Virginity: Important of Chastity in Westeros

[HoodedCrow]

In Westeros, even in the Seven, there is the Maiden...no crazy emphasis on virginity...the Mother...no confusion with virginity...and the Crone...no oops a daisy, take bodily up to heaven before we have to talk about aging. The other religions do not make a big deal about an intact or re growing Virginity. No one is killed for honor although they pretend Lyanna is kidnapped to justify a war.

[Kaibaman]

On 10/01/2017 at 11:31 AM, HoodedCrow said:

In Westeros, even in the Seven, there is the Maiden...no crazy emphasis on virginity...the Mother...no confusion with virginity...and the Crone...no oops a daisy, take bodily up to heaven before we have to talk about aging. The other religions do not make a big deal about an intact or re growing Virginity. No one is killed for honor although they pretend Lyanna is kidnapped to justify a war.

I actually see the Maiden and the Mother analogous to the Virgin Mary only as separate aspects. I guess whenever we have a society which holds up celibacy as a high virtue, it would be reflected in their religion. In Christianity the Virgin Mary thing didn't become such a big deal until the Romans started reforming their society to try and curb the hedonism and depravity of their society.

[Winds of Winter blow cold]

On 1/9/2017 at 5:31 PM, HoodedCrow said:

In Westeros, even in the Seven, there is the Maiden...no crazy emphasis on virginity...the Mother...no confusion with virginity...and the Crone...no oops a daisy, take bodily up to heaven before we have to talk about aging. The other religions do not make a big deal about an intact or re growing Virginity. No one is killed for honor although they pretend Lyanna is kidnapped to justify a war.

"Maiden" is synonymous with "Virgin", in medieval/ASOIAF talk. & it was Aerys brutal killing of Rickard & Brandon Stark, then calling for Jon Arryn to kill Ned & Robert that started the war. 

7 minutes ago, Kaibaman said:

I actually see the Maiden and the Mother analogous to the Virgin Mary only as separate aspects. I guess whenever we have a society which holds up celibacy as a high virtue, it would be reflected in their religion. In Christianity the Virgin Mary thing didn't become such a big deal until the Romans started reforming their society to try and curb the hedonism and depravity of their society.

Maiden, Mother & Crone are analogs of the Greek Hecate...the "Triad of the Moon".

[Colonel Green]

On 1/9/2017 at 9:38 AM, Jon's Queen Consort said:

Yet according to the majority of the Westerosi Jaehaerys was maybe the greatest King, I don't agree but anyway. Hence his court should had been more liberal and equal than the rest of the Kings. 

That would only follow if being "more liberal and equal" meant it was better in the eyes of Westerosi.  Rather, it's the opposite; Jaehaerys I's court was seen to uphold good moral values, whereas Aegon IV's court was corrupt and dissolute, epitomized by Aegon himself.

On 1/9/2017 at 5:12 PM, Protagoras said:

Come to think of it, are there any characters in the book who actually speak about the importance of virginity apart from Cersei (who is clearly not a role-model when it comes to this) and Lancel (who has gotten a serious disease - religion - in him at that point)?

Edit: Oh - Lysa too, not the brightest bulb nor a great role-model.

Catelyn thinks about the importance of virginity when thinking about the rumours around Lysa, noting that it would have been a problem in her marriage to Jon Arryn.

As for "a serious disease - religion", this is an overall religious society.  Lancel has by that point joined a warrior order, but that's merely a more muscular expression of existing official doctrine, not some radical new theological development.

On 1/9/2017 at 8:31 PM, HoodedCrow said:

In Westeros, even in the Seven, there is the Maiden...no crazy emphasis on virginity...the Mother...no confusion with virginity...and the Crone...no oops a daisy, take bodily up to heaven before we have to talk about aging. 

Er, you don't think that "the Maiden" involves an emphasis on virginity?  A virgin is literally what a maiden is; she's wholly defined as a chaste young unmarried woman, before women marry and (theoretically) transition to the Mother.

In general, I find the assertion by some here that the Faith doesn't put a premium on chastity really baffling.  The High Sparrow talks at length about chastity all through AFFC, to name just one prominent example, and Margaery's unmarried attendants are all given virginity inspections alongside her, with the indication that it would be a gross stain on their reputation if they weren't virgins.  Girls in Westeros are expected to be chaste until marriage, and faithful afterward.

[Protagoras]

8 hours ago, Colonel Green said:

Catelyn thinks about the importance of virginity when thinking about the rumours around Lysa, noting that it would have been a problem in her marriage to Jon Arryn.

As for "a serious disease - religion", this is an overall religious society.  Lancel has by that point joined a warrior order, but that's merely a more muscular expression of existing official doctrine, not some radical new theological development.

Catelyn is also wrong here, Lysa was married to Jon depite her lack of virginity without any problems and if Jon have a issue with it, then he shouldn´t have accepted the marriage. Acting cold afterwards is just hypocritical bs, since he accepted those terms given to him. He sold out his precious honor for Hoster´s swords and if he acts pissy about it, then it should be rammed up his face that he should consider his own lack of honor in the issue before criticizing someone else (pro-tip, if your marriage credentials looks poor too, you really don´t have moral capital enough to criticize someones lack of virginity). He made his choice and now he should suck it up, like a man. But you are correct, Catelyn is another character, which considering her own choices, that are likely to overvalue virginity. She has been traditionally raised and have therefore bought the lies about it. Yet her own marriage had nothing to do with her virginity at all...

