I mean...maybe I'm being too ugh when I say this, but just because there's a dildo in this straight-led man's room, doesn't mean he's queer or questioning. the dildo could be for any woman he grabs consensually or wit money, to assault women with, or a way to piss off his parent for attention. From what I've heard, some st-men just want to direct other men's pain/pleasure to feel in control, even direct a 3rd party for that.

He seems like a dude who'd not experiment for fear of losing his masculinity card because he already feels so inadequate.

In 1x08, Alicent, after Rhaenyra gave one apology, immediately accepted her as the next queen wholeheartedly even thought she has been harassing both her and her sons for 10 years and impressed on all her kids that she needed to be ousted for them all to even survive. I already didn't like the writing for Alicent & kinda mentally checked out of all the drama in the "suspension of disbelief" way before, but this is when I really started to actively despise her writing. When all my latent thoughts about this show's absurdities & hypocrisies swelled up to be unignorable. There, too, Alicent seemd all too ready to pretend the past is the past bec apparently Rhaenyra acknowledging her as a queenly authority and being a good wife to Viserys proved she would make a good Queen AND not kill her kids...okay. Ironically, they decided to be consistent for this of all things AND that 1x08 switch up is itself an inconsistency of such different definition that it is just an irrationality rather than an inconsistency.

Maybe responding to this post.

As you say, it will be those who always rooted for her or those who haven't really prioritized/clocked what Rhaenyra's story's significance as a anti-misogyny piece it was or want to be ignorant about how the unreliable narrators of F&B actually operate (I mean, this is the same woman who wanted to join her dad to battle the Myrish while she was trill pregnant with either Laena or Laenor...why can't she be the women who argued for them to burn down the Red Keep?!). What's infuriating, anon, is that some people will probabaly argue that you built up a false or very flawed and trussed up image of Rhaenys in your head once they learn abt you having been 17 when you read this...as if 17 year olds don't read far more complex literary work, and those with unreliable narrators all the time!!!

Ever since show!Rhaenys didn't kill the greens when she had the chance, the overall enthusiasm around her character has dropped and stayed steady, at least from what I've seen. Yeah it makes sense for her to not want to perform first blood and truely ensure a war...but then what was the whole point of her standing there for a few minutes on Meleys as if she were contemplating it? Does it really take that long to get to that logical point when you already have shown and acted to keep yourself and Baela out of the "g v b" business?! This is me taking the show's writing at face value/Watsonianly, btw. Yeah she doesn't want to possibly get herself accused of kinslaying...however, if Rhaenrya truly wishes to protect Baela and Rhaena's hold over Driftmark without the greens breathing down their neck and therefore undermining that rule...if that is her true primary objective...take one for the "team".

Because her primary objective is certainly not to "protect the realm" when she kills thousands of smallfolk instead of sitting in her room as a hostage and allowing the greens to try to pressure Rhaenyra to give up.

Anyway, she shouldn't have even stayed behind with her grandkids both gone back in episode 8. she's merely there so they can do that substance-less spectacle of a last moment in epi 8.

AND

I wrote abt Rhaenys' character HERE when another asker criticized another of my posts detailing why I didn't & will never like her or really her patronizing faux-pacifism, but you bring up good points. I included how she decides to only speak about Corlys' will after Viserys' entrance bc she intended to just keep the Velaryons away from Rhaenyra's and Viserys' "mess" bc Viserys--the final authority who could say anyting against the more energetic greens, wasn't there to gainsay against them. She essentially did not appear to want to throw herself and her granddaughter in with what she saw as a sinking ship.

If Laenor was going to be prince consort as Corlys intended, he can't also be the lord of Driftmark and Corlys was preparing Lucerys to be his heir. Rhaenrys could have pressed for Corlys to name Laena instead and we can say that she knew Corlys would never go for it bc again Laenor cannot be both prince consort to Rhaenyra's Queen regnant AND be Lord of Driftmark.

