#mikastormborn

[fromtheseventhhell]

IDK if it's exactly what you wanted but your recent post about Mirri came "in time" for what I've seen.

Here are some screeshots of tags from this post

To me it seems like they try to critique the writing but as always, tend to blame the character. Plus, they sprinkle some lies (that Dany forced Mirri to save Drogo, that she refuses to engage with history), they project onto GRRM (that he wants to critique violent intervetionism with her), they ignore his statement about the "white saviour" accusations (which fair, you may not find them satisfying but still, take his intentions into account), they take away acountability of what the slavers did (bc THEY turned Slaver's Bay into a "hole of death" and was that long before Dany arrived) and not saying why "she allowed slavery to continue", which is a convenient way to frame her as immoral because after the masters of Yunkai attacked Astapor, and because "gently born" people, anticipating the struggle in Meereen, ask her to let them sell themselves back into slavery :

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

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

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

"I see." Perhaps it was not so shocking, if these tales of Astapor were true. Dany thought a moment. "Any man who wishes to sell himself into slavery may do so. Or woman." She raised a hand. "But they may not sell their children, nor a man his wife." (ASOS, Daenerys VI)

I mean, she does this because she wants to respect their choice and she makes sure no one is forced to be enslaved. I don't think she should have allowed it but I understand why. It was not out of mallice. (here is a meta about how she is not a slaver X , X )

Plus the tendency to blame Daenerys fans for pointing out how the situation with Mirri was grey, that Mirri indeed killed Rhaego, but they can defend Mirri and acuse us, Dany stans, of being racists and whatnot.

Ironically my post was about conversations on Twitter (I know) where people were demonizing Dany and I found out this post was actually what started it all, so my post was unintentionally a response to this one. I'm gonna talk a little bit about this conversation and the overall conversations about racism in this fandom but I don't mean it as a direct reply to OP's post. The only thing I have to say specific to their post is that it does stand out to me that they acknowledge the issue with Mirri's writing, which is that it's part of a trend with how characters of color are written, but they fail to actually talk about said characters. Their main point isn't even about how Mirri is handled, it's on the subject of Dany's whiteness.

The thing about discussing racism in asoiaf is that it's a more complex and nuanced conversation than a majority of people are willing to have. Often times it just gets devolved into justifications for disliking a specific character and this was the same attitude people had towards the show. If there's racism in the writing, then that's a factor that affects how the entire series is written, it doesn't just reflect poorly on a single character. People definitely act like that's the case though.

On the subject of Mirri and her treatment, it's rare that people discuss her character without using her as a means of bashing Dany. The screenshots you provided highlight this. We're supposed to believe that Mirri's actions towards Dany are justified and that Dany's actions towards Mirri are racist solely on the basis that Mirri is a WOC, but it's not that simple (Also note that it's always "Mirri was right to do what she did" but they never talk about what specifically she did, which was force the abortion of a 14-year-old bridal slave. Somehow saying exactly what happened doesn't make her as sympathetic). What makes the writing racist isn't the situation itself, it's the idea of characters of color being disposable in service of white characters' arcs. But this situation is often talked about as an isolated event, in a vacuum. The logic applied just doesn't work. If race is such an important factor, why was Mirri right to kill a child of color over a prophecy she was ultimately wrong about? There are plenty of racist connotations in the "brute" narrative surrounding POC, specifically men of color, but people eagerly justify his death because of the hypothetical harm he could've caused. They also completely ignore that the prophecy wasn't about him, so the justification is that a child of color can be murdered if people assume they'll cause harm. There were also the others in Drogo's Khalasar that Dany couldn't help because of her situation. Eroeh suffered a horrible fate before her ultimate death, but Dany would've conceivably been able to help her if she hadn't been incapacitated. So does the fact that Mirri's actions harmed other POC, and not just a white woman, factor in at all? Or are we not supposed to care about them because they are, however positively, associated with Dany?

That also leads to the question of what exactly would be the right way of handling this situation. Dany's whiteness is the biggest criticism but her being a woc would come with its own racist connotations. Dany's life of poverty and being sold as a slave would've had other implications when contrasted to the other primarily white, high-born female characters. So what would've been a better way of handling the Dothraki and other people of color in this series? Whether Dany is white or not, the problem isn't solved. Somehow that's never a conversation being had, despite the number of people who supposedly care so much. It also seems as though Dany's suffering, and only Dany's suffering, is considered justifiable through her whiteness. If Dany had been the one to die instead, it still would've been a child bridal slave being killed. How is that the "better" option for people supposedly concerned with racism and misogyny? With almost any other female character their suffering is never justified regardless of who is causing it.

