Dukhasinov

Weis and Benioff are missing the point of Robert`s Rebellion

98 posts in this topic

3 minutes ago, Beardy the Wildling said:

Okay, maybe I'm being a little generous. Both Robb and Cat were played by good actors and stuff, but yeah. Talisa's a fucking failure, no doubt there. She was so out-of-place, what with being an anti-slavery Volantine time-travelling feminist, that people came up with the honeypot theories that'd change the way we saw the GoT fandom, but I dunno. A little part of me wants to give them some credit for when they at least tried to be faithful :P

The Talisa nude scene makes it all worth it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jcmontea said:

The Talisa nude scene makes it all worth it

Not gonna lie. The actress was attractive :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hell yeah she was, I was going to post that thats one of the things I liked more than the books, in that thread, lol. 

 

"Attack, attack." That's one of my favorite scene's, to be honest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 05/09/2017 at 2:19 PM, The hairy bear said:

No woman in Westeros gets to decide who she marries with.

I have to disagree with this, i really do.

 

Rhaenyra refused to marry Laenor Velaryon, Viserys tried everything to make her accept the match, and she kept refusing. In the end, Viserys made Rhaenyra choose, it's either Laenor and the Iron Throne or nothing.

 

George plays with this all the time, there isn't an "absolute" rule in the middle ages, even though women are not supposed to have a say in anything, the truth is that they can, if they grow some balls. Lyanna clearly had some balls, and if she run away to marry someone else, there isn't much Rickard could have done, King Aegon V himself couldn't do anything about Jaehaerys and Shaera.

 

What would Rickard want to do anyway? have Lyanna returned to him so he could force her to say the vows to Robert? one cannot be forced to say the vows, and Lyanna likely knew this, just as Sansa did.

 

It's the same thing with Brynden Tully, even if he is a man, he did refuse to marry Bethany Redwyne. It's the same for everyone, men or women, one cannot be forced to say the vows, the price tends to be a strained relationship with the family, as we saw in Brynden's case.

 

But in the end, both men and women can refuse to marry, which means that they can run away as well, and what they do when they run away is their own problem.

 

Curiously enough, Lyanna was 16 when she died, and 16 is the age of majority in Westeros/Middle Ages, the age where people become responsible for their actions, the age where they have a right to choose where they go and what they do. Just like Ned when he made 16, George did point out that Ned was now free to go to or leave the Eyrie whenever he liked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/9/2017 at 0:32 AM, StepStark said:

What that has to do with anything? Yes, in the books they are in love, but in the books he doesn't rape her and that makes quite a lot of difference. And besides, it's kinda odd to use GRRM's text to make a point, when the problem in the show exists precisely because D&D deviated from the characters and the story from the books.

Yes he does. Not on the wedding night - which in anycase the whole "consent" thing of that night is a grey area - but he rapes her for many nights after that. To the point that Dany even considers suicide. Actually, I think the whole thing made more sense in the show rather than the books.

Anyway, her relationship with Drogo both in the show and the books was gross, and it sounds more like a Stockholm Syndrome to me. 

Edited by Caterina Sforza

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 9/29/2017 at 7:02 PM, theMADdestScientist_ said:

I have to disagree with this, i really do.

 

Rhaenyra refused to marry Laenor Velaryon, Viserys tried everything to make her accept the match, and she kept refusing. In the end, Viserys made Rhaenyra choose, it's either Laenor and the Iron Throne or nothing.

 

George plays with this all the time, there isn't an "absolute" rule in the middle ages, even though women are not supposed to have a say in anything, the truth is that they can, if they grow some balls. Lyanna clearly had some balls, and if she run away to marry someone else, there isn't much Rickard could have done, King Aegon V himself couldn't do anything about Jaehaerys and Shaera.

 

What would Rickard want to do anyway? have Lyanna returned to him so he could force her to say the vows to Robert? one cannot be forced to say the vows, and Lyanna likely knew this, just as Sansa did.

 

It's the same thing with Brynden Tully, even if he is a man, he did refuse to marry Bethany Redwyne. It's the same for everyone, men or women, one cannot be forced to say the vows, the price tends to be a strained relationship with the family, as we saw in Brynden's case.

