Que esse canto torto corte a carne de vocês

One Hundred Years of Solitude requested by @mirroredworld​

And that line "a song [...] that even Queen Alicent might hear" and at most the hint of a reaction, of a sneerful "oh, really?" on Gwayne's face. When their first interaction was Gwayne trying to intimidate Criston in the good old patriarchal "don't look at my sister" fashion. But Gwayne has finally realised that Criston is beyond such patriarchal and knightly notions of honour. You don't have to pretend now, because you just realised that he's already dead and he wants you to be dead as well. And you can dream of Oldtown all you want, but the only way out he offers you is through the grave. To become A Feast For Crows.

Yes, I saw the discussion around Condal’s interview. He did say the decision to remove Nettles was partly because they did not want to tell a story where Daemon was unfaithful to Rhaenyra, especially after building their relationship and because they believed the audience wanted to see that couple work.

So basically he admitted Nettles was cut because they wanted to protect Daemyra. Like instead of letting Daemon’s relationship with Nettles challenge the audience’s view of him, they changed the story so the ship could stay intact.

Nettles wasn’t just “the girl Daemon might cheat with” she was one of the most interesting characters in the Dance. She challenged Targaryen blood supremacy, had her own agency, and her relationship with Daemon was interesting because it wasn’t just another romantic fantasy. It forced people to question him.

Is this morally ambiguous Rhaenyra who’s no longer a whitewashed Mary Sue in the room with us? Because 50% of the season is over and so far all I’ve seen is a Rhaenyra who:

Lost a son because of his own recklessness and refusal to trust her, nothing to do with wanting to save his brothers.

Was forced by her husband into executing Otto, something they keep telling us she deeply regrets for some reason 🤦🏽‍♀️.

Is also being manipulated by the evil Daemon into killing Daeron, because apparently she would have never kill this obvious threat 🙄.

Doesn’t torture Green allies to the point of horrific disfigurement in order to find the gold.

Declares she cares about the Smallfolk, no way will she tax them! What does she look like Maegor with Teats???

Only cares about finding Sheepstealer’s rider because they killed Jace, nothing to do with victim blaming a child for being sexually abused by her 50 year old husband.

Treats Alicent and Helaena fairly well, you can’t blame her for any suicide or Brothel Queen conspiracy.

Would love to know who the Rhaenyra is that Emma thinks they’re playing in S3, because all I’m seeing is the Mary Sue of the past two seasons.

This is yet again an actor trying to explain a character arc that apparently forgot to appear on screen. 🤣

Mary Sue Rhaenyra is not going anywhere. Even when the writers finally make her lose control, they will still frame every atrocity as something done to her rather than by her.

They watched audiences defend Daenerys after King’s Landing and clearly want the same devotion transferred to Rhaenyra.

Calling Alicent’s children "Targtowers" is not a harmless fandom meme; it is a disgusting rhetorical weapon used to deny their legitimacy. It is a symptom of a much larger, uglier reality: the audience’s total eagerness to adopt the language of eugenics, blood-purism, and white supremacy just to defend their favorite fictional "girlboss."

Let’s strip away the romantic fantasy of the silver hair and the dragons: House Targaryen is an imperialist, colonizing superpower built on a foundation of unchecked violence, slavery, and an explicit ideology of racial supremacy. They don't practice incest out of love; they practice it because they view the rest of Westeros as genetically inferior. They are fantasy fascists.

When Alicent enters the royal lineage with her non-Valyrian Andal background, the fandom immediately treat her heritage as a pollutant. Her blood is framed as a "stain" on a sacred line. That is exactly what the term "Targtowers" means: it is a xenophobic dog-whistle used to declare that her children are structurally impure, dirty, and inherently "lesser" because they aren't product of incest.

The utter hypocrisy of this fandom obsession becomes glaringly obvious when we look at the rest of the Targaryen family tree. Numerous prominent Targaryens had non-Valyrian mothers, yet they are never subjected to this semantic erasure.

