We stan Criston for respecting sex workers and being the only feminist man in probably the entirety of GOT

And we hate Daemon for constantly making misogynistic remarks about any woman, generally his wives, that he doesn't like, emotionally neglecting his second wife, grooming Rhaenyra, cheating on Rhaenyra, neglecting his children, committing treason every other sentence, and that's not even half of it.

The Targaryens are cringe.

GRRM had to give them dragons, silver hair, purple eyes, an Atlantis-like empire of origin, incest and powers to make them even remotably interesting lol. They are literally those YA protagonists with *forrest green* eyes, that are also vampires, and the children of gods, the best fighters, the most intelligent, the hottest, etc.

They're just Special™ okay?

And the fact that they were massively overpowered and they still were the center of disasterous political conflicts for more than half their (very short) reign, starting in the SECOND generation... simply laughable. If it wasn't for the dragons, those hoes would still be living in Dragonstone, House Whitehill levels of irrelevant.

Also, the harm that they inflicted on the Starks, and the iconic House Martell, unforgivable.

But, the valyrians only knew destruction and supremacy, so what can you expect?

Hey I have a question that you might find interesting. Don't you find it strange that literally no one in this fandom questions whether the Valyrians (including the Targaryens) really were that beautiful and perfect, or whether this is actually part of some „propaganda” in the asoiaf universe? Because it seems strange to me that centuries of incest have not affected anyone at all, and supposedly it can be explained by the fact that "genetics work differently in this universe", but I don't buy it. The other thing is also that Valyria is described as the most advanced, but is it really? Throughout history we have instances where propaganda was used to make a given country or empire seem as good as possible, while the truth may always seems different. So I'm seriously surprised that I've never meet a person who would question the old valyria or even the Targaryens…

Anyway I hope you have a good day and take care!!

I wouldn't say that it has never been questioned in fandom at all? Plenty of fans are critical of the Valyrian empire, especially those who like Dorne and the Rhoynar, and take a look at asoiaf history from that angle.

This post is particularly concise on the subject of exactly why Valyrian looks seem to be considered beautiful by default. (Hint: it's imperialism.)

GRRM himself absolutely lampoons the idea of this universally adored ethereal Valyrian beauty when he gives us Arianne's reaction to a person with Valyrian looks:

"You look… " She hesitated. "…like a woman?" He laughed. "That I am not." " …like a Targaryen," Arianne insisted. His eyes were a pale lilac, his hair a waterfall of white and gold. All the same, something about him made her skin crawl. Was this what Viserys looked like? she found herself wondering. If so perhaps it is a good thing he is dead. "I am flattered. The women of House Targaryen are said to be without peer in all the world." "And the men of House Targaryen?" "Oh, even prettier. Though if truth be told, I have only seen the one." (TWOW, Arianne II)

It doesn't get much more damning than that.

As for their advanced society, they are still famed for their magical steel, which can't be replicated likely because most societies aren't knee-deep in peninsula-destroying blood magic. Which is also where the dragon bites its tail: if your "advanced" technology is essentially all rooted in blood magic that likely had a role to play in obliterating your entire "freehold", your people, and almost all dragons, is that advanced or is it just living large on borrowed time and stolen lives?

Because:

None can say how many perished, toiling in the Valyrian mines, but the number was so large as to surely defy comprehension. As Valyria grew, its need for ore increased, which led to ever more conquests to keep the mines stocked with slaves. The Valyrians expanded in all directions, stretching out east beyond the Ghiscari cities and west to the very shores of Essos, where even the Ghiscari had not made inroads. (The World of Ice and Fire, Valyria's Children)

Seems like whatever they had going for them was bought with the lives of those they oppressed. Either through enslavement or through literally trading their lives in blood magic rituals.

Is there anything support the populat interpretation that old valriya and valryians in general are more feminist, and progressive than the rest in Asoiaf?

Anon, thank you! I've been wanting to address this for awhile, so I'm going to actually answer this really fully, with as many receipts as I can provide (this ended up being more of an essay than I intended, but hopefully it helps)

I think there's in fact plenty of evidence to suggest that Valyria and the Valyrians in general were anything but progressive. Valyria was an expansive empire with a robust slave trade that practiced incest based on the idea of blood supremacy/blood purity. All of these things are absolutely antithetical to progressivism. There is no way any empire practicing slavery can ever be called progressive. Now, the Targaryens of Dragonstone have since given up the practice of slavery, but they certainly still believe in the supremacy of Valyrian blood.

