Jump to content

Why women don't take black


Recommended Posts

They don't want the men having children and wives, for their loyalty will be to them instead of to their duty. As Maester Aemon says:

Quote

"Jon, did you ever wonder why the men of the Night's Watch take no wives and father no children?" Maester Aemon asked.

Jon shrugged. "No." He scattered more meat. The fingers of his left hand were slimy with blood, and his right throbbed from the weight of the bucket.

"So they will not love," the old man answered, "for love is the bane of honor, the death of duty."

Jon VIII, AGOT

 

Given how often the issue is mentioned in various ways, I think there is a decent chance of the policy changing by the end of the series. Maybe some of the wildling women, maybe Brienne or maybe Arya will be the first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Horse of Kent said:

They don't want the men having children and wives, for their loyalty will be to them instead of to their duty. As Maester Aemon says:

 

Given how often the issue is mentioned in various ways, I think there is a decent chance of the policy changing by the end of the series. Maybe some of the wildling women, maybe Brienne or maybe Arya will be the first.

Actually my point is that women should also have right to take black like men.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Brandon Baratheon said:

Actually my point is that women should also have right to take black like men.

Westeros is not that progressive. I think that might change - largely out of desperation than belief it is the right thing to do though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Does the name Danny Flint have any meaning in this context?  Jon had to separate the spearwives from the NW because of discipline issues, and rejected two wildling hostages who were girls because they would be training with the NW, and he didn't want trouble.  And remember, the NW's biggest source of recruits is men convicted of rape.

Horse of Kent is correct, Westeros isn't that progressive.  Even in real life it has only been the last 30 years or so that women have gotten in modern forces in any numbers.  Also, I expect that, outside of the wildlings, the pool of possible volunteers is vanishingly small.  Brienne isn't considered a freak because of her unusual size, but because of her unusual occupation as a knight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Horse of Kent and Renly's Banana have the right of it. Even in these enlightened and progressive times of the 21st century, women who join the armed forces (in the US, at least) are very likely to be raped and abused by their brothers in arms. The rate of reported rapes is totally appalling, and given the way the chain of command works, it's likely that most go unreported.

So now we have medieval Westeros, with an even more ingrained female inferiority / rape culture. It's not a matter of "equal opportunity" for the girls. It's prevention of exploitation and abuse - and, as the Horse noted, prevention of love and family ties.

I'd say we're done here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I expect the policy may have originally been put in place to prevent a Craster's Sons type of situation from occuring along The Wall. Similiar to the modern Westerosi opinion that The Wall's main purpose is merely to keep out The Wildlings, the truth behind the lack of women in The Watch may have been clouded over the years.

Then again, the modern resons of love being the death of duty, aswell as the misogynistic culture amongst the Black Brothers certainly are solid enough for women not being permitted to join.

6 hours ago, zandru said:

Horse of Kent and Renly's Banana have the right of it. Even in these enlightened and progressive times of the 21st century, women who join the armed forces (in the US, at least) are very likely to be raped and abused by their brothers in arms. The rate of reported rapes is totally appalling, and given the way the chain of command works, it's likely that most go unreported.

So now we have medieval Westeros, with an even more ingrained female inferiority / rape culture. It's not a matter of "equal opportunity" for the girls. It's prevention of exploitation and abuse - and, as the Horse noted, prevention of love and family ties.

I'd say we're done here.

Just so. Considering the song "Brave Danny Flint" is still wildly popular in The North, I would imagine that most women would have a good idea of the brutality they would face at The Wall. 

 

12 hours ago, Nevets said:

 

Does the name Danny Flint have any meaning in this context?  Jon had to separate the spearwives from the NW because of discipline issues, and rejected two wildling hostages who were girls because they would be training with the NW, and he didn't want trouble.  And remember, the NW's biggest source of recruits is men convicted of rape.

Also, I expect that, outside of the wildlings, the pool of possible volunteers is vanishingly small.  Brienne isn't considered a freak because of her unusual size, but because of her unusual occupation as a knight.

Good point dude! Thinking about it, their are several women who could serve well in The Watch, but again, this is too few and far between.

The likes of Brienne, Dacey Mormont, Pretty Meris and Barsena Blackhair are execptionally uncommon in Westeros. Each display a level of skill and presence not seem amongst the majority of raw recruits at The Wall, perhaps showing they could be usefull Rangers.

It's also worth pointing out women with strong martial skill despite average physical size - The Sand Snakes and Asha Greyjoy - members of of the other sex who also have more suitable talents than most new Watchmen. Each display knowledge of arms, poisons, intrigue, courty manners and deception. All had to learn these skills at some point, showing that under the right teacher, a woman with a more feminine frame can still be more deadly than a large yet technically unsound brute from some dungeon.

A talented tracker like Meera Reed or Ygritte may also be of use in beyond The Wall recon missions.

Perhaps Jeor, who comes from a family of strong women, would have thought about the possibility of female recruits. This could have helped alleviate the pressure of The Watch's dwindling numbers, and while there is a clear lack of women in Westeros who would be physically suited to combat, their is a high number of crafty ladies who could serve well amongst the builders or stewards, such as Barbery Dustin, Ollena Tyrell, Taena Merryweather, The Mad Maid and even Mel.

