BAN ON CONVERSION PRACTICES IN THE EU. GO SIGN IT. DEADLINE IS FUCKING MAY 17. WE'RE STILL MISSING 800.000

Reblog or your mom will die in 928 seconds.

I love my mom.

I am risking nothing

I AM SORRY FOLLOWERS, I LOVE MY MOMMY

Will not risk.

sorry followers :(

Please share.

Alicent and Criston have every right to be together.

I’ve read a lot of posts regarding their non-existent hypocrisy and I’d like to clear some things up.

First and foremost, stop using Alicent’s “Where is duty, where is sacrifice?” line against her or Nyra’s outrageous “Exhausting, wasn’t it?” speech because you think you’re eating when you’re, in fact, starving. Alicent has done her duty and sacrificed herself. It’s the only thing she’s been doing for the past 20 years. She gave the man she was forced to marry four children and she took care of him despite all the shit he put her through. She has lived all her life based on her principles and now her husband is gone. She mourned him, she buried him, it’s been more than 10 days since his death (confirmed that E1 S2 takes place 10 days after Lucerys’ death) and she is finally fucking free. She deserves a sliver of comfort. Alicent is the only one in this series that’s been faithful and dutiful to a T, yet look where that got her. If someone has the right to break the law a little bit, it’s definitely her.

That being said, I don’t know when it was decided that Alicent is a pious saint that can do no wrong, but I need to remind y’all that following a religion does not magically prevent you from sinning. Is she committing fornication? Obviously. However, you are all under this impression that this is hypocritical on her behalf because she berated Rhaenyra for it when they were younger, without considering that her anger was justified for a myriad of other reasons, such as (but not limited to): 1) the fact that Rhaenyra’s freedom to marry whomever she pleased was a privilege granted to her thanks to Alicent’s efforts, who supported her even if Rhaenyra hated her, yet her friend casually threw that away, 2) the fact that Rhaenyra lied to her by swearing on her morher’s grave and never even mentioned Criston, 3) the fact that Rhaenyra had the guts to call her “sister” while lying to her face, 4) the fact that her lies resulted in Otto getting fired since Rhaenyra misled Alicent so that she speaks to Viserys in favour of her friend and betraying her own father by siding against him (a decision she wouldn’t have made if she knew the truth), leaving her completely alone and friendless at court, even if he was right all along and finally 5) the fact that Rhaenyra is the most sought after bachelorette in the whole world and by having sex she undermines herself (Rhaenyra knows this well, hence why she denies these accusations) and literally endangers herself, because had she been married to any other man but Laenor and had this man found out his wife and future queen is not a virgin, imagine the fucking horrors she could have been subjected to. Like, I hate to break it to you, but a 40-year-old widow, who’s had four kids and has completed her duty to the point where she is actually no longer needed and could leave the palace to go live the rest of her life in peace somewhere else and no one would notice her absence (literally though, she has birthed heirs, her husband is dead, her son is a grown adult king, her job is done there), having sex, is not the same as an 18-year-old princess and future heir in her prime, whose purity is linked to her worth, getting caught drunk in a brothel, hooking up with her uncle and losing her virginity to her guard, all in one night. Viserys himself was outraged. There’s lows and then there’s lows, y’all.

By the way, the crazy assumptions that Alicent has been cheating on Viserys with Criston for a while now need to stop. When Olivia Cooke said that they had filmed a messy sex scene with Fabien Frankel in a recent interview, she never said this was for S1 of HOTD. I don’t know where y’all got that from, but even if it was true, that scene has been scrapped so it is not canon. And don’t make me laugh about Daeron, a dragon rider who canonically has Valyrian features, potentially having brown hair. You’re all so blinded by your hatred for Alicent that you want her to be a lying hypocrite in order to make yourselves feel better about Rhaenyra’s mishaps, that you don’t get that the whole point of her and Criston getting physical is that she is a tortured woman who is finally able to break free, not that she has been a hypocrite all along. You’re heavily misunderstanding her arc.

Finally, when it comes to my good man Criston, y’all have lost it completely. No, Alicent is not raping him, unless he tells her to stop and she closes the door behind her like Rhaenyra did that is. No, Criston did not lie about how important his honour is to him. There’s a whole article on how Clare Kilner, the director of E4 S1, decided that Cole removing his armour slowly was necessary because it symbolises his inner conflict and uncertainty over breaking his vow: should he soil his cloak for the sake of the woman he loves? And he does soil it, because he thinks she loves him back. But that honourable man dies the day Rhaenyra tells him that he’ll never be anything more than a side piece to her. This man stops giving a flying fuck about his honour, oath, position and life. He is trying to kill himself. And you know what stops him? Alicent. Alicent is the only thing between him and death, the only person to show him kindness and understanding, to pull him up from the lowest point in his life. I don’t think you heard Alicent in E7 S1: “No, you’re sworn to me!”. Y’all. His life is hers. He doesn’t care about Rhaenyra, his job, Viserys, anyone else at this point. Only Alicent exists in his mind, Fabien himself has said time and time again that his loyalty to her is unwavering. He only exists for Alicent’s sake. He’s who you wish Daemon was. Crying that “Criston is a bad knight and a liar because he broke his chastity oath yet again!” is so pointless because that knight has been dead since Rhaenyra’s marriage to Laenor. What does an oath mean when you find out the people you swore it to have betrayed you?

