Jump to content
AlaerysTargaryen

If Dany becomes mad, it will cement the idea that all westerosi queens in their own right are unworthy.

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

You seem to be uninterested in comparing women in the story, it's either Iron Throne or bust. That seems disingenuous. Asha is interesting because she could be the only elected queen in this story, and that absolutely is a foil to Cersei. She's a mirror character to Dany because she comes from a culture that practices "fire and sword" but she doesn't lose touch with her human side. Wherever Sansa ends up, she should have been next in line after Robb died, and should have inherited his title as Queen. Because she didn't get that (which is sadly a realistic scenario) that leaves her out of your analysis? She's acting as queen in the north in all but name, as she is the only one defending Northern independence and keeping it together at Winterfell. It's kind of a discriminatory to dismiss her like that. 

1

I completely hear what you're saying and I love the fact that there have been incredibly strong and nuanced depictions of female characters in this story. The Iron Throne, though, is the symbol of power and a barometer of discussion here for a reason. What we're left with at the end of the day is the idea that Sansa can rule in the North, Yara can rule the Iron Islands, Brienne could absolutely lead the Queensguard, and all the other women can rule in different ways. But the ultimate seat of power needs a masculine figure with the masculine characteristics of logic and reason without emotion because, darn it, women need a male to keep them in check. 

I love this show, I love the books, I love the history. I love all of it. But pointing out certain issues within the themes of the story is what analysis and discussion are all about. This is one point that bothers me.

Edited by Wildling Queen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Wildling Queen said:

Yes, that's been the argument all along.

It's a bit hard to see that being precise argument being made in the OP.

5 minutes ago, Wildling Queen said:

 but Robert wasn't. He was just a simpleton taken down by a scheming woman. 

Well frankly Robert had a lot of big faults as a human being. And interestingly enough his faults were similar to Aegon IV. Is there a pattern there?

7 minutes ago, Wildling Queen said:

And Tommen could have actually been a good king eventually with the right guidance, but darn those scheming women who took him down.

I'm pretty sure Cersei did not intend for Tommen to kill himself.

 

8 minutes ago, Wildling Queen said:

Do you see a pattern here?

Only if I squint extremely hard.

13 minutes ago, Wildling Queen said:

Cersei's main negatives are that she's unable to control her own need for petty revenge. Her emotions get the best of her and lead her to failure.

I don't know about this, it seems up to this point Cersei has been wildly successful.  She successfully pulled of a coup and took power in Westeros. And she successfully played Jon and Dany and was able to neutralize their military superiority. She's utterly ruthless of course. She is kind of like Tywin that way. I doubt Edmure Tully could carry out Cersei's plan's. He is way too sentimental.

15 minutes ago, Wildling Queen said:

Daenerys is being painted the same way.

Well I don't consider Dany being pissed off by the killing of Missandei to be petty. Dany has always had a bit of ruthless streak in her. But, I don't consider her to be fundamentally the same as Cersei who isn't concerned by any ethical restraint at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, OldGimletEye said:

It's a bit hard to see that being precise argument being made in the OP.

That's exactly what I took from it. So I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree there.

Well frankly Robert had a lot of big faults as a human being. And interestingly enough his faults were similar to Aegon IV. Is there a pattern there?

No. Because Aegon IV wasn't part of this show, for one, and is one of just many male rulers we can compare.

I'm pretty sure Cersei did not intend for Tommen to kill himself.

He failed long before he killed himself.

Only if I squint extremely hard.

Okay. It seems like a pretty easy conclusion to me, but okay.

I don't know about this, it seems up to this point Cersei has been wildly successful.  She successfully pulled of a coup and took power in Westeros. And she successfully played Jon and Dany and was able to neutralize their military superiority. She's utterly ruthless of course. She is kind of like Tywin that way. I doubt Edmure Tully could carry out Cersei's plan's. He is way too sentimental.

Tywin's ruthlessness was solely about power. Cersei's is revenge against her enemies. And she's lost without him, the patriarchal figure.

Well I don't consider Dany being pissed off by the killing of Missandei to be petty. Dany has always had a bit of ruthless streak in her. But, I don't consider her to be fundamentally the same as Cersei who isn't concerned by any ethical restraint at all.

Dany being pissed off about Missandei isn't petty. Her outrage over not being accepted in Westeros is, though. Sorry, that's just my opinion.

