The Incestuous Nature of the Targaryens is What Doomed Them

[Lee-Sensei]

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

If we take that as a given, the Rickard was weak(er) before such marriage alliances and marrying his son to a Tully and his daughter to the Lord of Storm's End increased his prestige. Which is what I'm saying.

The guy didn't need 'alliances'. Nobody did, as it was a united Realm and they were all friends on paper. Not enemies.

You did not such thing.

LOL, sorry, but that is quite despicable. There are stepchildren, adopted children, and in-laws in this world as well as in ours. They are all family even if there is no blood relation there. You have to be warped and twisted to only care about 'blood relations'.

Cersei's children are Robert's because they were born in wedlock and he recognized them as such. Stannis has no right to not treat them as his trueborn nephews and niece as he cannot have any proof in this world that they are not. And Renly is worse as 'not getting along with your sister-in-law' is no justification for wanting to be king.

The Lannisters as a house only defend the rights of King Joffrey and his siblings. Tyrion and Tywin don't know that Cersei's children aren't Robert's, either. And even when they suspecting they never get any proof, either. To them it matters that they are their relations.

That is just complete nonsense. There are families where people go to sperm donor to have children, where people have open marriages and raise children from different fathers or mothers. Not to mention the simple stepchildren thing.

Good and proper uncles would have ignored the rumors about Cersei and Jaime - or would never have come up with weird shit like that (what deranged mind actually imagines that his sister-in-law sleeps with her twin brother?!) - because they would not want to harm or hurt their nephews and niece.

But you and Stannis are obviously not capable of decent behavior.

The biggest mistake Robert ever made was not to respect Cersei as his wife and queen and to repeatedly rape her. Margaery has no moral core at all. She participated in the murder of her husband at their wedding. She is rotten to the core. She is more outwardly nice, more controlled than Cersei ... but that is obviously part of her act.

LOL, the debt to Casterly Rock wouldn't go away just because Robert had or wanted a new queen. How fucked up the treasury was you see simply from the fact that Cersei has to get rid of the debt to the Faith and still can't build new ships and continue to pay the Iron Bank. The notion that she insisted at the same time that the government she was running paid back herself as Lady of Casterly Rock is ridiculous.

1) We'll have to agree to disagree on the alliances vs. prestige debate.

2) I have. I provided the quote. If you don't want to accept it, that's up to you.

3) Cersei herself is their in-law (even though Robert hates her and his brothers hate her). Cersei's bastards aren't his relatives at all. Step-children are kids from previous relationships. It's all out in the open and honest, so there's consent involved. The father or mother consents to raising those kids. Robert didn't consent. Adoption involves consent. By defitintion, Cersei's kids aren't in-laws, because they're not legitimate. He was being defrauded and so were his brothers. I shouldn't have to explain why paternity fraud is deeply immoral. This is common sense.

4) No. Robert accepted them based on the lie that those were his kids. If he knew that they were Jaimes, both of their heads would have been on spikes. Stannis and Renly have no obligation to accept and love Cersei's bastards.

5) Again. These aren't step children. Robert didn't consent to this insanity. And Renly and Stannis shouldn't be expected to give up everything their family has ever had to kids that are no relation to them.

6) Ignored the "rumors". No. Stannis knew and he was 100% correct. His only mistake was not telling Robert, Renly, Ned and Barristan for good measure so they could take action. Stannis and Renly owe them nothing. What's indecent is lying to a guy about the paternity of "his kids" while threatening to murder his actual kids if he brings them around.

7) Nah. Cersei was a monster and she's destroying herself now. Robert's biggest mistake was bringing her in. It would have been better for Westeros if she "fell" down the well instead of Melara Heatherspoon. Then she wouldn't have been able to start this continent destroying war because she's a power hungry monster.

8) If Cersei's treason was revealed, the debt to the Lannisters would have simply been cancelled. Robert isn't going to pay them back after this. If anything, he'd have crushed them militarily and force them to pay reparations.

[Lord Varys]

15 minutes ago, Lee-Sensei said:

3) Cersei herself is their in-law (even though Robert hates her and his brothers hate her). Cersei's bastards aren't his relatives at all. Step-children are kids from previous relationships. It's all out in the open and honest, so there's consent involved. The father or mother consents to raising those kids. Robert didn't consent. Adoption involves consent. By defitintion, Cersei's kids aren't in-laws, because they're not legitimate. He was being defrauded and so were his brothers. I shouldn't have to explain why paternity fraud is deeply immoral. This is common sense.

Seriously, how do you know that Robert didn't know or consented? Or how do Stannis or Ned know for that matter? They don't and can't because neither ever had the guts to tell Robert - which makes them all traitors if we assume Robert didn't know and would have wanted to know.

The reason why Stannis and Ned to a lesser degree are traitors is that they themselves decide who is 'the rightful king' without ever actually consulting their actual monarch, (dying) King Robert.

Also, of course, the notion that a sane person would, you know, just disinherit or murder the mailman's children after the revelation is also a supposition. Stannis and Ned couldn't know that for sure and we have no precedents for such drastic actions. I mean, yes, being betrayed the way Robert was by Cersei and Jaime could raise a lot of anger in a person like Robert ... but the children are innocent of that.

Certainly, Joff is a piece of work but Myrcella and Tommen aren't. Why should any of them suffer for Cersei and Jaime's crimes?

What Robert really wanted on his deathbed was for Ned to rule the Realm, for Ned to do a better job than Robert ever did. But for that he needed a minor heir, a boy king in need of a regent. So if he had learned of the twincest he might have named Tommen his heir so Ned could rule even longer or, more likely, he would have legitimized Edric, named him heir and Ned his regent. The idea that Robert of all people would want Stannis to succeed him is ludicrous. He would have named Renly heir instead of that prick.

15 minutes ago, Lee-Sensei said:

4) No. Robert accepted them based on the lie that those were his kids. If he knew that they were Jaimes, both of their heads would have been on spikes. Stannis and Renly have no obligation to accept and love Cersei's bastards.

Of course they have such an obligation. Because Robert - and only Robert - has a right to declare them bastards. And if he didn't want to believe the story - or if he believed it but didn't want to admit it publicly - then Ned and Jon and Stannis could prattle on all day about 'the truth' ... their heads would end up on spikes if they continued doing that after Robert made a ruling, not Cersei's or Jaime's.

Stannis is either a coward (unlikely) or an asshole driven by repressed ambition (very likely) for not actually talking to Robert about this.

15 minutes ago, Lee-Sensei said:

5) Again. These aren't step children. Robert didn't consent to this insanity. And Renly and Stannis shouldn't be expected to give up everything their family has ever had to kids that are no relation to them.

LOL, they are not stepchildren, yes. They grew up as Robert's trueborn children and should thus be treated as such by the entire royal family, court, and Realm. Emotions and family bonds grew over time, so sane and healthy and nice people wouldn't believe this shit story which can only ruin everything for everyone but would rather close their eyes and keep their mouths shut if they actually suspected anything.

Also because they didn't want to hate their sister-in-law and queen or view their nephews and niece in a different light. Normal and nice people wouldn't have been capable of Renly's and Stannis' treason. Their love and affection for their late brother and his children would have made it impossible for them.

15 minutes ago, Lee-Sensei said:

6) Ignored the "rumors". No. Stannis knew and he was 100% correct. His only mistake was not telling Robert, Renly, Ned and Barristan for good measure so they could take action. Stannis and Renly owe them nothing. What's indecent is lying to a guy about the paternity of "his kids" while threatening to murder his actual kids if he brings them around.

LOL, there is no proof that Stannis ever 'knew' anything. All the books give us is the man's conviction/belief ... but we never learn what caused him to believe this story. And until we do know that the best guess is that Stannis' ambition caused him to either invent this little tale without any evidence whatsoever ... or it brought his twisted mind to believe such a depraved story. Because Stannis acts like a guy who doesn't care to tell the truth to Robert, he just cared using it as pretext/justification to claim the throne. It was very convenient for him to not tell Robert as Robert could have then either decided to not believe his story or he could have named a new heir who wasn't Stannis.

15 minutes ago, Lee-Sensei said:

7) Nah. Cersei was a monster and she's destroying herself now. Robert's biggest mistake was bringing her in. It would have been better for Westeros if she "fell" down the well instead of Melara Heatherspoon. Then she wouldn't have been able to start this continent destroying war because she's a power hungry monster.

LOL, do you think Loras Tyrell wouldn't have become a Kingslayer if drunken Robert had raped his sweet sister? Robert caused Cersei to have Jaime father her children. Because the guy was a filthy rapist. Cersei has her flaws, but it is clear that she and Robert could have gotten along if Robert hadn't been such an asshole. Being queen is actually quite nice, after all.