Again, if you still get those good marriages without being a virgin and 99% of the marriages we see are made for realpolitical reasons, then the virginity lacks value apart from lip service, or has a very low value. In an optimal marriage the bride had been a virgin sure, but the world is rarely optimal nor do the westerosi expect it to be. And Westeros has had a lack of religious dogma, a culture focused on breeding and adoring men for their masculinity and less shaming on women compared with christianity. Of course pre-marital sex is seen more as ok in such a climate. 

As for the Faith, I certainly get the impression that we are talking a new radical theological development in the same way lutheranism was to christianity and catholisism. Suddenly, people are expected to actually follow those rules about sex, virginity and morality that had largely been ignored before. So, no - Westeros does not strike me as a religious society. Its rather a society that religion has known its place and been kept in the background. Virginity inspections and High Sparrows talk of female lust is for me a new development. And don´t forget that Westeros is multi-religious. That makes it harder to have a strong church enforcing hard moral rules. 

As for Maiden, Mother, Crone - they are representative of the stages in the female life. The poinyt is not reallly that the maiden is a chaste, but that she is young and innocent in life, slowly transforming and growing into the nurturing mother as time passes. 

[Tianzi]

It's strongly hinted that Lysa's lack of virginity was the reason why Jon Arryn took her, as he wanted a heir and she was proven to be fertile.

And to his credit, his dislike of her being caused by her being 'unpure' is Cat's (a wee bit too 'idealistic' character's) interpretation, not a fact. He could have disliked her for a number of reasons, he could have been a cranky old man, she disliked him, he could have been annoyed and disappointed by her personality especially compared to Hoster and Cat's (it seems like it was Lysa's problem during all her life).

But... it's exactly about what I said in the first sentence. As much as marriage is about money and alliances, it's also about getting heirs. And we will have double standard here, because of paternity. As loud as I cheered for Cersei giving Robert his payback, his bastards are just something uncomfortable, and her bastards are fraud to the throne.

This culture (supported by religion) of honour and chastity may seem like a pretty ornament around things that really matter, but there is a belief that if a woman (or just a person) couldn't keep hers/his inside before marriage, she/he wouldn't be able to do so after it... and is this belief so wrong in this story? Robert and Cersei again.

You likely don't know your future bride that well before marriage. Her (apparent) virginity or lack of it tells you something about her character  - if she is willing to uphold her duties (or at least not stupid enough to/willing to shame your house). Does that matter, or do you think you're just getting a breeding cow in addition to your dowry and alliance? Well, let's take a moment of silence for Jon Arryn and Robert Baratheon here.

[Colonel Green]

2 hours ago, Protagoras said:

Catelyn is also wrong here, Lysa was married to Jon depite her lack of virginity without any problems and if Jon have a issue with it, then he shouldn´t have accepted the marriage.

The issue is not whether Catelyn was correct in respect of that particular marriage, the issue is that Catelyn is a very typical noblewoman (indeed, she's, in concept, very close to being the ideal feudal lady) and her opinions on this point are reflective of what Westerosi culture in general would think.  And she thinks that Lysa not being a virgin when she married would be a big deal for her husband.

Quote

Yet her own marriage had nothing to do with her virginity at all...

Catelyn's marriage was a matter of wartime crisis.  That's hardly typical.

Quote

And Westeros has had a lack of religious dogma, a culture focused on breeding and adoring men for their masculinity and less shaming on women compared with christianity. Of course pre-marital sex is seen more as ok in such a climate. 

Again, all of that is totally unsubstantiated in the text.  Westerosi culture is intensely misogynist, and, if anything, women in Westeros have a much more restricted profile than in the real Middle Ages.

Quote

As for the Faith, I certainly get the impression that we are talking a new radical theological development in the same way lutheranism was to christianity and catholisism. Suddenly, people are expected to actually follow those rules about sex, virginity and morality that had largely been ignored before. So, no - Westeros does not strike me as a religious society. Its rather a society that religion has known its place and been kept in the background. Virginity inspections and High Sparrows talk of female lust is for me a new development. And don´t forget that Westeros is multi-religious. That makes it harder to have a strong church enforcing hard moral rules. 

What's new about the High Sparrow is not the theology, it's that he's not willing to bow to the need of the Crown.  That enforcement has been toughened doesn't indicate that Westeros wasn't religious before, he's just making it harder for people to be hypocritical.  Cersei's whole scheme in AFFC hinges on how damaging a reputation for unchastity can be, even apart from the specific issue of Margaery being alleged to cheat on Tommen.  The High Sparrow's talk about female lust, etc., is standard Faith dogma (we also saw this with, e.g., Baelor the Blessed and his attitude toward his sisters, where the issue was not the basic idea that women are lustful and incite lust in others, but the radical lengths Baelor went to keep his sisters "pure").  If it was meant to be new, there'd be actual indications of this in the discussions around the Sparrow movement; indeed, the Sparrow movement is never discussed as theologically radical, what's new about it is that it can't be bought off.

That not everybody actually follows the rules in practise is not evidence that Westeros isn't a religious society.  The medieval Catholic Church, for instance, was immensely corrupt much of the time, but that was still a religious society.  Hypocrisy does not negate that the ideals exist, and it doesn't meant that people who get caught don't suffer consequences for it.  Sure, sometimes you can get away with it, sometimes your status is such that people will overlook it, but those are exceptions to the rule.

