between never forgiving and being someone who can

queer. intersectional feminist. former barista, future bartender. i've got 32 years worth of proof the universe thinks I'm a joke. this may have ed/self harm triggers, but i'm healing so hopefully it's less destructive and more hopeful.

[lilmonstan9412]

I saw a post saying rhaenyra raped criston cole, because he initially says no at the beginning when she starts undressing herself. If that's how you interpreted the scene, that's fine. I get it. But mentioning the power dynamics of her being the princess, without also mentioning the power dynamics of him being much older and her being 17 in that scene, I believe, is flawed. Because in a modern setting, if a teenager had a crush on a person in their mid to late 20s (I think criston is made a member of the kings guard at 23 in the books, not sure about the show) we'd say the adult has the responsibility of putting a stop to it. A lot of predators will use the excuse that they were the ones pursued (which is not nearly always the case. I've heard people say that when it's a small child doing the most innocent things) Why is it any different in the setting of westeros?

Now, to be clear, I don't actually have a firm stance on this. I just want a good argument supporting either side, since I'm just now being made aware of this perspective. Because I remember thinking when I first watched the scene that he was protesting the way I would when someone offers to pay for me when I've only got $10 to my name. Like "no.. wait you don't have to pay for me" as I'm slowly putting my wallet away. And to be honest, I kinda skip over that part of the episode in rewatches (I truly don't care about watching the heteros have sex, I won't lie) so it's been awhile. Probably since the episode first came out.

I also think it was criston cole duty to tell viserys what she was trying to do, as a member of the kingsguard. But making this argument can very quickly lead to victim blaming, if in fact it was rape on rhaenyras part. How do we discern which power dynamic trumps the other? Is the older man less culpable because the younger girl happens to be a princess? Is the princess less culpable because shes much younger than the older man? What actually was cristons duty, and what kind of consequences could he have faced (real or imagined) that would compel him to give in, if he truly did not want to participate. Was it that she could say he forced her? Because she never makes that threat, and as bratty as she is, she is never shown to purposely try to get people into trouble just because shes displeased (save for Otto, but she had a point as he was spying on her and she wasn't wrong that he was trying to replace her as heir with aegon)

And how much can we use the actors opinions on what was going on when deciding how the characters themselves felt within the scene? How much of the writing decisions can we use, since there are plenty of instances where a writer intended for it to be romantic but when you think about it, it's just a depiction of rape?

If rhaenyra was responsible for raping criston, that makes her just as irredeemable as aegon, in my honest opinion. (Not that you still shouldn't try to be better, but that I truly don't think there's a point where forgiveness is possible)

And then of course, if rhaenyra did rape him, how much of his actions afterwards are on himself? We can arguing the killing of joffery isn't justified, but if you were a victim of rape, and someone brought up the barest knowledge of it happening, and the consequences of people finding out would be your own head, wouldn't you respond to the perceived threat? (It also would make sense, even if not rape, that he would've responded to the threat anyway, but I feel if it's a trauma based reaction, then it's more justified than a man who is afraid of getting caught doing something wrong)

I hope any of this makes sense. I still don't have my meds. I'm not taking a stance yet until I think about it more, but I'd love to hear others thoughts on this. Please remain respectful. And please have an argument that can back up whatever stance you take. Examining our morals and why we believe them is so important. Simply not liking it or finding it wrong is not enough of an argument. You need to be able to support it with good reasoning.

[squgs]

I think the show makes the situation extremely muddled kind of intentionally to avoid actually digging into all of the very icky dynamics in that scene. We do not have a clear picture of either Criston or Rhaeynra's ages. Rhaenyra is somewhere between 17 and 19 and Criston could be anywhere from 20 to 40. We are never given clear insight into Criston's exact thoughts as we watch him spiral out in the next episode (a decision that I think can work to portray his complete inability to process his trauma but there would need to be some acknowledgment of that at some point to make it work), and Rhaenyra's thoughts don't seem to go beyond 'that was fun.' The framing further dilutes things with the first half of the scene being tense and uncomfortable to watch while the second half is beautiful and empowering for Rhaenyra. The show makes it exhausting to litigate and provides just enough hints to allow a bunch of different readings to just barely fit with the rest of the story.

With that said I do think that it's important to note that from a modern lens of informed enthusiastic consent Criston is fairly clearly a victim of sexual assault. In the first part of the scene Criston communicates that he does not want to have sex with Rhaenyra three times. First he tries to leave the room when Rhaenyra begins to act inappropriately. Rhaenyra steps in front of the door to stop him. Then when Rhaenyra starts undressing he tells her to stop and reaches out (timidly) to stop her. Rhaenyra then takes his hand, leads him further into the room and begins undressing him. Lastly Criston completely freezes and looks absolutely miserable as he's undressed. A clear non verbal cue that he's not interested or at the very least extremely hesitant and conflicted. Rhaenyra only acknowledges this by giving him a 'why aren't you having fun' look (which I would argue clearly parallels the look Viserys gives Alicent while raping her earlier in the episode). From a modern moral lens it is not consent for Criston to eventually agree after all of his refusals and signs of discomfort are ignored and pushed past. Rhaenyra's age isn't particularly relevant to her borderline predatory behavior especially when the power dynamic is considered.

Rhaenyra is likely the 4th or 5th most powerful person in the country at that point and Criston states multiple times that everything he has in the world (his place on the king's guard and good name) is largely thanks to Rhaenyra. Rhaenyra is the only person we see think highly of him up to that point and the only person he seems friendly with. It makes a lot of sense that he would be very scared to physically or verbally rebuke her beyond his frustrated comments when she takes his helmet. Further he is responsible for Rhaenyra's safety making any action that could possibly hurt her (like pushing her away from him) very dangerous and dishonorable for him, and that is especially bad that night when she has somehow snuck past him, putting him in a situation where everyone will assume that he fell asleep at his post (no one except Daemon seems to know about the secret passage).

