Season 8 potential characters couple pairings

[jcmontea]

39 minutes ago, Kajjo said:

Sansa used to be a stupid cow up to season 6. She mellowed a bit in season 7, but to describe her as cool and clever, is simply nonsense. Now as adult she is not as dumb anymore and gets her stuff together a little bit. 

She did not rid herself of Ramsay. She barely escaped endangering her life and Ramsay was beaten by the army, not her in the least. Baelish worked his connections, not Sansa. They were all suprised, Baelish turned up just in time with the army. 

Without Bran's visions and Arya's knowledge Sansa would have most probably not get rid of Littlefinger. At least Sansa was smart enough to listen to her to siblings. She mellowed a bit, yes. But she is far aways from being really cool and in control. Contradicting Jon in front of all people was neither smart nor sensible. A smart woman would have played her cards in other ways.

Well, maybe close to reality, though?

These Hollywood-ish scenarios of "the married and lived happily ever after" is stupid nonsense. The main problems start after marriage. 

I guess we will see one or another couple coming together in love. Whether this will last, we will never know. World changes, always. One scene can be "love forever", the next can be betrayel, sickness, envy, jealosy or whatever. Forget Hollywood. See the reality!

Season 8 will end, but the Westeros world will continue. With new game of thrones. No kingdom lasts eternally.

I agree with you. 

But most people fall in love and get married even if it doesn't work out in the end. 

To expound on my point, that is what i find not realistic. I don't need to see that they lived happily ever after. But people falling in love and getting married yea, that should happen because that is a fundamental part of most lives - even if in the end they fall out of love and get divorced. 

I agree whole heartedly with how it should end. They can't leave it with the notion that the game of thrones is over. The game of thrones never ends. It continues even to our day. That has to be made clear. Which is why on a thematic level I think its interesting if after all this we end up with a Targaryen restoration. What better way to send the message that the game never ends, people gain power, they lose power and on and on it goes - plus war is ultimatley futile - than having all these wars and battles just bring us back to where it started. Robert rebelled and after everything that followed the Targaryens are on the throne. Maybe these new Targs do somehing to improve the life of the small folk, but at the end of the day it was all just another chapter in the never ending game of thrones. 

[Meera of Tarth]

12 minutes ago, jcmontea said:

I agree with you. 

But most people fall in love and get married even if it doesn't work out in the end. 

To expound on my point, that is what i find not realistic. I don't need to see that they lived happily ever after. But people falling in love and getting married yea, that should happen because that is a fundamental part of most lives - even if in the end they fall out of love and get divorced. 

I agree whole heartedly with how it should end. They can't leave it with the notion that the game of thrones is over. The game of thrones never ends. It continues even to our day. That has to be made clear. Which is why on a thematic level I think its interesting if after all this we end up with a Targaryen restoration. What better way to send the message that the game never ends, people gain power, they lose power and on and on it goes - plus war is ultimatley futile - than having all these wars and battles just bring us back to where it started. Robert rebelled and after everything that followed the Targaryens are on the throne. Maybe these new Targs do somehing to improve the life of the small folk, but at the end of the day it was all just another chapter in the never ending game of thrones. 

Or Gendry could be in the throne and everything would  be like the start as well sending the same message That the game never ends buy this time its better 

[jcmontea]

6 minutes ago, Meera of Tarth said:

Or Gendry could be in the throne and everything would  be like the start as well sending the same message

Yes but than Robert's Rebellion would also not be showed to ultimatley have been futile. If the Targs are back literally everything including Robert's Rebellion was pointless. We end up with King Aegon and Queen Daenerys just like we would have had their been no rebellion in the first place. 

Because of that, and also because Gendry is just not an important enough character in this story, I think a Targ restoration is more likely and makes more thematic sense. 

[Tywinelle]

21 hours ago, Zapho said:

 

Lol, you guys take shipping too seriously. 

If you think my post was serious, you haven't been paying attention...

[Meera of Tarth]

1 hour ago, jcmontea said:

Yes but than Robert's Rebellion would also not be showed to ultimatley have been futile. If the Targs are back literally everything including Robert's Rebellion was pointless. We end up with King Aegon and Queen Daenerys just like we would have had their been no rebellion in the first place. 

