Why do people hate Dany?

[Kittyhat]

This is hilariously, utterly wrong.

You're right. Since she died, she's become only as good a leader as him. She was better when she was alive, though.

Sorry, I was engaging in a touch of hyperbole.

[Castel]

You're right. Since she died, she's become only as good a leader as him. She was better when she was alive, though.

Sorry, I was engaging in a touch of hyperbole.

Hm? I didn't mean your cat... I meant Dany being a better ruler than Tywin. Was that hyperbole as well? :cool4:

[danm_999]

You say that like you think Tywin Lannister was even remotely competent. Daenerys at 15 with no training is already a better leader than Tywin. Hell, my cat is a better leader than Tywin. And she's dead.

I disagree with that, given what Tywin managed to do; restore his house's prestige, rule the realm very effectively under Aerys, almost win the War of the Five Kings, etc. Of course he made errors, he was a dreadful father, but he always struck me as more pragmatic and effective than most people.

However, that's entirely beside my original point, and the point of this topic. If you don't think Tywin was very good, substitute whoever you think was one of the most competant people in Westeros; Randyl Tarly if you like. My point was to say, Daenerys is very young and very experienced. Ultimately we shouldn't expect much from her.

[Ser Adam Dayne]

Somebody posted about her sliding scale of justice, and I think that's pretty spot on, along with her sense of entitlement, her general disconnect with Westeros, and so on. Oh, and Meereen got kind of boring. I generally hoped that chapters in Meereen would either have Barristan talking about Rhaegar or some other Westeros tidbit that only he would know, or that we would learn a little bit more about Ass'hai and the Shadow. Instead, we get endless tokars, harpies, and Leznak mo Reznar mo infinity.

[Faint]

Really?

Sadly, yes. I would not lump in everybody though and I don't want to give even the semblance of the impression that all those that do not like Daenerys are sexist. Plenty of women don't like her either. And plenty of non-sexist males as well.

That said, there is a sizable group of readers that are straight-out sexist. Just read any thread where Catelyn, Daenerys, or Cersei are in the topic title.

[Castel]

To be honest I think a lot of the dislike for Dany is blown up because of the forum. Something about being put in a forum to discuss an issue with such a split makes people dig in. I can say for myself that I did not dislike people like Dany or Cersei half as much as when I jumped here and saw the reaction. Fan reactions can play a part in how people react to a character, and seeing people like Dany, Jon, Robb and Tyrion all have different standards applied to them because of favoritism really made me make more posts against them than I ordinarily would just to point out the problems I have with that.

I think a lot of the "hate", as much as I realised I hate that word, is just a natural push against the idea that Dany is somehow by fiat the best person to rule Westeros because she has dragons, something that seems as strange as saying that Ned or Robb were the best people to rule in KL. Others provide reasons why this shouldn't be so, their opposites dig in and the whole thing becomes one big tug of war.

[FuzzyJAM]

Screw their "culture" and screw cultural relativism. The worst thing she's done is not go far enough with those slaving scum.

Not nearly high enough.

I am sorry, but no. This is not a reasonable position.

If you are fighting to improve the world (as Dany somewhat appears to, and as is the only justification for her actions beyond general conquest) then it's not enough to simply be fighting against injustice - you have to have something you're actually fighting for and you have to have a reasonable chance of actually implementing it. Dany does not, and as a result the lives of most of the people she has interacted with have gotten worse.

She may not have intended to make the world worse, but as it was utterly predictable it's on her shoulders.

[danm_999]

I am sorry, but no. This is not a reasonable position.

If you are fighting to improve the world (as Dany somewhat appears to, and as is the only justification for her actions beyond general conquest) then it's not enough to simply be fighting against injustice - you have to have something you're actually fighting for and you have to have a reasonable chance of actually implementing it. Dany does not, and as a result the lives of most of the people she has interacted with have gotten worse.

She may not have intended to make the world worse, but as it was utterly predictable it's on her shoulders.

Plus, if you want to screw cultural relativism in relation to Daenerys, one could ask why her bloodriders, handmaidens, the Unsullied and Missandei aren't drawing salaries.

