429 replies to this topic

[butterbumps!]

@Blue eyed Onion

I sympathize with a couple of your "lucky" saves, to a degree; the dragon recusing her at the fighting pits is probably a major example I'd point to, but I think the point could be made that she's got enough courage to face it with a whip and take advantage of the situation.   The dragon didn't exactly fly up to her benignly and accept ridership without something of a struggle.   Regarding Khal Drogo's initial gentleness, I agree that it's somewhat lucky and seemingly out of character, but it's also perfectly explainable by the fact that he's treating her like a precious piece of chattel-- he paid a large price for her, so he would understandably treat her more gently than another Dothraki or a slave that he got for free.  

I'd also say that Dany isn't perfectly lucky in terms of not suffering some forms of punishment or injustice.  I think she's suffered as much as most in terms of personal conflict as most of the other characters. So I don't think she's unharmed throughout her arc, but my problem with her perceived "luckiness" tends to be more about the lack of correlation between her political actions and continuing to hold power/ not being compelled to realize when she's wrong about something.  I still think this has more to do with her unreliable/ limited POV that exclusively frames the situation in Slaver's Bay.   They don't have a real unified army to speak of, nor were they culturally military powers, so they really can't face her effectively in open combat.  In truth, the Ghiscari are waging a guerilla warfare against her, and as I read it, her most "trusted" of allies, the Green Grace, is likely the Harpy, so I'd say they are trying to oppose her with whatever resources/ tactics they can afford, and given the nature of guerrilla war, the extent of this opposition is not something she'd be privy to, so we don't know about it.

Edited by butterbumps!, 21 March 2012 - 05:18 AM.

[Queen Beyond the Wall]

Apple Martini, on 20 March 2012 - 06:17 PM, said:

The problem is, when she makes a mistake, thousands of people, many of them completely innocent, die for it. That's a lot of destruction and mayhem just so Dany can have a "starter kingdom."

True, but how is that different from an other leader? Thousands of people died for Robert's rebellion, thousands of innocent people are dying in the 'war of the five kings', thousands of innocent people died when Aegon the conqueror invaded Westeros....I don't see how what Dany is doing is ANY different from any other leader/warlord...well, ever.

I certainly think some of her behavior is double-moral (she wants to free the slaves but wants to be a conqueror too...what makes the people of Westeros more deserving of war and possible enslavement than the slaves of Mereen or Yunak? Nothing at all, just her sense of entitlement).

Anyhow, all leaders screw up.  And those screw ups usually cost human lives. We are just further removed from the aftermath of those screw ups in our modern society.

[eyeheartsansa]

@Blue Onion,


Han, Luke or Leia should have been killed by a random laser blast from a nameless Storm Trooper, yet they didn't.  Frodo and Sam never should have made it across Mordor without being spotted by a single orc.  Voldemort or one of minions had so many damn chances to kill Harry Potter, but they failed.  Yet these are some of our most cherished / best selling stories.. because they are entertaining.  You can say you don't enjoy Star Wars/Potter/LOTR for these reasons, but the fact remains that they were successful on a massive scale, despite these obvious plot holes.

My point?? I think the plot armor you are describing is simply a convention of most fiction.. It's great that GRRM kills lots of people, and 'no one is safe,' but the reality is.. most main characters have to survive for a long time so they can do what they're supposed to do in the story.  There comes a point where you have to suspend your disbelief to an extent, because, at the end of the day, you know, it's a fantasy series.  If Melisandre can give birth to assassin shadow babies, Targeryans can be conveniently immune to certain plagues.  See how it works?

Yes, it is supposed to be edgier and grittier and more violent than Wheel of Time or something (and Robert Jordan is the KING of plot armor imo), but certain conventions remain, without which, there would not be a publishable story.

It is my opinion, and the opinion of many other readers - Dany haters and fans alike - that GRRM has given dany enough trials and hardships to make her various triumphs an entertaining and satisfying experience for the reader.  You seem to disagree... so here we stand.

ETA: ok.. more things:

Quote

but i don't think those 'westerosi princess' values nor her time of adaptation among the dothraki included the knowledge of how to properly deal with sellsword companies or plan strategies.

They didn't.. that's part of the problem.

