#the real Jon Snow defence squad

[fedonciadale]

After this trailer, I'm afraid to say that I don't care about jon anymore, I honestly had faith. but everything seems to indicate that he is indeed in love and he is even going to make a romantic expedition riding a dragon with her. Apparently frikidoctors leaks are true. 😭

Dear nonny,

as to frikki I just alert you to this post by @athimbleful that just passed my dash. He was pretty accurate last time because the whole season had leaked. The seasons before that he obviously only had a source in the dubbing department and accurate information only about a few days before the show aired. So there is no reason why he should be believed more than any  other fake leaker. Security has been very tight this season. I dare say, we won’t get nasty suprises this time.

I have said it numerous times already. I might not have faith in D&D but I have faith in GRRM and sry, not sry, none of the other possible outcomes has as many hints as Jonsa, not even DarkDany. So, I’ve survived the season 7 leaks, season 7 and the hiatus. I am not giving up on George on the very last inches of the run.

And nothing could make me not care about Jon. He is my favourite character and I will be interested in his fate whatever happens.

As for Jon being in love... Well, he doesn’t smile around D, he just doesn’t smile. And if he sits on a dragon with her and still doesn’t smile, I still would say, that we do not see him in love or even only slightly at ease with the supposed love of his life. I don’t know what experiences with love life people have who think that they have ‘amazing chemistry’ and ‘are a we-team’ or whatever. I just can say that I, myself, would not want that kind of relationship. I think if my boyfriend would look at me like Jon does at D, I would quit or go to therapy with him.

So, nonny, I don’t know if this is what you wanted to read, but that is where I stand. I believe in GRRM.

Thanks for the ask!

[fedonciadale]

Is it fair to say that I am skeptical of Jonsa happening? As much as I would love for Jon and Sansa to be the endgame couple, too many barriers stand in their way: D@enerys, possible Targcest!baby, the Northern lords, the Night King and Cersei, his parentage. As much as I loathe it, perhaps Jon did relinquish his kingdom due to his love/awe of Daenerys, though Lord only knows why. He has not seen the darker aspects of her character. Just like D@enerys, Jon is impetuous and doesn't think.

Dear nonny,

I would beg to differ, but of course I would do that….

Let’s look at the things that stand in their way:

Da€nerys. I would say it depends on how Jon feels for her. If he is in love with her, that would stand in their way, but since I don’t think he is, I would argue that Da€nerys could prove to be a catalyst for Jonsa. Sansa might realise that she is jealous and that might induce Jon to admit that their is no reason to be jealous. Da€nerys probably wouldn’t like it, but that does not mean that she can prevent it.

possible Targcest baby: This would only be a hindrance if D anounces she is pregnant and they marry before RLJ reveal, highly unlikely. And Sansa could not hold that baby against Jon. If he sired a baby, he sired it unawares of RLJ. I hold to the (unpopular) opinion that a Jon€rys baby, even a living one is a possibility, although I would not like it. I do not think it would necessarily prevent Jonsa, because the situation is different than with Ned/Cat at the time of Robert’s Rebellion. Sansa marrying Jon and bringing up a baby not her own would be as if she was married to a young widower. It would probably make things more difficult, but not necessarily impossible.

The Northern Lords: How do they stand against Jonsa? Once they learn of RLJ they might insist to raise another Stark as King/Queen, but they probably could be appeased very easily with a Jonsa marriage. A Targaryen tamed by a Stark bride. Would be o.k. for them. The Northern Lords would be a huge obstacle for a Jon€rys marriage especially after parentage reveal. If Jon wants to keep a hold on the North, marrying Da€nerys after parentage reveal and renewing Targaryen exceptionalism is the last thing he should do.

The Night King and Cersei are only enemies to be defeated. None of them has an interest in preventing Jonsa. They are only obstacles in the meaning that they might try to kill Jon, Sansa or both and that of course would mean an end. But otherwise than acting as cockblockers I can’t see  how they work against Jonsa. Indeed, fighting against a common ennemy might bring them even closer together.

Parentage reveal: I really strongly disagree with you on this point. RLJ reveal works strongly in Jon and Sansa’s favour. Without RLJ they could never be together, with RLJ there is no impediment for a marriage.

As for Jon relinquishing his kingdom for love, I also disagree. I mean, even if he were in love, what makes you think that he just forgot the North, his people and his family? You know the North he will fight for “no matter the odds” (Jon’s words not mine). Even if he would be a man completely and  utterly in love, why would he forget that?

And Jon might not have seen the darker aspect of her character, but he has seen her very dangerous “children”, her temper and he can guess that she did not win the battle on the Goldroad just be flying over the armies. He has an inkling on “what she is” (not who!).

As for Jon being impetuous, I disagree as well. During his whole time at Dragonstone he acted guarded and did not act rashly even once. He even hid his joy that must have been in his heart when he heard that Bran and Arya are alive. In episode 1 Sansa rubbed him the wrong way, and even then he fought with her on the battlements and not in the Great Hall for all to see, he did not lose his temper.

