Cercei's public penitence procession: Did the punishment fit the crime?

[Queen Cersei I]

I feel like you've massively contradicted yourself. It's not okay for Cersei to be raped by her husband, which isn't against the law in Westeros, but it's fine for a septa, a woman of religion, to be raped, for no reason whatsoever?

I've never claimed "that it's fine for a septa" or any other woman to be raped...ever.

I feel like you've massively contradicted yourself. It's not okay for Cersei to be raped by her husband, which isn't against the law in Westeros, but it's fine for a septa, a woman of religion, to be raped, for no reason whatsoever?

I really don't think there is ever "reason" to rape another human being... regardless of whether it "isn't against the law" in a society or not. But that's just me.

Disgusting,

I agree that rape is indeed disgusting. I think the vast majority of sane people do.

Disgusting, another reason I have very little sympathy for the woman.

Something that, from the beginning, I have said to be totally understandable. As I've noted several times now, I understand how, after all she's done, many may not feel inclined to feel sympathy with Cersei on a human level. I have never condemned anyone for that.

How is this challenging the patriarchal society? This is merely putting the line of succession at risk, through high treason.

It is challenging a patriarchal society because it is assumed that a man can treat a woman however he pleases and that she will still be expected to lie back and take it and bear him as many legitimate children as he wants. The system of Westeros is patriarchal and based on male privilege and male inheritance. Cersei threw a wrench in that. That is challenging the patriarchal society. Whether or not this is right or wrong, or should be approved of, is another issue entirely.

And you keep saying 'raped', as if it's a fact, when it clearly isn't, due to all the differing opinions here. Cersei is an UNRELIABLE NARRATOR, I cannot stress that enough.

I assume Cersei is telling the truth about Robert coming into her bedroom at night, holding her down, and forcing her legs apart because this is what she reflects in her own mind. She never tells anyone else, so the idea that Cersei is lying for... whatever reasons... is a little hard to swallow, sorry. As is the idea that she would make up such a graphic, excruciatingly detailed "false rape memory" in the privacy of her own mind. Her actions following the event, her shame and anger surrounding it, and her refusal to confide in anyone about it (even her BFF) all are very realistic reactions to rape or sexual abuse.

As for Cersei being an unreliable narrator, of course that is the case. I think anyone who would claim otherwise would be deeply mistaken. However, GRRM makes it clear when we are not supossed to trust her on something. For instance, her feelings about Margary, her fears about Tyrion, etc. In contrast, her brief thoughts of the rape are presented as utterly authentic.

So you, as a woman, would find it perfectly acceptable to try to pass off another man's children as your husbands?

:lmao:

Yes, you've got me. This is exactly what I've been saying all along. My wish is to bear another man's children and pass them off as my husband's. All the talk of patriarchal societies, male privilege, marital rape-- only so much hyperbole to cover that fact up. You caught me.

Your morals need looking at, I think.

Thanks, I'll look into that one.

[OnionAhaiReborn]

And I would have to disagree. In my eyes, the Dornishwomen are more the products of overheated male sexual fantasy than true female sexual liberation.

For instance, the Viper and Ellaria Sand, portrayed as the titular sexually liberated folks. Clearly, Elaria is supposed to be a strong, confident, sexually liberated woman. Yet when I look at her, all I see is the rather unrealistic, young, gorgeous, exotic temptress willing (nay, eager) to delightfully procure same sex threesomes and "go both ways" to please her man straight out of male fantasy. Honestly, I think most men would find Ellaria more arousing than threatening. And, personally, I can't help but wonder whether most women would (like myself) find her a trifle unrealistic and contrived.

I don't think she is contrived, there are women in the world who are bisexual and enjoy threesomes. Because this is not the case for 'most women' does not make it wrong, and it isn't objectifying women for the text to include a woman who is bisexual. Honestly I think it's a bit close-minded of you to write off bisexual threesomes as an unrealistic male fantasy.

Arrianne is another example. So sexy. A totally self confident woman in full charge of her sexuality, amirite? Well, on second glance, not so much. Frankly, there are a few issues with Arrianne, the first being that the text objectifies the hell out of her. ("No nipples were so large, so brown, or so responsive as hers.") More troublingly, her use of her sexuality to attain her ends is presented as clearly foolish and morally wrong, and leading directly to a mans death and a little girls maiming. It is only after Arrianne’s plans explode viciously in her face and she then fails again (repeatedly and embarrassingly) to escape her imprisonment that she learns that her father has had the plan all along, and he is the wise and mighty patriarch.

GRRM is bad at writing about sex, this is well established. Fat pink masts and Myrish swamps and other such ridiculousness. It's not objectifying a woman to write about her nipples, it's just clunky when it's done so poorly. I thought Arys and Arianne had a nice thing going, and I don't think the text presents her sexuality leading to Arys' death as much as poor planning and his own stupidity.

You're forgetting that one aspect of Arianne's story is that she believes her father is trying to pass-over her claim to Sunspear and give it to her younger brother, which is opposed to Dornish law. So Arianne is not only trying to force equal inheritance rights on all of Westeros for the Iron Throne, but is attempting to guard her own inheritance rights in Dorne.

And sure, the sandsnakes are sexually liberated, but-- their society says its okay. Their father says it's okay. They are unmarried. Not really challenging anything, imo.

So sexual liberation loses its value if no one in your close proximity is telling you it's wrong? Dorne is an open society, more open than the rest of Westeros- and that is the comparison that is being drawn in the text. In any case, I think you're muddling up sexuality and gender because the real issue is that Dorne has equal rights of inheritance for both genders- something that is related to but not the same as Dornish sexual mores.

What makes Cersei so controversial, so threatening and, in these books, so demonized, is that she is going against the assumed rights of her husbands and her entire patriarchal society. The sandsnakes, Ellaria, and the rest of Dorne are simply not doing that. Oberyn is fine with Ellaria having sexual adventures with him. Society and their father say it is okay for the sandsnakes to have sex. No harm, no foul. They are not threatening the patriarchy in any way by doing so. And Arrianne, who goes against her daddy and foolishly (and, for her “victim”, fatally) uses sex to get ahead, learns her lesson, and starts obeying her daddy.

Arianne is being overly suspicious and disregarding the wishes of the ruler of Dorne. She will one day be the ruler of Dorne, because Dornish law provides equal inheritance for women, and she will have the same power to command those under her. The fact that she has a sexual relationship with Arys does not have anything to do with the mistakes Arianne is making, nor does the text suggest that it does.

