Addressing Stark bias: Part 2

[Lee-Sensei]

A hostage doesn't owe his captors anything. This doesn't excuse Theon's actions after Robb released him.

What actions? Choosing his family over his captors? It does. Going to war with the North? Yes it does. Taking Winterfell? It does. Letting Ramsay kill the millers kids? No, it doesn't. And I've never argued that he was morally right in that situation.

[Dolorous Gabe]

I've stayed away from this thread and the first but the fact that it needs a second part just reconfirms what I first thought of it. It's just a way to ask people "why don't you hate the Starks like I do?" and "who's with me?!?!?!" Basically, attention seeking. You have an anti-Stark bias. Let's address that.

Objective? Please. This was not objective, nor was this or this.

Very few of us have some big hidden agenda to white wash the Starks. But I know of at least one who wants to character assassinate them with bullshit threads.

Thank you for this, Lord Stoneheart! Thank you!

[Game Of Thrones]

At least you didn't piss off the Stanstans this time, OP.

[Game Of Thrones]

I like the Starks. And it's pretty clear you're supposed to.

But everyone has their own opinions, I guess.

[John Doe]

For the love of god yer thesis was Robb being selfish going to war and Doran thinking about his people.

Again, just because Doran could have waited for a good chance to win, that doesn't mean he's, in fact, going to win.

No, but he waits until he can be sure to win, at least partially because of his people, and that's the difference imho.

Just wanted to clarify my point.

[A Bastard Snow]

At least you didn't piss off the Stanstans this time, OP.

He forgot to.

[John Doe]

Absolutely not.

Did you see Mace Tyrell pillaging and sacking King's Landing or the Great Sept after Margaery was arrested? Did Rickard Stark torched King's Landing and the Red Keep after Aerys took Brandon as prisoner?

If we're going to start with "Tywin was justified", he wasn't. He wasn't wrong to be mad, but that didn't entitled to what he did. The right course of action was sending men to the Vale and offer himself as his champion, like Rickard did when Brandon was judged by the King.

Robb didn't offer himself as a champion either.

[House Hendrix of Rock]

*sits back, eats popcorn*

[Veltigar]

At least you didn't piss off the Stanstans this time, OP.

Their power is waning on these boards sadly. Soon, no one will fear their wrath anymore :P And thus none will want to troll them.

[nastydream]

He forgot to.

Does that mean we won't have the onion sleight this time in the thread? :(

just cause i'm feeling deep right now : http://diaryofadepressed20something.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/winter-is-coming-but-snow-already-came.jpg

[JonCon's Red Beard]

No, but he waits until he can be sure to win, at least partially because of his people, and that's the difference imho.

Just wanted to clarify my point.

He waits until he can be sure to win because that's the most logical thing to do. Who goes to war unprepared?

Robb didn't offer himself as a champion either.

Ned wasn't even given a trial. And the Riverlands were being savaged, the lands of his mother. Had Ned been given a Trial by Combat, he could have asked for someone.

[RoamingRonin]

What actions? Choosing his family over his captors? It does. Going to war with the North? Yes it does. Taking Winterfell? It does. Letting Ramsay kill the millers kids? No, it doesn't. And I've never argued that he was morally right in that situation.

He didn't choose his family. He chose a chance to sit the Seastone Chair. That's what his first chapter on Pyke was all about. He barely gives a thought to his family except to wonder how they'll either oppose or support him.

You argue as if Theon was doing everything in the name of House Greyjoy and for the glory of Pyke when his actions were in defiance of Balon's orders and wishes.

If you weren't biased and eager to make excuses, you'd see that.

[nastydream]

He waits until he can be sure to win because that's the most logical thing to do. Who goes to war unprepared?

Just wanted to clear something up.Doran clearly cares for Dorne.You can see that right?

[thelittledragonthatcould]

. The right course of action was sending men to the Vale and offer himself as his champion, like Rickard did when Brandon was judged by the King.

Have you read the books? Cat told everyone she was heading North to deliberately make the Lannisters think that is where she was headed.

In Westeros is you lose a trial by combat it is a sign by the Gods that you are guilty. By bringing Tyrion to the Vale and trying to make sure that he had no one of quality to defend himself she was trying to besmirch Tyrion Lannisters name.

[thelittledragonthatcould]

Ned wasn't even given a trial. And the Riverlands were being savaged, the lands of his mother. Had Ned been given a Trial by Combat, he could have asked for someone.

He admitted his guilt in front of a large crowd, there was no need for a trial.

[bellyfrog]

Okay so the last thread didn't go as I'd hoped. It devolved completely into a discussion of Tywin Lannister which isn't what I wanted at all. I guess I'm going to have to structure the discussion more carefully

What I wanted was to get people to address their own Stark bias, and by that I mean when they are biased towards the Starks in face of the facts. I feel Theon would be a good starting point. The misconceptions surrounding his treatment, position, and anxiety as a Stark hostage (not "honored guest", hostage) is driven mainly by a rosy view of Winterfell. Why do people for example think that everyone in Winterfell loved Theon when the evidence is clearly against that? Why do people think Balon was at fault for Theon's imprisonment when Theon was taken against all choice? Or why do people think Ned would never have executed him in the first place? People mischaracterize these issues because of the root phenemonon of Stark bias

Also, why do people believe that Ned is the best Lord for his people that we see in the series? There isn't any evidence to suggest that Tywin for example, inspired less loyalty than he did. And there is nothing that indicates he was well loved other than by a select few factions. Why then do people say he is the greatest Lord of all time? Or that Lannisters inspire less loyalty and following than the Starks do, when nothing suggests this at all? Not to veer into Tywin too much (since that clearly isn't a good idea) but it is worth thinking about

