Jon Married Val

[Corvo the Crow]

14 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Sorry, that's just a horrendous scenario there. I guess Jeyne also agrees with her treatment by Ramsay and others because she never ran away?

12 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Can you really compare Jeyne with a wildling girl? Jeyne's upbringing wasn't the wildling way. It wasn't even the peasant way, she is brought up in a castle and her father probably belong to petty nobility, holding a village perhaps or at least descend from such. 

16 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Power is hereditary among the wildlings, too. Property in land is power, and people actually do have long halls and the like which they would pass on to their children or kin. There is no succession/inheritance by primogeniture but that doesn't mean that succession/inheritance within the family is uncommon or unheard of. One would expect that the children of great chiefs and raiders and warriors and 'lords' follow in their footsteps, although in a less rigid way than in the Seven Kingdoms - simply because the richest, most wealthy wilding families would give their children the best chances of making a name for themselves. They would have the best food, the least chances to starve or freeze to death in winter, the best equipment, weaponry, clothes, etc.

 

We don't know that. Those halls may very well be the villages property with current chieftain holding it. What you say is entirely different than how it works in Westeros, training etc. would happen of course, but tell me what does the second son of Royce, the most powerful house in the vale do? Those children, grandchildren would be following in their foot steps with their own personal skills, not like the weakling Caswells inheriting bitterbridge for generations but more like a second or third son of a powerful house at best.

21 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

The women would be dragged beyond the Wall bound and gagged and broken, one imagines. If they go back across the Wall at all. I mean, it seems obvious to me that raiding parties foraging for not only women but provisions as well might cross the Wall on their way south but would circumvent the Wall by boat or ship on the way back. In the west, for obvious geographical reasons.

 

please don't bring this, I really don't want to discuss this part because it's incredibly stupid. Wildling climbs seven hundred feet of wall which is already dangerous, then goes to Last Hearth, grabs an Umber giantess manages to carry her back to the wall with days of travel and then manages to climb back up with her at his back? Really so terribly done that there is no logic of discussing whether such a girl beyond the wall can return home or not. If you really want an answer my answer is, if the wildling manages to pull of such thing, then the girl can walk back home, much easier. Going by boat etc. are also terrible explanations. A village gets raid and the surrounding ones would not immediately take action, lords hold known passes, skullbridge etc?

 

27 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

The stealing happens in front of everybody in a village when it is done in a friendly way, and it might eradicate a village if it done in an unfriendly way. In both cases the people who are concerned by this know it.

A wedding can be larger and smaller but a necessary condition is that it happens publicly. Else people don't know that you are married - which means there is no point to the marriage at all.

 

Friendly way would be what?  If you mean single person doing it and not a band of raiders Ryk got his ear bit off by Munda, so not at all friendly like and risk of injury or death is still there.

Do wildlings even have weddings? Once you are stolen it is at least known to your village and stealing persons.

31 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Craster broke his little daughter-wives of course - proving, yet again, that this is doable and is likely done by other wildlings, too.

12 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

It's been a long time but weren't the older ones helped Sam escape and killed some mutineers?

32 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Ygritte defends her culture there. She, too, doesn't want to be stolen by any man, just as she doesn't want to work with/for any man as her cutting her ties with Rattleshirt shows. She gives the ideology behind her culture there, but even she wouldn't want to be stolen by the likes of Ramsay or Chett.

9 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

Whether she wants to be stolen by such guys or not is entirely irrelevant, she has said it herself, if it's a cruel guy the wildling women would stab him. 

 

34 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

I mean, honestly, breath mingling in cold winter air is a common phenomenon. It happens all the time when two people are standing next to each other outside at a cold day.

 

So common it is only ever mentioned in the books how many times? Once in the first book and then in the last book two times, both in the chapters of the same PoV, chapters following each other of which the latter include a wedding and in the next chapter other marriage symbolisms. Val in all white like a bride, in her houses clothing, handed to Jon by a male member of her house. 

[Craving Peaches]

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

Insofar as the transfer of proerty through inheritance, etc. - you do have to accept something that has been bequeathed to you. And if you are not to be found then such a transfer might not be possible (depending on the legal situation).

This just.... doesn't appear to be the case. Because there are multiple cases where someone has inherited something, haven't realised it and so haven't realised that they are owner, and then issues arise because by the time they do eventually find out someone else has been using it. If you are talking about accepting the whole of the will or whatever then maybe. But it is a fact you can own something and not be aware you own it.

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

I mean, honestly, breath mingling in cold winter air is a common phenomenon. It happens all the time when two people are standing next to each other outside at a cold day.

I'm not saying this cannot have symbolic signficance for the future ... but not in the sense that it points to a marriage already happening.

It is mentioned specifically in conjunction with Alys and Sigorn's wedding and the phrase only appears 4 times total in the series. Once with Alys and Sigorn, once with Jon and Val, once when Catelyn is talking to dying Hoster and his breath mingles with the rain, and once when describing men's breath mingling with a horses' during Gared's execution. So the only other time where two people's breath is mingling it is related to marriage. So I think it is quite significant.

[Corvo the Crow]

3 hours ago, Lord of Oldstones said:

There is nothing to gain from marrying her. Only desperate Axell Florent is fool enough to consider having any real power and position from marrying Mance's wife spear sister.

Its better if Jon stays dead than to wake up and marry some Wildling nobody.

 

What Axell says to Jon during wedding suggests that Val and Winterfell go hand in hand together, whoever get's Val gets Winterfell is probably the deal.

Val isn't just some wildling nobody. She is insistently being referred to as Wildling Princess. Queen, her lickspittles etc. saying it is not important, they are just parrots repeating what Stannis says but Stannis insisting to call her that even after being corrected by Jon is important, Stannis is not the man to refer to a nobody as a princess. Here, a theory of mine.

Even if you dismiss the theory above, Wall is an important figure. If nothing else she is close to and holds some sway over Tormund and most of the wildlings are loosely under his command.The rest are either Thenn men or have sworn themselves to Jon directly. She is probably some sort of wise woman like her sister Dalla. 

[Corvo the Crow]

@Lord Varys Something more on Wildlin stealing practices. So wives are not stolen. Tormund saying Toregg to stay away from Val gets more meaningful.

Quote

If winter had come and gone more quickly and spring had followed in its turn, I might have been chosen to hold one of these towers in my father’s name. Lord Eddard was dead, however, his brother Benjen lost; the shield they dreamt together would never be forged. “This land belongs to the Watch,” Jon said.

