One small fact: Joffrey was not evil

[Raksha the Demon]

That's another argument I've had on here, about when a girl becomes a woman. Nowadays in Western culture, that's usually when she's finished education, can vote, get married, get a job, drink alcohol and everything like that without parental permission, so I'd say about 18 for England. Some might say 16, as you can legally become a parent then, but I think that's too young. In Westeros, and certainly in times past, it would be when they begin menstruating. Does that make them an adult, or are they still a child? To me, they're still children - I know what I was like at 13, but girls like Arya and Dany are so much more mature than I was because they had to be. So it's all about perspective, I suppose. It's disgusting to us that a grown man would marry and have sex with a 13 year old girl, but if it wasn't frowned upon then, I see no problem from their perspective.

Tbh I forget how young they all are in these books :lol:

I don't think that thirteen is always the norm for arranged marriages in Westeros. Catelyn and Cersei were married well after thirteen, and not, I think, because the Rebellion interfered (Catelyn was married before or during it), I think at seventeen or eighteen. Lyanna was betrothed to Robert at thirteen, but there was no talk of a marriage anytime soon. Ned seems to disapprove of the idea of betrothing eleven-year-old Sansa to Joffrey; and Robert clarifies, without much prompting, that the marriage can take place a few years later.

Of course, the Lannisters think nothing of marrying a 14-year-old boy to an infant (Tyrek and little Ermesande); not to mention 12-year-old Sansa to Tyrion, but hey, at least Sansa's been a 'woman' for three whole months or whatever....And good ol' Viserys, who cheerfully tells his frightened 13-year-old sister that he'd have her servicing Drogo's entire khalasar if it would give him back the crown sooner. Some families are better about observing traditions that allow a pubescent girl to grow up a little before the wedding night than others...

[deleted01]

I don't think that thirteen is always the norm for arranged marriages in Westeros. Catelyn and Cersei were married well after thirteen, and not, I think, because the Rebellion interfered (Catelyn was married before or during it), I think at seventeen or eighteen. Lyanna was betrothed to Robert at thirteen, but there was no talk of a marriage anytime soon. Ned seems to disapprove of the idea of betrothing eleven-year-old Sansa to Joffrey; and Robert clarifies, without much prompting, that the marriage can take place a few years later.

Of course, the Lannisters think nothing of marrying a 14-year-old boy to an infant (Tyrek and little Ermesande); not to mention 12-year-old Sansa to Tyrion, but hey, at least Sansa's been a 'woman' for three whole months or whatever....And good ol' Viserys, who cheerfully tells his frightened 13-year-old sister that he'd have her servicing Drogo's entire khalasar if it would give him back the crown sooner. Some families are better about observing traditions that allow a pubescent girl to grow up a little before the wedding night than others...

Oh yeah, but with Dany there was a rush, for Viserys wanted the army and wanted to get going, so he married her off very quickly. The same with Sansa - didn't they want her married to Tyrion before Joffreys' wedding? And there was the issue of Robb possibly winning the war.

For Catelyn, the realm was in peace when she was betrothed to Brandon, the same for Lyannas' betrothal to Robert. I suppose that was the more likely custom - you were betrothed between say, 12 and 15, then married after that (presumably once the girl had 'flowered'). But in times of war, customs are thrown out of the window. Not that I think it's right and acceptable, but the Lannisters seem to have their own rules - and as the royal family, they see fit to live by them.

I think it also underlines the madness of the Targaryens and the Lannisters, and enforced the idea in the readers' minds that the Targaryens should never come back into power, and that the Lannisters should be thrown down. The Starks are the noble family, who abide by law and custom, and do not wed frightened young girls to an older dwarf, or a teenager to an infant, or brother to sister, so we root for them a bit more. This is of course my opinion, it may well not be the case for some readers.

[Nausicaä]

Reading this made my shoes fall off my feet and I had to hold on to my ears. I guess and hope I'm misreading this post.

Animals that are cut open don't purr and stay calm. They show signs of fear, pain, distress, As would seven year old boys when someone cut them open.