Take Baelor Breakspear, his brothers, and their subsequent children. No one in the fandom is inventing hybrid slurs to erase who they are, despite Baelor looking entirely Dornish. Why? Because their existence doesn't threaten the specific narrative that audiences want to coddle. Alicent’s children, by contrast, present a direct political threat to Rhaenyra. Because the fandom demands Rhaenyra's supremacy, Alicent's children must be stripped of their rights, proving that the rules of "purity" are only enforced when they are convenient for the chosen favorite.

In the patriarchal feudalism of Westeros, children legally and culturally inherit their father’s name and house. Their father is King Viserys I Targaryen. By the laws in their society, those children are Targaryens. End of story.

Yet, the fandom completely moves the goalposts for Alicent. Suddenly, the father’s royal blood doesn't matter; everything is reduced to her genetics, as if her Andal womb somehow overrode the King's. This reduces Alicent to an invasive, toxic vessel. She is stripped of her humanity and viewed merely as a parasite that "corrupted" the pure dragon line. To alter the rules of a patriarchal society just to blame a woman for "tainting" a royal lineage is textbook misogyny, and the fandom participates in it gleefully.

The defense of Rhaenyra Targaryen is one of the greatest ironies in modern media consumption. A massive portion of the audience champions her as the ultimate empowered, tragic heroine. But what is Rhaenyra’s "empowerment," really? It is the ultimate manifestation of white feminism. Rhaenyra does not want to dismantle the patriarchy; she just wants to be the one holding the whip. She expects to inherit an empire built on blood and subjugation while enjoying absolute immunity from the rules that oppress every other woman in the realm.

When fans defend her claim by using terms like "Targtowers," they are uplifting a wealthy, privileged princess who rides weapons of mass destruction, they always rely on, Blood Purism: Demanding the supremacy of "pure" Valyrian blood. Xenophobia: Treating the Andal population of Westeros as dirty outsiders. Misogyny: Dehumanizing another woman's motherhood and reproductive labor.

Alicent does not have the luxury of Rhaenyra’s privilege. She cannot fly away from her problems on a dragon. She is a woman who was groomed, traded by her father, forced into the bed of a decaying king, and compelled to perform her reproductive "duty" under the threat of violence. Alicent plays a quiet, institutional game, trying to carve out agency and protect her children from a system that gives her zero margin for error.

Instead of recognizing her surviva strategies as a deeply tragic, valid response to a horrific patriarchal world, the audience labels her a villain. They punish her for working within the system by targeting her children, stripping them of their royal birthright, and reducing them to a hybrid slur.

"Targtowers" is not a joke or a silly nickname; it is the point where white feminism and imperialism and misogyny meet. It allows viewers to root for a dragon-riding elite by adopting the very biases Xenophobia, blood-purism, and patriarchal cruelty that the story is actively screaming at us to reject and criticise. The nickname exists for one reason only: to strip Aegon, Aemond, Daeron, and Helaena of their legitimacy as Dragon riding targaryens.

Ah yes… I know team black stans use “Targtowers” as an insult toward Alicent’s children, usually to imply they aren’t “true” Targaryens because of their “dirty” Hightower blood.

Honestly I kind of find “Targtowers” more like a flex than an insult who wouldn’t want to have a Hightower mother? 🤷🏻‍♀️ It’s similar IRL arguments have been used against people with mixed heritage or immigrants to claim they are somehow “less” part of a nation or culture because one side of their family comes from somewhere else. There have been cases where women from immigrant or non-European backgrounds who married white European men were still treated as outsiders and denied a voice, even though their children were also part of that society and had European heritage through their father.

