Tysha - who is to blame?

[Bernie Mac]

4 minutes ago, Angel Eyes said:

Well, there are quite a few examples of people in arranged marriages not loving each other in the books.

Sure. There are always examples of unhappy marriage no matter the culture. But there are many happy marriages as well.

4 minutes ago, Angel Eyes said:

 

Robert Baratheon's marriage to Cersei and Jon Arryn's marriage to Lysa Tully are some of the shining examples of arranged marriages gone horribly wrong.

Obviously Lysa and Jon's was going to go wrong. The huge age difference was the problem here.

4 minutes ago, Angel Eyes said:

 

And then there's Ramsay's marriage to "Arya" really Jeyne Poole. Do you think that's a happy and loving marriage?

lol I don't want to be rude, but this is a pretty, pretty dumb debate tactic you are going for right now.

Do you think I could not pull out thousands of examples of marriages in the real world of people who chose to marry and it going hugely wrong?

4 minutes ago, Angel Eyes said:

 

Also, Lyanna Stark was quite unhappy about being betrothed to Robert;

And she broke it off and died soon after. I'm sure Lyanna would probably rethink the decisions she made if she could have a second chance.

4 minutes ago, Angel Eyes said:

she could have ended up like Cersei: more snake than man, twisted and evil.

But alive. So clearly in a better place.

4 minutes ago, Angel Eyes said:

Point is, it's very rare for an arranged marriage to work out well

What an idiotic statement. The vast majority of the marriages are arranged in the series, the vast majority have worked out well.

To say its rare is just dumb. Incredibly dumb. And it is equally true in the real world. Out of interest how many people do you know who have had an arranged marriage in the real world? When I was a teenager I was once as ignorant on the subject as you clearly are now, but then I got to work and live in other cultures that practice this, have friends, both male and female, in such marriages, whose families had always been in such marriages and speak of it glowingly.

Being Western I'd not want that for my own children, but to say its very rare for such marriages to work is some of the dumbest rhetoric I've heard on these pages. So well done on that.

4 minutes ago, Angel Eyes said:

and when you find one that does, there are several that don't.

Another dumb statement.

4 minutes ago, Angel Eyes said:

Why do I speculate and turn characters into pantomime villains? Well, because of evidence and coincidence. It's all but stated Cersei murdered Melara after they heard Maggy's prophecy

Did she murder Melara? Perhaps, perhaps not. Did she murder her mother? No. Her mother died from childbirth complications.

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

25 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

That is not evidence. If, in Tyrion's eyes, his father is as ruthless as you imagine, why marry in the first place? Why keep her under his father's nose?

I assume because he is in love & wants to have something good in his life. 

25 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

But still did it. People hide things all the time when they don't truly fear the consequences.

Hiding something does not mean that a person is fearful of harm as a consequence. People hide the most inconsequential of things as well. There is a spectrum.

Sure, sometimes when they hide stuff it's not because they are fearful, sometimes they hide stuff because they are fearful. I agree that hiding something isn't proof someone is fearful of harm as a consequence & also ascertain that just because he did it doesn't mean he wasn't fearful of the consequences. 

27 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

What ordeals before the rape? Can you quote them, where is father subjected him to such ordeals?

No, I can't. We aren't given any such details. It's an assumption on my part. An assumption rooted in reality, but an assumption none-the-less. 

28 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

Do you not think wanting him dead is not a little extreme for lying to him?

And Tyrion already thought Jaime had lied to him, when he initially told him she was not a whore. He did not want him dead for that lie. There is a huge difference between his feelings about each lie.

Yeah, I do think wanting him dead is a little extreme for just lying to him. As I said, I don't think I was fully understanding what you were saying before. 

I'm not sure I'm understanding the bold. Which other lie is there? 

30 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

And equally they can both be untrue

Agreed. 

30 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

Where is your evidence that he was fearful, as in scared of actual harm, from his father?

Well, as I've said I don't think he went through with it because he is fearful of his father - you have changed my mind on that matter. To delve a little deeper into my thought process though, I was looking at this situation trying to figure out why Tyrion would follow through with this ordeal willingly. As in, with out a fight, with out a ruckus. The only conclusion I could come to was that he would do this out of fear of harm from his father. I was basing that assumption on a few things. That we know Tywin orchestrated this entire disgusting event, that Tyrion has grown up with him, been raised by him, likely knows him very well & thus would likely know he is a force to be reckoned with. 

The reason I've accepted your assertion irt Tyrion & Jaime is it makes sense, once I understood it better, but also because it answers a question that I had pondered on for some time, which is: why is Tyrion so self-loathing. It doesn't make a lot of sense to be so self-loathing irt the Tysha situation if he only participated out of fear from his father or because he was forced. Of course some people hate themselves for things they really didn't have any control over but this answer never rang wholly true to me. That he participated willingly due to thinking she was a whore & "whores can't be raped" makes more sense & answers the question more satisfactorily IMO. 

36 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

It did give him the justification. In the Middle Ages whores could not be raped.

We know that was part of the justification, I've literally spammed the relevant quote multiple times in this thread, you either seem to ignore it or just not read it.

Slow down friend, I'm agreeing with you. 

I know you spammed the thread with this quote, & other threads. I didn't ignore it & I did read it. I just didn't understand what you meant by it. I took the quote a completely different way, which I've explained & didn't accept your explanation because I wasn't understanding it & so it didn't make much sense to me. I guess if that makes me stupid or whatever, it does. 

40 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

Sure. He could do. He hasn't so far, and Tyrion's next sexual encounters after he learnt the truth about Tysha reinforces not only his views on rape with slaves/whores but their societies.

GRRM purposefully gave Tyrion the information that someone he loved, was not actually a whore but used as one. He carries on as normal, knowing that the slave does not want to have sex with him, later seeing the dead eyes of the whore and where she had been whipped does not phase him.

So while I do have far more understanding for 13 year old Tyrion, who is just doing what he is told by society, than I do for adult Tyrion who is now well aware that not all women are willing whores I still maintain that the decision to rape Tysha was his, and not one borne out of fear.

I think it does phase him. I think he is doing it specifically because of what he did to Tysha. Kind of like a "well, I'm a bad guy already, so might as well behave as one." kind of thing. I may not be explaining this properly & if not I'll try to explain more. 

Certainly a 13 year old Tyrion is different than an adult Tyrion, but yes, I'm agreeing with you. I do not think his decision was made out of fear of his father & it was made because Tysha was a "whore" 

43 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

don't think he could have stopped it either, though he could have stopped his own participation. But Tyrion thinks he could and he is more aware of what was possible in that situation than either of us.

 

For sure. He certainly could have tried to stop it & we don't have any info saying he did. 

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

34 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

Tyrion should know better. In fact he clearly does as he hides it.

Tysha also likely knows better, but she is in position to say no to the son of the ruler of her lands.

GRRM: I mean, the class structures in places like this had teeth. They had consequences. And people were brought up from their childhood to know their place and to know that duties of their class and the privileges of their class. It was always a source of friction when someone got outside of that thing. And I tried to reflect that.

A noble, at 13, would know their place. Someone as smart as Tyrion would certainly know it. Jon's only 15 at the start of the series and he is well aware of his place in the world. Sansa is eleven at the start and she is well aware of her place in the world.

I very much doubt a Lannister would be confused about the difference between the smallfolk and nobility.

I'm not saying he shouldn't have known better, I'm saying whether he should have, shouldn't have, did or didn't, merely engaging in the relationship does not make him to blame for the rape. 

I'm certain there was no confusion irt to this from Tyrion or Tysha. I'm also fairly certain that Tysha was in agreement, anyway though. 

36 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

He would not have know the lesson he would be taught as a consequence, but he certainly knows that young nobles don't

• marry without the permission of the patriarch/matriarch of the family
• marry peasants
• marry someone they had known for a week

These are all things Tyrion will not have been ignorant about. He will have been taught about Egg's children and the consequences of their actions.

Certainly, that's why he tries to hide it. 

37 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

No, I hugely disagree with that. The gangrape is solely on Tywin.

I do think that Tyrion had choice in his own actions and I aslo do wonder if Tysha had any choice in marrying Tyrion or even engaging in a sexual relationship with him.

I agree with the bolded. As to the rest: We know she didn't really have a choice whether she wanted to or not. I think it's fair to wonder if she was indeed participating because she wanted to. I think she was because of the way that Tyrion remembers her. Of course there is always the possibility that Tyrion is misremembering but I haven't seen much evidence for that. Another possibility is that Tyrion still doesn't have the entire story - but that could be anything so I won't go down that road. A third possibility is that Tysha was a good actor. She acted as if she loved him & so Tyrion thought she did. Someone such as Tyrion, especially at a young age, would probably not be hard to convince. That would beg the question as to why she played along. Maybe because she knew she had no choice anyway. Maybe because she truly did want his money. Or maybe because she just understood how much better off she would be married to Tyrion than as an orphan on the streets, not necessarily after his money or a "gold-digger" but willing to engage in a sexual relationship with Tyrion in order to have a better life. 