Her nostrils flared. “No one lives here.”

“Your raiders drove them off.”

“They were cowards, then. If they wanted the land they should have stayed and fought.”

“Maybe they were tired of fighting. Tired of barring their doors every night and wondering if Rattleshirt or someone like him would break them down to carry off their wives. Tired of having their harvests stolen, and any valuables they might have. It’s easier to move beyond the reach of raiders.” But if the Wall should fail, all the north will lie within the reach of raiders.

“You know nothing, Jon Snow. Daughters are taken, not wives. You’re the ones who steal. You took the whole world, and built the Wall t’ keep the free folk out.”

 

Edited March 7, 2023 by Corvo the Crow

[Lord Varys]

3 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

@Lord Varys Something more on Wildlin stealing practices. So wives are not stolen. Tormund saying Toregg to stay away from Val gets more meaningful.

Wives are no longer wives if their husbands are dead, no? South of the Wall it also not exactly an uncommon practice to claim a woman you desire by means of making her a widow. It is by the way also a very shitty attitude to assume that unmarried women are fair game for raping raiders. I mean, where is the difference there? Isn't a father and a mother and a brother and a married sister not going to be sad when their daughter/sister is abducted by some savage? Would a husband grieve more about such a loss than her birth family?

Why on earth do you bother treating this monstrous practice as something that has any merit whatsoever. Why not also the First Night? It has effectively the same root - strong and powerful men must pump their seed into every womb they lay their hands on so 'the clan' gets 'stronger children'. That was barbaric nonsense, too, and the Seven Kingdoms are better since it was abolished.

But we cannot even take this apologetic as fact. Just as the notion that the evil First Men/men of the Hundred Kingdoms built the Wall to keep a couple of filthy savages out is utterly ridiculous. They should know that this is not the case because they know the fucking Others are a thing. And they search refuge south of the Wall because they think the Others cannot pass through it.

Jon would know it if the wildling raiders only stole daughters ... he is the son of the Lord of Winferfell, after all. Not that this would make it any better. It is a crime in the Seven Kingdoms and in the mind of any decent person, just as raiding in general is. And the wildling women themselves are victim of that ideology, too.

One can defend some of those things when people are desperate need. Say, the winter raids we hear about in FaB are matters of life and death - just as the wildling raids of the Vale in winter are. That you can understand to a point. But the kind of things the likes of Jarl do - raiding because they enjoy it, because it gives them prestige among their peers to climb the Wall and kill and abduct some poor defenseless people south of the Wall - is just disgusting.

It is also very obvious why the Watch ended up keeping the wildlings out. The Seven Kingdoms feeds and clothes the Watch and from their ranks the black brothers are drawn. It makes no sense whatsoever that the Watch would allow thieves and rapists and murderers to cross the Wall they protect to steal and rape and murder on their lands or the lands south of the Gift.

Edited March 7, 2023 by Lord Varys

[Mithras]

Accidental marriages can happen, just like accidental pregnancies 

[Corvo the Crow]

8 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Why on earth do you bother treating this monstrous practice as something that has any merit whatsoever. Why not also the First Night? It has effectively the same root - strong and powerful men must pump their seed into every womb they lay their hands on so 'the clan' gets 'stronger children'. That was barbaric nonsense, too, and the Seven Kingdoms are better since it was abolished.

 

I don't. I am treating as a custom that is different than those south of the Wall and therefore taking into consideration that Jon may or may not understand somethings even if they hit him in the face. Entire point of this thread. Also abolished practice is quite common even among the faction that Abolished it, Valyrians. Plenty of dragonseeds going around. Aurane Waters can be considered one such. 

 

8 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

But we cannot even take this apologetic as fact. Just as the notion that the evil First Men/men of the Hundred Kingdoms built the Wall to keep a couple of filthy savages out is utterly ridiculous. They should know that this is not the case because they know the fucking Others are a thing. And they search refuge south of the Wall because they think the Others cannot pass through it.

 

Forgotten due to time. I bet wildlings didn't even live beyond the Wall when it was completed. 

8 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Jon would know it if the wildling raiders only stole daughters ... he is the son of the Lord of Winferfell, after all. Not that this would make it any better. It is a crime in the Seven Kingdoms and in the mind of any decent person, just as raiding in general is. And the wildling women themselves are victim of that ideology, too.

 

The way he knew how honourable men of the Watch are, instead of being thieves, murderers, rapists? Or that Giants were eating humans? He lives in Winterfell a long way away from the Wall, any knowledge he had will not be first hand, his knowledge probably comes from Old Nan's bedtime stories which are full of half truths at best.

8 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

It is also very obvious why the Watch ended up keeping the wildlings out. The Seven Kingdoms feeds and clothes the Watch and from their ranks the black brothers are drawn. It makes no sense whatsoever that the Watch would allow thieves and rapists and murderers to cross the Wall they protect to steal and rape and murder on their lands or the lands south of the Gift.

Watch is made up of thieves and rapists and murderers, if you haven't noticed. Watch ended up as a convenient place to send the criminals to. Wildlings devolving into what they are probably has to do with Wall anyway. As I said I highly doubt that wildlings were there when the Wall was built. Even if they were there, they would've moved south with the threat of Others having just dealt with and in the memory of people so they would be allowed but no, they are north of it. They moved after the Wall was established.

[sweetsunray]

On 3/3/2023 at 10:49 PM, LongRider said:

Jon was not Lord Commander when Jarl fell off the Wall so the Wall was not his, he did not kill Jarl, as he said.

True, but Jeor was dead already, and Jon is a special case as a descendant of Brandon the Builder and having dragonrider blood (I think Brandon the Builder had Garth + Dayne blood, and Dayne proto-Valyrian blood was also dragonblood). And if Brandon's blood sealed the spell of the Wall and he was a greenseer, then Jon's blood and being a skinchanger makes it possible for the Wall to recognize Jon as its new owner/master, even before he was elected LC.

To the OP, I think that most importantly wildling women decide for themselves who stole them or not. So, her all-in-white and Tormund warning Toregg off shows that Val considers herself stolen by Jon imo. And she's challenging him to steal into her bed. And since stealing basically is marriage (not necessarily for life), yes, I consider them married.

[Corvo the Crow]

19 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

True, but Jeor was dead already, and Jon is a special case as a descendant of Brandon the Builder and having dragonrider blood (I think Brandon the Builder had Garth + Dayne blood, and Dayne proto-Valyrian blood was also dragonblood). And if Brandon's blood sealed the spell of the Wall and he was a greenseer, then Jon's blood and being a skinchanger makes it possible for the Wall to recognize Jon as its new owner/master, even before he was elected LC.

