Drogo didn't rape Dany

[Queen Cersei I]


The problem is, you're comparing it to modern standards. A thirteen year old girl is as perfectly capable of consenting to sex as a thirty year old woman. 


Dany's age isn't even the main issue here, it never has been. However, some people (such as myself) may find the concept of a 13 year old girl being sold to a grown man and fucked roughly by him on a regular basis, then proceeding to fall in love with him, start adoring the sex, and developing a healthy lifelong attitude towards sex and sexuality to be just a bit hard to swallow. Add in the fact that the girl is basically forced into the marriage, and that the sex is initially so rough for weeks and weeks that it leads her to have to repress sobs and tears and screams of pain, and the situation becomes all the more ridiculous. To many of us, Dany's situation seems like it likely would have led to some lifelong emotional traumas, issues with sex, and, at the very least, a conflicted and somewhat resentful attitude towards the husband who caused her such pain.

That's not "seeing things through the lens of modern attitudes." It's simply psychological realism.

GRRM’s comments that girls being married at 12 or 13 was fairly common and not looked down upon is inaccurate, in the same way his comparing the sadistic little sexuzlized punishment he conceived for Cersei to Jane Shore’s religious themed shaming.

You may think, "A 13 year old girl is just as capable of consenting to sex as a 30 year old woman." But there is a wealth of evidence that suggests that girls of 13 are simply not ready, psychologically or physically, for a sexual relationship with a grown man at age 13.

However, that said, once again, Danerys age was not the primary issue at stake. It was the forcible, rough, hurtful nature of the sex itself, and the considerable damage (psychological and physical) that it caused Danerys.)

it is worth noting that even here there are exaggerations that make Drogo seem more of a beast than is actually written. .

Actually, Khal Drogo is not a character I've personally given a great deal of thought to. For the most part, he honestly seemed like a pretty one dimensional "fierce tribal warrior" archetype with next to no deviation from the original stereotype. With the exception of his kindness to Danerys on their wedding night, he seemed to remain pretty two dimensional to me.

However, that said, Khal Drogo is the Khal, or king, of a society where pilaging and raping numerous women as part of the conquest is the norm. Given his paramount position amongst men who believe in and respect pillaging and rape as "normal" it seems strange to me that Khal Drogo has never participated in rapes of the villages he has conquered before.

In short, I'm not sure how I'm "trying to make Drogo appear more of a beast than is actually written." His lack of consideration for Danerys, his brutal treatment for her, his violation of her, are all clear in the scene itself.

That said, my focus was not on Khal being "a beast" but on the suffering of Daerys.

@Queen Cersei I: would she be able to hide her tears and muffle her crying if she was hysterical? I don't think so. This is actually one more example of the inner strength she has: even feeling so bad, she still maintains some control.

Danerys controlling herself shows her own undeniable strength of character. It does not make Khal Drogo’s treatment of her any more okay or any less of a violation.

[corbon]

and that the sex is initially so rough for weeks and weeks that it leads her to have to repress sobs and tears and screams of pain

...

In short, I'm not sure how I'm "trying to make Drogo appear more of a beast than is actually written." His lack of consideration for Danerys, his brutal treatment for her, his violation of her, are all clear in the scene itself.

Either way, be it trying to make Drogo look worse or trying to increase Dany's 'suffering', you are STILL inventing things to make the whole scene worse than it is.

As I have pointed out, twice already, example by example, the 'brutality' and 'violation' are not clear, but productions of inventions not in the text.

Which is not to say that they are definitely not present, just that we aren't sure. Your 'clarity' comes from your own lies, not the text.

Once is an accident, twice is coincident, three times is enemy action (when the 'errors' have been pointed out already). Why? Why is it so important that Dany be raped by Drogo? What agenda to people have that makes this necessary?

This is exactly what I am pointing out by saying the attitudes here stink of lynch mobs. The false 'certainty' people have of rape is not based on evidence from the text, its based on their own thoughts and feelings and misreadings of themselves and/or others.

[All Men Must Rhyme]

Dany's age isn't even the main issue here, it never has been.

This was in response to a point made by the guy I replied to. It has no bearing on what you are saying, because it was made to a completely unrelated comment. His point was that Daenarys couldn't consent, because she was a minor. So, yes, in that case, her age was the main issue. Of course I disagree with the idea of a thirteen year old girl being sold to a grown man. I disagree with the idea of a thirteen year old girl having sex with a grown man, not that it's any one's place to judge. You're picking up one sentence from my argument and changing the question. As I've said, a thirteen year old girl is perfectly capable of consenting to have sex; only they will know whether they feel ready or not. You telling me that they aren't is purely, again, your opinion being expressed as fact. You do not speak for every single thirteen year old girl that has or will ever have sex. I'm not even sure why you've decided to pick this point up 6 pages on from where I originally posted it, but if you're going to continue picking apart my post line by line to construct an argument for yourself, I'm not going to bother. I explained everything I said in my original post, don't try and twist it.