This image shocks me immensely because of:

a) the horror and determination engraved on Alicent’s face

b) Heleana watching her mother defending (and holding onto) Aemond in the background.

I think that the incident at Driftmark had a different potency on each of Alicent’s kids, but especially upon Heleana it must have impressed the idea that “a mother fights for her child no matter what” and that she doesn’t stay silent.

I can only imagine how Heleana feels after B&C, but the sense of being unable to protect and stand up for her son must be devastating.

And further than that, Heleana must be repelled by the idea of being coerced and finally having chosen to sacrifice one of her own kids. She probably feels that she has failed as a mother. That unlike Alicent, she has no right to demand justice for Jaehaerys’ murder because she herself chose him over Maelor. Maybe she blames herself for not doing enough to save him (even if she offered up her own life instead of her children’s), and possibly compares her efforts to defend her children with Alicent’s defense of Aemond. In essence, she probably tragically feels that she offered up one of her children herself instead.

In any case, this is such a heartbreaking and unsettling position to be in and it makes the emotional and psychological toll she consequently suffered all the more unbearable, because even if she drew courage and strength from and tried to imitate her mother’s actions, nothing could have ever prepared her for this.

This meme is inescapable on French insta so I'm posting it here for all to enjoy

if you have “zionists dni” in your bio, i do not trust you. at all. bc y’all have proven that “zionist” can mean anything from “actual kahanist who hates arabs and thinks that bombing gaza into oblivion is great” to “doesn’t want every single israeli to be violently murdered or expelled.”

i do not have time to figure out if you’d consider me an antizionist bc i’m highly critical of the israeli government and think the occupation of the west bank and siege of gaza are wrong, or if you’d consider me a zionist bc i think the jewish people originated in eretz yisrael and that antisemitism is bad even when it’s coming from progressives and leftists. i do not have the luxury of giving the benefit of the doubt to ppl who say “death to zionists” when there’s a very real chance they are including me and pretty much every other jew on the planet in that statement. you (hopefully) would not expect queer ppl to have a calm conversation with each person who says something questionable just to check if by “kill all pedophiles” they were including us in that statement. extend the same consideration to jews when using a word that has been used, within living memory, to systemically persecute and murder us in several countries.

Guinevere and Lancelot's Sex

(an overview so we can be on the same page when discussing Alicent and Criston's sex)

I've been looking into the history of courtly love for quite a while now, trying to figure out where the "chaste" bit comes from. And honestly I'm still not sure. (My best theory at the moment is that it was Elizabeth I's contribution?) Histories consistently trace courtly love to The Knight of the Cart, the OG Guinevere and Lancelot story — a story where they do have sex.

They are the poster children. And they have always been unambiguously sexual.

The Knight of the Cart

Queen Guinevere and Lancelot have sex about halfway through The Knight of the Cart. At this point, Lancelot has traveled for a week and braved all sorts of hurdles to come rescue Guinevere, who's being held captive. He wants to have sex with her, but he does not expect sex from her — he doesn't think he's owed anything. This is expressed in this line:

"It would take more than these bars to keep me out. Nothing but your command could thwart my power to come to you. If you will but grant me your permission, the way will open before me. But if it is not your pleasure, then the way is so obstructed that I could not possibly pass through."

A reminder that The Knight of the Cart was commissioned by a woman, Marie de Champagne. This is a female fantasy — and specifically, the fantasy of a noblewoman who's in a political marriage where sex is presumbably expected and owed.

So Guinevere says yes, he climbs through her window, and they have sex. It's written "fade to black" style, but the author does tell us they had a great time.

Their sport is so agreeable and sweet, as they kiss and fondle each other, that in truth such a marvellous joy comes over them as was never heard or known. But their joy will not be revealed by me, for in a story, it has no place. Yet, the most choice and delightful satisfaction was precisely that of which our story must not speak.

I've seen too much discourse where Criston wanting to worship Alicent and have sex with her are framed as if they're in opposition or mutually incompatible. Which just — no. Lancelot kneels to Guinevere in an explicitly religious way, both when he enters the room to have sex with her, and before he leaves.

then he comes to the bed of the Queen, whom he adores and before whom he kneels, holding her more dear than the relic of any saint. .... When he leaves the room, he bows and acts precisely as if he were before a shrine; then he goes with a heavy heart, and reaches his lodgings without being recognised by any one.

