House Frey should be respected

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

39 minutes ago, Nowy Tends said:

This.

What's next? A “Ramsay must be forgiven because he had such a difficult childhood” thread?

I'm surprised we don't have one yet. 

 

35 minutes ago, divica said:

For me the great question about the RW will always be how much of a choice the freys really had if tywin demanded it.

You always have a choice. No matter the situation. It isn't always an easy choice. Sometimes doing what is right is terribly hard. Walder chose  to participate in the RW. He doesn't get relieved of guilt because his choices were hard. 

Jaime Lannister shoved an 8 year old boy out of a window to his near death. He crippled the child. His other "choice" was to let him go & hope he, Cersei, & his children could escape before Robert murdered them all. Does that mean the choice Jaime made was right? NO! Because it is never right to attempt to murder a child.

I don't care if Tywin "forced" Walder. I don't think he did. Tywin would have forgiven Walder merely for bending the knee & pledging his allegiance to the IT. How could he say no? It's absurd to believe the RW was justified no matter how you look at the situation. Robb broke an oath, yes. It was wrong. Walder have every reason to be angry & question Robb's word. He had every reason to demand the next wedding be held immediately. He did not have any right to slaughter unarmed guests during a wedding. Forget the fact that this is morally reprehensible IRL. It is spelled out, word for word, plain as day, in black & white in the books. No clues to follow or foreshadowing to dissect. It's there. The authors own words. It's wrong. It doesn't say the person who breaks guest right is wrong unless he was left with hard choices, or unless he had a marriage pact broken. Or unless anything. He is wrong. 

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

20 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

21 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

 

 

20 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Yeah, no one actually brings up the various heinous crimes all parties committed in the war. Especially the North. They pretend the RW was the worst and most despicable thing to have happened in the war done anyone. That the Freys are so much worse having done it. A lot of them are people. And the RW is a bad thing. But when compared to what other Northmen the Freys aren't the definitive bad guy. They deserve no more respect or that much less respect for their conduct during the war than any major house, zero

Well that's partially because this thread is titled "House Frey Should Be Respected" and not "The Northmen & their war crimes" & partially because we don't have a repeated telling in the books about how sacred the custom of not burning & pillaging is & we do have how sacred the custom of guest right is. Are you arguing against the North or for the Frey's? Because you can do one with out the other. It is possible to believe all war crimes are wrong & that the Frey's don't deserve respect after the RW. 

The following is in response to the quote below. It's not letting me type below it. 

Possibly we live in different societies but while we still have many leagues to go in regards to equal rights for everyone homosexuality is not punishable by law while murder is. 

22 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Having Homosexual relations in this society would be considered worse than murderering a man who deflowered your sister and refused to marry her, or starting a war for ego, that doesn't mean I place the gay guy lower than the actual murderers. Nor point out the ridiculousness of the readers who actually do. 

[divica]

8 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

I'm surprised we don't have one yet. 

 

You always have a choice. No matter the situation. It isn't always an easy choice. Sometimes doing what is right is terribly hard. Walder chose  to participate in the RW. He doesn't get relieved of guilt because his choices were hard. 

Jaime Lannister shoved an 8 year old boy out of a window to his near death. He crippled the child. His other "choice" was to let him go & hope he, Cersei, & his children could escape before Robert murdered them all. Does that mean the choice Jaime made was right? NO! Because it is never right to attempt to murder a child.

I don't care if Tywin "forced" Walder. I don't think he did. Tywin would have forgiven Walder merely for bending the knee & pledging his allegiance to the IT. How could he say no? It's absurd to believe the RW was justified no matter how you look at the situation. Robb broke an oath, yes. It was wrong. Walder have every reason to be angry & question Robb's word. He had every reason to demand the next wedding be held immediately. He did not have any right to slaughter unarmed guests during a wedding. Forget the fact that this is morally reprehensible IRL. It is spelled out, word for word, plain as day, in black & white in the books. No clues to follow or foreshadowing to dissect. It's there. The authors own words. It's wrong. It doesn't say the person who breaks guest right is wrong unless he was left with hard choices, or unless he had a marriage pact broken. Or unless anything. He is wrong. 

I agree it is wrong. However when tywin says either you do the RW or I going castamere on your ass, Tywin has the IT and the support of several kingdoms, robb is running north to retake his kingdom from the IB, roose is plotting with tywin against robb and has 2 of his sons as hostages and already conquered winterfell and robb betrayed you...

