I don't have a sister but if I had one, I wouldn't try to snatch someone else's man for he...

And the way she's begging like she gets to negotiate? your henchman almost killed her daughter and you angered her malewife who holds the entire high society in his hand, the audacity.

mister miss maam madam sir you are so right you ate her the fuck up

Well, I’ve been to places for women were second class, citizens, and if you live in a world where you don’t have opportunities and education or careers, you try everything in your power in order for your daughter to live happy and not end up broke or worse. I mean, like, it’s not like as if it’s like, I want my sister to get the best guy because she’s a material girl. It’s more like, I want to see my sister survive because this world doesn’t give us any other opportunities and I don’t know how to protect and help her. I know that the guy she used to like would’ve been perfect for her and I would never have to worry about her but now, she’s gonna be a single woman in the world that treats single women like pariahs. Worst case scenario? The sister will end up having to become a street walker. If her husband goes broke? They go to the work houses. Being broke isn’t just, oh no I can’t live with money writing down on me and servants massaging my feet. Being broke also means, I can’t work and I’ll have to sell my body. I have seen the worst of the worst, and if I had to do the most lowest down thing in order to save my sister from becoming a victim of Trafficking or a victim of an institution that even if you become a widow, you’re not even guaranteed doing her at your husband‘s fortune and you’d probably end up in the work house anyway if you outlive him, I don’t know I probably would do things I would never do if I wasn’t in the society in opportunities that we have now. I don’t even wanna think about that. It scares me, and the way this country is running, if my sister‘s rights were taken away, and we ended up losing it into the point where we were all ending up like that television show, handmaiden. Can you imagine living the world like handmaiden? I think I would cross lines I wouldn’t do normally. You guys seen handmaid’s tale I mean, like what would you do if you wanted your sister to escape that? I’m not saying that story is like it, I’m just saying is, are they not that far than that? No careers no education and you’re not even allowed to vote to change things.

Bro are you the blue haired sister? why are you defending her from every single comment so much?

You don't need to go back into the middle ages to be poor and lower class, you can just look out of the window once in a while.

Most of the time, our generation can only afford basic necessities by prostitution like onlyfans, McDonald minimum wage can't even buy you groceries anymore.

Also this whole paragraph doesn't explain her stupidity? she's still trying to steal someone else's man who clearly dislikes her sister.

It's clear he's capable of hurting her so why would you want him specifically? there are so many rich men who can take care of her so why would you go after a taken man who bankrupted your family because you angered him?

My sister can like wolves but I won't go into the forest to hunt down one. She may want one, but as the older sibling I know the wolf can hurt her even if it looks soft and fluffy.

That should've been her motivation. Yes her sister likes the rich boy everyone is jealous of, but as the older sister who's supposed to care for her, she should've tried to get someone else for her because she knows how dangerous the rich boy could be when he gets angered.

She especially shouldn't have harmed his woman because what was the plan there?
This man bankrupted our family because we angered him, let's harm the woman he likes and try to matchmake him with our sister he clearly dislikes! there's no way it could go wrong! it's not like he's a vengeful person or anything!

ML isn't the only rich man in the world, in the story. She's just being stubborn because she has savior complex. She could've hunted down another man who likes her sister but she specifically went after him because the sister had a crush on him.

To me, the blue sister is worse than any enemy because she's consciously poking the ML and angering him who can and will take his anger out of the sister, he's already plotting revenge plans to ruin their family.

She's knowingly poking the bear and letting it attack the sister in some sick twisted heroic tale she's trying to write like the bear will suddenly fall in love with the sister and abandon his woman for her.

She doesn't care about the consequences and how badly this could affect her sister, she only cares about being the hero who put the villainess in her place and got her sister the man she wanted.

She decided to turn a blind eye to all the consequences that will come with her shitty plan, instead getting lost in her delusions that everything will go perfectly and if things do go wrong, everyone she wronged will go ''okay, understandable'' and forgive her for the crimes she committed.

And now that she can't pretend to be blind to her hubris, she's panicking because all the bear traps she set up for MC is blowing up on her sister's face who never asked her to do any of this, hell, she begged her to drop it because the woman she's trying to take out literally saved the sister's life.