Quote

As for Maiden, Mother, Crone - they are representative of the stages in the female life. The poinyt is not reallly that the maiden is a chaste, but that she is young and innocent in life, slowly transforming and growing into the nurturing mother as time passes. 

Virginity is inherent in the term "Maiden".  GRRM knows what he's doing when he uses that word.

1 hour ago, Tianzi said:

It's strongly hinted that Lysa's lack of virginity was the reason why Jon Arryn took her, as he wanted a heir and she was proven to be fertile.

Where's that hinted?  Jon Arryn married Lysa because he wanted an alliance with Hoster Tully.  He seems to have been a widower for some time prior to the civil war and never made any attempt at remarriage, so I don't think fathering heirs was on his mind at that point.  He was accepting, at that point, of passing on his title to members of his extended family.

[The Grey Wolf]

2 hours ago, Protagoras said:

Text

I think you're wrong about Westerosi religiosity. The nobles of the 7K may on the whole be unrealistically skeptical, dismissive, or outright agnostic/atheist but the majority of people, the smallfolk are VERY religious. Just look at the Sparrow movement, the Faith Militant Uprising, the Storming of the Dragonpit, the riots in King's Landing and the speech given before that about the "whoremonger king", which is clearly couched in religious terms of salvation/damnation/spiritual cleansing.

Also, calling someone becoming religious after traumatic experience being "infected" is a little strong don't you think?

On the subject of sexuality in the 7K Westeros is simultaneously more liberal, with the Faith being much weaker than the Catholic Church was historically and the availability of Moon Tea as a reliable contraceptive, but on the other hand it is also at the same time strangely much more misogynistic than the RL Middle Ages were, with the Rule of Six and the right of First Night actually existing in the history, not to mention the prevalence of marriages in which the girl has newly "flowered". In fact in all my reading of history the only notable example I can find of a noble wedding and actually impregnating his child wife was in the case of Margaret Beaufort, mother of Henry (VII) Tudor, and even then it was noted not only by her physicians that she wasn't "fully-formed" but the stress of delivering the child prevented her from every having another for the rest of her life given that she was married twice-over after her first marriage and never had any children during the course of either.

[Tianzi]

27 minutes ago, Colonel Green said:

Where's that hinted?  Jon Arryn married Lysa because he wanted an alliance with Hoster Tully.  He seems to have been a widower for some time prior to the civil war and never made any attempt at remarriage, so I don't think fathering heirs was on his mind at that point.  He was accepting, at that point, of passing on his title to members of his extended family.

SoS, Cat's first chapter. It's her thoughts, just as about Jon Arryn 'acting pissy' because of Lysa being 'soiled', but it makes a lot of sense, especially since JA was old, it was his last chance for fathering a heir and it was a wartime so he wasn't spoiled for choice.

27 minutes ago, The Grey Wolf said:

I think you're wrong about Westerosi religiosity. The nobles of the 7K may on the whole be unrealistically skeptical, dismissive, or outright agnostic/atheist but the majority of people, the smallfolk are VERY religious. Just look at the Sparrow movement, the Faith Militant Uprising, the Storming of the Dragonpit, the riots in King's Landing and the speech given before that about the "whoremonger king", which is clearly couched in religious terms of salvation/damnation/spiritual cleansing.

I'd still say that it was more because (after the rebellion) whoring was just about the only thing Robert was doing (ok, next to drinking), and he wasn't exactly discreet about it.

I would see religion and 'morality' as a supporting tool in politics: if you have a problem with someone, go after his rumoured or not sexual scandals, especially if it's a woman (not so unlike today's real world, tbh...). Of course, it wouldn't have worked if at least a part the general public wasn't treating the religious blah blah seriously. So while the men of reason would primarily count money, swords and big names, they's also know that having the reputation of being noble/pure/religious wouldn't hurt. (ex: the Tyrells)

[Protagoras]

4 hours ago, Colonel Green said:

The issue is not whether Catelyn was correct in respect of that particular marriage, the issue is that Catelyn is a very typical noblewoman (indeed, she's, in concept, very close to being the ideal feudal lady) and her opinions on this point are reflective of what Westerosi culture in general would think.  And she thinks that Lysa not being a virgin when she married would be a big deal for her husband.

Nope, Catelyn is judging and too traditional. She represents at best the conservative segment of the populace, not the whole of it. And (as  I have pointed out repeatedly) that segment doesn´t strike me as overly large. In fact, Catelyn is one of the few highborn ladies who are known to have slept only with her husband - Lysa Tully, Cersei Lannister, Asha Greyjoy, Jeyne Westerling, Arianne Martell, Daena Targaryen, Melissa Blackwood, the three daughters of Lord Butterwell, Barbra Bracken, Barbry Ryswell, Daenerys Targaryen, Ami Frey and Delena Florent are people we know have not, and most of them before they got married (with many people suspected of pre-marital sex too - Margaery Tyrell and Rhaenyra Targaryen as two clear examples.

So clearly, Catelyn doesn´t look to be the standard here, but have rather adopted a hypocritical ideal many in Westeros might agree with in theory but ignore in practice. Therefore, chastity is overrated - despite the amount of big words people proclaim in support for it. We are following a book series of several characters and their actions on screen must be what we use to draw conclusions about morality, no? Saying that there might be alot of unnamed characters who supports Catelyn is a very poor argument.

