#ic discourse

[equine-fanblog]

so fucking tired of people saying "ohhhh blue flame rapidashes are unethical!!! the flames burn them!!" THEYRE LITERAL FUCKING FIRE TYPES. A BRIGHT AND HOT FLAME IS INDICATIVE OF HEALTH AND ISNT UNETHICAL GODDAMNIT. also dont even fucking TALK to me about false shinies. i dont give a shit. shinies are just a genetic mutation and i really honest to god do not give a shit

[grayintogreen]

Ludinus Da’leth talks a lot of shit for a guy whose origin story boils down to: “I wasn’t on the Titanic but my family died because of an unrelated iceberg incident and now I glorify the Titanic and its time period and have become an eco-terrorist in the name of destroying the polar ice caps.”

[kisses-in-the-void]

I need more hetero ships where the guy doesn’t like the woman at first—including her appearance—and it’s not the usual ‘ugh, she’s so hot, why does she have to be such a bitch?’ situation. I mean genuine initial rejection. But over time, as he gets to know her and starts to admire her personality, he slowly begins to see her as beautiful too.

Because for me, that’s what real love is—based not on physical attraction, but on being drawn to the soul inside. And when you love that person’s soul, their body starts to look beautiful too. Because beauty is always in the eye of the beholder.

So far, though, I can only think of one couple like that: Jaime and Brienne.

And when I say "hetero couples", it doesn’t mean I wouldn’t love to see that dynamic in queer ships too. But I feel like this idea is so deeply ingrained in most straight ships, and in how the majority of people expect them to be portrayed—that a man should ALWAYS be physically and sexually attracted to a woman first and foremost. It’s acceptable if he can’t stand her personality, but the desire has to be there from the very first minute they meet.

[the-pea-and-the-sun]

starting Some Sort of collection

[askmeaboutmyoctopustheory]

sometimes when i see asoiaf discourse and i’m just like. you know this was all made up by a white man from new jersey right. let’s take a deep breath.

[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.

[punkitt-is-here]

You're being dogwalked into aggressive transmisogyny by a commentariat who've made a hobby of institutionally harrassing trans women and are trying to steer you into public feuds with artists they're demonstrably bigoted against.

I understand that you're dedicated to an outward image of total apolitical "tits n' beer gender liberalism", but if you could extend some sympathy to Patricia's arguments, it'd really help salvage my idea of you as having any kind of integrity on the topic of 'trans unity' at all.

hi what do literally any of these fuckign words mean lol. if you wanna get a point across you gotta dumb it down for me. who calls it a commentariat. huh?

[moonstrck]

Rereading ACOSF and Nesta and Cassian’s first sex scene ended in such a fucked up way, imo.

Despite obviously feeling a connection and saying he was “beyond lies right now” after calling her “sex” beautiful, Cassian immediately switches up and stonewalls her. She had said “just sex” at first when they began messing around, yes, but you can tell he pulled this just to spite her and leave her reeling.

Especially how when complimented she said “no one’s ever called it beautiful before”, showed him her genuine self and shared that the experience was “too good”. Almost like she knew it was too good to not end with some kind of punishment and pain, like everything in her life had up to that point.

I just found this so… ick. I’ve been in a position like that where someone just changes their demeanor and shows complete loss of interest in you after they’re satisfied and it’s such a disgusting feeling of being used. She even said she felt empty afterwards. And she had been self harming via sex before this (WHICH WAS ONE OF THE REASONS SHE WAS LOCKED IN THE HOUSE OF WIND!!!) and he did this. Again, ick

[bunnyshideawayy]

responding “22 years old btw” to me during fandom discourse is so hilariously odd like do middle schoolers think people stop enjoying things once they reach the ancient age of 18?

[doubleslashkarma]

i do think tr!bad is aro but i think people using that to explain his sheer obliviousness is. strange. cc!bad is being deliberately obtuse and misconstruing lukey's advice in the strangest ways possible because a) he enjoys being difficult but also b) his character is a however-old immortal demon that cannot wrap his head around traditional relationships

guys aro people arent just. completely clueless and oblivious about relationships. not any more than your average allo at least. guys we cant automatically label every character that struggles to interpret romantic gestures as aro based on that alone... aro people arent just emotionally unintelligent... guys please... guys... can anyone hear me...

[that-satireguy]

Me on my way to travel walking distance to afghanistan and tell the Taliban I shouldn't be affected by sharia law because i'm not a woman

���

[true-deru]

Deru's Ice Cream Truck (F/O Reblog Game) (Closed!)

Reblog this with one of your F/O and I'll give them an ice cream to enjoy~

[blackcat419]

Alicent, Elia, and Sansa’s stories remind me a lot of women like Catherine of Aragon, Anne Boleyn, and Katherine Howard.

Their stories reflect the real suffering women went though in history when they did not have men around them to protect them.

Alicent has her father sent away and has a husband actively setting up a succession crisis. Her and her children’s safety is being undermined and threatened by those around her and in the end she’s punished for trying to keep her family safe.

Elia has her husband abandon her, her father in law actively threatening her, and her only family miles away. She’s a pawn used by those around her to keep her family in line and in the end her and her children are violently murdered.

Sansa looses her father and has her betrothed actively abuse her. She does nothing to those in the red keep yet they stand by and let jeoffrey have her beaten.

While they are fictional, they draw on real world women who suffered because the men around them decided they weren’t worth anything.

Catherine of Aragon, despite being a princess of Spain, her nephew being the holy Roman emperor, and the queen of England. Was locked away in a damp castle to die never seeing her only child ever again.

Anne Boleyn, despite being the woman Henry fought for years to marry, was accused of incest and witchcraft and murdered along with her brother.

Katherine Howard, despite being queen of England, was murdered because Henry found out she had been groomed and assaulted by men in the past and was being actively blackmailed by one of his friends.

Their stories reflect the suffering women have gone through for generations. They don’t have swords, dragons, or armies ready to die for them. Despite their high statues, they are disposable to the men around them.

And they ask us to look with sympathy upon them and women in the past. To see through the lies and slander to see the real person underneath. Despite doing everything their society asked of them, they still suffer.

I ask you, dear reader, to see these often hated and sidelined characters as not the monster in the closet, the hag keeping lovers separated, or a whiny child who needs to learn their place. But as women who are placed in a world where perfect is never enough, where your duty will never secure safety, and where fighting back as best will have you condemned as hysterical and at worst killed.

[criticalbeauregard]

sometimes you just have to read a post and say “you’re fucking stupid” out loud and keep on scrolling

[kurzler]

re entering the asoiaf fandom after a brief pause

[brettdoesdiscourse]

If you snitch to ICE, you would've snitched to the slave catchers and Nazis too btw.