I think you come from a good place, and you've probably seen the horrors of how the world treats women. But while I understand where you're coming from, we have to remember that while society may be a motivating force for people's actions, it can never replace people's free will. Never take away the agency of the human person. No matter how difficult your circumstances may be, no matter how selfish the world may be, it is always your CHOICE how to act. And choosing evil means despite having good intentions, will always still be an evil act. For example, just because a school shooter was bullied doesn't mean his murder spree is justified. In the same vein, just because women are treated that way in their society doesn't mean you should break up a potential couple & family and hurt them, nearly causing a murder scene because of your henchman.

Look, it sucks that they have to live in such a restrictive society, but even when Mildred was so anxious about marrying off her daughters (and she's even got 3 to think of!), she never once harmed another person to achieve that. It's ALWAYS a choice to do good, no matter how dire the circumstances may be. And Mildred did that. The Blue-haired sister? Not so much.

Forgiving the blue-haired sister now would be UNJUST to Mildred and her family. Just as mercy is a virtue, so is justice.

Thank you, it does come from a good place. Also....
The female character's actions, although flawed, were a desperate attempt to navigate a society that perpetually silenced and marginalized women. In a world where women were denied agency, autonomy, and basic human rights, she was forced to make impossible choices to protect herself and her sister.
We must acknowledge that women in Victorian times were trapped in a patriarchal society that denied them education, economic independence, and social mobility. They were expected to conform to rigid social norms, with severe consequences for non-compliance. The struggles of women like Emily Davison, who fought for women's suffrage, only to be beaten, imprisoned, and tortured, are a testament to the brutality of this era. Women like her were even force-fed through brutal procedures, highlighting the extremes of oppression.
Given these circumstances, it's essential to approach the character's actions with compassion and understanding. She was doing the best she could, armed with limited resources, knowledge, and power. Her decisions, though imperfect, were a testament to her resilience and determination to survive in a society designed to oppress her.
While some might argue that individuals are responsible for their actions, citing extreme examples like school shooters, I believe this comparison is unfair. School shootings are horrific tragedies that cannot be justified or excused. However, I do think it's essential to acknowledge that the responsibility for such tragedies extends beyond the individual. It also lies with those who failed to address bullying, neglected cries for help, and ignored the need for gun control. By recognizing the systemic failures that contribute to such events, we can work towards creating a more compassionate and equitable society.
In the context of the female character, it's crucial to recognize that her actions were shaped by the societal constraints and expectations placed upon her. Rather than judging her, we should strive to understand the complexities of her situation and the impossible choices she faced. By extending compassion and empathy, we can work towards a more nuanced understanding of the experiences of women in Victorian times, recognizing that they were not passive victims, but active agents doing the best they could in a society that denied them basic human rights.
Remember what the woman in Handmaids Tale had to do or was forced to do? She is not the real.villain, oppression is.

My guy, is this chatgpt? I know this sentence construction and word flow, and it's WILDLY different from your other replies.

I think it's unfair to double down on your argument and not address the good points we raise.

Now, it's becoming a classic juxtaposition of the individual vs. Society.

We never said that society wasn't at fault, only that it's likewise important to recognize the responsibility of EACH person to carry the consequences of the actions they CHOSE. They're not puppets on a string; they're humans and they have free will to choose. Stop glossing over that detail.

The blue-haired sister literally made a decision to plot out a scheme that will harm others. Even if she's doing this "to protect her sister" (which we all doubt she is, based on her expressions and actions thus far, but for your sake, sure.), she made an active decision to harm an innocent family, place Ashley's life in danger, jeopardize Iris's candidacy, and stain the reputation of the Vance family, inadvertently doing the same thing she didn't want to be done to her: ruining the chances of the Vance children's prospects of marriage.

Yes, there is a systemic problem that needs to be solved, we all understand that. But the sister isn't doing this just to ensure the younger sister's survival, she's also doing this for her own pleasure.

She's also gone beyond that: she literally desecrated a human body, orchestrated an identity theft, and actively sabotaged someone else's relationship. Those aren't the actions of someone desperate to survive, that's ill-intentioned. I think this is why everyone else is so against the blue-haired sister. It's because she wasn't trying to survive, she was malicious. And if you think she wasn't, then you probably need to read the manhwa again.

so many things are happening right and so many paragraphs, i know i should just shut the fuck up but god damn HAHAHAHAHAHA

I think he might be copy pasting the same arguments, I've seen him in other comments and he keeps spamming these text walls and not responding properly when they argue.

