#anti daenerys

[the-daily-dreamer]

The targaryen ruled 130 years without dragons. And the most capable kings were all targaryen. After them it was a decline for the throne. Robert, joffrey, tommen, cercei were all sith ruler .

I see targ stans are investing in high quality air to fill their heads lol

But anyways. “The most capable kings were all targaryens”. You know who else were targaryens? The worst rulers of Westeros. Robert, Cersei, Joffrey, and Tommen aren’t even close to the worst kings and queen to rule. And bringing them up as evidence to show that the targaryens are good is so disingenuous.

Maegor the Cruel, Aegon the Unworthy, The Mad King Aerys, Rhaenyra (yes, I know that’s controversial), and Daenerys (yes, I know that’s even more controversial) are all far FAR worse than anyone you mentioned.

Maegor killed his wife and her entire family. He was a usurper (apparently it’s good when the targs you like do it lol), a kinslayer (also a thing only good when it’s targs you like doing it), raped and tortured many people, wiped out entire houses, killed any and everyone that he saw in any way as deserving, and created a huge war with the faith of the seven.

Aegon the unworthy was corrupt and lazy and legitimized his bastards leading to the blackfyre rebellions that led to endless bloodshed for 5 generations.

Aerys was so bad he had a rebellion staged against him that ended his family dynasty. He burned fathers and sons together. He tortured people and burned them alive. He abused and raped his wife when he would burn people alive. He wanted to kill the entire city of kings landing.

Rhaenyra (who like it or not went down in history as one of the worst rulers) known as maegor with teats taxed her people to starvation. She had daily executions. She had knights inquisitors hunt down and punish people.

Daenerys burnt down kings landing, was complicit in the rape and enslavement of hundreds, ruined city economies so badly slavery was a better option, then profited from said slavery, abandoned the people she conquered (no doubt ensuring they will be enslaved much more harshly after supporting her), raped a “free” slave that she admits still acted like a slave because that’s all she knew, oh yeah and again, SHE BURNT DOWN KINGS LANDING. And this is after the people you listed.

And this isn’t including non Targaryen rulers that ruined lives like the blackfyres. Or rulers that are bad but weirdly beloved like Aegon I who basically conquered people by threatening to kill them and everyone they loved, subjugating a country for hundreds of years.

The best rulers I admit were Targaryens. But that’s because they were the only rulers save for 4 people. Of those four, two were bad and two were incompetent. Not nearly the sadistic “mad” people I described above. And funnily enough, as soon as a Targaryen came back to power…things got worse again. Funny how that is.

Oh and by the way. Going with the histories of Westeros. Guess who is among the best rulers according to small folk Aegon II and Alicent. Seethe :)

[buckysteve]

daemon’s line “the terms are simple. bend the knee to me or your house burns.” in the 2x05 promo reminds me of when nikolaj tweeted “is it just me, or is it not much of a choice when the only options you’re given are bend the knee or i’ll burn you alive” re: daenerys during s7 (something along those lines anyway). targies are truly all the same.

[saltywinteradult]

How is Dany is abusive to Jon?

Honest question, I’ve never given it a thought

I'm sorry this took me so long, anon, and I am really sorry for how long this post got. I had a lot of thoughts on this.

Before we begin, I'd like to point you to this compilation of Jon's reactions to Dany, which hardly paints a picture of a man who is happy and in love, as well as this post and this gifset, both pointing out the parallels between Jon's relationship with Dany and Sansa's relationship with Littlefinger, the latter being a relationship I hope most people can agree is abusive.

It's absolutely crucial to remember that in this relationship, Dany is the person with the power. She is the one with the dragons and the biggest army, and she is willing to both use and abuse that power to get her way.

Furthermore, Dany wants the North's loyalty, but the North needs her help. (The fact that it's Dany's duty as well as in her own best interest to help fight the Others is a different discussion; she doesn't seem to understand this anyway.) She has agreed to grant that help, but she could easily withdraw it if she chooses. She has more power than literally anyone else and there's simply no escaping that power imbalance - it permeates every single interaction Dany has with Jon and all the other Northerners for all of s7 and the first half of s8.

