Hey kids, let's talk about the male gaze!

[Damon_Tor]

Just now, Renly's Banana said:

Although this whole "he's not gay so he's physically incapable of doing it" excuse is super lazy and tired. He's not a rapist either, but he's written a lot of that. Or a cannibal or a murder -- I assume his brain is also "hardwired" to not like those either.

Rape has historically been an extremely successful mating strategy, why on earth would we develop instincts against raping?

[Maester Drew]

9 hours ago, Good Guy Garlan said:

Ok, whatever, that's not as ridiculous as Dany having sex with Irri out of absolutely nowhere. There was no set up to that, and it had literally no implications or consequences for character or plot. None at all. What did that contribute to the plot or Dany's (or Irri's) character development, I ask you? 

It's been a while since I last read ASOS, but didn't Dany have sex with Irri because she was horny? At the time, her husband had been dead for almost a year (according to this timeline) so she hadn't had sex in a long time. Simply put, she needed release, and Irri was available.

What does this serve to Dany's character development? Not much, but I ask, does everything in a story have to contribute character development? But, the Synopsis of ASOS- Chapter 23 does mention that Dany did feel guilty for treating Irri like a sex slave, so, I'd actually count that as character development, especially when one considers her actions against slavery in later chapters.

[chrisdaw]

There is a purpose to underplaying JC's sexuality, he's building him as a romantic. You're likely going to get what you want in the form of JC and Daemon. And the text won't be any different for it.

[aryagonnakill#2]

6 hours ago, Good Guy Garlan said:

Sure, I get that, I mentioned that in the OP. It's just funny to me that the plot never lends itself to have a gay scene but it goes out of its way - even against how characters usually act - to have lesbian intercourse. Pretty convenient, seems to me. 

(Again, I'm not asking why GRRM writes solely from the perspective of a male gaze, but to what extent it affects the novels and especially how the audience views the female characters.)

This post is on point, I totally agree. 

Hmmm, what's your source on that? Mtv circa 2003? 

Considering the highly problematic context of his relationship with Dany, I'm not even sure what was GRRM's aim with that. Even if we ignore the obvious rape going on, I wouldn't say those bits are meant to be alluring or erotic or non-male gaze-y. 

 

6 hours ago, David Selig said:

My guess is "porn".

I was actually referring to every study/survey done on the matter which you are both more than capable of looking up, but by all means since you don't like the result go ahead and dismiss it...

[velo-knight]

7 hours ago, David Selig said:

So the guy is careful not the give himself away to mindreaders?

I mean, there are people who repress. If we had more gay POVs and they were all repressed, it might be a pattern. I do think it's a shame we don't, though - and am totally willing to believe GRRM's sexuality plays into that.

8 hours ago, Good Guy Garlan said:

*Sigh*

That's hella convenient, that the one gay POV just so happens to be repressed. It's almost as if the author doesn't wanna write a gay sex scene (which is fine, he has the right to write whatever he wants, just as I have the right to criticize and comment on his writing).

1 hour ago, JCRB's Honeypot said:

Unlike Jaime or Theon, who have more sexual experience, I feel Jon has probably had one or two occasional lovers. And he really doesn't care about sex so far because his priorities are going back to Westeros and not dying. Besides that, as I said above, we've only seen TWO chapters of him. I feel like he will eventually meet a man he's going to like and we'll see how he reacts.

I agree that the broader point of the OP is valid, but with regard to JonCon: I think he is this way because the plot sort of requires it. He's the Jasper Tudor type to Aegon, only the way the Aegon plot was constructed is extremely suspicious and he's probably one of the people being fooled. Therefore, JonCon needs a personality that will make him driven, will make him desperate, and will make him willing to believe the exceedingly unlikely story - and a singleminded obsession with Rhaegar and massive grief and guilt over his death is probably the most compelling character reason. I think the bigger issue is that he's our only gay POV, which falls into the problem Martin neatly avoided in other areas by writing so many different male and female roles, because now one character can seem like a stand-in for an incredibly diverse group of people. 

6 hours ago, aryagonnakill#2 said:

It is my understanding that women are much more likely to be bi sexual than men, and that many young women experiment with such things.

