#Anti-Dany Stans

[kyliafanfiction]

Anyway, the game of thrones ending was cool and good.

[lunamond]

Genuinely insane to me that there are Targ stans claiming that the Targs, an incestuous family of former slaveowners of a colonial empire, came to Westeros and were corrupted by the evil eViL Andal culture and religion.

Like what??? The Andals and the faith of the seven are absolutely not without their own systemic issues (nor are the first men) BUT to argue that the rulers have been corrupted by the people they conquered is INSANE.

[amaltheas-garden]

when u point out Dany having the power of god x3 to destroy any city she doesn't like might be a bad thing and probably won't be rewarded by the narrative

targies: noooo it will be fine because Dany would NEVER do that she's just too fundamentally GOOD to ever be corrupted by unlimited power 🙃 source: trust me bro

apparently the theme of asoiaf is absolute power is good, actually, we just need to make sure the *right* people have it 😇

[rise-my-angel]

I think its funny that technically Jon has "the blood of Old Valyria" in him as well. But if you told him that as if it meant something, you know Jon would dismiss it entierly as unimportant, and that he does not give a single shit about it. Being Valyrian is so integral to someone like Danaerys or really any mainstream Targaryeans identity.

Then you have Jon Snow whose just like "I have things to do, I don't care" literally anytime something tries to convince Jon hes special. He's the opposite of everything Valyrians stand for and it would be so funny if hes the only one with Targaryean blood to survive, so that the last living relic of the ancient Valyrian Freehold is stuck inside the most grouchy, anti prophecy Northerner known to man.

[the-daily-dreamer]

Reminder that if your feminism revolves around propping up women that partake in traditionally masculine activities/roles and shitting on or even hating women who embody traditionally feminine roles and enjoy feminine activities you’re not really a feminist.

It sets the precedent that women are only valuable and valid if they have traditionally masculine traits, which feeds a narrative that masculine traits are better simply because they are associated with men who are the ideal. It perpetuates the idea that things that are feminine and traditionally associated with women are in fact inferior to men/masculinity and should be looked down upon and belittled.

And, it alienates so many individuals that feel more comfortable in femininity, regardless of gender identity.

I think people in the ASOIAF fandom really need to learn this because feminine characters are so despised on the basis that they are not “better” women. Simply because they don’t embody traditionally masculine things like conquering or fighting.

Much of the hate comes from stans that love characters like Rhaenyra, Daenerys, and Arya (and do not get me wrong I love Arya), who are women and girls that are in positions that allow for more traditionally masculine behaviors and tomboyishness. And they will say incredibly sexist things about how the other women in media are inferior and directly contrast these women to their faves negatively by pointing out that they’re “too weak” or “subservient”. They reduce femininity to weakness and bowing to patriarchy instead of considering that some people have a different, more feminine nature. And that is OK! Just because a woman isn’t wielding a sword or fighting on the front lines or pursuing leadership roles in masculine ways (because historically women exacted and sought power in different ways than men) doesn’t mean they aren’t valuable and strong characters. Do not use feminine characters as a negative comparison to show how “feminist” and great your fave is. Because it’s just so blatantly sexist.

Don’t fall into the trap of reinforcing patriarchal rhetoric!!! Don’t reinforce narratives that traditional masculinity is superior to femininity!! Don’t belittle feminine activities and act as if they aren’t valuable!!! Girbosses are great but so are gentlewomen.

[throwawayasoiafaccount]

btw what theon went through is what thousands upon thousands upon thousands of slaves still go through in essos. so, do you still feel pity for the slavers that were crucified? do you still pity the slavers killed when daenerys freed the unsullied?

i ask these questions, and yet i know that there are still many people who believe that the violence against the slavers wasn’t justified, or believe that it was simply “too much” or “not fair.” truly… what an insane hill to die on.

maybe these people should spare more empathy for the formerly enslaved instead of wasting time making up excuses (that are not supported by the text) for why the slave masters' deaths were somehow not justified 🫶

[saltywinteradult]

not the targaryen stans seeing daemon having a vision of dany and thinking this means dany was actually meant to be the hero, she was good all along guys, she actually was the Chosen One destined to save the world and they just ruined her for no reason!!! jesus christ if you people wanted a simple good vs evil narrative you should’ve stuck to harry potter

this shit is so disrespectful to asoiaf because prophecies being misinterpreted through people’s own biases and blind spots and causing more harm than good when obsessed over (see also: rhaegar) is such an important theme in the books. fuck house of the dragon for upending that theme and making the targs the good guys who totally had an altruistic reason to violently conquer westeros, actually! and fuck hotd for implying that daenerys (the person who probably killed about as many people by burning king’s landing as she saved by helping fight the white walkers) was actually a good guy all along.