[PatrickStormborn]

This bit troubles me.

I see (in our modern 21st century world) a husband - not a particularly pleasant or sensitive one, but not violent either, let's call him "Drogo" - coming home from the pub late at night, waking up his wife and having sex before falling asleep. Let's call his wife "Dany". He wakes her up and she has no interest in having sex at all but in order to please him or just to get it over with quickly so she can go back to sleep she is passive and compliant until it is over.

The next morning they go about their daily routines as normal, thinking nothing of it but the police call round because a neighbour suspects that Drogo might have "done something". After interviewing both husband and wife Drogo is prosecuted for rape. Neither Drogo nor Dany think of it as rape and are bemused to find someone imposing their view of the marital couple's behaviour and state of mind onto events but they are told that the fact that neither of them "realise" it is rape is beside the point and Drogo is prosecuted as a criminal.

I am laying it on a bit thick but rape is a crime against the person and if both parties - who understand their intentions and own states of mind far better than any outsider - reject the idea of rape then I don't think that our supposition as to what they might have thought at the time or might have done if they had thought differently (i.e. as we do) can just sweep aside their context.

And do you know what? This post troubles me.

If that hypothetical situation did arise, it would still be rape, and Drogo would still have to pay for his actions. I really hope you weren't trying to make a serious point here, because it's verging on being absolutely ridiculous -- and slightly sickening.

A lot of rape victims don't even realise they have been raped.

[Lyanna Stark]

Once is an accident, twice is coincident, three times is enemy action (when the 'errors' have been pointed out already). Why? Why is it so important that Dany be raped by Drogo? What agenda to people have that makes this necessary?

This is exactly what I am pointing out by saying the attitudes here stink of lynch mobs. The false 'certainty' people have of rape is not based on evidence from the text, its based on their own thoughts and feelings and misreadings of themselves and/or others.

I actually think people have been quite respectful in this thread, despite it being a very difficult topic. Clearly you do not consider it rape and you think it somehow "cheapens" the word if it is used for what you may consider something like "sexual assault", or something similar?

I don't mind calling it rape, it doesn't cheapen the word to me and I have reasons of my own to maybe be a bit more sensitive to it than some, too. If you feel more comfortable calling it "sexual assault" then I can't see fault with that. It certainly doesn't mean that people who look at it as rape are part of some lynch mob, that's a huge hyperbole.

The fact of the matter is that the readership will view what is written with modern eyes, and apply moral judgements based on that. Sure, we can understand that, in the context of the story, certain things were accepted there which are outlawed in our society. Like for instance the fairly brutal marriage customs of the Dothraki, where the Khal shares his wife with his blood riders, people die en masse at their weddings and raping and pillaging are part of their culture. Even if we can see that this has a place within that culture, we still make moral judgements on whether that is a good thing, or not.

And do you know what? This post troubles me.

If that hypothetical situation did arise, it would still be rape, and Drogo would still have to pay for his actions. I really hope you weren't trying to make a serious point here, because it's verging on being absolutely ridiculous -- and slightly sickening.

A lot of rape victims don't even realise they have been raped.

I guess the concept of marital rape is still new to a lot of people even thought it has been banned in most western countries since the 1970s.

[eyeheartsansa]

To many of us, Dany's situation seems like it likely would have led to some lifelong emotional traumas, issues with sex, and, at the very least, a conflicted and somewhat resentful attitude towards the husband who caused her such pain.

That's not "seeing things through the lens of modern attitudes." It's simply psychological realism.

]Actually, Khal Drogo is not a character I've personally given a great deal of thought to. For the most part, he honestly seemed like a pretty one dimensional "fierce tribal warrior" archetype with next to no deviation from the original stereotype. With the exception of his kindness to Danerys on their wedding night, he seemed to remain pretty two dimensional to me.

But 'to many of us,' Dany's entire life experience before Drogo - being an exiled princess couch-surfing all over Pentos, being psychologically abused by Vis, the only family you have... is impossible to fathom. Dany probably expected to be married to Vis and stuck with him forever. Then She probably expected to be gang raped by Drogo's blood riders. For Dany, it had to be incredibly liberating to be out from under Vis's thumb, to have her own servants and at least some degree of power and control in her life. That Drogo was nice to her on their wedding night, had to be a huge relief to her.

