Lots of people would do exactly the same as what Cersei did to Robert and Ned if they were in her shoes. The story is just mostly presented from Stark POV.

[Craving Peaches]

2 minutes ago, boltons are sick said:

What is Cersei supposed to do in your opinion, so that she wouldn't break the inheritance law but still have an affair with someone outside of her abusive marriage?

Not have children with whoever she's having the affair with.

[boltons are sick]

6 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

Not have children with whoever she's having the affair with.

But in one of your previous posts you said that you don't mind Cersei having an affair outside of her marriage if her husband is also doing it and nobody minds that, but apparently you actually do. Maybe she loves the person she is having the affair with and doesn't want children from someone who is raping her 

 

This is what I mean when I say that Cersei is only persecuted because of the sexist laws of her country since she can't sleep with anyone outside of her raping husband who is ruining her psyche with his abuse, but  he can do it and nobody minds it.

[Craving Peaches]

9 minutes ago, boltons are sick said:

And the comparisons with modern day Britain are also really ridiculous

You are the one who said we should judge Cersei by modern standards so I don't see how they're ridiculous. If it was in the modern world Cersei would still be guilty of fraud and incest and murder.

[Craving Peaches]

2 minutes ago, boltons are sick said:

But in one of your previous posts you said that you don't mind Cersei having an affair outside of her marriage if her husband is also doing it and nobody minds that, but apparently you actually do.

No I don't, if you read what I've written multiple times it's not the affair it's having children from the affair.

3 minutes ago, boltons are sick said:

Maybe she loves the person she is having the affair with and doesn't want children from someone who is raping her

Then she can not have any children with Robert...

Murdering someone should be an absolute last resort. You should only take another life if there's no other way. In Cersei's case, there are multiple other solutions which don't involve murder.

[Alden Rothack]

4 minutes ago, boltons are sick said:

A woman cheating on her husband IS punishable by death in the Middle Ages. If she didn't claim that her children belong to Robert, they WOULD be executed not because of some inheritance laws but because she is disrespecting the King.

What is Cersei supposed to do in your opinion, so that she wouldn't break the inheritance law but still have an affair with someone outside of her abusive marriage? Tell her husband that she is having sex with her own brother and that the children she is giving birth to shouldn't be considered heirs to the Iron Throne? In that case, she and her children would still be executed because having ANY affair outside of marriage is punishable with death which is ridiculous.

we know thats not the case because in at least two cases the children of women executed for treason later inherited the throne, there is no basis that i'm aware of for her children to be executed if they weren't children of incest. 

4 minutes ago, boltons are sick said:

And the comparisons with modern day Britain are also really ridiculous. Cersei lives in a society where she is trapped in an abusive marriage against her will where if she doesn't pretend that her children belong to her husband, they would be executed due to the sexist laws of Westerosi society, so she is forced to pretend that her children belong to her husband for their own safety. No one in modern day Britain would face this problem because.

she chose to have them in the first place knowing it put her in mortal danger despite managing not to have children with Jaime before marriage or with Robert during their marriage

4 minutes ago, boltons are sick said:

Also, it's not like Cersei is destroying a royal line that's thousands of years old. Robert himself is the first of his line to sit in the throne and he started a bloody war to get it and wiped out the previous family and took the throne from them. Why is this somehow considered more moral than Cersei lying about her children's parentage to preserve their lives when if everything went according to plan, this wouldn't have claimed anyone's life 

 

The Baratheons are a Targ cadet line in addition to being descended from the Storm Kings so yes actually they are a royal line thousands of years old and even if they weren't Robert was still the king, Cersei was fully aware of the law when she nmade her choices and the Lannisters were willing to destroy families thousands of years old who disrespected them why should they not receive the same treatment in return

[frenin]

5 minutes ago, boltons are sick said:

What is Cersei supposed to do in your opinion, so that she wouldn't break the inheritance law but still have an affair with someone outside of her abusive marriage?

Not have children with Jaime, like he did not have with Robert, going as far as using moon tea to avoid it.

 

7 minutes ago, boltons are sick said:

And the comparisons with modern day Britain are also really ridiculous.

