Honestly agreed. The showrunners apparently wanted Aegon to be "sympathetic", yet portrayed him as a rapist. There's no coming back from being a rapist, as that's worse in the audience's eyes then murder. All that scene did was cement Aegon as the "bad guy" in the minds of most of the audience, and the showrunners absolutely knew that. There's very easy ways to portray Aegon as totally unsuited for the throne without being a caricature. I mean, GOT did a fantastic job of showing why Robert was a bad king without having to turn him into a monster (though they did slip in martial rape that I'm not sure was in the AGOT book. Would have to double check on that part).
Except GRRM never established Aegon II as a rapist. Of the three accounts of the Dance of the Dragons, only Mushroom's more or less called him one, found at his "revels" in a Flee Bottom rat pit, where feral children fought each other for the amusement of watchers, while Aegon, drunk and naked, was pleasured by a young girl. Considering how unreliable Mushroom is (and the fact that he wasn't even in King's landing at the time), anything established solely by him is meant to be suss. Of the other accounts, Septon Eustace claimed he was with a paramour/lover and Maester Munkun just said "revels". There's nothing I remember reading in F & B that established Aegon as any worse then say Robert Baratheon, or on the level of Aerys Targaryen. The most is maybe mentions of fondling women which, while gross, isn't the same as rape, more what drunk idiots do at a Hooters.