And I'll see the argument, well what's wrong with believing your blood is special if your blood really is special and magic? Which is just-- if anyone catches themselves thinking this, and you sincerely believe that GRRM intended to create a magically superior master race of hot blondes who deserve to rule over all other backwards races by virtue of their superior breeding which is reinforced through brother-sister incest, and you've convinced yourself this represents progressive values, then you might want to step away from the computer for a bit and do a bit of self reflection.

And remember-- what is special about this special blood? It gives the bearers the ability to wield sentient weapons of mass destruction. It's also likely, according to the most popular theories, the result of blood magic involving human sacrifice. So there is a terrible price to pay for this so-called supremacy. Would any of us line up to be sacrificed to the Fourteen Flames so that the Valyrians can have nukes?

And if you are tempted by the idea that a woman who rides a dragon must inherently have some sort of power-- that is true. A woman who rides a dragon is more powerful than a woman who does not ride a dragon, and in some cases, more powerful than a man who does not ride a dragon, but that does not make her more powerful than a man who also rides a dragon. Dragonriding remained a carefully guarded privilege, and Targaryen women who might otherwise become dragonriders were routinely denied the privilege (despite the oft repeated "you cannot steal a dragon," when Saera Targaryen attempted to claim a dragon from the dragonpit, she was thrown into a cell for the attempted "theft,"words used by Jaehaerys). The dragonkeepers were established explicitly to keep anyone, even those of Targaryen blood, from taking them without permission. Any "liberation" that she has achieved is an illusion. What she has gained is the ability to enact violence upon others who are less privileged, and this ability does not save her from being the victim of gender based violence herself.

Politically speaking, it is also true that Valyria was a "freehold," in that they did not have a hereditary monarchy, but instead had a political structure akin to Ancient Athens (which was itself democratic, but not at all progressive or feminist). Landholding citizens could vote on laws and on temporary leaders, Archons. Were any of the lords freeholder women? We don't know. If we take Volantis as an example, the free city that seems to consider itself the successor to Valyria, the party of merchants, the elephants, had several female leaders three hundred years ago, but the party of the aristocracy, the tigers, the party made up of Valyrian Old Blood nobility, has never had a female leader. Lys, the other free city, is known for it's pleasure houses, which mainly employ women kidnapped into sexual slavery (as well as some young men). It is ruled by a group of magisters, who are chosen from among the wealthiest and noblest men in the city, not women. There does not seem to be a tradition of female leadership among Valyrians, and that's reflected by Aegon I himself, who becomes king, rather than his older sister-wife, Visenya. And although there have been girls named heir, temporarily, among the pre-Dance Targaryens, none were named heir above a trueborn brother aside from Rhaenyra, a choice that sparked a civil war. In this sense, the Targaryens are no different from the rest of Westeros.

As for feminism or sexual liberation, there's just no evidence to support it. We know that polygamy was not common, but it was also not entirely unheard of, but incest, to keep the bloodlines "pure," was common. Incest and polygamy are certainly sexual taboos, both in the real world and in Westeros, that the Valyrians violated, but the violation of sexual taboos is not automatically sexually liberated or feminist. Polygamy, when it is exclusively practiced by men and polyandry is forbidden (and we have no examples of Valyrian women taking multiple husbands, outside of fanfic), is often abusive to young women. Incest leads to an erosion of family relationships and abusive grooming situations are inevitable. King Jaehaerys' daughters are an excellent case study, and the stories of Saera and Viserra are particularly heartbreaking. Both women were punished severely for "sexual liberation," Viserra for getting drunk and slipping into her brother Baelon's bed at age fifteen, in an attempt to avoid an unwanted marriage to an old man. She was not punished because she was sister attempting to sleep with a brother, but because she was the wrong sister. Her mother, the queen had already chosen another sister for Baelon, and believed her own teenage daughter was seducing her brother for nefarious reasons. As a sister, Viserra should have been able to look to her brother for protection, but as the product of an incestuous family, Viserra could only conceive of that protection in terms of giving herself over to him sexually.

Beyond that, sexual slavery was also common in ancient Valyria, a practice that persisted in Lys and Volantis, with women (and young men) trafficked from other conquered and raided nations. Any culture that is built on a foundation of slavery and which considers sexual slavery to be normal and permissible, is a culture of normalized rape. Not feminist, not progressive.