You argue that passing her children as trueborn would not be considered a crime nowadays, Britain is the prime example that it indeed would, i'm not even going with Qatar or Saudi Arabia here.

 

8 minutes ago, boltons are sick said:

they would be executed due to the sexist laws of Westerosi society, so she is forced to pretend that her children belong to her husband for their own safety.

Wow, sounds like a shitty situation... Why have them in the first place?

Because it was never about her children, her children were but a tool used to punish Robert for being the cunt he was, she wanted to make sure that no trueborn child of Robert got the throne, it was the perfect revenge for her

She was also signing away her doom and the continent's doom at large.

 

11 minutes ago, boltons are sick said:

Also, it's not like Cersei is destroying a royal line that's thousands of years old.

Still treason.

 

12 minutes ago, boltons are sick said:

Why is this somehow considered more moral than Cersei lying about her children's parentage to preserve their lives when if everything went according to plan and Ned didn't try to expose her secret, this wouldn't have claimed anyone's life

The secret was already out and she had to start killing innocent people in order to cover her ass.

And the Robellion started on a whole different premise anyway.

 

[boltons are sick]

If Cersei was in modern day, she wouldn't do those things because she wouldn't be forced ro defend her children by lying about their parentage.

 No offence, but this is like saying that a slave in the 17th century who kills his slavemaster for abusing him, deserves to be punished for murdering the slavemaster because the laws of the country allow the slavemaster to treat his slaves as property and because murdering a fellow human being in any situation outside of self-defense is punishable by death in the 21st century without taking into account that we also don't have slavery in the 21st century and he wouldn't be a slave in the 21st century in the first place.

 Cersei's situation is exactly the same as that of the abovementioned slave. Fans scream how she should be punished for pretending that her children belong to Robert because that's punishable in the 21st century without taking into account that if she lived in the 21st century she wouldn't be forced to do it to protect her children's lives from sexist laws in the first place and she could leave Robert if he is raping her (which is also punishable in the 21st century but not in Westeros) and not be forced to find some measure of happiness by cheating on him. 

[frenin]

3 minutes ago, boltons are sick said:

If Cersei was in modern day, she wouldn't do those things because she wouldn't be forced ro defend her children by lying about their parentage.

 

She would if she specifically wanted her children to inherit a throne they had no right to.

 

And you officially compared Cersei with a slave... Damn, bye, you're trolling.

[Craving Peaches]

6 minutes ago, boltons are sick said:

No offence, but this is like saying that a slave in the 17th century who kills his slavemaster for abusing him, deserves to be punished for murdering the slavemaster because the laws of the country allow the slavemaster to treat his slaves as property

No it's not. Cersei is not a slave. Robert treats her badly but not as badly as the Masters treat the Slaves in Slaver's Bay. Cersei can say no to Robert and has enough freedom to have an affair...She is not chained, she has servants, a position of influence and power, she was not bought, she has her own property...

8 minutes ago, boltons are sick said:

murdering a fellow human being in any situation outside of self-defense is punishable by death in the 21st century without taking into account that we also don't have slavery in the 21st century and he wouldn't be a slave in the 21st century in the first place

?

There are scenarios outside of self-defence (at least where I live) when you can 'murder' someone and won't be punished, such as if you are insane, it was absolutely necessary to prevent something worse, or possibly if you were coerced. Alternatively if you were provoked it wouldn't be murder, and you would receive a reduced sentence. And murder isn't punishable by death everywhere anyway.

[boltons are sick]

14 minutes ago, frenin said:

She would if she specifically wanted her children to inherit a throne they had no right to.

 

And you officially compared Cersei with a slave... Damn, bye, you're trolling.

 She is not a slave, but she is a rape victim and the slave is forced to kill his slavemaster to avoid further abuse while Cersei is also forced to ly about her children's parentage and then kill her husband to avoid her whole family being killed and the reason why they have to do those things is because of the discriminatory laws of their countries and they wouldn't have to do them in a 21st century country.