If walder wanted to avoid the RW and fight tywin he would need to allie with robb. However because of my previous paragraph walder has a lot of reasons for not wanting to allie himself with robb. He basically can choose between being a monster or fighting in a fight he doesn t believe with people he doesn t like and that might get his familly killed...

And don t forget that roose who is allied with tywin wants robb dead. I am pretty sure that in their aliance robb must die before getting north.

If you want to be dramatic you can nearly say that walder cursed himself to save his familly (if only there weren t so many freys involved, however I have also read that very few of them were actually aware of the plan). So while there is nothing that can justify the RW, Who is to blame for it and why it happened is another matter. So how much % of the blame do the freys have and how many of them are actually responsable or just had to go along with the plan? How much % of the blame do roose and tywin have?

 

[Varysblackfyre321]

1 hour ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

 

Possibly we live in different societies but while we still have many leagues to go in regards to equal rights for everyone homosexuality is not punishable by law while murder is. 

First, I'm talking about Westeroes. A man could be respected at the very least empathized with for his motives would be deemed by all things honorble he may be sent to the wall or executed but nevertheless he'd be deemed better than a guy who likes another dude by the rest of society while the former has /could have a legal consequence. Something being legal or illegal in a society doesn't always reflect the actual societal stigma attached to it.Let me put it this way, jaywalking is a crime, there's a legal consequence to it but for the most part it's sociably acceptable. Making fun of handicap kids although legal would have the perpetrator be deemed lower than any Jay walker. 

1 hour ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

2 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

 

Well that's partially because this thread is titled "House Frey Should Be Respected" and not "The Northmen & their war crimes" & partially because we don't have a repeated telling in the books about how sacred the custom of not burning & pillaging is & we do have how sacred the custom of guest right is. Are you arguing against the North or for the Frey's? Because you can do one with out the other. It is possible to believe all war crimes are wrong & that the Frey's don't deserve respect after the RW. 

 

It's not just this thread. The fandom is virtually silent on the horrific things the armies of the north did, what their leaders wanted to do, or hired monsters to do. The RW: oh the Freys are so awful how could they do such a thing? Robb hiring the brave companions to rape and pillage his enemies: crickets. And do hear repeated instances of how both the south's and northern little war is screwing everyone else and they are each beating up on the common folk for gain. I'm arguing people need to stop framing the war as being some noble thing being fought for the little guy, that the Freys deserve any less or more respect for what they did during the quite frankly ego/revenge driven war than anyone else. 

[Ferocious Veldt Roarer]

5 hours ago, divica said:

I agree it is wrong. However when tywin says either you do the RW or I going castamere on your ass,

Pure fanfiction. Those who crossed to Tywin's side after the RW, like House Bracken, were welcomed with open arms, no question asked. Those who stayed defiant well after that, like the Blackwoods, had to suffer usual penalties for finding themselves of the wrong side after the war: a village here, a mill there, some hostage. Nothing they couldn't survive.

Castamere? Don't make shit up to reinforce your argument.

[Varysblackfyre321]

12 minutes ago, Ferocious Veldt Roarer said:

Pure fanfiction. Those who crossed to Tywin's side after the RW, like House Bracken, were welcomed with open arms, no question asked. Those who stayed defiant well after that, like the Blackwoods, had to suffer usual penalties for finding themselves of the wrong side after the war: a village here, a mill there, some hostage. Nothing they couldn't survive.

Castamere? Don't make shit up to reinforce your argument.

Yeah, again readers hindsight. We (the readers) know Tywin was far from being particularly brutal in regards to punishing the houses that rebelled but up to the RW Tywin has had of history of going over board in exacting retribution on those who put up arms against his house. 

[Varysblackfyre321]

6 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

7 hours ago, divica said:

 

You always have a choice. No matter the situation. It isn't always an easy choice. Sometimes doing what is right is terribly hard. Walder chose  to participate in the RW. He doesn't get relieved of guilt because his choices were hard. 

Jaime Lannister shoved an 8 year old boy out of a window to his near death. He crippled the child. His other "choice" was to let him go & hope he, Cersei, & his children could escape before Robert murdered them all. Does that mean the choice Jaime made was right? NO! Because it is never right to attempt to murder a child.

