#this is a targeted post (towards aegon specifically)

[dirtytransmasc]

Step dad Criston Cole HC:

his kids never got too big. never too big for him to (at the very least try to) hold close, to carry around, to rock them to sleep, to let them sit in his lap or be buried in his side. they're never too big to run to him for comfort. they're never to big to need their tears wiped away. his kids are never to big for him, they never 'age out' of his love and care, he will always be their dad in every way until he draws his last breath.

[queenvhagar]

While I can understand people being frustrated with Alicent’s writing this season, I do have to admit that some people seem to take it a little bit too far. Like I literally had to leave the green Reddit because people were being straight up nasty towards Alicent.

So people can still enjoy Aegon and Aemond despite the shit writing they’ve been given but fans aren’t allowed to like Alicent anymore? Again, I understand people not being happy with the writing for Alicent (trust me im pissed too) but idk some of things said makes me uncomfortable.

I don’t know, I feel like as an alicent fan (and even as an alicole shipper) the fandom just feels… less inviting know, ya know? I now just enjoy her S1 and book characterization but seeing how much hate Alicent is getting honestly makes me both sad and mad cause it means that Ryan Condal making her a rage bait this season essentially worked.

Sorry if im bothering you, i just needed to vent to someone😅

Her writing this entire season has definitely just been rage bait and it's working for both her critics and her fans.

For me, it's just completely turned me away from the show, and particularly the Dragonstone scene in the finale is the last straw in terms of her character being completely ruined. This writing choice has made her objectively one of the most pathetic and despicable characters in my opinion in ways that the real Alicent is not. I've kind of separated her characterization this season and particularly the finale, which is ultimately rage-inducing and worthy of criticism, from her real character that exists in the books and was hinted at in moments in season 1.

Her show character is not something I can enjoy at all post-Dragonstone, and while the character assassination has been strong for show Aemond and show Aegon (and all the other Greens), it has yet to be so completely illogical that it absolutely breaks the story and character and the role they play in the story. So this might be where other people are coming from when they say they can be fans of other Greens but not Alicent anymore.

I'm just checked out and can't even go along with the idea that any version of Alicent would do what she does because it goes completely against everything essential to her character. If I was still able to have immersion in the story and the ability to try to think through or justify her choices and motivation or find any connection or coherency in her character change over time, I might have more to say about her, but that's gone for me. It is just so transparent what the writers are trying to do with her, the Greens, and the Blacks that I no longer have any buy-in with this show as something that feasibly could exist in-universe. It's like I can see the writers manipulating and changing the story so strongly to fit their specific vision in every scene that I can't even view the story or characters independently from that anymore.

So yeah, I'm not a show Alicent fan anymore (nor am I a show fan after this). But book Alicent will always be supreme. That's the real Alicent. And I prefer the book versions of basically every other character as well.

I suppose people can still be a fan of show Alicent and try to justify her choices, but it definitely will continue to get harder and harder to defend her because the writers are clearly and so transparently determined to completely humiliate and butcher her character to uplift Rhaenyra and fans will be continue to be critical of her because of this targeted writing, unfortunately.

And the sad result is the fandom will just get more toxic 😓 take care out there and definitely feel free to avoid spaces that are getting too hostile or leaning into the misogynistic hate that the writers are inviting fans to direct at Alicent through their misogynistic writing.

[horizon-verizon]

Daeron I & Baelor I

*EDITED/EXPANDED POST* (11/28/23)

HERE, I answered an ask about Daenaera's fate and family, where this post stems from a question that came up as I went to edit that post.

After the loss of dragons, the House Targaryen struggled with defining themselves without the existence of dragons and being able to ride them. Aegon III hated dragons after seeing his mother die between Sunfyre's jaws and yet later tried, his Viserys (II) to revive some eggs with 9 Essosi mages means and failed. His reluctance to battle with his need to subdue enemies or use them as a deterrent against other possible reluctance might have not helped and even hindered his relationship with his own heritage and relationship with his brother and older sisters, which is hinted at in Rhaena's offense at Aegon not allowing Morning into the castle walls. Even he and Viserys's relationship took a serious dip after Aegon removed all eggs from the Keep to Dragonstone after Baela's daughter Laena's mutated and deformed dragon took a chunk out of the newly-born girl. It would have also made some of the mental alienation he had in his depression, further exacerbating the alienation from those closest to him (though I can't blame him for the egg-transport one, Laena, like Rhaenyra, was eaten by a dragon!). This would have been felt and observed/passed down to his children, who all had different responses, but I want to talk only about his sons here.