Aside from the sex being painful - which Drogo was likely clueless about because to him it was just regular sex - we have no indication that Drogo once treated her unkindly. No - he showered her with gifts, gave her servants, the best horse, and eventually came to adore her... to the point where he would honor her request - forbidding his blood brothers to rape their captives, which ultimately cost him his life. You admit to not giving much thought to Drogo as a character.. considering these things, he does seem like a brutal, one dimensional stock war-chief to me... just a man who is utterly captivated by a beautiful girl.

Danerys controlling herself shows her own undeniable strength of character. It does not make Khal Drogo’s treatment of her any more okay or any less of a violation.

Is there any conceivable way, to you, that a Dothraki horse lord could treat his new foreign trophy wife that would be both believable, 'ok', and not 'marital rape?'

I actually think people have been quite respectful in this thread, despite it being a very difficult topic. Clearly you do not consider it rape and you think it somehow "cheapens" the word if it is used for what you may consider something like "sexual assault", or something similar?

I don't like calling it rape, because it puts Drogo in the same category as the Gregors and Lorches in the world when he is clearly not - at least not to Dany. Lollys, Tysha, any number of anonymous peasants who are caught up in all the pillaging.. those are rape victims. Rape is ugly, degrading, and makes the victim feel like a piece of trash.

dany, on the other hand, is treated like a khallisi by her husband, because that's what she is. she is given status and authority to give orders to anyone in the kahl. She can stop the entire procession for as long as she feels like, if she wants to take a break. Men rush to her defense when Viserys is mean to her - like, is this guy bothering you? want us to kill him for you? This is simply not what comes to mind when I think "rape victim."

I would venture to guess that victims of marital rape in today's world are not treated half as well as Drogo treated Dany.

[the trees have eyes]

And do you know what? This post troubles me.

If that hypothetical situation did arise, it would still be rape, and Drogo would still have to pay for his actions. I really hope you weren't trying to make a serious point here, because it's verging on being absolutely ridiculous -- and slightly sickening.

A lot of rape victims don't even realise they have been raped.

I know this is a sensitive subject but please try to remain civil. I am indeed making a serious point. Where I come from we have the presumption of innocence until guilt is proven. We also have trial by jury and testimony by witnesses who are then cross-examined. I find the assumption that anyone who isn't prepared to state without absolute conviction that Drogo is a rapist - without allowing the "victim" an opinion in the matter as it happens - "isn't serious" or is "sickening" to be troubling to say the least.

If anyone posting on this thread ever sits on a jury trial I am sure they will be prepared to listen to the facts in detail, difficult as that may be, with an open mind and make their judgment after that. That can't happen on a forum, true, but there are a lot of assumptions being made on a few lines of text.

The point I am making is people are presuming to know Dany's mind - both the Dany of AGOT and the thinly-sketched Dany of my scenario but that they do not and until we know in detail the thoughts and feelings of the person presumed to be a victim we cannot know she is a victim. People may have got it wrong. My point was that to assume that GRRM's Dany is too young, inexperienced and ignorant and hypothetical Dany is too ignorant or downtrodden to be mentally competent to reflect and understand what has happened to them robs them of any voice or say in something that affects them profoundly. You will need to convince me that they are incompetent to speak on their own behalf before I am prepared to dismiss their own right to an opinion as to what has happened to them.

I guess the concept of marital rape is still new to a lot of people even thought it has been banned in most western countries since the 1970s.

No the concept is not new to me (and I do find the suggestion offensive but as you know nothing about me I will allow that you genuinely consider that it may be new to me).

Let's be blunt. In all the wide world there will be some women who do not expect sex to be fulfilling (not every sexual relationship is satisfying to both parties, I hope you'll agree). It is also true in relationships that one partner may be "in the mood" when the other is not but that the latter will acquiesce to please the former.

In my mind both of these things were true of fictional Dany. She does not consider herself a rape victim not because she is incompetent to assess what is happening to her or to object to it but because she isn't raped, she accepts "poor sex". Her husband is an inconsiderate and selfish (poor) lover (sorry, some are) rather than a brute or a marital rapist.

They could do with a trip to a marriage counsellor and perhaps sex therapist, maybe they could do with a separation but my point was that it is extremely dangerous to interfere in a relationship without understanding the dynamics of the relationship and highly objectionable to ignore the woman's opinion.

