#hotd fandom discourse

[tell-them-the-north-remembers]

Every single time I think a TB stan will actually make an unbiased critique of Alicent that I can respect even if not necessarily agree with on here they start spewing the most misogynistic bullshit ever instead that involves calling her deragotary and sexist terms, victimblaming her for the middle-aged Viserys wanting to bed his daughter's 15 year old bestfriend that he saw grow up and claiming that she is the worst mother to ever live who hates her own children. Bonus points if they blame her for Viserys' neglect too.

It is insane the way I have yet to meet an Alicent critiquer that doesn't immediately slip into blatant misogyny. Every time I see a cool-looking TB blog interacting with me or my mutuals the first thing I do out of reflex is to look at their posts about Alicent. If I see the word "Alicunt" once it is over. Like don't get me wrong, some of y'all TB stans are lovely but the majority I have had the displeasure of meeting so far are Alicent-haters who attack anybody who respectfully critiques Rhaenyra, Daemon or Daemyra. Like I said, not saying everybody is like this but I have met very few people that aren't.

[synchodai]

I get this impression that House of the Dragon doesn't get that "named" heirs aren't really the norm in Westeros. If it were that easy for someone to just give everything to their favorite child, Randall Tarly wouldn't have needed to force Sam to go to the Wall and Tywin could have simply chosen Cersei over Tyrion as heir of Casterly Rock.

If we look at the history Westeros borrows from, the concept of "naming" heirs wasn't really a thing in medieval England. Landed gentry didn't have direct say over the order of succession until the Statute of Wills in 1540. Before then, land and subsequent titles could only be inherited through agnatic primogeniture.

Agnatic primogeniture prioritized the living, eldest, trueborn son. Claims can only be passed on patrilineally. This means that a grandaughter can inherit a claim of her grandfather's titles through her father, but a grandson cannot be given the same through his mother. However, if his mother finally does have land and titles under her own name (not under her father's), only then does her son and other children enter the line of succession.

The reason it was like this was because it kept land and titles under one family. Daughters are less preferred because when they are married, they become part of their husband's family — meaning that any titles they receive will be inherited through a new line. This wouldn't be an ideal situation because it gives two families claims to the titles. The more claimants there are, the more unstable the hold the owner has.

In other words, agnatic primogeniture was practiced for stability. Because back in the day, titles weren't just property or land. They came with governorship over a people, so a stable and predictable transfer of titles was necessary to avoid civil conflicts and questions of legitimacy.

A landed lord or lady wasn't given the right to designate heirs for a few reasons:

Most of them were vassals who oversaw the land in the name of someone higher up. It technically isn't even theirs to give away (see: feudal land tenure).

The wishes of a human being are less predictable than having a determined line of succession based on birth order. What if he becomes incapable of declaring an heir either through illness or disability? What if he's captured and a bad actor forces him to name this person heir under threat of violence?

People died unexpectedly all time. This was before germ theory and modern medicine — child mortality was extremely high. With no refrigeration technology, a single poor harvest could mean dying from starvation. Bandits, cutthroats, and raiders were a constant threat. They could not afford to rely on a person choosing a different heir every time the old heir drops dead, because the landed lord/lady could die just as suddenly.

Even 21st century families stab each other in the back over who gets grandma's house — so imagine having an uncertain line of succession in the middle ages over a life-defining lordship and without a modern-day court system to mediate.

Going back to HotD, whenever Targaryens did go against the established line of succession, they could only have done it by consolidating the support of their vassals. Only royalty seemed to have the power to bend agnatic primogeniture, but even then they were beholden to it.

When Jaehaerys I ascended the throne over Aerea, it was mainly because there were those who saw Maegor the Cruel's act of disinheriting Jaehaerys as null and void. This restored Jaehaerys place in the line of succession above Aerea.

And when Rhaenys was passed over for Baelon, Jaehaerys had to convene his lords and offer compelling reasons as to why — her young age, her lack of an heir, her Velaryon last name, etc. It wasn't a given that just because she was a woman that she was ineligible. If he was doing it purely out of misogyny, he still had to legally justify his misogyny in order to strip away her rights.

