Was Jon Snow raped by Ygritte?

[Mithras]

“Fantasy is escapist, and that is its glory. If a soldier is imprisioned by the enemy, don't we consider it his duty to escape?. . .If we value the freedom of mind and soul, if we're partisans of liberty, then it's our plain duty to escape, and to take as many people with us as we can!”

― J.R.R. Tolkien

[Mithras]

German social philosopher Ernst Bloch wrote that utopias and images of fulfilment, however regressive they might be, also included an impetus for a radical social change. According to Bloch, social justice could not be realized without seeing things fundamentally differently. Something that is mere "daydreaming" or "escapism" from the viewpoint of a technological-rational society might be a seed for a new and more humane social order, as it can be seen as an "immature, but honest substitute for revolution".

[Lopsang]

Greetings.

I would like to ask, do you think Ygritte blackmailing Jon into having sex with her should be considered rape?

Furthermore, does being coerced by your parents into marrying someone constitute rape?

Or would one/both of these things be defined by a different term?

I think it's a bit of a stretch to say Jon got raped, but it's not completely out of the question. It comes down to whether or not Jon had a legitimate choice in the matter (not just "oh, I can decide to not have sex, but die as a result"). A similar question was posed about Cersei when she was married to Robert. I essentially agreed she was raped in that instance, because Cersei simply did not have a legitimate choice in the matter (if she did not copulate with Robert, her pregnancy would have obviously been that of someone other than Robert and she would probably get hanged for treason.

In Jon's case, I guess it depends if he could have still won the wildling's loyalty without have any relationship with Ygritte. If the wildlings did not trust him, he may have gotten killed or exiled or whatever else. Since he had the intercourse with Ygritte as a way to get the wildlings to trust him, and because it was probably necessary to do so in order to not get killed, he was probably raped. But not really by Ygritte; and this is where it gets complicated. Ygritte could have been any woman. It was probably Qhorin who really forced Jon to basically have sex, because he said Jon had to do ANYTHING he must to win the wildling's trust. Now, I don't think he could have foreseen that Jon doing what he did as a necessity, but...

Anyway, it's hard to say and it does get complicated. But, with that framework in mind, perhaps somebody else can extrapolate the correct judgement.

[OrangeStallion]

yeah she did, and?

I don't get your point. Irrelevant to what.

i was just pointing out that she raped him, and the fact that they got married later had nothing to do with the fact she raped him. Its the whole argument about "but he/she enjoyed it later" that I was trying to disprove. sorry if it came out wrong

[Qhorin Halfhand and Yoren]

i was just pointing out that she raped him, and the fact that they got married later had nothing to do with the fact she raped him. Its the whole argument about "but he/she enjoyed it later" that I was trying to disprove. sorry if it came out wrong

I don't disagree that it was rape.

But I was more talking about young Lysa wanting to marry Littlefinger and have his children in response to Seanf post about it being considered mad by young nobles boys, girls to marry who they want. Which might be true but not with all.

Some concerns that are seen as 'modern morality concerns' are concerns of actual characters in the books as well.

[SeanF]

I think it's a bit of a stretch to say Jon got raped, but it's not completely out of the question. It comes down to whether or not Jon had a legitimate choice in the matter (not just "oh, I can decide to not have sex, but die as a result"). A similar question was posed about Cersei when she was married to Robert. I essentially agreed she was raped in that instance, because Cersei simply did not have a legitimate choice in the matter (if she did not copulate with Robert, her pregnancy would have obviously been that of someone other than Robert and she would probably get hanged for treason. .

In Cersei's case, I've no reason to believe she did not marry Robert willingly. Of course, the marriage was a disaster. I interpret her recollections in AFFC as Robert raping her, but that's far from being unanimous. Ran and Linda, for example, have argued that did not do so.

[RhaenysBee]

Greetings.

I would like to ask, do you think Ygritte blackmailing Jon into having sex with her should be considered rape?

Furthermore, does being coerced by your parents into marrying someone constitute rape?

Or would one/both of these things be defined by a different term?

Yes. Both of these things would and should be defined by a different term. The first by "sex" the second by "arranged marriage".

[Mithras]

Did Varamyr commit bestiality by wearing the skin of Sly while mating with One Eye? Or was that some kind of rape too?

[Mikkel]

Did Varamyr commit bestiality by wearing the skin of Sly while mating with One Eye? Or was that some kind of rape too?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but we're talking about animals here, right?

