Ellaria said to Have Takena An Empowering Move

[Maid So Fair]

1 hour ago, Tijgy said:

Personally, I think the whole scene was disgusting and created out a mix of three things: they wanted to say byebye to Dorne, REVENGE and need for strong women vs. weak men. 

I can completely not see Ellaria and SS as something else than villains. They killed Myrcella who might have been a little brat to her uncle/father but was actually very understanding to him and who is called a very sweet and gentle child. They killed Doran, an apparently great ruler who tried to keep his people safe, who did not want his guest been killed and whose last words were for his son. They killed Areo who only wanted to protect his lord. They killed Trystane who was mourning his girlfriend by painting those eggs and refusing diner and who first declined to fight because they were family. And they killed the maester

 A little recent reminder. And they all died.

They cannot want from us we think Ellaria and the SS are nothing else than villains. Not if they killed those five people and not if you also remember they just killed the family of guy who they wanted to avenge and who died in the name of her family. 

And then they are justifying their actions because of REVENGE. And they are doing this in the adaptation of the book in which some characters spoke against revenge, like Ellaria, the Ned. We are actually IMO not supposed to feel happy about the actions of Lady Stoneheart but actually sad Cat became such person as consequence of all her sufferings. 

D&D actually they take a whole different path. REVENGE is awesome and very present in the whole series. Edd wants to take revenge, Sansa is going to want revenge, Cersei and Larry want revenge, Ellaria and the Sandsnakes want revenge ... almost everybody want revenge  And revenge is something you actually are obliged to want. In season 5 LF actually tried Sansa to feel guilty about the fact she was standing at the sidelines when her whole family was killed (so she would marry Ramsay) - (oh look victim blaming - always fun). And now Doran and Trystane are being murdered. Why? Because Doran is a weak man because he wants peace (in the show at least ) to protect his people and because he doesn't chose vengeance. At the same time Ellaria and the Sandsnakes are empowered because they take their revenge and because they are taking the power from those weak men. Yeah, I really want those women been seen as examples of strong women /sarcasm

The whole storyline is insulting IMO. And it is even made more insulting for me some certain media are thinking Ellaria and Sandsnakes are not villains here. Myrcella, Areo, Doran, the maester and Trystane are here their victims who died for no good reason. IMO it is actually immoral to claim something else. 

I thought the Ramsay symphatisation scene was terrible, but the show has managed to outdo itself with the Sand Snakes and 'Ellaria'. These characters have absolutely no redeeming qualities yet for some reason they keep being portrayed in an almost positive light.

[Cas Stark]

1 hour ago, Tijgy said:

Personally, I think the whole scene was disgusting and created out a mix of three things: they wanted to say byebye to Dorne, REVENGE and need for strong women vs. weak men. 

I can completely not see Ellaria and SS as something else than villains. They killed Myrcella who might have been a little brat to her uncle/father but was actually very understanding to him and who is called a very sweet and gentle child. They killed Doran, an apparently great ruler who tried to keep his people safe, who did not want his guest been killed and whose last words were for his son. They killed Areo who only wanted to protect his lord. They killed Trystane who was mourning his girlfriend by painting those eggs and refusing diner and who first declined to fight because they were family. And they killed the maester

 A little recent reminder. And they all died.

They cannot want from us we think Ellaria and the SS are nothing else than villains. Not if they killed those five people and not if you also remember they just killed the family of guy who they wanted to avenge and who died in the name of her family. 

And then they are justifying their actions because of REVENGE. And they are doing this in the adaptation of the book in which some characters spoke against revenge, like Ellaria, the Ned. We are actually IMO not supposed to feel happy about the actions of Lady Stoneheart but actually sad Cat became such person as consequence of all her sufferings. 