Fwiw I don't think any of those things are true, I think she did love him. But that may just be because I'm a sucker for a love story. Besides, when we have so little information, it's always worth wondering. It's possible she wasn't in love at all. 

[corbon]

On 3/28/2020 at 4:48 AM, James Fenimore Cooper XXII said:

Tywin and the Lannisters are mostly to blame.  One could say all share some blame.  Tysha was no stranger to westeros. Should she have known better?  I think so.  Tyrion was a young man but he's been educated from birth as a noble man. He should have known better too.  An early teen rapists?  Maybe.  

 

4 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

That's like you're walking down a dark street alone & you get robbed & someone saying "you should have known better than to walk down that street alone" that's faulty on so many levels. 

And yet, true. Its not the whole story though. But putting yourself in risky situations is on you. You may not be to blame for the exact thing that happens, but you are responsible for your own decisions that increase the chance of bad things happening.
That does not transfer "blame" from the actor to the victim. Its not a zero sum game. The actor is responsible for the actions, but the 'victim' is also be responsible for their choices, actions, that increased their own risk factor. "Victimhood" is not an absolver. It is morally and intellectually dishonest to act as though it is.
How much "blame" goes to the victim due to their choices is always an indecipherable game. We can't know because we can't accurately foresee all the eventualities and that goes as much before the events as after - so not only can we not accurately apportion risk-blame, the person taking the risk didn't necessarily have the correct factors in their own risk-analysis either, so their decisions can be objectively 'wrong' in hindsight but subjectively 'right' in inaccurate foresight. Certainly though, its considerably less than the blame for acting.

4 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Tywin did something wrong here, he is the one to blame. Not Tysha for not "knowing better" than to engage in that relationship & not Tyrion for not taking into account whatever horrific deed his father may come up with.

And indeed, that was the actual definitive statement that you originally responded too. Tywin (and the Lannisters) is to blame. But you focused on the acknowledgement that perhaps ("one could say") Tyrion and Tysha have their own elements of responsibility.

Frankly, I think Tyrion does bear some 'blame' - not for the act itself (that was forced), but that it happened at all. He knew it would end badly. Thats why he tried to hide the marriage, which was always a futile act. Thats why he feels guilty. He made a bad risk analysis and decided to enjoy the fruits as long as he could, hoping the punishment wouldn't happen (he knew it would) or be too unbearable (I'm sure he knew it might). He miscalculated badly, hence the guilt. Plus, Tysha bore the brunt of his miscalculation, exponentially expanding his guilt factor.

Tysha I think is less likely to fully understand the situation. We don't know how much she was aware of, how much she understood. We don't know if she incorrectly factored risk elements or was simply unaware of them. Its possible she thought that this could end well. Its likely she underestimated the risk factor of it ending badly.
Its also possible that she knew there was some risk, but took the risk anyway due to the potential reward. If so, that would be on her (not that it would be worth much, in comparison).

Last point. Hormonal teenagers are notoriously bad at risk estimation. Due to hormones and unformed brains and stuff. Not to mention simple inexperience. That lessens the 'blame' factor for them, but does not absolve it.

4 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

Yup, victim-blaming, and that’s so wrong on so many levels.

Well, one thing is right there. Using the phrase "victim blaming" is wrong on so many levels. Intellectual, certainly. Moral, in my opinion. Ethical, again in my opinion. There are probably more levels its wrong on too.

[corbon]

On 3/31/2020 at 3:35 AM, aryagonnakill#2 said:

I did not mean to imply it made my opinion more important. The fact that you took it that way says a lot about you.

The way you interpret her response says even more about you.
And I guess this response says things about me too.

On 3/31/2020 at 3:35 AM, aryagonnakill#2 said:

At the University I am studying at it is customary to identify your sex,

This is the real world. Leave the sexism out of the conversation.

On 3/31/2020 at 3:35 AM, aryagonnakill#2 said:

ethnicity,

This is the real world. Leave the racism out of the conversation.

On 3/31/2020 at 3:35 AM, aryagonnakill#2 said:

and sexual orientation

This is the real world. Leave the whatever-ophobia out of the conversation.

On 3/31/2020 at 3:35 AM, aryagonnakill#2 said:

when talking about such things.  I simply carried that over because it is what I'm used to.  

And yet, you didn't identify your race or orientation.

In the real world, truth matters.

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

57 minutes ago, corbon said:

And yet, true. Its not the whole story though. But putting yourself in risky situations is on you. You may not be to blame for the exact thing that happens, but you are responsible for your own decisions that increase the chance of bad things happening.

Absolutely. You should always avoid putting your self in situations where you may end up harmed. But yeah, doesn't mean it's your fault that a bad thing happens. 

57 minutes ago, corbon said:

That does not transfer "blame" from the actor to the victim. Its not a zero sum game. The actor is responsible for the actions, but the 'victim' is also be responsible for their choices, actions, that increased their own risk factor. "Victimhood" is not an absolver. It is morally and intellectually dishonest to act as though it is

Indeed. Each person is responsible for their own actions. My main point was that walking down a dark street alone does not give someone else the right to rob you. Much as engaging this relationship did not give Tywin the right to orchestrate the gang rape. 

Unlike the person who is walking down a dark street alone, who should have a reasonable understanding of the risk they are putting themselves in, if they are of sound mind, Tysha, (and maybe Tyrion depending on what you believe) shouldn't or wouldn't have had a reasonable understanding of the risk they were putting themselves in. They would have understood that they were going against the grain of societal rules, but I don't think either of them would have suspected the actual outcome. 

57 minutes ago, corbon said:

How much "blame" goes to the victim due to their choices is always an indecipherable game. We can't know because we can't accurately foresee all the eventualities and that goes as much before the events as after - so not only can we not accurately apportion risk-blame, the person taking the risk didn't necessarily have the correct factors in their own risk-analysis either, so their decisions can be objectively 'wrong' in hindsight but subjectively 'right' in inaccurate foresight. Certainly though, its considerably less than the blame for acting

Yeah, I think blame is the wrong word. I don't think the 'victim' ever holds blame or fault for being victimized. I do think the victim holds some responsibility to keep themselves safe if they want to remain out of harms way  (I assume most would) So, I agree the victim has some responsibility, but not blame or fault if that makes sense?

You bring up an interesting point about people who don't have the necessary tools to identify the risk factors & I think in some cases, like with children or developmentally/mentally disabled people, they don't hold any responsibility. 

I also think sometimes this is a slippery slope & agree it becomes indecipherable at some points. I don't think it's clear where to draw the line between a discernable risk & an undiscernable one.

57 minutes ago, corbon said:

And indeed, that was the actual definitive statement that you originally responded too. Tywin (and the Lannisters) is to blame. But you focused on the acknowledgement that perhaps ("one could say") Tyrion and Tysha have their own elements of responsibility.

That wasn't exactly what was said though. I would agree that perhaps one could say Tyrion & Tysha have their own elements of responsibility. What I disagree with is the assertion that Tyrion brought this upon himself for merely engaging in the relationship, because he should have known how his father would react. I agree Tyrion holds some blame for his own actions & even that engaging in the relationship puts him knowingly at risk for some things (maybe being ostracized by society for marrying so far below his station) but I disagree that engaging in this relationship he should have known or understood the ultimate consequences that Tywin put forth & think this applies doubly to Tysha, who would hold some responsibility for putting herself at risk for things like being called a gold digger or something of that nature but certainly not for what happened to her. 

I would also like to clarify, that while I agree Tysha is putting herself at a potential risk for being named a gold digger, I don't think this is a situation where her action should have been avoided due to the potential of said risk nor do I think the people calling her such are in the right. Not that you were saying otherwise, I'm just trying to clear up my stance. 

1 hour ago, corbon said:

Frankly, I think Tyrion does bear some 'blame' - not for the act itself (that was forced), but that it happened at all. He knew it would end badly. Thats why he tried to hide the marriage, which was always a futile act. Thats why he feels guilty. He made a bad risk analysis and decided to enjoy the fruits as long as he could, hoping the punishment wouldn't happen (he knew it would) or be too unbearable (I'm sure he knew it might). He miscalculated badly, hence the guilt. Plus, Tysha bore the brunt of his miscalculation, exponentially expanding his guilt factor.

Since writing the OP I've come to believe that Tyrion does actually hold some blame for the act itself. But yes, I agree he knew it would end badly, he knew his father was going to dole out repercussions & he chose to go through with the act of marrying Tysha anyway. He holds responsibility for his decisions & his actions. I don't think, even he, knew how badly it would end up though. I agree he would have understood that his father was not someone to disobey lightly, I just don't think 13 year old Tyrion would have understood completely what lengths Tywin would go to, to teach this lesson. 

1 hour ago, corbon said:

Tysha I think is less likely to fully understand the situation. We don't know how much she was aware of, how much she understood. We don't know if she incorrectly factored risk elements or was simply unaware of them. Its possible she thought that this could end well. Its likely she underestimated the risk factor of it ending badly.
Its also possible that she knew there was some risk, but took the risk anyway due to the potential reward. If so, that would be on her (not that it would be worth much, in comparison).