Because of that, and also because Gendry is just not an important enough character in this story, I think a Targ restoration is more likely and makes more thematic sense. 

I dunno if you read my comment edited since i accidentally pressed the submit button before writinf the last words. Gendry woul be better monarch than Robert. Thats ny point. Jon would be but Dany no. 

[jcmontea]

9 minutes ago, Meera of Tarth said:

I dunno if you read my comment edited since i accidentally pressed the submit button before writinf the last words. Gendry woul be better monarch than Robert. Thats ny point. Jon would be but Dany no. 

Its a possible hypothesis. 

What i laid out is just a hypothesis as well. Whether Gendry is better than Robert or not doesn't really change the core reasons as to why your hypothesis is less likely than the one I laid out: 1.) A baratheon in charge doesn't make Robert's Rebellion pointless and 2.) Gendry is a super minor character and I have a hard time believing we end up with such a minor character in charge.

But those reasons also don't mean it won't happen just why I don't find it convincing based on the evidence we have now. 

We shall see. 

[Kajjo]

25 minutes ago, Meera of Tarth said:

Gendry woul be better monarch than Robert.

Why do you think so? He has low-class upbringing and absolutely no education like high-born, no experience with ruling. We do not know much about his character. 

In the scenes with the red priestess he appeared very unmature and since then... what happened? A lot of rowing, a smith career and that's all. He appears to be a minor character and why he was reactivated in season 7 we all don't really know.

Gendry might be a likelable character, I agree. But a king, a ruler? I don't think so. 

Dany won't make it either, I am afraid. She is a very temperamental "queen" so far. A lot of charisma and desires, but little experience and capabilities.

[Newstar]

14 hours ago, Angel Eyes said:

So... is there such a thing as love? If there is, why so much cost? What's the point? Is love something to be hidden away, a mark of shame, something that we should not feel?

Do GRRM and D&D hate love? 

"Sansa, Arya, Tyrion and multiple other major characters are highly unlikely to end up with anyone" does not mean "GRRM and D&D hate love."

This isn't the kind of story where all the major characters pair off. GRRM has never written that kind of story in any event, and usually his male protagonists--like Tyrion--are perpetually disappointed in love. Also, in ASOIAF just as in many of his works, the relationships that do exist are often toxic, dysfunctional, or even outright abusive. It doesn't mean that "GRRM hates love," just that he's not writing a cheery rom com where everyone pairs up and no one dies.

I'd say Jon and Dany have a decent shot at a healthy relationship--as healthy as it can get where Targs are concerned--and romantic happiness if they make it out of the series alive, and even that feels like a generous concession from GRRM. Anything more than that? Don't get greedy, LOL.

 

14 hours ago, TRILOGY said:

What will become of House Stark? No heirs, no legacy, no future. Just wondering what's your theory. 

Maybe the Stark line will end, who knows? Could be part of the "bittersweet" ending. One of Jon and Dany's hypothetical future children could take on the Stark name as the heir--a Harry the Heir-type arrangement--if needed. If Sansa does end up as an Elizabeth I figure, designating one of Jon and Dany's kids as her heir, James I-style, seems like a sensible solution.

As it is, I find speculation assuming that Sansa--who was repeatedly raped by Ramsay so that she would birth an heir--or Arya--who has never shown any interest in romance and has always wanted to buck gender expectations--MUST settle down and become brood mares...highly unpleasant. Both Stark sisters have been compared to Cersei at various points in the show, and I think at this point they would react about as well to being forced into a life they didn't want as Cersei did.

[greensleeves]

37 minutes ago, Newstar said:

As it is, I find speculation assuming that Sansa--who was repeatedly raped by Ramsay so that she would birth an heir--or Arya--who has never shown any interest in romance and has always wanted to buck gender expectations--MUST settle down and become brood mares...highly unpleasant. Both Stark sisters have been compared to Cersei at various points in the show, and I think at this point they would react about as well to being forced into a life they didn't want as Cersei did.

It's really bad to assume that because a woman has been raped she will never want to be a mother.  Also, just because you want to buck some gender stereotypes doesn't mean you'll never want a romantic partner or children.

