Anti Targaryen Antis - Tumblr Posts

The whole "Targaryens are colonizers" take is so frustrating in more than one way. First off: it's blatantly wrong. Colonialism is the taking of someone else's land in the name of your kingdom and exploiting the land and people for resources. A necessary part of this is establishing a colony, which usually goes hand in hand with wiping out or severely reducing the population of the natives. The Targaryens didn't do this.

They began their time in Westeros as refugees who fled to a small Valyrian outpost off the main continent. They basically no influence or interest in Westerosi politics. This changed with Aegon, who led a conquest of Westeros, not for Valyria, for his house. Because the Targaryens lived in Westeros for over a century, they became just as Westerosi as the Andals. So, Aegon's conquest was not the establishment of a colony in the name of a foreign power, Aegon was from Westeros, his family had lived in Westeros for generations. Yes, the Targaryens kept the Valyrian traditions, the Andals and First Men also kept their traditions when they came to Westeros.

My second reason is that by painting the Targaryens as colonizers, people are erasing the true natives of Westeros, the Children of the Forest. The First Men were not the first inhabitants of Westeros, something people always insist on for some reason. The Children of the Forest lived in Westeros long before the Dawn Age, before any humans came to Westeros (that's fucking why the First Men are called that, they were the first humans in Westeros). They suffered huge massacres during the wars with the First Men and were forced into restricted areas to live after the treaties, then were forced further and further off their land until they were completely gone from the Seven Kingdoms. Sound familiar? This is almost exactly what happened when colonies were established in the real world. The name "Children of the Forest" literally was one of the names used to refer to the American Indigenous peoples. The First Men invaded and had reinforcements and resources sent to them from their original kingdom until the CoF destroyed the land bridge. Erasing the CoF destroys a huge part of the story Martin is trying to tell.

Finally, my third reason, it's a symptom of people misusing and misunderstanding the word colonialism. Words have power, but people seem to enjoy minimizing words like this by constantly using them when they aren't appropriate. The ASOIAF fandom is just a small example of a culture-wide issue. When people constantly use words like colonialism it loses its true impact, so when actual examples exist, people don't see it or nothing is done. I'm not saying it's the antis faults, I'm just saying it's a small symptom of a bigger issue.

TG stans and Targaryen antis complaining about Aegon's dream getting added to HOTD is so fucking funny to me. Like it makes so many of their theories and metas about House Targaryen null and void.

But one thing that does take the enjoyment out of watching their tailspin is when they accuse GRRM or even the HOTD writers of adding it in after the fact to retcon things. This is blatantly wrong.

The Prince that was Promised prophecy is directly referenced in the dream. The propht is something that had been established by GRRM in ASOIAF. It's referenced multiple times, especially in relation to House Targaryen. It's the reason why Aerys and Rhaella were made to be married, Rhaegar talks about it in Daenerys' vision, and Maester Aemon talks about it. The only time it's not referenced in relation to the Targaryens is Melisandre and Stannis, which is a false reading of the prophecy.

The Targaryens have had dreams about apocalyptic events before, and the Prince that was Promised has massive textual significance to the house. Other houses don't talk about or even seem to know about the prophecy. Therefore, no it's not pulled out of thin air that the prophecy came to them as well as to the Red Priests, neither is it a very big leap in logic. Also, no, Aegon's dream was not made up by the HOTD writers, George was the one who brought it up to them.

So, no, Targ antis and TG stans, Aegon's dream is not something the HOTD writers or GRRM pulled out of their asses. Also the books aren't over yet, so it's not retconning anything if George writes it in (and he did), it's just revealing something he's going to go into in the books. Just because you're bitter about House Targaryen's importance and Rhaenyra's rightful claim doesn't mean you can go accusing the writers of being shitty without evidence. There's plenty of other instances of the HOTD writers being shitty that actually exist.

I find it interesting that Targaryen antis will go on and on about protecting the cultures of the Andals, First Men, Dornish, and the Ghiscari while condemning and wanting to eradicate Valyrian traditions.

Valyrian customs, like incest, are constantly condemned and hated, meanwhile any incest the other houses engage in on a regular basis are ignored or excused. Joanna Lannister is Tywin's cousin, the Starks only married other Northern lords (meaning a very small gene pool to choose from), and uncle-niece marriages were common.

Antis also love to ignore a crucial fact about the Targaryens. They are one of the last Valyrian houses and the last house of dragonlords. Houses Velaryon and Celtigar are the only other Valyrian houses still in existence, and House Celtigar has long since lost their connection to their Valyrian roots. There's a reason why the Velaryons are the house the Targaryens marry with the most. It has nothing to do with "blood purity", it's about preserving their dying culture.