....or that female bisexuality is more fetishized and more acceptable to discuss, thus leading to the impression that more women are bisexual than men?

[kimim]

31 minutes ago, aryagonnakill#2 said:

 

I was actually referring to every study/survey done on the matter which you are both more than capable of looking up, but by all means since you don't like the result go ahead and dismiss it...

Yeah, idk if those surveys are reliable given certain social expectations (men find women together sexy, and their gaze determines what everyone finds sexy, which would mean women would be less turned off by other girls, etc) but even if they were, I'm not sure how they work into the story. The two girl-on-girl sex scenes are gratuitous; that girls are more likely than boys to respond to a person of the same gender is immaterial, as there's no point to those scenes to start with. We do have one gay guy's pov, and an established gay relationship--Loras and Renly. In both cases, GRRM walks on eggshells when he doesn't have to; we're not talking about how likely a man is to be bi, but about men who are bi or gay.

Anyhow, I don't think this is a problem. GRRM's obsession with women's looks, though, is a problem. He falls into the "beautiful princess" thing with a vengeance. Let me count the beautiful women here:

• Cersei
• Cat
• Sansa
• Arya (who's getting there)
• Asha
• Myrcella
• Val
• Arianne
• Mel
• Dany
• Margaery
• Two of three Sand Snakes
• Ashara
• Lyanna
• Every single Targ female

Youngish noblewomen in asoiaf are either very beautiful, or very ugly. Either GRRM will go on about their nipple size, or he'll talk about their mustache or weight issues. If the woman is less than attractive, it's almost a given that she'll be either pointless (Lollys) or unpleasant (Selyse, Lysa). Cersei, who turns into extreme villain in Feast, is also (gasp) gaining weight. Exceptions are Ygritte and Brienne, and there, GRRM really digs into what makes them less than attractive. Jon repeatedly notes that Ygritte has buckteeth and skinny, bowed legs. And poor Brienne. I think GRRM mentions the issues with her appearance every single time she appears. She's the exception who proves the rule.

And the novel does not gain depth from any of this.

[JonCon's Red Beard]

1 hour ago, Renly's Banana said:

Literally every single other male POV character in our story (with the exception of maybe friggin Cressen) show their sexuality. Be it by word, history or thought, it's there, a part of the character. Even Hotah makes one or two passing comments about Arianne's body.  

You're absolutely right in pointing out it's also got to do with his frigid and snobby personality, and it is true he could very well show more of himself in the future, but solely basing it on what we've seen so far, things don't look too hopeful. You say that maybe it's because he's in a stressful situation, or maybe he liked Blackheart because of some vague interpretations, but here's the thing: we should not be playing the maybe game when we're privy to this man's inner thoughts.

3

Ok, playing Devil's advocate here, could it be that we haven't seen him more "sexual" because GRRM is keeping that for later? I mean, it's not confirmed in the text that he's gay, nor has GRRM literally said so. It's like he wants us wondering about it until it's time that Jon becomes less... snobbish and loosen up a bit with a guy he might like? As I said above, it looks like they are more, but we only have TWO chapters of Jon so far. We've learned definitely a lot of him as a character and those bits are, imo, more important that what he likes to have sex with. GRRM has said that sex plays an important part on his characters as it's an important part of people's lives. Fair enough. We might get there with Jon too.

 

1 hour ago, Renly's Banana said:

Again, no other character is as coy and vague as Connington. Why? He's the only POV man who has his sexuality willingly and forcibly hidden away and suppressed from the reader. And since he's also the only gay one.. things get problematic.

 

His sexuality isn't hidden away. Unlike other characters, he neither has an actual romantic interest nor he's a young kid obsessed with sex (he's around 35).

Jon seems to be a prude, and that fits his character. He didn't like Robert's womanizer ways and Haldon mentioned he's against whoring. So, we kinda have a window to what he thinks of sex. It's definitely not a vice for him. Yet, he despite he's so tough on the outside, he seems to be quite romantic himself. And, considering he mentions he wanted to gain "Rhaegar's love", he had no problem with becoming his lover and people knowing about that. So, I wouldn't say he has his sexuality hidden, only that is not for display AT THIS MOMENT.