I want you to remember how Dany treats Jon on Dragonstone. His weapons and his boat are taken away immediately upon his arrival. She says Jon is "not yet" her prisoner, but 1) that line very clearly implies that she could make him her prisoner if she chooses to, and 2) how much does it really matter that Jon is "not yet" her prisoner when she's already taken away his means of defending himself or leaving the island? Remember how she later tells him "I haven't given you permission to leave." Girl, what happened to Jon not being your prisoner?

I think it's also very telling that Dany never once addresses Jon by his proper title of King in the North, even before he bends the knee. As you may recall, Dany cares a great deal about titles. She never grants Jon the same respect she demands for herself, and she likes to remind Jon that she is his Queen even during a supposedly intimate, romantic scene.

(Gif by yocalio via gameofthronesdaily)

Earlier in this scene, Dany pointed out that they could stay here in this secluded spot, away from the kingdom and its politics, and no one would find them. Yet even here, away from the rest of the world, she makes a point of referring to herself as "your Queen".

I point all of this out to illustrate that from the very beginning and throughout their relationship, Dany views Jon as a subordinate, not an equal. That is very much not a good foundation for a healthy and equal romantic relationship. Her constant expectation is that Jon will submit, obey, give things up to benefit her, and ensure that the people he has power over act the way she wants.

Case in point:

"Your sister doesn't like me. [...] She doesn't need to be my friend, but I am her Queen. If she can't respect me..."

The implication is that Sansa is doing something wrong by not liking or respecting Dany (meaning "not acting deferential enough for Dany's taste"). The fact that Dany is saying this to Jon and not to Sansa herself implies that it's Jon's responsibility to ensure that Sansa behaves acceptably. "If she can't respect me..." Then what? What exactly is she implying will be the consequences? That their romantic relationship will end? Something worse?

At this point, the North has bent the knee to Dany. As their monarch this is not an entirely unreasonable thing to ask of her subjects - but it's not a very reasonable thing for a girlfriend to ask of her boyfriend, is it? The line between Jon and Dany's political relationship as monarch and subject and their personal relationship as girlfriend and boyfriend isn't just blurred, it's practically nonexistent. To state the obvious, there is a reason we decided that absolute monarchies are bad here in the real world. There is also a reason why a boss dating a subordinate is frowned upon in the real world. Big power imbalances are a bad idea in general and in romantic relationships especially. They should at the very least be considered and navigated carefully. Dany not only fails to do so; she is only happy with her and Jon's relationship when she has power over him.

For proof, let's look at how she reacts when that power imbalance is upended by the revelation of Jon's true identity:

This revelation is a bombshell for Jon. Everything he thought he knew about his own origins turns out to be untrue. However, Dany's first and only thought is how this affects her. Her first reaction is denial and scepticism; the second is to turn cold as soon as she realises that this makes Jon a threat to her ambitions.

There's also this line:

"A secret no one in the world knew, except your brother and your best friend. Doesn't seem strange to you?"

Which implies... What, exactly? That Sam and Bran made this up? Why? Just like with Sansa in the previous scene, we see Dany questioning the actions and intentions of Jon's loved ones. Remember that.

Things escalate in episode 4:

Dany is faced with the notion that Jon might hold more political power than she thought, that they might actually be on somewhat equal footing, and this makes her unhappy.

"I want it to be the way it was between us."

Her desire is to continue their sexual relationship and to return to the previous status quo where she held more power than him and therefore didn't consider him a threat. Jon having a stronger claim to the throne than her threatens Dany's sense of her own identity and purpose, and she reacts by trying to deny and suppress this reality:

"You can say nothing, to anyone, ever! Swear your brother and Samwell Tarly to secrecy and tell no one else! Or it will take on a life of its own and you won't be able to control it or what it does to people!"

(Imagine this with the genders reversed. Yikes.)

Dany is demanding Jon keep his own identity secret from his own family. That's not a reasonable thing to ask of a person you love. Not for one second does she show any consideration for how Jon might feel or what Jon might want. It's all about her. Her expectation is that Jon suppress his own identity, his own reality, to benefit Dany's ambitions. Never once does it seem to occur to Dany that what Jon does with this secret is up to him to decide, not her. His agency is of no concern to her.