4 hours ago, Colonel Green said:

Catelyn's marriage was a matter of wartime crisis.  That's hardly typical.

Funny that few marriages in the books seem to be "typical" then. Or maybe they are and your definition is simply wrong.

4 hours ago, Colonel Green said:

Again, all of that is totally unsubstantiated in the text.  Westerosi culture is intensely misogynist, and, if anything, women in Westeros have a much more restricted profile than in the real Middle Ages.

Yeah, I hear you say that - but nothing seem to point that way. As was said before, Westeros doesn´t execute people as witches and doesn´t force women to consider themselves inferiour nor accept that the root of all sin is their original mother eve, who have transferred that sin to them. So the only one who comes off as totally unsubstantiated is you, since you fail to see the real oppression in the real Middle Ages.

4 hours ago, Colonel Green said:

What's new about the High Sparrow is not the theology, it's that he's not willing to bow to the need of the Crown.  That enforcement has been toughened doesn't indicate that Westeros wasn't religious before, he's just making it harder for people to be hypocritical.  Cersei's whole scheme in AFFC hinges on how damaging a reputation for unchastity can be, even apart from the specific issue of Margaery being alleged to cheat on Tommen.  The High Sparrow's talk about female lust, etc., is standard Faith dogma (we also saw this with, e.g., Baelor the Blessed and his attitude toward his sisters, where the issue was not the basic idea that women are lustful and incite lust in others, but the radical lengths Baelor went to keep his sisters "pure").  If it was meant to be new, there'd be actual indications of this in the discussions around the Sparrow movement; indeed, the Sparrow movement is never discussed as theologically radical, what's new about it is that it can't be bought off.

Another case where you don´t come off as believable. Baelor the Blessed was seen by basically all as a religious nut and his legacy is rather that you shouldn´t be too pious (a message I have a hard time seeing in the real middle ages).

And if it is standard Faith dogma, why have we seen so little of it before? The elder brother nor Septon Meribald say little about it, nor do the septons and septas themselves. The first septa we see gets herself drunk early. Its not like they are trying that hard imprinting moral messages.

[Protagoras]

5 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

I think you're wrong about Westerosi religiosity. The nobles of the 7K may on the whole be unrealistically skeptical, dismissive, or outright agnostic/atheist but the majority of people, the smallfolk are VERY religious. Just look at the Sparrow movement, the Faith Militant Uprising, the Storming of the Dragonpit, the riots in King's Landing and the speech given before that about the "whoremonger king", which is clearly couched in religious terms of salvation/damnation/spiritual cleansing.

Also, calling someone becoming religious after traumatic experience being "infected" is a little strong don't you think?

On the subject of sexuality in the 7K Westeros is simultaneously more liberal, with the Faith being much weaker than the Catholic Church was historically and the availability of Moon Tea as a reliable contraceptive, but on the other hand it is also at the same time strangely much more misogynistic than the RL Middle Ages were, with the Rule of Six and the right of First Night actually existing in the history, not to mention the prevalence of marriages in which the girl has newly "flowered". In fact in all my reading of history the only notable example I can find of a noble wedding and actually impregnating his child wife was in the case of Margaret Beaufort, mother of Henry (VII) Tudor, and even then it was noted not only by her physicians that she wasn't "fully-formed" but the stress of delivering the child prevented her from every having another for the rest of her life given that she was married twice-over after her first marriage and never had any children during the course of either.

Funny that, because what I see are people who in desperation turn to things they don´t quite understand (Yes, the quote from Dark knight about the Joker and comparing it to religion is very much with purpose). In all those cases, people have basically mentally given up.

I have a hard time finding a better word tbh. Suddenly a person is getting a mental wound which make him try to convince others, with no real evidence whatsoever, that there is a magical guy in the sky who we must obey. And regardless of what you say said person will continue his bullshit. I get that people want hope, but if you are going to create an imaginary friend and force that construction on the society I am going to fight said person regardless of his or hers existing traumas. Do you prefer the word afflicted with religion? Or suffering from religion?

The first night is not misogynism but a class issue. Nobles (the privilegied group) has the right to use the wives of the commoners (the less privilegied group). And the rule of six could be seen as an attempt to stem violence against women and instead as a punishment for cheaters. But certainly - the situation in Westeros is not optimal. But then again - they lack and religion who forces women to consider themselves inferiour and accept that the root of all sin is due to the original female, Eve - who have transferred that sin to them, they lack clothing rules, they lack charges of witchcraft, Brienne is not executed for cross dressing etc. I think you paint our medieval times with a big whitewashing brush.

[Colonel Green]

1 hour ago, Protagoras said:

Nope, Catelyn is judging and too traditional. She represents at best the conservative segment of the populace, not the whole of it. And (as  I have pointed out repeatedly) that segment doesn´t strike me as overly large. In fact, Catelyn is one of the few highborn ladies who are known to have slept only with her husband - Lysa Tully, Cersei Lannister, Asha Greyjoy, Jeyne Westerling, Arianne Martell, Daena Targaryen, Melissa Blackwood, the three daughters of Lord Butterwell, Barbra Bracken, Barbry Ryswell, Daenerys Targaryen, Ami Frey and Delena Florent are people we know have not, and most of them before they got married (with many people suspected of pre-marital sex too - Margaery Tyrell and Rhaenyra Targaryen as two clear examples.