I think we get the picture! so where did this idea that Valyrians are more progressive come from? I think there are two reasons. One, the fandom has a bit of a tendency to imagine Valyrians and their traditions in opposition to Westerosi Sevenism, and if Sevenism is fantasy Catholicism, and the fantasy Catholics also hate the Valyrian ways, they must hate them because those annoying uptight religious freaks just hate everything fun and cool, right? They hate revealing clothing, hate pornographic tapestries, hate sex outside of marriage, hate bastards. So being on Sevenism's shit-list must be a mark of honor, a sign of progressive values? But it's such a surface level reading, and a real misunderstanding of the medieval Catholic church, and a conflating of that church with the later Puritan values that many of us in the Anglosphere associate with being "devout." For most of European history, the Catholic church was simply The Church, and the church was, ironically, where you would find the material actions which most closely align with modern progressive values. The church cared for lepers, provided educations for women, took care of orphans, and fed the poor. In GRRM's world, which is admittedly more secular than the actual medieval world, Sevenism nevertheless has basically the same function, feeding the poor instead of, you know, enslaving them.

Finally, I blame the shows. While Valyrians weren't a progressive culture, Daenerys Targaryen herself held relatively progressive individual values by a medieval metric. She is a slavery abolitionist, she elevates women within her ranks, and she takes control of her own sexuality (after breaking free from her Targaryen brother). But Daenerys wasn't raised as a Targaryen. She grew up an orphan in exile, hearing stories of her illustrious ancestors from her brother, who of the two did absorb a bit of that culture, and is not coincidentally, fucked up, abusive, and misogynistic. He feels a sexual ownership over his sister, arranges a marriage for her, and even after her marriage, feels entitled to make decisions on her behalf. It is only after breaking away from Viserys that Dany comes into her own values. Having once been a mere object without agency of her own, she determines to save others from that fate and becomes an abolitionist. But because Game of Thrones gave viewers very little exposure to Targaryens aside from Daenerys, House Targaryen, in the eyes of most show watchers, is most closely associated with Dany and her freedom-fighter values. And as for Rhaenyra in House of the Dragon, being a female heir does not make her feminist or progressive, although it is tempting to view her that way when she is juxtaposed against Aegon II. Her "sexual liberation" was a lesson given to her by her uncle Daemon, a man who had an express interest in "liberating" her so that she would sleep with him, it was not a value she was raised with. In fact, she was very nearly disinherited for it, and was forced into a marriage with a gay man as a result of said "liberation." She had no interest in changing succession laws to allow absolute primogeniture, no interest in changing laws or norms around bastardy despite having bastards; she simply viewed herself as an exception. Rhaenyra's entire justification for her claim is not the desire to uplift women, bring peace and stability to Westeros, or even to keep her brother off the throne, it is simply that she believes she deserves it because her father is the king and he told her she could have it, despite all tradition and norms, and in spite of the near certain succession crisis it will cause. Whether she is right or wrong, absolutism is not progressive.

And let me just say, none of this means that you can't enjoy the Valyrians or think that they're fun or be a fan of house Targaryen. This insistence that Targaryens are the progressive, feminist (read: morally good) house seems by connected to the need of some fans to make their favorite characters unproblematic. If the Valyrians are "bad," does that make you a bad person for enjoying them? Of course not. But let's stop the moral grandstanding about the "feminist" and "progressive" Valyrians in a series that is an analogue for medieval feudalism. Neither of those things can exist under the systems in place in Westeros, nor could they have existed in the slavery based empire of conquest that was old Valyria.

desperately need people to understand that alicent is a victim but she’s also an abuser and a perpetrator

that she actively makes choices to harm other women because of jealousy and envy and the greed deep in her bones because submitting to suffering didn’t get her what those women fight to grasp for themselves.

she is absolutely a victim, in show.

that doesn’t change that she abused rhaenyra and her children, her own son, most likely helaena given how she flinches every time her mother touches her, and is actively weaponizing the patriarchy of westeros against other women- rhaenyra primarily, but also mysaria and dyana.

she isn’t the moral, righteous force of good that even she thinks she is, she’s a wounded woman directing all of the rot, pain, and fury inside her at the wrong people and forces.

Daemon only thinks Rhea Royce is ugly cause she's not Valyrian or a child.

In response to the Nettles-obsessed fans who somehow found their way in my inbox with a very colorful language:

“A skinny brown girl on a skinny brown dragon.”