4

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Wildling Queen said:

 What we're left with at the end of the day is the idea that Sansa can rule in the North, Yara can rule the Iron Islands, Brienne could absolutely lead the Queensguard, and all the other women can rule in different ways. But the ultimate seat of power needs a masculine figure with the masculine characteristics of logic and reason without emotion because, darn it, women need a male to keep them in check. 

If one accepts the first four premises as being true, then how does one logically make the final conclusion here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, OldGimletEye said:

If one accepts the first four premises as being true, then how does one logically make the final conclusion here.

Because real power, power like ruling Westeros, needs a male head, a good man who can embody all the male characteristics so valued in a patriarchal society. There's a long history of this in literature and film. Whether or not D&D intended to follow that pattern, only they could say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Wildling Queen said:

Because real power, power like ruling Westeros, needs a male head, a good man who can embody all the male characteristics so valued in a patriarchal society. There's a long history of this in literature and film. Whether or not D&D intended to follow that pattern, only they could say.

Because being Queen of the Iron Isles or wardness of the North is "fake power"? If somebody could ably administrate those regions, I'm sure they would have a good chance of being a good monarch. I don't think their power is not real by any stretch of the imagination.

Look, when it comes to a lot of this stuff, I think D&D blow it a lot. Don't even get me started on the whole Sansa "Ramsay made me stronger" thing, which is hideous.

That said, I'm having a hard time seeing anything inherently insidious about Dany failing to matriculate into a good ruler.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

I'm having a hard time seeing anything inherently insidious about Dany failing to matriculate into a good ruler.

Good ruler? She hasn't had the chance to rule Westeros, she is losing her mind and barreling towards mass murder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

Because being Queen of the Iron Isles or wardness of the North is "fake power"? If somebody could ably administrate those regions, I'm sure they would have a good chance of being a good monarch. I don't think their power is not real by any stretch of the imagination.

Look, when it comes to a lot of this stuff, I think D&D blow it a lot. Don't even get me started on the whole Sansa "Ramsay made me stronger" thing, which is hideous.

That said, I'm having a hard time seeing anything inherently insidious about Dany failing to matriculate into a good ruler.

No, not "fake power." But it's also a subjugated form of power, isn't it? There's still a higher authority they have to submit to, and that higher authority has always been male and being male seems to be painted as a requirement for the position, at this point.

I hear you on the Sansa comment, but you know what's funny? I worked as a rape crisis counselor for years and I couldn't tell you how many times I've heard clients say that. I've said it about my own experience. It's a comforting thought when there is no other comfort. "It was terrible but it's made me who I am today." I hate that it's framed that way in terms of conversations about rape, but for a survivor, it's a pretty common sentiment. As a feminist, it should've bothered me, but it was just too familiar.

It's not about Dany personally, to me. It's about a theme in this show about women and their ability to rule when having a chance at true power, which always seems to be undermined in a similar way. It just bothers me.

Edited by Wildling Queen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, darksellsword said:

Good ruler? She hasn't had the chance to rule Westeros, she is losing her mind and barreling towards mass murder.

She's ruled in other countries. In the book, she didn't really rule well, but the show has focused on how good a ruler she's been in those places and how the people love her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Wildling Queen said:

No, not "fake power." But it's also a subjugated form of power, isn't it? There's still a higher authority they have to submit to, and that higher authority has always been male.

So the complaint here isn't so much that women haven't been shown to have the capability to rule, it's more that they haven't achieved the highest authority in the land within the story, that's the problem here?

Is it problematic that nobody from a KL slum has become the monarch of Westeros?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, OldGimletEye said:

So the complaint here isn't so much that women haven't been shown to have the capability to rule, it's more that they haven't achieved the highest authority in the land within the story, that's the problem here?

Is it problematic that nobody from a KL slum has become the monarch of Westeros?

No. Again. The problem is that the only two women who've had a shot at that kind of power were unable to do anything with it because their emotions and pettiness ruled them. It undergirds all the patriarchal notions that women are just too emotional to rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Wildling Queen said:

No. Again. The problem is that the only two women who've had a shot at that kind of power were unable to do anything with it because their emotions and pettiness ruled them. It undergirds all the patriarchal notions that women are just too emotional to rule.

Aerys Targaryen was a bad king, Robert Baratheon, a bad king, Joffrey and Tommen also bad kings....so I'm not sure that the story is saying anything particular about women in power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Wildling Queen said:

No. Again. The problem is that the only two women who've had a shot at that kind of power were unable to do anything with it because their emotions and pettiness ruled them. It undergirds all the patriarchal notions that women are just too emotional to rule.