In fact, in light of how silly and dangerous the twincest-with-children thing is ... it is quite clear that Cersei must have suffered a lot from the drunken asshole to actually contemplate shit like that - much less go through with it three times.

15 minutes ago, Lee-Sensei said:

8) If Cersei's treason was revealed, the debt to the Lannisters would have simply been cancelled. Robert isn't going to pay them back after this. If anything, he'd have crushed them militarily and force them to pay reparations.

That would have been hard to justify. Because Tywin's daughter is a slut, Tywin's debtors now get off the hook? What has one thing to do with the other? Tywin handed Cersei to Robert. He was her lord husband and king. It wasn't Tywin's job to control Robert's wife. That was Robert's job. And if he failed at that it was Robert's fault, not Tywin's.

[Lee-Sensei]

30 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Seriously, how do you know that Robert didn't know or consented? Or how do Stannis or Ned know for that matter? They don't and can't because neither ever had the guts to tell Robert - which makes them all traitors if we assume Robert didn't know and would have wanted to know.

The reason why Stannis and Ned to a lesser degree are traitors is that they themselves decide who is 'the rightful king' without ever actually consulting their actual monarch, (dying) King Robert.

Also, of course, the notion that a sane person would, you know, just disinherit or murder the mailman's children after the revelation is also a supposition. Stannis and Ned couldn't know that for sure and we have no precedents for such drastic actions. I mean, yes, being betrayed the way Robert was by Cersei and Jaime could raise a lot of anger in a person like Robert ... but the children are innocent of that.

Certainly, Joff is a piece of work but Myrcella and Tommen aren't. Why should any of them suffer for Cersei and Jaime's crimes?

What Robert really wanted on his deathbed was for Ned to rule the Realm, for Ned to do a better job than Robert ever did. But for that he needed a minor heir, a boy king in need of a regent. So if he had learned of the twincest he might have named Tommen his heir so Ned could rule even longer or, more likely, he would have legitimized Edric, named him heir and Ned his regent. The idea that Robert of all people would want Stannis to succeed him is ludicrous. He would have named Renly heir instead of that prick.

Of course they have such an obligation. Because Robert - and only Robert - has a right to declare them bastards. And if he didn't want to believe the story - or if he believed it but didn't want to admit it publicly - then Ned and Jon and Stannis could prattle on all day about 'the truth' ... their heads would end up on spikes if they continued doing that after Robert made a ruling, not Cersei's or Jaime's.

Stannis is either a coward (unlikely) or an asshole driven by repressed ambition (very likely) for not actually talking to Robert about this.

LOL, they are not stepchildren, yes. They grew up as Robert's trueborn children and should thus be treated as such by the entire royal family, court, and Realm. Emotions and family bonds grew over time, so sane and healthy and nice people wouldn't believe this shit story which can only ruin everything for everyone but would rather close their eyes and keep their mouths shut if they actually suspected anything.

Also because they didn't want to hate their sister-in-law and queen or view their nephews and niece in a different light. Normal and nice people wouldn't have been capable of Renly's and Stannis' treason. Their love and affection for their late brother and his children would have made it impossible for them.

LOL, there is no proof that Stannis ever 'knew' anything. All the books give us is the man's conviction/belief ... but we never learn what caused him to believe this story. And until we do know that the best guess is that Stannis' ambition caused him to either invent this little tale without any evidence whatsoever ... or it brought his twisted mind to believe such a depraved story. Because Stannis acts like a guy who doesn't care to tell the truth to Robert, he just cared using it as pretext/justification to claim the throne. It was very convenient for him to not tell Robert as Robert could have then either decided to not believe his story or he could have named a new heir who wasn't Stannis.

LOL, do you think Loras Tyrell wouldn't have become a Kingslayer if drunken Robert had raped his sweet sister? Robert caused Cersei to have Jaime father her children. Because the guy was a filthy rapist. Cersei has her flaws, but it is clear that she and Robert could have gotten along if Robert hadn't been such an asshole. Being queen is actually quite nice, after all.

In fact, in light of how silly and dangerous the twincest-with-children thing is ... it is quite clear that Cersei must have suffered a lot from the drunken asshole to actually contemplate shit like that - much less go through with it three times.

That would have been hard to justify. Because Tywin's daughter is a slut, Tywin's debtors now get off the hook? What has one thing to do with the other? Tywin handed Cersei to Robert. He was her lord husband and king. It wasn't Tywin's job to control Robert's wife. That was Robert's job. And if he failed at that it was Robert's fault, not Tywin's.

1) There are a lot of reasons. Firstly, because George says he didn't know. Secondly, because Robert wonders how he could have created Joffrey (if he was Jaime's son, he wouldn't wonder that). Thirdly, because everyone in-universe says he didn't know including Cersei. Fourthly, because that's why she murdered him. So he wouldn't find out.

2) The rightful king was determined by law and tradition. They knew (correctly) that Robert wouldn't want Cersei's bastards sitting on taking his families stuff.

3) Disinherit? Absolutely. Murder the kids? No. It's not their fault. Cersei and Jaime would have brought their deaths on themselves. They knew that what they were doing was punishable by death.

4) I don't think the kids deserved to die (except for maybe Joffrey). But they definitely don't deserve to inherit all of Robert's stuff over his actual relatives.

5) Yes.

Cersei: Robert. I know you hate my guts and I lied to you and cheated on you with my brother, defrauded you, tried to remove you from the gene pool, murder your brothers, your real children and you, but would you let my bastard born of incest inherit over your actual children or you brothers? K. Thanks.

No. Tommmen would not have inherited. And one of the last things Robert would have done was make sure that Cersei was executed. Most likely, Robert would have legitimized Edric or let the throne pass on to Stannis. The first one is a lot more likely though. Ned didn't tell him that because he knew it would hurt Robert. Just like he raised Jon as a bastard, even though Jon has a claim to the throne. Robert also asked Ned to look after his kids and he was promised to make sure that they were taken care of.

6) They don't have to be declared bastards. They just are bastards, because their actual parents were unmarried (twins in fact). There's no evidence that Robert wouldn't believe it. He's seen his father, his brothers, himself, his bastards and Cersei's kids. Ned also has the book of genealogies. Brienne isn't a schemer, but she puts it together quickly enough. If Robert was told, he'd have believed it. Especially if it comes from Ned. Someone that he knows almost never lies.

7) Maybe Stannis is ambitious, but that doesn't change the fact that he doesn't owe Cersei or her kids anything. Except maybe justice for Robert, Ned and the other people that Cersei screwed over.

8) Again. Those aren't Robert's children. If they loved Robert, they'd want to punish Cersei and Jaime for what they did to him. Can you acknowledge that what they did wasn't nice or decent? That it was in fact a monstrous lie and treasonous in their world?

9) Nope. Stannis knew that Cersei's kids were bastards. That's in the books, George has mentioned it outside of the books and it's commonly accepted by the fandom. You want it to be wrong, but it's not.

10) Loras and Renly were already planning on marrying off Margaery to drunken Robert. Although, if he'd survived the hunt, I imagine that he wouldn't want to get married again. He'd probably just legitimize Edric and Margaery might have married him. No. Robert didn't make Cersei commit paternity fraud. That's a choice that she made, because she's a terrible person. And no. Cersei and Robert would have never gotten along, because Cersei's a spiteful, vindictive, monster that hated him for killing Rhaegar in a fair fight. She had sex with Jaime on the morning of her wedding. I actually can't think of a single time that she's done anything genuinely kind for anyone beside from maybe her children.

11) Robert's an asshole and Cersei's a monster. I'll take the asshole.

12) It wouldn't be hard to justify. As Catelyn said, few people would even blame him for killing Cersei's children. Most people would just accept all of this. Tywin Lannister doesn't have a lot of friends. Tywin would likely go to war. Just like he went to war for Tyrion. The child that he hated. Jaime and Cersei would certainly have to be killed. They put him in a position where he had to fight. Tywin's also her parent.

Edited September 16, 2023 by Lee-Sensei

[Craving Peaches]

57 minutes ago, Lee-Sensei said:

Tywin Lannister doesn't have a lot of friends.

In such a scenario I can see everyone ganging up on Tywin. The North and Riverlands would be with Robert due to Ned's friendship and ties with the Tullys, the Stormlands and Dragonstone would obviously be with Robert, if Robert marries Margaery the Reach is there, Dorne jumps at the chance for revenge which is very low risk due to the imbalance of numbers, Iron Islands, assuming Balon isn't that stupid, would seize the chance to raid the West with impunity, and the Vale has to join because Lysa claiming the Lannisters killed Jon Arryn looks strange if she doesn't fight when the scales are weighted so heavily in their favour. This is why I think Tywin got really lucky that Robert died when he did. Otherwise Robert is out for blood and Tywin just broke the King's Peace.