All of the counter arguments to that reading that I've seen feel extremely victim blame-y 'he should have said no more' 'it's not like she could physically stop him from leaving.' Those all boil down to 'he should have fought back more' and 'it's not rape if you don't fight back' two disgusting sentiments. There's also the description of the scene as seduction based around the idea that deep down he wanted it and just needed Rhaenyra to encourage him, despite him never saying anything that concretely shows that he is romantically or sexually interested in Rhaenyra.

For Rhaenyra's part I think it's important to put what she does in the context of the rest of the episode. It's an interesting and important part of her character and the world that coming from her first sexual experiences of being groomed and molested by her uncle she has no notion of consent or of respecting the autonomy of those with less power than you. That then leads into this spiral of trauma where the Targaryen predatory incest dynamics hurts their family, Criston and then eventually Laenor and Joffrey. Which would certainly be a powerful statement... if the show acknowledged it at all.

Sorry for the essay response, but my thoughts on that scene are fairly sprawling.

[lilmonstan9412]

No this is exactly the kind of discussion I want. Like you said, the show makes it purposely muddied. And when discussing it, it can be very easy to fall into victim blaming arguments if we aren't careful. I know male victims of rape aren't taken as seriously, especially with the toxic idea that "men always want sex" and I never want to contribute to those beliefs. I'm definitely gonna come back to this when I can focus better and also have more time to reflect on your points (though I'll say in a modern context, it's still on the adult to put a stop to the situation. If a young girl or boy is flirting or pursuing you as a fully grown adult, you stop them, even if they make repeated attempts. It's not always so simple, of course. But in most cases it's on the adult to stop the child/teenager or to remove themselves from the situation altogether)

Some points I need to, maybe not argue against but point out some potential flaws other people might see, is that, as a kings guard, yes he's responsible for keeping her safe, but sleeping with her could just as easily harm her as pushing her away from him (not just physically, because losing virginity is painful anyway, and the possibility of getting her pregnant is also dangerous, but it damages her ability to marry and causes issues politically for her) so, which form of protection takes priority? What is his duty when put in that situation?

Is the potential danger involved with rejecting her realistic to assume, if you take into consideration rhaenyras and viserys behavior? And how much of that can we use to influence our decision on this? Does it really matter if rhaenyra has not shown to hurt people when she's displeased (past verbal, at most. Otto is the only one she gets punished and she had a valid point as he was spying on her and trying to replace her as heir) when he is put in that position? Does it matter that viserys isn't the kind of person who would believe his daughter is completely innocent in this situation had criston gone to him instead (he may have defended her, but he didn't trust her. It's why he sends the moon tea to her even though he still sends Otto away. He KNOWS she would do something like that) is it enough that he may think something bad would happen to him if he rejected her, regardless of how their characters are portrayed (we can assume criston has some level of understanding when it comes to them as he's been a kingsguard member for 3+ years at that point and they are the closest to the king and his family outside of maybe the hand and maybe small council members)

And does the fact that rhaenyra lacks an adequate comprehension of consent and what someone might feel when she puts them in that position make her any less guilty if it's deemed she did in fact rape him? I don't think it would. I think regardless of her understanding, it's still morally wrong, and causes trauma to her victim that simply saying "I didn't know better" will never be able to fix. That's like saying the men of today that don't understand consent because of how society raises them are not guilty for committing rape when they coerce someone.

Thank you for providing a different argument to my post. I value your perspective immensely, and I hope I get a better understanding after some more time to reflect.

[lilmonstan9412]

I saw a post saying rhaenyra raped criston cole, because he initially says no at the beginning when she starts undressing herself. If that's how you interpreted the scene, that's fine. I get it. But mentioning the power dynamics of her being the princess, without also mentioning the power dynamics of him being much older and her being 17 in that scene, I believe, is flawed. Because in a modern setting, if a teenager had a crush on a person in their mid to late 20s (I think criston is made a member of the kings guard at 23 in the books, not sure about the show) we'd say the adult has the responsibility of putting a stop to it. A lot of predators will use the excuse that they were the ones pursued (which is not nearly always the case. I've heard people say that when it's a small child doing the most innocent things) Why is it any different in the setting of westeros?

Now, to be clear, I don't actually have a firm stance on this. I just want a good argument supporting either side, since I'm just now being made aware of this perspective. Because I remember thinking when I first watched the scene that he was protesting the way I would when someone offers to pay for me when I've only got $10 to my name. Like "no.. wait you don't have to pay for me" as I'm slowly putting my wallet away. And to be honest, I kinda skip over that part of the episode in rewatches (I truly don't care about watching the heteros have sex, I won't lie) so it's been awhile. Probably since the episode first came out.

I also think it was criston cole duty to tell viserys what she was trying to do, as a member of the kingsguard. But making this argument can very quickly lead to victim blaming, if in fact it was rape on rhaenyras part. How do we discern which power dynamic trumps the other? Is the older man less culpable because the younger girl happens to be a princess? Is the princess less culpable because shes much younger than the older man? What actually was cristons duty, and what kind of consequences could he have faced (real or imagined) that would compel him to give in, if he truly did not want to participate. Was it that she could say he forced her? Because she never makes that threat, and as bratty as she is, she is never shown to purposely try to get people into trouble just because shes displeased (save for Otto, but she had a point as he was spying on her and she wasn't wrong that he was trying to replace her as heir with aegon)

And how much can we use the actors opinions on what was going on when deciding how the characters themselves felt within the scene? How much of the writing decisions can we use, since there are plenty of instances where a writer intended for it to be romantic but when you think about it, it's just a depiction of rape?

