[lemmsjid]

I think what you're seeing there is Jemisin actively foregrounding and exploring a difficult fact, which is that people who were abused are more likely to turn around and be abusers.

Often times books turn abuse into the catalyst for a noble struggle and cathartic improvement, when in fact that often isn't the case. There's large swathes of human history where oppressive regimes were powerful enough to quickly and brutually suppress rebellions. When violence and abuse are normalized in a culture, it can take a long time and a lot of failed struggles to truly unwind the violence.

I think Jemisin is actively trying to explore that mentality, which is pretty brave because it does make the characters off putting. As the reader you want so badly for them to rise out of the muck and take on a noble struggle, but they're caught up in the cycle of violence.

I say this with respect for your viewpoint, I think you're being very fair about expressing your response, and I completely see where you're coming from.