Checkpoint

A safe place created for me, by me. Basically a pantry for my thoughts on the media I consume. I take everything personally.

[spacerockfloater]

Unfortunately, I’m a slut for angry blonde men who hate their fathers and, despite their copious efforts to create a better world for themselves, still end up becoming villains — the chaotic blonde trope, if you will.

[spacerockfloater]

I always hated Lexie’s ass and I think the only reason she’s popular is because she’s some kind of Wallflower Jesus for people with no lives but MAN. The pure glee on her face when she had to tell Cassie the TV thing wasn’t gonna work out, combined with the fact that she gave absolutely no fucks that her baby sister was engaging in sex work, was fucking evil.

[spacerockfloater]

I really like the way Rhaenyra turns around to look at Jace in the new trailer when Daemon tells her THEIR kids are going to rule her new empire forever.

It really makes you wonder: does this dialogue take place before or after Jace’s death in the Gullet?

Is this Jace overhearing his stepfather talking about how his younger legitimate siblings are going to replace him while his mother listens silently?

Or is this Rhaenyra’s guilty conscience projecting her firstborn’s image in front of her because she feels like she’s betraying him? Putting him aside as she feared her father would one day?

Is he even alive at all when this happens? Maybe it’s not guilt that creates this hallucination, but regret? Regret that in her pursuit of power she unknowingly orchestrated her son’s death, who was everything she wanted to protect in the first place?

[spacerockfloater]

Why are this seasons’s dialogues so shitty?

I think the word “pathetic” has been used against Homelander three million times. It makes it feel so insignificant.

Also, if I see Frenchie calling Kimiko “mon coeur” one more time…

[spacerockfloater]

Devastated over A-Train’s death. Don’t get me wrong, the cinematography was excellent but his death felt rushed. He should have lasted until the middle of the season and I kinda wish his final exchange with Homelander was more impactful and written better.

His storyline is magnificent though, literally no notes.

[spacerockfloater]

Is every last season of every show ever made destined to be flaming hot garbage?

I nearly threw up when Kimiko went “Oh Frenchie, my vagina is fully regrown and ripe for the taking!” like, excuse y’all?

So I guess their whole friendship and deep bonding arc was for nothing and they made her end up right where Frenchie wanted her to begin with: in his pants. Silly me for thinking they were going to let her be her own person.

I hate it here.

[spacerockfloater]

I don’t remember a single thing that happened in AKOTSK. Six 30-min-long episodes would feel like too little runtime for any show under normal circumstances, but my God, they were STRETCHING those few days. This series could have been an email.

[spacerockfloater]

Hey, remember when Tamlin immediately believed Feyre when she told him that Rhys had raped her and we were supposed to be mad at him?

[spacerockfloater]

When Rhysand’s mother decided his future wife must be able to escape the clutches of a death god in order to prove her love for her son, Rhysand straight up surrendered Feyre to the Weaver. He sent his mate to a trap no other fae ever survived solely to satisfy his dead mother and his own ego.

When Tamlin had to make a woman profess her love for him in order to save all of Prythian at the risk of her getting harmed, he sent Feyre home.

Don’t ever get it twisted.

[spacerockfloater]

See, the thing about me is that I’m always willing to take things a step further ok, I’m totally fine with crossing the line and taking things too far, because the moment Edward Cullen tries breaking up with me in that fuckass forest, I’m threatening him with suicide. ‘DoN’t TrY aNyThInG sTuPiD-’ and that’s exactly what I’m gonna try next babes.

“Oh? What’s that? I’m not good enough for you? You don’t want me nor care about me? Ok. I’m going home and drinking bleach. If you don’t care about me, this won’t be a problem. I hope you don’t mind me departing this world and going to hell for committing suicide Captain Christian Guilt. How do you like them apples, you victorian cunt?”

That saga would have been over 2,5 books earlier if I was in Loca’s shoes.

[spacerockfloater]

Y’all, I apologise in advance but I just have to know: what the fuck is up with Caleb Landry Jones’ face in the second half of “Dracula: A Love Tale”?

In 1480, he looks devilishly handsome, I mean look at this man:

And then we jump to 1880 and I-

God forgive me but, what happened? I’m crying, he looks like he got a lip flip, hello? His whole face looks wrong, he’s giving:

This can’t just be my face blindness acting up guys, you’re seeing this too, right? His face was so distracting throughout the rest of the movie that I couldn’t focus on anything else, he looks like he could star in the next episode of “Botched”. And I know for a fact that’s not how he normally looks, I checked out some of his interviews after the movie was filmed and he seems fucking normal.

Is this just bad makeup? Is there a reason he looks so yassified? Help.

[rhaenelle-deactivated20240625]

it is 132 AC. aegon ii is nineteen (born in 113 AC). helaena is seventeen (born in 115 AC). aemond jace and baela are sixteen (born in 116 AC). rhaena and luke are fourteen (born in 118 AC). joffrey is six (born in 126 AC). aegon iii jaehaerys and jaehaera are four (born in 128 AC). viserys ii is two (born in 130 AC).

[spacerockfloater]

This needs to be read by the whole HOTD fandom.

[spacerockfloater]

Remember.

[spacerockfloater]

I just found out that Liev Schreiber was supposed to reprise the role of Victor Creed in “Logan” and as a fan of Sabretooth I’m devastated. We could have had it all.

[spacerockfloater]

I have now been informed that Liev Schreiber signed an open letter supporting Israel’s inclusion in Eurovision last year. Fuck his ass.

[spacerockfloater]

I think I need to clarify my feelings for Rhaenyra a little bit.

Given how often I make anti Rhaenyra content, I think it is understandable that the average person who interacts with my posts on a surface level would think that my negative perception of her stems from misogynistic views, a love for conservatism or the belief that I support the idea that Aegon II should indeed have more rights than her as a man according to the laws of Westeros.

I’m stepping forward to let you all know that none of this is true. I don’t dislike Rhaenyra for being a woman or for wanting power. I dislike her because she is not clever.

In fact, I have a very Tyra Banks approach when it comes to Rhaenyra: I was rooting for you, we were all rooting for you! How dare you?

I am mad at Rhaenyra. I am disappointed in her. I wanted her to be my favourite character in the show. I loved her in episode 1. With the exception of Alicent, no one has suffered as much as she has, no one more wronged or robbed.

She is the firstborn child, the throne should have been hers from the moment she was born yet all she got was dismissal. Her father doesn’t think she is enough. The whole world doesn’t think she is enough. Her own uncle wants to steal from her, her brother, had he been born, would be stealing from her. Her father steals her mother from her, forces her to get pregnant again and again until she dies slashed open like an animal and tortured in hopes that the child inside her will be a son and that he will be alive. She loses her mother and her uncle celebrates! Not long after, her best friend is a couple rooms down the hall giving birth to her father’s new children. Boys than can replace her in the blink of an eye. Her mother is not even cold yet.

I cannot even begin to comprehend the horror? The disgust? The rage? The sadness? The betrayal? she must have felt knowing Alicent, her childhood companion is pregnant with her brothers and sisters. By all means, she should have murdered all of them. Viserys, Alicent, their children, Daemon, Otto, everyone! She wasn’t angry enough. She should have gotten on her dragon in the middle of the night and burst through the castle walls, bathing all of their asses in flames for what they put her through.

She wasn’t half as angry as she should have been. And not being murderous and losing your mind as I would have done, I can understand. But she should have spent every. waking. fucking. second. of her life plotting her revenge and doing everything right, making precise moves to make fucking sure she will get her hands on the throne. Everything she did should have been calculated.

But she doesn’t do that! She is virtually alone and every person that supports her is simultaneously harming her. Viserys makes her his heir but has children that undermine her authority. Alicent tries to help her but she is the root of half her problems at the same time, whether she likes it or not. Daemon is… straight up fucking evil and wants everything that’s hers. Instead of doing whatever she can to help herself, she digs herself into a deeper hole and that’s something that I can’t forgive her for. She is not even passive; becoming depressed and withdrawing after everything that happened to her would also be a totally normal response. Instead, what she does is act annoyed about the whole shitshow that’s going on and stomps her feet, expecting the situation to resolve magically on its own while she keeps making irrational, rushed decisions that compromise her mission. She becomes her own obstacle. She makes wrong choice after wrong choice and then acts surprised when her enemies are not forgiving of her mistakes. Why would they be?

This is why I prefer Alicent over her. I find her reactions to what’s happening in her life more realistic. I get her completely giving up at first, but picking herself up and going full offence when shit hits the fan. Alicent was spot on when she said Rhaenyra feels entitled to everything. But despite those feelings, she almost never acts in a way that would serve her purpose well.

You may argue that Alicent had Otto to guide her through the difficulties she was facing, even if he was the one that caused them all to begin with, whereas Rhaenyra was totally abandoned. I can’t really agree with that. Rhaenyra also had Viserys, who, much like Otto did to Alicent, may have caused all of her problems but at the same time he had her back by reaffirming she is his heir again and again, giving her opportunities and some pretty solid advice: marry well, stay away from your uncle. It’s not like Rhaenyra had zero guidance. She just prioritized her enjoyment over her survival or victory and this makes me not want to support her. It’s true, however, that people react to trauma and difficult situations differently. It is her right to act the way she does and it is my right to dislike it and judge her negatively for it.

RIP to the woman who you could have been Rhaenyra Targaryen.

[spacerockfloater]

Hello,

I have a few responses regarding your post about Rhaenys:

[1) She does nothing when her throne is taken from her. 2) She does nothing when Corlys pimps out their 12-year-old daughter to Viserys. 3) She does nothing when Daemon marries her 14-year-old daughter and takes her far away from her, all the way to fucking Pentos.]

Wouldn’t that just be throwing the realm into war? How does her choosing not to make her a pushover?

[4) She does nothing to Daemon who, in a way, is responsible of Laena’s death. 5) She does nothing to Corlys when he keeps pursuing the throne in her name despite her not wanting to. 6) She does nothing to Rhaenyra when she murders (as far as she is aware) Laenor.]

A lot of the things you listed would mean Rhaenys would go against the king.

[And then she has the balls to tell Alicent that she toils in the service of men, when Alicent has been the active ruler of Westeros for six years while Viserys was withering away, not to mention that she is taking action and pursuing the interests of her family?]

Yeah Alicent ruled for years, and she did a good job, the whole agenda was to get Hightower blood on the throne just for her to place her incapable son on the throne who has no respect for her.