There is just...a different set of standards people have for Dany than they have for any other character. Someone brought up the point that Robb's part in the war caused incredible violence to the smallfolk, yet he is considered one of the noblest characters in the series. We see firsthand the devastation the Northerners are responsible for through Arya's POV, and many women and children specifically are harmed. We hear about countless women being raped and killed from the fallout of Robb's actions but somehow that's not Robb's responsibility. On top of that, there are plenty of smallfolk who have actively anti-North mindsets. Robb, who isn't trying to bring about systemic change or actively focused on fighting for the smallfolk, isn't responsible for the damage he causes them. Dany, who is trying to overthrow a violent system built on subjugating people, is the most evil character in the series because she interacts with characters of color more than anyone else. But then...people seem uninterested in discussing privileges and harm caused when it isn't related to bashing Dany. It's damn near taboo to refer to certain characters as classist, even when that's how they're written.

If you want to discuss racism in the series and fandom though, let's do it! Let's talk about the depiction of the Dothraki vs. The (white) Wildings and the difference in nuance and empathy they get, let's talk about how the current generation of Starks benefit from colonization and the eradication of the children of the forest (who are very much indigenous-coded) and how that's not framed as a bad thing, let's talk about women of color who are already being enslaved before Dany was sold to the Dothraki, let's talk about Alayaya + the senseless violence she faces and how her pain is used to give Tyrion angst, let's talk about the various background women of color portrayed as sex workers and how that could play into the jezebel trope, let's talk about lack of prominent characters of color outside of Dany's pov, let's talk about how D&D wrote a former Black slave dying in chains, how they portrayed the slaves exclusively as people of color despite slavery not being based on race in the books, let's talk about how they played into the Dothraki's racist writing and portrayed Dany's people as "scary foreign invaders" that the North looked down on, let's talk about how everyone justified the Northerners (and Sansa specifically) being scared even though Dany came to help, let's talk about how people in the fandom were laughing at Missandei's death and saying she deserved to die for being "rude" to a white woman, let's talk about fandom's habit of portraying Jon and Arya (considered the uglier, feral starks) as dark-skinned in comparison to their "white" siblings, let's talk about how the hotd writers made characters Black and then diminished their roles and importance, let's talk about how routinely characters of color are ignored and turned into props by fandom, LET'S TALK ABOUT IT! But no, the only capacity people are interested in talking about racism is when they can use it to bash Dany.

TL;DR/summation: There's nothing wrong with having good-faith conversations about racism in the series or disliking a character because of it. The issue is that that's rarely what happens. Instead of having constructive conversations about race, the pain of characters of color gets turned into props and given no nuance outside of that.

[horizon-verizon]

So, I can bet you my soul that if tomorrow GRRM released a live interview where he confirmed that Daenerys is indeed the prince who was promised, it is her, her alone, there is no mistake, it has always been the case, and there is no question of having the slightest chance of changing it. In the hour that follows, Reddit, Tumblr and all others will overflow with posts to explain to us why in fact Azor Ahai is a Satanist figure who comes to destroy the world, and that believing otherwise is only propaganda from fanatics worshiping R’hllor. Daenerys isn’t the chosen one but if she is then that’s somehow Bad and Wrong.

I don't have anything to argue with, bc this is exactly how it'd go down. Peach-headed, ass backward sexists would try it, esp since a section of them try to argue Dany couldn't be Azor Ahai bc the orig narrative poses a women's body and willful sacrifice as the material needed for a male hero's rise and is "inherently" sexist.

Meanwhile, as mikastormborn says in their tags for the OP of this thread, Jon has been posed as Azor Ahai, and no one ever accused Azor Ahai's narrative then of being a sexist narrative....sounded like they merely wished to create their own leverage over Dany-the-character and those who argue for her being Azor Ahai by making her insisted "goodness" hinge on her not having anything to do with deep Essosi lore and the fate of the world in a similar way that many people who argue Rhaena of Pentos becomes "less interesting" or just "good" if she uses/refers to/is linked back to something perceived as or really non-Westerosi:

She’s...allowed to wield “respectable” forms of power—like her intelligence, ability to navigate political relationships, or role in scheming. But the moment she taps into the Targaryen legacy, like bonding with a dragon, people seem to lose interest in her character or condemn her, as if that somehow reduces her to being like any other Targaryen with a dragon...Why should Rhaena have to distance herself from such a core part of her Targaryen identity to be seen as complex?

