Sansa is truly one of the best characters and her development is fascinating

[Dya of Oldstones]

There may have been more, but the only marriage that comes to mind of being consummated at age 12 was Margaret Beaufort, mother of Henry VII. Both mother and child nearly died when she gave birth to him at age 13, and she never had any more children after that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Beaufort,_Countess_of_Richmond_and_Derby

It's not out of the question that some marriages were made when both bride and groom were children, but I think the average age of consummation, even among royalty and aristocrats was 15 or older.

 

[LiveFirstDieLater]

13 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

When were the first children born? Almost all your examples are "royal marriage", which were an exception, not the rule for very obvious reasons. Church made 12 and 14 the minimum age of consent, but not consummation.

Here's a woman who examined 66 marriages of mideval times. Of those 66, average age for women was 17. 35% were <15. She gives an example of the marriage Louis IX of France and Margaret of Provence. He was 20, she 13. She did not have her first child however until she was 19. And she ended up having 11 children, with 1 to 3 years apart between each. So, what happened between her marriage at 13 and 18? It was most likely not consumed.

http://madeofwynn.net/2013/09/23/misuse-of-the-word-medieval-part-13-most-girls-married-old-guys/ 

The quotes I gave were mostly about commoners and middle class.

Not to harp on the original topic, but Sansa's marriage wasn't consummated either... and once Rob becomes King in the North she's a princess, so it is a royal marriage too... I'm not debating the common occurrences, we are talking about a political wedding after all

[Mladen]

12 minutes ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

Not to harp on the original topic, but Sansa's marriage wasn't consummated either... and once Rob becomes King in the North she's a princess, so it is a royal marriage too... I'm not debating the common occurrences, we are talking about a political wedding after all

No, it is not a political marriage (not in the way, arranged political marriages are done). Because, first, Sansa, in the eyes of the court of KL is not a Princess but the Lady. Robb's independence is not valid in the eyes of KL. So, it is not a royal marriage. Not to mention, that the entire point of political marriages is to create alliances, forming bridges, making mends. What Lannisters have done is an act of violation of Sansa's body and family. It was invasion just as any other military action.

[sweetsunray]

12 minutes ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

Not to harp on the original topic, but Sansa's marriage wasn't consummated either... and once Rob becomes King in the North she's a princess, so it is a royal marriage too... I'm not debating the common occurrences, we are talking about a political wedding after all

Agreed. But Tywin did want it to be consummated, and that was not the norm, not in RL mideval times, not in Westeros either.

[LiveFirstDieLater]

4 minutes ago, Risto said:

No, it is not a political marriage. Because, first, Sansa, in the eyes of the court of KL is not a Princess but the Lady. Robb's independence is not valid in the eyes of KL. So, it is not a royal marriage. Not to mention, that the entire point of political marriages is to create alliances, forming bridges, making mends. What Lannisters have done is an act of violation of Sansa's body and family. It was invasion just as any other military action.

Do you really think it was about her body? It was about Winterfell and the North, if Tyrion gets her pregnant with a son that kid would be heir once they won the war and disposed of the rest of the Starks. (IMO It would also let Tywin, the driving force behind it, send off Tyrion to rule the North and allow him another excuse not to let him inherit Casterly Rock).

4 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

Agreed. But Tywin did want it to be consummated, and that was not the norm, not in RL mideval times, not in Westeros either.

For sure not the average, I agree. I just wanted to point out that it wasn't remarkably unusual either, especially at the highest levels of nobility.

[Mladen]

5 minutes ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

Do you really think it was about her body? It was about Winterfell and the North, if Tyrion gets her pregnant with a son that kid would be heir once they won the war and disposed of the rest of the Starks. (IMO It would also let Tywin, the driving force behind it, send off Tyrion to rule the North and allow him another excuse not to let him inherit Casterly Rock).

Well, her being pregnant is about her body. They can't make her pregnant without her body being involved.

As for your IMO part, that was indeed a plan. Tywin plainly said that.

[Blue-Eyed Wolf]

1 hour ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

That's fine, but her "woe is me", petty, half hearted resistance isn't going to get my applause... As usual she's punishing the wrong party, he doesn't want to be there either... It's like her blaming Arya for the Trident, it's misplaced and not productive, even harmful.