Alicent begged for Rhaenys’ support for the greens, and Rhaenys denied it. Vaemond and Rhaenyra both asked for her support during the driftmark succession and she denied them both so that she could she could petition for herself, Baela and Rhaena. She put herself foward to fly to Rook’s Rest and did all she could to defend it, when she could have fled. Corlys kept his bastards away from court because of her, and when she shows up at the shipyard to say she was going to Dragonstone, he immediately acted defensive. She also kept the Black Council members in check when Rhaenyra was unable to.

Oh my, I took a literal year to answer this. I’m so terribly sorry, I took a HUGE break from Tumblr because I was very busy with work and university. Thank you for the question and the opportunity for conversation! Here are my answers:

Regarding 2) and 3), I don’t believe Rhaenys’s objecting to her daughter’s betrothal to Viserys/ Daemon would be an act of war. At worst it would strain her relationship with the Targaryens or her husband even. Regarding 1) though, it is true that this would mean war. It is absolutely understandable that she would choose not to go to war ober her right to the throne. Whether she did that because she put the good of the realm above her personal goals or because she didn’t think she would win I do not know, but her reaction is totally valid. What I find absurd is that she accuses Alicent of staying idle and not “imagining herself on the throne” when Alicent herself was never in line for it and had no claim, whereas Rhaenys that did meet both of these requirements sat still when she could have acted more aggressively. This sounds super hypocritical to me. Why urge someone to be proactive when you yourself didn’t act that way when you were facing the same circumstances?

Exactly. Why does she feel so comfortable to judge Alicent for doing the same thing then? Why tell her that she “toils for the men around her” instead of acting for her own interests when Rhaenys does the same thing? Double standards.

Yeah Alicent and Otto did an excellent job ruling the kingdom. However, since my original post only talks about Rhaenys and Alicent, I think I have to clarify that “putting Hightower blood on the throne” was exclusively Otto’s ambition. Alicent didn’t care about her son ruling, it wasn’t her end goal. Regardless of how disappointing he was as a person, Alicent needed him to take the crown because had Rhaenyra taken control of the throne, the lives of all her children and grandchildren would be at risk. Aegon II, Aemond and Jaehaerys (and Maelor, assuming he exists in the show but we haven’t seen him) as males had a stronger claim to the throne than Rhaenyra and we see how a large portion of the people didn’t react well when Viserys didn’t name Aegon II his heir and replace Rhaenyra the moment he was born. Her brothers and nephews would always be a threat to her. I think it’s totally valid for Rhaenyra to have them executed just to make sure she faces no opposition in the future, especially considering that they’re only half siblings that happen to share a father, there’s no love between them. That means that Alicent would have to live every day in fear that Queen Rhaenyra and King Daemon would maybe wake up and decide to put her children to the sword one morning. To avoid that, Alicent needs her own son to be in charge and protect their family. It is true that Alicent never wanted to be queen or marry Viserys, but life happens and regardless of whether she wanted it or not, she now has children that she can’t help but love and wants to protect them. Aegon II becoming king isn’t her goal, it’s the only way she can ensure her family’s safety in the situation that she is. Now, regarding Rhaenys, I think you should rewatch the episode because Rhaenys never petitions for herself or her granddaughters lol. She straight up takes Rhaenyra’s side which I think is just ridiculous considering that it was ALICENT who offered her the opportunity of Driftmark passing directly to Baela and her ruling it in her own right. Instead, she supports Rhaenyra who STEALS those rights from her and gives her to her son, making Rhaena nothing more than his consort. That’s so fucking stupid. Why would she do that? It makes 0 fucking sense. By letting Lucerys take over Driftmark it is Rhaenys who toils in the service of men. Regarding Corlys’ bastards, I’m not going to applaud him because he had the decency of not bringing them home to his legal wife. That’s like someone taking a dump in the middle of your living room on purpose and you congratulating them for picking the shit up and taking it out, lol. That’s like, the least you could do after you’ve fucked up. Now, when Rhaenys finds out, miss girl was fucking SILENT. She finds out her man was cheating on her and miss “take action!!!” did fucking nothing. That’s batshit insane to me. Regarding her going to war for Rhaenyra and keeping her council in check, I think that was expected of her after she took her side in the whole Driftmark succession episode. Like, she’s chosen her team, her supporting them is kind of a given. It’s more like she’s obligated to do these things since she enjoys the “privilege” of her granddaughters marrying Rhaenyra’s boys rather than choosing to do them.

[spacerockfloater]

Sansa Stark & Alicent Hightower:

Young redhead noble girls that start off as soft and naive

Daughters of a powerful lord that becomes the King’s Hand

Married off to incapable kings, after being promised their lives as queen consorts will be happy and prosperous, although they end up friendless and miserable

Oppose their blood relatives and defend their (future) husband’s side of the family at first

Betrayed by the royal family who brutalises their beloved ones, which hardens them and makes them seek justice

Await a knight in shining armour to avenge them

End up becoming queens and ruling in their own right

Survive the war and get their revenge at a great personal cost

and they peaked right here -

But no, let’s give Alicent the exact same shit we gave Sansa undeservingly, because apparently the history book on the shelf is always repeating itself and you people never learn.

[thehyperfemininesoulaani-deacti]

Alicent’s losses are largely caused by her father’s political decisions and alliances. Otto Hightower’s maneuvering against Prince Daemon and later Viserys’s rivals sets off a chain of events that puts Alicent’s friends and loved ones in danger. So unlike Sansa, whose suffering comes mostly from the royal family she serves (Joffrey, Cersei, Ramsay, etc.), Alicent’s pain is directly tied to her own family’s machinations, even as she remains loyal to them. Let's not blame Rhaenyra for everything. Otto simply fucked around and found out. He sent for Rhaenyra to be killed while doing exactly what he claimed Rhaenyra would do to them the hypocrisy.

[spacerockfloater]

You do understand that the intention behind Ned Stark’s decision is irrelevant after he agreed to Sansa marrying Joffrey, right? Whether he wanted her to marry him or not initially does not matter after he agreed to it. No one forced him to agree. And Ned opposing Joffrey being crowned king is the exact same as Otto standing against Daemon, yeah? I do not see what’s so difficult to understand. Both did that because they believed that the crown princes and princess were unfit rulers, Joffrey and Daemon because they were violent lunatics and Rhaenyra because she was a fool that kept fucking up every political move she made which would make it impossible for the realm to be united under her, considering that she should have been working extra hard to make up for the fact that she is a woman in a society that doesn’t favour women. Whether Otto was simultaneously aiming to fulfil his own ambitions does not matter in the slightest; he wouldn’t have been able to do that if the line of succession was solidified to the point of there being no room for him to intervene. Since he was able to do that, it means that his logic was correct. Of course he is a piece of shit for forcing his daughter into a marriage with a much older man she didn’t love, but he didn’t want her to be abused and attacked the way she was. He probably expected her life will be difficult of course, but the perpetrators of Alicent’s abuse remain the Targaryens. Viserys marries a young girl to have male heirs, which will hold a stronger claim to the throne than his daughter since Westeros puts sons above daughters, essentially pitting Alicent and Rhaenyra against each other from the get-go. He then completely abandons his new wife and children at the mercy of their enemies, after cutting her off from her father who is her only support. He also absolutely did not have to marry at all since he was so set on his daughter succeeding him, let alone marry Alicent. Then Rhaenyra, naturally of course, turns against Alicent and her sons, which would have been totally fine in my books because hey, eat or be eaten, until she pushed for her bastard sons to be put above Alicent’s legitimate ones? That was nuts and totally unfair for Alicent. She could have arranged it so that Aegon II’s line would succeed her after her reign since she couldn’t have kids with Laenor. She could have done a myriad things other than push Alicent against the wall doing whatever the fuck she wanted.

And please. Hypocrisy? What about Otto wanting to have Rhaenyra killed after they openly declared war on her was hypocritical? Otto wasn’t wrong when he said Rhaenyra and her faction would come for his grandkids given the chance, the girl demanded for her brother to be tortured after her kid crippled him for saying the truth for God’s sake. He wanted to finish off his enemy before she had the chance to attack first. In an open war mind you, after he openly put his grandson on the throne. He never said he would’t go after Rhaenyra, all he did was acknowledge the fact she could very well go after them. Which again, natural and expected. He wasn’t filling Alicent’s head with irrational fears, everything he told her was an actual possibility. Y’all are just as slow as miss girl I believe.

[thehyperfemininesoulaani-deacti]

Ned Stark and Otto Hightower are not the same. Ned accepted Sansa’s betrothal as a reluctant political compromise, not to advance his own bloodline, and he opposed Joffrey because the boy was illegitimate not because Ned thought him “unfit.” Otto, on the other hand, deliberately undermined both Daemon and Rhaenyra from the start to secure the throne for his descendants. Saying Otto was “right” because the succession was unstable is circular logic; the instability existed in large part because Otto fueled it, first by pushing Alicent into Viserys’s bed and then by poisoning her against Rhaenyra. That’s not impartial stewardship, that’s opportunism.

Viserys’s failures are real, but they don’t erase Otto’s scheming. Viserys’s indecision lit the match, but Otto built the pyre. Expecting Rhaenyra to pass over her own sons for Alicent’s children ignores both Westerosi precedent and maternal instinct no woman in that world would willingly hand her crown to her rival’s line. Otto spent years filling Alicent’s head with fear that Rhaenyra would kill her children long before war even broke out, then turned around and plotted to kill Rhaenyra first. That’s the hypocrisy: projecting his own ruthlessness onto her, then claiming he was justified.

I am not denying Rhaenyra’s flaws I never did. I simply shifted the focus because, if we are going down that path, we could argue that everyone is flawed in some way. For instance, Aemond literally killed her child while on a dragon, and even Aegon, who is arguably the best-written character in the series, commits morally questionable acts. Rhaenyra, meanwhile, experiences significant trauma throughout her life, including the violent loss of family members, political manipulation, betrayal by allies, the constant threat to her claim as a female ruler in a patriarchal society, and the loss of her children due to conflicts orchestrated by her enemies. Helaena’s flaws, by contrast, are less apparent unless one references Fire & Blood, where she serves as an advisor to Aegon II. Daeron is still a child in the midst of these events, so there is little exploration of his character compared to the more developed arcs of Otto, Alicent, Viserys, and most members of Team Black.