The Valyrian culture is basically dead by the time of the the Conquest, even more so in ASOIAF. The Valyrian religion is only practiced in Volantis by some aristocrats, Lys and Volantis are the only places where the Valyrian people still survive other than the Targaryens and Velaryons. As time goes on, the Targaryen and Velaryon blood becomes more and more mixed with that of the Andals and First Men, one day, they will be like the Celtigars, only having their roots be Valyrian.

Valyrian magic was once the most powerful in the world, able to even tame dragons. However, after the Doom, the secrets of their magic were lost. This is why Valyrian steel, glass candles, and their horns are so rare and valuable. The Freehold was once the center of magic in the world, now that has moved to Asshai and magic is slowly dying out.

Therefore, it makes sense that the Targaryens seek to protect their culture in what ways they can. Aegon the Conqueror sacrificed many of their traditions to appease the Westerosi lords and others were abandoned over time.

Now, it does make sense to not approve of some Valyrian traditions, like incest, blood magic, and slavery. However, using these as excuses to hate the Targaryens while supporting other cultures who have similar or identical traditions is just hypocritical. Condemning the Valyrians for slavery while saying Dany leading a fight against Ghiscari slavers is wrong is not a real argument against Valyria. Saying Targaryen incest is wrong makes sense if you hold everyone else to the same modern standards. Condemning the Targaryen and/or Valyrian conquests is fine, but then you'd have to condemn the Starks' conquest of the North or the Andals invasion.

Basically, if you have issues with Valyrian culture/traditions that makes sense, but condemning them while supporting other cultures that practice the same things you condemn Valyrians for is just hypocritical.

team green logic: "fuck these freak silver haired targaryens and and their beasts!"

do they know that Aegon, Helaena, and Aemond are also "freaks silver haired Targaryens"? lol

I love how they have practically all the characteristics that TG says they hate in the targaryen house, and they swear that they are better targs just because they are not the result of incest and their mother is a religious nutcase lol

It's so interesting how they'll always talk about how evil the Targaryens yet they support the group that glorifies what they criticize.

Alicent and her children are elitist, looking down on Rhaenyra's children for not looking Targaryen enough. All the Greens support the patriarchy and reject any chances to change it. The people don't support the greens and most of the lords fight for the Blacks. Aegon is a rapist who abuses his power and rules purely through fear of his dragon. Aemond and Daeron commit major atrocities because of temper tantrums with their dragons.

Everything the Targaryen antis hate about the house and bitch about are exemplified in the greens. It just shows their hypocrisy and how they don't actually care about any issues they have with the house.

TG always saying that they likes team green because they are more interesting and I'm always... (??) I give my coins to Aemond and even Alicent at a certain point, who are the only ones I can find the slightest interest in, now you tell me that you think Aegon is an interesting and complex character? He's practically an abuser, what's so complex about that? "he just always wanted his father's attention" ok.. and? and did he think that by abusing the maids he would attract his father's attention? WTF!!

"all asoiaf characters are evil" yes! But I don't see anyone justifying ramsay being a disgusting person because his father didn't like him or that Joffrey is trash because cersei spoiled him a lot etc.

TG loves to talk about GRRM's gray characters until is comes to TB lmao. They'll write metas about how Aegon and Aemond are just soooo misunderstood then turn around and say Daemon is an irredeemable monster.

Personally I really dislike what was done to Aemond in the show, mostly because they took Jace's book traits and gave them to him. But yeah, even with the show turning Aegon into a crybaby with daddy issues, there's still no depth to his character.

Aegon stans are like those people who make excuses for serial killers because they had a hard childhood. Nothing they do is their fault because they're just a bunch of precious little sad bois. Any critical thinking goes out the window if he just looks into the camera all weepy (just like his mother's stans actually).

Basically all of TG are still bland antagonists even with the show's additives. Aemond is still a stereotypical tragic backstory villain. Aegon is still the petulant man-child who rapes and abused others. Alicent is the only character who's written with even less complexity: she's a perpetual victim who's constantly passive in her own life.