Children are at a very young age able to know and feel what seems right. ETA They also can feel pain and distress in others. if not there may be something terribly wrong with them and red flags should be raised, as Robert knew.

He was extremely persistent if he didn't enjoy it as I assure you it wouldn't have been an easy task.

I can believe that a kid does not totally understands what would happen when he cuts a cat open. But, I do not believe that he does not see that somethings wrong as soon as he starts to cut the cat open. A cat can make a lot of noise and will try to scratch you if you hurt them.

Okay, I admit I didn't put enough thought into it and I'm sorry. Joff should have realized that was he was doing was wrong when he was doing it.

It's just a distressing situation to think about it.

Given the setting and the wealth of parental guidelines presumably available in Westeros I still feel a punch in the face was justified.

In the modern world a better solution would most likely be fostering and a lot of therapeutic intervention.

I still don't agree with this, though..

[FanTasy]

That's another argument I've had on here, about when a girl becomes a woman. Nowadays in Western culture, that's usually when she's finished education, can vote, get married, get a job, drink alcohol and everything like that without parental permission, so I'd say about 18 for England. Some might say 16, as you can legally become a parent then, but I think that's too young. In Westeros, and certainly in times past, it would be when they begin menstruating. Does that make them an adult, or are they still a child?

Off topic, but I can't resist to eact, because in a lot of threads the age of women is considered important to uphold moral and ethical standards - and rightly so, in my opinion. Having said that, in my country (Western Europe, rich) the gaps between the biology of women and the moral and ethical standards concerning sexuality are growing wide apart.

Young girls are having their first menstruation at a younger age. Years earlier than some decades before.

Still marriage and the average age that women choose to get a child is postponed. Sometimes postponed in a way that women have trouble to become pregnant at all in a 'natural' way.

I shudder when thinking that my daughter is fit to conceive and having a child at 12 or 13, even if 'nature' yells at me that this clearly is what nature wants.

Luckily in rich modern society we have laws that make what is natural in a biological sense, unwanted in a legal sense.

But this makes the debate about when women are fit to be married and have children a cultural debate. It is in a biological sense not unnatural to have sex for a 12 or 13 year old, nature tells us this is an age for women to be 'fit' to produce children.

In our time in modern society we don't want this to happen - for very sound 'unnatural' reasons.

[deleted01]

Off topic, but I can't resist to react, because in a lot of threads the age of women is considered important to uphold moral and ethical standards - and rightly so, in my opinion. Having said that, in my country (Western Europe, rich) the gaps between the biology of women and the moral and ethical standards concerning sexuality are growing wide apart.

Young girls are having their first menstruation at a younger age. Years earlier than some decades before.

Still marriage and the average age that women choose to get a child is postponed. Sometimes postponed in a way that women have trouble to become pregnant at all in a 'natural' way.

I shudder when thinking that my daughter is fit to conceive and having a child at 12 or 13, even if 'nature' yells at me that this clearly is what nature wants.

Luckily in rich modern society we have laws that make what is natural in a biological sense, unwanted in a legal sense.

But this makes the debate about when women are fit to be married and have children a cultural debate. It is in a biological sense not unnatural to have sex for a 12 or 13 year old, nature tells us this is an age for women to be 'fit' to produce children.

In our time in modern society we don't want this to happen - for very sound 'unnatural' reasons.

One idea I could use here is that in times past, young girls did not have the educational opportunities that they do now, and there was no effective birth control. Children are expected to stay in school until they are 16 at least, and I think it's just increased to 18 in England. While some still have children before they leave school, it is not as common as it was. Also, young girls had more responsibilities back then than they do now. My sister is 14, and she has zero responsibilities (I was raised very differently, but that's irrelevant) - she might have a few chores but if she chooses not to do them, they don't get done. She only has to go to school and be responsible for her own education to an extent, such as doing homework. In previous times, young girls would be expected to learn how to make house and rear children, how to do everything a "good wife" should - needlework, cooking, cleaning, raising children, basic education perhaps, but that's about it. They had very little opportunity to do anything other than be a wife and mother.

