Why I don't hate Theon Greyjoy

[Lee-Sensei]

The legal definition of what constitutes rape varies by country.

However, since I believe you're my compatriot, Roose Bolton's Pet Leech, I should point out that the above definition doesn't quite meet the definition in New Zealand. In order for it not to be rape, the penetrator must have reasonable grounds to believe that the penetratee consents. In other words, the usual legal standard about what is considered "reasonable" applies.

This is an important distinction - if one is not aware that there's no consent this has to be a reasonable lack of awareness, not for example someone who is drunk and therefore has impaired judgment and rapes another drunk. Same applies to unlawful sexual connection (i.e without penetration).

As for unlawful connection versus rape, it's a fairly safe bet - and seems reasonable to me - that consent for penetration is likely withdrawn at the point where any serious physical assault commences in conjunction with it. Though I'd hate to see it go through the local courts on something like biting.

Rhaegar I Targaryen, I'm certainly not trying to imply that anyone in this thread is a rape apologist - I'm simply highly surprised by the different understandings of what constitutes rape. Though, on second thoughts I probably shouldn't be, because as I've said, it varies considerably. I seem to recall, for instance, that there are still some controversies around spousal rape definitions in some parts of the United States.

The reason I get the impression that some posters' definitions seem to rule out rape on grounds of prior consent or prior relationship, is because of the way arguments between several posters and Sharya Stark seemed to focus on establishing those two things. This is a long thread for a newbie like me to wade through but in the interests of politeness, here are some examples I thought imply this focus:

Finally, I find this post intriguing because it hints at the different definitions of rape in different cultures... are you advocating cultural relativism? I don't know:

It was after killing the miller boys IIRC. He called her in for sex. He was angry and lost in thought and was violent with her. I'm iffy on calling it rape as she was willing to have sex with him, but it was IMO indecent assault. Of course that's still very bad, but I don't think I'd call it rape.

I also said that it's very bad. I'm pretty sure everyone agrees on that, but it being rape is debatable.

[Lee-Sensei]

I'm done arguing about Kyra.

[Arland]

I don't think it's quite likely at all. Seeing as part of the reason he became friends with Robb was that Robb was his equal in social status and he planned for to be a King just like Robb. Unlike in the show he never asks his father to swear fealty to Robb and he never swears fealty himself. Doing so would take him out of the running for the Seastone Chair.

However, let's put all of that aside. What if Theon decided to return and warn Robb? He can't send a raven as they'd likely be shot down. He could steal a ship? Doubtful as Balon wouldn't let him leave so easily and risk leaking his plans to the North. His best bet to escape is to pretend to go along with Balons plan. So he takes his troops to the Stony Shore and hopefully he'll be able to escape. In the show he has 1 ship. In the books he has 8 ships. That's a lot of people to escape from. If he's lucky enough to escape he has to hope that he's lucky enough to get past the bulk of the Iron Born forces at Moat Cailin without being noticed. Then he has to run across War torn Westeros and hope that he's lucky enough to meet Robb.

So he makes it back to Robb... and now he has to deal with the fact that he's a hostage. Robb won't want to execute him, but the other Northern Lords, River Lords and Lady Stark will push for it. They never trusted or accepted him before betraying Robb had crossed Theon's mind. They're not going to be okay with Theon Greyjoy fighting by their side and sitting on their war council while Balon Greyjoy rapes, pillages and plunders his way across their land. Robb will at the very least have to lock him up or put him under heavy guard.

He's still considered a turncloak. Only this time most people in Westeros will see him that way instead of just the Northeners and the Riverlanders. He'll be a turncloak to his family. He may even be considered a kinslayer for going taking sides against his family. He would have given up all rights to the Seastone Chair and been a landless exile. Will Robb allow him to marry Sansa and officialy bring Theon into his family? Probably not. Theon is a landless exile with no political value. He would still have betrayed people who cared about him (his mother and Dagmer) and will be stuck living off of Stark charity for the rest of his life.

I don't see why Theon would have been executed if he would have returned to Robb. When Robb released him he was no longer a hostage. Anyhow practically I don't see Balon letting Theon go...

I think the ethical choice in such case was to choose not participate in Balons attack and sit this one out.

Obviously this was very disadvantageous choice, with no glory and with diminished chances to win Balon's throne - but it was a right one. Theon had to stand up to Balon and say that he is honor bound not to raise arms against Robb and "wash his hands".

