Is Jon and Dany's blood relationship supposed to be a problem?

[falcotron]

10 minutes ago, Meera of Tarth said:

Jon is not not raised as a Targaryen. targaryebns liked incest because they are a different culture than people from Westeros. They were foreigners with their special things, like incest being normal and extremely common.

How is this even remotely a reply to what I wrote, or even relevant to it?

[Meera of Tarth]

Just now, falcotron said:

How is this even remotely a reply to what I wrote, or even relevant to it?

Just read it again and you'll understand it.

PS: just bolded what I wanted to respond.

It's not personal beliefs, it's what the story is. When I say Northern, I'm referring to his values, but also his life as a Non-Targ (since Targs lived in KL and that's the South, so that's why I used that term), but it's not that I used it as something different from the Southeners that are not Targs, that was not my intention.

In fact, as you say, it's true than North and South have similar beliefs, and that's why I pointed out the video, which is also revelant for the topic of the thread because people from Non-Targ origins /Northerners and southerners/ have different values and culture than Targs; Targs are pro-incest and the rest are not.

What they have in common (North and South) is a culture that, while is different (different gods for instance); they have more similarities amongst themselves than differences as whole. Both North and South are very different from the Targaryen culture, as the author says. Westeros and Targs.

PS2: the site has crashed while I was editting this, so my apologies if the post was not understandable meanwhile

[Noneofyourbusiness]

It seems several of the posters have an exaggerated idea of the odds of producing freakish offspring from incest in the real world. Even with siblings, it's not 100%, just higher than average. Aerys and Rhaella had several other children who didn't survive. Given that, Dany turning out normal is not unrealistic.

[Noneofyourbusiness]

38 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

-Tywin & Joanna were either 1st or 2nd cousins (I can't remember which) & their marriage was perfectly ok with everyone. (If this is a book only thing I apologize but I couldn't remember if it was mentioned in the show or not.

First. Their fathers were brothers.

It hasn't been referred to on the show, in fact Joanna hasn't been named on the show, but the family tree that shipped with the Season 1 boxset and the online family tree both show it to be the case in-show, too.

[falcotron]

31 minutes ago, Meera of Tarth said:

Just read it again and you'll understand it.

PS: just bolded what I wanted to respond.

OK, sorry for lumping you in with the usual silly misuse of the term "Northern values" within fandom. With your clarification, I understand what you're saying. But now I don't see why you used the phrase in the first place—it doesn't have anything to do with specifically Northern values, or with the usual fandom misuse of the term, it just led to some momentary confusion. (Which you've since cleared up, so that's not a big deal.)

[Meera of Tarth]

Just now, falcotron said:

OK, sorry for lumping you in with the usual silly misuse of the term "Northern values" within fandom. With your clarification, I understand what you're saying. But now I don't see why you used the phrase in the first place—it doesn't have anything to do with specifically Northern values, or with the usual fandom misuse of the term, it just led to some momentary confusion. (Which you've since cleared up, so that's not a big deal.)

no worries. Thanks.

[The Fattest Leech]

2 hours ago, Newstar said:

As previously pointed out by other posters, GRRM originally planned ASOIAF to be a fictional incestuous romance involving two cousins (Jon/Arya). That destroys your argument right there and really should be the end of the discussion as to whether GRRM really intends some sort of anti-incest message with ASOIAF. Let's leave that aside for a moment, though, since I didn't mention that in the post you were commenting on.

Uh, you do know that George has said on many occasions that in his outline he was, "making shit up," because he had to write an outline for the first time ever in order to sell a book, and that he doesn't do outlines because they take the fun out of writing, and so forth. Now a days they are called query letters and you send them to agents first.

George has been talking since 1999 about how he changes things along the way, and the outline means nothing, characters changed along the way, and broad strokes, yadda yadda. I mean, just last year he mentioned that Sansa was in the main 5, now main 6 to survive.

• There is no "master outline" for the series, just a half-dozen pages of very rough notes that are largely out of date. http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/1432/
• 2000: GRRM replied that while he had to outline in Hollywood he doesn't do it naturally. Although some writers do outline to a fare-thee-well, and he knows the broad strokes going in, it works better if some of the twists and turns are spontaneous along the way. And in the event of his untimely death, we're just SOL. http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/Mysterious_Galaxy_Signing_San_Diego/

And it doesn't take a genius to realize that the incest in that outline was moved from Jon to Jaime and Cersei, since Cersei was invented later.