[crimsonbastard]

That's it. I've had it with these brain-dead takes

Rightful Queen:

Firstly, what the fuck do you mean when you say Rightful? There's no "Rightful" monarch in ASOIAF. There are only the ones who are elected as per the laws in which the Realm Functions. So There's only Lawful Queen or Lawful King.

Daenerys: Wasn't the Rightful Queen by blood, but by conquest (mass murdering an entire city that surrendered), but even then, she had contenders to the Throne in the form of her nephew. Her family was deposed through rebellion and they were in exile.

The throne no longer belonged to her unless she forcefully claimed it back. After Robert's death, the crown goes to Stannis, the next in line, followed by Shireen, considering Robert's children aren't his. But since all the legitimate Baratheons died and Gendry wasn't legitimized yet, the Lannisters covertly took the crown by continuing to pose Cersei's children as true borns (the children atleast took after one of the parents, making the argument for their legitimacy somwhat strong, Unlike Rhaenyra).

Daenerys took Kingslanding by force, decimating the city and it's populace with Dragon Fire and seated herself on the Throne. So yes, she has become the Lawful Queen by right of Conquest, all that's left is to eliminate the equally Lawful Contender to the throne, it being Jon.

Rhaenyra: Despite Viserys i (who was the younger of the two candidates, but got elected over Rhaenys who was older than him) naming her as his heir after Aemma's and Baelon's death he never really prepares her to rule in the future. He doesn't teach her the ways of Politics, nor does he reinforce the line of succession. He instead puts his daughter's claim in jeaprody and remarries, and sires THREE LEGITIMATE SONS. As unfair as it sounds, Westeros follows Male Primogeniture, the very system that made Viserys i heir to the throne over Rhaenys. As long as Aegon ii, Aemond and Daeron lived, Rhaenyra would always have challengers to the Throne.

"Half-Blooded" Murderer named Aegon:

Funny how TB thinks just because someone's Half-Targ (half inbred), It automatically makes them less of a claimant to the throne. Paternity goes a long way in Westeros.

Aegon ii is the first born son of King Viserys ii Targaryen and Queen Alicent Hightower. He's the result of a legitimate marriage between two ancient and powerful houses. He was anointed by a Septon of the Faith, crowned with thousands as a witness. As shitty as his character is in the show, he's a more legitimate claimant to the throne compared to Rhaenyra and her illegitimate children.

Jon Snow (Aegon) being confirmed to be R+L=J in the show doesn't make him a "half-blood" by any chance. He's the Son of Rhaegar Targaryen and Lyanna Stark. The show states that Rhaengar annulled his marriage with Elia Martell, making Jon a "legitimate" (as per TB) contender to the throne.

There's also the implication of the term "half-blooded" used in the post. Just because Jon and Aegon ii are half Targaruen doesn't make them less of a claimant. It also sheds light on the Targaryen Exceptionalism that TB drinks like kool-aid. Anyone who's non-targ or is half-targ and isn't on the Targaryen side is automatically treated as lesser.

[naetaesarya]

Jonsas are such clowns. They'll celebrate kissing cousins in the Stark and Arryn families while referencing the Jonnel-Sansa avuncular marriage in the Stark line to "support" Jonsa while vilifying Dany for the incest that took place before her birth.

This boils my blood into carbonated soda pop.

[pessimisticpigeonsworld]

I saw a tiktok comparing Paul Atreides to Daenerys and it made me want to gouge out my eyes and break my phone.

I just don't understand how Dany and Paul are comparable in any way. For one thing, Dany's ending in GOT only happened because of bad writing. There's no foreshadowing, no buildup, or reason for her fall.

Disclaimer: I haven't actually read the Dune books yet, just watched the movies and read Wikipedia stuff. So anyone who has read Dune, please please please correct me if I'm misunderstanding things.

From what I saw in the movies and read from secondhand sources, Paul was never meant to be a hero. Sure, he was a good kid, but his arc isn't that of a fallen hero. The moment Paul chose to exploit the fremen and the Bene Gesserit's false prophecy, he solidified himself as anything but a hero. He was set on vengeance and survival.

Paul is a fascinating character, but he's not a hero in any way, and wasn't at any point in his story (to my understanding).