 

True. Jon has a lot of things going on for him for Wall being his.

Wall is his through lineage: He's a Stark descendant

Wall is his through "right of conquest" he held the Wall's defense

Wall is his in the form of regency: Jeor, the Old Commander has died and he was his steward

Wall is his in the form of inheritance: Jeor had chosen him steward so he could groom him as his successor

Wall is his through election: his brothers voted for him

24 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

To the OP, I think that most importantly wildling women decide for themselves who stole them or not. So, her all-in-white and Tormund warning Toregg off shows that Val considers herself stolen by Jon imo. And she's challenging him to steal into her bed. And since stealing basically is marriage (not necessarily for life), yes, I consider them married.

I think of somethins similar, but not in the sense of whether stolen or not, but whether they are married or not. Of the limited examples we see, I think being stolen is more objective than subjective but even if stolen the choice to marry or not is of the woman: Longspear Ryk stole Munda, but it was Munda who took him to husband, implying a choice for her there.

 

[sweetsunray]

On 3/5/2023 at 5:41 PM, Lord of Oldstones said:

There is nothing to gain from marrying her. Only desperate Axell Florent is fool enough to consider having any real power and position from marrying Mance's wife spear sister.

Stannis explicitly says Val and Winterfell go hand in hand. Can't have one without the other.

Axell knows this, so does Patrek. Selyse is ignorant and stupid to try and make one of the men Stannis left with her Val's husband. Stannis doesn't even consider them worthy enough to be at his war council or on his march on WF. But Selyse insists on marrying one of those fools to Val, which they hope will make them Lord of WF.

[Lord Varys]

3 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

I don't. I am treating as a custom that is different than those south of the Wall and therefore taking into consideration that Jon may or may not understand somethings even if they hit him in the face. Entire point of this thread. Also abolished practice is quite common even among the faction that Abolished it, Valyrians. Plenty of dragonseeds going around. Aurane Waters can be considered one such. 

And again - chances are very low that any of that includes an actual marriage. And, no, the First Night is not 'quite common' in the Seven Kingdoms - the lords who still follow this ugly practice do so clandestinely and face punishment should their crimes be discovered by their respective liege lords or the king.

Aurane Waters is simply a bastard, there is no indication he was fathered on a married woman in her wedding night. All we know is that Lord Velaryon fathered him on a woman. In fact, those so-called dragonseeds as well as all the children born in a First Night were likely not part of the bastard system - or only if the lord in question himself insisted

3 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Forgotten due to time. I bet wildlings didn't even live beyond the Wall when it was completed.

Then it is rather odd that they would ever move north of the Wall. Back when it was built folks knew what it was for, so anyone consciously deciding to live on the turf of the Others (north of the Wall) would be a moron. And they would have continued to be morons to migrate there in later centuries when people still believed in the threat of the Others.

3 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

The way he knew how honourable men of the Watch are, instead of being thieves, murderers, rapists? Or that Giants were eating humans? He lives in Winterfell a long way away from the Wall, any knowledge he had will not be first hand, his knowledge probably comes from Old Nan's bedtime stories which are full of half truths at best.

I'm pretty sure some giants have been eating humans - just as some wildlings are.

If the Stark lands are harrassed by the wildlings - and they are - then Winterfell should learn what exactly happens there. Doesn't mean Jon does, but if the wildlings never abducted any wives then the Northmen actually should know that.

3 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Watch is made up of thieves and rapists and murderers, if you haven't noticed. Watch ended up as a convenient place to send the criminals to. Wildlings devolving into what they are probably has to do with Wall anyway. As I said I highly doubt that wildlings were there when the Wall was built. Even if they were there, they would've moved south with the threat of Others having just dealt with and in the memory of people so they would be allowed but no, they are north of it. They moved after the Wall was established.

There are no reports that the black brothers go out into wildling territory to rape and abduct women there, no matter what they are. All they do is not allow wildlings cross the Wall to raid and pillage their own lands (the Gifts) and the lands of the people the Watch is sworn to protect.

If you want to barter and trade at the Wall you are welcome to do so as a wildling - and you might even be allowed in if you come as a nice guy looking for work or a place to build a farm and plant some crops. The Gifts are largely empty, after all.

[Corvo the Crow]

5 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

And again - chances are very low that any of that includes an actual marriage. And, no, the First Night is not 'quite common' in the Seven Kingdoms - the lords who still follow this ugly practice do so clandestinely and face punishment should their crimes be discovered by their respective liege lords or the king.

 

Define actual marriage again please. As you have pointed out, marriage is about people knowing you are married. In a world where there was no proper record keeping and no official processes involved, it could be all that there was. We can even bring real historical examples even among the nobility. Harold Godwinson's marriage to Edith Swanneck was in the Danish manner and was not accepted by the church he was later married to Edith/Ealdgyth of Mercia because he wasn't considered married according to the church, even though it was a wide known fact. There are other such examples among Hungarian etc. nobility.

13 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Then it is rather odd that they would ever move north of the Wall. Back when it was built folks knew what it was for, so anyone consciously deciding to live on the turf of the Others (north of the Wall) would be a moron. And they would have continued to be morons to migrate there in later centuries when people still believed in the threat of the Others.

5 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Not due to their own preference. I was going to open a thread on it a month ago but couldn't bestir myself. My idea is that they were part of the Watch and Brandon the Breaker exiled them.

14 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

I'm pretty sure some giants have been eating humans - just as some wildlings are.

 

We haven't seen any wildlings eating meat though and even their teeth suggests a more vegetable died, lacking canines. 

17 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

If the Stark lands are harrassed by the wildlings - and they are - then Winterfell should learn what exactly happens there. Doesn't mean Jon does, but if the wildlings never abducted any wives then the Northmen actually should know that.

5 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

How harassed are they? We know hill clans suffer some, and Umbers. But there are only a handful of notorious raiders anyway and at least some are notorious not for the raiding itself but their excessive cruelty such as bag of bones or weeper. Most of what Jon knows would be from former happenings and not present day stuff. 

20 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

There are no reports that the black brothers go out into wildling territory to rape and abduct women there, no matter what they are. All they do is not allow wildlings cross the Wall to raid and pillage their own lands (the Gifts) and the lands of the people the Watch is sworn to protect.

