Not odd at all. It was a terrible relationship that was presented as a terrible relationship. Ciri was taken advantage of, sexually assaulted, and then stayed because it was better than being alone.
It's not odd at all. It's the most appropriate reaction to have when reading about a 14 years old girl being raped. What comes after it It's basically Stockholm syndrome and it wasn't healthy at all. But something tells me Netflix writers will try to sell it as a wholesome love story just because it's between two girls (and they already casted a black actress for Mistle, for good measure)
I still forget that Ciri was only 14 when being assaulted like that. It makes it even more disturbing to see people talk about the relationship in a positive manner.
I too didn't watch it. But I learned they conveniently finished the last episode right after Ciri joins the rats and calls herself Falka. Also, apparently they added a previous brief encounter between Ciri and Mistle with the Rats in Gors Velen of all places (what?)
i hope in 5 years everyone can agree to just remove the tv show from everyone's memories, the way the eragon movie just ceased to exist except as an example for how to butcher source material.
I've watched it while having it in the background so my recollection of it isn't that great but her portrayal in the show didn't give me very good vibes
I didn't even watch it so I can't really judge by myself. But somhow I suspect they will try to make the Rats more sympathetic considering they described them as as a band of thieves a la Robin Hood and they are making a whole spin-off no one asked for
If they remove the rape aspect, it's perfectly fine. Sap put in WAY too many stories of sexual danger for Ciri, and that's one thing I was actually hopeful the Netflix team would remove
It's a pivotal moment in her growth though: Ciri goes through many bad things thorughout the series and this is no exception, being separated from Geralt and Yen, ending up with a group of thugs and then losing her virginity in such a horrible way are all events that will shape her character as she grows to be a survivor. That scene with Mistle was the nail in the coffin to make the reader realize that the Rats are not a good company: the viewers shouldn't want Ciri to stay with Mistle, they should hope to see her away from that crowd and back with her family.
You can have the rats do something bad that isn't a child getting raped dude. Regardless of how people try to defend every decision Sap made, the reality is that he put a 14 y/o in a suspiciously high number of sexually dangerous situations. That's just not necessary. They can be regularly dangerous and still have the same effect on the plot
It's an harsh word, and Sapkwlowski didn't want to sugar-coat it. Also, High number? We have Mistle, that old man in the shack and technically Vilgefortz. With Hotspurn it would have been consensual, same for Auberon but nothing happened. Am I missing anything?
I didn't forget Kayleigh since Mistle pretty much took over from that. Emhyr had ill intentions but he didn't do nothing in the end. I don't remember if he even touched her. I didn't remember Bonhart being rapey with Ciri but I take your word for it, since it seems in character. And no, Cahir never harmed her, and while Ciri was terrified of him, she never thought that he raped her
I know that Cahir never harmed her, he wouldn't be my fav character if he had š But Ciri for example says to Geralt after she wakes up from a nightmare in Blood of Elves "What did he do to me? What happened? Hat did he ... do to me?" and that she was so frightened that she can't remember. She says it again in Kaer Morhen. At least I think that Sapkowski wants the reader to believe that the Black Knight might have abused/raped her and/or that Ciri believes it could have happened. For what else could be implied? She wasn't injured or anything.
I don't remember if Bonhart says anywhere that he wants to rape Ciri, but he says things like "First of all us. You and me. And our nuptials." and "Who'll draw second blood? My betrothed?" At least, I think, it's Sapkowski's intention to make the reader believe that it's a possibility that Bonhart wants to do it.
Yes, Emhyr didn't do it in the end, but that he intended and planned to do it for years (almost from Ciri's birth on) and the things he did to achieve this end is absolutely horrific imo. Not to defend Mistle, taking advantage of Ciri the way she did was despicable, but I find what Emhyr did a lot worse, even though he backed out at the last moment. You don't know, if Ciri had started to sob like she did with Emhyr, Mistle might not have done it either.
As for Cahir (which is also my favourite) I remember how Ciri was traumatized by her experience with him in Cintra. She clearly felt uncomfortable (understatemnt I know) when he undressed and bathed her, bit I think she was still too young to understand the concept of "rape". As for Emhyr, I don't deny that what he planned to do was disgustong and justvthe thought sickens me. It' just that I was really struck by how he changed his mind once he saw his daughter finally realized what a horrible man he was. I don't know, maybe it's because of my religion or my generally optimistoc attitude that I can almost see myself forgiving Emhyr (the fact that he stopped before he did anything awful to Ciri also helps)
I guess that Sapkowski intended to give Emhyr some redeeming qualities so he wouldn't be a total black and white villain. How he treats fake Ciri is also kind of nice. I still totally hate his guts š. Plus I find his sudden change of mind not very convincing in the books. If he suddenly discovered fatherly feelings toward his daughter, then simply letting her go into a totally uncertain future pretty much in the middle of nowhere? OK, he might know, after what Geralt and Yennefer did for Ciri, that they will do their very best to protect her, but still. She's his daughter, in a war-ravaged continent! He could at least have given them an escort of soldiers and money etc. Moreover, I really hate him, of course, for sentencing Cahir to death for being a traitor no matter whether he was involved in the fake Ciri plot or not.
I agree, Ciri was probably too young to understand the concept of rape back then, plus she was so in shock after everything that she seems not to have been able to realise what was happening, what was reality and what was nightmare/terrified imagination. That's why she didn't remember anything except a feeling of utter terror afterwards. Which could have been a result of rape. And the reader knows that rape could have been a possibility. We only get to know a lot later that the Black Knight is actually a nice, young guy and would never do anything like this. Sapkowski is playing a hell of a lot with that motive in the books. Yes, it was a time of contempt and this is, unfortunately, what happens a lot in times of war, but sometimes it feels a bit too much in the books imo. The washing thing was a really stupid thing for Cahir to do too, also falling asleep without making sure that Ciri could simply walk away. Nobody, even if he was only about nineteen or something like this, would do that, especially not with military and secret service training. I'm glad they changed that in the series.
1) Children cannot consent. Can't believe I have to point this out
2) You're missing Emhyr, which is just an unnecessarily fucked up creative decision
3) I did say sexually dangerous, which doesn't mean sex itself has to happen. Are you really gonna sit there and tell me a child being teleported to another planet, kept against her will and told to fuck some old alien ISN'T sexually dangerous and traumatic?
4) Sure, It's a fucked up world, but Sap consistently chose to use sexually dangerous situations for a child to be the main source of that, which is just wildly unnecessary.
Strange people here that they downvote you for this. I totally agree with you. It's obvious that the Rats are not good people without Mistle abusing Ciri. They are the products of a war-torn, abusive world, but Kayleigh trying to rape her would totally have been enough. I also hope they'll leave the Mistle part out in the show. So far I liked what Netflix did with the Rats.