 

Right by who? Mycerlla, Tommen, or even Joffrey? They're children too. Is it right to almost assuredly condemn three children to death to spare one boy? How about the rest of the children of House lanister? You know Robert's fury is great, and doubtless he'd speak of purging the world of the Lanisters who made him into a cuck like he so often does of the Targaryians. 

What about Arya? She's stolen to feed herself to survive.

How about Davos? He should have humbly allowed his family begger by rather than become a smuggler? 

 

6 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

don't care if Tywin "forced" Walder. I don't think he did. Tywin would have forgiven Walder merely for bending the knee & pledging his allegiance to the IT. How could he say no? It's absurd to believe the RW was justified no matter how you look at the situation.

And be put labeled an enemy by Robb and put his entire house at risk having to face his brunt? And again readers hindsight (I can't believe how often I've had to say this week), from what everyone knows Tywin is a man of brutal reprisal, and it's not unreasonable to suspect he'll  harsh on the major houses that cost him the most during the war. The RW was justified to house Frey. It was right by them. 

 

7 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

He didn't have any right to slaughter unarmed guests during a wedding

Of course he didn't. 

No one is saying he did. 

But Arya doesn't have a right to the bread she stole.

The authors own words. It's wrong. It doesn't say the person who breaks guest right is wrong unless he was left with hard choices, or unless he had a marriage pact broken. Or unless anything. He is wrong. 

 

You've a very determinist mindset

So even if it is to save his family you'd chastize a man for violating guest right in any way?

[Shouldve Taken The Black]

1 hour ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Yeah, again readers hindsight. We (the readers) know Tywin was far from being particularly brutal in regards to punishing the houses that rebelled but up to the RW Tywin has had of history of going over board in exacting retribution on those who put up arms against his house. 

He treats betrayal or direct insults to his house harshly, he doesn't do the same for those who fight on the other side of a war and lose. I don't have a book handy but by memory there are a couple of references to this:

When Joffery wants to slaughter all the rebels, Tywin says something along the lines of, "When your enemies defy you, you give them fire and sword, when they bend the knee you raise them up, or no-one will bend the knee again."

When discussing terms with Tyrion, he says he'll offer generous terms to everyone, except one, ""Harrenhal", said Tyrion, who knew his father. "The realm is best rid of these Brave Companions."" Here, Tywin is showing that he is willing to give generous terms to all those who rebelled except the Bloody Mummers, who betrayed him and turned their cloaks (he was not yet aware of them chopping off Jaime's hand). 

Roose Bolton points out the same distinction to Jaime, which was why the Bloody Mummers knew they were finished after the Blackwater.

From this, we can discern that Tywin sees fighting the Lannisters in a war because your LP tells you to is fair enough, all part of the game. He won't go lightly on you, but that doesn't mean he'll "go over board" as you say. This is shown by how literally all those in the North, the Stormlands, the Reach and the Riverlands who bent the knee after rebelling were treated reasonably. 

The distinction is that the Freys were actually rewarded, rather than just forgiven. They were given Lannister marriages and Riverrun. Why? Because they didn't just bend the knee under threat, they betrayed Robb and killed him. It wasn't the threat of violence that made the Freys do this, it was the promise of being a favoured house in the new regime. There's no evidence that Tywin would have extinguished them, or that he threatened to do so. There's plenty of evidence that Tywin bribed them, and that the Freys were motivated by vengence towards Robb.

6 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Robb hiring the brave companions to rape and pillage his enemies: crickets.

Whoa, whoa. Robb didn't hire the BCs, Tywin did, and then Roose Bolton convinced them to switch sides. Robb was in the Westerlands at that point, I think. Anyway, I don't think anyone denies that the Northmen and the Rivermen visited acts of war on the Riverlands. Certainly, Bolton is viewed as as bad as all the rest by the smallfolk. Pretty much the whole point of Arya's POV for two books is to point out what happens to the poor, weak and powerless during a war. But whataboutery gets us nowhere. There is a very simple reason the Freys are seen as beyond the pale by most lords and smallfolk, and that's the illegal and immoral act of the Red Wedding. 

[Varysblackfyre321]

36 minutes ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

He treats betrayal or direct insults to his house harshly, he doesn't do the same for those who fight on the other side of a war and lose. I don't have a book handy but by memory there are a couple of references to this:

When Joffery wants to slaughter all the rebels, Tywin says something along the lines of, "When your enemies defy you, you give them fire and sword, when they bend the knee you raise them up, or no-one will bend the knee again."

