Emma Swan: 1000% done with your infuriating optimism

[YaddaYadda]

17 minutes ago, TheGreenKnight said:

I wonder though, hasn't Emma often said in regards to her childhood that she felt like she was abandoned throughout the series?

That's how she felt before she knew what happened, and I think it was 3x02 (Lost Girl) sort of fleshed that out a bit. But Emma also ended up in the system right away, and she was bounced from home to home. Even when the time came to adopt her, she was returned to where she came from. Emma grew up an orphan, she had no adoptive parents, no home, and ran away. Emma turned her corner at the end of season 3. 

The whole thing about her abandoning Henry is false though. She explained to him back in season 1 why she gave him up for adoption. Henry asked her and she told him her reasons. Emma didn't get her shit together until after the whole Cleo debacle.

And it's not like she was wrong, Henry had a good life until he started questioning his life, and what was going on in town. Then all bets were off. 

[Shanna Marie]

I think the Regina-Emma-Henry thing in season one is one situation that can't be given real-world parallels. Regina is not just a concerned adoptive mother with a difficult relationship with her adopted son who is going through the "you're not my real mom" phase and wants to get the birth mother who's never had a role in his life out of the way because she's concerned about her son. Regina is concerned because Henry has figured out the truth about who she is, so she's been gaslighting him to make him think that he's being delusional, and is coercing everyone around into going along with her in that, and since they don't know the truth because of the curse, they can't help but agree with her because the idea that they're all fairy tale characters sounds crazy. Regina wants Emma out of the way not because she's concerned about Henry getting fixated on a birth mother who gave him up and who might be unreliable. She wants Emma out of the way because she knows Emma is the Savior who can break the curse. Regina's actions in all this have nothing to do with her concern for Henry and everything to do with sustaining her curse and her power. In order to maintain the curse and keep power over everyone, she's willing to do whatever it takes, even hurting Henry.

As for Emma's feelings of abandonment, she grew up not knowing why she'd been left beside the road. She wasn't left in a safe place like a hospital, fire station, or police station, but rather in the middle of nowhere, where she could have died. If she'd been kidnapped and then left behind, then surely her parents would have found her because they'd have been looking desperately for her. No one adopted her. She was bounced from foster home to foster home. So, yeah, she'd feel abandoned. It's natural for an adopted child to feel a bit unwanted because the birth mother did give him up, but at least she gave him up to put him in what she believed would be a safe home with a parent who loved him, and he did grow up with a home and a mother. Emma never had that until she was an adult and learned the truth. Now she knows what really happened to her, but that can't change a lifetime of feelings. She may know intellectually that she was sent to what they hoped was safety and that her parents felt they had no other choice, but it's hard to change feelings like that just on the basis of new knowledge, and she can't erase a lifetime of memories of feeling that way. Her identity as a lost girl is ingrained in her psyche. I'm not sure something like that can ever be fixed, no matter how much she learns about what really happened.

[TheGreenKnight]

4 hours ago, Curio said:

Emma might have personally felt that way for a time because she didn't know the full truth (and honestly, I'm still not sure how much she registers the fact that Regina was out to kill her as an infant), but the actual action of Snow and David saving their daughter from being murdered isn't abandonment. I've always disliked the way the show has framed Snow and David as being "in the wrong" for giving Emma up. But since the show refuses to address the Regina elephant in the room, they play it off as Snow and David "giving Emma up" and "abandoning" her.

Oh, I know that Emma wasn't abandoned and I don't blame Snow/Charming at all for their choice to send her to the world without magic, and I don't even think Emma did anything selfish/wrong in giving Henry up or that she "abandoned" him when she gave him up for adoption, I was only bringing up Emma's perspective on her own life in the system and how she sent her baby into the same life. How does she then have a right to insert herself into his life later and disregard his legal parent?

4 hours ago, superloislane said:

You mean besides the fact that Henry begged her many times to stay with him and he clearly wanted her in his life?

Henry is a child. He doesn't get a vote. I read the rest of your post and I don't feel any differently about what I've said, since I've already seen the show.

Edited July 28, 2016 by TheGreenKnight

[Joanh23]

I think it's telling that for about the first 8 eps (I haven't watched S1 in a while so I can't remember exactly when it changed) whenever Emma talked to Henry about Regina she referred to her as "your mom" but later in the season she only called her Regina. Emma had no intention of becoming Henry's mom when she brought him back to Storybrooke and it was only after she talked to Regina that she decided to stay.  And I do think that even if Emma had gone back to Boston that Henry would have run away again to find her.  

[YaddaYadda]

Emma told Henry that Regina was his mom and that she was doing the best that she could. She never went to SB with the intention of taking Regina's place as Henry's mother. And she tried to leave town.

[Shanna Marie]

1 hour ago, YaddaYadda said:

And she tried to leave town.

That's where we have yet another case of the villain causing her own downfall. Emma kept trying to leave town, but Regina got in her way and kept doing stuff that made her suspicious. We don't know who sent the wolf or why, or if that was just part of the curse keeping everyone in town (though nothing bad happened to Henry when he tried to leave, so why wouldn't Emma be allowed to leave?), but if Regina had just treated that like a car accident instead of throwing Emma in jail and then had done whatever she needed to do to let Emma get out of town, then Emma would have left (until Henry ran away again). Then at the end, Emma had announced her plan to leave town, but Regina couldn't deal with the idea of Emma even existing and Henry wanting to have anything to do with her, and she baked the cursed tart that led to the curse breaking. Emma wasn't even trying to break the curse. She just wanted to know what the hell was up with the psycho who had adopted her son. If Regina had managed to keep the crazy in check rather than trying so hard, Emma would have left town and maybe called Henry on his birthday. That's what Emma wanted to do. She didn't want a kid, didn't want to stay.