 

But in the end, both men and women can refuse to marry, which means that they can run away as well, and what they do when they run away is their own problem.

 

Curiously enough, Lyanna was 16 when she died, and 16 is the age of majority in Westeros/Middle Ages, the age where people become responsible for their actions, the age where they have a right to choose where they go and what they do. Just like Ned when he made 16, George did point out that Ned was now free to go to or leave the Eyrie whenever he liked.

I think it's easier to refuse if you're a man; you can refuse if you're a woman, but it's harder to get your way. Rhaenyra didn't want to marry Laenor Velaryon, yet she married him anyway. And then there's Sansa. Wasn't she threatened with getting dragged to the Sept? Blackfish refused and only Hoster insisted, but Blackfish said no and that was final.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/23/2017 at 7:17 PM, jcmontea said:

I am going to withold judgement on that until the end since GRRM has indicated more will be revealed about Robert’s Rebellion. 

Also, what the hell does Bran know. This is the same person that said Jon Snow is Jon Sand so who knows how much he can trusted. He didn’t pay much attention Maester Luwin’s lessons. 

He's the Three-eyed Raven, he would know these things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/23/2017 at 7:31 AM, Caterina Sforza said:

Yes he does. Not on the wedding night - which in anycase the whole "consent" thing of that night is a grey area - but he rapes her for many nights after that. To the point that Dany even considers suicide. Actually, I think the whole thing made more sense in the show rather than the books.

If you even read the books, you obviously failed to comprehend them, or at the very least you failed to comprehend the part about Dany and Drogo:

1) There is no "grey area" about Dany's consent on the wedding night, she undoubtedly grants it to Drogo. Given that her position in that particular situation is not really different from the position of great many other brides AND grooms on their wedding nights, and not really different from the position she'd find herself in if Targaryens stayed in power in Westeros (because noble marriages are almost always arranged for the interest of the family, and marrying a stranger is something she most probably wouldn't escape in any scenario without incest), there is no reason to disregard her clear "yes" to Drogo on their wedding night.

2) From the text itself it is completely obvious that after the wedding night Drogo is in no way aware that he's hurting Dany because she herself does her best to hide her pain from him. Maybe that makes him self-centered or uncaring even, but in no way it makes him a rapist. Given the general circumstances, like the fact that Drogo and Dany can't even communicate properly at the time, that the marriage is definitely more traumatic for her than for him (she's all alone in his culture), and that she's probably afraid of disappointing him, her decision to hide the pain shouldn't be so hard to understand. Dany "considering suicide" is probably just an author's way of giving gravity to her agony, and not a sign of her actual suicidal tendencies which are never even hinted about in the entire story.

3) Throughout the books Dany's constantly remembering how she was sold to Drogo and she never hesitates to remind other people how horrible experience it was. But she never thinks that she was raped. She doesn't think that even for a second. Dany knows what rape is, and she obviously has no qualms about speaking loudly or thinking about injustice done to her, so the fact that she never talks or thinks about being raped definitely means that she doesn't think Drogo raped her, and that means that Drogo actually didn't raped her.

On 10/23/2017 at 7:31 AM, Caterina Sforza said:

Anyway, her relationship with Drogo both in the show and the books was gross, and it sounds more like a Stockholm Syndrome to me. 

Their relationship in the books was not gross. That's just you reading into it, probably because of the damaging influence of the show and/or annoying SJWs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rhaegar isn't really absolved from anything, and people who believe that he is are not paying attention or stupid. Because marrying Lyanna pretty much reinforces the idea of him just abandoning his kids and wife and leaving them in the protection of just the king, who hated her. And that's aside of the whole "causing a war by running away without telling anybody" thing. Still makes Rhaegar the asshole and Robert the hero. 

Edited by John Doe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, John Doe said:

Rhaegar isn't really absolved from anything, and people who believe that he is are not paying attention or stupid. Because marrying Lyanna pretty much reinforces the idea of him just abandoning his kids and wife and leaving them in the protection of just the king, who hated her. And that's aside of the whole "causing a war by running away without telling anybody" thing. Still makes Rhaegar the asshole and Robert the hero. 

I think most people understand what happened they just think (at least I do) that Rhaegar had a very good reason for doing what he did & that when all is told Rhaegar will be the hero or at the very least was attempting to be the hero. 