Even after consolidating support, the book mentions Jaehaerys I and Viserys I's respective hold on the crown was still weakened. Even though their claims were backed by reasons cosigned by a powerful majority, they still had to ensure the security of their rule through other means. There were people who doubted their right to rule, and those people had to be placated with gifts (by Viserys) or intimidated into submission (by Jaehaerys).

So we come to Viserys I who never gave his vassals a reason why Rhaenyra should supercede his three sons other than, "I said so." Had he convened with his lords and maybe made the argument that a first marriage takes precendence over a second one, then maybe he could have set a new precedent and gathered support.

But no, he didn't. He relied on the power of his own words and the lords' personal oaths — oaths that he didn't exactly plan how he would enforce posthumously.

And the Realm did not choose to adopt a different succession law after Jaehaerys's designation of Baelon in 92 AC or the Council of Harrenhal choosing Viserys on 101 AC. If those two events did change anything, it was that now women were exempt from the line of succession for the crown and only the crown. It did not set the precedence that monarchs could freely choose heirs. It did not upend the whole system; it only made a tweak, as most lawful policy-changes do, by carving out at an exception. It was a committee, not a revolution.

Before and after the Dance, no other monarch, lord, or lady "declared" an heir that went against agnatic primogeniture, save for Dornish who have cognatic (equal-gender) primogeniture instead. Ramsay had to get rid of Roose Bolton's living trueborn son AND be legitimized by the crown in order to be recognized as heir (only a crowned monarch can legitimize baseborn children which is another world-building pillar a lot of people miss). Randall basically had to force Sam to abdicate because he wanted his younger brother to inherit instead. And of course, Tywin despite his intense hatred of Tyrion is forced to acknowledge him as his heir.

The rigidity of the line of succession is a major and constant source of conflict in the series, so it baffles me that people really thought that characters could just freely choose their heirs. That's why we have a civil war. It wasn't a misunderstanding. It's the expected consequences of someone carelessly going against a foundational tenent of the society they inhabit.

[jessmalia]

HOUSE OF THE DRAGON 2x03 "The Burning Mill"

[ride-thedragon]

Because I'm seeing the discourse pop up. Fake Rhaena enjoyers do not have a valued opinion when it comes to the leak about her and Nettles.

"Rhaena gets a bigger plot." Rhaena is literally a beckon of hope for her house by the end, the only dragonrider with her dragon of house Targaryen by the end. She has the entire Vale plot, which , as Rhaenyra thinks Tyraxes isn't enough, could easily be her playing the game of thrones and forming a close alliance and meeting her future husband.

"She deserves a dragon." She has one. It's one of the prettiest dragons in ASOIAF history. One that matches with her sisters.

"Nettles' plot points can be transferred." They can't. It's the worst part of the rumour and people acting as though they care about either characters. It's literally impossible for the characters because of how different they are. Neither of their plots can be transferred one to one. Rhaena is a Sansa parallel in the Narrative, Nettles is Daenerys'.

"It stops this conflict." Any conflict in this instance with these two is point of the story. Their conflicts are there for a reason.

"Rhaena can still get Morning" Then WHAT WAS THE FUCKING POINT???? That's actually insane. What would be the point?

To those people who say Rhaena is black, she isn't. I'll link the multiple post as to why:

Here

And here

And Nettles specifically.

The bottom line is that Rhaena is Valyrian. She isn't black within the written narrative even though her actor is. The way these two gentlemen are black, she isn't.

If she takes Nettles' place, it's racism.

So you fake Rhaena enjoyers who probably have a Daemon daughter oc to revoke her in your canon, who can go on for hours about Daemon and the Velaryon boys without one post about his actual children and who hate Laena for no reason can disrespectfully sit this one out. This change doesn't affect you or your enjoyment.

Let's not act as though the Nettles replacement theory doesn't predate Rhaena’s introduction as a character on the show.

Either all the final girls are on screen, or the point of the adaptation is lost before it can establish itself.