If rhaenyra was responsible for raping criston, that makes her just as irredeemable as aegon, in my honest opinion. (Not that you still shouldn't try to be better, but that I truly don't think there's a point where forgiveness is possible)

And then of course, if rhaenyra did rape him, how much of his actions afterwards are on himself? We can arguing the killing of joffery isn't justified, but if you were a victim of rape, and someone brought up the barest knowledge of it happening, and the consequences of people finding out would be your own head, wouldn't you respond to the perceived threat? (It also would make sense, even if not rape, that he would've responded to the threat anyway, but I feel if it's a trauma based reaction, then it's more justified than a man who is afraid of getting caught doing something wrong)

I hope any of this makes sense. I still don't have my meds. I'm not taking a stance yet until I think about it more, but I'd love to hear others thoughts on this. Please remain respectful. And please have an argument that can back up whatever stance you take. Examining our morals and why we believe them is so important. Simply not liking it or finding it wrong is not enough of an argument. You need to be able to support it with good reasoning.

[lilmonstan9412]

On one hand, I'm pissed that they decided to have rhaenyra start her period because I think it feeds into the idea that, by being a person who has one, we aren't equipped to rule because we'll be too "emotional and volatile". Because really, what does it contribute to the story by adding it, when the entire episode seems to be trying to point out rhaenyra's incompetence with actually ruling? They may not outright say it, but putting in there when you're showing her struggle with ruling is just going to be further evidence to misogynists that women can't lead. They could've shown it without adding the period starting. That way we could point to her character not being suited to rule, without leaving an opening for people to point to her gender as the reason instead.

On the other hand, never have I felt so represented because this entire episode is rhaenyra being overstimulated and in pain, with too many issues in the kingdom and not nearly enough resources to solve them. Genuinely feels like a normal day for me lmao

The scene with the banquet was great. Loved it, no notes.

I already had a small spoiler about daeron's storyline, so I wasn't surprised by the imposter. I'm almost 100% certain now that the boy in the first episode was actually daeron with his hair dyed. Gotta hand it to ormund though, that was a good plan. Not one person on team black would've known what he looked like, and rhaenyra refusing to tell alicent she had him in custody proved a mistake because it gave them time to take tumbleton. I am surprised alicent was honest though, all things considered. She seemed upset at the idea of him being sent to the wall, so if she knew her son was free, and what would happen if he was found, it doesn't make sense she wouldn't at least try to pretend that was her son. Idk that was strange.

Also, I knew the writers were trying to pull this. Because it wasn't explicitly stated she was giving up anyone other than aegon, I had a feeling they were either trying to make alicent look dumb or incredibly naive to think rhaenyra wouldn't have to kill them, or they were gonna make rhaenyra still try to seem sympathetic and merciful because God forbid you let her be ruthless. And this also serves to try and make alicent less guilty, because hey, at least she didn't actually sell out the innocent son. At least it was only supposed to be aegon. It's frustrating because yes, I still don't think it's morally wrong to sell out aegon specifically, but suddenly these amazing discussions on morality I've recently had (revolving around aemond and daeron being included) suddenly don't matter, at least if we're discussing what actually happened on screen. Like, wtf, that's what made it so interesting. That's what made me enjoy those conversations even if we disagreed on it. And now it simply doesn't matter because the show says "actually alicent only meant aegon and rhaenyra only wanted aegon (maybe aemond too) and its morally justified because they're both violent and sexually abusive and letting them rule would cause irreparable harm to westeros" so there goes the complexity of her decision.

[And before anyone who's read my previous post says "well isn't that what you were arguing before? That it was justified for her to sell out her sons because aegon and aemond are sexually abusive?" I'll point out that I said the better argument was that daeron, an innocent person, was being included. I also, in a reblog I posted, showed my stance on aemond was less firm than it was in my original rant, because someone else brought up some very valid points on him and specifically his attack on aegon, which I now believe is completely justified (as I originally was thinking that he only did it to become king, not that he was a justifiably upset man who was tormented and sexually abused by his brother, who now had the opportunity to get justice for himself in a way no one else could) all I want is for people, myself included, to make better and stronger arguments supporting why they believe a character is right or wrong. Simply finding it morally wrong is not enough of an argument because we all have different morals. You need to be able to back up your beliefs with good reasoning]

Loved the bickering with mysaria and daemon again. And I think there's a level of jealousy from mysaria regarding rhaenyra and alicents relationship that's being shown a bit more in this episode.

The thing between corlys and rhaenyra I get. I don't think his statement is meant to convey that he never loved Jace and Luke. He's acknowledging what everyone knows and pointing out the hypocrisy of rhaenyra giving her sons everything while denying corly's children anything when he's given everything to her. Joffery can't be his heir, since he's next in line for the throne, and aegon and viserys can't be his heir because they were from her marriage with daemon, not laenor. Baela won't take it, and he mentions once that rhaena is a girl (before immediately asking baela so idk) who knows nothing about the sea. Alyn at least has been shown to be more than capable at sea, and he's a man. Why shouldn't he become corly's heir?