The very meaning of what a Targaryen is came into question.

🎨: Amok

Daeron

Daeron--in trying to subjugate Dorne and pull it into Targ-Andal domination while probably looking back at the Dance's consequences (no dragons and lords' resentment towards his father's "coldness")--developed an interest in displaying his and Targ power. He seemed to wish to say to his subjects, esp the nobles, that he/the Targs still had the quality of supremacy or "strength" from the first of their line, Aegon I, without having to have actual dragons and sort of redeifng what a "dragon" was. It's like he was saying, yes, we won bc of dragons but there is something within us-me that allows me-us to accomplish our duties and more.

It could have reflected the already present Andal-Targ blood consciousness and relied on that element running in the back of everyone's collective social consciousness and means to politically define themselves apart from other nobles as well as smallfolk. As this is a militaristic, patriarchal society that prizes military achievements above almost all else, Dorne remained independent and already practiced equal primogeniture since Nymeria, not long ago the throne was fought over a woman ruling or not and the "precedent" against women leading became stronger then ever, Dorne may have gotten more attention. As a state, it was out of monarchial control and its people were equivocally ambiguous as to their relations to other parts of the Targs' realm, perceived as an "Other", and thus became the first part of Daeron's mission, his target. It also explains why and how Daeron even bothered to begin a racialization of Dornish folk: "salty" vs "stony" vs "sandy".

He tries to suppress the Targness-is-being-only-a-dragonrider while still using the heritage of dragon-riding to define his/Targ supremacy. Thus an internal conflict with his own masculinity, heritage, etc.

Baelor

Baelor's problem came from him trying to use only & purely Andal core principles to justify his Valyrian-descent house's right to rule with a very specific principle of socio-religious "devotion" that is actually extreme mortification ("denial of the flesh", the Christian terms), or self-denial.

By claiming he was cleansing his house of sin through his own interpretations of Faith or Andal principles of anti-carnal devotion and martyrdom through denying the body's (his own and others') expressions or movements, he was also:

blinding himself to others' feelings or motives aside from what he felt they were/could be -> one way paranoia and abuse get encouraged

ensuring carnal/sexual rebellion from those he oppressed/repressed and tried to make look evil through his shows of extreme religious mortification

exposing himself to actual physical danger

stoking the urges to perform "sinful" behavior bc the lack of nuanced thought prevented him from thinking rationally about his own motives and urges to begin with

Before going on, it's crucial to understand that Baelor sincerely believed in the Faith religion's principles. Religion whoever, does not escape political history and can never be claimed to be completely non-affective in how people organize their societies and behaviors...

His Sisters

*(11/28/23)* As I already alluded to later in this post, one of the "sins" the house Targaryen performed, in Baelor's public and private policies, was also the house/dynasty's central principle & means to self-affirm or separate itself from Andals to justify its own right to rule: incestuous marriage between siblings. Thus him imprisoned his own sisters. Check out the previously known Brideoffires' Twitter thread about how Baelor works against himself specifically in how he treats his sisters:

In this thread, OP makes it very clear that there WAS a threat of rape against these women: "by claiming his actions were to purify the sin of incest, baelor inadvertently revealed his own sin of incest, by seeing all of his sisters as temptations of the flesh, beyond just the one he married dissolving the marriage only to imprison Daena and her sisters because he was so possessive over them. he wanted to keep them to himself." Others have added that he could have sent them or just Daena to other regions like Essos and a theory that he eventually believed and justified their imprisonment from a fear that they'd usurp him. Perhaps his spiritual/Seven advisors/hallucinations guided him toward this. Then OP points out how Baelor, if he was serious about them remaining faithful and spiritually "pure", could have forced them to become septas. Rhaena was already one.

If dragons had continued to exist as they were before and during the Danc, the man also would have tried to at least stay away from dragons and see them as a curse or imprison them just as he did his sisters and either refuse to let dragonkeepers properly take care of or organize their eggs later in his life if he were still king OR reject any attempt to let others inform him of them. It would be a mistake to think Baelor was, in his heart of hearts, totally against violence or didn't use violence to affirm himself and the dynasty.

