Sensitive Topic Right Here!

[Lord Littlefinger's Lash]

I don’t see Littlefinger as a pedophile, but as a really creepy guy!!!

Yeah he clearly was scarred psychologically by the duel with Brandon, being raped by Lysa and then being disowned by Hoster whom I think he would have considered a foster father. Basically a similar version of what happened with Theon.

[Maroucia]

Yeah he clearly was scarred psychologically by the duel with Brandon, being raped by Lysa and then being disowned by Hoster whom I think he would have considered a foster father. Basically a similar version of what happened with Theon.

True, but he was not fleshed so I don’t pity him.

[Lord Littlefinger's Lash]

True, but he was not fleshed so I don’t pity him.

fleshed?

[All Men Must Rhyme]

Flayed?

[Maroucia]

flayed. Sorry.

[Maroucia]

English is not my language. :dunno:

[Nukelavee]

All right, I was mistaken in trying to give Robert a conscience.

The quote is from her innermost thoughts and she makes consistent mention of these instances both in internal monologue and externally to Ned Stark.

I shall borrow Ygritte's words here:

"If you kill a man, and never meant', he's just as dead"

Ygritte pestered Jon to have sex and eventually he agreed-there was no coercion involved and Jon could say no freely and safely.

Why would you bother giving Robert a conscience? So you could use that to imply it was rape? No. He was a brute, and a letch, and an unpleasant person, but, by the laws of the land, not a rapist. It those laws that matter, not our, and not our feelings.

Cersei? What you said doesn't disprove what I did - She's guilty of treason, incest, and adultery - of COURSE she's going to justify her crimes to herself and the Hand by claiming she had every reason to do what she did.

What point does Ygrittes quote serve? How does that mean anything to what this topic is about.

There is no way Jon could say no. Sure, she lied in his favour once, but, gee, no woman has ever lied when she's been spurned, or simply stopped lying?

It's not rape, but it's hardly moral.

Which is my point - by our standards, some of this stuff is unpleasant, and immoral, possibly. But it isn't immoral for Westeros.

[mormont]

Why would you bother giving Robert a conscience? So you could use that to imply it was rape? No. He was a brute, and a letch, and an unpleasant person, but, by the laws of the land, not a rapist. It those laws that matter, not our, and not our feelings.

Er, this is a book and we are the readers. It seems very odd to suggest that our feelings don't matter.

If we understand what Robert did as rape, then surely it's fair for us to discuss the incident in those terms, to say that Robert is a rapist, and to judge him as such. Whether he would have been prosecuted for it under Westerosi law is a fair point, but in contrast, a very limited one: it tells us about Westerosi legal and moral standards but it tells us nothing (or at any rate very little) about the character. It's a rather arid avenue of discussion that leads to nowhere interesting at all. To suggest that that's more important, in some way, than our understanding of and reaction to what happened... well, I can't get behind that at all.

Besides, legal or not, there is every indication that Robert understood that what he did to Cersei was wrong. Cersei certainly believed it was wrong. Jaime and Ned would both have understood it as wrong too, though they'd obviously have reacted in very different ways. So even by Westerosi standards, even by his own standards, Robert was guilty of doing something immoral here.

[David Selig]

Well, I don't want to go off on too large of a tanget about Sandor Clegane, but it is pretty clear that Ned was disgusted that Sandor ran down and violently killed Mycah, only to joke that he didn't run very fast. Their society certainly was brutal and murdering people happened, but Ned was visibly shocked at Sandor's actions which shows he was excessively brutal even by Westeros standards. Sandor does appear much softer later on, but this image has always stuck with me.

Where do you get that from? Ned's only reaction in the scene was a relief that it was Mycah's and not Nymeria's body that the Hound's horse was carrying.

Robert was clearly a rapist. He knew it was wrong yet still continued to abuse his wife sexually.

[scotcat]

It's easy to look at a culture that isn't - be they literary, historical or modern - our own and sit in judgement. Yes, I think we can all agree that rape is wrong, that rape within marriage is wrong, that sex with underage girls is wrong, but in the context of the books it is a common and legal thing.

In westeros, once a girl had her first period she was marriagable, as wrong as a grown man having sex with a 13/14 year old is to us it was common practice. Likewise, once a man and woman were married, the wife's body belonged to her husband so any sex - willing or otherwise - was legal.