And although ShowJon is dumbed down, he is not stupid. He can act rashly, when his emotions run high - like when Rickon is in danger - but he does not do so regularly. And BookJon is really smart. So no, Jon acted like he did, because he thought he had no choice, not because he doesn’t think.

Thanks for the ask!

[fedonciadale]

As s8 draws near I noticed more awareness to political jon and acceptence towards it. From your perspective, would you say thats true or does the numbers of those who invalidate this theory outweigh those who come around. Have you ever come across someone who has changed their stance on pol!Jon?

Dear nonny,

the funny thing is that Political Jon is a theory that is mostly misunderstood by people in this fandom, because most think it is a Jonsa theory. It does stand on its own though, and could work well with Jonsa but is not connected to Jonsa. It could happen independently. Anyway, in short it means that Jon is not as dumb as he seems and that he has a political agenda (securing dragonglass, dragons and support for the fight against the WW) in his dealings with Da€nerys.

The funny thing is, that I have witnessed Jon€rys shippers jump on the Political Jon bandwagon twice already, argueing that Jon has a political agenda, even that he must have a political agenda.

The first time was then a photo of Kit kneeling in front of Lena leaked - implicating that Jon would kneel to Cersei for whatever reason. And Jon€rys shipper immediately claimed that Jon must have a hidden agenda in doing so. There is no way his kneeling was not fake. There was no way he would just kneel to Cersei of all people. Surely it must mean that he plays her…

The second time Political Jon was brought up by Jon€rys shippers was after the interview with Maisie, where she said that her character Arya is on Sansa’s side now and reprimands Jon for acting “with his dick”. The protest waves were great. Of course Jon does not think with his dick. He needs support for the North, dragonglass, dragons and Da€nerys can give him all that. So, he had political reasons for getting Da€nerys on board….

So, I would say, as long as you don’t see Political Jon through distorting Anti Jonsa hate goggles, misinterpreting it as a theory that Jon does everything because he wants to fuck Sansa - I mean I do think part of his internal reasoning for leaving Winterfell was to distance himself from Sansa, but that does not come into his political agenda in his dealings with D - , Political Jon is a theory that is actually easy to accept. If you just let yourself speculate for one moment that Jon does not do everything only for the reasaon because he is in love with D, it is the only sensible option. Political Jon could even work with Jon being fascinated with D or infatuated and even falling in love. I doubt it would happen the same way as with Ygritte though. But apart from what Jon€rys shippers say, it is not a theory that is necessarily against Jon€rys. And the very fact that they now claim that Jon has political reasons for his “alliance” (it is not an alliance if Jon knelt, but that is for another post), shows that it is easy to argue that. Because it makes sense, if you look at Jon’s arc. His arc was always about saving the North/humanity and fight the WW. And why would he suddenly forget that, when he has family in Winterfell he wants to save?

So, in my experience, if you argue with casual viewers, general audience, anyone who is not adamant that Jon has to lose his brains the moment he meets the ‘love of his life’, it is easy to argue for political Jon. I know of a multishipper who wanted to write a fic about Jon being all political and falling for D despite his misgivings (they didn’t after all, it was too much for the fellow shippers), I know of a fervent Jon fan who is not a Jonsa at all but who desperately wants Political Jon to be true, because for them it is a question of Jon’s character, I know of my collegues, friends, who got interested in the theory, when I told them some of the arguments for Political Jon. Most agree that it would certainly make his character more interesting. So, I’ve done the Lord’s work and converted many people to Political Jon.

So, I would argue with even Jon€rys shippers argueing for Political Jon it is already part of the fandom discourse. People just don’t realise because they have this distorted idea of what Political Jon means. Just for the record Political Jon does not mean “Jon is in love with Sansa and does everything because he wants to bang her.”

But since many people think that this is what Political Jon is about they fail to realise that they have long accepted Political Jon - and it makes me double over laughing….

So just for the record, Politcal Jon means the following: Jon has not left his brain at Winterfell, and he does everything to get the support he thinks he needs to save Winterfell and the North from the threat that comes for them and that includes manipulating a volatile possible ally into helping them. The irony is that Jon might have added to the already existing problems, but that is where Bran will come into the game.

Thanks for the ask!

[fedonciadale]

Ok someone sent me an ask like this about Sansa the other day that I enjoyed answering so I’m returning the favour. What are your favourite things about Jon Snow? Book and/or show is all good to hear!

Hi Char!

I’ll keep it to three..... Three examples that show, that Jon cares for people and that he is smart and sometimes devious.

Jon cares for all his siblings/cousins, when he persuades Ned not to kill the direwolf pups. Jon was introduced here, and it really helped me like him.

"Lord Stark," Jon said. It was strange to hear him call Father that, so formal. Bran looked at him with desperate hope. "There are five pups," he told Father. "Three male, two female."          "What of it, Jon?"                  "You have five trueborn children," Jon said. "Three sons, two daughters. The direwolf is the sigil of your House. Your children were meant to have these pups, my lord."