D&D actually they take a whole different path. REVENGE is awesome and very present in the whole series. Edd wants to take revenge, Sansa is going to want revenge, Cersei and Larry want revenge, Ellaria and the Sandsnakes want revenge ... almost everybody want revenge  And revenge is something you actually are obliged to want. In season 5 LF actually tried Sansa to feel guilty about the fact she was standing at the sidelines when her whole family was killed (so she would marry Ramsay) - (oh look victim blaming - always fun). And now Doran and Trystane are being murdered. Why? Because Doran is a weak man because he wants peace (in the show at least ) to protect his people and because he doesn't chose vengeance. At the same time Ellaria and the Sandsnakes are empowered because they take their revenge and because they are taking the power from those weak men. Yeah, I really want those women been seen as examples of strong women /sarcasm

The whole storyline is insulting IMO. And it is even made more insulting for me some certain media are thinking Ellaria and Sandsnakes are not villains here. Myrcella, Areo, Doran, the maester and Trystane are here their victims who died for no good reason. IMO it is actually immoral to claim something else. 

I really don't know.  Logically you would think murdering two innocent teenagers and a ruler who appeared to want to prevent a war who were members of your own family would make you a villain.

But, given the way they played trystane's murder, I feel like we're supposed to think 'badass empowered women', I really think so.

[Miley the Monstrous]

8 minutes ago, Maid So Fair said:

I thought the Ramsay symphatisation scene was terrible, but the show has managed to outdo itself with the Sand Snakes and 'Ellaria'. These characters have absolutely no redeeming qualities yet for some reason they keep being portrayed in an almost positive light.

I thought the Ramsay mourning scene was just a lame joke, the punchline being the "feed her to the dogs" line. So we're not supposed to sympathize with him...I think? (I'm so confused).

As for the SS and Ellaria I would think DnD expect us to see them as villains but not regular villains: strong, kickass grrl power villains. Eww, I don't even know. (I'm so confused). 

[thehandwipes]

5 minutes ago, Miley the Monstrous said:

I thought the Ramsay mourning scene was just a lame joke, the punchline being the "feed her to the dogs" line. So we're not supposed to sympathize with him...I think? (I'm so confused).

As for the SS and Ellaria I would think DnD expect us to see them as villains but not regular villains: strong, kickass grrl power villains. Eww, I don't even know. (I'm so confused). 

Yeah, it was just a joke, it wasn't supposed to tell us anything or develop the characters.  Same as Deadpan deadpanning her way through Dothraki open-mike night.

[Tijgy]

12 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

I really don't know.  Logically you would think murdering two innocent teenagers and a ruler who appeared to want to prevent a war who were members of your own family would make you a villain.

But, given the way they played trystane's murder, I feel like we're supposed to think 'badass empowered women', I really think so.

I actually have no idea what they intend to do with the Dorne storyline? At one hand they clearly wanted to sympathize with poor Doran and Trys (good leader, fear for his son, grieving over his girlfriend). They are actually the ones who I feel sorry for. So yeah, they intended to make them villains? (Or maybe it was just a part of their usual emotional manipulation scheme )

And then you have their typical empowered women, REVENGE, ... Doran is being blamed for not taking revenge like Sansa by Littlefinger. So if you compare it to how they treat those themes in the rest of the show, I believe we should see them as 'badass empowered women'. 

If they want to see them as villains, then the Dorne storyline is just crap storyline. If they really want to see them as empowered or they believe Doran's and Trys' deaths were understandable*, it would make it sexist, it would reek of toxic masculinity and it would just be disgusting. 

 

[Liuko]

"Your son is weak just like you, and weak men will never rule Dorne again."

Lots of thoughts on Ellaria and her/the Sand Snakes' "new" role in the show (will post a detailed reply later). But for now I'd like to say: Ellaria's quote is gendered, but not misandrist. Much more complicated.

[Edd Tollett's One Vote]

This article is depressing me. I'm pretty sure it's an example of why my family finds it strange that I identify as a feminist. It's because of these bizarre, radical interpretations of what feminism is. 