[Gala]

There was no evidence to sustain the deserter's claim that the Others were back; Ned had no reason to believe a man who had apparently run from his duty. Hasn't the death penalty been used on at least some deserters in our world for millenia, though mercifully it is employed less often now? Sadly for the men of the Night's Watch, desertion is a crime punishable by death; and as the Warden of the North, it was Ned's duty to enforce that penalty. He didn't do it because he enjoyed decapitating people, or had some personal vendetta against the poor guy.

Agree. I've never understood why Will didn't turn back to NW in the first place to say what he saw, but deserted! May be I missed something? I understand that he was very-very afraid of what he saw, but wouldn't it be better to go to NW and report what he saw, rather than to run and say about the Others before his execution. I understand why Ned did his duty, but why Will didn't go to NW? First I thought he went mad, but he was quite normal (he even understood and some kind of excepted punishment for deserting).

Back on topic: As I understand everyone agrees that society rule in Westeros is that a wife must have sex with her husband (queen is obliged to this duty even more than anyone else); Dany/Drogo first night is rather an exception for an arranged marriage and she indeed changed their "routine"; probably, there is a subject of marital rape and abuse in Westeros, but it is more of subjective one (remember Jaime's reaction on Aerys actions with his wife, he wanted to protect a weak woman from being forced and hurt, which makes me respect him).

As for Robert and Cersei...those who have family a member, who has problem with drinking and is not a bad person, I mean not evil or sadistic by nature, would probably understand me: at fist Robert was really ashamed of what he did to Cersei, alcohol is a cruel thing, it changes people, they become absolutely different and thing that would make feel Robert or any other drunk ashamed earlier became normal for him/them (I do not justify at any point I am just telling what I know from personal experience). Even the best of the best can become an unbearable pigs and bastards because of alcohol.

Robert/Cersei relationship were absolutely awful from the beginning, they were not able to make any kind of connection with each other, neither of them ever loved, respected (I presume Robert understood everything after she smashed a glass or what that was with wine at his face) or cared for each other. Everybody agrees that It was a political arranged marriage, but Cersei didn't tell even once that she didn't want to have sex with him, because she was raised to know that it's not what she can say, instead she did everything to make him out of her bed (was cold etc), which in her situation was a smart move (because she didn't want him and didn't love him), but it was her duty to give her husband and a king children whatsoever - a society rule. The same thing with any arranged marriage in Westeros, nobody would say against husband's right (except for the wife's family, which is also doubtful in some cases). That's what I saw. Robert wasn't very bad person, he shouldn't become a king and I think shouldn't marry at all, he is a kind of man, who would be a teen all his life, with drinking and whoring added later when he became older.

People in this forum came from different countries, with different traditions and each one of us have our own experiences no matter what age person is and I am sure that almost everyone would agree that nowadays such situations like Robert/Cersei (and Westerosi traditions in general) are very rare (there are countries which make arranged marriages and women are obliged to give children to their husbands and are considered almost like their property) and unpleasant for most societies/nations/countries. But those are modern "civilized" societies, while Westeros is not, moreover, it is a fictional world with its own rules. So I think Robert/Cersei situation is not considered a marital rape in their society at all, probably like any other arranged marriage in Westeros. On the other hand, things like Bolton made to "Arya" would be considered awful and won't be accepted easily, but still won't be considered as a marital rape by Westerosi. I presume their is not such thing like marital rape in Westeros at all.

But, thank God, rape is considered a crime there, though, we didn't see much of punishment for that in the series. Or I just don't remember?

[lostinwesteros]

Popular topic - lots of posts here since I logged off last night. I did have one other thought this morning, though, that I wanted to post. When reading about Sansa and Tyrion's wedding, I was singularly impressed by Tyrion's decision not to force Sansa to submit to having sex with him when all custom/laws gave him every right to [constituting what I'd view as marital rape]. Beyond that, he gave her his word that he would not force her to until/unless she consented, and before that, he acted to save her the humiliation of the 'bedding' tradition. I would have been a Tyrion fan even without this story line, but these actions really added respect for him IMO. And, again, I appreciate the thread which gives us a chance to look seriously at these sensitive issues of the series.

[Gala]

Popular topic - lots of posts here since I logged off last night. I did have one other thought this morning, though, that I wanted to post. When reading about Sansa and Tyrion's wedding, I was singularly impressed by Tyrion's decision not to force Sansa to submit to having sex with him when all custom/laws gave him every right to [constituting what I'd view as marital rape]. Beyond that, he gave her his word that he would not force her to until/unless she consented, and before that, he acted to save her the humiliation of the 'bedding' tradition. I would have been a Tyrion fan even without this story line, but these actions really added respect for him IMO. And, again, I appreciate the thread which gives us a chance to look seriously at these sensitive issues of the series.