The act of jailing someone or forcibly separating them into an isolated space is itself still an act of violence and a show of force. Again, add this to how he had many options on keeping them "pure" or removing the "threat" of incest and temptation he instead keeps them all together and relatively close to him where he can keep an eye out for their movements WHILE if he ever felt he couldn't stop said temptations...oh lookie there, a fresh sister to make "sin" with and blame his own actions on....

Chilvary, Religion and Masculinity in Real Medieval History & Westeros

The thematic inspiration behind Baelor's fervent faith in the Faith and how he imprisoned his sisters stems from the same things that inspired Daeron in his conqueror mission: the Dance's effects (personal and political regarding gender) and the loss of the dragons while having to marry Targs to the dominant religion of the subjects for the dynasty to maintain its own hegemony (not that kind, the racial one. just the kind where he has authority over other states that you see in any period of hierarchical human history).

A knight is described in Andal-Westeros as a "devoted" protector of the weak, women, children, and of God/the Faith. They are supposed to be morally positive forces of good who uphold the feudal order through violence. Baelor could have felt this internal struggle between the Andal militaristic masculinity, the image of a king being "generous" but also "strong", and the memories of Rhaenyra, his father and now his brother, and after Daeron's death he might and probably have felt that House Targaryen had to prove its importance and position by the mode of self-sacrifice serve its subjects through the Faith/the dominant religion AND the house brought it's own tragedies to itself, having had multiple "punishments" from the gods after his brother's and grandmother's heretical "arrogance".

Instead of forcing rule to display strength of arms, he felt he had to express first remorse towards the previous aggression (especially with the small of Dorne rising up after their lords lost) and then show leadership through something inspired by what Catholic-Christian medieval societies of real-life described as "martyr" strength of doing extreme, sacrificial actions facing intense persecution for that faith and doing anything to protect God's word and presence on Earth against "infidels" and "pagan" disbelievers. It is why several saints have stories of great suffering and violent deaths in the Catholic canon. It was and still is to many, a means to display a uniquely Christian sort of bravery, especially as Christianity is/was not an ethno-religion but a religion dependent on converting people. Thus, martyrdom is absolutely needed/needs violence wasn't ever far away from Christian identity. With the Andals and lords' already present history of "promised land"ness justifying their migration to Westeros thousands of years ago, the Faith of the Seven mincing Catholism's own principles and role in society, and how knighthood and chivalry themselves come to be defined from their Andal roots, that importance about self-sacrifice in "trials" of great danger would have been a huge factor in how Baelor felt he must appeal to even those in Dorne but especially to lords at home. (We know that the Warrior's Sons were a group of nobles' sons who claimed to protect the Faith through violence and we know that the Andals desperately fought against the First Men for resources, presumably with their ASoIaF "chosen people's" justification--or at least enough of them used that excuse.)

Now while Dornish people do worship the Seven and it is the dominant religion, being the target of violence for months from one of the same family and wanting their political independence would have been part of why--if not all--Lord Wyl was so unimpressed with Baelor's Boneway walk and his request to release his captured uncle Aemon the Dragonknight. Instead, he decides to play with him, and we, the readers and maybe some of Yandel's readers, see through Lord Wyl's action straight at the folly of zealotry disguised as perfect devoted bravery.

What is interesting is that the Christian mode of bravery made bravery and strength themselves more accessible to people who were not men--many women were canonized as saints for their great personal and public humiliation and violent acts for not converting away from Christianity, converting to the religion, or--less often told in narratives--putting themselves into direct harm's way for their fellow Christians through housing them or helping them escape from authorities or even leading banned services. We see that Baelor eschews the Andal notion of masculinity (facing your enemies with a sword and intention to violently push off and kill) in his self-subordination rituals of the walk, his attempts to abase and put himself in danger for the sake of his uncle, and his later fasting to death as if he made sin (but really expressing his ability to inflict on himself his own determined punishment). Because part of sainthood and the martyr's bravery is to submit yourself totally to God's will and mercy while you "advocate" for his rule on Earth, which decidedly crosses over with the Andal idea of femininity.

