Okay you stupid revisionists and apologists, always remember this. He wasn’t coerced or manipulated. Griffith said “yes.” Griffith said “I sacrifice.”
yeah, it’s not liked he was tortured for a year while being kept in a basement with basically no light, unable to move or talk, then saved by the person who abandoned him just to find out they were going to abandon him again, as well as someone who had always admired him looking at him with an expression full of pity before he fell into a river, broke several limbs, failed his suicide attempt and then was guilt-tripped by some ugly weird giant people who knew one of his weakest spots before he said that
You’re right, it’s not like that at all.
It was TWO of his weakest spots: guilt over the wasted lives of the Hawks and Guts’ opinion (“Ain’t this part of the path to your dream? You believe that, don’t you? What’s with (the doubt)? Now, of all times.”)
As for the OP, “He wasn’t manipulated. He said yes.” That’s not even an argument. He said yes. Okay. Well, we knew that. What’s that got to do with whether or not he was manipulated?
Putting those sentences next to one another doesn’t actually make them a coherent point. His saying yes doesn’t somehow imply that he wasn’t manipulated any more than his saying no would imply he was manipulated. In fact, if he WAS manipulated, it would be pretty ineffective manipulation if it resulted in his saying no.