Kittykatknits, on 07 May 2012 - 06:36 AM, said:
Again, power was obtained through marriage. I think we are going to see women assume power without marriage. There are women who obtain power through marriage or as widows but that is because their husband allows it or they married a man they can control, at least some degree.
Indeed. It seems with the current generation, you have Arianne, who is heir to Dorne; Asha, who would like to be for the Iron Islands and who has men ready and willing to follow her as their leader; then there's Dany, who has hard power enough in her dragons to want to rule in her own right and be able to force it through.
Right now, Lady Whent and the Mormon women seem to be exceptions rather than a common practice. But, they do show the reader what is possible. With the land ravaged by years of war, there are going to be opportunities for women in a way that there has not been in the past as well.
Interestingly, there are real life examples of that women gained more power after wars since there were fewer men left to rule. The most recent example is during WW2 when women were taken in as factory workers and administrators since the men were off fighting a war. And once women have entered into that sphere, it's more difficult to chuck them out again as a precedent has been set. Perhaps something like it will be happening in Westeros. At least I hope that the Targaryen inheritance rule with "no women evah" will be thrown out for good and burnt to cinders by Dany's dragons.
A lot of things are actually changing in Westeros. The Faith Militant has risen again, dragons are in the world again. Why not a stronger position for women, or female rulers too?
Lummel, on 07 May 2012 - 06:57 AM, said:
I don't think that Dany on the iron throne would need a consort. By the time she turns up the realm will be exhausted, lots of people will be dead, she'll have dragons and represent the promise of order and security. On the otherhand because of the inheritance she might want a consort, but of course she might choose to resolve that another way by adopting a heir.
You mean she means to rule a bit like Elizabeth I?
It would make for a nice ending, I think, but who will her heir be? I doubt she'd want for the Targaryen line to be extinguished and there's only her and Jon left who are "real" Targaryens. As Jon has taken the Black, he then needs to leave, marry someone else and have some children for a future Targaryen line to continue unless Dany tries to continue the line. And this is given that she is told that Jon is Rhaegar's son in the first place.
I'd say that she has been burnt by her experience in Meereen, she knows what she wants done, even though she may well want other people to implement her ideas. Already in Meereen she's not keen on having to compromise on the big picture policy ideas, she sees it as a failure, which it is, she compromises step by step until she's given up everything that she made other people fight and die for.
She'd set a precedent even without changing any laws. Though of course that might not have much influence on romance in the seven kingdoms, just on politics.
The personal is the political?
It may have an impact in the level of freedom women can enjoy if there is a woman on the Iron Throne. It would at least set a precedent that women can rule and can have power, which means more women may see it as a possibility apart from being taught pretty things by their septa and giving birth to lots of babies for their lord husband.
As for romance though, I doubt the infatuation type romance disasters would change at all with a female ruler. They seem to be more generally destructive more because they are unrealistic overall than having overmuch to do with gender power dynamics.