It’s clear that you’re framing Rhaenyra as the cause of everyone else’s suffering, but that’s a distortion. Alicent’s losses, Otto’s scheming, and Viserys’s failures are active choices made by those characters, not unavoidable consequences of Rhaenyra’s actions. Yes, Rhaenyra makes mistakes she is ambitious and politically bold but calling her a “fool” or blaming her for every hardship ignores the very real trauma she endures and the intentional harm inflicted by others. Making her a scapegoat for everyone else’s faults erases the agency and culpability of the people who actually manipulated, betrayed, and undermined her. When she arrived in King’s Landing, the Greens actively undermined her, including seizing her wealth. No wonder she’s such a “horrible ruler.” Nobody would be in great shape after losing three of their children. TG dismisses Rhaenyra’s trauma in favor of Alicent’s, minimizing the hardships Rhaenyra endured. Unlike Aemma, whose suffering was also extreme, much of Rhaenyra’s trauma resulted from Viserys’s failures and Otto Hightower’s manipulations, including his scheming, undermining of her position, and exploitation of her rivals, which made her challenges uniquely severe.

It’s also worth noting that your framing consistently casts the Targaryens particularly Rhaenyra and her allies as the source of all conflict, while excusing or minimizing the deliberate actions of the Greens, Otto, and Viserys. This selective focus essentially ignores the real sabotage, manipulations, and trauma inflicted on Rhaenyra, making your argument read less like an analysis and more like Targaryen-bashing.

[spacerockfloater]

You are centring your arguments around Ned and Otto’s intentions. I repeat: their intentions are completely irrelevant. The only thing that matters is that their actions follow the exact same pattern. Become Hand > betroth/ marry daughter to the (future) king > oppose the heir(s) to the throne > get yourself removed from the court (killed/fired) > your daughter gets abused by the royal family.

Even if Otto pushed Alicent in a situation where she could be harmed and he bears great responsibility for her misfortunes, it is still the Targaryens that chose to harm her. Alicent had no choice but to marry the king. Everyone else could choose not to abuse her. Instead, they did her dirty to protect their own interests. I still don’t get why people say that Otto’s warnings to Alicent about Rhaenyra were baseless. Rhaenyra proved to be exactly who Otto was said she was: demanded her son receives no reprimands for disabling another prince, demanding said prince be tortured, demanding her brother’s head after she already killed his son (whether it happened against her will or not is irrelevant, a child is dead and she STILL demands “a son for a a son” as payment, admitting that she’s going after Aegon’s head not only because he as a “usurper” must die for her to triumph absolutely, but because she wants revenge which is just nuts after her faction already killed an infant). For some reason, you people believe that Otto’s words to Alicent were something along the lines of “Oh my sweet angel, we are so innocent and pure and the evil Rhaenyra wants to kill us!” and then wanted to murder Rhaenyra out of the blue, when in fact Otto is a realist, not a hypocrite. His logic was that of “Ok, our family is actively challenging Rhaenyra’s claim. We are heading into war (he literally says that to Alicent in Driftmark). Rhaenyra will come after our throats naturally, so we will either kill her or be killed”. I honestly do not know where exactly people got the idea that Otto was pretending to be a victim in the situation. He was honest with Alicent about marrying her off to put his line on the throne, he didn’t pretend he had other, more noble intentions. Call him a child abuser, call him a pimp, call him cunning, call him scheming and power hungry, these are all crimes he is guilty of, but he isn’t a hypocrite lol. He couldn’t be more honest. Even when Viserys straight up accuses him of wanting to see his blood on the throne, he doesn’t flat out deny it. The man couldn’t have been more honest without being branded a coup monger.

Additionally, it is true that Otto did nothing to ease the unrest caused by Viserys’s fragile line of succession, but the instability itself wasn’t his own creation either, lol? A brother that brutalises the subjects of your realm and a daughter are hardly “secure succession” material in the world of Westeros. Corlys Velaryons was pushing his even YOUNGER daughter towards Viserys before Otto did the same thing, which means that everyone saw the situation as an opening to get their own blood on the throne, which means that Rhaenyra’s and Daemon’s claim to it wasn’t undisputed as a son’s would be. Viserys himself admits this by telling Rhaenyra that even he as a king has no choice in the matter: he has no sons and he just exiled his only brother. He MUST marry and produce more children. How the most short sighted character in the show is able to see this and some fans aren’t is beyond me. Otto built no pyres, those were built the moment Aemma died and left Viserys with no sons, which is sad and cruel but it is what it is. If Alicent hadn’t married Viserys, someone else’s daughter would and the Dance would unfold in the exact same way.

Rhaenyra’s response to the whole situation is natural and expected. Why wouldn’t she fight for the crown? However, every move she makes to achieve this is not only wrong and selfish, but also straight up illegal. She wants a claim to the throne, but refuses to get married and have children. She doesn’t want people to challenge her reputation, but she runs to the brothels with her uncle. She could declare that her brother’s line will succeed her after her death since she and Laenor could have no children, making everyone happy, but no, she wanted her own line to succeed her at all costs, so she has bastard children, pushing Alicent’s legitimate children down the line of succession. To rob a woman who did everything by the book at a great personal expense off her rights is outrageous and a great insult. Rhaenyra had her chance to fight for her rights fair and square and SHE fucked it up by making wrong decision after wrong decision. That’s not being politically bold, that’s being a fool. She demands the ultimate reward while making no sacrifices which is absurd. She may be a human and she may be a mother, but she is petitioning to become an absolute monarch with control over everyone’s lives and a leader should lead by example. Since she is not openly advocating for the unjust laws of Westeros regarding women and illegitimate children to be repealed or changed, she should be following them. Instead, what she does is try to bend the rules just enough so she can make it through at the expense of another woman. She cannot afford to be “just a mother and a woman” when she is actively pursuing the highest political position of her world. It is RHAENYRA who is a hypocrite.

Nobody said everything is Rhaenyra’s fault or that no one else is flawed, this however is not a masterlist on everyone’s wrongdoings ever. Rhaenyra remains Alicent’s main aggressor though. Interestingly enough, Rhaenyra’s name is not even mentioned in the original post, I am holding the ENTIRETY of the Targaryen family of Alicent’s time responsible for what they did to her if you would bother to look at what you’ve reblogged again. But I guess if the shoe fits…

Btw. I am a Targaryen basher. OG post was literally tagged as “anti targaryen” and “anti targ stans” lol.

[thehyperfemininesoulaani-deacti]

Your “pattern = equivalence” argument is intellectually lazy. Ned Stark’s compromises were protective, reluctant, and non-ambitious; Otto Hightower’s moves were deliberate, self-serving, and designed to secure the throne for his line. Alicent’s suffering isn’t some inevitable byproduct of fate it exists because Otto engineered her situation, manipulated her mind against Rhaenyra, and escalated court instability. Patterns alone don’t erase the difference between defensive prudence and opportunistic scheming.

Labeling Rhaenyra as reckless or selfish ignores her reality: she faces systemic patriarchy, trauma, and threats designed by Otto and enabled by Viserys’s indecision. Protecting her children and asserting her claim isn’t foolishness; it’s survival. Expecting her to sacrifice her bloodline for Alicent’s children is absurd under Westerosi law, precedent, and maternal instinct. Her “rule bending” is contextually justified, not evidence of folly or hypocrisy.

You claim Otto wasn’t hypocritical because Rhaenyra eventually behaves dangerously. Wrong. Otto proactively manipulated Alicent, filled her with fear, and then acted ruthlessly to preempt threats projecting his own ruthlessness onto her while scheming.

Let's not pretend he didn't ask Alicent to comfort Viserys directly after Rhaenyra's mother's funeral. This happened long before Rhaenyra started acting recklessly.

In essence, Otto fucked around and found out, as his reckless political maneuvering ultimately led to the consequences he had set in motion.

[spacerockfloater]

Last reply to this absurd, on your behalf, dialogue.

Your claim that a person’s intentions can differentiate two situations that are the exact same is simply unintelligent. Sansa’s suffering was also Ned’s byproduct, since he chose to oppose Joffrey. His reasoning for that simply doesn’t matter. Whether Otto and Ned did what they did for the greater good or for personal gain is completely irrelevant: they make the exact same choice for different reasons yet the result remains the same: they are removed from the equation and their daughters suffer for it. I think understanding this concept requires some basic mathematical knowledge that I cannot magically grant you.

No one said Alicent’s mistreatment by the Targaryens was an accidental result of Otto’s push for power that made him stand against Viseys, Daemon and Rhaenyra. It is a direct consequence of it, same as Sansa’s mistreatment by the Lannisters is a direct consequence of Ned standing against Joffrey and Cersei.

And you seem to be missing something: Ned doesn’t step on Cersei’s toes because he simply wants the good of the realm. Stannis isn’t what’s good for the realm, the guy murdered his brother and daughter in cold blood and Ned barely knows him, he has no idea how Stannis is like as a person, let alone ruler. He fights Cersei because what she’s doing is against the LAW. The only reason Ned does anything, aside from feeling obligated to preserve his friend’s legacy, is because he is upholding the law. Ned would 100% side against Rhaenyra and her bastards in the Dance. Up to the point of Robbert’s death, Joffrey has shown no signs of being evil other than being a whiny child. Ned could literally let him rule with the full support of the realm, especially since Robbert thought Joffrey was his own blood. Joffrey may have even been able to have a decent rule under his council’s supervision, especially since he wouldn’t have to deal with the entire realm rebelling against him for being a bastard born of incest, something he can’t control. I repeat: up until Robert’s death, Ned has no reason to believe Joffrey is unfit to be king. He could let things be and everyone could be happy to Ned’s knowledge. But he doesn’t do that! He plunges the realm into war and chaos knowing fully well what he does because he is upholding the LAW. In that sense, Otto does the same thing: the king’s brother is exiled and the king needs male heirs. When the king finally has these male heirs, the law dictates that they now supersede his daughter as heirs. Otto doesn’t create all this commotion by himself. There is GROUNDS for the moves he makes, which is evident by the fact that such a large portion of the realm supports him in the war.