Jon: I have to tell Sansa and Arya. Dany: Sansa will want to see me gone and you on the Iron Throne. [...] She's not the girl you grew up with. Not after what she's seen, not after what they've done to her. [...] Jon: They're my family. We can live together. Dany: We can. I've just told you how.

Here we are again with Dany questioning the motives and agendas of Jon's loved ones. Now she's no longer implying but outright stating that they're working against her. What we have here is a pattern of Dany implying that Jon's loved ones are up to no good and can't be trusted. I don't need to explain why that is a dangerous and manipulative thing to do to one's partner, right?

I also want you to pay extra attention to how Emilia delivers that final line. Throughout the whole scene Dany is distraught and desperate, but at this point she turns cold and closed off with an unmistakable anger that Jon won't agree to do as she demands. It is very hard not to read a threatening undertone into that line. "Keep it secret, or else."

Before we move on to episode 5, I'd like to highlight this line, spoken by Dany to Tyrion and Varys in episode 4:

"Speaking to Cersei will not prevent a slaughter. But perhaps it's good the people see that Daenerys Stormborn made every effort to avoid bloodshed, and Cersei Lannister refused. They should know whom to blame when the sky falls down upon them."

Let's be clear on one thing here: Cersei could choose to back down and surrender to avoid bloodshed - but, and I cannot stress this enough, so could Dany. Cersei and Dany are both being selfish and power-hungry by refusing to give up the throne in order to avoid bloodshed. But to admit that would ruin Dany's deeply rooted self-image as morally superior to her enemies. So what does she do instead? She deflects blame. She's the one with the dragons, but if she makes the sky fall down on people, as she puts it, it's not her fault. Keep that in mind.

Now for the absolute low point:

"What did I say would happen if you told your sister? [...] She betrayed your trust. She killed Varys as much as I did. This was a victory for her. Now she knows what happens when people hear the truth about you."

Okay. Varys was conspiring against Dany, which he could've chosen not to do; I guess Dany was within her rights to punish him. She still could've chosen to imprison him, or at least give him a trial. Nobody made her kill him. But as we've just seen, Dany doesn't like to accept responsibility for her own decisions. She'd rather deflect the blame onto the people who displease her.

What's more, she's not just blaming Sansa for Varys's death but Jon as well, for telling Sansa the secret in the first place - which Jon was well within his rights to do! He never agreed not to tell anyone. That wasn't up to Dany to decide in the first place. Jon did what he wanted to do and not what she wanted him to do, so now everything Dany does as a result of Jon's actions is Jon's fault? Do I even need to explain how shitty this is?

"Far more people in Westeros love you than love me. I don't have love here. I only have fear."

This is entirely true. She never stops to think about why Jon is more beloved in Westeros than she is, but whatever. What's important is that after this, Dany initiates a kiss and Jon rebuffs her.

(Gifs from snowsource)

"Alright then. Let it be fear."

Again, what exactly do we think she's implying here? Remember the context. During this conversation, Jon already told her "you will always be my queen". He hasn't rejected her as his queen (which at this point he damn well should), he's just rejecting her sexual advances. And yet, Dany's reaction to his personal rejection of her is to embrace "fear", which again refers to how all of Westeros sees her, not just Jon. Dany already deflected blame for her previous actions onto people who displeased her including Jon, and now she's deflecting the blame for her future actions in the same way. And we all know what she did after this, don't we? I don't know how the line "let it be fear" can mean anything other than "you rejected me and that's why I'm going to embrace being feared, so whatever I do now in the name of being feared is really your fault. Look what you made me do." If that isn't abuse, I don't know what is.

[montyluvsjasper]

Dany: Hello Northerns I'm here to liberate and free you!

Northerns: We already did that ourselves?

[sasha-zoe7]

Whenever I come across a tiktok video justifying Daenerys' burning of king's landing, it makes me sick. And the comments.. oh my god.

It's always comments like;

"Daenerys did what she had to do"

"she did nothing wrong"

"King's landing was in need of a cleanse"

"as Queen it was her right"

"no one in king's landing is innocent".

It's been so many years and I still don't understand how some people can think like this... Especially with everything that's going on in the world.