Sure & the potential "reward" may have just been that she had a husband that loved her & that she loved as well. I don't think there is anyway Tysha would have or could have imagined that she would end up gang raped because of this. 

1 hour ago, corbon said:

Last point. Hormonal teenagers are notoriously bad at risk estimation. Due to hormones and unformed brains and stuff. Not to mention simple inexperience. That lessens the 'blame' factor for them, but does not absolve it.

I agree. 13 year old Tyrion & Tysha do not have the capacity to understand risk factors the way that adult Tyrion & Tysha do, BUT they aren't 5 year olds either & considering in universe, in 3 short years they are considered adults, yeah they share some responsibility for things not turning out well. 

[corbon]

 

1 hour ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Indeed. Each person is responsible for their own actions. My main point was that walking down a dark street alone does not give someone else the right to rob you.

And no one said or implied that it did.
Thats why I object, intellectually, to the use of the term "victim shaming" (which was not by you, but is common in current popular culture). It makes this direct implication that someone did suggest that a right was given to rob, in this example. Which is intellectually dishonest, because no such suggestion was made. 
Thats why I object morally to the term "victim shaming". Because it shouts a moral negativity toward the original statement which is based entirely upon a lie. It is in fact the accuser who is acting immorally.
Ethically I object because it is an attempt at intimidation. It shuts down an argument by a lie without offering any counter argument.

It may actually be appropriate, in certain conversations to use the term "victim shaming". But I don't think I've ever seen it used when someone is attempting to shame a victim by blaming them for what happened. It is always used shut down a valid point that victims may have made deleterious choices which contribute to an event (without transferring blame from the actor to the victim) and to absolve a victim of any responsibility for their own choices.

1 hour ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Unlike the person who is walking down a dark street alone, who should have a reasonable understanding of the risk they are putting themselves in, if they are of sound mind, Tysha, (and maybe Tyrion depending on what you believe) shouldn't or wouldn't have had a reasonable understanding of the risk they were putting themselves in. They would have understood that they were going against the grain of societal rules, but I don't think either of them would have suspected the actual outcome. 

Agreed.
And, as I said, I think this is where Tyrion's guilt comes from. Because he knew it would end badly, but misjudged how badly. His choice resulted in the gang rape of Tysha, even though he did not anticipate that result. And good people, empathetic people, which I think Tyrion is (for all his flaws and failures) tend to blame themselves more than they should, rather than less.

1 hour ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Yeah, I think blame is the wrong word. I don't think the 'victim' ever holds blame or fault for being victimized. I do think the victim holds some responsibility to keep themselves safe if they want to remain out of harms way  (I assume most would) So, I agree the victim has some responsibility, but not blame or fault if that makes sense?

It does, and it does not.
If you hold responsibility for a bad event, then what is the result of that responsibility if not blame or fault?
The difference is that its not absolute 'blame' or 'fault' for the event happening, its limited 'blame' or 'fault' for choices that led to being in a position for the event to happen. And that limited 'quantity' can't usually be quantified. But it can often be relativised. If I get mugged at midday in a quiet suburban street, I hold considerably less responsibility (IMO) than if I get mugged  at 2am in an inner city alleyway. The mugger is still 100% responsible in both situations though.
Further,  apportioning that blame or fault (which we can never do accurately anyway, as previously discussed) is not transferring the blame or fault from the perpetrator to the victim. Its not a case of 100%-0% becomes 98%-2%. Its a case of 100%-0% becomes 100% for and 2% - or whatever factor is our feeble and inaccurate best judgement.

In the end, the point is not to calculate numbers or relativity. The point is to acknowledge that victims too, are responsible in part at least for the fruits of their choices. 
Its not saying to the guy, " if you dance naked through a drunken hen party, its your fault you got groped". Its saying "if you don't want to get groped, make the responsible choice for your own actions of not dancing naked through the drunken hen party, even if you want to". It doesn't matter that you should be able to dance naked through the drunken hen party without being groped, its simply a fact that there are bad actors in the world, and your choices make a difference in what happens to you.

And the point of that is for people to try understand and learn so they make better choices themselves in future situations.

1 hour ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

You bring up an interesting point about people who don't have the necessary tools to identify the risk factors & I think in some cases, like with children or developmentally/mentally disabled people, they don't hold any responsibility. 

Yeah, although I think the point of no responsibility disappears pretty quickly. But its like an exponential curve - there's a long, long flat start at close to zero before things start escalating, responsibility-wise.

1 hour ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

I also think sometimes this is a slippery slope & agree it becomes indecipherable at some points. I don't think it's clear where to draw the line between a discernable risk & an undiscernable one.

Agreed.

1 hour ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

That wasn't exactly what was said though. I would agree that perhaps one could say Tyrion & Tysha have their own elements of responsibility. What I disagree with is the assertion that Tyrion brought this upon himself for merely engaging in the relationship, because he should have known how his father would react.

That is exactly what was said. There was no assertion that Tyrion "brought this on himself" (which equates to complete blame AFAICT) by the poster you were discussing with. He outright stated that Tywin was to blame. He merely pointed out that Tyrion and Tysha should have known better, which is not an apportioning of blame, but an acknowledgement of elements of responsibility.
Tyrion I believe, did know better. Thats why he feels so guilty. Tysha, its impossible to judge. On balance of probabilities I'd suggest she ought to have known better, but possibly did not. Heck, I'm not even clear (and don't think its important enough to review) if she knew Tyrion was Lord Tywin Lannister's son (though given Jaime was also there, its hard to see how she couldn't - but, who is to say for sure how much a poor crofter's daughter might or might not be informed?)
 

1 hour ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

I agree Tyrion holds some blame for his own actions & even that engaging in the relationship puts him knowingly at risk for some things (maybe being ostracized by society for marrying so far below his station) but I disagree that engaging in this relationship he should have known or understood the ultimate consequences that Tywin put forth & think this applies doubly to Tysha, who would hold some responsibility for putting herself at risk for things like being called a gold digger or something of that nature but certainly not for what happened to her. 

Agreed.

1 hour ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Since writing the OP I've come to believe that Tyrion does actually hold some blame for the act itself. But yes, I agree he knew it would end badly, he knew his father was going to dole out repercussions & he chose to go through with the act of marrying Tysha anyway. He holds responsibility for his decisions & his actions.

Agreed.

1 hour ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

I don't think, even he, knew how badly it would end up though. I agree he would have understood that his father was not someone to disobey lightly, I just don't think 13 year old Tyrion would have understood completely what lengths Tywin would go to, to teach this lesson. 

I do think he understood that it could go that badly. I doubt he could even imagine exactly how it did end up, but I'm sure he knew Tywin held absolute power over life and death and more.
I just don't think he imagined it would go that badly. He miscalculated horribly, hence the guilt.

1 hour ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Sure & the potential "reward" may have just been that she had a husband that loved her & that she loved as well. I don't think there is anyway Tysha would have or could have imagined that she would end up gang raped because of this. 

Agreed.

1 hour ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

I agree. 13 year old Tyrion & Tysha do not have the capacity to understand risk factors the way that adult Tyrion & Tysha do, BUT they aren't 5 year olds either & considering in universe, in 3 short years they are considered adults, yeah they share some responsibility for things not turning out well. 

Agreed.

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

20 minutes ago, corbon said:

And no one said or implied that it did

I looked back for the quote the poster was originally responding to & couldn't find it. Possibly I've misunderstood the posters implications. I don't know why I can't find it but it was my understanding that we were speaking directly on how much Tyrion is to blame irt the gang rape. Maybe I was mistaken, but if so it was an honest mistake. 

23 minutes ago, corbon said:

Thats why I object, intellectually, to the use of the term "victim shaming" (which was not by you, but is common in current popular culture). It makes this direct implication that someone did suggest that a right was given to rob, in this example. 

I don't think I've ever used that term, but I have seen it thrown around a bit & usually widely out of context. That being said, there are those who do believe that walking down a dark street alone does give the right to rob. I don't think it's unfair to tell a person believing or implying this that I disagree with that assertion & why. 

26 minutes ago, corbon said:

Which is intellectually dishonest, because no such suggestion was made. 

Well, it's only intellectually dishonest if that assumption is not made fairly from the words given. I can be incorrect about what the poster was saying & not be intellectually dishonest. 

28 minutes ago, corbon said:

Thats why I object morally to the term "victim shaming". Because it shouts a moral negativity toward the original statement which is based entirely upon a lie. It is in fact the accuser who is acting immorally.

Yeah, like I said, I don't use that term but I don't see anything wrong with disagreeing with someone's opinion or claim.

To be fair, even though I did not use the term, I did give an example in which I likened to the posters statement that did blame the victim. I do understand why that is shouting a moral negativity. 

On the other hand, I do think it's fair to discuss why I disagree with the stance I believed the poster to be taking. 

I may have presumed too much or misunderstood the poster but if so I don't think that makes it based on a lie - especially if it's a reasonable assumption. 

36 minutes ago, corbon said:

Ethically I object because it is an attempt at intimidation. It shuts down an argument by a lie without offering any counter argument.