[Newstar]

18 minutes ago, greensleeves said:

It's really bad to assume that because a woman has been raped she will never want to be a mother.

It's a fact that a lot of rape survivors lose interest in intimate relationships; Sansa seems to be one of them. Even absent the rape, Sansa would be well within her rights to refuse to remarry given her experiences with marriage. Book Sansa is already sour on marriage as well.

Also, it's far worse to imply that a rape survivor needs to suck it up, spread her legs, and take one for the team, which is why all the whining about how Sansa needs to have babies OR ELSE is so distasteful. 

It's also a false assumption that Sansa and/or Arya need to have kids or else House Stark is doomed. If Sansa ends up as an Elizabeth I figure, she can do what Elizabeth I did and designate one of Jon and Dany's children (assuming they have more than one) as her heir, which is what is supposed to happen with Harry the Heir if Sweetrobin dies in the books. It's not the big crisis others are making it out to be.

 

Quote

 Also, just because you want to buck some gender stereotypes doesn't mean you'll never want a romantic partner or children.

The writers strongly implied that the Nymeria scene foreshadowed that Arya is never going to settle down and will ultimately reject any form of domestication just as Nymeria did. Pretty obvious, really.

I believe the writers said that Season 4 contains a lot of foreshadowing for the end of the series. I wouldn't be surprised if Arya's last scene in the show is similar to her last scene in Season 4: sailing off to new adventures in a new land (although I'm guessing Arya will be headed west of Westeros as Season 6 hinted, not to Braavos). 

[greensleeves]

5 minutes ago, Newstar said:

It's even worse to imply that a rape survivor needs to suck it up, spread her legs, and take one for the team.

That is in no way what I implied or said.

Quote

The writers strongly implied that the Nymeria scene foreshadowed that Arya is never going to settle down and will ultimately reject domestication just as Nymeria did. Pretty obvious, really.

I guess I haven't seen that.. but if there is foreshadowing that's actual valid evidence. Saying that women who aren't feminine in some ways can't want romance and children is not good.

I'll let you get back to lecturing women on feminism... Newstar gender: male.

Edit: I will note that having children also doesn't mean being tamed.

[Angel Eyes]

1 hour ago, Newstar said:

"Sansa, Arya, Tyrion and multiple other major characters are highly unlikely to end up with anyone" does not mean "GRRM and D&D hate love."

This isn't the kind of story where all the major characters pair off. GRRM has never written that kind of story in any event, and usually his male protagonists--like Tyrion--are perpetually disappointed in love. Also, in ASOIAF just as in many of his works, the relationships that do exist are often toxic, dysfunctional, or even outright abusive. It doesn't mean that "GRRM hates love," just that he's not writing a cheery rom com where everyone pairs up and no one dies.

I'd say Jon and Dany have a decent shot at a healthy relationship--as healthy as it can get where Targs are concerned--and romantic happiness if they make it out of the series alive, and even that feels like a generous concession from GRRM. Anything more than that? Don't get greedy, LOL.

 

I'm not asking for a cheery rom com, the series is well past that now. I guess what I'm saying is that, do we need to be disappointed in love? Does love require brutal, numbing tragedy? Do healthy relationships and romantic happiness need to be "generous concessions"? Do we need to be taught that love is bad? Because that's the lesson I'm getting from GRRM and D&D. And it's a lesson I hope isn't real.

[Meera of Tarth]

2 hours ago, jcmontea said:

Its a possible hypothesis. 

What i laid out is just a hypothesis as well. Whether Gendry is better than Robert or not doesn't really change the core reasons as to why your hypothesis is less likely than the one I laid out: 1.) A baratheon in charge doesn't make Robert's Rebellion pointless and 2.) Gendry is a super minor character and I have a hard time believing we end up with such a minor character in charge.

But those reasons also don't mean it won't happen just why I don't find it convincing based on the evidence we have now. 

We shall see. 

Oh, I don't think that Gendry has lots of chances of ending in the iron htorne, but I think it would be poetic in a way, since it would mean that changes in the game of thrones, after all those battles to win it, ends up in the same House Name and also that Gendry would be a better ruler, since he was born as a commoner.

