The source of all Sansa-hate

[Mad Monkey]

Sandor had a redemptive arc?

I couldn't tell.

If you accept the Gravedigger theory, most of it took place off-page during his convalescence with the Elder Brother. There was some inner turmoil long before that but until he was injured and about to die he wasn't forced to lay down and reflect on it for an extended period of time.

[Queen Sansa Stark]

Sandor had a redemptive arc?

I couldn't tell. couldn't tell.

Well he is at the Quiet Isle and getting some heavy therapy. I think that counts as an redemption arc.

[Dicer]

Well, if that was what I was saying, then you'd have a point.

Let's dissect a source of frequent criticism: "Sansa is passive."

Well, you just came on here and generalized a whole bunch of readers as intentionally manipulating the text to mask their 'hate'. Have you read this thread? Some people have given different reasons as to why they don't like her. Why don't you address those individual points? Instead of generalizing. So if someone in this thread said " I hate Sansa because she is passive" you can just post your whole comment and address them, instead of claiming Sansa haters just hate because they are not reading the text right.

Since I specifically said it was bullying and it was cruel, I don't know why you'd think I was saying it was 'okay'. That's just a straw man response: the point stands. You've described this wound as 'mauling' and 'brutalising' - that's every bit as inaccurate as saying it was 'okay', not that anyone has actually done that.

If it is not okay, according to you, why would a typical 11 year old girl love a guy who gets off on giving pain to others?

And I stand by my point. Joffrey was pushing his sword point against Mycah's face. He drew blood. He was mauling Mycah's face. Did he stop there? No. He was still pushing his sword into Mycah's face and mentions that he is not going to stop, when Arya steps in.

And if it's typical for 11 yr old girls to love boys who like to inflict pain and terrorize other powerless children, then I guess Arya is atypical. Seeing as how she did not enjoy what was happening and stepped in to defend Mycah. I guess Arya is the abnormal one here, since normal 11 yr olds love boyfriends who stick sharp implements into the faces of other children.

Again, why are you saying these things? How do they relate to what I actually said? They don't. They're hysterical mischaracterisations, straw men constructed to take the place of the actual response.

I am saying these things because your point implied that Joffrey really did not try to harm Arya. According to you, he just hit away her stick and forced her backwards. You stress that he does not hit her. What are you trying to say here? That just because Arya is able to successfully dodge Joffrey's sword, Joffrey is really not trying to hurt her? Sansa herself is scared of what she is seeing. She talks about Arya being frightened and Joffrey slashing at her with his sword? Is that not enough to understand that Joffrey was intending to cause serious harm? Did Joffrey's sword have to actually hit it's mark in order for Sansa to understand what she was seeing?

The situation has become so silly that now posters are trying to defend Joffrey in order to defend Sansa!

The fact is, Sansa's reaction to the incident with Joffrey is a very realistic picture of how the human brain works. We privilege information that fits what we want to believe, and ignore or discount information that doesn't fit this pattern. We revise the things we saw to fit better with what we want to have seen, assign motives to others that fit our preconceived ideas about them, attribute to coincidence the things we want to have been luck and to intention the things we want to have been intentional, and then we go over our memories until they fit the story we like.

See, that's your interpretation. Sansa sees Joffrey torture this innocent kid and try to injure her sister, but she ignores all that. Like a typical 11 year old. I see things differently. I don't think typical 11 yr old girls in today's modern world are okay with that sort of behavior. Contrary to what seems to be the popular consensus here about typical 11 yr old girls, I think they are intelligent, perceptive (even more than adults sometimes) and empathetic. They are not typically infatuated with bullying boys. They are affected by cruelty to animals, other people and the innocent. I think the 11 yr old who loves the sadistic, torturing bully is the rare exception, not the rule. I think it's rarer still for a 11 yr old to still love a boy who tries to harm her sister. I don't see anything typical about that.