[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

[springs-hurts]

She loved khal drogo, named her dragon after him(which btw wtf no) enjoyed when he talked about raping westerosi women and taking children as slaves and then she went on killing "others" Because they were slavers, keeps jorah Mormont with her even though he was exiled because they caught him selling slaves but then exiles him the moment she learns of him spying on her! Oh man such a hypocrite, such a fucking hypocrite!

[esther-dot]

I mean it's worth mentioning that Mirri exploited the grief of a fourteen-year-old girl, one who attempted to save and protect her, taking both her husband and her child (and therefore her security and stability in the society she was still pretty new to, as well as getting a lot of the slaves Dany saved from worse fates killed) in the process. I'd probably kill someone for that too. And if I knew I'd get a dragon out of it? Fuck that bitch if I can't have my son I'm having a dragon.

Like yeah it's not great but per the moral standards of this series Dany is pretty good

I've already explained, Mirri didn't kill Drogo, and Dany knows Mirri didn't kill Rhaego.

As for Dany's age meaning she isn't responsible for her actions:

"Unsullied!" Dany galloped before them, her silver-gold braid flying behind her, her bell chiming with every stride. "Slay the Good Masters, slay the soldiers, slay every man who wears a tokar or holds a whip, but harm no child under twelve, and strike the chains off every slave you see." She raised the harpy's fingers in the air . . . and then she flung the scourge aside. "Freedom!" she sang out. "Dracarys! Dracarys!" (ASOS, Daenerys III)

Dany ordered her men to kill kids younger than that.

And Dany "saved" Mirri? They burned and murdered and pillaged and raped throughout her village. Dany thinks of it all as the cost of the throne ie Dany's ambition demands it. You don't have to agree with each POV, every thought they have. Sometimes you are meant to judge them. Listen to Mirri's perspective on being saved:

"I spoke for you," she said, anguished. "I saved you." "Saved me?" The Lhazareen woman spat. "Three riders had taken me, not as a man takes a woman but from behind, as a dog takes a bitch. The fourth was in me when you rode past. How then did you save me? I saw my god's house burn, where I had healed good men beyond counting. My home they burned as well, and in the street I saw piles of heads. I saw the head of a baker who made my bread. I saw the head of a boy I had saved from deadeye fever, only three moons past. I heard children crying as the riders drove them off with their whips. Tell me again what you saved." "Your life." Mirri Maz Duur laughed cruelly. "Look to your khal and see what life is worth, when all the rest is gone."(AGOT, Daenerys IX)

And then what does Dany do? She takes Mirri's life.

"You will not hear me scream," Mirri responded as the oil dripped from her hair and soaked her clothing. "I will," Dany said, "but it is not your screams I want, only your life. (AGOT, Daenerys X)

Dany didn't save anything. She took. She repeatedly benefits from other people's suffering.

You can convince yourself to be cool with this, but the author isn't. He didn’t intend for audiences to work themselves into moral pretzels to avoid condemning Dany or realize where her story is going.

Here is what he said of some famous Dany essays:

And here are some quotes about Dany from those essays:

(link)

This is not a hero.

[nutellaninja0001]

I’ll have to admit, I truly thought I was done talking about this but here I am to say once again, the conflict between Sansa Stark and Daenerys Targaryen in season 8 was not “out of nowhere” it was not “pointless drama” and it was not “Sansa was just being a bitch” I started thinking about this debate again when I rewatched a recap video of GoT 5 years later. The creator went on to talk about how it didn’t make sense for Sansa to “not trust Daenerys” but why exactly SHOULD Sansa have trusted Daenerys?

I’m going to go over some points again just to break it down to the most basic level.

At this point in the series, it would be dumb for any Lord/Lady in Sansa’s position to openly trust a newcomer. Dany already had a reputation. She had dragons, an army known for its cruelty and the other for its pillaging/raping. Even if Jon had warned Sansa he bent the knee to Dany there isn’t one scene Jon actually vouches for Dany as a good or trustworthy person. Sansa only had what she might have heard about Dany whether that was burning lords or sacking cities. She only ever had Jon telling Sansa they need Dany to survive. Either way, why would Sansa want that coming to her doorstep? Fans point out time and time again how Foolish Ned was for trusting the wrong people. They just felt different because this time it was Dany.