 

1 hour ago, Renly's Banana said:

I neither expect nor want him to be giving guys reach arounds on the back of a Volantene elephant, but this other extreme is just as ugly. Especially when you parade him as your first and only gay protagonist then proceed to make him as sterile and blank as humanly possible.

 

GRRM isnt' parading Jon as "my gay character". He doesn't care about those issues.

"I've had letters from fans who want me to present particularly an explicit male sex scene – most of the letters come from women. [...] I'm not going to do it just for the sake of doing it. If the plot lends itself to that, if one of my viewpoint characters is in a situation, then I'm not going to shy away from it, but you can't just insert things because everyone wants to see them. It is not a democracy. If it was a democracy, then Joffrey [the sadistic boy king] would have died much earlier than he did." (source)

Jon is gay because the plot requires him so, not because he's fitting a diversity quota. It's not even a situation of a character who is looking for self-acceptance, as Jon seems to be quite pleased about who he is and, as I mentioned above, had no issue with the idea of becoming the lover of the Prince. Jon's character and his purpose in the story isn't about that.

[chrisdaw]

19 minutes ago, kimim said:

Yeah, idk if those surveys are reliable given certain social expectations (men find women together sexy, and their gaze determines what everyone finds sexy, which would mean women would be less turned off by other girls, etc) but even if they were, I'm not sure how they work into the story. The two girl-on-girl sex scenes are gratuitous; that girls are more likely than boys to respond to a person of the same gender is immaterial, as there's no point to those scenes to start with. We do have one gay guy's pov, and an established gay relationship--Loras and Renly. In both cases, GRRM walks on eggshells when he doesn't have to; we're not talking about how likely a man is to be bi, but about men who are bi or gay.

Anyhow, I don't think this is a problem. GRRM's obsession with women's looks, though, is a problem. He falls into the "beautiful princess" thing with a vengeance. Let me count the beautiful women here:

• Cersei
• Cat
• Sansa
• Arya (who's getting there)
• Asha
• Myrcella
• Val
• Arianne
• Mel
• Dany
• Margaery
• Two of three Sand Snakes
• Ashara
• Lyanna
• Every single Targ female

Youngish noblewomen in asoiaf are either very beautiful, or very ugly. Either GRRM will go on about their nipple size, or he'll talk about their mustache or weight issues. If the woman is less than attractive, it's almost a given that she'll be either pointless (Lollys) or unpleasant (Selyse, Lysa). Cersei, who turns into extreme villain in Feast, is also (gasp) gaining weight. Exceptions are Ygritte and Brienne, and there, GRRM really digs into what makes them less than attractive. Jon repeatedly notes that Ygritte has buckteeth and skinny, bowed legs. And poor Brienne. I think GRRM mentions the issues with her appearance every single time she appears. She's the exception who proves the rule.

And the novel does not gain depth from any of this.

Terrible, you'd almost think he's writing in the POV of characters in a patriarchy. The novel gains no depth from exploring the worth of attractive or unattractive women as deemed by Westeros society? Nothing in Jaime's feelings for Brienne despite her appearance? Nothing to provoke thought in Cat's pity for Brienne? Nothing to it when LF specifically mentions Sansa's beauty as a reason she can achieve great things? No reason to dwell on the beauty of a woman who magically commands her appearance? No depth gained in Jon's love for plain Ygritte and refusing lovely Val? In the dichotomy between harsh and hard Asha (who despite being in your list is far from a conventional beauty) and beautiful lean Qarl?

Not that beautiful men don't abound or their beauty or deficits not harped upon.

[JonCon's Red Beard]

44 minutes ago, velo-knight said:

 

I agree that the broader point of the OP is valid,

 

It is valid as any opinion is, but can we get ruled by concept and opinions that are relative? The whole idea of the "male gaze" seems to be based on the assumption than men longing to observe women is inherently sexist and objectifying. There is perfectly possible to see a woman and rate her attractiveness and feel aroused by her while also respect her as an individual. If it wasn't, then every other straight relationship would be based on shallowness and abuse. It is not. In any case, I'm sure that are women who feel uncomfortable at being watched by men and that's fair, but many other women (myself included) don't. I can't force those women to feel comfortable with is as much as they can't force me to feel I'm being "used" by men when I don't feel like it.

