I actually just don’t read TMA character metas anymore, because I lot of the stuff I read in the past are like. Treating Jon and the other characters (I mean like the main cast, not the avatars) really differently?
When it comes to the other characters it’s usually like: X character did this bad thing, but it’s understandable from their perspective/they are infulenced by the entities/they are manipulated by the circumstances.
When it comes to Jon, it’s usually like: Jon was infulenced by the entities/malnipulated by the other people, but he still made the decision and did those bad things.
And that just seems really unfair? I don’t know why it’s like that, maybe we are all too aware that Jon was being hurt and manipulated by a lot of things? And it really kind of sucks especially if the meta makes it seems like it’s making an impartial read, but in reality it of course contains some of the biases.
I mean this is just the general impression I got, I might be just wrong. And I no longer read such metas, so this might no longer be the case.
There is of course nothing wrong with wanting to defend your fav character, I’d prefer if preferences and biases are stated. Like this:
I’m very biased and I think Jon did nothing wrong. He’s a little bunny and he’s perfect :P
I still can’t believe there are so many people who Genuinely believe that the point of jon magnusarchives is that he was a monstrous person who only gained humanity when he became a monster.
the point is that jon was a traumatized child that grew up into an emotionally stunted adult desperately afraid to open up to people who was Nevertheless a fundamentally good person that cared about other people deeply. he was Always capable of learning how to be a softer Kinder person, and he Deserved to learn how to do that in a softer kinder way. that’s the tragedy, that he was only allowed to learn when almost nobody was willing to listen anymore.