Why should Daenerys be distanced from a very important prophecy closely linked to her ancestors (Old Valyria was also Essosi), their dragons, supported by the text's fire vs ice symbolism, etc.? Why must she be de-powered and "humbled" so much for her to be considered a positive force in this world, but Jon's preemptively granted the grace of being believed as a positive force before being empowered through his using her death? When he has no proximity to any Essosi myth nor culture other than being Rhaegar's son, which is less than nothing (hyperbole,l not expressive of how compared to Dany and her Essosi life and experience/proximity to active magic & dragons, Jon has no support for being Azor Ahai)? That's non-withstanding how Dany dragon dreams Rhaegar as her, how he/Aerys/Viserys/Drogon/Rhaego all had to die for her to get where she currently is.

[simply-ellas-stuff]

I. Have. Maxed!!!

@kalina-e @allierosch @noellez-best-life23 @mikastormborn @in-it-for-the-bants @alyseofwonderland @whatdidwejustdo @foolishhitt @owlgetyouhooked and @foreverfalling21 made up the most of my boops and I thank you 🤣🤣🤣🩵🩵🩵

[the computer version is the one with omg/lol and all the cool cat messages when yoh hit the digicat, btws]

[daenerysstormreborn]

@mikastormborn I have not called Dany’s heroism in books as they’ve been written so far into question. I was purely talking about her hypothetical future in the story. I found it so hard to believe that D&D made it up entirely BECAUSE it seemed like such a huge change of her character to me and then the bit in the outline seemed to reinforce that. I have since been informed that D&D took credit for the idea of Jon killing Dany, which I hadn’t known. How are people not reading this post and seeing a Dany fan who wants her to remain a hero and is looking for arguments to support that position in the face of what seemed like counter evidence?

I expect that a war to win back the throne would be devastating because of how devastating the wars for the throne have already been. The wars being fought in Westeros have already proven to be extraordinarily destructive. The War of Five Kings has already caused mass suffering. Why would it be different for another claimant?

I believe Daenerys would be a good ruler, although, as I said in the original post, it’s hard to make that call for someone so young. But as someone else pointed out, GRRM himself said she’d be a good ruler. I think she has the best claim because I think the tradition of male only inheritance is stupid and sexist. But I still don’t want her to sit on the throne because the IT has historically brought misery to whoever sits upon it. I want Dany to be happy. I want her to feel like she has a home. I don’t think claiming the throne would bring her that happiness because the thrones makes people miserable. I have not yet finished ADWD but so far? Dany doesn’t seem to enjoy the reality of ruling. So far, Dany is happy when she feels loved and can act as a liberator. The reality of being queen would, for the most part, likely not provide that.

Also: I do call Tyrion’s heroism into question because of how he treats women, so even if I’d called Dany’s heroism in the books into question, she still wouldn’t be the only one.

[nobodysuspectsthebutterfly]

#in the original story azor ahai's wife willingly gave her life so her husband could become the hero #it's something we've seen many times in stories: the woman dies so the man can be the hero #(it's not a feminist story but that does not make azor ahai a villain) #but daenerys mercy kills drogo #she is not doing it to become a hero but because it's cruel to let him live a vegetative life (and rhaego was an unintentional sacrifice) #and unlike the typical story here the man dies so the woman can be the hero #also re azor ahai being a villain because he killed his wife to forge lightbringer (the sword that saved humanity): #i saw people theorizing that jon will kill dany to forge lightbringer like azor ahai did with nissa nissa (the same story being told again) #yet no one says that this would make jon a villain #unsurprisingly the “azor ahai is a villain” comes only when daenerys is considered being azor ahai (via @mikastormborn)

From time to time, I see some people argue that Dany can't be Azor Ahai because Azor Ahai was a man who killed his wife and such a character can't be considered a hero. So Dany couldn't be Azor Ahai because she is a hero and because such a feminist character like Dany can't be associated with Azor Ahai.

I agree that Dany is a hero, and I agree that Azor Ahai killing his wife is not the most feminist story. But I disagree with the idea that this means Dany isn't Azor Ahai, because literally all the foreshadowing points to her, she fulfills every aspect of the prophecy. Just because we as readers might think there's a moral dissonance in Dany being Azor Ahai, doesn't mean that she isn't. Whether we as readers might not like her being Azor Ahai, whether we think it's not feminist for Dany to be Azor Ahai, it doesn't change the fact that GRRM wrote all the clues pointing to her.