In any case, no one watched my vid, so I'm posting here because I consider Paglia to know more of these issues as she's not only a feminist but her specialty are the arts (and it's also related to Connington, kinda):

CP: You cannot just wade into film criticism and start talking about the male gaze without knowing something about the history of art, and of perspective and of vision, and so on. The male gaze is a foolish idea, it should long ago being discarded.

Hoff Summers: And it's not as if in gay culture we don't find [..] male gays enjoy looking at pictures of beautiful idealized [--]

CP: And there you just disproved a theory. Because gay men know when they look at a beautiful young man that they aren't creating some sort of powerful subordination on that man. They know they are looking up in admiration at that beauty. It's been part of Western art since the Greeks

So, the point here is that GRRM could be exploitable about women's sexuality in his books? Yes, maybe. Could be. But then, any other author could be accused of the same and worst (just read at the "JRRT was a misogynist because he didn't include more women" theories). 

 

44 minutes ago, velo-knight said:

but with regard to JonCon: I think he is this way because the plot sort of requires it. He's the Jasper Tudor type to Aegon, only the way the Aegon plot was constructed is extremely suspicious and he's probably one of the people being fooled. Therefore, JonCon needs a personality that will make him driven, will make him desperate, and will make him willing to believe the exceedingly unlikely story - and a singleminded obsession with Rhaegar and massive grief and guilt over his death is probably the most compelling character reason. I think the bigger issue is that he's our only gay POV, which falls into the problem Martin neatly avoided in other areas by writing so many different male and female roles, because now one character can seem like a stand-in for an incredibly diverse group of people. 

2

There is a chance that Martin doesn't know how to write from a gay male perspective. I mean, I'm a woman and I really don't  know what a man would feel during sex from a male perspective. Because it's something I've never experienced in my life. I could maybe write how a man feels in any other situation, but that's very specific and very defining of someone's identity. Now, in my experience, I've met many gay men who I never knew they were gay because they were never talked about it openly. It was part of their private lives. Jon seems to be a private man as well. And Ned and Stannis are very similar to him. We had a scene of Ned having sex because he's married, but when he's away from Cat, he doesn't see any other woman. He doesn't care. I honestly doubt that Stannis even notices any attractive woman he's close to either. 

So, it kinda sounds a bit of a double standard to me. We want Jon to be more sexually open but we don't want the women being that open? I have no problem with reading about sexy or sexual woman. And what about lesbians who enjoy these scenes? Are they also "objectifying" them? Wouldn't be better to judge every character as individuals? Arianne's display of sexuality is way different than Cat's or Sansa's. In the same way, Oberyn's approach to sex is almost the opposite as how JonCon sees it. I mean, I do joke a lot that I want JonCon sex scenes, but it's based on a silly harmless joke of having a crush*. I want him to be developed as a character, whatever GRRM plans for him.

 

 

 

*not really. It's real for me, we're gonna get married, don't judge me!

[Good Guy Garlan]

3 hours ago, Renly's Banana said:

This is definitely one of GRRM's biggest issues, and no, you can't wave it away by saying it's just cause he's a straight dude and can't imagine what women/gay men would want. He's never been a twelve year old girl either, yet here he is writing about Sansa having her first period and seeing the world through her eyes. So it can be done, he just chooses not to do it. Other authors have done it plenty of times before.

It's understandable that almost everything is clouded by the male gaze and the patriarchy of the world. Even Cersei's own insecurities and sexual curiosity is influenced by it -- that's fine, this makes sense. But the extent at which he writes it (and, conversely, ignores the opposite) is kinda getting old. If I see one more woman getting her nipples described in full detail (they're always huge and they're always hard and brown; I think we really know what kind of nipples GRRM likes), i'm gonna throw myself into the sunset sea. 