As for the pointless Rebellion? Why should the ending mean that it was poitless? Tehere was only one rebellion during his reign, the things started to get complicated once Joffrey sat the throne so I don't know why does invalidates Robert's reign as an acceptable one. 

 Well, anyway, following your reasoning and that it has to be proven as pointless, why would the Restoration of the Targaryen Dinasty be any better? Shouldn't it be proved as pointless as well? The Targaryens conquered the Seven Kingdoms, so why is it any better?

Wouldn't it be more poetic if the Throne ends up destroyed or the Kingdoms end up being independent again, ruled by people who has suffered the Game of Thrones?

[Meera of Tarth]

2 hours ago, Kajjo said:

Why do you think so? He has low-class upbringing and absolutely no education like high-born, no experience with ruling. We do not know much about his character. 

In the scenes with the red priestess he appeared very unmature and since then... what happened? A lot of rowing, a smith career and that's all. He appears to be a minor character and why he was reactivated in season 7 we all don't really know.

Gendry might be a likelable character, I agree. But a king, a ruler? I don't think so. 

Dany won't make it either, I am afraid. She is a very temperamental "queen" so far. A lot of charisma and desires, but little experience and capabilities.

Well, the show has established that commoners such as Davos and Gilly can quickly learn to read and behave in a more noble way, so I don't know where the problem is, if not time. And time is not a problem in this show.

And as for the immature thing...he learned of his mistakes, now he would not be fooled again in the same way. Characters develop. Jon has been fooled many times and lost battles, and no one is saying he'd not be capable of ruling a Kingdom.

As for Dany, yeah, the person who would probably really like to rule and yet she is the most temperamental, she would need really good Hands.

[Meera of Tarth]

2 hours ago, Newstar said:

"Sansa, Arya, Tyrion and multiple other major characters are highly unlikely to end up with anyone" does not mean "GRRM and D&D hate love."

This isn't the kind of story where all the major characters pair off. GRRM has never written that kind of story in any event, and usually his male protagonists--like Tyrion--are perpetually disappointed in love. Also, in ASOIAF just as in many of his works, the relationships that do exist are often toxic, dysfunctional, or even outright abusive. It doesn't mean that "GRRM hates love," just that he's not writing a cheery rom com where everyone pairs up and no one dies.

I'd say Jon and Dany have a decent shot at a healthy relationship--as healthy as it can get where Targs are concerned--and romantic happiness if they make it out of the series alive, and even that feels like a generous concession from GRRM. Anything more than that? Don't get greedy, LOL.

As it is, I find speculation assuming that Sansa--who was repeatedly raped by Ramsay so that she would birth an heir--or Arya--who has never shown any interest in romance and has always wanted to buck gender expectations--MUST settle down and become brood mares...highly unpleasant

Sansa not wanting to give an heir to Ramsay doesn't mean she wouldn't want to be a mother. Why would you expect if you were married to a sadist? Would you like to be his brood mare? I wouldn't, so I don't understand how you take that as indicative that she won't love anyone. Also, you use the word brrod mares, I think that no woman would like to be a brood mare even with the man she loves. Am I incorrect?

Do you think that Arya or Sansa would like to just give birth to children and stop being herself, even if being in love? No. That has nothing to do with their arcs, 

And Arya has never said she dislikes being in love. In the first season, she disliked being a conventional Lady (being the Lady OF ...) but she clearly stated that the problem is on the rules this season. We also saw how she very likely had a crush on Gendry in the first seasons.

Why would Arya, Sansa and Tyrion have almost no odds of ending up with anyone but Jon and Dany would?

I read your reasoning for Tyrion, and I could buy it, but the same could be applied for Jon and Dany, since they have been disappointed in love before.

If you could just elaborate more on your reasonings about why Jon and Dany are the exceptions to this rule, having a decent shot, while the Stark sisters are highly unlikely to find love, it would be interesting, since I fail to see this with your explanation of Tyrion.

[jcmontea]

40 minutes ago, Meera of Tarth said:

Oh, I don't think that Gendry has lots of chances of ending in the iron htorne, but I think it would be poetic in a way, since it would mean that changes in the game of thrones, after all those battles to win it, ends up in the same House Name and also that Gendry would be a better ruler, since he was born as a commoner.