With this in mind, we should have seen an huge rift play out b/t Rhaenyra and Corlys (as I say should have happened already bc this version of Rhaenys doesn't make sense with Corlys at all). As you say, HotD!Rhaenys not choosing to do so is either another "small" writer's oversight or it's the writers simply not thinking through Rhaenys' character....bc how would this never come up to press for if she was so adamant about Lucerys not inheriting Driftmark/the Velaryons not getting more & more involved with the throne's messes for the sake of her own kids and their kids? Perhaps bc in the show, Laena & Daemon were all in Essos by Laena's own volition and Laena was already "safe" in Rhaenyra's eyes? IDK, bc this damn show doesn't DEVELOP OR EXPLORE ITS SPLITTING IMPLICATIONS THAT COULD HAVE BECOME EXTENSIONS OF THE MAIN STORYLINES!!!

This is the script/scene of epi 8!Rhaenys & Rhaenyra I transcribed.

It may be very weird to try to make equivalent her not helping Rhaenyra to recover Lucerys' designation vs Daemon intending to burn down Aemond once and for all. Because it is true that show!Daemon's plan to destroy Aemond and any of the greens in retaliation is pretty fucking dumb and way too impulsive even for him (btw, he was in Harrenhal when Lucerys died and for B&C, not that he didn't plan it, but he wasn't by Rhaenyra in the bk for anyone who is wondering. Plus it's pretty clear he became not less "roguish" but he did mellow out other than the B&C deal for Luke's death).

Lucerys losing Driftmark doesn't = his death, but it does/would have signified a political win for the greens that also would demean Luke's social respect and dignity apart from disrespecting Corlys' will (if we're supposed to care abt custom and the "legal" transfers of power the greens ae so adamant about).

I mentioned the "sinking ship" of Rhaenyra & co, yes? I definitely think that part of her motivation to not support Rhaenyra was to keep who she could keep out of "Targ business"--

(as if the greens were not going to use Vaemond against Baela-Rhaena, no one expected Vaemond to sign his own death warrant so Rhaenys was going to be in a bit of pickle regardless and she really should have seen Vaemond's allegiance with the greens coming...again, if we assume the writers would have realized this likelihood themselves and followed through by at least making Rhaenys to visibly realize Vaemond was plotting w/the greens and then realize what that meant for her and her grandkids, esp if Corlys never woke up...again, not very "wise" of her but I digress)

BUT we can't deny that another part was, as you say, was pleased with the comeuppance she saw for the child-lost nor that it didn'e harden her resolve to go ahead with her plans/added on top of the already existing one.

I would say Viserys took her place instead of usurped, bc their situation is unique even though it is another situation of a Targ women being pulled away from what could have been her supported and affirmed ascension. "Usurp" means to "unlawfully", forcefully, or violently remove someone from their political seat. Viserys did nothing of the sort and Jaehaerys, for all intents and purposes, was the King. Jaehaerys is the "law" and he said he'd abide by the results of the GC/approved of the GC. Was it underhanded and dishonest, absolutely. Just as Aemond claiming Vhagar the way he did was dishonest (and yes dragons were considered royal "property" since Jaehaerys so Aemond did disrespect the royal authority of not just Viserys but Rhaenyra, the head of Dragonstone and the keeper of the family's dragons).

As I said abt Rhaenys in that post I linked, Rhaenys is taking the opportunity to express her frustrations more than she is trying to actually give any sort of constructive advice. Long held-frustrations taking opportunity through Rhaenyra's lonely, worrying presence. She doesn't even make small, suggestive snide remarks about the succession in Viserys' presence when she and Corlys both were proposing marriage to their 12 year old. If you're going to arrange such a kind of marriage for the sake of tying your family to the "messy" Targs bc you felt you had to present a united front and offer to prevent another crisis//wanted to have access to the throne through Laena and her royal kids with Viserys (as I have heard others argue), you really don't have reason to get so righteous about Rhaenyra also trying to get you to get her on your side...esp since you didn't seem to bother to get Rhaena as well as Baela to go back to Driftmark.

I noticed that same thing in episode 8, and I'm glad you pointed that out, anon. We could contrast these with him leaning on Alicent in epi 7 after she slices Rhaenyra, when he says the final words of him being "lucky" to draw the tension from that moment from Alicent. And yeah, this plus Aemond embracing Alicent somewhere in 8, I'd say that shows that Aemond does care for his mother. It's a very fraught, dependent one. I can see Aemond feeling he has to perform a level of pleasing his mother but also not getting all of which he wants from her, which is her attentions and care when it's not about Rhaenyra...so he's both hungry for that validation (thus his seeming devotion at times) vs recognizing that she, as a mother under specific gendered constraints (including what he doesn't know, that she had him and his siblings basically under a sort of duress from Otto) cannot fully give him that validation or social advancement. So he also doesn't allow her to pull him back from asserting his dominance when he perceives that he will lose the most (humiliation at dinner; later when he decides that Luke's death is actually good and it seems Alicent is only castigating him for love of Rhaenyra). Alicent, to him, is someone who should know her own limits.