I understand why you say so but I assure you it was no attempt at intimidation. The very last thing I ever want to do is shut down an argument or discussion. 

I extreme dislike the tactic you are explaining & would not ever intentionally use it. BUT if someone is saying such, or it can be reasonably inferred, I don't think it should be ignored because it may be hard to defend. If the claim is made, the person can own it & defend it or change their mind & explain. If the claim has not been made, as you are saying here, then the person can say so. If that is not what was meant by that poster I will sincerely apologize. Again though, it wasn't made out of malice, it was made because that is what I understood them to be saying. 

44 minutes ago, corbon said:

may actually be appropriate, in certain conversations to use the term "victim shaming". But I don't think I've ever seen it used when someone is attempting to shame a victim by blaming them for what happened. It is always used shut down a valid point that victims may have made deleterious choices which contribute to an event (without transferring blame from the actor to the victim) and to absolve a victim of any responsibility for their own choices

Indeed. Believe me I've seen it made erroneously a million times. I take no issue with someone laying some reasonable responsibility with the victim. It's only if/when the blame for the outcome gets transferred to the victim that I disagree. 

46 minutes ago, corbon said:

Agreed.
And, as I said, I think this is where Tyrion's guilt comes from. Because he knew it would end badly, but misjudged how badly. His choice resulted in the gang rape of Tysha, even though he did not anticipate that result. And good people, empathetic people, which I think Tyrion is (for all his flaws and failures) tend to blame themselves more than they should, rather than less

Absolutely. He certainly places more blame on himself than I do. 

48 minutes ago, corbon said:

It does, and it does not.
If you hold responsibility for a bad event, then what is the result of that responsibility if not blame or fault?
The difference is that its not absolute 'blame' or 'fault' for the event happening, its limited 'blame' or 'fault' for choices that led to being in a position for the event to happen. And that limited 'quantity' can't usually be quantified. But it can often be relativised. If I get mugged at midday in a quiet suburban street, I hold considerably less responsibility (IMO) than if I get mugged  at 2am in an inner city alleyway. The mugger is still 100% responsible in both situations though.

I agree with all of this, I just did not have the words to express it properly. I probably shy away from using the word blame in relation with the victim for the very reasons you have stated. It's hard to put in words that I feel the person shouldn't have been walking around at 2 a.m. in an inner city alley way while simultaneously feeling as if the bad thing that happened to them was not right or ok or brought on by their actions. 

In a perfect world you could walk down an alleyway in an inner city at 2 a.m. & no harm would come to you. Why should it? You aren't doing anything wrong to justify any harm against you. But we don't live in a perfect world & most of us are well aware of the correlation between walking in a bad neighborhood at night & being victimized. Doesn't mean if we do this we want to be victimized or deserved to be victimized but it does mean we made a poor decision & that decision cost us something. 

53 minutes ago, corbon said:

Further,  apportioning that blame or fault (which we can never do accurately anyway, as previously discussed) is not transferring the blame or fault from the perpetrator to the victim. Its not a case of 100%-0% becomes 98%-2%. Its a case of 100%-0% becomes 100% for and 2% - or whatever factor is our feeble and inaccurate best judgement

Agreed. I don't like arguing in absolutes. Not to say there aren't situations where one person is entirely to blame & the other holds none, there are. But this shuts down discussion just as much IMO. When we get into discussions on situations like these it just can't be done. It can't be assessed fairly & accurately. It's not all or nothing. 

1 hour ago, corbon said:

In the end, the point is not to calculate numbers or relativity. The point is to acknowledge that victims too, are responsible in part at least for the fruits of their choices. 
Its not saying to the guy, " if you dance naked through a drunken hen party, its your fault you got groped". Its saying "if you don't want to get groped, make the responsible choice for your own actions of not dancing naked through the drunken hen party, even if you want to". It doesn't matter that you should be able to dance naked through the drunken hen party without being groped, its simply a fact that there are bad actors in the world, and your choices make a difference in what happens to you

Agreed 

1 hour ago, corbon said:

Yeah, although I think the point of no responsibility disappears pretty quickly. But its like an exponential curve - there's a long, long flat start at close to zero before things start escalating, responsibility-wise

Sure, situations where there is no responsibility would be hard to find, it's a matter of with who the responsibility lies & I think there are instances in which the victim would hold none. For instance, a young child, say a toddler, is out roaming a neighborhood alone & gets kidnapped. That child holds zero responsibility, their parent/care giver does hold some though, because they should have been paying attention & watching the child. 

1 hour ago, corbon said:

That is exactly what was said

Not totally. You said 

 

1 hour ago, corbon said:

perhaps one could say Tyrion & Tysha have their own elements of responsibility.

The difference in this & what the other poster said is the other poster isn't saying perhaps one could say. They start the statement with saying Tywin & the Lannisters are mostly to blame. It appeared clear to me that they are referring to the actual gang rape of Tysha because what blame would Tywin hold in Tyrion starting a relationship with/marrying Tysha? 

Going off of the basis that we are speaking directly on the gang rape the paragraph reads quite differently IMO than yours. 

Then they say irt Tysha "Should she have known better? I think so." This equates in my mind to saying - Tysha should've known better than to marry Tyrion because she might get gang raped. I wholly disagree with that. I can agree she shares her own elements of responsibility irt the entire situation; she knew he was far above her station, she willingly married him, presumably willingly went along with hiding it etc. 

They go on to say "He should have known better" referring to Tyrion. Again, we were, as I understood it, speaking directly to the gang rape. He knew what he was doing, he knew it could end up badly, but he did not, could not have known that this would be the result. 

Had they suffered normal, reasonable (in universe) repercussions I could agree they "should have known better" in this context though, I cannot. 

4 hours ago, corbon said:

 

 

1 hour ago, corbon said:

There was no assertion that Tyrion "brought this on himself" (which equates to complete blame AFAICT) by the poster you were discussing with. He outright stated that Tywin was to blame. He merely pointed out that Tyrion and Tysha should have known better, which is not an apportioning of blame, but an acknowledgement of elements of responsibility.

It's possible. It's not how I read it but sometimes it's all in the delivery for me. It is not that posters responsibility to use verbage that makes it easier for me to gather their meaning by any means, but when you said it, the way you said it, it seemed very much more reasonable than when they did. So if you are both indeed saying the same thing, I have misunderstood & I apologize. 

1 hour ago, corbon said:

Tyrion I believe, did know better. Thats why he feels so guilty. Tysha, its impossible to judge. On balance of probabilities I'd suggest she ought to have known better, but possibly did not. Heck, I'm not even clear (and don't think its important enough to review) if she knew Tyrion was Lord Tywin Lannister's son (though given Jaime was also there, its hard to see how she couldn't - but, who is to say for sure how much a poor crofter's daughter might or might not be informed?)

I think it's safe to say even if Tysha didn't know Tyrion was Tywin Lannisters son in the beginning she certainly knew he was Highborn. 

So, when you say he probably did know better, I understand you to mean that Tyrion knew this was not a good choice. He knew there would likely be a negative outcome. When the other poster said it, that isn't what I gathered. Whether that's because you & I have discussed things in much more depth than we did, or because your verbage is more easily understood by me, I don't know. 

1 hour ago, corbon said:

do think he understood that it could go that badly. I doubt he could even imagine exactly how it did end up, but I'm sure he knew Tywin held absolute power over life and death and more.
I just don't think he imagined it would go that badly. He miscalculated horribly, hence the guilt

For sure. I don't think he would have even imagined it would go this badly. 

I think he likely knew Tywin well enough to know he doesn't take being disobeyed lightly. I also think this is most likely the first time Tyrion disobeyed his father to this degree. He would know how his father dealt with subjects who disobeyed but would likely think his treatment would be different than theirs. He also has Jaime as an example, who had just gone against his father's wishes & joined the KG, with no apparent punishment at all. He would have known that Jaime was the golden child & that he was not well liked but I think it would be a fair assumption on his part to think his likely consequences would land somewhere in between the none that Jaime got & the extremely harsh that Tywin's enemies or subjects got. I think he underestimated Tywin's hate for him, more than anything else. 

 

[corbon]

1 hour ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

I looked back for the quote the poster was originally responding to & couldn't find it.

Post #31 on pg2
You effectively asked for an expansion in your reply #34. 
I think that is that your expansion adjusted your focus unfairly to Tyrion ad Tysha alone, effectively negating the explicit original assignation of blame to Tywin. Unfairly.

Quote

Possibly I've misunderstood the posters implications. I don't know why I can't find it but it was my understanding that we were speaking directly on how much Tyrion is to blame irt the gang rape. Maybe I was mistaken, but if so it was an honest mistake. 

Yes, I saw it as such. And if you can do it, one is generally careful, reasoned, responsible, how much easier for those less casual. 

Quote

Well, it's only intellectually dishonest if that assumption is not made fairly from the words given. I can be incorrect about what the poster was saying & not be intellectually dishonest. 

Agreed. You didn't use the term anyway.
My feeling is that the term is almost always used in a dishonest way, and because that dishonesty isn't challenged enough it becomes a thoughtless accident by people who don't actually intend or even realise the intellectual dishonesty they have engaged in.