Daenerys shows little interest in the actual preparations for winter/survival of Winterfell beyond her affections for Jon. Dany outright admits to Sansa Jon is the only reason she is here. Why would Sansa want to hand over a Kingdom she fought and suffered for to Dany, considering she sees it as yet another conquest on her list. If anything doesn’t make sense, to me it’s why Dany didn’t mind if the Iron Islands were independent but the North couldn’t be?

Sansa’s desire for northern independence wasn’t a season off arc she forgot about. It was a consistent character arc that pushed her from hopeful southern Queen to Queen of the North. Dany from day 1 made it clear that would never be under her rule.

Sansa asked some real questions as a ruling Lady while Dany tried to charm Sansa and it didn’t work. I think it was one of the only consistent writing choices made in season 8 considering this arc for Sansa reclaiming/coming home had started back in season 4. What did fans expect from Sansa? Both characters as I’ve said before were MEANT to be in conflict. Both women had been fighting for a long time to be in the positions they were. Neither were going to let that go or because Jon and Dany were together. I don’t even think we would’ve gotten as much of a debate had it been Arya speaking out against Dany but I’m glad it was Sansa as fans really thought she was going to up and serve Dany. 🤷🏻‍♀️

Let’s also please remember that after Sansa asked what Robb, Jon, Mance, The Wildlings, Yara and Dorne all asked. To be ruled as their own Kingdom. I gotta say, since it was Sansa as the main driving force for Northern independence in the last seasons fans made it out to be Sansa was once again, just being stupid. I never see the same arguments used against any of the other characters who wanted/died for the same thing. Even when Dany was outright threatening Sansa in the middle of her own Home

Why did Dany say this again? Because Sansa asked how they were to feed 3 large dragons in the middle of Winter. How they were going to feed Dany’s armies. Yet I never saw many fans argue Dany’s behavior to Sansa. She was a guest at Winterfell. Hoping to make good alliances and instead acted like this. You will never catch me defending most of the writing of GoT in season 8 but this was not one of them. The conflict started the minute Dany expected the North to bend and the minute Sansa said they will be an independent Kingdom

[thisonetimeinmeridian]

So I have a thought about that prophecy that HotD is using to justify the Targaryen invasion of Westeros. Obviously, this isn't entirely their fault since George R.R. Martin is the one who came up with it and has said a similar thing in different interviews . Yes, the books make Rhaenerya more vengeful and thirsty for blood, but it also does not make the Greens sympathetic at all and views them as one dimensional villians. George also had the Starks and the Blackwoods side with the Blacks, so I think it's clear which side we were "supposed" to root for, if any, but I digress. Anyway, into my theory.

Time and time again, we hear that Targaryens are the closest thing to gods because they have superior blood that "controls" the dragons. That they are dragons. We hear this within the books, within HotD, even in Game of Thrones. But really, they are no better than anyone else, GOT even had Dany say this outright in the last season when she says that without their dragons, they weren't great at all. Your argument might be well they could control them thats what they mean." But really, no, they couldn't. I'm not even just talking about when Aemond accidentally killed Luke. In one of the earlier seasons, Dany's dragon literally burned a child alive, and she didn't even know until much later. Does that sound like control to you? Neither Luke nor Aemond had control in that fight. Their animals, their instincts, took over despite what their riders wanted. You could say that "oh well, Aemond is only HALF Targaryen, that's why we need to keep the blood pure with superior Targaryen blood," in which case, refer to my earlier point about Dany.

Unlike some people, I like this change of Luke's death being an accident. It shows that the Targaryen's aren't gods, or infallible after all. As I said, Game of Thrones even shows this to us.

So that's why I think they are going in a similar direction with the whole "prophecy" BS. We hear multiple times within the original series that prophecies are never direct and often misinterpreted. This is made even clearer when Melisandre misinterprets the "Prince Who Was Promised" multiple times. This, combined with the fact that GRRM is heavily involved with HotD, and the fact that they've already shown that Targaryen's aren't immune or gods after, leads me to believe they are going in a similar direction as the idea that they can "control" the dragons. See my previous point.