[KAOS Agent]

Here's the sticking point, this show doesn't exist if Emma does like she originally planned and dropped Henry off and left town. Fate stepped in to stop her from taking the action that most would agree would be the correct action to take by not inserting herself into her son's life when he and Regina were going through a rough patch. However, Regina really was the Evil Queen and Emma was supposed to break the curse, so she's got to stay. That's the story. If the writers didn't do enough to convince the audience that things were seriously off in town, then that's an issue, but the whole story requires her to stay, so stay she will. But let's imagine Emma keeps trying to leave and fate stops trying to stop her. So epilogue: 50 years later... Emma dies of old age and the curse is broken. The end. Glad we all watched that show.

2 hours ago, TheGreenKnight said:

I know that Emma wasn't abandoned and I don't blame Snow/Charming at all for their choice to send her to the world without magic, and I don't even think Emma did anything selfish/wrong in giving Henry up or that she "abandoned" him when she gave him up for adoption, I was only bringing up Emma's perspective on her own life in the system and how she sent her baby into the same life. 

Emma gave Henry up exactly to avoid putting him in the situation she was in. She was never adopted as a baby and was thrust back into the system when her first family decided they didn't want to foster her anymore. If she had kept Henry, he would have ended up in the system at least though the end of her prison sentence and it is doubtful that she could have gained custody of him as an underage, jobless felon with no support system. He would have been in the same limbo she experienced as a baby. Giving him up for adoption was keeping him out of the system and giving him the family that she didn't believe she could give him. A shady, illegal adoption ensured that that didn't happen for Henry, but that was completely counter to Emma's intentions. We've seen that Emma always wanted to be adopted. She saw it as a positive thing and wanted it for herself. It hurt that no one ever wanted her. Adoption in Emma's eyes was the best thing she could do for Henry.

[Rumsy4]

Quote

I was only bringing up Emma's perspective on her own life in the system and how she sent her baby into the same life. 

Isn't that conflating two different things? This seems to me like lumping all the people who give up their children for disparate reasons under the same category. As @KAOS Agent stated, what Emma did was to try to ensure her son did not get into the same life that she herself had. What kind of life would she have been able to provide for her son as a homeless jailbird? The choice was not between bring Henry up herself or put him up for adoption. It was put Henry into foster care until she got out of jail and got her shit together and hope she would be able to gain custody of her son, or put him up for adoption right away and hope he got placed into a loving home.

Quote

How does she then have a right to insert herself into his life later and disregard his legal parent?

If someone believes that a child is not being treated well, or is in danger of physical or emotional harm, any person might be said to have the moral responsibility to consider doing something to further evaluate the situation. Emma may not have felt that she had a legal right to step in, but in the beginning, she was only attempting to access the situation. Emma may not have wanted to be a mother (relationship), but it was as a mother (biology) that she made the decision to put her child up for adoption, and it was as a mother (biology) that she decide to stay and evaluate the situation. She did not go in guns blazing calling CPS or engage a lawyer. Anyway, there is little point in calling the law into question in S1 Storybrooke, as the town was cursed, and Henry's adoption was legally bogus.

[orza]

Emma could have kept Henry if she really wanted to. In 2001, when Henry was born, it was already very common for women giving birth in correctional facilities to keep their babies with them, if that is what they wanted. Henry did not need to be separated from Emma. Emma did not try to ensure that her baby would not land in the system. She did not inquire about what would happen to him or attempt to speak to a social worker about his future. She didn't even spend 60 seconds with her child for that matter. Open adoptions were also common in 2001. Emma could have interviewed families to find the right family for her baby but she didn't. Emma had lots of choices but she did nothing for her baby, not a thing. That's why I see it as abandonment. Had Emma kept her baby, she would have gotten services and could have lived, for example, in a group home with other young mothers, gotten her GED, a job, etc, and taken the first steps to make a better life for herself, all with support from the state. That would have been a significant step up from robbing convenience stores and fencing stolen goods but she instead chose to continue her old life of crime for another 9 or so years until she had her transformative red jacket experience.

Emma went to jail for a crime she committed. She was not an innocent victim. Bad luck for her that her criminal boyfriend was involved in ratting her out, but you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas. If Emma had not insisted on helping Neal fence the watches she would have been in the clear. Sure, Emma had a crummy childhood. But at some point she chose to keep picking at the scabs of her old wounds to keep them open and festering instead of letting them heal so she could move on. She could have chosen to get professional help for that but she didn't.

If fate had determined that Emma was meant to break the curse she would have eventually ended up in Storybrook, just under different circumstances. She could have made different choices for a better life along the way.

[Mari]

I don't think it's possible to overstate how much emotional damage Emma most likely had;  she had--to her knowledge--been thrown away by every person/place she'd ever been or become attached to.  

At the time Henry was born, she was seventeen.  After she was three years old and given back, she was not with a single family for more than five months.  (See the conversation about Ingrid.  Emma stated that she should remember, because that six months was the longest she was anywhere.)  She had few positive family memories, and since she was the one returned, abandoned, or moved on, while others went to "forever families"  (see the episode with Lily), she would have internalized that it was her fault, and she was the one who was not capable or worthy of a family.  

In Arizona (where she was when Henry was born), in 2001, giving a baby up for adoption should have meant the baby went to a carefully vetted family, with the means and support system to give him a good life.  Just because Regina and/or Rumple and/or the curse managed to work around that doesn't change that Emma didn't just say "Here, random people!  Take my baby!"  

Do lots of birth mothers extensively interview people and have an open adoption?  Yes.  However, it is not unheard of for birth mothers not to have contact or spend time with their baby after the birth--and it's not necessarily a sign that the mother is abandoning the baby or doesn't love the baby.   Some mothers don't feel able or worthy to do open adoption--a close friend, for example, was given up and her birth mother told her when they made contact as adults that she couldn't trust herself to follow through on what was best if she had not done it right away.  

When she did try to make connections and judgements about people, it turned out that she the people she chose were untrustworthy or left her.  (Neal, Lily)   She likely didn't trust herself to make choices about who would be Henry's family.  Why would she?  