[Lee-Sensei]

9 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

In such a scenario I can see everyone ganging up on Tywin. The North and Riverlands would be with Robert due to Ned's friendship and ties with the Tullys, the Stormlands and Dragonstone would obviously be with Robert, if Robert marries Margaery the Reach is there, Dorne jumps at the chance for revenge which is very low risk due to the imbalance of numbers, Iron Islands, assuming Balon isn't that stupid, would seize the chance to raid the West with impunity, and the Vale has to join because Lysa claiming the Lannisters killed Jon Arryn looks strange if she doesn't fight when the scales are weighted so heavily in their favour. This is why I think Tywin got really lucky that Robert died when he did. Otherwise Robert is out for blood and Tywin just broke the King's Peace.

George definitely put his thumb on the scale. I agree that most of Westeros would jump in. The Martells might be too cautious (or they'd take the chance to get revenge). I still don't think Robert would get remarried. He'd probably legitimize Edric, but the Tyrells want a queen. So they'd join. Lysa could still stay neutral like she did in the Wot5K. But The North, Riverlands, Stormlands, Crownlands and probably the Iron Islands would all attack the Westerlands. If Robert had survived the boar hunt, the Lannisters would have been crushed.

[Alester Florent]

4 hours ago, Lee-Sensei said:

1) There are a lot of reasons. Firstly, because George says he didn't know. Secondly, because Robert wonders how he could have created Joffrey (if he was Jaime's son, he wouldn't wonder that). Thirdly, because everyone in-universe says he didn't know including Cersei. Fourthly, because that's why she murdered him. So he wouldn't find out.

2) The rightful king was determined by law and tradition. They knew (correctly) that Robert wouldn't want Cersei's bastards sitting on taking his families stuff.

3) Disinherit? Absolutely. Murder the kids? No. It's not their fault. Cersei and Jaime would have brought their deaths on themselves. They knew that what they were doing was punishable by death.

4) I don't think the kids deserved to die (except for maybe Joffrey). But they definitely don't deserve to inherit all of Robert's stuff over his actual relatives.

5) Yes.

Cersei: Robert. I know you hate my guts and I lied to you and cheated on you with my brother, defrauded you, tried to remove you from the gene pool, murder your brothers, your real children and you, but would you let my bastard born of incest inherit over your actual children or you brothers? K. Thanks.

No. Tommmen would not have inherited. And one of the last things Robert would have done was make sure that Cersei was executed. Most likely, Robert would have legitimized Edric or let the throne pass on to Stannis. The first one is a lot more likely though. Ned didn't tell him that because he knew it would hurt Robert. Just like he raised Jon as a bastard, even though Jon has a claim to the throne. Robert also asked Ned to look after his kids and he was promised to make sure that they were taken care of.

6) They don't have to be declared bastards. They just are bastards, because their actual parents were unmarried (twins in fact). There's no evidence that Robert wouldn't believe it. He's seen his father, his brothers, himself, his bastards and Cersei's kids. Ned also has the book of genealogies. Brienne isn't a schemer, but she puts it together quickly enough. If Robert was told, he'd have believed it. Especially if it comes from Ned. Someone that he knows almost never lies.

7) Maybe Stannis is ambitious, but that doesn't change the fact that he doesn't owe Cersei or her kids anything. Except maybe justice for Robert, Ned and the other people that Cersei screwed over.

8) Again. Those aren't Robert's children. If they loved Robert, they'd want to punish Cersei and Jaime for what they did to him. Can you acknowledge that what they did wasn't nice or decent? That it was in fact a monstrous lie and treasonous in their world?

This is (collectively) the thing. My niece and nephew are my sister's, so the chances of their being falsely passed off as my relatives are pretty remote, but if I discovered my brother-in-law was cheating on my sister, I would be furious. Much more so, I think, than if I discovered she were cheating on him. I wouldn't be impressed in the latter case, but family does count for a lot. And if I had a brother and learned that his wife was passing off children that she knew were someone else's as his, then that would be an issue. If these were adopted children, it'd be different. And yes, it would be even more of an issue if those kids stood in line to inherit everything that would otherwise come to me. These issues aren't nothing even in 21st century England. In a world where blood and legitimacy (and inheritance!) count a lot more than they do IRL, these are all big deals.

I wouldn't blame the kids themselves, at least not for that. If my nephew were a cruel, cowardly, cat-mutilating bully like Joffrey, I probably wouldn't like him or feel much affection for him, but you can't hold him responsible for his parentage. Then again, I don't have the force of an overbearing religion and moral system at my back telling me the children are abominations who don't deserve to live, as Stannis feels he does. And there is of course always a strong element of realpolitik in these things: if justice is to be done and the succession put to rights, then having kids around who can claim to be Robert's legitimate offspring is setting yourself up for a problem. Thinking in those terms is callous and ruthless, and perhaps alien to us, but it's common (albeit not universal) among powerful people in Westeros, and among those who play the game of thrones, arguably necessarily so.

Is it weird to come up with the idea that your nephews are incest bastards? Well, yes. But there are of course two important factors: firstly, it's entirely possible that Stannis didn't come up with the idea himself and was tipped off by Littlefinger or Varys; secondly, he's completely right. The "oh my god, it's disgusting you can even think that!" defence loses all merit when the accusation being levelled is true.

Let's not delude ourself into thinking that Cersei is an innocent victim here, either. She didn't accidentally birth Jaime's bastards following a moment of weakness. She deliberately did so repeatedly despite having access to effective abortifacients, while aborting her legitimate children by Robert. Any fear she lives under on behalf of her children is entirely self-inflicted. She didn't turn to Jaime out of despair at her abusive marriage with Robert: she was banging Jaime before she got married and never stopped. She considers herself entitled to birth and raise bastards, passing them off as Robert's children, but has no issue with killing Robert's innocent, infant children - at least three still in the cradle - and openly threatening the lives of other children of his, seeing their existence as a personal affront. And in the end, she effectively has Robert killed.

Yes, Robert was abusive towards her and that is bad. It in no way excuses any more than a fraction of the things Cersei does.

 

As to the question of the obligation of Stannis and Renly to get on with Cersei and Joff, I'm inclined to agree that they ought to try. This obviously doesn't come naturally to Stannis. But I have absolutely zero reservations in placing the failure of any such initiative, at least as far as Renly goes, squarely on the shoulders of Cersei and Joff - particularly Cersei, since she's the one who raised, enabled and encouraged Joffrey. Neither of them places any value on anything in others except sycophancy: this is why at the outbreak of a war that their family started, they sack the most experienced military commander at their immediate disposal in order to reward a loyal thug. Neither of them need more bootlickers: they need someone to give them honest counsel and rein them in. And neither of them has any tolerance for anyone who tries to tell them no, with the sole exception of Tywin (Joffrey seems to permit it in Robert, too, on the rare occasions that Robert does, but we don't see enough of that relationship).

Cersei in particular has no tolerance not just for opposition of any kind, but even the potential of opposition. She doesn't understand the concept of "allies", let alone "friends": other than the people she can see as extensions of herself in some capacity (Jaime, her children), she has enemies, and she has enemies who haven't declared themselves yet. This is why she goes after the High Septon, Margaery, Bronn, why she stacks the Small Council with incompetent stooges, and puts ciphers like Osmund Kettleblack on the Kingsguard, why she plans to have Trystane Martell killed. We might in fact agree that the Tyrells had it coming (debatable) but she doesn't actually target them because of anything they've done: rather, because she considers anyone else with power to be a threat. And that's without getting into her natural tendency to be cruel and spiteful for no particularly good reason at all.

She was never going to have any time for people like Stannis and Renly: they're too powerful, and because they represent alternative centres of power to her own, she can see no satisfactory outcome that doesn't result in their destruction. It doesn't matter how much effort either of them made with her: she was always going to consider them enemies to be destroyed. And both of them clearly saw that, and responded appropriately.

Edited September 16, 2023 by Alester Florent

[Lord Varys]

4 hours ago, Lee-Sensei said:

1) There are a lot of reasons. Firstly, because George says he didn't know. Secondly, because Robert wonders how he could have created Joffrey (if he was Jaime's son, he wouldn't wonder that). Thirdly, because everyone in-universe says he didn't know including Cersei. Fourthly, because that's why she murdered him. So he wouldn't find out.

That is all irrelevant. In-universe nobody asking Robert directly can now ... and nobody did know. Robert talking about Joff to Ned could be him putting on an act because he doesn't want to appear a cuckold in public.

4 hours ago, Lee-Sensei said:

2) The rightful king was determined by law and tradition. They knew (correctly) that Robert wouldn't want Cersei's bastards sitting on taking his families stuff.