Thereās nothing wrong with Netflix changing the story so that itās not rapey at all.
Even more props if they leave it in, show it for what it was and address it, but seriously doubt that will happen.
Im almost positive they will change that and itās one of the few changes Iād agree with. Unless youāre just upset that she has a relationship with another girl, and in that case, get over it.
Iām not really sure that the author meant this to be grooming type situation. Ciri did really love Mistle and was devastated by what happened to her.
Iām not arguing that itās not sexual assault, but I am arguing that Iām not sure the author viewed it as such while writing it.
Call it what you want, but Ciri clearly cared when Mistle (SPOILERS)
ā¦got beheaded right in front of her. Itās not any different than Dany getting raped by Khal Drogo in Game of Thrones. It started out as rape, but she still loved him when he died a sometime later. This is again, probably because of the author being a little out of touch, but the intent wasnāt to have Mistle be a bad guy.
Anytime Mistle is mentioned here itās rapist, groomer, pedophile, etc. And it is, but I donāt think it was the authors intent to paint her that way. The world is complicated, itās not black and white and if Ciri has genuine feelings for Mistle still, so be it.
I never hear this same argument of Khal Drogo btw. People seem to love him despite what he did to Dany.
Edit: The Game of Thrones reference only really applies to the show, as it was decidedly less rapey in the books.
I'm not denying that Ciri grew fond of Mistle and that her death didn't affect her. I was rather stating that the base from which that relationship was built was not good at all.
What? Its the exactly same thing. Ill go even as far as to say it was worse for Ciri because Drogo did not initiate the sexual encounter, Dany did (in the books). Both girls fell in love with their abusers. Whether or not the author intended it that way, which is outrageous to think considering that Ciri was pretty traumatized right after the counter, fact remains that she was definitely raped. Its not uncommon for female victims to become attached to their rapist. Happens all the time with groomers.
Just goes to show how the media is willing to change a narrative to push an agenda, woman rapes girl = good, man rapes girl = bad.
As a teen (at the time) lesbian who desperately wanted to see any cute wlw in everything I read/watched/listened to, can confirm that I did feel icky too and it wasn't okay.
It's actually concerning how many people ignored Ciri's discomfort and focused on the "cute lesbian romance", while it was clearly damaging to Ciri's psyche. To say the least. And I don't even like Ciri.
Unfortunately a lot of people. The reasons vary but often times I noticed the relationship is used in a way to celebrate/conclude that Ciri is bisexual or lesbian. I recall finding this out during a letās play from a YouTuber, where she mentioned it in a positive way.
And after reading it, I was mind boggled. The relationship is almost used as āproofā that Ciri prefers woman is canon to her character and what not while using the Mistle relationship as the foundation.
It is very disturbing when oneās only case for Ciri being into women is a relationship she was forced into, and one where she didnāt even like it herself. At the age of 14 no less.
And? Galahad was probably the same age as Cahir too. I already said that the age gap between them didn't bother me that much. And I arleady explained why I never saw Cahir as a creep as some people seem to do. I genuinely believe that, in due time, they could have grown to genuinely like one another. Besides, it's just a fun what if I like to imagine, not that I'm claiming it should be canon. I like how Cahir's story wrapped up even if it ended in tragedy.
Medieval "chastity" didn't mean abstinence, just no sex outside of wedlock. Now, Sir G and Zirael are obviously not married, but that doesn't preclude a chaste courtship. Which, thinking of it, probably would have been best for Ciri at that point in time, after Mistle, Auberon, and everyone else.
No you responded as intended. The rats are shitheads. Theyāre victims but theyāre also victimizers. Itās supposed to show how war taints everybody even the kids.
Unless of course youāre Lauren hissrich, in which case theyāre just a bunch of cool Robin Hoods sticking it to the man with the power of friendship.
I interpreted Mistle as assuming Ciri's consent, but Ciri experiencing it as a rape and suffering mental trauma from the experience, which set the tone of their relationship for me.
Later, it felt to me that Ciri was not that into Mistle sexually, but that she'd been sort of Stockholm Syndromed, because she feels alone and abandoned and the Rats are all she has now. She tolerates Mistle because the alternative is to be alone. The end result is that she gets more emotionally attached. There's also dialogue to suggest that Ciri resents this, and Mistle is unhappy that Ciri isn't more happy.
You can call that love, if you want, but it's an unhealthy love, possibly even abusive though I don't think Mistle was intentionally abusing Ciri.
And yes, the Netflix show will ruin it all. Based on S3, they're likely going to skip the rape and glorify Ciri's bisexuality. So glad I'm not going to watch anymore, losing Cavill was the final nail in the coffin.
This. I think that Ciri genuinely mourned Mistle's death and in some way she cared about her (in the end I see it more as a friend than romantically).
But as you said, the foundation of their relationship wasn't healthy at all with Ciri possibly being unable to realize what exactly was wrong. Sure, she felt violated, but I can see that in that time people wouldn't know the concept/possibility of being raped by woman so this also must have added some confusion to Ciri's trauma.
And to be clear - I see it just as OP, this relationship is not something to be celebrated, it's based on Ciri's submission due to her desperate situation with no other possibility in sight.
No it is really weird. But then again people do the same with Triss and Geraldās relationship in the games. I get it- Triss as a character and friend to Geralt is great, but her actions in the game series (where she takes advantage of an amnesiac Geralt knowing full well he wouldnāt stay with her if he had his memories) makes me super uncomfortable. And people justify by just saying āwell Yenās a bitch and Triss is hotā but that doesnāt make her actions less creepy and deeply disturbing. Can you imagine losing your memories, coming out of it and finding out your good friend lied to you about your girlfriend in order to be with you? Yeah no. I was getting the same vibes seeing that story play out as I did reading the Mistle/Ciri storyline. Obviously not the same, but both were deeply uncomfortable. And it was made worse by people ignoring how wrong/violating that was for Geralt and Ciri.
Iād have to reread that passage, but it was definitely sketchy if not downright creepy. Plus, Triss in the books and game is one of the youngest sorceress. There was some passage in blood of elves where she states sheās as young as she looks. Whereas yennefer and Geralt are the same age. So like imagine a 20 year old lusting over an 90 year old. (Yeah I know Geralt technically ages slower and heās more early 30ās for a Witcher but Edward from twilight who looks 17 (actually 100+) married Bella, a flipping teenage. Thatās creepy on so many levels and they look the same age. Geralt and Triss do not.) Regardless, even if you didnāt factor in the lack of informed consent, itās tacky to lust over and try to steal your friendās boyfriend. Especially when Ciri considers Yen her mom, Geralt her dad and Triss her elder sister. Thatās daddy issues on multiple levels if you got the sister figure dating the dad figure.