I remember being confused and even being a little miffed I was upset for Aemond in the feast scene. Not bc Luke did anything worth being that upset over but bc Alicent--after years of essentially telling her sons that Aegon is the heir, will be king, and that they should not consider Rhaenyra was the heir or a relative--decides to now try to stop them from fighting or harassing Rhaenyra's sons after one apology from Rhaenyra and their father showing a hole in their face and giving a big peace about he can't put up with their fighting!

I haven't written all that I really wish to convey bc I'm simply not eloquent enough.

Idk about that. but like I said in other asks about Dyana, I wouldn't hold it too tight against her if she somehow helped B&C to hurt any peorsn especially close to Alicent or Aegon. But we don't know yet if she will be present or even if she will know for sure that those kids would be the targets/B&C's directions were for them. If it happens, I think the writers will make it so that Dyana doesn't know and lets them pass and even points them the way when they happen to see her. Or she pretends not to see them, or just not report them if she sees them and they don't see her. Because I don't think they'll go the route of her flagrantly trying to get these kids killed since that contradicts the heavy anti-war/violence here, but who knows. We shall see. They could make an exception to lay a consequence on the greens and use Dyana's non-aristocratic status to further highlight how the greens/the blacks' noble civil war is going to and has already harmed the peasant class.

I'm not emotionally attached to Helaena or her children, BUT it is a tragedy any of them died; these are the undisputed "pure" aristocratic victims of the Dance. And their deaths do mean something or let us know significant patterns of Westerosi patriarchy and its steamrolling of any person who basically is not a noble adult male.

As for Dyana, yeah, I'd still feel for her even if she were part of this plot, and I hope she actually just managed to leave with that money far from people. Preferably Jenny of Oldstones-style isolation pre-Duncan.

Jokes aside, still, either way I've come to think Dyana wouldn't know that they were going to kill the kids so much as Aegon or just any adult Targ and maybe she'd silently do a 🤫👉🏻👉🏻🚪 or otherwise smooth their way to the Keep via Mysaria, rather than her actually be with B&C all the way. That seems the likeliest thing if they decide to incorporate her. Because she's not in the Keep as an official servant anymore either.

Either anon's talking about this post I wrote OR this post. @pessimisticpigeonsworld wrote.

A)

Anon, why are you trying to make an argument about Rhaenys' attitude against Rhaenyra as a someone who occupies the position she wished she was in by using events that occurred after the ones I describe to support my thoughts about Rhaenyra's rewrite in HotD?!

I described & focused on Rhaenys' behavior in episode 2, not episode 7.

B)

In the post where I talked about Rhaenys' treatment against Rhaenyra, Rhaenyra & Daemon haven't even kissed. Rhaenyra wasn't married yet, and neither had their first kids yet. I am well aware why Rhaenys doesn't like Rhaenyra after episode 7, I never said she was stupid or absolutely wrong for her feelings there towards Rhaenyra (post epi 7, Laenor's death, her thinking Rhaenyra and Daemon are his killers; by epi 7, her dislike towards Daemon comes from how she thought he was responsible for Laena's death by not allowing her to go back to Driftmark--both which weren't what I was even talking about).

I, however, was talking about Rhaenys coming out gate trying to lecture Rhaenyra and fans passing it off as "wisdom" when it isn't. You can be well aware of how men will never/be unlikely to ever "accept" a woman as their ruler, but:

Now it's not entirely what Rhaenys says, but mainly how she does and why. This is what Rhaenys says:

Rhaenyra is just standing there. Rhaenys began their conversation.