Robert himself is a bloody usurper, he has no right to the throne he stole, so 'law' and 'tradition' play little to no role in his succession. That is something Renly, Stannis, and Cersei make very clear after the fat asshole is dead.

4 hours ago, Lee-Sensei said:

3) Disinherit? Absolutely. Murder the kids? No. It's not their fault. Cersei and Jaime would have brought their deaths on themselves. They knew that what they were doing was punishable by death.

Actually, Ned fears Robert might kill the children if he found out, so that possibility is clearly on the table. But then - there is no precedent in Westerosi history of a cuckolded king actually murdering his own legal children in cold blood, so Ned's fears might have been more imaginary there ... and clouded by his fears for Jon.

4 hours ago, Lee-Sensei said:

4) I don't think the kids deserved to die (except for maybe Joffrey). But they definitely don't deserve to inherit all of Robert's stuff over his actual relatives.

That depends on Robert's decision, not other people's. He is the king. And they are his legal children. Only he can declare them bastards, nobody else. Which is why Tommen still sits the throne. People don't give shit about Stannis' silly story.

4 hours ago, Lee-Sensei said:

5) Yes.

Cersei: Robert. I know you hate my guts and I lied to you and cheated on you with my brother, defrauded you, tried to remove you from the gene pool, murder your brothers, your real children and you, but would you let my bastard born of incest inherit over your actual children or you brothers? K. Thanks.

LOL, why would you think (1) that Cersei would admit to having intended to 'murder' Robert's brothers here, and (2) where is the actual confirmation that she wanted to do that. She implies she wanted to deal with Stannis and Renly, but that doesn't need to involve murder. She could have just been able to drive them into exile or have Robert take their lordships from them. Then they would have been landless knights which is what they should have been in the first place. They were both ungrateful pricks, after all.

4 hours ago, Lee-Sensei said:

No. Tommmen would not have inherited. And one of the last things Robert would have done was make sure that Cersei was executed. Most likely, Robert would have legitimized Edric or let the throne pass on to Stannis. The first one is a lot more likely though. Ned didn't tell him that because he knew it would hurt Robert. Just like he raised Jon as a bastard, even though Jon has a claim to the throne. Robert also asked Ned to look after his kids and he was promised to make sure that they were taken care of.

But Robert didn't want his stupid bastards being taken care of, he wanted his legal children to succeed to what he thought was their birthright. And he was betrayed there by his 'friend'.

The thing is, though - when Robert is on his deathbed with his entrails hanging out he is done for. He cannot try Cersei nor absent Jaime. And if he were to name a new heir he himself would likely set up a succession war. Robert thinks about his legacy when he is dying, not blood or vengeance. In that sense it is entirely possible that he would command Ned to go with Tommen or even Joffrey.

And even before the drunkard windbag that he was would have never survived the twincest scandal coming out. What self-respecting lord (or man, in general?) would keep with this silly excuse for a king? A guy who allows his wife to cuckold him with her own twin brother, a man of his Kingsguard, no less. If that scandal came out it would destroy the entire dynasty. A man who cannot rule his wife is no man at all in this setting. Nobody would take pity on Robert. They would all laugh at him.

If Robert had been told and if he had believed the story he would have likely madly attacked Jaime and the guy would have murdered him because the fat asshole would have never stood a chance against the Kingslayer in his state. If that behavior could have been somehow averted we would likely look at some kind clandestine arrest and murder of Jaime and Cersei rather than an actual trial. And, yes, perhaps indeed the murders of the children, too, because publicly declaring them bastards would destroy Robert's reputation, so they would have to disappear without anyone knowing the truth.

4 hours ago, Lee-Sensei said:

6) They don't have to be declared bastards. They just are bastards, because their actual parents were unmarried (twins in fact). There's no evidence that Robert wouldn't believe it. He's seen his father, his brothers, himself, his bastards and Cersei's kids. Ned also has the book of genealogies. Brienne isn't a schemer, but she puts it together quickly enough. If Robert was told, he'd have believed it. Especially if it comes from Ned. Someone that he knows almost never lies.

Of course they have to be declared bastards. Bastardy is a legal concept just as marriage is. Those children were born in wedlock so they are Robert's children by default. That is only going to change if Robert himself does change it. Ditto with other such cases. If Benjen Stark claimed Robb and Sansa and Bran and Rickon were Edmure's children it would only matter if Ned believed it and declared them that - and even then it might fail because if the king disagreed with that assessment Ned might be stuck with his children and wife.

4 hours ago, Lee-Sensei said:

7) Maybe Stannis is ambitious, but that doesn't change the fact that he doesn't owe Cersei or her kids anything. Except maybe justice for Robert, Ned and the other people that Cersei screwed over.

LOL, Cersei is Stannis' queen. He owes her allegiance and respect.

4 hours ago, Lee-Sensei said:

8) Again. Those aren't Robert's children. If they loved Robert, they'd want to punish Cersei and Jaime for what they did to him. Can you acknowledge that what they did wasn't nice or decent? That it was in fact a monstrous lie and treasonous in their world?

It depends on why they did it. Sure enough, they didn't have good motives there as far as we know but the act as such could have been done with Robert's agreement and support like it seems to have been when Rhaenyra fucked Harwin Strong rather than Laenor Velaryon or when Queen Rhaenys had some singer impregnate her because the oh-so-mighty Conqueror wasn't capable of producing mighty seed.

4 hours ago, Lee-Sensei said:

9) Nope. Stannis knew that Cersei's kids were bastards. That's in the books, George has mentioned it outside of the books and it's commonly accepted by the fandom. You want it to be wrong, but it's not.

Nope. He never told us what he knows, he just tells us what he suspects and believes. Awfully convenient beliefs for the asshole, right?

4 hours ago, Lee-Sensei said:

10) Loras and Renly were already planning on marrying off Margaery to drunken Robert. Although, if he'd survived the hunt, I imagine that he wouldn't want to get married again. He'd probably just legitimize Edric and Margaery might have married him. No. Robert didn't make Cersei commit paternity fraud. That's a choice that she made, because she's a terrible person. And no. Cersei and Robert would have never gotten along, because Cersei's a spiteful, vindictive, monster that hated him for killing Rhaegar in a fair fight. She had sex with Jaime on the morning of her wedding. I actually can't think of a single time that she's done anything genuinely kind for anyone beside from maybe her children.

Cersei tells us that the drunken asshole fucking her drunk and using the wrong name on her is what decided how she felt about Robert. And that is fine with me. She didn't owe the asshole anything after that. Also not faulting Cersei for fucking Jaime earlier. There are lovers, her marriage was arranged and Robert was sleeping around, too.

4 hours ago, Lee-Sensei said:

11) Robert's an asshole and Cersei's a monster. I'll take the asshole.

Cersei is no monster.

25 minutes ago, Alester Florent said:

This is (collectively) the thing. My niece and nephew are my sister's, so the chances of their being falsely passed off as my relatives are pretty remote, but if I discovered my brother-in-law was cheating on my sister, I would be furious. Much more so, I think, than if I discovered she were cheating on him. I wouldn't be impressed in the latter case, but family does count for a lot. And if I had a brother and learned that his wife was passing off children that she knew were someone else's as his, then that would be an issue. If these were adopted children, it'd be different. And yes, it would be even more of an issue if those kids stood in line to inherit everything that would otherwise come to me. These issues aren't nothing even in 21st century England. In a world where blood and legitimacy (and inheritance!) count a lot more than they do IRL, these are all big deals.

Those are not so big deals in this context as the crucial thing for royals and nobles is that they have children they can hand things to. It doesn't matter so much who fathered them as one view in the history of royal dynasties and the alleged or confirmed affairs of queens shows. Robert had three heirs of his own body, so to speak, so everything is fine there. Handing the throne to your asinine middle brother with ridiculous views on politics or the ambitious baby brother would rock the boat. In the wake of Robert's own usurpation it would set bad precedents, etc. They want to get things back to normal.

25 minutes ago, Alester Florent said:

I wouldn't blame the kids themselves, at least not for that. If my nephew were a cruel, cowardly, cat-mutilating bully like Joffrey, I probably wouldn't like him or feel much affection for him, but you can't hold him responsible for his parentage. Then again, I don't have the force of an overbearing religion and moral system at my back telling me the children are abominations who don't deserve to live, as Stannis feels he does. And there is of course always a strong element of realpolitik in these things: if justice is to be done and the succession put to rights, then having kids around who can claim to be Robert's legitimate offspring is setting yourself up for a problem. Thinking in those terms is callous and ruthless, and perhaps alien to us, but it's common (albeit not universal) among powerful people in Westeros, and among those who play the game of thrones, arguably necessarily so.