GRRM's books are full of morally gray characters, but he also has many characters who are just bad. Ramsay Bolton, Joffrey Baratheon, Euron Greyjoy, Kraznys mo Nakloz, and Gregor Clegane are all examples of this. Aegon, Aemond, and even Daeron are not characters we're supposed to look at and turn into poor misunderstood babies. They're awful people who did awful things, and had no remorse until they died.

people in this fandom are so bitter about a possible targaryen restoration? you can't post a harmless post saying this is what you want and you already receive rude comments

Certain people in this fandom just hate Targaryens for no reason lmao. They hate Dany for not immediately being a perfect queen who doesn't sit there and kiss the asses of the men around her. They hate Rhaenyra for not bowing to her incompetent rapist brother and having sexual autonomy.

The only Targaryens they like are the greens who just plain suck and represent everything they claim to hate about the Targaryens. So clearly they don't hate House Targaryen because of moral reasons. It's because they are a powerful and influential house, who are changing the face of planetos even after the house's apparent fall.

The antis are just bitter that the Targaryens are great and clearly loved by GRRM. Hope they can get over it lmao

TG stans loves to mock the targaryen blood with babies that are born looking like dragons just like visenya for example when they have jaehaerys with 6 fingers (which in the book the green are ashamed of that btw) and from jaehaera's sigil in the opening of the series it is also a hand with six fingers just like his brother's lol I don't know if they just have the same sigil because they are twins but it would be funny if the girl had the same problem as her brother after all... they are twins LOL

TG stans are majority Targaryen antis. They want to distance their favs from the rest of the Targaryens so their hypocrisy is less obvious. So they'll write posts calling the blacks incestuous dragonspawn while blatantly ignoring that the greens are every bit as incestuous.

Aegon and Helaena are siblings, like you can't get more incestuous than that. Daemyra's kids actually have less genetically similar parents than Jaehaerys, Jaehaera, and Maelor. Rhaenyra's parents were first cousins, something not acknowledged as incest by Westeros.

Then there's the Helaemond shippers who criticize the Velaryons' legitimacy while theorizing that Helaena's kids are Aemond's. How exactly is Jace succeeding Rhaenyra wrong but Jaehaera succeeding Aegon is good? How is Jaehaera a more legitimate heir than Aegon III (who is trueborn)? These people are still in the same camp as other TG stans who hate the blacks for incest. They ship a brother and sister, wtf is happening in their brains?

Joffrey Baratheon and his siblings are talked about more respectfully than Rhaenyra and her children. It's so disgusting how this woman and her children are being called subhuman by these hypocrites.

The TG stans hate House Targaryen (most of them anyway), it takes a lot of mental gymnastics to justify liking the greens. It's insane seeing them do that, but it's also so fucking frustrating. They don't seem to realize that TG are the most cartoonishly evil Targaryens in ASOIAF who are all guilty of the things they hate the house for.

It shows the true reason they support the greens. It's not about how "cool" they are, because there's a lot of Targaryens who are "cool" in the same way but are still hated. It's not because they're interesting villains, because they bend over backwards defending them. It's not about hating feudalism or caring about the smallfolk, the greens committed worse atrocities than the blacks and were hated by the smallfolk more. It's not about being morally against incest (in a fictional world for some reason), because they love the incest of their favs. It's about misogyny, it's about not wanting a woman to inherit the throne or have agency in her story.

It's posts like this that show that Targaryen antis are really just jealous that their favs don't have dragons. They'll bitch about how "dragons are nukes 😠", then post little fantasies like this. They really are just pathetically jealous of the Targaryens :).

https://www.tumblr.com/crushingthebroken/741170379192745984/the-fact-ryan-condal-keeps-hitting-with-the?source=share

I think there is a lot of bias in this analysis, what is your opinion?

Yes, there's definitely a lot of bias here; op is so clearly a pissy TG stan. This analysis is rife with observation bias and just plain misinformation. I do sympathize with some of their points though. Op is doing something I've seen a lot of TG stans do: projecting the issues in HOTD onto Rhaenyra.

HOTD is a pretty bad adaptation, full of inconsistent characters and just plain fucking up the characterizations of the people. The Velaryons definitely suffer more than most other characters from this. They made Rhaenys rather antagonistic to Rhaenyra, turned Laena into basically nothing, made Laenor a deadbeat dad, and Corlys is just kinda there.

However, op's complaints about the Velaryons' representation show their bias very obviously. They don't complain about Rhaenys' characterization until she's supporting Rhaenyra. They don't talk about the issues Laenor's running away brings in, just about how it makes the Velaryons' support of the Blacks confusing. They complain about Corlys not being hated for offering Laena to Viserys, but don't acknowledge how the show purposely aged Laena down to younger than Rhaenyra to make Corlys look worse. The most damning however, is how they complain about how Corlys didn't care about Vaemond's death.