All may explain why Baelor was so adamant about locking his sisters up for, what he planned, for the entirety of their lives not shortly after he became king (besides the info in the linked Twitter post by former brideoffires). It's already been noted and discussed how dragons and female Targs are narratively and phenomenonologically linked together. In the Faith and maesters'/Citadel's perspective, dragons by themselves were anathema by being "impossible" creatures of fire that most people cannot dominate. And since Targ women can and have bonded/claimed dragons and their Valyrian heritage was less restrictive against female authority and autonomy (Alysanne, Rhaenys, Rhaenyra, and Visenya), the Targs just were too seen as "Other" and always have been, will continue to be so. Both Valyrian and Andal/FM lords drew their house identity from patrilineality and patriarchal customs, but out of the Andals and the Vlayrinas (who also had women go out to those conquered Essosi outposts to rule in the name of Old Valyria), which had women actually practice leadership and real autonomy? The Faith and the Targs have always had contention over the supremacy of Westerosi society after the Conquest, enough that there is a running theory that they and maesters are responsible for several mysterious tragedies the Targs suffered (multiple miscarriages for certain periods, Syrax going off, the Shepherd, etc.). There are multiple instances of Targ women's autonomy being linked to the decline of Targ power and political integrity, and the consequences of its suppression:

the last female Targ's death and personal loss spelling the end of dragons

(but) the last dragon rider before Daenerys was Rhaena, Daemon and Laena's child, bc she independently successfully hatched Morning and got to bond/ride with her

Daenerys Stormborn reviving dragons towards her own rise, it is pretty clear that

Daena is described as a typical "dragon" out of all her siblings except Daeron maybe and retaining pride from Daemon (even if not her own father Aegon) to her son Daemon -- her daring to have a bastard in her own way of claiming back some of her autonomy --> from that event of her imprisonment, she births a "superstar" player in the next Targ conflict and probably instills in him his right to a place in the Targ lineage despite his bastardry

Queen Dowager Rhaena giving her siblings Alysanne and Jaehaerys their dragons (by legend) out of sisterly love and her dragon Dreamfyre being the one who probably birthed Dany's dragons / her conflict with her daughter

Aerea, who claimed Balerion and found both freedom and danger with him after her great uncle/new stepfather held her and her mother hostage -> leads to her mother's trauma and bad handling \/emotional imprisonment of her, thus her flight on Balerion -> against

Saera trying to get a dragon to run away from the imprisonment and abuse Jaehaerys put her in after her sex debacle -> making the first of two rifts b/t the Golden Couple (Alysanne & Jaehaerys)

Alysanne, while faithful to the Seven, also has a dragon and supplies most of the most well-known policies protecting women and a few protecting KL infrastructure with the help of Septon Barth's support (right of the first night, the Gift, improved North-Targ relations, KL's sewage and water system; unfortunately, no girls in the Citadel, but again that theory...)

Visenya and Rhaenys have their own dragons and not only participate in warfare but out of warfare making laws in the absence of their brother and thus making several laws and an institution for the better of Westeros and the beginning of the entire dynasty: the Kingsuard, the rule of thumb and the rule of seven, Rhaenys' masterful manipulation of the court, and Visenya's conquest of the Eyerie // Visenya's instrumental role in making Maegor king and supporting his reign and her better advice to Aenys before then, before Aenys allowed Targ-Faith relations to worsen so bad open rebellions came and Maegor's firmer hand was needed

Anyway, thematically, Targ dragons and Targ prosperity need its women free and competent, which cannot come from patriarchal oppression of women's bodily autonomy and authority. Thematically, Baelor proved to be the antithesis of the conventional image of Targness to better and fulfill that long and steady attempt at full Targ-Andal assimilation I talk about HERE. Part of Andal masculinity itself is to have and show control over female sexual partners, which translated into having control over who they marry and have children with (competition or allies). By isolating and reserving his sisters' bodies away from his physical presence but just close enough where they are still more limited and controllable, he assures the less chance of his own temptations for their bodies (as traditions of incest would and could encourage genuine attraction but again, he himself obviously was just attracted to them all or thought that he'd become so...it's not as if he couldn't have self-control), debilitates their access to accruing power amongst the court for themselves, and outwardly expresses his devotion to Faith anti-sibling marriages (he canceled his betrothal to Daena).

Therefore, it is a means of self-repression as well as his way of reassuring his masculinity, focusing on the aspect of being obedient to the religion above all and acting as a "godly" king who may "protect" the gods' dominion on Earth. That displays his generosity-openhandedness-ability to provide sustenance (another expected kingly trait) for the smallfolk: "he emptied the treasury regularly to fund his charitable acts, including the year when he donated a loaf of bread daily to every man and woman in the city" (AWoIaF; The Targaryen Kings -- Baelor I). However he also eventually took septon's vows after cancelling his betrothal and thus prevented himself from producing any direct heirs completely--which is another knock against his claim to conventional masculinity as well as his kingship.

