Alyn Oakenfist Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 So was I the only one that got really uncomfortable reading about Ygritte blackmailing Jon into having sex? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Varys Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 No, it is pretty much a consensus that she raped him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeanF Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 He loved every minute of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alyn Oakenfist Posted February 19, 2020 Author Share Posted February 19, 2020 8 minutes ago, SeanF said: He loved every minute of it. One, the loved every minute of it part is debatable, and even if t was true, it was his choice to make. Secondly, and far more importantly, imagine giving this exact argument in other rape cases, preferably with the genders switched around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeanF Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 3 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said: One, the loved every minute of it part is debatable, and even if t was true, it was his choice to make. Secondly, and far more importantly, imagine giving this exact argument in other rape cases, preferably with the genders switched around. I was being a bit tongue in cheek. There is an element of dubious consent. But, Ygritte was well aware he desired her; never actually said "sleep with me or I'll tell Mance who you are", and was also trying to protect him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Varys Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 2 minutes ago, SeanF said: I was being a bit tongue in cheek. There is an element of dubious consent. But, Ygritte was well aware he desired her; never actually said "sleep with me or I'll tell Mance who you are", and was also trying to protect him. She was harassing him, she was being creepy, and she didn't respect his boundaries. If she wanted to just protect him she could have just lied that they were having sex rather than telling a lie to force him to have sex with her. And Jon didn't really desire Ygritte before she forced herself on him. He didn't even think she was pretty or attractive with her crooked teeth before hormones kicked in after they had sex continuously. Ygritte is basically Jon's Drogo. That he eventually desired or loved her doesn't change the fact that she raped him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alyn Oakenfist Posted February 19, 2020 Author Share Posted February 19, 2020 Quote Find another place for Ghost to sleep tonight, Jon Snow. It's like Mance said. Deeds is truer then words. 5 minutes ago, SeanF said: never actually said "sleep with me or I'll tell Mance who you are" She said quite clearly without saying. First off she has clear leverage on him because all she has to do is tell Mance they didn't ever sleep together. Second off she is telling him, not asking him. And third off there is the ,,deeds speak truer then words" thing that clearly states ,,do it or else". All in all it's sexual blackmail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nagini's Neville Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 If you don't have the choice to say no, it's not consensual and therefore it's rape. And here Jon would have had to face the worst possible consequence: death. And even if he might have wanted to "chose" death to not have to go against the oath he had sworn to the old gods, he still had to do his job for the night's watch, that ironically here went against the oath he had sworn on the night's watch's behalf. So he was really in a "no other way out" situation here and had no possibility to chose at all. So yes it was rape. The reason why you might not want to doesn't matter, if you can't choose it's not consensual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nagini's Neville Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 3 minutes ago, Lord Varys said: She was harassing him, she was being creepy, and she didn't respect his boundaries. If she wanted to just protect him she could have just lied that they were having sex rather than telling a lie to force him to have sex with her. And Jon didn't really desire Ygritte before she forced herself on him. He didn't even think she was pretty or attractive with her crooked teeth before hormones kicked in after they had sex continuously. Ygritte is basically Jon's Drogo. That he eventually desired or loved her doesn't change the fact that she raped him. It also doesn't matter, whether he desired her or not. His choice matters. If you force a catholic priest (under the threat of death), who desires you, but his religion is more important to him so he doesn't want to have sex, it's also rape. And I don't think Jon would have slept with Ygritte, if he had a way out, since his oath and not wanting to father a bastard was so important to him. His reasons why he didn't want to sleep with her aren't relevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Varys Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 7 minutes ago, Nagini's Neville said: It also doesn't matter, whether he desired her or not. His choice matters. If you force a catholic priest (under the threat of death), who desires you, but his religion is more important to him so he doesn't want to have sex, it's also rape. And I don't think Jon would have slept with Ygritte, if he had a way out, since his oath and not wanting to father a bastard was so important to him. His reasons why he didn't want to sleep with her aren't relevant. Yeah, exactly, Jon being a healthy adolescent has a strong sex drive, but he has sworn a vow of chastity and intended to keep that. He wasn't willing to give consent and had, in the end, to choose between having sex and risk being killed. And as I think I laid out somewhere else already - chances are very high that Mance used Ygritte there to corrupt Jon. He likely suspected that Jon wasn't exactly like him, but he knew that the Watch would hardly take him back - nor would Jon have a strong desire to return - if he forced him into a sexual relationship with a wildling woman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rotting sea cow Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 Hardly any sex scene in the books is unproblematic or unmistakably consensual. It's another problem in the books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TedBear Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 Certainly, even though he responded in the sexual act, he was coerced to do that to prove that he had left the NW, if he didn't, he had a good chance of being killed, I don't know if that would be totally fit as a rape if you take into account some legislation, much less in a medieval setting, but I think it was a rape. In a way it's even similar to Dany and Drogo's first night. Dany and Jon correspond to the act, but if they had a choice they would not do so, Dany was being threatened by Viserys and probably Drogo would have done it even against her will, and Jon was pressured to do so by Ygritte and the other WL. If Ygritte was a 30 year old man it would be disturbing that, but as she is a girl who couldn’t physically force Jon the chapter was comical for me, it was one of the chapters that I laughed the most "You know nothing Jon Snow" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nagini's