I felt the same.

[deleted01]

Here I go:

I just want to mention that I like Sandor. All he did, he did in his duty, and he's nowhere near as bad as some characters. I'm glad we got to see his other side. And during the scene with Sansa, I never got the impression that he would rape her, but later he claims that he would have? Well either way, he didn't, when he quite easily could have.

This is the point I wish to make. Westeros is based on a time where women had absolutely no say, and the laws were very differently. In England, to be convicted of a crime you must commit the guilty act, and have the intent to commit the crime. In Westeros, marital rape isn't a crime, so there is no intent, do you see what I mean? From my modern, Western point of view, Robert's "forcing" of Cersei is wrong, but a lot of what Cersei does is wrong as well - and I cannot help but see Cersei as an unreliable narrator, so I don't fully believe everything she says, like some apparently people do. To me, Robert's treatment of Cersei was wrong, but I can understand that in the time in which this is based upon, it wasn't wrong, so I take it as it is. Maybe I'm just a hard bastard and so can view things objectively in this way :dunno:

Drogo didn't rape Dany. I'm absolutely disgusted that some people still try to insist this (and the TV show didn't help). The consent to marriage is the consent to sex, and while people have quite rightly argued that Dany didn't consent, she didn't have much choice. I cannot and will not condemn Drogo in this way - he was a sick fuck in other ways, raping and killing his way around to Vaes Dothrak - but he could have taken Dany as the Dothraki do, "as a dog takes a bitch", and never cared for her feelings. Instead, he tried to make it as pleasant as he possibly could, and Dany ended up enjoying it and falling in love with him. The following times they had sex might be seen as rape, yes, I can see that, Dany was obviously very distressed because she was being hurt, and terrified, but like I mentioned above, Drogo did not see this as wrong. So how can we condemn him, if he didn't see it as wrong, and his society didn't either? Westeros and Essos are, of course, fictional parallels of our own world, in some ways. Westeros does not accept slavery, rape is against the law (though some seem to be above the law), hitting your wife is looked down upon, etc. In Essos, slavery is prevalent, women have no rights and no one to go to in the case of a rape - I don't even know that they have any laws.

There have been some very interesting arguments and it has been surprisingly civil, and I hope to keep it that way of course, but there's my opinions on some of the points. It is not fair for us to place our modern standards on the events without considering the morals, ethics and laws of the time on which ASOIAF is based.

[ChromeWeasel]

Rape is rape is wrong, regardless of whether a society considers it acceptable in some circumstances. However, I would say that in these cases the blame lies partly with the social system as a whole for condoning it, rather than solely with the individual who commits rape. Same applies to torture, murder, etc. Point is, a lot of ordinary, decent people will go along with all sorts of horrible shit if it's considered acceptable in their society; this doesn't make them monsters, but it also doesn't mean that those actions are ok.

The concept that rape is rape, and they are all the same, causes some issues. That's a pretty silly statement when you think about it. Some examples:

Five Dothraki forcing themselves on an old woman.

One Iron Islander kidnapping a woman for a salt-wife.

A Wildling capturing and conquering a non-Wildling for a wife.

A Wildling capturing and conquering a Wildling for a wife.

A nobleman having sex with his bride at his wedding with all the hoopla of the consummation ceremony.

The King claiming his 'rights' and having sex with the Queen.

An 18 year old having sex with his a 16 year old girlfriend.

Two drunken people having sex with each other.

All those acts can be construed as rape. Some of them are very debatable. To consider them all the same things by saying that 'rape is rape' is ludicrous. Getting brutally gang-raped by 5 men is not the same thing as an 18 year old having sex with his 16 year old boyfriend.

The same thing goes for torture. Saying that 'torture is all the same' is silly, and suggests a serious lack of understanding for the physical torture that was really inflicted on people in the middle ages. There are things like sleep deprivation, and then there is being drawn out on the rack. Calling both things torture and calling them equal is ridiculous.

[Woman of War]

This is a topic where I am thoroughly insecure how to answer. For example in RL, and in a democratic country with a working law system, Ned would be a war criminal for executing a deserter. Even in wartimes there is to be a trial for deserters, and in most democratic countries of the world death penalty doesn't even exist in wartimes.