And please show us where in that outline an ending was ever given. There is none because it is blacked out. No one knows what is might have maybe been if George wasn't putting a bunch of "shit" on paper to sell. Seriously, does Dany stumble on eggs in the middle of the great grass sea? Does it say Jon and Arya fell in love, acted on it, everything worked out in the end and so on??? Nope, because key moments then have been drastically changed. http://www.businessinsider.com/game-of-thrones-was-supposed-to-be-a-trilogy-2015-2

Quote

GRRM has no horror of fictional incest and fictional incestuous romances; he's irresistibly drawn to writing about them in great length and in very explicit detail in ASOIAF and related works.

Please do tell me which story that does feature incest, or even a suggested incest relationship, does it work out well. Even if it is his other work to where you can draw upon his writing style.

Quote

 

In addition to the many Targ-on-Targ romances populating TWOIAF, TPATQ, etc., Jaime/Cersei is the central romantic relationship of ASOIAF (to date, since Jon and Dany haven't met yet).

And you seem to think that just because it is central to the arc in the story, that is means it is a good thing? And Cersei and Jaime are not romantic, she is controlling and manipulating him and he is walking away from her in the books and on the show (finally). And George has set it up nicely that either Tyrion (most likely) or the Cersei/Jaime duo could be a result of a Targ parent and they are all mad. There is a reason for that.

Quote

 

As I said. Quotes indicating that in universe, non-Targs take issue with incest in Westeros are irrelevant to that point. Non-Targ characters may rabbit on about how hideous incest is, but GRRM clearly doesn't give a shit when it comes to telling the story he wants to tell; incest is as much part of the fabric of his world as magic and dragons,

 

Quote

and he treats it about the same way, even though many characters in-universe hate and mistrust magic and dragons. Many of the incestuous relationships are toxic, dysfunctional, or even abusive and result in massive collateral damage,

The only people in-world that practice incest are the Targs because it is a way to control the dragon gene/blood, and to covet that power and not let it pass to other families that could possibly own and control a dragon one day. It is a chess move, so to speak. We do not hear about any other culture practicing incest at all. If I missed one, please let me know.

Quote

but that's true of many of the non-incestuous relationships as well (Robert/Cersei, Tyrion/Shae, etc.). 

In short, and not delving into a King Bob the drunkard discussion, Cersei was awful to Robert because of her controlling desire over Jaime. She repeatedly committed treason that resulted in abominations. Tywin had sex with the woman Tyrion was in, or near in love with. That is another incest-triangle tension George repeatedly writes about, both in ASOIAF and his other work. Glad you mentioned them because it fits.

Quote

Those quotes don't prove anything about whether GRRM is trying to structure ASOIAF as an anti-incest parable, which again is the argument you and others have unsuccessfully tried to make. It's also doing GRRM a disservice to suggest that all he's doing with the Targs is providing a neat little parable about how Incest is Bad. Give the man some credit already.

Sure. He is a chess master and is/was and avid role player and he loves the drama that comes with a long game. He goes on about this in the autobiography sections of his anthologies. The ASOIAF story is a long game with lots of players across the board. Ever wonder why the opening credits to the show looks like a role player game board? The Targs are the quintessential drama family that gives lots of action and moves, and in great part because of the incest that creates drama and tension that no other family has. They are his private cyvasse game to play with at his will. Look at the game pieces of cyvasse that he created in-world. Nope, not even the Starks who do not have direct half-uncle + niece incest in them are that dramatized.

Quote

ASOIAF and related works featuring Targ incest are not a long-form condemnation of the horrors of incest. Accordingly, claims that Jon/Dany must end horribly since it is the culmination of GRRM's supposed disgust for fictional incestuous romances are completely inaccurate. If GRRM had such a goal, GRRM ignoring the real world implications of incest and building his world around a fictional dynasty with magical, largely healthy, inhumanly beautiful people regularly practicing incest, which features prominently in the related Westeros works (TPATQ, e.g.), and making two of the three lead characters of ASOIAF and one of the two main characters of D&E healthy, beautiful, magical, and intensely sympathetic products of that fictional dynasty is probably the worst possible way to go about it.