All I can say is that, like everyone else on the forum, I did not see anything empowering or feminist about Ellaria's actions. Revenge, killing your innocent family, and plunging your country into a war are not good things, and they're certainly not what I want to be inspired by as a woman. I mean... yikes! These Ellaria and the SS are beginning to seem almost as evil as Ramsay to me. Look at the way Nym and Obara killed Trystane as if it was some sort of fun game. Nym actually seemed upset that Obara did the killing, and there was no remorse in either of their faces. That's really messed up. And considering the show version of Ramsay seems capable of limited love (I think he was sad about Myranda's death...? I think...? It could be interpreted that way?), I don't see how he's any different to the SS. Ramsay is a strong male character in the sense that he too kills, and has assisted in placing his family at war with the crown through marrying Sansa. Is he an empowering figure for men? For anyone? ... No. Just no.... 

[David Selig]

Bustle.com is a total joke most of the time, sadly, and I say that a strongly feminist guy.

But the Salon article is even dumber, what with lines like this:

Quote

Seeing the decadent phallocrats of Dorne taken down was surprisingly exhilarating—and surprisingly righteous.

 

[Maid So Fair]

7 hours ago, Miley the Monstrous said:

I thought the Ramsay mourning scene was just a lame joke, the punchline being the "feed her to the dogs" line. So we're not supposed to sympathize with him...I think? (I'm so confused).

As for the SS and Ellaria I would think DnD expect us to see them as villains but not regular villains: strong, kickass grrl power villains. Eww, I don't even know. (I'm so confused). 

Well, the issue is that Ramsay was like super sad about Myranda, to the point of choosing to mourn her death over his favourite last time of hunting women in the woods and trolling Theon. Even giving her to the dogs sees to read as some way of paying homage in his own twisted way.

And Ellaria gets her heroic speech about weak men while Trys's murder, which should be a horrifying crossing the event horizon moment, is played for laughs and used to crack jokes about killstealing as if this was some RPG game.

Like you, I am very confused.

[JonCon's Red Beard]

15 hours ago, Liuko said:

"Your son is weak just like you, and weak men will never rule Dorne again."

Lots of thoughts on Ellaria and her/the Sand Snakes' "new" role in the show (will post a detailed reply later). But for now I'd like to say: Ellaria's quote is gendered, but not misandrist. Much more complicated.

The misandry is in the context, imo. Male violence is celebrated. Remember last year, Sansa's rape was a general cause of outrage, and when HBO/DD writers tried to defend it by saying it "empowered" her, they got even more critic, specially from feminist media. Now "women murder men to empower themselves, yay!" is celebrated. I mean, Cersei kinda does this (or tries) in the books and is universally criticised.

 

[mormont]

[mod] Folks, keep the discussion show-relevant is not complicated or hard to understand, I would have thought. Yet several of you appear to be having trouble with it.

If you just want to have a general rant about how awful feminists are, take it elsewhere. Last warning.

[Humble AK]

I think you guys better brace for more articles like this. A central criticism of GoT (show and books) has been misogyny, so it's only natural that this will be a popular consideration in articles on the show and its episodes.

Feminism and misogyny are ill-defined concepts, but people sure do like to throw them around a lot. In the article, the author regards themselves as feminist. And yet that article is receiving a lot of umbrage from people on this thread, who consider themselves feminists. There are even self-proclaimed feminists now accusing the material that the author of the article - a self-proclaimed feminist - is praising as feminist to be misogynistic.

Of course the roach in the pudding is that everyone seems to think their idea of feminism and misogyny is infallibly correct.

As long as feminism and misogyny are so vaguely defined, people will passionately throw these labels out and be convinced they are right to do so.

So, pertaining this post to the subject of the article, it totally makes sense that someone would view violently murdering innocent people for totally mystifying reasons as pure feminism. Because it's the easiest thing in the world, with the modern view of feminism, to call anything feminist.

I disagree with the article, but doubtless the author would say that that's only because I'm a misogynist who hates women too much to see the truth.