I agree with you that the thought of my sister having a child at this age makes me shudder, but mostly because she is not ready. Naturally, her body may be preparing itself (yuck) but she does not have the knowledge nor the stability (of a husband, a household, as they would have in other times) to raise a child properly. It definitely is cultural - I'm pretty sure that in some Eastern cultures, girls are married off as young as 12 or 13. Who am I to judge their culture? To me, and to my countrys' laws, it's disgusting and the girl should have the opportunity to do something else with her life, but in other cultures those opportunities are not there (and we've all seen news stories about the abuse women suffer in some cultures) and they do what they have been raised to do.

[Tall Tyrion Lannister!]

I suggest you read about the relationships between:

Aeron-Euron

Aegon 5-Aerion brightflame

So you see it can be entirely possible for GRRM..

is the Aeron one proven, or just some speculation.

[Raksha the Demon]

Off topic, but I can't resist to eact, because in a lot of threads the age of women is considered important to uphold moral and ethical standards - and rightly so, in my opinion. Having said that, in my country (Western Europe, rich) the gaps between the biology of women and the moral and ethical standards concerning sexuality are growing wide apart.

Young girls are having their first menstruation at a younger age. Years earlier than some decades before.

Still marriage and the average age that women choose to get a child is postponed. Sometimes postponed in a way that women have trouble to become pregnant at all in a 'natural' way.

I shudder when thinking that my daughter is fit to conceive and having a child at 12 or 13, even if 'nature' yells at me that this clearly is what nature wants.

Luckily in rich modern society we have laws that make what is natural in a biological sense, unwanted in a legal sense.

But this makes the debate about when women are fit to be married and have children a cultural debate. It is in a biological sense not unnatural to have sex for a 12 or 13 year old, nature tells us this is an age for women to be 'fit' to produce children.

In our time in modern society we don't want this to happen - for very sound 'unnatural' reasons.

Didn't I read somewhere, in these forums I think, and elsewhere, that the age of 12-13 is definitely not a natural age for childbearing, despite menstruation having occurred - unless by nature, one means a higher rate of problems with pregnancy, childbirth, and the young mother's body afterwards - diminished fertility and other, worse things? I think a better age, if a girl is married young, to begin a first pregnancy would be at least 15 and 16 or 17 even better. Leaving the morality of forcing little girls (emotionally they are little girls still) to become mothers at 12, if the practical goal is to get healthy babies out of a young wife, one would have better chances if the girl-bride's first pregnancy was at sixteen instead of twelve.

[Fragile Bird]

As I recall, there is some mention somewhere that daughters in Westeros will get betrothed at an early age but the parents will often wait until they are 15 or 16 for the wedding to occur. And Jaime and Cersei are about 32 in AGOT, and Joffrey is 12, so Cersei was 20 when she finally married (although 15 when she seduced Jaime).

So she was pretty old by Westeros standards when she had Joffrey. Joffrey was not evil, she was!

Edit: and at 15 she must have had access to moon tea, but how? She went home after having sex with Jaime and asked the maester to brew some up, and the maester didn't tell big daddy Tywin? Does anyone find this believable?

[clover]

All I can think of is that he had a sort of condescending reverence for the Hound, seen less and less by the time Sandor skipped KL.

Also, I thought about things happening the other way around. What if Cersei died before him? My honest opinion? I think he would have either been a basketcase or on the other hand, even more violent and angry due to fear. Most of the stuff he did was still because he always had that security that his mother was around and had his back. Why do I picture her dying and Joff crying for his mommy and not taking it to well.

Okay, when he was king he didn't always listen to her, but other people do that too, but he was testing the water, knew he could get away with it, and if he messed up he always had the security of knowing mommy would help bail him out.