I sat down to write my reaction post to the second ep of HOTD and…realized Idk how to approach it, where to start. And not because I hated every single thing about it – like with ep1 there were lots of good or at least interesting moments. There were other choices I wouldn’t have personally liked in any circumstance but that weren’t necessarily bad in and of themselves if they’d been in another show, surrounded with other context or other scenes. The problem is how ridiculously biased this writing is and how that bias and the ridiculousness of it permeates everything, even the parts that were good or fine or reasonably in character. We knew, of course, even from S1, that the writing was biased. But this season it feels especially blatant.

How am I supposed to feel about say…Jae’s funeral? On one hand, a gut-wrenching scene, carried so well by Olivia and Phia’s superb understated acting. It’s a scene that has every reason to be there – royal funeral processions/spectacles were (and still are) normal. And even if it’s not a regular occurrence in this universe (questionable), it’s a very good and smart play by Otto. On the other hand, is it not suspect that the funeral of this child was less of a melancholy moment of mourning like Luke’s funeral (despite the obviously grieving family) but focused on Helaena’s panic attack at being too close to too many people, and with the distraction of Jae’s cart getting stuck in the mud (was that supposed to be symbolic of something???). Do we not remember TB shrieking long before the episode aired that the Greens have a public funeral for Jae “just to make the Greens look bad”? These people are known for the worst faith takes, so what does it say that the writers apparently agree with them?

How am I supposed to feel about Alicent’s inability to successfully, if at all, to comfort her children? Is this a potentially interesting exploration of how her own grief, guilt, self-blame/low self-esteem, and complicated relationship with her kids due to their common and individual family traumas (and, in Helaena’s case…neurodivergence, I guess?) have and are affecting her? Or is it just a low-key attempt at character assassination, given that last season she was shown as perfectly capable of showing affection to her children (more than one with Aemond, hugging Helaena and making other attempts when she was less receptive, even kissing Aegon at the coronation despite their turbulent relationship)?

Is Alicent’s self-blame and guilt a potentially interesting exploration of how grief can affect people, of what happens when a person feels they are breaking some moral or ethical or religious code of conduct that they sincerely believe in/believe they can be punished for breaking? Or does the narrative blame her too/knows that a large chunk of the audience will too or at least will find the self-blame and guilt pathetic or unsympathetic (because goodness knows that’s all Twitter/X has to say on the matter, it seems).

How am I supposed to feel about Aegon hanging the ratcatchers? Of course, Otto is right – this was a terrible thing to do, not just because it was politically a misstep, but first of all because there were many innocent people executed without trial. It’s a canonical event, and in context of Aegon’s grief and fury, it’s interesting in and of itself, it’s part of the commentary on the wreckage that war and nobles’ games cause. I’d have no issue with it, except…. Why was this made into a literal cartoon-villain-esque kick the dog moment? By making me feel sorry for the sad, cute puppy am I supposed to think that hanging Cheese was somehow wrong? After he sawed off a child’s head? And why is it that the smallfolk get angry when Aegon hands the ratcatchers but not when Rhaenys trembles dozens of smallfolk in the dragon pit? How come Aegon is held accountable for all his mistakes, at least by the people closest to him, and Criston very specifically sends a kingsguard member to impersonate his twin and kill Rhaenyra, but the show removed maximum responsibility from Daemon and of course made sure that Rhaenya was just appalled by the whole thing. (And suddenly cares about Helaena? I actually rolled my eyes at that line so hard it hurt.)

What am I to think of the messy/awkward/complicated TG family dynamics? They’re interesting! They’re fun! They could make for some great television (and fic lol). I could/should/would enjoy this. But on the other hand, when TB get all these bonding moments, or the potential messiness (e.g. Rhaena feeling ignored by her father) is ignored in like 85% of situations? And when this imbalance is not at all in the book? (When it feels like they wanted to cut/held off on Daeron specifically because he was so sweet and mild tempered and beloved by everyone?) It becomes frustrating, not fun.

At what point do I need to decide that this show isn’t worth it? After all, I think the sentiment that “maybe this is just not telling the kind of story you want to hear/watch” is generally a wise approach. Except…that would hold if this was an original show or if it was one of those “loosely based on/inspired by” things that were not pretending to be adaptations. But when you’re advertised an adaptation, you’re not coming in blind. Ideally, you’re coming in knowing what sort of story you’re coming for, at the very least. Unlike  ASOIAF, the Dance is a fully finished story. There shouldn’t have been any “nasty surprises” like some people got in the last seasons in GoT…

But they mentioned Daeron by name. Tom’s acting is incredible. We know I’m not going anywhere for now lmao.