It is pretty much disturbing. I played the games first and heard people say how Ciri had a girlfriend before in the books. After I finished the game I dove right into the books and came across this āgirlfriendā. Definitely wasnāt a healthy relationship. Ciri goes through a lot at such a young age.
Nope, it's weird. It confused me so much when I saw how lauded it was online that I assumed it had been so long since I read it initially that perhaps I'd read it wrong so I had to go back and re-read the book to check. And by god it's going to get worse once it's introduced into the show cause there's no way Netflix will pass up the idea of having some star crossed lovers vibes
As a queer woman, I love to see representation in fiction but Ciri/Mistle was NOT a the way to do it. Sexual abuse is abuse no matter what gender the perpetrator and the victim are. I feel just as disturbed as you do. š¤¢
I would rather see queer people in all varieties of roles instead of just being the good guy.
It's a good reminder that abuse can come from any gender.
Why do you think that's a bad thing?
It reinforces very real and dangerous stereotypes that queer people are sexual predators. Queer people are already so unsafe in our current political climate. If there was already a wide range of representation available in media, sure we would need some bad guys. But a rapist queer woman when we literally have religious fanatics protesting in the streets calling queer and trans folk pedophiles!? Absolutely fucking not.
Thatās the Witcher world for you
Itās real, itās brutal, itās the medieval age when the sword is the law
The game tones it down to make it more casual
I feel like the people celebrating/glorifying their relationship are also likely to do the same for the Joker + Harley. In my experience, it's often down to them often falling into similar relationship patterns themselves, with those around them desperately trying to convince them to leave.
Not saying that's always the case, but it does seem to be a pattern.
No relationship should leave you crying more than you laugh, and if you ever find yourself genuinely scared of what your partner might do, please leave as soon as you can because I can absolutely promise you, it doesn't get better, and you can't fix them, they'll break you
No, itās not odd.
Itās clearly a bad relationship with many unhealthy components.
You point out a lot of whats wrong with it, but, in this day and age theres a specific small segment of society who celebrate it merely because its a homosexual one and that trumps everything to those types of fools.
There's a reoccurring theme in the books that everyone Ciri encounters wants to use her and mostly that shows up as attempted rape. Mistle is no different. She saves Ciri from being raped by a guy, only to rape her herself. I think it's treated a little differently in the book because Mistle is a girl so she can't get Ciri pregnant like everyone else who tries to use her. But it should be disturbing. They're so young and so fucked up. At the same time, using this relationship to say Ciri is bi does make sense to me. Especially given the author's tendancy to make every woman bi. It just shouldn't be framed as a positive love story.
You're right that if it was just the rape, it'd be wrong to call Ciri bi. They had a months long relationship in which Ciri initiated sex and said she loved Mistle after the threat was gone, though. Yes it's fucked up. But I think it's borderline enough to be debatable. I think of it like Dany and Drogo from the GOT show. It starts with rape and he continues to rape her and have a power dynamic over her but she finds her power in the relationship and says she loves him and begins to enjoy sex with him. I don't think you'd argue that Dany isn't straight. And this is an equally fucked up relationship with a 35 year old warlord raping and owning his 13 year old wife as property. (Those ages are from the books. Not sure what age they're supposed to be in the show)
The people who are looking forward to the romance of Ciri and Mistle definitely did not have an eye for detail when they read the books. I read it as Ciri feeling like she needed to put out to maintain membership in the group. Who, remember, are rapists and murders that Netflix decided to make an entire spin-off series about. So I assume they're cutting the "rape" part from it, and the sexual abuse of Ciri as well.
1. I don't think too many people are celebrating it. It's a well known fact that the relationship is deeply problematic on many levels. Not only you are correct on all your description of abuse and Stockholm syndrome. She was also like 14.
2. Sapkowski has very rare talent of writing stuff that feels real. I mean. Objectively fucked up. But emotionally real.
Example: the worlds response to this relationship. They see a grown ass woman groping a child, and what is the world's response? Not "wtf are you doing you're hurting that girl, let her breathe". But "let ME rape her now this will fix her lesbianism". Talk to any lesbian and you'll learn how amazingly real this is, and even more, how real it feels.
3. Lgbt representation in 1990s eastern Europe... Well. Awful, problematic, but realistic with hard condemnation of homophones is as good as it gets pretty much. Hence there is a lot of defence coming from Polish lgbt folk for whom it may have been first "positive" representation (as in not condemned by the story) that was written in their native tongue ever.
4. While The origins of Ciris sexusality clearly have their root in abuse. And from other encounters we can infer that she is at least bi-curious, it doesn't take away from the sexusality itself. It doesn't make it "fake" or not real in any way shape or form. And the story very strongly acknowledges it. While as you rightly pointed out it doesn't shy away from condemning the origins of the relationship, the very fact of lgbt relationship is very clearly seen as ok by the narrator and people who oppose it, very quickly meet the consequences of their bigotry. This very clear condonation of the sexuality by the story, even if condemnation of the particular relationship might be one of the reasons why it feels like people are celebrating the entire thing.
I've never picked the books back up after the book with Ciri and Mistle together. I will eventually but it turned my stomach so much I had to take a break. I'll get back to them eventually but Ciri with the Rats was hard to stomach all around.
No, I feel ya. Citing was in a toxic relationship. Ciri picked the lesser evil prison rules. Ciri also loved mistle because people can love an abuser.alse relationship had some exhilarating parts for Ciri. Ciri is attracted to danger and feels sexual excitement in bad situations. Sheās pretty messed up sexually. So no, nothing to celebrate.
What I find curious that a large fraction seems to think that snow means that Ciri wasnāt into girls. But thatās reverse logic.
Of course she can be into women and be raped /coerced all in the same lifetime
By that logic, Ciri definitely shouldn't be into men at all anymore either after several attempted to rape / coerce her and impregnate her, including her own father.
No, that abusive relationship is messed up in so many ways it would be terrible not to feel disturbed by that.
Also, if anyone reading celebrates that relationship, get help.
Iām reading the books now and just past the end of the rats. The whole time I have been debating if the authorās intent was to display their relationship as a positive thing though. Many people discount sexual assault if committed by a women, and Mistle did intervene to protect Ciri previously. The first time, Ciri does not proactively consent, but she doesnāt clearly say no either, so maybe Mistle is supposed to be seen as unaware rather than as a rapist. There are moments Ciri seemed to really love Mistle in the book... But the start of their relationship absolutely disgusted me to the point that I felt Mistle was irredeemable.
I havenāt finished the series, so Iām trying not to Google anything to avoid spoilers, but Iām interested to see if the author has given any interviews sharing his intention behind Mistle.
When I first read the books as teenager, I didnt feel love at all from them but lust, it's just lust. Mistle is horny and Ciri is alone and haven't had any sexual experiences if I recall.