Also, while some people may argue that it's not feminist for Dany to be Azor Ahai because the original Azor Ahai killed his wife, other people might argue that Dany being Azor Ahai is a feminist subversion, because everybody expects the prophesied hero to be a man.

[la-pheacienne]

Well thanks a lot @mikastormborn for the quotes because I was kind of bored to do this but it is important.

Mirri never killed Rhaego. She explicitly told everyone to stay out of the tent and Jorah, idiot that he is, disobeyed. Dany knows this and chose to give her the most excruciating death anyway. (Which is still wrong even if Mirri planned this.)

Jorah wasn't there when Mirri said that, which you would know if you had read the chapter, which you didn't. It was a tragic coincidence, one that Mirri specifically wished for since the beginning in order to take revenge. She wanted Drogo and his child gone, she explicitly stated that in the end ("The stallion who mounts the world will burn no cities now. His khalasar shall trampleno nations into dust") and she pursposefuly withheld crucial information from Dany in order to mislead her. Dany was the only person who actually cared for that woman and this is how she payed her back. Understandable, but Dany's fury is also understandable. I am sorry that you are too biased to see that. This is a story that is filled with violence and apparently it's not your cup of tea, I would advise you to find something more light-hearted to read.

This has been a good occasion for me to re-read Dany's chapters there and can I just say that these are some of the best written, most heart-breaking moments in this series. Dany seeing herself through Rhaegar's helmet, if I look back I'm lost, the red door, the entire dream/nightmare sequence basically.

[aboveallarescuer]

it's not even true that barristan does not want to tell the truth to daenerys (as this fandom so believes) but to tell someone (a child) how awful her father was it has to be handled with tact and that's what barristan does: he is tactful i think people just want barristan bluntly spew all out in front of daenerys and to disregard her feelings they just want daenerys to feel miserable and daenerys already expects to hear A LOT of bad stuff about her father no person asks if there is some good to be told about their father if they did not expect the worst to hear (tags by @mikastormborn)

When people argue that Barristan should have bluntly told Daenerys that she is a child of rape, are they genuinely motivated by Barristan making amends to Dany, or are they motivated by wanting Dany to spiral into darkness and hate herself and her family, to pave way for their theory that she should die to let the Targaryen name die?

I ask this because the biggest proponents of this line of argument, or other criticisms of Barristan (who yes, deserves his critiques, no doubt about it), don't apply this logic consistently.

Who will tell the Starklings that their grandfather, Hoster Tully, forced their aunt Lysa to abort a child and marry a pedophile who raped her, at the age of 16? Who will tell the Starklings that their father, Ned Stark, was best friends with a serial rapist and abuser, Robert Baratheon? That Ned Stark's mentor, Jon Arryn, was the pedophile their aunt Lysa married? Particularly because "Barristan served Robert, how dare he try to serve Dany" is one of the criticisms being levied at him––so should not the Starklings know that their father went south and signed their destruction warrant by serving such a man?

You see, if it's about "Dany has to confront the legacy of her horrible family," and "Dany should know that she was only conceived through rape and only exists in this world because her father raped her mother," then shouldn't the Starklings confront the direct role their family has played in aiding and abetting abusive, sexually violent, and predatory men?

Perhaps the logic is that unlike Dany, the Starklings have enough distance from the crimes of their father and grandfather. Or their father and grandfather shouldn't be held accountable to begin with. Theon comes to mind here, as someone who lived alongside the Starks during his formative years. Will those Starklings confront the reality that Ned Stark held him as a hostage, and would have killed him if Balon Greyjoy made the wrong move? Is that something the fandom consistently wants to see, as much as it bays to see Dany react to the knowledge that she was conceived through rape? Will this change how Bran feels about Theon's conquest of Winterfell and betrayal of the Starks?

Should Asha and Theon learn that Victarion murdered his wife to please Euron? That Euron likely raped Aeron? Is this something the fandom yearns to witness, for the Greyjoys to "confront their legacy?"

The only person who has to "confront her legacy" is Dany––the orphan with no family by her side––and this is fashioned through criticisms of Barristan with a fake concern for Dany. Absolutely, he should tell her the truth. Or someone should. But how should that truth be told? And what effect do you want it to have on Dany? Do you want her to know the truth so that she can be a better ruler, or do you want her to know the truth so that she can hate herself, and willingly be a corpse that the rest of the characters step on to see the dawn of a new day?