At most, if Balon would have pressed and demanded Theon to obey him (which I doubt - I think Balon would have concluded that Theon is a weakling, "tainted" by north and left him alone or banished him) he should have done the minimum required of him. This would be the choice if Theon were mere "weakling" (and I can sympathize with such choice - not everyone have a "balls of steel", even if someone reaching for the throne should have ones)

But Theon went much further. He choose his glory and his personal gain over his honor - he betrayed his ally and his friend, who entrusted him with his freedom. And this was not even a cowardly choice (Theon's life was not really in danger), it was an evil one.

[Lee-Sensei]

I don't see why Theon would have been executed if he would have returned to Robb. When Robb released him he was no longer a hostage. Anyhow practically I don't see Balon letting Theon go...

I think the ethical choice in such case was to choose not participate in Balons attack and sit this one out.

Obviously this was very disadvantageous choice, with no glory and with diminished chances to win Balon's throne - but it was a right one. Theon had to stand up to Balon and say that he is honor bound not to raise arms against Robb and "wash his hands".

At most, if Balon would have pressed and demanded Theon to obey him (which I doubt - I think Balon would have concluded that Theon is a weakling, "tainted" by north and left him alone or banished him) he should have done the minimum required of him. This would be the choice if Theon were mere "weakling" (and I can sympathize with such choice - not everyone have a "balls of steel", even if someone reaching for the throne should have ones)

But Theon went much further. He choose his glory and his personal gain over his honor - he betrayed his ally and his friend, who entrusted him with his freedom. And this was not even a cowardly choice (Theon's life was not really in danger), it was an evil one.

I said that I don't think Robb would execute Theon if he returned (I think Ned would though).

He's not necessarily "honor bound". He was in a lose-lose situation. Either way people are going to consider him a traitor and a turncloak.

Invading the North isn't evil. Taking Winterfell isn't evil. Killing the Mikken wasn't evil. Up until the Miller boy's none of the things he did was evil.

Sitting out the war, giving up claims to the Iron Island and being forced to live off Stark charity for the rest of the time. I don't see why he'd want to do that.

I think that Theon is the result of half-assing. The Starks treated him okay, but they never truly accepted him. Had they made his position their clear and completely separated them, perhaps things would have gone better for both Robb and Theon. Robb wouldn't have trusted him to go back to the Iron Islands. And if Theon somehow escaped, he'd be able to do the Iron Born thing... sack Winterfell and run instead of trying to rule like Ned Stark. The problem is that Theon wasn't just a ward. He was a hostage. Had he been a ward in the same way that Ned and Robert were wards to Jon Arryn, he and Robb could have remained friends, but he wasn't and when the time came he chose his family.

[The Marquis de Leech]

Ok. Theon sits on his ship and sulks. Robb still finds out that the Ironborn have invaded the North, and thereby reasonably concludes that Theon has betrayed him. Theon can't go back (even if Robb believes him, the Northern lords won't), and his status as a treasonous weakling among the Ironborn is now confirmed. In other words, he has no future, and will probably meet with an accident.

(Incidentally, under this scenario, the Red Wedding still happens, but probably slightly differently, given that Winterfell hasn't fallen. I could imagine Roose offering to go ahead and clear out Ironborn while Robb attends the Wedding. Once Robb dies, Roose can plead that he was too far away, makes a dash to Winterfell to 'protect' Bran and Rickon, and seize power that way).

[ghosts in winterfell]

Ok. Theon sits on his ship and sulks. Robb still finds out that the Ironborn have invaded the North, and thereby reasonably concludes that Theon has betrayed him. Theon can't go back (even if Robb believes him, the Northern lords won't), and his status as a treasonous weakling among the Ironborn is now confirmed. In other words, he has no future, and will probably meet with an accident.

Yep, Theon is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't.

I think that Theon is the result of half-assing. The Starks treated him okay, but they never truly accepted him. Had they made his position their clear and completely separated them, perhaps things would have gone better for both Robb and Theon. Robb wouldn't have trusted him to go back to the Iron Islands. And if Theon somehow escaped, he'd be able to do the Iron Born thing... sack Winterfell and run instead of trying to rule like Ned Stark. The problem is that Theon wasn't just a ward. He was a hostage. Had he been a ward in the same way that Ned and Robert were wards to Jon Arryn, he and Robb could have remained friends, but he wasn't and when the time came he chose his family.

This. I think Ned & Cat never really approved of how close Robb & Theon were, but since Robb was so young when Theon arrived they didn't have the heart to tell him that this kid wasn't there to be his friend.

[Arland]

He's not necessarily "honor bound". He was in a lose-lose situation. Either way people are going to consider him a traitor and a turncloak.