Bran saw his father's face change, saw the other men exchange glances. He loved Jon with all his heart at that moment. Even at seven, Bran understood what his brother had done. The count had come right only because Jon had omitted himself. He had included the girls, included even Rickon, the baby, but not the bastard who bore the surname Snow, the name that custom decreed be given to all those in the north unlucky enough to be born with no name of their own.          Their father understood as well. "You want no pup for yourself, Jon?" he asked softly.                  "The direwolf graces the banners of House Stark," Jon pointed out. "I am no Stark, Father."(AGOT, Bran I)

When he looks out for Sam and serves the Night’s Watch when he persuades Maester Aemon to take Sam as steward. It shows that he cares for his friend Sam, another one of my favourites (I love their friendship). It shows again how he can negotiate, but also that he is ruthless when it comes to the wellfare of his friend Sam over the unsympathetic Chett.

Maester Aemon smiled. "And so?"          "The Night's Watch needs all sorts too. Why else have rangers and stewards and builders? Lord Randyll couldn't make Sam a warrior, and Ser Alliser won't either. You can't hammer tin into iron, no matter how hard you beat it, but that doesn't mean tin is useless. Why shouldn't Sam be a steward?"                  Chett gave an angry scowl. "I'm a steward. You think it's easy work, fit for cowards? The order of stewards keeps the Watch alive. We hunt and farm, tend the horses, milk the cows, gather firewood, cook the meals. Who do you think makes your clothing? Who brings up supplies from the south? The stewards."

Chett gave a nasty laugh. "I've seen what happens to soft lordlings when they're put to work. Set them to churning butter and their hands blister and bleed. Give them an axe to split logs, and they cut off their own foot."          "I know one thing Sam could do better than anyone."                  "Yes?" Maester Aemon prompted.

     Jon glanced warily at Chett, standing beside the door, his boils red and angry. "He could help you," he said quickly. "He can do sums, and he knows how to read and write. I know Chett can't read, and Clydas has weak eyes. Sam read every book in his father's library. He'd be good with the ravens too. Animals seem to like him. Ghost took to him straight off. There's a lot he could do, besides fighting. The Night's Watch needs every man. Why kill one, to no end? Make use of him instead."                  Maester Aemon closed his eyes, and for a brief moment Jon was afraid that he had gone to sleep. Finally he said, "Maester Luwin taught you well, Jon Snow. Your mind is as deft as your blade, it would seem." (AGOT, Jon V)

And as a last example, Jon not watching out for a friend, but for a woman he only knows superficially, just because she is in need of help, and again he is acting smart! He watches out for Alys Karstark in ADWD, not only marries her to Sigorn but also makes sure, that her bad uncle won’t pester her or abduct her:

     Cregan Karstark had turned up a day behind his niece. With him came four mounted men-at-arms, a huntsman, and a pack of dogs, sniffing after Lady Alys as if she were a deer. Jon Snow met them on the kingsroad half a league south of Mole's Town, before they could turn up at Castle Black, claim guest right, or call for parley. One of Karstark's men had loosed a crossbow quarrel at Ty and died for it. That left four, and Cregan himself.                  Fortunately they had a dozen ice cells. Room for all.(ADWD, Jon X)

I also like this because it may foreshadow Sansa arriving at Castle Black as the Girl in Grey, but Jon takes care that Cregan can’t wriggle through the holes the usual laws of Westeros would normally leave him.

Thanks for the ask! Lovely idea!

[fedonciadale]

I wrote a Jonsa/Pol!Jon rant on tumblr and I got my first “anon hate” ever. I’ve been on this site since 2014 and have never gotten anon hate for anything. I write 1 pro Jonsa/Pol!Jon piece with all the right tags and I get ‘Maybe Sansa isn’t as important as you think she is’ If the the opposing side has deigned to look at me who only has, like, 1 GoT post when it’s tagged properly, I can’t imagine how bored the other side of the fandom is right now. (Idk because I filtered my tags).

Hi there!

Well, Political Jon really is rather controversial and I got my share of hate for that as well. I can’t wait for season 8 and Political Jon and all the Anti Jon rants on behalf of D in the Jon Snow tag….

Then it will be time for “The Real Jon Snow defence squad”…

Honestly, I don’t get their obsession… I mean, not a day passes without some trespassing, random (if not always rude) anons etc…. But it is only three weeks now, we’ll survive until then!

Thanks for the ask!

[fedonciadale]

I’m not a shipper of anything in the got fandom but I am a stark Stan & i think if jon actually did fall for d & gave away north I will only care about bran, arya & sansa. ( without poljon) it’s him doing the same thing as Robb & giving up everything (when he didn’t need to) for a woman knowing what his family has been through to get it back. I love all the starks but that level of stupidity may just be enough to write him off 🤷🏽‍♂️

Dear nonny,

many Jon fans, at least those who are also House Stark fans and like and respect BookJon, feel like you. But I don’t think you need to fret. We’ll get Political Jon.

