“She knocks him out so hard, she sends him out of the story completely” this took me out 😅😂😂😂

Penelope has always been Lady Whistledown. However, no one knows that until book 4. Them telling the audience in Season 1 ruined the surprise readers got when the book first came out.

They should’ve change the scene from deception/SA to something more believable for Daphnes character:

Daphne and Simon have consensual sex, Simon gets carried away. Daphne is confused by Simon’s frustration at the situation AND at the contents he has left in her. She asks the maid, the maid tells her what semen is/how women become pregnant. Daphne gets mad, confronts Simon, they fight, she leaves.
Simon realizes a life without Daphne isn’t worth living, Daphne has a miscarriage scare (bleeding during pregnancy, not uncommon but still scary as it can indicate a miscarriage),
And Simon realizes he wants children with her. She has the baby, the end.

In the show, Simon does stutter as an adult a few times, when he's embarrassed or his emotions are running high. Just wanted to point that out! I remember it vividly because I thought it was an endearing and meaningful detail. It showed the character's vulnerability behind all the walls he's built to protect himself.

I really can’t grasp how the writers managed to make the rape scene even WORSE bc it wasn’t that hard to change and make it unproblematic. The scene could stay the exact same. Only difference: instead of Simon saying „stop“ and „Daphne no“ clearly not wanting to continue the sex act, he should’ve just enjoyed the entire time. They should’ve made him so aroused that he just forgot to pull out or push off Daphne and didn’t realise what happened until it’s already over and then he’s started panicking

in the books, penelope is lady whistledown but nobody, not even the readers, knew until her own book which is the fourth one.

I don't know why they didn't just take that scene out. The conflict could have just been Daphne finding out Simon was choosing not to have kids rather than being incapable of having them. They could have argued and she could have initiated the split. Then he could have told her his whole backstory and explained the reasons. And he could even have had his whole "I don't want my terrible father to control me" epiphany if that was what the writers wanted.

My main issue is that, at least in the show what he's doing to her, prior to her learning about sex, is also assault. He knew she wasn't educated, made no effort to bring her into the loop and continued to have sex with her without informed consent. He was fully & knowingly taking advantage of her.  

This doesn't make what she did any better, and by God what she did in the book is awful but it does add more nuance to the situation when you consider the fact that they both sexually assaulted their partner.

They should have made her get pregnant because his method of birth control is not the best and then she has a miscarr1age and he realizes he wants children.

This is just my opinion, having read the book and seen some parts of the show. But I would say that historical context does matter here. First, I will just say that what Daphne did was terrible regardless but because Shondaland decided to make this 'alternative history' version of the regency era where a lot of modern-day principles are incorporated into the setting and the story, it was probably worse in the show. In the book, it wasn't an alternative version of the regency era-it was just the regency era. Different rules, difference principles, different ideas of right and wrong. Eloise wasn't some mega-feminist: she was nosy and a little gossipy but otherwise a fairly ordinary young woman of her time. And back then, the concept of non-consensual sex between a married couple was nearly non-existent. Let alone, dubious consent from one of them being intoxicated. Due to the book being firmly set within the regency era, Daphne wouldn't have known it was wrong because, back then, dubious consent from intoxication wasn't seen as wrong in that time. Not to the full extent that it is today. In the show however, the society created from this alternative history changes Daphne's understanding of dubious consent. We all know how simple games are played: by the rules. If the rules include modern principles in a show vaguely set in the regency era, and that said-principles are often acknowledged, then we play that game with those rules in consideration.

What she did was horrible either way; I'm not questioning that. What makes it worse in the show is that we know that she knows what she did was horrible. In the book, she doesn't and after some conflicting inner-monologue, Simon isn't sure if what she did was wrong either, as he could remember at least enjoying it. If society says it's okay, mustn't it be okay? While I'm not big on all the changes made because of this tweaking of history, I can at least acknowledge that the Bridgerton show setting is creative. But when it unknowingly makes changes to some important plot-points of the book, it can be problematic. Dominic Noble brought it up in his review of 'The viscount who loved me'. Queen Charlotte, a woman who's Kingdom colonised and terrorized India, being not only a woman of colour herself but also on good terms with the Sharma family, an Indian family? It's more than a little problematic when you're dealing with actual history.

I felt the same way about the adult stutter, and I was wondering your take on that problematic scene. I was just now curious when the book was published because the way even authors will approach historical fiction changes sometimes based on current societies views.  (It was published in 2000, so written in the 90s probably).  I agree that some things they added are really nice.   Some changes I hate.   I think maybe I prefer the problematic scene from the book just because it wasn’t premeditated and it was coming from a more historical view versus the tv show being a more modern take on it.