[Liuko]

Hello again! And thank you to "JCRB's Honeypot" for sending me here :).

Quick disclaimer on the scope of this post. 

Spoiler

"Feminism" (I swear this is contextual, Moderator) currently functions as a political term and a term in narrative criticism. Bustle, like 95% of quick-hit "Game of Thrones" reviews, sloppily conflate the two. Take out that problem, and you've still got the conflation of "feminist character"/"feminist storyline"/"strong female lead"/number of female roles, etc. in different degrees and permutations. It's a mess. Acknowledging that, I'm going to disregard it (and the books) and stick to the two Dorne scenes in "The Red Woman". And try to work around the way the writers left story holes for themselves that are wide enough to accommodate a truck.

Ellaria has three accusations for Doran: isolation, passivity, weakness. Her lead-in, "When was the last time you left this palace?" falls directly on the heels of their talk of how Oberyn's travels showed him the world. Doran concludes that he was born for rule, not adventures, just as he settles into his wheelchair. That is his picture of rule. Given that the entire (tiny) scene's a betrayal, it's unclear to me whether Ellaria truly thinks Oberyn would have been "a terrible ruler"

Spoiler

If you believe she *does* think Oberyn would have been terrible, too, it adds to the idea that this scene trumpets "All men are unfit!"

, but he chose interaction over isolation (and was active and strong) so he at least had the three traits of this scene.

Next, she attaches isolation to passivity, and then neatly draws both into the net of Dornish identity.

Spoiler

Nice continuity nod to Obara's "I fight for Dorne. Who do you fight for?" (Yes, last season.)

 Doran 1. has no familiarity with his own people (isolation), and 2. failed to avenge Elia or Oberyn (passivity), making him not a "real" Dornishman. The Sands, "born of passion" and accepted like no other illegitimates in Westeros, are quintessentially Dornish.

That looks like the end of the argument. And then dying Doran says "My son. Trystane." Unclear: was he saying "Please spare him", "My son will avenge me", or "I'm dying; my last thoughts are of my boy"? Ellaria, understandably, addresses angle 2: Trystane is too weak to be a threat. And having Trystane dispatched, ending the all-male line of Doran, she can say "Weak men will never rule Dorne again", as rule passes to the all-female line of Oberyn. (Not going to work, but without kinslaying and regicide and the allowance of illegitimate children to inherit the throne, yes.)

Super-weird scene: lots of holes, deliberate ambiguity, and stupid behavior (Areo Hotah's immediate death from a shot to his armored back with a throwing knife; that none of the guards move AT ALL - I guess it's a visual contrast between male passivity and female action, but it's nonsensical). It's short and vague enough you could skim and call it feminist or misandrist or part of some general episode theme of "giving power to women" and there's so little information little can be confirmed or denied (maybe they're all Faceless Men rehearsing as mummers). But, IMO, the opening conversation re: Oberyn, the invocation of traits that Doran lacked and Oberyn clearly had, Doran's illegitimacy based on failing to be "Dornish", and that the passage from an all-male line to what happens to be an all-female line fallows the normal line of succession from older brother to younger brother, makes a broad brush definition a non-starter. 

 

 

[JonCon's Red Beard]

4 hours ago, Liuko said:

Hello again! And thank you to "JCRB's Honeypot" for sending me here :).

Quick disclaimer on the scope of this post. 

  Reveal hidden contents

"Feminism" (I swear this is contextual, Moderator) currently functions as a political term and a term in narrative criticism. Bustle, like 95% of quick-hit "Game of Thrones" reviews, sloppily conflate the two. Take out that problem, and you've still got the conflation of "feminist character"/"feminist storyline"/"strong female lead"/number of female roles, etc. in different degrees and permutations. It's a mess. Acknowledging that, I'm going to disregard it (and the books) and stick to the two Dorne scenes in "The Red Woman". And try to work around the way the writers left story holes for themselves that are wide enough to accommodate a truck.