No, I do not think this changes or mitigates the portrayal of Cersei’s sexuality in any way. Though I hardily agree with you that the Dornish women have more rights, and that it is a far, far better place to be female then the rest of Westeros.

So yes, I’d say that Cersei is the only one to truly threaten the patriarchy. The actions of the sansnakes and dornishwomen neither threaten the patriarchy on the whole nor are disapproved of by their society in general.

Sexual mores are related to but not the same as gender rights. Most of Westeros has gendered standards when it comes to sexuality, what is acceptable for a man to do is not acceptable for a woman. In Dorne this is not the case, and because this is not the case for the Dornish does not lessen the value of the women who are claiming sexual liberation. You're making the claim that the text is guilty of condeming Cersei's sexuality, but it is celebrating the sexual mores of Dorne. So it's not really fair to say that it's meaningless that the women of Dorne are more liberated than the women of the rest of Westeros. Whether there is active struggle is not the point, the point is that the text is celebrating Dornish values over the rest of Westeros.

In the same vein, it isn't fair to say on the one hand claim that the text demonizes Cersei for trying to challenge patriarchy, and then on the other hand say that the kingdom of Westeros that does challenge patriarchy does so without value because it's already accepted law. Some Dornish are even actively trying to change the laws of inheritance for the rest of Westeros, so that ought to be struggle enough for you. But more importantly, it's not fair to claim that the text is demonizing women who want equal inheritance when we have such an obvious example of the text celebrating a society that has equal inheritance rights.

[Fire_Kiss]

Queen Cersie, it seems to me that you're saying that it was okay for your namesake to have Jamie's kids, and not Robert's, simply because Robert was mean to her, raped her, and called her by another woman's name.

I believe what Fire and Blood was tryin to do was put that in another light. How would your husband (if you have one, if not, you're metaphorical husband) feel if all your children were the seed of another man?

I dont see why you think this isn't wrong.

[Queen Cersei I]

Cersei is an admitted murderer and has historically made threats of violence against many of her peers. She sleeps with her brother, aborts her husband's baby, passes off her brother's incestuous sons as Robert's heirs, plots and murders her husband, plots and murders the High Septom, plots for the ruin and possible murder of Margary, and so on. It's hard to see how someone can ignore all of the murder and violence and come to the conclusion that the REAL problem is simply that Cersei challenges the male authority in Westeros. Even in a feminism 101 course, that would be a pretty massive leap.

This has never been my argument, all though I can appreciate that you are bringing in Cersei's actual, legitimate crimes in now to obscure the whole matter.

As I've noted, Cersei is a horrible human being for her assorted acts of murder, torture, and despotism. That was never the issue at stake. (In fact, I'd be mightily comforted if the books-- and posters--actually focused 1/3 as much on the infanticide, murders, and real cruelty rather than who she's shagged and when.)

The issue at stake is whether Cersei was "evil" in her choice to

a. Refuse to sleep with her rapist

b. Refuse to have children for her rapist

c. Bear another man's children after being raped repeatedly by her legitimate husband.

Cersei's assorted acts of murder and torture and cruelty, while horrific, have nothing to do with the issue at hand.

It's hard to see how someone can ignore all of the murder and violence and come to the conclusion that the REAL problem is simply that Cersei challenges the male authority in Westeros. Even in a feminism 101 course, that would be a pretty massive leap.

I never suggested that anyone "ignore all of the murder and violence." Indeed, a major issue with me has always been how people obsess over her sexual deeds over her actual attrocities.

But again, that's not the point here. The point is whether or not Cersei's refusing to bear her rapists children was wrong. And I still do say that yes, in bearing another man's children and usurping his male rights, she struck back at the patriarchy of Westeros.

Even in a feminism 101 course, that would be a pretty massive leap.

I honestly have no idea why you chose to equate feminism with lesser morals in regards to murder, torture, and cruelty. That in itself is fairly disturbing.

\. She sleeps with her brother, aborts her husband's baby, passes off her brother's incestuous sons as Robert's heirs, plots and murders her husband

I think it is funny the first things you note as Cersei's "crimes". You would place her choice to take the exact same sexual privileges her husband takes, her choice to abort a baby conceived during a violent rape, as acts equivalent with the murder and torture of innocent people? Give me a break. Furthermore, Cersei murdered Robert after he had raped and physically abused her for years. And your noting her substituting another man's children for her husband's at the top of the list pretty much goes against the idea that it is Cersei's violence and cruelty, rather than her "unnatural" acts of usurping sexual deviancy and usurping the patriarchy, that is at issue here.

[ChromeWeasel]

The characters in ASOIF aren't unreliable narrator in the usual sense of the term. Sure, they see everything from their PoV, they have their biases, and they might misremember some extraordinary events due to overwhelming emotions related to it (Sansa and Sandor's kiss that never was, for example) but they aren't lying intentionally in their thoughts and none of them (except to a degree Theon at the start of ADWD) is going totally crazy as to imagine repeatedly happening events which actually are there. I see no reason to doubt the veracity of the facts presented in Cersei's PoV in regards to Robert and his regular drunken nightly visits into her bed. She's not trying to justify anything since she didn't kill Robert because of that.

Sure, we don't see Robert's PoV on that, but by that logic, we can't say nobody is really bad in ASOIF except the PoV characters, because maybe Sansa just imagined LF pushing Lysa through the Moon Door and ordering Dontos killed, and Ned had a hallucination due to the milk of the poppy when he was betrayed by LF. Maybe the Tickler was an awesome dude, only Arya imagined him being a torturer.

Two points on that: First is that Cersei doesnt have to be lying in her recollection of sex with Robert for those occasions to not be rape. I consider rape a pretty heinous crime. I'm not using that term for ambiguous activities that seem to be consensual on both sides. Cersei's memories are resentful of Robert, but I don't see her objecting to sex with her husband. Considering how strong willed she is, I'd expect her to make more a point of saying no to him. She doesn't seem to do that. If we take Cersei's recollection as given, I consider it debatable whether what happened can fairly be called rape. Would Robert consider his drunken sex to be rape? Would Cersei? I don't think either one of them would. And it's only fair to say that the whole kingdom of Westeros wouldnt consider that to be rape. Un-fulfilling sex is not the same thing as rape. Having distasteful sex with your partner is not the same thing as rape. That's just too strong an accusation considering everything involved.

On the second point, Cersei's point of view chapters are more questionable than most. Cersei makes several comments that suggest how narcissistic she is. From her point of view a lot of people need to die. Some of those people just got in her way. She's not the kind of character that you can take at her word. That doesn't necessarily change what happened in Cersei's bedroom, but it should make you remember who the narrator was. She's not deserving of being held down and raped. But she's got a very skewed point of view on things, and she consistently feels oppressed by everyone. Considering how skewed her PoV chapters are, I don't see how you could take everything she thinks back on without at least looking at it from a different angle.