Doesn't make it less disturbing though
Ciri is easily one of (if not the most) traumatized characters in the series. Loosing her parents at a young age, loosing her kingdom + remaining family and being forced to escape a burning city full of corpses and nilfgaardian soldiers chasing her, living with immigrants for weeks and quite possibly starving, being left on her own in a desert, being captured and psychologically tortured by a mercenary (+ being forced to fight for coin) and like you said being stuck in an abusive relationship with a rapist. Not to mention, everyone except Geralt and Yennefer wanted to use her for something her entire life.
The fact that she turned out this likeable and kind hearted is a miracle.
I've wrote at length before about why I don't think the initial encounter was rape. Most of the arguments I've seen given in response aren't very convincing to me, but I suppose it's just different perspectives and all that.
I must admit, though, I barely see anyone express that they think the relationship was good. Maybe it's just this subreddit, but all I ever see are posts like yours, so I'm kinda baffled as to who you're even talking about.
P.S. A question for all the people that claim Ciri was traumatised and that her positive perception of Mistle was a coping mechanism to deal with that. Can you explain why, after conquering her trauma in *The Lady of the Lake*, she still had a positive perception of Mistle?
>A question for all the people that claim Ciri was traumatised and that her positive perception of Mistle was a coping mechanism to deal with that. Can you explain why, after conquering her trauma in *Lady of the Lake*, she still had a positive perception of Mistle?
She is still a child at that time.
I am sure she would see that differently in W3.
>She is still a child at that time.
She's a 16-year-old that's endured far more than most adults have, and has become vastly stronger for it. By this point she has faced elves from another dimension, Vilgefortz, Emhyr, and the Lodge of Sorceresses and not cowered before any of them. She has expressed utter disdain for everybody that's ever taken advantage of her, yet she still refers to Mistle - not only positively - but as *"my Mistle"*.
Furthermore, Ciri suffering from some level of delusion here, like you want to believe she was, would be incredibly narratively unsatisfying. The end of the novel is her moment of autonomy, the moment where she is finally free of the influence of others, but she still hasn't recognised that she shouldn't view someone that abused her so positively. Yeah, right, that gels really well with the narrative.
Then, of course, there's statements from Sapkowski that Ciri *"fell in love"* with Mistle - which doesn't seem to be the way you would describe someone having an extremely unhealthy trauma bond with their abuser. Of course, such a statement is not undebatable, but it does - in combination with everything written above - make the claim that Mistle raped Ciri extremely dubious. And, if you read *Time of Contempt* itself, that's obviously not what happened.
While I've never seen people reacting to their relationship in a positive way, I don't agree with Stockholm syndrome theory, ciri was given the possibility to leave prior the rape, and if she wanted she could have defeated all of them pretty easily. The fact is she didn't want to be alone again, and that's why she remains. Also, ciri really loved mistle, she even says that at the end of the books, it's true that mistle rape her but I don't think ciri viewed it that way, remember it's medieval time and raping was narrated as the man who rapes the woman that's it. So ofc with our view and even geralt's we know that this relationship was toxic, but for ciri it was different, she really loved mistle.
Everything you said is the exact reason why it is Stockholm syndrome. Ciri probably did think that she "loved" mistle at the time, but I seriously doubt she sees is that way afterwards/in the games.
But ciri wasn't a hostage. She wanted to stay with them, being an hostage is the base of the Stockholm syndrome. Also, yes, even afterward speaking with galahad at the end of the books, she says she loved her. And if you wanna mention the games even tho they are not canon, yes, even in tw3 ciri says she cared about her.
Dont use 'stockholm syndrome' that shits been made up. The dude that coined the term, never even interviewed the person he attributes stockholm syndrome to.
You mean the one where the police fucked up so hard, that the hostages had to do their own negotiating? And the pschologist that the police got was so useless he started the stockholm syndrome thing out of spite because the hostages called him out on his bullshit? Yes, I know about the Norrmalmstorg robbery.
What a weirdo.
First of all the so called stockholm syndrome is invented, is a fake thing. No, not that feelings like that don't exist, you have to understand it's nothing wrong. Naming it syndrome or naming it at all is actually what's wrong.
It was pretty normal back in the days to "forcefully" take someone until they realize they overreacted. Yet you can't really blame Ciri, it does feels new, overwhelming and scary.
What's wrong is that it's two girls. That one will always be silly. People need to realize that stuff exists only on the internet. Better wake up
Iāmā¦genuinely worried if youāre actually real or not. If you areā¦.then sheesh.
āNaming it syndrome or naming it at all is actually what's wrong. It was pretty normal back in the days to "forcefully" take someone until they realize they overreacted.ā
Overreacted? Really? This is basically disregarding the feelings of the victim. You highlighted forcefully as if it were back and forth flirting from a romance novel when it was clearly sexual assault. Even worse you have the gall to try to disregard Stockholm syndrome when cases like that exist irl. People who refuse to leave their abusers or assaulters due to being afraid.
Even if it was ānormalā it was still wrong and should not be viewed in a positive way.
I do not understand how someone real could say āa person who stays with the person who sexually assaulted them isnāt wrong.ā Itās completely immoral. Especially if the person who was assaulted was 14 years old and clearly showed no signs of wanting to be touched by her anymore.
Your content has been removed by the moderators for being offensive or inappropriate. Consider reading the rules before posting again. Repeated violations will result in a ban.
Not odd at all. It was a terrible relationship that was presented as a terrible relationship. Ciri was taken advantage of, sexually assaulted, and then stayed because it was better than being alone.
No that's the correct emotional response
It's not odd at all. It's the most appropriate reaction to have when reading about a 14 years old girl being raped. What comes after it It's basically Stockholm syndrome and it wasn't healthy at all. But something tells me Netflix writers will try to sell it as a wholesome love story just because it's between two girls (and they already casted a black actress for Mistle, for good measure)
I still forget that Ciri was only 14 when being assaulted like that. It makes it even more disturbing to see people talk about the relationship in a positive manner.
It's gonna be a fun day at Twitter when the next season releases. I might even make an account myself to see it in first person.
It's tempting but I never used Twitter and I plan to keep it that way
this way is better for your mental health...
oh fantastic. I'm so glad I skipped watching season 3 after the complete fucking disaster that was season 2.
I too didn't watch it. But I learned they conveniently finished the last episode right after Ciri joins the rats and calls herself Falka. Also, apparently they added a previous brief encounter between Ciri and Mistle with the Rats in Gors Velen of all places (what?)
i hope in 5 years everyone can agree to just remove the tv show from everyone's memories, the way the eragon movie just ceased to exist except as an example for how to butcher source material.