[OrangeStallion]

Did Varamyr commit bestiality by wearing the skin of Sly while mating with One Eye? Or was that some kind of rape too?

Mayhaps he likes wearing the skin of sly and getting the Doggy D.

[Raving Stark the Mad]

I suppose you could say rape, but coerced is probably a better word to use. Yes, I know you can get deep into it and go into the meaning of rape. I think everyone would still agree that even if it could be classified as rape, then we would have to start differentiating between different degrees of rape, and that what happened to Jon wasn't exactly the worst type of rape. Blackmail may actually be more accurate.

[SeanF]

I don't disagree that it was rape.

But I was more talking about young Lysa wanting to marry Littlefinger and have his children in response to Seanf post about it being considered mad by young nobles boys, girls to marry who they want. Which might be true but not with all.

Some concerns that are seen as 'modern morality concerns' are concerns of actual characters in the books as well.

I think Lysa was unusual. Most people in her position would expect to marry the son of a high lord, rather than the heir to the Lord of Sheepshit.

[Raving Stark the Mad]

A Kansas woman testified that the only reason she agreed to have sex with her ex-husband was to prevent his disclosure of an embarrassing extramarital affair. Did the ex-husband commit rape?

Some states have amended rape statutes to encompass sex by extortion. Kansas is not one of those states. So the question boiled down to whether prosecutors could show that the ex-husband overcame his victim by “force or fear.”

The facts are these. George Brooks and J.P. divorced in 2006 after a ten-year marriage.

According to prosecutors, shortly after the divorce was final, Brooks accessed J.P.’s e-mail account, apparently intent on stirring up trouble for his ex-wife. Brooks hit pay dirt, finding e-mails showing that J.P. was having an extramarital affair with a coworker at her work.

On May 7, 2006, Brooks telephoned J.P. to reveal he had copies of the e-mails. To make his point, Brooks read portions of the revealing messages over the phone, making J.P. sick to her stomach. According to J.P., Brooks concluded the telephone call by saying he would be coming over to her house for sex that evening.

As promised, Brooks arrived at J.P.’s home around 8:30. Brandishing a folder containing copies of the embarrassing e-mails, Brooks threatened revealing the affair to J.P.’s employer and to her coworker’s wife if she did not do as he said.

According to J.P., she made clear that she did not want to have sex and it would be against her will. This made no difference to Brooks, though, and he ordered J.P. to take off her underwear.

J.P. submitted after Brooks allegedly became “agitated” with his ex-wife’s objections. She sat in a chair with her hands over her face and her eyes closed while Brooks had intercourse with her. After the act was done, Brooks proclaimed that it had all been a “test” and he would be back later in the week for more sex.

Why did J.P. submit to Brooks? At trial, J.P. failed to characterize Brooks’ agitation. Nor did J.P. testify that she thought Brooks would have physically harmed her had she refused.

Apparently, it all boiled down to avoiding embarrassment and her fear that the atmosphere of her workplace would be poisoned by the disclosure of the affair.

But with the threat of a repeat performance, J.P. contacted her lawyer who told her to call police. Officers arrested Brooks, who was charged with rape, two counts of blackmail, and breach of privacy.

A jury found Brooks guilty of those charges and he was sentenced to 155 months in prison on the rape conviction, 12 months in prison on each blackmail conviction, and 12 months in the county jail on the breach of privacy conviction.

The rape conviction was the big ticket item, so naturally it was the focus of Brooks’ appeal.

Friday, the Kansas Court of Appeals concluded that, no matter how evil, Brooks’ actions did not fit within the state’s definition of a rape offense. Specifically, the court determined that the fear engendered by Brooks’ threatened disclosure of an embarrassing affair was not of a kind that would support a finding that he overcame J.P. by “force or fear” within the meaning of the state’s rape law.

The court explained that the “emotional impact of the disclosure on J.P. may have been substantial. She certainly thought it would be; she submitted to Brooks’ demand for sex to avoid precisely that possibility. We do not diminish those considerations. …

“But the threat Brooks made did not involve any present or future application of force and, in turn, the response it provoked in J.P., however disquieting or upsetting, did not constitute fear of the sort that supports a rape charge under the Kansas law. As a result, the jury’s verdict rests on insufficient evidence to demonstrate the statutory elements of rape.” (Kansas v. Brooks)

So the court overturned Brooks’ rape conviction. The court tacked on a minor victory for Brooks, finding that the man did not “intercept” a communication within the meaning of the state’s breach of privacy law by copying e-mails J.P. had sent more than 6 months earlier.

