Dany and child murder

[The Lord of the Crossing]

There was both justice in slaying the masters as well as strategy.  Leaving boys alive who can fight back is bad.  Tywin knew that when he fought the Reynes and the Tarbecks.  Twelve years old is old enough to know better.  They've been living sinful lives and it's now the time to pay the price.  I completely agree with Daenerys on this matter.

[Hodor the Articulate]

2 hours ago, The Lord of the Crossing said:

There was both justice in slaying the masters as well as strategy.  Leaving boys alive who can fight back is bad.  Tywin knew that when he fought the Reynes and the Tarbecks.  Twelve years old is old enough to know better.  They've been living sinful lives and it's now the time to pay the price.  I completely agree with Daenerys on this matter.

I don't get the sense that it was strategic. She couldn't bring herself to harm the child hostages in Meereen, after all. I think she just considers 13 to be the age of adulthood (or at least the age at which one bears the responsibilities of adults), since that's when she had to grow up.

[John Suburbs]

18 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

That isn't entirely true. Ned does send people to stop Gregor & Roose only commits his atrocities out in the open AFTER he knows he has the backing of the crown. They are not afforded the same rights as IRL but they do have some. There are people who will stick up for the small folk, to date no one but Dany attempts to stick up for the slaves.

 

I've asked once but you didn't answer: What choices do the enslaved have to end their slavery? The only one I can think of is suicide. 

Ned did this only when Gregor stepped outside of the westerlands. Within his own lands, Gregor has a completely free hand to do whatever he likes, like rape the 13yo daughter of an innkeep. And Ned's response was his decision acting in his capacity as Hand of the King. It was not a response to any codified law that guarantees civil rights to smallfolk. Another Hand, another king, and things could have gone completely different.

This would be the same situation in Essos if one slaveowner harmed or killed another's slave. And as the conversation at the well attests, it is the wealthy slaveowners who afford the best protection for their slaves.

Yes, that is the choice. Slavery or death. The same choice that people trapped in poverty have.

19 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

No what you said was "So poverty is a choice then? Tell that to children of ..." What I was saying is the poster never said poverty was a choice. You then in turn say slaves are given the same choices are those that are poverty stricken, which is also not true. 

Sorry had to post before I got finished. You can't really believe that just because the slaves outnumbered the Slavers & they didn't revolt that they were perfectly satisfied. I disagree that the text makes that perfectly clear. I would highly doubt any slave, but most especially the unsullied are perfectly satisfied. 

Of course there are commoners of Westeros who are happy with their position & living situations? Just to be clear what you are telling me is that being a commoner in Westeros is worse than being a slave because they can rise to positions of importance while the Westeros common folk cannot? 

My point was that since neither slavery nor poverty are choices, then it is just as unfair to condemn freemen for living in a slave culture than it is to condemn the well-off for living in a culture that breeds poverty. Both are intractable and both can only be undone through massive social change. Killing people for the injustices of slavery is no different than killing people for the injustices of poverty. Both are beyond the control of any individual.

Who on this earth is perfectly satisfied? Do you think the swineherd loves to muck around in the mud all day with pigs? The stableboy loves to shovel manure all day? We see that even kings, queens and high lords and ladies are not perfectly satisfied. Yes, there are many who are not perfectly satisfied with slaver, but there are many who are even less satisfied with what Dany has given them:

Quote

"We have no slaves for sale," Dany said.

"My queen?" Daario stepped forward. "The riverside is full of Meereenese, begging leave to be allowed to sell themselves to this Quartheen. They are thicker than the flies."

"Dany was shocked. "They want to be slaves?"

"The ones who came are well spoken and gently born, sweet queen. Such slaves are prized. In the Free Cities they will be tutors, scribes, bed slaves, even healers and priests. They will sleep in soft beds, eat rich foods, and dwell in manses. Here they have lost all, and live in fear and squalor."

And then she allows people to sell themselves into slavery and even imposes a 10 percent tax on the sale.

So sorry, but this idea that every single slave is subjected to a life of misery, torture and abuse is patently false. Many, many slaves are perfectly satisfied with it.

And I'll also note that Dany herself was never a slave, despite her claims to the contrary. She was never sold, never collared, never whipped. She was married to a "lord" as part of a military pact to benefit the men in her life, just like virtually every highborn maid in Westeros.