As for the pointless Rebellion? Why should the ending mean that it was poitless? Tehere was only one rebellion during his reign, the things started to get complicated once Joffrey sat the throne so I don't know why does invalidates Robert's reign as an acceptable one. 

 Well, anyway, following your reasoning and that it has to be proven as pointless, why would the Restoration of the Targaryen Dinasty be any better? Shouldn't it be proved as pointless as well? The Targaryens conquered the Seven Kingdoms, so why is it any better?

Wouldn't it be more poetic if the Throne ends up destroyed or the Kingdoms end up being independent again, ruled by people who has suffered the Game of Thrones?

There are a lot of different poetic endings. It just depends on the theme they are going for. 

I think the theme is that the game of thrones never ends. The wheel never stops. Someone is in power than someone else is in power and that is how it goes. Its even in the structure of the theme song, which is just an alternating series of major notes minor notes major notes minor notes. 

However, if that is not the theme, than sure several other endings could be poetic. 

I pick the Rebellion as somehing that would make sense being pointless since its really the starting point of the entire story. Its sets the stage for where everyone is starting in season 1. So i think it makes sense from that perspective and also two of our main characters are Targareyns while we have no main character who is a Baratheon so having those Targareyns on the throne just feels like it makes more sense than a Baratheon who is not an important character. 

[Newstar]

1 hour ago, greensleeves said:

I'll let you get back to lecturing women on feminism... Newstar gender: male.

Why not try an actual argument?

 

Quote

Edit: I will note that having children also doesn't mean being tamed.

Children are inherently incompatible with freedom and being a lone wolf (which is how the writers characterized Nymeria and Arya)...unless you're a horrible parent. 

 

1 hour ago, greensleeves said:

guess I haven't seen that.. but if there is foreshadowing that's actual valid evidence. Saying that women who aren't feminine in some ways can't want romance and children is not good.

Not that Arya can't, but that she doesn't, and projecting those desires on to her does Arya a disservice. Why not focus on what Arya actually cares about and wants, instead of being disappointed that she doesn't share what you think should be her priorities?

Also, FYI, insisting that a gender expectation-bucking female character who has no interest in romance or babies is going to develop that interest at some point down the line in the absence of any evidence is not a good look.

 

1 hour ago, Angel Eyes said:

I'm not asking for a cheery rom com, the series is well past that now. I guess what I'm saying is that, do we need to be disappointed in love? Does love require brutal, numbing tragedy? Do healthy relationships and romantic happiness need to be "generous concessions"? Do we need to be taught that love is bad? Because that's the lesson I'm getting from GRRM and D&D. And it's a lesson I hope isn't real.

If you want a story where everyone pairs off at the end and heads off into happy unions, there are many, many stories like that. GRRM has never been about that, though, as a review of his other works makes very clear. Even the historical Targ bios GRRM has written about at great length are full of misery, abuse, adultery, and dysfunction; there's maybe one or two happyish marriages of any duration in the lot, and we're talking about dozens of characters. That's also true of ASOIAF in general: most of the relationships are dysfunctional at best. 

I think at some point you have to accept GOT/ASOIAF for what it is and stop hoping it will be something else. 

 

52 minutes ago, Meera of Tarth said:

Sansa not wanting to give an heir to Ramsay doesn't mean she wouldn't want to be a mother. Why would you expect if you were married to a sadist? Would you like to be his brood mare? I wouldn't, so I don't understand how you take that as indicative that she won't love anyone. Also, you use the word brrod mares, I think that no woman would like to be a brood mare even with the man she loves. Am I incorrect?

My point was that someone who was repeatedly raped in the hopes of producing an heir would have very strong feelings about her supposed "duty" to do the same, especially someone strongly influenced by and admiring of a woman deeply embittered by her own experience as a brood mare. 

 

Quote

And Arya has never said she dislikes being in love.

Good thing I never said that, then, isn't it? I said that she's shown no interest in romance or children, which is correct. Even the dream she wanted for herself as a child as expressed in Season 7 was being a knight and going on adventures. Nothing about marriage or babies there. Book Arya never showed any interest in romance or children, either, for that matter.