Now I have to agree that Ned, as maybe other wardens of the North, had no choice to act otherwise, thus guaranteeing the strength of the Nightwatch. Actually the whole scene, Ned and his talk with Bran, was a very strong one and, despite my political convictions, I never had the impression that Ned was wrong acting the way he did. And I do not want to make the comparison to Sandor who killed a child because he was ordered to and enjoyed it. "I was was ordered to" is the excuse of Eichmann, but, horrible as it is, you cannot expect every person to line up with the victims and get her- or himself killed as well instead of becoming the killer. Although this is certainly not the case with Sandor, he would not have been killed for not killing or simply "not finding" the boy. (before any unnecessary debate about Sandor starts: I think as well that he is an interesting literary character).

And then the topic of forced and arranged marriages: about once a month you read in my local big city newspaper about a young woman who got beaten, hurt or even killed by family members for not agreeing with the plans they had for her, in most cases refusing to get married or having sex outside a marriage (as well as insisting on a higher qualification). So there is a very thin line between a forced and an arranged marriage, when a woman has not much choice not to agree.

A woman herself may be willing to follow the traditions of her social group because she perceives them as right and there is no other way for her without losing all support or her life. The sex that follows may be called "consensual" but it contains imo so many elements of pressure that in my opinion it is rather close to rape. And this happens in so many parts of the world, as I said even somewhere down my street probably.

Now back to Westeros: What really shocked me was the reaction of Catelyn and Robb talking about Sansa's marriage to Tyrion. They of course did not know that the marriage had never been "consummated" (how I HATE that expression!). There was no "oh my god, the poor child, got raped, far too young for sex, she must be so afraid and alone, i hope she isn't in pain" , the imo normal reactions of mother and brother. I cannot give their exact words by heart but it was more like: "they took her from us, they stole her, they'll make her have Lannister kids, they broke the promise to return her". I had the horrible impression they saw Sansa by then: "she is not one of us anymore". If she had indeed returned to Cat, would Sansa still have been Cat's little girl and Robb's beloved sister or only the relative married to the wrong man, what a shame, spoiled goods, cannot be married to one of Robb's allies anymore.

No, their reaction struck me as thoroughly loveless, I was shocked when I read it.. I can only explain that by the fact that a daughter is owned by the family she is married to, this is the way it works and the moment a daughter marries, her parents lose ownership and the daughter is part of the husband's family. She is chattel and can be stolen or sold in agreement between two families, her own agreement is irrelevant. Even to loving parents a daughter is the object, never the subject in that deal and for their own emtional protection parents better distance themselves from a married daughter, she is not theirs anymore, unnecessary emotional investment. So incredibly cruel to us but reality in Westeros and in many parts of our world, where a daughter in law has to forget about her own parents but has to do everything for her husband's parents.

This does not mean that it was not expected by a man to treat his wife in a decent manner but listening if she refused to have sex was certainly not part of the business deal, after all you don't mistreat your most valuable horse either.

I would certainly not get so enraged about this topic if it were a strange exotic custom from a time far, far away, like e.g. cannibalism. Forgive my rant but things like that are sad reality in our world.

[Erinne]

The concept that rape is rape, and they are all the same, causes some issues. That's a pretty silly statement when you think about it. Some examples:

Five Dothraki forcing themselves on an old woman.

One Iron Islander kidnapping a woman for a salt-wife.

A Wildling capturing and conquering a non-Wildling for a wife.

A Wildling capturing and conquering a Wildling for a wife.

A nobleman having sex with his bride at his wedding with all the hoopla of the consummation ceremony.

The King claiming his 'rights' and having sex with the Queen.

An 18 year old having sex with his a 16 year old girlfriend.

Two drunken people having sex with each other.

All those acts can be construed as rape. Some of them are very debatable. To consider them all the same things by saying that 'rape is rape' is ludicrous. Getting brutally gang-raped by 5 men is not the same thing as an 18 year old having sex with his 16 year old boyfriend.

The same thing goes for torture. Saying that 'torture is all the same' is silly, and suggests a serious lack of understanding for the physical torture that was really inflicted on people in the middle ages. There are things like sleep deprivation, and then there is being drawn out on the rack. Calling both things torture and calling them equal is ridiculous.

Excuse me but what on earth are you even talking about? When did I ever claim that all acts that could be possibly construed as rape are exactly the same thing or that all forms of torture are equally bad? I mean, I'd come up with a counterargument but I'm honestly at a loss as to how you came to that conclusion from my post or what point you're trying to make.

