Catelyn is an idiot

[Phat Walda]

And that qualifies as child abuse, damn, jon should go see a doctor...

I'm sorry, I think that's a shitty way to treat someone, and yes, I think NEVER CALLING A CHILD BY THEIR NAME, and instead using a classist word like that, IS abusive. You can disagree without being a dick.

[The GRRumbler]

If you're in a home with a child, particularly your husband's child, and you refuse to speak to that child, refuse to even call the child its name, you cast cold looks and make your displeasure known in subtle ways, what in the name of the seven would you call that. If it was another adult that Cat was doing this to, then I might put it down to being rude and distant, but when she's directing it towards a child, then yes, that fits the label of abuse. Because those kinds of actions can damage a child's self-esteem and self worth. There's a reason why you have to be careful concerning children's physical and emotional development. Things that adults can brush off can be extremely harmful when applied to children.

And then to put the cherry on top of all this, Cat declares that as soon as Ned hits the Kingsroad, she wants Jon out of Winterfell. So you never tried to make the kid feel at home, and now you're insisting that he leave the only home he's ever known? If you consider my balking at that an unfair bias towards Cat, then we can end our conversation right here because clearly we're coming at this from two wildly different perspectives on what is fair and not fair.

Well in the first place this is not a house this a castle, there's a lot of places to be, and a lot of people to be with.

Second you can't focus their relationship solely from a familiar point of view, this is a ruling family we're talking about, that Rules over a region that's almost half the entire continent, there's a lot of power in stake here.

As i said, Jon could be fostered in one of the other Lords househoulds.

If that "abuse" was done you have to look at it from the political perspective, it was necessary that Cat kept his status in winterfell clear for everyone, not ust the family, but the entire household, this is power we're taliking about, Ned was naive enough not to think of this of things, look at were that attitude took him.

[OnionAhaiReborn]

Catelyn risked her life for Brienne by interfering in the battle between armed knights when she had no weapon nor fighting skills - she hit one of those fighting brienne with a brazier. She risked her life again taking Brienne with her.out of the camp. And by helping Brienne she negated all chances of getting a deal with the Tyrells, which was a major political blow for her side. If that's not going out of the way to help someone outside of your family, I don't know what is.

And yeah, words are wind and all, but Martin wrote the sept scene for a reason after all. What was the point of it if not to show us something about Catelyn's character?

Again, saving Brienne is her finest hour. I would only disagree in the sense that Catelyn had no shot of an alliance with the Tyrells because she is smart enough to know that she will also be suspected of murdering Renly, probably reasonably given that people are never going to believe that a shadow did it and Robb is a 'traitor' in their eyes and Catelyn is his mother. I think she goes into react and escape mode and takes Brienne with her and yea, this is her most awesome moment. But I still don't think it's going out of her way.

The sept scene does say something about Catelyn to us, you're right. It says that in this quiet moment she thinks some nice thoughts about people. And while that's a good thing, it's not an action and it also does not outweigh all of her other thoughts that get under my skin.

[The GRRumbler]

Ok to refresh my memory I've gone back and found it.

ASoS pg 1088:

"That morning he called it first. 'I'm Lord of Wintefell!' he cried, as he had a hundred times before. Only this time, this time, Robb had answered, "You can't be Lord of Winterfell, you're bastard-born. My Lady mother says you can't ever be the Lord of Winterfell.'

I actually didn't remember the full extent of this quote so I'm glad you forced me to go back and read it. It seems like Catelyn is actively trying to put a wedge between Jon and Robb here, which I think is another example of mistreatment

and then ASoS pg 1089:

"It was not Lord Eddard's face when he saw floating before him though; it was Lady Catelyn's. With her deep blue eyes and hard cold mouth, she looked a bit like Stannis. Iron, he though, but brittle. She was looking at him the way she used to look at him at Winterfell, whenever she had bested Robb at sowrds or sums or most anything. Who are you? that looked had always seemed to say. This is not your place. Why are you here?"

So I think it's abusive enough that a child feels this way from the way an adult has looked at him. But I don't really see how having remembered her looks specifically shows that she never referred to him as a 'bastard' in his presence on another occasion. He is not remember everything that happened in his whole time at Winterfell. We do know that when King Robert came, Jon knew that he wasn't allowed to sit with them because Lady Catelyn spoke up. Presumably he knows this because she said so in his presence, and presumably there were other occassions when this type of situation arose.

I would now ask you to go back and read the post where I say why I think it is wrong to assume that bastards are threats to inheritance.

This is a example of mistreatment? from your perspective.