 

Aren't there? We know of brothers fathering bastards on wildlings, I doubt that they look too favourably on bedding crows.

21 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

If you want to barter and trade at the Wall you are welcome to do so as a wildling - and you might even be allowed in if you come as a nice guy looking for work or a place to build a farm and plant some crops. The Gifts are largely empty, after all.

You might? Craster's mother was chased away, wasn't she? 

[Lord Varys]

2 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Define actual marriage again please. As you have pointed out, marriage is about people knowing you are married. In a world where there was no proper record keeping and no official processes involved, it could be all that there was. We can even bring real historical examples even among the nobility. Harold Godwinson's marriage to Edith Swanneck was in the Danish manner and was not accepted by the church he was later married to Edith/Ealdgyth of Mercia because he wasn't considered married according to the church, even though it was a wide known fact. There are other such examples among Hungarian etc. nobility.

Now you talk about third parties - the Church. We discuss a scenario where the groom has no idea that he is married. It also strikes one as silly to even contemplate that the wildlings would have a marriage concept that doesn't include consummation - real or symbolically. The idea of making a pledge or promise which is then later fulfilled is modernistic (and romantic) nonsense.

Now the idea that Jon may have sent signals that he is interested in Val and vice versa could make a certain sense. But the idea of marriage just doesn't.

2 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Not due to their own preference. I was going to open a thread on it a month ago but couldn't bestir myself. My idea is that they were part of the Watch and Brandon the Breaker exiled them.

Not sure on what tangible evidence something like that would be based ... I'd assume it more likely that the wildlings are the descendants of people who were allied with or worshipped the Others during the Long Night.

2 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

How harassed are they? We know hill clans suffer some, and Umbers. But there are only a handful of notorious raiders anyway and at least some are notorious not for the raiding itself but their excessive cruelty such as bag of bones or weeper. Most of what Jon knows would be from former happenings and not present day stuff.

If it was a thing that wives would be spared then the Northmen would know. After all, this is a thing that has been going on for generations.

2 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Aren't there? We know of brothers fathering bastards on wildlings, I doubt that they look too favourably on bedding crows.

The wildlings don't care about the concept of bastardy, meaning they would also have no problems with consensual relationships between crows and wildlings.

2 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

You might? Craster's mother was chased away, wasn't she? 

Apparently because she thought the Watch should care for her and Craster - which they did not have to do.

[Corvo the Crow]

4 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Now you talk about third parties - the Church. We discuss a scenario where the groom has no idea that he is married. It also strikes one as silly to even contemplate that the wildlings would have a marriage concept that doesn't include consummation - real or symbolically. The idea of making a pledge or promise which is then later fulfilled is modernistic (and romantic) nonsense.

 

Yes, I do and with good reason, to show how marriage practices can differ to the point of how even a marriage that was within the full knowledge of both sides and were done with both sides consent, got consummated, had several children born out of and around two decades past can be considered invalid.

Wildlings "consummate" their marriage before it happening, with the stealing.  In fact, given Ygritte's first was the boy with fire hair and he tried to steal her after but failed, it may even be "consummation"(if we can even call it that because no marriage) can come before the stealing as well, making it a three step process, they may have premarital sex but without the stealing, stealing happens and if stealing is successful, woman may or may not take to husband. Step 1 is not a must and even if step 2 is successful, step 3 isn't assured to happen.

Betrothals happened in medieval times, so not exactly modernistic.

4 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Now the idea that Jon may have sent signals that he is interested in Val and vice versa could make a certain sense. But the idea of marriage just doesn't.

6 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Signals of interest that he/she is aware of or stuff that Val/Jon perceived to be as such? In fact, forget about Val's signals, as she is the wildling party here whose customs we don't have the full knowledge of.

4 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Not sure on what tangible evidence something like that would be based ... I'd assume it more likely that the wildlings are the descendants of people who were allied with or worshipped the Others during the Long Night.

6 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Interesting idea, worshipping Others, but when and why did they stop and not only that but started to see them as evil?

It is Brandon who breaks the Watch, Brandon who lived further away than Umbers, Boltons, Clansmen etc. and he destroys all records. He may very well have sent the survivors beyond the wall both as a punishment and maybe to keep a secret. Remember Joramun helps Brandon, how did he cross the wall to help him? My idea is Joramun was a member of the Watch, he made Brandon aware of the situation and helped him take down the NK. Brandon as a thank you exiled them and that's why Joramun attacked later on.

4 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

If it was a thing that wives would be spared then the Northmen would know. After all, this is a thing that has been going on for generations.

6 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

What do Northmen know? Like Giants eating humans even though they are herbivores? I doubt they have given any consideration as to whether the wildlings steal their wives or not. I also really doubt that wildling raids are or could be such a big threat either there was barely 40.000 wildlings with Mance, their entire population, clansmen alone have contributed around 4000 men to Robb and Stannis combined, not mentioning those left at home, women etc. Among them few were experienced raiders and even fewer were notorious as bag of bones or weeper, most were regular folk so pathetic in feat of arms that Varamyr was able to establish his own little lordship with a dozen villages, four times as many villages as poor old ser Eustace, a fifth that of Lady Webber. No, you don't have armies of wildlings roaming around raping and robbing whatever they see. Gift depopulating has probably more to do with idiot queen Alysanne's interference ultimately resulting in mismanagement to the point of depopulation.

4 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

The wildlings don't care about the concept of bastardy, meaning they would also have no problems with consensual relationships between crows and wildlings.

7 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

True, they don't care but it exists. Whether caring or not caring about it is irrelevant in the case of a Crow though. In consensual relationship, at best they'll be called crowlovers and looked down upon.

 

4 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Apparently because she thought the Watch should care for her and Craster - which they did not have to do.

They did for Mance who wasn't even born of a brother but was just some Wildling boy whose family they killed. 

[Corvo the Crow]

9 hours ago, sweetsunray said:

Stannis explicitly says Val and Winterfell go hand in hand. Can't have one without the other.

 

He explicitly keeps on saying Princess as well. Anyone else, It'd not raise an eyebrow, but not him, he wouldn't after he was warned, so he knows something Jon doesn't.