Sansa may be revising things to fit in with what she wants because she is infatuated with Joffrey and wants to be Queen. Which is okay. But it does not make it right. And I don't see why she should not be criticized for not standing up for her sister, continuing to blame Arya for what happened (Instead of Joffrey and Cersei) or showing any empathy for Mycah. Or continuing to love someone who has been exposed as a brute to everyone else.

There's lots of solid evidence to back all this up: it's just how the mind works. Sansa does it. I do it. You do it. You're almost certainly doing it now, in fact: you're almost certainly downplaying or ignoring the behaviour of people you've met who are a bit like Sansa. Your memory of the wound Joff inflicted on Mycah was inaccurate: why? Almost certainly because the 'mauling' fit your preferred version of events better. Sansa is no different. Her version of how it all went down almost certainly downplays the likelihood of Joff actually hurting Arya, just as yours plays it up. It almost certainly downplays the seriousness of what he did to Mycah, just as yours exaggerates it. And so on.

If the mind is constantly hiding the real truth from Sansa then she is either mentally ill or her IQ levels are really low. Or she is doing it for selfish reasons, because facing the truth makes her acknowledge what a bastard Joffrey is and she can't be Queen. There is nothing wrong with my memory of the wound Joff inflicted. He was pushing his sword into Mycah's face! For you it was ' a scratch' , while I used the word 'maul' to describe what Joff was doing when he drew blood. And he was not going to stop there as he tells everyone present.

Sansa's version is what makes it sound so scary. Mycah standing there terrified to move while Joffrey has fun sticking his knife into his face. Professing that he is not going to 'hurt him.....much'. Attacking Arya while spewing filth. Arya herself getting scared and trying to dodge his sword. Nymeria stepping in to save Arya. We only hear one account of it and that is Sansa's. And that account captures Joffrey's sadism, Mycah's terror and Arya's fear when Joffrey turns his anger on her. Are you saying that I am wrong? That Joffrey was not being a sadistic bully there? That Mycah was not terrified? That Arya was not scared of Joffrey's attack? What am I playing up and misinterpreting and exaggerating here?

[harry_dresden]

Well he is at the Quiet Isle and getting some heavy therapy. I think that counts as an redemption arc.

Therapy?

Nothing Sandor has done makes up for just Mycah. And honestly nothing will.

No. Sandor is a scumbag who cannot ever be redeemed.

I don't care if he goes out in a blaze of glory saving the world from the Others.

[butterbumps!]

Well, you just came on here and generalized a whole bunch of readers as intentionally manipulating the text and acting as if their critique is 'objective'. Have you read this thread? Some people have given different reasons as to why they don't like her. Why don't you address those individual points? Instead of generalizing. So if someone in this thread said " I hate Sansa because she is passive" you can just post your whole comment and address them, instead of claiming Sansa haters just hate because they are not reading the text right.

No I didn't. People in this thread cited "Sansa fans" as a reason why they hate Sansa for skewed readings. Some of those same posters supplied their own skewed readings. I was remarking on the irony of this condition. It was pretty clear that first post I made was a comment about those who cited "Sansa fans" and skewed readings by fans as a source of their problem with Sansa. So no broad generalizations-- I addressed an individual point-- the irony of sourcing one's hate as the skewed readings of Sansa fans, while also being guilty of the same from the other angle.

I didn't claim my reading was objective truth. I used a common criticism ("Sansa is passive") to illustrate what I meant by the idea that there's something else behind that criticism.

By the way, why didn't you address those that cited Sansa fans as the source of their angst for generalizing about a fanbase if you're taking issue with what you were reading to be generalizations?

If you want a more direct example, then your use of the word "maul" to sensationalize the Trident scene is precisely the sort of skewed misrepresentations I'm taking issue with. While "maul" is denotatively true, you made a conscious choice to use a synonym for "cut" that has alarmist connotations in order to present a more damning version of this scene.

[harry_dresden]

yeah you guys are really nitpicking with this maul issue.

[harry_dresden]

If you accept the Gravedigger theory, most of it took place off-page during his convalescence with the Elder Brother. There was some inner turmoil long before that but until he was injured and about to die he wasn't forced to lay down and reflect on it for an extended period of time.