[witheredoffherwitch]

Antis: Y'all will hate Aemond's guts when he enters his villain era in Season 2. I am just getting that popcorn ready 🫵😂

HoTD girlies:

[greenbloods]

always infinitely funny to me how the dance of the dragons is about the futility of both sides of the struggle as they tear each other apart and doom the realm. and the fandom looked at that for all of two seconds before deciding to recreate it online

[very-straight-blog]

I want to join the fandom discourse a little bit, @st-eve-barnes inspired me huh. Sooo... In my blog, I try to avoid drama as much as possible - I quite rarely talk about the blacks in general, never discuss TB blogs and don't argue with their authors. The description of my blog clearly states what it's dedicated to and I put the right tags under the posts. My main goal is to create a cozy and safe space for people who read me, who love the same characters as me and agree with my opinion. However, even this doesn't save my blog - I regularly receive hate asks, TB fans who want to argue come in comments, my posts are often discussed in TB blogs, usually with insults. I really don't understand what these people's problem is - obviously they take this fandom VERY seriously. They don't understand the difference between characters and real people, and that scares me. If you're ready to bully a real person because of their taste for those who don't even exist, it's scary. Touch the grass.

[blackcat419]

Pros and Antis in HotD and aSoIaF Fandom: the breakdown around grey storytelling

I think I know why TB people struggle so much for understanding why TG is liked by people and it’s because fandom discourse has been so rotted away by “pro shippers” and “anti shippers” discourse that we’ve entered into a puritanical view of consuming media.

They see the media you consume as a direct reflection of the type of person you are and thus the characters you like must be similar to who you are as a person.

To a certain extent I get it, looking at a broad portfolio of media consumption can reveal a bit about a person. For example, I consume a lot of horror media. You can discern that I like being scared and the adrenaline that comes from it. But that’s only in a safe controlled situation where I can turn off the tv or monitor when it gets too much. I don’t like haunted houses, being alone at night, or even the dark.

Media is a safe place to explore different sides of humanity in a controlled setting where the only thing at risk is our own enjoyment. People can find that they like things in media that they wouldn’t like in real life. But this distinction is lost on a lot of fandom puritans. To them, media consumption is a political act. You reaffirm that you are a “good person” by watching the “good shows” and rooting for the “good guys”. To look upon a morally complex character or even the villain with interest and sympathy is thus to condone and support every action that character will be written to take.

But this idea of assuming moral righteousness from the characters you support in media because even harder to understand and justify when applied to stories like HotD and aSoIaF where every character possesses both good and evil. So how does a puritan fan reaffirm their belief that they are morally good in a series such as these? The fan will assign the idea oh moral correctness and superiority to the characters they like. Any bad, morally questionable, or straight up evil act the character commits will be justified as righteous no matter how the story frames those actions to the audience. The same is applied to characters these fans do not like. Every bad, morally questionable, or evil action is amplified to become the main character trait while any good, just, or morally righteous act is off written as either an evil act in disguise or any good to come out of the act should be attributed to another character. Any harm committed again the character is then down played as not that bad or actually deserved.

In HotD and aSoIaF, this fandom Puritanism mainly affects female characters.

In aSoIaF, we have characters such as Dany and Arya being framed as the morally righteous and just while characters such as Catelyn and Sansa are painted as villains. Weirdly this does not apply to actual villainous female characters likes Cersei. This could be because the books and show are very clear that her actions are evil and cruel, puritan fans do not feel insecure liking her as they feel secure that the story and thus other fans know she is a bad person and won’t assume liking her means viewing her as a good person. Characters such as Margery Tyrell and Arianne Martell are viewed with more complexity than other female characters but I bet once they come into conflict with beloved female characters, they will be viewed as villainous.

In HotD we see the same thing happening. Puritan fans see Rhaenyra as the perfect hero with any negative action being just or not her fault while Alicent is painted as more evil than the step mother from Cinderella who, despite all evidence to the contrary, wanted to be queen and this deserves everything that she gets.