Quote

the first time she has sex with Drogo is out-of-character (for a Dothraki) no one will convince me otherwise

I bought it.  I thought it was kind of touching actually.  It shows early on that Drogo has a bit of a soft spot; so yes, it's out of character for a Dothraki, but it is written that way in order to establish Drogo's character - to distinguish him from other Dothraki warlords - from very early in the story.  In front of all the other warlords he is still a badass.. but in a very private moment, in his own way, he gives her the option of refusing.  You can buy it or not - but I'm pretty sure that was GRRM's intention for KD.  I was actually disappointed that they changed this for TV - and I'd be willing to venture that this change was not GRRM's idea.

Quote

Quaithe (giving her advice) is aparently never wrong in her predictions, while, for instance, Melissandre is.

this in itself is interesting.  Why are some people more accurate than others in their predictions?  We dont' know why, but it's interesting.  You gotta have some mystery. And how do we know that Quaithe is "never wrong?"

Quote

the ones who are comming (or came in the case of Quentyn) do so to offer alliances and/or advice, with the possible exception of Victarion who will at some point try to make a move (if he lives long enough), but he'll probably be just used by someone else and probably fail (we've seen already that he's not very bright and easily manipulated).

Yep; if you hatch the only dragons, people are going to come to you to offer alliances or advice.  Or try to use you; or take yoru dragons.  Is this not to be expected?

Edited by eyeheartsansa, 21 March 2012 - 08:35 AM.

[Lady Octarina]

@Blue-eyed Onion
I think you were unfortunate on how you formulated some (or most) of those points in your first post, which generated all the violent reaction. But I got what you were saying, and what you elaborated now: Daenerys, no matter the hardships she went through, seems to get through more easily than other characters, and that can be infuriating. But it's like other people said: Martin is doing that on purpose and has something cruel in his mind. He is subverting the female warrior princess paradigm, something that began to show in ADWD, and that will certainly be more elaborate and evident in the final books. And the passion with which this subject is discussed on both sides only proves how well he wrote that...

... unless he intends to troll us and puts Daenerys as the typical female hero in the end, but we have no reason not to trust him so far.
___

But also, the thing is: she is not winning. There's every chance Victarion and the plague will help her keep the city, but can we truly say she's winning? She has no political support (really, the only reason why no one tried to kill her in a competent way were the dragons), half of what she seems to consider her people is dying either in a violent way or because of that same plague that is killing her enemies, the only thing that can assure her any support in Westeros are the dragons but she is on the verge of losing them. The thing is, Daenerys thinks she's winning (like Charlie Sheen! but blood of the dragon, not of the tiger...), and we occasionally forget ourselves and buy that. The same way we buy she is immune to fire and disease. Which is why I'm really curious to see how her arc ends, and I'm pretty sure it will be by one of those things she is "immune" to.

I can't stand her, but I feel bad for her at the same time, you know? All she wanted was the house with the red door and the lemon tree... a pity she became megalomaniac conqueror number 1 later.

Edited by Lady Octarina, 21 March 2012 - 08:29 AM.

[OnionAhaiReborn]

Lady Octarina, on 21 March 2012 - 08:28 AM, said:

The thing is, Daenerys thinks she's winning (like Charlie Sheen! but blood of the dragon, not of the tiger...)

Quote

I can't stand her, but I feel bad for her at the same time, you know? All she wanted was the house with the red door and the lemon tree... a pity she became megalomaniac conqueror number 1 later.

I can't bring myself to truly 'hate' Danaerys, just knowing how sad her story is and reading the chapters where she is sold as a terrified 13 year old sex slave, basically. But that doesn't mean she gets a pass for being a crazy egomaniac conqueror and tyrant, which is the road she is on now and heading steadily further down.

Edited by OnionAhaiReborn, 21 March 2012 - 08:40 AM.

[eyeheartsansa]

I thought Targeryan immunity was going to be an important plot point, because Tyrion was also exposed to some bad stuff and came out unharmed.  I always felt out of place in the Figure Out Who Jon's Parents Are scene, so Tyrion the Targ is my one stupid/awesome theory that I'm indulging myself in.

[eyeheartsansa]

Quote

I can't bring myself to truly 'hate' Danaerys, just knowing how sad her story is and reading the chapters where she is sold as a terrified 13 year old sex slave, basically. But that doesn't mean she gets a pass for being a crazy egomaniac conqueror and tyrant, which is the road she is on now and heading steadily further down.