Then there's also this

Quote

He is stone and she is flame. The king’s eyes were blue bruises, sunk deep in a hollow face. He wore grey plate, a fur-trimmed cloak of cloth-of-gold flowing from his broad shoulders. His breastplate had a flaming heart inlaid above his own. Girding his brows was a red-gold crown with points like twisting flames. Val stood beside him, tall and fair. They had crowned her with a simple circlet of dark bronze, yet she looked more regal in bronze than Stannis did in gold. Her eyes were grey and fearless, unflinching. Beneath an ermine cloak, she wore white and gold. Her honey-blond hair had been done up in a thick braid that hung over her right shoulder to her waist. The chill in the air had put color in her cheeks.

Reminding very much this

Quote

The ancient crown of the Kings of Winter had been lost three centuries ago, yielded up to Aegon the Conqueror when Torrhen Stark knelt in submission. What Aegon had done with it no man could say. Lord Hoster’s smith had done his work well, and Robb’s crown looked much as the other was said to have looked in the tales told of the Stark kings of old; an open circlet of hammered bronze incised with the runes of the First Men, surmounted by nine black iron spikes wrought in the shape of longswords. Of gold and silver and gemstones, it had none; bronze and iron were the metals of winter, dark and strong to fight against the cold.

 

9 hours ago, sweetsunray said:

Axell knows this, so does Patrek. Selyse is ignorant and stupid to try and make one of the men Stannis left with her Val's husband. Stannis doesn't even consider them worthy enough to be at his war council or on his march on WF. But Selyse insists on marrying one of those fools to Val, which they hope will make them Lord of WF.

Selyse and her court are idiots. Selyse I can forgive on this matter (and only in this matter, her behaviour in general is horrible) but how dumb you need to be to attack a giant?

bit off topic, She later marries Axell to Gerrick's eldest so must think Gerrick's daughter is the greater prize, him being "descended" from Raymun Redbeard. What she was hoping to achieve I don't even know, even if Wildlings worked as she thought, unlike Val there was no land attached.

Edited March 8, 2023 by Corvo the Crow

[Lord Varys]

11 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Yes, I do and with good reason, to show how marriage practices can differ to the point of how even a marriage that was within the full knowledge of both sides and were done with both sides consent, got consummated, had several children born out of and around two decades past can be considered invalid.

But this is not the scenario we talk here. We talk about the cliché of some outsider interacting with or joining some indigenous tribe or other culture he knows nothing about who knows the local customs and rules, and thus ends up doing or saying something that causes the people to view him and his actions not the way he intended them to be understood.

11 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Wildlings "consummate" their marriage before it happening, with the stealing.  In fact, given Ygritte's first was the boy with fire hair and he tried to steal her after but failed, it may even be "consummation"(if we can even call it that because no marriage) can come before the stealing as well, making it a three step process, they may have premarital sex but without the stealing, stealing happens and if stealing is successful, woman may or may not take to husband. Step 1 is not a must and even if step 2 is successful, step 3 isn't assured to happen.

Sorry, but here you make things up. Ygritte sleeps around with some dude. That means nothing. She can do that, because she is a free woman. Her lover wanting to steal here meant he wanted to make her is, take possession of her, so she would stay with him.

In my opinion, the wildlings just know free sex with no strings attached and the man claiming a woman for himself by taking her, usually against her will and by ways of overpowering or outsmarting her protectors.

The notion that a stolen woman can actually leave is nonsense. She doesn't have to be asked to be stolen, and there is no authority which could ensure she is returned to her family if she were not want to be with her stealer.

I also really see no reason why a stolen woman needs another marriage ceremony, nor why the wildlings would need one. The man already has his prize, and there was no bartering, no negotiating involved.

If there are marriage rites of some sort then because men make deals and arrange marriages where stealing plays no or only a symbolic part.

Again - I don't believe Jarl or Mance ever stole Val and Dalla.

11 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Betrothals happened in medieval times, so not exactly modernistic.

Betrothals also involve the parties involved knowing that a betrothal was made. But I meant that wildling culture would not include subtle things that revolve around fantasies about symbolic gestures leading to love, romance, and marriage. It is either a contract or something that's done with brute force in this world. Love still exists as a feeling in this culture, but it is obviously not the basis for stealing since most women have no say in the matter and most men likely never knew the woman (closely) who they are going to steal. Especially not during a proper raiding, but also not when you end up in some gathering of wildlings where there is trade done. I mean, what's the basis for such stealings then? Some guy sees an attractive woman he would like to fuck, perhaps he exchanges a couple of glances with her and talks to her for five minutes and then he abducts her from her family and friends and ends up living with her someplace else and she is stuck with him.

A brilliant way form lasting relationships.

The smallfolk down south don't have to cope with shit like that. They marry whoever they want ... if they marry at all. They don't rape and abduct the women from the second village to the right.

11 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Signals of interest that he/she is aware of or stuff that Val/Jon perceived to be as such? In fact, forget about Val's signals, as she is the wildling party here whose customs we don't have the full knowledge of.

Well, Val would have to be even thicker than Jon Snow if she were to actually believe he married her. One could see her using arguments like yours as BS to guilt Jon into fucking her or accepting her as 'his wife', possibly even against his will (although I think there is no chance that this character would act in such a deplorable and manipulative fashion).

But her actually believing Jon Snow married her is out of the question.

And it should be the same for Tormund who would most definitely tease Jon if he thought Val was his wife. And if others knew about that they would have let something slip, too. For them there would be no reason to keep this secret.

11 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Interesting idea, worshipping Others, but when and why did they stop and not only that but started to see them as evil?

Because thousands and thousands of years passed? I mean, you could just as well ask why Craster worships the Others when they are evil and also the mortal enemies of humanity.

Collaborators/friends/allies of the Others would be the only people left out of the coalition who actually built the Wall. The only men not counted among the realms of men the NW were going to protect - hence their placement north of the lands the Wall would protect.

Now with the Others gone for thousands of years chances are folks reverted back to the old ways of the First Men for lots of reasons, prominently among them could be the simple fact that handing your newborn sons to the Others is not something you enjoy doing, so when no Others came knocking at your door you eventually stopped praying or worshipping them since they were absent deities who didn't do anything for you, anyway. Then the weather getting better, the seemingly eternal winter broken, there being long summers, autums, springs ... all that would have helped them to move past those practices.

But clearly they were not completely forgotten. Craster remembered them. Perhaps his mother's people taught him. We don't know yet. And it stands to reason that there were some clandestine Others' worshippers in Mance's party. Craster cannot be the only one.