[Kittyhat]

I disagree with that, given what Tywin managed to do; restore his house's prestige

He's left things so that "Lannister" means the same thing as "lying scum" to most people, and the very temporary power he managed to establish is crumbling quickly, in part because of how badly he screwed up his family in general. He screwed up his children in particular royally, and any redeeming qualities any of them manage to have are in spite of him, not because of him.

Anything about the Lannister legacy that's good or enduring exists in spite of Tywin, not because of him.

Of course he made errors, he was a dreadful father, but he always struck me as more pragmatic and effective than most people.

His effectiveness was all short-term, the mere illusion of effectiveness. He built nothing that could last or has lasted, and he did potentially incredible long-term damage to the Lannister name and legacy.

[Kittyhat]

I am sorry, but no. This is not a reasonable position.

I'm sorry, but I don't see any reason to take half-measures with them. And indeed, they've taken advantage of the half-measures, turned them against her. The only thing they're going to understand is two eyes for an eye.

"If they pull a knife, you pull a gun. If they send one of your people to the hospital, you send one of theirs to the morgue."

It's ugly, but sometimes that's what it takes. And again, I'm sorry, but I'd shed no tears for the kinds of people she currently has as enemies.

[danm_999]

His effectiveness was all short-term, the mere illusion of effectiveness. He built nothing that could last or has lasted, and he did potentially incredible long-term damage to the Lannister name and legacy.

You're contention is that Tywin is incompetant not because of his own abilities or his track record in ruling, but because he did not adequately raise his children to rule to effectively rule after he was gone, so any peace or legacy he will have left behind is destined to crumble upon his death.

A fine point. Only problem is, you're using this failure to argue Daenerys is more competant. But by her own estimation, she can't even produce another generation, let alone gear them effectively to rule after she's gone. So if neither Tywin or Daenerys are going to provide long term stability, it's only Tywin who provides short term stability, and is therefore more competant.

[danm_999]

I'm sorry, but I don't see any reason to take half-measures with them. And indeed, they've taken advantage of the half-measures, turned them against her. The only thing they're going to understand is two eyes for an eye. "If they pull a knife, you pull a gun. If they send one of your people to the hospital, you send one of theirs to the morgue." It's ugly, but sometimes that's what it takes. And again, I'm sorry, but I'd shed no tears for the kinds of people she currently has as enemies.

Capone was caught by Ness through a pragmatic, reasonable move though.

Ness didn't get him for bootlegging, or theft, or bribery, or prostitution or the St. Valentine's Day massacre, or all the things they knew he did, they got him for Federal tax evasion.

[FuzzyJAM]

I'm sorry, but I don't see any reason to take half-measures with them. And indeed, they've taken advantage of the half-measures, turned them against her. The only thing they're going to understand is two eyes for an eye. "If they pull a knife, you pull a gun. If they send one of your people to the hospital, you send one of theirs to the morgue." It's ugly, but sometimes that's what it takes. And again, I'm sorry, but I'd shed no tears for the kinds of people she currently has as enemies.

So when you butcher all your "enemies", what of their children? Kill them too? For the greater good?

Or do you have a huge orphan population that despises the regime that murdered all their parents?

[Kittyhat]

A fine point. Only problem is, you're using this failure to argue Daenerys is more competant. But by her own estimation, she can't even produce another generation, let alone gear them effectively to rule after she's gone. So if neither Tywin or Daenerys are going to provide long term stability, it's only Tywin who provides short term stability, and is therefore more competant.

Tywin wasn't facing anything remotely like what Daenerys is facing, nor is she done yet. And her infertility, if indeed she remains infertile, is not an indication of her ability to rule or lack thereof.

Anyway, I'm not saying Daenerys is a great ruler. She's proven to be a very effective war leader (to a point -- her management of an occupation could use work), but she's yet to demonstrate great skill at rulership. Not that Mereen is a normal situation or particularly good example, given it's more a city still at war that's trying to pretend to be at peace than a city genuinely operating in peacetime.

I'm just saying that saying "she's no Tywin" is kind of like saying "she's no George W. Bush." It's almost an unintentional compliment in the context in which it's meant as a criticism.

[Kittyhat]

So when you butcher all your "enemies", what of their children? Kill them too? For the greater good? Or do you have a huge orphan population that despises the regime that murdered all their parents?