Idk why but I didn't like the music this time. I think a lot of it is trying to convey some kind of spiral that rhaenyra is going through but then the show never follows up with it. Like the whole scene where she's standing over "daeron" after daemon says she has to kill him. The music almost made me think she was going to try killing him, only for her to go to alicent and be like "he can live, I'm just sending him to the wall" I don't get it. Or the conversation with the septon (high septon?) like I genuinely thought she'd have him killed or something, but apparently not.

His warning about making of an enemy of the faith is... concerning. Especially the way he talks about dragons. Hmmm wonder if that's setting up for something that will happen in the future 🤔 Probably not right? Though, he's not wrong about them only causing destruction.

I do like the idea of her seeing "ghosts". She can claim she doesn't feel grief, that all she feels is rage, but it seems more like disassociation, with the reality of her children being dead trying to push its way back in. Though, I think this may be used to explain how she ends up becoming rhaenyra the cruel, and part of me thinks it's kinda cheap? Like, I want to watch her morals slowly degrade until she's no longer the person she used to be, but I don't want it to just be because her sons died and now she's "gone mad with grief"

Daemon looked genuinely upset by Simon strong being killed with his sons. I knew the old man grew on him. That was nice to see.

You can see Adam struggling with accepting rhaenyras decision to name him a velaryon, and I think that's gonna play into her eventual distrust of him, but he also seems like he'll stay loyal regardless of his dissatisfaction (yes I know what happens in the books, and I'm saying the actor portrays Adam very well in this regard)

I like Alicents little speech about not being able to remain yourself when you rule. I think she has a point and rhaenyra is being incredibly naive to think otherwise. If only ruling a kingdom were so easy. If only she could help the peasants and not piss off the Lord's at the same time. The lords that have the power to raise armies when displeased, while the peasants only have themselves (though as mysaria says, they can be dangerous when left to starve)

Helaena only makes one comment on jaces death and that kinda pisses me off. Last episode she says "her sons were always kind" and now all she asks is "did it make you feel better? For jaces death?" I don't get it.

Anyway, I don't really care for this episode. I'm not someone who thinks the show should be exactly like the book, and I do still like rhaenyra as a character, but justifying this episode is hard, and I don't think I have the desire to do so. It's like they put all the flaws of the show on full display with few redeeming qualities.

[lilmonstan9412]

I really hate having ADHD man like. They just cancelled my prescription after I missed an appointment (which was a separate issue) and I can't focus on anything. Even stuff I like. There are like three posts of genuinely good critique I've read and want to respond to, but without writing what I'm thinking down first, it'll come out incoherent and I can't sit down and make myself write anything 🫠 the perk is it's giving me time to sort out my thoughts and reasoning, but still. It's incredibly frustrating. Even outside of that, I can't play games or watch shows without having to do something else at the same time and the only thing that's been helping to keep my brain quiet is reading out loud for my puppy lmao but even that's only like 15 mins at a time

[nemaesys]

She really did

[lilmonstan9412]

You know what? Screw team green or team black. I'm team let-helaena-live-in-peace-with-her-chickens

[lilmonstan9412]

I'm gonna be so real, some of y'all are fucking weird. Like your morals are so strange to me. "Alicent sold out her sons, she's such a bad mother" are we forgetting that aegon is a literal rapist? Are we forgetting that aemond burned his own brother? And likely was going to kill him? When kinslaying is considered a huge sin in westeros? Are we just gonna ignore aemond kissing alicent? They're both violent and sexually abusive, and they're both horrible at ruling. And no matter how she raised them, she didn't raise them to do THAT. especially the sexual abuse. And you want her to stick by them?

It's also ridiculous to blame her for their actions as grown adults, especially when the vast majority of the time, they don't listen to her. You can blame some things on her for sure. she was, objectively not a good mother, even if there are valid reasons for why she wasn't, especially at the beginning (the same way we should not be blaming alicent for these grown mens decisions, we can't blame everything bad alicent does on the people who harmed her when she was younger too. When she becomes an adult, and can make her own decisions, the responsibility of her actions rests with her) but she didn't raise them like cersei does joffery. She doesn't encourage their violent or sexually abusive behaviors and say they can have and do whatever they want because they're her sons. And even then, aegon and aemond are grown men, and they are choosing to behave that way, which means they are responsible for their actions. Not alicent.

The other argument is that she created this mess and sent them to war so she has no right to suddenly change her mind. which is absurd because 1) she's literally the only one on team green who is actively against a war and tries to make peace, multiple times, while still keeping aegon on the throne initially. It's aemond and daemon who actually kickstart the war. Mainly daemon when he gets jahaerys killed. 2) people are allowed to grow and if you realize you made a mistake that is hurting people, you can and should do your best to stop and fix it. That doesn't make you a hypocrite, it means you're repenting and trying to make things right.

"she's just trying to save herself" sure that might be a part of it, but she's also trying to save her daughter and granddaughter, arguably the most innocent in the entire show.

There are so many other valid things to criticize alicent for, but y'all choose this, the fact that she sold out her sexually abusive and violent sons, in an effort to save her daughter and granddaughter.

If y'all wanted to make a better argument on how fucked up what she did was, why don't y'all mention daeron. From what I remember, he's a good kid. Why not be angry about her selling him out? even if it's not explicitly said, she has to know daeron will be included. But no. Y'all would rather defend a rapist and a predator (idk if aemond has done anything past the kiss with his mother as far as sexually abusive behaviors goes, so I'm just gonna label him as a predator for now)

[mousenor]

Are we supposed to be mad at Aemond for burning the rapist, that’s probably the only person who even could get justice since Aegon is y’know supposed to be king of Westeros at that point.

What’s wrong with another great council I don’t know seems like the kind of situation that law was built for.