[ChromeWeasel]

This has never been my argument, all though I can appreciate that you are bringing in Cersei's actual, legitimate crimes in now to obscure the whole matter.

As I've noted, Cersei is a horrible human being for her assorted acts of murder, torture, and despotism. That was never the issue at stake. (In fact, I'd be mightily comforted if the books-- and posters--actually focused 1/3 as much on the infanticide, murders, and real cruelty rather than who she's shagged and when.)

The issue at stake is whether Cersei was "evil" in her choice to

a. Refuse to sleep with her rapist

b. Refuse to have children for her rapist

c. Bear another man's children after being raped repeatedly by her legitimate husband.

Cersei's assorted acts of murder and torture and cruelty, while horrific, have nothing to do with the issue at hand.

I never suggested that anyone "ignore all of the murder and violence." Indeed, a major issue with me has always been how people obsess over her sexual deeds over her actual attrocities.

But again, that's not the point here. The point is whether or not Cersei's refusing to bear her rapists children was wrong. And I still do say that yes, in bearing another man's children and usurping his male rights, she struck back at the patriarchy of Westeros.

I honestly have no idea why you chose to equate feminism with lesser morals in regards to murder, torture, and cruelty. That in itself is fairly disturbing.

I think it is funny the first things you note as Cersei's "crimes". You would place her choice to take the exact same sexual privileges her husband takes, her choice to abort a baby conceived during a violent rape, as acts equivalent with the murder and torture of innocent people? Give me a break. Furthermore, Cersei murdered Robert after he had raped and physically abused her for years. And your noting her substituting another man's children for her husband's at the top of the list pretty much goes against the idea that it is Cersei's violence and cruelty, rather than her "unnatural" acts of usurping sexual deviancy and usurping the patriarchy, that is at issue here.

There are the issues as they exist in the books, and then there are the issues that exist largely in your own mind. In your mind, Cersei was repeatedly and brutally raped. In the text of the story that's a very debatable point. If you want to be reasonable, you can accept that the word 'rape' is a pretty charged term and see that it's not a fact that Robert was a 'rapist' as you keep insisting.

[Guest]

The Dornish accept that women should be able to hold power and rule. They are also much more open about women's sexuality, and sexuality in general. They are challenging patriarchy at its root when they say that women are equal in matters of inheritance and right to rule, and they are liberal on matters of sexuality. I would call them proto-feminists, if not full-fledged feminists. And I would say that the books portray them in a positive light.

Don't you mean "noble born women can inherit"? Bastardy is still a social division in Dorne, even if the bastards are welcomed into the family (like Jon was). One way patriarchy works is by dividing a woman's children into "illegitimate," and "true born." I'll admit that in Dorne they tend to be less obsessed with shaming bastards or shaming women for having them, but would GRRM keep this social division firmly in place if he meant to make a point that Dorne wasn't a patriarchy?

As for the point about sexuality, I don't see how the assorted mob of women (whom I like to call the "Spice Snakes" because they really are described in "types" rather than "real human qualities") represent openness to women's sexuality, because they're all bastards by one man. Dornish views toward sexuality still seem to favor men, since it gives men more freedom to accept their illegitimate children as family members. If he really wanted to shake things up, GRRM could have turned Oberyn into a matriarch who gets it on with as many men as possible, and claims their children as "hers."

Now, to the big picture here. Cersei is the only POV character who bitches about being female in a man's world and who refuses to let a man determine her destiny. She thinks she'd be able to get away with a lot more stuff if she were a man. Seeing as her ultimate "downfall" was brought about not because she was acting like a murderous man but because she was acting like a "slutty woman," I tend to agree with her. She's still an awful person all around, but I appreciate that she's pointing out the sexual double standards for being an awful person, lol.

Dornish women might think "you know what, this man/daddy/lord thing - overrated," and the structure of Dorne's society is set up to challenge it, but the point is, we're talking about character's reflections on their own situation within patriarchy, i.e. psychology of it. Clearly Martin knows what patriarchy is and he does create a society that rejects it to some degree. But I still think its worth pointing out that the only POV character who comes close to naming patriarchy for what it is, is also unquestionably portrayed as a "raging bitch" who is almost impossible for us readers to defend.

You could toss Arianne in there too, as she tries to ensure her claim to the Dornish throne, but she's portrayed as a terrible schemer whose efforts weren't even useful, since its revealed that her Daddy had a plan for her destiny all along. When she wants to take charge of her own destiny and Dorne's vengeance, she defers to Dad's plans because she was shown that hers were incompetent.

All I'm saying is, it's too bad that the only character that resists and identifies her own second-class status as a woman is hated and despised. Do you guys think Martin despises her too, in the vitriolic way that the fans do? I wonder that sometimes.

[deleted01]

Snipped some for space.

I've never claimed "that it's fine for a septa" or any other woman to be raped...ever.

I really don't think there is ever "reason" to rape another human being... regardless of whether it "isn't against the law" in a society or not. But that's just me.

I agree that rape is indeed disgusting. I think the vast majority of sane people do.

No but you don't seem to condemn Cersei for thinking it. It's like, I can take Tyrion's bad with his good; I admit that he's done some terrible things, things that should probably turn me against him, but as a character he definitely challenges my morals and I can't help but like him, despite everything. But with Cersei, you don't appear to realise that she's not as victimised and demonised as you think. If she was truly a rape victim, she would NEVER wish rape on another woman. This is something I will never understand, and why I despise her as a character. If she had been raped for what, the 15 years she was with Robert? and the experiences were so terrible, painful and awful for her, WHY THE FUCK would she wish that on another woman? She's a twisted, vicious character and I do not fully believe her side of the story.

Also, 'vast majority of sane people'. Interesting, because what we deem as rape in our society, may not be deemed as rape in another society, for example marital rape. I think another culture might deem us insane for thinking that counted as rape, and a crime, but there we go. It's a difference of opinion and society, and you never seem to take that into account. I know you've come up with the argument that some people pick and choose when they apply their modern viewpoints, which is a fair point, but I try to use both for every circumstance. If my husband forced himself on me now, I would call the police on him, because I've grown up in a society where rape is illegal, marital rape is illegal, I have laws to protect me and I have people to go to. But if I were Cersei, I just think it's a different kettle of fish. I'm fine to agree to disagree on it, but please stop making out that everyone who doesn't think the same as you is a joke and a rapist themselves.