[Woman of War]

The concept that rape is rape, and they are all the same, causes some issues. That's a pretty silly statement when you think about it. Some examples:

Five Dothraki forcing themselves on an old woman.

One Iron Islander kidnapping a woman for a salt-wife.

A Wildling capturing and conquering a non-Wildling for a wife.

A Wildling capturing and conquering a Wildling for a wife.

A nobleman having sex with his bride at his wedding with all the hoopla of the consummation ceremony.

The King claiming his 'rights' and having sex with the Queen.

An 18 year old having sex with his a 16 year old girlfriend.

Two drunken people having sex with each other.

All those acts can be construed as rape. Some of them are very debatable. To consider them all the same things by saying that 'rape is rape' is ludicrous. Getting brutally gang-raped by 5 men is not the same thing as an 18 year old having sex with his 16 year old boyfriend.

Then your examples are not the best to choose.

No one could count having sex between two young lovers as rape. They are of about the same age, now we assume they are both happy and willing, there is no way this can be anything like rape, they are having sex, nice for them. But why should there be a difference if boy or girl is the older part?

Two drunk people??? I have had a lot of hot sex while I was not totally sober and we both enjoyed it thoroughly. As long as not someone helpless is abused, meaning one is the object of sexual abuse to the other.

We should be careful to water down the definition of rape. This means to belittle the sufferings of those children, men and women who have gone through the worst. Maybe that's exactly what you wanted to say but I was not sure.

The same thing goes for torture. Saying that 'torture is all the same' is silly, and suggests a serious lack of understanding for the physical torture that was really inflicted on people in the middle ages. There are things like sleep deprivation, and then there is being drawn out on the rack. Calling both things torture and calling them equal is ridiculous.

No, here i have to contradict you. The main quality of torture is to destroy the personality and self esteem of the tortured, this is not about inflicting physical damage or pain , this is about destroying your enemy' s image of himself. Of course the medieval torture was worse because the victims had nearly never a way to survive this. But, applying modern day humanist morality here: torture is ALWAYS wrong. A society that tortures gives up its own moral system, putting itself on the same level as the perpetrator or alleged terrorist or ....

I know, now people will tell me: " what about the bomb hidden somewhere, what about the abducted child that must be found?" Hm, what can I answer without being a hypocrite: if it were my child I would do the torture myself maybe. But that's what a democratic society is for: taking that decision out of individual hands and giving it to a neutral institution, the legal system. We should be aware that torture (like death penalty imo) is wrong, it dehumanizes us all.

[The Sleeper]

The problem is the modern definition of rape. It involves one indivdual forcing sex on another without his or hers consent. In the case of people in the historical context Martin is emulating the concepts of individuality or consent did not enter into it and that doesn't involve just marriage or sex. They had a postion in a social structure and certain duties and obligations arose from that position. They comformed or risk marginilization. And those expecations were not only externally imposed by a legal authority or social custom; they informed the way these people saw themselves. Obviously this system sucks and in a sense this is worse for the victims since ti makes submission and trauma a part of their character but I am reluctant to assign individual blame to the perpetrators or call them rapists since the motivation and mentality are different than the modern use of the word would imply. In that context rape is to them a particularly brutal act of war and most men would punish it primarily as a violation of their honor rather than concern for the actual afflicted party. i think this raises so much controversy because in some ways modern society still has not been rid of such concepts.

[The Storm Queen]

Right. Sansa and Cersei were property of their wives, they were socially expected to give sex to their husbands whenever they wanted them. Whereas Tyrion and Robert may be having breakthroughs of modern morality, in their society their actions are/would have been entirely accepted. That is how we have to look at these events first and foremost.

Let´s play this game further: Here are my opinions backed by Westerosi morality

- Tywin was the best daddy ever. Tyrion as a dwarf is cleary a breach against nature and should have been abandoned in the wilderness. Tywin was better than society required of him and actually took care of this abomination and let it enjoy the privileges of being a Lannister.

- Myrcella and Tommen are abominations born out of incest. Someone should kill them very fast

- Tywin Lannister was right in conducting a total war against the civilian population. There is no law against it, amirit?

You know, the funny thing is that I never saw anybody seriously arguing these points. Virtually everbody uses modern morality in these cases. But when subjects like womans´ rights or rape are concerned suddenly many people cry " back to medival morality"