11 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said:

It is Brandon who breaks the Watch, Brandon who lived further away than Umbers, Boltons, Clansmen etc. and he destroys all records. He may very well have sent the survivors beyond the wall both as a punishment and maybe to keep a secret. Remember Joramun helps Brandon, how did he cross the wall to help him? My idea is Joramun was a member of the Watch, he made Brandon aware of the situation and helped him take down the NK. Brandon as a thank you exiled them and that's why Joramun attacked later on.

That seems to be rewriting the story into the Watch being evil when only the Night's King was. He and his supporters which weren't the entire Watch.

11 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said:

What do Northmen know? Like Giants eating humans even though they are herbivores? I doubt they have given any consideration as to whether the wildlings steal their wives or not. I also really doubt that wildling raids are or could be such a big threat either there was barely 40.000 wildlings with Mance, their entire population, clansmen alone have contributed around 4000 men to Robb and Stannis combined, not mentioning those left at home, women etc. Among them few were experienced raiders and even fewer were notorious as bag of bones or weeper, most were regular folk so pathetic in feat of arms that Varamyr was able to establish his own little lordship with a dozen villages, four times as many villages as poor old ser Eustace, a fifth that of Lady Webber. No, you don't have armies of wildlings roaming around raping and robbing whatever they see. Gift depopulating has probably more to do with idiot queen Alysanne's interference ultimately resulting in mismanagement to the point of depopulation.

The giants are pretty much gone these days - but the wildlings do raid the Gifts and Stark lands. Winterfell would receive reports about what was stolen, who and how many people were killed and abducted, etc. Some reports would be more thorough than others, of course, but they would know it if the wildlings rarely or never took any wives.

11 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said:

True, they don't care but it exists. Whether caring or not caring about it is irrelevant in the case of a Crow though. In consensual relationship, at best they'll be called crowlovers and looked down upon.

I'm not sure the wildlings do acknowledge that bastardy is a meaningful concept. Whatever marriage is to them, it is not something that is as binding or exclusive as it is south of the Wall. Men can have multiple wives, after all. With Mance a crow became the king of the wildlings, so their attitude towards them is not the way try to paint them. If they leave the Watch they are welcome among their ranks ... and that would also have been the case for Craster's dad.

Nobody views Dalla or Ygritte as a crowlover.

In fact, if the Watchmen could have wives and families some wildling would likely live gladly in their castles as their wives or mistresses. They would have no problem with that, one imagines. But this is not possible, so the only consensual relationships are between wildling women and former crows, i.e. oathbreakers.

11 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said:

They did for Mance who wasn't even born of a brother but was just some Wildling boy whose family they killed. 

Yes, well, we don't know who Craster's father was nor whether he ever returned to the Wall. But if he did his son could not possibly live there. But it actually doesn't seem to be the case since the mother seems to have turned to the Watch for help after the man abandoned her. She didn't follow him to the Wall.

And we also don't know why they didn't take the boy in. Perhaps she talked to some asshead. Or she made arrogant demands. Perhaps they didn't believe the child was the son of a black brother. Perhaps Craster was too little then and they had no wetnurse/surrogate mother for the child at the castles ... nor were they willing to keep one there.

Mance is yet a child when he is taken in, but he may have been somewhat older.

[Corvo the Crow]

18 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

But this is not the scenario we talk here. We talk about the cliché of some outsider interacting with or joining some indigenous tribe or other culture he knows nothing about who knows the local customs and rules, and thus ends up doing or saying something that causes the people to view him and his actions not the way he intended them to be understood.

No it's not. As said, it's as an example on how wildly marriage practices can differ and how it might not be considered marriage in the eyes of someone else even when both parties are full aware that they are marrying and had the intention of marrying and also part of what is or isn't a marriage discussion. Your claim is that they are not married on the basis that Jon was unaware, but we don't know how wildling customs work.

31 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

We talk about the cliché of some outsider interacting with or joining some indigenous tribe or other culture he knows nothing about who knows the local customs and rules, and thus ends up doing or saying something that causes the people to view him and his actions not the way he intended them to be understood.

Except that this cliché has already happened. Jon was very much unaware when he stole Ygritte and even after he's spent some time with them and know what amounts to stealing, he is still unaware of the fact that he has stolen Val, probably several times over now. He may just as well have unwittingly brokered a marriage contract according to the wildling customs. We don't even know if men even have a say on marriage after having stolen someone, after all, why steal someone if you don't want her? After stealing it may be woman's choice to take to husband or not but man have no other choice if woman wants it. Remember it is Munda who takes Ryk to wife, not the other way around.

 

33 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Sorry, but here you make things up. Ygritte sleeps around with some dude. That means nothing. She can do that, because she is a free woman. Her lover wanting to steal here meant he wanted to make her is, take possession of her, so she would stay with him.

In my opinion, the wildlings just know free sex with no strings attached and the man claiming a woman for himself by taking her, usually against her will and by ways of overpowering or outsmarting her protectors.

The notion that a stolen woman can actually leave is nonsense. She doesn't have to be asked to be stolen, and there is no authority which could ensure she is returned to her family if she were not want to be with her stealer.

Earlier you were talking about wildlings being patriarchal, sorry but sleeping around, having abortion decisions by yourself etc. doesn't strike too patriarchal to me. Being able to steal is a good quality that's wanted and again we know from Ygritte that if a wildling woman doesn't want it, she may even kill her spouse.

 

Quote

Jon caught her wrist. “What if the man who stole you drank too much?” he insisted. “What if he was brutal or cruel?” He tightened his grip to make a point. “What if he was stronger than you, and liked to beat you bloody?”

“I’d cut his throat while he slept. You know nothing, Jon Snow.” Ygritte twisted like an eel and wrenched away from him.

I know one thing. I know that you are wildling to the bone. It was easy to forget that sometimes, when they were laughing together, or kissing. But then one of them would say something, or do something, and he would suddenly be reminded of the wall between their worlds.

“A man can own a woman or a man can own a knife,” Ygritte told him, “but no man can own both. Every little girl learns that from her mother.” She raised her chin defiantly and gave her thick red hair a shake. “And men can’t own the land no more’n they can own the sea or the sky. You kneelers think you do, but Mance is going t’ show you different.”

Plain and simple. You mention the lack of an authority that will bring the women back to her family but you also forget the lack of the very same authority that would prevent, or in failure to do so punish that woman from murdering her abusive kidnapper husband. What good is stealing a woman if you can't even trust her to do house work and entrust her with basic tools in fear of getting murdered? 

38 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

I also really see no reason why a stolen woman needs another marriage ceremony, nor why the wildlings would need one. The man already has his prize, and there was no bartering, no negotiating involved.