I've never read the books, but book Daphne seems like a way more interesting character. I know that certain tropes are overdone and the show probably wanted to avoid that. But they still could have blended their idea for her with the book version more.  Keep her beautiful. Maybe have it be her 2nd year instead of her 3rd. She could have even been named the diamond of the season that year, because she learned all the tricks from her last season.  Still have her be seen as a bro bc she spends so much time with her brothers.  Or even spin it so that's just what she thinks, but those guys are actually into her but not ready to settle down yet, and she's their friend's sister so they'd never do anything inappropriate.  Have Simon meet her when he sees her punch a guy in the face bc he was being creepy. That would have been a way better way to immediately catch his interest.  It's nice to hear Simon still had the stutter in the book.  I think the show could have kept it so he only had it when he was emotional, letting him keep the rake reputation.  That Daphne sees right through; it would have been so much funner.  He could have stuttered around Daphne, bc he was in love with her. We could have avoided that scene all together and the conflict could have been that he lied to Daphne; he told her he couldn't have children, not that he didn't want children. Daphne took that to mean he was physically unable. Once she learns about his "seed", they could have had it out. That alone could have been the conflict and drama, bc Daphne did want children.  Then Simon shares his past, they make up, yada yada. Or it could lead to Simon telling her his history before THAT scene.  And instead of Daphne doing what she did, have them both get drunk together.  Daphne drinking with Simon in solidarity,  bc she loves him despite being mad af, and also hearing all that has made her need a drink.  Instead of anyone taking advantage, they could both just start off cuddling, but start feeling frisky due to being drunk and do the do.  Except instead of having Daphne do what she did, have her still...in the same location. Simon is drunk and not as in control of his facilities as he thinks, so he ah, releases his seed earlier than intended.  They could have even had him still say stop and Daphne does, but it happens just as she goes still.  Then the conflict and drama is Simon THINKS Daphne seduced him to get a baby, and Daphne being hurt that he thinks she would do that after learning about his past, while also still being mad/hurt that he lied to her instead of sharing his past and his reasons for not wanting children.

Never read the book, but honestly watching the show for the first time I was exciting thinking the showrunners were going the "no kids" route. So many romance stories treat children like the be-all-end-all of marriage, but a lot of people either can't have or don't want kids. They could've taken out the plot twist and just made Simon infertile, or even kept it, and it would've been interesting to see a plot where Daphne found a way to accept it because she loved him. People can be happy in a relationship without children, and I think it would've resonated with a lot of people to see that explored, especially because it's so rare in a story like this. But sadly, it was not to be. Both the author and the showrunners gave us a predictable story (though I blame the author less, since she was writing to sell books to a specific market and not a huge Netflix audience), and by the end of it all I was left thinking that Daphne and Simon learned nothing and were using children as a temporary band-aid for a toxic marriage 😐 It doesn't help that Simon's actor dropped out of the following seasons, it really makes it feel like their whole relationship broke down and he can't even be around her anymore 😂

For me the "can't have kids" lie was pretty awful. In the show she seemed to be looking forward to marriage, to children, to the life her mom raised her to expect. I'm not excusing her, I'm merely stating they are both wrong in this. He lied to his wife, the one he supposedly loves so much he's willing to never allow her to have what she so wanted, lie to her about his inability that she does not initially understand and trap her with him.  I can't really get down with the "I love you too much to be truthful with you." style of romance.  Again not excusing her behavior but (if we were on reddit) they're both the asshole.

Why didn’t they get rid of that scene? Completely agreed that it ruined their romance. They could have had Simon become more comfortable with having a kid when they decide to drop the surname Basset & change/change back to Bridgerton, or sold the estate, or similar. Also, let Daphne be a tomboy. Let Simon have a stutter.

“Greater of two evils” - both are just plain bad. You can debate specifics all you want, but both book and movie Daphne’s decisions are abhorrent and disgusting.

7 months late but I wanted to say I've understood the scene differently. Yes, it was really horrible but it seemed like a justified vengeance. I've felt with her because for months she didn't understand what was being done to her body. She thinks he has a condition, worries about him, asks him if "it" hurts him. Then she finds out it's not that, she feels lied to and that her body was used in the way that she didn't conset to. That's how I see it, I think she felt he took advantage of her innocence.

@10:00 he did stutter in the show, at least the one time I noticed was a scene when he was watching her dance with other man and lady Danbury was asking him if everything was alright, and he stuttered.
And I haven't read the books, so that was a pretty cool moment in the show where it showed me that the feelings he's feeling for Daphne bring out like the vulnerable child he was.  
And also I read someone else in these comments that said he also stuttered in the scene after she forced herself on him and he asked her "what have you done?"

Please continue this discussion for the other seasons books

I'm shocked you simply came up on my home page !
I'm definitely subscribing and waiting to watch you grow :)))