The asshole behavior of Stannis is actually believing that Jaime and Cersei are fucking and Robert didn't father any of his children himself. That is a monstrous thing to think and he never gives us a reason why he believes that. If he had seen and heard what Bran did ... okay. But he never says he witnessed something like that. Without it he has nothing. And he knew it, or else he wouldn't have gone through Jon Arryn, meaningless books, and the looks of bastards, never actually daring to talk to Robert himself.

25 minutes ago, Alester Florent said:

Is it weird to come up with the idea that your nephews are incest bastards? Well, yes. But there are of course two important factors: firstly, it's entirely possible that Stannis didn't come up with the idea himself and was tipped off by Littlefinger or Varys; secondly, he's completely right. The "oh my god, it's disgusting you can even think that!" defence loses all merit when the accusation being levelled is true.

No, it doesn't as long as the person in question has no proof. And if Stannis was as stupid as to buy any shit Littlefinger or Varys were telling him then, well, all the worse for him. He is actually pretty smart in certain areas and loathes both men ... so would he actually believe such an outlandish story if it came from them? I don't think so. He also doesn't buy the Patches-Selyse thing that is spread by Littlefinger, right?

25 minutes ago, Alester Florent said:

Let's not delude ourself into thinking that Cersei is an innocent victim here, either. She didn't accidentally birth Jaime's bastards following a moment of weakness. She deliberately did so repeatedly despite having access to effective abortifacients, while aborting her legitimate children by Robert. Any fear she lives under on behalf of her children is entirely self-inflicted. She didn't turn to Jaime out of despair at her abusive marriage with Robert: she was banging Jaime before she got married and never stopped. She considers herself entitled to birth and raise bastards, passing them off as Robert's children, but has no issue with killing Robert's innocent, infant children - at least three still in the cradle - and openly threatening the lives of other children of his, seeing their existence as a personal affront. And in the end, she effectively has Robert killed.

Cersei is not innocent, but I understand why she is doing that. She takes for herself what men take for granted. Sleeping with their lovers as Robert does, too. And she also has any right in the world to not get pregnant by the drunken rapist who calls himself her husband. It is her body, not Robert's. Cersei was under no obligation to stop banging Jaime ... but she may have if Robert hadn't been Robert. Also, to be sure, she could have also banged Jaime while also giving birth to Robert's children. That she didn't was also Robert's fault. No man is actually entitled that his wife gives birth to his children. Women aren't property.

But to be sure - George dropped the ball with the twincest story by failing to actually elaborate in detail so far how and why the twins decided they wanted to have three children together. Why not just one? Who was the leading party there. Did Jaime want children? Did Cersei?

We don't know.

Robert is not murdered by Cersei, he dies in an accident. At best she is guilty of increasing the likelihood that he would have an accident. But helping a hopeless drunkard to get drunk is no crime. Nobody forced Robert to face a wild boar all by himself.

In fact, it is rather silly that Lancel views himself as a kingslayer in his self-pity or that Cersei actually stands accused of this crime.

Cersei only has Barra killed, no other bastards. She tries to get Gendry, too, but that's it. The Casterly Rock story is something that only Littlefinger mentions and Cersei never references or recalls herself. I doubt that this actually happened.

25 minutes ago, Alester Florent said:

Yes, Robert was abusive towards her and that is bad. It in no way excuses any more than a fraction of the things Cersei does.

It is not about excuse. Robert married a proud, entitled woman of the highest birth. And he couldn't satisfy or please her or even treat her kindly. That was a huge mistake. You cannot marry a Lannister of Casterly Rock and expect just because your house is descended from some alleged Targaryen bastard and some backwater kings she will worship you.

25 minutes ago, Alester Florent said:

As to the question of the obligation of Stannis and Renly to get on with Cersei and Joff, I'm inclined to agree that they ought to try. This obviously doesn't come naturally to Stannis. But I have absolutely zero reservations in placing the failure of any such initiative, at least as far as Renly goes, squarely on the shoulders of Cersei and Joff - particularly Cersei, since she's the one who raised, enabled and encouraged Joffrey. Neither of them places any value on anything in others except sycophancy: this is why at the outbreak of a war that their family started, they sack the most experienced military commander at their immediate disposal in order to reward a loyal thug. Neither of them need more bootlickers: they need someone to give them honest counsel and rein them in. And neither of them has any tolerance for anyone who tries to tell them no, with the sole exception of Tywin (Joffrey seems to permit it in Robert, too, on the rare occasions that Robert does, but we don't see enough of that relationship).

There you seem to not get the chronology straight. Renly was a child when Robert took the throne. And Joff is still a child. So when exactly should Joff have tried to befriend Renly? That would have been Renly's job. Then being so far apart in age means they had little in common, would have spend effectively no meaningful time together, meaning the enmity between them (it that is even a real thing) would have been quite recent indeed.

Renly didn't live at court in recent years as Loras' time as squire in Storm's End proves. Yet Renly is already planning to pimp out Margaery to Robert and replace Cersei as queen about 1-2 years after he joined the Small Council as Master of Laws (presumably). That means there must have been a lot of bad blood between him and Cersei ... and that wouldn't just happened because Cersei is evil or something like that.

In fact, nothing indicates Cersei wanted to get rid of Renly because of the twincest thing. It is entirely possible and plausible that Renly loathed Cersei for his own reasons and wanted her gone because he craved more power for himself ... and Cersei realized this in time.

Stannis was next in line after Robert's children, so he was a problem for Cersei in relation to the twincest. Renly not so much.

Also, of course, Renly is still very young so he would have only gained popularity in recent years, most likely following his knighthood and his coming-of-age progress. The idea that Cersei for some reasons loathed Renly the child makes little sense.

25 minutes ago, Alester Florent said:

Cersei in particular has no tolerance not just for opposition of any kind, but even the potential of opposition. She doesn't understand the concept of "allies", let alone "friends": other than the people she can see as extensions of herself in some capacity (Jaime, her children), she has enemies, and she has enemies who haven't declared themselves yet. This is why she goes after the High Septon, Margaery, Bronn, why she stacks the Small Council with incompetent stooges, and puts ciphers like Osmund Kettleblack on the Kingsguard, why she plans to have Trystane Martell killed. We might in fact agree that the Tyrells had it coming (debatable) but she doesn't actually target them because of anything they've done: rather, because she considers anyone else with power to be a threat. And that's without getting into her natural tendency to be cruel and spiteful for no particularly good reason at all.

That is not the Cersei we meet in AGoT and ACoK. It is the Cersei of AFfC who just barely survived a succession war, lost her eldest son and father to her twisted dwarf brother (she believes) and still faces real enemies in every corner.

That woman goes too far at the wrong points but she could have easily hit the right people. And some of them - Margaery, for instance - are deserving what they got for their role in Joff's murder. The bitch isn't innocent.

And while her council decisions sucked ... not putting Tyrells there was a wise decision indeed. Remember: The Tyrells murdered a crowned and anointed king on his own wedding feast when he was marrying their own daughter. They are capable of anything. We have no clue what they are planning next, but it stands to reason that their plans weren't to allow Cersei to continue as Queen Regent until Tommen came of age.

25 minutes ago, Alester Florent said:

She was never going to have any time for people like Stannis and Renly: they're too powerful, and because they represent alternative centres of power to her own, she can see no satisfactory outcome that doesn't result in their destruction. It doesn't matter how much effort either of them made with her: she was always going to consider them enemies to be destroyed. And both of them clearly saw that, and responded appropriately.

That seems to be just speculation. Stannis likely never made any efforts to befriend Cersei, anyway, whereas Renly really has no good reason to loathe Cersei. 

[Lee-Sensei]

23 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

That is all irrelevant. In-universe nobody asking Robert directly can now ... and nobody did know. Robert talking about Joff to Ned could be him putting on an act because he doesn't want to appear a cuckold in public.

Robert himself is a bloody usurper, he has no right to the throne he stole, so 'law' and 'tradition' play little to no role in his succession. That is something Renly, Stannis, and Cersei make very clear after the fat asshole is dead.

Actually, Ned fears Robert might kill the children if he found out, so that possibility is clearly on the table. But then - there is no precedent in Westerosi history of a cuckolded king actually murdering his own legal children in cold blood, so Ned's fears might have been more imaginary there ... and clouded by his fears for Jon.

That depends on Robert's decision, not other people's. He is the king. And they are his legal children. Only he can declare them bastards, nobody else. Which is why Tommen still sits the throne. People don't give shit about Stannis' silly story.

LOL, why would you think (1) that Cersei would admit to having intended to 'murder' Robert's brothers here, and (2) where is the actual confirmation that she wanted to do that. She implies she wanted to deal with Stannis and Renly, but that doesn't need to involve murder. She could have just been able to drive them into exile or have Robert take their lordships from them. Then they would have been landless knights which is what they should have been in the first place. They were both ungrateful pricks, after all.