[SeanF]

11 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

Ned did this only when Gregor stepped outside of the westerlands. Within his own lands, Gregor has a completely free hand to do whatever he likes, like rape the 13yo daughter of an innkeep. And Ned's response was his decision acting in his capacity as Hand of the King. It was not a response to any codified law that guarantees civil rights to smallfolk. Another Hand, another king, and things could have gone completely different.

This would be the same situation in Essos if one slaveowner harmed or killed another's slave. And as the conversation at the well attests, it is the wealthy slaveowners who afford the best protection for their slaves.

Yes, that is the choice. Slavery or death. The same choice that people trapped in poverty have.

My point was that since neither slavery nor poverty are choices, then it is just as unfair to condemn freemen for living in a slave culture than it is to condemn the well-off for living in a culture that breeds poverty. Both are intractable and both can only be undone through massive social change. Killing people for the injustices of slavery is no different than killing people for the injustices of poverty. Both are beyond the control of any individual.

Who on this earth is perfectly satisfied? Do you think the swineherd loves to muck around in the mud all day with pigs? The stableboy loves to shovel manure all day? We see that even kings, queens and high lords and ladies are not perfectly satisfied. Yes, there are many who are not perfectly satisfied with slaver, but there are many who are even less satisfied with what Dany has given them:

And then she allows people to sell themselves into slavery and even imposes a 10 percent tax on the sale.

So sorry, but this idea that every single slave is subjected to a life of misery, torture and abuse is patently false. Many, many slaves are perfectly satisfied with it.

And I'll also note that Dany herself was never a slave, despite her claims to the contrary. She was never sold, never collared, never whipped. She was married to a "lord" as part of a military pact to benefit the men in her life, just like virtually every highborn maid in Westeros.

There's plenty of evidence that very many slaves are unhappy with their situation in the East.

The slaves of Meereen rose up against their masters.  The slaves of Volantis are on the brink of revolt. 

It would be great if slavery could be abolished peacefully, but we could be waiting for centuries before the Good/Wise/Great Masters conclude that it is wrong.

[John Suburbs]

13 hours ago, SeanF said:

We know that Volantis is on the brink of revolution, by its slaves (eg the Widow on the Waterfront says they're all waiting for Daenerys).  Many of Meereen's slaves rise up, when she attacks the city.  So, a great many slaves are unhappy with their lot.

And yet, a great many are:

Quote

"We have no slaves for sale," said Dany.

"My queen?" Daario stepped forward. "The riverside is full of Meereenese, begging leave to be allowed to sell themselves to this Quartheen. They are thicker than the flies."

Dany was shocked. "They want to be slaves?"

"The ones who come are well spoken and gently born, sweet queen. Such slaves are prized. In the Free Cities they will be tutors, scribes, bed slaves, even healers and priests. They will sleep in soft beds, eat rich foods, and dwell in manses. Here they have lost all, and live in fear and qualor."

 

[SeanF]

Just now, John Suburbs said:

And yet, a great many are:

 

Some are.  But, I don't think that's a great reason to keep slavery in place. 

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

3 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

Ned did this only when Gregor stepped outside of the westerlands. Within his own lands, Gregor has a completely free hand to do whatever he likes, like rape the 13yo daughter of an innkeep. And Ned's response was his decision acting in his capacity as Hand of the King. It was not a response to any codified law that guarantees civil rights to smallfolk. Another Hand, another king, and things could have gone completely different.

This would be the same situation in Essos if one slaveowner harmed or killed another's slave. And as the conversation at the well attests, it is the wealthy slaveowners who afford the best protection for their slaves.

Yes, that is the choice. Slavery or death. The same choice that people trapped in poverty have.

Sure, the response absolutely depends on who is ruling. With the slaves though it isn't going to matter what wrong has been done to them or who is in charge there will be no justice. If someone harmed or killed another's slave they may be required to pay for the slave but in their eyes the injustice has been committed to the slave owner, not the slave. 

There are definitely other choices for people in poverty than death. 

5 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

My point was that since neither slavery nor poverty are choices, then it is just as unfair to condemn freemen for living in a slave culture than it is to condemn the well-off for living in a culture that breeds poverty. Both are intractable and both can only be undone through massive social change. Killing people for the injustices of slavery is no different than killing people for the injustices of poverty. Both are beyond the control of any individual.

