#internalized misoginy

Something i love about the cruel prince is how politics and emotions play so much into it and how nuanced every character is, no one is flawless, so i found it incredibly important when we learned that Eva was Lady Asha's bestfriend, especially taking into consideration how much Jude seems to put her mother on a pedestal. Showing that Eva was just as flawed as any human is so important, and using it to justify a femicide is just so cruel and tasteless. I don't care that's just a book character, it really is that deep.

Madoc is also a nuanced character, since the beginning we see how much it affects Jude, this inner conflict of knowing her only father figure is a terrible person responsible of so much hurt, but also, how she cannot help but love the man that taught her how to become the woman she is, that never gave up on her when everyone else did.

Jude loves Madoc because after all, he is her father, the only one she's known, but as a reader you should know better than to take jude's judge for it, she is an unreliable narrator in so many occasions and even then, she outwardly admits how much she hates to love Madoc. As a reader it is our duty to understand that Madoc CAN be a loving father and a horrible murderer at the same time, he's just a human being like any, and making these horrible character intrinsically human is a huge part of writing a good villain.

The way Isabella was written doesn't feel like the usual way someone would write the woman you are supposed to see as "the wrong kind of woman" There's a certain subtle amount of vitriol that went into her development, turning her from a character with a role to fulfill for the story to caricature with a role to fill for the author's and the audiences hatred for people they project onto her.

Isabella was originally supposed to be the most beautiful female character in the story, no matter how evil she is, her beauty is a part of what makes Isabella the woman she is, she knows her looks are the only piece of her that matters according to her family, which could have been used to explain why she wasn't as educated as her sisters. Her good looks combined with her fake personality are what brought her to such high standing in the first life.

That same beauty is what would eventually become the source of mockery against the character as a whole, it paints her as a backpedal on feminism, a stereotype that women who care about their looks and dress in traditionally feminine colors and clothes are all pure evil temptresses with the brain power of a sloth, these type of "bad women" can never be better than the "right women" because the "right kind" of women never have to beg other men to notice her, the men already notice how different and "unique" she is because she doesn't dress or act callously like other broads. Ariadne doesn't have to wear heels or bright colors because men like Alfonso are already attracted to how "special" she is compared to other women.

Isabella's lack of interest in anything outside of makeup, fashion, jewelry, and evil scheming isn't the result of a writer wanting to tell a story about the inherent sexist society the setting takes place in, Isabella's lack of interest in academics or the arts is simply because she needs to embody every negative trait of these perceived "bad women" to prove a point, that girls who act a certain way are all secretly out to get you because they're jealous of your special ability to attract men with your messy bun and "interesting" personality.

The funny part about this whole thing is that despite Isabella being portrayed as someone who will do anything for men to love her, she still is depicted as a misandrist, one of the only remaining remnants of what she used to be before personal bias, and hatred tainted her character writing. When has Isabella ever truly had any kind of genuine crush on another man? Every man she has ever been affiliated with, she only ever tolerated them in the moment because there was something to gain out of it. Power, status, a chance to hurt Ariadne, whatever it may have been, love was never a reason.

Sure, her inability to charm most men is something that is designed to ridicule her. Ariadne doesn't have to try, and several attractive and powerful men are already at her feet, ready to do whatever she says. Isabella can only attract ugly, fat, diseased, and sexist men who only want her for her body, these types of men are her "punishment" for being so girly and unoriginal, they could do horrible and sadistic things to her and you'd be expected to nod along because these horrifying crimes would be inflicted on the woman who "deserves it" because she's so cruel.

Isabella pushes children down the stairs, causes miscarriages, sacrifices infants, sleeps with other women's partners in broad daylight, sexually assaults people including her own sister, attempts to assassinate the same sister, NOT because she is the villain of the story, but because if she wasn't this obscenely evil then the fantasy of watching her be mutilated and abused by other men wouldn't feel as comfortable to the audience. Notice how everything she does plays little of a role in the actual narrative? How most characters who were victims of her wrath don't think about the trauma that was inflicted on them until it is needed for an Isabella torture scene or how nothing is done out of randomly writing her as a rapist?