To me is a example of why she was so explicit in showing his position in relation to his brothers, because one day Jon could be screaming i am the lord of winterfell! And not be kiding at all.

As i say, this is the rulling family in the North, these are matters of power, not only family, and is good to see how efficient and foresighted Cat was being, point for the Lady in the North.

[The GRRumbler]

I'm sorry, I think that's a shitty way to treat someone, and yes, I think NEVER CALLING A CHILD BY THEIR NAME, and instead using a classist word like that, IS abusive. You can disagree without being a dick.

u mad?

http://www.aspioresdanet.xpg.com.br/wp-content/uploads/TrollFace.png

[OnionAhaiReborn]

This is a example of mistreatment? from your perspective.

To me is a example of why she was so explicit in showing his position in relation to his brothers, because one day Jon could be screaming i am the lord of winterfell! And not be kiding at all.

As i say, this is the rulling family in the North, these are matters of power, not only family, and is good to see how efficient and foresighted Cat was being, point for the Lady in the North.

Again, please go back and read the post where I say why I think it is wrong to believe that bastards are a threat to inheritance. I'm sure you won't agree with it, but at least we won't be repeating the same points over again.

[Ygrette]

Maybe we all disagree on what "abuse" is.

Agreed, she never accepts him or loves him. Agreed, she feels angry towards him although he's not to blame. Agreed, it would have been a lot nicer of her if she could have just accepted and loved him (as we all do, I hope!). Agreed, she doesn't trust him although, as we all know, he's the most honorable little cutie in Westeros. She's wrong there. She's cold and makes him feel unloved.

But coldness towards someone else's child still does not equal abuse in my eyes. Also, reminding him of his status in her house, is not abuse in my eyes. It's cold, but not abuse. At least, for me.

...and I think it's time for me to leave it at that. Some posters show a level of emotional involvement that makes me a little uncormfortable.

@Onion

Thanks for your kind words and I can return the favour by saying you and "Imp" have been the most pleasant "adversaries" in this thread and I have no doubt that we will meet again in another thread and maybe this time on the same side. ;)

[The GRRumbler]

Again, please go back and read the post where I say why I think it is wrong to believe that bastards are a threat to inheritance. I'm sure you won't agree with it, but at least we won't be repeating the same points over again.

Well, then we have to agree to disagree, from my perspective it would be very dangerous to keep a bastard so close to the family, you think differently, and that closes it.

[The Storm Queen]

I tend to be slightly disturbed by the fact that people sing R. Tarly´s praise or openly declare their Tywin-fanboyness although these men are the worst fathers ever while Catelyn is condemned for one single moment of weakness during a deep crisis. It makes me wonder if being a mother is seen as much more integral to a female character then being a father for a male one. Randall and Tywin can openly abuse their children yet people are often more eager to focus on their other "accomplishment" while we already can see in this threat that Catelyn´s treatment of Jon seems to be most important incident concerning her arc or character.

Concerning the Jon thing my two cents. Catelyn is wrong from a moral PoV and she would be a better person if she would be able to be nicer to Jon. Yet I can totally sympathize with her situation and even justify her behaviour to a great extent. David Selig makes a better case than I could so I leave it with that. Only one thing: I honestly believe that most conflicts tend to deteriorate if the cause of the problem is repressed and not spoken about. Catelyn did the right thing in confronting Ned about Jon but unfortunately Ned used all of the power he owned in a patriarchal society and suppressed Cat´s justified desire for the truth. Hell, he made her frightened and I think we all agree that Cat is a brave woman who is not easy to fright. I have the deepest sympathy for Cat in this situation because the power dynamic is so messed up....

[brashcandy]

Look, we can all agree to disagree, but let me just say this. Cat's hatred against Jon was personal. It went way beyond him simply being a bastard and her trying to protect her children's interests. It was a sustained campaign of silent warfare against a child, whom she saw as representing Ned's love for another woman. This is why she could never yield, why she could never show an ounce of pity or understanding, because Jon wasn't simply a bastard, he was a threat to her very sense of security of being as a wife and a woman.

[Imp Beyond the Wall]

I really don't see that. I've reread very recently her last few chapters before her death and she's very much human in every way. Yeah, she's not in a good mood for obvious reasons, but she feels all kinds of strong emotions. She tries to keep them in check, but doesn't always succeed. How exactly was she lacking in humanity?

By the end...after the RW...she is totally lacking in humanity. that's the point. I think her arc up until then is in large part her eating her own heart out always trying to be hard, trying to make the hard choices, etc. It's a theme. That's my theory. If some of you think I am FOS, that's ok.