Was she a saint?  Absolutely not.  But there is a bit of a difference between not caring what happens to your baby, and not feeling like you are capable of providing for and worthy of having your baby.

[TheGreenKnight]

5 hours ago, KAOS Agent said:

Emma gave Henry up exactly to avoid putting him in the situation she was in. She was never adopted as a baby and was thrust back into the system when her first family decided they didn't want to foster her anymore. If she had kept Henry, he would have ended up in the system at least though the end of her prison sentence and it is doubtful that she could have gained custody of him as an underage, jobless felon with no support system. He would have been in the same limbo she experienced as a baby. Giving him up for adoption was keeping him out of the system and giving him the family that she didn't believe she could give him. A shady, illegal adoption ensured that that didn't happen for Henry, but that was completely counter to Emma's intentions. We've seen that Emma always wanted to be adopted. She saw it as a positive thing and wanted it for herself. It hurt that no one ever wanted her. Adoption in Emma's eyes was the best thing she could do for Henry.

My understanding is that she gave the baby up, not to anyone specifically. So didn't the baby technically go into the system until Rumpel found him for Regina? How did Emma have any guarantee that he would be adopted if she never was?

[Shanna Marie]

52 minutes ago, TheGreenKnight said:

My understanding is that she gave the baby up, not to anyone specifically. So didn't the baby technically go into the system until Rumpel found him for Regina? How did Emma have any guarantee that he would be adopted if she never was?

There's a huge difference between a child given up for adoption and putting a child into the foster system. I don't know that there have been any cases of newborns given up for adoption who didn't go straight into an adoptive home unless there were medical issues, mostly because there's a long waiting list to adopt newborns. People spend years hoping a baby comes along. A healthy baby whose mother signed him over at birth would go to a family, with zero chance of ending up in foster care because there wasn't a home for him. A newborn would only end up in foster care if it was taken away from the mother because the mother was unfit or otherwise unable to care for him. Like if she was a teenager in prison. A more common cause is if the mother is a drug addict and the baby is born with drugs in its system. Those babies wouldn't be eligible for adoption until either the mothers proved they were able to care for them, the mothers signed away parental rights, or the court severed parental rights because it became clear that the mother would never be fit to care for them. The courts tend to be very reluctant to do that sort of thing. That's when a kid ends up bouncing around foster care, when parental rights haven't been terminated so the child can be adopted but the mother isn't yet deemed fit to have custody. (I have friends who are foster parents and specialize in babies, so I've seen a lot of this first-hand.)

Realistically, Emma wouldn't have ended up bouncing around foster care because a newborn baby found in mysterious circumstances with news coverage (Emma found clippings) would have had people lining up to adopt her. It happens every time there's a news story about a baby left at a fire station or found still alive in a dumpster. In the show, the explanation they seem to have gone with was that they had to first look for her parents before she could be adopted, and then there was a potential adoptive family that changed their mind before the adoption was final, and by then she was a traumatized toddler nobody wanted. I still have a hard time believing that would happen in the real world, and you generally don't get to give a child back because you changed your mind. But I guess we'll have to go with that having something to do with the curse. Anyway, when a birth mother surrenders a child for adoption at birth, there's already a family lined up, with several backup families in case that doesn't work. Even with a closed adoption where the birth mother doesn't know who the adoptive families are, she knows there is an adoptive family. She's not just putting a kid into the foster system when she decides upon adoption.

I also have a hard time believing that a minor in state custody when giving birth would have her child end up in a shady adoption agency. That kind of outfit wouldn't have access to her. I guess we'll have to strike that off to the curse, as well, or fate, possibly via a corrupt jail official, or else the shady agency had a really good cover of a fake adoptive family, and from there the kid was funneled to Regina, with the Darlings as a backup family. Still, from Emma's perspective, she would have believed he was going directly to a family that had already been lined up and vetted. He wouldn't be in foster limbo, waiting for her to get out of jail and prove she was capable of taking care of him.

[KAOS Agent]

I think we're supposed to believe that Rumpel did something to make the original adoption of Henry fall through. Regina & Gold had a whole conversation about how Regina didn't want to wait the two years that adoption agencies were requiring and she knew he could cut through the red tape and get her a child. He later talks about speaking with an agency where Henry's placement with a family fell through and apparently, there's no other prospective families in line wanting a healthy baby boy. Riiiiight. Rumpel refers to it as fate.

Since Henry had been placed with a family in Boston, Emma would have believed that Henry was in a much better position than she could have provided for him. He had a home and a family. All the shadiness after that point would have been unknown to her.

[Mari]

7 hours ago, TheGreenKnight said:

My understanding is that she gave the baby up, not to anyone specifically. So didn't the baby technically go into the system until Rumpel found him for Regina? How did Emma have any guarantee that he would be adopted if she never was?

The laws about parental rights.

Emma wasn't left in a place that would automatically terminate parental rights--like a hospital or police station, where it's obvious you are giving up the baby.  Instead, she was found in a handmade basket,  with a handmade blanket, made with handspun wool.  

To our modern sensibilities, that either spells expensive artisan work, or person living in a deliberately old-fashioned environment.  

Finding a baby girl in those circumstances, with no drugs/alcohol in her system that would indicate the mother was using?    They would need to do an investigation and search before they could legally terminate parental rights and put Emma up for adoption.  Emma would have been out of the adoption system for months before they could legally give her to a permanent family.

Henry, on the other hand, was given directly into the adoption system, with Emma and Neal's parental rights terminated immediately.  He was a white, healthy newborn boy with no physical defects and no parental drug/alcohol use problems.  There are waiting lists for those.  (I know a couple from AZ who adopted at about the same time Henry was born.  They asked for a newborn, but weren't picky about sex.  They were put on a waiting list, and had to wait quite a while.)  At the most, he'd be in foster care a few days while his adoptive family arranged transport.    