But Robert didn't want his stupid bastards being taken care of, he wanted his legal children to succeed to what he thought was their birthright. And he was betrayed there by his 'friend'.

The thing is, though - when Robert is on his deathbed with his entrails hanging out he is done for. He cannot try Cersei nor absent Jaime. And if he were to name a new heir he himself would likely set up a succession war. Robert thinks about his legacy when he is dying, not blood or vengeance. In that sense it is entirely possible that he would command Ned to go with Tommen or even Joffrey.

And even before the drunkard windbag that he was would have never survived the twincest scandal coming out. What self-respecting lord (or man, in general?) would keep with this silly excuse for a king? A guy who allows his wife to cuckold him with her own twin brother, a man of his Kingsguard, no less. If that scandal came out it would destroy the entire dynasty. A man who cannot rule his wife is no man at all in this setting. Nobody would take pity on Robert. They would all laugh at him.

If Robert had been told and if he had believed the story he would have likely madly attacked Jaime and the guy would have murdered him because the fat asshole would have never stood a chance against the Kingslayer in his state. If that behavior could have been somehow averted we would likely look at some kind clandestine arrest and murder of Jaime and Cersei rather than an actual trial. And, yes, perhaps indeed the murders of the children, too, because publicly declaring them bastards would destroy Robert's reputation, so they would have to disappear without anyone knowing the truth.

Of course they have to be declared bastards. Bastardy is a legal concept just as marriage is. Those children were born in wedlock so they are Robert's children by default. That is only going to change if Robert himself does change it. Ditto with other such cases. If Benjen Stark claimed Robb and Sansa and Bran and Rickon were Edmure's children it would only matter if Ned believed it and declared them that - and even then it might fail because if the king disagreed with that assessment Ned might be stuck with his children and wife.

LOL, Cersei is Stannis' queen. He owes her allegiance and respect.

It depends on why they did it. Sure enough, they didn't have good motives there as far as we know but the act as such could have been done with Robert's agreement and support like it seems to have been when Rhaenyra fucked Harwin Strong rather than Laenor Velaryon or when Queen Rhaenys had some singer impregnate her because the oh-so-mighty Conqueror wasn't capable of producing mighty seed.

Nope. He never told us what he knows, he just tells us what he suspects and believes. Awfully convenient beliefs for the asshole, right?

Cersei tells us that the drunken asshole fucking her drunk and using the wrong name on her is what decided how she felt about Robert. And that is fine with me. She didn't owe the asshole anything after that. Also not faulting Cersei for fucking Jaime earlier. There are lovers, her marriage was arranged and Robert was sleeping around, too.

Cersei is no monster.

Those are not so big deals in this context as the crucial thing for royals and nobles is that they have children they can hand things to. It doesn't matter so much who fathered them as one view in the history of royal dynasties and the alleged or confirmed affairs of queens shows. Robert had three heirs of his own body, so to speak, so everything is fine there. Handing the throne to your asinine middle brother with ridiculous views on politics or the ambitious baby brother would rock the boat. In the wake of Robert's own usurpation it would set bad precedents, etc. They want to get things back to normal.

The asshole behavior of Stannis is actually believing that Jaime and Cersei are fucking and Robert didn't father any of his children himself. That is a monstrous thing to think and he never gives us a reason why he believes that. If he had seen and heard what Bran did ... okay. But he never says he witnessed something like that. Without it he has nothing. And he knew it, or else he wouldn't have gone through Jon Arryn, meaningless books, and the looks of bastards, never actually daring to talk to Robert himself.

No, it doesn't as long as the person in question has no proof. And if Stannis was as stupid as to buy any shit Littlefinger or Varys were telling him then, well, all the worse for him. He is actually pretty smart in certain areas and loathes both men ... so would he actually believe such an outlandish story if it came from them? I don't think so. He also doesn't buy the Patches-Selyse thing that is spread by Littlefinger, right?

Cersei is not innocent, but I understand why she is doing that. She takes for herself what men take for granted. Sleeping with their lovers as Robert does, too. And she also has any right in the world to not get pregnant by the drunken rapist who calls himself her husband. It is her body, not Robert's. Cersei was under no obligation to stop banging Jaime ... but she may have if Robert hadn't been Robert. Also, to be sure, she could have also banged Jaime while also giving birth to Robert's children. That she didn't was also Robert's fault. No man is actually entitled that his wife gives birth to his children. Women aren't property.

But to be sure - George dropped the ball with the twincest story by failing to actually elaborate in detail so far how and why the twins decided they wanted to have three children together. Why not just one? Who was the leading party there. Did Jaime want children? Did Cersei?

We don't know.

Robert is not murdered by Cersei, he dies in an accident. At best she is guilty of increasing the likelihood that he would have an accident. But helping a hopeless drunkard to get drunk is no crime. Nobody forced Robert to face a wild boar all by himself.

In fact, it is rather silly that Lancel views himself as a kingslayer in his self-pity or that Cersei actually stands accused of this crime.

Cersei only has Barra killed, no other bastards. She tries to get Gendry, too, but that's it. The Casterly Rock story is something that only Littlefinger mentions and Cersei never references or recalls herself. I doubt that this actually happened.

It is not about excuse. Robert married a proud, entitled woman of the highest birth. And he couldn't satisfy or please her or even treat her kindly. That was a huge mistake. You cannot marry a Lannister of Casterly Rock and expect just because your house is descended from some alleged Targaryen bastard and some backwater kings she will worship you.

There you seem to not get the chronology straight. Renly was a child when Robert took the throne. And Joff is still a child. So when exactly should Joff have tried to befriend Renly? That would have been Renly's job. Then being so far apart in age means they had little in common, would have spend effectively no meaningful time together, meaning the enmity between them (it that is even a real thing) would have been quite recent indeed.

Renly didn't live at court in recent years as Loras' time as squire in Storm's End proves. Yet Renly is already planning to pimp out Margaery to Robert and replace Cersei as queen about 1-2 years after he joined the Small Council as Master of Laws (presumably). That means there must have been a lot of bad blood between him and Cersei ... and that wouldn't just happened because Cersei is evil or something like that.

In fact, nothing indicates Cersei wanted to get rid of Renly because of the twincest thing. It is entirely possible and plausible that Renly loathed Cersei for his own reasons and wanted her gone because he craved more power for himself ... and Cersei realized this in time.

Stannis was next in line after Robert's children, so he was a problem for Cersei in relation to the twincest. Renly not so much.

Also, of course, Renly is still very young so he would have only gained popularity in recent years, most likely following his knighthood and his coming-of-age progress. The idea that Cersei for some reasons loathed Renly the child makes little sense.

That is not the Cersei we meet in AGoT and ACoK. It is the Cersei of AFfC who just barely survived a succession war, lost her eldest son and father to her twisted dwarf brother (she believes) and still faces real enemies in every corner.

That woman goes too far at the wrong points but she could have easily hit the right people. And some of them - Margaery, for instance - are deserving what they got for their role in Joff's murder. The bitch isn't innocent.

And while her council decisions sucked ... not putting Tyrells there was a wise decision indeed. Remember: The Tyrells murdered a crowned and anointed king on his own wedding feast when he was marrying their own daughter. They are capable of anything. We have no clue what they are planning next, but it stands to reason that their plans weren't to allow Cersei to continue as Queen Regent until Tommen came of age.

That seems to be just speculation. Stannis likely never made any efforts to befriend Cersei, anyway, whereas Renly really has no good reason to loathe Cersei. 

1) No. Robert didn't know and there's no reason to believe that he supported Cersei removing him from the gene pool so she could rob his family. This is absurd.

2) Robert won by right of conquest in a war that was started against him, Ned and Jon Arryn without just cause. There's no right of deception, which is why Cersei lies about her children's paternity. Read the books.

3) Ned's not representative of everyone. That's his personal standard. Catelyn says that few people would blame him if he did.

4) Because it's useful to ignore it, but they are bastards and they'll all die. Just like in the tv show.

5) Yes. St. Cersei never meant them any harm. Robert was never going to take their Lordships from them either. She wanted them dead, just like Robert and his bastards.

6) We don't know what Robert meant. All we know is that he wanted his children taken care of, because we don't have Robert's POV. Most likely he meant all of them. Although if he'd known the truth, Joffrey, Tommen and Myrcella would be out.

7) Pure delusion. If Robert knew that Cersei's kids were her bastards, there's not a chance in hell that he'd want them sitting on the throne after him. Especially that little monster Joffrey. He'd name Edric his heir or let the throne pass on to Stannis. Probably Edric though. And there would be no trial for Cersei. She'd just be killed.