You clearly have not read the many generic "kill Jon" threads that repeatedly talk about how ugly he is because he is "short", has a loooong face, and dull hair, blah, blah, blah. Beauty is subjective and I don't think this particular talking point of yours means much because of that reason. And, Lord Varys pointed out earlier in another thread, we do see certain Targ kings in portraits with body parts covered because they were deformed. So not all Targs are conventionally beautiful.

And people complained plenty and made jokes about the level of "hotness" with the first show Dany compared to Emilia Clarke. I have no doubts that if the show actors were not as "inhumanly beautiful", then much of this shipping would not exist.

I did end up watching the boatsex scene a few days after it aired, and I gotta say, looks are the only thing these two actors had on screen together because the "plank and roll" bed move is not sexy or romantic.

Oh, and in general, that Taylor interview where he talked about Dany and Jon "converging", well, he uses that word twice in that interview and he really was using it in the basic meaning. He first talks about how all the plots are converging, so to converge =/= sex... unless season 8 is one big sexposition orgy  

[Blackwater Revenant]

3 hours ago, Newstar said:

As previously pointed out by other posters, GRRM originally planned ASOIAF to be a fictional incestuous romance involving two cousins (Jon/Arya). That destroys your argument right there and really should be the end of the discussion as to whether GRRM really intends some sort of anti-incest message with ASOIAF. Let's leave that aside for a moment, though, since I didn't mention that in the post you were commenting on.

Yes, let's leave that nonsense aside. I give no credit to, and have no interest in hearing the absurd arguments and conclusions drawn from that bs outline.

Quote

GRRM has no horror of fictional incest and fictional incestuous romances; he's irresistibly drawn to writing about them in great length and in very explicit detail in ASOIAF and related works. In addition to the many Targ-on-Targ romances populating TWOIAF, TPATQ, etc., Jaime/Cersei is the central romantic relationship of ASOIAF (to date, since Jon and Dany haven't met yet). As I said. Quotes indicating that in universe, non-Targs take issue with incest in Westeros are irrelevant to that point. Non-Targ characters may rabbit on about how hideous incest is, but GRRM clearly doesn't give a shit when it comes to telling the story he wants to tell; incest is as much part of the fabric of his world as magic and dragons, and he treats it about the same way, even though many characters in-universe hate and mistrust magic and dragons. Many of the incestuous relationships are toxic, dysfunctional, or even abusive and result in massive collateral damage, but that's true of many of the non-incestuous relationships as well (Robert/Cersei, Tyrion/Shae, etc.). 

Those quotes don't prove anything about whether GRRM is trying to structure ASOIAF as an anti-incest parable, which again is the argument you and others have unsuccessfully tried to make. It's also doing GRRM a disservice to suggest that all he's doing with the Targs is providing a neat little parable about how Incest is Bad. Give the man some credit already.

ASOIAF and related works featuring Targ incest are not a long-form condemnation of the horrors of incest. Accordingly, claims that Jon/Dany must end horribly since it is the culmination of GRRM's supposed disgust for fictional incestuous romances are completely inaccurate. If GRRM had such a goal, GRRM ignoring the real world implications of incest and building his world around a fictional dynasty with magical, largely healthy, inhumanly beautiful people regularly practicing incest, which features prominently in the related Westeros works (TPATQ, e.g.), and making two of the three lead characters of ASOIAF and one of the two main characters of D&E healthy, beautiful, magical, and intensely sympathetic products of that fictional dynasty is probably the worst possible way to go about it.

OK, so yet again - what is this, the fourth time? - you come at me with the exact same argument of which I've repeatedly attempted to point out to you is a fallacy, as the evidence you continue to present is in no way supportive or relevant to the conclusion you are drawing. GRRM is not obligated to only write about subjects that he approves of.  

You then attempt to discredit the quotes I've provided as evidence that GRRM is "trying to structure ASOIAF as an anti-incest parable." Only problem is, I have not made that argument, and the quotes were in response to your claim that in the books, incest is no big deal, and without consequences. Clearly, that is a flawed interpretation of the world that GRRM has built.