[Rumsy4]

The show made it clear that Emma was putting Henry up for adoption, not into foster care. I can see that some people are unaware of the difference, and assume that babies put up for adoption are placed under foster care and face an uncertain future. Even if that was the case (which it is not), Emma had no other choice. She couldn't keep Henry in jail with her. And if the System stupidly let her have her child once she got out of jail, how would she even care for him? The baby would have been taken from her by force and put back in the system. Emma made the most responsible decision she could for her son, considering she was 17 years old when she had Henry. 

Edited July 29, 2016 by Rumsy4

[TheGreenKnight]

My point was only ever about Emma’s thoughts about her own childhood, and how she did the same thing to Henry. If you believe Regina was emotionally abusive (and I’m guessing many of you do), then how can you then say Emma didn’t hypocritically condemn him to the same experience she had and still resents Snow/Charming for?

[YaddaYadda]

But that's the thing. She didn't condemn him to the same existence she had. Henry had a good life with Regina until he started questioning things about the town and started believing that Regina was the EQ. And Emma doesn't resent her parents anymore as far as we know, but then again, everyone brushed that topic aside. She understands what happened and there's a difference between that and her thinking she was dumped on the side of the freeway, left there to basically die. She even tells Henry that her parents didn't even leave her at a hospital or a fire station, they just left her there. 

The writers though, they doubled down on whatever feelings Emma was having regarding her parents with that Echo Caves speech. Snow just told her it was her job to make her not feel like an orphan anymore, and then she turned around and said that a grown ass woman wasn't what she wanted and that she wanted another baby.

Anyway...I think the conversation is just circling the drain at this point. There's a side that sees things one way and another that sees things another way.

[Curio]

58 minutes ago, TheGreenKnight said:

My point was only ever about Emma’s thoughts about her own childhood, and how she did the same thing to Henry. If you believe Regina was emotionally abusive (and I’m guessing many of you do), then how can you then say Emma didn’t hypocritically condemn him to the same experience she had and still resents Snow/Charming for?

I think a better word to use would be ironic. It would be hypocritical if Emma left Henry on the side of the road with no intention of ever calling for help and ditching him. It's more ironic than hypocritical because Emma didn't want to be put in that situation—she didn't expect to become pregnant at 17 years old—but she did the best she could to give her child the best life he could have, which ended up being adoption. 

But I can kind of see where you're coming from. It's a bitter irony that Emma had to give up her child, which is something she still has personal issues with looking back at her own childhood, but I can't call naive 17-year-old Emma a hypocrite for unintentionally getting knocked up. (Especially since teenage Emma was probably not on any medical insurance, and condoms are way cheaper than birth control pills, Neal). Now, looking at 30-year-old Emma, I can see more where you're coming from. It frustrated me, especially in Season 2, whenever Emma would project onto her parents and blame them for giving her up instead of getting angry at Regina and Rumple for enacting the Dark Curse to begin with.

Can you explain your analogy more? I'm not sure how being upset with Regina for gaslighting Henry and being upset with Emma for giving Henry up for adoption are comparable. One is intentionally malicious and doesn't care about Henry's future, the other has hope for a better future for Henry and was done out of necessity.

Quote

Anyway...I think the conversation is just circling the drain at this point. There's a side that sees things one way and another that sees things another way.

Probably for the best.

Edited July 29, 2016 by Curio

[Rumsy4]

1 hour ago, TheGreenKnight said:

My point was only ever about Emma’s thoughts about her own childhood, and how she did the same thing to Henry. If you believe Regina was emotionally abusive (and I’m guessing many of you do), then how can you then say Emma didn’t hypocritically condemn him to the same experience she had and still resents Snow/Charming for?

I guess I don't see your logic behind saying Emma condemned Henry to the same experience as herself. She didn't dump Henry by the side of the road nor did she place him in foster care until (if ever) she could get her shit together.

Are you only referring to the fact that neither she nor Henry were brought up by their biological parents (until they were 10 in Henry's case)? To me it seems like equating putting a child up for adoption to abandonment, which again, I can't agree with. 

In Emma's childhood, she encountered abandonment, neglect, and betrayal. No one wanted her. Correct me if I am wrong, but I feel that you are conflating adoptive parenting with foster parenting. Emma was returned by her first foster parents, and subsequently bounced around from foster parent to foster parent/group home. By putting Henry for adoption, Emma was making sure he ended up with someone who actually wanted a child, no take backs. Unlike her parents who had (as she thought) dumped her by the side of the road, she was trusting the adoption agency to place Henry in a properly vetted family. That is the leap of faith any parent who places their child for adoption takes. That Henry ended up with a sociopath in a cursed town frozen in time was beyond Emma's control. 

Edited July 29, 2016 by Rumsy4

[Rumsy4]

9 minutes ago, Curio said:

Now, looking at 30-year-old Emma, I can see more where you're coming from. It frustrated me, especially in Season 2, whenever Emma would project onto her parents and blame them for giving her up instead of getting angry at Regina and Rumple for enacting the Dark Curse to begin with.

I can understand Emma's feelings though. People always get more angry with whom they are close with. Plus, Snow and Charming made the decision to send Emma alone to an unknown land before Regina sent her black knights to kill her. That was a pretty huge risk to take based on hope. How exactly did Snowing think a newborn would survive alone? In 4A, MM was so touchy when Emma mentioned the fact that she had shoved her into a wardrobe as a newborn, and was an insensitive jerk about giving baby Snowflake "everything". Even when Snowing came to the UW to rescue Hook, they kept whining about the baby and making Emma feel bad about their decision to both accompany her to the UW. 

However, I think we're supposed to believe that Emma is totally fine with her parents now. Unless the writers want to revive the conflict at some point for whatever reason.

[Camera One]

Quote

Plus, Snow and Charming made the decision to send Emma alone to an unknown land before Regina sent her black knights to kill her. That was a pretty huge risk to take based on hope. How exactly did Snowing think a newborn would survive alone?