8) Some might laugh. Others would probably just be disgusted with the Lannisters like Catelyn was. But nothing would be worse then letting Cersei's bastards inherit his throne. He'd never have let that happen as George has already stated.

9) Killing Jaime and Cersei wouldn't be murder. It would be executing criminals.

10) Nope. They're bastards. It's as simple as that. Their parents were unmarried (twins in fact), so they're bastards. That's the point.

11) Not really. He's the kings brother and she's trying to rob them blind. He owes her nothing except a punishment for her crimes.

12) "It doesn't matter who fathered them." It actually does, which is why Cersei was so desperate to keep it secret. If you have a cuckold fetish, that's your business. But don't project that on to others. Most people aren't okay with paternity fraud and it's quite clear that the Baratheons weren't. Nor should they be.

13) No. Robert didn't want Cersei to get pregnant with her brothers kids and he was quite capable of producing kids of his own. At least one of them was killed by Cersei in the womb. Again, if you have a cuckold fetish that's your business. But it's clear from the text and what George has said outside of the books that Robert never consented to this.

14) Nope. Stannis knows and he's far from the only one at this point.

15) Yup. Everyone owes Cersei something, but she doesn't owe anyone anything.

16) Cersei is one of the biggest monsters in the series. She's by far the worst of the Lannisters with maybe only Tywin as he close competitor.

[Craving Peaches]

Westeros does not work like modern legal systems, there is no 'innocent until proven guilty'. If Robert, the king, says the kids aren't his, they legally aren't his. And people would jump at the idea because they hate the Lannisters.

Edited September 16, 2023 by Craving Peaches

[Odej]

It's really necessary to argue why someone who:

Used her baby brother as scapegoat when she heard a tale she didn't like;

Killed a child when she herserf was a child and stay close enough to hear Melara cry for help;

Murdered babies;

Gave Falyse as a guinea pig to Qyburn;

Forges a whole story to torture Margaery's singer;

Thinks septans pray to be raped;

(And the list goes on)

Is a monster?

Edited September 16, 2023 by Odej

[SaffronLady]

I have never thought a Targ thread could be derailed, but here we are. Apparently the Targ stans don't come here.

[Lord Varys]

13 hours ago, Lee-Sensei said:

1) No. Robert didn't know and there's no reason to believe that he supported Cersei removing him from the gene pool so she could rob his family. This is absurd.

As long as we don't know Robert's mind we can't know. Also, Cersei and Jaime can't know, either. I mean, fucking Robert was a stupid moron, of course, but if his wife were to pop out three children while he, Robert, never so much as touched Cersei much less put his cock in her cunny he would, well, have doubts about those 'fatherless children', right?

So in fact Jaime and Cersei can only strongly believe that Jaime is the father of the children but they cannot know. Some sex must have happened between Robert and Cersei around the time Cersei got pregnant with her children, or else the entire deception wouldn't have worked.

Cersei tells the story about finishing off Robert in other ways, etc. and him being too drunk to recall later. But that doesn't sound like young Robert shortly after the Rebellion, it sounds like fat drunkard Robert at the end of his life.

13 hours ago, Lee-Sensei said:

2) Robert won by right of conquest in a war that was started against him, Ned and Jon Arryn without just cause. There's no right of deception, which is why Cersei lies about her children's paternity. Read the books.

Robert is just a successful usurper, nothing more. And of course Cersei has every right to deceive and fool her rapist.

13 hours ago, Lee-Sensei said:

4) Because it's useful to ignore it, but they are bastards and they'll all die. Just like in the tv show.

LOL, they are not bastards. Bastards are born out of wedlock. Children born in wedlock are the children of the husband by default even if he is not the biological father. And please don't use those insulting terminology from the books. Those children are innocent children.

13 hours ago, Lee-Sensei said:

5) Yes. St. Cersei never meant them any harm. Robert was never going to take their Lordships from them either. She wanted them dead, just like Robert and his bastards.

LOL, you don't know that. Cersei is not stupid enough to think she can get away with murdering the entire royal family with impunity especially since she never actually murdered anyone at that point aside from, perhaps, the bitch lusting after Jaime in her childhood.

Also Cersei merely targeted the bastards she knew Stannis, Jon, and Ned visited - which may have been cruel but not stupid from her POV. She was never on a crusade to kill all of Robert's bastards.

13 hours ago, Lee-Sensei said:

6) We don't know what Robert meant. All we know is that he wanted his children taken care of, because we don't have Robert's POV. Most likely he meant all of them. Although if he'd known the truth, Joffrey, Tommen and Myrcella would be out.

LOL, Robert didn't give shit about his bastards aside from, perhaps, Mya Stone.

13 hours ago, Lee-Sensei said:

7) Pure delusion. If Robert knew that Cersei's kids were her bastards, there's not a chance in hell that he'd want them sitting on the throne after him. Especially that little monster Joffrey. He'd name Edric his heir or let the throne pass on to Stannis. Probably Edric though. And there would be no trial for Cersei. She'd just be killed.

Well, that would then be murder.

13 hours ago, Lee-Sensei said:

8) Some might laugh. Others would probably just be disgusted with the Lannisters like Catelyn was. But nothing would be worse then letting Cersei's bastards inherit his throne. He'd never have let that happen as George has already stated.

George himself doesn't know as he never wrote about that. And to be sure - I never said folks would be Lannister fans after this. But also not fans of the fat drunkard cuckold.

13 hours ago, Lee-Sensei said:

9) Killing Jaime and Cersei wouldn't be murder. It would be executing criminals.

Nope, without trials it would be murder.

13 hours ago, Lee-Sensei said:

10) Nope. They're bastards. It's as simple as that. Their parents were unmarried (twins in fact), so they're bastards. That's the point.

LOL, no. Bastardy isn't a fact of the world, it is a legal concept. And it is used strictly for men fathering children on unmarried women. If the woman is married then the child in question isn't a bastard but the child of the husband ... even if he didn't father it. That is actually still the law in most countries.

13 hours ago, Lee-Sensei said:

12) "It doesn't matter who fathered them." It actually does, which is why Cersei was so desperate to keep it secret. If you have a cuckold fetish, that's your business. But don't project that on to others. Most people aren't okay with paternity fraud and it's quite clear that the Baratheons weren't. Nor should they be.

Stannis was fine with it, apparently, as he never told his dear brother. And again: Since we don't know why fucking Stannis believed this story we have no idea what his basis for the story was. Obviously Stannis is as bad as Renly in his power grab. He could have been wrong there. Yet he still tried to usurp the throne. He is an asshole.

13 hours ago, Lee-Sensei said:

13) No. Robert didn't want Cersei to get pregnant with her brothers kids and he was quite capable of producing kids of his own. At least one of them was killed by Cersei in the womb. Again, if you have a cuckold fetish that's your business. But it's clear from the text and what George has said outside of the books that Robert never consented to this.

I didn't say Robert was okay with it. But he could have refused to believe the story. Which is what Stannis and Jon apparently feared. Even if he believed it he could have decided to accept it after the fact rather than lose face in public.

13 hours ago, Lee-Sensei said:

14) Nope. Stannis knows and he's far from the only one at this point.

Nobody but the people who were told by Jaime and Cersei 'know'. Stannis doesn't. He just believes it. And nobody else 'knows'. They treat it as a silly story that has no bearing on the real world.

And as I said even Jaime and Cersei only believe it. They can't really know unless it was confirmed that no Robert semen ever entered Cersei's cunny around the time she got pregnant.

13 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

Westeros does not work like modern legal systems, there is no 'innocent until proven guilty'. If Robert, the king, says the kids aren't his, they legally aren't his. And people would jump at the idea because they hate the Lannisters.

They would also laugh at a king who actually did something like that.

I mean, seriously, nobody ever pulled shit like that. Aegon IV could have done it, but he had some crony accuse Queen Naerys of adultery and staged a trial, he didn't declare his heir a bastard born of adultery despite the fact that he could have.

It might be okay if something like that happens the way it did with Alys Harroway, i.e. shortly after the birth of a child. But if we talk about Robert suddenly discovering after thirteen years and three children that his wife cuckolded him with her own twin brother he would look like an utter fool.

It would destroy his reign and reputation. And 'the Lannisters' aren't guilty there. Only Jaime and Cersei. Tywin, Tyrion, Kevan, etc. have nothing to do with any of that.

And it is quite clear that Robert is very unlikely to have ever believed this monstrous story. It would destroy him completely to do so. If he believed that, he could not possibly look at himself in the mirror ever again because he would no longer be a man.

[Odej]

23 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

That is all irrelevant. In-universe nobody asking Robert directly can now ... and nobody did know. Robert talking about Joff to Ned could be him putting on an act because he doesn't want to appear a cuckold in public.