Rhaenys had been watching Viserys and Laena speak to each other in the gardens, obviously anxious about what a new marriage for her father would mean for her position as well as very likely missing Aemma. NO ONE HAS TO TELL RHAENYRA A THING ABOUT WHAT VISERYS' MARRIAGE TO ANOTHER WOMAN MEANS! The awkwardness is that everyone knows she knows and she know they know and she's expected to chin-up, present herself royally in front of others, etc. while still sometimes grieving. B/C apparently she has no other friends at court, no ladies in waiting, and has never seemingly even approached Laena...the girl who is supposed to be Rhaenyra's greatest friend, as she was in the original story.

This is not how rational, well-intentioned, and constructive communication works. What was the purpose of that initial question that determined the tone and value of the entire conversation? If show!Rhaenys were actually smart, she'd know all this as just basic observation. If we say she does have a brain, then she says the first question as a rhetorical question just to draw Rhaenyra into an confrontation. Instead, Rhaenys calls her out on emotions that any normal person in Rhaenyra's position would feel, poking the wound, to tell her "to bad, but you should have known".

What's funny is that even if Rhaenys were giving advice in good faith and not just to express resentment, she could still "poke the wound" in a way to get Rhaenyra to focus on thinking constructively OR to distract her & give her new perspective. Anger is a good way to get someone out of their funk.

Instead, we get hostility, like how--in the 2nd post I already linked and reblogged--this on top of the Laenyra erasure//quick blowup of the nonsensical Rhaenicent relationship perpetuates a stereotype of female friendships being unstable and unfulfilling because:

What offense did Rhaenyra give to Rhaenys for Rhaenys to pick at her? How does this make someone more amenable to you trying to give them unsolicited "advice"?! Again, epi2!Rhaenyra hadn't "killed" anyone atp. Is not even lusty after Daemon yet. A conversation that began with Rhaenya trying to confront Rhaenys instead of actually drawing her into a conversation where Rhaenyra could be receptive to a real attempt at advice.

And later on in that post, I talked about how Rhaenys' words to Alicent (not Rhaenyra!) is further proof of how she is not what HotD or many fans claims she is, which is "wise". You can't be "wise" and then foist a lot of your resentment on another girl who is in the place you wished you were. "Petty" (of this level) and "wise" are antithetical.

C)

1.

I was not talking about Rhaenys. Laenor left of his own accord, he could've stayed. But he wanted to leave his parents behind. So you, and I mean you, can't say that show!Rhaenyra took anything away from Rhaenys. Rhaenys can feel those things, because she doesn't know. We have no excuse as the viewers, though, to feel and think like her.

2.

As for Rhaena, you say:

a)

Rhaenys obviously refused to give Rhaenyra an answer:

So idk why you are making as if Rhaenyra succeeded in convincing Rhaenys to support Lucerys' claim through that move in particular.

Rhaenyra had to cry to Viserys' paper-thin cask of a body to get him up later. And Rhaenys really speaks about Corlys' wish for Lucerys after Viserys finally shows up and beats back against the greens' running roughshod. Bad writing aside, this is the intent. We were supposed to be as anxious as Rhaenyra, holding our breath as to how Rhaenys would choose to answer in the hearing.

b)

Don't Corlys AND Rhaenys approach Viserys with their daughter with their pitch of joining their houses, strengthening those two houses? Was that not business, as Rhaenya does in her offer to marry Baela to Jacaerys so Baela becomes Queen and Rhaen rules jointly with Lucerys in their own proposed marriage? Laena's marriage to Viserys was for Corlys' ambition, not Rhaenys' satisfaction, while here Rhaenya is at least trying to appeal to Rhaenys directly. And neither Baela nor Rhaena were going to lose anything in this deal, but stood to have a lot to gain without having to be so young as Laena was to get it, with men the same age or just a bit younger than their own parents.

c)

I'm sorry that the show made it so that Rhaenyra--or anyone with their exact circumstances--looked like she was trying to fuck Rhaenys about by dangling Rhaena even while she knows Rhaenys doesn't trust or loke her, but realistically we know Rhaenys would have visited Rhaena often on Dragonstone and vice versa.

Look up Dragonstone and Driftmark on a map, you'll see a dragon ride is practically light work for Rhaenys and a boat to Driftmark is not so big a deal for Rhaena.