Invading the North isn't evil. Taking Winterfell isn't evil. Killing the Mikken wasn't evil. Up until the Miller boy's none of the things he did was evil.

I did explained in previous posts why I think he was "honor bound". His was released and entrusted with his freedom by Robb which implies "you will not use my kindness and turns turn your arms against me" pledge, as basic concept of human decency. Thus turning against Robb was morally wrong.

It was a bad situation, but only in such situation person can show his character. It is not a problem to be kind and nice, when it costs you nothing.

Ok. Theon sits on his ship and sulks. Robb still finds out that the Ironborn have invaded the North, and thereby reasonably concludes that Theon has betrayed him. Theon can't go back (even if Robb believes him, the Northern lords won't), and his status as a treasonous weakling among the Ironborn is now confirmed. In other words, he has no future, and will probably meet with an accident.

(Incidentally, under this scenario, the Red Wedding still happens, but probably slightly differently, given that Winterfell hasn't fallen. I could imagine Roose offering to go ahead and clear out Ironborn while Robb attends the Wedding. Once Robb dies, Roose can plead that he was too far away, makes a dash to Winterfell to 'protect' Bran and Rickon, and seize power that way).

So? And how do you jump to conclusion that he will "meet with an accident". And how Theon will be seen as "treasonous weakling" if he will do what Balon commands but will not go beyond the minimum he is required to do? He will win no glory and probably wont inherit Balon's throne, but it is very far from being "treasonous weakling".

Basically you and Lee Sensei say : it was much beneficial for Theon to do what he did and if he didn't do it he would be poorer person, with less glory and material goods.

Exactly my point. A decent man chooses morality over personal gain , an evil one sees his personal well being as more important then anything. This exactly the choice Theon made, every time.

[Lee-Sensei]

I did explained in previous posts why I think he was "honor bound". His was released and entrusted with his freedom by Robb which implies "you will not use my kindness and turns turn your arms against me" pledge, as basic concept of human decency. Thus turning against Robb was morally wrong.

It was a bad situation, but only in such situation person can show his character. It is not a problem to be kind and nice, when it costs you nothing.

So? And how do you jump to conclusion that he will "meet with an accident". And how Theon will be seen as "treasonous weakling" if he will do what Balon commands but will not go beyond the minimum he is required to do? He will win no glory and probably wont inherit Balon's throne, but it is very far from being "treasonous weakling".

Basically you and Lee Sensei say : it was much beneficial for Theon to do what he did and if he didn't do it he would be poorer person, with less glory and material goods.

Exactly my point. A decent man chooses morality over personal gain , an evil one sees his personal well being as more important then anything. This exactly the choice Theon made, every time.

Human decency has nothing to do with it. If it did, he wouldn't have bee taken hostage in the first place as he was a frightened 10 year old child and hadn't done anything wrong. And people who care about honor in this series meet a bad end.

Do you think the Northeners and Riverlanders are going to forgive him if he's raiding the Stony Shore. They'll still see him as a turncloak and a traitor.

Why shouldn't he want to sit on the Seastone chair? He was taken hostage for 10 years of his life because he was the heir. It's his by right. Just like Robb expected and did become the Lord of Winterfell. Why should he give it all up?

[Lee-Sensei]

I did explained in previous posts why I think he was "honor bound". His was released and entrusted with his freedom by Robb which implies "you will not use my kindness and turns turn your arms against me" pledge, as basic concept of human decency. Thus turning against Robb was morally wrong.

It was a bad situation, but only in such situation person can show his character. It is not a problem to be kind and nice, when it costs you nothing.

So? And how do you jump to conclusion that he will "meet with an accident". And how Theon will be seen as "treasonous weakling" if he will do what Balon commands but will not go beyond the minimum he is required to do? He will win no glory and probably wont inherit Balon's throne, but it is very far from being "treasonous weakling".

Basically you and Lee Sensei say : it was much beneficial for Theon to do what he did and if he didn't do it he would be poorer person, with less glory and material goods.

Exactly my point. A decent man chooses morality over personal gain , an evil one sees his personal well being as more important then anything. This exactly the choice Theon made, every time.

Human decency has nothing to do with it. If it did, he wouldn't have bee taken hostage in the first place as he was a frightened 10 year old child and hadn't done anything wrong. And people who care about honor in this series meet a bad end.

Do you think the Northeners and Riverlanders are going to forgive him if he's raiding the Stony Shore. They'll still see him as a turncloak and a traitor.

Why shouldn't he want to sit on the Seastone chair? He was taken hostage for 10 years of his life because he was the heir. It's his by right. Just like Robb expected and did become the Lord of Winterfell. Why should he give it all up?