Is that true?

Regardless, that's not redemption.

Redemption doesn't come if you're so far in deep like Sandor.

And how did he not have time to reflect on it?

Really, he couldn't reflect before sleeping or something

[Lee-Sensei]

Honestly, I think it's much easier to sympathize with Ned throughout his questionable decision-making than Sansa. But this is kind of getting into the "inconsistency" I was talking about-- how Sansa's various "crimes" of being favorable toward the Lannisters are enumerated as reasons for hating her, while Ned, guilty of doing the same things, remains a sympathetic character.

I don't think anyone must like these two equally. Rather, that Ned isn't criticized in a similar fashion as Sansa about these alleged "crimes" speaks to the fact that there's something else at play here outside of the Sansa's specific actions that render her actions so seemingly egregious to some readers. For example, Ned is never blamed for Lady's death, while Sansa's lack of testimony is cited as the cause. Essentially, it seems easier to trace this to Sansa's "malfeasance and idiocy" for "loving" Joff, whereas we overlook the fact that Ned knowingly carried out a truly unfair sentence on an innocent party out of some ideal of honor to his king, who had just shown himself unworthy and unconcerned about truth or innocence.

I don't dislike Ned for this. To the contrary. But Ned worked against the interest of his own family more than Sansa ever did, so I think the fact that Sansa's actions to this end are cited as reasons for hating her is therefore only a partial truth at best (unless said poster also hates Ned for these things-- then that's consistent).

I wouldn't say that Robert proved himself unworthy in that instance (although he was a bad King). He stood by and let Cersei have her way reluctantly and Ned carried out the sentence. I blame her honestly.

I agree with the rest.

[butterbumps!]

I wouldn't say that Robert proved himself unworthy in that instance. He stood by and let Cersei have her way reluctantly and Ned carried out the sentence. I blame her honestly.

To be sure, I see her as the main antagonist here. If not for her, then neither the trial nor execution would have happened.

But I do see this as an instance where Robert showed himself untrustworthy and even unworthy in his capacity as king-- he's the king, dammit! He didn't have to give in to Cersei harping when doing so was unjust and wrong. The issue for me is that I see this as a case of misplaced loyalty/ honor on Ned's part-- yes, he obeys his king, but that command was wrong, and given in service to making Cersei happy with no regard for truth or innocence. I think they're all wrong here, though Cersei's the ringleader, Robert is neglectful, and Ned's priorities seem a bit misplaced in my view. I hasten to add that I'm forgiving of Ned for this-- I really do sympathize with him here.

[cocoalover1956]

If the mind is constantly hiding the real truth from Sansa then she is either mentally ill or her IQ levels are really low. Or she is doing it for selfish reasons, because facing the truth makes her acknowledge what a bastard Joffrey is and she can't be Queen. There is nothing wrong with my memory of the wound Joff inflicted. He was pushing his sword into Mycah's face! For you it was ' a scratch' , while I used the word 'maul' to describe what Joff was doing when he drew blood. And he was not going to stop there as he tells everyone present.

No, its an extremely common psychological response. On average, people will ignore/misinterpret an unpleasant truth more often than not.

[Queen Sansa Stark]

No, its an extremely common psychological response. On average, people will ignore/misinterpret an unpleasant truth more often than not.

Also known as defense-mechanism.

[Dicer]

No I didn't. People in this thread cited "Sansa fans" as a reason why they hate Sansa for skewed readings. Some of those same posters supplied their own skewed readings. I was remarking on the irony of this condition. It was pretty clear that first post I made was a comment about those who cited "Sansa fans" and skewed readings by fans as a source of their problem with Sansa. So no broad generalizations-- I addressed an individual point-- the irony of sourcing one's hate as the skewed readings of Sansa fans, while also being guilty of the same from the other angle.

I didn't claim my reading was objective truth. I used a common criticism ("Sansa is passive") to illustrate what I meant by the idea that there's something else behind that criticism.

By the way, why didn't you address those that cited Sansa fans as the source of their angst for generalizing about a fanbase if you're taking issue with what you were reading to be generalizations?