Thanks for the ask!

[fedonciadale]

Do you think Jon Snow is a Gary Stue? Part of the fandom already saw a little resemblance between young Georgie with Kit's appearence, both Jon and George have a kink for redheads, and on the surface Jon seems like a typical Gary Stue, but I don't know... I kinda see why people might say that, but I'm not entirely sure. What do you think? It is clear that George self inserts in Jon (at least a little), which I find personally, cute? Not even a great author like GRRM can escape that tendency...

Dear nonny,

definitely not. For once, although the ressemblance of young George with Kit is there, this particular post is a crackpost. I would remind you that BookJon has no ressemblance to George, even to young George. His face is long and stern, and he has no curls. Here is a picture from a calendar of ice and fire (sorry for the bad quality).

and here is a link to the art by amoka (x), which shows pretty much how Jon looks like in the books. So, sry, not sry, George does not look like Jon, and he himself said that if he is anyone he is Samwell Tarly... (x), bookloving, fat Samwell Tarly.

You know, it is funny that young George has a resemblance to Kit, but this does not prove anything, least of all that Jon is a Gary Stue.

Honestly, - and this is not directed at you, nonny - people should learn to seperate what is an actual argument (for instance quotes and foreshadowing from the books or the show) and what is crack and funny coincidence. I mean GRRM could not possibly know that Kit Harrington would play his Jon Snow when he published his first book in 1993....

You know that is the same kind of argument that is used by Da€nerys stans: GRRM’s family lost their fortune and house and as a child he had the feeling that he was robbed, and therefore he could not write anything else but a Targ restoration. Honestly? This is not how writing and literature works.

Yes, of course writers let their own experience flow into the writing, but good writers transcend this and I sincerely doubt that GRRM self-inserts very much into any of his characters. I would just alert you to the fact that he has several very different female characters that are all great and believable in their own way - the only part he does not get is female friendship, but so be it, otherwise the range of his women is spectacular.

So, I wouldn’t say GRRM self-inserts much into Jon apart from maybe channeling some of his experience and feelings into the character, but Jon is not a Gary Stue.

People say that he has it easy (where, honestly where?) and that he has a plot armour... But even that is not true. There are several reasons that Jon dies and will be ressurrected and none of them is about plot armour.

I didn’t mean to get all riled up about this, in particular because yours was an honest question. So please, bear with me, that I am a bit impatient with Jon ridicule. Jon Snow is my favourite character in the books, and BookJon is smart and clever and a well-fleshed character who has his faults. And I hate him being misrepresented as cinnamon roll whose only purpose is to bring Da€nerys to the good side, or a Gary Stue who has it easy, or a Northern fool who gives up the North for love and cheats Sansa of her birthright. None of this is Jon. Somehow people think he got everything handled on a platter? Like when he lost Ygritte? When he was killed? When he fought in the Battle of the Bastards? When he is ready to do everything for the survival of the North!

 I can’t wait for season 8... Then I probably will have to defend Jon against other accusations, but I’ll gladly do this as long as I don’t get any more ‘cinnamon roll’ - Jon Snow posts on my dash.

Thanks for the ask!

[fedonciadale]

I don't think people think we Jonsas can't be Jon fans. It's those who believe in political Jon that attract the ire. It's a source of mockery everywhere else. The hate for our ship ramped up with that. You've twisted Jon's actions and quote the same things from the book (Ygritte and the baby swap) to support it, even though they're totally different. It IS an insult to Jon's character. Sansa means more to you than Jon, and it's Jonsa at all costs for you. Which is ok, but just ADMIT it.

Dear nonny,

are you pressed somehow? Do you truly think that just speaking about “we Jonsas” will make me believe that you are one? I know Jonsas who don’t believe in the Political Jon Theory, but none of them come into my ask box anonymously to pester me about it, but we discuss it as civil persons. You might be the same anon who has come again and again to question my stance on Jon Snow.

So what about the people who came into my ask box, since season 7 aired and proclaimed that they are no Jonsa shippers but that they believe that the Political Jon theory has some merit? What about my colleagues in real life who are fans of the show who see that the theory might be true (and they are all non-shippers)? So, there are people in my ask box and people in my real life who directly contradict your generalisation. I would argue that this means that Political Jon is NOT mocked everywhere else. Make of this what you want.

The reasons the Jonsa ship is hated are multi-layered and I’ve talke about this elsewhere, and I won’t repeat what I said. I just think that Political Jon comes only into it because if the theory is true, it really destroys Jon€rys. And although Political Jon and Jonsa work well togehter as theories they are not identical as I have said multiple times.