Yes, even with Rhaenys being left to be the overseer of Driftmark in Corlys' absence. Unless you're saying that in HotD these two locations are so far apart Rhaenys nor Rhaena could spare a day of a visitation to each other, this is the fact. Even if HotD's universe had these locations far apart, you best believe that Rhaenys could and would still fly back and forth. Bad writing.

d)

The context matters here, too. In the context of Rhaenys believing Daemon & Rhaenyra were both somehoe responsible for Laenor's "death"....If the writers of HotD decide to make Rhaenyra perform such a transparent act knowing/not knowing how strange it would be for Rhaenyra to try to convince Rhaenys when she knows Rhaenys blames her for Laenor's "death"...they are deliberately making a situation that really didn't need to be as mortifying as it was. Because again, Rhaenyra is made to try to finagle Rhaenys and do it in a way that's not... respectful with Laenor's death and the accusation floating around their heads.

Without the accusation of the Laenor-death thing, this could have been the understanding amongst the audience instead: Rhaenyra had already come with the entire family she & Daemon raised on Dragonstone, wouldn't it have been weird if she left Rhaena behind? Especially since she knew Rhaenys would come with Baela?

Yeah--as it is--she's making an opportunity of Rhaenys getting to see her granddaughter/Rhaenys' happiness, but is she really "using" Rhaena nefariously? She's not threatening Rhaenys with the possibility of not allowing Rhaena to see her again or keeping her hostage. What Rhaenyra was--or could have been doing if the writers blah blah blah--was more like someone bringing their kid to their parents' place not just because they had very important to do at said location or something very important to pick up and had to bring said kid, but to also ask their parent for advice or anything really. Whether or not the stakes are high for the parent/asker in Rhaenyra-Rhaenys' case, there simply was no malicious intent, a malicious effect, nor any disrespect. You're saying you never did something similar with a person you knew didn't like you or was angry with you?

3.

I also find it hilarious how you protest against Rhaenyra's actions here and not Rhaenys' episode 2 ones where she PURPOSEFULLY gets into an argument to just throw her angst onto Rhaenyra. Because at least Rhaenyra is trying to get shit done and benefit all parties involved instead of tearing people down!

Because let's think for a second here...what if Rhaenys had advocated for herself to become the head of House Velaryon? Who's the heir she's ruling for and will pass down the leadership to? Would the house itself accept her as its head with Corlys still out there and no confirmation of his demise? Neither Baela nor Rhaena were named his heir in any will.

But more importantly, the greens would have still backed Vaemond...because he is a Velaryon man, they are trying to substantiate Aegon's claim to the throne as a man, they anticipate obtaining a very loyal man in the new hypothetical Vaemond-head of the house with the largest fleet (Rhaenys wants to stay out of it), and despite her not wanting to be a part of the war, Baela 100% was going to participate in some way/she is Daemon's daughter (Daemon's never sitting this one out and he definitely couldn't even if he thought to bc he married and had kids with Rhaenyra...he'd never want to bc both that and he sees Otto as the "true" Targs' enemy...his daughters by a Velaryon daughter would, the greens think, need to be "contained" and will always be seen as a possible threat). She is not a member of House Velaryon even though by blood, spirit & love she is technically a Velaryon.

It would have been better for Rhaenys to not arrive at the Keep at all and try to just take over Driftmark herself, but then we will have to really think about the house's reaction & whether or not she'd risk the fallout. I don't see this Rhaenys doing that.

So much for "wise" Rhaenys. [post by @rhaenyragendereuphoria]

4. *SLIGHT DIGRESSION*

Show!Rhaenyra was under stress in the book to get Luke Driftmark, but it was a choice to make her that subdued and rejected. I think we should also go back and really see how everything was shot, the color grade, Emma's posture during and after her talk with Rhaenys. It's a picture of almost accepted dejection, a mood of quiet desperation.

Where is the impatience and indignation that matches the "proud" woman GRRM describes in So Spake Martin?:

Read that description, consider how Rhaenyra feeds Vaemond's corpse to Syrax, and let me know if you truly think that this change into a paled and mortified waif is a good change? Not because you can't be sad, but because Rhaenyra has been converted away from her passionate original Adult!self into a dourer, less self asserting person.

