Why are the Ironborn widely hated but the Dothraki popular?

[RenlyIsNotRight]

Thread title is pretty self explanatory, but...these are both cultures whose entire society revolves around raping and pillaging essentially, and both are pretty morally repugnant by modern standards.

And yet the general phenomena seems to be that The Dothraki are actually well liked by the fandom, and the bad things they do are given the "it's their culture" pass, and yet the Ironborn are generally regarded as disgusting marauding rapists and thieves for doing essentially the same things. So what gives?

I'm going to go on a limb and guess that the Ironborn are hated because they initially appeared in the series as antagonists to the Starks, while the Dothraki appeared as the introduction to Drogo and Danys extremely creepy yet disgustingly romanticized by the fandom relationship, and rape and pillage in societies that we don't really have much emotional attachment to (unless youre like me and think Mirri Maaz Duur was a hero, but that's just me).

Could it also be that the Ironborn seem less primitive in general, have up to date technology, a system of vassals, maesters, etc. yet still stick to their old ways?

To be honest I'm not an overly huge fan of either myself, but I'm curious to see what others say/if anyone can remind me of something I'm missing.

[TallTyrion]

The Dothraki are popular in the fandom?

[RenlyIsNotRight]

The Dothraki are popular in the fandom?

Maybe not on here, but I see a lot of love for them in the decidedly more "mainstream" parts of the fandom (read - the GoT Facebook page and the like)

[Shpati]

I don't read or post here much, but I didn't know the Dothraki were well liked other than Khal Drogo and a few others.

But I guess it has to do with the Ironborn and Greyjoys invading the North, which is probably the most popular Kingdom among fans. While the Dothraki invade villages and places in Essos we don't know much about and have little to no attachment to.

[David Selig]

The GoT Dothraki looked "cool" and "badass" on screen, at least according to a whole lot of viewers who watch the show for the action scenes. The Ironborn have been quite pathetic on the other hand.

[RenlyIsNotRight]

The GoT Dothraki looked "cool" and "badass" on screen, at least according to a whole lot of viewers who watch the show for the action scenes. The Ironborn have been quite pathetic on the other hand.

"Hey we're supposed to be the closest thing Westeros has to vikings and a martial culture based on strength...but when some shirtless Heath Ledgers Joker knockoff opens up the dog cage, that's where we draw the line. Gotta bail and forget this ever happened."

Seriously that was probably the worst scene ever on the show, and that's saying a lot.

[TallTyrion]

Maybe not on here, but I see a lot of love for them in the decidedly more "mainstream" parts of the fandom (read - the GoT Facebook page and the like)

hmm maybe because of the Show watchers. You don't really get a view of their brutality in the show, Drogo sacks one city for a few minutes of screen time. Other than that they seem like simple horse loving bad asses. The guy they got to play Khal Drogo was also pretty popular with the ladies so maybe that helps.

Contrast that with the pale ugly Iron Born we get on the show and that could explain the popularity among casual fans.

[John Doe]

"Hey we're supposed to be the closest thing Westeros has to vikings and a martial culture based on strength...but when some shirtless Heath Ledgers Joker knockoff opens up the dog cage, that's where we draw the line. Gotta bail and forget this ever happened."

Indeed. The show completely fucked the ironborn up.

[kimim]

Thread title is pretty self explanatory, but...these are both cultures whose entire society revolves around raping and pillaging essentially, and both are pretty morally repugnant by modern standards.

And yet the general phenomena seems to be that The Dothraki are actually well liked by the fandom, and the bad things they do are given the "it's their culture" pass, and yet the Ironborn are generally regarded as disgusting marauding rapists and thieves for doing essentially the same things. So what gives?

I'm going to go on a limb and guess that the Ironborn are hated because they initially appeared in the series as antagonists to the Starks, while the Dothraki appeared as the introduction to Drogo and Danys extremely creepy yet disgustingly romanticized by the fandom relationship, and rape and pillage in societies that we don't really have much emotional attachment to (unless youre like me and think Mirri Maaz Duur was a hero, but that's just me).

Could it also be that the Ironborn seem less primitive in general, have up to date technology, a system of vassals, maesters, etc. yet still stick to their old ways?

To be honest I'm not an overly huge fan of either myself, but I'm curious to see what others say/if anyone can remind me of something I'm missing.

The Dothraki are in the first book, perform a function, while the Ironborn read like filler from the last two books. Whether people know it or not, imo this plays a part.

[INCBlackbird]

because most casual watchers don't think further then "this character looks cool I like them" and so there's lots of fans of Dany causing lots of fans of Khal Drogo, while Theon is very much disliked by most causual fans and these are the two most prominant characters and the like/dislike grows from them.

[Drth Fel]

The OP is based on a false premise. Aside from Jason Momoa (Khal Drogo), the show Dothraki are pretty much as much of a joke as in the books. For those that don't know, Momoa played in Stargate Atlantis.

[BRANDON GREYSTARK]

Because the Dothraki are half naked savages, they create a sight in the mind's eye .

[John Doe]

because most casual watchers don't think further then "this character looks cool I like them" and so there's lots of fans of Dany causing lots of fans of Khal Drogo, while Theon is very much disliked by most causual fans and these are the two most prominant characters and the like/dislike grows from them.

Drogo was pretty badass in the show though, his fighting scene was one of the best scenes imho.

[Bronn Stone]

Not so sure about the non-Drogo Dothraki being so bad in the show. Rakharo comes out looking pretty cool when he forces Viserys to walk.

[dread pirate davos]

I dislike both, bar the reader and asha

[StrongBelwas]

The answer to the thread-question is simple: The ironborn are directly harming characters and cultures we've come to know. The Dothraki are harming cultures we don't know well. If the story was set in the lands of the Lamb-men, we'd likely hate the Dothraki and think the ironborn curious.

[Maid So Fair]

I don't think Dothraki are that popular. If people are more vocal about the IB it's mostly because they're more prominent in the story.

I think another distinction is that you keep thinking that the IB SHOULD know better by now. With Dothraki, you can understand that their culture is simply not advanced enough for them to really live any other way while the IB have had ample exposure to the life of the rest of Westeros and other ways of making a living.

[Wmarshal]

I don't hate the ironborn, but I hate everything about the Dothraki, they are meant to be the mongols but lack the complex system of government, weaponry, use of other cultures, use of sieges period and anything actual interesting. But for some reason they are as powerful of them, em kay.

[C.T. Phipps]

Because the Dothraki are a culture of raiders and conquerors but have some redeeming qualities.

They honor family, friendship, and each other.

The Ironborn....really don't.

[Wmarshal]

Because the Dothraki are a culture of raiders and conquerors but have some redeeming qualities.

They honor family, friendship, and each other.

The Ironborn....really don't.

When did they do that? The dothraki believe a man can bang his khal's wife but not sit on his horse, and their is the matter of them killing the babe heirs of dead khals.