As for the hate the Jonsa fandom gets, I would argue that neither GRRM nor the writers of the show hang around in fandom and decide “Oh, Jonsa is so hated, guess we rewrite the show, Let’s go bully some delusional toxic teenage soccer moms because they surely deserve it”. Shipping in ASOIAF and GOT is not the Hunger Games. Being popular does not bring your ship into the haven of endgame. Although I admit, it bugs me, that somehow in a fandom that has all kinds of problematic ships, one ship between two consenting adults is somehow the WORST ™, but honestly by now we could all be veritable angels (which we are not, only some of us) and yet the ASOIAF and GOT fandom would find a way to justify that we are still the WORST.

As for the things we quote for the Political Jon theory, the Jon/Ygritte situation and the babyswap are just two arguments, there are many many more, and I just can’t work enough enthusiasm for your ask to count them. There are enough metas around. Read them, educate yourself and if you think you can rebut every argument there is for Political Jon we can have a civil discussion - but you would have to come off anon.

I just say the following Jon/Ygritte shows that Jon was prepared to enter into a relationship with a woman (whom he did not love at first) for the task that was set to him by Quorin Halfhand. The Baby Swap shows that Jon was prepared to bully a woman (poor Gilly) for the sake of rescuing two children instead of one. So, Jon can be ruthless when it comes to acting for a certain goal. And this is all we say. Ygritte and the Baby Swap are two different situations, but they both show that Jon can act emotionally detached to reach his goal.

Nobody ever said that the situation with Da€nerys is exactly the same. The two examples just show a character trait of Jon, that is essential for Political Jon - a character trait that is backed up by canon. Sry, not sry, to me Jon the “cinnamon role” is an insult to Jon’s canon intelligence.

As for “Sansa meaning more to me than Jon”…. You must have went to the Severus Snape school of Legilimency, because you obviously can read my thoughts and feelings, through the Internet on top of that. Or maybe you just jump to conclusions because you hate my ship? Just ADMIT it.

You come into my ask box like a coward, anonymously and then you claim you know how I feel about two fictional characters? How comes you think you know better than I myself who is my fav in GRRM’s books? This is really a new level of arrogance. You just don’t respect any opinion but your own. Just ADMIT it.

Or don’t admit it, I honestly don‘t care for your opinion, although I’m not against you having one. It’s just an opinion that has very little back-up in canon - in contrast to the Political Jon theory.

No thanks for the ask.

[fedonciadale]

The "delusional" thing is awful. But the accusation of stupidity goes both ways. It's the worst thing about this ship war - that and the political Jon stuff. I'm a Jon fan only. I don't care about J/D, esp not as endgame. Boatsex wasn't meant to be seen as soppily romantic/erotic - the showrunners have said so!! But i DO think most political Jon theorists can't be Jon fans. It's only Jonsas who believe it. Why do you think that is? It's NOT because you're smarter than the rest of us/the GA.

Dear nonny,

of course people accuse others of being stupid, and I don’t have any beef with it, although I myself try to avoid being downright insulting. I would rather say something like “I think, this is a stupid assumption” than “you are stupid” for example. And even that I do only rarely, because being insulting doesn’t make the other party any more willing to think about your argument.

And it is not only Jonsas who believe in Political Jon: I alert you to an ask I had not long ago (x) that came from an non-shipper. And you would have to take my word for it, but I converted two of my colleagues to the political Jon Theory, non-shippers as well, although they believed that Da€nerys will become an antagonist, so it was not that difficult for them.

Just for the record: I do feel kind of insulted when people tell me that I can’t be a Jon fan, if I believe in the Political Jon theory. I know many Jonsas including myself who are Jon fans. For me it is the other way round: I cannot understand how you can be a fan of cunning BookJon and not believe in Political Jon. Yet, I do not run around and accuse Jon€rys shippers publically of not being real Jon fans. To me it is absurd to believe that Jon who was all about defending the North from book 1 and season 1 onward would not keep this in mind in all his actions in season 7.

The thing about freedom of speech is that you are allowed to voice your opinion, but you don’t have to. And you shouldn’t if all you can do is being insulting.

So, characters in fiction (show and books) can be interpreted and analysed differently, and this is how it should be. This is why we have discussions about interpretations and look for evidence in the books. Your take on Jon seems to me either that he is a cute cinnamon roll who is too honourable for his own good or since you don’t believe that boatsex was romantic that he thinks with his balls only and was maybe horny (I know other people who believe that).

This assumption might be wrong of course, and it might simply be that you - like many others - have not realised that Political Jon theory is not really a single theory but that there are variants of it, from Jon coming to Dragonstone with the purpose to manipulate D (which I think is not likely) to Jon playing the game only after the Wight Hunt when everything else had failed.

“Why do you think that is? It’s NOT because you’re smarter than the rest of us/the GA.” - Do you think that being an ESL doesn’t make me realise what you did there? You insinuate that we think that we are smarter than the GA, but you say that we are in fact less intelligent - doing the very thing you bemoaned as being common in ship wars. I don’t know why, but that made me think of pots and kettles.

