Guinevere And Lancelot's Sex

Here is your mission.

Alicent’s relationships with her children can never be perfect and healthy because they’re objectively broken from their onset. And I’m so tired of seeing brain dead takes comparing the “superior” relationship Rhaenyra has with her kids to Alicent and her kids as some sort of gotcha.

Alicent’s exposure to motherhood isn’t on her terms in any conceivable way. Her children are the products of marital rape and coercion. They are conceived and born when she is a young teenage girl 15-18, well before she is ready to have them. They are born in quick succession with no opportunity for her to recover. And, they are from a man that not only does she not love but who neglects and belittles her.

All these factors severely damage Alicent’s ability to connect with her children in their infancy. And can you blame her given the circumstances?

She’s not ready to have them at all, so she doesn’t know how to properly mother them. And she likely resents them at least a bit in the early stages because they are the physical manifestation of not only her rape but the life she is trapped in. And that likely compounds with severe guilt because these are her babies, why doesn’t she feel the love and joy she’s supposed to?

And yet. She still loves and cares for them. She holds them as babies (despite being a baby herself) and dutifully cares for them even though she could simply dump them off with a nursemaid. She charges with a knife at Rhaenyra for them. She stands between them and a dragon from them. She betrays her closest companion of her childhood for them. She defies the king and their father for them.

I know that Alicent makes some crucial mistakes that ends up hurting her children. And I know that the scenes we see with Alicent and her kids often show her lack of connection to them. But despite the fact that her relationship to them can be nothing but fractured at the onset. There is so much passion and love and devotion she has for them.

These are not scenes of a woman who is a bad mother. These are scenes of a mother who adores her children and would do anything for them. But who can only love them roughly because she never had an opportunity to love them gently. Their very existence was never gentle for her and never fostered through love.

Alicent’s relationship with her kids may be broken. But it’s not her fault that it is. And no matter what there is love and it is her motivation. So stop acting like she is a bad mother when she’s fighting like hell to breed a relationship with them that is fostered in connection.

On the subject of Alicent and the accusations of hypocrisy, I'm not really interested in delving into what societal taboos she actually is and isn't breaking. Don't care, have fun, girl.

What does interest me is how the popular framing of Rhaenyra vs Alicent as feminist girlboss vs woman for Trump prevents people from acknowledging what the show explicitly told them in season 1.

Simply put, I never understood why people were interpreting Alicent as someone who honestly, genuinely wants to enforce the values of duty, honor, and sacrifice as a social norm to combat "sexual immorality" (??? I guess???), instead of hiding behind them as the only available coping mechanism for her horrifying personal situation.

Mind you, Alicent isn't just subjected to what the standard for Westerosi noblewomen is, i.e. being sold as a bargaining chip for loveless breeding while expected to have no say in it. She gets a particularly nasty version of this by being sold to an old creep at 15 and put into an extremely exposed position as a queen who is, to reiterate, 15 and thus unable to tweak any personal space, power, and advantages in this marriage until after child number three. And as a plus, she gets mocked both by her husband and his incompetent idiot of a brother (for whom she went to bat, btw), discarded by her only friend, and her children being ignored and neglected by the very man who made sure she'd have them—starting at 15.

So it's the least surprising thing in the world that she would reframe her powerlesness in a way that'd give her some sense of active involvement, i.e. she made a sacrifice and she made that sacrifice in the name of duty.

Alicent's moral framework is such that it encompasses the totality of one person. It's actually astonishing how little of it she applies to others. She empathises with Rhaenyra not stepping up and "doing her duty" by marrying whomever her dad throws at her, and seeks to give her options. She's outraged at Rhaenyra not because she can't stand the idea of a girlboss winning, rather because it's physically painful how little Rhaenyra cares about the precariousness of her political position. She doesn't turn against Rhaenyra because the latter had extramarital sex; it's because she lied to her fucking face. And even when gunning for her bastards who are the textbook definition of usurping and a succession crisis waiting to happen, she allows for one bastard as a freebie.

So no, Alicent's "where is duty, where is sacrifice" isn't her demanding that an immowal girlboss corrects her behaviour right now, young lady. It's a cry of a person breaking because she can no longer ignore that her cope was ever just that, that she was made to give and sacrifice everything while fuck-ups who sacrificed nothing and demanded everything are now going after her children, the fruit of a life she never wanted to live.

Now, why was she made to live that life? Because Viserys.

Why was she made to have those children? Because Viserys.

Who created the situation to which adopting a coping mechanism became a matter of survival? Viserys.

Well, Vizzy? Is fucking dead. Tragically he wasn't given the Drogo treatment of having an urgent meeting with a pillow but he is indeed toast. So the whole reason why Alicent reframed her awful life as an act of dutiful sacrifice? Is gone.

So it doesn't surprise me whatsoever that the moment she became a widow she decided to do something very much undutiful and unsacrificial and jumped on Criston's dick, or that the old programming where she isn't allowed to have anything at all would always immediately bounce back.

(Why is Criston, apparently, pursuing the relationship, I still have no earthly clue)

Wait what's a buildings fire evacuation plan if you aren't supposed to use the elevator to get down

When I was younger and more abled, I was so fucking on board with the fantasy genre’s subversion of traditional femininity. We weren’t just fainting maidens locked up in towers; we could do anything men could do, be as strong or as physical or as violent. I got into western martial arts and learned to fight with a rapier, fell in love with the longsword.

But since I’ve gotten too disabled to fight anymore, I… find myself coming back to that maiden in a tower. It’s that funny thing, where subverting femininity is powerful for the people who have always been forced into it… but for the people who have always been excluded, the powerful thing can be embracing it.