While of course it can and does often happen, It is certainly not a guarantee that a person gets more...reserved even in the face of Rhaenyra went through. This was still a choice from one of the silent options the writers had and then decided to go with to make her more palatable to more people who are looking for a more "peace for peace sake" element (nothing wrong with peace and trying to avoid war, but GRRM wrote F&B writing this for Dany's rise AND Gyladyn writing F&B as propaganda against female leadership doesnt invalidate or erase how:

Repetition: Their/the writers' trying to create a story for that doesn't make the fact that bk!Rhaenyra was much fierier than this go away or false. Again, GRRM describes who Rhaenyra was OUTSIDE OF F&B! (So Spake Martin).

Also, she has had 6 years of happy times with Daemon by the beginning of the 8th episode, we couldn't get Rhaenyra make at least some snide comebacks at Vaemond?!

Okay, let's say that F&B is unreliable, two canons, etc (true enough)....why are we acting this is the best or only way to write how the Driftmark claim and Rhaenyra's bearing?!! Why are we (the HotD writers) choosing to make Rhaenyra seem to have so many helpless images of tolerant agency-lessness? Why are we choosing to make Rhaenys so hostile form the beginning to the very last episode, only when Rhaenyra shows her what she thinks is good for the "realm" and (when the war with the greens was inevitable if the green usurped Rhaenyra and she is expected to at least plan how to get it back without/as little bloodshed as possible)? Why are we making Rhaenyra so destitute in positive female connections when there's proof of otherwise in the original story?! There is a difference between having 0 to having 2-3 good connections out of much more bad or neutral ones!

Why are we choosing to rely on one negative stereotype of women...to avoid another perceived negative stereotype against of women?!

And once more, just bc the book is unreliable in terms of who's telling what, how, and for what reason (Septon Eustace dislike of Rhaenyra with the deal with her bleeding from the throne and other things, Mushroom's hypersexualizing and objectifying her while seemingly favorable, Gyldayn's sexism towards Nettles, etc.) doesn't mean that characterizations, events, dates, appearances in Fire & Blood are totally subject to interpretation and absolute changes. Otherwise we can say that Daemon or Viserys were totally different people and re-characterize Daemon as a scholar--a Samwell Tarly-- for life who never hurt a life and only went to war to supervise command over the Stepstones wars from a tent!! Or we could make Nettles into someone who insults everyone she meets after finally getting a dragon, high on a victory she never got to have. Or we could make Mysaria into a crybaby and have her controlled by some john with aspirations for throne instead of a woman who independently worked with Daemon to do horrible shit, and that's how she becomes even more victimized into her eventual death. We could then write Otto to be the brash, unsecretive agent pushing Viserys through glaringly obvious intimidation insteadof the staid politician and manipulator that he was.

Why is it that with these women, we're okay with them becoming their polar opposites?!!! Why are women take with being the "voice of reason" and men show destructive anger, or just hot anger and indignation? Why are women the ones keeping males' "natural" warring in check as if they themselves have not also sprung for wars in real life?! Why are women in HotD (more often than not) the failed keepers of men and the ones to temper their male aggression & ambition?

The final paragraph of the Introduction of the anthology Dangerous Women, where GRRM wrote "The Princess and the Queen". Which is the precursor of Fire & Blood, and relates essentially the Blacks and the Greens chapter of F&B:

I really don't think GRRM is making the agency of these women a value of total 0 when he frames both Alicent & Rhaenyra choosing to assert themselves & their real or perceived rights through this war as them NOT being "hapless victims who stand by whimpering in dread".

5.

You:

a)

Watsonianly: Daemyra still likely happens in Fire & Blood, before Daemon's married to Laena. They all stay close, esp Rhaenyra and Laena, before Laena dies. Their relationship was in no way extant JUST BC Daemon happened to be there. The language doesn't allow that. They rode dragons together several times, ffs! Even while we can guess Rhaenyra & Daemon still were very attracted to each other while they hung out & Laena likely knew, she was never sidelined but a central part of a new unit.

..so...idk what to tell you.

Doylisticaly: GRRM has said Daemon was written for Rhaenyra and that this was one of the thing he loved most about Daemon.

They were literally written to be each others' great loves and Daemon & Rhaenyra were always meant to propogate the Targ line to Daenerys Stormborn. If we argue that Laena was sidelined here, we'd have to say she was sidelined for the entire Targaryen bloodline leading up to Dany, you know. Then we'd have to say Mysaria and Nettles, Alicent and Aemond and Aegon II, etc. all were. Nah.

b)

I actually argued that he was in love with Laena...but it was a different relationship than the one with Rhaenyra (and all the 3 posts that one gives). Not the same sort of passion. Another post by pessimisticpigeon HERE more explains it, too.