[FanTasy]

Didn't I read somewhere, in these forums I think, and elsewhere, that the age of 12-13 is definitely not a natural age for childbearing, despite menstruation having occurred - unless by nature, one means a higher rate of problems with pregnancy, childbirth, and the young mother's body afterwards - diminished fertility and other, worse things? I think a better age, if a girl is married young, to begin a first pregnancy would be at least 15 and 16 or 17 even better. Leaving the morality of forcing little girls (emotionally they are little girls still) to become mothers at 12, if the practical goal is to get healthy babies out of a young wife, one would have better chances if the girl-bride's first pregnancy was at sixteen instead of twelve.

Off topic, but yes, there is a higher risc risk of complications with teenage mothers. Possible explanations: related problems like drugs, alcohol, smoking, bad nutrition, bad health care and not fully developed reproductive organs.

[deleted01]

Didn't I read somewhere, in these forums I think, and elsewhere, that the age of 12-13 is definitely not a natural age for childbearing, despite menstruation having occurred - unless by nature, one means a higher rate of problems with pregnancy, childbirth, and the young mother's body afterwards - diminished fertility and other, worse things? I think a better age, if a girl is married young, to begin a first pregnancy would be at least 15 and 16 or 17 even better. Leaving the morality of forcing little girls (emotionally they are little girls still) to become mothers at 12, if the practical goal is to get healthy babies out of a young wife, one would have better chances if the girl-bride's first pregnancy was at sixteen instead of twelve.

I had a discussion about this somewhere, Margaret Beaufort, mother to King Henry 7th, gave birth at like 13? And she was utterly ruined by it. So while I don't think it's advisable that girls as young as that have children, if they're married, without contraception, it'd be down to luck. Didn't Catelyn get pregnant with Robb on the first go? If Sansa and Tyrion had consummated their marriage, even if they didn't do it again after, she might have fallen pregnant and there's sod all anyone could do about it - apart from drink some moon tea I guess. Oh, just saw that that can prevent pregnancy. Well, in that case I've just babbled about a load of crap xD I can't imagine it being 100% effective though, not even our contraception nowadays is that.

[The Bastard of Bolton]

FYI I am not trying to get people to agree with me that punching children in the face is a viable solution to animal cruelty and a good parenting technique to employ.

I don't have children so no one needs to worry, I was just stating that given my perception of that time period the disciplining of children wasn't as fleshed out as it is today, the thought process is completely unrelated to how we handle situations and that for a great lot of people in the realm I bet this would have been a reasonable reaction. Apart from Boltons and Freys.

[Revan Baratheon]

is the Aeron one proven, or just some speculation.

Subtle hints given in a similiar manner as loras-renly.I hope HBO dosent make it stark clear or anything.. :ack:

[deleted01]

FYI I am not trying to get people to agree with me that punching children in the face is a viable solution to animal cruelty and a good parenting technique to employ.

I don't have children so no one needs to worry, I was just stating that given my perception of that time period the disciplining of children wasn't as fleshed out as it is today, the thought process is completely unrelated to how we handle situations and that for a great lot of people in the realm I bet this would have been a reasonable reaction. Apart from Boltons and Freys.

Well, there's still the age-old argument going on (in England, anyway) about whether or not it's right to smack your children. I agree with what you said about the time period - we have a lot of 'beating children' being mentioned (something the Queen of Thorns says to Sansa, "If you ever have a son, be sure to beat him regularly so he learns to mind you", something like that), which seemed to be quite accepted as a form of punishment (as it was in times past). Again, before I get jumped on, a punch/smack in the face from a large, grown man to a small child is NOT what I'm talking about, and is indisputably wrong.

[Ororo727 Jon Snow Fangirl]

I thought this thread was supposed to be funny?

[Dena]

I thought this thread was supposed to be funny?

It used to be...

[1234567]

Didn't I read somewhere, in these forums I think, and elsewhere, that the age of 12-13 is definitely not a natural age for childbearing, despite menstruation having occurred - unless by nature, one means a higher rate of problems with pregnancy, childbirth, and the young mother's body afterwards - diminished fertility and other, worse things? I think a better age, if a girl is married young, to begin a first pregnancy would be at least 15 and 16 or 17 even better. Leaving the morality of forcing little girls (emotionally they are little girls still) to become mothers at 12, if the practical goal is to get healthy babies out of a young wife, one would have better chances if the girl-bride's first pregnancy was at sixteen instead of twelve.