When discussing terms with Tyrion, he says he'll offer generous terms to everyone, except one, ""Harrenhal", said Tyrion, who knew his father. "The realm is best rid of these Brave Companions."" Here, Tywin is showing that he is willing to give generous terms to all those who rebelled except the Bloody Mummers, who betrayed him and turned their cloaks (he was not yet aware of them chopping off Jaime's hand). 

Again Readers hindsight. The things you listed after the RW. There's good reason for any opposing house particularly those who cost him the most would suffer the most based on what they know of how Tywin treats rebellion prior to the red wedding. 

36 minutes ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

Robb didn't hire the BCs, Tywin did, and then Roose Bolton convinced them to switch sides. Robb was in the Westerlands at that point, I think. Anyway, I don't think anyone denies that the Northmen and the Rivermen visited acts of war on the Riverlands. Certainly, Bolton is viewed as as bad as all the rest by the smallfolk. P

Roose whose under Robb. The BC's employment wasn't unknown, Robb didn't care because they benefited him, he wanted the Iron born to rape and pillage his enemies as well. Robb employs monsters like Tywin to do enormous acts of barbarity on his enemies.

 But whataboutery gets us nowhere. There is a very simple reason the Freys are seen as beyond the pale by most lords and smallfolk, and that's the illegal and immoral act of the Red Wedding.

Well the lords probably . I'm sure most small folk are too preoccupied on how the heal they going to feed their families to give much thought to which highborn asshole did which immoral act to some other highborn assholes. The Freys did something worse than the torture, rape and murder that is deemed as an acceptable consequence of these wars often fueled by familial pride/revenge: violate social etiquette expected of nobility treating with nobility. Houses may have to send important members in the heart of a potential enemies home and guest right ensures if something bad happens the enemy will face sever unilateral condemnation. And thus they are hated. When looking at what was. done and what was proposed by all sides of the war I have to say the level of outrage expressed by the highborn reeks of the kinda of "You have to treat us like human not peasants" sorta of thought. The various acts of savagery take a back seat in the war by both sides of the war to the RW. Hell the 3000 soldiers who lost there lives there that weren't highborn don't get much a mention.

[Shouldve Taken The Black]

9 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Well the lords probably . I'm sure most small folk are too preoccupied on how the heal they going to feed their families to give much thought to which highborn asshole did which immoral act to some other highborn assholes.

Qyburn reports to the Small Council that the smallfolk are unhappy about the RW, and worries that the Freys' reputation will reflect badly on the IT. The remaining BWB clearly show their disapproval of the Freys, by hanging lots of them, and make quite a few comments to Brienne about it. Everyman Davos is sickened by the idea of the RW.

I get your point about outrage about the RW being kind of hypocritical when both sides have been slaughtering smallfolk throughout the war, but that's kind of the issue with class societies. Atrocities against the rich are always going to be seen as worse than those against the poor, mostly because they are exceptional. Killing peasants is par for the course, killing nobles at a wedding a high crime. That's just the way of the world (this one, and that one). We can shake our fists at the sky and scream "why god/s why?!", but the existence of that double standard doesn't make the Freys' act any less despicable. 

Yes, others committed crimes equal and worse, but that's not an ethical defence. If I'm in court for murdering the neighbours, my defence can't be "There were only five of them your honour, 300,000 men died at the Battle of the Somme, so let's keep things in perspective." 

33 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Again Readers hindsight. The things you listed after the RW. There's good reason for any opposing house particularly those who cost him the most would suffer the most based on what they know of how Tywin treats rebellion prior to the red wedding. 

But that's at best an assumption regarding Walder's motives. It's pretty clear he's motivated by revenge and personal gain. The idea he was strong-armed into it isn't anywhere in the text. Is it possible? Maybe. But it's not referred to, by anyone, even the Freys. The Freys claim they did it for revenge, they also benefitted, clearly, from the act materially. 

There's an SSM where GRRM clearly states that while the Freys may have jumped ship anyway, it was because of the Westerling marriage that they did the Red wedding. Nowhere, in any text, is it suggested that they were threatened into doing it. Tywin doesn't say he threatened them, Roose and Walder don't suggest it, nor do any Freys. 