The rest of your post is just more straw man arguments and divertive tactics. You've failed even an attempt to address any of the points I've made, and are attempting to prove me wrong in matters that I haven't even offered my opinion on. As you don't seem interested in addressing the content of our particular discussion, and instead only want to make a blanket argument in favor of the characters you ship, I really see no point in continuing any further in this discussion.

 

[Commander Jon Snow]

I believe he said that Jon and Dany were the point. Then he went on to say that George told them that their meeting/convergence was the point of the series

Also, let's accept the idea that the message is that incest is bad. I don't agree but I'll accept it. That doesn't mean it isn't going to happen lol. Main hero and main heroine getting together but being related is just the kind of twist I'd expect George to play on that trope. I've never found him to be as much of a trope-breaker as people have always said

[MinscS2]

3 hours ago, Commander Jon Snow said:

I've never found him to be as much of a trope-breaker as people have always said

Agreed. That Game of Thrones is beyond tropes and cliches is a very common misconception. 

Heck, underdog bastard boy secretly being the rightful heir to the entire kingdom? Doesn't get more cliche than that.

[Graydon Hicks]

i think that i wont be a problem, from daenerys's end. she grew up being raised by viserys, and likely spen tmuch of her childhood under the impression that she would be marrying him. a relationship with her own nephew is kind of tame compared to that.

i think the problem will be on jon's end. he was raised a stark, with values based on the culture and religions of the first men, and social acceptances that go with that. but the issue concerning incest of this nature is going to be coming at him in the same trains of thought as his realization of his own heritage, and what that means. he qualms over sleeping and possibly impregnating his own aunt are going to swalloed partly by his crisis of identity, he coming to grips that he isnt ned's son, that he isnt a stark or even a bastard, that he is the legitimate heir to the iron throne. he is going to have a rough time wrestling with himself over both issues. 

i think he will draw away from dany for a while, until she realizes she is pregnant, and then will hunt his self pitying ass down and have a long talk with him over their family's peculiarities.

[GhostNymeria]

Incest is viewed as problematic from several character's and cultures' perspective in the books. But at the same time incest is practiced by many characters and cultures in the same story.  According to wildling cuture and their interpretation of the old gods, incest is an abomination, but at the same time some of their own cultural practices isn't exactly morally "better" either. Then we have the other side of this topic, Aegon and his sister wifes who united six kingdoms, something that hadn't ever been done before. The valyrian society was far more powerful and advanced than any other kingdom in the world, despite their incectious culture. But eventually the valyrian/Targaryen success came crashing down of course.

My pont is, I don't think Grrm is building towards an anti-incest ending just because it's "genetically bad". The topic of incest is a morally ambigous here, since there are different opinions of it within the story. There is no character or culture in Asoiaf that have "the right" ideas, that's not how Grrm operates. They are all morally grey. 

As for Jon and Dany, I think it will be a problem for Jon but not for Dany. But putting the incest as an opsticle for Jon doesn't mean he will codemn the relationship and turn away because it "wrong". Jon is not going to be morally flawless in this matter just because he follows the old gods. As Grrm said:

Quote

 "I've always agreed with William Faulkner when he said that the human heart in conflict with itself is the only thing worth writing about," Martin has said. "I've always taken that as my guiding principle and the rest is just set dressing. You can have dragons in it, or aliens and starships, or a western about a gunslinger, or even literary fiction, and ultimately you're still writing about the human heart in conflict with itself." 

 

[DMC]

12 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

That is why they came up with this ridiculous annulment story. At this point, they do what they want, and they most likely decided to hand out parts of Aegon's plot to Cersei and Jon when they cut him,

Well, in terms of Dany encountering another (at least ostensible) Targ that has a better claim then her, sure - I suppose this is Jon taking on Aegon's part in that regard.  Other than that though, the fake tension will likely play out as you say, with a few scenes between Jon and Dany that will then be expediently resolved when they're ready for their next Michael Bay set piece.  I suppose the only potential for any prolonged escalation I can possibly see here is how partisans in Dany (e.g. Tyrion and Jorah) and Jon's (e.g. Sansa, maybe Arya, or hell even Jaime) camp react to the news.

12 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

If they wanted to create (fake) tension around the incest thing they would have done it completely differently.

Agreed.