So clearly, Catelyn doesn´t look to be the standard here, but have rather adopted a hypocritical ideal many in Westeros might agree with in theory but ignore in practice. Therefore, chastity is overrated - despite the amount of big words people proclaim in support for it. We are following a book series of several characters and their actions on screen must be what we use to draw conclusions about morality, no? Saying that there might be alot of unnamed characters who supports Catelyn is a very poor argument.

Again, whether people in practise engage in premarital sex doesn't mean that there aren't expectations of chastity.  That's why women, especially, don't do so openly.  The collection of people you list there are quite varied in circumstances, and in numerous cases they suffered consequences for it.  Hell, you cite Jeyne Westerling -- the whole point of Jeyne Westerling's role in the story is that, having had premarital sex, she's considered soiled, and Robb is honour-bound to marry her to save her reputation (something that, in practise, lots of people probably wouldn't do in that situation, but there you are).

Several more are people who became the king's mistresses, which was also a real phenomenon in our world too, yet the middle ages in our world were considered religious times.

Quote

Funny that few marriages in the books seem to be "typical" then.

Most marriages in Westeros are not contracted in the midst of wartime alliances, which radically alters circumstances, increasing the value of people who might otherwise be less desirable and altering the pool of candidates by making necessary alliances that wouldn't be contemplated otherwise.

Quote

Yeah, I hear you say that - but nothing seem to point that way. As was said before, Westeros doesn't execute people as witches and doesn't force women to consider themselves inferior nor accept that the root of all sin is their original mother eve, who have transferred that sin to them. So the only one who comes off as totally unsubstantiated is you, since you fail to see the real oppression in the real Middle Ages.

It's also legal to beat your wife in Westeros (the "rule of six"), and until recently it was legal (and apparently spiritually acceptable) for nobles to rape the wives of their smallfolk.  The Faith clearly does teach that women are inferior, even if it doesn't have the specific equivalent of Original Sin -- literally every female character's story is an examination of Westerosi misogyny, and its religious culture is part of that.

Also, while there were some witch hunts, etc. in the medieval period, those mostly happened in the Early Modern period, after the time period Westeros is modeled on (contrary to stereotype).

Quote

Another case where you don´t come off as believable. Baelor the Blessed was seen by basically all as a religious nut and his legacy is rather that you shouldn´t be too pious (a message I have a hard time seeing in the real middle ages).

Baelor is one of the most well-loved monarchs of the Targaryen dynasty, particularly by the smallfolk, and his piety is central to his image.

Quote

And if it is standard Faith dogma, why have we seen so little of it before? The elder brother nor Septon Meribald say little about it, nor do the septons and septas themselves. The first septa we see gets herself drunk early. Its not like they are trying that hard imprinting moral messages.

Because, as in real life, different people focus on different theological issues, and have different life experiences that inform their perspectives.  If you got to five different churches on Sunday, you'll hear five different sermons.  As well, the people you cite fulfill different sorts of roles.  There are drunk priests, and there are teetotaler priests.

Also, do you really think Septa Mordane has been teaching Sansa and Arya that premarital sex is okay?  Clearly not.

[The Grey Wolf]

2 hours ago, Protagoras said:

Text

On peasants: The smallfolk expressing their discontent through the Faith is not "having given up". Its them fighting back through the means that are available to them and expressing their opinions through ideology, which again, since the smallfolk are on the whole generally very religious, makes perfect sense.

On religion: Neither of those terms are any better because they imply that being religious=being crazy or sick and that is just NOT true. There are plenty of religious people who are also logical and reasonable, something I can attest to from personal experience. Furthermore, if you honestly believe that you have the right to believe that what the person with the head trauma in your example is saying is bullshit then I don't see how you can claim to want to stop him from saying what he believes without being a hypocrite.

On the Middle Ages: I am well aware of all those facts though I do need to point out that the witch hunts only really took off as we know them in the Early Modern period that followed the Middle Ages. Beyond that I stated quite clearly that Westeros is simultaneously more liberal AND more misogynistic at the same time. To clarify if you honestly think the First Night is ONLY about class and not also about gender (and how it can be objectified and abused) then I don't think anything I say can or will change your mind not to mention that in the Rule of Six we have a secular law that permits a man to beat his wife, something which I don't believe is true of the RL Middle Ages (feel free to correct me though if I am wrong). Finally, unlike Christianity since the Faith is the product of one man's mind and GRRM treats religion with little depth or nuance we will never have the amount of information on the Faith that we do have on the Catholic Church, which makes making any definitive statements on it and its dogma rather meaningless.

On Baelor: Wrong again. You're taking the view of a segment of the nobility, themselves a tiny segment of the population, and applying it to everyone when we know that unlike most of the lords the smallfolk are religious and thus would not see Baelor's piety as an issue. Furthermore, according to TWOIAF Baelor was "loved" by the smallfolk (AKA the majority of the population) partly because of his charity admittedly but also because of his piety and mercy. What's more, the only ones who mock Baelor in ASOIAF are Tywin's brood (who are as immoral and arrogant as the nobility gets) and Oberyn (who hails from Dorne, a place well-versed in treachery). Finally, to quote the wiki: "None of the Targaryen kings are as beloved as Baelor" who "loved the smallfolk and the gods in equal parts". Yeah, Baelor was popular, just not with most of the nobility or you know less than a five percent of the population. Boohoo.