Yep this has come up before. There is a historical urban legend that girls in Medieval Europe were married off at 12- 14 as normal practice because of famous cases like Margaret Beaufort. Looking at it in depth, the poorer you were the later you got married, with the general population getting married in their late teens. Further up the social tree marriages happened earlier, and a lot of girls got married at 15 or 16. Some did get married before 15 (and like Margaret had children very early) but most who married young, didn't have children until a lot later and agreements not to consummate the marriage until the girl is older are recorded. Given the lack of contraception it would make sense that those married young, did in fact wait until they were older for the marriage to be consummated.

Also not all husbands were unfeeling towards their wives (a la Robert). One of the few Medieval female authors, Christine de Pizan talks about when she was married at 15 and her husband not sleeping with her on their wedding night and waiting until they got to know each other better. There is a good book on the subject called "Medieval maidens: young women and gender in England, 1270-1540, by Kim Phillips.

[deleted01]

Also not all husbands were unfeeling towards their wives (a la Robert). One of the few Medieval female authors, Christine de Pizan talks about when she was married at 15 and her husband not sleeping with her on their wedding night and waiting until they got to know each other better. There is a good book on the subject called "Medieval maidens: young women and gender in England, 1270-1540, by Kim Phillips.

Yes, I looked into that book, and the others you recommended for me when this subject last came up, they're a bit on the expensive side but they're in my basket, awaiting a time when I have money :lol:

[Morte]

Yep this has come up before. There is a historical urban legend that girls in Medieval Europe were married off at 12- 14 as normal practice because of famous cases like Margaret Beaufort. Looking at it in depth, the poorer you were the later you got married, with the general population getting married in their late teens. Further up the social tree marriages happened earlier, and a lot of girls got married at 15 or 16. Some did get married before 15 (and like Margaret had children very early) but most who married young, didn't have children until a lot later and agreements not to consummate the marriage until the girl is older are recorded. Given the lack of contraception it would make sense that those married young, did in fact wait until they were older for the marriage to be consummated.

Just to through one thing into this discussion: At least for antiquity the urban lagend derivates from the fact that the ancient medical writings state that a girl becomes a woman when she gets her menarche (they messed the beginning of puberty up with the end, yes), and so can be married and bear children at that point.

BUT not only was this a theoretical age (just as in medieval times) but also modern historians for a long time did not take into account that most girl would got their menarche a lot later then girls in modern societies, as the menarche is triggered by the propotion of body fat has in the total weight of the girl's body.

So girls in medieval or ancient societies would got their menarche around 14 or even later at 16, as with less fat and protein in the food, their body would take longer to reach the needed propotion of fat needed.

[Fragile Bird]

Just to through one thing into this discussion: At least for antiquity the urban lagend derivates from the fact that the ancient medical writings state that a girl becomes a woman when she gets her menarche (they messed the beginning of puberty up with the end, yes), and so can be married and bear children at that point.

BUT not only was this a theoretical age (just as in medieval times) but also modern historians for a long time did not take into account that most girl would got their menarche a lot later then girls in modern societies, as the menarche is triggered by the propotion of body fat has in the total weight of the girl's body.

So girls in medieval or ancient societies would got their menarche around 14 or even later at 16, as with less fat and protein in the food, their body would take longer to reach the needed propotion of fat needed.

That's a good point. I've been meaning to mention that in our modern society we have gotten used to the fact that girls are menstruating earlier and earlier. There was a sad paper I read at least 10 years ago that talked about girls as young as 8 getting their periods.

I'd also like to point out that in one of the opening scenes in Romeo and Juliet, the party that Juliet's father throws and is crashed by Romeo and Mercutio, Juliet's father talks about the fact he won't let his daughter get married until she's 15 or 16. And this would have been written when, 1595ish?