Ironically, because he put away his sisters in a very accessible way, Baelor basically created/encouraged his own temptations and thus his continued devolution into worse and worse zealous narcissism that stuck him in various self-contradictory phases that only a scandal or another internal act of rebellion--Daena's escape and her sex with their cousin Aegon--could change immediately. He even tried to use tax exemptions to encourage others to prevent their daughters from "losing their 'sacred' virginities" in marriage with chastity belts. And the zealous narcissism grew worse in some way like Cersei's narcissist preoccupancy with gaining destructive power over men to become like a man.

He was not actually acting self-sacrificing for the sake of Dorne's real well-regard but for the sake of fulfilling his role as the gods' king, using Andal principles of martyrdom. He was fueled by his own performance of martyrdom, but maybe like Cersei, never really got complete satisfaction both because his arduous emotions cyclically kept getting in his own way and he could not seem to accept that he could never quite be the perfect Faith-Andal king, which I think breeds his own need to prove his uniqueness amongst his family.

[horizon-verizon]

Even if she didn’t specifically direct it, she implicitly approved of the murder of Jaehaerys in retaliation for the murder of her son Lucerys. This had no real military or political value; a small child was killed violently out of spite. She never rebukes Daemon for it and shows no remorse or sympathy.

She sank into paranoia and tried to hold innocent people in her camp responsible for the actions of a few. This drove Corlys Velaryon and Daemon away from her, lost her Nettles and Sheepstealer, and compelled Addam Velaryon to go on a suicide mission on Seasmoke that he otherwise might not have done. She was unable to capitalize personally or politically on her victories or to cultivate and keep loyal people around her.

*EDITED POST* (4/9/24)

Perhaps a response to this post about Rhaenyra and Nettles.

If this is commentary on Rhaenyra not being the best ruler or not one people should have? Sure. If this is supposed to justify what happens to her, no. If this is to justify the anti-female rulership Fire & Blood takes as its stance? Again, no.

Rhaenyra's issues stemmed a lot from misogyny out of her control as well as the classism she performs that guaranteed her end. The generations-long misogyny set her up; then, after she lost more and more agency and children, she clinched it for her self.

Rhaenyra's grief and paranoia, sure, lead to her being unable to see the threat that was Mysaria in her treatment towards Nettles (and the dragonseeds, but worst for her). AND it is definitely true that Rhaenyra brings about her own downfall in her trying to kill Nettles through a proto?-misogynoir act of trying to regain her sense of control & agency through political authority.

But while this is true, it is also true that you are putting aside the misogyny for blood purity as if the misogyny's effects against Rhaenyra collapse under the blood purity she performs. No, the misogyny doesn't and will not disappear once blood purity and racism enter the chat. That makes it easier to identify the misogyny part of misogynoir and its motivations to make femaleness/womanhood inferior to any invention of manhood.

It was never about only Rhaenyra's leadership skills. I think that it is an error to assign racism, and blood purity to bad leadership and NOT/NEVER misogyny on the part of Aegon, Alicent, and Jaehaerys I.

A)

You: "This had no real military or political value; a small child was killed violently out of spite. She never rebukes Daemon for it and shows no remorse or sympathy."

I find it funny that in order to condemn or push more blame onto Rhaenyra and the blacks and make this argument, you have to:

re-position Rhaenyra's approval or disapproval/allowance for the killing of her nephews into a more strategic or political motivation than it actually was/would be (basically vacuuming out or reducing her emotions about Luke's death and his death's emotional value)

completely ignore how Luke's death itself was both cruel and totally unnecessary and unjustified bc his slashing Aemond's eye was self-defense both in the show and originally

completely ignore how the greens/Alicent/Aemond were the ones to act unethically first with their sense of patriarchal entitlement-- from Rhaenyra's sons being seen as illegitimate and themselves thinking they have the real right to rule because 3 of them are Viserys' only boys and Rhaenyra doesn't act "chastely"/conform to Andal/Faith patriarchal constrictions of female sexual autonomy

I don't know, I just find it absurdly funny how all of this is absent in your assessment. So much bad faith.