I have a very high regard for the person who used it this time. I am certain they did not intend any dishonesty of any sort. I hope they are not offended by my comments - there is a high chance they have or will be. But my regard for that particular person extends to believing they have the capacity to truly understand my intent in engaging on this, and respect that, whether they agree or not.

Quote

Yeah, like I said, I don't use that term but I don't see anything wrong with disagreeing with someone's opinion or claim.

Me either. But its important to be careful that one is disagreeing with an actual expressed opinion. I think you made the same mistake as 'victim blaming' but to a lesser extent, because you are more careful. Thats why I quoted the original post you responded to where the very first sentence apportioned blame to Tywin (and the Lannisters).

Quote

I may have presumed too much or misunderstood the poster but if so I don't think that makes it based on a lie - especially if it's a reasonable assumption. 

I understand why you say so but I assure you it was no attempt at intimidation. The very last thing I ever want to do is shut down an argument or discussion. 

I extreme dislike the tactic you are explaining & would not ever intentionally use it. BUT if someone is saying such, or it can be reasonably inferred, I don't think it should be ignored because it may be hard to defend. If the claim is made, the person can own it & defend it or change their mind & explain. If the claim has not been made, as you are saying here, then the person can say so. If that is not what was meant by that poster I will sincerely apologize. Again though, it wasn't made out of malice, it was made because that is what I understood them to be saying.

Yeah I know. I could see it was a mistake on your part, and would've just ignored it but I guess that the actual "victim blaming" post pushed my buttons.

Quote

I agree with all of this, I just did not have the words to express it properly.

Hey, its no easier for me. My attempts to explain feel just as clumsy an improperly expressed as the original thing I'm arguing against, in some ways. I wonder if perhaps that's why (partly) no one ever stands up against it - because its a very difficult think to explain clearly.

Quote

I probably shy away from using the word blame in relation with the victim for the very reasons you have stated. It's hard to put in words that I feel the person shouldn't have been walking around at 2 a.m. in an inner city alley way while simultaneously feeling as if the bad thing that happened to them was not right or ok or brought on by their actions. 

In a perfect world you could walk down an alleyway in an inner city at 2 a.m. & no harm would come to you. Why should it? You aren't doing anything wrong to justify any harm against you. But we don't live in a perfect world & most of us are well aware of the correlation between walking in a bad neighborhood at night & being victimized. Doesn't mean if we do this we want to be victimized or deserved to be victimized but it does mean we made a poor decision & that decision cost us something. 

Exactly. Except the painful truth is that it partly is "brought on" by those actions. Or at least, the chance of it happening is increased - so it may or may not have been 'brought on' by those actions (ie happened when it wouldn't otherwise), depending on variables that are impossible to analyse accurately.

Quote

Not totally. You said 

 

The difference in this & what the other poster said is the other poster isn't saying perhaps one could say.

Actually, they did. I just rephrased it by adding the perhaps. Which is actually redundant because 'could say' is not an absolute anyway.

Quote

They start the statement with saying Tywin & the Lannisters are mostly to blame. It appeared clear to me that they are referring to the actual gang rape of Tysha because what blame would Tywin hold in Tyrion starting a relationship with/marrying Tysha? 

Agreed

Quote

Going off of the basis that we are speaking directly on the gang rape the paragraph reads quite differently IMO than yours. 

I don't think so.

Quote

Tywin and the  Lannisters are mostly to blame.  One could say all share some blame.

Quote

perhaps one could say Tyrion & Tysha have their own elements of responsibility.

 The 'perhaps' is redundant, merely emphasising because the non-absolute in 'could' appeared to have been lost.
"have their own elements of responsibility" is really no different than "share some blame" in actual meaning. Again, I merely rephrased to make more clear that actual meaning of the words, since something very different was being argued against.
All I did was break down the original statement, I think, not change its meaning significantly.
In part I think its the natural reluctance for the word 'blame', which I changed to responsibility. But as I said, if there is responsibility, then surely an element of blame follows?
I would appreciate anyone else sticking their nose in here if they have a more precisely appropriate word, btw. I refuse to shy away from "responsibility -> (some) blame" just because its uncomfortable using the word blame. But i'm more than happy to if a more appropriate word can be shown.

Quote

Then they say irt Tysha "Should she have known better? I think so." This equates in my mind to saying - Tysha should've known better than to marry Tyrion because she might get gang raped. I wholly disagree with that.

Really?
Take out the horror element of the actual result.
Tysha should have known better. Not did know better. Should have. And yes, although we are talking about the gang rape event, we are also talking generally here, about any of a range of possible results from the secret marriage, not just the exact specific one that eventuated. She should have known, giving Tywin's status, past deeds, and reputation (not to mention that Tyrion needed to bribe a septon to get the marriage performed), that this could end very badly indeed for her. Probably. The poster's actual response? An uncertain "I think so". Not definitive.
I have to agree with him. She should have known that things could turn out very, very badly. Up to or beyond gang-rape. I doubt she did know. I don't know if she even had the appropriate information available to her for one thing, and very much I doubt she was capable of processing it properly, really thinking this through with her brain, for another. The same for Tyrion really, except I am sure he did have the appropriate information available, as his guilt demonstrates.

Quote

I can agree she shares her own elements of responsibility irt the entire situation; she knew he was far above her station, she willingly married him, presumably willingly went along with hiding it etc. 

They go on to say "He should have known better" referring to Tyrion. Again, we were, as I understood it, speaking directly to the gang rape. He knew what he was doing, he knew it could end up badly, but he did not, could not have known that this would be the result. 

Again, as I see it, this is not just speaking directly to the gang rape but to any of a range of possible results. And I agree with you that he did not, could not, have envisaged this particular result.
He certainly should have envisaged a possible result where Tysha was dead, for example. He knows how little regard Tywin has for those who get in his way, highborn or lowborn.

Quote

I think it's safe to say even if Tysha didn't know Tyrion was Tywin Lannisters son in the beginning she certainly knew he was Highborn. 

I think so too. 

Quote

So, when you say he probably did know better, I understand you to mean that Tyrion knew this was not a good choice. He knew there would likely be a negative outcome. When the other poster said it, that isn't what I gathered. Whether that's because you & I have discussed things in much more depth than we did, or because your verbage is more easily understood by me, I don't know. 

Probably because I took care to emphasise that and make it extra clear. Possibly because we have discussed similarly very tricky sorts of things in some depth so you understand in some way where I'm coming from and therefore don't leave assumptions that conflict with that understanding un-examined?

Quote

For sure. I don't think he would have even imagined it would go this badly. 

I think he likely knew Tywin well enough to know he doesn't take being disobeyed lightly. I also think this is most likely the first time Tyrion disobeyed his father to this degree. He would know how his father dealt with subjects who disobeyed but would likely think his treatment would be different than theirs. He also has Jaime as an example, who had just gone against his father's wishes & joined the KG, with no apparent punishment at all. He would have known that Jaime was the golden child & that he was not well liked but I think it would be a fair assumption on his part to think his likely consequences would land somewhere in between the none that Jaime got & the extremely harsh that Tywin's enemies or subjects got. I think he underestimated Tywin's hate for him, more than anything else. 

Agreed, agreed and agreed. 
But he should have expected Tysha would be very severely punished. much more severely than he would.
I think he hold s a significant degree of responsibility for that - she was severely punished because of his conscious choices - and he knows it (ETA: and knew it was possible before he made those choices), and thats why he feels so guilty. Which, of course, doesn't lessen Tywin's blame in the slightest.

[Nagini's Neville]

3 hours ago, corbon said:

But he should have expected Tysha would be very severely punished. much more severely than he would.
I think he hold s a significant degree of responsibility for that - she was severely punished because of his conscious choices - and he knows it (ETA: and knew it was possible before he made those choices), and thats why he feels so guilty. Which, of course, doesn't lessen Tywin's blame in the slightest.

I have not read the whole thread yet ( but plan to, if I have a bit of time to do this very complicated sensitive topic justice) But I just wanted to respond a bit to that last bit here.

I strongly disagree with the bold. Tyrion maybe would have held some responsibility/blame, if Shae had been discovered and killed, because he is completely aware of that danger and the consequences the whole time, but chooses to take that risk anyway and without telling her and transferring some responsibility to her to decide for herself, if she wants to take that risk or not. But we are talking about 13 year old Tyrion here and of course he probably knew he shouldn't have just wed a commoner behind his father's back. But the reaction, that Tywin has is by no means a normal one, or appropriate one or something you should expect. A normal father like Ned (maybe Ned would have even let Tyrion stay married given, that it might have been hard to marry tyrion and for him to find true love) would have just had the marriage annulled, the girl would have been punished enough- given not being a maiden anymore in this sexist society and the son would have just been disciplined in a normal, non-traumatizing way, send him away to become someone's ward, who is strict. Just look at Hoster's treatment of LF, who wasn't even his son and by no means was Hoster in anyway a exemplary of a father of course.