Vaemond is killed both in the book and the show, both times because he was slandering Rhaenyra and calling her sons bastards. Daemon kills him both times (with Rhaenyra's approval in the book, which was a slay tbh). Corlys doesn't care in either occurrence because Vaemond was attempting to usurp Corlys' line and his chosen successors. Op choosing to ignore the actual truth of the situation shows they just hate Rhaenyra and are bitter HOTD didn't go all the way with making the Velaryons disloyal to her.

Moving on to their complaints about Rhaenyra's portrayal, another thing I agree with to an extent. HOTD made Rhaenyra into a much more passive character than she actually was. They made her virtually inactive politically, removed her approval of Vaemond's execution, and made it so she was unwilling to go to war until Luke's murder. They showed their benevolent misogyny. However, op isn't angry about the sexism of this portrayal or how they nerfed an interesting and fun character, rather about how she does fewer morally ambiguous and questionable things. They're upset that HOTD made it harder to say Rhaenyra is an evil bitch without revealing the misogyny of TG.

Op also complains about how HOTD doesn't condemn Daemon enough while actually portraying how awful Aegon, Criston, and Vaemond are. This shows how op isn't actually using media literacy. Condal and Hess constantly condemn Daemon and went out of their way to make him worse than he is in the book. Daemon didn't murder Rhea or abuse Rhaenyra in the book, those are things they added to make him look worse. Meanwhile they actively defend Aegon raping women and go out of their way to make him more "sympathetic".

Op also sympathizes with Criston, because apparently him being held accountable for his own decisions is wrong. He chose to sleep with Rhaenyra, he chose to murder Joffrey, he chose to dedicate the rest of his life to ruining hers. Criston isn't a good person, he isn't a victim, he made all his choices and can't accept the consequences of them.

Op also reveals how they are very anti Valyrian by throwing in a spiel about how Daemon is a neo-nazi and the Valyrians are fundamentally evil for utilizing slavery. Yes, slavery is abominable, however, criticizing Daemon and Rhaenyra for wanting to hold onto their cultural traditions that have nothing to do with slavery or human exploitation isn't wrong. If every person was expected to abandon their culture just because the culture has morally wrong practices, no person could ever hold onto their culture. This applies to the other cultures of AWOIAF, including TG's precious Andals who tried to literally murder any religion other than the Faith. Daemon valuing his culture is the least condemnable thing he's ever done.

Op also complains about how Otto is portrayed as being an awful person. I have to say, a TG stan wanting to defend Otto is new to me, but not very surprising. Of course Otto is portrayed as bad and the head of the greens, they took away all of Alicent's agency and had to give it to someone. Otto is a raging misogynist and only cares about power, that's all there is to him, but apparently he's more sympathetic than Rhaenyra for some reason.

In conclusion anon, yes, this is an extremely biased "analysis". Op hates Rhaenyra and is upset that Condal and Hess didn't go out of their way to make her the primary antagonist of the show. Apparently it isn't enough that they outright defend a rapist and made the Velaryons completely nonsensical. TG stans are ridiculous and are driven purely by hatred of Rhaenyra and/or House Targaryen, op is no exception.

Mad Queen Misogyny

All the mad queen Dany takes, from both D&D and the audience, are just plain misogyny. They are literally just repeats of common misogynistic ideas. D&D have given a few reasons for why they wrote the mad queen ending for Dany, and all of them are the same old misogynistic tropes of fantasy and mythology.

The Mad Queen:

I'm going to start this off by going into how the mad queen trope itself is rooted in misogyny. This is one of the oldest tropes in fantasy/fairytales. Whether it's Snow White's evil step mother or the Queen of Hearts, literature is riddled with mad queens.

The idea of the mad queen is informed by the desires of men to keep women out of power. Yes there are historical women who were horrible people and unstable when in power. However, those examples are not enough to justify the amount of times the trope occurs, especially since some of the examples occur after many stories have already been written (ie, Mary I and medieval fairytales). These fictional women were written as cautionary tales of what happens when a woman is placed in power.

By writing the mad queen Dany arc in GOT, D&D are perpetuating an old trope rather than "subverting" anything as they claim. The most powerful woman in the world turning out to be a war mongering and mass murdering tyrant isn't subversive in any way. The only reason it was surprising was because it came out of nowhere narratively.

ASOIAF fans who constantly try to justify this turn for Dany's book character are attempting to do the same thing D&D did. They want to employ an ancient trope to justify their dislike for her in name of being "subversive".

