You had a very different playthrough to me. In mine, there was no sacrifice, in fact, she specifically said, "if she had to do it all over again, she would still honor her oath and lie to MC." She was sad about it, but had no regrets, her oath always had and always will come first.
i'd have to disagree with this even tho I forgiven her. She was clearly brainwashed from a young age so she really never had a choice in her future so I don't believe she sacrificed a thing she is doing what she always has known. However I do suspect her loyalty for them at least on the love path is going to slowly start to waver and instead until she does eventually put the MC before the Templars.
She lied at first, but then broke her oath to protect him when shit hit the fan. Until that time, honoring her oath didn't put MC in danger and allowed him to live a life free of the pressures of being the Templar leader's son. He was blissful and at peace. Then things changed, and she placed him above her oath.
She didn't break her oath. She disobeyed one order, and if you want to be technical, her major order was to protect MC, so she disobeyed 1 order, to obey her prime directive.
True. But she had conflicting orders. When you have conflicting orders, you follow the major directive, or the one from the highest authority, which is what she did.
I honestly think most folks so salty about her, consciously or not, are mostly pissed that she made a decision that a man would have made under the same circumstances, but that it was the woman doing the protecting and the man being protected - it doesn't fit with the "natural order". Not saying it's outright, hard misogyny, but the "soft misogyny" that the man is the protector and must always know everything and it's a betrayal of the natural order of things if a woman makes such a decision - a decision that would seem stoic and heroic if made by the man. It's the same ingrained hindbrain kind of thing that makes a man hesitate just slightly more when it's a woman with a gun on him than when it's a man: we're wired to protect the women and children, not harm them, even if they're about to murder us or someone else. Some will screech at that assessment (I'm not like that at all!!!!!!), but I'm pretty sure the science of it is on my side.
Really??I honestly think most folks so salty about her, consciously or not, are mostly pissed that she made a decision that a man would have made under the same circumstances, but are pissed that it was the woman doing the protecting and the man being protected - it doesn't fit with the "natural order". Not saying it's outright, hard misogyny, but the "soft misogyny" that the man is the protector and must always know everything and it's a betrayal of the natural order of things if a woman makes such a decision - a decision that would seem stoic and heroic if made by the man. It's the same ingrained hindbrain kind of thing that makes a man hesitate just slightly more when it's a woman with a gun on him than when it's a man: we're wired to protect the women and children, not harm them, even if they're about to murder us or someone else. Some will screech at that assessment (I'm not like that at all!!!!!!), but I'm pretty sure the science of it is on my side.
I don't hate her, and even said I was happy if she was given a believable redemption path. Besides you know I only make Kaija comments to stir up you and Xapi.
yeah wasn't talking about you or any one person reallyI don't hate her, and even said I was happy if she was given a believable redemption path. Besides you know I only make Kaija comments to stir up you and Xapi.
I don't hate her. I just don't find her trustworthy.
Maybe "misogyny" is the wrong word - too strong. Chauvinism might be better.
that hypothetical situation is something id think she would disobey her loyalty to the templars for the MC if on the love path at least. I think she is only loyal up until the MC is in danger. But I get it why many don't trust her. For me she is trustworthy and not at the same time. I think she is trustworthy in her personal life but when it comes duty not so much at least until the MC is in danger. Which is why I feel she might slowly change how loyal she is over time.
That would be on the love path a nice turn, and would throw her into a deep conflict. for all that matters.
Personally I don't think it's misogyny, but it's more related to the vision one has of the Templars
I understand psychology and I am able to recognise the difference. I am not rejecting anything out of hand, but you are using an argument of the male protection psyche has nothing to do with this conversation. It appears you just wrote me off as a misogynist/chauvinist and didn't read what I wrote.
Couldn't agree more Xapi. A character that evokes such emotion is a masterpiece of writing. She is an amazing character (even if I don't trust her yet
)