“[…] her teeth were crooked, her nose scarred where it had once been slit for thieving. Hardly a likely paramour for a prince, one would think.”

- Fire & Blood

I definitely agree with that last sentence.

As if the Valyrian beauty-obsessed Daemon Targaryen would ever consider this girl someone fit to share his bed. Those who actually believe that need to take some personal time to read the book and understand the Rogue Prince and his preferences.

The only fit woman for this Dragon Prince is a Dragon Queen named Rhaenyra Targaryen.

I am super done with this constant obsession over a common girl named Nettles for the sole reason that she is the only canon black character of the story. These people are acting as if her being black somehow entitles her to the charming, handsome, roguish white prince who should totally leave his wife for her (even though it goes against his character). The filth called “White women are evil and their white husbands should cheat on them with black women because they are clearly better” is one of the things very wrong with society these days.

Take a spoonful of common sense and leave the political agendas out of my inbox!

Legit been having a back and forth with a fan on twitter with me saying valyrians didn't have women succeeding over males in terms of inheritance and them saying they do.....

Just support the Martell's they are right there.

Valyrians have never in all my readings had a womans claim come before a males in rights of succession.

If one more person tells me I'm not reading and not show me a receipt 🧾 but instead sends me a frickin gif 🙄

Everytime i think i've seen everything in this fandom... wdym the man who exterminated Houses Tarbeck and Reyne down to the last child, who ordered an innocent 14-year-old to be gang-raped by an entire garrison before ordering his own son to rape her last, who emotionally abused said son down to his last moment on Earth for the crime of being born disabled, who ordered the sacking of an entire city and commanded every atrocity in the Riverlands all for his own personal and politican gain, wasn't evil? Tywin Lannister ruined the life of hundreds, if not thousands of people, including his own children, and the narrative is quite explicit in portraying him as the source of his own destruction. Tywin Lannister is one of the most evil, cruel, petty and malicious man of ASOIAF, even if he didn't personally commit every act of violence himself; the fact that I see people still somehow making excuses for his behavior is ..????!?!?

"alicent is evil for taking the dragon porn off the walls"

well thanks to eagle-eyed @kindhearted-ocean, we can see how miss girl was kind enough to leave the sex tapestries in viserys' room so as to not mess with his feng shui

it adds a layer of irony to hear daemon complaining about this with the kamasutra behind him in the background

screenshots taken from here

"I choose Rhaenyra cuz she's the feminist option" Oh bless your heart.

Rhaenyra is these second-coming of that white lady in the mall screaming to "TAKE HER PHONE AWAY!!"

Rhaenyra CHOSE to have three bastards. You heard Alicent; Jace she could've gotten away with, but she had two more. She willfully put her children's lives in danger. She knows how Westeros treats bastards, and she had them anyway.

Just because you wanna act like the Dornish are a part of the Kingdoms doesn't mean Westeros agrees with or puts to use any dornish customs.

(Just cuz he called Daren don't mean he belong to Daren)

And even Rhaenyra herself doesn't thunk women have the right to rule by default; in the scene where she's asking Rhaenys to betrothe the twins to Jace & Luce, she says "Baela will be queen, and her sons will rule after." So she still buys into the Andal succession shit. She is the fucking Caitlyn Jenner of women.

I'm F&B/ROTD, she starts taxing the smallfolk for HAVING BASTARDS. As if not even a year prior she planned to put her bastards on not one but two thrones... Very much entitled white woman move if I ever saw one.

She's also fine with the plan to sell Alicent & Helaena to brothels & watch them be raped and impregnated.

Oh wait, one more thing, SHES A RACIST TOO. (All the Valyrians are, they hold the same racial ideologies as Hitler but she was very obvious about it) She call Nettles a CREATURE and said she must've used her magic on Sheepstealer because if you take one look at her you'd know she's not Valyrian. Considering her first three boys were brown haired, I highly doubt she was talking about her hair. She also uses this as a reason Daemon wouldn't fuck her- Honey a child's a child he's gonna fuck it.

And these same people will turn around and blame Alicent for Aegon ii being a rapist...Congrats, you're blaming a woman for a full-grown man's actions. How feminist of you.

But yeah let's just keep acting like you're choosing Rhaenyra for feminism.

I wrote & posted this at 2 am and I'm aware that I get off topic multiple times but I'm still right lmfao 😭

daemon and aegon ii have very similar attitudes and beliefs the only difference in outcome is aegon was primarily raised by an overbearing mother trapped in the feudal dystopia that is being female in westeros while daemon was primarily raised by a distant father trapped in the feudal incestual dystopia that was the targaryens under jaehaerys. in this i will--

Why the text doesn't say idk anything about the valyrian slavers and Meereen/other slave cities?