I have never heard of anything more damning and hypocritical in my life (says a person who has seen such shit from tg many times before). So Dyana's victimhood status gets removed if she were to be a part of B&C, but Alicent's victim status never "disappears" even into her adulthood where these people keep arguing that she shouldn't be held accountable for attacking Rhaenyra all those years! Which is it? They say a victimhood is unchanging and eternal, but then for Dyana it's not even though her pain is immediate from a recent event whereas Alicent's bedding Viserys would have ended back a few years! (Again, following their logic, I'm saying that Dyana shouldn't suddenly get total blame or censure if she did participate!!!)

Anyway, actually answering the question. If she did, I'd think of it was a dreadful situation Alicent perpetuated. I mean...Alicent allows such things to continue to happen to those girls and if she hadn't, Dyana very well could have had a clearer mind and psyche, so...

And if she doesn't that's fine, too. Point is, I wouldn't hate Dyana.

Final Thoughts on Show!Rhaenys before We Get into the Second Season

I'm not hopeful about Rhaenys in season 2 because the trailer showed us that she'd be sticking to her "no war" and "anti-emotions" agenda even after Luke's death and our knowledge of who Otto is/his emotional influence on Alicent.

I clearly see show!Rhaenys became as bitter as she was. Despite her father-- Prince Aemon--having been the named and official heir plus her being his only surviving child, she was automatically, technically, his heir as well. But because Jaehaerys I didn't believe women should rule like a man AND worried that there would be a civil conflict between Viserys' supporters (namely Daemon) & the Velaryons-Baratheons (Jocelyn Baratheon was Rhaenys' mother and was alive at the time), he decided to use an election knowing how it would go to place a universally uncontested male heir. Show!Rhaenys and dbk!Rhaenys were, some argue, a better fit for the throne by character. It would so likely make any person, woman, resentful of her lot & thus express her resentment...

But the issue is that show!Rhaenys is too cynical & she decides to take it out o the wrong person, the person who is probably the least responsible for her position and the person who is more vulnerable to such expressions at that moment. To the point where she's passive-aggressively trying to discourage a good thing (Rhaenyra believing she could be Queen) when she tells Rhaenyra that men would "sooner" destroy the realm than "see" a woman on the throne. This isn't advice, it's her bitterness being expressed, because she doesn't ever follow up with how Rhaenyra can constructively begin to come up with any strategies.

Because yes, things ARE different for Rhaenyra. Viserys made her his OFFICIAL, declared heir. Rhaenys was never that. Viserys also never called for any Great Council, he relied on the already extant custom that the King's word was Law to justify his choosing Rhaenyra.

Men will never accept ANY woman, so I (Rhaenyra) do what I must anyway.

In the context of a woman having to become Queen in a patriarchal world where there literally ever has been a Queen regnant, Doylistically, why is this woman who the show is saying is supposed to be strong of character or will submitting to patriarchal will wholeheartedly and trying to get Rhaenyra to?!!! Okay, so men will not accept me...am I supposed to just lie down and accept that when I DO have an opportunity to rule anyway, which Viserys/the Monarch, allowed me? "That's how it is"...okay, so bc that's how it is, I should just do nothing at all to improve my place?

It's not smart as people claimed, it's not insightful. It's you putting us all against a wall & saying you shouldn't even try to cross bc you'll fail. It's an ingredient to anti-progress, anti constructivism.

Rhaenys was also absolutely being hypocritical with Alicent in episode 9 about "windows" in prisons, because she has not really protested against Corlys sending off their daughter to be married off at 12 purely for his own ambitions like Otto.

She has done what I already described to Rhaenyra in episode 2. And she says to Corlys she's over not having been chosen...yet says what she says how she says about the lords never going to accept her in episode 2.

And while being anti-war for "the realm", she also kills dozens of smallfolk bc "it's not my war"...but the greens can use this as an excuse against her, Rhaenyra, and the blacks to open the war and make themselves look that much more righteous! (Rhaenyra is still close r to the blacks than "neutral" through Baela & Rhaena) So is she really that careful or conscientious even in her goal for there to be no war?!