Besides that some of us just can't resist a tragic love story. Rhaegar started a war to be with the woman he loves & died with her name on his lips. It's beautiful. 

I suppose it's possible after all is said & done the truth will be that Rhaegar abandoned his sickly wife & children to have a good time with Lyanna & then abandoned her while pregnant to try to kill the heroic knight that was vying for her hand, Robert Baratheon. 

Until we get all the answers though it's fun to speculate & for me personally it's much funner to speculate as to how, why, etc this love story will be told & Rhaegar's name to be vindicated rather than to take it at face value that Rhaegar is an asshole womanizer - Because then there really isn't anything else to speculate about. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, StepStark said:

If you even read the books, you obviously failed to comprehend them, or at the very least you failed to comprehend the part about Dany and Drogo:

1) There is no "grey area" about Dany's consent on the wedding night, she undoubtedly grants it to Drogo. Given that her position in that particular situation is not really different from the position of great many other brides AND grooms on their wedding nights, and not really different from the position she'd find herself in if Targaryens stayed in power in Westeros (because noble marriages are almost always arranged for the interest of the family, and marrying a stranger is something she most probably wouldn't escape in any scenario without incest), there is no reason to disregard her clear "yes" to Drogo on their wedding night.

2) From the text itself it is completely obvious that after the wedding night Drogo is in no way aware that he's hurting Dany because she herself does her best to hide her pain from him. Maybe that makes him self-centered or uncaring even, but in no way it makes him a rapist. Given the general circumstances, like the fact that Drogo and Dany can't even communicate properly at the time, that the marriage is definitely more traumatic for her than for him (she's all alone in his culture), and that she's probably afraid of disappointing him, her decision to hide the pain shouldn't be so hard to understand. Dany "considering suicide" is probably just an author's way of giving gravity to her agony, and not a sign of her actual suicidal tendencies which are never even hinted about in the entire story.

3) Throughout the books Dany's constantly remembering how she was sold to Drogo and she never hesitates to remind other people how horrible experience it was. But she never thinks that she was raped. She doesn't think that even for a second. Dany knows what rape is, and she obviously has no qualms about speaking loudly or thinking about injustice done to her, so the fact that she never talks or thinks about being raped definitely means that she doesn't think Drogo raped her, and that means that Drogo actually didn't raped her.

Their relationship in the books was not gross. That's just you reading into it, probably because of the damaging influence of the show and/or annoying SJWs.

I agree. & furthermore Danaerys never one time tells him to stop or that she doesn't want to. It could be argued she was scared to say no but there really isn't any reason for her to believe that. Drogo did not force himself on her the first time so why would he force himself on her after that? 

Even assuming Dany wants to say no but doesn't because she is scared or thinks she will be forced Drogo has no way of knowing that. Dany reflects repeatedly about being sold as a slave but again Drogo does not see it that way. He has no reason to. He sees an arranged marriage to a woman who grows to love him. She isn't not treated as a slave & the only person who seems to think she should be treated that way is her snot nosed brother. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 27/10/2017 at 9:30 PM, StepStark said:

If you even read the books, you obviously failed to comprehend them, or at the very least you failed to comprehend the part about Dany and Drogo:

Me and many other people who thinks the same. But thanks god we have you to enlighten us. :unsure:

You're right, I totally failed to comprehend their story. The epitome of love. :wub:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Caterina Sforza said:

Me and many other people who thinks the same. But thanks god we have you to enlighten us. :unsure:

You're right, I totally failed to comprehend their story. The epitome of love. :wub:

I'm sorry that you feel insulted, and it wasn't my intention to insult you, but in reality if you say that Drogo raped Dany in the books then you're doing that against the author himself. There is not a single word in the entire story that even hints at the rape in their relationship, not while the relationship is still going on and not after Drogo dies. In the part you brought up, the author specifically made it clear that Drogo isn't even aware of Dany's pain because she hides it from him. How can that be a rape then?

Maybe they're not the epitome of love, but Dany and Drogo are certainly not a story about rape and Stockholm Syndrome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Robert's rebellion was based on a lie, than we should assume that if Robert knew the truth, he would've been all fine with it and no hard feelings. 