Who on this earth is perfectly satisfied? Do you think the swineherd loves to muck around in the mud all day with pigs? The stableboy loves to shovel manure all day? We see that even kings, queens and high lords and ladies are not perfectly satisfied. Yes, there are many who are not perfectly satisfied with slaver, but there are many who are even less satisfied with what Dany has given them:

Correct. No one chooses to be a slave or to live in poverty so there are very little choices afforded to them. The SLAVERS have many choices though. First & foremost they have decided to be a slaver. I'm talking about people who own slaves. Not every freeman across the planet. It is a culture & way of life that needs to be changed period. Don't give me the nonsense about them being born into & having no choice. While they are children maybe they have no choice but once they are old enough to make decisions in their own right they have choices. Yes, to undo slavery takes massive social change. How can you not see the difference between someone who OWNS another human being, doesn't believe they are human beings really, & someone who doesn't live in poverty?? 

You said many, many slaves were perfectly satisfied because they could move to a cushy household job while the small folk of Westeros cannot/are not. 

This seems to happen quite often in our conversations - you argue one thing & when I comment on it you change the argument. YOU said the small folk of Westeros were worse off than slaves because of the reasons stated above. I said there are definitely small folk that are satisfied. Now you are replying as if I said swineherds like to muck around in mud all day. Do you think slaves with household jobs are completely satisfied with having to do every single thing a master tells them regardless of how dirty, nasty, dehumanizing, humiliating it might be? Or do you think that maybe the household slaves are not used to living the hard life they are now & rather than sticking it out want to return to that easier life? That seems the more likely to me. They are picking the lesser of two evils to them. That most certainly does not mean that liberation was a mistake or a bad choice. There are just as many, if not more, that CHOOSE to live the hard life they are living as free slaves because while they were slaves their life was much worse. So what should Dany have done? Said "Sorry, I know many & more of you are treated miserably, tortured, & killed but there are some of you who live less than harsh lives as household slaves so..." No. The folk choosing to sell themselves back into slavery at least had a choice. None of them did before. They were taken by force to serve other human beings & no one cared if they wanted to or not. It's absurd to liken this to poverty. Speaking of there are plenty of people that are in poverty IRL that are there due to their own actions. Not all surely, but some. Should poverty as a whole not be battled because some of them chose to be there? 

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

20 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

And then she allows people to sell themselves into slavery and even imposes a 10 percent tax on the sale.

So sorry, but this idea that every single slave is subjected to a life of misery, torture and abuse is patently false. Many, many slaves are perfectly satisfied with it.

And I'll also note that Dany herself was never a slave, despite her claims to the contrary. She was never sold, never collared, never whipped. She was married to a "lord" as part of a military pact to benefit the men in her life, just like virtually every highborn maid in Westeros.

Show me quotes that prove "Many, many" slaves are perfectly satisfied & not living a life of misery. How would you know the number of slaves in aSoIaF that are happy with their circumstances. I can think of 8,000+ that most definitely are not. 

Dany being a slave or not is arguable. By today's standards it would definitely be slavery. By Westerosi standards it's not. But morally it's not right IMO. I hate that women are/were stuck into forced marriages to benefit the men in their lives. It's terrible. 

[Cas Stark]

13 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Show me quotes that prove "Many, many" slaves are perfectly satisfied & not living a life of misery. How would you know the number of slaves in aSoIaF that are happy with their circumstances. I can think of 8,000+ that most definitely are not. 

Dany being a slave or not is arguable. By today's standards it would definitely be slavery. By Westerosi standards it's not. But morally it's not right IMO. I hate that women are/were stuck into forced marriages to benefit the men in their lives. It's terrible. 

An arranged marriage isn't slavery. Dany was not a slave, good grief, she commanded basically everyone in the khalisar except for Drogo and his direct blood riders, and even they were almost always cowed by her position into doing what she wanted.

[John Suburbs]

2 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Sure, the response absolutely depends on who is ruling. With the slaves though it isn't going to matter what wrong has been done to them or who is in charge there will be no justice. If someone harmed or killed another's slave they may be required to pay for the slave but in their eyes the injustice has been committed to the slave owner, not the slave. 

There are definitely other choices for people in poverty than death. 