Snow was supposed to go with Emma until she unexpectedly gave birth (not by Snow's choice).  At that point, it was send Baby Emma off for the chance of survival, or face certain death once Regina finds the baby.

Quote

Even when Snowing came to the UW to rescue Hook, they kept whining about the baby and making Emma feel bad about their decision to both accompany her to the UW.

I don't think Emma herself for one moment considered that whining.  She understood how they felt and appreciated their being there but believed that they shouldn't be.

Edited July 29, 2016 by Camera One

[Rumsy4]

18 minutes ago, Camera One said:

Snow was supposed to go with Emma until she unexpectedly gave birth (not by Snow's choice).  At that point, it was send Baby Emma off for the chance of survival, or face certain death once Regina finds the baby.

But they didn't know Regina was sending someone to kill baby Emma. That didn't happen until after Rumple revealed to Regina that Emma was the savior. 

Quote

I don't think Emma herself for one moment considered that whining.  She understood how they felt and appreciated their being there but believed that they shouldn't be.

Emma did not consider it whining. But to me, at the very least, it felt insensitive, and made me feel that Snowing still had no clue how bad Emma's childhood was. David and Snow kept making comparisons to them leaving Snowflake alone for two days to Emma's entire parentless childhood. For example, Charming complained to Hook that he was missing Snowflake's childhood like he missed Emma's. Umm... it's been two days, Charms, and no one forced you to come. The level 1 haunting was especially laughable. If, as Snowing suggested, Emma had been able to hear her parent's voices in her sleep, that would have been worse for her--not better.

However, Snowing coming along with Emma to the UW was the first time since S2 they did something for her sake. So, I was actually very happy about that. Snow's "love is worth it" speech was fantastic too. I would be happy with more of SupportiveParent!Snow.

[Camera One]

Quote

But they didn't know Regina was sending someone to kill baby Emma. That didn't happen until after Rumple revealed to Regina that Emma was the savior.

They knew the Curse was coming though, and they knew the Curse would render Snow and Charming powerless, or dead (they had no idea what the Curse would involve, but they were told it would be horrible and not something they would want a baby to endure).  Regardless of how the Curse went down, Baby Emma would be defenseless and at Regina's mercy, if they didn't send Emma off.

Edited July 29, 2016 by Camera One

[Rumsy4]

I confess my opinion is biased by the fact that Snowing had 1 million chances to defeat Regina for good, but kept forgiving her and doing stupid things like eggnapping and fetal soul surgery instead. Charming had this great speech about enjoying the moments and not worrying about Regina. But that strategy didn't help them, did it? Add to that the world's slowest Dark Curse, and how easy it seems to break curses and defeat villains in recent seasons, it just seems like Snowing didn't do enough to protect themselves or Emma or their people from Regina. 

Regina and Rumple bear the ultimate responsibility for casting the Dark Curse, but I still can see why Emma would feel the most resentful to her parents, regardless of how illogical it may be. Plus we have the REC that means no one can ever be angry with Regina over anything. So, Snowing end up being the easiest targets in most cases.

[Camera One]

Sadly, all the stuff A&E have added and retconned have systematically eroded away the power and logic of the original premise scenario.  

As the writers had Regina say to Snow I think?, "Well, at least you found Emma/got her back."  And clearly, we're expected to go, "Yeah, what're you complaining about?"

Shifting to another topic, Emma is expected to be the Savior, but like all heroes, she's bound by the no-kill policy?  I mean, if killing Zelena was going to eradicate The Dark One for all eternity, I'm sorry, but go for it.  Though we're expected to believe if she did so, she would have gone psycho and never return from the dark side again.  Yet Regina has killed many times and now she's supposedly redeemed, right?  And Rumple could have a transplanted heart of purity.

Edited July 30, 2016 by Camera One

[andromeda331]

21 hours ago, Camera One said:

Shifting to another topic, Emma is expected to be the Savior, but like all heroes, she's bound by the no-kill policy?  I mean, if killing Zelena was going to eradicate The Dark One for all eternity, I'm sorry, but go for it.  Though we're expected to believe if she did so, she would have gone psycho and never return from the dark side again.  Yet Regina has killed many times and now she's supposedly redeemed, right?  And Rumple could have a transplanted heart of purity.

Me too. They finally learn of a way to get rid of the Dark One forever.  But everyone is 'oh no you can't murder Zelena'. Really? Not one wonders if maybe its worth it to get rid of the Dark One forever? They don't even want to discuss it? Wonder what life would be like without the Dark One? 

[YaddaYadda]

The whole Zelena thing is such a moot point though just because Rumple once again was smarter than everyone else.

Plus it almost seems like the writing was done that way on purpose where Emma the Dark One chooses who will die carefully, someone she doesn't like, someone who has done bad things to people she cares about only to have to kill someone she really loves in the end to destroy the Dark One.

Here Emma, here's another really harsh lesson for you.

[Mari]

52 minutes ago, andromeda331 said:

Me too. They finally learn of a way to get rid of the Dark One forever.  But everyone is 'oh no you can't murder Zelena'. Really? Not one wonders if maybe its worth it to get rid of the Dark One forever? They don't even want to discuss it? Wonder what life would be like without the Dark One? 

I'm moving my response to the morality thread.  :)

[KingOfHearts]

Quote

I think [Rumple] always knew about the Savior, just not who the parents would be. Merlin knew about Emma, her name, her magic before she was ever born, before her parents met. 

I thought the point of bringing Snow and Charming together was to produce Emma, the Savior. I get that he was also trying to tick Regina off with Snow getting her happy ending, but he says something in 1x22 that seems to imply something more than that. "I'm a fan of true love, dearie - and more importantly, what it creates." Then right after he says it, the next shot is Emma.