This is why so many people have to explain to puritan fans that liking characters like Sansa, Catelyn, Alicent, Aegon, or Aemond does not make one bastardphobic, a rape apologist, or anti feminist. I also think it explains why these fans can’t except that their favorite characters have done wrong and hurt people. They can’t accept criticism or critique of their favorite character because to them it’s not another person’s reading of a fictional character, it’s someone judging them on their morals.

Puritanical fans interlock their identity and sense of self with the characters they like and struggle to separate criticism of those characters as criticism of themselves as a person.

[booksbhenchod]

hotd fandom on twitter is just sad, they've driven off so many fanartists and authors, the show wasn't even that good to begin with 💀

i don't think any character in HOTD is better than any asoiaf character 🤷🏽‍♀️ especially not the women in agot/asoiaf

tv adaptations of both were shit but atleast season 1 gave us some joint family drama

[ilikefelines]

I hate when people say about Queen Alicent:

'bUt ShE mARrIeD her BfFs dAd1!1' as if the poor woman had a choice. Do you know what it's like being demonised for something you were forced into? And then Rhaenyra gives her the cold shoulder as if she initiated her marriage to Viserys, when by all rights, the Princess should be angry with the king.

And I understand why Rhaenyra did that - I really do and I feel sympathy for Rhaenyra's precarious situation but her treatment of Alicent was still gross.

We can acknowledge that Rhaenyra had a tough time of it without demonising Alicent. You don't need to demonise one character to elevate another, especially when their both crushed by the feudal system of Westeros in different ways.

[greenqueenhightower]

I can understand why people like Rhaenyra. I can understand why Alicent isn't to everyone's taste. I still don't understand how she is so hated for behaving like a human considering the gaslighting and abuse she's been through, and how she has much less free agency than Rhaenyra. It was reading through the horrific and vitriolic extreme takes on Alicent that made me side with her. And something about Rhaenyra and her mean diehards just remind me so much of white feminism. I feel like it's no coincidence I see way more WoC tending to sympathize with Alicent, as a WoC myself. The gaslighting and watching someone else consistently get away with things you wouldn't while being trapped in a cage is all too relatable. The rules dont apply to Rhaenyra and Rhaenyra only. And seeing Rhaenyra being the only one in the narrative made to look extra sympathetic (like the double birth scenes, as if all births aren't horrific and like Alicent didn't give birth even younger too). I also hate how despite their efforts in diverse casting, black actors are just backdrops or tools to make Rhaenyra and TB look better and how they're disposable to move the plot forward for her. This matter has been brought up in the TG subreddit thank God I was not the only one who saw that. Now it seems like they're even butchering B&C to absolve TB. 🙂🙃 Girl I am not ready for the blind Rhaenyra dickriding and Alicent victim blaming to come this season. You'll know it'll be misogyny and double standards all around. The suffering Alicent endured in Season 1 will be even more disregarded.

Hi anon! 💚

Alicent isn't to everyone's taste because to understand her character, motivations, and aspirations, one needs to take the whole show as context, instead of some stand-alone scenes that provide dissatisfaction or lack the "wow"/"badass" factor that the average got/hotd viewer is used to.

I understand how Rhaenyra's character appeals to people because she is the female Targaryen heir, desires the best for her children, and is determined to honor her cause and her late father's wishes to serve the realm. Rhaenyra believes so much in herself; Alicent doesn't. Rhaenyra's overconfidence, her "flouting to do as she pleases" is what is so attractive to a lot of viewers, me included, because, well, she doesn't give a damn. She can go against the conventions of her time because she has already entered the game in a good battle formation, has the means, and is ready to play it (I'm trying to go for a chess analogy here as we saw in the promo, bear with me).

Alicent on the other hand, has entered the game as a foreigner. She did not wish this, she has no historical ties to rulership, no dragon blood to base her confidence on, and no pride in taming and riding wild beasts. She is common as Rhaenyra is exotic. What Alicent has and brings to the game is "honor, duty, sacrifice." These values alone make Alicent compelling and intriguing because they are very subtle qualities and principles that one needs to notice to comprehend her character. They are not as easily identifiable as riding a dragon or slicing a wild boar.