If Rhaenys meant "realm" as both nobles & peasants, she has a funny way of showing her concern for "the realm". If not and she just meant nobles, is she really all that wise or compassionate?!

But Rhaenys in the show is made not to see any of that. You can say she's "keeping it real", but sometimes you stifle your own hopes so you cannot see possible paths to the thing you want to accomplish or change. Therefore, show!Rhaenys is actually being very blind & close minded.

It reminds me of some people's tendency to say "I'm just being real" (not so much Rhaenys but the justifications for her behavior towards Rhaenyra) & being nihilistic or over-cynical kinda places us back to square one, the place where we stay victimized by the status quo.

I mean, think of how if people had just accepted "that's just how it is", we'd still have legal segregation, women wouldn't be able to vote or own their own properties or have their own bank cards w/o having to get paper permits from their dads & husbands into the 70s!!!

Show!Rhaenys' particular brand of bitterness (that some of us have misidentified as "truthtelling"), if allowed to be totally justified can serve to reaffirm oppressive status quos.

Which is why I just prefer book!Rhaenys, who many have pointed out was not bloodthirsty but merely thinking of a ruthless strategy and eager to protect her own interests & those that she loved. Because no matter what either show or book Rhaenys wanted, war was definitely coming for not just Daemon & Rhaenyra, but Baela and Rhaena. They are Daemon's daughters no matter who their supposed host was [HotD, Baela is Rhaenys' & Corlys' ward], how would the greens just ignore them?!! Baela is very much like her father, by the evidence and I'm sure Rhaena would also not just abandon Daemon or Rhaenyra, not having had been close to them for years and Daemon literally being their father who has raised them with real love since both were born.

To clear up some misunderstandings about the original book, no one at the black council believed for a second that greens wouldn't come for them or were really "warmongers":

The greens would have never let go of the people they usurped (Rhaenyra & her kids) who could come back at any moment to oust them...that's how usurpations usually go. Look at Robert with Dany and Rhaegar's children!

["The Blacks and the Greens"] -- further proof of greens' intentions against the blacks

Rhaenys says this ("The Blacks and the Greens"):

Bk!Daemon was actually the one practicing some caution, against a full front attack on KL. (Something bk!Rhaenys advocated for.) BUT like Rhaenys, Daemon in the OG story wasn't against a war. Not because he is he's "turned a new leaf" against violence and being an actual, non-playful menace just for the fun of it (which was never his character), but so he can protect his family...proven by how before he speaks, we have Rhaenyra worry over the fates of her sons going into battle in Rhaenys' suggestion. Bc again, the war was nearly inevitable, and definitely became so after Lucerys' death.

Bk!Daemon knew how hard it'd be to fight against actual dragons. He specifically wanted them to use them as a last resort & first send letters to different lords to get them to show their allegiances & prepare for war, fight under Rhaenyra's name. And so they knew who to watch out for.

["The Blacks and the Greens"] -- Black council, Daemon's Words

Corlys was also not anti-war, he was anti-full blaze attack on KL bc it would destroy the things they were fighting for.

["The Blacks and the Greens"] -- Black council, Corlys Disagreeing w/Rhaenys

So Daemon & Rhaenys' roles are almost switched for the show, and this reveals another layer of how the show seeks to subdue their female characters into parrots and puppets of men around them for the male gaze, turn them into something "nonthreatening" & more influenced by men's wills & ambitions than they had been in the book. [xenonwitch]

I say "almost" because the show was anti war vs "go-go-go" instead of the book's full attack on KL vs dragons-as last-resort.

Doesn't matter that the scenes where Baela tries to get Rhaenys to see that were deleted, this situation exists without any of their permission, consent, will, etc. Book!Rhaneys has the sense to not try to deny or hide from it. No one tried.

No, show!Rhaenys doesn't offer very good things, nor is "wise" as people claim she is. "Wise" is different from "clever", and claiming that this iteration of Rhaenys was "wise" really just positions this discouragement of actual action and seizure of opportunity for an event where else-time didn't or couldn't happen is categorically unwise!! And a way to re-affirm patriarchal license of suppressed female ambition or rage.

You bring up a great point, anon! The discrepancy is stark, yet underappreciated.

HotD; Season 1, Episode 8; “The Lord of the Tides”    

HotD; Season 1, Episode 8; “The Lord of the Tides”