The Violent Woman:

A trope that stretches back all the way to the Ancient Greeks is that of the angry, homicidal woman in power. From Hera to Medea, the myths are full of women who commit atrocities simply because of anger. This trope isn't just about avenging a slight or retribution on the guilty; it's about a woman taking out her anger on innocent parties.

Daenerys has fallen into the role of the avenger many times throughout both the show and and book. She killed Mirri Maz Duur for the murder of her son and husband. She killed the Undying for attempting to trap/kill her. She kills Kraznys mo Nakloz and many other slavers for the atrocities they commit constantly on the people they enslaved.

In the show, she imprisoned Xaro Xhoan Daxos and Doreah in a vault for killing Irri and helping the warlocks steal her children. She killed the Khals who threatened to rape her. She kills the Tarleys for rebelling against the Tyrells, thus getting them killed, and refusing to bend the knee.

Every time Dany killed up until season eight, it was purely because those she killed harmed her or her allies/children. That is why none of her past kills justify her burning KL. The people of KL did nothing to her; it's not an established part of her character to harm innocents out of anger. She even outright condemns the killing of innocents in earlier seasons.

The inconsistencies show how D&D chose to blatantly ignore the complexities of Dany's character in favor of a sexist trope. They perpetuated the idea that a woman in power who is angered will ultimately commit injustice and atrocities.

Dany antis in the ASOIAF fandom are no different from D&D. A common argument used by Dany and Targaryen antis is that they are bound to be corrupt and tyrannical because they have dragons. Essentially saying that Dany was doomed to be the villain the moment she hatched her children.

They point to her dragons' existence and her conquest in Essos as reasons for her "villain arc", despite the fact that none of her actions reflect the things they claim. Dany is simply being condemned for being a woman with power; it's expected of her to be a tyrant for those reasons alone.

The Woman Scorned:

This reasoning given by D&D in a behind the episode interview is probably the excuse that I hate the most. They said that one of the reasons for Dany's descent into madness was because Jon Snow refused to kiss her back once he found out they were aunt and nephew. This is an insanely misogynistic trope.

Used time and again by writers (mostly male), this trope is about a woman who becomes an antagonist due to rejection, unrequited love, or betrayal from a lover. In the case of Dany and GOT, it's Jon refusing to continue their romantic relationship.

For some reason, this is seen as a breaking point for Dany. A woman who has endured poverty, homelessness, sexual slavery, a traumatic miscarriage and death of a spouse/protector, and the stresses of war was broken by a man refusing to kiss her. Doesn't that sound fucking stupid? Well that's because it is.

Dany has never felt entitled to people's love (with the exception of shitty writing from D&D) let alone someone's sexual/romantic reciprocation. It's out of character and flat out insulting to women to believe that is enough to make Dany into a mass murdering tyrant.

Once again, there are members of the fandom who espouse this reasoning into their own theories and metas. Jonsas especially are guilty of this; some claiming that Jon's rejection of Dany in favor of Sansa will be a catalyst for the "mad queen".

An offshoot of this thinking, is the idea that Dany went/will go mad because she was rejected by the realm.

In the show, the Northmen are dismissive or outright hostile to Dany when she arrives (even after she saves them). Due to this rejection by the Westerosi people, Dany decides "let it be fear" and chooses to burn KL to the ground.

Once again, this idea isn't grounded in her past actions at all. Dany has always known she needs to earn people's love and respect as a ruler, why should she change her mind the moment she steps onto Westerosi soil? The answer is simple: she's a woman, so she can't possibly be able to deal with rejection.

Fans theorize constantly that Dany is going to go mad and destroy KL and Westeros because the people will definitely reject her in favor of Young Griff/Jon Snow/any other king they can think of. This theory is simply clinging to misogynistic ideas about women and it's disgusting in every iteration (it also dismisses the fact that there are people in Westeros excited about the idea of Dany and her dragons in the books but that's a different post).

The Woman Bereft:

This argument is probably the least outright in its misogyny. The idea that a woman who has lost everything will lose her mind isn't a new one and it can be played in a non-sexist way. However, GOT played it completely in the sexist roots of the trope.

Throughout seasons seven and eight, Dany loses basically everything. All but one of her children, her closest advisor and best friend Missandei, Ser Jorah, a massive chunk of her army, her other advisors, most of her allies, and is rejected by Westeros and Jon. That's a lot of loss to endure.

However, Dany has endured severe loss before and never reacted by murdering a city full of innocents. Again, this decision and descent isn't backed up by anything else in her storyline.