I assume Cersei is telling the truth about Robert coming into her bedroom at night, holding her down, and forcing her legs apart because this is what she reflects in her own mind. She never tells anyone else, so the idea that Cersei is lying for... whatever reasons... is a little hard to swallow, sorry. As is the idea that she would make up such a graphic, excruciatingly detailed "false rape memory" in the privacy of her own mind. Her actions following the event, her shame and anger surrounding it, and her refusal to confide in anyone about it (even her BFF) all are very realistic reactions to rape or sexual abuse.

As for Cersei being an unreliable narrator, of course that is the case. I think anyone who would claim otherwise would be deeply mistaken. However, GRRM makes it clear when we are not supossed to trust her on something. For instance, her feelings about Margary, her fears about Tyrion, etc. In contrast, her brief thoughts of the rape are presented as utterly authentic.

Why would you assume that she's being truthful? And anyway, she may well believe that that's what happened, maybe as an excuse for the way she treated Robert. And her BFF? Pray, please tell me who that is, because I didn't realise she had any friends.

:lmao:

Yes, you've got me. This is exactly what I've been saying all along. My wish is to bear another man's children and pass them off as my husband's. All the talk of patriarchal societies, male privilege, marital rape-- only so much hyperbole to cover that fact up. You caught me.

Thanks, I'll look into that one.

What the actual fuck? Sarcastic answers to me are when you have no real answer for what I've said. I didn't even say that, as Fire_Kiss seemed to notice. I'd rather my posts went ignored rather than answered like that. You seem to think that you're right no matter what, so if you utterly refuse to listen to others and their interpretations, more fool you. And the person who liked your post - yeah, nice one. "Scary dude's" back :rolleyes:

[OnionAhaiReborn]

Don't you mean "noble born women can inherit"? Bastardy is still a social division in Dorne, even if the bastards are welcomed into the family (like Jon was). One way patriarchy works is by dividing a woman's children into "illegitimate," and "true born." I'll admit that in Dorne they tend to be less obsessed with shaming bastards or shaming women for having them, but would GRRM keep this social division firmly in place if he meant to make a point that Dorne wasn't a patriarchy?

Bastardy is not a special feature of patriarchy, or a way to divide women's children into illegitimate and true born. It divides both men and women's children into bastard and trueborn. What's unfair is that women are sexually shamed for infidelity and birthing bastards while men are not. But this a gendered sexual value and is not a comment on equal rights of genders.

In any case, I'm glad you brought this point up, because I don't see anyone accusing the text of having an obvious bias against bastards due to the fact that there is so much bastard hating going on and that the only bastard POV we get in the text ends up getting himself stabbed like an idiot. GRRM is writing about a lot of unreasonable social divisions. Why stop at saying that it's unfair that women can't inherit? Or that bastards can't inherit? We could go on to discuss how absolutely unfair it is for there to even be nobility. We could discuss any number of injustices present in the text- and we should! Because the text is asking us to see the injustice.

I strongly disagree when people look at Cersei fucking people in a vacuum, connect that to her stupidity, paranoia, maliciousness, and cruelty and then claim that this is the text demonizing Cersei for her sexuality or GRRM despising her character. ASoIaF is so much bigger than that, and if it's not obvious that GRRM is asking us to look at the injustice of sexual, gender, birth-status, and class inequality, you're just not paying attention.

There's a lot of sex in these books. Some of it is manipulative, some of it is loving, some of it is incest, some of it is between married couples, some if it is infidelity, some of it is just unmarried sex. There are also a lot of women in these books, some of them are kind, some of them are cruel, some of them are intelligent, and some of them are stupid.

Cersei does not occur in a vacuum. With probably a very small number of exceptions, name me a character- male or female, and I can name you something stupid or cruel that they have done. But this does not mean that their stupidity or cruelty is connected to their genitals or what they do with them. Think about the claim that you're making when you say that the text is shaming Cersei for having sex and despising her for challenging patriarchy. And that it does this also in the case of Arianne.This is a very strong claim you are making. You need to back it up with more than just, these women have sex and do stupid things and it doesn't work out well for them. Hello to basically every character in the books!

If you think the text should have included some more female POVs who didn't fall into the warrior-badass mold of Arya/Brienne/Asha, I get that. I think the text over relies on that particular avenue of challenging gender constructions. There are other interesting ways to challenge gender constructions out there that GRRM could be writing about. But if you are claiming that the text is actively opposed to women who have sex and that the text is actively encouraging the reader to despise women who have sex, or that the text is actively opposed to women who want power and actively encourages the reader to despise women who want power, I strongly disagree. If I believed this text was engaged in slut shaming or supporting patriarchal society, I would not be reading it. I would find it despicable. I love it because I think it is trying to make exactly the opposite point.

[Res ipsa loquitur]

She wondered what it would feel like to suckle on those breasts, to lay the Myrish woman on her back and push her legs apart and use her as a man would use her, the way Robert would use her when the drink was in him, and she was unable to bring him off with hand or mouth.

Those had been the worst nights, lying helpless underneath him as he took his pleasure, stinking of wine and grunting like a boar. Usually he rolled off and went to sleep as soon as it was done, and was snoring before his seed could dry upon her thighs.She was always sore afterward, raw between the legs, her breasts painful from the mauling he would give them. The only time he’d ever made her wet was on their wedding night.

This is the "evidence" that is used to show Robert raped Cersei? Im not buying it. This is rough sex, not rape. This is a lousy lay, for sure "the worst nights" but I dont see rape here. She was not sexually aroused, maybe that was why it hurt the next day...but no where in this am I seeing any lack of consent to the sex act.

[lilbufbuf]

IMO, the message in regards to Cersei when comparing her to other women is that strong, intelligent and good women know how to survive in the patriarchy-- Cersei does not. Dany is thrust into nearly the same situation, but deals with it "far better" (by submitting.) Happilly falling in love with her rapist, happilly bearing him children, and unquestioningly submitting to sex whenever he wants it. Compare Dany's self learned pleasure by learning to ride Drogo (who had more or less forced her numerous times, but she feels no resentment for it ????), with Cersei's impotent fury at Robert's "claiming his rights."

