channel power that he's only recently drained from his own comatose family into Rhea to save her - and when figuring out a solution coaches Cassie through what to do. The problem with refusing to give credit where it's due to such extremes is that it's very hard to maintain the illusion of this coming from a reasonable place. It's perfectly possible to hold a view that acknowledges the positive effects of Mircea while still being of the opinion that it doesn't make up his faults and so you still dislike him. That's why I usually suggest letting go of false facts and far-one-sided extreme claims, and black-and-white arguments because they are impossible to hold reasonably, and only make it seem like a case of hate propaganda.

The same goes for 'throwing in the towel', because if that is such an issue, is there also a similar condemnation directed at the failure of a Pythia that Cassie proved to be at the end of RtS when she decided all was lost and was ready to throw in the towel? Probably nobody would suggest that right? So likely, this is once more a case of making judgments and claims based on personal biases, in which the simple factual action of 'thinking there is no other solution to win this' gets framed as some flaw or failure in Mircea, but is glanced over in Cassie. Can't have it both ways is all I’m saying.

5) ‘As for the rest, yeah, he’s saved her a few times.  But his overprotectiveness and inability to listen and see Cassie as anything more as his/a vampire possession to be used at will has put her in harm’s way more than it’s protected her.’

And this is what I talk about when I mention opinions vs facts. That's a pretty big claim there, and the issue is that some parts of it can’t be supported while other parts can even be disproven. First, his positive effects are again brushed aside, as the argument hinges of cherry-picking the 'bad bits' that support the bias. And even those bad bits are shaky, because they include  a presupposition, the opinion that the argument hinges on, that you personally know exactly how Mircea views Cassie. The part that suggests that he always views her exclusively only that and nothing more is a particularly too grand statement to make that only discredits the already shaky claim. And there's the issue of disregarding facts in favor of sticking with opinions, with a part at the end that makes the phrase 'citation needed' becomes relevant. Put her in harm's way more than protected her? Citation needed. Really btw, as always, anybody please correct me or show me what this is based on or something if I am wrong to doubt the truth of these bold statements.

5.5) ‘She’s been attacked in her suite with her bodyguards more than once.  If it wasn’t for the Pythian power, Pritkin’s training, and other magical guards she’d have been dead regardless of all the vampires he has around her.  But I’ve beat this dead horse before.’

I missed that beating, because this doesn't seem to be supported much, but please, as always, links to posts, or quotes/chapters would be appreciated to see what this is based on. I mean it can't really be the argument that somehow, being in a suite with her bodyguards put her more in danger than she would have been in without a suite and without bodyguards? Right? And that's hardly a singular fault of the vamps, because she's been attacked with Pritkin more than once too, and if it wasn't for the Pythian power and happy coincidences, she'd have been dead regardless of his training or him being there, so I think this might be cherry-picking again.

TBC, but just to sum up for now: This isn’t about having an opinion, but about framing that opinion as truth in the form of legit statements, which are futhermore often based on misguided claims and untruths - all in the interest of pushing one’s own narative. And as in my facts vs opinions post, what I’m curious about is why there is such a need to try maintaining extreme claims that only discredit one’s own side because they can’t be viably maintained. So something good can come of these posts too! It could almost be argued that I’m being constructive and actually trying to improve the anti-Mircea argument, lol.

So I’ve read a post by KC on her facebook page that asked readers to please review and rate her books, because she’s getting a lot of one-star reviews from people who want to force her to write romance. I know quite a few people got bored of the ‘dangling carrot’ of the never-ending Pritkin-rescue, or the lack of character development in seven books, but I checked out the review sites and I honestly couldn’t find any one-star reviews that bashed RtS unreasonably for romance or other reasons.

GR and B&N did not have any 1-star reviews to speak of, and the ones on Amazon aren’t complaining about the book’s lack of romance or some other arbitrary expectation, they mostly all address the pacing, lack of character development and slow plot advancement: (each quote is from a different 1-star review that are there at the time of writing this, and feel free to check out the real ones on amazon.com, I did not distort them through misleading quotations or anything)

“More monotonous fight scenes, more frustrating moments of uselessness from Cassie and less of the character driven story that I fell in love with from the get go.”

“Cassie goes back in time, gets beat up, and then gets forced back into her own time. Then, it happens all over again, and again, and again”

“I hope in the future Karen Chance sticks to the actual main idea rather than filling out her books with non important scenarios.”

“with so little of it making sense; chaotic stupid battles that went on for chapters, long pointless conversations that added little to nothing to the narrative.“

“At 60% through the book I was still trying to find a light at the end of the tunnel. Fluff. Filler. Things that could have been left out. [...]  Less filler, less Rosier, less Gertie (way less please), less Jo, and more action. More Romance!!!!”

“The insanely hectic pace was unpleasant and unnecessary. Repetitive plot devices no character development. Flipped through a bunch of fight scenes ad nauseam.”

“Are you looking for a book that only propels the story half a step forward, but takes million of steps to do so? This is the book for you. Are you looking for a book with a main character that has become the least interesting character in the story? This is the book for you.”

“But this book is jumping from era to era and it gave me vertigo. I did not enjoy it. And Mircea is supposed to be the husband but it seems politics is his priority and winning is Cassie constant. I stop reading and skipped chapters and same.”

Basically, only one of them wanted more romance, only one complained about Mircea, but all of them complained about plot and pacing.

Getting reviews that did not absolutely love the stuff that you wrote (and absolutely love yourself, naturally) can be tough, granted. But I’ve read through all 1 to 4 star reviews* and even the higher ones kept bringing up the same complaints. Complaints that have been brought up in almost every Cassie book so far. Too long gratuitous action scenes that slow down rather than speed up the plot, too many fillers with not enough focus on the major plot, not enough genuine conversations that result in character development, etc, I’m not making these up, it’s a recurrent trend.

I’m also pretty sure that the romance readership is actually helping the reviews, as opposed to that one single person who rated it 1 star because the romance wasn’t enough, so it really doesn’t seem to be a widespread phenomenon that fans are rating her books 1 star to force her into romance as this 3-star rating shows: 

“Forward momentum. Possible interesting things. Character stuff. Challenges. You know, the bits we really want. Honestly, if it weren't for Pritkin I'd be out by now. But. You know....Pritkin.”

So it’s much more the good reviews, if anything, that are pressing for the romance plot: only continuing to read for Pritkin, totally loving the last bit of RtS because of Pritkin, being excited for the future book because of Pritkin, etc. Many of the super positive reviews would probably have not been so forgiving of RtS’s other issues if Pritkin had died at the end, really, as the ‘save Pritkin already’ complaints on earlier books and the ‘if Pritkin dies I’ll drop this series’ pledges attest to. The majority of disgruntled readers in RtS cited plot and pacing issues, so whether or not the books have romance had nothing to do with their frustrations as they articulate in their reviews above.

*The reason I didn’t read through the 5-star ones is because there were far too many, and most of them didn’t list any complaints at all, some claimed the books are utterly flawless and only described how much they liked it - which I’m sure is a pleasant compliment to read, but isn’t exactly informative feedback to ascertain what parts are working for the book’s audience and what parts aren’t.