Perhaps I shouldn't have raised the scenario. It was meant to warn against ignoring Dany's view, indeed of saying that her view didn't count because she wasn't competent to speak for herself; and that righteous conviction and best intentions can lead to the wrong actions if you presume to deny the people most affected a voice and do not consider circumstances wisely and humanely. It seems to have been misinterpreted as supporting the brutalisation of damaged women when in fact I am saying you need to listen to them and understand whether they are either of those things before you effectively take away their right to a voice or any say in their own actions, to deny them fee will.

[Castel]

I've personally never seen it as rape. Brutality is not a sign of rape as far as I'm concerned. Lack of consent is. Some people tend to like brutality, go figure. Of course, generally speaking, it may as well be a sign since most people will withdraw consent because of violence, but it isn't a concrete thing in my book.

Dany was never shown to reject Khal Drogo's advances. If it was this would be a clear cut case to me. As it is, I see her, "lying back and thinking of Westeros". It doesn't make what happened any less brutal, and you could make the argument that it was rape because of the power differential or even the brutality but I think that rape as a moral issue begins at the refusal or withdrawal of consent. Our society has a bunch of laws that expand on this, and while I think they are good in most cases, I can't apply them here, because there is no direct evidence of coercion, or reprisals for refusing to have sex.

[butterbumps!]

I agree with the above points for the most part. I think there are a lot of factors that make these scenes tricky (Dany's age, differences in the perception of Drogo, for example). To be thoroughly honest about this situation, I don't think that Dany would have respected Drogo if it had gone any other way- not because she is innately accepting of victimhood, but because she finds control and power (even brutality to a degree) attractive. Since I bring it up, I feel I must address the point that I never see Dany as a victim, no matter how many times I read her scenes, perhaps the most compelling reason is because she does not let herself become one. For example, she inherently knows that the way Viserys thinks makes him a fool, even if she does not question the factual aspects of what he says. To my mind, this is a very important difference. I can expand on this, but for now I'll leave this here.

Going back to the issue of sex, I have no doubt that Dany's respect for Drogo comes in part by the lack of shame he feels as part of the Dothraki way, and because of the way he does it in particular. I think it's very interesting to her character that she somehow innately understands sex as separate from Westerosi (and many modern Western) perceptions of sex as anything other than a very natural way of life. Further, she understands the dance of power inherent in the act- Drogo's "dominance" is what made her respect him, and now she will use sex to dominate him. I see this much less something heinous and much more a mutual dance of power.

She's learned a lot about sex from Drogo, and we see her engage in this similarly with Daario- for lack of a better way of saying this, they take turns in dominance and submission (and I do not mean to imply that Dany is into S+M, which is an extreme form of fetishizing the natural power play of the sexual act). The major difference here is that Dany is not recuperating from saddle sores, but the game is still the same (she let's him "have her"- her words).

I would never call Asha's scene with Qarl rape, despite the fact that it begins in such a way that I remember my heart in my throat at the idea. That's also an interesting power game those two play, and I see it very similarly to both of Dany's lovers. In fact, the one man Dany sleeps with who does not use it as a show of power or an inclination toward some form of brutality is the one man she can not bring herself to respect. I just think sex is far more nuanced, and Dany's understanding of it too complex, to glean a sense of violation from their relations.

[redqueen]

Spousal rape has only been illegal in the US for twenty years. In some states today, it's only rape if a weapon had been used or it would be defined as assault as well. If the woman wasn't physically hurt and doesn't report it immediately, in some states it is still not rape. Until the 1970s, there was no such thing as spousal rape. A woman gave her husband consent by marriage.

[Torben]

I don't like calling it rape, because it puts Drogo in the same category as the Gregors and Lorches in the world when he is clearly not -

I think your problem here is mainly in semantics: Evidently Gregor is far worse than Drogo, at least in so far as individual cruelty is concerned. It is debatable who has caused more mass suffering.

That aside, putting two people into the same category doesn't make equal on all accounts. Example: A kills B in cold blood because B has brutally raped and murdered A's wife. A has otherwise never done anything illegal in his life, while B was a serial killer. Nonetheless, both are murderers. Even though most of us will judge their actions very differently, both of their actions qualify as murder.

So saying Drogo and Gregor are both "rapists" may or not be factually correct, but it doesn't per se put them on equal moral footing.

Rape is ugly, degrading, and makes the victim feel like a piece of trash.

I am not aware of any of these conditions being part of the definition of rape in any legal code I know. Yes, Drogo is treating Dany exceedingly well given the standards of his culture, yet part of that culture is that rape including marital rape is considered normal and accepted behaviour.