More tellingly, compare the almost exact same scenes where Cersei and Dany engage in contrived sexual frolics with their same sex underlings. Dany lies back, assumes the passive role, imagining her late husband whilst being masturbated. She is portrayed as natural and healthy, and is rewarded with a hearty orgasm. Cersei, meanwhile, tries to assume the male role (because, get it, she won't sumbit to a man, and thus must want to have a penis!) and feels only sexual frustration. She is also portrayed as a weird, freaky, unnatural sadist, fantasizing about goring Taena, using her, etc. Sorry, I don't see much true, heartfelt sympathy here-- mostly just contempt, fear, and a smidge of queasy pity at times. And the most disturbing thing is the implication that if Cersei, like Dany, would have only found a way to be a cool woman and enjoy it, then she wouldn't have had to have experienced all her discomfort when her husband claimed his rights with her.

Are you saying that this is how fans interpret Cersei in comparison to other women or this is how the series portrays Cersei in comparison to other women? I don't agree that the series pits these women against each other.

I think the series clearly portrays all the women as survivors in their own unique situations--they deal with their situations as best they can. I don't think it's a cut and dry as "this woman deals with the patriarchy better than this other woman."

I (and many others) read both Cersei and Daenerys as resisting and surviving the patriarchy. Cersei does this by having sex with Jaime, having children with Jaime, and resisting Robert. Daenerys does this by learning how to power from her position of Drogo's queen. Robert was obviously in love and obsessed with Lyanna; he treated Cersei like she was of no consequence. He forced her to have sex, he beat her, he didn't hide his feelings for Lyanna or his cavorting with other women etc. Drogo wasn't Robert, Drogo grew to love Daenerys although in the beginning of their relationship, he took what he wanted from her without consent. In both cases, these women were treated like property; they both suffered marital rape, but the difference is that Robert never changed or treated Cersei with any respect and continued to be cruel to her. From the day she married him, his behaviour was atrocious. She made the choice to resist that because she had the opportunity through her relationship with Jaime. In Daenerys' case, she's largely isolated from everyone, including her brother--she's bought and sold much like a slave and a slave has very little power. Daenerys is nearly a child when she's given to Drogo and she initially submits because she has no choice. She has no power. She has no agency. She doesn't happily submit to Drogo either, she's clearly in pain and clearly resentful of her situation, but she can't do anything because she's being controlled by her brother and she can't communicate with anyone. Drogo's initially nice to her (although later, he ignores her and he treats her like property). She gains strength from adapting to the Dothraki way of life and adapting to sex with Drogo; she lives with her situation because she has no other choice. She eventually learns how to derive power from her situation and how to make Drogo submit to her. The scene where she pulls him outside, lays him down and rides him is a manifestation of the change in the power dynamic between her and Drogo. I don't think she happily fell in love him or happily bore him children. She fought to gain her power and she used her sexual agency to change the dynamic between herself and this man that she had no choice but to marry. The fact that she conceives Rhaego after that night where she makes Drogo submit to her is pretty telling. If Drogo hadn't submitted to her and hadn't fallen in love with her (to the point where she could command him), Daenerys wouldn't be the same person--she definitely wouldn't have loved him back.

The problem with comparing the way these women navigate their situations is that their situations are unique due to many different factors (location, culture, age, position of authority, the relationships with their brothers etc). Daenerys' story has an element of sexual awakening and gaining sexual agency, whereas Cersei had hers much earlier on in life when she and Jaime experimented together.

Daenerys actively changing her dynamic and the way her husband demands sex from her, isn't any less resistant to the patriarchy than Cersei's choice to not enjoy sex with her husband and her choice to have sex with Jaime (and to enjoy it).

Both Daenerys and Cersei's sexual frolics with their underlings are about releasing emotions--not about submission/non-submission. Daenerys' emotion obviously comes from a different place. Daenerys pleasing herself and then having sex with Irri is about her loneliness and pining for her dead husband who she loved. And those emotions were brought on by Jorah's affection for her. She's not expressing anger in her situation; she's sorrowful and she gets a release from that through sex. Cersei on the other hand is angry. She has horrible memories of her relationship with Robert. She's frustrated over her lack of power (and her father wanting to marry her off to someone else). Having sex with Taena is an expression of rage and a release of her anger and her frustration, which is why she doesn't get any release from it. It's not an expression of sorrow or pining for some great love that she lost. In general, I think GRRM doesn't portray sexual desire between these women and their female partners as natural or healthy. There's no emotional attachment and in both situations, it's about both women finding a release for their emotions more than it is about sexual experimentation.

[deleted01]

She wondered what it would feel like to suckle on those breasts, to lay the Myrish woman on her back and push her legs apart and use her as a man would use her, the way Robert would use her when the drink was in him, and she was unable to bring him off with hand or mouth.

Those had been the worst nights, lying helpless underneath him as he took his pleasure, stinking of wine and grunting like a boar. Usually he rolled off and went to sleep as soon as it was done, and was snoring before his seed could dry upon her thighs.She was always sore afterward, raw between the legs, her breasts painful from the mauling he would give them. The only time he’d ever made her wet was on their wedding night.

This is the "evidence" that is used to show Robert raped Cersei? Im not buying it. This is rough sex, not rape. This is a lousy lay, for sure "the worst nights" but I dont see rape here. She was not sexually aroused, maybe that was why it hurt the next day...but no where in this am I seeing any lack of consent to the sex act.

I agree, I don't see it as rape. I know some people do, and that's fine, I can see why people might. But I just don't.

Your name is wicked btw, 'the thing speaks for itself' - most definitely ;)

[The King in the South]

Why is this being debated still?

It's pretty obvious that,

Cersei has commited several heinous crimes, and probably deserves some punishment.

This is not about Cersei being evil, but her being punished for having "sex". Not commiting adultery, just having sex.

There is no way the punishment fits the crime in this case. Unless you want to say that Arianne Martell, Lysa Tully, Asha Greyjoy, Daenarys Targaryen, etc should have been shaved dry, stripped naked, and forced to walk through a jeering crowd, your arguement is flawed.

If you want to argue whether Cersei deserves punishment for her other crimes, then do it somewhere else. That is not what this thread is about.

[lilbufbuf]

I agree, I don't see it as rape. I know some people do, and that's fine, I can see why people might. But I just don't.

Your name is wicked btw, 'the thing speaks for itself' - most definitely ;)

Just because a woman has no choice but to submit, doesn't make it not rape. Both Cersei and Daenerys lacked the agency to say no. Daenerys didn't want sex with Drogo whenever she was sore from riding her horse, but she was afraid to say no, therefore she couldn't say no. Robert would go to Cersei and force himself on her, whether or not she resisted. If you make a woman scared to say no, or if you ignore her cries of pain--whether you believe you have the right to her body--it's still rape. From the point of view of these women, they were unwillingly made to have sex when they didn't want to. From the way they felt in these instances, they were raped. Even if there were no way to clearly define the rape, they were still raped.