While it would be a logistical nightmare, and a pretty rotten idea in general, sending the likes of Dareon of Yoren on a ship to Kayakayanaya, Shamyriana or Bayasabhad could perhaps prove useful in finding suitable warrior women to help repopulate The Night's Watch. If the ratio of male and female recruits were evenly balanced and The Lord Commander had a more empirical rule over his men, with a good enough spy network, the culture of rape and misogyny amongst The Black Brothers could certainly be stamped out. Of course, this would also necessitate the end of taking in new recruits who are imprisoned for sexual abuse, aswell as putting more of an emphasis of teaching the new members about the valor and honour of The Night's Watch.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Leo of House Cartel said:

the culture of rape and misogyny amongst The Black Brothers could certainly be stamped out

A hopeful thought, indeed, but as noted, this hasn't yet worked in the US armed forces, a modern and (once) enlightened society. In Westeros, it would be centuries, if ever. And while this was going on, raising all the babies and young children would have their own impacts on "readiness." (And no, "moon tea" is not infallible. Particularly if taken by choice.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Horse of Kent said:

They don't want the men having children and wives, for their loyalty will be to them instead of to their duty. As Maester Aemon says:

 

Given how often the issue is mentioned in various ways, I think there is a decent chance of the policy changing by the end of the series. Maybe some of the wildling women, maybe Brienne or maybe Arya will be the first.

Banning marriage and relationships serve a very important purpose.  Destroying that rule will indeed be the death of duty.  Just look what happened with Jon.  He engaged in treasonous acts to help a loved one out of a bad marriage. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Widowmaker 811 said:

Banning marriage and relationships serve a very important purpose.  Destroying that rule will indeed be the death of duty. 

Exactly! Moreover, in a society where prostitution is the standard and well-accepted, and where men have zero personal responsibility for their offspring, the "no marriage" rule works just fine. "Sire no children -- that I'll admit to or care about" is just what's expected of the guys. Look at Robert Baratheon's (13?) bastards, nearly all unacknowledged - and how Ser Duncan the Tall seems to have scattered his "genetic material" from Dorne to Winterfell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many factors. Few women are willing to be in an enviroment that put them into risk of being raped and many males have this strange idea that they have to protect women from bad things, regardless of said womans choice or not. In addition, this force are supposed to exist for a single task and women increases the odds of relationship and focusing on them as a couple. Not that homosexuality is unknown of, but it is less common and have very, very low chance of offspring to put it mildly. 

And tbh, would women freely choose the Nights watch if said organization more or less said this, with a Randall Tarly approach "Fine, you can join - but its on you. If you get raped, you are to blame for it and are supposed to deal with that yourself. Otherwise you are not tough enough. And we will not execute necessary personnel to adapt to your needs." (Remember Victarions "help" to his Measter - I think he pretty much is representative for the majority here). Because thats most likely the best deal they can get in this setting. Nor will the pool be large, since most women will follow the tradition and norms and act in a feminine way, as their society teaches them to do. And of less muscular strength as well.

But the biggest issue is that few are there by their own choice. They had to often choose between that and death. And it is very hard to teach people who had no choice in the first place to really accept rules that forbid them to do stuff and take their new job with valor and honor. And tbh - this is logical. If I had been taken to the wall as a death sentence, I would have been pretyy lenient about killing and raping too. After all, this society have treated me like shit, sending me here because some noble thought that deer in the forest was his and not mine - why should I respect rules said society have ordered. 

So, no - I think the westeros mentality and the structure of the watch completely works against this. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with the many posters that have pointed out that women would not fare well in the NIght's Watch and in fact the general Westerosi society would not seem to allow women to fare well in most institutions. And the reason that the Wall is mostly manned by rapists and murderers is if I recall that there simply are not anyone else who are interested in that duty, as oppose to another path through life. As such I would imagine that most women would rather die or join the Silent Sisters rather than spend the rest of their lives among almost all-male rapists and murderers.

And as noted above women will in general have been thought not to consider the kind of jobs that the Watch does as suitable for them and would thus presumably not think of the Watch as a real alternative. The change to this lies many generations in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Widowmaker 811 said:

Banning marriage and relationships serve a very important purpose.  Destroying that rule will indeed be the death of duty.  Just look what happened with Jon.  He engaged in treasonous acts to help a loved one out of a bad marriage. 

 

59 minutes ago, zandru said:

Exactly! Moreover, in a society where prostitution is the standard and well-accepted, and where men have zero personal responsibility for their offspring, the "no marriage" rule works just fine. "Sire no children -- that I'll admit to or care about" is just what's expected of the guys. Look at Robert Baratheon's (13?) bastards, nearly all unacknowledged - and how Ser Duncan the Tall seems to have scattered his "genetic material" from Dorne to Winterfell.

If the rules regarding women were to change it would only ever be a result of desperation or the nature of the watch fundamentally changing. Both seem plausible possibilities to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Brandon Baratheon said:

Actually my point is that women should also have right to take black like men.

Westeros is a extremely primitive, extremely patriarchal society with strong gender roles. In general Westerosi women are barred from martial carriers. The only female fighters we meet during the story are fighters either because of circumstance or because their fathers indulged their whims.

Also PFFFFFFFT! Joining the cultist border patrol in the worst place in all of Westeros is not a "right"...in most cases it's a sentence! Most of the members of the Night's Watch are at the  Wall because they were either pressured to take the black (usually at the PAIN OF DEATH) or outright forced.

Where is there any "right" in there? Why force more innocents to suffer that fate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...