On paedophilia and moral relativism

[mcb]

They don't make sense though-the presence of a common language for instance, sans dialects, local mutations etc in a country as large as Westoros for instance.

Is Venezuelan Spanish that much different from Argentinian Spanish?

[Sevumar]

Is Venezuelan Spanish that much different from Argentinian Spanish?

I don't know about South American dialects of Spanish, but there wasn't a widely used "official" version (Castilian) of Spanish until the Reconquista. There were a host of related regional languages used throughout the Iberian Peninsula.

[winterbird]

I think part of the character's plight is that this young marriage is allowed in Westeros. I mean we feel for Sansa because she is 13 and was first married against her will and now stuck with LF. The bigger that gap and the younger and more impressionable she is, the worse we feel for her. I don't think we are supposed to like the way Westeros is run or agree with it. I think those practices are put in play to make us uncomfortable. When you see people like Cersei and Sansa and how the west is dealing with them, it make the fact that people are following Dany in her own right (not because of a man) that much more important. (though I really hate the last marriage that got thrown at Dany.) Yes GRRM has chosen this and could have easily chosen to make marriage unacceptable for a woman under 16, but when has he ever made a choice just so his readers would be more comfortable? It's our struggle with the situation that gives it more conflict. We aren't supposed to like it. It's a hard choice when you have to pick against things that readers will like/agree with, but it often make the story sharper. And since there is precedent for it or historical basis it makes it a harder reality for the reader to face.

[ARYa_Nym]

My grandparents speak Panamanian and Costa Rican Spanish and they're often asking each other what word do you use for this and what word do you use for that. They're able to speak to and understand each other though.

[Dunk the Drunk]

The whole concept of childhood is still relatively new, people under the age of seven prior to 16th century were considered 'small adults' throughout the majority of europe. They were dressed and treated as such, it has only been in more recent times that we have started to form the distinction between a 'child' and and 'adult'.

As for the creepy nature of LF/Sansa, this has less to do with her age when considered within the context with which GRRM has written and set. It's creepy because she looks like her mother with whom he is infatuated.

[winterbird]

The whole concept of childhood is still relatively new, people under the age of seven prior to 16th century were considered 'small adults' throughout the majority of europe. They were dressed and treated as such, it has only been in more recent times that we have started to form the distinction between a 'child' and and 'adult'.

As for the creepy nature of LF/Sansa, this has less to do with her age when considered within the context with which GRRM has written and set. It's creepy because she looks like her mother with whom he is infatuated.

ITA I was just coming back to write this. The idea of childhood wasn't a medieval construct. Most children were treated as mini-adults training for what their life was to be (for instance the Stark boys training for arms as children. These days we wouldn't imagine training a child with how to use a weapon but in those times it was normal and boys were excited for when they'd get to be squires etc.) Childhood as we know it now was different then and the whole concept of being a "child" is a modern construct. Boys then trained when they were able to hold a sword and worked as soon as they were able. That was accepted.

But I also wanted to say again that I think it comes down to the issue of sex or violence. For me at least it is easier to imagine a girl being married off against her will at 12/13 than it is to imagine a 9/10 year old running someone through with a sword. You can argue it was a survival instinct, but later she plans it in advance. Other characters kill their first person before 12.

[ARYa_Nym]

I don't know about the stats on modern children being forced to marry although I know that human trafficking is prevalent which could lead to child prostitution.

I do know that today there are tons of kids who kill.

Many children joined armed groups in Cambodia in the 1980s as the best way to secure food and protection. Similarly, in Liberia in 1990, children as young as seven were seen in combat because, according to the Director of the Liberian Red Cross, "those with guns could survive."

in Liberia, where a quarter of the combatants in the various fighting factions were children—some 20,000 in all. Indeed, the National Patriotic Front of Liberia had its own 'small boys unit', ranging in age from 6 to 20

The Renamo forces in Mozambique, in particular, systematically practiced forced recruitment. Renamo had at least 10,000 boy soldiers, some as young as six years old. Similarly, in Angola, a 1995 survey found that 36 per cent of children had accompanied or supported soldiers, and 7 per cent of Angolan children had fired at somebody.¹⁵

http://www.unicef.org/sowc96/2csoldrs.htm

Forcible abductions, sometimes of large numbers of children, continue to occur in some countries. Children as young as nine have been abducted and used in combat.

http://www.child-soldiers.org/childsoldiers/some-facts

It is estimated that some 300,000 children – boys and girls under the age of 18 – are

today involved in more than 30 conflicts worldwide.

Although the Unicef definition of child soldier also includes children who have been forced to marry.