It could likely be a criticism of the Targaryen hubris, and the fact that they think they have "superior" or "pure" blood makes them better than everyone else. Or that they are justified on starting multiple wars that lead to immeasurable amounts of death and destruction. As Ser Barristan said about the Mad King, "the mad king gave his enemies what he thought they deserved, and each time it made him feel more powerful and right."

Targaryen's are their own worst enemy, and they will tear each other apart over "who deserves it more" or "who has the purest blood" and is "more Targaryen." The prophecy is just an excuse to hold up their own superiority and god complex, despite the fact that no one wanted them to rule in the first place. Even George R.R. Martin says that holding the realm together with dragons is ficle and bound to break.

[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.

[meanderingstar]

the way Daenerys treats Irri in the books is incredibly disturbing and I hate how it's overlooked by both the narrative and the majority of the fandom.

Daenerys uses Irri for sex at least twice over the course of the story, once in Storm and once in Dance. I really, truly cannot overstate how horrific the power imbalance between them is: Daenerys is her khaleesi, her queen and her employer; Irri was formerly a slave in her service and is now her maid with absolutely nowhere else to go. She has evidently been conditioned to believe that displaying absolute obedience to her higher-ups, including sexual services, is her "duty", which Daenerys recognizes and still actively exploits for her own pleasure. This is also why consent between them is utterly impossible – contrary to some asoiaf blogs who claim that consent was not a major issue in this situation (lol) or that Irri freely consented, Irri’s conditioning means that she will never be able to freely consent to someone like Daenerys, who is her employer and holds absolute power over her. Daenerys herself acknowledges this and feels guilty (damning in itself), but ends up using her in such a manner anyway, despite explicitly recognizing that Irri's kisses "tasted of duty" and nothing more.

What makes this even worse is that despite using her in this way in Storm, Daenerys has no issue saying that Irri and Jhiqui (who are her age and have had the same, if not worse, experiences than she has) are "only girls" in comparison to her. She also dismisses their (pretty sensible, imo?) concern about her touching sick and dead people by calling them "utter fools" and saying the Dothraki were only wise when it came to horses. She says all this AFTER sleeping with Irri, which makes it twice as bad - Daenerys considers her a little girl and a fool when it comes to advising her, but still finds it perfectly fine to use her for sex? This condescension extends to their sexual relationship as well, where Daenerys refers to Irri as "the maid", "her handmaid" and "the Dothraki girl" as she has sex with her. It's patronizing, disrespectful and exploitative at best, outright dehumanizing at worst.

While I highly doubt this was Grrm's intention, Daenerys's dynamic with Irri is clearly reminiscent of the horrific way Cersei uses Taena Merryweather. Dany is obviously not as vicious with Irri as Cersei was with Taena but that really doesn't change the fact that she was still a queen exploiting her employee's obedience and conditioned sense of "duty" for her own pleasure, made even worse by the fact that Irri, as a servant and former slave with no family, no connections and nowhere else to go, was 10x more vulnerable than Taena was and certainly more dependent on Dany. It's bizarre how Cersei's treatment of Taena is recognized as fucked up by most of the fandom but Daenerys's treatment of Irri is not, even though the power imbalance between them is infinitely worse. (also: Grrm writing about TWO white queens using their brown maids/ladies-in-waiting for sex is flat-out racist. I'm also extremely uncomfortable with how both wlw interactions are dubiously consensual at best and arguably revolve around Cersei/Dany's relationships with men to some extent: Cersei uses Taena to reenact her trauma by Robert, and Dany not only "pretended it was Drogo holding her...only somehow his face kept turning into Daario's" when she was having sex with Irri, but also explicitly states that "it was Daario she wanted, or perhaps Drogo, not Irri").

Certainly, Daenerys and Irri's dynamic is part and parcel of Grrm's fucked notion of consent and piss-poor writing of wlw relationships (both of which he should be called out for far more than he is, btw), but it doesn't change the fact that in-universe, these are Daenerys's textual actions. Grrm seems to believe that Drogo didn't rape Daenerys (a 13 year old who was forced into marriage) on their wedding night because she said "yes", just like he seems to believe that Jaime didn't coerce Cersei to have sex with him over their own son's dead body because she eventually responded to Jaime's advances, but I clearly recognize them as rape and coercion. The same logic and same standards apply to Daenerys and the way she uses and exploits Irri and she should be judged accordingly.