His pussyfooting around Jon Con's sexuality is also ridiculous. If he were a secondary character (like Renly or Loras or Lyn Corbray) then that'd be one thing, but we're LITERALLY inside this dude's head and yet he never once has any sort of gay thought? Not even a single "damn, Ser Rolly is lookin' fine today"? Why even tout that you're gonna include a gay POV if he's basically just gonna be asexual?  

Thank you! I wanna marry this post and have its babies. 

Like I said, being a cis het male didn't stop Michael Chabon from writing one of the most convincing and realistic gay relationships in literature to the point that people thought he himself was gay. And GRRM really is a talented writer and he's proven time and time again that he can get inside the head of a plethora of characters, from child assassins to turncloak sociopaths, so I totally agree that he could write a homoerotic scene between two men just fine, he just chooses not to. And that's his right, just as it is my right to complain about it.

I just gotta laugh at the circular argument that Jon Connington doesn't think about sex because GRRM didn't write him that way. Well, no shit, it's not like the character is real and GRRM is just documenting what goes on in his head. Like, GRRM took a conscious and deliberate decision to create a character that doesn't go around thinking about other men sexually. I'm not debating the traits of the character, but rather asking why it was created that way. 

[chrisdaw]

JC was created the way he is because GRRM wanted a bitterly determined ruthless man (Tywin wannabe) in Aegon's corner and by having JC hellbent on avenging his mistakes to the prince he loved suited that purpose. Balancing lesbian and homosexual scenes is not his concern.

Include a scene of JC being randomly blown by some guy and his grim dedication to sitting the son of his silver haired prince on the throne doesn't pack the same punch.

[Renly's Banana]

4 hours ago, JCRB's Honeypot said:

Jon is gay because the plot requires him so, not because he's fitting a diversity quota. It's not even a situation of a character who is looking for self-acceptance, as Jon seems to be quite pleased about who he is and, as I mentioned above, had no issue with the idea of becoming the lover of the Prince. Jon's character and his purpose in the story isn't about that.

The plot did not require Tywin to have sex with women, a character similar in personality and prudeness... And yet, right before he dies, we get that glimpse of it. That's depth. 
The plot does not require Jon Connington to be gay. You can accomplish his devotion to Rhaegar and Aegon a hundred different ways. And yet GRRM chose to make him gay. And has chosen so far to not give him even a hint of that same depth.

But so be it. You are right that he could have more development later on, so there's not much else I can say about this. Let's just hope he finds some manner of love before the fatal disease kills him... Another tired gay trope I love.

1 hour ago, chrisdaw said:

Include a scene of JC being randomly blown by some guy and his grim dedication to sitting the son of his silver haired prince on the throne doesn't pack the same punch.

Nobody has asked for this. 
Giving a gay man depth and desires -- regardless of how subtle -- is not the same as showing gay sex. A revolutionary thought, I know. 
 

[chrisdaw]

15 minutes ago, Renly's Banana said:

Nobody has asked for this. 
Giving a gay man depth and desires -- regardless of how subtle -- is not the same as showing gay sex. A revolutionary thought, I know. 

Depths and desires like those on show when he stands atop his tower and reminisces about having done so once with his love and how his love fuels his every current action and desire?

[Traverys]

6 hours ago, kimim said:

Yeah, idk if those surveys are reliable given certain social expectations (men find women together sexy, and their gaze determines what everyone finds sexy, which would mean women would be less turned off by other girls, etc) but even if they were, I'm not sure how they work into the story. The two girl-on-girl sex scenes are gratuitous; that girls are more likely than boys to respond to a person of the same gender is immaterial, as there's no point to those scenes to start with. We do have one gay guy's pov, and an established gay relationship--Loras and Renly. In both cases, GRRM walks on eggshells when he doesn't have to; we're not talking about how likely a man is to be bi, but about men who are bi or gay.