[The Sleeper]

Cersei was not brought down because of her acting like a "slutty woman" but because of antagonizing the people with the 70000 troops on short call who made it possible for her to stay on the throne. Patriarchy on the other hand seems hale and healthy to me despite her actions.

I would also like to point out that Asha wondered at the kingsmoot why teats on a King are a bad thing, Catelyn gets annoyed, to say the least, when her actions are dismissed because of her being a woman and Dany is constantly being ironic to anyone by saying "but I am just a young girl". The only thing I can recall Cersei saying in regards to the unfairness of women's fate in her society is regarding Baelor the Blessed's sisters imprisonment because they were beautiful. Apparently her regard for her gender only extends to the pretty ones.

Also Arianne was following her uncle's plan.

Tywin raised Cersei as his perfect little jewel, secluded and unsupervised and then sold her to gain political influnce. Having that character become entitled, arrogant, resentfull and narrowminded is not contrived, it is solid character-building.

[Many and More]

[...]

What the actual fuck? Sarcastic answers to me are when you have no real answer for what I've said. I didn't even say that, as Fire_Kiss seemed to notice. I'd rather my posts went ignored rather than answered like that. You seem to think that you're right no matter what, so if you utterly refuse to listen to others and their interpretations, more fool you. And the person who liked your post - yeah, nice one. "Scary dude's" back :rolleyes:

Yes, I am back, Fire&Blood. And talk about the pot calling the kettle black!

If I have in the past responded to your rudeness and bad behaviour on this board with derision and stomped off, well, sorry, but I'm only human. I can only take so much passive aggressive bullshit. When you deliberately misread and twist other posters' words, and tell them to go examine their morals, and accuse them of disgusting things, and engage in personal attacks, you don't have any ground to stand on, much less the high ground.

Frankly, I am amazed at how long Queen Cersei patiently tried to have a rational discussion with you before she had to simply step back and laugh. The things you were accusing her of were so outrageous and silly and completely divorced from reality that they don't deserve anything but a sarcastic response.

I'm still not sure if you're deliberately trolling people, or if you're actually serious. Maybe the joke's on me, and if so, well done, I fell for it hook, line, and sinker!

[Queen Cersei I]


Cersei was not brought down because of her acting like a "slutty woman" but because of antagonizing the people with the 70000 troops on short call who made it possible for her to stay on the throne. Patriarchy on the other hand seems hale and healthy to me despite her actions.






I never said that Cersei defeated the patriarchy, only that, by her actions, she mounted a very real (albeit covert) threat to it. Nor did I ever claim that Cersei was an advocate for the rights of all women.




I would also like to point out that Asha wondered at the kingsmoot why teats on a King are a bad thing,




Asha says that once, a throwaway comment in the midst of her numerous pages as a POV. Never at any point whatsoever does she resent the appalling sexism of her society. Cersei does constantly, and at some length.




I would also like to point out that Asha wondered at the kingsmoot why teats on a King are a bad thing, Catelyn gets annoyed, to say the least, when her actions are dismissed because of her being a woman and Dany is constantly being ironic to anyone by saying "but I am just a young girl". The only thing I can recall Cersei saying in regards to the unfairness of women's fate in her society is regarding Baelor the Blessed's sisters imprisonment because they were beautiful. Apparently her regard for her gender only extends to the pretty ones.






Incorrect. Throughout AFFC, Cersei is frequently resenting the norms of her society, protesting that she is not allowed to be her father’s heir and inherit Casterly Rock because of her sex, and feeling that people are not taking her seriously/ blocking her way to power because she is a woman. The books portray this as so much silly whining and foolishness on Cersei’s part—if she were a truly clever (Margary, the Queen of Thorns) or strong and able (Brienne, Asha, the Sandsnakes), then Cersei would be able to do just fine in her society. She is portrayed as a petty, spoilt, stupid, and supremely self deluded woman, a vision that you yourself appear to agree with.

But I disagree. And the fact is, that Cersei FREQUENTLY reflects on the unfairness that being a woman in her society holds, and resents not having a right to power and equal inheritance. Meanwhile, the women that you mention generally do not make a peep, which is problematic. Asha, whom you mention, besides making the throwaway comment you note here, never complains once about the appalling treatment and double standards she encounters on the Iron Islands due to her sex. (And it is made clear that her society is 10 times more sexist and misogynistic than Cersei’s.) The good Asha never thinks, “they are mistreating me because I am a woman, and this is totally wrong and unfair,” as the whiny, petulant Cersei does over and over again. At one point the reader even tells Asha, “they straight up won’t follow you because you are a woman,” and Asha still does not resent the sexist norms of her society.

Dany and Cat are no more overtly resentful of the unequal access they have to power and inheritance. Cat may resent it at times when she sees the men making dumb decisions, but this is in no way comparable to Cersei’s frequent resentment that she is banned from equal right to inheritance and personal power because of her sex. Dany never feels this either. It is only when the man in question is crazy and violent that she objects to be beholden to (an sold by) him. When the man in charge is Drogo, she has no huge issue with playing her submissive role. (That is not to say that Dany is not formidably strong and courageous, only that she does not fit the bill as one who complains about the gender norms of her society.) Dany only says, “I am only a young girl,” when she’s playing coy, as Baristan notes. Otherwise, she never resents the way power is given to one gender in her society, or the rights to inheritance.

What makes GRRM’s portrayal of Cersei as spoilt, deluded, and incompetent for resenting the gender norms of her society so troubling is that all of the positively portrayed women do not resent these things. Dany was subjected to some supremely uncomfortable sex with her husband, but she learned to love it, like a good woman. Asha is oppressed by sexism, but she never complains about it. Instead, she stands up and lives her life… like a good woman.

The end result seems to be the implication that Cersei is a bitch for complaining that the norms of her society are oppressive and designed to favor the male gender when… in fact, the norms of her society are oppressive and designed to favor one gender. And no, it is not her other bad behavior that is at stake here. It is the fact that Cersei is being portrayed as whiny, bitchy, self-deluded, and petulant for making some utterly understandable and valid criticisms against her environment.




Apparently her regard for her gender only extends to the pretty ones.






Cersei (unfortunately) has very little regard for her own gender, as has been noted previously by myself and others. This is an enormous defect in character and reason to loathe Cersei. However, I don’t see how that makes her complaints about the unjustness of her society any less legitimate.




Tywin raised Cersei as his perfect little jewel, secluded and unsupervised and then sold her to gain political influnce. Having that character become entitled, arrogant, resentfull and narrowminded is not contrived, it is solid character-building.