Isabella isn't evil because she's the main antagonist, she's evil because the author NEEDS her to be evil in order to paint the stereotype as true, she's evil because there needs to be some kind of justification to watch this character be brutally tortured while still being able to claim that the people who hurt her are "better" than her because at least they know to hate the right woman.

And despite all of that, that little piece of the original Isabella still survived, she may have been reduced to a slut who will throw herself at anyone who gives her a five-dollar bill, but her view on the patriarchal society she is confined has remained, she knows these men won't love her forever, she is AWARE that she is replaceable, she never tries to get attached out for the sake of romance.

It makes her a tragic character in a way, a woman who is aware that she is trapped in a situation that forces her to rely on the whims of men to survive but will never be allowed to leave that situation due to the hand of the people who already won the race. Unlike her amazing, generous, intelligent, and special sister. Isabella is "the wrong" type of woman, so whatever happens to her is always going to be considered to be deserved.

At least our toxic queen still has several panels of looking spectacular.

Lariessa is a victim of similar writing to Isabella, she's another case of "The bad type" of women in IATQITL, acting very much like first life Ariadne in the way that she's obsessive over a man who never loved her to begin with and is instead pining after another woman.

But whereas Ariadne is owed sympathy by the audience, Lariessa is mocked and ridiculed for acting "delusional" She doesn't want to accept that the first person who asked about HER and not her sister, Susanne, is in love with another woman, the man that she has been promised to actively trying to fight against the marriage because he doesn't want HER, he wants Ariadne, the only "good woman" who doesn't think about things that are "typical" or "basic" Lariessa is all about fairytales and romance, she wants things to go her way exactly, and when she can't have that, she copes in self-destructive ways.

Alfonso telling her to remember that she is just a woman, to remember her place amongst both her homeland and Etruscan's culture, is meant to be considered a moment of triumph for Ariadne as it proves her love interest's adoration for the main character. Who cares if Lariessa was basically degraded to a womb and a vagina with eyes in the most passive aggressive way imaginable? Alfonso was the one who said it, he isn't one of the ugly fat men who blatantly tell women to get back in the kitchen, so it isn't sexism! Alfonso is head over heels for one particular woman who was ordained as "Good" and "Mentally sane" So he's already a feminist, guys!

Lariessa is moody, she's high maintenance, she's bipolar, narcissistic and BPD coded, she needs constant validation, she's clingy and obsessive, she was happy that her amazing unseen sister is dead, she wants attention, and most of all, she can't it through her head that Ariadne suffered the most so only she deserves basic respect as a woman.

Okay, sarcastic rant over, you guys know where I'm getting at.

I find it really ironic that the woman who acted just like Ariadne, a woman who believes that she should be absolved of all responsibility because she acted in the name of love, is being villainized as an unintentional stereotype of a person with a personality disorder. It's funny how an author will go so far to convince the readers that the main character deserves nothing but the readers sympathy that they start making contradictions in their morals.

Because that does is make me feel sympathy for Lariessa because she's just acting the same way Ariadne is, but since she doesn't have the foresight from a past life, the author's favoritism, or the traits of what makes a good the "right" type of woman, she is expected to be scorned as Alfonsos uglier fiancé with no chance at winning is heart.

And yes, Lariessa, according to the novel, is considered ugly by the standards of the story. Way to write women for the sake being put down to bring the boss babe up, Lariessa deserves way more than just being the evil crazy fiancé trope.

Even if Alfonso and Lariessa were wed, how would it even go forward in a healthy way? He didn't really give her a chance since he assumed she was on the same page as him and slowly grew to resent her when he realized just how desperate she is for his affections. Lariessa would still be denied the love she craves so much, simply because she isn't the protagonist, she's the one getting in the way of fantasy fulfillment of Ariadne. What could she do when her husband brings in his first love as a mistress, whenever Ariadne accepts becoming a mistress or not, the feelings towards Lariessa would still be evident.

Alfonso wants nothing to do with her, not after her emotions consistently got the better of her when she threatened him. She isn't what the story considers to be 'The right" kind of woman, her insecurities and lack of love for herself don't matter when she doesn't act like a good victim or a sanitized depiction of mental health.