Dany is a hero, whether you like it or not. From book/season one, she's been protecting those weaker than her to the best of her ability. She sacrifices her own desires and ambitions for the sake of others.

...this Mother of Dragons, this Breaker of Chains, is above all a rescuer. (ADWD - Tyrion VI)

Dany chooses to prioritize the innocent and the oppressed in her mission. Paul chooses to lead a holy war that will kill billions of innocents.

They're not comparable characters, because they're very different archetypes and communicate very different things from the authors. Dany is an underdog and someone who fights for justice while maintaining her gentleness. Paul is someone who basically embodies "for the greater good", sacrificing billions for the future.

Dany is written to be a hero, Paul is not. Dany is only turned from being a hero because of bad writing and sexism. Paul's descent is well written and clearly foreshadowed. Paul's story is what D&D wanted to gaslight the viewers into believing Dany's was. Unfortunately, that seems to have worked for certain parts of this fandom. Also, the poster had a Sansa pfp, so I think it's easy to tell why they view Dany this way.

Paul and Dany's characters aren't even in the same ballpark as each other. Comparing them is stupid.

[cl0ud-ninex]

Babes, I need to tell you something...

If you're one of the 'DaNy StAnS' who believe that Dany has to die to fulfill some bittersweet/tragic ending while also wanting the other characters especially the Starks to live happy health lives and become kings and queens you're not a real Dany stan.

You're just a Daenerys anti. The only difference between you and the antis is that the antis are more honest about how they actually feel about her.

[fromtheseventhhell]

Very funny to me how Stansas present her character as being so interesting and complex because of her vulnerabilities, while simultaneously ignoring those same vulnerabilities in other characters. Dany is sold as a bridal slave and lacks agency throughout AGOT and after. Her dragons are either too young/small to utilize effectively or locked away for the majority of the story. They aren't some all-powerful trump card that protects her from harm. Arya is captured as a prisoner of war, forced to watch countless people tortured and murdered, and then essentially enslaved in Harrenhal with no way to fight back. She has an entire arc of feeling powerless, of being a "mouse", during ACOK. She doesn't have "kung-fu" or the ability to magically fight her way out of every situation, she's a young child lacking physical strength with only the most basic sword training.

Sansa isn't the only female character, she isn't the only young character, she isn't the only character who suffered, and no one is obligated to prioritize her. I'm so tired of Dany and Arya being mischaracterized and having their stories erased to prop Sansa up. "Sansa has kept her dignity" In other words, let's praise her for having a level of security that Dany and Arya don't have access to. She hasn't ever been forced to make a hard decision which of course means that she's morally superior to them. They can't even admit to themselves that her lack of action is due to her own passivity. If it doesn't fit their delusion, they erase it from the story and expect the rest of us to play along. Ask one of them what they like about her character without bringing up her being the ultimate victim, and I genuinely don't believe they'd be able to give you an answer. They belittle other characters more than they talk about her and these takes just scream insecurity/jealousy at the content and development other characters have in their POVs.

[atopvisenyashill]

"Daenerys has done a lot of wrongs" and said are killing slavers

thanks for this one actually because you gave me an excuse to talk about that for a bit.

now first of all - i find it very frustrating that when people say “this was wrong” everyone defaults to “why do you care about slavers” when usually, when i’m talking about things dany has done wrong, i’m talking about mirri maz durr, sacking astapor, sexually abusing irri, and taking a profit off slavery. mirri wasn’t a slaver, she was a slave, and she was blood sacrificed by dany. sacking a city, regardless of who is in that city, is always messy and bad - ask Cleos the Butcher and the people he rules over how they feel about the Sack. Ask the people of King's Landing how they feel about their houses being set on fire every few decades. Ask Missandei how she really feels watching the woman she put all her faith in take a cut off the selling of slaves. Hell, Dany knows that Irri does not want to have sex with her and is doing it because she feels "obligated" because she's a slave and Dany still uses her as a bed warmer and then bars her from expressing an interest in Rakharo because she doesn't believe Irri is ~worthy~ of Rakharo (worthy to fuck but not to love and don't I fucking know about attitudes like that coming from white straight girls lmao).