If you want a more direct example, then your use of the word "maul" to sensationalize the Trident scene is precisely the sort of skewed misrepresentations I'm taking issue with. While "maul" is denotatively true, you made a conscious choice to use a synonym for "cut" that has alarmist connotations in order to present a more damning version of this scene.

Again, what readings are skewed or not is your opinion. It's not fact. If someone claims, that Sansa fans are skewing their opinions address them. Your comment was basically

What does concern me is when those who profess to hate her try to mask that hatred with the veneer of "objective" critique that comes from intentionally manipulated "analysis." I'd rather posters just owned their hate and gave the honest reasons for disliking her, rather than trying to pass their hatred off using thin, logically inconsistent and misleading "analysis" allegedly derived from the text. That is, instead of naming the true reasons for disliking her, they try to pass this off as failures in Sansa's character, failures which, for the most part, do not actually exist (things like she's dumb and disloyal, for example).

You don't give specifics, but talk about how those 'who profess to hate her', try to mask their hatred with their 'objective' critique using manipulated analysis. This is the generalization I am talking about. Again, why don't you address specific posters who have mentioned their reasons, instead of talking about how 'those who hate her' manipulate the text to support their hatred?

By claiming that the critique of Sansa haters is not objective, you are implying that somehow you have a better understanding of the text. Is that not right? How do you know that their critique is not objective. There's only one person who can make that judgement. And I don't think GRRM is going to be reading this thread any time soon.

So if I address you about your specific comment, I should also address other posters about their comments about Sansa fans? I don't understand what you are saying here.

I just googled the word maul and this was the first definition I got:

"(of an animal) wound (a person or animal) by scratching and tearing."

Joffrey was definitely trying to wound Mycah by scratching his face (Or more accurately pushing a sharp sword into his face) and drawing blood. English is not my first language, but I am not exactly sure why everyone has such an issue with using the word maul for what Joffrey was doing and intended to continue doing to Mycah's face.

No, its an extremely common psychological response. On average, people will ignore/misinterpret an unpleasant truth more often than not.

Ah, I see. Surprising that Sansa is the only character who does this, considering that it's extremely common. But I guess, that's why she is so 'hyper realistic'. Because her mind hides all the unpleasant truths like it does for typical 11 yr olds. She just sails through her fantasy world, because that's how the mind works.

[Cas Stark]

I don't think many people actually "hate" Sansa. What ends up happening is that the discussion revolves around, in my humble opinion, non fans refuting the various excuses and rationalizations that are given by her army of fans for her GOT actions, which all begin with 'it was wrong, but.....' and then go on from there.

Some of the rationalizations are reasonable, some beggar belief.

[Elaena Targaryen]

At no time during those conversations with Cersei (about Ned's plans to take her away from Joffrey0 did Sansa, who was an immature child rather than an adult in her late 20's) have the slightest idea that her revelations to Cersei would result in the deaths of Stark retainers, much less the seizure and imprisonment and ultimate death of her father, the flight of Arya, or Jeyne's horrible fate. She was guilty of poor judgment and naivete, but not of intent to murder or kill, in going to Cersei.

Hi Raksha long time no chat. :)

The thing here is Sansa should have taken a moment to realize she did 'have the slightest idea' that all was not well in Neverland, but I know she was too caught up in her plight and naiveté to do so. I know she was not paying strict attention as she was distraught but Ned did remind her that their own people were getting killed.

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

Maybe Ned should have told her more, maybe Sansa should have reflected more, but there was a very slight idea ignored.

He was her fiancee, so as Ned notes theirs a legitimate conflict there.

Ned only 'notes' that in the show and not in the books

It makes it worse that it was her own sister though. Other kids picking on each other is one thing, and maybe even between siblings, but Sansa shouldn't have allowed Jeyne or anyone else pick on her sister.