I mean i don't remember reading d@ny even make a connection or have The Moment about it? Is curious, bcs I wonder at what point does the crisis come? Because if you have a character who has a history of her ancestors being slavers and you put an anti-slavery arc on her, it's pretty obvious that there should be an identity crisis at the very least or something, you know?

It's like we forgot something important along the way.

Excellent question.

There is plenty of reference to Valyrian conquest in Dany's chapters but none about their extensive practice of slavery. It doesn't seem to matter to Dany.

I doubt we'll get a personal crisis out of this, though. Dany will cling to her anti slavery gap year experience in Slaver's Bay to erase all internal connection to her ancestor's dark legacy, then wipe her hands and go off to copy the next phase of their history: conquering Westeros. After leaving behind a smoking pile of rubble in Essos, I'm sure.

I just saw the most offensive edit ever (to me obviously). Someone putted Alicent in the Valyrian wedding garbs. THATS DEFAMATION, god, I can’t believe my eyes just had to witness this. My poor heart.

What if Ned and Catelyn were gender bent? And let's assume they still get married though this time they're betrothed from the get-go what happens? How does this change things? Who does Lysa marry now that she's the only Tully daughter? Does Littlefinger fall for her instead? Who does Robert want to marry if he's not friends with Ned? Who is Lyanna betrothed to?

i rewrote this answer ten times sorry.

firstly - we know who lysa was supposed to marry and that’s jaime. if the northern-riverlands alliance is already there with nedcat, hoster is gonna look at the westerlands and the eyrie, his powerful neighbors, for lysa. i imagine the jaime to jon arryn pipeline goes the same for her regardless of how the plot changes. however, lysa without a perfect older sister to feel inferior to is gonna be a vastly different person, and a petyr without an unattainable and perfect cat to get fixated on is also wildly different. maybe those two crazy kids try to run away when hoster & tywin start talking engagements, esp since jaime & cersei are ALSO plotting, but i canNot imagine petyr and lysa are particularly successful.

when it comes to robert, that is admittedly tricky - rickard sends ned to foster at the vale in part because robert is there, but benjen is several years younger than ned and that bond might not exist so seriously without ned there (and, if you want my opinion, the smartest thing to do in this situation is actually for brandon to marry cat and ned to marry robert, and use Lyanna's hand for someone else later on). there's also the debate over how in on the "southron ambitions" stuff Steffon, so Robert marrying Lyanna might have been more Robert's fancy and Rickard's political machinations than anything Steffon would have pushed for. Given Jon Arryn's mentorship of Robert, though, Robert would likely lean whatever way Jon Arryn leans, and Jon Arryn is very likely in on the southron ambitions shenanigans which means Robert is looking outside the Stormlands for a bride.

as for rickard - i don't know that I buy some of Barbrey Dustin's more tinfoil-y "the maesters are trying to control Westeros" ideas, but I firmly believe that the lords were getting some bad vibes from aerys and started making alliances through marriages to prepare for another civil war. rickard has the riverlands locked in, now he wants a wife for his heir. mind you, "most eligible bachelorette" for brandon has a lot of crossover with rhaegar and robert in previous asks - Mina and Jana Tyrell, Cersei Lannister, Elia Martell. Given that Rickard's maester, Walys, is a Hightower bastard, Walys might push Malora, Denyse, or Leyla for a marriage match as well. And mind you, this is the list for Robert as well, with the addition of Lyanna. Very likely when Rickard goes engagement hunting, Jon Arryn suggests Lyanna for Robert - Lyanna's options (if we're looking at the important families) include Jaime, Elbert Arryn, maybe Oberyn, Willas, and Robert. If I'm Jon Arryn, I'm probably wondering if I can get Elbert and Lyanna hitched (considering how often the Arryn line is wiped out, it's important to get your relatives hitched and having kids, lmaooo) and if I'm Rickard and I can't get the Tyrells to bite at either Brandon or Lyanna, I'm probably looking at a Hightower so I have some friends in the Reach, and Robert.

TG stans: “Alicent’s kids are just as much Targaryen as Rhaenyra’s!”

The same TG stans on their blogs: “I am very anti-Targaryen. I hate them. Team Green all the way!”