[The GRRumbler]

Look, we can all agree to disagree, but let me just say this. Cat's hatred against Jon was personal. It went way beyond him simply being a bastard and her trying to protect her children's interests. It was a sustained campaign of silent warfare against a child, whom she saw as representing Ned's love for another woman. This is why she could never yield, why she could never show an ounce of pity or understanding, because Jon wasn't simply a bastard, he was a threat to her very sense of security of being as a wife and a woman.

I don't think so, she has the right to be offended by Ned's actions, but she did confronted him for them.

Towards Jon she felt a grudge, so what? She has flaw, how dare her...

But i think what really motivated her to make Jon's position explicit was the fear of a future attempt by him to usurp his brothers of the title of Warden of the North, this has happened before in this series, Blackfyres, Ramsay Snow, for example, so it makes sense that she takes such preemptive actions.

Yes this is personal, but its also about power.

[OnionAhaiReborn]

I tend to be slightly disturbed by the fact that people sing R. Tarly´s praise or openly declare their Tywin-fanboyness although these men are the worst fathers ever while Catelyn is condemned for one single moment of weakness during a deep crisis. It makes me wonder if being a mother is seen as much more integral to a female character then being a father for a male one. Randall and Tywin can openly abuse their children yet people are often more eager to focus on their other "accomplishment" while we already can see in this threat that Catelyn´s treatment of Jon seems to be most important incident concerning her arc or character.

I would be disturbed by this as well, but I haven't seen anyone in this thread praise Tywin/Randyll and then bash Cat. I know some people do it, but I know I haven't, and I don't think I've seen any of my fellow anti-Cat people do it in this thread. As for the Jon thing dominating the discussion, I've tried to write about the other reasons I don't like Catelyn.

I'm not saying you were calling me out directly, but I think this becomes a very passionate issue because people like me will resent anything even approaching the implication that I'm sexist for disliking Catelyn. It's why I try to make very certain to distance myself from over-the-top Cat hatred. But in the case of some posters, no matter what I say about Catelyn it will get turned into me calling her a 'monster' or 'bad mother,' and I haven't said these things.

[The GRRumbler]

I would be disturbed by this as well, but I haven't seen anyone in this thread praise Tywin/Randyll and then bash Cat. I know some people do it, but I haven't. As for the Jon thing dominating the discussion, I've tried to write about the other reasons I don't like Catelyn.

I'm not saying you were calling me out directly, but I think this becomes a very passionate issue because people like me will resent anything even approaching the implication that I'm sexist for disliking Catelyn. It's why I try to make very certain to distance myself from over-the-top Cat hatred. But in the case of some posters, no matter what I say about Catelyn it will get turned into me calling her a 'monster' or 'bad mother,' and I haven't said these things.

Often when people reply to you they are not refering to you only, they are refering to whats most frequently thrown against cat.

But you never called her that? No was trying to say that you did, only showing that such reaction to her actions would be exaggerated.

[Phat Walda]

Some posters show a level of emotional involvement that makes me a little uncormfortable.

:blushing:

I don't mine people disagreeing, but when it devolves into a, "ORLY? LAWL" sarcasm fest, I get seriously annoyed. It's obnoxious, and doesn't further the conversation. :ack:

[David Selig]

I'm not buying this argument in several places. Of course I understand that in Westeros bastards are not treated well and the royal family, especially Queen Cersei, would very likely have been offended by having Jon in their presence. The whole society is unfair to bastards in general. I don't see how this excuses Catelyn at all. Somehow the rest of Winterfell saw fit to treat Jon nicely even though he was a bastard and for most of them not their flesh and blood. So it's really fairly clear that this is Catelyn expressing her personal anger over the slight to her honor, and not Catelyn being a stickler about the rules of class. She is using these rules to stick it to this poor kid who has done absolutely nothing to her. And so when GRRM makes it clear that over the years she made very certain to let everyone know that Jon was unequal to her children, she is abusing a child- even if it's in a less direct way than constant berating.

I really dislike the argument that Jon, as a bastard, was a threat to her children's inheritance. For starters, I think it's unjust that bastards can't inherit anything. But setting that aside (because I don't place the burden of fixing society's ills on Cat or any other single person), the association between bastardy and treachery or a threat to 'proper' succession is spurious. People will undoubtedly be able to come up with examples of bastards challenging trueborn children for succession and inheritance, but there are far more examples of threats from non-bastards. Renly tries to usurp Stannis' claim, for example, even though Renly was not a bastard. Perhaps Cassana did a poor job of putting Renly in his youngest-brother place? Maybe Cat shouldn't be grieving for Bran at all, because he is a potential challenge to the rights of her eldest, Robb. But more than that, most of the threats are actually going to come from outsiders. There is not actually anything about bastards that make them more threatening. People end up coming to a point where they are defending Cat's suspicions of bastards, which is actually a false suspicion.