People can be born somewhere, grow up in that culture, speak the language, contribute to society, and still be told they are not “real” enough because of their ancestry. For example, there are French citizens of Arab descent who are born in France, speak French, grow up in French society, study, work, and are part of the country, yet some people still try to tell them they are “not real French people” because one of their parents or ancestors is Arab. Or when they use terms like “sale Arab,” meaning “dirty Arab,” it’s the same type of blood-based insult of the “dirty Hightower blood”

Or the argument that Alicent “doesn’t have the right” to fight for her children because she herself is not a Targaryen is also another racist argument. Despite her children are Targaryens through their father, and Alicent is still their mother and has every reason to advocate for them. Mind you, Alicent actively had to push back against Valyrian supremacy, to justify crowning Aegon since he arguably has less Valyrian blood than Rhaenyra. Which again it’s similar to arguments that have existed irl where mothers from immigrant or non-European backgrounds are told they have no place speaking up for their own children’s rights because they are not seen as "belonging" in the society despite their children being part of that society but the mother is still hated because of her own background. I’ll add white/European feminism too when talking about the way people hate characters like Alicent.

So yes people have questioned the blood of children whose mothers came from immigrant or minority backgrounds, even when their fathers belonged to the dominant national or ethnic group. Those children were treated as somehow “less authentic” or “less truly” part of the nation because of their maternal ancestry.

I do think Baelor Breakspear and other Dornish-Targaryen like Rhaenys Rhaegar’s daughter, face racism from parts of the fandom because they have both Dornish and Targaryen heritage. But not in the same way people talk about Alicent’s children. With Baelor and other Dornish-Targaryens (dark hair, darker eyes, and their Dornish ancestry) You can see it in the way people redraw them with purple eyes or add white/silver hair streaks to make them look MORE “traditionally” Valyrian. And… why is that always the change people feel the need to make? Why are the Targaryens with darker features the ones who constantly get “corrected” into having more stereotypically Valyrian traits? People try to erase darker features because they have been taught to see whiteness and lighter features as more beautiful more “pure” That’s how colorism and racism can show up, even in fictional fandom.

It’s actually wild how they project their real-life racism into fictional characters and don’t even realize they’re exposing themselves. The way they talk about “dirty blood,” “fake” members of a family because of where their bloodline comes from is the same type of blood purity logic we see irl. And then when people call it out, they get mad like… you said it out loud. Fiction being fictional doesn’t mean people can throw around racist ideas about ancestry and expect nobody to notice.

There’s a difference between criticizing a character’s actions and using racist arguments about someone’s heritage to say they’re somehow less worthy.

THIS:

Misogyny: Dehumanizing another woman's motherhood and reproductive labor.

No, anon, I don’t think it’s wrong.

A lot of those same people spent years telling book fans to shut up, stop complaining, and accept every change because the show was supposedly a masterpiece. Now the same writing choices are turning on characters they like, and suddenly book accuracy matters. Funny how that works. 🤣

Book accuracy was dead on arrival, and the man who wrote the world already shut the door on this mess. C&H don’t care about the story they’re “adapting.” They care about their own bastardized version of it.

This is the same arguments historically used to marginalize wives and undermine their offspring’s legitimacy when women and children are sometimes denied full recognition or rights because of perceived “bloodline” or “racial/cultural purity,” If Viserys had married Laena Velaryon, who’s related to him it’s hard to imagine him calling their sons as “her blood” in the same distancing way because she’s related to him. Likewise with Aemma Arryn, who was already half-Targaryen. Her children were never rhetorically separated from him in that way.

This is just how “blood purity” ideology can function on multiple levels.

And the insult wasn’t small. The Hightowers were ancient, wealthy, powerful, and loyal. Oldtown housed the Faith and the Citadel. If they could be treated as disposable incubators rather than partners in rule, then no non-Targaryen house was safe. Viserys effectively sent a message to every noble family in Westeros: your daughters may marry the king, bear his sons, sacrifice their bodies and lives and still be cast aside if they aren’t “pure enough.”

That is an insane precedent.

Royal marriages are political contracts. They exist to bind houses to the crown through shared blood and shared futures. By privileging one daughter from a “more” Valyrian mother over legitimate sons from a non-Valyrian queen, Viserys broke the trust that makes those contracts work. Once that trust is gone, why would any house gamble its daughters, resources, and loyalty on a royal match? Why marry into a house that openly devalues you and your children?