She's thinking to herself how it should be someone big and strong, not a dwarf... That's all she protested, not the wedding itself (again I would respect making them drag her up there at sword point, that's protesting the wedding), not the Lannisters who did her harm (Cersei and Jeof love the mockery of the imp), and it doesn't save her dignity (she just highlights the same superficial judgment she's making in her head of Tyrion to the court) and then gives in a moment later (showing her lack of will, and/or realization that it was a pointless petty move).

I could respect real resistance, and I could respect carrying yourself like a gentle person, head held high, but the half hearted petty misdirected spitefullness just doesn't play for me...

but of course that's just my opinion

He half-heartedly doesn't want to be there.  In any case, he's coming out with the better end of the deal here.  He gets a pretty wife who he thinks he can make come around if he's just nice to her.  He gets an estate of his own, Winterfell, since he ain't getting Casterly Rock.  In short, Tyrion does feel bad for Sansa but he also wants her to comply with her own exploitation.  What does she get but forced marriage to someone she doesn't love or desire and sinks her in even deeper with the enemy.  Funny how the same logic about Sansa having superficial judgement about appearances doesn't get applied to Tyrion.  He always prefers conventionally beautiful women and rejects the idea of being with women like Lollys Stokeworth or Penny, another dwarf that he can only bring himself to pity.  In the end, you can't apply political correctness to human desire and love.  The heart and body just want what they want period.  Even during their marriage, she's cool and distant, but she never does anything to insult or embarrass him.  She does recognize he is kinder to her than other Lannisters, but she cannot be the wife he wants, so she wears the mask all the time.  She cannot trust him as he's demonstrated by the BotBW and him going along with this forced marriage, he wants the Lannisters to win this war despite being at odds with his family.  Add to that the murder of her mother and Robb, eliminating all hope anyone with power is coming for her.  That's a huge fundamental difference that can never be reconciled no matter how "nice" he is to her.  "Nice" meaning he wants to look good and be the hero.  "Nice" does not mean true emotional connection with her.  I totally do sympathize with Tyrion and understand his neediness comes from his abuse by Tywin, but he's way off here.  At the wedding, he's more concerned with his own pride than what's being done to Sansa.  So good for her that she didn't bend her knees at a cruel farce of a wedding.  Yeah she's pissed this isn't the wedding she wants for herself and she's 100% right and has nothing to apologize for.  

Bolded:  I really have a problem with the attitude of criticizing someone for not being the "right" kind of victim people can respect.  Okay even if she had been dragged at sword point, all that might get her is another beating and possibly even worse humiliations in retaliation for resisting.  She chose to quietly go with it probably to avoid even more harm.  Being married to Tyrion will not protect her as Joffrey told her he would still have her anyway.  Her abuse was just going to go on.  Victims of violence are often criticized for not doing enough to help themselves, which is just ignorant because it disregards the psychological effects of abuse or trauma.  Craster's wives are a great example of this. She's isolated, has no support system, in a hellscape of truly evil people.  It just blows my mind how people can knit-pick character flaws as reasons for her being less deserving of empathy.  Beatings, threats of rape, and forced marriages are not just desserts for childish, bratty behavior at the beginning.  And yet, she does actively resist in that she repeatedly goes to the godswood to plan her escape with Dontos without getting caught.  Is she now more respectable?  The only reason she wasn't leaving before was because there was no opportunity and her means of escape wouldn't be ready until much later.  Until then, she had to just lay low and go along with things as best she could.  That's honestly what most people would probably do in that situation.               

[Winter's Cold]

1 hour ago, Blue-Eyed Wolf said:

Bolded:  I really have a problem with the attitude of criticizing someone for not being the "right" kind of victim people can respect.   

The first issue is that it's essentially Sansa's fault that she's trapped in King's Landing and being forced to marry a Lannister. She went to Cersei and told her the specifics of her father's plans to evacuate the Stark household. Victims who cause their own problems engender less sympathy than victims who've done nothing wrong. I feel far more sympathy for Jeyne Poole than I do for Sansa or Theon.

The second issue is that people like to read stories about heroes. Heroes tend to be proactive and special in some way. Sansa does not fit these expectations. Sansa' POV is mainly about what other characters are doing rather than what Sansa herself is doing. That's why even though some readers may pity Sansa due to the abuse she's suffered, they'll still dislike her passivity. Why like someone who never takes charge of her own rescue?