Ellaria has three accusations for Doran: isolation, passivity, weakness. Her lead-in, "When was the last time you left this palace?" falls directly on the heels of their talk of how Oberyn's travels showed him the world. Doran concludes that he was born for rule, not adventures, just as he settles into his wheelchair. That is his picture of rule. Given that the entire (tiny) scene's a betrayal, it's unclear to me whether Ellaria truly thinks Oberyn would have been "a terrible ruler"

  Hide contents

If you believe she *does* think Oberyn would have been terrible, too, it adds to the idea that this scene trumpets "All men are unfit!"

, but he chose interaction over isolation (and was active and strong) so he at least had the three traits of this scene.

Next, she attaches isolation to passivity, and then neatly draws both into the net of Dornish identity.

  Reveal hidden contents

Nice continuity nod to Obara's "I fight for Dorne. Who do you fight for?" (Yes, last season.)

 Doran 1. has no familiarity with his own people (isolation), and 2. failed to avenge Elia or Oberyn (passivity), making him not a "real" Dornishman. The Sands, "born of passion" and accepted like no other illegitimates in Westeros, are quintessentially Dornish.

The whole "real" Dornishman kinda fits what the show has tried to said about the Dornish, that they are a certain type: impulsive, prone fight, and even violent. In other words, the "savages" of the universe. That's another reason for Ellaria to be changed into a more "Dornish" person.

4 hours ago, Liuko said:

Super-weird scene: lots of holes, deliberate ambiguity, and stupid behavior (Areo Hotah's immediate death from a shot to his armored back with a throwing knife; that none of the guards move AT ALL - I guess it's a visual contrast between male passivity and female action, but it's nonsensical).

Good catch, I didn't notice that. But yeah, it's nonsense. All the guards fear Ellaria now? The Sand Snakes?

4 hours ago, Liuko said:

It's short and vague enough you could skim and call it feminist or misandrist or part of some general episode theme of "giving power to women" and there's so little information little can be confirmed or denied (maybe they're all Faceless Men rehearsing as mummers). But, IMO, the opening conversation re: Oberyn, the invocation of traits that Doran lacked and Oberyn clearly had, Doran's illegitimacy based on failing to be "Dornish", and that the passage from an all-male line to what happens to be an all-female line fallows the normal line of succession from older brother to younger brother, makes a broad brush definition a non-starter.

  Hide contents

I kinda thought better the whole "misogynistic/misandrist" thing. I already discussed this outside the board with another person, and we kinda agree that the show or D&d aren't necessarily "misogynistic": they simply don't know how to portray strong women that aren't a cliché and they are equally exploitative towards women and men because they like to endorse violence on the show as their one-trick dog.

My critic of misandry should then go to the press, and it's not the first time. As I mentioned above (I think I did), there was general outrage for Sansa's being raped, but not for Gendry being raped, even when Gendry's scene was even more graphic and everything was shown onscreen. I think this fit a pattern in which many people actually believe men can't be raped, specially if they show any kind of arousal. I mean, it's obvious for us that Gendry didn't willingly walked there and he was very much afraid of what would happen to him. Melisandre's sexuality and sensuality were just a lure.

Now, my critic towards the press –not to feminism, Mormont–, is that they are the exact opposite of what GoT does: they want a certain type of women being portrayed on screen so they can call it a "perfectly portrayed woman". First, personally, I think such thing doesn't exist, because I believe that even weak women should have representation in stories. And second, if we criticism misogyny, then we should do the same for any type of misandry.

Now, where is the misandry? Not in Ellaria herself, but in how they are portraying the scene, the context. I understand they want to portray the scene as "Doran is weak, it's time for women to rule", yet, there is nothing there indicating that Doran did anything deserving to be killed. We know, in books, what Doran's actions really are but not in the show. As far as we know, he could have sent Trystane to spy. And then, Trystane is innocent, as was Areo and the Maester. Ellaria's statement then sounds little like "you're dying because you're a weak man" but more like "you're dying because men are weak and it's time for women to rule". There are four men dead to prove it, and as you said, all the men in the scene are passive participants. Or they don't participate at all.