UNICEF defines a ‘child soldier’ as any child – boy or girl – under 18 years of age, who is part of any kind of regular or irregular armed force or armed group in any capacity, including, but not limited to: cooks, porters, messengers, and anyone accompanying such groups other than family members. It includes girls and boys recruited for forced sexual purposes and/or forced marriage. The definition, therefore,does not only refer to a child who is carrying, or has carried, weapons.

http://www.unicef.org/emerg/files/childsoldiers.pdf

Most kids nowadays probably wouldn't kill with a sword though. There are other methods.

[Hear Us Roar]

I agree with the OP. As long as the "good guys" do it it is fine for most people. The Starks can do no wrong.

[Every]

But the thing is, in many circumstances the text asks us to bring our modern conceptions and values to it. We're supposed to cheer for Dany when she tries to abolish slavery, because today slavery is bad (we can debate whether slavery was considered morally wrong in the medieval period, but it largely depends on exactly where and when during that period you're talking about). We're supposed to admire characters like Brienne and Arya, who defy society's conventions and take on men's roles, and we're supposed to condemn Randyll Tarly's attitude (despite the fact that his would have been the common reaction in medieval times, and in fact you could argue that he is unusually permissive - he doesn't try to force Brienne to change) because we as modern readers know that women should be empowered.

The series also contains nods to the reader, things like Renly's Rainbow Guard or House Jordayne, which ask us to bring in our own outside knowledge to indulge in GRRM's little jokes.

So, having asked us to bring our modern conceptions and standards into some aspects of the text, is it acceptable to then turn around and say that no, we can't bring modern conceptions to these aspects of it - love, sex and marriages?

[Natalie_S]

GRRM has commented on the sex himself saying that there was no concept of "adolescence" in the middle ages. You were a child or you were an adult. The difference was marked at sexual maturity. So once a girl flowered she was a woman. That is the transition from woman to child.

And here's the quote:

From what friends have told me, some of the kids have been aged up from how they're described in the books. Robb (Ned's eldest son) is definitely older, Daenerys seems quite a bit older. Are you okay with that? Was it just logistically necessary? Like you can't actually have someone Daenerys' age doing some of the things she has to do in the books?

Yes. It was logistically necessary. It was legally necessary, especially for something that's an international production. We filmed largely in Ireland, but also in Morocco and Malta. Each of those locations has its own laws and regulations that affect actors and age, and it's a largely American show, so that comes into play, too.

But also in some ways, I think it's realistic. I was basing a lot of the book into my research into the real world middle ages. Where they did not have the whole concept of adolescence that we have: this in-between period when you're not quite an adult but not a child. In most medieval cultures, there was childhood and adulthood, and you went from one to the other. There would be some rite of passage ceremony like the Jewish Bar Mitzvah or Catholic confirmation, which they took seriously in 1300, but not as seriously today. In 2011, we have the ceremonies, but we don't believe the person is an adult. But if you go back to Middle Age history, you find people doing things that they just wouldn't do today. You find kings who are 14 or 15 winning battles, squires who are 8 or 9 rushing into battle with the knights and holding their own. And girls, of course, were getting married at similar ages. So I reflected that in the books, but that becomes more difficult when you have to film it. What age are you going to use your actors? There were all these reasons for it then. Generally, I think it works just as well with the actors we chose. Also, we also have much longer lifespans than in the Middle Ages. Ned is in his mid-30s in the book, Sean Bean is, I believe, 51. (Note: Bean turns 52 the day of the series premiere.) But a medieval man in his mid-30s would be in some senses older than Sean Bean is today. He would've had a much harder life. It would have aged him more quickly. I think aging him up makes sense for who the character is supposed to be, and the experiences he's had.

If this is hystorically correct or not, it makes no difference, because the point is that GRRM believed it was so, and therefore that's what Westeros is.

I also remember GRRM admitting that probably he screwed up the age of the characters a bit (can't find the interview right now though), and that they should be a bit older.

But, since it's a fantasy universe you can just assume that a solar year is longer or something like that and suddendly everything fits. :)

[Queen Cersei I]

Its a fictional world and the standard for whats expectable is different for our time/world. If all the rape and murder in the book bothers you then put the book down and go read something from the young adult section.

That's not the case, and I think that most of us who are reading realize that a different time is being represented. And of course, representing something is utterly different from agreeing with it. In that same vein, readers can be free to note that they find 13 year old child brides distasteful/ sexual attraction to children to be wrong without insulting the books or indicating that they are "not able to handle" the gritty realism being put forth therein. Honestly, I'm not sure how, "I think Tyrioin being attracted to a 13 year old kid is gross" indicates that the person in question is unable to handle the maturity of ASOIAF, and should stick to YA literature.