[blackeyedlily]

This is a well thought out intelligent post. Nice work!

I'm no Theon fan, but I support your ideas and do find Theon a fascinating character. I too would like to see further character development rather than death, but I'm concerned about where the released Winds of Winter Theon chapter left him.

I watched a recent Alfie Allen interview on YouTube where he discussed a scene from the upcoming Season 4. He stated that it involved Theon asking for forgiveness at a Heart Tree. I'm looking forward to seeing this.

[ghosts in winterfell]

Exactly my point. A decent man chooses morality over personal gain , an evil one sees his personal well being as more important then anything. This exactly the choice Theon made, every time.

And Theon was plagued by guilt for those choices, even before Ramsay tortured him. An evil one would feel no remorse whatsoever for their mistakes or wrongdoings, and that just isn't the case for Theon.

[mushroomshirt]

I watched a recent Alfie Allen interview on YouTube where he discussed a scene from the upcoming Season 4. He stated that it involved Theon asking for forgiveness at a Heart Tree. I'm looking forward to seeing this.

Theon's godswood scenes were my favorites from Dance.

I recall reading somewhere that they were accelerating Bran's Dance Chapters into season 4 & this seems true based on the trailer. If so it makes a lot of sense that they are also accelerating Theon's godswood chapters.

The night was windless, the snow drifting straight down out of a cold black sky, yet the leaves of the heart tree were rustling his name "Theon," they seemed to whisper, "Theon."

The old gods, he thought. They know me. They know my name. I was Theon of House Greyjoy. I was a ward of Eddard Stark, a friend and brother to his children. "Please." He fell to his knees. "A sword, that's all I ask. Let me die as Theon, not as Reek." Tears trickled down his cheeks, impossibly warm. "I was ironborn. A son ... a son of Pyke, of the islands."

A leaf drifted down from above, brushed his brow, and landed in the pool. It floated on the water, red, five-fingered, like a bloody hand. "... Bran," the tree murmured.

They know. The gods know. They saw what I did. And for one strange moment it seemed as if it were Bran's face carved into the pale trunk of the weirwood, staring down at him with eyes red and wise and sad. Bran's ghost, he thought, but that was madness. Why should Bran want to haunt him? He had been fond of the boy, had never done him any harm. It was not Bran we killed. It was not Rickon. They were only miller's sons, from the mill by the Acorn Water. "I had to have two heads, else they would have mocked me ... laughed at me ... they ..."

[The Marquis de Leech]

So? And how do you jump to conclusion that he will "meet with an accident". And how Theon will be seen as "treasonous weakling" if he will do what Balon commands but will not go beyond the minimum he is required to do? He will win no glory and probably wont inherit Balon's throne, but it is very far from being "treasonous weakling".

Basically you and Lee Sensei say : it was much beneficial for Theon to do what he did and if he didn't do it he would be poorer person, with less glory and material goods.

Exactly my point. A decent man chooses morality over personal gain , an evil one sees his personal well being as more important then anything. This exactly the choice Theon made, every time.

Balon ordered Theon to raid the Stony Shore. Your "sit on ship and sulk" idea would be Theon undercutting even that most basic of tasks, because OMG Theon somehow owes something to the people who kept him prisoner for a decade. And this would be noticed (Theon being under Dagmar's supervision). Theon couldn't go back to the North, and he couldn't realistically stay - those who want the Seastone Chair will want to dispose of him.

Basically, you think it is somehow decent for Theon to screw over his family. Which is nonsense; Theon is a Greyjoy, not a Stark, and he owed the North nothing.

[Arland]

And Theon was plagued by guilt for those choices, even before Ramsay tortured him. An evil one would feel no remorse whatsoever for their mistakes or wrongdoings, and that just isn't the case for Theon.

Not really. I think what you describe is a psychopath and not every evil person is such.Evil person can have moments of guilt or remorse, but in the end he chooses his own ego and self interest. His selfishness overcomes any guilt or remorse and he still acts in evil way. At least that is "my" definition of evil person.

Also IIRC in the books, Theon was not really "plagued" by guilt until his situation turned bad once Bran and Rickon escaped. He made no attempt to distance himself from Balon campaign and really the only thing that interested him was his glory - hence his idiotic plan to capture WF.

[Kate Poem]

I did explained in previous posts why I think he was "honor bound". His was released and entrusted with his freedom by Robb which implies "you will not use my kindness and turns turn your arms against me" pledge, as basic concept of human decency. Thus turning against Robb was morally wrong.