37 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Roose whose under Robb. The BC's employment wasn't unknown, Robb didn't care because they benefited him

We don't know Robb's opinion, because his reaction to it is not recorded. Roose was behaving pretty much autonomously as far as we know. It may be that Robb heard of it, and accepted it as necessary in the circumstances, or he was willfully blind to what Bolton and the BCs were doing. But we don't know. My guess is that Robb was aware that Roose had gained Harrenhal by turning the BCs, but if he knew about the atrocities the BCs were committing he would have demanded Hoat's head. But that's speculation, not fact, because we don't know.

I don't have an issue with people speculating and using the balance of probabilities, but it's frustrating when the conclusions from this are presented as FACT to be debunked. It's also, in this case, pointless. The assertion is that the Freys should be respected. The argument against that is that the Red Wedding, by the ethical standards of the time (however contradictory those may be), was a grossly dishonourable act.  

[Varysblackfyre321]

43 minutes ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

We don't know Robb's opinion, because his reaction to it is not recorded. Roose was behaving pretty much autonomously as far as we know. It may be that Robb heard of it, and accepted it as necessary in the circumstances, or he was willfully blind to what Bolton and the BCs were doing. But we don't know. My guess is that Robb was aware that Roose had gained Harrenhal by turning the BCs, but if he knew about the atrocities the BCs were committing he would have demanded Hoat's head. But that's speculation, not fact, because we don't know.

 

No he wouldn't. The BC horrid acts were not isolated and should not be unknown to the people running this war. and the BC's specialty in brutalizing their employeer's enemy is the main reason they're hired out. He didn't care what crime the ironborn enacted against his enemies. They could have raped every woman in the westerlands.He wouldn't raise a complaint because wanted an alliance. 

 

43 minutes ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

the Freys, by hanging lots of them, and make quite a few comments to Brienne about it. Everyman Davos is sickened by the idea of the R

You mean the group now run by Zombie-Catelyn? And Davos has always a soft heart towards travesty anyone. Still, I concede the wedding was scandalous even among the small folk. 

 

43 minutes ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

Yes, others committed crimes equal and worse, but that's not an ethical defence. If I'm in court for murdering the neighbours, my defence can't be "There were only five of them your honour, 300,000 men died at the Battle of the Somme, so let's keep things in perspective." 

This will be an extreme example but it's the one that springs to mind: say 3 women are raped. 1 dresses what would be typically thought immodestly, the other two modestly. The public slams the rapists who raped the women who dress modestly far more than the rapist who raped the immodest women saying he's more immoral having raped a woman who didn't dress like a "slut". Now me saying the differing reactions is ridiculous  isn't excusing one. All these rapists should get equal condemnation for their crimes.

But ok I can accept in universe the Freys being deemed far worse particularly by the northern nobility. 

But I get irritated when readers  act as if the Freys were the only ones to have done something utterly atrocitious during the war.

And Frey isn't a stupid man. He doubtless considered the risks, of taking or not taking Tywin's offer Tywin's fury would be something that'd at least give a little nudge. Not to say he needs much nudging. The RW was the best way to secure both his family's place, it's revenge,and got them the Riverlands.

[Shouldve Taken The Black]

5 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

 

But I get irritated when readers  act as if the Freys were the only ones to have done something utterly atrocitious during the war.

And Frey isn't a stupid man. He doubtless considered the risks, of taking or not taking Tywin's offer Tywin's fury would be something that'd at least give a little nudge. 

I don't think many are arguing that Frey's crime was the only bad thing to happen in the war. I certainly wasn't. A large part of Aryas POV and Jaime's exchanges with Brienne are devoted to that topic.

Certainly, Tywins reputation would be a factor in deciding what to do. But we get the impression from Tywin that Walder approached him.

[Blackfish Tully]

4 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

And Frey isn't a stupid man. He doubtless considered the risks, of taking or not taking Tywin's offer Tywin's fury would be something that'd at least give a little nudge. Not to say he needs much nudging. The RW was the best way to secure both his family's place, it's revenge,and got them the Riverlands.

It did not get them the Riverlands , Littlefinger is Lord Paramount of the Riverlands . Frankly all the Red Wedding did was give the Freys a ton of enemies and a Castle they will have a difficult time holding (Riverrun) and allies who can barely stand them . 

[Here's Looking At You, Kid]

On 12/22/2017 at 7:15 PM, Frey Kings said:

Exactly!!! 