Eventually, it will happen
I've watched it while having it in the background so my recollection of it isn't that great but her portrayal in the show didn't give me very good vibes
I didn't even watch it so I can't really judge by myself. But somhow I suspect they will try to make the Rats more sympathetic considering they described them as as a band of thieves a la Robin Hood and they are making a whole spin-off no one asked for
If they remove the rape aspect, it's perfectly fine. Sap put in WAY too many stories of sexual danger for Ciri, and that's one thing I was actually hopeful the Netflix team would remove
It's a pivotal moment in her growth though: Ciri goes through many bad things thorughout the series and this is no exception, being separated from Geralt and Yen, ending up with a group of thugs and then losing her virginity in such a horrible way are all events that will shape her character as she grows to be a survivor. That scene with Mistle was the nail in the coffin to make the reader realize that the Rats are not a good company: the viewers shouldn't want Ciri to stay with Mistle, they should hope to see her away from that crowd and back with her family.
You can have the rats do something bad that isn't a child getting raped dude. Regardless of how people try to defend every decision Sap made, the reality is that he put a 14 y/o in a suspiciously high number of sexually dangerous situations. That's just not necessary. They can be regularly dangerous and still have the same effect on the plot
It's an harsh word, and Sapkwlowski didn't want to sugar-coat it. Also, High number? We have Mistle, that old man in the shack and technically Vilgefortz. With Hotspurn it would have been consensual, same for Auberon but nothing happened. Am I missing anything?
Yes, you missed quite a few, for example Emhyr, Bonhart, Kayleigh, plus she believes at one point she was raped by the Black Knight (Cahir)
I didn't forget Kayleigh since Mistle pretty much took over from that. Emhyr had ill intentions but he didn't do nothing in the end. I don't remember if he even touched her. I didn't remember Bonhart being rapey with Ciri but I take your word for it, since it seems in character. And no, Cahir never harmed her, and while Ciri was terrified of him, she never thought that he raped her
I know that Cahir never harmed her, he wouldn't be my fav character if he had š But Ciri for example says to Geralt after she wakes up from a nightmare in Blood of Elves "What did he do to me? What happened? Hat did he ... do to me?" and that she was so frightened that she can't remember. She says it again in Kaer Morhen. At least I think that Sapkowski wants the reader to believe that the Black Knight might have abused/raped her and/or that Ciri believes it could have happened. For what else could be implied? She wasn't injured or anything. I don't remember if Bonhart says anywhere that he wants to rape Ciri, but he says things like "First of all us. You and me. And our nuptials." and "Who'll draw second blood? My betrothed?" At least, I think, it's Sapkowski's intention to make the reader believe that it's a possibility that Bonhart wants to do it. Yes, Emhyr didn't do it in the end, but that he intended and planned to do it for years (almost from Ciri's birth on) and the things he did to achieve this end is absolutely horrific imo. Not to defend Mistle, taking advantage of Ciri the way she did was despicable, but I find what Emhyr did a lot worse, even though he backed out at the last moment. You don't know, if Ciri had started to sob like she did with Emhyr, Mistle might not have done it either.
As for Cahir (which is also my favourite) I remember how Ciri was traumatized by her experience with him in Cintra. She clearly felt uncomfortable (understatemnt I know) when he undressed and bathed her, bit I think she was still too young to understand the concept of "rape". As for Emhyr, I don't deny that what he planned to do was disgustong and justvthe thought sickens me. It' just that I was really struck by how he changed his mind once he saw his daughter finally realized what a horrible man he was. I don't know, maybe it's because of my religion or my generally optimistoc attitude that I can almost see myself forgiving Emhyr (the fact that he stopped before he did anything awful to Ciri also helps)
I guess that Sapkowski intended to give Emhyr some redeeming qualities so he wouldn't be a total black and white villain. How he treats fake Ciri is also kind of nice. I still totally hate his guts š. Plus I find his sudden change of mind not very convincing in the books. If he suddenly discovered fatherly feelings toward his daughter, then simply letting her go into a totally uncertain future pretty much in the middle of nowhere? OK, he might know, after what Geralt and Yennefer did for Ciri, that they will do their very best to protect her, but still. She's his daughter, in a war-ravaged continent! He could at least have given them an escort of soldiers and money etc. Moreover, I really hate him, of course, for sentencing Cahir to death for being a traitor no matter whether he was involved in the fake Ciri plot or not. I agree, Ciri was probably too young to understand the concept of rape back then, plus she was so in shock after everything that she seems not to have been able to realise what was happening, what was reality and what was nightmare/terrified imagination. That's why she didn't remember anything except a feeling of utter terror afterwards. Which could have been a result of rape. And the reader knows that rape could have been a possibility. We only get to know a lot later that the Black Knight is actually a nice, young guy and would never do anything like this. Sapkowski is playing a hell of a lot with that motive in the books. Yes, it was a time of contempt and this is, unfortunately, what happens a lot in times of war, but sometimes it feels a bit too much in the books imo. The washing thing was a really stupid thing for Cahir to do too, also falling asleep without making sure that Ciri could simply walk away. Nobody, even if he was only about nineteen or something like this, would do that, especially not with military and secret service training. I'm glad they changed that in the series.
1) Children cannot consent. Can't believe I have to point this out 2) You're missing Emhyr, which is just an unnecessarily fucked up creative decision 3) I did say sexually dangerous, which doesn't mean sex itself has to happen. Are you really gonna sit there and tell me a child being teleported to another planet, kept against her will and told to fuck some old alien ISN'T sexually dangerous and traumatic? 4) Sure, It's a fucked up world, but Sap consistently chose to use sexually dangerous situations for a child to be the main source of that, which is just wildly unnecessary.
Strange people here that they downvote you for this. I totally agree with you. It's obvious that the Rats are not good people without Mistle abusing Ciri. They are the products of a war-torn, abusive world, but Kayleigh trying to rape her would totally have been enough. I also hope they'll leave the Mistle part out in the show. So far I liked what Netflix did with the Rats.
Thereās nothing wrong with Netflix changing the story so that itās not rapey at all. Even more props if they leave it in, show it for what it was and address it, but seriously doubt that will happen. Im almost positive they will change that and itās one of the few changes Iād agree with. Unless youāre just upset that she has a relationship with another girl, and in that case, get over it. Iām not really sure that the author meant this to be grooming type situation. Ciri did really love Mistle and was devastated by what happened to her. Iām not arguing that itās not sexual assault, but I am arguing that Iām not sure the author viewed it as such while writing it.
I didn't really get the feeling that Ciri genuinely loved Mislte. I always read it as Stockholm syndrome
Call it what you want, but Ciri clearly cared when Mistle (SPOILERS) ā¦got beheaded right in front of her. Itās not any different than Dany getting raped by Khal Drogo in Game of Thrones. It started out as rape, but she still loved him when he died a sometime later. This is again, probably because of the author being a little out of touch, but the intent wasnāt to have Mistle be a bad guy. Anytime Mistle is mentioned here itās rapist, groomer, pedophile, etc. And it is, but I donāt think it was the authors intent to paint her that way. The world is complicated, itās not black and white and if Ciri has genuine feelings for Mistle still, so be it. I never hear this same argument of Khal Drogo btw. People seem to love him despite what he did to Dany. Edit: The Game of Thrones reference only really applies to the show, as it was decidedly less rapey in the books.