Correct. No one chooses to be a slave or to live in poverty so there are very little choices afforded to them. The SLAVERS have many choices though. First & foremost they have decided to be a slaver. I'm talking about people who own slaves. Not every freeman across the planet. It is a culture & way of life that needs to be changed period. Don't give me the nonsense about them being born into & having no choice. While they are children maybe they have no choice but once they are old enough to make decisions in their own right they have choices. Yes, to undo slavery takes massive social change. How can you not see the difference between someone who OWNS another human being, doesn't believe they are human beings really, & someone who doesn't live in poverty?? 

You said many, many slaves were perfectly satisfied because they could move to a cushy household job while the small folk of Westeros cannot/are not. 

This seems to happen quite often in our conversations - you argue one thing & when I comment on it you change the argument. YOU said the small folk of Westeros were worse off than slaves because of the reasons stated above. I said there are definitely small folk that are satisfied. Now you are replying as if I said swineherds like to muck around in mud all day. Do you think slaves with household jobs are completely satisfied with having to do every single thing a master tells them regardless of how dirty, nasty, dehumanizing, humiliating it might be? Or do you think that maybe the household slaves are not used to living the hard life they are now & rather than sticking it out want to return to that easier life? That seems the more likely to me. They are picking the lesser of two evils to them. That most certainly does not mean that liberation was a mistake or a bad choice. There are just as many, if not more, that CHOOSE to live the hard life they are living as free slaves because while they were slaves their life was much worse. So what should Dany have done? Said "Sorry, I know many & more of you are treated miserably, tortured, & killed but there are some of you who live less than harsh lives as household slaves so..." No. The folk choosing to sell themselves back into slavery at least had a choice. None of them did before. They were taken by force to serve other human beings & no one cared if they wanted to or not. It's absurd to liken this to poverty. Speaking of there are plenty of people that are in poverty IRL that are there due to their own actions. Not all surely, but some. Should poverty as a whole not be battled because some of them chose to be there? 

You keep talking about civil rights and justice as if this matters to the slaves or the small folk. At the end of the day, you are killed or your daughter is raped and there is no justice for you. You live or die, reside in comfort or squalor, at the whims of your lord/owner. The legal abstractions that differentiate between slave and serf don't amount to a hill of beans when you get down to the lives that these people are actually living.

Again, I go back to my example of the naked, feral children who are not slaves but are scrabbling around landfills eating garbage and digging for batteries. What choice do they have? Can the go to school? No, that costs money and they have none. Can they appeal to some social agency or NGO? If any exists at all, it is overwhelmed, otherwise there would be no children in this condition. Get a job? What job? Where? If there were any available they would have them. The have NO CHOICE but to keep doing what they are doing or starve -- poverty or death -- and you and me and everyone we've ever met are personally responsible for this and should be slaughtered in our beds just because we benefited off of this system and did nothing to make this misery and suffering go away.

I never said the small folk were worse off. I merely quoted Tyrion who noted that many slaves in Essos had it better off than many small folk in Westeros. And talk about changing the subject. You've gone on and on about how slaves have no choice, and now all of a sudden they are picking (choosing) the lesser of two evils. They chose to be slaves, ergo, slavery is in fact a choice that many choose to make, and they continue to make that choice each and every time they get up in the morning and start going about their duties.

Dany could have let the world sort itself out. If slavery is in fact unbearable to the enslaved, it will end one way or another. And the babies' blood would not be on her hands.

 

[John Suburbs]

23 minutes ago, SeanF said:

Some are.  But, I don't think that's a great reason to keep slavery in place. 

There are many more people in today's world who are suffering from capitalism and free enterprise than are benefiting from it. Should we start killing babies to get rid of that too?

[John Suburbs]

22 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Show me quotes that prove "Many, many" slaves are perfectly satisfied & not living a life of misery. How would you know the number of slaves in aSoIaF that are happy with their circumstances. I can think of 8,000+ that most definitely are not. 

Dany being a slave or not is arguable. By today's standards it would definitely be slavery. By Westerosi standards it's not. But morally it's not right IMO. I hate that women are/were stuck into forced marriages to benefit the men in their lives. It's terrible. 

Quote

"They are thicker than the flies"

And the flies are everywhere in Meereen. There are many, many former slaves who are choosing to sell themselves back into bondage, just as there are many who choose to risk their lives in the fighting pits. This is their culture. This is how they were born and raised. This is normal to them.