 But apparently, a 21st century audience is able to empathize with a slave who is forced to kill his slavemaster to avoid further abuse without bringing up the fact that murder is illegal even in the 21st century, but a woman who is subjected to Medieval sexism; is repeatedly raped by her husband whom she can't leave which traumatizes her and causes her to find comfort outside of her marriage with someone she loves, then she is forced to protect her family by lying about the parentage of her children and is then forced to kill her husband to protect her family's lives and as revenge for his abuse is too much to understand without bringing up ridiculous talking points like how lying about the parentage of royal children and murder are illegal even today while ignoring the fact that her situation is totally different from that of a woman in the 21st century who could leave her husband, could complain about the rape and wouldn't have to worry that her entire family would be threatened by death penalty if she doesn't pretend that her kids belong to her husband is too much to empathize with and they have to bring up the fact that those things are illegal in the 21st century (which they don't do for the slave) and completely ignore that those things are done to protect herself from sexist laws that inflict rape upon the woman and death on her entire family if she doesn't comform to those sexist laws. 

[Craving Peaches]

6 minutes ago, boltons are sick said:

kill her husband to avoid her whole family being killed

She had other options to avoid this that didn't involve killing but she chose to kill.

6 minutes ago, boltons are sick said:

the reason why they have to do those things is because of the discriminatory laws of their countries and they wouldn't have to do them in a 21st century country.

Fraud and incest are still crimes today. Cersei was getting away with the incest anyway. It was the fraud that caused the issue.

[Alden Rothack]

2 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

She had other options to avoid this that didn't involve killing but she chose to kill.

Fraud and incest are still crimes today. Cersei was getting away with the incest anyway. It was the fraud she had to cover up.

cersei committed murder long before she married Robert and legally Robert can't have her killed for adultery unless he wants the faith to turn against him, conspiracy against the king on the other hand is a crime regarfdless of who you are (Aerys could legally have sdisinheritted Rhaegar and exceuted him on that basis)

[SeanF]

12 minutes ago, boltons are sick said:

 She is not a slave, but she is a rape victim and the slave is forced to kill his slavemaster to avoid further abuse while Cersei is also forced to ly about her children's parentage and then kill her husband to avoid her whole family being killed and the reason why they have to do those things is because of the discriminatory laws of their countries and they wouldn't have to do them in a 21st century country.

 But apparently, a 21st century audience is able to empathize with a slave who is forced to kill his slavemaster to avoid further abuse without bringing up the fact that murder is illegal even in the 21st century, but a woman who is subjected to Medieval sexism; is repeatedly raped by her husband whom she can't leave which traumatizes her and causes her to find comfort outside of her marriage with someone she loves, then she is forced to protect her family by lying about the parentage of her children and is then forced to kill her husband to protect her family's lives and as revenge for his abuse is too much to understand without bringing up ridiculous talking points like how lying about the parentage of royal children and murder are illegal even today while ignoring the fact that her situation is totally different from that of a woman in the 21st century who could leave her husband, could complain about the rape and wouldn't have to worry that her entire family would be threatened by death penalty if she doesn't pretend that her kids belong to her husband is too much to empathize with and they have to bring up the fact that those things are illegal in the 21st century (which they don't do for the slave) and completely ignore that those things are done to protect herself from sexist laws that inflict rape upon the woman and death on her entire family if she doesn't comform to those sexist laws. 

Cersei did not have to have sex with her brother, nor bear his children.  By doing so, she placed a lot of people in danger. And, she found herself in a position where innocents had to be killed, in order to protect her secret.

It’s not just Robert who she harms.

 

[Alden Rothack]

15 minutes ago, SeanF said:

Cersei did not have to have sex with her brother, nor bear his children.  By doing so, she placed a lot of people in danger. And, she found herself in a position where innocents had to be killed, in order to protect her secret.

It’s not just Robert who she harms.

 

Even if we accepted that she needed to kill Robert (which is not certain) she did not need to kill a bunch of innocents, she choose to do so.

poisoning Robert at any point would have dealt with the issue as far as she knew, most of the realm didn't even care when Stannis revealed it because they had already chosen sides each for their own reasons.

[Ring3r]

Cersie is a psychopath who has been murdering her own friends and destroying the lives of those around her since she was a little girl.