Hi. Welcome to war.

You may as well pose that question to everyone who ever led a force in war, including Ned Stark. In war, people die. And they leave people behind in dying.

[Castel]

Tywin wasn't facing anything remotely like what Daenerys is facing, nor is she done yet. And her infertility, if indeed she remains infertile, is not an indication of her ability to rule or lack thereof. Anyway, I'm not saying Daenerys is a great ruler. She's proven to be a very effective war leader (to a point -- her management of an occupation could use work), but she's yet to demonstrate great skill at rulership. Not that Mereen is a normal situation or particularly good example, given it's more a city still at war that's trying to pretend to be at peace than a city genuinely operating in peacetime. I'm just saying that saying "she's no Tywin" is kind of like saying "she's no George W. Bush." It's almost an unintentional compliment in the context in which it's meant as a criticism.

Except that it is part of the criteria for a good leader that you yourself set out: the ability to maintain stability past one's lifetime.

You can't have it both ways, either Tywin is a bad ruler for not creating a good dynasty and Dany is a terrible one for not coming up with a work around while she's still planning on conquering places, or Tywin is a competent ruler for the successes in his lifetime and Dany is not.

Dany brought what happened to herself. Part of being a good leader is picking your battles, why should we let her off for a situation she caused?

[danm_999]

Tywin wasn't facing anything remotely like what Daenerys is facing, nor is she done yet.

So now cultural relatavism is ok?

And her infertility, if indeed she remains infertile, is not an indication of her ability to rule or lack thereof.

But if Tywin sucks because what he builds is temporary, so does Daenerys, because without an heir, it's going to die with her.

Anyway, I'm not saying Daenerys is a great ruler. She's proven to be a very effective war leader (to a point -- her management of an occupation could use work),

I agree, she's very gifted tactically. Maybe not at the actual martial elements in warfare, but at a tactical levle.

but she's yet to demonstrate great skill at rulership.

Thus far, she's demonstrated the opposite.

Not that Mereen is a normal situation or particularly good example, given it's more a city still at war that's trying to pretend to be at peace than a city genuinely operating in peacetime.

In large part the city is still at war due to her inability to root out dissent, which is always going to be there in peacetime.

I'm just saying that saying "she's no Tywin" is kind of like saying "she's no George W. Bush." It's almost an unintentional compliment in the context in which it's meant as a criticism.

As I said, I disagree on the characterisation of Tywin as a poor ruler.

[Castel]

Hi. Welcome to war. You may as well pose that question to everyone who ever led a force in war, including Ned Stark. In war, people die. And they leave people behind in dying.

See, the problem with this is that Dany is occupying a foreign land and is hopelessly outmatched. To succeed she needs to earn the love of the natives. On top of that if her motivation is to end slavery then committing acts crueler than anything done during slavery means she failed in her goal.

She claims she is for justice yet doesn't give any real justice at all.

The original point still stands though, maybe she shouldn't have been as lenient as she was but she should have understood the culture before she stomped in to free the "savages" from themselves. Knowing you enemy =/= as being lenient or condoning their behavior.

[Kittyhat]

You can't have it both ways, either Tywin is a bad ruler for not creating a good dynasty and Dany is a terrible one for not coming up with a work around while she's still planning on conquering places, or Tywin is a competent ruler for the successes in his lifetime and Dany is not.

I'm not. Tywin had a whole lifetime into relatively old age to establish a good dynasty, and he spent it sabotaging it brutally instead.

Dany is ... 15, for Christ's sake. And hasn't even gotten out of the wartime part yet. It's not the same thing; it's not even on the same planet as the same thing.

Dany brought what happened to herself. Part of being a good leader is picking your battles, why should we let her off for a situation she caused?

So you think that slavery and brutal torture of innocent children is acceptable and should be left alone by those with the means and opportunity to stop it. Good to know.

I happen to believe in stopping such things.

[FuzzyJAM]

Hi. Welcome to war.

You may as well pose that question to everyone who ever led a force in war, including Ned Stark. In war, people die. And they leave people behind in dying.

My point is that war has different justifications. War is a terrible thing - if you are going to put on an aggressive war to improve the world, you'd better be actually improving the world.

Dany hasn't, and is thus utterly unjustified.