[Queen Cersei I]

edit

[Queen Cersei I]

I don't like calling it rape, because it puts Drogo in the same category as the Gregors and Lorches in the world when he is clearly not - at least not to Dany.

You know, I’ve heard this stated on these boards before (that one cannot call “character X” a rapist, because to do so “would be to group him along with Gregor Clegane”), however, I disagree with it. There is a basic flaw in the reasoning behind such thinking. To commit a criminal act, one does not automatically become the moral equivalent of all those who have committed that same act. Not all rapists are stereotypical villains, laughing wickedly as they twirl their mustachios. Not all rapists are Gregor Clegane.

If a person with many good qualities commits a murder, they are still a murderer. It does not mean they are automatically the equivalent of Geoffrey Dahmer, but it does not mean they should be categorized as “something other than a murderer” because they are “better” then men like Jeffrey Dahmer. Similarly, no matter how many good qualities a man may have, if he rapes or abuses a woman at any point, he can be defined as a rapist or abuser of women. And if a man violates a woman, it is not slander to say he has violated a woman.

The idea that all rapists are vicious, purely sadistic, scary sociopaths without a single redeeming is a widely held societal myth that many of us, IMO, hold onto for the sake of comfort. It allows us to feel safe and simultaneously hang onto our common assurances and preconceptions. But the fact is that pure, vicious psychopaths along the lines of Ramsay and Gregor are incredibly rare. Far more common is the “smaller” (and far more common) crimes of date, acquaintance, or marital rape, in which someone is violated by one they know, trust, even love. I don’t find it at all hard to believe that many of people who rape their wives, female acquaintances, or girlfriends have many good qualities, and are seen by many who know them as “nice guys.” But for whatever reason—either because of anger, the desire for dominance, or, disturbingly most common of all, because they simply want to satisfy their own sexual needs at the expense of another person who is unwilling, these individuals violate another human being.

Of course, the vast majority of men are not rapists and would never do this. (And I have male friends who have fallen victim to female sexual predators in various ways, so it is by no means a gendered issue.) However, the point is that not all rapists are card-carrying sociopaths a la Gregor Clegane, whatever we’d like to believe to comfort ourselves. Drogo used and violated Dany because, it seems, his pleasure and release was more important than her pain and discomfort. Something very common, and that continues to happen in marriages to this day. Robert Baratheon did the same thing to Cersei.

As it happens, Danerys never blames Drogo for treating her this way, adores him, and learns to love the sex. Both her love for her husband and the sex they have is pure, total, and without a shade of ambiguity and resentment present. Personally, I find this unbelievable, in both the unconflicted nature of Danerys reaction and GRRM’s presenting this attitude as unambiguously morally right on Danerys part. (He parallels Danerys “good” reaction to her husband using her body with Cersei’s “evil, unnatural” one. But that’s another topic for another day.)

GRRM’s attitude seems to be (judging from the way the scenario is presented by the text itself) similar to that of several posters here. That it was not really rape because that is what Drogo should expect of his wife, that is how society works. In bending over and learning to love the sex, Danerys showed strength and was “natural” and did the best thing she could to thrive in her environment. Personally, I agree about Danerys strength of character, but I find the idea that Drogo, regardless of societal norms, did not violate, use, or mistreat Danerys in any way to be rather ridiculous. Danerys may never resent the following treatment:

"Yet every night, some time before the dawn, Drogo would come to her tent and wake her in the dark, to ride her as relentlessly as he rode his stallion. He always took her from begind, Dothraki fashion, for which Dany was grateful; that way her lord husband could not see the tears that wet her face, and she could use her pillow to muffle her cries of pain. When he was done, he would close his eyes and begin to snore softly and Dany would lie beside him, her body bruised and sore, hurting too much for sleep.

Day followed day, and night followed night, until Dany knew she could not endure a moment longer. She would kill herself rather than go on, she decided one night."

..and if she still cried out when Drogo took her, it was not always in pain."

But in the end, Danerys reaction is dictated by the message GRRM wants to send. He determines Danerys reaction, and in this case, I find it utterly unrealistic, more colored by personal ideology and wishful thinking than human reality.

People have said that to say that Drogo roughly treated and used and violated Dany entails creating facts and breaking with the truth. But honestly, it’s all right there on the page. Drogo makes Danerys cry, he uses her, she screams out in pain. Even later, in passages that people have characterized as “triumphant” and “awesome,” Danerys continues to occasionally cry out in pain. To quote: “and if she still cried out when Drogo took her, it was not always in pain."And she’s in love with him, adores this sex, and feels no conflicts or resentment either against him or her situation? Okay then.