This kind of conduct is more similar to Cersei's speech in Feast, in which she said "men have ruled ever, now it's my time" despite she is not remotely prepared to do so. Some people actually encourages this and call Cersei a feminist, which I think it's as hilarious and as entitled as if I go to NASA and demand a job because "we women have faced oppression". Sadly, these cases DO happen in real life. I have read about them in my career (tech), and it's something that a small group of women do pursue because they believe it's fair. I personally don't. This isn't justice but revanchism and vindictiveness. I dunno if D&d actually want to portray this, but this is how it looks at first glance.

[Wall Flower]

59 minutes ago, JCRB's Honeypot said:

The whole "real" Dornishman kinda fits what the show has tried to said about the Dornish, that they are a certain type: impulsive, prone fight, and even violent. In other words, the "savages" of the universe. That's another reason for Ellaria to be changed into a more "Dornish" person.

Good catch, I didn't notice that. But yeah, it's nonsense. All the guards fear Ellaria now? The Sand Snakes?

I kinda thought better the whole "misogynistic/misandrist" thing. I already discussed this outside the board with another person, and we kinda agree that the show or D&d aren't necessarily "misogynistic": they simply don't know how to portray strong women that aren't a cliché and they are equally exploitative towards women and men because they like to endorse violence on the show as their one-trick dog.

My critic of misandry should then go to the press, and it's not the first time. As I mentioned above (I think I did), there was general outrage for Sansa's being raped, but not for Gendry being raped, even when Gendry's scene was even more graphic and everything was shown onscreen. I think this fit a pattern in which many people actually believe men can't be raped, specially if they show any kind of arousal. I mean, it's obvious for us that Gendry didn't willingly walked there and he was very much afraid of what would happen to him. Melisandre's sexuality and sensuality were just a lure.

Now, my critic towards the press –not to feminism, Mormont–, is that they are the exact opposite of what GoT does: they want a certain type of women being portrayed on screen so they can call it a "perfectly portrayed woman". First, personally, I think such thing doesn't exist, because I believe that even weak women should have representation in stories. And second, if we criticism misogyny, then we should do the same for any type of misandry.

Now, where is the misandry? Not in Ellaria herself, but in how they are portraying the scene, the context. I understand they want to portray the scene as "Doran is weak, it's time for women to rule", yet, there is nothing there indicating that Doran did anything deserving to be killed. We know, in books, what Doran's actions really are but not in the show. As far as we know, he could have sent Trystane to spy. And then, Trystane is innocent, as was Areo and the Maester. Ellaria's statement then sounds little like "you're dying because you're a weak man" but more like "you're dying because men are weak and it's time for women to rule". There are four men dead to prove it, and as you said, all the men in the scene are passive participants. Or they don't participate at all.

This kind of conduct is more similar to Cersei's speech in Feast, in which she said "men have ruled ever, now it's my time" despite she is not remotely prepared to do so. Some people actually encourages this and call Cersei a feminist, which I think it's as hilarious and as entitled as if I go to NASA and demand a job because "we women have faced oppression". Sadly, these cases DO happen in real life. I have read about them in my career (tech), and it's something that a small group of women do pursue because they believe it's fair. I personally don't. This isn't justice but revanchism and vindictiveness. I dunno if D&d actually want to portray this, but this is how it looks at first glance.

Honestly, I think the writers are very ham fisted and cliched in how they portray both women and men in the show. I think a lot of the press ('feminist' or otherwise) are trying to put the best possible spin on some piss-poor writing. ShowDorne is not only a cliched portrayal of 'strong women' but it's pretty much saying that the only worthwhile men in Westeros are violent, vengeful men who don't care about honour or their own subjects. Even ShowSam has become a bit of a dudebro, boasting about his slaying and obsessed with getting laid. I really miss the more varied and nuanced portrayal of both sexes in the books.