And Arya's murder of Dareon is another example of Stark bias in action. I have seen this justified several times as Arya "carrying out Stark justice"? That is very concerning that people think she has a carte blanche to kill people who have done her no wrong because of some vague entitlement as a Stark. Not to mention she is not even Lord of Winterfell nor is she even in Westeros for her to act in this way. Call it what it was; cold-blooded and harsh

And Stark bias extends to the general perception of the North as well. That Northmen are all more "honorable" in their conduct, with regards to how they carry out war and that they aren't "scheming snakes" like the people in the south. It is interesting that this view can't be shaken off by the loads of textual evidence that suggest otherwise. What is honorable or good about killing people, baking them into foodstuffs and feeding them to their own family? I don't think Ned would approve of that

And the hot button issue of the Freys, thinking for example that they should be completely exterminated down to the women and children. Is that really a fair and requisite response to the Red Wedding? I don't think Robb would want children killed in his name. Equal or even worse things than the Red Wedding happen but readers don't want such an extreme punishment for them.

These are just some quick examples of where Stark bias leaks through that I have witnessed from reading posts. Maybe we can start looking at things more objectively in the future, that's what I hope for at least.

I think it's clear from your post you are somewhat biased against the Starks, because it contains either willful misinformation or some ignorance of the facts.

Regarding Theon, sure he was taken hostage against his will, but this a perfectly normal occurrence given the Greyjoy rebellion. While he may not be loved by everyone at Winterfell he clearly had a good position within the Stark family regardless of his attitude. He seeks their approval but his actions and character are questionable at best, and the Starks are not lovey dovey people so it's unsurprising that he's unsatisfied in this regard. He was raised and taught alongside the Stark children, he thought of Robb as a brother. Can you imagine what his situation would have been like if he had been hostage to some of the other "noble" families?! He landed in maybe the best situation possible given the circumstances but his petulance leads to resentment.

To your next point, a "select few factions"? This is where my willful misinformation or ignorance statement comes into play. The entire North rallied around Robb when Ned was taken hostage. They rallied around a 15 year old boy to the cause of freeing Ned, in what was clearly going to be a very difficult war for them to fight, with the numbers against them. If this doesn't prove that the Starks were well loved by pretty much all of their bannermen then I don't know what does. Not going to debate about the Lannisters vs Starks in terms of who was a more loved house, because there's very little evidence to say anything about the Lannisters in this regard.

Not going to go into Arya's killing of Dareon too much because this was just done to death in another thread. In my eyes yes this kill is somewhat questionable and I don't justify it purely as because she is carrying out "Stark justice". Although that surely is a part of her reasoning I feel that the main reason is because this man abandoned the one living person that she loves (Jon). As well as him being a deserter of the Night's Watch and thus "marked for death", she is part of an organization that worships the god of death, plus it's just good practice for her! I won't go as far to say this kill is completely justified by any means but I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt on this one. The old man kill was more questionable from my POV.

Personally I don't have any general perception of the North vs the South I believe they both have honourable houses and houses that are not so much. Regarding the Manderly's they are really exacting their own revenge for the Red Wedding, the fact they can cover that with the sentiment that they are also revenging the Starks and the North is just convenient.

The Starks definitely do a handful dishonourable things throughout the books but put into context it's hardly enough to make the reader turn against them in comparison to some of the atrocities carried out by the other houses of Westeros. Most of these are easily explained by either necessity, revenge or justice. Robb marrying Jeyne Westerling, and one or two of Arya's kills are really the only unjustifiable dishonours they commit.

[bellyfrog]

Have you read the books? Cat told everyone she was heading North to deliberately make the Lannisters think that is where she was headed.

In Westeros is you lose a trial by combat it is a sign by the Gods that you are guilty. By bringing Tyrion to the Vale and trying to make sure that he had no one of quality to defend himself she was trying to besmirch Tyrion Lannisters name.

Cat didn't want him to have a trial in the Vale at all, that was all down to Lysa, and Cat and Brynden Tully both see it as "folly". We can clearly see from her POV that she wanted to keep him hostage and use him as leverage to get Ned or at least the girls freed.

[Lord Reaver]

plus it's just good practice for her!

This is surely grounds enough to justify any murder. Yep yep, it's a shame Dahmer or any of the other serial killers didn't think of that one.

"Yes, your honor, I killed that man in cold blood, but in my defense, I was doing it so I could become a better killer."

[John Doe]

Just wanted to clear something up.Doran clearly cares for Dorne.You can see that right?

Exactly. When talking about the children in the watergardens it was made pretty clear that it was a motive for him not to let the people/children pay for a lost war.

[Hrafntýr]

Have you read the books? Cat told everyone she was heading North to deliberately make the Lannisters think that is where she was headed.

In Westeros is you lose a trial by combat it is a sign by the Gods that you are guilty. By bringing Tyrion to the Vale and trying to make sure that he had no one of quality to defend himself she was trying to besmirch Tyrion Lannisters name.

Cat refers to the trial by combat as a "mummer's farce," she never intended for such a thing, and wanted to avoid it, so no, it was not a set-up in the fashion you describe. Lysa intervened, wanted to make a public show of Tyrion's "confession," and brought about that whole sequence of events; she wouldn't even speak to Cat, who wanted to hear the confession in private.

ETA: ninja'd by bellyfrog!