Well I'm not too sure about this premise. For one, Cersei's main fault is she is completely ruthless. No amount of ethical notions will restrain her from getting want she wants. Sentiment doesn't get in her way either, like say it might for Edmure Tully.

Often when women are portrayed as "being too emotional" or whatever it often is portrayed as they don't have the ability to "make the hard decisions". Sentiment gets in there way of doing what "needs to be done". Nothing like that ever gets in Cersei's way. As I said she is a lot like Tywin in that regard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, Wildling Queen said:

She's ruled in other countries. In the book, she didn't really rule well, but the show has focused on how good a ruler she's been in those places and how the people love her.

I was initially agreeing with you on the point of her not being mad or evidently spirally towards madness as the show will most likely try to shoehorn in. I have to disagree with you on her being loved and a good ruler in Essos, even on the show they demonstrated how her decisions aren't really going down well, it was only with Tyrion and Varys ruling on her behalf did things turn around, which I suppose proves your main point in another regard. Just because someone has a few failed social polices doesn't make them a hysterical homicidal maniac.

Edited by darksellsword

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

Aerys Targaryen was a bad king, Robert Baratheon, a bad king, Joffrey and Tommen also bad kings....so I'm not sure that the story is saying anything particular about women in power.

Yes, I acknowledged that earlier. But they were each bad for different reasons. Dany and Cersei are bad for similar reasons, reasons that speak to all the historical beliefs about why women can't hold power. They're just too emotional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

Well I'm not too sure about this premise. For one, Cersei's main fault is she is completely ruthless. No amount of ethical notions will restrain her from getting want she wants. Sentiment doesn't get in her way either, like say it might for Edmure Tully.

Often when women are portrayed as "being too emotional" or whatever it often is portrayed as they don't have the ability to "make the hard decisions". Sentiment gets in there way of doing what "needs to be done". Nothing like that ever gets in Cersei's way. As I said she is a lot like Tywin in that regard.

Cersei is scheming, conniving, and hysterical. Her decisions aren't made from cold reasoning, that's why they almost always blow up in her face. That didn't happen to Tywin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, darksellsword said:

I was initially agreeing with you on the point of her not being mad or evidently spirally towards madness as the show will most likely try to shoehorn in. I have to disagree with you on her being loved and a good ruler in Essos, even on the show they demonstrated how her decisions aren't really going down well, it was only with Tyrion and Varys ruling on her behalf did things turn around, which I suppose proves your main point in another regard. Just because someone has a few failed social polices doesn't make them a hysterical homicidal maniac.

True, but the Dothraki and the Unsullied and a lot of the people she held power over have followed her all the way to Westeros. Apparently, a whole lot of them think she's pretty awesome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Wildling Queen said:

Cersei is scheming, conniving, and hysterical. Her decisions aren't made from cold reasoning, that's why they almost always blow up in her face. That didn't happen to Tywin.

I disagree. You seem to see what you want to see. Cersei has had very few things blowing up in her face let alone "always". She has been cold and ruthless and she has got the job done. Lately she came from an impossible situation after the loot train to a place where D&D will come up with something utterly stupid again to save her enemies. I would only slightly raise my eyebrows at Sheepstealer coming from the Sun in the next episode.

Shoehorning Cersei into a feminist ideal of a held back woman is wrong, not only because it is factually wrong but it is also wrong morally - because it diminishes the accomplishments of a woman. And for what? To make a point. Much like a good portion of fourth wave feminism ideas and paradigms that don't stand up to any basic scrutiny, because they are based on ideas and desires rather than research and facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Wildling Queen said:

She's ruled in other countries. In the book, she didn't really rule well, but the show has focused on how good a ruler she's been in those places and how the people love her.

She’s a good conqueror, but a terrible ruler. 

The slaves she freed in Essos may love her, but she’s done an absolute crap job of subduing the underground resistance to her, and she’s maintained even a tiny slip of peace only by using her Unsullied to enforce martial law. 

Maybe that was inevitable, but it should have been a lesson for her that she needs to do a better job of picking up on the news and expectations of the people if she wants to rule long term. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, Wildling Queen said:

Cersei is scheming, conniving, and hysterical. Her decisions aren't made from cold reasoning, that's why they almost always blow up in her face. That didn't happen to Tywin.

Except thus far Cersei's schemes have worked out pretty well for her. She successfully took the throne. And now she is evenly matched against Dany military. And I'm not too sure all of Tywin's plans always ended up as great as he thought.

Edited by OldGimletEye

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×