[Bea Noleto]

The OP (and others) makes a rather unoriginal defense of Sansa. The same old excuses: age, naivete, being in love, believing too much in fairy tales,  Arya's fault, the adults' fault, lack of information, trauma, shock, fear of retaliation, trying to be neutral...

There is nothing to add about that. So I will address the title that deceived me into reading this thread.

Sansa is truly one of the worst characters, she is inconsistent, unrealistic and generaly badly written. There are beautiful moments, like the snow castle scene, but just scenes don't make her cohesive. That is why she is so polarizing. The reader has to fix the character for the author, and some do that by diminishing or ignoring her faults in order to make her an heroine while others invent faults that are not there to make her a villain.

I came to that conclusion by dividing Sansa's story in three parts. The first is the introduction, from the moment we first meet/hear of her to the moment she leaves Lady behind and go on a walk with Joffrey, before meeting Mycah and Arya. Until that point, she is what her more reasonable defenders say she was:  standard, normal, preteen, 'mean girl', spoiled, hormone ridden and in love with the bad boy. Her behaviour is very much grounded in how the books show the adults treated her, Arya, and one sister in relation to the other. 

Then comes the second part, from Joffrey and Sansa's encounter with Arya and Mycah to the moment Ned dies and Sansa watches. I think GRRM needed a lot of things from the plot.

• He needed someone to be foil to Arya, he already had that.
• He needed someone to mirror Tyrion's role within the Lannisters. Which means making her a black sheep, but the Starks are supposed to be the heroes, so she had to do something questionable at least, she had to be disliked for herself, not for Arya.
• He wanted Sansa to be a desconstruction of the damsel in distress, the princess, and the girl who fights for her forbidden love.
• He had to get Lady killed and Nymeria gone.
• He had to give the readers the sensation that the Lannisters are really bad, really dangerous and that they are out to get the Starks, and the girls are in true peril. 
• He probably wanted Cersei to have one or more upper hand truly unexpected to Ned, and an plot excuse to kill him. To me, Ned was caught because of his own mistakes, he trusted LF, who constantly mocked him to his face that he wasn't trustworthy, and after Varys warned him and Renly offered help. But Martin says otherwise and a lot of people agree with him. If it wasn't for that spice of betrayal, he would look more dumbass than he already does, and perhaps nobody would take his death seriously. If Sansa wasn't their hostage, it would be even more stupid of the Lannisters to kill Ned. 
• He wanted to create drama, to shock us.

So he put almost the whole of  this responsibility on the shoulders of a 11 year old character. To do that, he flanderized the tropes (in a good sense, they were well placed) Sansa is based on without giving any background to support her behaviour and thoughts.

The act of taking a single (often minor) action or trait of a character within a work and exaggerating it more and more over time until it completely consumes the character. Most always, the trait/action becomes completely outlandish and it becomes their defining characteristic.

Minus the 'more and more over time'. With Sansa it was pretty sudden.

Sansa was elitist, way too proud of her class (trope)? (Exaggeration in this part of the story) She was ok with an innocent lowborn boy being attacked and killed for no reason at all than the freaking royals wanting it. Even though her own father was not ok with that and her mother wouldn't approve of it either.

Sansa was in love with a bad boy? She comforts the little shit right after he tried to kill her own sister. She disobeys her father, trusts the woman that demanded her direwolf dead and wanted to wear its fur as a coat, and tells her secrets in order to marry the dude that wanted to kill her sister and would likely abuse her if they married.

Sansa had a beef with  Arya? She ignores that her sister would have died if not for Nymeria, lies instead of support her and tells her she should have died shortly after her sister almost got murdered. Shifts responsibility and blames her for deaths, not some broken vase.  Doesn't ask about Arya when her father has been arrested and charged with treason, her household staff slaughtered and herself imprisioned. Doesn't even think about her at that point.

That doesn't make sense at all. That is not naivete. She must be unbelievably stupid or selfish to the point of not caring if her family gets hurt (Arya, at least).  Or both. But she is a Stark! And she is just eleven! WTF!

Then the third part, the development after Ned's death.

All of a sudden, if she was too stupid to realize that a sword kills and that Cersei wanted her family harmed, she is not anymore. In fact, she is intelligent enough to maneuver Joffrey into saving Dontos, even though she was very nervous.