Neville Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 16 minutes ago, rotting sea cow said: Hardly any sex scene in the books is unproblematic or unmistakably consensual. It's another problem in the books. Yes and consent is primarily a new concept, that didn't really exist in the Middle Ages. Rape was a crime against the husband or father not the woman herself and rape of men was probably not acknowledged at all, but the men, who "let that happen" were guilty of sin themselves. Would be my guess at least since I'm not an expert, when it comes to the Middle Ages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernie Mac Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 To the people in their society, especially her (Wildling) society, no. To us it certainly seems that way. A prisoner threatened with his life if he did not sleep with one of his jailers would certainly be rape in our society. To GRRM I'm not so sure. These books were written 20 years ago by a man in his 50's. His thoughts on rape may have changed in that the last two decades, but certainly our societies thoughts on rape has changed in the last 20-30 years. Things that may have been acceptable when GRRM was in his 20's/30's/40's is not today. I do think some readers get hung up on the 'rapes' in the series. That some readers don't seem to mind the murder or other violence characters do to get their way, but seem unsettled about the rape in the series. That some in the fandom find it easier to excuse people of the Middle Ages from physical violence but once they rape someone they become irredeemable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeanF Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 11 minutes ago, Nagini's Neville said: Yes and consent is primarily a new concept, that didn't really exist in the Middle Ages. Rape was a crime against the husband or father not the woman herself and rape of men was probably not acknowledged at all, but the men, who "let that happen" were guilty of sin themselves. Would be my guess at least since I'm not an expert, when it comes to the Middle Ages. In Christian societies, rape was generally acknowledged to be a crime against the woman, (Roman law did indeed view it as a crime against the paterfamilias) but it was very hard to prosecute. For one thing, contemporary doctors thought that a woman needed an orgasm to conceive; if she conceived, that was evidence that she had enjoyed the experience, and therefore there was no rape. Nor was there any idea that marital rape could be a thing. Men and women owed each other sexual intercourse, as part of the marital bond. The idea that a man could be raped or sexually abused by a woman would have been laughed out of court. Likewise, a man who suffered domestic violence at the hands of a woman would be thought to be a spineless worm. As it happens, both views remain very widespread. Indeed, as a matter of English law today, a woman is incapable of rape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nagini's Neville Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 5 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said: I do think some readers get hung up on the 'rapes' in the series. That some readers don't seem to mind the murder or other violence characters do to get their way, but seem unsettled about the rape in the series. That some in the fandom find it easier to excuse people of the Middle Ages from physical violence but once they rape someone they become irredeemable. Dunno, if I'd say irredeemable, because as you say the context and culture is important, but rape and sexual abuse is hardly ever "necessary". Killing can is some cases be "justified", self-defense, you are a solider, have no choice, if you don't want to endanger yourself or you loved- ones, that's hardly ever the case for rape or sexual abuse, except maybe for the purpose of heir-making. Other than that you hardly ever improve your situation by raping or sexually abusing someone. And there is just something so wrong about "taking your pleasure" or whatever you get out of it, by inflicting pain and suffering on someone else. It is a form of torture and torture is for me personally also worse than killing. That doesn't mean, that you can't examine every case individually, while considering the context and culture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nagini's Neville Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 14 minutes ago, SeanF said: In Christian societies, rape was generally acknowledged to be a crime against the woman, (Roman law did indeed view it as a crime against the paterfamilias) but it was very hard to prosecute. For one thing, contemporary doctors thought that a woman needed an orgasm to conceive; if she conceived, that was evidence that she had enjoyed the experience, and therefore there was no rape. Nor was there any idea that marital rape could be a thing. Men and women owed each other sexual intercourse, as part of the marital bond. The idea that a man could be raped or sexually abused by a woman would have been laughed out of court. Likewise, a man who suffered domestic violence at the hands of a woman would be thought to be a spineless worm. As it happens, both views remain very widespread. Indeed, as a matter of English law today, a woman is incapable of rape. Are you serious? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigella Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 From my (post-modern, swedish) perspective the situation first reads like a nag-rape. Its when someone gets "consensual" sex from an unwilling partner due to nagging or emotional blackmail. Immoral but not illegal, like. But as others have pointed out Jon was blackmailed with death and not withdrawn affection, so its definitely closer to true rape, though. In-world views, we know how the IB deals with man-rape: Quote Maesters had their uses, but Victarion had nothing but contempt for this Kerwin. With his smooth pink cheeks, soft hands, and brown curls, he looked more girlish than most girls. When first he came aboard the Iron Victory, he had a smirky little smile too, but one night off the Stepstones he had smiled at the wrong man, and Burton Humble had knocked out four of his teeth. Not long after that Kerwin had come creeping to the captain to complain that four of the crew had dragged him belowdecks and used him as a woman. "Here is how you put an end to that," Victarion had told him, slamming a dagger down on the table between them. Kerwin took the blade—too afraid to refuse it, the captain judged—but he had never used it. aDoD, The Iron Suitor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeanF Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 4 minutes ago, Nagini's Neville said: Are you serious? Oh Yes. Rape can only be legally performed by a man through penetration of vagina, mouth or anus. A woman can be convicted of aiding and abetting rape, and various forms of sexual assault, but it is legally impossible for her to be a rapist. I expect the same would be true in most US States. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigella Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 22 minutes ago, SeanF said: Indeed, as a matter of English law today, a woman is incapable of rape. Huh? According to the British papers I read females get imprisoned for it all the time. edit: sorry different name for the crime, hadn't noticed that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.