[lilmonstan9412]

I mean, no, the same way I don't feel bad for aegon being sold out by his mother. But aemond isn't doing it to protect himself or as some form of justice for what he did to those girls. He's doing it cause he thinks he deserves to be king. It's like, if a murderer killed a rapist in real life, just for funsies, not as a form of justice, are we not supposed to punish him since the victim technically deserved it? The only reason I bring up that initially is because, up until that point, the only thing he's done that was really violent was kill Luce, which was not intentional (vhagar just didn't listen) though it admittedly is not a good idea to chase someone around on a dragon and not think it'll end badly. And until he kisses alicent, I don't think he actually shows the sexually abusive behavior aegon does (at least not on screen so there's no definitive proof until season 3. and that could also just be him not understanding the difference between familial, platonic and romantic/sexual affection because of how fucked his family is regarding incest, and not caring about boundaries when it comes to alicent) like I'm not saying she's not in the wrong, I'm saying it's strange for people to expect someone to continue to support horrible people as if they can't ever change, especially when they realize what they're doing is wrong, and it's even stranger that it's in defense of aegon and aemond, rather than say, daeron, who is arguably just as innocent in everything as her daughter and granddaughter.

[mousenor]

Aegon sexually harassed Aemond though. Think about if the gender were swapped for Aemond. Aemond is naked, in a vulnerable position, didn’t consent to have Aegon join the interaction & Aegon sits down on the bed & starts making sexual comments. Aemond knows what kind of person Aegon is & that’s not the first time Aegon has done something sexually inappropriate toward Aemond/boys than younger than himself.

Forget the girls momentarily, Aemond has been sexually harassed by Aegon since childhood. That what Season 1 Ep 9 was setting up

Who is Aemond supposed to go to for recourse, rhetorically. Aegon is the king at that point, technically, though I think we’re all clear the real power behind that throne is Otto as an administrator & Aemond as a dragon rider. Still, it’s not like Aemond can go to HR, Aemond has one form of power & that’s violence. That’s all Aemond can do. Look at how Helaena reacts to Aemond burning Aegon, apparently Helaena didn’t care to see the repeat pattern of sexual misconduct toward Aemond by Aegon that lead up to it-because Aemond is a man & apparently that renders Aemond’s violation mute in Helaena’s mind-Helaena just tells Aemond she hopes Aemond dies. Full tilt toxic victim blamer.

Aemond saved every woman Aegon was going to come into contact with in the future but what’s beside the point Aemond has a right to stand up for himself, if Aegon can’t handle a fight with Aemond maybe Aegon shouldn’t sexually harassed Aemond to begin with. That kind of abuse can create a lot of anger.

Let’s not forget the poetic justice, everybody talks about how loyal Aemond is but there went Aegon picking on Aemond for that very quality-even though Aegon’s life depended on Aemond’s fidelity to Aegon’s claim to the throne. Aemond doesn’t need Aegon, Aegon needs Aemond & seems to have forgotten that. Aemond didn’t do anything wrong, he just makes Aegon feel insecure by virtue of existing & Aegon decided to take it out on Aemond.

I’m sure from a male perspective it must be hell to try to compete with Aemond. Biggest dragon, best fighter, taller, stronger, the best executive intelligence out of the three, arguably the smartest of the siblings. Aemond could roll out of bed one morning decide he wanted to be in charge & there’s not much anybody could do as we saw.

So maybe Aegon poking the proverbial bear & trying to pick away Aemond’s decency wasn’t a good decision.

What Aegon is doing is like kicking a dog over & over & then crying when the dog finally bites. No crap it bit, you kept kicking it.

So I applaud that Aemond took his loyalty away from Aegon. That’s what should happen to sexual predators. Aemond was a thirteen year old boy & Aegon seems to have some kind of sexual thing for boys losing their virginity, Aemond didn’t even know wtf Aegon was talking about. We’re talking about a thirteen year old boy being manipulated by his own brother into getting assaulted by an adult. Aemond couldn’t consent, I’d be surprised if Aemond were even growing facial hair that young.

Aemond’s not the type to wuss out of life, luckily, but omg, sexually assaulted, physically assaulted, emotionally neglected. It’s a miracle Aemond didn’t turn out to be a serial killer.

Most families would have loved to have Aemond, would have been grateful to have him & cherished him. It was obvious from the time Aemond was a kid he was smart enough & organized enough to do pretty well at just about anything. Instead Aemond got caught up in the middle of everybody’s stupid Bull crap. Aemond probably would have been happier in Old Town with Daeron & away from everybody who felt entitled to psychologically torture Aemond for sport.

I feel so bad for the life Almonds lived. Wtf.

Good. Fucking good Aemond stood up for himself.

Aemond was naked, obviously uncomfortable & on the verge of tears & Aegon kept picking at him. Talk crap get smacked as far as sex crimes are concerned.

[lilmonstan9412]

You're absolutely right. I was seeing it as aemond thought he deserved to be king, rather than a justifiably upset man who was tormented and sexually abused by his older brother as a little boy. Which, I think is strange because I remember distinctly thinking about how aemond had every right to attack aegon when the episode first came out, for the same reasons you just listed. I think the gap between seasons 2 and 3, along with seeing everyone else's reactions changed how I viewed it initially. It doesn't help that I made this rant after seeing season 3s first episode. It doesn't absolve him of what he does to alicent, but like I said, he may just not understand the difference between familial, platonic, and romantic/sexual affection. It's been confirmed that aemond is not in love with alicent or anything, and given he doesn't show any hint of abusing others that way until this point, I'm inclined now to think it's less of him being a predator, and more that his understanding of what was happening is so fucking skewed because of his family dynamics. And in alicents attempt at manipulating him, it does seem like she's very much love bombing him. It doesn't make what he does right, he's still violating alicents boundaries and the power dynamics make it so she doesn't feel safe enough to push him away, but it might not be that he's a completely morally corrupt character (well see how the season plays out) it's much different than how aegon is.