The sexism of this idea, that loss produces mad women, is that it's rarely applied to men in the same situations. For example: Tyrion lost everything he cared about, yet he's never written by D&D to be in danger of becoming a mass murderer. He even outright says he wishes he'd poisoned the whole court, but is never portrayed as a mad man by D&D or fans.

Dany is expected to go insane after enduring loss because she's a woman. She's perceived as being fundamentally weaker, mentally as well as physically, so she must be more vulnerable to madness than the male characters.

The Foreign Seductress:

The idea of the foreign seductress is a xenophobic and racist stereotype. For Dany, her antis use the instances of her exercising sexual autonomy and her life in Essos as fodder for this disparaging trope.

In the books and the show, Dany pursues sexual and romantic relationships outside of marriage. This is something that doesn't fall in line with the medieval setting of the world. In Westeros and Essos, it's common for men to do that, but not women, due to systematic misogyny. Because of this, Dany's antis often feel free to argue that because she doesn't act "pure", she is wrong and evil. Dany's bound to become a villain because she isn't a chaste and "good" woman.

In the same way, Dany is painted as wrong for wanting to take her family's throne purely because she wasn't raised in Westeros. She's perceived as a foreign invader by both her antis and D&D.

D&D wrote many scenes of outright xenophobia from the Northmen, Sansa, and Arya towards Dany and her forces without ever condemning those ideas. In fact, they justify them by writing the mad queen ending. The fact that Dany isn't "one of them" is used as an excuse for her descent.

Dany antis also employ this rhetoric, especially when people compare Dany's conquest for the IT to the Starks' desire to retake Winterfell. It's good for the Starks to want to retake their throne because they were raised in Winterfell, but Dany has no right to her ancestral home because she wasn't raised in Westeros.

However, this idea is never applied to Young Griff, who was also not raised in Westeros. Despite this, people will talk about how excited they are for his story and how sad it is that he's totally going to be murdered by his evil aunt. Once again a double standard is applied to Dany.

All this is because Dany is a woman who refuses to conform to patriarchal standards and was raised in a foreign country.

Never Good Enough:

Dany antis and D&D thrive on applying a different set of standards to Dany than other characters. They do this an a way that's reminiscent of the double standards set for women even today.

No matter what Dany does, it's never good enough for them. She dealt with Viserys and his death in the wrong way. She didn't protect her people in the right way. She tried to abolish slavery in the wrong way. She saved the goddamn world wrong. Like nothing Dany does is right in their eyes.

In their minds, Dany should've died in AGOT being a perfectly passive woman. She refused to submit to those (men) around her, and for that they punish her.

She's wrong for fighting the slavers, she's wrong for trying to avenge murdered children, she's evil for killing to protect herself. D&D used each of her actions throughout the show that they seemed too aggressive as justification for what they wrote. Dany's antis do the exact same thing in their theories.

The mad queen Dany theory is rooted completely in misogyny. It has no true justification in the narrative and every argument conjured up is just as sexist as the trope they want to perpetuate.

Blood Purity and the ASOIAF Fandom

I find it very ironic how Targaryen antis scream about "blood purity" then turn around and support and play into blood purity themselves. Specifically I'm talking about Stark stans and stansas/jonsas.

The Starks canonically prefer to marry with Northern houses, in other words: other First Men. This tradition gives them a rather small gene pool, meaning that incest is pretty much a necessity for them to carry it on. Uncle-niece, aunt-nephew, and cousin weddings were all allowable, and cousin weddings were rather commonplace.

What all that means is that the Starks practice blood purity. Yes, it's different from how the Targaryens did it, but the only differences are that the Valyrians allowed brother-sister marriages and there are only two other Valyrian houses to marry. The Celtigars barely even count, due to how little Valyrian blood is left in them. Both the Starks and Targaryens did marry outside their preferred gene pools. However, that fact doesn't negate that they both practice blood purity.

Stark stans who condemn the Targaryens for marrying to preserve their Valyrian blood are hypocrites. The Starks prefer to marry other First Men and allow certain forms of close incest, if they had as few options as the Targaryens did, they would probably change their views on brother-sister marriages.

Stansas tend to follow the same patterns as Stark stans. They ignore Stark incest and talk about "super special Stark genes" in an almost cult-like fashion. Stansas will go on and on about how the Starks are very special and their (specifically Sansa's) blood is the key to saving the world. Now, there is magic blood in ASOIAF, and the Starks are the one of the families with this. However, the sheer hypocrisy of Stansas and Stark stans to embrace and cheer on this fact for the Starks while simultaneously despising the Targaryens for the same fact is interesting.

