Not a dude, first off.
Second I said that I believe poptart wouldn't make it so rape magically solves all problems with no negative consequences. That would 100% make them a rape apologist, but because I don't think they are, they won't do that.
I think there might be a problem with this logic?
If I followed your argument correctly (I could be mistaken, of course) then the issue here is that if Jaron's psychological issues were not a side effect of the sealing but a side effect of it being applied wrong because of Jaffur, that would mean that said side effect could be resolved by applying more mind control and since you are using an interpretation of mind control = rape because it ignores consent, then it would be equivalent to have the issues that came from rape to be solved with more rape and thus someone who wrote something like that a rape apologist. Since we both trust poptart not to be that, that seems to indicate to you that the sealing must have side effects that can't be trivialy resolved by Dandeer.
However, that actually depends on the moral system and perspective you are using. I mean, even if we exclude "they lose their free will" from the definition of negative consecuences, that kind of reasoning indicates a moral system that says that rape is wrong because it causes a negative psychological impact on the victim rather than one that says that it is wrong because it is an act against the free will and identity of the victim. I understand that the issue is not that it is portrayed as a good thing since it isn't but that it seems to make light of the consequences of something equivalent to it... but from my perspective, the fact that they lose their free will is bad enough even without suicidal thoughts that even if she fixed it with more mind control, that would mean the situation and consequences are worse, not that they are making light of it.
If it were portrayed as a good thing then yes, you would be right but from the perspective of both the main character and the questers, even if Jaffur had been happy as Jaron, the sealing was wrong and equivalent to murder. Her mind control does not need to cause suicidal thoughts or have extra side-effects for the readers, author and characters to consider it wrong. The real issue that we are against is the mind control because it is mind control so saying that if it doesn't cause psychological issues it means that it implies it is ok is, to my understanding wrong since the main consecuence is still there.
Another way to look at it is that mind control could also be considered equal to murder since it destroys the person the victim was. In that case, just because the killer hid their tracks well and they suffer no consecuences from it it doesn't mean that the murder didn't happen or that the author who wrote that is a murder apologist. Neither is the case if the killer avoids the consequences of their actions with more murder; that still does not make them a murder apologist.
Now, considering that this is not the end of the quest and that we will still aim to bring her to justice, it doesn't seem to me that she got away scot free. She will still face the consequences once we free everyone and they will probably will still be traumatized once they are free so I wouldn't say that it magically solves all problems. It might solve Dandeer's problems until she is stopped but that doesn't mean that is the moral of the story.
Now, in relation to the statement that Poptart not being a rape apologist means that her thralls will develope suicidal thoughts, unless you are either saying that my perspective doesn't matter or that I am a rape apologist without knowing (which... fair enough, most people who are are probably out of ignorance) then there are perspectives which mean that her mind control could not cause such thoughts and the one who writes that still not be a rape apologist.