Yet they are equally powerful, because as Rhaenyra plays the game in the open field, being free to make her own decisions, unstoppable in always getting what she wants and being able to claim it herself, Alicent plays the game behind closed doors, in septs, praying to the seven, following directions, seeking council, and moving strategically. Rhaenyra's battle is more visually impactful, but Alicent's is equally moving if one cares to observe and understand it properly.

Therefore, what you are saying about WoC standing by Alicent makes perfect sense because the motivations and experiences as well as the feeling of always having to try twice as hard to achieve what is simply given to others is a point of connection for WoC.

You also very poignantly highlight the show's "humanization" of Rhaenyra through two birth scenes, because again, she is this exotic being whom the audience loves to aspire to, but we must also not forget that she is special while also being human. Alicent's suffering in S1 very much humanizes her in my eyes and is precisely also what distinguishes her from a commoner. She becomes a strong woman who doesn’t shy away in the fear of danger, learns to hold her head high and pushes forward the interests of herself and her children. The hate Alicent receives is uncalled for, and it stems from a misreading of her character, despite being the most interesting character in hotd in my opinion.

I’m glad you decided to stan Alicent after reading all the horrific takes about her! There are so many people in the fandom who want to vilify her, but there are also many who totally connect to her and sympathize with her character, like queer people, WoC, etc.

I didn’t like what the show did with black characters in s1 either. They served mostly as props and had brutal deaths. For S2, it does seem as if the show will want to downgrade the events of B&C and continue emphasize the narrative of Rhaenyra’s superiority (and the Greens and Alicent will be blamed and hated a lot this season), but I honestly stopped reading leaks and spoilers because they affect me a lot. I’d rather wait and see what the producers decide to do with their portrayal and then comment on the events. I’m so scared about B&C though and how this will affect the Greens’ arc and their perception by the public, but again, I’ll be standing by Alicent’s side till the end lol. 💚

[synchodai]

i am genuinely unfollowing and unsubscribing asoiaf "content creators" turning on grrm for being "unprofessional" and telling him "to shut up and finish winds." thank you for telling me that you don't care about the author's vision as long as you get more soulless seasons and shows to turn into tiktok theory vids and ship fodder. thank you for letting me know that you are more concerned about HBO's ability to churn out half-baked slop and want TWOW now regardless of how it reflects the author's creative message and how happy he is with it. thank you for letting me know that you see asoiaf as primarily a content mill for you to profit off of and you will turn on anyone who threatens the content mill, even the very person who made the world and characters you claim to love so much.

[pterodactylterrace]

Oh, Aegon is a pig for celebrating the death of Lucerys, who was responsible for taking Aemond’s eye?

What does that make Daemon, then? I have four very important words for you to remember:

Heir For a Day

And that was for a literal infant that wasn’t even alive long enough to do anything, along with Aemma who was killed giving birth to him.

Rules for thee, not for me, I take it?

I’m sorry, but that was just too hypocritical NOT to post.

[liaa--qb]

your unpopular opinion about team green from fnb and hotd series??? Wanna know

unpopular opinion on team green.....😑

I would say my simple complaint from writer. I am not against or hater of the show. FNB wasn't any good itself. But if I talk about characters honestly to me, greens wasn't any good (same with team black) in book both were 2d but greens actually had potential to be very interesting.

"Like writers seriously got mini version of Paul Atreides n Jessica, Borgias family , Ivar the boneless, prince Jorg ancrath and Prince Jalan Kendeth from Prince of thorns and prince of fools books n the riot club drama among the green family so well still.....how can they not write them really good ? "

Like material is right there infront of them already way better written and explored😭 they just have to mix all these correctly according to their plot at right time. How can they miss it so bad ?😫😵

I can tell so many books too and characters from which they could have taken inspiration for Aegon, Alicent , Aemond 😭🤦🏻‍♀️ that would fit so good if they wanted to do some changes and add something extraa for these characters. I don't get how can they be sooo.... Lazy

Believe me when I say team greens could have been really interesting in the show to watch if writers actually wanted to write something excellent. But it just looks like to me that they don't......😒🤷🏻‍♀️ I can't say honestly

[ride-thedragon]

Nettles, Rhaenyra, Laena, Mysaria, and the Prize that is DAEMON TARGARYEN

Now, I'm not going to sit here and police shipping. I'm also not going to act as though better writers and thinkers long before me haven't talked about the same phenomenon of centring men in women's narratives as a way to value the women. However, as a person in this fandom, I do want to apply this thought to the shipping discourse of Daemon Targaryen because it has become exhausted.