Good point. Again, we know Munda took Ryk to husband. So with no reason at all and the women obviously having a choice here, perhaps the only one who has the choice on that matter, men having already made their choice by way of stealing, there may not be a ceremony at all. Once the man has stolen the woman and she decided that they are husband and wife, that may be it. No ceremony involved, just the decision of woman and woman alone. 

 

52 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Well, Val would have to be even thicker than Jon Snow if she were to actually believe he married her. One could see her using arguments like yours as BS to guilt Jon into fucking her or accepting her as 'his wife', possibly even against his will (although I think there is no chance that this character would act in such a deplorable and manipulative fashion).

But her actually believing Jon Snow married her is out of the question.

 

3 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Jon stole her, there's no denying that part. If the choice is woman's alone as said above, then there's no belief involved.

 

So in the mind of a wildling, if Jon didn't want to marry her, then he shouldn't have stolen her and not once but at least twice, both beyond the wall, during battle and after the wall, stealing her from the tower and sending to Tormund. Unlilke the first time, he has no rights for a free pass either(not that he got one the first time anyway), he can't claim he has no knowledge of wildling customs and stole her without knowing, he knows full well that what he did amounts to stealing but is so know-nothing, he can't comprehend. 

Quote

Tormund shook his shaggy head. “What fools you kneelers be. Why did you steal the girl if you don’t want her?”

“Steal? I never …”

“You did,” said Tormund. “You slew the two she was with and carried her off, what do you call it?”

“I took her prisoner.”

“You made her yield to you.”

“Yes, but … Tormund, I swear, I’ve never touched her.”

“Are you certain they never cut your member off?” Tormund gave a shrug, as if to say he would never understand such madness. “Well, you are a free man now, but if you will not have the girl, best find yourself a she-bear. If a man does not use his member it grows smaller and smaller, until one day he wants to piss and cannot find it.” -AsoS Jon II

 

"Freedom of the castle you shall have, but I regret to say you must remain a captive. I can promise that you will not be troubled by unwanted visitors, however. My own men guard Hardin's Tower, not the queen's. And Wun Wun sleeps in the entry hall." -ADwD Jon Xı

 

 

Val's marriage prospects have been talked many times but not once do I remember seeing her talking about marriage, the only time we get something coming from Val's mouth is through Gilly, saying Val said she would marry whoever Stannis wanted(can you guess who's the lucky guy in Stannis mind?)and at the time she was Stannis' prisoner. Yes Stannis may also have stolen her, in wildling mentality. We haven't seen these marriages talked before her either. 

 

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

And it should be the same for Tormund who would most definitely tease Jon if he thought Val was his wife. And if others knew about that they would have let something slip, too. For them there would be no reason to keep this secret.

3 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

But... he does? He is essentialy telling him "come on, what are you waiting for" and telling Toregg flat out no. 

 

 

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

That seems to be rewriting the story into the Watch being evil when only the Night's King was. He and his supporters which weren't the entire Watch.

3 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

How come? I just said that it's Joramun a member of the watch helping the Breaker Where's the evil in that? Brandon may have just sent them away anyway as a punishment from this happening in the first place. 

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

Because thousands and thousands of years passed? I mean, you could just as well ask why Craster worships the Others when they are evil and also the mortal enemies of humanity.

Collaborators/friends/allies of the Others would be the only people left out of the coalition who actually built the Wall. The only men not counted among the realms of men the NW were going to protect - hence their placement north of the lands the Wall would protect.

Now with the Others gone for thousands of years chances are folks reverted back to the old ways of the First Men for lots of reasons, prominently among them could be the simple fact that handing your newborn sons to the Others is not something you enjoy doing, so when no Others came knocking at your door you eventually stopped praying or worshipping them since they were absent deities who didn't do anything for you, anyway. Then the weather getting better, the seemingly eternal winter broken, there being long summers, autums, springs ... all that would have helped them to move past those practices.

But clearly they were not completely forgotten. Craster remembered them. Perhaps his mother's people taught him. We don't know yet. And it stands to reason that there were some clandestine Others' worshippers in Mance's party. Craster cannot be the only one.

Then being their descendants, then perhaps instead of trying to run south, they should do as their ancestors did. Whole lot easier than what they are trying to do right now and a whole lot more of them would've survived.

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

I'm not sure the wildlings do acknowledge that bastardy is a meaningful concept. Whatever marriage is to them, it is not something that is as binding or exclusive as it is south of the Wall. Men can have multiple wives, after all. With Mance a crow became the king of the wildlings, so their attitude towards them is not the way try to paint them. If they leave the Watch they are welcome among their ranks ... and that would also have been the case for Craster's dad.

Nobody views Dalla or Ygritte as a crowlover.

 

They do acknowledge bastardy, they are aware of the concept, it's that hey don't care much for it. Polygamy is a thing, you have multiple spouses but they are still acknowledged as spouses, can't be compared with bastardy

Some groups may welcome them, not all

Quote

"Qhorin Halfhand." The girl looked half a child beside him, but she faced him boldly.

"Tell me true. If I fell into the hands of your people and yielded myself, what would it win me?"

"A slower death than elsewise."

Jon was able to join only because he didn't kill Ygritte earlier and killed Qhorin. Even then he wasn't allowed to join on the spot, he was taken to Mance. 

[sweetsunray]

Suggestion for the wedding ceremony:

could it be after a man steals a woman, but sets her free to visit or search for her family/people, and she then chooses to return to the man who stole her, in front of witnesses? 

[Corvo the Crow]

4 hours ago, sweetsunray said:

Suggestion for the wedding ceremony:

could it be after a man steals a woman, but sets her free to visit or search for her family/people, and she then chooses to return to the man who stole her, in front of witnesses? 

Not that it is necessary to have one but if they have a sort of ceremony what you suggest is entirely possible with the choice to marry seemingly being the females even after the stealing.

[Lord Varys]

22 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

No it's not. As said, it's as an example on how wildly marriage practices can differ and how it might not be considered marriage in the eyes of someone else even when both parties are full aware that they are marrying and had the intention of marrying and also part of what is or isn't a marriage discussion. Your claim is that they are not married on the basis that Jon was unaware, but we don't know how wildling customs work.

We can be sure that those customs include that people know they marry. And as I said - marriage as a concept is public. Yet your curious examples of Jon and Val being married revolve around them doing stuff in private or semi-private contexts. There is no chance for them being married that way.