I am not sure what's your point. Sure, bastards aren't the only threat about inheritance, nobody said they were. But they are a threat. What's the logic in ignoring one threat just because they are others?

Besides, apart from Robert's rebellion, the only major conflicts in Westeros in the last 100+ years (and before the start of the books) that we know of, are the Blackfyre rebellions. In terms of major conflicts, bastard related succession struggles have caused more problems than anyone else. It's only natural that this makes people extra wary of bastards.

[The Storm Queen]

I would be disturbed by this as well, but I haven't seen anyone in this thread praise Tywin/Randyll and then bash Cat. I know some people do it, but I know I haven't, and I don't think I've seen any of my fellow anti-Cat people do it in this thread. As for the Jon thing dominating the discussion, I've tried to write about the other reasons I don't like Catelyn.

I'm not saying you were calling me out directly, but I think this becomes a very passionate issue because people like me will resent anything even approaching the implication that I'm sexist for disliking Catelyn. It's why I try to make very certain to distance myself from over-the-top Cat hatred. But in the case of some posters, no matter what I say about Catelyn it will get turned into me calling her a 'monster' or 'bad mother,' and I haven't said these things.

Sorry, Sorry Sorry! I did not want to attack you in a personal way, I talked about overall fandom tendencies but English is not my mother tongue thus I often fail to communicate in an exact manner ...

It is only an observation that I have made often: Discussions about Cat seems to be stuck at the Jon issue in most cases while male characters who are really bad fathers never get "reduced" to their role as fathers to such a great extent..

[OnionAhaiReborn]

I am not sure what's your point. Sure, bastards aren't the only threat about inheritance, nobody said they were. But they are a threat. What's the logic in ignoring one threat just because they are others?

Besides, apart from Robert's rebellion, the only major conflicts in Westeros in the last 100+ years (and before the start of the books) that we know of, are the Blackfyre rebellions. In terms of major conflicts, bastard related succession struggles have caused more problems than anyone else. It's only natural that this makes people extra wary of bastards.

The point I am trying to make is that threats are the only constant, and bastards are no more threatening than anyone else. Westeros is a dangerous place, and bastards are no more dangerous than anyone else. So yes, bastards are a threat. So are younger brothers. So are uncles. So are total strangers. They are all equally threatening.

edit:

Sorry, Sorry Sorry! I did not want to attack you in a personal way, I talked about overall fandom tendencies but English is not my mother tongue thus I often fail to communicate in an exact manner ...

It is only an observation that I have made often: Discussions about Cat seems to be stuck at the Jon issue in most cases while male characters who are really bad fathers never get "reduced" to their role as fathers to such a great extent..

No, no, don't worry you didn't offend me :) . I understood that your post wasn't directed at me. I was just trying to say that sometimes it can feel like I'm being called sexist for disliking Cat when I am lumped in with other over-the-top Cat haters. But I understood that you were not doing this.

[The GRRumbler]

The point I am trying to make is that threats are the only constant, and bastards are no more threatening than anyone else. Westeros is a dangerous place, and bastards are no more dangerous than anyone else. So yes, bastards are a threat. So are younger brothers. So are uncles. So are total strangers. They are all equally threatening.

So why is Cat wrong in taking measures to prevent such threat? One can argue if such measures were exaggerated but the fact tha they were necessary is beyond discussion for me.

[OnionAhaiReborn]

So why is Cat wrong in taking measures to prevent such threat? One can argue if such measures were exaggerated but the fact tha they were necessary is beyond discussion for me.

Because it's silly to pick out one single person out of everyone on the continent who could be a potential threat. Since Jon is no more threatening than anyone else, why should Cat be spending her time making sure that he understands that he cannot inherit Winterfell. She didn't feel the need to make sure that Roose Bolton knew he could not rightfully become Warden of the North or Lord Paramount of the North or to make sure Ramsay Snow understood that he could not rightfully become Lord of Winterfell. But these are the people who actually stole her children's inheritance. The point is that if Jon is an equal threat to absolutely everyone else, you're as much wasting your time telling him to know his place as you are telling anyone else to know their place. You're pissing in the wind. And in this case the piss is blowing back into a child's face. But I think it was actually much more personal than political between Cat and Jon anyway.