[HoodedCrow]

Wrong, Wrong. Wrong. Recent misogynistic quotes.

[Protagoras]

17 hours ago, Colonel Green said:

Again, whether people in practise engage in premarital sex doesn't mean that there aren't expectations of chastity.  That's why women, especially, don't do so openly.  The collection of people you list there are quite varied in circumstances, and in numerous cases they suffered consequences for it.  Hell, you cite Jeyne Westerling -- the whole point of Jeyne Westerling's role in the story is that, having had premarital sex, she's considered soiled, and Robb is honour-bound to marry her to save her reputation (something that, in practise, lots of people probably wouldn't do in that situation, but there you are).

Several more are people who became the king's mistresses, which was also a real phenomenon in our world too, yet the middle ages in our world were considered religious times.

Most marriages in Westeros are not contracted in the midst of wartime alliances, which radically alters circumstances, increasing the value of people who might otherwise be less desirable and altering the pool of candidates by making necessary alliances that wouldn't be contemplated otherwise.

It's also legal to beat your wife in Westeros (the "rule of six"), and until recently it was legal (and apparently spiritually acceptable) for nobles to rape the wives of their smallfolk.  The Faith clearly does teach that women are inferior, even if it doesn't have the specific equivalent of Original Sin -- literally every female character's story is an examination of Westerosi misogyny, and its religious culture is part of that.

Also, while there were some witch hunts, etc. in the medieval period, those mostly happened in the Early Modern period, after the time period Westeros is modeled on (contrary to stereotype).

Baelor is one of the most well-loved monarchs of the Targaryen dynasty, particularly by the smallfolk, and his piety is central to his image.

Because, as in real life, different people focus on different theological issues, and have different life experiences that inform their perspectives.  If you got to five different churches on Sunday, you'll hear five different sermons.  As well, the people you cite fulfill different sorts of roles.  There are drunk priests, and there are teetotaler priests.

Also, do you really think Septa Mordane has been teaching Sansa and Arya that premarital sex is okay?  Clearly not.

Again, if many more people in practise seems to engage in premarital sex than those not then we clearly don´t have the strongest expectations of chastity - far weaker in our world. And again, if Jeyne Westerling was so good unsioled then how can she not even get a marriage to one of ser Kevans sons? The theory (virginity is important) doesnt match the reality here. 

Most marriages in Westeros are based on what the other party has to offer, and considering the somewhat instability created by wars in 10 year intervals, your idea that the circumstances are radically altered simply isn´t true. The circumstances has always been in favor of those with strong trade, much money, military might and strategical position and NEVER in favor of those with purer daughters as Westerlings found out. But I have already written about this in earlier posts. Why do you ask questions I have already answered. 

Again, the situtation for women in our world was worse. And many of the thing you describe are not a religious law but a secular. Indeed (as I also have written about before) the religious dogma in Westeros seems to be low, indeed almost lacking with the tradition of law not that based on religious needs. You also fail to see the difference between holding someone responsible for original sin and limiting someones role in society due to tradition. One is far less harmful. And your early modern argument makes no sense - sure we had that in a later time period, but Westeros still hasn´t had it - you can´t necessary assume that they will in the future. 

When I say "basically all", I of course meant the nobilty (which is after all the people we follow in the books!) and while in general only certain individuals like Tyrion or Oberyn critizice him, I see few in the books who praise Baelor (In general you should stop assuming that there are many off-screen nobles supporting you - what we don´t see doesn´t exist). Show me an example of a noble who have anything good to say about Baelor instead. 

I certainly think Septa Mordane will teach them to be ladies, admiring men for their strength, to be social and active. She won´t say that premarital sex is okay, but she won´t preach against it the same way people would in our word either. There will be far less speeches about the immorality of sex (which is of the devil and will send you to hell!) and far more about that her father will find her a suitable husband. Clearly a weaker message, in other words. 

In general, I feel this discussion is going nowhere since you are repeating questions that I have already answered. It is a bit annoying to have to go back and repeat previous answers. I think you should read my previous posts a bit better. But then, this is going in a circle - I have pretty much presented my case. That you don´t see it that way is your loss. 

[Protagoras]

17 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

On peasants: The smallfolk expressing their discontent through the Faith is not "having given up". Its them fighting back through the means that are available to them and expressing their opinions through ideology, which again, since the smallfolk are on the whole generally very religious, makes perfect sense.

On religion: Neither of those terms are any better because they imply that being religious=being crazy or sick and that is just NOT true. There are plenty of religious people who are also logical and reasonable, something I can attest to from personal experience. Furthermore, if you honestly believe that you have the right to believe that what the person with the head trauma in your example is saying is bullshit then I don't see how you can claim to want to stop him from saying what he believes without being a hypocrite.

On the Middle Ages: I am well aware of all those facts though I do need to point out that the witch hunts only really took off as we know them in the Early Modern period that followed the Middle Ages. Beyond that I stated quite clearly that Westeros is simultaneously more liberal AND more misogynistic at the same time. To clarify if you honestly think the First Night is ONLY about class and not also about gender (and how it can be objectified and abused) then I don't think anything I say can or will change your mind not to mention that in the Rule of Six we have a secular law that permits a man to beat his wife, something which I don't believe is true of the RL Middle Ages (feel free to correct me though if I am wrong). Finally, unlike Christianity since the Faith is the product of one man's mind and GRRM treats religion with little depth or nuance we will never have the amount of information on the Faith that we do have on the Catholic Church, which makes making any definitive statements on it and its dogma rather meaningless.