I beg to differ. Cersei was a pawn from the beginning. She was used. Despite her privileges, she was basically sold to Robert by her daddy. Following that she did not even have ownership of her own body. Robert could rape her whenever he damn well pleased.

IMO, Cersei is privileged, to an extent, but is very unfortunate in some ways—a bird in a golden gilded cage. The fact that the books (and readers) choose to endlessly dwell on her privileges and discount her very real mistreatment and the injustices of her situation shows bias. This is especially clear when comparing Tyrion vs. Cersei.

When people are insisting (as they frequently do) that Cersei is merely a spoilt woman of privilege who has experienced very little hardship in her life, they are taking into account her material privileges. Meanwhile, though his upbringing was remarkably similar, I have yet to hear that Tyrion led a privileged upbringing in any context. I do frequently hear how horrible his early life was, how he’s been cheated and mistreated.

What surprising is how little difference there is between Tyrion’s supposedly “abusive” childhood and Cersei’s “privileged” one. Both got wonderful material things. Both received wonderful social privileges that few others in the realm could receive. The one difference is that their father treated Tyrion with less kindness than Cersei. Tyrion and Cersei basically had the same upbringing, save for the fact that Tywin looked at Cersei with cold approval, Tyrion with cold disapproval and disgust. In terms of love, though, none of his children appeared to receive much…. The difference between Tyrion and Cersei was that Tyrion was scorned and ignored by his father and sister. I guess the line between “privileged” and “abusive” is really quite fine….

Tyrion is underestimated and held back at times by his physical appearance, Cersei receives the same treatment due to her gender. And whilst Cersei was never cruelly mistreated by Tywin, Tyrioin has far more access to concrete power as a man than she ever does. In addition, Tyrion’s body is his own—he can do whatever he damn well pleases with it, and isn’t socially expected to spread his legs for a person he despises on a regular basis.

There’s also the issue of Casterly Rock—Cersei’s complaint that she should inherit it is displayed as yet more proof of Cersei’s greedy, bitchy, petulant nature. Tyrion’s exact same complain, meanwhile, is treated as fair, just, legitimate, and heartrending.

In the end, the only difference between Cersei and Tyrion is presentation. Tyrion is presented as an abused outsider (though, from a certain perspective, he is the ultimate insider); Cersei as a privileged, sheltered, indulged woman.

[Queen Cersei I]

And the person who liked your post - yeah, nice one. "Scary dude's" back :rolleyes:

Somebody's trolling for liking a post that you disagree with? Good to know...

Honestly, you seem pretty upset, and I apologize if you are offended by sarcasm. I agree that its good to be sincere.

However, I'm honestly not sure how to respond politely to the following: "So you, as a woman, would find it perfectly acceptable to try to pass off another man's children as your husbands? Your morals need looking at, I think."

Arguing about the text or even definitions of rape is one thing. Personal insults are another. Implying that I am plotting to have extramarital sex and bear illegitmate children and then proceed to pass them off as the children of my husband, based on some things I have said in a message board dedicated to a discussion of fantasy books, is ridiculous. And many would argue, offensive, but I am not even going to bother getting offended, because, quite frankly, life's too short.

As for your accusations that I ever implied that it was okay for Cersei to wish rape upon other women, they are simply too ridiculous to be treated seriously, I apologize. Especially because I made it clear in the very same post that I found Cersei's views on women to be appallingly misogynistic.

In the past, you've said that you don't really care if men sleep around, but that you feel disgust for women who engage in the exact same activities. Now honestly, I could venture to form some opinions about you based on this. But I won't. Because its not my place to say what sort of a person you are, based on some opinions that you've voiced on a message board.

Basically, I understand your desire to argue that Robert did not "really" rape Cersei. However, veering away from actual arguments in favor of personal insults is probably out of line, and certainly not conductive to having an interesting, well balanced discussion. I understand that things get heated sometimes and we've all veered towards personal insults. However, my argument that Robert raped Cersei by holding her down forcing her legs openwas indeed rape was not a personal attack against you, however you seem to have taken it.

And while you may be offended by sarcastic responses, that is really the only kind I can provide to comments like the following: ""So you, as a woman, would find it perfectly acceptable to try to pass off another man's children as your husbands? Your morals need looking at, I think."

[Guest]

Bastardy is not a special feature of patriarchy, or a way to divide women's children into illegitimate and true born.

It's a construction of a family, and what makes a noble family at that. When men decide what constitutes a family, we have this:

• A bastard with no father, but claimed by the mother is not a "family."
  
• A bastard with no mother, but claimed by a father is a family.
  

It's a system rigged against women, and the kids, of course. It's decided by the men. The smallfolk don't even play it. Patriarchy lumps women, children, and smallfolk together anyway.

In any case, I'm glad you brought this point up, because I don't see anyone accusing the text of having an obvious bias against bastards due to the fact that there is so much bastard hating going on and that the only bastard POV we get in the text ends up getting himself stabbed like an idiot.

You're putting words in my mouth. I didn't say the text had an "obvious bias" against women, bastards, cripples, whoever. That goes against the motif in the story that "everyone is a bastard" in some way. Since you're exaggerating everything I said, I guess I'll just repeat myself. Cersei is given no redeemable qualities whatsoever, and GRRM doesn't do this with anyone else. Especially not Jon, who has thoughtfulness and empathy in spades. I have no answers and I'm making no firm conclusions, I'm simply wondering...why? It's kind of a fascination, actually. Why does GRRM destroy her as a woman (through her sexuality), and not destroy her as a man (her stupidity at ruling)? Asking this question does not condemn GRRM as a dirty sexist fer christ sake.

GRRM is writing about a lot of unreasonable social divisions. Why stop at saying that it's unfair that women can't inherit? Or that bastards can't inherit? We could go on to discuss how absolutely unfair it is for there to even be nobility. We could discuss any number of injustices present in the text- and we should! Because the text is asking us to see the injustice.

Again, I think you're missing my point. If he's asking us to see the injustice in Cersei's life, he's doing a clumsy job of it. Why are we having a debate about her WoS, rape, and her relationship with Robert, if "injustice" was so easily identifiable in these books? What "lessons" are we learning through Cersei, if they're coming from a woman who orders babies murdered? That women are just as cruel as men, and that women are complicit in their own enslavement? That's really not the insightful treatise against patriarchy that it could be (again, look at Toni Morrison's novels for a better treatment). After AFFC, I saw Cersei as completely ridiculous, a parody of a woman in power. She was actually better off just being a POV whom I could awe from afar without tedious debates about the truthfulness of her POV.