As I’m disabled, as I say to groups of friends, “I can’t walk that far,” as I’m in too much pain to keep partying, I find myself worrying: I’m boring, too quiet, too stationary, irrelevant. The message sent to the disabled is: You’re out of the narrative, you’re secondary, you’re a burden.

The remarkable thing about the maiden in her tower is not her immobility; it’s common for disabled people to be abandoned, set adrift, waiting at bus stops or watching out the windows, forgotten in institutions or stranded in our houses. The remarkable thing is that she’s like a beacon, turning her tower into a lighthouse; people want to come to her, she’s important, she inspires through her appearance and words and craftwork.  In medieval romances she gives gifts, write letters, sends messengers, and summons lovers; she plays chess, commissions ballads, composes music, commands knights. She is her household’s moral centre in a castle under siege. She is a castle unto herself, and the integrity of her body matters.

That can be so revolutionary to those of us stuck in our towers who fall prey to thinking: Nobody would want to visit; nobody would want to listen; nobody would want to stay.

I'm gonna need these people to stop mixing the book with the show because frankly not everybody has read the book but we have watched the show which clearly shows Alicent as a victim who's just trying to keep her children and herself safe and also shows rhaenyra being the stupidest targaryen woman to ever live, but because y'all wanna keep trying to make rhaenyra the saint in the whole situation and act like she can't do any wrong, y'all bring up the book because y'all know that if y'all didn't you would have to be forced to face the fact that you're all wrong about rhaenyra and that she is literally the person that y'all want Alicent to be

HEY GUYS!!

GUYS!!!

FRANCE HAS REACHED THE REQUIRED NUMBER OF SIGNATURES ON THE CITIZEN'S INITIATIVE AGAINST CONVERSION THERAPY IN THE EU!!

ONE COUNTRY DOWN, SIX TO GO!!

We also need still quite a few signatures in order to reach the one million required.

As to date, the six other countries with the most signatures are:

Spain - 38.72%

Finland - 30.31%

Ireland - 24.86%

Netherlands - 24.15%

Germany - 23.54%

Belgium - 23.09%

So yeah, still a long way to go, but we ARE slowly getting closer. Don't stop now! Don't let this stay within the community, either, if you have any friends or family who are open to queer rights, get them to sign, too!

Petitions - UK Government and Parliament

Petition: Legally enshrine the right of adults to physically transition using NHS services

Introduce a law to legally protect the right of those aged 18 and over to transition using NHS services. This should specifically cover phys

Uk peeps!! Let’s get this going! 🏳️‍⚧️🇬🇧

Olivia Cooke thinks she only has one fan so…

REBLOG THIS POST IF YOU ARE A FAN OF OLIVIA COOKE!!!

She needs to know!!!!

„Are you for real(?) (…) there was a war! (…) which started immediately after Lucerys‘ death.“ if there was no war at the time of Lucerys‘ killing it wasn‘t a warcrime as War crimes can only be committed during an armed conflict qualified accordingly under international humanitarian law. (See link cited above)

It is literally in the name. The text says During NOT immediately preceding or causing.

Now the obvious point you seem to be making is an analogy to Pearl Harbour but the attack itself is usually qualified as a crime against peace under Section III of the 1907 Hague Convention, which defines the responsibility of all signatories as needing to engage in negotiation and issue a final ultimatum before declaring war,(with regards to Imperial Japan and Pearl Harbour the Charges in the Tokyo Trials counts 1-53 deal with crimes against peace with only the last teo counts dealing with warcrimes and crimes against humanity. ) see https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/NR/rdonlyres/A9B8696D-FF7E-4CF0-90B0-F47C4C2D9EAB/283891/Totanichapter_correctversion.pdf page 9 of pdf and 154 of book.

https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/NR/rdonlyres/A9B8696D-FF7E-4CF0-90B0-F47C4C2D9EAB/283891/Totanichapter_correctversion.pdf

But the Green Council actually do offer an ultimatum, making that comparison null and void and I think IRL you would have some trouble convicting anyone on the Green Council of the crime of aggression/crimes against peace. In Response Rhaenyra issues a formal declaration of war, in the show she orders the Velaryon fleet to Blockade Kings Landing and shelters Rhaenys both of which constitutes a hostile act towards the Greens even before the Greens have time to do anything, giving a reasonable ground to declare that she was not negotiating in good faith.

„And wih his death the war of ravens came to an end the war of fire and blood began in earnest.“

Meaning: this is where hostilities proper start NOT where the war itself starts. War had been declared prior and it had been declared by the blacks, as I pointed out and cited in one of the points you left unadressed. Wars usually begin with a declaration of war not with immediate hostilities.

My friend you were the one to bring Alicents opinion on the matter into this. And even if you were correct (I don‘t believe you are) it does not exclude me from being correct as well. Her not valuing human life does not mean she considered herself and her faction not in a state of war.

Regarding Otto, yeah, that is literally what that quote means. As far as it being a war crime, see above.

I‘m very curious where you got that impression from, becuse we see the Greens seconds after then not at all for nearly two weeks. Otto bot bringing it up at Peace talks doesn‘t mean it isn‘t an important issue, just one that might be counter productive.

In fact Rhaenys not being offered a pardon might indicate them caring a bit more than you seem to think.

Calling an envoy, a soldier and a threat, is quite literally the dumbest thing you can say. They are basically postmen with diplomatic immunity. It really sums up the extent of intelligence I have come to expect from team green fans. Lucerys was innocent and he will keep being it, murdering him was a war crime + king slaying being a taboo.

You can take your stupid posts somewhere else. Him saying "I will not fight you" isn't a joke, he is representative of borros's enemy and his only Job is to take a letter and bring back an answer, if he joins in fighting he starts a war.....like aemond did.