On Baelor: Wrong again. You're taking the view of a segment of the nobility, themselves a tiny segment of the population, and applying it to everyone when we know that unlike most of the lords the smallfolk are religious and thus would not see Baelor's piety as an issue. Furthermore, according to TWOIAF Baelor was "loved" by the smallfolk (AKA the majority of the population) partly because of his charity admittedly but also because of his piety and mercy. What's more, the only ones who mock Baelor in ASOIAF are Tywin's brood (who are as immoral and arrogant as the nobility gets) and Oberyn (who hails from Dorne, a place well-versed in treachery). Finally, to quote the wiki: "None of the Targaryen kings are as beloved as Baelor" who "loved the smallfolk and the gods in equal parts". Yeah, Baelor was popular, just not with most of the nobility or you know less than a five percent of the population. Boohoo.

But why speak of the smallfolk and not the nobles? It is the nobles who make arranged marriages, its the nobles who we as readers follow and it is the nobles we therefore have information about. The discussion of castity/virginity (and its low value) is of course about the standards to said nobility and if they are as sceptical and outright agnostic/atheist then certainly virginity doesn´t have the same value as it had historically. It doesn´t really matter what the smallfolk think since they wont be able to marry neither a Jeyne Westerling nor a Asha Greyjoy. 

In general, you are the one coming of as doing definitive statements about thinks we have little information about, like the religiousity and the habits of the smallfolk. We have no idea if they are as religious that you say they are. Nor do they have any realpolitik to consider and therefore are not capable answering these questions. But if they had such a choice, I am pretty certain that they would pick a Asha Greyjoy any time despite their religious views. Why? Because basic human nature - you do the thing that gives you an advantage. Look at the smallfolk every time they are given money for their bodies (sex or service). They take it almost every single time. If Tyrion is willing to pay 1 dragon for a random local girl, the smallfolk will fight with themselves for the money and the honor. 

In fact, it looks like you agree with much that I say, but that I still am wrong about Westerosi religiosity? How can I be? What exactly are you not agreeing with here? After all, religion has been more of a personal role in Westeros since there have been few enforced religious laws, which is basically the same thing as "weak religion". It is a society that religion has known its place and been kept in the background. Just look on any place where a religion is strong and influential in the populace - what do they do? Thats right, enforcing religious rules in the law! Secular laws are a point in MY favor and you yourself called them secular laws. 

As for religion, if you try to convince others, with no real evidence whatsoever, that there is a magical guy in the sky who we all must obey and refuses to prove said point, then you are NOT a logical and reasonable person. If you don´t consider that crazy - how would you classify someone who claim something exists that you can´t see, find, touch nor analyse and when confronted said person say "its about having faith". Oh, its about assuming shit up? Why not claim Santa is real then too, or pixies or the Yeti? Its the same, exact argument! Those people might be logical in other areas, but they sure are not in that case. 

[Colonel Green]

2 hours ago, Protagoras said:

And again, if Jeyne Westerling was so good unsioled then how can she not even get a marriage to one of ser Kevans sons? The theory (virginity is important) doesnt match the reality here. 

Whether she was good enough to marry Kevan's son is irrelevant.  The point is that her value is considered to be catastrophically lower after sleeping with Robb compared to what it was before.  Nobody disagrees on this point, they merely disagree on whether Robb should have married her.

Quote

Most marriages in Westeros are based on what the other party has to offer, and considering the somewhat instability created by wars in 10 year intervals, your idea that the circumstances are radically altered simply isn´t true.

Westeros doesn't have wars in 10 year intervals.  In the 3rd century AC, the only protracted conflicts that would necessitate major intermarrying of houses came at the very end:  Robert's Rebellion, and the War of Five Kings.  The times our characters live in are meant to be extraordinary, that's why we're reading a story set there.

Quote

Again, the situtation for women in our world was worse.

No, it definitely wasn't.  There's been quite a lot of commentary on GRRM's depiction of women's rights in Westeros versus the actual Middle Ages, and overwhelmingly his view of women's roles, social rights, etc. is much narrower than was actually the case.

Quote

And many of the thing you describe are not a religious law but a secular.

A custom like First Night could not exist if it was incompatible with either the Faith of the Seven or the Old Gods, as to all appearances it was not.

Quote

And your early modern argument makes no sense - sure we had that in a later time period, but Westeros still hasn´t had it - you can´t necessary assume that they will in the future. 

Your argument was that the Middle Ages were worse because of witch burnings.  My point was that witch burnings weren't really a feature of the time period GRRM is basing Westeros off of, so the lack of evidence for them in Westeros is not a point at which Westeros is superior to the real world.

Quote

I certainly think Septa Mordane will teach them to be ladies, admiring men for their strength, to be social and active. She won´t say that premarital sex is okay, but she won´t preach against it the same way people would in our word either. There will be far less speeches about the immorality of sex (which is of the devil and will send you to hell!) and far more about that her father will find her a suitable husband. Clearly a weaker message, in other words. 

I don't see the basis for that, since to all appearances Westerosi views of gender roles are every bit as misogynist as the real Middle Ages.  As was very evident the more the series started to delve into them, particularly beginning in AFFC.