Jon and Ygritte were also never married. They were together, but the word marriage never comes up. They think they are very close, so if we pretend this is a closeness akin to marriage then marriage were a pretty meaningless concept to the kind of wildling Ygritte was.

And, as I try to say here - I don't think the wildlings believe in romantic shit like 'marriage is for life'. If you can steal a woman, you can also discard her. And if you are free as a wildling then as a woman you can also leave your man if you dare. So whatever their concept of marriage is, it must be less restrictive than the standard model.

22 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Except that this cliché has already happened. Jon was very much unaware when he stole Ygritte and even after he's spent some time with them and know what amounts to stealing, he is still unaware of the fact that he has stolen Val, probably several times over now. He may just as well have unwittingly brokered a marriage contract according to the wildling customs. We don't even know if men even have a say on marriage after having stolen someone, after all, why steal someone if you don't want her? After stealing it may be woman's choice to take to husband or not but man have no other choice if woman wants it. Remember it is Munda who takes Ryk to wife, not the other way around.

Jon never stole Val. That's just a fantasy in your mind. And he also never stole Ygritte, and she knew it. They just use it to manipulate him. Of course, the way how Jon treated Ygritte piqued her interest in him - she is into this exotic little plaything from down south - but even she must be aware that neither Jon nor his buddies attacked and killed her group because they wanted to steal themselves some women.

She also know that the crows don't have wives and father no children, so Jon Snow most certainly never stole her. Nor Val, who also knows who and what Jon Snow is.

22 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Earlier you were talking about wildlings being patriarchal, sorry but sleeping around, having abortion decisions by yourself etc. doesn't strike too patriarchal to me. Being able to steal is a good quality that's wanted and again we know from Ygritte that if a wildling woman doesn't want it, she may even kill her spouse.

They are patriarchal but they are also a liberal society. They do have fighting women and especially they have the power and strength and standing to do what they want. I'm not sure why a woman like Ygritte would be even protected, since she is a spear wife herself, but Val actually stealing Jarl kind of implies that women (warriors) among the wildlings treat men they fancy like men treat women they want to be their property/pets.

Harma Dogshead was a female war chief - she certainly would not need male protection nor would she allow herself to be stolen. Like a powerful man, she would take what she wants, be it man or woman.

In any case, the example of Ygritte and her affair shows wildling women can and do sleep around with no strings attached. Which is why I also believe that Munda and Ryk were in love before he finanized their bond by stealing her.

22 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Plain and simple. You mention the lack of an authority that will bring the women back to her family but you also forget the lack of the very same authority that would prevent, or in failure to do so punish that woman from murdering her abusive kidnapper husband. What good is stealing a woman if you can't even trust her to do house work and entrust her with basic tools in fear of getting murdered? 

LOL, sorry, now, that's one of those ridiculous things I've had to deal with here for a very long time. Powerful men do have family, kin, friends, and followers. Like Robb Stark started a war to free/avenge his dad, the family/friends/followers of a murdered wildling chieftain would also avenge his death on the slut who murdered him in his sleep.

Now, there certainly are scenarios where such an abusive rapist 'husband' would be without friends or family. I'm not denying that this is an option. But just like in our worlds women struggle all the time getting away from abusive husbands, it would be much harder to do this in shithead wildling world.

22 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Good point. Again, we know Munda took Ryk to husband. So with no reason at all and the women obviously having a choice here, perhaps the only one who has the choice on that matter, men having already made their choice by way of stealing, there may not be a ceremony at all. Once the man has stolen the woman and she decided that they are husband and wife, that may be it. No ceremony involved, just the decision of woman and woman alone. 

There is not the slightest indication that the woman chooses her husband. That would be the case if she was an active part in all that if there was a ritual strengthening her role. Her not murdering her husband doesn't mean she consented. Just as her not running away means she wanted to be his wife.

I mean, let's talk Dany and Drogo? Does her getting wet in her wedding mean she was not coerced into giving consent? Does she not running away when Drogo starts to rape her after their first night mean he actually didn't rape her and she enjoyed what he did to her?

22 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Jon stole her, there's no denying that part. If the choice is woman's alone as said above, then there's no belief involved.

LOL, again, this doesn't even make sense in a wildlings-only scenario. So I'm a war chief and raid some neighboring village. I kill some weaklings and drag some ugly girl out of a burning building because I'm not a total ass. She is clearly mine now. Does this mean I'm stuck with her as my fucking wife even if I have not the slightest interest in her? Just because she might suddenly have the hots for me?

No society would work like that.

22 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

So in the mind of a wildling, if Jon didn't want to marry her, then he shouldn't have stolen her and not once but at least twice, both beyond the wall, during battle and after the wall, stealing her from the tower and sending to Tormund. Unlilke the first time, he has no rights for a free pass either(not that he got one the first time anyway), he can't claim he has no knowledge of wildling customs and stole her without knowing, he knows full well that what he did amounts to stealing but is so know-nothing, he can't comprehend. 

Val was never stolen by Jon. She was always the prisoner of Stannis Baratheon.

22 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Val's marriage prospects have been talked many times but not once do I remember seeing her talking about marriage, the only time we get something coming from Val's mouth is through Gilly, saying Val said she would marry whoever Stannis wanted(can you guess who's the lucky guy in Stannis mind?)and at the time she was Stannis' prisoner. Yes Stannis may also have stolen her, in wildling mentality. We haven't seen these marriages talked before her either. 

Val is a prisoner of war, not anyone's wife. If the wildlings don't know that concept, they should learn it. But I'm sure they know it because lots and lots and lots of other men, women, and children of their folk happen to be prisoners of war, too. And the daughters they have are not suddenly all Stannis' wives nor the wives of whatever man-at-arms or knight happened to capture them.

I mean, please, take a step back and put the text before you fantasies.

22 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

But... he does? He is essentialy telling him "come on, what are you waiting for" and telling Toregg flat out no. 

I've just gone back to read this stuff - this is banter, not serious. And Val herself makes it clear she is going to geld Jon if her were trying to steal her. She is no man's wife at that point, and has likely never been stolen before (since she actually stole Jarl). Val also does acknowledge Jon's vows and seems to respect them.

22 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

They do acknowledge bastardy, they are aware of the concept, it's that hey don't care much for it. Polygamy is a thing, you have multiple spouses but they are still acknowledged as spouses, can't be compared with bastardy

It does seem to be the case that wildling men fucking wildling women can do so without caring for the children from such unions. In that sense bastardy is a meaningless concept.