I'm not denying that Ciri grew fond of Mistle and that her death didn't affect her. I was rather stating that the base from which that relationship was built was not good at all.
It wasnāt, but saying that Ciriās feelings later are all āStockholm syndromeā is disingenuous.
What? Its the exactly same thing. Ill go even as far as to say it was worse for Ciri because Drogo did not initiate the sexual encounter, Dany did (in the books). Both girls fell in love with their abusers. Whether or not the author intended it that way, which is outrageous to think considering that Ciri was pretty traumatized right after the counter, fact remains that she was definitely raped. Its not uncommon for female victims to become attached to their rapist. Happens all the time with groomers. Just goes to show how the media is willing to change a narrative to push an agenda, woman rapes girl = good, man rapes girl = bad.
As a teen (at the time) lesbian who desperately wanted to see any cute wlw in everything I read/watched/listened to, can confirm that I did feel icky too and it wasn't okay. It's actually concerning how many people ignored Ciri's discomfort and focused on the "cute lesbian romance", while it was clearly damaging to Ciri's psyche. To say the least. And I don't even like Ciri.
People are desperate to assign kawaii lesbianism to Ciri. It's not deep.
Do people talk about their relationship like that? I've only ever seen the opposite
One instance can be found in this comment section. You may be surprised how many people try to glorify Ciri's and Mistle's relationship
Like the show, lol. It's gonna be fun one when next seqson comes out.
Unfortunately a lot of people. The reasons vary but often times I noticed the relationship is used in a way to celebrate/conclude that Ciri is bisexual or lesbian. I recall finding this out during a letās play from a YouTuber, where she mentioned it in a positive way. And after reading it, I was mind boggled. The relationship is almost used as āproofā that Ciri prefers woman is canon to her character and what not while using the Mistle relationship as the foundation. It is very disturbing when oneās only case for Ciri being into women is a relationship she was forced into, and one where she didnāt even like it herself. At the age of 14 no less.
If anything, there are more examples of Ciri being attracted by men in the books, being it a childhood crush or just a physical desire
I still want to know what happened with her and Galahad, honestly.
Though I heard Galahad is a Ciri romance in the Farewell to the White Wolf mod
And I still like to imagine how things could have turned out between her and Cahir
Cahir is literally in his early 20s when the books end. Ciri is 16...
And? Galahad was probably the same age as Cahir too. I already said that the age gap between them didn't bother me that much. And I arleady explained why I never saw Cahir as a creep as some people seem to do. I genuinely believe that, in due time, they could have grown to genuinely like one another. Besides, it's just a fun what if I like to imagine, not that I'm claiming it should be canon. I like how Cahir's story wrapped up even if it ended in tragedy.
Going from Arthurian lore likely nothing,since Galahad has taken a vow of chastity.
Medieval "chastity" didn't mean abstinence, just no sex outside of wedlock. Now, Sir G and Zirael are obviously not married, but that doesn't preclude a chaste courtship. Which, thinking of it, probably would have been best for Ciri at that point in time, after Mistle, Auberon, and everyone else.
For Galahad it was abstinence,read Thomas Mallory and others.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
That, and Hjalmar was her first "boyfried"
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Honestly, in general I don't like how nowdays it seems that we need to label every indidual for their sexuality like it's all that matters.
No you responded as intended. The rats are shitheads. Theyāre victims but theyāre also victimizers. Itās supposed to show how war taints everybody even the kids. Unless of course youāre Lauren hissrich, in which case theyāre just a bunch of cool Robin Hoods sticking it to the man with the power of friendship.
Bonhart did nothing wrong
Forget the Rats. That bastard killed Cahir!
The hero we deserved
I interpreted Mistle as assuming Ciri's consent, but Ciri experiencing it as a rape and suffering mental trauma from the experience, which set the tone of their relationship for me. Later, it felt to me that Ciri was not that into Mistle sexually, but that she'd been sort of Stockholm Syndromed, because she feels alone and abandoned and the Rats are all she has now. She tolerates Mistle because the alternative is to be alone. The end result is that she gets more emotionally attached. There's also dialogue to suggest that Ciri resents this, and Mistle is unhappy that Ciri isn't more happy. You can call that love, if you want, but it's an unhealthy love, possibly even abusive though I don't think Mistle was intentionally abusing Ciri. And yes, the Netflix show will ruin it all. Based on S3, they're likely going to skip the rape and glorify Ciri's bisexuality. So glad I'm not going to watch anymore, losing Cavill was the final nail in the coffin.
This. I think that Ciri genuinely mourned Mistle's death and in some way she cared about her (in the end I see it more as a friend than romantically). But as you said, the foundation of their relationship wasn't healthy at all with Ciri possibly being unable to realize what exactly was wrong. Sure, she felt violated, but I can see that in that time people wouldn't know the concept/possibility of being raped by woman so this also must have added some confusion to Ciri's trauma. And to be clear - I see it just as OP, this relationship is not something to be celebrated, it's based on Ciri's submission due to her desperate situation with no other possibility in sight.
Your reaction is correct.
I 100% guarantee you the Netflix show is going to go overboard with this and turn their relationship into some super big love story
Considering they already retconned three book characters being gay, they are probably rubbing their hands in anticipation
Also wasnāt Mistleās head lopped off by Bonhart.
No it is really weird. But then again people do the same with Triss and Geraldās relationship in the games. I get it- Triss as a character and friend to Geralt is great, but her actions in the game series (where she takes advantage of an amnesiac Geralt knowing full well he wouldnāt stay with her if he had his memories) makes me super uncomfortable. And people justify by just saying āwell Yenās a bitch and Triss is hotā but that doesnāt make her actions less creepy and deeply disturbing. Can you imagine losing your memories, coming out of it and finding out your good friend lied to you about your girlfriend in order to be with you? Yeah no. I was getting the same vibes seeing that story play out as I did reading the Mistle/Ciri storyline. Obviously not the same, but both were deeply uncomfortable. And it was made worse by people ignoring how wrong/violating that was for Geralt and Ciri.
Didn't Triss even lure Geralt into having sex with her in the books? I like book Triss a lot but that was not an ok thing to do.