But see, this is the type of discussion I like. You gave very valid points on why aemond is justified in his attack on aegon, and I agree with you, and also had evidence to back up your reasoning. I think there's a lot of people in this fandom that are arguing for the sake of arguing, not necessarily to understand one another. It's a shame because there's so many layers we could dig into and we could learn a lot from each other if only people were willing to think about things more critically, admit when they're wrong, and not respond with outright hate when someone disagrees with them.

My issue with most of what was in my rant is that the arguments go "alicent does this so she's a bad mom" or "rhaenyras decision to have children with harwin was goofy, stupid and immature" (something else said to me in a different argument) and there's no thought about why it was bad or unwise other than that they just don't like or agree with it.

Thank you for this conversation, and your input. You've given me more to consider, and I appreciate you being respectful about it as well.

[lilmonstan9412]

I'm gonna be so real, some of y'all are fucking weird. Like your morals are so strange to me. "Alicent sold out her sons, she's such a bad mother" are we forgetting that aegon is a literal rapist? Are we forgetting that aemond burned his own brother? And likely was going to kill him? When kinslaying is considered a huge sin in westeros? Are we just gonna ignore aemond kissing alicent? They're both violent and sexually abusive, and they're both horrible at ruling. And no matter how she raised them, she didn't raise them to do THAT. especially the sexual abuse. And you want her to stick by them?

It's also ridiculous to blame her for their actions as grown adults, especially when the vast majority of the time, they don't listen to her. You can blame some things on her for sure. she was, objectively not a good mother, even if there are valid reasons for why she wasn't, especially at the beginning (the same way we should not be blaming alicent for these grown mens decisions, we can't blame everything bad alicent does on the people who harmed her when she was younger too. When she becomes an adult, and can make her own decisions, the responsibility of her actions rests with her) but she didn't raise them like cersei does joffery. She doesn't encourage their violent or sexually abusive behaviors and say they can have and do whatever they want because they're her sons. And even then, aegon and aemond are grown men, and they are choosing to behave that way, which means they are responsible for their actions. Not alicent.

The other argument is that she created this mess and sent them to war so she has no right to suddenly change her mind. which is absurd because 1) she's literally the only one on team green who is actively against a war and tries to make peace, multiple times, while still keeping aegon on the throne initially. It's aemond and daemon who actually kickstart the war. Mainly daemon when he gets jahaerys killed. 2) people are allowed to grow and if you realize you made a mistake that is hurting people, you can and should do your best to stop and fix it. That doesn't make you a hypocrite, it means you're repenting and trying to make things right.

"she's just trying to save herself" sure that might be a part of it, but she's also trying to save her daughter and granddaughter, arguably the most innocent in the entire show.

There are so many other valid things to criticize alicent for, but y'all choose this, the fact that she sold out her sexually abusive and violent sons, in an effort to save her daughter and granddaughter.

If y'all wanted to make a better argument on how fucked up what she did was, why don't y'all mention daeron. From what I remember, he's a good kid. Why not be angry about her selling him out? even if it's not explicitly said, she has to know daeron will be included. But no. Y'all would rather defend a rapist and a predator (idk if aemond has done anything past the kiss with his mother as far as sexually abusive behaviors goes, so I'm just gonna label him as a predator for now)

[mousenor]

Are we supposed to be mad at Aemond for burning the rapist, that’s probably the only person who even could get justice since Aegon is y’know supposed to be king of Westeros at that point.

What’s wrong with another great council I don’t know seems like the kind of situation that law was built for.

[lilmonstan9412]

I mean, no, the same way I don't feel bad for aegon being sold out by his mother. But aemond isn't doing it to protect himself or as some form of justice for what he did to those girls. He's doing it cause he thinks he deserves to be king. It's like, if a murderer killed a rapist in real life, just for funsies, not as a form of justice, are we not supposed to punish him since the victim technically deserved it? The only reason I bring up that initially is because, up until that point, the only thing he's done that was really violent was kill Luce, which was not intentional (vhagar just didn't listen) though it admittedly is not a good idea to chase someone around on a dragon and not think it'll end badly. And until he kisses alicent, I don't think he actually shows the sexually abusive behavior aegon does (at least not on screen so there's no definitive proof until season 3. and that could also just be him not understanding the difference between familial, platonic and romantic/sexual affection because of how fucked his family is regarding incest, and not caring about boundaries when it comes to alicent) like I'm not saying she's not in the wrong, I'm saying it's strange for people to expect someone to continue to support horrible people as if they can't ever change, especially when they realize what they're doing is wrong, and it's even stranger that it's in defense of aegon and aemond, rather than say, daeron, who is arguably just as innocent in everything as her daughter and granddaughter.

[lilmonstan9412]

I'm gonna be so real, some of y'all are fucking weird. Like your morals are so strange to me. "Alicent sold out her sons, she's such a bad mother" are we forgetting that aegon is a literal rapist? Are we forgetting that aemond burned his own brother? And likely was going to kill him? When kinslaying is considered a huge sin in westeros? Are we just gonna ignore aemond kissing alicent? They're both violent and sexually abusive, and they're both horrible at ruling. And no matter how she raised them, she didn't raise them to do THAT. especially the sexual abuse. And you want her to stick by them?