I would say, that the reason for no one in the the general fandom being open to a real discussion of the theories of the Jonsa fandom is of a phenomen called bulverism (thanks to @occupyvenus to introduce me to that term). That means devalidating an argument because the person who put forward the argument is known to be biased. “It’s just your shipper goggles that make you see that”… Well, not taking an argument seriously, because the source is known to be biased is not taking that argument down. Actually it shifts the focus away from the argument to the arguer, but it is not really a counterarguement per se. In view of argueing it does nothing to the argument. Imagine a math professor saying: “1 + 1 = 2″, and the bulversim take on this would be: “Of course you would say that, you’re a mathematician.” If my memory of my school math is right 1+1=2 cannot actually be proven or disproven, since it is an axiom. But not to accept it because mathematicians have taught this for centuries would be… you say it… Bringing my bias into an argument we have is counterproductive, I have many biases…. I’m a European, I’m a woman, I have children, I’m against death penalty, I like how guns are controlled in my country…. I carry many ‘biases’ around… Bias can only be used as devalidating an argument if bias made me manipulate the evidence. But to insinuate that evidence brought forward from any shipper would be invalid? I prefer to compare shipper goggles to glasses. Some things you can only see with the right kind of lens.

I would also alert you this post, where I did collect some of the reasons why Jonsa in general is such a hated theory - which makes the GA unwilling to engage with us in a real discussion.

I would also say, that you are doing exactly what I argued against in my last post. You just put Jonsa shippers in a box and put a label on it (the label maybe being ‘NOT smarter than the rest of the GA’ or ‘ship biased’). The Jonsa fandom is a rather huge fandom and I’m convinced we have all kind of people in there, including some very talented people, as I’m sure there are in the Jon€rys fandom.

I give you the benefit of the doubt and pretend that you did not want to be insulting, so thanks for the ask!

[fedonciadale]

Re: Jon fans and Political Jon - I was a Jon fan first and foremost. I didn't care what happened to anyone but him and I was not a shipper. I saw Jonsa content after season 6 and asked about it, a jonsa was kind enough to explain it to me, and I understood, but didn't ship. It wasn't until I posted about dark!d@ny - not related to jonsa at all - and got harassed by D and J/D stans that I started shipping Jonsa out of spite and s7 confirmed it for me. So yeah, we can ABSOLUTELY be Jon fans.

Hi there!

I was a Jon and Bran fan from the beginning and Sansa only grew on me later. I totally fell for the POV trap in Arya's chapters and found her superficial in book 1. I only grew to love her after the Battle of the Blackwater.

I disliked Da€nerys since book two which I read in 1999.... Also Jon€rys has been my NOTP since then. So you might say that I was an Anti Jon€rys and Anti-Da€nerys literally more than a decade before I began to ship Jonsa.

It really, really bugs me that the D stans of the fandom cannot fathom why anybody would dislike their Khaleesi. That is why they always connect disliking Da€nerys with shipping Jonsa. They have to devalidate the arguments by claiming bias.

You might find your way from one theory to the other. They fit together without being necessarily connected. The same holds true for Political Jon. That doesn't mean that one theory means that you necessarily adhere to the others as well.

And all the theories have been around before the show! DarkDany, Jonsa and Political Jon have been around since about 2013 and it is just ridiculous to claim a) that show watchers only who were duped by Kit and Sophie's chemistry on screen came up with these theories and b) that only someone with shipper goggles could come up with that. They just fail to understand that for many of us this is not only about shipping but about a satisfying end to a beloved story.

As a Jon fan I really feel insulted that anyone would expect me to take season 7 Jon at face value. They have downgraded Jon's smartness in the show, but even in the show he is not as dumb as that. He is not a cinnamon roll and anybody who thinks that will get a rude awakening.

I really like that you and others came to the Jonsa ship in season 7. It means that even with the supposed romance, people saw the potential of Jonsa which at least to me is about the logic of the story. I also like that you were kind of driven into our arms... 😁

As for spite... I try not to forget that there are more reasons for shipping Jonsa than the satisfaction of being able to say 'I told you so'! But I must admit this mental image has a certain appeal to me!

Thanks for the ask!

[fedonciadale]

Jon didn’t feel like jon this episode. He felt off. He was weird & his reactions were weird & I don’t know what to make of it ? Like say pol jon is completely wrong then wtf happened to jon snow ?

Dear nonny,

I tend to think that he is more sacrificial Jon than political, although there are signs of political Jon. He thinks they need D and her dragons (which might not actually be true), and he wants her placated at all costs. That is why he tells her the truth that Sansa and him were not close as children, letting her conclude that this is still true, so that she does not see, that he fears for her. Trying to get Arya on board so that Sansa will also play nice (which she is so not going to do…. If she does we’ll know that Jon told her something).

In general I agree, if there is not Political Jon, his character doesn’t make any sense. And if the explanation that he was dumbed down for Doylist reasons to make the impact of the plot twist greater is not the right explanation I do indeed not know who this person is. But nothing is sad and done yet, and I believe we’ll still get Political Jon. I just hope they don’t botch it and make some sort of Winterhell plot with no indications of the plot twist beforehand and no way for the audience to tell when everybody was in on the manipulation.