Lariessa and Isabella aren't even the end to this trend of "Women the readers and the authors don't like being punished by sexism"

Body shaming and slut shaming is cruel... It's not Ariadne's fault she was born that; Isabella is probably just jealous that she doesn't have large, luscious melons like her beautiful sister.

Until it's the "bad women" Ariadne is back handily slut shaming. It's okay though, Lucrezia should know better than to show her cleavage and wear heavy makeup at her age.

A maid has to use her body if she wants a chance at a happier life? Oh wow... I can't believe Ariadne's mother had to endure all that just because she wasn't lucky enough to be born into wealth...

A maid is using her body to her advantage to gain financial security by having a baby with the son of the house? Ugh, what a whore, what kind of shallow skank thinks that she can cheat her way in life, she should be grateful that she even has this job.

There's a clear pattern here. It's what determines what makes a woman one of the "good ones" by this story's standards. The answer is obvious.

You have to be Ariadne or at the very least, you have to be someone who is both below her in status and devoid of any personality that has nothing to do with your love for Ariadne.

And if you're a female character with importance to the plot that isn't an enemy of the girl boss, then what do you know, you're being lined up on the chopping block of killed off characters for the sake of shock value

Isabella, Lariessa, Lucrezia, Maletta, and many more, will always be the women readers will want to stick around for the most, because tales of women trying to achieve happiness in a society that does whatever it can to push them down is far more interesting than watching a woman participate in that system because of her victim complex.

Anyway, live laugh love Bianca, she's one of the only female characters in the story that's still alive, likeable, and she isn't fodder for Ariadne, honestly, she deserves to have her own novel.

She taught herself to play Quidditch and ended up being better than her brothers. She didn’t take crap from anyone, and she even helped lead a rebellion at Hogwarts. There was foundation for her to become a great character. I don’t think Ginny was written as every guy’s dream girl (I have a lot of guy friends who date drastically different type of girls), but she was clearly Harry’s type. He’s clearly drawn to conventionally attractive, athletic, and popular girls. His first crush was Cho, but let’s be honest Harry didn’t have the emotional maturity to handle Cho’s grief, and they didn’t have much in common. Even Parvati, who I thought might have potential, was clearly a mismatch.

With Ginny, there was real potential for something deeper. But honestly, Rowling kind of fumbled both her and Harry. I don’t think Ginny is a bad character, I think Rowling just struggles to write strong female characters unless they resemble her in some way. She’s openly said Hermione was partly based on herself, and after her anti-trans comments, it’s hard for me to separate the two lol (and how Harry and Ron are basically incompetent without Hermione, it felt like Rowling was trying to project her own personality onto Hermione for me). It feels like Rowling only develops the characters she relates to, and the ones she doesn’t, like Ginny, end up underwritten or sidelined. That’s not on the character. That’s on the author. I personally think the negativity should be directed to Rowling for being a misogynist and not being to develop women who are different, rather than a fictional character that was created by her. Ginny can only do or be as Rowling writes.

(I also have this hc that she was one of Snape’s favourite students, and hated that she was in Gryffindor and held a candle for Harry loll)

While it’s absolutely true that Rowling is responsible for how Ginny was written, her portrayal still relies heavily on clichés and the “male gaze” rather than offering a genuinely feminist, fully realized young woman. From the moment Ginny arrives, her narrative value is wrapped up in whether or not Harry (and the boys around her) find her attractive. Her “fiery red hair,” her “feistiness,” even her budding sexuality, are described as if for the reader’s (and Harry’s) spectacle, not as an expression of Ginny’s own subjectivity. The “fiery redhead” stereotype is a ready-made package for the male imagination: passionate, unpredictable, a bit dangerous, but ultimately something to tame. Rowling leans into that, so Ginny’s spunk always circles back to her being hot property, not a young woman with genuine depth.

Laura Mulvey’s concept of the male gaze explains this: Ginny is positioned as the object of desire, rather than an active agent of her own story. Her agency only really kicks in when it serves Harry’s arc (ex needing rescue in Chamber of Secrets), reinforcing that her worth is tethered to his heroism and to male approval.