[Lord Varys]

9 hours ago, The Fattest Leech said:

Uh, you do know that George has said on many occasions that in his outline he was, "making shit up," because he had to write an outline for the first time ever in order to sell a book, and that he doesn't do outlines because they take the fun out of writing, and so forth. Now a days they are called query letters and you send them to agents first.

That doesn't mean he outright lied there. There are very strong hints in the first chapters of AGoT that he actually planned to make 'Evil Jaime' king and that Jon and Arya could end up in an incestuous relationship if they met each other again years in the future when they had all grown somewhat older - as was the original plan.

Ignoring that doesn't make any sense. The other point being that the broad strokes of the story as plot elements didn't change all that much, after all. Take Dany's story - it became more complex but the result is still the same. The addition of Theon, Tywin, Littlefinger, and the Freys changed the stories of Tyrion and the eventual end of Robb, Catelyn, and Joffrey but the basic outline there is still that the Lannisters win and the Starks lose in the first part of the overall story.

The chances that the (incestuous) love triangle plot moved from Tyrion-Arya-Jon to Tyrion-Dany-Jon are actually pretty likely. I mean, you do know that the dragon now has three heads - which he didn't back in the outline.

Quote

And you seem to think that just because it is central to the arc in the story, that is means it is a good thing? And Cersei and Jaime are not romantic, she is controlling and manipulating him and he is walking away from her in the books and on the show (finally). And George has set it up nicely that either Tyrion (most likely) or the Cersei/Jaime duo could be a result of a Targ parent and they are all mad. There is a reason for that.

Jaime and Cersei are not bad for each other because they twins, they are bad for each other because they are both shitty and narcissistic people. Jaime even more so than Cersei. He is the one who doesn't give shit about his own children, and is apparently willing to ruin their lives and future just to tell 'the truth'.

Quote

The only people in-world that practice incest are the Targs because it is a way to control the dragon gene/blood, and to covet that power and not let it pass to other families that could possibly own and control a dragon one day. It is a chess move, so to speak. We do not hear about any other culture practicing incest at all. If I missed one, please let me know.

There is evidence that keeping the power within the family actually helped Westeros to remain at peace. When outsiders like the Hightowers (Dance) or Lannisters (War of the Five Kings) marry into the royal family succession wars threaten. Even the Blackfyre Rebellion can be explained by Daeron II marrying outsiders and a horny king fathering too many children on women outside his immediate family.

In a feudal or monarchic setting power isn't shared. It is concentrated in the hands of few people, and that's what all the noble families do. The Targaryens literally marry their own, and the others restrict themselves to cousins of various degrees. 

Quote

In short, and not delving into a King Bob the drunkard discussion, Cersei was awful to Robert because of her controlling desire over Jaime. She repeatedly committed treason that resulted in abominations. Tywin had sex with the woman Tyrion was in, or near in love with. That is another incest-triangle tension George repeatedly writes about, both in ASOIAF and his other work. Glad you mentioned them because it fits.

LOL, no. It is not incest to fuck the whore of your son. It is strange to do that but it is not incest. If that's incest then 'stealing' your sister's boyfriend would also be incest.

Quote

Sure. He is a chess master and is/was and avid role player and he loves the drama that comes with a long game. He goes on about this in the autobiography sections of his anthologies. The ASOIAF story is a long game with lots of players across the board. Ever wonder why the opening credits to the show looks like a role player game board? The Targs are the quintessential drama family that gives lots of action and moves, and in great part because of the incest that creates drama and tension that no other family has. They are his private cyvasse game to play with at his will. Look at the game pieces of cyvasse that he created in-world. Nope, not even the Starks who do not have direct half-uncle + niece incest in them are that dramatized.

That overstates the importance of the Targaryens. Their back story is not that important for the ASoIaF story. The Dance or the Conquest have to relevance on what's unfolding in the series.

The Targaryens are important in the back story because they are the ruling family of Westeros throughout the centuries which George has actually flashed out. If he flashed out the entire last millennium of Westerosi history in detail the Targaryens wouldn't be all that important - instead we would have a lot of interesting material on the Gardeners, Lannisters, Hightowers, Starks, Hoares, Martells, Durrandons, etc. 

But the Targaryen individuals during the series are the core characters of ASoIaF - Dany, Jon, and Tyrion are the main characters of this thing. That fact has been somewhat downplayed during the first half of the series but with ADwD it becomes clear that the Targaryens are everywhere.