But I’ve said it before on this blog. Anything else but Political Jon would be such a difference to the books, that I don’t see how they could reach the same end as the books.

Thanks for the ask!

[fedonciadale]

I didn’t mean for the comment about jonsas v the GA to be insulting but I can see how it might seem that way. It was a pushback against all the posts/comments that sneer at the “GA” for not seeing what political Jon believers see - and there are A LOT of them. In reply to some of the comments on your post: I don’t get how people think there are only 2 options (Jon is a lovefool or a schemer). I believe he chose Dany because he had to.

(Cont). Cersei WILL attack at some point. She’s asked him to bend the knee or die. The north will be annihilated by the WW, and the few that are left won’t be able to fight alone. They NEED Dany, and she wants to be queen. He thought, after the wight hunt, she’d be a decent one. You can argue that point but that’s what he thinks. I don’t care one way or the other if Dany is Queen. I care about Jon. And this idea that he’s stupid for bending the knee is really insulting to him (imo).             

Dear nonny,

“but I can see how it might seem that way.” The comments on that post show that I was not the only one to understand it as insulting. I’m glad you clarified that though. I would advise you to be more careful with your wording, especially if you use the word “but”. It is a common method to first say something the other person can agree on, or even give a compliment and then proceed to the real argument (which is quintessentially the meaning of “everything before the word but is horseshit”).

As for the comments/posts that “sneer” at the GA I would first of all want to say, that I know a lot of people in the Jonsa fandom who do not “sneer”, but try to be polite even if personally attacked. I’m not saying that all Jonsa shippers are like that, but you should truly differentiate.... There are shitposts who shouldn’t be taken seriously, there are rants in the Anti tag and there are discussion posts. Imho the Jonsa fam is quite good in keeping these types apart. And you know, even if we were all angels - which I certainly am not, although I could name a few who are - I think nobody could really blame us if our patience occasionally runs thin. On my answer to your ask there was yet another comment, that Jonsas are hated because “Jonsa is gross.” I mean, there are people who ship Theon and R@msay, who ship Sansa with her abuser Littlefinger, and who ship the toxic Cersei/Jaime, but it is us who are “gross”. Everyone of us gets these kinds of comments on correctly tagged posts - most of the time with the excuse that “this post was on my dash” (as if it was that difficult to have a look at the tags before jumping on a post). So, even if we “sneer” in the occasional shitpost, you could give us some slack.

As for your point on there being  only two options to interpret Jon’s behaviour, I would kindly ask you to reread what I wrote in my answer...

This assumption might be wrong of course, and it might simply be that you - like many others - have not realised that Political Jon theory is not really a single theory but that there are variants of it, from Jon coming to Dragonstone with the purpose to manipulate D (which I think is not likely) to Jon playing the game only after the Wight Hunt when everything else had failed.

Why would you come to the conclusion that there are only two possibilities how we can interpret Jon? There is a whole set of interpretations of political Jon, from cunning undercover lover, to someone who what - as you yourself said - does what he has to do. I must admit that I do not see that huge of a difference of your take to my own interpretation which I put down in my own first post on Political Jon:

Jon’s plans: Now, for Jon’s plans. We can’t be sure, but I would argue that he personally means to hold true to his oath to D. He does not necessarily expect the North to follow him in that, he might even suspect that they will depose him and make another Stark king or queen, but he does not care about that. What he does care about, is that D will stay true to her word and fight with the dragons on his side. All he does is to ensure that no matter what happens, D will be so much invested in their relationship/alliance that she will not let him down, even if the North turns against him.

I alert you in addition to a post by @everythingjonsa  who is not convinced by the Political Jon theory, but points out that we don’t know everything and that some things just don’t add up.

I saw one post by a multi-shipper who summed  up Political Jon in a nutshell as the following: “Jon has ulterior, not romantic motives, for bendind the knee.” This again seems pretty close to your take. So I don’t really know why you seem to have such a beef with Political Jon.

“He thought, after the wight hunt, she’d be a decent one. You can argue that point but that’s what he thinks.” This is the only thing I really have a problem with in your ask. I don’t have a problem with Jon bending the knee, because I think it is justified in his quest for help for the North. And I also think, that he made sure, that there are loopholes just in case, even if not for him personally. I really think he wants to stick to his word, but for the North there are loopholes. If he does it “fighting for the North”, because he’ll fight for the North “whatever the odds”, I’m fine.

My problem would be not if he bent the knee for dragons but because he thinks Da€nerys would make a decent queen. That would indeed make Jon quite unobservant and that to me is character assassination. He saw her demanding him to bend the knee, when he had come to Dragonstone to ask for an alliance and was deprived of his ship and “grounded” (this is such an indecent move: Invite someone for talks, then detain him on an island by taking his ship until he bends the knee?). He saw her questioning Tyrion’s loyalty over a lost battle. He saw her not moving for her ally Yara. He saw her flying away to roast some Lannister soldiers from the air, after she had to be talked out of burning King’s Landing. He saw her letting her dragons fly about and intimidate her ‘guests’/prisoners as he himself experienced twice. He didn’t saw her burning the Tarlys, but that’s about it.