Yes, Ginny teaches herself Quidditch, demonstrates courage, and helps lead Dumbledore’s Army. Yet each time she shows promise, those traits are downplayed or diverted into romantic subplots. Her “strength” becomes little more than another form of “fun, feisty girlfriend,” rather than a consistent, inner-driven arc. In feminist terms, this is the “Strong Female Character” trap: she’s applauded for “being tough” only insofar as it makes her appealing, then she disappears into the background once she becomes Harry’s love interest.

A “pick-me girl” basically ditches her own personality to prove she’s the One True Girl who’s “not like the other girls.” Ginny is constantly shown as feisty but never allowed to just be. Everything she does seems designed to make Harry (and his mates) go, “Wow, she’s different” or “She’s so cool for a girl.” She ends up performing femininity to fit his tastes, instead of having traits that exist for her own sake because almost every moment of Ginny’s growth is tethered to her relationship with Harry: from her first crush through to their marriage. Moments that could have been used to deepen her character (e.g., her lone resistance in the Chamber, her feelings about fighting in the war) are framed as tests of her loyalty and love for Harry, not explorations of her own moral compass.

Rowling has this habit of elevating the “tough” or “brainy” girls (Ginny with her Quidditch swagger and Hermione with her endless books) casting them as somehow special because they’re “not like the other girls.” Meanwhile, Lavender, the Patils or Cho get mocked for liking fashion, whispering in corners or wearing their hearts on their sleeves. It’s as if Rowling is giving a little wink and saying, “Look at how ridiculous ‘girly’ girls are,” while glorifying those who act more like boys or hide their emotions.

That pattern isn’t harmless: it’s exactly the way internalized misogyny works. Traits coded as feminine— (mpathy, emotion, grooming) have long been devalued and ridiculed by patriarchal culture. By celebrating only the girls who suppress or transcend those traits, Rowling ends up echoing the old “bleh, girls are dumb” narrative, even as she pats herself on the back for creating “strong” female characters.

With Ginny, this shows up in how her worth hinges on being extra brave, extra spunky, extra cool for a girl, basically performing a pick-me routine to win Harry’s attention. She’s never allowed a storyline that isn’t sidetracked into “Will she make Harry happy?” or “How does she compare to Cho or Lavender?” As a result, her strength always feels less like genuine self-actualization and more like a performance calibrated to male desire.

From a feminist media perspective, that means Ginny never escapes the male gaze. She’s rewarded for being the “not like the other girls” girl: brave but not too emotional, fiery but still flattering to Harry’s ego, while the rest of the female cast are painted as shallow or annoying. In the end, Ginny’s “strength” serves the hero’s journey rather than her own, and that’s exactly why, however much Rowling may chalk it up to “I gave her Quidditch skills,” Ginny still comes off as underwritten, trapped in a misogynistic setup where only male-approved femininity gets a spotlight.

i love pixar's turning red. it is such a good representation of girls at that age. they don't shy away from depicting the awkward and weird parts. it is so rare to see a movie depict girls and their silly interests without condemning or judging them. they just let the girls be girly, noisy, and silly.

fuck the hate this movie got on its release. i could go on for hours about society's uniquely shitty attitude towards teenage girls and their interests. there are countless examples. remember the feverish hate for twilight, a series aimed exclusively at young women? what about the hunger games? teenage girls were the first ones to fall in love with elvis and the beatles, and critics treated them like a joke. that is, until adult men started liking them. funny how that works. justin bieber fans, one direction fans, vsco girls, girly girls, tomboys, emo girls, indie girls, bookworms. you will see every single type of girl being made fun of for every conceivable interest a human being can have.

at a certain age you feel forced to make an arbitrary choice. lean into your feminine side and continue to get mocked for 'being shallow', 'only caring about your looks', 'being annoying' etc. or lean into your masculine side and get called a pick-me or told that you just want to get with their guy friends. you like things that are popular? you’re basic. you like things that aren’t as popular? you’re trying too hard. it is the entire reason why so many girls internalize this misogyny, why they start saying things like "im not like other girls."