Anyhow, I don't think this is a problem. GRRM's obsession with women's looks, though, is a problem. He falls into the "beautiful princess" thing with a vengeance. Let me count the beautiful women here:

• Cersei
• Cat
• Sansa
• Arya (who's getting there)
• Asha
• Myrcella
• Val
• Arianne
• Mel
• Dany
• Margaery
• Two of three Sand Snakes
• Ashara
• Lyanna
• Every single Targ female

Youngish noblewomen in asoiaf are either very beautiful, or very ugly. Either GRRM will go on about their nipple size, or he'll talk about their mustache or weight issues. If the woman is less than attractive, it's almost a given that she'll be either pointless (Lollys) or unpleasant (Selyse, Lysa). Cersei, who turns into extreme villain in Feast, is also (gasp) gaining weight. Exceptions are Ygritte and Brienne, and there, GRRM really digs into what makes them less than attractive. Jon repeatedly notes that Ygritte has buckteeth and skinny, bowed legs. And poor Brienne. I think GRRM mentions the issues with her appearance every single time she appears. She's the exception who proves the rule.

And the novel does not gain depth from any of this.

Well, I hate to say it, but isn't how the real world works? Maybe not you or I, but the average Joe or Jane judge women by their physical appearance first and foremost. Of course that's a problem, don't get me wrong, but whether deliberate or not on GRRM's part it's the unfortunate way women are still evaluated in most societies. Warp back in time 600 years and women were only valued for their ability to have kids, which implies fertility and the ability to sexually arouse their spouse. Even if they had intellectual or physical (i.e., battle) gifts on par or superior to men, no one gave two shits and let that talent go to waste.

I'm not sure I would agree that GRRM is in tune with that and deliberately wrote all the POV's this way. But, in the end, it seems to unfortunately be consistent with reality.

[rotting sea cow]

7 hours ago, Renly's Banana said:

Nobody is petitioning him to write in gay sex scenes. 
Although this whole "he's not gay so he's physically incapable of doing it" excuse is super lazy and tired. He's not a rapist either, but he's written a lot of that. Or a cannibal or a murder -- I assume his brain is also "hardwired" to not like those either. This isn't some impossible thing that nobody has ever done before. 

I think GRRM should stay away of writing sex scenes. If straight sex scenes are almost always quite badly written, what can you expect of gay sex scenes?

[rotting sea cow]

30 minutes ago, Traverys said:

Well, I hate to say it, but isn't how the real world works? Maybe not you or I, but the average Joe or Jane judge women by their physical appearance first and foremost. Of course that's a problem, don't get me wrong, but whether deliberate or not on GRRM's part it's the unfortunate way women are still evaluated in most societies. Warp back in time 600 years and women were only valued for their ability to have kids, which implies fertility and the ability to sexually arouse their spouse. Even if they had intellectual or physical (i.e., battle) gifts on par or superior to men, no one gave two shits and let that talent go to waste.

I'm not sure I would agree that GRRM is in tune with that and deliberately wrote all the POV's this way. But, in the end, it seems to unfortunately be consistent with reality.

First, if we just give a look to classical art, it becomes clear that many (if not most) of the depicted noble women were not particularly attractive.

Nevertheless, things is, GRRM is in position to subvert the trope regarding a consistent social problem so @kimim is right on that respect. Hell, I have a cousin who reminds me of Lollys and she has done quite fine in life, despite her intellectual disability, actually better than her normal brother. So, I have a personal grudge with this. Same with the excessive focus on nobility.

To be fair with GRRM. The books have been written during 20+ years and during this time the awareness about these issues have changed considerably. The series are not done, so certain blind spots can be covered. Finally, no artist is completely free of their social environment.

 

7 hours ago, Damon_Tor said:

Rape has historically been an extremely successful mating strategy, why on earth would we develop instincts against raping?

I'm not sure what you are trying so say.

[Ralphis Baratheon]

I think your on to something involving Arianne's nipples. 

[Ferocious Veldt Roarer]

8 hours ago, kimim said:

Yeah, idk if those surveys are reliable given certain social expectations (men find women together sexy, and their gaze determines what everyone finds sexy, which would mean women would be less turned off by other girls, etc) but even if they were, I'm not sure how they work into the story. The two girl-on-girl sex scenes are gratuitous; that girls are more likely than boys to respond to a person of the same gender is immaterial, as there's no point to those scenes to start with. We do have one gay guy's pov, and an established gay relationship--Loras and Renly. In both cases, GRRM walks on eggshells when he doesn't have to; we're not talking about how likely a man is to be bi, but about men who are bi or gay.