The proponents of this argument also believe that Rhaegar raped and abducted Lyanna. Who will bluntly tell Jon that he is a product of rape, if you believe that Rhaegar raped Lyanna? Should Jon confront his Targaryen legacy, or is he distant enough from it to not have to die to lay the Targaryen name to rest? Does anyone want to see his emotional state, or do they just skip to "Jon will reject his father and embrace the Starks?"

I'd much rather see Tyrion tell Dany the truth. Tyrion, who was born to a terrible father, like Dany. Tyrion, left to suffer under his elder sister's hands, like Dany was left to suffer under her elder brother's hands. Tyrion, who knows exactly what it's like to strive to embody your identity, all while knowing your family did not want you. Tyrion, whose mother died in childbirth, like Dany's. Tyrion, who is the embodiment of his father and his house, despite being hated by his father and family. Tyrion, who clashes with his family's values and goals. Tyrion, who remains proud of his Lannister identity in spite of it all. The very specific subjectivity of knowing that your father is a rapist, a horrible person, a tyrant, and knowing that you carry his name, is very specifically shared between Dany and Tyrion.

But I want Tyrion to be the one to tell Dany the truth about Aerys because I want to see mistrust evolve into shared understanding and empathy between them. I want it to be a moment of catharsis for them both, of relating to someone who is probably the only one in the world who knows the exact thing you're going through. The rest of you, however, want it to be Barristan, or Jaime, because if we're being honest, you want Dany to hate herself and spiral even more afterward, paving the way for "Dany dies to make the Targaryen name die" endgame.

[laurellerual]

@mikastormborn

Sansa stan threads on Westeros.org be like:

[rainhadaenerys]

#so these people are basically saying that the best way to know a character with its own pov is through other povs which is just asinine#the biggest advantage that a pov offers to the reader is that you really get to know said character#an author can't hide the true nature of a character when he offers you a front seat in said character's mind#so idk why people keep insisting that we don't know “the true” daenerys#not matter if we see her through a gazillion of povs or none WE DO KNOW HER#because being in her head and reading her thoughts and knowing how she really feels#understanding why she feels the way she feels and what moves her#is the best way of truly knowing her#all that this argument tells me is that the people who came up with it and/or use it are#a) people who don't know how povs work (bc they seem to believe that you can't truly know a character with its own pov)#and b) people who know that dany is written as a hero and a sympathetic character but they don't like that#so they keep making up reasons why she is not actually the way grrm wrote her (tags by @mikastormborn)

About that idea that it’s supposedly ominous that we only see Dany through her own POV… I’m like… why is it so ominous or alarming? Dany’s most controversial actions (killing Mirri, crucifying the slavers and allowing torture for information) are all shown on page, and the fandom discusses them to no end. The lack of an outsider POV doesn’t stop the fandom from discussing them. So what exactly would an outsider POV add? Which of Dany’s actions specifically do people think would make us see Dany differently if we had another POV on her? Which of her actions do people think that Dany is describing in a biased way, so much that it would completely change how we view her character?

I don’t think there’s anything that is so biased with Dany’s POV to that point. On the contrary, seeing her from someone else’s POV could lead to biased information about her. As an example, during Daznak’s Pit, we know that it wasn’t Dany’s fault that Drogon started to burn people, but if we only saw this event through someone else’s POV, we could think that Dany was the one that ordered Drogon to burn everyone. So having someone else’s POV on this could make us see Dany as worse, but that doesn’t mean it would be correct: it would be biased, we need her POV here to actually know the full story and understand that it wasn’t her fault.

So back to my question, what exactly do people think it’s so biased in Dany’s POV? People keep talking about this supposed “POV trap”, this idea that seeing Dany through her own POV makes us not see how bad she actually is, but I’ve never seen any specific examples, only vague suggestions that seeing her through her POV means she must be worse than she looks. But I truly can’t think of anything that would make us see Dany as a villain. As I mentioned, the lack of other POVs on her doesn’t stop the fandom from discussing Dany’s controversial moments, and those controversial moments are not enough for me to see Dany as a villain. So what else there is? Nothing, really. This POV argument just seems to be a vague argument from people who don’t really know Dany’s character all that much.