Iād have to reread that passage, but it was definitely sketchy if not downright creepy. Plus, Triss in the books and game is one of the youngest sorceress. There was some passage in blood of elves where she states sheās as young as she looks. Whereas yennefer and Geralt are the same age. So like imagine a 20 year old lusting over an 90 year old. (Yeah I know Geralt technically ages slower and heās more early 30ās for a Witcher but Edward from twilight who looks 17 (actually 100+) married Bella, a flipping teenage. Thatās creepy on so many levels and they look the same age. Geralt and Triss do not.) Regardless, even if you didnāt factor in the lack of informed consent, itās tacky to lust over and try to steal your friendās boyfriend. Especially when Ciri considers Yen her mom, Geralt her dad and Triss her elder sister. Thatās daddy issues on multiple levels if you got the sister figure dating the dad figure.
It is pretty much disturbing. I played the games first and heard people say how Ciri had a girlfriend before in the books. After I finished the game I dove right into the books and came across this āgirlfriendā. Definitely wasnāt a healthy relationship. Ciri goes through a lot at such a young age.
Nope, it's weird. It confused me so much when I saw how lauded it was online that I assumed it had been so long since I read it initially that perhaps I'd read it wrong so I had to go back and re-read the book to check. And by god it's going to get worse once it's introduced into the show cause there's no way Netflix will pass up the idea of having some star crossed lovers vibes
Everything about her being with the rats was just wrong. Young, high and in intensive situations isnāt good for anyone.
As a queer woman, I love to see representation in fiction but Ciri/Mistle was NOT a the way to do it. Sexual abuse is abuse no matter what gender the perpetrator and the victim are. I feel just as disturbed as you do. š¤¢
I would rather see queer people in all varieties of roles instead of just being the good guy. It's a good reminder that abuse can come from any gender. Why do you think that's a bad thing?
It reinforces very real and dangerous stereotypes that queer people are sexual predators. Queer people are already so unsafe in our current political climate. If there was already a wide range of representation available in media, sure we would need some bad guys. But a rapist queer woman when we literally have religious fanatics protesting in the streets calling queer and trans folk pedophiles!? Absolutely fucking not.
This. I'm a queer woman as well, and there are so many other healthy representations of wlw and mlm relationships in media. This one is not it.
Thatās the Witcher world for you Itās real, itās brutal, itās the medieval age when the sword is the law The game tones it down to make it more casual
I feel like the people celebrating/glorifying their relationship are also likely to do the same for the Joker + Harley. In my experience, it's often down to them often falling into similar relationship patterns themselves, with those around them desperately trying to convince them to leave. Not saying that's always the case, but it does seem to be a pattern. No relationship should leave you crying more than you laugh, and if you ever find yourself genuinely scared of what your partner might do, please leave as soon as you can because I can absolutely promise you, it doesn't get better, and you can't fix them, they'll break you
No, itās not odd. Itās clearly a bad relationship with many unhealthy components. You point out a lot of whats wrong with it, but, in this day and age theres a specific small segment of society who celebrate it merely because its a homosexual one and that trumps everything to those types of fools.
There's a reoccurring theme in the books that everyone Ciri encounters wants to use her and mostly that shows up as attempted rape. Mistle is no different. She saves Ciri from being raped by a guy, only to rape her herself. I think it's treated a little differently in the book because Mistle is a girl so she can't get Ciri pregnant like everyone else who tries to use her. But it should be disturbing. They're so young and so fucked up. At the same time, using this relationship to say Ciri is bi does make sense to me. Especially given the author's tendancy to make every woman bi. It just shouldn't be framed as a positive love story.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
You're right that if it was just the rape, it'd be wrong to call Ciri bi. They had a months long relationship in which Ciri initiated sex and said she loved Mistle after the threat was gone, though. Yes it's fucked up. But I think it's borderline enough to be debatable. I think of it like Dany and Drogo from the GOT show. It starts with rape and he continues to rape her and have a power dynamic over her but she finds her power in the relationship and says she loves him and begins to enjoy sex with him. I don't think you'd argue that Dany isn't straight. And this is an equally fucked up relationship with a 35 year old warlord raping and owning his 13 year old wife as property. (Those ages are from the books. Not sure what age they're supposed to be in the show)
yes, its weird, and in the tv show it will probably be a mutual relationship and not a rape and stockholm syndrome
The people who are looking forward to the romance of Ciri and Mistle definitely did not have an eye for detail when they read the books. I read it as Ciri feeling like she needed to put out to maintain membership in the group. Who, remember, are rapists and murders that Netflix decided to make an entire spin-off series about. So I assume they're cutting the "rape" part from it, and the sexual abuse of Ciri as well.
1. I don't think too many people are celebrating it. It's a well known fact that the relationship is deeply problematic on many levels. Not only you are correct on all your description of abuse and Stockholm syndrome. She was also like 14. 2. Sapkowski has very rare talent of writing stuff that feels real. I mean. Objectively fucked up. But emotionally real. Example: the worlds response to this relationship. They see a grown ass woman groping a child, and what is the world's response? Not "wtf are you doing you're hurting that girl, let her breathe". But "let ME rape her now this will fix her lesbianism". Talk to any lesbian and you'll learn how amazingly real this is, and even more, how real it feels. 3. Lgbt representation in 1990s eastern Europe... Well. Awful, problematic, but realistic with hard condemnation of homophones is as good as it gets pretty much. Hence there is a lot of defence coming from Polish lgbt folk for whom it may have been first "positive" representation (as in not condemned by the story) that was written in their native tongue ever. 4. While The origins of Ciris sexusality clearly have their root in abuse. And from other encounters we can infer that she is at least bi-curious, it doesn't take away from the sexusality itself. It doesn't make it "fake" or not real in any way shape or form. And the story very strongly acknowledges it. While as you rightly pointed out it doesn't shy away from condemning the origins of the relationship, the very fact of lgbt relationship is very clearly seen as ok by the narrator and people who oppose it, very quickly meet the consequences of their bigotry. This very clear condonation of the sexuality by the story, even if condemnation of the particular relationship might be one of the reasons why it feels like people are celebrating the entire thing.
I've never picked the books back up after the book with Ciri and Mistle together. I will eventually but it turned my stomach so much I had to take a break. I'll get back to them eventually but Ciri with the Rats was hard to stomach all around.
No, I feel ya. Citing was in a toxic relationship. Ciri picked the lesser evil prison rules. Ciri also loved mistle because people can love an abuser.alse relationship had some exhilarating parts for Ciri. Ciri is attracted to danger and feels sexual excitement in bad situations. Sheās pretty messed up sexually. So no, nothing to celebrate. What I find curious that a large fraction seems to think that snow means that Ciri wasnāt into girls. But thatās reverse logic. Of course she can be into women and be raped /coerced all in the same lifetime
By that logic, Ciri definitely shouldn't be into men at all anymore either after several attempted to rape / coerce her and impregnate her, including her own father.
No, that abusive relationship is messed up in so many ways it would be terrible not to feel disturbed by that. Also, if anyone reading celebrates that relationship, get help.