This is why the Dance was inevitable. Not because Alicent was “ambitious,” but because Viserys hollowed out the system that kept peace. He tried to rule on his feelings in a world that runs on precedent. He wanted the authority of a king without accepting the consequences of breaking the rules kings depend on.

And it’s deeply ironic. The Targaryens survived in Westeros because they married outside their bloodline. They needed Andal swords, gold, legitimacy etc... By treating Alicent and her children as only her blood, Viserys wasn’t preserving his blood he was isolating it.

Why are Daemon, the Valyrians, and Harwin Strong allowed to have their blood on the throne, but a woman who risked her life multiple times in childbirth isn’t considered deserving seeing her blood on the throne as her right as a wife? Why do we ignore her reproductive labor and her duty of service to her liege and to her lordly house? Why do we claim her reproductive work as a legal and social obligation, tying legitimacy and inheritance rights to her husband, and never acknowledge the intrinsic value of her sacrifice?

Well…Because society -- and people -- has long measured a woman’s worth by what she produces for others, not by who she is or what she sacrifices. Her labor, her risks, her very life are considered as duties to her husband, her children, her house, or the realm, rather than acts deserving recognition in their own right.

Strictly speaking, I think when Viserys denied Alicent's sons as his heirs - trueborn sons before trueborn daughters - over Rhaenyra, he was undermining the concept of marriage alliance for House Targaryen more than for Westeros.

Jaehaerys could be seen to have started it, even. And yes, this will lead into the Dance repeating among Rhaenyra's sons later too.

So, tragically this still is less organized than I'd like but here goes. The main thing is that House Targaryen has been setting precedent of preferring heirs with as much Targaryen blood as possible. Lords paying attention to this will stop marrying their daughters to the royal House. Even House Velaryon.

From the beginning, Aegon and his sisters had 2 sons, and Aegon didn't codify succession. So his eldest son inherited after him, despite that son being by his second wife (that both his wives were alive at the same time is less important than him going by personal favoritism between the mothers rather than a codified or traditional hierarchy). The son who is heir was married to a Velaryon, as a reward for services rendered during the conquest and because that is the closest available to a Targaryen woman.

Aegon then did not clarify the statuses of Rhaena vs Maegor in succession when Rhaena was born. Aenys didn't either. Then after Aegon died, although I doubt he would have spoken against it and may have known of Aenys's plans, Aenys betrothes Rhaena and Aegon the uncrowned. This is what would show me, as an external observer, that for Targaryen heirs a sibling marriage is preferred, and if not sibling than cousin. That's only considering marriage though.

Maegor, until he took a second wife, did by accounts treat Ceryse Hightower with the respect she deserved as his lawfully wedded wife. And even then, he was basically following his father's precedent of marrying for love after marrying for duty. (Then he became an insane zombie or had a massive head injury and brain trauma and became the Maegor the Cruel we know and fear/loathe/analyze.)

After Maegor, who in his nuts years did still marry the nearest available Targaryen woman who wasn't his mother - Rhaena, we have Jaehaerys. Jaehaerys was under a regency of his mother, a Velaryon, and (eventual?) stepfather Baratheon. Both of them, Queen Alyssa included!, were intent on stopping the sibling marriage in House Targaryen. But Jaehaerys enforced it. He then got a Doctrine of Exceptionalism through to get the Faith - the unifying and military force that gave Maegor and Belarion the most problems - on board with special rules allowing House Targaryen to marry siblings. #BecauseDragons but still. As the Faith Militant showed - #BecauseDragons only gets you so far.

Then comes the succession crises of Jaehaerys. First, Aemon is the clear eldest male heir, which is of no concern. Then, by bypassing Rhaenys - who married a Velaryon and would have Targaryen-Velaryon children, even if he did it based on her sex the precedent is then made to prefer the male heir with more Targaryen blood - Baelon. The Council of 101AC does the same thing, although I doubt that was what the lords had in mind. Because Viserys and Daemon both had Targaryen (sibling) parents instead of Rhaenys's Targaryen and Velaryon-Baratheon parents, the implication remains.