It's also ridiculous to blame her for their actions as grown adults, especially when the vast majority of the time, they don't listen to her. You can blame some things on her for sure. she was, objectively not a good mother, even if there are valid reasons for why she wasn't, especially at the beginning (the same way we should not be blaming alicent for these grown mens decisions, we can't blame everything bad alicent does on the people who harmed her when she was younger too. When she becomes an adult, and can make her own decisions, the responsibility of her actions rests with her) but she didn't raise them like cersei does joffery. She doesn't encourage their violent or sexually abusive behaviors and say they can have and do whatever they want because they're her sons. And even then, aegon and aemond are grown men, and they are choosing to behave that way, which means they are responsible for their actions. Not alicent.

The other argument is that she created this mess and sent them to war so she has no right to suddenly change her mind. which is absurd because 1) she's literally the only one on team green who is actively against a war and tries to make peace, multiple times, while still keeping aegon on the throne initially. It's aemond and daemon who actually kickstart the war. Mainly daemon when he gets jahaerys killed. 2) people are allowed to grow and if you realize you made a mistake that is hurting people, you can and should do your best to stop and fix it. That doesn't make you a hypocrite, it means you're repenting and trying to make things right.

"she's just trying to save herself" sure that might be a part of it, but she's also trying to save her daughter and granddaughter, arguably the most innocent in the entire show.

There are so many other valid things to criticize alicent for, but y'all choose this, the fact that she sold out her sexually abusive and violent sons, in an effort to save her daughter and granddaughter.

If y'all wanted to make a better argument on how fucked up what she did was, why don't y'all mention daeron. From what I remember, he's a good kid. Why not be angry about her selling him out? even if it's not explicitly said, she has to know daeron will be included. But no. Y'all would rather defend a rapist and a predator (idk if aemond has done anything past the kiss with his mother as far as sexually abusive behaviors goes, so I'm just gonna label him as a predator for now)

[wolfienation]

she was so happy to help mummy commit high treason. "i will not have any beast harmed😁" helaena dont make unnecessary journeys stay away from windows

[lilmonstan9412]

My girl Helena's first royal command. I'm so proud 🥲

[emmaziadarcy]

"Now here's a thing I haven't seen before" then Daemon moving away 😭😭😭 let's get you an unobstructed view then

[lilmonstan9412]

For as much as I dislike daemon (in that he's not a good man, not that he's not a compelling and interesting character) this episode he really was being a good husband to rhaenyra. He knows she needs people to start taking her seriously as the ruler, and multiple times he supports her without making it seem like he's taking over. Like when she gives the command , and they question her, he's like "I'm fairly certain her command was clear, so get to it" or when he gives her dark sister to execute otto, and he doesn't mock or belittle her when she gets ready to fight alongside him, even if she's never been trained.

[lilmonstan9412]

My girl Helena was so proud of herself for making a command. I love her so much.

And for as imperfect as Alicent is as a mother, you can tell she genuinely loves Helena. Just that smile when Helena says she thinks she might like keeping chickens 😭

[lilmonstan9412]

When I die, I want not one piece of evidence I ever existed to still be here. I want all my journals and pictures burned, all my belongings given away or destroyed. I want all my social media deleted and my phone and computer wiped clean. If I could make everyone forget any memories associated with me, I'd do that too. I won't leave a note and I don't want a funeral. Throw me in an unmarked grave, or leave my body in the woods so at least the animals will be fed. Cremate me and scatter my ashes in some landfill, I don't care anymore.

[lilmonstan9412]

Y'all if I make a comment about house of the dragon, or literally any other show I watch, just know that I'm not trying to fight about something lol I genuinely just love discussing the show and seeing other people's perspectives. So long as everything is respectful, I don't care if you disagree with me because there is no "right" perspective. Everyone does bad things in this show, there's no completely moral character, and the society is so violently misogynistic that even the best of intentions by the characters are also going to be problematic more often than not. The entire show is a tragedy. Everyone makes horrific decisions, and everyone dies, and no one gets a happy ending, regardless of who wins at the end.

[lilmonstan9412]

I wonder if it was possible for Jace to unclip himself from the saddle once they got close enough to the water, and he could've found some way to free vermax (I can't remember if he even brought a sword with him, or if he assumed he wouldn't need a weapon)

[lilmonstan9412]

What breaks my heart is that rhaenyra is believing that her son is doing this because he too has decided she cannot lead as a woman (especially if she learns exactly what Jace told the guard to get him to lock her in the room) and because he's not there anymore, he can't clarify that it was because he wanted to protect her and didn't want to lose her. I can't remember how the book went, but I thought Rhaenyra ended up pretty paranoid. Maybe this is where her paranoia starts to grow. Because on some level, she expects daemon and the other men around her to behave that way. But her queens guard? Her own son? That's a different kind of betrayal, and she doesn't have Jace there to reassure her that what he did was because he loves her not because he thinks less of her.

[natural--lighting]

But Jace’s love and protection was patriarchal and controlling, and ultimately diminished her power as a Queen, mother, and woman. If Rhaenyra was a man her son and guard would not treat her that way, even if from love.

I don’t think reassurance of love would have made anything better. She knows her son loves her. He still pulled the oldest misogynistic trick in the book, “protect her from herself,” she’s not in her right mind bullshit.

Also it was fucking stupid. He assumed he knew better than Queen Mother, acted out when she didn’t listen, and got his own ass killed.

Misogyny and love can exist in the same breath, and Rhaenyra experiences it every day. It was the ultimate betrayal to have her son display it as well.