[saltywinteradult]

jon*rys shippers be like ”you hate jon*rys for being incest but then you ship jonsa!!! hypocrite!!!” actually i hate jon*rys because dany is abusive to jon and a tyrant in the making. hope that helps

[aegor-bamfsteel]

It may be a HC that will never be confirmed, but I believe that Daenerys's dragon eggs hatched because she sacrificed a live woman on a pyre, who happened to be a slave for "conquest" (like the ones her valyrian ancestors killed by thousands) just as I believe that dragon fetuses are because of experiments to create chimeras. Maybe that's how dragonbind works, giving a life in exchange for claiming a dragon

I think you’re right that dragon binding/hatching/chimeras involve blood sacrifice; a lot of what we know of ASOIAF magic involves it (not just dragons; but the Red priests use blood to create winds and curses; it seems certain people can see the future after ingesting blood; the Children of the Forest allegedly created the Neck and the Broken Arm using a mass blood sacrifice). It’s GRRM’s fantasy way of exploring how certain people gained fantastic power by exploiting, dehumanizing and killing others. Jorah finding Dæny “surrounded by blackened logs and bits of glowing ember and the burnt bones of man and woman and stallion” seems compelling that given dragons are “fire made flesh” all 3 were used to hatch them (and maybe Dány, she’s surrounded by an eggshell of dying fire and dead flesh herself). Then there’s the dragonhorn that needs to be claimed with blood and seems to burn whoever blows it (if what Moqorro is saying is true), which could be evidence that another “fire and flesh” ritual involving human sacrifice is needed to control dragons just as it is to hatch them. Mirri mocked Dány killing the horse for Drogo, saying “by itself the blood means nothing”, was defiant when Dàny had her bound to the pyre and dumping oil on her like kindling, but once Dàny had her bound to the pyre and said “it is not your screams I want, only your life. I remember what you told me. Only death can pay for life” she became afraid. It’s the intentional, agonizing ritual immolation of another person that can bring forth dragons. This kind of mentality is based on dehumanizing others (literally killing them and using their body/spirit to make a weapon) for power, which, you’re right, does overlap with slavery and conquest.

[ansheofthevalley]

Cersei and Dany have more parallels than Cersei and Sansa yet Sansa always gets compared to Cersei whilst Dany gets to stand on her own :/

(Sorry for taking ages to answer this.)

The way I see it, GRRM actually wants us to see and compare the three. To see them, in a way, as a triad:

It's no secret that George loves to use the rule of three (I talk about it a little bit here.) The way I see it when it comes to Cersei/Dæny/Sansa is to compare their ruling styles, especially since they're the strongest candidates to wield power by the end of the series (I'm talking exclusively about book canon, but we can take show canon into consideration since they are the last three big female characters wielding power by the final season.)

At first, Cersei and Dæny are foils, in a way. Cersei calls herself Queen (which she is, first Queen Regent/Dowager Queen, by being Robert's wife, then Queen Mother by being Joffrey and Tommen's mother). Dæny, however, in the beginning, rejects the title of Queen, saying that she's a Khaleesi. As the series progresses (specifically since she's -at least to her knowledge- the last Targaryen), she uses both titles: rightful Queen of the Seven Kingdoms and Khaleesi. So, this would be where the contrast stops working when it comes to these two ladies: they both call themselves Queen, but most importantly, they seek that title because they're motivated by power and the desire to have the Iron Throne. Sure, their motivations are not exactly the same, but they can be boiled down to one word: survival.

(I've spoken about characters motivated by power in the quest for the Iron Throne and what the narrative does to them in show canon, but I can't find the posts, so I'm sorry.)

Now, what part does Sansa play in all of this? Well, we're told in the first book that she's meant to be Queen. After all, she was promised to the prince of the Seven Kingdoms. And she wants to be Queen... until Joffrey orders the execution of Ned. Then, we notice a change in Sansa: she's not interested in the games of intrigue, in the subterfuge. It can all be encapsulated in this quote: "If I am ever Queen, I'll make them love me."