The girl who was fine with throwing her sister under the bus to achieve a petty goal has empathy for Dontos, and even Lancel, and helps them precisely when she needs to think of herself the most. 

Sure, she meets Margaery and thinks that Arya was a bad sister, but she still improved a lot very quickly. I don't believe in anyone changing so much even after a rude awakening. And I recall no one else in the books doing that, change is slow and takes in consideration what happened before.

See Jaime. He befriended Brienne (not admiting it yet), protects her from rape (if I recall correctly), loses his hand, bathes with her, tells a secret that he told no one before. At that point, GRRMartin prepares us for change by showing us a new side of Jaime, his background, so that it won't feel abrupt. Then Jaime jumps in the pit with the bear and Brienne to force the Bloody Mummers to kill the animal. That it a heroic act, a huge change, but believable because Brienne reminded him of the idealistic squire and knight he once was, they connected deeply. That doesn't make a hero, though, or in any sort of redeeming arc. He is definitely a villain. He breaks his word toward Catelyn (at swordpoint, shouldn't count, but he believes it was serious); thinks about the horrible things he would have done if he had found Arya in the Trident, without remorse; doesn't even remember Bran. It is the same Jaime, the same asshole, but with a new dimension, new interests, a development.

This  third part Sansa, however, is a continuation of the first part Sansa, who had failings that were  truly understandable given her age and her environment. And this time, she also has a trauma to explain those.  Second part Sansa was brushed off with a "What was I thinking?" and I don't think the nasty details will ever be addressed. 

Therefore, I think Martin never wanted Sansa to be bad, or exceedingly selfish or too stupid, (not bright, super empathic either)  but he used her as a plot device early on, and deformed a character that was still being established. I think only recently she has been taken seriously. That is why I hope she saves SR. If she sides with LF it would be another huge blunder.

[Blue-Eyed Wolf]

19 minutes ago, Winter's Cold said:

The first issue is that it's essentially Sansa's fault that she's trapped in King's Landing and being forced to marry a Lannister. She went to Cersei and told her the specifics of her father's plans to evacuate the Stark household. Victims who cause their own problems engender less sympathy than victims who've done nothing wrong

Well actually, her father went to Cersei before and basically spelled out everything he knew and was going to do to expose her.  He did this before securing his daughters' safety.  He didn't explain anything to Sansa about why he was sending them away.  Sansa thought her father was making a huge mistake and she just needed to stop them from being sent away.  She thought this was something she could fix and smooth over.  At no point did she think it would lead to her father being accused of treason and imprisonment.  Was it a selfish, disobedient thing to do? Yes.  Did she understand the actual consequences? No.  Was it the cause of Cersei retaliating against Ned? No.  She was going to do that anyway.  She moved quickly on having Robert killed and Ned imprisoned.  Sansa just unknowingly gave her a heads up on the time table to snatch up her and Arya as hostages.  Again, Sansa thought she was keeping her betrothal together and keeping her "dreams" alive.  She did not think it was going to end up the way it did.  I see this not as a result of being truly evil or selfish at the core, but having an extremely sheltered and unrealistic upbringing.  Her whole education with her septa was to make her the most perfect, obedient wife and mother to her husband, to be always pleasing and deferential to her husband. Couple that with her natural love and unrealistic obsession with the songs.  What happened are those lessons coming back to bite everyone.  I see Arya and Sansa as two sides of the same coin on the consequences of patriarchy.  Arya feels the rejection of not conforming to female roles and Sansa is the internalized misogyny of a female's sole value is pleasing her husband and suppressing all authentic thoughts and actions to be an ideal female.  So she becomes a medieval version of a Stepford wife.  Septa Mordane was constantly encouraging the girls to be at odd with one another, which is just sick and horrible.  When you consider the lessons she was getting at home and the positive-reinforcement for being so perfectly obedient, it's not that surprising her initial default setting was to defend Joffrey.    