Daemon is blatant about his opinions on what a 'proper marriage' is for a Targaryen - only a Valyrian blooded woman would do for him to have children with (Mysaria during his marriage to Rhea Royce). Then for marriage, who he actually married of his own free choice was Laena Velaryon, daughter of Rhaenys Targaryen, and Rhaenrya Targaryen.

When Viserys prioritizes his only surviving child - a daughter - by Aemma Arryn of Targaryen blood, despite wishing for a son to be his heir, OVER his three sons by his second, non Targaryen blooded, wife Alicent Hightower... He's showing that the preference of the king is always to prioritize an heir with more Targaryen blood. If the succession were not challenged, no House besides Velaryon and maybe Celtigar would ever want to marry into House Targaryen again (at least, not without assassination related contingency plans).

But it goes even further. Rhaenyra does not, percievably by the realm, respect her Velaryon husband. She has sons in their marriage that she claims are trueborn but evidently don't look at all like her or her husband. Or, potentially, that much like their alleged grandmother Rhaenys Targaryen. I assume on that part, since she was used to justify their dark hair but not their dark eyes. Its very rare even in non-magical-Westeros-genetics for two parents with light eyes to have one, much less three, children with dark eyes. Its much more likely to be the other way around, light eyes are recessive. It can happen, its just very unlikely to happen three times in a row.

House Velaryon is already feeling slighted by the acknowledgement of Rhaenyra's sons as trueborn by Laenor, Corlys, and Viserys. Vaemond's death pushes the slight into active insult. Would House Velaryon be willing to marry back into House Targaryen again, if somehow Rhaenrya's son(s) didn't inherit Driftmark? I doubt it.

Viserys even considers Rhaenrya's sons legitimate, because he doesn't care as long as Laenor isn't fussing about it. So he doesn't respect Laenor or House Velaryon - or even Rhaenys - enough to push his daughter to respect them by not having other men's children and passing them off as Laenor's. Then for Alicent, when he prioritizes their reputations over her sons' physical wellbeing and even lives (torture by "sharp questioning" of a kid who just lost an eye is risky) at Driftmark? When she tells her father this? Even if he's not Hand of the King, does anyone expect him to keep it quiet from his brother, Lord of Oldtown, or any other lords? Does anyone expect there to be no gossip or rumors about how the young prince lost an eye? Or that no one at Driftmark would talk?

Daemon also snubs the Velaryons by marrying Rhaenyra without a respectable mourning period between Laena and Laenor's deaths and their wedding. It isn't just Rhaenyra and Viserys offering insult.

Aegon, then Aenys, then Jaehaerys, then Daemon and Viserys, and even Rhaenyra gradually set a precedent that only marriages between members of their own house matter. And yes Ceryse was a Hightower married to Aegon's second son, but any children they had would not be in line to inherit the throne except behind Aegon (uncrowned), Viserys (prince), and Jaehaerys, if not also Rhaena, Alysanne, and any of their children. If Maegor was not inheriting Dragonstone, then any children he had - which means any children Ceryse might have - would have no inheritance either. And children of as-Targaryen-as-possible marriages would be prioritized over all other children, regardless of sex, birth order, or their parents' birth order (Aemon to Rhaenys).

The oversight of Rhaenys makes even marrying the Crown Prince a gamble when it shouldn't be - if his younger brother has a child with 'purer blood' than can be offered by your non-Targaryen House, the king might decree that child will inherit before your grandchild.

And with that blood purity supremacy preference in inheritance, that's just another arrow in Daemon's quiver that his sons by Rhaenyra should inherit before their older, falseborn brothers. I think in the show Jace asks Rhaenyra basically - what was she thinking, having him and his brothers and throwing them into this political mess? Did she think no one would notice?