Anyhow, I don't think this is a problem. GRRM's obsession with women's looks, though, is a problem. He falls into the "beautiful princess" thing with a vengeance. Let me count the beautiful women here:

• Cersei
• Cat
• Sansa
• Arya (who's getting there)
• Asha
• Myrcella
• Val
• Arianne
• Mel
• Dany
• Margaery
• Two of three Sand Snakes
• Ashara
• Lyanna
• Every single Targ female

Youngish noblewomen in asoiaf are either very beautiful, or very ugly.

First, it's only natural that a characteristic gets a mention if it somehow diverge from average. So, for hotness, the options would be: "beautiful - ugly - not worth mentioning". Just like for, let's say, height: "unusually tall - unusually short - not going to mention it". Do you recall many characters being of middle height and middle build? Oh, sure, there probably were some, but being of middle height and middle build by its very nature isn't very memorable even if it gets actually written down.

Remember the cyclical discussion of Ned's height (in the context whether would he make the Knight of the Laughing Tree)? I don't think it gets spelled out even once in the entire series - apart from the tiny piece of info that his big brother was taller than him. I conclude that Ned was most likely of average height. And there's no mention of that, following - I believe - an unstated rule "if I'm not writing about it, then probably there's nothing to write about". No, Westeros isn't populated solely by very tall and very short people, only they stick out the most.

BTW, doesn't mentioning Arya here, with her "getting there", kind of hurt your point? Known as Arya Horseface on one hand, compared to Lyanna on another (how beautiful Lyanna actually was also varies, depending on the source), she would be a prime example of someone who doesn't fit in either of the two extremes.

You also mention Asha. Here's Asha: He liked what he saw. Ironborn, he knew at a glance; lean and long-legged, with black hair cut short, wind-chafed skin, strong sure hands, a dirk at her belt. Her nose was too big and too sharp for her thin face, but her smile made up for it. Nope, neither very beautiful nor very ugly, rather a mix with some content of both.

[Springwatch]

@Ferocious Veldt Roarer Well, 'average' characters, by definition, don't alter the average picture of a woman.

What I'm seeing in these books is a super-abundance of characters as hot chicks; sexually liberated and not in a loving and committed relationship, ie available and pleasing to the male gaze.

This is sort of fine - in a way it's nice to see an artist trying to please (at least part of) his public.

What's not fine is success for a woman depending on being in the hot chick group - so Ygritte isn't the perfect counter-example for me, because she died and Jon's love-interest is now Val.

The Queen of Thorns and the Widow of the Waterfront are successful and competent - but are minor characters with very little room in the books.

Brienne, Sansa and Arya could turn this right round, but will they?

Brienne has little beauty and a lot of heroism, and has notable achievements (pretty rare this). I'd like to see her live happily ever after with Jaime, but I don't think that's going to happen. Plus her lack of charisma diminishes her importance to the reader - many posts here describe her as stupid.

Which leaves Sansa and Arya (one shy, one probably average looking). If they grow up to be beautiful, calculating seductresses, that would about wrap it up for me.

ETA

Cersei's advice: (will she be proved right all along?)

"You little fool [Sansa]. Tears are not a woman's only weapon. You've got another one between your legs, and you'd best learn to use it..."

Depressing!

[cyberdirectorfreedom]

8 hours ago, Good Guy Garlan said:

I just gotta laugh at the circular argument that Jon Connington doesn't think about sex because GRRM didn't write him that way. Well, no shit, it's not like the character is real and GRRM is just documenting what goes on in his head. Like, GRRM took a conscious and deliberate decision to create a character that doesn't go around thinking about other men sexually. I'm not debating the traits of the character, but rather asking why it was created that way. 

Well, why not? A lot of people posting on this thread, at least who agree with your point of view, seem to have some problem with prudish people. Prudish people exist. Just because Connington is gay, that doesn't mean he has to act in ways that you wish him to. Nor does it show that Martin thinks that all gay men would act the way Connington does.

Jon Connington is a gay man, he is not all gay men. His actions aren't indicative of all gay men, and his portrayal isn't indicative of Martin's view of gay men.