Apparently, it isn't that Rhaenyra may have seen how she would never even get to bury her son (they never found the body), how the greens already tried to either put out his eye for something that wasn't his fault, how they all have consistently been targets of the greens' abuse or public undermining for years before Rhaenyra went to Dragonstone, how the Velaryon boys were very likely undermined by the court itself in myriad unsubtle to subtle ways from childhood from not being Laenor's kids....none of that matters and couldn't possibly have inspired rage and grief to even not be that bothered to punish for when someone else decides to make the greens/murderers of your kid pay with literal blood. I really don't think many people would do differently and this doesn't make them necessarily evil, even if it's morally wrong. It's obviously a irrational reaction/lack of reaction but not one that is unique or extreme.

BTW, I already wrote about this thing about Blood & Cheese in connection to Aemond claiming Vhagar and Luke's death HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, and HERE (scroll down to "The Context of Aemond’s Tactic in Episode 7" for the last post). So you either are new, you forgot these posts, you were not online at a certain time to see this post, or you decided to test me or trip me up.

B)

You: "She sank into paranoia and tried to hold innocent people in her camp responsible for the actions of a few. This drove Corlys Velaryon and Daemon away from her, lost her Nettles and Sheepstealer, and compelled Addam Velaryon to go on a suicide mission on Seasmoke that he otherwise might not have done. She was unable to capitalize personally or politically on her victories or to cultivate and keep loyal people around her."

So, to you, her inability to suppress and compartmentalize her grief well is the real and primary culprit of her demise and her losing followers? One's ability to put aside their grief makes them the better ruler?

True. It was that that lead to her decision to Nettles. Doesn't mean that if the greens had set aside their own ambitions, not raised Aemond the rest as seeing Rhaenyra as their enemy unjustly, and not usurp her, that their own kids wouldn't be exposed to war or revenge. They were the aggressors.

Simultaneously, Aegon the Elder partially goes into the battle of Rook's Rest to avenge said dead child....but got so severely hurt he basically couldn't sire more heirs and had to give the practical command to his even less-anger-control-managing younger brother?

He threatens Corlys with Baela and was going to mutilate his own nephew to push off Rhaenyra's remaining supporters ("driving" people so far from him that he was poisoned & eliminated by the same man and Larys Strong)?

And yes, Rhaenyra gets both a little more sympathy and grace from me because her children's deaths came from no instigation from the blacks nor her, but years of the patriarchal apathy and entitlement that greens are inherently characterized by. Which allows Aemond to act as he did toward his cousins and nephews in either the book or the show.

Aegon the Elder is "unable to capitalize personally or politically on her victories or to cultivate and keep loyal people around her". Aemond is "unable to capitalize personally or politically on her victories or to cultivate and keep loyal people around her". not only did the second brother refuse to go to the capital and save his own mother and sister, he refused to join Daeron and the Hightower army in battle because, he says explicitly, that it is "cowardly" and he wanted to have his own way of accruing battler glory. And this is pretty clear how he would conduct himself once he became Prince Regent and the council around him tried to stop him from going to Harrenhal and essentially leaving KL too unprotected...which allowed Daemon to take KL for Rhaenyra. (Fuller quote HERE).

Criston leaves him alone at Harrenhal! With a full-assed army! After they have already decided to partner expeditiously after Aemknd made his choice to invade Harrenhal in the first place! And Aemond decides not to leave bc he wants glory and coercive sex. What a partner!

I find it funny how Aegon the Elder's leadership & decisions aren't being put into question or vacuumed of emotional motivation despite your arguing for how Rhaenyra can't keep her feelings in check! Not only is she the worst sort of king you can find (to be nearly outdone by Aegon IV and Robert Baratheon), Rhaenyra's actions in the later part of the Dance are precipitated by people trying to undermine her worth and take what is publicly given to her!

Aegon is not a better candidate than Rhaenyra legally nor ethically or practically! He is categorically worse! There was no alternative to him other than Aemond (you should now why he shouldn't be king), and Daeron was a child!

Are you are trying to say that her paranoia does not come from a valid place? No, it doesn't matter that even before she became a mom, Alicent targeted her indirectly from the time she was a child and: make her feel small and look small to the court for being "unladylike" or "chaste" and unfit for the throne from the time Rhaenyra is 10 or so? The psychological weight of this plus how long Alicent would have kept it up, how it would have shaped Rhaenyra's prepubescent and adolescence, her personality and need to self-assert herself and develop a stubborn emotional resilience without as much support as she could have had (again, she was a literal child, children don't form factions!) doesn't matter at all?