Y'all need to stop going on about what you think Arya should be and accept what she is. She said it herself. "That's not me." That's not me. THAT'S. NOT. ME.

 

Quote

We also saw how she very likely had a crush on Gendry in the first seasons.

Certain shippers did, that's for sure.

 

Quote

Why would Arya, Sansa and Tyrion have almost no odds of ending up with anyone but Jon and Dany would?

Because Arya, Sansa and Tyrion are not only not involved with anyone but unlikely to get involved due to their terrible experiences (in Tyrion and Sansa's cases) or lack of interest (in Arya' case), and that's extremely unlikely to change. Jon and Dany are already in a relationship, so at least they have a shot.

As for Tyrion vs. Jon and Dany, Tyrion in the show has never had a real relationship and probably questions whether Shae ever felt anything for him at all--unlike Jon and Dany, who believed that Drogo, Daario and Ygritte genuinely loved them--and he's been shown to be traumatized by what happened with Shae to the point where he even refuses free sex with a pretty, kind prostitute, something that he once would have jumped at. Dany was receptive to a sexual relationship post-Drogo, as we saw with Daario, and there was no indication that Jon was turned off sex forever by Ygritte. So there's an easy distinction to be drawn between Tyrion and Jon/Dany. Tyrion has been shown in the show to have been traumatized by what happened to him to the point that his previous attitudes towards sex and the opposite sex have changed. Jon and Dany never showed a similar change.

[AEJON TARGARYEN]

4 hours ago, Newstar said:

As it is, I find speculation assuming that Sansa--who was repeatedly raped by Ramsay so that she would birth an heir--or Arya--who has never shown any interest in romance and has always wanted to buck gender expectations--MUST settle down and become brood mares...highly unpleasant. Both Stark sisters have been compared to Cersei at various points in the show, and I think at this point they would react about as well to being forced into a life they didn't want as Cersei did.

It's not so black and white, Sansa doesn't want to get married for political reasons but she wants to start her own family and die of old age, will she get everything she wants? No, but that doesn't stop her from wanting it. 

"If I give him sons, he may come to love me. She would name them Eddard and Brandon and Rickon, and raise them all to be as valiant as Ser Loras. And to hate Lannisters, too. In Sansa's dreams, her children looked just like the brothers she had lost. Sometimes there was even a girl who looked like Arya."

"Please, he doesn't need to love me, just make him like me, just a little, that would be enough for now."

"I'm sure Ser Harrold loves you well." And if the gods are good, he will love me too. Her tummy gave a little flutter."

Arya dislikes gender norms and romantic cliches, but she's capable of feeling attraction and loving people, she can do that on her own terms.

"He is a man of the Night's Watch, she thought, as he sang about some stupid lady throwing herself off some stupid tower because her stupid prince was dead. The lady should go kill the ones who killed her prince."

ETA: Sansa wasn't raped in the books, but you can be a rape survivor and still have a partner, kids, etc, it doesn't have to define your life.

[Kajjo]

3 hours ago, Newstar said:

I believe the writers said that Season 4 contains a lot of foreshadowing for the end of the series. I wouldn't be surprised if Arya's last scene in the show is similar to her last scene in Season 4: sailing off to new adventures in a new land (although I'm guessing Arya will be headed west of Westeros as Season 6 hinted, not to Braavos). 

That's the end I would favor and would make a lot of sense. I hope so very much.

31 minutes ago, TRILOGY said:

Arya dislikes gender norms and romantic cliches, but she's capable of feeling attraction and loving people, she can do that on her own terms.

 

True. But considering the actual story-line, I regard it as not very likely that Arya's long-term future will be fixed in the last season.

[Meera of Tarth]

1 hour ago, Newstar said:

My point was that someone who was repeatedly raped in the hopes of producing an heir would have very strong feelings about her supposed "duty" to do the same, especially someone strongly influenced by and admiring of a woman deeply embittered by her own experience as a brood mare. 

Even if that was the case, why would Sansa's duty be producing heirs for her husband ? Are women obligued to do that?

Do you think she'd not speak about that topic whith her husband in case that really terrified her as you point out? We have seen that Sansa has become smarter and pragmatic. Giving up on romance because you are terrified about children and not talking about it with the man she has fallen in love with it's something that Sansa would not do after seven seasons of development.