The entire show’s essential plot is fueled by misogyny. Jace’s last act falls within the plot so hard it was practically predictable.

[lilmonstan9412]

I actually don't think he's doing it out of pure misogyny, though he does use it to get his way with the guard. I think its more trauma based. Jace is a kid still, or at least very young, and he's reacting out of fear of his mother being led to a trap. Should he trust his mother? Absolutely. Not just cause she's his mom but she's his queen. But he also has no context of who alicent actually is or why she does things. All he knows of her is that she has consistently tried to hurt him and his family. To him, it's an obvious trap, and his mother is falling for it because of a friendship he has never actually witnessed (he probably thinks she sees an idealized version of it) and doesn't believe is possible given everything that's happened. I think if Jace had lived, he could've learned to be better, to trust that rhaenyra knows what she's doing, and that these perceived weaknesses (like sentimentality and empathy) are the entire reason why she is suited to be the queen. That she can in fact separate what she feels, and what she knows, and can make logical decisions regardless of her emotions.

Jace isn't like aemond. He doesn't think he's inherently better suited to rule because he's a man. He's a scared teenage boy who is seeing his mother trust a person who tormented him and his family throughout his entire life. And his actions are bad, but he is not irredeemable, and I do believe communicating with each other after could've resolved a lot pain they inflicted on each other. Unfortunately, that's not how this story goes.

[lilmonstan9412]

What breaks my heart is that rhaenyra is believing that her son is doing this because he too has decided she cannot lead as a woman (especially if she learns exactly what Jace told the guard to get him to lock her in the room) and because he's not there anymore, he can't clarify that it was because he wanted to protect her and didn't want to lose her. I can't remember how the book went, but I thought Rhaenyra ended up pretty paranoid. Maybe this is where her paranoia starts to grow. Because on some level, she expects daemon and the other men around her to behave that way. But her queens guard? Her own son? That's a different kind of betrayal, and she doesn't have Jace there to reassure her that what he did was because he loves her not because he thinks less of her.

[lilmonstan9412]

I'm rewatching squid games and I'm on season three and I'm realizing asking someone what they thought of this season in particular would be great to see if you're morally compatible with someone, specifically if you're dating men, but it could be anyone. Spoiler warning if you haven't seen it yet.

I've seen men say some insane things, like being okay with killing a baby and/or her mother, being upset that the mom killed her son because he went after a woman who just gave birth rather than her when she pleaded with him to, or being okay with the person who killed the person protecting the mother of their child because "he didn't know she was protecting them" nevermind the fact that he didn't have to since he had already passed. I've already known that men have this desire to be loved unconditionally, which seems sweet on the surface, but most mean they want that love and care despite bad and even abusive behavior. But they really exposed themselves during this season. There are nuances in the discussion of whether the actions someone did in the games were morally justified or not, but I think it's pretty commonly accepted that killing a mother and her child, or even just a baby, are morally reprehensible regardless of the circumstances. You'd need a damn good reason to even make the argument that it can be justified. When it comes to the mom and son, I think it's always morally wrong to hurt or kill your child, however it can be justified depending on your moral beliefs that she was willing to make the sacrifice of committing a morally wrong action in order to do an objectively good thing (saving a mother and her child). No she didn't need to have the same level of connection to know that letting him kill the mother was wrong, and letting it happen would not only be letting him get away with something vile, but also letting him turn into a person like his father. Keep in mind, he had an opportunity to kill a player before he ran into them. He hesitated either because 1) he was more afraid of the man fighting back, or 2) he felt sympathetic to the man when he mentioned his wife and kids. Aside from the time limit, it's convenient that he chose to hesitate only with the man pleading for his life than with a woman who was already weak from just giving birth. To me, that's being a coward and lacking moral integrity.

333 is interesting to me, because so many men felt like they related to him and felt sympathetic towards him. While I think he's an interesting character, close to how I felt with sang-woo, he's by no means a good man. I've seen men say 222 deserved her outcome because she was "mean" to him. I've seen them justify what he did to the woman protecting 222 by saying he didn't know any better. Here's my counter argument. At no point did 222 owe him anything, not her trust, her love, or kindness. Even if he was perfect (he wasn't, even before the games) she didn't deserve anything bad just because she was less than kind and distrusting in her behavior towards him. He gave her absolutely no reason to trust him either. From ghosting her before the games, all the way to killing 120 in a game he already passed because of his greed. Idc whether he knew it was her or not, killing someone like that just because of greed can't be morally justified.

As for the end, I think even some men have a hard time defending 333. Rather the arguments I've seen were about 456, choosing to sacrifice himself. (Some were just okay with killing the kid regardless of what stage the game was at. I'd say stay away from people like that) some bring up a valid argument that 456 has his own daughter to take care of, and wonder why he sacrificed himself when he did. My counter argument, though I won't say it's something I'll blame another person for disagreeing with necessarily, is that it's because of his daughter that he feels compelled to do it. The little baby girl probably reminded him of her, and he knew even if he wasn't there, his daughter would be okay. Maybe he thought she'd be better off even, as he knew he was never the best father no matter how much he tried. Maybe he hoped the baby would live a good life despite the horror she was born into. He's not a bad person, he's a hopeful one. He wants to see the best in people (his PTSD takes control for a bit, but his overall character has always felt compelled to help others when he can and do as little harm as possible in the games) even when he's betrayed, he wants to put as much good in the world as he can, because he's already witnessed so much cruelty. It literally would not have made sense for him to kill the baby with how he acted in the games to that point.

Anyway, I'm done yapping. Just needed to get my thoughts out there.