The result leaves Brooks facing only a two-year prison term on his blackmail convictions, which hardly seems right. The court agreed, confessing that it was “dismayed” by the result, while explaining that it felt constrained by the black letter law.

“The outcome leaves J.P. without a full measure of justice for what Brooks did to her in this case,” the court admitted, called for new legislation to cure the deficiency in the law.

“The criminal code simply does not speak directly to the criminality of threatening to invade a person’s privacy or to expose him or her to public ignominy as a means of extracting sexual relations,” the court explained. “The code fails to consider the intersection of those two strands of antisocial behavior to carry out a single criminal endeavor.”

– Pat Murphy

Apparently, it all depends on how the law is written, since there are different legal definitions of rape. I imagine there are just as many different personal definitions of rape.

http://lawyersusaonline.com/benchmarks/2011/10/12/is-sex-by-extortion-%E2%80%98rape%E2%80%99/

[OrangeStallion]

I suppose you could say rape, but coerced is probably a better word to use. Yes, I know you can get deep into it and go into the meaning of rape. I think everyone would still agree that even if it could be classified as rape, then we would have to start differentiating between different degrees of rape, and that what happened to Jon wasn't exactly the worst type of rape. Blackmail may actually be more accurate.

Agreed. That's one of the problems is that everyone wants to throw everything in the "rape" bucket and treat it the same when its not. It depends on what you define as rape, and the parties involved.

[OrangeStallion]

Someone else posted about the fact that if you're going to define rape as something that happens to X character, you have to apply it to Y character too. Your same logic has to apply. If the logic is that cases are different than you can't say that both are rape, if your logic is "_______ constitutes rape" then you have do prosecute Ygritte the same way you prosecute Bobby B.

[Universal Sword Donor]

Why because it defends men's rights just as well as women when it comes to sexual abuse? People are people, its one of GRRM's main themes. Just like domestic violence, sexual abuse can come about with women as the instigator.

Just because you disagree with someone doesn't mean they're a troll. The fact that you would rather have an admin lock the page than defend your position is very telling, however.

I'm a dude. This thread is one level above "Aerys was doing it for the realm". It's ridiculous

[Mindrot]

I think the most important thing to note in this topic is the fact that Jon would not have willingly had sex with Ygritte if not for the implied threat of death. Ygritte told Mance they were having sex because SHE wanted it, and then used the implied threat of death to coerce Jon into having sex. That is rape, hands down. Jon wanted to keep his vows, he did not want to have sex with Ygritte (his body did, but the Mind/Man that is Jon Snow did not want to violate his oath) and if Jon was free to act in a manner that he chose, he would not have had sex with Ygritte. I think it is important to note that Jon is fighting against hundreds of millions of years of biological evolution here in his refusal to have sex with Ygritte, the fact that he got 'hard', and the fact that they had sex more afterward does not mean that he was not raped in that first encounter. The fact still remains that Jon WANTED TO KEEP HIS VOWS, and if he was given the opportunity (i.e had he not had the his death/the failure of his mission hanging over his head) he would not have had sex with Ygritte. After he has broken his vows once, his continued refusal to have sex with Ygritte would not make any sense, the damage is done, and also she is a smoking hot red-head (again, Jon was fighting millions of years of evolutionary instinct here) so yes they had sex often after that, and Jon liked it, and he grew to truely love Ygritte. None of that changes the fact that without the initial coercion and threat of death/failure of his mission he would not have chosen to have sex with Ygritte, which means he was raped.

[Raving Stark the Mad]

I think it's absolutely ridiculous to apply present day law and morality on characters in a medieval fantasy world anyways. I'm not saying that morality is relative, but if it is knowledge, and can be taught/learned, then it is subject to current social beliefs on the subject. I would just as soon judge a man an idiot from 1000 AD for believing that the world was flat as I would judge medieval individuals or fantasy characters by modern moral knowledge.

[Alaynsa Starne]

I'm a dude. This thread is one level above "Aerys was doing it for the realm". It's ridiculous

Wait that's an argument that people actually make?

[Merlmaid]

I'm a dude.

So?