Your 10000 year old castle, 5000 year old sword , the 3000 year old war where your ancestor slew some rival lord because he wanted to take a stone mill from your lands... That all means nothing in the end If you can't catch enough fish to feed your people. 

George Martin gave us the Westerlings as the opposite of the Freys.  The Westerlings are poor but overly proud and arrogant resting on their past.  The Freys are realistic and practical.  Walder Frey is a good leader and in his younger days he should have served in the small council.  The kingdom would be better for it.  At least economically.

[Blackwater Revenant]

On 2017-12-24 at 5:54 AM, Bernie Mac said:

No they didnt. They had no choice in the matter, Robb and his noble buddies decided they wanted to go to war and the common soldiers were forced along, to die because Robb felt aggrieved that

Just like the small folk under the rule of every single Lord in the Seven Kingdoms, whom have been are fighting petty wars constantly throughout the history of the Seven Kingdoms. Stop singling out Robb, and trying to use him as a scapegoat responsible for the state of the society that he lives in.

Quote

his father was arrested for a crime he actually did commit. 

This is such BS. And don't bother trying to explain. I've seen your argument on this matter, and it's quite the weak and absurd stance.

Quote

By their fellow Northmen.  That is just poor leadership on Robb's part, in the middle of the war he allowed his men to be caught off guard. Same goes for Jaime and Stafford with their respective forces that were caught off guard. 

Again, your comparing two completely different circumstances, in a petty attempt to slander Robb. His scouts were not caught off guard by his enemy, his army was caught off guard by his allies who were hosting them as their guests.

[Blackwater Revenant]

On 2017-12-24 at 7:17 AM, Bernie Mac said:

This is a strawman argument. This is often what happens in these conversations. Peope stop reading and responding to what is being said and revert to what they understand in their heads and what the echo chamber is telling them is right. 

Really?? You might want to peruse through your own responses before preaching to others.

[Blackwater Revenant]

On 2017-12-24 at 7:17 AM, Bernie Mac said:

That does not seem to be the case here as you have not said shit about the men that died fighting for Robb lie to Walder? All you seem upset about is the men who died over Walder's lie. 

Freys did not die because of Robb's lie. They died because Walder made the decision to rebel against the Crown, as he figured it would bring him glory and improve the status of his house. 

[Blackwater Revenant]

On 2017-12-24 at 7:17 AM, Bernie Mac said:

It is called an agenda. 

Again, the kettle calling the pot black. Your agenda here is quite transparent.

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

21 hours ago, divica said:

agree it is wrong. However when tywin says either you do the RW or I going castamere on your ass, Tywin has the IT and the support of several kingdoms, robb is running north to retake his kingdom from the IB, roose is plotting with tywin against robb and has 2 of his sons as hostages and already conquered winterfell and robb betrayed you...

But there is no evidence to support Tywin doing any such thing. 

 

20 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

First, I'm talking about Westeroes. A man could be respected at the very least empathized with for his motives would be deemed by all things honorble he may be sent to the wall or executed but nevertheless he'd be deemed better than a guy who likes another dude by the rest of society while the former has /could have a legal consequence. Something being legal or illegal in a society doesn't always reflect the actual societal stigma attached to it.Let me put it this way, jaywalking is a crime, there's a legal consequence to it but for the most part it's sociably acceptable. Making fun of handicap kids although legal would have the perpetrator be deemed lower than any Jay walker

I apologize, I misunderstood. 

 

20 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

It's not just this thread. The fandom is virtually silent on the horrific things the armies of the north did, what their leaders wanted to do, or hired monsters to do. The RW: oh the Freys are so awful how could they do such a thing? Robb hiring the brave companions to rape and pillage his enemies: crickets. And do hear repeated instances of how both the south's and northern little war is screwing everyone else and they are each beating up on the common folk for gain. I'm arguing people need to stop framing the war as being some noble thing being fought for the little guy, that the Freys deserve any less or more respect for what they did during the quite frankly ego/revenge driven war than anyone else. 

Gotcha. Perhaps this isn't the thread for that then? I haven't read the whole thread but I certainly have not condoned any raping, burning, or pillaging of any small folk by any army. 

14 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Right by who? Mycerlla, Tommen, or even Joffrey? They're children too. Is it right to almost assuredly condemn three children to death to spare one boy? How about the rest of the children of House lanister? You know Robert's fury is great, and doubtless he'd speak of purging the world of the Lanisters who made him into a cuck like he so often does of the Targaryians. 