Edited September 6, 2016 by KingOfHearts

[YaddaYadda]

9 minutes ago, KingOfHearts said:

I thought the point of bringing Snow and Charming together was to produce Emma, the Savior. I get that he was also trying to tick Regina off with Snow getting her happy ending, but he says something in 1x22 that seems to imply something more than that. "I'm a fan of true love, dearie - and more importantly, what it creates." Then right after he says it, the next shot is Emma.

I think it can be both. Rumple knows a Savior will be born on the day the dark curse is finally cast. It's unclear who her parents will be until he finally knows and does what he has to do to bring them together. Maybe that's the entire reason he went to Ruth and her husband and brokered the baby deal between them and King George. 

Who knows though because he seemed surprised as hell when Emma told him she had magic. Is having magic not always part of being the Savior?

[Shanna Marie]

12 minutes ago, YaddaYadda said:

Maybe that's the entire reason he went to Ruth and her husband and brokered the baby deal between them and King George.

Except wasn't he surprised during the Back to the Future episode that "Prince James" was Snow's True Love and the Savior's father, when he'd put all that effort into matching up "James" and Abigail? Once Snow and Charming got together, he became intent on getting their DNA to work into the curse and have as his backup, but as of the engagement ball, he seemed to have no idea that "James" was supposed to be with Snow.

[KingOfHearts]

In 3x21, Rumple says this about Emma breaking the curse and being the product of True Love:

Quote

Rumple: "That's speculation. Part of my plans, but I haven't done it."

He doesn't really confirm or deny his knowledge of Snow's child being the Savior. He just wasn't aware that James' alias was Charming. There's no really no telling how much he knew about the circumstances surrounding Emma or at what point in the timeline he realized the details of his plan. I'm guessing after Snow and Charming met, he found out that they had True Love and therefore could produce the Savior he needed. The extent of his foreknowledge is definitely ambiguous. It's more about possibilities than facts.

Edited September 6, 2016 by KingOfHearts

[YaddaYadda]

Also there's the whole David and James. James died and David was posing as James. So there's that whole thing going on as well.

[Shanna Marie]

51 minutes ago, YaddaYadda said:

Also there's the whole David and James. James died and David was posing as James. So there's that whole thing going on as well.

But Rumple knew about that, since he was the one who got David to pose as James.

1 hour ago, KingOfHearts said:

The extent of his foreknowledge is definitely ambiguous. It's more about possibilities than facts.

I think what you mean is that it's more about plot than facts. :-)

[YaddaYadda]

11 hours ago, Shanna Marie said:

But Rumple knew about that, since he was the one who got David to pose as James.

I know that. It was more a comment about how Rumple knew that detail along with King George, and no one else did. 

[andromeda331]

17 hours ago, KingOfHearts said:

In 3x21, Rumple says this about Emma breaking the curse and being the product of True Love:

He doesn't really confirm or deny his knowledge of Snow's child being the Savior. He just wasn't aware that James' alias was Charming. There's no really no telling how much he knew about the circumstances surrounding Emma or at what point in the timeline he realized the details of his plan. I'm guessing after Snow and Charming met, he found out that they had True Love and therefore could produce the Savior he needed. The extent of his foreknowledge is definitely ambiguous. It's more about possibilities than facts.

Back at his castle when Emma tells him her father is Prince Charming who goes by Prince James. Rumple says 'King George's son? The one who's marriage I just arranged?' Emma has to explain that marriage isn't suppose to happen. Its weird he doesn't know that since its a big piece of his plan. I thought the whole reason he arranged for David to take his brother's place was to make sure David was in place to meet Snow.

[Camera One]

I haven't thought too much about whether Rumple's plan actually made sense in hindsight.  Certainly, the whole "true love" thing has really dropped in credibility given how common true love actually was.  In "The Shepherd", it seems like the main reason for Rumple to arrange the marriage, was to make a deal to find out the Fairy Godmother's whereabouts since he needed her wand.  Which raises more questions about why King George would know the Fairy Godmother's every move.  The death of the Fairy Godmother should have been a big deal, but she was apparently just a random redshirt.

[Rumsy4]

40 minutes ago, KingOfHearts said:

Hook sacrificed his life for Emma, then Emma went to the Underworld to save him from death. There proven to be a True Love, too. After all that, I don't think "ILU without crisis" is good payoff. It's like going on an international trip, then being proud of yourself for managing to get to the grocery store. You do everything that shows you and your boyfriend belong together, yet you still need to take time to date casually? I'm not trying to rush them, but the ILU was no big accomplishment. All that development over S5 and they were right back where they started. There's no sign they'll be moving anywhere significant in S6, which bums me out.

I feel like a confirmation they were moving in together would have been appropriate payoff. Killian wanted that future together. Emma wanted it. But there is no mention of the CS house in the finale. Only Emma feeling guilty Killian was alive because Robin was alive and Regina was unhappy. It gave me a bad flashback to the 4A climax, and sometimes makes me question the level of Emma's commitment to the relationship. What's the purpose of going to hell to save Killian and back if Regina's state of mind makes Emma feel guilty?? That's a controlling relationship--not a mutual friendship between two women. Besides, it made no sense because Killian saved himself. Zeus rewarded him for helping to defeat Hades. I hope we will see Emma and Killian moving into the CS house right away, but I'm not sure it will happen before the season finale, especially if the time-line is very short as usual.

[YaddaYadda]

8 minutes ago, Rumsy4 said:

I hope we will see Emma and Killian moving into the CS house right away, but I'm not sure it will happen before the season finale, especially if the time-line is very short as usual.

Yeah, well the show has 2 seasons (including this one) at the most left, and we're not getting any younger. They need to get off the pot and hop to it.

[KingOfHearts]

I imagine one of the final scenes being the Captain Swan wedding, with everyone wondering where Regina is. Then she storms into the ceremony, like the Pilot, and says "Sorry I'm late. I've brought you a gift... apple-scented candles." Then everyone giggles and Emma hugs her maid of honor, the woman who tried to kill her. The end.