What Sansa is quilty of is being in denial of some serious warning signs.  Should she have been more wary after the Trident incident? Yes.  She even says herself she was angry at Joffrey, but then quickly put it out of her mind and changed the story. She is responsible for burying her head in the sand.  Even then, the kids or Ned and Robert could not have foreseen that Cersei would demand deaths over a childish fight.  That response is crazy disproportionate to what happened.  That was the moment Sansa's testimony changed to siding against Arya: when Cersei shockingly demanded Lady be killed as punishment.  I can almost understand why Sansa freaked out and reacted by claiming it was Arya's fault in order to protect Lady.  Cersei upped the ante when Sansa's initial testimony was too wishy-washy for her.  The issue was never Arya attacking Joffrey.  She admitted to that.  The issue was if it was provoked by Joffrey or unprovoked.  Even Ned told Arya that Sansa could not realistically go against her betrothed.  Let's say Sansa had sided with Arya to begin with.  Cersei would most likely have demanded Lady's life anyway as punishment plus more.  She's a horrible, vain person that sees her son as an extension of herself and she went full "Rains of Castermere" on anyone that slights her family.  Ned's downfall was happening with or without Sansa.  The escalation in conflict is the result of many decision made by multiple characters on both sides.  She is not responsible for her own imprisonment and torment.  She was officially a hostage when Ned tried to take Joffrey into custody and oust the Queen. Though the Queen and Joffrey are 99% responsible for Ned's death, Ned played a larger role than Sansa in his own downfall.  It was happening with or without her.  The letter to her mother and Robb was pure intimidation by the Queen and small council, which Catelyn even said it was. Sansa even tried with her last shred of hope that Joffrey might have actually loved her to plead for her father's life and thought she had succeeded.            

Anyway,  this is a quote of GRRM on Sansa's responsibility which I think is both fair and how it was intended to be taken:

Quote

The way I see it, it is not a case of all or nothing. No single person is to blame for Ned's downfall. Sansa played a role, certainly, but it would be unfair to put all the blame on her. But it would also be unfair to exonerate her. She was not privy to all of Ned's plans regarding Stannis, the gold cloaks, etc... but she knew more than just that her father planned to spirit her and Arya away from King's Landing. She knew when they were to leave, on what ship, how many men would be in their escort, who would have the command, where Arya was that morning, etc... all of which was useful to Cersei in planning and timing her move.

Ned's talk with Littlefinger was certainly a turning point, though I am not sure I would call it =the= turning point. There were other crucial decisions that could easily have changed all had they gone differently. You mention Ned's refusal of Renly, which was equally critical. And there is Varys to consider, as well as the minor but crucial player everyone forgets -- Janos Slynt, who might have chosen just to do his duty instead of selling the gold cloaks to the highest bidder.

So... all in all, I suppose my answer would be that there is no single villain in the piece who caused it all, but rather a good half dozen players whose actions were all in part responsible for what happened.

 

[Winter's Cold]

14 minutes ago, Blue-Eyed Wolf said:

Well actually, her father went to Cersei before and basically spelled out everything he knew and was going to do to expose her.  He did this before securing his daughters' safety.  He didn't explain anything to Sansa about why he was sending them away.

So Jory Cassel is murdered, her father is injured and Sansa has no idea why he's sending her away?

Ned explicitly states why he's sending Sansa back to Winterfell.

Quote

“Sansa, I’m not sending you away for fighting, though the gods know I’m sick of you two squabbling. I want you back in Winterfell for your own safety. Three of my men were cut down like dogs not a league from where we sit, and what does Robert do? He goes hunting.”

This is why it's hard to take the arguments of Sansa apologists seriously. You keep restating falsehoods in an attempt to absolve Sansa of any blame or personal responsibility. Do you think that if you lie enough, that your lie will become the truth? 

[Mladen]

3 hours ago, Winter's Cold said:

The first issue is that it's essentially Sansa's fault that she's trapped in King's Landing and being forced to marry a Lannister. She went to Cersei and told her the specifics of her father's plans to evacuate the Stark household. Victims who cause their own problems engender less sympathy than victims who've done nothing wrong. I feel far more sympathy for Jeyne Poole than I do for Sansa or Theon.

So, according to that logic, every abused woman is to be blamed because well, she married the man abusing her? That is, at best, very problematic logic and at worst, rather terrible approach to the subject. 

I can't resist the feeling that some people wanted Sansa properly raped, blooded and smacked, just so she would be truly punished for what she did. It seems that regular beatings didn't work for them. 

As for Jeyne Poole, yes, what she went through is quite horrible. But, that still doesn't take away from all the victim-blaming going around.