Agreed.  I don't think anyone is giving her a 'pass.'  But she's still at a point where readers can empathize with her.  I'd be totally cool with her becoming the Mad Queen someday.. that's a pretty incredible story arc.

[Fylimar]

Edited, because I didn't realise, that I was answering t osomething 14 pages ago - so go on, there is nothing to see here, really ;-)

Edited by Fylimar, 21 March 2012 - 02:08 PM.

[Apple Martini]

eyeheartsansa, on 21 March 2012 - 08:39 AM, said:

I thought Targeryan immunity was going to be an important plot point, because Tyrion was also exposed to some bad stuff and came out unharmed.  I always felt out of place in the Figure Out Who Jon's Parents Are scene, so Tyrion the Targ is my one stupid/awesome theory that I'm indulging myself in.

Except that there really is no such thing as "Targaryen immunity." Targaryens have died from all sorts of stuff — fire, a mace to the head, dragons, and, yes, disease. The idea that they're immune to fire and/or disease is incorrect, even if Dany thinks otherwise. For someone who thinks she can't get sick, Dany seems to be running a fever and having severe digestive issues in her last chapter. And for someone who thinks she actually dodged fire in the pit, the burns on her hands are real enough.

[Kittyhat]

Queen Beyond the Wall, on 20 March 2012 - 05:09 PM, said:

I don't see why people hate Dany. She may be taking a long time to get to Westeros, but she has to learn how to be a leader first, and that means making mistakes too.

She has breasts and no penis.

That's all.

There are plenty of excuses given for the reasons, but the fact is, if Daenerys were the same character otherwise save for being male, she'd have far fewer detractors.  And if you pay attention, you'll notice them condemning her for many of the same things they blithely give male characters a pass for and holding her to extreme standards and scrutiny they don't hold any male character to.

Incidentally, Arya and Asha mostly don't suffer from this, but as noted elsewhere, they have more traditionally "masculine" qualities to them ... and it's also worth noting that neither is currently a serious contender for the Iron Throne.  Tough women are okay ... as long as they know their place and don't aspire to too much.

On the subject of aspiring to too much ("get back in the kitchen!"), take careful notice of how frequently Dany is called "arrogant" and compare it with how often any male character you care to name is accused of that.  This is significant.  It's a bit like calling successful and educated black people "uppity," in fact, and comes from the same kind of thinly concealed prejudice.

Edited by Kittyhat, 20 April 2012 - 11:25 PM.

[atia-]

As much as I dislike Dany, you could say this about a lot of the characters, particularly Jon Snow, who is one of my favorites.

[Apple Martini]

Kittyhat, on 20 April 2012 - 11:21 PM, said:

She has breasts and no penis.

That's all.

Sorry, but I call shenanigans. Some of her biggest proponents on here are men, and some of her biggest detractors are women. The "because she's a woman" excuse is insulting and doesn't add anything substantive to the argument.

Quote

There are plenty of excuses given for the reasons, but the fact is, if Daenerys were the same character otherwise save for being male, she'd have far fewer detractors.  And if you pay attention, you'll notice them condemning her for many of the same things they blithely give male characters a pass for and holding her to extreme standards and scrutiny they don't hold any male character to.

Because the vast majority of the male characters aren't being sold off as some godlike savior of mankind.

But OK, I'll hold the men who do what Dany does to the same standard. I assume you mean Ramsay (the only guy in Westeros we see actually crucifying people), and the Tickler and the High Septon (who torture people for information). All three of them are psychotic monsters. There, men held to the same standard.

Quote

Incidentally, Arya and Asha mostly don't suffer from this, but as noted elsewhere, they have more traditionally "mrsculine" qualities to them ... and it's also worth noting that neither is currently a serious contender for the Iron Throne.  Tough women are okay ... as long as they know their place and don't aspire to too much.

I'm sorry, I must have imagined the part where Asha threw herself into the Kingsmoot to rule the Iron Islands. And if being an 11-year-old sword-wielding assassin is your idea of a girl "knowing her place," well ... that's just silly.

Edited by Apple Martini, 20 April 2012 - 11:30 PM.