It was a bad situation, but only in such situation person can show his character. It is not a problem to be kind and nice, when it costs you nothing.

It could be problem, when it costs Theon everything. NO Seastone Chair, NO return to Robb.

So? And how do you jump to conclusion that he will "meet with an accident". And how Theon will be seen as "treasonous weakling" if he will do what Balon commands but will not go beyond the minimum he is required to do? He will win no glory and probably wont inherit Balon's throne, but it is very far from being "treasonous weakling".

Probably Robb's thoughts. Or Northern lords. Or everyone in the North.

A decent man chooses morality over personal gain , an evil one sees his personal well being as more important then anything. This exactly the choice Theon made, every time.

Theon Greyjoy is'nt Stark. Theon Greyjoy is'nt an angel. Balon and Asha thouught about Theon as "greenlander" = no Greyjoy. He wanted exist again in his family, to be... known as the heir of Seastone Chair.. Win respect and praise from his father.

He was in "no winner" situation. He was deluded and confused and angry and...

Robb Stark should'nt send him to Pyke, but, after Balon's first moves...

"No winner". Theon's head could be in danger.

[Arland]

"Everything" is a big word. Lessened prospects to inherit a throne is very far from "everything".

And I really cannot see how his "head" will be in danger or in any bigger danger it was when he decided to do what he actually did. Who would kill him? Asha? Balon? Victarion?

A person must no be an "angel" to be a decent one and not put his selfish ambitions about everything else.

I find this notion that a desire to be a "winner" gives you legitimization to be a scumbag and that only "angels" act differently, appalling.

[The Marquis de Leech]

Again, what you are suggesting means that Theon can never go back to the North - misplaced loyalty to his captors over his family will never be recognised. He'll still be a persona non grata as far as Winterfell goes.

Similarly, Dagmar will simply go back to Balon and tell him how useless his son turned out. Balon will nod his head, think how Asha is his heir, and Theon doesn't have a meaningful future on Pyke.

It isn't moral or decent to ask Theon to sacrifice himself for nothing (it'd have zero effect on anything). It's asking him to be a masochist.

[Arland]

Again, what you are suggesting means that Theon can never go back to the North - misplaced loyalty to his captors over his family will never be recognised. He'll still be a persona non grata as far as Winterfell goes.

Similarly, Dagmar will simply go back to Balon and tell him how useless his son turned out. Balon will nod his head, think how Asha is his heir, and Theon doesn't have a meaningful future on Pyke.

It isn't moral or decent to ask Theon to sacrifice himself for nothing (it'd have zero effect on anything). It's asking him to be a masochist.

Again I hardly see lessened chances to be named as heir by Balon as "self sacrifice". And I don't see moral values as "nothing".

Notice: Asha actually was waging war with much more decent approach then Theon. No human sacrifices, good way to treat prisoners. She is well respected, in-spite not following "old ways" because she has a spine and sticks to her values and doesn't give a shit about what people think about her. I think that ironically if Theon would have standed up to his moron dady, he would have gained much more respect.

[Lady Sharya]

The only real dilemma Theon was ever in was wanting something (respect & glory/admiration) that he had NO CLUE how to obtain.

The heart in conflict with itself is what GRRM says is the only thing worth writing about.

Theon could never have gained his heart's desires because he simply lacked the substance (honor, courage, compassion, a sense of justice or duty, loyalty, etc...) to earn them and the ability to ever recognize these deficiencies.

He was a loose canon that went off and he lacked the intelligence (& substance) to salvage the pieces when things went astay.

[Minsc]

Notice: Asha actually was waging war with much more decent approach then Theon. No human sacrifices, good way to treat prisoners. She is well respected, in-spite not following "old ways" because she has a spine and sticks to her values and doesn't give a shit about what people think about her. I think that ironically if Theon would have standed up to his moron dady, he would have gained much more respect.

We have little insight into how Asha actually waged her war as we only see her there a while after taking the place. Therefore, she could have easily given a sacrifice to the Drowned God when she initially took the Motte only we know no one there thus it resonates less in our mind (especially, in how she probably faced more fighting then Theon). Next, she doesn't treat her highborn prisoners any better then how Theon initially treated his highborn prisoners if I recall. However, though she has no problem endangering an infant by placing in a sea voyage without a source of milk to help ensure her control.

Finally, it is interesting how Asha despite thinking to herself about the flaws of Balon's moronic plan actually appears to have kept her mouth shut and gone along with it. That is despite your claims that she sticks to her values and the fact she had a much stronger position with their father in how he doesn't despise her.