But let's move past all of that (you certainly seem uninterested in talking about the personhood of slaves like Missandei and Mirri after all, despite ostensibly defending them here) and dig into the crucifying of the Great Masters. In fact, let's turn to Dany's own thoughts over this, bolded part mine:

In the plaza before the Great Pyramid, the Meereenese huddled forlorn. The Great Masters had looked anything but great in the morning light. Stripped of their jewels and their fringed tokars, they were contemptible; a herd of old men with shriveled balls and spotted skin and young men with ridiculous hair. Their women were either soft and fleshy or as dry as old sticks, their face paint streaked by tears. “I want your leaders,” Dany told them. “Give them up, and the rest of you shall be spared.” “How many?” one old woman had asked, sobbing. “How many must you have to spare us?” “One hundred and sixty-three,” she answered. She had them nailed to wooden posts around the plaza, each man pointing at the next. The anger was fierce and hot inside her when she gave the command; it made her feel like an avenging dragon. But later, when she passed the men dying on the posts, when she heard their moans and smelled their bowels and blood… Dany put the glass aside, frowning. It was just. It was. I did it for the children.

Immediately after doing it, Dany regrets it. She recognizes she did it while angry and impassioned and reckless, and that the deaths were agonizing, that she did it not for the children but because she was angry and humiliated. This scene has never been as righteously clean morally than people would believe from the moment it was on page! She recognizes she did a fucked up thing but rationalizes it away because she can't admit she made a mistake. She reflects on it later again as she's ruling Meereen:

She had not forgotten the slave children nailed up along the road from Yunkai. They had numbered one hundred sixty-three, a child every mile, nailed to mileposts with one arm outstretched to point her way. After Meereen had fallen, Dany had nailed up a like number of Great Masters. Swarms of flies had attended their slow dying, and the stench had lingered long in the plaza. Yet some days she feared that she had not gone far enough. These Meereenese were a sly and stubborn people who resisted her at every turn. They had freed their slaves, yes … only to hire them back as servants at wages so meagre that most could scarce afford to eat. Those too old or young to be of use had been cast into the streets, along with the infirm and the crippled. And still the Great Masters gathered atop their lofty pyramids to complain of how the dragon queen had filled their noble city with hordes of unwashed beggars, thieves, and whores. To rule Meereen I must win the Meereenese, however much I may despise them.

She lets the bodies of the people she wants to rule rot, the smell lingering in the plaza for weeks, reminding the people she is trying to make peace with that she can and will viciously murder their families and gloat over their corpses and they cannot stop her. Then doesn't put in any rules about wages, anything to help the sick and disabled. She blames the Great Masters for working within the system they've had for generations despite yelling at them to get a new system and doing nothing to help them move to that new system. She judges them, she hates them, and she wonders why she has the Meereneese version of the KKK springing up afterwards. She is just as ineffective as Andrew Johnson is during Reconstruction, too focused on her own feelings to look objectively at what this destroyed city actually needs from her, instead judging them from her own lofty pyramid with her own slaves and her own superior culture and mopes about how much she wants the Seven Kingdoms.

SHE is the one who decided she was going to rule this place. But instead of focusing on reconciliation, she focuses in on revenge. And that is why she sets herself up to fail.

[amaltheas-garden]

people still shocked that in the year of our lord 2024 some of us don't want to see Dany get her 'happy ending' by becoming the white savior who was promised

[rise-my-angel]

Anytime I see a post about how Rhaenyra won because her bloodline leads to the Prince that was Promised I have the most petty urge to just reblog their post with a single gif of Jon Snow.

[the-daily-dreamer]

My favorite this about targ stans is that they cherry pick GRRM’s words so that they seem right. Specifically the quote that ice and fire are the others and dragons.

And on the surface that could serve as a feasible argument, corroborated by the author, that Daenerys is the “most important character tm”. Because of the others are obviously the mythical antagonists then dragons must be the mythical protagonists. The fire will destroy the ice and so dragons are good and therefore Daenerys, the mother of dragons, is good. And that’s a serviceable argument until you look further into GRRM’s quotes.

Quotes about how the dragons are weapons of mass destruction (from a well known anti-war writer). Quotes about how if you think Jon and Dany are the point of the story, you’re missing 80% of the story (implying each are only roughly 10% of the story). They start to diminish this claim of Dany being the ultimate savior against the others.

And if you want my opinion, I think that the quote of dragons being fire and the others being ice is misinterpreted. Because GRRM never says that it’s the fight between ice and fire or the triumph of fire over ice. He provide ZERO context actually about what those mean for the broader world and story. And I think that based on comments about the threat dragons pose as weapons of mass destruction, the dragons are yet another threat to Westeros. Just like the others. The song of ice and fire is the song of the triumph of Westeros against the two threats to come and icy undead army and giant fire breathing serpents.

After all, once the long night ends and the icy threat of winter is defeated, we will all dream of spring. And dragons plant no trees.