Initially, I enjoyed the gritty realism of poor Danerys having to marry a grown man; though it was painful to watch, I felt that it accurately reflected the brutality of the world I was being immersed in, and allowed me (the reader) to feel just how Danerys was forced to sacrifice herself for the desires of others. It also pulled the reader into the world of a child who had to force herself to adjust to the world of adult pastimes and adult desires, or perish. Horrible, not at all romantic, but compelling, and, I thought, and excellent critique of a social system that forces 13 year old kids to become mothers and wives.

So initially, I took no issue with things like this; seeing most of the instances of sexual overtures being made to children as honest portrayals of Westeros society, rather than anything else. I always assumed that the story of Danerys Targaryen and Khal Drogo was the story of an barely pubescent girl being exploited and sold and then used by a grown man, then proceeding (through only her own remarkable strength of character) to rise above.

To me, Dany/ Drogo was not a love story, but the story of a child's exploitation and survival; I naturally assumed that that was the way it was portrayed. However, rather recently GRRM has commented that he found Dany and Drogo's wedding night (in which the thirty something Drogo deflowers the 13 year old Dany) to be "the most romantic scene in all of the books." He's also noted that he wants to meet Danerys more than any other character (who is still 15, at the moment), "because she's hot." And to ice the cake, he commented (jokingly, I'm sure, but still) that the scene in which Drogo straight up rapes Dany in the Game of Thrones TV series, is, in his eyes, "A pretty hot sex scene." (Note-- Danerys is being raped and weeping in this scene. Again, I’m sure he’s joking, but…really?)


Considering this new information, I've reread the Dany Drogo scenes and some other scenes (such as descriptions of Sansa's 12 year old breasts) with a different eye, and some issues have definitely arisen. It seems that GRRM definitely does view the story of Dany and her 30 something Romeo as sexy and romantic, portraying the sex scenes between a 13-year-old child and a grown man with an attitude of drooling, voyeuristic eroticism. He does seem to sexualize her heavily and portray her as a sexually desirable object from the age of 13 onwards, continually mentioning the size, shape, motion of her breasts a total of 17 times throughout AGOT (this is not counting sensible descriptions that make sense in context; this is merely referring to rather gratuitous descriptions of how 13 year old Danerys breasts are feeling/ doing.) He does seem to portray it as normal and healthy and right that Danerys, after being brutally sexually used by Drogo in the most painful possible fashion, goes on to bear no resentment whatsoever towards him, falls in love with him, and, at 13, enjoys an intensely satisfying mutual sexual relationship with her 30 something husband. (Unlike the wicked, unnatural Cersei who refuses to forgive her husband for forcing himself on her a few measly times!) Personally, I’m less than comfortable about some of this stuff.

Does that mean I'm going to stop reading the books and head over to the Judy Blume section? Hell no. Does that mean I take issue with the portrayal, horrible as it is to see, of rape, abuse, and child seduction in a society that realistically would feature such issues? No again. I don't want to watch The Wizard of Oz, here. However, there is a difference between realistically portraying children being sexualized and sexually used by their society and actually celebrating such a thing, and portraying sex with 30 something men as something that 13 year old girls would enjoy.

ETA: I just want to clarify that the above quotes are in no way meant to slander GRRM or indicate anything about his real life character/ preferences. I'm quoting the Danerys/ Drogo wedding night comment not to imply anything about him, simply to note that I find the "it was totally romantic" stance a highly problematic one to take towards a union between a 13 year old girl and a grown man. While this probably says nothing about him as a person; it does color how he's going to portray the Dany/ Drogo relationship in the text.

Furthermore, I noted his comments WRT the "hotness" of Danerys not to slander him, but simply because I think it reflects the problematic issue of sexualizing her at a very young age that we see recur throughout the text. (And which seems to begin when she is first introduced at age 13.)

[snowboard_season_is_coming]

Most kids nowadays probably wouldn't kill with a sword though. There are other methods.

Sadly you are right.

Child soldiers were not really effective before the advent of automatic weapons.

Now combat effectiveness is no longer tired to physical maturity, putting children in greater danger to be abducted and conscripted.

[Lady Lea]

Japan, at least in my opinion, is not really a Western country. And European countries where 14 is the age of consent tend to be Central/Eastern Europe (with the exception of Spain, which is 13 IIRC). So also, not really Western countries.

That leaves us with a handful of irregular US states vs the majority of US states, the UK, Ireland, Canada, New Zealand and Australia, all of which I consider a stronger representation of "the West". So yeah, generally in the West, you need to be 16 to consent to sex.

I think you might be picking and choosing what to call the "West". Spain and Argentina are 13, Brazil, Portugal, Chile, Paraguay, Colombia, Italy, Germany, Ecuador and Austria are 14. France and Uruguay are 15. The "West" is not only English-speaking countries, you know.