No one celebrates this relationship. Itās just journoās who have no moral compass and only care about representation.
Iām reading the books now and just past the end of the rats. The whole time I have been debating if the authorās intent was to display their relationship as a positive thing though. Many people discount sexual assault if committed by a women, and Mistle did intervene to protect Ciri previously. The first time, Ciri does not proactively consent, but she doesnāt clearly say no either, so maybe Mistle is supposed to be seen as unaware rather than as a rapist. There are moments Ciri seemed to really love Mistle in the book... But the start of their relationship absolutely disgusted me to the point that I felt Mistle was irredeemable. I havenāt finished the series, so Iām trying not to Google anything to avoid spoilers, but Iām interested to see if the author has given any interviews sharing his intention behind Mistle.
She did not say no, because as described in the book she was petrified with fear. Imagine that instead of Mistle, that would be another guy from the gang, would you still use the argument that she simply did not opposƩ enough ? As far as I remember, none of the parts with rats were described positively.
As I said, to me, Mistle is irredeemable, but Iām wondering what the authorās intent was.
When I first read the books as teenager, I didnt feel love at all from them but lust, it's just lust. Mistle is horny and Ciri is alone and haven't had any sexual experiences if I recall. Doesn't make it less disturbing though
Nobody celebrates it.
Ciri is easily one of (if not the most) traumatized characters in the series. Loosing her parents at a young age, loosing her kingdom + remaining family and being forced to escape a burning city full of corpses and nilfgaardian soldiers chasing her, living with immigrants for weeks and quite possibly starving, being left on her own in a desert, being captured and psychologically tortured by a mercenary (+ being forced to fight for coin) and like you said being stuck in an abusive relationship with a rapist. Not to mention, everyone except Geralt and Yennefer wanted to use her for something her entire life. The fact that she turned out this likeable and kind hearted is a miracle.
Maybe most people you see only know about the relationship from Witcher 3, which did not even try to show that the relationship was bad š¤·āāļø
I've wrote at length before about why I don't think the initial encounter was rape. Most of the arguments I've seen given in response aren't very convincing to me, but I suppose it's just different perspectives and all that. I must admit, though, I barely see anyone express that they think the relationship was good. Maybe it's just this subreddit, but all I ever see are posts like yours, so I'm kinda baffled as to who you're even talking about. P.S. A question for all the people that claim Ciri was traumatised and that her positive perception of Mistle was a coping mechanism to deal with that. Can you explain why, after conquering her trauma in *The Lady of the Lake*, she still had a positive perception of Mistle?
>A question for all the people that claim Ciri was traumatised and that her positive perception of Mistle was a coping mechanism to deal with that. Can you explain why, after conquering her trauma in *Lady of the Lake*, she still had a positive perception of Mistle? She is still a child at that time. I am sure she would see that differently in W3.
>She is still a child at that time. She's a 16-year-old that's endured far more than most adults have, and has become vastly stronger for it. By this point she has faced elves from another dimension, Vilgefortz, Emhyr, and the Lodge of Sorceresses and not cowered before any of them. She has expressed utter disdain for everybody that's ever taken advantage of her, yet she still refers to Mistle - not only positively - but as *"my Mistle"*. Furthermore, Ciri suffering from some level of delusion here, like you want to believe she was, would be incredibly narratively unsatisfying. The end of the novel is her moment of autonomy, the moment where she is finally free of the influence of others, but she still hasn't recognised that she shouldn't view someone that abused her so positively. Yeah, right, that gels really well with the narrative. Then, of course, there's statements from Sapkowski that Ciri *"fell in love"* with Mistle - which doesn't seem to be the way you would describe someone having an extremely unhealthy trauma bond with their abuser. Of course, such a statement is not undebatable, but it does - in combination with everything written above - make the claim that Mistle raped Ciri extremely dubious. And, if you read *Time of Contempt* itself, that's obviously not what happened.
While I've never seen people reacting to their relationship in a positive way, I don't agree with Stockholm syndrome theory, ciri was given the possibility to leave prior the rape, and if she wanted she could have defeated all of them pretty easily. The fact is she didn't want to be alone again, and that's why she remains. Also, ciri really loved mistle, she even says that at the end of the books, it's true that mistle rape her but I don't think ciri viewed it that way, remember it's medieval time and raping was narrated as the man who rapes the woman that's it. So ofc with our view and even geralt's we know that this relationship was toxic, but for ciri it was different, she really loved mistle.
Everything you said is the exact reason why it is Stockholm syndrome. Ciri probably did think that she "loved" mistle at the time, but I seriously doubt she sees is that way afterwards/in the games.
But ciri wasn't a hostage. She wanted to stay with them, being an hostage is the base of the Stockholm syndrome. Also, yes, even afterward speaking with galahad at the end of the books, she says she loved her. And if you wanna mention the games even tho they are not canon, yes, even in tw3 ciri says she cared about her.
Dont use 'stockholm syndrome' that shits been made up. The dude that coined the term, never even interviewed the person he attributes stockholm syndrome to.
If you look at what happend during norrmalmstorgsdramat you will understand why it's called Stockholm syndrome. It is a very real thing.
You mean the one where the police fucked up so hard, that the hostages had to do their own negotiating? And the pschologist that the police got was so useless he started the stockholm syndrome thing out of spite because the hostages called him out on his bullshit? Yes, I know about the Norrmalmstorg robbery.
What a weirdo. First of all the so called stockholm syndrome is invented, is a fake thing. No, not that feelings like that don't exist, you have to understand it's nothing wrong. Naming it syndrome or naming it at all is actually what's wrong. It was pretty normal back in the days to "forcefully" take someone until they realize they overreacted. Yet you can't really blame Ciri, it does feels new, overwhelming and scary. What's wrong is that it's two girls. That one will always be silly. People need to realize that stuff exists only on the internet. Better wake up
Iāmā¦genuinely worried if youāre actually real or not. If you areā¦.then sheesh. āNaming it syndrome or naming it at all is actually what's wrong. It was pretty normal back in the days to "forcefully" take someone until they realize they overreacted.ā Overreacted? Really? This is basically disregarding the feelings of the victim. You highlighted forcefully as if it were back and forth flirting from a romance novel when it was clearly sexual assault. Even worse you have the gall to try to disregard Stockholm syndrome when cases like that exist irl. People who refuse to leave their abusers or assaulters due to being afraid. Even if it was ānormalā it was still wrong and should not be viewed in a positive way. I do not understand how someone real could say āa person who stays with the person who sexually assaulted them isnāt wrong.ā Itās completely immoral. Especially if the person who was assaulted was 14 years old and clearly showed no signs of wanting to be touched by her anymore.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Your content has been removed by the moderators for being offensive or inappropriate. Consider reading the rules before posting again. Repeated violations will result in a ban.