Jonsas, who are all stansas just to be clear, are probably the most hypocritical in this group. Jonsa shippers will espouse both anti-incest and anti-blood purity arguments, especially in regards to the Targaryens. However, at the same time, they will write posts about how the incest between Jon and Sansa wouldn't be wrong and how Stark blood is superior. Just like the Stark stans and stansas, they are unironically supporting Stark blood purity. All three of these groups will also write about how the Targaryen bloodline needs to be wiped out.

So basically: Stark stans, stansas, and jonsas all not only support Stark blood purity, but also the eradication of Valyrian blood in Westeros. The hypocrisy is riveting.

Get em horizon-verizon!!

I find it interesting how the Targaryens' flaws and issues are made out to be all their house is and what make them "evil" in certain fans' eyes. Meanwhile the Starks can do no wrong lmao.

The fact that so many people think the Starks are honorable anticolonial fighters and the pinnacle of morality is absolutely insane, they literally built a massive wall to isolated a bunch of people they considered as “savages”, they hunted and slaughtered the Free Folk, the Children of the Forest, giants, exterminated whole houses and clans and took their daughters as “prizes” while conquering the North, etc. The Blackwoods were originally from the North and ruled most of the wolfswood, before being driven out by the Starks and forced to flee south. The Starks are the OG COLONIZERS in ASOIAF.

Even this did not give Winterfell dominion over all the North. Many other petty kings remained, ruling over realms great and small, and it would require thousands of years and many more wars before the last of them was conquered. Yet one by one, the Starks subdued them all, and during these struggles, many proud houses and ancient lines were extinguished forever. — The World of Ice and Fire – The North: The Kings of Winter.

I recently finished a Tiktok series that will probably just be as lost to the internet if we lose TikTok but I had to get out in response to a particular creator who bashes Rhaenyra while also proclaiming themselves as black stans. I think they are really more black stans because they hate Alicent personally and feels the thrill of the side-taking, but that's neither here nor there. 😏

Tiktok

#stitch with @fantasticfrankey I won't be restitching the prior video, that would give me more work. And I don't want this series to take as much time as my Rhaena Queen Dowager one. #targaryen #targaryens #thetargaryens #westerosihistory #westeros #asoiaf #asoiaftiktok #fyp #dragons #westerostiktok #rhaenyratargaryen #alicenthightower #danceofthedragons #fireandblood #houseofthedragon #hotd

To quote one of my mutuals here [rhaenin]:

It just rings so familiar to the way so many people view the other in real life. Because the Targaryens are overtly, and intentionally written as the other. It's the reason so many people identify with them, and it's the very same reason that other people vilify them. They're not just the in-universe other to the 'default' culture established in the text, but they're also given characteristics that we, the reader and audience, can recognize as other and even sometimes anathema to Western Christian culture. To paraphrase the annoying people that love to cite Ramsay when they feel like it: If you look at a morally complex family surrounded by other morally complex families in a morally complex world in a story that's famed for seeking to challenge your underlying assumptions, and think that their association with fire and brimstone is meant to signify their singular satanic evilness, rather than say... challenge that very Eurocentric assumption, you haven't been paying attention. This vilification mindset where the Targaryens are the singular evil of Westeros is so common to people who seem to want to consume ASoIaF without engaging with the criticisms of the Eurocentric worldview of history at the heart of it. And they end up using the convenient “others” to project all the wrongs of that world onto so they don't need to examine it any deeper. ........... It comes from the same place with how someone pointed out that the baffling bastardphobia that would have medieval peasants giving the side eye is so often people jumping at the chance to “cosplay” as bigots who base their arguments in misogyny and bio-essentialism. Because it's an acceptable channel to indulge in that mindset in a way that they'd often otherwise question, or at least hold back from expressing out of caution.

Almost always it's the usual suspects: Stansas, Broccolis or Bobby B/ Stannis The Mannis stans.

Can't live without Dany and the Targs. Can't live with them either.

Well of course, those are the most braindead groups in this fandom lmao. They're all just so bitter about how much more influential to the plot Dany and her family are.

After GRRM's post decrying HOTD, I've seen a shit ton of people using it to defend the tired idea that Rhaenyra and the Blacks actually totally lost the Dance.

This idea is just so desperate and braindead. One especially memorable post I saw claimed that because House Targaryen was overthrown and is going to definitely be eradicated, the Greens actually won 🤓.