Quote

You clearly have not read the many generic "kill Jon" threads that repeatedly talk about how ugly he is because he is "short", has a loooong face, and dull hair, blah, blah, blah. Beauty is subjective and I don't think this particular talking point of yours means much because of that reason. And, Lord Varys pointed out earlier in another thread, we do see certain Targ kings in portraits with body parts covered because they were deformed. So not all Targs are conventionally beautiful.

They still are seen as such, though, are they not? I mean, just go back and read George's own description of them in the appendix of AGoT.

12 hours ago, Meera of Tarth said:

"the world tells you who you are and not yourself"~~???????? Once they treat him as a Targaryrn he will become a Targaryen~~???

no, that would make the story bad literature. Jon is about his decisions in this story, not others and he wont become a Targ BC others tell him it's more likely that an rxtraterrerestrial arrives than that this happens in this show or books.

Sure, Jon is also a Stark bastard right now because the world told him he is. Ned Stark started that lie and the world believed it and treated him like people in Winterfell and the North treat a Stark bastard.

If Jon doesn't become 'Aegon Targaryen' in the show - and whatever he is going to be called in the books - then there is little to no point in this entire plot line. This is not distraction or a temptation - like Ygritte or Stannis' offer of Winterfell or even Robb's last will - it is the truth. Doesn't the truth set you free?

If Jon and the people around him more or less ignored the Targaryen back story then there would be no potential for conflict there, no point to this entire plot line.

Quote

"we are actually all sexually and romantically attracted to close kin"~~~?????

Nope.

Well, I should perhaps elaborated more on that. We are attracted to close kin because of the similarities we see in such people. That is why close biological kin who aren't raised to together and don't emotionally see each other as family usually are attracted to each other when they later meet in life.

Now, if you are raised together that usually doesn't lead to sexual or romantic relationships because of the so-called Westermarck effect - although that seems to be more cultural than actually rooted in psychology. There are studies which show that 10-20% of people actually have incestuous erotic encounters and desires. In addition, we know of cultures - like Ancient Egypt - where a huge portion of the population did marry their sisters (there are tax documents from Egypt during the Roman which confirm this). If it was truly more or less inevitable that you would develop some sort of innate incest taboo then such cultures would likely never have developed.

The idea that nature somehow cares about preventing a population from becoming (overly) inbred isn't exactly well-founded. The sex drive rules our lives to a very strong degree - the abstract knowledge that fucking our siblings may result in a somewhat higher risk of producing sick children not so much. Just as adolescents usually are not able to care or prepare for unwanted pregnancies if they are not properly educated on the subject. Or do you tell your children the best way to prevent getting pregnant is just to decide not to have sex, never mind the fact that they desperately want to?

If a group of people can only have sex with their close kin they most likely will do it. I mean, what else can they do?

[Newstar]

8 hours ago, Blackwater Revenant said:

OK, so yet again - what is this, the fourth time? - you come at me with the exact same argument of which I've repeatedly attempted to point out to you is a fallacy,

I keep making that argument because you've failed to respond to it in any substantial way, as I've pointed out ("Nuh uh" is not argument, using a bigger typeface is not argument, claiming I don't understand the books is not argument, and the quotes you cited were wholly irrelevant for the reasons I stated), but since you're clearly incapable of doing so, I won't bother doing so again.

 

Quote

Yes, let's leave that nonsense aside. I give no credit to, and have no interest in hearing the absurd arguments and conclusions drawn from that bs outline.

Yes, it's always a good idea to ignore inconvenient facts that completely invalidate your attempted argument. That always works, LOL.

Also, everything @Lord Varys said.

[Blackwater Revenant]

2 hours ago, Newstar said:

 using a bigger typeface is not argument, 

That was unintentional.

2 hours ago, Newstar said:

Also, everything @Lord Varys said.

I no longer waste my time reading the posts by Lord Varys, as I will no longer waste my time reading yours.

[MinscS2]

Something occurred to me recently. For all I know, I could very well end up in a similar position as Jon and Dany.
Everyone who has siblings that are quite a lot older than themselves can actually end up in a similar position to Jon and Dany.