[Corvinus]

Ha, I just discovered this thread. I've read about half of the OP's rant when I realized that he/she hasn't really paid attention to Dany's story, so no point in even arguing. And the ok's at the end of each point were really annoying.

[Howling Mad]

Kittyhat, on 20 April 2012 - 11:21 PM, said:

She has breasts and no penis.

Really? Have been reading these threads at all?

[Kittyhat]

Apple Martini, on 20 April 2012 - 11:29 PM, said:

Sorry, but I call shenanigans. Some of her biggest proponents on here are men, and some of her biggest detractors are women. The "because she's a woman" excuse is insulting and doesn't add anything substantive to the argument.

Being a woman doesn't make you incapable of harboring and spreading that kind of sexism, even unconsciously.  It's a cultural problem, not simply a male problem.

Quote

Because the vast majority of the male characters aren't being sold off as some godlike savior of mankind.

So you mean, like, aside from Jon "Classic Boy Hero" Snow and Bran "Super Godly Magic Kid" Stark?

And let's not forget Tyrion "Every Time I Should Get Killed, The Plot Saves Me Again" Lannister (hey, I love Tyrion, but the fact is, he should be dead several times over by now), who just in case we didn't catch on to the You Are Special tag he's wearing, has had such things said about him as that he's a "little man who casts a large shadow."

Quote

But OK, I'll hold the men who do what Dany does to the same standard. I assume you mean Ramsay

No, and this is almost too stupid to respond to at all.  The people Dany is killing are not morally equivalent to Ramsay's victims, and you either knew that already or will not be able to understand it anyway, so I'm not wasting any more time on something that obvious.

Quote

I'm sorry, I must have imagined the part where Asha threw herself into the Kingsmoot to rule the Iron Islands. And if being an 11-year-old sword-wielding assassin is your idea of a girl "knowing her place," well ... that's just silly.

I spoke of serious contenders to the Iron Throne, not a failed claimant to a throne no one really cares about or a budding assassin.  But you read my post(?) ... so you knew that already.  And therefore apparently had no actual point here.

[Kittyhat]

Howling4Reed, on 20 April 2012 - 11:45 PM, said:

Really? Have been reading these threads at all?

I'm sorry to say I have been.

[Apple Martini]

Kittyhat, on 21 April 2012 - 12:28 AM, said:

Being a woman doesn't make you incapable of harboring and spreading that kind of sexism, even unconsciously.  It's a cultural problem, not simply a male problem.

I think I know why I dislike Dany, thanks. I don't need you or anyone else saving me from "cultural problems." But if it makes you feel better to believe that sexism is the only reason at all anyone could possibly dislike Dany, feel free to erroneously believe so. I and many other women on this board know differently.

Quote

So you mean, like, aside from Jon "Classic Boy Hero" Snow and Bran "Super Godly Magic Kid" Stark?

Who within the story refers to either of them as saviors of mankind? Jon's a bastard and Bran's a cripple. When do either of them wage offensive wars and sack cities?

Quote

And let's not forget Tyrion "Every Time I Should Get Killed, The Plot Saves Me Again" Lannister (hey, I love Tyrion, but the fact is, he should be dead several times over by now), who just in case we didn't catch on to the You Are Special tag he's wearing, has had such things said about him as that he's a "little man who casts a large shadow."

Take it up with Martin, not me.

Quote

No, and this is almost too stupid to respond to at all.  The people Dany is killing are not morally equivalent to Ramsay's victims, and you either knew that already or will not be able to understand it anyway, so I'm not wasting any more time on something that obvious.

My point is, what Dany does "heroically" in Essos is what people do "evilly" in Westeros. You don't think that's odd? You said that men who did what she did should be held to the same standard, which is what I did. Dany had the wineseller's daughters tortured and crucified 163 people of unproven guilt. How is that different than the Tickler torturing people for information or Ramsay crucifying ironmen? Because it's "Dany"? Because we're beat upside the head by how evil Ramsay and the Tickler are?

Quote

I spoke of serious contenders to the Iron Throne, not a failed claimant to a throne no one really cares about or a budding assassin.  But you read my post(?) ... so you knew that already.  And therefore apparently had no actual point here.