Cersei is certainly not cut out for ruling - as Littlefinger says she is more interested in power as a prize to be won than a tool to be used, so she has no idea what to do when she actually gains power. Westeros isn't exactly like NASA though, as many of the rulers only qualified for their position by virtue of being the eldest child with a penis. Westeros would probably be a lot better off if all the noble lords had to apply for their jobs.

[JonCon's Red Beard]

17 minutes ago, Wall Flower said:

Honestly, I think the writers are very ham fisted and cliched in how they portray both women and men in the show. I think a lot of the press ('feminist' or otherwise) are trying to put the best possible spin on some piss-poor writing. ShowDorne is not only a cliched portrayal of 'strong women' but it's pretty much saying that the only worthwhile men in Westeros are violent, vengeful men who don't care about honour or their own subjects. Even ShowSam has become a bit of a dudebro, boasting about his slaying and obsessed with getting laid. I really miss the more varied and nuanced portrayal of both sexes in the books.

Agree with this. The men in the show are as badly written as the women, but (certain) press tends to focus more on the issues with the women, for very obvious reasons.

17 minutes ago, Wall Flower said:

Cersei is certainly not cut out for ruling - as Littlefinger says she is more interested in power as a prize to be won than a tool to be used, so she has no idea what to do when she actually gains power. Westeros isn't exactly like NASA though, as many of the rulers only qualified for their position by virtue of being the eldest child with a penis. Westeros would probably be a lot better off if all the noble lords had to apply for their jobs.

I agree but males are taught to rule according to their statuses. And also the women. Sansa and Arya are taught maths, which I suppose are included in how to administrate and run a house. I'm sure Cat was taught as well because Hoster Tully was not yet having a male heir. Cersei's case is odd because while she protested she wasn't treated like a male, she only seems to be doing it on behalf of the "cool" stuff men are taught to do, not the responsibilities. That or Tywin was very cheap when he hired the Maesters teaching their children. Jaime isn't exactly the brighter bulb there... that or the Maester was scamming Tywin.

[Wall Flower]

4 minutes ago, JCRB's Honeypot said:

Agree with this. The men in the show are as badly written as the women, but (certain) press tends to focus more on the issues with the women, for very obvious reasons.

I agree but males are taught to rule according to their statuses. And also the women. Sansa and Arya are taught maths, which I suppose are included in how to administrate and run a house. I'm sure Cat was taught as well because Hoster Tully was not yet having a male heir. Cersei's case is odd because while she protested she wasn't treated like a male, she only seems to be doing it on behalf of the "cool" stuff men are taught to do, not the responsibilities. That or Tywin was very cheap when he hired the Maesters teaching their children. Jaime isn't exactly the brighter bulb there... that or the Maester was scamming Tywin.

I really don't think that Tywin gets the whole mentoring approach to training his heirs. Maybe he thought they would be brilliant just by virtue of being his kids or he was too much of a control freak to expect anything but absolute obedience from his children. Cersei seems to have been the one most with Tywin but she learned all the wrong lessons! I guess if you treat your kids like tools, you shouldn't be surprised if they fail when you're not there to pull the levers.

[Ruhail]

Man @Tijgy that was a fantastic write up on everything wrong with Dorne, good job.

[Rhaechyll Targaryen]

That article honestly made my blood pressure spike. JFC, it was a situation where I was reading and realized that I had a problem with every damn sentence in the article. 

This article actually tops that ridiculous piece that came out of the NYT in (I think) season 1 where the reviewer Gina Bellafante commented that no women would possibly watch the show were it not for the nudity and 'illicit' eroticism. 

[PrinceOfWolves]

The article seems in almost every way misguided. However just because one writer at Bustle interpreted Ellaria's coup as promoting the idea of female empowerment that does not necessarily mean, as some here seem to have suggested, that it was the show-writer's intention that people should view it in that way - and as such I don't really see any evidence to support this.