We treat this man as though he's the prize to gain when these women are in relationships with him. In the sense that when Daemon picks these women to have a relationship with they gain a value and devalue the women he leaves behind. We see this with him going:

from Rhea and Mysaria to Laena.

He finally has a Valyrian bride who matches his spirit and can give him Valyrian children. They get along and are of equal standing.

From Laena to Rhaenyra.

He moves on, finds real happiness, finds his true family, becomes the Targaryen he was destined to be with his Targaryen bride at his side, and their Targaryen children with his real family

From Rhaenyra to Mysaria .

Rhaenyra became mournful and wasn't as she once was. Him and Mysaria just have this connection, and Rhaenyra approves.

From Rhaenyra and Mysaria to Nettles.

Daemon finally found someone he could look past himself for. The singers say they end up together. He does all of this and leaves the Rhaenyra to her death because Nettles left. He's finally ready to settle down and grow old. She saved him.

All of this is an overgeneralised hyperbole of conversations I've seen, but they always centre Daemon choosing these women to be in a relationship with as their biggest accomplishment in the narrative. Him at their side is the biggest deal, and when he leaves them, they are discarded and replaced by his new love interest.

The issue with this

Prioritising a man, this man, as the main factor in these relationships, discredit the women who exist outside of him and make it seem as though he's the only thing that adds value to them. The language being used, in short, dismisses their personhood and equates them to something he can own, discard and replace at whim, and he alone adds value to them. It's icky language especially with his game card.

Lady Rhea: wasn't even her choice. She hated him and refused to give him an heir to inherit Runestone. In the show, she makes sure he returns and kills her by insulting his sexual prowess.

Mysaria: is complicit and involved in his worst action but always ensures she pulls herself up with it. Being his courtesan made her wealthy, almost made her his wife. Then she's complicit in blood and cheese and gets herself promoted to the Lady of Whispers to the Queen, eventually putting an end to him.

Laena: CLAIMED THE LARGEST DRAGON IN THE WORLD AS A TEEN. Is quite literally the mother of the girls that survived the Dance. Her blood inherits her house's seat.

Rhaenyra: Queen of the Seven Kingdoms. Had men avenge her death, and her son sat on the iron throne after her.

Nettles: created the religion that forged the most dangerous tribe in the Vale of Arryn. Claimed a wild dragon and committed alleged treason and escaped.

I'm not saying Daemon isn't important. I'm not saying he doesn't play a part. I'm saying that when we have these conversations about him and these women and the progression of his relationships with them, I hope we can reach a place where the idea that he leaves them isn't a jab or joke against one woman for the sake of the one he chooses. It's getting strange.

Women don't lose value because of a man. Ever.

This also applies to Baela and her adaptation in the show. She isn't uninteresting because she isn't a tomboy or like Daemon. They make her a political girl in the show and like Laena. That's not a loss. She's modelled after Rhaenys as well. She's just reflective of the women in her life. I'm sure she'll have a relationship to Daemon as well, but she's the Ward of Driftmark. That's quite interesting. We also have tomboys like Alysanne and Sabitha, so we aren't in a deficit by any means.

[witheredoffherwitch]

"What happened to the fierce mother bear who demanded Luke's eye as payment for Aemond's lost one? I want that fiery, badass Alicent back!"

NEWSFLASH: Turns out she was never really that Alicent to begin with! She had a moral crisis the very next day that caused her to turn to religion for next six years as a coping mechanism. And none of that lessens the love she bears for Aemond because it was precisely his injury that made her snap in the first place and Viserys' indifference just added fuel to the fire..