[rainhadaenerys]

#in the original story azor ahai's wife willingly gave her life so her husband could become the hero#it's something we've seen many times in stories : the woman dies so the man can be the hero#(it's not a feminist story but that does not make azor ahai a villain)#but daenerys mercy kills drogo#she is not doing it to become a hero but because it's cruel to let him live a vegetative life (and rhaego was an unintentional sacrifice)#and unlike the typical story here the man dies so the woman can be the hero#also re azor ahai being a villain because he killed his wife to forge lightbringer (the sword that saved humanity) :#i saw people theorizing that jon will kill dany to forge lightbringer like azor ahai did with nissa nissa (the same story being told again)#yet no one says that this would make jon a villain#unsurprisingly the “azor ahai is a villain” comes only when daenerys is considered being azor ahai (tags by @mikastormborn)

From time to time, I see some people argue that Dany can't be Azor Ahai because Azor Ahai was a man who killed his wife and such a character can't be considered a hero. So Dany couldn't be Azor Ahai because she is a hero and because such a feminist character like Dany can't be associated with Azor Ahai.

I agree that Dany is a hero, and I agree that Azor Ahai killing his wife is not the most feminist story. But I disagree with the idea that this means Dany isn't Azor Ahai, because literally all the foreshadowing points to her, she fulfills every aspect of the prophecy. Just because we as readers might think there's a moral dissonance in Dany being Azor Ahai, doesn't mean that she isn't. Whether we as readers might not like her being Azor Ahai, whether we think it's not feminist for Dany to be Azor Ahai, it doesn't change the fact that GRRM wrote all the clues pointing to her.

Also, while some people may argue that it's not feminist for Dany to be Azor Ahai because the original Azor Ahai killed his wife, other people might argue that Dany being Azor Ahai is a feminist subversion, because everybody expects the prophesied hero to be a man.

[daenerysstormreborn]

@mikastormborn gotcha gotcha, I do think it’s sad but given the influence of the show I try not to blame them too much. I’m sure many people are like me and have trouble believing that such a dramatic change could’ve been made up by D&D. When I watched the last few episodes of the show, it felt surreal. Like the bad, non-canon ending to a video game. It felt very much like “how could they have possibly come up with this? how did they think this was a good idea?” when the author had previously trusted them so much. In a situation like that, it does seem a bit more believable to think “these men were working towards something author-approved but rushed it and executed it poorly” instead of “these men made up something that doesn’t suit the character arcs of most of these characters and runs contrary to the author’s plan AND THEN rushed it and executed it poorly ON TOP OF THAT.” I can’t really blame people for thinking as much. But the most sensible explanation isn’t always the correct one. Given that they did take credit for the idea of Jon killing Dany, it seems the less sensible explanation is the truth.

I didn’t mean to single out Daenerys’s fight for the throne as compared to the other battles for the throne. I meant to compare it to HER battles in Essos. She has faced opposition, but if I’m not mistaken, it seems like her victories in Essos have required less bloodshed than the battles in the War of Five Kings. So it’s not that Dany reclaiming the throne for her house would be more destructive than what Westeros is used to (although an argument could be made about the dragons, I’d imagine that her desire to minimize destruction could balance out the potential for destruction the dragons bring), it’s that I think it’d be more destructive than what DANY is used to. I’m looking at it from her perspective here.

Thank you for the input!

@mikastormborn I have not called Dany’s heroism in books as they’ve been written so far into question. I was purely talking about her hypothetical future in the story. I found it so hard to believe that D&D made it up entirely BECAUSE it seemed like such a huge change of her character to me and then the bit in the outline seemed to reinforce that. I have since been informed that D&D took credit for the idea of Jon killing Dany, which I hadn’t known. How are people not reading this post and seeing a Dany fan who wants her to remain a hero and is looking for arguments to support that position in the face of what seemed like counter evidence?

I expect that a war to win back the throne would be devastating because of how devastating the wars for the throne have already been. The wars being fought in Westeros have already proven to be extraordinarily destructive. The War of Five Kings has already caused mass suffering. Why would it be different for another claimant?

I believe Daenerys would be a good ruler, although, as I said in the original post, it’s hard to make that call for someone so young. But as someone else pointed out, GRRM himself said she’d be a good ruler. I think she has the best claim because I think the tradition of male only inheritance is stupid and sexist. But I still don’t want her to sit on the throne because the IT has historically brought misery to whoever sits upon it. I want Dany to be happy. I want her to feel like she has a home. I don’t think claiming the throne would bring her that happiness because the thrones makes people miserable. I have not yet finished ADWD but so far? Dany doesn’t seem to enjoy the reality of ruling. So far, Dany is happy when she feels loved and can act as a liberator. The reality of being queen would, for the most part, likely not provide that.

Also: I do call Tyrion’s heroism into question because of how he treats women, so even if I’d called Dany’s heroism in the books into question, she still wouldn’t be the only one.