I have a brother who is almost 20 years older than me (He's my oldest sibling and I'm the runt of the litter.)
Let's imagine that 30 years ago (around the time I was born), he had a one-night stand. Not unlikely as he was quite the womanizer when he was younger. 
Unbeknownst to him however, this resulted in the girl he slept with getting pregnant.
She never told him however, perhaps because she was embarrassed, or because she didn't approve of him as a father, or because she failed to get into contact with him and tell him. Social media and cellphones weren't really a thing in the 80's. Either way, she gave birth to a baby girl, and raised it on her own.

25 years later, I encounter a woman who I quickly fall in love with, and the feelings are mutual. A few years into our relationship, she ends up pregnant, and we start to discuss family, and a possible wedding. She tells me that she has never met her father. She only tells me what her mother has told her, that's she's the result of a one-night stand, and that her parents allegedly had sex in his apartment in city X, street Y, the latest parts being news to me. I at the same time, know that my brother actually lived on that street 30 years ago. My wife knows my brother of course, but her mother and my brother have never really met (what they know of). I get a rising suspicion however, and call my mother-in-law and show her a picture of my brother. She asks why I have a picture of the man who fathered her daughter... reaction:  It seems I've loved, banged and impregnated my own niece. Neat huh?

Now, is it plausible to expect me to instantly reject my girlfriend?
Should I get disgusted? Should I tell her to have an abortion? 

Or is it plausible to expect me to simply not care about our blood relationship, and, after the shock has settled, continue as nothing happened?

If you ended up in the same situation, and you say that you would reject her, Arya would slap you in the face with a stick because then you are a liar. 

I also dare anyone to claim that the above scenario is just as bad as me and my sister (who I know is my sister) starting to bang when we're teens.
There you have it folks, the difference between Jon/Daenerys, and Jamie/Cersei.
Both are relationships are incestuous, but only one of them can truly be considered incest.
One is nasty and wrong, the other is...unlucky, tragic even? They are unwilling victims of circumstance.

I should also note that the story I just told isn't true (except for my brother, he is 20 years older than me), but it is something that could happen to anyone who has a much older sibling, and it's the main reason why I personally don't have any issues with Jon and Dany's relationship. A lot of people who don't like Jon and Danys relationship brush away the "they didn't know"-argument without a second thought, all while screaming "Incest!", but the fact that they don't know makes all the difference.
 

[Meera of Tarth]

14 hours ago, The Fattest Leech said:

Oh, and in general, that Taylor interview where he talked about Dany and Jon "converging", well, he uses that word twice in that interview and he really was using it in the basic meaning. He first talks about how all the plots are converging, so to converge =/= sex... unless season 8 is one big sexposition orgy  

[Lord Varys]

2 hours ago, Blackwater Revenant said:

That was unintentional.

I no longer waste my time reading the posts by Lord Varys, as I will no longer waste my time reading yours.

I think I never read yours, anyway, as far as I can recall.

@MinscS2

I actually discussed the same scenario with my girlfriend - and, yeah, if you make that a problem for your relationship you are either not in love, a bigot, or a moron.

I'd not agree about Jaime-Cersei, though, since I think their love is genuine, or at least was genuine back in their childhood and youth, before life twisted them around. If the society they lived in allowed them to marry each other - like the Targaryens did - or even if Tywin had let them alone, allowing them quietly to live their lives they way they wanted to they would have been infinitely happier with their lives. Their lives could have been like Jaehaerys-Alysanne or Jaehaerys-Shaera.

Jaime could have been a father to his children and Cersei wouldn't have been eaten by disgust, fear, and hate.

And with Dany-Jon we have Dany as a woman who grew up expecting to marry her brother. She has no issue with that kind of thing. Jon didn't grow up that way but grew up knowing - like anyone in Westeros - what the Targaryens did. If he is a Targaryen he can do it, too, without a guilty conscience. And that's what he is going to do if he loves Daenerys and/or wants to marry her.

[MinscS2]

18 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

I'd not agree about Jaime-Cersei, though, since I think their love is genuine, or at least was genuine back in their childhood and youth, before life twisted them around.

Oh I'm not denying that Jamie and Cerseis feelings for each other are (or rather, were) genuine. They truly loved one another at one point.

I've edited my post to make it clearer, I realized that it didn't seem like I acknowledge the fact that Cersei and Jamie did love each other when they where younger, but I do.