The 8000+? If by that you mean the Unsullied, they were all set to live their entire lives as slaves before Dany came along. There was no burning desire to be free as far as I can tell, otherwise they would have risen up long ago. Do you think the mothers of all the children who have died, even those who lost one to the Unsullied training, are perfectly satisfied that all of their children are now dead and that their whole lives are in ruins?

I think this is part of your misunderstanding, Lyanna. You keep judging a feudal society by today's standards. That's unwise, not just because it opens you up to the same kind of judgement for living comfortably while others suffer, but it leads to broad misunderstandings of why things are the way they are and what truly motivates the people of this day and age. 

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

34 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

An arranged marriage isn't slavery. Dany was not a slave, good grief, she commanded basically everyone in the khalisar except for Drogo and his direct blood riders, and even they were almost always cowed by her position into doing what she wanted.

Not in the beginning she didn't. Anyway by today's standards, like I said, calling her a slave would be pretty accurate. 

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

33 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

I never said the small folk were worse off. I merely quoted Tyrion who noted that many slaves in Essos had it better off than many small folk in Westeros. And talk about changing the subject. You've gone on and on about how slaves have no choice, and now all of a sudden they are picking (choosing) the lesser of two evils. They chose to be slaves, ergo, slavery is in fact a choice that many choose to make, and they continue to make that choice each and every time they get up in the morning and start going about their duties.

No they only had a choice because they were no longer slaves. They had the choice to go back into slavery, a choice they were not given the first time. 

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

20 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

The 8000+? If by that you mean the Unsullied, they were all set to live their entire lives as slaves before Dany came along. There was no burning desire to be free as far as I can tell, otherwise they would have risen up long ago. Do you think the mothers of all the children who have died, even those who lost one to the Unsullied training, are perfectly satisfied that all of their children are now dead and that their whole lives are in ruins?

I think this is part of your misunderstanding, Lyanna. You keep judging a feudal society by today's standards. That's unwise, not just because it opens you up to the same kind of judgement for living comfortably while others suffer, but it leads to broad misunderstandings of why things are the way they are and what truly motivates the people of this day and age. 

Yes the Unsullied. I'm not saying they had some burning desire to be free - they had no burning desire to be anything because it was tortured & beaten out of them. What I said was they could not have been at all satisfied with their situation. Their situation previous to Daenerys was worse than what it was after. After getting a taste of what it might be do you think they would choose to go back? Like the household slaves? 

I get what you are saying & they are both terrible situations but one set of people are directly responsible for enslaving another set of people. You or I, or most of anyone in aSoiaF haven't done anything to directly cause poverty, if we have it was unknowingly. The Slavers cannot say the same. 

[Cas Stark]

5 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Not in the beginning she didn't. Anyway by today's standards, like I said, calling her a slave would be pretty accurate. 

A 'slave' with handmaidens to bath her and dress her?  People who cooked her food, set up her tent, took care of her horse and took oaths to protect her life?  Sorry, no this is not a slave by any stretch of the imagination, not at any time.  

[SeanF]

1 hour ago, John Suburbs said:

There are many more people in today's world who are suffering from capitalism and free enterprise than are benefiting from it. Should we start killing babies to get rid of that too?

You're making the argument for doing nothing, in the face of evil.  Which is the soft moral option. You might as well argue that modern governments should do nothing to end slavery, because somebody will lose out.  

As it happens, I think that free enterprise has lifted millions out of poverty.

[SeanF]

27 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

A 'slave' with handmaidens to bath her and dress her?  People who cooked her food, set up her tent, took care of her horse and took oaths to protect her life?  Sorry, no this is not a slave by any stretch of the imagination, not at any time.  

A sex slave with privileges, IMHO. 

[Cas Stark]

Just now, SeanF said:

A sex slave with privileges, IMHO. 

Up until the last 50 years it was expected that a wife would have sex with her husband and give him children.  If you want to count all women throughout history from 3000 BC to 1970 as sex slaves, due to that expectation and the lack of legal safeguards surrounding same,  that is your option.

[SeanF]

1 minute ago, Cas Stark said:

Up until the last 50 years it was expected that a wife would have sex with her husband and give him children.  If you want to count all women throughout history from 3000 BC to 1970 as sex slaves, due to that expectation and the lack of legal safeguards surrounding same,  that is your option.

It would have been considered unusual for a husband to have the right to hand his wife over to his close friends for sex.  Dany got lucky.  If Drogo had beaten her, mated her to his dogs, hanged her if he got tired of her, she'd have had no redress.