Honestly, here’s how it went down:

Danerys is sold to Drogo

He plays with her tits once, and treats her with consideration on their wedding night.

He does the following to her each and every proceeding night:

Taking her roughly without foreplay and causing her intense pain and psychological trauma.

She feels no resentment towards him whatsoever, and feels guilty about her own tears and screams of pain.

She starts to enjoy the once excruciatingly painful sex, at the age of 13 with a grown ass man.

She becomes a randy sex kitten, learning tons of sexual tricks to “empower” herself, and starts adoring every last second of banging Drogo

She falls deeply and unambiguously in love with Drogo, no resentments, internal conflicts, or issues involved. She submits to him utterly in all things.

This is called “romantic” by the author.

Honestly, hard as the series was to watch, I actually find it more honest than what was shown here. Both cases are basically the tale of a girl falling in love with her rapist.

[Torben]

@ Queen Cersei I

I agree. You say what I wanted to convey, albeit probably clearer than I wrote in fewer words.

I am not certain I agree about the message GRRM wanted to send, however. I don't actually know what GRRM himself said on the issue, but just from the text it is not clear to me that Dany's reaction is "good" and Cersei's "evil". Cersei cheated on Robert, but that's something he started, and she killed him to further her own agenda and enlarge her own power, but that's part of the normal powerplay GRRM presents. There are many things Cersei did I consider evil, but killing Robert is not really prominent among them. As for Dany, her unconditional love to Drogo is consistent with her character in that she regularly is unwilling to confront unpleasant unrealities. We don't yet know how things will play out in the next books but this trait might as well foreshadow her descent to becoming "Mad Dany".

[butterbumps!]

Queen Cersei-

I know we disagree on many of the principles being debated, but I actually do agree with much of what you're saying. I know that I'm one who's said things similar to "if rape applies here then it does everywhere," and I want to express the fact that even though I'm arguing the semantics of this particular word, I find about 95% of the sexual relationships we see grievously troublesome. Personally, I don't think a rapist is only a rapist if he's a caricature of a villain- I think there's far more middle ground scenarios that qualify as rape.

I think my main reason for not calling this coupling rape is really about the nature of sex itself and their relationship in particular. It seems like the main issue you and others take with Drogo/ Dany is the fact that she was in pain, and despite this, had sex with her anyway, as well as the fact that she never explicitly gives consent, and it is thus a form of taking (which is also technically rape, as it pertains to taking beyond the sexual sphere). To this end, I agree with you and other that in the most direct sense of the word it is a "rape."

But for me, I think taking (i.e. dominance) is inherently a part of sex- not to say that one member is always the submissive, but that almost any sexual act can tip the balance one way or another, and not just along gender lines. I don't think that there's a "bright line" necessarily that's easy to pinpoint where "healthy sex" enters into rape territory, though it seems we agree at the extremes, and I suspect is why there is a lot of debate about Dany and Drogo. I agree with you wholeheartedly that the issues you bullet at the end of your last post point to really strange improbabilities regarding their relationship, and which highlight how problematic this paring truly is. But then I think that these issues have a lot of impact on who she is/ becomes as a character-- especially the fact that it is through things like Drogo's sexual behaviors that earns him her respect.

I agree with the problematic nature of hiding her tears and muffling sobs, but then later, when Dany is extremely pregnant, she thinks about how she plans to go through the bazaar of Vaes Dothrak and tells her maids to prepare her litter. She thinks to herself, "Dothraki women ride until the moment they give birth, but since Drogo is off to kill the legendary lion today, he won't see me taking the more comfortable litter, so I'll take the litter." (paraphrased). Dany very willingly assumes physical discomfort, perhaps even desires it at times as a means she thinks tempers her. At the risk of passing judgment on her character, I reservedly say that I find the extreme admiration of power, and discipline through physical discomfort and brutality that Dany respects problematic. However, since that is the nature of her character, I accept this position as it pertains to her relations with Drogo, because I really do think that this is a big aspect of who she is, and realistic within the context of Westeros and modern ideas of sexuality.

There's a big difference in the issue of physical discomfort between this and Asha's scene, but I think it speaks to there not being a "bright line" that enables such draconian categorization as either rape or not rape, making this even debatable in the first place. For all intents and purposes, Asha's scene falls under a "brightline" definition of rape based on the way it's initiated, the domination of one party and the fact that she explicitly gives non consent. Yet, I think many of us have read that as not being rape, despite fitting under technical guidelines. But I want to express my agreement with you and others that I find something repellant and troublesome about Dany and Drogo, and don't think there's an easy answer.

[butterbumps!]