[Protagoras]

3 hours ago, Colonel Green said:

Whether she was good enough to marry Kevan's son is irrelevant.  The point is that her value is considered to be catastrophically lower after sleeping with Robb compared to what it was before.  Nobody disagrees on this point, they merely disagree on whether Robb should have married her.

Westeros doesn't have wars in 10 year intervals.  In the 3rd century AC, the only protracted conflicts that would necessitate major intermarrying of houses came at the very end:  Robert's Rebellion, and the War of Five Kings.  The times our characters live in are meant to be extraordinary, that's why we're reading a story set there.

No, it definitely wasn't.  There's been quite a lot of commentary on GRRM's depiction of women's rights in Westeros versus the actual Middle Ages, and overwhelmingly his view of women's roles, social rights, etc. is much narrower than was actually the case.

A custom like First Night could not exist if it was incompatible with either the Faith of the Seven or the Old Gods, as to all appearances it was not.

Your argument was that the Middle Ages were worse because of witch burnings.  My point was that witch burnings weren't really a feature of the time period GRRM is basing Westeros off of, so the lack of evidence for them in Westeros is not a point at which Westeros is superior to the real world.

I don't see the basis for that, since to all appearances Westerosi views of gender roles are every bit as misogynist as the real Middle Ages.  As was very evident the more the series started to delve into them, particularly beginning in AFFC.

I certainly do, since that is not a point that I am willing to accept. Her value was low at the beginning. Extremely low. But house Westerling still has a noble name, some resources and some soldiers. That is hard currency. Its the same with stock markets - at some point a stock can´t sink lower, due to the hard currency in the company like machines and owned land. And this is Jeyne Westerling, a noble nobody who actually has been very clear at that point in which bed she has slept. If you are Sansa Stark or Asha Greyjoy or Arianne Martell and has some discretion, your marriage value will always be high. I think people talk about her value being catastrophically lower, without really analyzing the situation.

So, lets see - Westerlings have a tradition to marry wealthy commoners. Do you think that rich cheesemonger (or whatever his business is) would say no to that noble marriage and connections just because Jeyne isn´t innocent? Or that a second son would pass up on Arianne ans Sunspear just because they find out about her and Daemon. They certainly would not, because Virginity is not a important trait. You want status, power, money - all those nice things and you won´t find virginity in top 10 nor most likely top 20. And that is regardless if its war or peace. That trade deal is going to look lucrative in wartime as well as peace time.

As for the middle ages, you are clearly ignoring what you don´t want to see. Certainly the lack of evidence for witch burnings in Westeros is a point at which Westeros is superior to the real world. And so is no clothing restrictions. You (for example) just assume that First Night must have a religious acceptance but why would that be the case considering it clearly breaks the religious ideas on what a marriage is (apart from the Iron Islands and the Drowned god). Why bother discussing with you if you just assume things are because you say they are.

And no, you can´t use the argument that to all appearances Westerosi views of gender roles are every bit as misogynist as the real Middle Ages, considering that I have in several posts now disagreed with that notion. They live in another culture. Which does not vilify sex. And the only persons you find think so are the religious, the conservatives and Cersei - which, again, does not represent the whole Westeros but a small part.

But I think I am done trying to convince you. I have at least given several arguments why Westeros is less religious, less misogynistic and logical reasons a maidenhead doesn´t matter much. You havn´t given evidence nor arguments for your positions. You have just said "it is so", which is not an argument and then used that assurance in a follow-up argument, which obviously gives it zero value. But I don´t think you are willing to accept that, so we are clearly done here. Believe what you will.

 

[The Grey Wolf]

4 hours ago, Protagoras said:

Text

Jeyne Westerling was not considered worthy of marriage with Kevan's son because her family intermarried with lower-class merchants from Essos. And you're right this discussion is going nowhere so I'm going to drop out because it is clear neither of us can agree with the other. Good day to you.

[Colonel Green]

6 minutes ago, Protagoras said:

Do you think that rich cheesemonger (or whatever his business is) would say no to that noble marriage and connections just because Jeyne isn´t innocent?

The Westerlings (and other nobles) don't want to marry rich cheesemongers.  That's marrying down.  Indeed, the fact that Jeyne's mother is of low blood is why Kevan passed her over as a bride for his sons.

The thing is, every argument you're making for what a maiden's virginity doesn't matter would also apply to the real world, yet in the real world it did matter.

Quote

Certainly the lack of evidence for witch burnings in Westeros is a point at which Westeros is superior to the real world.

Why, since witch burnings really weren't a thing in the medieval world?  That's like saying Westeros is superior to the real world because it doesn't misuse nuclear waste.

Quote

You (for example) just assume that First Night must have a religious acceptance but why would that be the case considering it clearly breaks the religious ideas on what a marriage is (apart from the Iron Islands and the Drowned god).

Clearly it doesn't break their notions of what a marriage is, since for pretty much all of Westerosi history it's been allowed.  Theology would have accommodated such practises, even if they didn't originate from them, otherwise the septons and people learning the Old Gods' faith would be inciting opposition to the status quo.

Quote

They live in another culture. Which does not vilify sex. And the only persons you find think so are the religious, the conservatives and Cersei - which, again, does not represent the whole Westeros but a small part.

Most of Westeros is religious, in the same way that people in the medieval period were.  You simply dismiss the characters who voice this philosophy as atypical, when the thematic point of the novels is that this is all typical.