No, a mother possibly cannot be so in pain and outrage that she does this on her personal loss alone. It's inconceivable, but worse...it doesn't matter bc somehow Rhaenyra--more than Aegon--is wholly to blame for her own actions and decisions bc she happens to be the leader of the blacks and a woman fighting for what was already given to her by the previous king.

Even Daemon, who directly (as you yourself put it) planned for harm to come to them, he gets less of your condemnation. Once again, in another post, I will link later, along with the feeling of retribution from some sort of punishment for Luke's death

(bc what do you think the greens would have done if Rhaenyra demanded retribution in a "peaceful" process anyway, anon?! And don't pretend your response wouldn't try to mirror those arguments that say "What was Rhaenyra & Viserys supposed to do, take out Luke's eye for Aemond's, their own son/grandchild?!").

C)

Jaehaerys I was a king who basically "put aside" the feelings of his daughters and neglected actually getting to know any of them past their use to shore up alliances. So when they all displayed some sort of will against his and Alysanne's arrangements, he became either dismissive and forced them to marry (Daella) or brutal (Saera). This makes Daella die of childbirth before she could really grow into her own or a semblance of adulthood, Viserra dead trying to feel better about marrying an old assed man and Saera endangering herself before she succeded in building a prosperous life in Essos. Targ assimilation = female Targ abuse and denigration = Targ's decline. His feelings about Saera lead to him viciously murdering one of her lovers in front of her, leading to her escape and decision to break totally with her family, and Jaehaerys showed shame and regret over it how he mistook Alicent for her several times as he lay alone and dying. Jaehaerys paid for his emotional neglect and undermining of female Targs (Rhaenys and his own sister Rhaena), too, by opening up the monarchy's succession to be questioned by subjects as if this weren't a monarchy. A monarchy that is NOT a constitutional one and never was. Despite his own attempts and life-long mission of consolidating more privilege and power for the Targaryen house! It also landed him with less members of the Targ house.

Also, I find it funny how Alicent's own emotional responses--especially her being the one to demand Luke's eye before it could be investigated properly and fairly--aren't condemned by you at all either morally or strategically. While eye-for-an-eye is a thing most understood, you don't think that this also could be used against her image of a benevolent grandmother, Queen Consort (Mother of the Faith/Mary, mother of God in real EU medieval societies), and stepmother to the heir?

Alicent also performed emotionally and unstrategically several times...this, the time she tried to negotiate with Rhaenyra to get her to not execute the green Targtowers, her measuring how many allies Rhaenyra would have for her own ambition, her demanding her granddaughter to kill Aegon III despite the war being over because she was in extreme grief and outrage for not only her kids dying but being the prime reason for it AND losing. I'd go far as to say that Alicent should have known she lost, that she did know, deep down and aware enough that she is a huge reason how she lost everything. She is the one to call the council to usurp Rhaenyra, to leave Viserys' rotting corpse to do so, to imprison people to get this underway, to install her son, to collect and get people like Larys and Criston on the side of the green...all without being the leader of her faction. She was the driving force behind the faction, the one to consolidate its power. Without her, there was no faction! Is she then, not a "leader" in her own right?!

Yet no discussion about that. Funny.

D)

I even already wrote about the often-neglected side to all of this that I not-so-briefly mentioned before: Rhaenyra's psychological journey and looking at her writing/narrative purpose

...despite her being the goddamn protagonist.

*EDIT* (8/21/23):

THIS is a great post by @mononijikayu about medieval queens, female rulers, the history of how women in leadership positions were made and seen as threats to the very structure of social "order", and contextualizing Rhaenyra thru Empress Matilda. I didn't even know about Matilda's husband being comparable to Rhaneyra's Daemon! PLZ READ!!!!

Excerpt:

just as much, along with these fictitious portrayals, more lies are depicted. these women are considered vixens that cause havoc to men by shifting them into desires and danger. through the written word, we see how women are cast in roles of villains in men’s lives. it is because by their conclusive thoughts, women are the only creatures that are able to turn ‘good honorable men’ into despicable creatures who do shameful, deplorable acts for the sake of women’s pleasures.  it is within this narrative that ancient chroniclers declare that women were in fact the doom of men. if they were not able to control the dangers posed by the wiles of women, then the foundations of the mighty society they had built would be up in flames.  [...] as i mentioned, these factors of community are written down and preserved. and with that, the example of the ancients were the foundations by which medieval society built itself. the same concepts continued to cause the same issue within society and that was the exclusion of women from participating in the bigger picture of community and state, much so with governing states in their own right—without judgment or disapproval. 