I've been following the discussion and I really need to talk about this.

How can be irrelevant the writer's words about his own character? Martin gives many information about asoiaf universe in interviews and on his blog, not only in the books. And since we don't have Robert's POV (same case to many other characters) this is a good way to get his feelings about things that weren't shown in the books, whatever was the reason for Martin didn't do it.

Aren't these informations canon to you because they aren't in the books even though the owner of the story had said it?

Edited September 17, 2023 by Odej

[Lee-Sensei]

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

As long as we don't know Robert's mind we can't know. Also, Cersei and Jaime can't know, either. I mean, fucking Robert was a stupid moron, of course, but if his wife were to pop out three children while he, Robert, never so much as touched Cersei much less put his cock in her cunny he would, well, have doubts about those 'fatherless children', right?

So in fact Jaime and Cersei can only strongly believe that Jaime is the father of the children but they cannot know. Some sex must have happened between Robert and Cersei around the time Cersei got pregnant with her children, or else the entire deception wouldn't have worked.

Cersei tells the story about finishing off Robert in other ways, etc. and him being too drunk to recall later. But that doesn't sound like young Robert shortly after the Rebellion, it sounds like fat drunkard Robert at the end of his life.

Robert is just a successful usurper, nothing more. And of course Cersei has every right to deceive and fool her rapist.

LOL, they are not bastards. Bastards are born out of wedlock. Children born in wedlock are the children of the husband by default even if he is not the biological father. And please don't use those insulting terminology from the books. Those children are innocent children.

LOL, you don't know that. Cersei is not stupid enough to think she can get away with murdering the entire royal family with impunity especially since she never actually murdered anyone at that point aside from, perhaps, the bitch lusting after Jaime in her childhood.

Also Cersei merely targeted the bastards she knew Stannis, Jon, and Ned visited - which may have been cruel but not stupid from her POV. She was never on a crusade to kill all of Robert's bastards.

LOL, Robert didn't give shit about his bastards aside from, perhaps, Mya Stone.

Well, that would then be murder.

George himself doesn't know as he never wrote about that. And to be sure - I never said folks would be Lannister fans after this. But also not fans of the fat drunkard cuckold.

Nope, without trials it would be murder.

LOL, no. Bastardy isn't a fact of the world, it is a legal concept. And it is used strictly for men fathering children on unmarried women. If the woman is married then the child in question isn't a bastard but the child of the husband ... even if he didn't father it. That is actually still the law in most countries.

Stannis was fine with it, apparently, as he never told his dear brother. And again: Since we don't know why fucking Stannis believed this story we have no idea what his basis for the story was. Obviously Stannis is as bad as Renly in his power grab. He could have been wrong there. Yet he still tried to usurp the throne. He is an asshole.

I didn't say Robert was okay with it. But he could have refused to believe the story. Which is what Stannis and Jon apparently feared. Even if he believed it he could have decided to accept it after the fact rather than lose face in public.

Nobody but the people who were told by Jaime and Cersei 'know'. Stannis doesn't. He just believes it. And nobody else 'knows'. They treat it as a silly story that has no bearing on the real world.

And as I said even Jaime and Cersei only believe it. They can't really know unless it was confirmed that no Robert semen ever entered Cersei's cunny around the time she got pregnant.

They would also laugh at a king who actually did something like that.

I mean, seriously, nobody ever pulled shit like that. Aegon IV could have done it, but he had some crony accuse Queen Naerys of adultery and staged a trial, he didn't declare his heir a bastard born of adultery despite the fact that he could have.

It might be okay if something like that happens the way it did with Alys Harroway, i.e. shortly after the birth of a child. But if we talk about Robert suddenly discovering after thirteen years and three children that his wife cuckolded him with her own twin brother he would look like an utter fool.

It would destroy his reign and reputation. And 'the Lannisters' aren't guilty there. Only Jaime and Cersei. Tywin, Tyrion, Kevan, etc. have nothing to do with any of that.

And it is quite clear that Robert is very unlikely to have ever believed this monstrous story. It would destroy him completely to do so. If he believed that, he could not possibly look at himself in the mirror ever again because he would no longer be a man.

1) You're boring and you just don't know what you're talking about. No. Robert didn't know and agree to Cersei having Jaime's kids. You're just objectively wrong about this. You're objectively wrong about a lot of things. As I said before, if you're a cuckold, that's your business. Stop projecting your fetish.

2) No. Cersei isn't morally right to defraud him. I thought you said he knew anyways? You're all over the place.

3) No. Again. These kids are bastards as Stannis said. They weren't born in wedlock, because they weren't born to two married people. Try to follow along.

4) I don't know. Cersei's pretty stupid, which is why her rule was so short. She had Robert killed and then said that she meant to deal with his brothers first. She obviously meant to have them killed too. You just have very poor reading comprehension skills. Also, Melara Heatherspoon was a "bitch" that deserved to die for lusting after Jaime? Cersei's bastards are innocent kids though (agreed in the case of Tommen and Myrcella). Even Joffrey.

5) There's no evidence of that. All we know is that Robert was "dutiful" towards his brothers, "loved" his children and asked Ned to make sure that they were taken care of. I'm not saying he was the greatest father. Of course, Cersei was a terrible mother that helped turn Joffrey into a monster and would have ruined Tommen too. Both of her last kids will die by the time this series is over. Just like in the TV Show and a lot of that is her fault.

6) No. The Lannisters are already hated. It would just be seen as another example of their madness, degeneracy and evil as Catelyn pointed out.

7) Nope. He doesn't need a trial. He can just kill them.

8) Try to follow along. But there's a difference between legal recognition and bastardy. Even if two unmarried parents have a child and get married later, that child is considered a bastard.

9) Nope. Stannis wasn't fine with it as George has stated himself inside and outside of the books.

10) If you're not saying that Robert was fine with it, then stop trying to argue that it was possible that he was okay with it. He wasn't. Let's move on. And no. Robert wouldn't have accepted it after the fact. He'd have killed them. Nothing would be worse than knowing and letting them get away with it.

11) No. They know. And people don't consider it a siilly story. They know, but some of them find it convenient to ignore it. Whch is why both Olenna and Margaery take shots at the Lannisiters for it. Even Brienne's figured it out. Once the secret was out, it's easy enough to come to the correct conclusion.

12) You'd know a lot about cuckolding and humiliation. Wouldn't you? There'd be embarrassment there as you'd know, but the proper course of action would be to kill Cersei and Jaime (in their world) as Victarion did. And the fact that Cersei and Jaime were twins, would say a lot more about them than it would about Robert as a man.

[Daeron the Daring]

On 9/16/2023 at 12:27 AM, Lee-Sensei said:

Cersei's kids aren't his relatives

They are to him. If you fail to realise this much, maybe you should resort to fan fictions.

[Lee-Sensei]

25 minutes ago, Daeron the Daring said:

They are to him. If you fail to realise this much, maybe you should resort to fan fictions.

That's my line, buddy. Cersei's kids are Jaime's children. They aren't related to Renly or Stannis and they don't owe them anything.

[Daeron the Daring]

12 minutes ago, Lee-Sensei said:

They aren't related to Renly

Okay, I will go that low.

That's not the important part. The important part is if Renly rebelled/plotted in mind with the tought that he inevitably has to step over the dead bodies of 3 bastards or the bodies of his niece and two nephews. (Both are insanely bad)

You wanna bet which one was it? 

Quote

That's my line, buddy.

Buddies share lines.

Edited September 17, 2023 by Daeron the Daring

[Lee-Sensei]

1 hour ago, Daeron the Daring said:

Okay, I will go that low.

That's not the important part. The important part is if Renly rebelled/plotted in mind with the tought that he inevitably has to step over the dead bodies of 3 bastards or the bodies of his niece and two nephews. (Both are insanely bad)

You wanna bet which one was it? 

Buddies share lines.

They aren't his nephews or his niece. He owes them nothing. You guys have this strange idea that the Baratheons should just accept Cersei's treasonous paternity fraud. It's very odd. The last one was funny though.

Edited September 17, 2023 by Lee-Sensei

[Daeron the Daring]

1 hour ago, Lee-Sensei said:

They aren't his nephews or his niece. He owes them nothing. You guys have this strange idea that the Baratheons should just accept Cersei's treasonous paternity fraud. It's very odd.

You're playing a dirty game.

[Lee-Sensei]

32 minutes ago, Daeron the Daring said:

You're playing a dirty game.

How? By think that paternity fraud is deeply immoral and that the family that's being defrauded don't have to just accept it? Renly owed them nothing. Neither did Stannis.

Edited September 18, 2023 by Lee-Sensei