It does not bother me that Sansa says mean things to her sister, siblings fight, but I am troubled by her not correcting her friends in doing so. Sansa is the eldest daughter of a Lord Paramount and it should be her place to correct these girls from speaking to her highborn sister in such a manner but this probably falls back to the Septa not teaching Sansa the appropriate behavior of high ladies obligations with their siblings and allowing and encouraging the bullying.

Arya has ruined a girl's toy and traumatized the kid because of her own trauma

I always found it sort of touching, in an odd way, that Martin wrote this almost exact same scenario for the girls and I found it to be a heartbreaking link between them.

[Dicer]

Nothing Sandor has done makes up for just Mycah. And honestly nothing will.

No. Sandor is a scumbag who cannot ever be redeemed.

I don't care if he goes out in a blaze of glory saving the world from the Others.

Yeah, I don't see anything redeeming in him either. He runs down a fleeing, defenseless child and kills him in cold blood. He kicks Mycah's body off his horse, makes a joke and laughs about it.

Is involved in the slaughter of loyal Stark men including Jeyne Poole's father.

He has a lot of fans though, just like Jaime. I think it's because the bad guys are more interesting since they get to do lots of bad things and then get to darkly brood about it later on as they go through their 'redemption arc'.

[mormont]

If it is not okay, according to you, why would a typical 11 year old girl love a guy who gets off on giving pain to others?

Again, you're characterising the situation in your preferred way and using that to set up straw man arguments. Clearly, Sansa does not perceive the situation in those terms: she simply didn't see Joffrey as 'getting off on giving pain to others'. She will have ignored or downplayed the evidence that leads you to that conclusion (if she ever saw it). It's likely that she simply has a different story for that situation than you do, and as long as you insist on arguing as if your story was the only possible interpretation of events (not just the right one - the only one possible), we'll get nowhere.

You're arguing with blinkers on, and it's doing nothing for your position at all, I'm afraid.

And I stand by my point. Joffrey was pushing his sword point against Mycah's face. He drew blood. He was mauling Mycah's face. Did he stop there? No. He was still pushing his sword into Mycah's face and mentions that he is not going to stop, when Arya steps in.

Stand by it if you wish. A minor cut is not 'mauling': insisting that it is only makes your other points look weaker.

And if it's typical for 11 yr old girls to love boys who like to inflict pain and terrorize other powerless children, then I guess Arya is atypical. Seeing as how she did not enjoy what was happening and stepped in to defend Mycah. I guess Arya is the abnormal one here, since normal 11 yr olds love boyfriends who stick sharp implements into the faces of other children.

Who said anything like this? Straw man again. I don't mean to be rude, but every single post you've made so far in this discussion has contained at least one straw man. You appear to rely on it as a go-to method of debate. That's... not wise.

I am saying these things because your point implied that Joffrey really did not try to harm Arya.

Well, first of all, no, it didn't: it simply pointed out that he didn't ever hit her, and that it would therefore be possible for someone who desperately wanted to believe that he wouldn't really have hurt her, to interpret the situation that way.

Second of all, even if you had taken that (inaccurate) implication, what you wrote would still be a gross and exaggerated mischaracterisation, attributing a view to me that I have simply never expressed. This is not a reasonable way to participate in a discussion. It's very bad etiquette, in fact.

What are you trying to say here?

I'm not trying to say anything. I have said it, more than once. If I had been unclear, I'd elaborate - but I was not.

I see things differently.

That's fine. People do see things differently: that's my point. The problem comes when you insist on your point of view as being the only reasonable or possible one, and misrepresent other points of view in order to do so.

Contrary to what seems to be the popular consensus here about typical 11 yr old girls, I think they are intelligent, perceptive (even more than adults sometimes) and empathetic.

Well... as the father of one just two years ago, I would say 11 year old girls are all different. Like adults. Some are very much not perceptive. What I would also say is that 11 year old girls don't have much life experience and have almost no romantic experience. They're insecure and vulnerable and particularly prone to believing the world is as they would wish it to be, rather than as it is. Adults do this too, all the time: but girls of that age are particularly prone to it.

Sansa may be revising things to fit in with what she wants because she is infatuated with Joffrey and wants to be Queen. Which is okay. But it does not make it right.