This is a horrendous display of cruelty and torture most lords would have not even inflicted on criminals and really reveals Tywin's sociopathic personality to us.

Now Tyrion knows of his father's sociopathic and beyond cruel nature, but there is no reason at all to just assume, that Tyrion had been aware of this already as a child, prior to this gang-rape (IMO it was always portrayed as this big wake up call for Tyrion about how his father is really like)  And even, if he had some inkling, there was no reason to believe he would inflict the same behavior on his own son and even, if Tyrion had been fully aware of his father's nature (which I very much don't believe) he is a child and is in no way to be expected to be able to rationalize and predict the same way an adult could. His brain isn't fully developed yet. There is a reason children are not punished the same way as adults are in modern societies. And even though this is a different world brain development doesn't work differently, since GRRM writes all of his characters age appropriately.

So to say Tyrion should have known, what would happen is indeed victim-blaming and it's even more ridiculous to say Tysha should have known, who was a child herself, and even more severe victim-blaming, because she didn't even know Tywin and as I said having someone gang-raped is not an appropriate or to be expected response here. Also what you have to remember is that commoners had a very limited exposure to the world. They only know what's going on in their village and have no education, so if some lording comes along and tells an uneducated commoner girl he loves her and will marry her, she'll sleep with him, because she doesn't know enough about the world to know a lording will and could never marry her and that he tells the same story to every peasant girl he meets. 

 

[corbon]

1 hour ago, Nagini's Neville said:

I strongly disagree with the bold. ...

Now Tyrion knows of his father's sociopathic and beyond cruel nature, but there is no reason at all to just assume, that Tyrion had been aware of this already as a child,

You really think he didn't know that his father was utterly ruthless?
That the Tarbeck and Reynes stories, or the way his father treated his grandfather's mistress, had no meaning?

I think there are more than enough clues that Tyrion, even at 13, understood that his father could be utterly, utterly ruthless. 
I think Tyrion thought hat his position as Tywin's son would save him from anything truly awful, but he wasn't in this alone, was he. And Tysha was utterly vulnerable.
And I think his guilt indicates that Tyrion knew all of this, even as he tried not to think about it or admit it to himself.

1 hour ago, Nagini's Neville said:

and even, if Tyrion had been fully aware of his father's nature (which I very much don't believe) he is a child and is in no way to be expected to be able to rationalize and predict the same way an adult could. His brain isn't fully developed yet. There is a reason children are not punished the same way as adults are in modern societies. And even though this is a different world brain development doesn't work differently, since GRRM writes all of his characters age appropriately.

Indeed. And thats why his 'blame' or 'responsibility, is lessened in such a situation.
Its not absolved entirely though. 
He knew, underneath, that Tywin was ruthless, and deadly, and Tysha had no protection at all. He didn't have to rationalise it out. In fact, he likely avoided doing exactly that. And thats exactly why he's guilty.
Its also why he blames himself more than anyone else would.

1 hour ago, Nagini's Neville said:

So to say Tyrion should have known, what would happen

But I didn't say that he should have known what would happen. In fact I explicitly said that he probably could not have envisaged this particular result.
I suggested he should have known something bad was likely to happen, and that Tysha would be particularly vulnerable.
And i think he did know that, he just irresponsibly avoided thinking about it.

1 hour ago, Nagini's Neville said:

is indeed victim-blaming and it's even more ridiculous to say Tysha should have known, who was a child herself, and even more severe victim-blaming, 

Oh my. 
I think its best I practice restraint here.
You should practice paying better attention.

1 hour ago, Nagini's Neville said:

Also what you have to remember is that commoners had a very limited exposure to the world. They only know what's going on in their village and have no education, so if some lording comes along and tells an uneducated commoner girl he loves her and will marry her, she'll sleep with him, because she doesn't know enough about the world to know a lording will and could never marry her and that he tells the same story to every peasant girl he meets. 

You might notice that I said that was it possible that Tysha was genuinely ignorant enough to not even comprehend that a bad ending was likely.
I just don't believe thats likely. I have a somewhat different view of how much the commoners know I guess. 
I think they know very well that marrying a lordling's brat never ends well for the commoner. I think they know very well that Lord Tywin Lannister is particularly ruthless and fearsome. I think they've heard the Reynes of Castamere many times and understand its messages.
I'll give a 13 year old crofter's girl the benefit of the doubt that she may be genuinely ignorant through isolation - if the croft was isolated enough she may have been unusually ignorant. But I won't assume it automatically.
I think its most likely that she, like Tyrion, just was in the moment, and avoided thinking about scary futures, no matter how likely. A child too, when all's said and done.

[Nagini's Neville]

1 hour ago, corbon said:

You really think he didn't know that his father was utterly ruthless?
That the Tarbeck and Reynes stories, or the way his father treated his grandfather's mistress, had no meaning?

I think there are more than enough clues that Tyrion, even at 13, understood that his father could be utterly, utterly ruthless. 
I think Tyrion thought hat his position as Tywin's son would save him from anything truly awful, but he wasn't in this alone, was he. And Tysha was utterly vulnerable.
And I think his guilt indicates that Tyrion knew all of this, even as he tried not to think about it or admit it to himself.

Do you know what happens, when you were sexually abused? You feel guilt! A shit load of guilt for no reason whatsoever. Especially, when you have been sexually abused as a child. There is no need to shame victims, they usually already do that themselves. They always feel in hindsight, they should have known, maybe if they had behaved differently this wouldn't have happened. And other ppl do the same thing, because the thought of having no control over your fate is terrifying. But hindsight is always 20/20

Of course he feels guilty. He was made to rape the love of his life. Everyone, who is not a psychopath and had to witness that and was additionally forced to participated, would. In no ways, does that mean he knew this would happen. Victims always feel guilt. Just read witness accounts of ppl, in whose homes were broken into and who were made to watch loved ones being abused in front of them. Even if there was no way for them to possibly prevent it, they still always feel guilty. There is also something called survivors' guilt.

Guilt and shame are weird emotions, that we often experience against any logical sense.

We also have to take into account, that Tyrion's thoughts now as a 26 year old man, in hindsight of what he might have known beforehand as a child are no accurate representation of what he truly knew. Events in the rearview mirror are always distorted and informed by our current knowledge.

Also please provide quotes, that show Tyrion already knew as a child, that his father would react this way towards his own son (and not quotes, that show he knows now as a adult to evaluate those actions and attitudes correctly)

We see how inaccurate and distorted memory is in general, when Tyrion even tries to remember this event, that he feels so guilty about. Numerous times he recalls with very emotional vivid memory, that it were 100 men, who raped Tysha (honestly it would be extremely surprising, if she had survived that- therefore maybe that is just how it feels emotionally to him) but on a different occasion he asks himself how many men it had been again? 

For me this all falls into the same category as saying Sansa should have known as an 11 year old, that the queen and Joff would behead her father, because of the Trident incident and Lady.

Or similarly withe Dany and the Dothraki raping, killing and pillaging.

It is IMO just the judgement of adults, who have trouble taking on the pov of a child in this specific situation.

And it happens again and again in real life as well. In Austria a 10 year old girl, natascha kampusch, was kidnapped and held hostage for 8 years. But she also had the possibility to be outside sometimes, she even was on a ski trip with her abuser, even though she didn't suffer from stockholm syndrome. You wouldn't believe how she gets attacked and victim-blamed now. 

The psyche has it's own and often for outsider illogical and incomprehensible ways of responding to abuse and trauma.

 

 

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

7 hours ago, corbon said:

think that is that your expansion adjusted your focus unfairly to Tyrion ad Tysha alone, effectively negating the explicit original assignation of blame to Tywin. Unfairly

Fair enough. Tbh I didn't even realize it said Tywin is mostly to blame until you re-quoted it. It appears I should have read more carefully. 

7 hours ago, corbon said:

Yes, I saw it as such. And if you can do it, one is generally careful, reasoned, responsible, how much easier for those less casual

Indeed & for the sake of continuing discussion I think it would have been beneficial to both myself & the other poster had I asked for further clarification rather than having a knee-jerk reaction. 

8 hours ago, corbon said:

Agreed. You didn't use the term anyway.
My feeling is that the term is almost always used in a dishonest way, and because that dishonesty isn't challenged enough it becomes a thoughtless accident by people who don't actually intend or even realise the intellectual dishonesty they have engaged in

I didn't use the term but I did say basically the same thing so this conversation wasn't unwarranted. It was a thoughtless accident, but one I know better than to make, usually. Thoughtless being the operative word there, I should have thought things through better & requested more information if I didn't fully understand.

I think we often read & respond to what we believe the other poster is saying & occasionally that is misunderstood & then explained without an issue. However, in cases like these, it would be better to err on the safe side to avoid stifling the conversation & having others view the poster in a negative light. 

8 hours ago, corbon said:

have a very high regard for the person who used it this time. I am certain they did not intend any dishonesty of any sort. I hope they are not offended by my comments - there is a high chance they have or will be. But my regard for that particular person extends to believing they have the capacity to truly understand my intent in engaging on this, and respect that, whether they agree or not

I have a high regard for that poster as well & can't speak to how offended she may be but I agree she will understand your intent, whether in agreement or not. 