Alicent also faces the exact same obstacles Rhaenyra does yet she doesn’t deal with them in the same self serving, self centring, illegal way Rhaenyra does. Alicent and Rhaenyra are not simply mothers and women: they are people with great political responsibilities, competing for absolute power and therefore should be held to the same standards as normal subjects. More is expected of them and Rhaenyra is failing to meet the requirements entirely due to her own actions. Lastly, her illegitimate children were not something that just, happened to her or that she had prior to her journey for power. She has those children ON PURPOSE because she WANTS the throne but has no heirs of her own with Laenor and therefore no strong claims! She had these children because she wanted to achieve her goals! No one is denying that she loves them to bits as any mother would, but she still made the conscious decision to have them in order to serve her own purposes. You know what she could have done? Not do that! She could have not had her bastards and reach an agreement with the Hightowers since her marriage with Laenor wasn’t fruitful. Hell, her very marriage with Laenor was the direct consequence of her own inability to find one decent man to marry in the whole kingdom, let alone a rushed cover up for her indecent public actions with her uncle. But of course not, why would she try to find a middle solution when she could just go all or nothing after royally fucking everything up. 🤦‍♀️ Please do not bother mentioning the marriage proposal she made to Alicent about their children: if I was Alicent and someone asked me to marry my legitimate princess of a daughter, who came to me after I swallowed my own wants and needs and did my duty at the expense of my literal life, to their love child, strengthening his claim and pushing my other legitimate kids further down the line of succession, I too would look at you like you’re crazy. Rhaenyra’s offer was a pitiful attempt to catch a ship that had already sailed and she only made it because there was nothing else she could do.

Are you able to… read? I do not claim Otto isn’t hypocritical because Rhaenyra eventually acts with hostility as he predicted. I claim that Otto isn’t hypocritical because he is honest about his intentions from the get-go. He makes it clear to Alicent that she must gain the king’s favour because HE wants for power. He is up front about it. When she succeeds in doing that, he very validly informs her that she is now at war with Rhaenyra and Daemon, who are her children’s competition for the throne. Like, he’s right in telling Alicent that Rhaenyra is no longer her friend. Willingly or not, she’s fucking her dad for Christ’s sake, let alone giving him children that can replace her. He isn’t fear-mongering, he is simply explaining to her the reality of her situation, a situation that Alicent is in regardless of the reasons that landed her there, so she can either await Daemon’s and Rhaenyra’s mercy, or act proactively and strike before the other side strikes. The man couldn’t be more clear. I don’t get what’s so difficult to understand.

If one thing’s for sure, everyone fucked around and found out in the Dance. This wasn’t Otto’s fault though. Had Viserys not married Alicent, he would have married Corlys’s or anyone else’s daughter, who would then give him male heirs, whose claim their maternal family would support until the Dance unfolded in the exact same way. It is not Otto’s moves that set the Dance in motion because Otto specifically can be replaced with Corlys or any other from the ambitious noble men. It is Viserys, Rhaenyra and Daemon that set the Dance in motion. Had Viserys not remarried, his daughter’s claim wouldn’t have been weakened. Had Rhaenyra not been brazen, she wouldn’t have been forced to marry Laenor. Had Daemon not been arrogant, he wouldn’t have been exiled. They could have been a united front, Viserys would give his blessing to Rhaenyra and Daemon and their reign would be undisputed. Do you see how the key factors in the equation are the Targaryens themselves? It doesn’t matter if Otto or any other man thirsting for power went after it as long as the Targaryens worked out their beef, but as always, they are each other’s worst enemy and fucked it all up completely by themselves.

[thehyperfemininesoulaani-deacti]

Outcomes and intentions both matter in Westeros. Law, legitimacy, and honor shape how history views people. Ned is remembered as honorable; Otto as manipulative. That distinction is literally why people rally to certain banners in the Dance. Rhaenyra's Options were rigged. Laenor was gay, Alicent turned against her under Otto’s influence, and Viserys refused to enforce her status. The “just marry better” argument ignores how few allies a woman heir had in Westeros her so-called recklessness was one of the only ways she could secure loyalty to her bloodline. What the fuck was Rhaenyra suppose to do? Rape him!? Being “transparent” after grooming your teenage daughter into your political pawn isn’t honesty, it’s coercion. Telling her “you’re at war with Rhaenyra now” doesn’t absolve him it locks her into a position he created. He frames her choices to make his scheme seem inevitable.Yes, the Targaryens were dysfunctional, but Otto sharpened those cracks into open war. Without his relentless push for Aegon, Rhaenyra might have consolidated support under Viserys’s lifetime of insistence. Ambitious lords always exist, but Otto’s timing, pressure, and manipulation of Alicent specifically created the factional split when it still could have been prevented.Ned’s “suffering byproduct” was unintentional fallout from protecting the law. Otto’s “suffering” was the vehicle of his ambition. Alicent wasn’t collateral damage, she was the ladder. That’s not equivalence, that’s exploitation. Bitch, if your argument was actually solid you wouldn’t have to throw in ‘basic math’ and ‘are you able to read?’ like a discount Otto Hightower trying to play smart. I can read just fine and what I’m reading is that you’ve got no real counter, so you’re hiding behind condescension. Intentions do matter in Westeros, and the fact you can’t admit that just makes your whole take look sloppy.

[spacerockfloater]

Oh girl, losing the debate got you all hot and bothered, huh? That’s alright, in time you will remember this as a valuable lesson. My remarks regarding your literacy and logical abilities stem out of genuine surprise regarding how someone could be this dense, they weren’t meant to degrade you. Your poor critical thinking skills are doing that for you already!

You haven’t countered a single one of my arguments. The only thing you keep repeating is that Ned is an honourable man and that Otto is a hypocrite, both of which are 100% wrong. Ned isn’t honourable. What exactly is honour? How do you define honour? The man lied twice to his best friend, once by sheltering the child of his greatest enemy because he was his sister’s son and twice by changing Robert’s will on his deathbed without telling him! Not to mention that when his life was at stake he publicly declared that he was a traitor and went back on his statement about Joffrey being a bastard born of incest in order to save himself and his daughters. Seems to me like Ned’s “honour” should be instead dabbed as self preservation and protection of his loved ones rather than hOnOuR. Ned Stark’s glorification is unintelligent GOT fans’ bread and butter. Y’all suck such major ass at analysing characters in depth. No one is denying Otto is cunning and self serving. He isn’t manipulative though. He doesn’t manipulate Alicent, he is straight up exploiting her. Read a damn dictionary. Up until her marriage to Viserys, after which she becomes queen and he can no longer force her to obey him although he tried hard, he doesn’t try to persuade Alicent to do what he says. He is COMMANDING her. He’s not filling her head with silly scary ideas about Rhaenyra, he uses her and simply keeps her updated on where she stands with her enemies now. Is he a piece of shit? Duh. He isn’t a hypocrite though. Learn the definitions of the words you use.

Ned and Otto are the same person, as Sansa and Alicent are equivalent. Their actions of opposing the crowned heirs to the throne plunged the Seven Kingdoms into civil war and destroyed their families. Why each did what he did does not matter when we are discussing the end results of their actions. I don’t know what your fucking problem is. Look at the post again. The parallels of Sansa/Alicent and Ned/Otto are so fucking clear a blind man could see it. But yet again you weren’t even able to read the tags so…

Rhaenyra had no options? After the ENTIRE kingdom rushed to ask for her hand in marriage? Sure grandma, let’s get you back to bed!

Lastly, I have to laugh at your train of thought here: “Oh, Rhaenyra couldn’t have possibly crowned her brother and nephews as her heirs since she was childless because this goes against human nature! It’s totally logical that she wanted her OWN blood on the throne. Oh btw, Otto is literally the devil for wanting the exact same thing. Wanting for power and human greed in general are concepts that should be reserved for Rhaenyra exclusively!”.

Anyways, the Targaryen’s basically committed suicide by acting the way they did and orchestrated their own demise.

[thehyperfemininesoulaani-deacti]

You rely heavily on semantic hair-splitting (manipulate vs. exploit), outcome-only reasoning (ignoring intent), ad hominem, and condescension. I’m impressed your argument is so “mathematical” that it completely ignores context, nuance, and critical thinking. Truly the height of abstract logic: ignore everything that actually matters and declare equivalence. Genius.

Gaslighting 101: insult the reader, ignore context, pretend patterns erase agency. Otto exploiting his daughter ≠ Ned trying to protect his family. You can scream about math and outcomes, but that’s not analysis it’s bad rhetoric.

Ned Stark and Otto Hightower may superficially follow similar “patterns” of opposing heirs and their daughters suffering, but pattern alone does not equal moral or strategic equivalence. Ned acts out of principle and duty to law and family, often at personal cost. Otto acts to secure power for his lineage, deliberately manipulating his daughter to achieve his ends. Outcomes may align, but intentions, context, and ethical weight are fundamentally different. That distinction matters in Westeros history, alliances, and public perception are shaped as much by why someone acts as by what happens.

Otto may “command” Alicent, but systematically shaping her perceptions, instilling fear of Rhaenyra, and positioning her as a political tool is manipulation by function, regardless of semantics. Exploitation without manipulation ignores the coercive framing he applies he doesn’t merely issue orders; he actively conditions her worldview to ensure compliance. That’s morally and strategically distinct from Ned placing Sansa in a betrothal for the sake of alliance and survival.

Claiming Rhaenyra “had plenty of suitors” ignores the realities of her situation: Laenor was gay, Viserys refused to fully enforce her authority, and she was a female heir in a patriarchal system stacked against her. Her so-called recklessness protecting her children, asserting her claim is a survival strategy in an environment where options were severely constrained. Expecting her to sacrifice her bloodline for Alicent’s children is unreasonable and historically unrealistic within Westerosi law and precedent.

You dismiss intentions entirely, but Westeros’ political and moral system consistently distinguishes between selfish ambition and defensive prudence. Ned is celebrated as honorable because he prioritizes principle; Otto is condemned because his actions are self-serving and coercive. Ignoring this distinction collapses ethical reasoning and misrepresents character dynamics.

The Dance might have occurred due to Targaryen dysfunction, but Otto’s manipulations sharpened and accelerated factionalism. His timing, pressure, and personal agenda created the split in ways that could have been mitigated. He did not merely “update Alicent on reality” he orchestrated her position to maximize his family’s advantage. Alicent was not collateral damage; she was an instrument of his ambition.

Ned ≠ Otto, Sansa ≠ Alicent, and outcomes alone do not erase context, intent, or coercion. Rhaenyra’s decisions were made under systemic constraints and threats engineered by others. Anyone who claims these situations are morally or strategically identical can, frankly, eat a dick.