Most of all he saw her demanding a “reward” for helping him, when it is in her own interest to fight against the White Walkers. So, imagine England, France and Germany at the beginning of WW II. France came to England for help and they would just have said: Well these Nazis are your problem, we help you if you finally acknowledge that France has been subject to the English Crown since Edward III. And of course I know that this historical parallel is an exaggeration and doesn’t fit entirely. But the war against the WW is a war for everybody. You can’t opt out, because you’ll be overrun anyway - if only later than the North. And Jon wanted Da€nerys to see that, hoping that she might see reason.

So, just by the actions he saw, Jon - who is an observant person - could not possible come to the conclusion that she’ll make a decent queen. I’m talking actions here, not talk. Missandei talked all about her good heart, but there were no actions to back that up. And her rescuing the FabFive on the Wight Hunt was her making good on a mistake - for once. And she immediately showed that she hadn’t learned anything or readjusted her priorities. She immediatley went South to the superfluous parley, when she should have gone to Winterfell to fight. Stannis knew better than her. And I don’t think Stannis was excellent king material. All of this doesn’t make her good queen material.

I do think that he still came to the conclusion that Da€nerys and her dragons are their best available option - which is not the same as a good option. I guess that the ultimate irony will be that a) he could claim the dragons for himself and b) the dragons might not even be the solution to the White Walker problem. So, although he thinks he needs her, it might turn out that he doesn’t. She might even become an additional problem.

So, I went out of my way to answer your ask. I kindly ask you to never insinuate again that I am not a fan of Jon. It really, really bugs me. Having a different interpretation does not make me a non-fan, nor does it mean I think he is dumb. And you yourself seem to be on the verge of Political Jon anyway. It’s time for you to realise that.

[fedonciadale]

I have to respectfully disagree with the Political Jon theory. He's not playing her Jon thinks he's in love but he loves this image that Dany projects He doesn't know her or that she feels powerful in cruelly killing her "enemies" (fire, crucifiction) He needs dragonglass and he is wary of Cersei and he respects Aemon and Jeor and hearing from her followers that Dany is a good person he might think that he is in love Dany is Jon's Joffrey Sansa learned that lesson long ago Jon didn't

Dear nonny,

But wouldn't you say that a reiteration of that Joffrey/Sansa relationship aka crush without reason wouldn't be boring if it were exactly the same? I mean I can understand a 13 year old girl having a crush on somebody because her parents told her she would marry him and he is good looking, but a grown man, an adult doing the same?

You might be right that D is Jon's Joffrey but wouldn't it be more interesting if it was a parallel with a twist?

And even if he didn't see some of the things D did, he still experienced her disregard of guest right when she took his ship and her temper when she rounded on Tyrion just because a plan hadn't worked out. So he saw enough to be sceptical.

As for being in love? I would argue that we don't see that apart from the scene 'how about my Queen'. And there the context is so important. Jon is on a boat sailing south and he knows that D is not 100% committed to the fight in the North against the threat of the Zombie apocalypse.

I've said it multiple times already. Political Jon is for me about Jon having an agenda which is the safety of the North and humanity 's survival. That does not rule out that he could still fall in love with D, even though his primary goal would have been to get those dragons. We don't fall for compatible persons all the time after all. I don't see that, but there is a slight possibility that the story could go that way. I doubt it though.

Because for that line of thought we would have had to get more than just the hints of political Jon we got.

Jon in love with a false image of D is your interpretation, mine is that he sticks to D out of necessity. I still think that it is his intent to go through with it and that the break-up will be because of reasons that are out of his control. I don't think that making an alliance work at all costs is really 'playing' another person. In your interpretation he is bound to a sobering awakening. Although the parallels to Sansa do have some appeal, I beg to differ. The other story would be even better!

Thanks for the ask!

[fedonciadale]

Just thinking about how after S8 the Jonsa fandom will have to defend Jon as well as Sansa as the dany/aegony stans and probably the Jons stans as well will hate him. I knows it's petty but I'm going to enjoy their tears and use the word delusional a lot. Love your posts.

Dear nonny,

thanks for the compliment! Spite is certainly one of the reasons why I ship Jonsa by now....

And I am a huge Jon fan and I hate it that some people (cough, cough) try to tell me, that I can’t be a Jon fan and adhere to the Political Jon theory.... So, obviously I’m not a Jon fan at all. It’s mutually exclusive.

So, yes I want these people who claim that their interpretation of Jon is the only valid one to be taught a lesson next season.

So, I’m petty as well, but I guess I’ll mostly enjoy in my corner. And I’m all for “tit for tat”, but I’m not going to use delusional... We have to come up with something better than that!

Thanks for the ask