Maybe I won’t do my usual type of notes/reaction post this time, after all I’ve said so much of what I most feel right now anyway.

Sorry for the depression/pessimism guys. I’m just so tired.

all RIGHT:

Why You're Writing Medieval (and Medieval-Coded) Women Wrong: A RANT

(Or, For the Love of God, People, Stop Pretending Victorian Style Gender Roles Applied to All of History)

This is a problem I see alllll over the place - I'll be reading a medieval-coded book and the women will be told they aren't allowed to fight or learn or work, that they are only supposed to get married, keep house and have babies, &c &c.

If I point this out ppl will be like "yes but there was misogyny back then! women were treated terribly!" and OK. Stop right there.

By & large, what we as a culture think of as misogyny & patriarchy is the expression prevalent in Victorian times - not medieval. (And NO, this is not me blaming Victorians for their theme park version of "medieval history". This is me blaming 21st century people for being ignorant & refusing to do their homework).

Yes, there was misogyny in medieval times, but 1) in many ways it was actually markedly less severe than Victorian misogyny, tyvm - and 2) it was of a quite different type. (Disclaimer: I am speaking specifically of Frankish, Western European medieval women rather than those in other parts of the world. This applies to a lesser extent in Byzantium and I am still learning about women in the medieval Islamic world.)

So, here are the 2 vital things to remember about women when writing medieval or medieval-coded societies

FIRST. Where in Victorian times the primary axes of prejudice were gender and race - so that a male labourer had more rights than a female of the higher classes, and a middle class white man would be treated with more respect than an African or Indian dignitary - In medieval times, the primary axis of prejudice was, overwhelmingly, class. Thus, Frankish crusader knights arguably felt more solidarity with their Muslim opponents of knightly status, than they did their own peasants. Faith and age were also medieval axes of prejudice - children and young people were exploited ruthlessly, sent into war or marriage at 15 (boys) or 12 (girls). Gender was less important.

What this meant was that a medieval woman could expect - indeed demand - to be treated more or less the same way the men of her class were. Where no ancient legal obstacle existed, such as Salic law, a king's daughter could and did expect to rule, even after marriage.

Women of the knightly class could & did arm & fight - something that required a MASSIVE outlay of money, which was obviously at their discretion & disposal. See: Sichelgaita, Isabel de Conches, the unnamed women fighting in armour as knights during the Third Crusade, as recorded by Muslim chroniclers.

Tolkien's Eowyn is a great example of this medieval attitude to class trumping race: complaining that she's being told not to fight, she stresses her class: "I am of the house of Eorl & not a serving woman". She claims her rights, not as a woman, but as a member of the warrior class and the ruling family. Similarly in Renaissance Venice a doge protested the practice which saw 80% of noble women locked into convents for life: if these had been men they would have been "born to command & govern the world". Their class ought to have exempted them from discrimination on the basis of sex.

So, tip #1 for writing medieval women: remember that their class always outweighed their gender. They might be subordinate to the men within their own class, but not to those below.

SECOND. Whereas Victorians saw women's highest calling as marriage & children - the "angel in the house" ennobling & improving their men on a spiritual but rarely practical level - Medievals by contrast prized virginity/celibacy above marriage, seeing it as a way for women to transcend their sex. Often as nuns, saints, mystics; sometimes as warriors, queens, & ladies; always as businesswomen & merchants, women could & did forge their own paths in life

When Elizabeth I claimed to have "the heart & stomach of a king" & adopted the persona of the virgin queen, this was the norm she appealed to. Women could do things; they just had to prove they were Not Like Other Girls. By Elizabeth's time things were already changing: it was the Reformation that switched the ideal to marriage, & the Enlightenment that divorced femininity from reason, aggression & public life.

For more on this topic, read Katherine Hager's article "Endowed With Manly Courage: Medieval Perceptions of Women in Combat" on women who transcended gender to occupy a liminal space as warrior/virgin/saint.

So, tip #2: remember that for medieval women, wife and mother wasn't the ideal, virgin saint was the ideal. By proving yourself "not like other girls" you could gain significant autonomy & freedom.

Finally a bonus tip: if writing about medieval women, be sure to read writing on women's issues from the time so as to understand the terms in which these women spoke about & defended their ambitions. Start with Christine de Pisan.

I learned all this doing the reading for WATCHERS OF OUTREMER, my series of historical fantasy novels set in the medieval crusader states, which were dominated by strong medieval women! Book 5, THE HOUSE OF MOURNING (forthcoming 2023) will focus, to a greater extent than any other novel I've ever yet read or written, on the experience of women during the crusades - as warriors, captives, and political leaders. I can't wait to share it with you all!