Funny how your own post paints Alicent as a soft, naive girl betrayed by the royal family, just like Sansa, yet in this debate she magically transforms into a fully competent strategist whose suffering is apparently Rhaenyra’s fault. According to your “masterpost,” she’s a victim of circumstance but now she’s morally responsible for everything that happens to her? Incredible consistency. This level of mental gymnastics is giving peak delusion and narcissism. Maybe next time try keeping your characterizations and your arguments in the same universe. And for the love of all seven kingdoms, please get therapy your obsession with bending every narrative to make yourself right is giving full-blown delusion, and it’s exhausting to watch. I’m neither Team Green nor Team Black I like both sides because I relate to their characters but watching you fully indulge yourself and take it to heart is so unhinged, I only insulted you because you took it personally enough to insult me first.

[spacerockfloater]

“Well intentions DO matter when it comes to results because I said so and anyone who doesn’t agree with me can eat a dick!”

First of all I’m afraid you’ve left no dicks for me to eat, you were too gluttonous and devoured them all yourself. Girl. You are exhausting. You have failed to provide counterarguments for EVERY single one of my arguments. I say intentions don’t matter when we are comparing actions and their results, because if the same actions but different intentions lead to the same results then the intentions hold no value and have no role in how things turn out. Let me spell it out for you.

I say that actions alone equal results, therefore I suggest that:

Results = Actions

Let’s name Ned’s case 1, so we have:

Results 1 = Actions 1

and Otto’s 2:

Results 2 = Actions 2

Ned’s actions and Otto’s actions are the same. Their results are also the same. They rebel against crown prince/ princess, their families pay for it and civil war erupts. Simple enough. We agree on that. Therefore

Results 1 = Results 2

and

Actions 1 = Actions 2

meaning that

Results 1 = Actions 2

and

Results 2 = Actions 1

Mathematically, my hypothesis checks out.

Now, here comes you adding a new variable: intention. You propose that:

Results = Actions + Intentions

Therefore for Ned we have:

Result 1 = Action 1 + Intention 1

And for Otto we have:

Result 2 = Action 2 + Intention 2

Here’s the catch: you say that Intention 1 and Intention 2 are different, therefore

Intention 1 ≠ Intention 2

So far we both agree that

Actions 1 = Actions 2

Results 1 = Results 2

Intentions 1 ≠ Intentions 2

If we accept all those as true, then your proposition of Results = Actions + Intentions cannot be true because Intention 1 ≠ Intention 2 would lead to Results 1 ≠ Results 2, which is not true since we have already accepted that R1 = R2. It’s a VERY basic concept really.

I will cling onto semantics and maths. Some of us have been educated, unfortunately for you. You say that Ned is remembered as honourable and that Otto as a manipulator. I ask you: by whom? Half the kingdom sided against Ned with the Lannisters and half the kingdom sided with Otto against the full blooded Targaryens. This shows that the public’s perception of Ned and Otto was divided. You are making the mistake of projecting your own feelings onto the general public of Westeros. If the people unanimously agreed that Ned was a hero and Otto a villain, then the civil wars wouldn’t have happened lol.

You talk about Rhaenyra’s limited options and her being left with no allies when in fact, Viserys always acknowledged her as his true heir her whole life publicly many times and she was provided with the opportunity to choose her own suitor out of anyone in the kingdom, a privilege she lost because she put her reputation at risk. Mind you, she was more privileged than any other woman in her position before her. Not to mention that being able to choose her own suitor was a privilege earned for her by Alicent, despite her father warning her that Rhaenyra is her natural enemy and she shouldn’t toil for her. And what does Rhaenyra do when Alicent confronts her about her behaviour? She treats her exactly like an enemy, doing exactly what Otto said she would do. Rhaenyra was neither friendless nor provided with no opportunities. She simply didn’t use neither of her resources well and made her already hard life even more difficult. I never denied she had it rough. But for someone who knows the have it rough, she kept digging herself into a bigger hole. Saying she did that because she had no choice is false. She had choices, she just always chose wrong. Btw, Aegon II did exactly what I proposed Rhaenyra should have done when she couldn’t have kids with Laenor: made his nephew his heir when he had no children of his own left, and mind you that was the child of his mortal enemy. Rhaenyra’s solution was having bastards and trying to pass them out as legitimate heirs. Aegon II had bastards of his own but his party didn’t put them above his trueborn nephew. Therefore your claim that sacrificing your own bloodline for the sake of upholding laws is unreasonable for the Westerosi society is debunked.

What on earth are you talking about? Where exactly did I state Alicent is a full blown strategist? Can you quote me on that? Are you well? Do you require medical assistance?

I genuinely wish you the best, you have so much to learn.

[thehyperfemininesoulaani-deacti]

You basically did call Alicent a strategist, if Alicent’s choices and outcomes are meant to mirror Sansa’s, the argument implicitly gives her agency. But in this post, you're also denying Alicent's agency entirely. The contradiction is what I'm pointing out. Your statement is useless.

[spacerockfloater]

You absolutely can have both. Pre-marriage Alicent is the daughter of a noble man, little more than property to him. She can’t oppose him or say no without suffering the consequences of his wrath. Post-marriage Alicent is the motherfucking Queen of the Seven Kingdoms. She doesn’t have to do what daddy says anymore. She has options and power. And she supports her former friend even at the expense of her own children getting robbed. This all changes when Rhaenyra decides to switch up on her. Simultaneously, the King pulls rank on her. She can’t oppose him. She is his victim and at his mercy. Notice how in the OG post I hold all the Targs responsible for her mistreatment, Vizzy included. She is their victim even as queen.

[spacerockfloater]

Sansa Stark & Alicent Hightower:

Young redhead noble girls that start off as soft and naive

Daughters of a powerful lord that becomes the King’s Hand

Married off to incapable kings, after being promised their lives as queen consorts will be happy and prosperous, although they end up friendless and miserable

Oppose their blood relatives and defend their (future) husband’s side of the family at first

Betrayed by the royal family who brutalises their beloved ones, which hardens them and makes them seek justice

Await a knight in shining armour to avenge them

End up becoming queens and ruling in their own right

Survive the war and get their revenge at a great personal cost

and they peaked right here -

But no, let’s give Alicent the exact same shit we gave Sansa undeservingly, because apparently the history book on the shelf is always repeating itself and you people never learn.

[thehyperfemininesoulaani-deacti]

Alicent’s losses are largely caused by her father’s political decisions and alliances. Otto Hightower’s maneuvering against Prince Daemon and later Viserys’s rivals sets off a chain of events that puts Alicent’s friends and loved ones in danger. So unlike Sansa, whose suffering comes mostly from the royal family she serves (Joffrey, Cersei, Ramsay, etc.), Alicent’s pain is directly tied to her own family’s machinations, even as she remains loyal to them. Let's not blame Rhaenyra for everything. Otto simply fucked around and found out. He sent for Rhaenyra to be killed while doing exactly what he claimed Rhaenyra would do to them the hypocrisy.

[spacerockfloater]

You do understand that the intention behind Ned Stark’s decision is irrelevant after he agreed to Sansa marrying Joffrey, right? Whether he wanted her to marry him or not initially does not matter after he agreed to it. No one forced him to agree. And Ned opposing Joffrey being crowned king is the exact same as Otto standing against Daemon, yeah? I do not see what’s so difficult to understand. Both did that because they believed that the crown princes and princess were unfit rulers, Joffrey and Daemon because they were violent lunatics and Rhaenyra because she was a fool that kept fucking up every political move she made which would make it impossible for the realm to be united under her, considering that she should have been working extra hard to make up for the fact that she is a woman in a society that doesn’t favour women. Whether Otto was simultaneously aiming to fulfil his own ambitions does not matter in the slightest; he wouldn’t have been able to do that if the line of succession was solidified to the point of there being no room for him to intervene. Since he was able to do that, it means that his logic was correct. Of course he is a piece of shit for forcing his daughter into a marriage with a much older man she didn’t love, but he didn’t want her to be abused and attacked the way she was. He probably expected her life will be difficult of course, but the perpetrators of Alicent’s abuse remain the Targaryens. Viserys marries a young girl to have male heirs, which will hold a stronger claim to the throne than his daughter since Westeros puts sons above daughters, essentially pitting Alicent and Rhaenyra against each other from the get-go. He then completely abandons his new wife and children at the mercy of their enemies, after cutting her off from her father who is her only support. He also absolutely did not have to marry at all since he was so set on his daughter succeeding him, let alone marry Alicent. Then Rhaenyra, naturally of course, turns against Alicent and her sons, which would have been totally fine in my books because hey, eat or be eaten, until she pushed for her bastard sons to be put above Alicent’s legitimate ones? That was nuts and totally unfair for Alicent. She could have arranged it so that Aegon II’s line would succeed her after her reign since she couldn’t have kids with Laenor. She could have done a myriad things other than push Alicent against the wall doing whatever the fuck she wanted.

And please. Hypocrisy? What about Otto wanting to have Rhaenyra killed after they openly declared war on her was hypocritical? Otto wasn’t wrong when he said Rhaenyra and her faction would come for his grandkids given the chance, the girl demanded for her brother to be tortured after her kid crippled him for saying the truth for God’s sake. He wanted to finish off his enemy before she had the chance to attack first. In an open war mind you, after he openly put his grandson on the throne. He never said he would’t go after Rhaenyra, all he did was acknowledge the fact she could very well go after them. Which again, natural and expected. He wasn’t filling Alicent’s head with irrational fears, everything he told her was an actual possibility. Y’all are just as slow as miss girl I believe.

[thehyperfemininesoulaani-deacti]

Ned Stark and Otto Hightower are not the same. Ned accepted Sansa’s betrothal as a reluctant political compromise, not to advance his own bloodline, and he opposed Joffrey because the boy was illegitimate not because Ned thought him “unfit.” Otto, on the other hand, deliberately undermined both Daemon and Rhaenyra from the start to secure the throne for his descendants. Saying Otto was “right” because the succession was unstable is circular logic; the instability existed in large part because Otto fueled it, first by pushing Alicent into Viserys’s bed and then by poisoning her against Rhaenyra. That’s not impartial stewardship, that’s opportunism.

Viserys’s failures are real, but they don’t erase Otto’s scheming. Viserys’s indecision lit the match, but Otto built the pyre. Expecting Rhaenyra to pass over her own sons for Alicent’s children ignores both Westerosi precedent and maternal instinct no woman in that world would willingly hand her crown to her rival’s line. Otto spent years filling Alicent’s head with fear that Rhaenyra would kill her children long before war even broke out, then turned around and plotted to kill Rhaenyra first. That’s the hypocrisy: projecting his own ruthlessness onto her, then claiming he was justified.