You talked about Asha and Arya as if they "knew their place," and I pointed out that no, they actually don't. Asha cared about the Seastone Chair enough. Why is it less valid than the "man's" Iron Throne? Neither of them are Targs or Baratheons, so why would they seek the Iron Throne? Why do so many people want the women to be just as vacuous and power-hungry as the men?! Why should I or anyone else side with Dany just because she's a woman? That's just as sexist as not rooting for her because she's a woman.

I'm sorry but I think it's hilarious that apparently in order for women to be "worthwhile" in your eyes, they need to make the same stupid, self-destructive grasps at empty power that the men do. Isn't that counterproductive?

Edited by Apple Martini, 21 April 2012 - 12:43 AM.

[Kittyhat]

Apple Martini, on 21 April 2012 - 12:42 AM, said:

Who within the story refers to either of them as saviors of mankind? Jon's a bastard and Bran's a cripple. When do either of them wage offensive wars and sack cities?

Who in the story refers to Dany as one? If anyone ever did, it was such a throwaway remark that I honestly can't even recall it.  She gets called "Mother of Dragons" a lot, and sometimes "Breaker of Chains" and a few other random honorifics.  I don't recall seeing anything about "Savior of Mankind."

So is that all you've got? Strawmen?

Quote

Take it up with Martin, not me.

Uh-uh.  You can't start out by accusing one character of wearing too obvious a "You Are Special" sign, then just say "take it up with Martin" when I point out that others wear the same signs.  Point stands.

Quote

My point is, what Dany does "heroically" in Essos is what people do "evilly" in Westeros. You don't think that's odd? You said that men who did what she did should be held to the same standard, which is what I did. Dany had the wineseller's daughters tortured and crucified 163 people of unproven guilt. How is that different than the Tickler torturing people for information or Ramsay crucifying ironmen? Because it's "Dany"? Because we're beat upside the head by how evil Ramsay and the Tickler are?

Because the circumstances are entirely different.  Do you think there's no moral difference between Eddard's execution of a Night's Watch deserter and Eddard's own execution at the command of an incest-spawned usurper simply because the methods of death are the same?

If all you have is "I don't like the methods she uses," well ... you can say that's your reason for disliking her, but it's a pretty stupid reason frankly, and it doesn't make her evil even if you want to believe it does.

Quote

You talked about Asha and Arya as if they "knew their place," and I pointed out that no, they actually don't.

They do relative to the main focus of the books, at least with regard to thrones.  Sure, Asha cares about the Seastone Chair, and so do the ironborn.  No one else does, including the vast majority of readers.  It's a largely irrelevant throne situated on islands that are painfully boring to read about and are mostly only important to the plot because their inhabitants happen to be crazy.

Even if Asha were a serious contender (currently she's not), that wouldn't make her goal a place of power that's central to anything that actually matters in the story.

Don't get me wrong.  I don't mind Asha, and I like Arya.  But neither one of them is or ever was really a serious contender for anything that approaches real political power.

Quote

Why do so many people want the women to be just as vacuous and power-hungry as the men?! Why should I or anyone else side with Dany just because she's a woman?

Well, first off, she's neither vacuous not power-hungry.  Secondly, I don't side with her because she's a woman; I side with her because I think she's great ... and yet still also far from perfect, with a lot to learn -- extraordinarily gifted and yet still all too human all the same.  Which pretty much also describes Arya, Bran, Jon and arguably Tyrion as well, despite his being a dwarf.

[Apple Martini]

Kittyhat, on 21 April 2012 - 01:01 AM, said:

Who in the story refers to Dany as one? If anyone ever did, it was such a throwaway remark that I honestly can't even recall it.  She gets called "Mother of Dragons" a lot, and sometimes "Breaker of Chains" and a few other random honorifics.  I don't recall seeing anything about "Savior of Mankind."

You're kidding right? Aemon flat-out tells Sam that she's Azor Ahai reborn, and the red priests in Essos (Tyrion's POVs in ADWD) say the same, saying that she'll bring an unending summer, that death will flee before her, her servants will rise from the dead, etc. Multiple people have basically said that she's the Westerosi Jesus. A lot of her fans' reasoning for thinking that she's Azor Ahai is because people in the story actually say she is.

Quote

So is that all you've got? Strawmen?