As for "The reason for this is sexism."   That is an extreme oversimplification.  The reason Cersie is villainized for her infidelity is because she's systematically and intentionally ensuring that robert CANNOT have any children, to the point of killing his bastards, while fucking her own brother.  She's intentionally sabotaging succession, and the reason that's considered such a bad thing is it can lead to civil wars...which of course, in this case, it absolutely does.

Robert is a pig, and he always was.  Cersie is a literal monster of a human being.

[Nathan Stark]

7 hours ago, boltons are sick said:

First, let's talk about the sexist double standatds regarding Westerosi marriages which are the reason why Cersei is framed as a villain in the first place even though her actions in the first book are very understandable and I would argue that a lot of people would do them if they were in her place.

We see that Robert constantly cheats on Cersei with countless women and no one bats an eye. Meanwhile, if Cersei sleeps with a man outside of her marriage, it is considered a treason and she woud be executed. The reason for this is sexism and if you support a woman being executed over having an affair outside her marriage (because I have seen a lot of people who think that Cersei should be executed for commiting "treason" against her husband, then you are just supporting the sexist norms of the society because the story is framed from Ned's POV. If Robert is allowed to have multiple affairs without any consequences, then Cersei should also be allowed to have an affair without being labeled a "traitor" for it.

We live in the 21st century where we have multiple cases of men killing their women for having an affair with another man and all those men are then sent to jail because killing a woman over something like that is no longer considered justifiable (except in some Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia, but nobody cares about their opinion). For those reasons, anyone who expresses the opinion that Cersei deserves to be executed for having an affair with Jaime, but have no problem with Robert having affairs with multiple women, should really reevaluate their moral values because the only countries that still hold such values are Saudi Arabia and co while killing women for cheating is no longer considered justifiable in progressive countries.

The other argument is that she tried passing off her own bastards as Robert, but I have to say, so what? If she revealed to anyone that those children are not Robert's, she an her entire family would have been executed, so it's pretty understandable why she wouldn't do it. The female body works differently than the male, so she can't just pretend that those babies coming out of her vagina are not hers like Robert does with his own bastards. Cersei didn't do it to usurp the throne, she did it because she didn't want a man who constantly treated her like shit and raped her on top of that, to impregnate her which is a perfectly reasonable wish, but most fans frame even that decision as some diabolical machination from the "evil" Cersei to enact her schemes.

Plus, do readers from the 21st century really care if a bastard rules the Iron Throne instead of a trueborn son of Robert. Imagine for a moment if Joffrey was actually a good and wise person who would be better suited for the throne than someone like Stannis (not saying he is, just imagine it), would you have a trouble with him ruling just because he is a bastard and not a legitimate heir. Let's not forget that Robert himself also didn't inherit the throne, he usurped it from the Targaryen dynasty and took it for himself, so it's not like he has moral highground over Cersei in that regard either.

Finally, we come to the fact that Robert raped Cersei repeatedly and she is clearly traumatized by the experience and a lot of her negative qualities stem or at least were worsened by the rape she had to endure. This makes me even less inclined to judge Cersei for what she did because when her spouse who is supposed to treat her more nicely constantly rapes her and she can't escape her abusive marriage, if she found any comfort in Jaime, then good for her, I don't judge her for this, at all.

The reason why Cersei killed Robert is justifiable because if she didn't do it, her entire family would have been executed for something that's not even considered a crime nowadays and is only considered a crime in Westerosi society because almost everyone is a sexist prick and the reason why so many fans consider this to be a "crime" is because they themselves absorb some of the Westerosi sexism since it's narrated from Ned's POV or they themselves have some sexist attitudes towards this subject. Also, if somebody rapes a person, I am totally fine with the rape victim killing the rapist.