I am not denying Rhaenyra’s flaws I never did. I simply shifted the focus because, if we are going down that path, we could argue that everyone is flawed in some way. For instance, Aemond literally killed her child while on a dragon, and even Aegon, who is arguably the best-written character in the series, commits morally questionable acts. Rhaenyra, meanwhile, experiences significant trauma throughout her life, including the violent loss of family members, political manipulation, betrayal by allies, the constant threat to her claim as a female ruler in a patriarchal society, and the loss of her children due to conflicts orchestrated by her enemies. Helaena’s flaws, by contrast, are less apparent unless one references Fire & Blood, where she serves as an advisor to Aegon II. Daeron is still a child in the midst of these events, so there is little exploration of his character compared to the more developed arcs of Otto, Alicent, Viserys, and most members of Team Black.

It’s clear that you’re framing Rhaenyra as the cause of everyone else’s suffering, but that’s a distortion. Alicent’s losses, Otto’s scheming, and Viserys’s failures are active choices made by those characters, not unavoidable consequences of Rhaenyra’s actions. Yes, Rhaenyra makes mistakes she is ambitious and politically bold but calling her a “fool” or blaming her for every hardship ignores the very real trauma she endures and the intentional harm inflicted by others. Making her a scapegoat for everyone else’s faults erases the agency and culpability of the people who actually manipulated, betrayed, and undermined her. When she arrived in King’s Landing, the Greens actively undermined her, including seizing her wealth. No wonder she’s such a “horrible ruler.” Nobody would be in great shape after losing three of their children. TG dismisses Rhaenyra’s trauma in favor of Alicent’s, minimizing the hardships Rhaenyra endured. Unlike Aemma, whose suffering was also extreme, much of Rhaenyra’s trauma resulted from Viserys’s failures and Otto Hightower’s manipulations, including his scheming, undermining of her position, and exploitation of her rivals, which made her challenges uniquely severe.

It’s also worth noting that your framing consistently casts the Targaryens particularly Rhaenyra and her allies as the source of all conflict, while excusing or minimizing the deliberate actions of the Greens, Otto, and Viserys. This selective focus essentially ignores the real sabotage, manipulations, and trauma inflicted on Rhaenyra, making your argument read less like an analysis and more like Targaryen-bashing.

[spacerockfloater]

You are centring your arguments around Ned and Otto’s intentions. I repeat: their intentions are completely irrelevant. The only thing that matters is that their actions follow the exact same pattern. Become Hand > betroth/ marry daughter to the (future) king > oppose the heir(s) to the throne > get yourself removed from the court (killed/fired) > your daughter gets abused by the royal family.

Even if Otto pushed Alicent in a situation where she could be harmed and he bears great responsibility for her misfortunes, it is still the Targaryens that chose to harm her. Alicent had no choice but to marry the king. Everyone else could choose not to abuse her. Instead, they did her dirty to protect their own interests. I still don’t get why people say that Otto’s warnings to Alicent about Rhaenyra were baseless. Rhaenyra proved to be exactly who Otto was said she was: demanded her son receives no reprimands for disabling another prince, demanding said prince be tortured, demanding her brother’s head after she already killed his son (whether it happened against her will or not is irrelevant, a child is dead and she STILL demands “a son for a a son” as payment, admitting that she’s going after Aegon’s head not only because he as a “usurper” must die for her to triumph absolutely, but because she wants revenge which is just nuts after her faction already killed an infant). For some reason, you people believe that Otto’s words to Alicent were something along the lines of “Oh my sweet angel, we are so innocent and pure and the evil Rhaenyra wants to kill us!” and then wanted to murder Rhaenyra out of the blue, when in fact Otto is a realist, not a hypocrite. His logic was that of “Ok, our family is actively challenging Rhaenyra’s claim. We are heading into war (he literally says that to Alicent in Driftmark). Rhaenyra will come after our throats naturally, so we will either kill her or be killed”. I honestly do not know where exactly people got the idea that Otto was pretending to be a victim in the situation. He was honest with Alicent about marrying her off to put his line on the throne, he didn’t pretend he had other, more noble intentions. Call him a child abuser, call him a pimp, call him cunning, call him scheming and power hungry, these are all crimes he is guilty of, but he isn’t a hypocrite lol. He couldn’t be more honest. Even when Viserys straight up accuses him of wanting to see his blood on the throne, he doesn’t flat out deny it. The man couldn’t have been more honest without being branded a coup monger.

Additionally, it is true that Otto did nothing to ease the unrest caused by Viserys’s fragile line of succession, but the instability itself wasn’t his own creation either, lol? A brother that brutalises the subjects of your realm and a daughter are hardly “secure succession” material in the world of Westeros. Corlys Velaryons was pushing his even YOUNGER daughter towards Viserys before Otto did the same thing, which means that everyone saw the situation as an opening to get their own blood on the throne, which means that Rhaenyra’s and Daemon’s claim to it wasn’t undisputed as a son’s would be. Viserys himself admits this by telling Rhaenyra that even he as a king has no choice in the matter: he has no sons and he just exiled his only brother. He MUST marry and produce more children. How the most short sighted character in the show is able to see this and some fans aren’t is beyond me. Otto built no pyres, those were built the moment Aemma died and left Viserys with no sons, which is sad and cruel but it is what it is. If Alicent hadn’t married Viserys, someone else’s daughter would and the Dance would unfold in the exact same way.

Rhaenyra’s response to the whole situation is natural and expected. Why wouldn’t she fight for the crown? However, every move she makes to achieve this is not only wrong and selfish, but also straight up illegal. She wants a claim to the throne, but refuses to get married and have children. She doesn’t want people to challenge her reputation, but she runs to the brothels with her uncle. She could declare that her brother’s line will succeed her after her death since she and Laenor could have no children, making everyone happy, but no, she wanted her own line to succeed her at all costs, so she has bastard children, pushing Alicent’s legitimate children down the line of succession. To rob a woman who did everything by the book at a great personal expense off her rights is outrageous and a great insult. Rhaenyra had her chance to fight for her rights fair and square and SHE fucked it up by making wrong decision after wrong decision. That’s not being politically bold, that’s being a fool. She demands the ultimate reward while making no sacrifices which is absurd. She may be a human and she may be a mother, but she is petitioning to become an absolute monarch with control over everyone’s lives and a leader should lead by example. Since she is not openly advocating for the unjust laws of Westeros regarding women and illegitimate children to be repealed or changed, she should be following them. Instead, what she does is try to bend the rules just enough so she can make it through at the expense of another woman. She cannot afford to be “just a mother and a woman” when she is actively pursuing the highest political position of her world. It is RHAENYRA who is a hypocrite.

Nobody said everything is Rhaenyra’s fault or that no one else is flawed, this however is not a masterlist on everyone’s wrongdoings ever. Rhaenyra remains Alicent’s main aggressor though. Interestingly enough, Rhaenyra’s name is not even mentioned in the original post, I am holding the ENTIRETY of the Targaryen family of Alicent’s time responsible for what they did to her if you would bother to look at what you’ve reblogged again. But I guess if the shoe fits…

Btw. I am a Targaryen basher. OG post was literally tagged as “anti targaryen” and “anti targ stans” lol.

[thehyperfemininesoulaani-deacti]

Your “pattern = equivalence” argument is intellectually lazy. Ned Stark’s compromises were protective, reluctant, and non-ambitious; Otto Hightower’s moves were deliberate, self-serving, and designed to secure the throne for his line. Alicent’s suffering isn’t some inevitable byproduct of fate it exists because Otto engineered her situation, manipulated her mind against Rhaenyra, and escalated court instability. Patterns alone don’t erase the difference between defensive prudence and opportunistic scheming.

Labeling Rhaenyra as reckless or selfish ignores her reality: she faces systemic patriarchy, trauma, and threats designed by Otto and enabled by Viserys’s indecision. Protecting her children and asserting her claim isn’t foolishness; it’s survival. Expecting her to sacrifice her bloodline for Alicent’s children is absurd under Westerosi law, precedent, and maternal instinct. Her “rule bending” is contextually justified, not evidence of folly or hypocrisy.

You claim Otto wasn’t hypocritical because Rhaenyra eventually behaves dangerously. Wrong. Otto proactively manipulated Alicent, filled her with fear, and then acted ruthlessly to preempt threats projecting his own ruthlessness onto her while scheming.

Let's not pretend he didn't ask Alicent to comfort Viserys directly after Rhaenyra's mother's funeral. This happened long before Rhaenyra started acting recklessly.

In essence, Otto fucked around and found out, as his reckless political maneuvering ultimately led to the consequences he had set in motion.

[spacerockfloater]

Last reply to this absurd, on your behalf, dialogue.

Your claim that a person’s intentions can differentiate two situations that are the exact same is simply unintelligent. Sansa’s suffering was also Ned’s byproduct, since he chose to oppose Joffrey. His reasoning for that simply doesn’t matter. Whether Otto and Ned did what they did for the greater good or for personal gain is completely irrelevant: they make the exact same choice for different reasons yet the result remains the same: they are removed from the equation and their daughters suffer for it. I think understanding this concept requires some basic mathematical knowledge that I cannot magically grant you.

No one said Alicent’s mistreatment by the Targaryens was an accidental result of Otto’s push for power that made him stand against Viseys, Daemon and Rhaenyra. It is a direct consequence of it, same as Sansa’s mistreatment by the Lannisters is a direct consequence of Ned standing against Joffrey and Cersei.

And you seem to be missing something: Ned doesn’t step on Cersei’s toes because he simply wants the good of the realm. Stannis isn’t what’s good for the realm, the guy murdered his brother and daughter in cold blood and Ned barely knows him, he has no idea how Stannis is like as a person, let alone ruler. He fights Cersei because what she’s doing is against the LAW. The only reason Ned does anything, aside from feeling obligated to preserve his friend’s legacy, is because he is upholding the law. Ned would 100% side against Rhaenyra and her bastards in the Dance. Up to the point of Robbert’s death, Joffrey has shown no signs of being evil other than being a whiny child. Ned could literally let him rule with the full support of the realm, especially since Robbert thought Joffrey was his own blood. Joffrey may have even been able to have a decent rule under his council’s supervision, especially since he wouldn’t have to deal with the entire realm rebelling against him for being a bastard born of incest, something he can’t control. I repeat: up until Robert’s death, Ned has no reason to believe Joffrey is unfit to be king. He could let things be and everyone could be happy to Ned’s knowledge. But he doesn’t do that! He plunges the realm into war and chaos knowing fully well what he does because he is upholding the LAW. In that sense, Otto does the same thing: the king’s brother is exiled and the king needs male heirs. When the king finally has these male heirs, the law dictates that they now supersede his daughter as heirs. Otto doesn’t create all this commotion by himself. There is GROUNDS for the moves he makes, which is evident by the fact that such a large portion of the realm supports him in the war.