Did Viserys and Daemon also think no one would notice them treating their non-Targaryen wives with blatant disrespect, and that it would have no effect on their children? Viserys's younger sons - Aemond and Daeron, since Aegon and Helaena are married - are riding the grace of their mother not being Targaryen and her efforts in networking and not prioritizing isolation in marriages for House Targaryen. If she had a second or third daughter and pushed for them to marry her sons, then yes. Scions of House Targaryen I think would have had difficulty finding marriageable women outside of their own House.

As a sidenote: this is incidentally prioritizing matrilineal inheritance over patrilineal inheritance and I think its hilarious that Jaehaerys, Viserys, and Daemon are supporting it. Jaehaerys invalidating the inheritance of Aemon's child because she's a daughter - or will history see it as because she didn't have a Targaryen mother? Viserys prioritizing his matrilineally Targaryen daughter and her sons over his own patrilineally-only Targaryen sons. Daemon loathing his first wife so much based on her bloodline and that's why he considered her unsuitable to have a child with - the mother is what is prioritized there, rather than the (blood, genetic) inheritance through the father.

And then yes. Its screwing over the men of House Targaryen because families of non-Targaryen brides are probably also considering the cost of their murder along with the cost of a wedding. But it's also decimating the reputations of Targaryen women. If men of her near and immediate family are potential marriage candidates, then how can her virtue be assumed to be intact when she's left unchaperoned around them? From practically any age, since Aemma married Viserys at 11, and Jaehaerys and Alysanne eloped around age 15? Who could be trusted as a guard for daughters of House Targaryen? Jonquil Darke is a one-off, but more women like that might be sought out for appearances' sake. (Lol the irony of starting a warrior women guild/cult for the protection of royal women. I can dream that if that happened it would have slaughtered the kingsguard of and Aerys II himself when he hurt Rhaella.) What male family member could a daughter of House Targaryen go to if she's being threatened? More specifically, what man can she go to that wouldn't be seen as 'seducing him' or seeking to be disloyal to her (potential, future, possibly abusive) husband? Her father. Maybe. But otherwise, brothers, uncles, cousins are all seen as potential marriage prospects and her virtue would always be somewhat questionable if she was unchaperoned and alone with them.

I don't remember if it was you or someone else who had made the point about women's reputations being everything in medieval times because of a lack of paternity tests, but Rhaenyra being seen as being disloyal to her husband was a problem. Laenor backing it probably also lowered other lords' opinions of him and House Velaryon, because if Laenor got his way, a bastard would be the lord of that house and... that's highly stigmatized in Westeros. They're basically born of and a walking reminder of a broken promise (the marriage between their mother's house and her husband's).

the 5 most annoying people in town

Oh #they must be secretly fuming and hating those martell, dondarion, dayne, arryn, blackwood genes in their trew kweens bloodline ...poor neonazis... on top of that the only way of their faves house continuing is through halfbreed jon snow🫣

Grrm writes irony really well i gotta say!

Example of their racial purity:

“But Alicent isn’t a Targaryen, she doesn’t have the right!” has always been a weird argument to me because… the “right” she’s defending is not her own personal dragonlord claim. She’s fighting for her children’s inheritance. Her children are literally Viserys’s legitimate Targaryen children.

And by that logic, where does this stop? Alyssa Velaryon wasn’t a Targaryen either. She was half-Andal Velaryon fighting for the interests and inheritance of her children, who were only half-Targaryen themselves. Are we saying queens, wives, and royal mothers have no political standing to advocate for their children unless they possess enough Targaryen DNA points?

The blood-purity obsession. Also… this is Westeros. Noble mothers constantly fight for their children’s rights, claims, marriages, lands, positions, and survival. That is not uniquely scandalous Alicent invention. Catelyn, Cersei, Alyssa Velaryon, literally half the political mothers in this universe work through kinship advocacy.

It feels odd when her entire political position is inseparable from being the queen consort and mother of the king’s acknowledged children. You can disagree with her claim or support Rhaenyra’s inheritance without sliding into arguments that basically sound like Nazi/eugenics logic and sliding into “non-Targ women must sit down and accept whatever happens because blood...”