He might be ragebait probably.

This isn't rage bait. It's a debate!! This isn't AI or winning an argument; it's about exploring complex perspectives on women's suffrage. We're not disagreeing to provoke each other, but to deepen our understanding of the sacrifices made by women who fought for their rights.
It's ironic that we're debating the morality of a woman's actions to protect her sister, when history shows us that women have risked everything – even their lives – for the sake of equality! THIS IS WHY MEN DON'T TAKE WOMEN SERIOUSLY! I have seen long paragraphs of men argue over the Power Systems of Naruto or talk about Star Wars and the use of the force, where it looks like novels. Where they talk about the complexities of powers and levels but here we're having a debate about women's rights and perspectives and actions, and what do we do? We back out because we're scared of an in-depth debate about the complexities of characters and their actions during the time where in a historical period, women's rights are limited. This is why men don't take women's opinions seriously in debates. As soon as something becomes deeper than the shallow end of a romance pool, you guys blow off series of pans has just, it's just rage bait because they're saying something I don't like and it hurts my brain to think any deeper about it. There are people that really want to take character complexity seriously and want to become serious writers. I am so sorry if I thought that this group had women with more serious forethought than just, oh wasn't it romantic instead of, well considering the political climates, was her actions so unforgivable because of the situations women are facing in this period? This is why the handmaid's tale is never going to be taken as seriously as Harry Potter. Because as soon as there's women that are the main character of something, it's blown off as just romance

how is it a debate if you ignore everything we say and keep repeating the same argument? it's like talking to a wall.

I'm actually convinced you're using chat GPT because you never actually respond with an argument, you just keep talking about handmaid's tale and how everyone is sexist against women. Okay, glad you finally caught up but what's your actual argument?

''Women's rights are limited'' exactly, and why would she ruin her life even further by angering a powerful rich man who can ruin her life in a day? why would she throw rocks at the woman he loves and try to matchmake this man with her sister when he's a vengeful person who's already planning their downfall?

I swear to god if you copy paste the same ''argument'' for the 5th time I'm gonna lose it. ACTUALLY ARGUE your point, don't recite the same paragraph you stole from a facebook post or something, ACTUALLY ARGUE the points we're raising, have an opinion of your OWN you Oblivion NPC

To me, you're the only coward backing away from the discussion. We're clearly stating what we see wrong and why would it be wrong during the time period and situation she's in, you're the one who keeps repeating the same paragraph without arguing the actual problems.

It's like talking to game NPC who keeps repeating the same dialogue because the devs forgot to give you more dialogue options.

Maybe instead of recycling the same paragraph trough chat GPT, actually read the arguments we're making and try forming a thought by yourself, try to argue your point without copy pasting the same text wall like a shield that automatically makes you win the argument.

Trust me, I would love to argue with you if you could form a thought all by yourself, but ignoring everything I say and recycling the same text wall isn't arguing, it's dodging the argument which is what you're accusing us of doing.

Go on, don't be shy, don't back out of the argument about women's rights with the AI generated text wall, read our arguments and form a single thought by yourself, I believe in you little NPC man.

If I was recycling, I would understand, but I’m iterating my point that was made in the past. Every argument you have put forth, hasn’t proving that wrong. It’s like, I’m telling my side of it and you tell your side of it and then when I hear your side of it, it’s like, you haven’t considered the point I made. You just said that yes I’m right, but my pain hasn’t changed despite everything. I have just told you about it that should change your opinion or at least make you consider it when you’re giving your opinion. That is the situation. We are running into right now. We’re both making the same argument and I’m making some good points that you don’t even take into account. You say I’m recycling something but I’m just proving, I’m probably just as good as ChatGPT because I’m on the same level as a computer and you’re still seeing things so limited, you can’t help but stay human instead of being logical. I’m not recycling the same argument, I’m reiterating why mine is right and yours is lacking substance. But I was being nice about it.