I am not aware of any of these conditions being part of the definition of rape in any legal code I know. Yes, Drogo is treating Dany exceedingly well given the standards of his culture, yet part of that culture is that rape including marital rape is considered normal and accepted behaviour.

As a separate thought, I'm inclined to disagree with this. Speaking from at least an American perspective, intention plays a tremendous role in the determination of guilt. We have murder in the first, second and third degrees, as well as manslaughter and other less "heinous" determinations (so that it's not murder when a negligent act results in killing because the intention was not to kill). For many, executions are not murders because it has a much different intention and purpose than what "murder" entails. I think all of this speaks to there not being a "bright line" on many issues of morality, and that it is factors like intention and victimhood that determine these distinctions.

ETA: sorry Toben- I accidentally cut the part of your post I was actually referring to:

I think your problem here is mainly in semantics: Evidently Gregor is far worse than Drogo, at least in so far as individual cruelty is concerned. It is debatable who has caused more mass suffering.

That aside, putting two people into the same category doesn't make equal on all accounts. Example: A kills B in cold blood because B has brutally raped and murdered A's wife. A has otherwise never done anything illegal in his life, while B was a serial killer. Nonetheless, both are murderers. Even though most of us will judge their actions very differently, both of their actions qualify as murder.

So saying Drogo and Gregor are both "rapists" may or not be factually correct, but it doesn't per se put them on equal moral footing.

[QuaitheTheShadow]

It’s not clear to me that Drogo knew he was hurting her, or that if he was hurting, that this was in any way unusual. It’s also not clear to me that Dany thought Drogon’s sexual relationship with her was unusual. It was just painful for her and she hated the pain.

They were both ignorant of how sex could be different.

Once Dany learns ‘the seductive arts’ she basically teaches Drogo how to have sex without hurting her. Drogo quickly obliges. Other than sex, there’s no evidence that Drogo treats her poorly, and he seems to treat her as well as any khal would. Better even.

Dany forgives Drogo for his ignorance and for hurting her once he stops. They come to love one another.

I see no break with reality there. Other women may have been permanently resentful or glad to be rid of him, but Dany liked his character. He made her feel safe and important and he was willing to reclaim her kingdom.

[eyeheartsansa]

Honestly, hard as the series was to watch, I actually find it more honest than what was shown here. Both cases are basically the tale of a girl falling in love with her rapist.

I honestly wonder if this is exactly why the screenwriters made this change; otherwise it would seem implausible to HBO viewers. But whether or not the 'love story' GRRM conceived is plausible to you or other readers is another discussion entirely - a meta-discussion about the author's views, rather than an analysis of the characters.

Within the context of the story that's been created, it appears that Drogo didn't know he was raping her, or even causing her pain.. and that Dany, despite being in pain, didn't think it was rape .. it just seems like an instance of bad communication and culture barriers... sex between two people who didn't know each other. I suppose lots of sex in any context could be construed this way.

it's only modern readers applying this concept of marital rape to a decidedly not modern scenario.. in which case you could say someone like Catlyn, who at first performed 'dutifully' for Ned, could be called a victim of marital rape as well, and the whole designation of 'marital rape' - while it makes sense in the context of studying gender relations throughout world history - it does not seem very useful for understanding the characters and their experiences/motivations.

Queen Cercei, I had asked before but you may not have seen it.. can you conceive of a way that Drogo would have behaved that would be both:

a - conceivable behavior for a warrior of Drogo's status and

b - not rape

If Drogo behaved exactly the same way, only without causing Dany any physical discomfort, would it still be considered rape? Or do you feel that the very nature of the arrangement is inherently rape?

[corbon]

I actually think people have been quite respectful in this thread, despite it being a very difficult topic. Clearly you do not consider it rape and you think it somehow "cheapens" the word if it is used for what you may consider something like "sexual assault", or something similar?

No. I think it might be rape. But on the evidence we have, we cannot conclusively decide it was (bearing in mind the age-thing being irrelevant). There are more feasible alternative options that actually fit better with the text and the attitudes and feelings displayed by the participants.

I don't mind calling it rape, it doesn't cheapen the word to me and I have reasons of my own to maybe be a bit more sensitive to it than some, too. If you feel more comfortable calling it "sexual assault" then I can't see fault with that. It certainly doesn't mean that people who look at it as rape are part of some lynch mob, that's a huge hyperbole.

I don't think it is hyperbole. Those people have judged and presumed guilt based on insufficient evidence. That is what lynch mobs do. They judge, when it is not their pace, they condemn when they don;t understand and they don't bother with basic little things like sufficient evidence.