And we should assume that Brandon wouldn't have went to KL anyways, because Westerosi nobles were all in for "true love". 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, StepStark said:

I'm sorry that you feel insulted, and it wasn't my intention to insult you, but in reality if you say that Drogo raped Dany in the books then you're doing that against the author himself. There is not a single word in the entire story that even hints at the rape in their relationship, not while the relationship is still going on and not after Drogo dies. In the part you brought up, the author specifically made it clear that Drogo isn't even aware of Dany's pain because she hides it from him. How can that be a rape then?

Maybe they're not the epitome of love, but Dany and Drogo are certainly not a story about rape and Stockholm Syndrome.

D&D and Alex Graves State that Jaime and Cersei scene at Baelor was not a rape scene yet it is discussed as such. The creator statement of intention is does not always have final word. Martin has stated on occasions that he does understand why some will view it though it is not his intentions.

Dany felt pain and she was thinking of death as relief at. I really doubt in today that "I did not know" or "if she only said something" is viewed as an acceptable excuse from a man today.

Though I am someone who thinks that people ideas and expectation in regards to love are more changing at times. I do not find it strange a person thinks he can conquer someone in love and then think they do what they please with their conquest. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/4/2017 at 9:27 PM, Dukhasinov said:

The fact that Lyanna was in a consentual relationship with Rhaegar does not mean the "Robert`s Rebellion was based on a lie," and does not take away the legitimacy of what Robert, Ned, and Jon Arynn did in overthrowing the Targaryens. The rebellion did not start because Rhaegar made off with a woman who was the daughter of one great lord and the betrothed of another. It started because the Mad King brutally murdered Rickard and Brandon Stark when they came to the capital to put the issue of the Crown Prince`s gross misconduct before the King.

Did D&D say this to imply that the rebellion was without cause, or did they mean something else? Certainly in an honor-shame-patriarchal culture, a married prince having an affair with the daughter of a major family would be a scandal, but it wouldn't necessarily turn into a civil war. The consensual relationship would implicate the woman, more than it would the man. The Starks would be dishonored less by Rhaegar, more by the behavior of their daughter.

What drives the situation is the mystery of Rhaegar's disappearance, and the Stark-Baratheon insistence that Lyanna was raped, which the disappearance makes possible. By stressing rape, they take away the shame that would fall upon their house because of the behavior of their "immoral" daughter, which frees them to go after Rhaegar and the Targs. A consensual relationship would, instead, humiliate them. 

I believe that sexual double standard is why the KG fight Ned and his men at toj. The KG have every reason to believe that Ned would punish his sister and her baby for the humiliation of their house.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, they have missed the point. The rebellion started because King Aerys had Lord Rickard and Brandon Stark executed and called for Robert and Ned's heads for flimsy reasons and Jon Arryn refused to give them to King Aerys.

Is there any reason why King Aerys called for Robert and Ned's heads?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 27.9.2017 at 5:00 AM, Vortgyn said:

Here's the thing about that. If you were a medieval lord with an eligible daughter? Your biggest fear was going to be, say, the local baker's son. Why? Well because the emphasis most fantasy authors place on class as a prerequisite of marriage in medieval society isn't really accurate (including GRRM...to an extent, he's far better about this than most).

Yes, nobles used marriage to build alliances, settle treaties, and whatnot. Yes, almost all "highborn" marriages were political in nature. That has absolutely NO barring on the church's view of the sacrament of marriage though. That's why, to a lord, the bakers' son is such a cause for concern. If he catches your daughter's eye and the two run off to get married in some small out of the way church? The marriage stands. And all the rattling about "noble birth" means nothing in the eyes of the church. Marriage is marriage, regardless of the status of the two people saying the vows.

Now of course a noble daughter doing this was risking a lot. More often than not? Doing the above would cut her off from any support her father would otherwise offer. It was essentially a move that traded an upper class life for a life as a commoner. Still? The local bakers' boy running off with the lord's daughter to get married would result in a union that would be recognized as valid by all involved. Tragically valid perhaps, depending on your point of view. Still valid though.

The most likely consequence would have been an early widowhood for the girl and a forced stay in a monastery for the rest of her life if they failed to run away very quickly and hide themselves very well.;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now