8 hours ago, corbon said:

Me either. But its important to be careful that one is disagreeing with an actual expressed opinion. I think you made the same mistake as 'victim blaming' but to a lesser extent, because you are more careful. Thats why I quoted the original post you responded to where the very first sentence apportioned blame to Tywin (and the Lannisters).

For sure. It's very important to speak to the actual expressed opinion & not a perceived or assumed one. 

Tbh I didn't really relate it in my mind to "victim-shaming or blaming" I gave a hypothetical situation that I believed was comparable to what the poster was saying. BUT in my hypothetical scenario placed the blame on the victim, so it was effectively the same thing as saying they were victim-blaming. I just didn't connect the two things at the time. I disagreed with where I believed blame was being placed & attempted to show why I thought that was erroneous with my hypothetical. 

I do hope the poster is reading along. Maybe I will message them privately because I don't want them to feel as if they cannot express their opinion without being bullied into silence, especially not by me. 

8 hours ago, corbon said:

Exactly. Except the painful truth is that it partly is "brought on" by those actions. Or at least, the chance of it happening is increased - so it may or may not have been 'brought on' by those actions (ie happened when it wouldn't otherwise), depending on variables that are impossible to analyse accurately.

Agreed. I think the chance of it happening being increased by their actions is a very good way to put it. 

8 hours ago, corbon said:

Actually, they did. I just rephrased it by adding the perhaps. Which is actually redundant because 'could say' is not an absolute anyway

Right, I was just trying to explain how I came to the conclusion I did there. You're right though, perhaps is redundant & could say is not absolute. 

Side note on absolutes - I was re-reading my earlier post where I quoted you saying it's not 100%-0% etc & I said I think this shuts down discussion just as much. I want to clarify that I was saying speaking & arguing in absolutes shuts down discussion, not what you were saying irt the absolutes. I think you probably knew that, but wanted to be sure. 

8 hours ago, corbon said:

The 'perhaps' is redundant, merely emphasising because the non-absolute in 'could' appeared to have been lost.
"have their own elements of responsibility" is really no different than "share some blame" in actual meaning.

Right, there is not a difference in actual meaning, it was the difference in my mind between "responsibility" & "blame" that allowed me to read their post in a negative light & yours otherwise. 

8 hours ago, corbon said:

Again, I merely rephrased to make more clear that actual meaning of the words, since something very different was being argued against.
All I did was break down the original statement, I think, not change its meaning significantly.
In part I think its the natural reluctance for the word 'blame', which I changed to responsibility. But as I said, if there is responsibility, then surely an element of blame follows?

Yep, that is it. I shied from the word blame to avoid being called a victim blamer - it wasn't a conscious decision but it is indeed what happened. I understand that blame does not mean the person deserved so I'm not sure why, exactly, I jumped to that conclusion. 

8 hours ago, corbon said:

would appreciate anyone else sticking their nose in here if they have a more precisely appropriate word, btw. I refuse to shy away from "responsibility -> (some) blame" just because its uncomfortable using the word blame. But i'm more than happy to if a more appropriate word can be shown

Indeed & I shouldn't shy from it either. I don't know a more appropriate word but I don't think we need one, in this particular discussion, because I think we understand what is being said clearly. I do think a different word may be helpful to future discussions that are not as lengthy as ours, so that things are better understood. 

8 hours ago, corbon said:

Really?

Well, yeah. That's what I gathered from the statement originally. I was just trying to give my thought process on the whole thing for you to have a better understanding of where I was coming from & how I arrived where I did. It wasn't thought through very thoroughly & was a knee-jerk reaction, but that's how I got there. 

8 hours ago, corbon said:

Take out the horror element of the actual result.
Tysha should have known better. Not did know better. Should have. And yes, although we are talking about the gang rape event, we are also talking generally here, about any of a range of possible results from the secret marriage, not just the exact specific one that eventuated.

I still kind of disagree with this though. I agree she should have known better irt the entire event & that a range of negative things may result from those actions. Where I disagree is irt the actual gang rape because I just don't think she could have foreseen that. I don't think that would have been anywhere on her radar or within the realm of possibilities in her mind. Maybe I'm understating the knowledge a crofters daughter may have of what Tywin is capable of. 

8 hours ago, corbon said:

She should have known, giving Tywin's status, past deeds, and reputation (not to mention that Tyrion needed to bribe a septon to get the marriage performed), that this could end very badly indeed for her. Probably. The poster's actual response? An uncertain "I think so". Not definitive.

I agree, not definitive. I don't know how much of Tywin's past deeds & status she could be expected to reasonably know. Maybe the small folk generally know these things? I assumed they would not. I mean, I think the big feats of Tywin's most people would likely know, I just don't know if someone should be expected to relate those directly to this situation because she isn't an "enemy" of House Lannister, she probably wouldn't have understood or known Tywin's hatred for Tyrion. I don't think it would be unreasonable for her to believe that marrying Tywin Lannister's son would offer her some sort of protection more than an enemy would have. 

8 hours ago, corbon said:

have to agree with him. She should have known that things could turn out very, very badly. Up to or beyond gang-rape. I doubt she did know. I don't know if she even had the appropriate information available to her for one thing, and very much I doubt she was capable of processing it properly, really thinking this through with her brain, for another. The same for Tyrion really, except I am sure he did have the appropriate information available, as his guilt demonstrates

Yeah I guess I think if she didn't have the appropriate information available to her &/or the capacity to process it properly it isn't fair to say she should have known. I agree we don't know what information was available to her though, so maybe she did have it. 

Tyrion had it & the capability to process it I think. I think he probably didn't think things all the way through, he probably underestimated Tywin, & a large part of him wanted this to work even knowing it couldn't because he believes himself unlovable (or at least now he does, probably to a lesser degree before this situation) and that against all odds he has found someone who does love him. He wanted that. He wanted a wife that cared for him & to have a normal life with her. Point being that I agree he should have known better but I do understand why he didn't or why he acted even knowing 

8 hours ago, corbon said:

Again, as I see it, this is not just speaking directly to the gang rape but to any of a range of possible results. And I agree with you that he did not, could not, have envisaged this particular result.
He certainly should have envisaged a possible result where Tysha was dead, for example. He knows how little regard Tywin has for those who get in his way, highborn or lowborn

Right. He certainly knows, beyond a shadow of a doubt, now. I don't think it's entirely clear what he knew before this but agree it's likely he knew to some extent what Tywin is capable of. I think possibly he believed - wrongly - that being his son would offer some leniency. More than that though I think he hoped beyond hope that this wild scheme of his would work out, even knowing at the same time it couldn't, because he wanted this very badly. Also, even fully grown adults make terrible decisions when love gets in the way. 

8 hours ago, corbon said:

Probably because I took care to emphasise that and make it extra clear. Possibly because we have discussed similarly very tricky sorts of things in some depth so you understand in some way where I'm coming from and therefore don't leave assumptions that conflict with that understanding un-examined?

Agreed. All of the above. 

8 hours ago, corbon said:

Agreed, agreed and agreed. 
But he should have expected Tysha would be very severely punished. much more severely than he would.
I think he hold s a significant degree of responsibility for that - she was severely punished because of his conscious choices - and he knows it (ETA: and knew it was possible before he made those choices), and thats why he feels so guilty. Which, of course, doesn't lessen Tywin's blame in the slightest

For sure. I think this is in part due to the level of selfishness all teenagers possess, the inability to think things through to the end & understand & weigh the potential consequences. As an adult he understands much better how his actions played into the end result. 

[Nagini's Neville]

1 hour ago, corbon said:

Oh my. 
I think its best I practice restraint here.
You should practice paying better attention.

I was not directing that specifically at you, just stating it generally. I'm sorry, if that wasn't clear! But still no need to answer so condescendingly.

1 hour ago, corbon said:

You might notice that I said that was it possible that Tysha was genuinely ignorant enough to not even comprehend that a bad ending was likely.

Yep, I think that is true. Since i believe not even Tyrion anticipated something bad to this degree would happen. There is is big difference between being punished and what happened.

1 hour ago, corbon said:

I think they know very well that marrying a lordling's brat never ends well for the commoner. I think they know very well that Lord Tywin Lannister is particularly ruthless and fearsome. I think they've heard the Reynes of Castamere many times and understand its messages.

I disagree here and just taking that from history but also from the text. Peasants were often completely uneducated, had a lot of superstition, believed in weird stuff, that made them vulnerable- most of them never left their village, so how should they have learned all those things? Only when ppl came by to tell them distorted half-truths and scary stories like that the young wolf was a cannibal and his sister killed the king with a spell changed into a wolf with wings and flew off.

Just a scary song, that they might have, might not have heard is not sufficient enough IMO. They told each other "scary" magical stories all the time. I think we sometimes forget that we only have the povs from the nobility. So of course we are exposed to the truth as readers.

At the very least I'd say their knowledge of the way the world worked, varied strongly, depended on, if some elder wise ppl lived in their village, that had travelled the world a bit or not. 

