Alester Florent Posted May 3, 2015 Share Posted May 3, 2015 It was 100 instances actually. That wasn't a hundred separate instances. It is more comparable to giving an order for somebody to be beaten a number of times: you don't count every lash separately. It was a single order of gang rape, not multiple ones. Yes, it's still appalling. Actually 101 if you count Elia, or like 30,000+ if you count the Riverlands and the murder/rape squads Tywin sent out. Should probably up that by another 10,000 if you count the Sack of Kingslanding. HOLY SHIT, TYWIN RAPED A LOT OF PEOPLE! The order given wasn't specifically rapine, though, rather what would once have been called a general chevauchée in the case of the Riverlands, and a fairly conventional sack in the case of King's Landing. Sad as it is to say, rape is pretty much a universal feature of warfare when soldiers and civilians come into contact and it seems highly unlikely that any of the rapes which doubtless occurred there were actually ordered. Tywin didn't say to Gregor "go forth and rape"; he gave orders for him to "set the Riverlands on fire" and the same will go for the King's Landing sack. He most likely didn't order the rape of Elia either (though may have ordered her killing). Doubtless he knew that rapine would occur as a result of the orders he gave but it's really one of the inevitable features that characterises that activity and even if he specifically forbade it that would be highly unlikely to stop it. You could drag up anything that happened during that period as something else that Tywin is supposedly obsessed with - torture, murdering members of the Night's Watch, cannibalism, etc. as all of that was also a consequence of the orders he gave but not specifically mentioned. Seems a stretch. It is clear that Tywin is a roaring misogynist and does have something of a fixation on the sexual humiliation of women. However I don't think it can be extrapolated from that that he has an obsession with undifferentiated rape specifically and that that's his go-to response for any situation. Not only does the text not actually bear that out on even the most cursory examination, but there's an important distinction in the choice of purported target in this instance: Joffrey's not a woman, and subjecting him to a style of punishment thus far reserved for women in Tywin's mind would be rather out of character. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Ser Septon Maester Posted May 3, 2015 Share Posted May 3, 2015 I laughed. I hope that was your intent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bright Ancalagon Posted May 4, 2015 Share Posted May 4, 2015 You can't arrest the King when yours authority comes from him. Besides that if a King can be arrested you set a really danger precedent. The last time a king was kept on chains he was beheaded too. OTOH Imagine Tywin tries to arrest the King. How would he do that? The White Cloaks would not let this happen. So some of them would have to be killed. Perhaps all of them. What the Lords of the Realm would say about that? You can kill WS ad arrest the Monarch without being called traitor. Tywin had many enemies, how long Do you think they would wait to move against him? Even the lame ass Doran would put his claws to work. Sry for my bad english. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon Seed Posted May 4, 2015 Share Posted May 4, 2015 Stop feeding the troll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.