Think about the claim that you're making when you say that the text is shaming Cersei for having sex and despising her for challenging patriarchy.

This was not my claim. I was making a lament, that her arc is going backwards, from audaciously defying patriarchy by choosing her children's father, and saying things like "If I had a cock, none of this would happen" (paraphrased). Then, all of that power is washed away by AFFC and the WoS. GRRM is not shaming Cersei for having sex--that would mean he would be in agreement with the High Septon, which is ridiculous. I'm asking why he's creating a catalyst for a change in her through her sexuality, especially if her best quality, IMO, was her ability to "stick it to the man." This is her enduring strength, before and after the WoS. Why take it from her?

I sincerely hope he builds her back up, this time into someone resembling a woman who is NOT suffering from internalized misogyny. I want her to realize that she has wrongfully feared weakness and femininity her entire life, and that she has confused power with cruelty, masculinity with strength. This is the source of her cruelty - her hatred of the meek. It's the most patriarchal thing about her, and yet she still can't get ahead even if she mimics patriarchy to the letter. At a certain point, I want her to realize that the Game is rigged no matter how much she thinks she can play "better" than the boys. She has to win by not playing with patriarchy's ammunition, and she must destroy the master's house without using the master's tools. This is why she fails.

But if you are claiming that the text is actively opposed to women who have sex and that the text is actively encouraging the reader to despise women who have sex, or that the text is actively opposed to women who want power and actively encourages the reader to despise women who want power, I strongly disagree.

Gods, actively? Really? :rolleyes:

GRRM attempts to make us think about power, sexuality, sex, ect. Most of the time, he succeeds. The other times, it's simply clumsy, clunky, and inconsistent--not mean-spirited or vile.

The text obviously does not allow Cersei to claim victimhood very easily, so I feel like most of our problems in interpretation come from this point. Cersei defenders say that she gets the most scorn and abuse out of any other POV character. The counterpoint is that very few characters have done as many cruel things as Cersei has. Cersei defenders ask, "who is deciding what cruel things Cersei will do, and why?" The counter to this is Cersei, herself, because she loves inflicting pain on others. Cersei defenders then insist, "no, it's author, and for what purpose does he do this???" Counterpoint: "to show how women can be cruel, just like men." Cersei defenders: holy hell, it's not equality of cruelty, because she's written as more cruel than any man in the series!!!

[lilbufbuf]

Dany and Cat are no more overtly resentful of the unequal access they have to power and inheritance. Cat may resent it at times when she sees the men making dumb decisions, but this is in no way comparable to Cersei’s frequent resentment that she is banned from equal right to inheritance and personal power because of her sex. Dany never feels this either. It is only when the man in question is crazy and violent that she objects to be beholden to (an sold by) him. When the man in charge is Drogo, she has no huge issue with playing her submissive role. (That is not to say that Dany is not formidably strong and courageous, only that she does not fit the bill as one who complains about the gender norms of her society.) Dany only says, “I am only a young girl,” when she’s playing coy, as Baristan notes. Otherwise, she never resents the way power is given to one gender in her society, or the rights to inheritance.

Hm, I agree with your point that Dany and Cat aren't necessarily more overtly resentful of the unequal access that they have to power. I think in many ways, all the women frequently express how resentful they are about how they're treated. I disagree however, that Cat only notices it sometimes when she sees men making dumb decisions. I think Cat frequently ruminates on inequalities between sexes--and even when she doesn't consciously do it, her storyline in general (especially in A Clash of Kings) is a commentary on that inequality. The men don't listen to her because she's a woman and a mother. They disregard her suggestions, they excuse her actions in situations where she attempts to negotiate, as something that grieving mothers do as opposed to well-thought out political tactics. I also disagree that Dany never feels resentful regarding the way she's treated because of her sex. I think the reading of Daenerys here is shallow--her resentment of her position in society goes much further back than "I'm just a young girl" (which is so blatantly a tactic, not simply her just playing coy). Dany is resentful of the way men treat her, but she downplays how she feels (in the text) to gain the upper hand. I think if you re-read some some of passages and the way she interacts with the men around her--even if it's not explicit in the text--she despises being seen as weak, powerless, and she resists the implication that she is nothing/was nothing without a man's strength. The way she downplays her power specifically in order to navigate her position is a tactic that she uses, but that doesn't mean that she's okay with taking a submissive role.

When Drogo forcefully takes her, she doesn't let him see her cry because she doesn't want to seem weak--not because she wants to submit. Her thoughts about wanting to die alone is enough to tell you just how much she hated her situation. When Viserys hurts her, she submits because defiance only brings her more pain, but she doesn't want to submit. When she was younger and Viserys would constantly blame her for not being born early enough to marry Rhaegar, she once told him that it was his fault for not being born a girl. Even as a child Daenerys commented on the unfairness of it all (though she was unaware that that's what she was doing)--but what she got in return was more abuse by Viserys' hands. Submissiveness was a defense mechanism, a way of avoiding abuse (Sansa is another character who does the same--tries to appear agreeable in order to avoid being punished for being defiant). After she's married off to Drogo, she quickly takes the position of power in that relationship between herself and Viserys (even before he dies) and she begins to see herself as the one to carry the Targaryen name, not Viserys. At the end of AGOT, when Jorah insists on calling her princess, she basically tells him that she's his queen and she has the power Viserys had, so he should treat her as such.

Her relationship with Jorah in particular is a great example of how much Daenerys dislikes being treated like a young girl and dislikes when her power isn't recognised. Dany's internal monologue and aggressive expression of how she constantly feels in the presence of men is "I'm not a young girl. I've been married. Widowed. Lost a child. Birthed dragons. I'm a mother. I'm a warrior. I'm a queen." Despite all these things, Jorah sees Daenerys as simply a woman that she should possess, not as a queen. Daenerys hates this; she notes that Jorah's all too possessive of her and extremely presumptuous with her. She notes how he doesn't respect her time and time again. When he kisses her, part of the reason why she's angry is because he doesn't ask for her permission and she didn't give him leave to touch her.

When she's first negotiating with slavers (in Astapor, I think), she pretends to be ignorant of the Valyrian tongue and they're insulting her (calling her a whore and other gendered insults etc.) and she's angered by it, but doesn't show her anger because she needs to seem agreeable in order to gain the upper hand. Later, when one of the slavers calls her "woman," she asks him if that was meant to insult her and then she says to him that she'd be insulted if she took him for a man.

I think there are plenty of other instances like this where Daenerys most certainly shows how deeply she resents even having to pretend to be submissive to men who don't wield as much power as she does.