Cersei thinks the best way to rule is to make the people fear you more than they could ever fear the enemy. And that's precisely what she does during her time in power. So, she rules by fear.

Dæny is benevolent to those suffering injustice. But she's also severe regarding those she disagrees with or thinks have interests that go against hers. She is not forgiving. In my eyes, she also has a fatal flaw - she's not interested in the day-to-day tasks that come with being a ruler, as shown in her stint in Meereen. She also relies on her dragons and the Targaryen legacy to instill fear in those who don't want to submit to her. She rules by good faith when it comes to the marginalized and outpowering the powerful with her dragons and armies. So, she rules by power and, to some extent, fear.

Sansa is benevolent with people. She knows what is expected of her as a Lady while in King's Landing. In the Eyrie, she learns to run a household and the day-to-day tasks that come with running a Great Keep like the Eyrie. But that's not all she learns throughout the series. She understands the importance of politics and how to exercise that power. She also understands people's importance; let them be Lords, Ladies, Common Folk, or bastards. She sees their value regarding of station. Also, since the end of the first book, she doesn't get fooled by the nobility; she's more distrustful of their true intentions, and that distrust makes her read each person she encounters more carefully, which, in time, will make her a keen politician (all in all, and this is what sets her apart from Cersei and Dæny, she's not actively seeking to rule. And, when it comes to the rule of three, the last link is the one that differs from the other two and, for that reason, is the successful one.) Sansa is compassionate with those deserving of compassion and sometimes with those who are not, but she's never cruel like Dæny can be or vengeful like Cersei is. This is not to say that she bends to the will of others because she doesn't. She stopped doing it back in King's Landing, starting with small acts of defiance. In the Eyrie, she's on a journey to finding her voice. So, she rules by compassion and observation.

Now, how does the rule of three apply in this instance? Let's first define what the "rule of three" is:

The rule of threes is a writing principle that suggests that three elements, such as events or characters, are more humorous, satisfying, and effective than other numbers. Audiences of texts in this format are also more likely to retain the information conveyed to them. This is because having three entities minimizes the amount of information needed to create the pattern, combining both brevity and rhythm.

By giving us different styles of ruling/approaches to power in threes, GRRM is making sure those ways stick with the readers. He's making it known that the approaches to power and ruling are important for the endgame: this factor will contribute to who ends up in power at the end of the story.

One could argue that the use of the rule of three in comparing Cersei, Dæny, and Sansa is rhetoric: he's comparing three different ruling styles, and we, as the readers, can decide who might be better suited for the title of Queen based on the rhetoric the characters present. (I speak about the difference between Dæny and Sansa - and Jon - as figures of authority here and here. Keep in mind that those metas explore the dynamics of the characters in the show.)

Cersei doesn't give a shit about anyone but herself and her family. She rules with an iron fist and doesn't hesitate to annihilate anyone threatening her power. She rules alone.

Dæny cares about people and uses her power (her dragons) to achieve some of her more altruistic goals, but at the end of the day, those goals are not entirely altruistic since they also serve her. She also uses that power to intimidate and cause fear. To top it all off, she relies heavily on the power that her dragons represent, even though she tries to use politics as a more subtle way to solve problems, but she realizes that if she wants to change the world as she wishes, she needs brute force. She needs her dragons. She uses both power and fear in any situation, whether it is good or bad. She, too, rules alone, even though she has people giving her counsel. (Though that can be explained with Targaryen exceptionalism, in a way. But that's a whole other thing, and this has gotten too long already)

Sansa, on the other hand, is more surgical in her approach. She sees the value in relationships and working together. She sees the value of people and the importance of day-to-day tasks. She relies on her powers of observation and what she's learned in court to solve problems. She rules by understanding: by understanding that she has to work together with people in areas she's lacking and by understanding the potential of each person around her. She rules by working together with those around her.

In conclusion, Cersei and Sansa have always been foils to each other, and that's been set from the get-go. You could say the same about Cersei and Dæny, too. But, as the series progresses, the lines dividing Cersei's style of ruling from Dæny's start to blur, leaving this triad somewhat like this:

[amaltheas-garden]

ya know what? dany stans can have the azor ahai/prince that was promised prophecy. lemme know how that works out for y'all.