If House Targaryen for some reason ends up being wiped out in the books, that doesn't mean the Greens won. It means both sides lost and the Dance was completely pointless. The Greens lost the war, GRRM literally couldn't have made it more clear. Their bloodline has been eradicated, their allies either forced bend the knee to Rhaenyra's son or were killed. There's literally nothing that could happen at this point to make them somehow "win".

House Targaryen is GRRM's favorite house in ASOIAF. The dude is literally writing two history books about them. Not the Hightowers, the Starks, the Martells, the Daynes, or any other house of Westeros. I'm not saying those houses aren't important to the story (some more than others). But it's very clear who the favorite is.

As for the Dance, I've said it before, I'll say it again, Daenerys is Rhaenyra and the Blacks' ultimate victory, end of story. Some people in this fandom just have no brains jfc.

What do you think is what causes this absolutely unhinged Targ hate? Like, I totally get if the Targs aren’t someone’s cup of tea, they can be a lot, but the way Targ haters talk about the Targs is just scary. I had this unhinged Targ anti reply to my comment on Reddit with an absolutely unhinged essay on why the Targs aren’t magical at all and that it’s just “supremacist propaganda.” It’s just really weird.

Idc if someone just doesn’t like the Targs, but what bothers me is when they act like they invented feudalism, are the most evil family ever, and when they demonize them for their dragons. Targ antis act as if the Targs are the only problem in Westeros and that getting rid of them is the solution. They must have watched GoT and read asoiaf with their eyes closed, because the war of the five kings was a war that was started just fine without help from the Targs.

The Targs did not create feudalism or war. It’s just strange how Targ antis fixate on the Targs and only blame them for feudalism as if feudalism wasn’t the system Westeros had for thousands of years before the Targs appeared. Sorry for the rant, I’ve just seen some really dumb comments on Reddit about the Targs and wanted to say this.

Unbiased answer: hate is stupid in general and i've seed batshit takes for every single character I like in asoiaf. It's a general phenomenon, if it makes you feel any better.

Biased answer: targs get extreme hate because they are the coolest house in the asoiaf universe and the very reason for asoiaf's popularity. they get hate because, while not everyone is familiar with the asoiaf universe, everyone and their mother knows the targaryens and recognizes asoiaf precisely because of the targaryens. they get hate because george decided to keep writing about the targaryens and they get an insane backstory where other houses get nothing. they get hate because dany is the reason game of thrones got popular and the reason hotd exists. that's why they get hate. loving the targs on SOME level is the norm and hating on the norm simply makes you seem cool and different in online spaces, which gets you clout.

Actually this is in sync with my unbiased answer because every character/house/trope that is popular and well liked will get an insane amount of very loud and stupid hate, it's just the way it goes. It is not something that only concerns the targaryens. I hope that covered you.

Lmfao, never mind that the Targaryens switched from Valyrian god worship to the Faith of the Seven to adopt Westerosi culture.

Never mind that they adopted a house sigil to adopt to Westerosi House customs.

Never mind that they married people from non-Valyrian descended Houses like Martell, Dayne, Blackwood, Arryn...

Literally what part of this says "spit on Westerosi customs" lmfao?

I have a suggestion to the anti Targaryen people in fandom who bemoan (Wrongly BTW) that the Targaryen’s are evil colonizers.  If you are so goddamn pressed about colonization, maybe you should help out your fellow indigenous people.  Maybe if you are so goddamn pressed about a fictional feudalistic family who you wrongly perceived colonized Westeros, you can give back your land to your local indigenous people.  If you are a white person whose ancestors benefited from colonization, you need to shut your mouth about what YOU think is colonization, because guess what?  What the Targaryen’s did was conquest.  However what the First Men and the Andals did was actual colonization.  So either look at the proper definitions of things so you can speak accurately about them, or you need to shut your mouth about things that you don’t understand.  You misrepresenting colonialism is you cheapening the word, and cheapening the generational trauma and the near eradication of religion and culture from real indigenous groups who faced countless horrors and forced assimilation and are still suffering from it.  So educate yourselves.  However, I suspect that the vast majority of you are clinging to the word “colonization” as a reactionary excuse to justify your dislike of Dany and by extension House Targaryen.  Because if you all actually cared about colonization and imperialism and genocide you wouldn’t be misusing this word, and you’d actually be trying to help your fellow indigenous people one way or another, which you all aren’t.  So as a fellow indigenous person who actually understands colonialism, I’m kindly asking you to back off and stop trying to justify your hatred or dislike of something by misappropriating this word.