On a sidenote,  her expereince was not about being a brood mare, but being the sexual toy of a sadist. Rmsay didn't rape her just because she couldn't produce a heir, but we all know he did that because he was a sadist. So basically, you are wrong.

Quote

Good thing I never said that, then, isn't it? I said that she's shown no interest in romance or children, which is correct. Even the dream she wanted for herself as a child as expressed in Season 7 was being a knight and going on adventures. Nothing about marriage or babies there. Book Arya never showed any interest in romance or children, either, for that matter.

Y'all need to stop going on about what you think Arya should be and accept what she is. She said it herself. "That's not me." That's not me. THAT'S. NOT. ME.

You have wrong misconceptions about what having interest in romance and being in love is, as well as what being a knight means for Arya.

First of all, she said the rules are wrong, which means that she is against the idea that women can't be knights. This has nothing to do with rejecting romance, because both things are not incompatible. We have the example of Brienne, who is deeply in love with Jaime despite being incapable of telling him (but that's also that happens to Jaime). Falling in love is not something we can choose (quoting Jaime), so fighting these feelings because you have told yourself you are not into romance is not something they'd be free of doing, even if that was the case.

What does this remind us about? Jorah. He loves khlaessi and knows she doesn't love him in a romantic way, yet he can't control his feelings and they are unrequitted. He could try to stop having them so as not to be hurted, but not stop falling in love  per se. So Arya can be free to choose the life she chooses, but not free to not fall in love with somebody because that. In fact, she has never said she'd never fall in love, or that she would reject it.

As usual, you are interpreting the quotes of the show in your own way. Let's remember what Ned tells Arya (the whole thing):

Now that Bran's awake, will he come live with us? Well, he needs to get his strength back first.
He wants to be a knight of the Kingsguard.
- He can't be one now, can he? 
- No.
But someday he could be lord of a holdfast or sit on the king's council.
Or he might raise castles like Brandon the Builder.
Can I be lord of a holdfast? 
You will marry a high lord and rule his castle.
And your sons shall be knights and princes and lords.
- Hmm? 
- No.
That's not me.

Arya is rejecting the idea of being the wife of a lord, and instead of doing the things adult men do, which are exciting for her, having to be just her wife, with no freedom in that sense, and just having children. 

In the show, in fact, Arya has never said to herself she is not into romance. And while it could be debatable if she has associated the idea of romance to the fact that this means she is not able to do what she wants, what we have been told is that she acknowledges that the rules re wrong, because she wanted to shot arrows. She is complaining about the things that men can do, but women can't.

Just like Nymeria, she doesn't want to be the wife OF, Nymeria doesn't want to be the PET OF, she wants to lead her life.

And why should Arya reject romance once she learns she can be herself with who she loves (and who loves her in return)? She'd know to be who she wants (changing the rules) and that doesn't stop once you fall in love.

Quote

 

Because Arya, Sansa and Tyrion are not only not involved with anyone but unlikely to get involved due to their terrible experiences (in Tyrion and Sansa's cases) or lack of interest (in Arya' case), and that's extremely unlikely to change. Jon and Dany are already in a relationship, so at least they have a shot.

As for Tyrion vs. Jon and Dany, Tyrion in the show has never had a real relationship and probably questions whether Shae ever felt anything for him at all--unlike Jon and Dany, who believed that Drogo, Daario and Ygritte genuinely loved them--and he's been shown to be traumatized by what happened with Shae to the point where he even refuses free sex with a pretty, kind prostitute, something that he once would have jumped at. Dany was receptive to a sexual relationship post-Drogo, as we saw with Daario, and there was no indication that Jon was turned off sex forever by Ygritte. So there's an easy distinction to be drawn between Tyrion and Jon/Dany. Tyrion has been shown in the show to have been traumatized by what happened to him to the point that his previous attitudes towards sex and the opposite sex have changed. Jon and Dany never showed a similar change.

As I stated in the previous paragraphs, these points do not apply to Sansa and Arya, since victims of rape can find love again, and having children is just an option to them (not that they should reject it, but they could).

And Arya doesn't reject romance, she rejects the life of women in Medieval Westeros.