Nope, just pointing out that Jon and Bran aren't good comparisons, because no one in the story seems convinced that they're the magical saviors of mankind. And neither of them are perfect, either. Jon's too trusting, cruelly separates a woman from her baby, can't communicate his ideas across very well, bucks the Night's Watch order without thinking about its repercussions and, yeah, whines a lot. Bran has been warging Hodor, a pretty gross violation.

Quote

Uh-uh.  You can't start out by accusing one character of wearing too obvious a "You Are Special" sign, then just say "take it up with Martin" when I point out that others wear the same signs.  Point stands.

Well Martin writes the books, not me. I don't know what you want me to say about Tyrion. I'm not really accusing her of wearing a "You Are Special" sign, I'm accusing her of being a terrible, naive, and willfully ignorant ruler.

Quote

Because the circumstances are entirely different.  Do you think there's no moral difference between Eddard's execution of a Night's Watch deserter and Eddard's own execution at the command of an incest-spawned usurper simply because the methods of death are the same?

The Night's Watch member was guilty of desertion. Eddard was not guilty of treason. So yes there is a moral difference there. What did the wineseller's daughters do that they deserved to be tortured?

Quote

If all you have is "I don't like the methods she uses," well ... you can say that's your reason for disliking her, but it's a pretty stupid reason frankly, and it doesn't make her evil even if you want to believe it does.

Well aren't you a sweetheart, calling other people stupid. I disagree with many things that she says, does and is, it's not just her methods. I don't think she's evil (not yet, at least), I think she's an idiot who's too idiotic to know she's an idiot.

Quote

They do relative to the main focus of the books, at least with regard to thrones.  Sure, Asha cares about the Seastone Chair, and so do the ironborn.  No one else does, including the vast majority of readers.  It's a largely irrelevant throne situated on islands that are painfully boring to read about and are mostly only important to the plot because their inhabitants happen to be crazy.

Plenty of people don't give a shit about Essos and find it boring, does that mean that Dany's throne in Meereen is irrelevant?

Quote

Even if Asha were a serious contender (currently she's not), that wouldn't make her goal a place of power that's central to anything that actually matters in the story.

How the hell do you know what matters in the story? Do you think Martin's had Asha stomping around the North with Stannis because she's a throwaway?

Quote

Don't get me wrong.  I don't mind Asha, and I like Arya.  But neither one of them is or ever was really a serious contender for anything that approaches real political power.

You're all for women seeking "real" political power, yet you just want them to be on the same self-destructive level as the men. You're letting men define what real political power is. You haven't noticed what happens to people in this story who seek political power? It ends up destroying them or turning them into monsters. And I'd say that Asha wanting to bring HER people — HER people, people she actually cares about and grew up with and identifies with — into the "modern" world by improving their society and working to get them into a more updated and progressive system through diplomacy (what a concept) shows a damn sight more political wisdom than Dany has ever demonstrated.

Quote

Well, first off, she's neither vacuous not power-hungry.  Secondly, I don't side with her because she's a woman; I side with her because I think she's great ... and yet still also far from perfect, with a lot to learn -- extraordinarily gifted and yet still all too human all the same.  Which pretty much also describes Arya, Bran, Jon and arguably Tyrion as well, despite his being a dwarf.

She sacks three cities because she can, thinks she can overturn thousands of years of culture and society overnight, tortures and crucifies people out of vengeance and spite, refuses to face up to how screwed up her own family is, can't see that the Harpy is sitting across from her, literally staring her in the face, and drops such verbal gems as, "I am the blood of the dragon, do not presume to teach me lessons."

But oh yeah. Sexism. Juuuust sexism.

ETA: I get that people like her, and some people don't. But basically sneering that anyone who doesn't think she's cooler than the other side of the pillow must be sexist is seriously offensive, ignorant and, worst of all, inaccurate. I dislike her because I find her methods barbaric, her attitude terrible, her ignorance troublesome and her dragon-god complex overblown. But if I (and Tze, Val, Octarina, Kraken and other ladies on here who aren't Dany fans) am a gender traitor of some sort just for disliking her, then perhaps I could say that her male admirers only like her because they see her as some adolescent sex-fantasy fulfillment. That's pretty ignorant, incorrect and offensive, too, and I'm sure many of them would take umbrage with it. Just like I take umbrage with your assertion that sexism is the only reason anyone could dislike Dany.