What about Arya? She's stolen to feed herself to survive.

How about Davos? He should have humbly allowed his family begger by rather than become a smuggler? 

Right morally. It is morally wrong to shove an 8 year old child out of a window. It would have been just as wrong for Robert to kill Tommen, Myrcella, &/or Joffrey but since he didn't do that we don't have to worry about it. 

Surely you see the difference between stealing food or smuggling goods to survive VS murdering someone? 

14 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

And be put labeled an enemy by Robb and put his entire house at risk having to face his brunt? And again readers hindsight (I can't believe how often I've had to say this week), from what everyone knows Tywin is a man of brutal reprisal, and it's not unreasonable to suspect he'll  harsh on the major houses that cost him the most during the war. The RW was justified to house Frey. It was right by them. 

I'm not sure what you are going on about "readers hindsight" Walder Frey knew very well how sacred the custom of guest right was & chose to break it. There is no reason to think Tywin would not accept the Frey's bending the knee to the IT. That argument doesn't cut it for me. Walder has choices & he made one. Now he will have to live or die with the consequences. 

 

14 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

You've a very determinist mindset

So even if it is to save his family you'd chastize a man for violating guest right in any way?

No I wouldn't but guest right isn't some sacred custom of mine. It is in Westeros & Walder breaking guest right is, in part, reason for the Frey's not deserving respect.  I would, however, chastise a man for slaughtering unarmed guests in his own home - whether they had eaten first or not. 

[Bernie Mac]

4 hours ago, Blackwater Revenant said:

Again, the kettle calling the pot black. Your agenda here is quite transparent.

Really? Do tell. 

 

4 hours ago, Blackwater Revenant said:

Freys did not die because of Robb's lie. They died because Walder made the decision to rebel against the Crown, as he figured it would bring him glory and improve the status of his house. 

Which was done for the promise Robb made. Blood is on his hands. 

 

4 hours ago, Blackwater Revenant said:

Really?? You might want to peruse through your own responses before preaching to others.

Love how you just ignore you being caught out.

By all means quote these strawman arguments you believe I have made and I will be happy to go over them with you. 

5 hours ago, Blackwater Revenant said:

Just like the small folk under the rule of every single Lord in the Seven Kingdoms, whom have been are fighting petty wars constantly throughout the history of the Seven Kingdoms.

Sure. Never once claimed anything different. 

5 hours ago, Blackwater Revenant said:

 

Stop singling out Robb,

How is that singling Robb out? Robb never claimed that the smallfolk believed in him, the person I replied to did.  Maybe you should take it up with him, rather than me. 

5 hours ago, Blackwater Revenant said:

and trying to use him as a scapegoat responsible for the state of the society that he lives in.

lol this is delusional to nth degree. Were have I blamed him for their society? 

5 hours ago, Blackwater Revenant said:

This is such BS. And don't bother trying to explain. I've seen your argument on this matter, and it's quite the weak and absurd stance.

How is it BS? Is this all you have, false outrage. No discussion to be made? No counter points? Of course not 

5 hours ago, Blackwater Revenant said:

Again, your comparing two completely different circumstances, in a petty attempt to slander Robb. His scouts were not caught off guard by his enemy, his army was caught off guard by his allies who were hosting them as their guests.

Poor command is poor command. He tells his mother that his army will protect him and then allows them to get pissed. Had the Blackfish been there we likely would not have seen such a drop in discipline from the rank and file. 

 

18 hours ago, Ferocious Veldt Roarer said:

Pure fanfiction. Those who crossed to Tywin's side after the RW, like House Bracken, were welcomed with open arms, no question asked. 

No other Riverland House caused as much destruction to the Westerlands as the 1,000 Freys that were with Robb did. By opening their gates they played a huge part in the fall of Jaime's 15k army. 

There is good reason why the Freys could have expected harsher punishment than the other Riverland Houses who were just protecting their property. 

Plus Tywin has a ready made replacement for Walder and the sons and grandsons on Stevron Frey in Emmon, 

18 hours ago, Ferocious Veldt Roarer said:

Castamere? Don't make shit up to reinforce your argument.

To play devils advocate here, we are not dealing with what Tywin would have done but what the Freys think he would have done.