And about Cersei not taking Ned's offer, seen from her perspective: Ned’s offer was more a threat than a way out. And that’s why it was stupid for him to go to warn her. He said so himself “wherever you go, Robert’s wrath will follow you”. To her, he might as well had said “I’m going to turn you and your family in now, so you better run and hide before that bounty catch up on you. And it will eventually.”. She would have to live on the run, with her children, being in constant danger of being caught or recognised. Shamed and humiliated by name, with hardly any power or protection against the crown/Robert’s men. Her best bet was to get rid of the threats before the damage was done, and claim the power. There wasn’t really another way out in her mind. “In the game of thrones, you win or die. There is no middleground”

Also, in this situation if you look more closely, Cersei was actually the one trying to keep peace in the Seven Kingdoms even if it was ultimately for self-serving purposes. She reminded Ned that if he exposed her secret, the Seven Kingdoms would go to war because Tywin would not be happy with the result. Let's face it, Ned wasn't doing this because of some believe that he was helping the people of the kingdoms by trying to expose Cersei's secret because even he admits that if he does it, the people of the kingdoms would suffer through war. Also, he doesn't believe that Joffrey would be a bad ruler because at this point he doesn't even know him. So, why does he do it? Because his sense of honor wouldn't allow the Seven Kingdoms to be ruled by anyone other than the legitimate heir of the King. That's the whole reason why he is willing to risk a war and that's why I think that the fans who look at the conflict between Ned and Cersei as purely black and white are really wrong about the whole situation and they just look at it that way mostly because it's presented from Ned's POV. There was even a post about "the true villains of ASOIAF" here. While I wouldn't call Ned a "villain" at all, this post does bring up the exact same points I am writing about Ned and how his decision to try and imprison Cersei and her children is not really motivated by feeling that they are a threat to the kingdom and its people but because he just doesn't want the kingdom to be ruled by anyone who is not the legitimate heir to the throne even if in the long run no one will know the difference and he decision indirectly dooms countless innocent people who would die because of the ensuing war. Also, Cersei actually offered him to just return to Winterfell and forget about this, but he still refused and tried to have Cersei and her kids arrested which would have resulted in their eventual executions if Cersei hadn't acted first, but a lot of fans forget about that.

Just to be clear, I am not saying that Cersei is "good" or that she is not a cruel and vindictive person, so you don't have to come up with a list of all the bad things she has done in an attempt to convince me that she is "bad". I am just saying that I don't blame her for her actions during her marriage with Robert and in the first book because she was repeatedly raped and accused of a "crime" that is only considered a crime because of the sexist standards of her society, I can't blame her for fighting against this and trying to protect her family against an unjust execution. I am just saying that a lot of fans would actually see the logic behind that if they didn't constanty frame Cersei as "the villain" and didn't accept everything that was presented from Ned's POV for granted just because he is a likeable character and also a lot of people would understandably oppose the people who are trying to execute their families and that if they use a little critical thinking to analyse the whole situation instead of just accepting everything Ned and Robert do as morally pure because one is the main protagonist of the first book and a likeable character while the other is his friend.

Well, most people wouldn't bang their own brother.

[Craving Peaches]

1 minute ago, Nathan Stark said:

Well, most people wouldn't bang their own brother.

Aside from the ickyness I don't even have a brother to bang.

[Quoth the raven,]

A lot of women would accept Robert's infidelity and just enjoy the ride that comes with being queen.  I don't know the % who would have the fortitude to assassinate a king.  It's taboo.  I think the average girl would pack up the children and run away.  

[Alden Rothack]

2 hours ago, Quoth the raven, said:

A lot of women would accept Robert's infidelity and just enjoy the ride that comes with being queen.  I don't know the % who would have the fortitude to assassinate a king.  It's taboo.  I think the average girl would pack up the children and run away.  

average girls don't get to be queen

queens who are royalty in their own right (Eleanor, Katherine of Aragorn, Anne of Cleves) are a lot more powerful than those who are subjects of the king who have been elevated above the others because he says so, the fates of the above three compared to others are a good example of that

Cersei could have gone home with her children and been safe from Robert, Tywin is a different story however he was always the main onstacle to her fleeing the marriage and even then Tywin would have agreed to it to save Jaime rather than let the truth come out

cersei only needed to murder anyone because she wanted to be queen and have the vicious idiot be king.

[Terrorthatflapsinthenight9]

8 hours ago, Nathan Stark said:

Well, most people wouldn't bang their own brother.

Even less because they love their own reflection in their twin brother.