Alicent also faces the exact same obstacles Rhaenyra does yet she doesn’t deal with them in the same self serving, self centring, illegal way Rhaenyra does. Alicent and Rhaenyra are not simply mothers and women: they are people with great political responsibilities, competing for absolute power and therefore should be held to the same standards as normal subjects. More is expected of them and Rhaenyra is failing to meet the requirements entirely due to her own actions. Lastly, her illegitimate children were not something that just, happened to her or that she had prior to her journey for power. She has those children ON PURPOSE because she WANTS the throne but has no heirs of her own with Laenor and therefore no strong claims! She had these children because she wanted to achieve her goals! No one is denying that she loves them to bits as any mother would, but she still made the conscious decision to have them in order to serve her own purposes. You know what she could have done? Not do that! She could have not had her bastards and reach an agreement with the Hightowers since her marriage with Laenor wasn’t fruitful. Hell, her very marriage with Laenor was the direct consequence of her own inability to find one decent man to marry in the whole kingdom, let alone a rushed cover up for her indecent public actions with her uncle. But of course not, why would she try to find a middle solution when she could just go all or nothing after royally fucking everything up. 🤦‍♀️ Please do not bother mentioning the marriage proposal she made to Alicent about their children: if I was Alicent and someone asked me to marry my legitimate princess of a daughter, who came to me after I swallowed my own wants and needs and did my duty at the expense of my literal life, to their love child, strengthening his claim and pushing my other legitimate kids further down the line of succession, I too would look at you like you’re crazy. Rhaenyra’s offer was a pitiful attempt to catch a ship that had already sailed and she only made it because there was nothing else she could do.

Are you able to… read? I do not claim Otto isn’t hypocritical because Rhaenyra eventually acts with hostility as he predicted. I claim that Otto isn’t hypocritical because he is honest about his intentions from the get-go. He makes it clear to Alicent that she must gain the king’s favour because HE wants for power. He is up front about it. When she succeeds in doing that, he very validly informs her that she is now at war with Rhaenyra and Daemon, who are her children’s competition for the throne. Like, he’s right in telling Alicent that Rhaenyra is no longer her friend. Willingly or not, she’s fucking her dad for Christ’s sake, let alone giving him children that can replace her. He isn’t fear-mongering, he is simply explaining to her the reality of her situation, a situation that Alicent is in regardless of the reasons that landed her there, so she can either await Daemon’s and Rhaenyra’s mercy, or act proactively and strike before the other side strikes. The man couldn’t be more clear. I don’t get what’s so difficult to understand.

If one thing’s for sure, everyone fucked around and found out in the Dance. This wasn’t Otto’s fault though. Had Viserys not married Alicent, he would have married Corlys’s or anyone else’s daughter, who would then give him male heirs, whose claim their maternal family would support until the Dance unfolded in the exact same way. It is not Otto’s moves that set the Dance in motion because Otto specifically can be replaced with Corlys or any other from the ambitious noble men. It is Viserys, Rhaenyra and Daemon that set the Dance in motion. Had Viserys not remarried, his daughter’s claim wouldn’t have been weakened. Had Rhaenyra not been brazen, she wouldn’t have been forced to marry Laenor. Had Daemon not been arrogant, he wouldn’t have been exiled. They could have been a united front, Viserys would give his blessing to Rhaenyra and Daemon and their reign would be undisputed. Do you see how the key factors in the equation are the Targaryens themselves? It doesn’t matter if Otto or any other man thirsting for power went after it as long as the Targaryens worked out their beef, but as always, they are each other’s worst enemy and fucked it all up completely by themselves.

[thehyperfemininesoulaani-deacti]

Outcomes and intentions both matter in Westeros. Law, legitimacy, and honor shape how history views people. Ned is remembered as honorable; Otto as manipulative. That distinction is literally why people rally to certain banners in the Dance. Rhaenyra's Options were rigged. Laenor was gay, Alicent turned against her under Otto’s influence, and Viserys refused to enforce her status. The “just marry better” argument ignores how few allies a woman heir had in Westeros her so-called recklessness was one of the only ways she could secure loyalty to her bloodline. What the fuck was Rhaenyra suppose to do? Rape him!? Being “transparent” after grooming your teenage daughter into your political pawn isn’t honesty, it’s coercion. Telling her “you’re at war with Rhaenyra now” doesn’t absolve him it locks her into a position he created. He frames her choices to make his scheme seem inevitable.Yes, the Targaryens were dysfunctional, but Otto sharpened those cracks into open war. Without his relentless push for Aegon, Rhaenyra might have consolidated support under Viserys’s lifetime of insistence. Ambitious lords always exist, but Otto’s timing, pressure, and manipulation of Alicent specifically created the factional split when it still could have been prevented.Ned’s “suffering byproduct” was unintentional fallout from protecting the law. Otto’s “suffering” was the vehicle of his ambition. Alicent wasn’t collateral damage, she was the ladder. That’s not equivalence, that’s exploitation. Bitch, if your argument was actually solid you wouldn’t have to throw in ‘basic math’ and ‘are you able to read?’ like a discount Otto Hightower trying to play smart. I can read just fine and what I’m reading is that you’ve got no real counter, so you’re hiding behind condescension. Intentions do matter in Westeros, and the fact you can’t admit that just makes your whole take look sloppy.

[spacerockfloater]

Oh girl, losing the debate got you all hot and bothered, huh? That’s alright, in time you will remember this as a valuable lesson. My remarks regarding your literacy and logical abilities stem out of genuine surprise regarding how someone could be this dense, they weren’t meant to degrade you. Your poor critical thinking skills are doing that for you already!

You haven’t countered a single one of my arguments. The only thing you keep repeating is that Ned is an honourable man and that Otto is a hypocrite, both of which are 100% wrong. Ned isn’t honourable. What exactly is honour? How do you define honour? The man lied twice to his best friend, once by sheltering the child of his greatest enemy because he was his sister’s son and twice by changing Robert’s will on his deathbed without telling him! Not to mention that when his life was at stake he publicly declared that he was a traitor and went back on his statement about Joffrey being a bastard born of incest in order to save himself and his daughters. Seems to me like Ned’s “honour” should be instead dabbed as self preservation and protection of his loved ones rather than hOnOuR. Ned Stark’s glorification is unintelligent GOT fans’ bread and butter. Y’all suck such major ass at analysing characters in depth. No one is denying Otto is cunning and self serving. He isn’t manipulative though. He doesn’t manipulate Alicent, he is straight up exploiting her. Read a damn dictionary. Up until her marriage to Viserys, after which she becomes queen and he can no longer force her to obey him although he tried hard, he doesn’t try to persuade Alicent to do what he says. He is COMMANDING her. He’s not filling her head with silly scary ideas about Rhaenyra, he uses her and simply keeps her updated on where she stands with her enemies now. Is he a piece of shit? Duh. He isn’t a hypocrite though. Learn the definitions of the words you use.

Ned and Otto are the same person, as Sansa and Alicent are equivalent. Their actions of opposing the crowned heirs to the throne plunged the Seven Kingdoms into civil war and destroyed their families. Why each did what he did does not matter when we are discussing the end results of their actions. I don’t know what your fucking problem is. Look at the post again. The parallels of Sansa/Alicent and Ned/Otto are so fucking clear a blind man could see it. But yet again you weren’t even able to read the tags so…

Rhaenyra had no options? After the ENTIRE kingdom rushed to ask for her hand in marriage? Sure grandma, let’s get you back to bed!

Lastly, I have to laugh at your train of thought here: “Oh, Rhaenyra couldn’t have possibly crowned her brother and nephews as her heirs since she was childless because this goes against human nature! It’s totally logical that she wanted her OWN blood on the throne. Oh btw, Otto is literally the devil for wanting the exact same thing. Wanting for power and human greed in general are concepts that should be reserved for Rhaenyra exclusively!”.

Anyways, the Targaryen’s basically committed suicide by acting the way they did and orchestrated their own demise.

[thehyperfemininesoulaani-deacti]

You rely heavily on semantic hair-splitting (manipulate vs. exploit), outcome-only reasoning (ignoring intent), ad hominem, and condescension. I’m impressed your argument is so “mathematical” that it completely ignores context, nuance, and critical thinking. Truly the height of abstract logic: ignore everything that actually matters and declare equivalence. Genius.

Gaslighting 101: insult the reader, ignore context, pretend patterns erase agency. Otto exploiting his daughter ≠ Ned trying to protect his family. You can scream about math and outcomes, but that’s not analysis it’s bad rhetoric.

Ned Stark and Otto Hightower may superficially follow similar “patterns” of opposing heirs and their daughters suffering, but pattern alone does not equal moral or strategic equivalence. Ned acts out of principle and duty to law and family, often at personal cost. Otto acts to secure power for his lineage, deliberately manipulating his daughter to achieve his ends. Outcomes may align, but intentions, context, and ethical weight are fundamentally different. That distinction matters in Westeros history, alliances, and public perception are shaped as much by why someone acts as by what happens.

Otto may “command” Alicent, but systematically shaping her perceptions, instilling fear of Rhaenyra, and positioning her as a political tool is manipulation by function, regardless of semantics. Exploitation without manipulation ignores the coercive framing he applies he doesn’t merely issue orders; he actively conditions her worldview to ensure compliance. That’s morally and strategically distinct from Ned placing Sansa in a betrothal for the sake of alliance and survival.

Claiming Rhaenyra “had plenty of suitors” ignores the realities of her situation: Laenor was gay, Viserys refused to fully enforce her authority, and she was a female heir in a patriarchal system stacked against her. Her so-called recklessness protecting her children, asserting her claim is a survival strategy in an environment where options were severely constrained. Expecting her to sacrifice her bloodline for Alicent’s children is unreasonable and historically unrealistic within Westerosi law and precedent.