[horizon-verizon]

What do you think of having made Helaena a dreamer in the series? I personally have mixed feelings about this, but one thing is for sure, giving him autistic traits was a mistake.

*EDITED POST* (3/19/24)

Disclaimer: I really don't know anything about neurodivergence or autism.

Here is one earlier post that I wrote about an issue with Helaena’s new characterization.

I used to think that it was nice to see some neurodivergent representation and that she got to be a little more than just the “plump” “fine mother” Gyldayn describes her. But it’s just that: “little”.

Now:

A) Dragon dreams are...dreams. Not visions you have while fully awake. So...

B) I think that it Helaena’s characterization suffers from the reliance on her neurodivergence. Neurodivergence does not equal personality. We don’t know her other than one small scene of her unintentionally(?) calling Aegon out, that she liked to play with bugs in her youth, and that she doesn’t like her own mother. These aren’t personality traits they are conviences for the greens’ image.

And the prophecies she speaks does nothing but tell us what we--the book readers--already know will happen, except for Rhaenys, but that was a scene that also never should have happened. We’re supposed to be wowed by how she is like Cassandra--the prophet who no one believes after cursed by Apollo for not sleeping with him or otherwise disobeying him. At least Cassandra is trying and much more active in her story, using her visions to try to stop catastrophe even though she knows or we may make the argument she already knew and thus this is where the Greek tale's futility comes from. HotD is not using this kind of futility but it is expressing a futility while keeping Helaena a passive victim.

But using the futility of Cassandra’s story element to express how “futile” and “tragic” the Dance was diminishes human choice more than i needs to--how Alicent decides to go after Rhaenyra and tries to get Aegon on the throne for power. Diminishes the activeness of human decision specifically for the people already having lost their ambition in the adaptation from the original story to the show:

Alicent is a such younger sexual abuse victim (after years of fans having said that there was too much sexual abuse or violence esp against women in GoT) who apparently can't really reason as she would have in the book version and is more vulnerable to her father's machinations rather than her being a go getter herself

Rhaenyra's muster has also been greatly diminished

even Aemond's whitewashed and made less active by his killing Luke made into an "accident").

Then there is what another writers says about how we know what will happen to her. The show gives us the only neuro-divergent character and we know she’ll lose her son to Blood and Cheese, of which she obviously blamed herself for, driving her into a mad grief. That she will die a horrid, “suspicious” death. Her suffering will be used to generate more sympathy for the greens, while diminishing and ignoring that Daemon only uses B&C for what Aemond did to Lucerys. (Again, eye-for-an-eye is not moral or justifiable. I’ have said over and over that it is rather Aemond and Alicent’s fault for targeting Rhaenyra.) The show till then inadvertently act like the biased Maester Gyldayn, who also just refers to Helaena's death; the writer ponders over how her death inspired rebellion against Rhaenyra and seems to lean towards Rhaenyra actually doing it, even though it brings up the missing Larys and the possibility that he spread the rumors to incite the peasants against Rhaenyra more than they would have otherwise.

This cheapens her, especially because we don’t really get to see her apart from her Alicent, her brothers, and her kids. Nor do we see her interact with Aemond or Aegon like the two eldest boys do in episodes 6-9.

Rhaenyra’s story was about how women in Westeros would be pushed further back into practically subservient positions, and Daenerys was meant to be a penetration into that element. Rhaenyra is the story of how a precedent against women in power came to be; Dany is when a women pushes back and begins to regain that power.

So Helaena doing nothing more than tell visions that don’t matter while she stays in her room with her children and tries to get her own mother to stop touching her and knowing that she’ll die a horrendous death after long grieving and torturing herself for her son’s death just so she becomes some sort of Martyr for green-stans makes for a more disheartening picture than I’d like.

Oh, and it doesn't really make sense for her to know what's going to happen to not just her siblings and parents but her CHILDREN and not go to Viserys, the most prophecy-focused person in her family as well as the most able to actually do something to turn things around.

Dragon dreams in ASoIaF are fixed but they do not say that a specific person WILL do this so much as someone must do this for that to happen...unless they're Dany, Daenys, Rhaegar, & Aegon I.