[David Selig]

6 hours ago, Winter's Cold said:

The first issue is that it's essentially Sansa's fault that she's trapped in King's Landing and being forced to marry a Lannister. She went to Cersei and told her the specifics of her father's plans to evacuate the Stark household. Victims who cause their own problems engender less sympathy than victims who've done nothing wrong. I feel far more sympathy for Jeyne Poole than I do for Sansa or Theon.

This is  wrong. She would have been captured anyway.

[Greywater-Watch]

Pages 23-27 of this thread deal mainly with Sansa's marriage to Tyrion and her behaviour in this. That is - I think - not appropriate to judge on Sansa's character, because there she is all alone (Ned and the whole Starkhousehold dead, Arya on the run).

A 12 year old girl all alone exposed to the whole court and other strangers (the vast majority not in a friendly attitude to her). Drawing conclusions from her acting in such a situation is not fair, I think.

No, I feel that an analysis of her character can only be founded on the period before, when she had all the security and support of her family around her. And of course in the later period, when things had settled a bit. But interpreting why she kneeled or not during her wedding ceremony in Kings Landing - no, I would not dare to.

[Land's End]

7 hours ago, Bea Noleto said:

The OP (and others) makes a rather unoriginal defense of Sansa. The same old excuses: age, naivete, being in love, believing too much in fairy tales,  Arya's fault, the adults' fault, lack of information, trauma, shock, fear of retaliation, trying to be neutral...

There is nothing to add about that. So I will address the title that deceived me into reading this thread.

Sansa is truly one of the worst characters, she is inconsistent, unrealistic and generaly badly written. There are beautiful moments, like the snow castle scene, but just scenes don't make her cohesive. That is why she is so polarizing. The reader has to fix the character for the author, and some do that by diminishing or ignoring her faults in order to make her an heroine while others invent faults that are not there to make her a villain

I agree, I wrote something along these lines a few pages earlier though I didn't word it as drastic as you (and still wouldn't). Glad somebody else sees the inconsistencies regarding her character. 

[WolfClaw]

I find it really strange, but it seems like most of Sansa's accusers in these boards are women!

[Land's End]

24 minutes ago, WolfClaw said:

I find it really strange, but it seems like most of Sansa's accusers in these boards are women!

"Sansa accusers". Wtf... do you have statistics?

I just counted the first two pages:

Sansa Supporters
Male: II
Female: III
No Gender: III

Neutral:
Male: I
Female:
No Gender:  II

Sansa Accusers
Male: IIII
Female: II
No Gender: III

(tried not to count anyone twice)

So maybe get your facts straight before going for the „evil self hating pseudo-feminist women“-trope

 

[sweetsunray]

44 minutes ago, Land's End said:

"Sansa accusers". Wtf... do you have statistics?

I just counted the first two pages:

Sansa Supporters
Male: II
Female: III
No Gender: III

Neutral:
Male: I
Female:
No Gender:  II

Sansa Accusers
Male: IIII
Female: II
No Gender: III

 

I'd argue over your tally. I don't support Sansa on some of her choices and actions, while I don't agree with the condemnation she gets for other choices and actions. I'd consider myself "neutral" because of that and I'm female, but obviously since you don't have a female with neutral, I don't trust your tally there. Though I have no issue with trying to confront someone's unfounded claims about "seems mostly women hate Sansa", especially when the post in question skirts at the rim of forum guidelines.

[Winter's Cold]

5 hours ago, Risto said:

So, according to that logic, every abused woman is to be blamed because well, she married the man abusing her? That is, at best, very problematic logic and at worst, rather terrible approach to the subject. 

Sansa had two choices: return to Winterfell with her sister and give up marrying Joffrey or stay in King's Landing and marry Joffrey betraying her father and the Stark household in the process. She chose the second. Thus, she is partly responsible for the situation that she's in. She knew about Joffrey's abusive nature from the Trident incident. She knew that Cersei was a cruel woman from that same incident. Despite knowing these things she still chose Joffrey and Cersei over her family.

[Land's End]

6 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

I'd argue over your tally. I don't support Sansa on some of her choices and actions, while I don't agree with the condemnation she gets for other choices and actions. I'd consider myself "neutral" because of that and I'm female, but obviously since you don't have a female with neutral, I don't trust your tally there. Though I have no issue with trying to confront someone's unfounded claims about "seems mostly women hate Sansa", especially when the post in question skirts at the rim of forum guidelines.

You didn't post on the first two pages...