You dismiss intentions entirely, but Westeros’ political and moral system consistently distinguishes between selfish ambition and defensive prudence. Ned is celebrated as honorable because he prioritizes principle; Otto is condemned because his actions are self-serving and coercive. Ignoring this distinction collapses ethical reasoning and misrepresents character dynamics.

The Dance might have occurred due to Targaryen dysfunction, but Otto’s manipulations sharpened and accelerated factionalism. His timing, pressure, and personal agenda created the split in ways that could have been mitigated. He did not merely “update Alicent on reality” he orchestrated her position to maximize his family’s advantage. Alicent was not collateral damage; she was an instrument of his ambition.

Ned ≠ Otto, Sansa ≠ Alicent, and outcomes alone do not erase context, intent, or coercion. Rhaenyra’s decisions were made under systemic constraints and threats engineered by others. Anyone who claims these situations are morally or strategically identical can, frankly, eat a dick.

Funny how your own post paints Alicent as a soft, naive girl betrayed by the royal family, just like Sansa, yet in this debate she magically transforms into a fully competent strategist whose suffering is apparently Rhaenyra’s fault. According to your “masterpost,” she’s a victim of circumstance but now she’s morally responsible for everything that happens to her? Incredible consistency. This level of mental gymnastics is giving peak delusion and narcissism. Maybe next time try keeping your characterizations and your arguments in the same universe. And for the love of all seven kingdoms, please get therapy your obsession with bending every narrative to make yourself right is giving full-blown delusion, and it’s exhausting to watch. I’m neither Team Green nor Team Black I like both sides because I relate to their characters but watching you fully indulge yourself and take it to heart is so unhinged, I only insulted you because you took it personally enough to insult me first.

[spacerockfloater]

“Well intentions DO matter when it comes to results because I said so and anyone who doesn’t agree with me can eat a dick!”

First of all I’m afraid you’ve left no dicks for me to eat, you were too gluttonous and devoured them all yourself. Girl. You are exhausting. You have failed to provide counterarguments for EVERY single one of my arguments. I say intentions don’t matter when we are comparing actions and their results, because if the same actions but different intentions lead to the same results then the intentions hold no value and have no role in how things turn out. Let me spell it out for you.

I say that actions alone equal results, therefore I suggest that:

Results = Actions

Let’s name Ned’s case 1, so we have:

Results 1 = Actions 1

and Otto’s 2:

Results 2 = Actions 2

Ned’s actions and Otto’s actions are the same. Their results are also the same. They rebel against crown prince/ princess, their families pay for it and civil war erupts. Simple enough. We agree on that. Therefore

Results 1 = Results 2

and

Actions 1 = Actions 2

meaning that

Results 1 = Actions 2

and

Results 2 = Actions 1

Mathematically, my hypothesis checks out.

Now, here comes you adding a new variable: intention. You propose that:

Results = Actions + Intentions

Therefore for Ned we have:

Result 1 = Action 1 + Intention 1

And for Otto we have:

Result 2 = Action 2 + Intention 2

Here’s the catch: you say that Intention 1 and Intention 2 are different, therefore

Intention 1 ≠ Intention 2

So far we both agree that

Actions 1 = Actions 2

Results 1 = Results 2

Intentions 1 ≠ Intentions 2

If we accept all those as true, then your proposition of Results = Actions + Intentions cannot be true because Intention 1 ≠ Intention 2 would lead to Results 1 ≠ Results 2, which is not true since we have already accepted that R1 = R2. It’s a VERY basic concept really.

I will cling onto semantics and maths. Some of us have been educated, unfortunately for you. You say that Ned is remembered as honourable and that Otto as a manipulator. I ask you: by whom? Half the kingdom sided against Ned with the Lannisters and half the kingdom sided with Otto against the full blooded Targaryens. This shows that the public’s perception of Ned and Otto was divided. You are making the mistake of projecting your own feelings onto the general public of Westeros. If the people unanimously agreed that Ned was a hero and Otto a villain, then the civil wars wouldn’t have happened lol.

You talk about Rhaenyra’s limited options and her being left with no allies when in fact, Viserys always acknowledged her as his true heir her whole life publicly many times and she was provided with the opportunity to choose her own suitor out of anyone in the kingdom, a privilege she lost because she put her reputation at risk. Mind you, she was more privileged than any other woman in her position before her. Not to mention that being able to choose her own suitor was a privilege earned for her by Alicent, despite her father warning her that Rhaenyra is her natural enemy and she shouldn’t toil for her. And what does Rhaenyra do when Alicent confronts her about her behaviour? She treats her exactly like an enemy, doing exactly what Otto said she would do. Rhaenyra was neither friendless nor provided with no opportunities. She simply didn’t use neither of her resources well and made her already hard life even more difficult. I never denied she had it rough. But for someone who knows the have it rough, she kept digging herself into a bigger hole. Saying she did that because she had no choice is false. She had choices, she just always chose wrong. Btw, Aegon II did exactly what I proposed Rhaenyra should have done when she couldn’t have kids with Laenor: made his nephew his heir when he had no children of his own left, and mind you that was the child of his mortal enemy. Rhaenyra’s solution was having bastards and trying to pass them out as legitimate heirs. Aegon II had bastards of his own but his party didn’t put them above his trueborn nephew. Therefore your claim that sacrificing your own bloodline for the sake of upholding laws is unreasonable for the Westerosi society is debunked.

What on earth are you talking about? Where exactly did I state Alicent is a full blown strategist? Can you quote me on that? Are you well? Do you require medical assistance?

I genuinely wish you the best, you have so much to learn.

[thehyperfemininesoulaani-deacti]

Cute algebra, but you’ve made the exact mistake I already called out: reducing political reality to symbols until context disappears. Westeros isn’t a math equation; it’s a feudal society shaped by perception, precedent, and morality. That’s why Ned and Otto look the same in your formula but end up remembered and treated radically differently. Let’s unpack why your “proof” doesn’t prove anything. You say: “If Intent 1 ≠ Intent 2 then Results must differ.” Wrong. Intent isn’t a numeric variable in a closed system — it’s a social factor that alters alliances, narratives, and legitimacy. People rally behind leaders not just because of what they do, but why they’re seen to do it. Ned is mourned as honorable even by enemies (Varys, Cersei), while Otto is called calculating even by allies. That reputational difference affects long-term consequences. The realm didn’t split evenly between Ned and the Lannisters, nor between Rhaenyra and Aegon. Factionalism was fueled by propaganda, rumor, and manipulated loyalties. Otto deliberately sharpened division through Alicent, the Faith, and Hightower power. To equate that with Ned following law and duty collapses fundamentally different dynamics. Saying she “could pick any suitor” ignores both Laenor’s sexuality and Viserys’s weakness in enforcing her claim. Alicent securing that council scene didn’t erase structural sexism or the knives at Rhaenyra’s back. Calling her reckless for trying to preserve her bloodline is ahistorical in Westeros, producing heirs is survival. Aegon II had the luxury to designate a nephew because his own claim was propped by Otto’s machinations. Rhaenyra was boxed in differently. You accuse me of misquoting you about Alicent as a strategist, but your own framing flips constantly: she’s both a helpless victim of circumstance and the wise counterpoint to Rhaenyra. That inconsistency is exactly what I called out. Either she was conditioned by Otto (manipulated pawn), or she was an autonomous actor strategically “earning” privileges for Rhaenyra. You can’t have both, you are heavily oversymplifying.

[spacerockfloater]

Logic and reasoning are inherently mathematical concepts and you can’t decipher social behaviours without them. The only reason that social sciences and political science are considered sciences in the first place is because they follow systemic methodology which guess what! Is based on maths. E v e r y t h i n g in our universe is maths.

Morality and perception are not universal truths. You treat “good” and “bad” as if they have objective definitions when in reality, they are entirely subjective. What’s good for Otto is bad for Rhaenyra. Add philosophy to your reading list.

You presenting two out of Ned’s enemies who agreed he was honourable and dressing it up as solid proof that his enemies believed him to be honourable in general is a logical fallacy. Let’s have a think!¡! Hmm. If some of Ned’s enemies believed he was honourable, does that mean that all of them believed the same thing? No! You are again projecting your own feelings as a viewer onto TV characters.

What the fuck does Laenor’s sexuality have to do with her picking a suitor? Had Rhaenyra chosen a man for herself instead of going brothel hopping with Daemon, she wouldn’t have been forced into an arranged marriage with a gay man. She royally fucked it up with that one. And regarding Viserys, yeah the man made it virtually impossible for her to remain heir after he remarried and had sons, but come the fuck on now. Daddy had her back 24/7. Crowned her his heir in front of every lord, refused to make Aegon II his heir to the great surprise of his subjects, made sure Rhaenyra’s sons would suffer no consequences for disabling his own son and PUBLICLY announced the bastards are in line for the throne and anyone who calls them that will be punished, defended Rhaenyra’s claim to the throne and that of her son’s to Driftwood when Vaemond challenged him, reaffirmed again and again that Rhaenyra was his chosen heir at every chance. Like what fucking else was he supposed to do apart from not remarry? He couldn’t have been more supportive of her ass.

Alicent convincing Viserys to let Rhaenyra pick her own match should have been a huge relief for Rhaenyra. What other woman was ever able to do that? I’m sorry, was Alicent supposed to break all of Rhaenyra’s chains that years and years of patriarchal oppression placed on both of them? You people are insane. She afforded her a privilege that was unheard of for a woman, let alone a crown princess, and you still have the audacity to say “Well it’s not like she completely set her free and erased all her burdens…”. The fucking gall y’all have.

Oh, and Rhaenyra couldn’t have attempted to find that middle ground with Otto after her efforts to produce legitimate children failed? She just had to double down and have bastards and try passing them as legitimate? Go big or go home? So much for the whole “good people like Ned Stark who abide the law” rhetoric. I guess abiding the law is only good when the law serves us. Which would make what’s good and what’s bad subjective. Huh. So much for morality being universal too I suppose. Now THAT’s what’s hypocritical babes.

You absolutely can have both. Pre-marriage Alicent is the daughter of a noble man, little more than property to him. She can’t oppose him or say no without suffering the consequences of his wrath. Post-marriage Alicent is the motherfucking Queen of the Seven Kingdoms. She doesn’t have to do what daddy says anymore. She has options and power. And she supports her former friend even at the expense of her own children getting robbed. This all changes when Rhaenyra decides to switch up on her.

I will only be replying to this post with memes from now on.