On the evidence so far presented in the text, its not even sexual assault. Its unpleasant but consensual sex.

The fact of the matter is that the readership will view what is written with modern eyes, and apply moral judgements based on that. Sure, we can understand that, in the context of the story, certain things were accepted there which are outlawed in our society. Like for instance the fairly brutal marriage customs of the Dothraki, where the Khal shares his wife with his blood riders, people die en masse at their weddings and raping and pillaging are part of their culture. Even if we can see that this has a place within that culture, we still make moral judgements on whether that is a good thing, or not.

Modern moral judgements I can agree to disagree with, or even agree with. And, for example, I don't think Drogo is behaving particularly well toward Dany at this time.

But people are making a judgement they have no right to make, with insufficient knowledge of what actually passed, and insisting that their judgement shoudl be taken over the judgement of those directly involved - who incidentally do know exactly what happened in the spaces not described.

Honestly, here’s how it went down:

You lost me at honestly.

By the text, here's how it went down.

Dany was sold to Drogo.

On the wedding night she was frightened, but did not say no (and never had, that we know of, to Drogo). He gently seduced her and she explicitly said yes and she initiated proceeding past petting to sex.

The Khalasar then move on, leaving Dany with hard riding from dawn 'til dusk, causing her a great deal of pain and discomfort from open saddle sores and undoubtedly associated muscle and joint pains.

This proceeded for some time, at least 3 days, probably more than a week. We don;t know how long I believe.

Each night, Drogo drank with his bloodriders, ignoring her as he had during the day, then came to her midway through the night, waking her and having sex with her. This sex caused her pain, perhaps partly from the sex itself but mostly caused by her existing pains from riding.

She has tears and cries of pain during the sex, but she hides the tears and muffles the cries.

As far as we know she does not withdraw consent (given that first night and also implicitly given by the wedding itself - a contract in which her role is to provide an heir, and thus includes sex), and the indications are that she continues consent from the wedding night. Its unpleasant, but she is making deliberate attempts to keep it going and she also knows two things. First, her position, wealth, power and future hopes of returning to Westeros as Queen depend on her honouring her marital position. Second, she knows that a child will be a good and necessary thing for her.

Now maybe she withdrew consent to have sex. Maybe the discomfort was enough that she valued some 'escape' from her duties for a time enough to risk dishonouring her contract and losing everything. Maybe it was rape. But the text does not give us that and clearly indicates otherwise as she hides her discomfort from Drogo.

People can argue all they like that she "didn't have a choice" or "was too afraid to choose otherwise and was therefore compelled and therefore did not make a choice". But that is their argument, not one made by the text or by her, and not one that fits with the feelings and memories she has. As presented by the text, she made a choice, for whatever reasons. She chose uncomfortable sex (by hiding her discomfort) and accepted the benefits of that choice (power, position, wealth and the chance to return to Westeros with an army).

After the sex she lay there unable to sleep, bruised and sore. We know she was already sore. Good vigorous sex can leave leave bruising, let alone bad. Drogo was certainly vigorous.

Day followed day and night followed night.

After some time, she is beaten down by the constant misery. We know she is in constant pain all day and night from the riding. We know she isn't getting enough rest due to her pains and Drogos nightly visits. As far as she knows her life is now endless misery. All day, all night. This would be true even if she explicitly consented to sex every night. It is not necessary for her to be miserable because of being raped.

She contemplates suicide, and though she tells herself she cannot go on and will kill herself, her actual choice is to go on.

Eventually she becomes accustomed to riding and her body heals and toughens. Simultaneously she learns some sexual tricks and changes the sexual dynamic with Drogo, which has follow on effects her relationship dynamic. Thereafter her life is pretty good and she is happy in it (until of course other things happen to change it).

[Castel]

, but I find the idea that Drogo, regardless of societal norms, did not violate, use, or mistreat Danerys in any way to be rather ridiculous. Danerys may never resent the following treatment:

Mistreated =/= rape.

I honestly wonder if this is exactly why the screenwriters made this change; otherwise it would seem implausible to HBO viewers. But whether or not the 'love story' GRRM conceived is plausible to you or other readers is another discussion entirely. Within the context of the story that's been created, it appears that Drogo didn't know he was raping her, or even causing her pain.. and that Dany, despite being in pain, didn't think it was rape .. it just seems like an instance of bad communication and culture barriers... sex between two people who didn't know each other. I suppose lots of sex in any context could be construed this way.

Exactly, I don't see how it not being realistic to some people matters when we are determining whether or not it was rape or Drogo was a rapist.