Here me out on this.
We've all read romance stories where the male lead is already in a relationship with the second female lead, and things normally go well for them. Then - BOOM - enter Y/N, and out of nowhere, male lead starts catching feelings and chemistry between them happens and he leaves the second female lead for Y/N and they live happily ever after. Basically, Y/N stole another woman’s man and destroyed a relationship.
So what keeps us from actually seeing it that way?
Plot armour. It's either the second female lead is mean, toxic, manipulative, or controlling. The Male lead suddenly realises he's not happy being with the second female lead. The second female lead cheated on him. Or he's forced to be with the second female lead.
The perception that Y/N is automatically the hero/good in the story that we completely overlook and not criticize or question her as a character. Most of the time, readers automatically take her side granted if the authors provide a reason good enough to.
If the roles were reversed where Y/N was put in the role of the second female lead as the second female lead being put as a homewrecker, we'd automatically take Y/N's side, drag the second female lead or burn her to the stake and throw all kinds of slander at her.
And even if Y/N is actually portrayed as the homewrecker, she still won't receive as much backlash as the second female lead because of plot armour and because of the fact that she's the protagonist. Not to mention that when someone does call out Y/N for her behaviour or even question or criticize their character in the story, some readers try to justify her actions regardless of how questionable they are.
And sometimes, no scratch that, A LOT of the times it is frustrating and annoying how authors and the narrative keeps rewarding the Y/Ns and the FMCs for their bad actions but are more than willing to punish the second female lead for doing the same thing if not worse.
You want an example?
Ginny from Ginny and Georgia.
Before Ginny fully disrupted things, Marcus Baker was in a casual, ongoing relationship with Padma. Padma wasn't toxic, cruel, or a bully. She was a sweet person who genuinely cared for Marcus, even though this angst bad boy wanna was emotionally unavailable and and out here cheating on her with Ginny.
Ginny moved to Wellsbury and immediately forms a intense, secretive connection with Marcus. Despite knowing that this nigga already has a boo thang, and despite getting into a committed relationship with Hunter herself, this bitch STILL decides to sneak into Marcus’s room, sleeps with him and engages in emotional and physical infidelity with this nigga.
And instead of the narrative holding Ginny accountable for being a homewrecker to Padma's situationship (and a cheater to Hunter), the plot bends over backward to make Ginny the victim of her own love triangle. The show focuses heavily on Ginny’s internal angst, her identity struggles, and her overwhelming trauma. Because her life is so chaotic, the narrative implies she deserves the comfort of Marcus and vice versa, completely sidelining the fact that she is hurting other people to get it.
And worse, the narrative rewards Ginny’s actions when she gets with Marcus on and off but still sell this idea and propaganda that these two are “soulmates” and ‘are meant to be together” and “they have more chemistry so they work so well together.”
BULL. FUCKING. SHIT.
I mean, it's okay to sympathetise and understand a character and to give them flaws to make them as realistic and human as possible. But I’m not sitting through episodes and seasons of this ship and squealing, and giggling and kicking my feet like they’re this IT power couple when the reason and how they even got together in the first place was built on cheating and infidelity and the destruction of other people’s relationships.
Maybe if I was like 13 to 18 years old I would have bought and supported this propaganda. But as an 26 year old adult who have read enough stories and seen enough movies and tv to be able to spot and notice this pattern?
Hell nah.