Also, I made some great points. Why is it with men, you can debate paragraphs about the color codes of light sabers but when it comes to women’s suffrage, God forbid we think deeper than that and I’m going to reiterate that because you’ve just proven me right. You are afraid of diving deeper into a character than just what’s on the page. You’re afraid of looking into a character and seeing a little bit of yourself maybe. Maybe one day I’ll be an author and maybe one day I want to be able to write characters that are deeper than the shallow end of a romantic love, interest for some chick flick. Maybe if women decided to dive deeper into characters like men do with Star Wars characters, where they would write novels about the blue elephant guy that plays piano at a bar, maybe a swim would be taking more seriously in debates and as writers. Maybe that’s why when people think about writers, they think about Stephen King or they think about philosophers like Socrates and Shakespeare writing plays and when they think about directors, they think about James Gunn. But they don’t think about the women. They don’t think about the women who write this because we sabotage each other. We don’t debate about the small things because we want to save it for the big issues, but then when it comes to the big issues we’re shut up, because we don’t practice on the small ones like men do. I’m running into that right now, every time I try to give an opinion, every time I have to talk about series or I have to talk about my paper, I’m always sidestepped because a guy has more practice and when I argue with men, some of them just say I’m nagging. Some say I’m out of practice, and I see these men argue over magic to playing cards as if each card is an in-depth character. What do we do as women? We watch a romance and then we stop thinking. We see a character do something we think is wrong, and then we stop going into depth, we stop thinking about the justification she might have. She’s a bad guy and we hate her. We don’t debate, we just gossip. I swear to God, I wish sometimes God gave me a penis, or made me not interested in short stories of romance, because as soon as I want to dive deeper into a character. I’m told to shut up and sit down by other women. But if I was a man, you guys will all be jumping on me try to explain every nuance of the characters that are in the story

I literally don't think that you're a human being. I've told you not to recycle the same text wall and make an argument on your own and you still recycled the same text wall again with the same points and arguments.

I genuinely don't think you're a human being.

I'm curious and I know this might break your AI but I want simple answers.

1: why do you automatically assume I'm a man just because I'm not agreeing with you

2: why do you copy paste my comment and my points but act like it was yours?

3: Why do you keep dodging our questions and not answering our points?

4: Why are you defending feminizm when your view of women is so degrading and low? a woman is trying to argue with you but you keep saying women are stupid and how they can only gossip and be stupid when it comes to deep conversations? a woman is trying to have a deep conversation with you, why are you dodging the argument by recycling the same paragraph?

I only want 1-2 sentence answers, not a paragraph. Can you do it?

Omg you are absolutely right. The account owner probably isn't human, which is why the answers felt so...horrible and dry.

Maybe its algorithm was just to ragebait and have more sample data to fuel its learning. Because it definitely felt like we weren't talking to a human--the account had two types of responses so far (improper punctuation and so many run-on senctences vs. textbook chatgpt sentence construction) and neither of those felt like it was written by someone real. It also felt like arguing with the wall who only repeated itself hahaha

Huh. I suddenly feel better now lol

I actually feel so embarrassed I was arguing with a robot for days If he ever responds, I found some AI identifying sentences I wanna try on him.

Is this the dead internet theory everyone is talking about?

Dude I’m not a robot. I have feelings and yes maybe being in the spectrum, I’m obsessed with words and history but that doesn’t mean I am a robot and that my feelings aren’t real. You argue and you start throwing a fit, I argue and when I’m not mean or start name calling, you call me a robot. I thought we were debating but you apparently want to start hurting my feelings by calling me a bot and disregard me as real. Just typical. I can argue with men over the points of the fact that the Dark Force was the ANIMA or the Feminine side of the force and I had to accept that because according to Jung and Campbell, the feminine side of human nature is chaotic and emotional, but when I iterate about women’s suffrage, I’m accused of being a robot. Maybe, just maybe, you proved Carl Jung’s theory of the ANIMA side of psyche, by being the emotional and illogical side of women, history and writers have said we are for the last few hundred years. Maybe when there is a woman who thinks more linear, she has to hide it or be accused of being a bot!!! Here is a thing a BOT can’t do! (︶︿︶)＝凸 (︶︿︶)＝凸 and I say it with all due respect.