It's okay but not right? Do you mean, she's made a mistake, but we should understand why? If so, I can't disagree.

If the mind is constantly hiding the real truth from Sansa then she is either mentally ill or her IQ levels are really low.

As I said - everyone does this sometimes, including you and I. I guarantee you we have both done the same at some point in our lives. Does that mean we're either mentally ill or have low IQ? Of course not. As I say: this is how the human mind works. It's normal.

There is nothing wrong with my memory of the wound Joff inflicted.

Either you were misremembering or you were (and are) exaggerating: either way, the point stands. Your version is coloured by the story you prefer. And unlike in real life, of course, you have the luxury of reading the events on a printed page over and over: you can even go back and check. You are not reliant on memory, a fallible thing that we overwrite on a daily basis.

ETA - wrt the accuracy of the word 'maul', if you're not a native speaker you may not get the context. This is one of those occasions when you might be able to argue a word is technically accurate by the dictionary definition, but you would never hear it used in actual speech in that context. 'Mauling' would imply serious, even life-threatening, damage: not one minor scratch but many deep gouges, the sort that scar. I have never heard any speaker of English (native or not) use it to describe a single minor cut.

[WhiteWalder]

I don't think many people actually "hate" Sansa. What ends up happening is that the discussion revolves around, in my humble opinion, non fans refuting the various excuses and rationalizations that are given by her army of fans for her GOT actions, which all begin with 'it was wrong, but.....' and then go on from there.

Some of the rationalizations are reasonable, some beggar belief.

I think you hit the nail on the head with the statement "it was wrong, but".....

But, it seems Sansa fans use this logic more than the haters.

Most haters hate Sansa for selling out her sister. The fans claim "it was wrong, but"...

Most haters hate Sansa for betraying her father. The fans claim "it was wrong, but"....

I don't particularly enjoy Sansa because she is so unlike the other Stark children. Her siblings are head-strong, quick to action, and can think for themselves. Her siblings may not make the best decision, but her siblings don't sit around daydreaming about lemoncakes and Florian. She is manipulated by everyone around her. She was manipulated into selling our her sister and betraying her father. She didn't get out of KL by herself. LF schemed to get her out and is manipulating her for his own reasons. She was still being manipulated by LF as she came down from the Eyrie.

[JesterX]

I was about to start a Sansa thread, myself but since this one is up . . .

Did Sansa ever realize that it was her going to Cersei to report that Ned was sending them back to Winterfell, is essentially the reason her father lost her head? I'm trying to recall from the chapters.

[Cas Stark]

I was about to start a Sansa thread, myself but since this one is up . . .

Did Sansa ever realize that it was her going to Cersei to report that Ned was sending them back to Winterfell, is essentially the reason her father lost her head? I'm trying to recall from the chapters.

I've always found it odd that the author never has her really reflect on her actions in this regard, she never again thinks about her actions that day, I've never been sure what he's trying to tell us, or if he's trying to tell us anything...did she really never put 2 & 2 together, is this one more thing she remainsin denial about, or what?

[The Weirwoods Eyes]

yeah you guys are really nitpicking with this maul issue.

Out of interest, don't you think that, the words we use infer our intended message. It's not really about you personally its just that I've seen and had arguments over the use of specific words on this forum a few times now. And it seems that often people are ignorant or at least claim ignorance about the mental imagery certain words conjure up.

"The child was mauled in the incident" v's "The child was cut in the incident"

The first suggests in the readers mind a bloody brutal attack aka "the dog mauled the man" or "she was mauled to death".. Its quite an evocative word and it conveys severe, excessive, and devastating wounds. There are dictionary definitions, and there are accepted connotations of words.

So it may seem like Nit Picking, but I don't think it is. I think the words we choose tell us a great deal about the writers intentions. Why chose maul when you could choose cut, or pierced both of which would be more in keeping with the actual injury. Not that I'm defending Joffrey at all. Its more that I wonder if people genuinely don't grasp the power of the words they choose or if they are just trying to make those objecting to misleading use look petty?