Quote

I feel like a confirmation they were moving in together would have been appropriate payoff. 

It's one of those moments where it's what's satisfying to the audience versus what would logically play out. While too excessively appropriate of an example, you could take Snow White and Prince Charming. There's no reason Snow White should run off with a man she doesn't know kissing her awake. But she does it because it's the happy ending the viewer wants to see after everything she went through in the movie. It's the same logic behind villain comeuppance.

Within show time, Emma and Hook are at a steady pace. For us, they've been dating almost two years. We've seen how easy it is for them to lose each other, so it doesn't make much sense that they're slowing down when it comes to commitment. The longer they wait the more chances there are for soul-obliterating crystals to show up and disintegrate one of them. 

Edited September 9, 2016 by KingOfHearts

[KingOfHearts]

Emma's entire life has been retconned over time. In the first season, she was a hard-boiled bailbondswoman whose only advice was to choose your own path and push others back when they try to stop you. In more recent episodes, we've learned her entire life was dictated by other people and that she wore her heart on her sleeve up until only a couple of years before she arrived in Storybrooke. Despite being knocked up, sent to jail, and left unloved for decades, her turning point was the death of a stranger she had just met. 

Though I wouldn't call it a retcon, the trouble started in S2 with Neal. His interactions with Emma definitely fit in with what we had seen of her character up to the point. If he were the only person she met from magic realms that made an impact on her life, then I wouldn't complain. But then August immediately stepped into the scene and started manipulating her behind a veil. The writing will say Neal didn't try to find Emma because he was afraid, but let's face it - the plot needed him to not see her again. If Emma's life had been in her control, she would have been able to locate him as she tried to in Tallahassee for those two years. But because of August, fate prevented her from making her own choice on the matter.

For a while, we lived with that and it was forgivable because that seemed to be the only magic-related event in Emma's life. Then in S4, Lily happened. That little girl kept Emma out of loving homes because she was in fact her own potential for darkness personified. All of Lily's actions are a direct effect of "destiny" controlling her. She made the choice to no longer be friends with her, but Lily was drawn back because fate. And when she stopped coming back, it was because the Apprentice made her aware of the game the universe was playing. So again - things transpired the way they did in the end not because of what Emma decided, but what was already set in place by other parties.

Unfortunately, it doesn't stop there in S4. There was also Ingrid, who was prophesied to be Emma's "sister". But thankfully, that did nothing to guide her life until the present. If she had never gotten her as a foster mom, her backstory wouldn't really have changed. However, it's frustrating that Emma had someone who loved her in her adolescence and went straight back to being an orphan. That's a bit pointlessly cruel of the writers to do that. It's dumb that such an important thing happened in Emma's life and it was just glossed over. Even after Ingrid died, it didn't leave the impact it should have. We all know A&E did all that for shock value.

In S5, we had yet another person interevene in Emma's life only to be proven worthless. Merlin could have given the girl encouragement or send the Apprentice to take care of her, but instead he warned her ominously about something that never actually makes sense. Like Ingrid, fate's interference could have been used for good but instead it did her no favors. It was just there to slap on another prophecy. It really seems like destiny was either hellbent on making Emma miserable and alone or just contributed nothing, depending on what could be retconned.

It all came full-circle with the Cleo flashbacks. Unlike the other run-ins, Cleo was not affiliated with anything supernatural that we know of. Because of that, it seems the episode tried to recapture the realism Emma was originally engulfed in. It failed, though, because the writers forgot how they used to write. While Cleo didn't turn out to be the Fairy Godmother's exiled cousin, the events of the episode were still carried out in a fairy tale way. Her change was built on coincidences and instantaneous events, not realistic evolution. (Much like tropes such as love at first sight.)

Despite the fact we assumed Emma grew up alone, she did not always. When we saw her in S1, she was entirely realistic and a firm non-believer in everything happening by design. That characterization does not line up with all the magical interference that repeatedly trespassed into her life. Getting meta for a second, it looks like pure shock value. "Wouldn't it be cool if Emma actually knew magical people her entire life and didn't realize it?" It's a very A&E twist. Outside of Neal and the Savior stuff, it really has no place.

[Curio]

I wish the show would have held off on giving Emma the vision of her death until the end of the episode, or at least wait until Episode 2 to reveal the hand tremors. It would have been nice to give her one episode of relaxation before the next shitstorm and also give the audience a much-needed break. A summer hiatus went by for us and it still felt like whiplash, so imagine how Emma feels right now.

Instead, they could have started the episode off with Emma and Hook getting cockblocked by the dirigible, and the rest of the episode goes on without much angst as Emma helps her parents seek out the new people in the woods without any visions or hand tremors. (OMG, an actual Snow/Charming/Emma plot!) After Snow and Regina's warm and fuzzy bench conversation about hope, when it's nighttime, we cut over to a shot of Emma and Hook watching Netflix on the couch and they attempt to finish what they started at the beginning of the episode, but in walks Henry and the cockblocking gag continues. Hook makes an awkward comment about whether or not he should stay the night with Henry around (which resolves the issue of where the heck he's staying), and Emma suggests that maybe it would be a bit too much right now for him to stay over, but they'd talk about it later. They kiss goodbye, Hook goes off to the Jolly Roger, Emma goes to bed alone, and then we close off the episode with Emma waking up and getting her first nightmare as a cliffhanger heading into the next episode. It's still introducing her nightmares in Episode 1, but it's not introduced so quickly and we get a lot of establishing character moments out of the way.

Edited September 30, 2016 by Curio

[daxx]

@Curio why don't you write for this show?

[Curio]

I wish. If I ever get around to taking screenwriting classes, @daxx, I'll credit this show as my motivation. 

[Mari]

3 hours ago, Serena said:

I don't care if Emma and Hook conceive or adopt a baby, or if one falls from the sky into their backyard (or if they don't have kids at all, for that matter). All I want is for the kid, if it exists, NOT to be called Liam. Because he's a douche.