That's what Meribald said, who has been traveling to all the villages for years.

"Almost all are common-born, simple folk who had never been more than a mile from the house where they were born until the day some lord came round to take them off to war. Poorly shod and poorly clad, they march away beneath his banners, ofttimes with no better arms than a sickle or a sharpened hoe, or a maul they made themselves by lashing a stone to a stick with strips of hide. Brothers march with brothers, sons with fathers, friends with friends. They’ve heard the songs and stories, so they go off with eager hearts, dreaming of the wonders they will see, of the wealth and glory they will win. War seems a fine adventure, the greatest most of them will ever know."

A Feast for Crows 

Why shouldn't that apply to women as well, especially to a 13 year old girl, that still might believe in fairytales to some degree. But in general I'd say the commoners are very gullible due to lack of knowledge, experience and education. They all had to work hard all day, they had no time to think about all those possibilities. 

[Nagini's Neville]

On 31. März 2020 at 3:23 AM, Angel Eyes said:

Why do you think Tyrion didn't kill him sooner? When he learned the truth about Tysha in ASOS he killed Shae and Tywin within hours.

Tyrion was a child, when all of this happened. It is very hard for us as outsiders and adults to understand, that this was also the man, who raised him and how that affected him. All children have a form of "Stockholm syndrome", when it comes to their parents to some degree. We only see Tyrion reflect on this event as an adult and even there he doesn't completely condemn his father for his actions. 

It might have been the most horrible thing, that ever happened to Tyrion, a shock to his whole system, as all traumatic events are, but it was also an educational measure by Tywin. And this is a very important element, when it comes to analyzing Tyrion's character IMO

Why do little boys cry and want to protect their mother, when she is beaten by their father-this is probably the most traumatic experience in their lives, seeing their protector and caretaker, their mother threatened and attacked- but go on to beat their own wives? (not all of course- not even the majority, I believe)

Because even though their father was the one causing the pain and the trauma, he was also an educator (and protector as well). The little boy was given an example of how to deal with certain problems, how to react- (maybe, if unlucky the only example) and this early example from then on shapes his reality(if just in a subconscious way and that can be even more problematic).

And a lot of people have to "consciously unlearn"( therapy) for this not to have a profound effect on their behavior and really every aspect of their lives. 

Even though Tyrion probably always knew to a degree, what happened was wrong, since he is very much capable of compassion and empathy, we have to keep in mind, that we only get his adult perspective on everything.

Part of him might have believed (and still believe) this was an accurate punishment for him, that he deserved it, even for Tysha (not now still though, since he knows she wasn't a sex worker)

Tywin has victimized Tyrion, but simultaneous has taught him a lesson and already made him participate in the role as the abuser himself. IMO that shows itself later in his attitude towards women and how he treats them and sex as an adult, especially in moments, when he is under a lot of emotional stress or in pain.

Even though I criticize Tyrion for how he treated Sansa on their wedding night and IMO he is fully responsible for his actions there, that he in the end he doesn't rape her and doesn't act according to his father's teachings is still a triumph and shows, that Tyrion has it in himself to not turn into Tywin 2.0.

When he finally kills Tywin, it happens after a long built up, it's the response to a life time of abuse, the barrel has received one last drop, that made it overflow, but sadly he also simultaneously acts according to Tywin's teachings by killing Shae as well.

 

[Hugorfonics]

42 minutes ago, Nagini's Neville said:

It might have been the most horrible thing, that ever happened to Tyrion, a shock to his whole system, as all traumatic events are, but it was also an educational measure by Tywin. And this is a very important element, when it comes to analyzing Tyrion's character IMO

 

 

 

 

When he finally kills Tywin, it happens after a long built up, it's the response to a life time of abuse, the barrel has received one last drop, that made it overflow, but sadly he also simultaneously acts according to Tywin's teachings by killing Shae as well.

 

I agree. A Lannister always pays his debts. Its weird that thats not their words, probably because its a terrible way to raise a family. I wonder how old that phrase is, Hear me roar too.

Jaime and Tywin told Tyrion that Tysha was a whore, so debts need to be paid. And for the betrayal and trickery, debts need to be paid too.

Tywin pretty much brought his death on himself too. A Lannister pays his debts. I wonder how much Tywin thought of that, or if he acknowledged that in the bathroom

 

You ask me theres too much revenge going on in asoiaf. Tyrion specifically, even now in Dance with talk of raping his sister or feeding Nurse mushroom broth. Tyrion always tried to be Tywin 2.0, his aunt saw him as that too. Hopefully he will drastically change his demeanour 

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

4 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

I agree. A Lannister always pays his debts. Its weird that thats not their words, probably because its a terrible way to raise a family. I wonder how old that phrase is, Hear me roar too.

Jaime and Tywin told Tyrion that Tysha was a whore, so debts need to be paid. And for the betrayal and trickery, debts need to be paid too.

Tywin pretty much brought his death on himself too. A Lannister pays his debts. I wonder how much Tywin thought of that, or if he acknowledged that in the bathroom

 

You ask me theres too much revenge going on in asoiaf. Tyrion specifically, even now in Dance with talk of raping his sister or feeding Nurse mushroom broth. Tyrion always tried to be Tywin 2.0, his aunt saw him as that too. Hopefully he will drastically change his demeanour 

Yeah, Tywin earned what he had coming to him fair & square. I do hope Tyrion changes his demeanor though, or at least quits talking about raping his sister - or anyone for that matter LOL I'm all for him feeding Nurse mushroom broth & maybe even getting some revenge on Cersei, but not that. 

I honestly don't think Tywin ever thought in a million years, even with the cross bow pointed at him, that Tyrion would pull the trigger. Much like Tyrion underestimated Tywin before, Tywin underestimated Tyrion here. 

[Nagini's Neville]

11 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

Tywin pretty much brought his death on himself too. A Lannister pays his debts. I wonder how much Tywin thought of that, or if he acknowledged that in the bathroom

It's almost sad, that with all of his intelligence, how utterly stupid Tywin was. If he would have been truly smart, even if cold hearted, he would have seen the potential in all of his 3 children (especially Tyrion) and used them to his and house Lannister's advantage, like Bolton did with Ramsey. He would have recognized, what a political treasure he had with Tyrion. You got to be utterly stupid to not understand, what a great thing Tyrion was able to pull of during the BOTW and try to capitalize on that ability. Instead he shamed and degraded him.  And it would have been so easy to make Tyrion love his father and do anything for him. But Tywin was actually quite stupid in that regard and simply too emotional to think rational here. 

IMO it would have been an even more tragic story, if Tywin actually pretended to like/love Tyrion and then Tyrion would have found out, that it was all a lie. Would have been more chilling 

21 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

Tyrion always tried to be Tywin 2.0, his aunt saw him as that too. Hopefully he will drastically change his demeanour 

I think the problem is, that part of Tyrion is already Tywin 2.0, because Tywin was his father. But Tyrion also has a compassionate side, he just needs to decide to follow that path instead of the other. Maybe something will happen, that will inspire him to do so.

Tyrion has always put his own well-being, before that of anyone else (except maybe Jaime in the past) he has never acted truly selfless before (that is actually also something, that abuse can to you)- except maybe in the BOTB, but even there you could argue, that this was his only choice, if the city had fallen, so would he have. I think his redemption could lay in putting other ppl's needs before his own during the Long Night. But I'd say it's a 50/50 chance. Could also be, that GRRM is telling a villain origin story the same way with Dany.

And if he does that, honestly I think it would be really sweet as well  two excellent well fleshed-out Darth Vader stories 

and sorry for my non-existent proper speech toady. Normally I try with you since I know how important that is to you, but I'm just to lazy today

[Nagini's Neville]

33 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

I honestly don't think Tywin ever thought in a million years, even with the cross bow pointed at him, that Tyrion would pull the trigger.

Tywin suffered from some form of absurd hubris. He was very smart in certain ways, but also utterly dumb in others  IMO. The way he was ruling his house and as hand could ultimately not stand the test of time. All those cunning men might look down upon someone like Ned, but what they neglect is that you also need the love and loyalty of your ppl and your family, if you want to persist. There was basically no one at Tywin's funeral and only poor Kevan was truly sad.

If you have too many enemies, sooner or later one will get you and all the gold of casterly rock can't save you then. I thought it was fitting, that Tywin got such a for him probably "degrading" death.

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

3 minutes ago, Nagini's Neville said:

Tywin suffered from some form of absurd hubris. He was very smart in certain ways, but also utterly dumb in others  IMO. The way he was ruling his house and as hand could ultimately not stand the test of time. All those cunning men might look down upon someone like Ned, but what they neglect is that you also need the love and loyalty of your ppl and your family, if you want to persist. There was basically no one at Tywin's funeral and only poor Kevan was truly sad.

If you have too many enemies, sooner or later one will get you and all the gold of casterly rock can't save you then. I thought it was fitting, that Tywin got such a for him probably "degrading" death.

I agree. It's almost like Tywin is a little inhuman. He doesn't seem to have a steady grasp of human emotions & how they work. He thinks he can rule through fear mongering & that works for a while but not forever