Mind you, in Brazil the age of consent for sex is 14 but you have to be 16 to marry.

ETA: the point is, even today there isn't a "correct" age that everyone accepts.

[Every]

South America is considered 'the West'? I've never heard that before.

[LuisDantas]

We swear that we are. I have some doubts, personally.

[ARYa_Nym]

Sadly you are right.

Child soldiers were not really effective before the advent of automatic weapons.

Now combat effectiveness is no longer tired to physical maturity, putting children in greater danger to be abducted and conscripted.

Yup. It is sad.

& he's never had Arya kill based on being more skilled with a sword. She always has to use deception, the element of surprise, or has help.

[twincast]

Japan, at least in my opinion, is not really a Western country. And European countries where 14 is the age of consent tend to be Central/Eastern Europe (with the exception of Spain, which is 13 IIRC). So also, not really Western countries.

That leaves us with a handful of irregular US states vs the majority of US states, the UK, Ireland, Canada, New Zealand and Australia, all of which I consider a stronger representation of "the West". So yeah, generally in the West, you need to be 16 to consent to sex.

So for you only Anglo = West? Sorry, but you're talking out of your ignorant ass here. As a matter of fact the general trend in Europe going from east to west is exactly the opposite of what you're proclaiming. What's more, 14, 15 & 16 are spread pretty equally, with 13 in Spain and 17 in Ireland being the notable outliers.

[Frey Pentos]

These would be reasons for an author to make that choice, yes. But the point is, it would be a choice.

Or to put it another way: if you're writing history, you have no choice but to include marriages such as those we're talking about, because they reallly happened. Leave them out, and you're not writing history any more.

But fantasy writers aren't writing history to start with - not even if their setting is inspired by history. Everything they include or leave out is a choice. There really isn't anything they have to include. Even when it comes to 'authenticity', the degree of authenticity is a choice: the things the author thinks he should include to create authenticity, are choices.

And, as I say, you can see plenty of evidence of this in ASoIaF. There's much in Westeros that is unrealistic, incredible, fantastic, and yes, anachronistic, to the point where tying the setting down to anything more specific than 'vaguely like the late-medieval period in tone' is impossible. Lots of these things were included to make the story more interesting, or to make it easier to write, or because the author just liked it that way - and lots were included specifically because the series is fantasy and not history.

So: if you think that GRRM included these elements in order to lend 'authenticity', then we agree that he has made a choice to do so. The question then becomes, 'why is this element crucial to authenticity?' And also 'what do we mean by 'authenticity' here?'

This is the difference between history and fiction. In history, it's perfectly legitimate to say 'this is how it really was' and even defend the laws and customs of the time as being a product of their time. In fantasy, it makes little sense to say these things, because someone made them that way. Instead, we have to ask, 'why did the author do that?' Saying 'to make it feel authentic' is an answer, but it's a partial answer. Why that bit of 'authenticity' if another bit was changed? Why does the setting not ring true without underage marriage, but it does ring true with language barriers minimised or removed?

It's always possible to answer these questions, of course, but if you stop before answering them, you haven't really got much of an argument IMO.

Anyway, this is a bit of a digression. :)

Ok. Sounds like sophistry but I'll play along. Why do you think GRRM chose to include real medieval attitudes to childhood and adulthood in the books? Might it be that he wants the books to feel realistic and authentic (even though they are fantasy fiction)? Might it also mean that if he was to include the modern idea that childhood begins at 16, then he would have to change other attitudes in this medieval society, to maintain consistency in his made up world? Where would the push for this age of consent have come from? The Faith? Politics? Targaryens? The Maesters? Would males under the age of 16 also still be considered children? If so, why are they allowed to go to war, fight and kill? Do you see what I'm saying? If GRRM decided no sex until you are 16, then that actually changes the values of the whole society. It would be illogical in a pseudo medieval society. The internal rules of his world would have been subtly changed and only a bad writer would pretend otherwise and carry on regardless.

[Frey Pentos]

But the thing is, in many circumstances the text asks us to bring our modern conceptions and values to it. We're supposed to cheer for Dany when she tries to abolish slavery, because today slavery is bad (we can debate whether slavery was considered morally wrong in the medieval period, but it largely depends on exactly where and when during that period you're talking about).

The attitude to slavery in the books is consistent with the rules of the world though. Slavery has been abolished in Westeros. Jorah Mormont has been exiled for selling slaves. Dany is being Westerosi in her attitude to the Essos slave cultures rather than modern.

[Lady Lea]

South America is considered 'the West'? I've never heard that before.

Yes, of course.