Edited by Apple Martini, 21 April 2012 - 01:48 AM.

[Kittyhat]

Apple Martini, on 21 April 2012 - 01:20 AM, said:

You're kidding right? Aemon flat-out tells Sam that she's Azor Ahai reborn, and the red priests in Essos (Tyrion's POVs in ADWD) say the same, saying that she'll bring an unending summer, that death will flee before her, her servants will rise from the dead, etc. Multiple people have basically said that she's the Westerosi Jesus. A lot of her fans' reasoning for thinking that she's Azor Ahai is because people in the story actually say she is.

And we have people saying it of Stannis, too.  And there's the part with Melisandre seeing "only snow" that hints that Jon Snow is really Azor Ahai.  People say a lot of things in ASOIAF.

I'd kind of like it if Dany really were AA reborn, but I'm not at all certain that's really the situation.

Quote

Nope, just pointing out that Jon and Bran aren't good comparisons, because no one in the story seems convinced that they're the magical saviors of mankind.

Sooo ... to be a source of your ire, a character needs to be believed by someone to be a magical savior of mankind? Okay, then you need to remember to hate Stannis for sure and possibly Aegon going forward (we'll see).  There aren't many characters being accused of being saviors yet, but then there also aren't many people aware there's a threat that would call for such a savior, so that's more a consequence of the ignorance of most people of what's coming.

Quote

And neither of them are perfect, either.

Never said they were.  Who is?

Quote

Well Martin writes the books, not me. I don't know what you want me to say about Tyrion. I'm not really accusing her of wearing a "You Are Special" sign, I'm accusing her of being a terrible, naive, and willfully ignorant ruler.

Wait, I thought your chip was about her status as an alleged magical savior.  Now you're mad because a 13-year-old girl who was raised by an insane, abusive brother who intended to basically sell her in exchange for an army is a relatively inexperienced and naive ruler?  

Quote

The Night's Watch member was guilty of desertion. Eddard was not guilty of treason. So yes there is a moral difference there. What did the wineseller's daughters do that they deserved to be tortured?

I noticed you backed out of any discussion of the Masters in this context right quick and in a hurry! xD

As for the wineseller's daughters, you're taking that out of context.  Daenerys at this point is facing constant losses to what's basically a shadowy terrorism campaign against her within the city.  What she did there is right around the same moral plane as some of the things Tyrion's done, those little gray things that we're constantly giving him a pass on but that Dany DARE NOT DO.

I'm not saying it was one of her better moments, but again, in the cutthroat game of thrones, it's still squarely in the realm of something one of the other relatively "good" characters might have done under similar pressure.

Quote

I don't think she's evil (not yet, at least), I think she's an idiot who's too idiotic to know she's an idiot.

Then you apparently never read A Storm of Swords, or if you did, you didn't pay very much attention.

Quote

Plenty of people don't give a shit about Essos and find it boring, does that mean that Dany's throne in Meereen is irrelevant?

Relative to the main thrust of the story? Uh, YEAH.  Why do you think no one treats her winning it as a meaningful accomplishment of itself? It's not just that she's stuck in a wretched mess there ... the throne itself just isn't important really.

Quote

How the hell do you know what matters in the story? Do you think Martin's had Asha stomping around the North with Stannis because she's a throwaway?

She's not a throwaway, but she's not and never was an aspirant to anything half so important or powerful.

Quote

You're all for women seeking "real" political power, yet you just want them to be on the same self-destructive level as the men. You're letting men define what real political power is.

Am I? It seems to me that Daenerys fundamentally, and uniquely, is redefining it.  Her rule, again uniquely, is decidedly maternal in nature.  She refers to her "children," and she means it, and she wants to nurture and protect them.

And yeah, she screws up.  And yes, she's not perfect.  And okay, she has a lot to learn.  But she's also had moments of brilliance far beyond her years and of heroism and compassion -- even when she fails, she TRIES to save people -- that you do her and the story a great disservice in ignoring just because they're inconvenient to your case and your anti-Dany crusade.

In fact, of all of the characters in the story, she's the most uniquely feminine heroine, a matriarch on a woman's terms.  And don't try defining her violence as masculine -- nothing is more terrible than a mother fighting for her children.