 

3 hours ago, high said:

 While I agree that’s some BS, I do feel like it will be more in character for both Emma and Hook to adopt kids, given their history. 

 

4 hours ago, mjgchick said:

 They do realize Emma gave up Henry because her douche of a boyfriend left her to get caught by the police which lead to her having him in jail where she's still a minor right? Before that she wanted a home with that moron and most likely wanted children. 

Moved from the fandom thread.

This is an interesting question--should  Emma and Hook have kids, or would they want kids?  Neither one has had particularly good luck with family, and both of them have quite a bit in their background that would make them not trust their own judgement and ability to parent.

It always seemed to me that Emma did not keep Henry for a couple of reasons--she didn't feel worthy of him, and didn't think she was capable of giving him the life she thought he deserved.

Now that she's more stable, with a support system (well, as much of one as you can when everyone except your boyfriend likes your stepgrandmother more), would she still want kids? 

I guess I don't care whether or not we actually see them with another child, but I would like to know that the character is in a place where she feels she could be a baby's mom if she wanted to do so.  That would be a far, far bigger step than "I love you.", even if the baby (adopted or otherwise) was never seen on-screen.

(Also, if aforementioned Baby CS were to happen, he/she should not be named Liam or Liamma.  We have enough weird baby double naming going on already.  Use some imagination, show.)

[KingOfHearts]

Quote

Now that she's more stable, with a support system (well, as much of one as you can when everyone except your boyfriend likes your stepgrandmother more), would she still want kids? 

I think the year in New York helped Emma tremendously in becoming a more confident parent. As for Hook, his goal would be to be the father he never had. He has seen what bad fathers create (Rumple, Brennan, Pan), and while I think he would be afraid of doing the same, his passion for redemption would probably push him to do better. He really enjoyed having Bae on the Jolly Roger.

I don't really want to see Baby Swan in the show, but I could see it as a possibility in CS's future. If it was implied or there was a birth in the series finale, I would be satisfied. But if nothing ever came of it, I wouldn't be disappointed either.

Quote

(Also, if aforementioned Baby CS were to happen, he/she should not be named Liam or Liamma.  We have enough weird baby double naming going on already.  Use some imagination, show.)

Can we please have an original baby name for once? If Damien ends up being called Baelfire or Maurice, I will throw something at a wall.

Edited October 9, 2016 by KingOfHearts

[Camera One]

Emma and Hook wanting a kid would be natural eventually but not yet.  I mean, it took them two seasons to take the gigantic step of being able to say "I love you" without one of them at death's door.  At that rate, they would start broaching the topic of kids in Season 11 and maybe actually try to get pregnant in Season 15.  I mean, this season finale, we will probably see Emma giving Hook a place in the bathroom to leave his toothbrush.

Another thing is - this show will never explore the actual emotional struggles with deciding to have a kid, or the ramifications after having a child.  Baby Neal and whatever the other child is called are almost inconveniences in the plot.  Emma and Hook hardly gets any significant screen time with Henry, so how can they fit in screentime with a baby too.  

Furthermore baby plot would further segregate Emma and Hook.  Emma is already only allowed to have significant emotional screentime with Hook and Regina (yes, great for CS fans and SQ fans but for no one else), and then once in a while Henry.  One might go... oh, maybe Emma being pregnant will lead to some quality emotional significant scenes that last more than 30 seconds with Snow, but it's This Show with These Writers, and Emma is more likely to spend a half-season arc with a pregnant seahorse than she will with Snow or Charming talking about parenthood.

So, to conclude, what's the point.  Except we might still get this if A&E&J think of an "awesome" plot where someone tries to steal their unborn baby!  

Edited October 9, 2016 by Camera One

[YaddaYadda]

I think they'd probably both be good at it. I think it might open up more story for Henry, and what I wanted them to do with Emma and her parents after she found out Snow wanted another baby, after she found out her mother was pregnant. I wanted them to address those issues. 

Since Henry enjoys yelling at Emma because he's an entitled prat, maybe giving her a baby will allow everyone to hash that stuff out about having another child and getting to raise them from the moment they are born. 

The difference between Emma and Henry is that Emma was put in the wardrobe so that she can come back and save everyone (please don't give me the whole Emma was getting her best chance), and Henry was given up for adoption because Emma was no where near ready to be a mother. 

Let's blow this thing wide open and let people be fucking emotional about the things that hurt them.

[Camera One]

I do agree that a baby could open a lot of those issues up (I wish some of the Writers in the Room would actually raise such possibilities as you listed).  But it's unfortunate that by this point, I have very little hope that any of the potentially interesting character issues that arise from ANY plot will be explored in any depth.  It's a pattern that they will never explore anything that we would expect them to explore.  Just look at Dark Swan at the Writers' choices and reflexes in their first two episodes.

Edited October 9, 2016 by Camera One

[Shanna Marie]

I think if Emma were to find herself pregnant now, she'd probably freak out because of the impending doom thing, and she'd probably have very mixed feelings until something about her Savior job is resolved or clarified -- happy about the baby, but worried about what kind of mother she'd be if she had to drop everything constantly to go save the world. But she has said that she wants the white picket fence life, which generally entails a dog, cat, and 2.5 kids, so she's probably at least thought about having a family. She's much older, more settled, and more mature than she was when she felt she had to give up Henry. She's not on her own. There's no fear that Hook will voluntarily leave her (though he might get himself killed, since that's kind of his hobby), and she's got the rest of her family surrounding her.

I don't think a second child would necessarily be a Baby Do-Over. Snowflake was that because Snow explicitly stated she wanted to have another child because she didn't get the motherhood experience she wanted with Emma. I don't see Emma having a child for that reason (especially since she has the memories of raising Henry). Emma's more likely to want to have a child to be able to vicariously experience that picket-fence life through her own child, but really, I think it's more likely to come down to her loving Hook and wanting a family with him.