Are all females set to become "villains"?

[ab aeterno]

Except that we know that at least three slavers came from a prominent family:

I don't say that none of them were guilty, just that many of them may not have been. It was negligence rather than willful punishing of innocents. It doesn't make Dany evil, but IMO it does make her a little hypocritical. I would respond similarly to almost any character who did the same thing.

[JaegrM]

Except it's only a trend if you squint at it, lump different things together, make some assumptions and generally beg the question. I don't think you're answering my point, just restating it: you see a trend here because you're starting from the basis that there is some reason for or value in a male/female comparison. If you don't make that assumption and bend the data to fit it, there simply is no trend. Arya's story does not have more in common with Arianne's than it does with Jaime's.

It just started out as me noticing that the characters who were going to have a large affect on the future of the series were all girls.

I was like "what a coincidence"

Then I was like "Hey wonder how I'd think of Sansa if she just let sweet Robin die?".... "What if Brienne really does betray/murder Jaime?"

That's how this topic came to be.

[OberynBlackfyre]

I don't say that none of them were guilty, just that many of them may not have been. It was negligence rather than willful punishing of innocents. It doesn't make Dany evil, but IMO it does make her a little hypocritical. I would respond similarly to almost any character who did the same thing.

we are not arguing hypocrisy here, we are arguing villainy.

[ab aeterno]

she did not ask the slavers, she asked the freed slaves. big difference there.

I believe, if you check, she asked the slavers to give up 168 of their own. That was the point IIRC.

[ab aeterno]

we are not arguing hypocrisy here, we are arguing villainy.

I never said she was a villain, but you could argue it. She's a villain to a great deal of Essos.

[Tyrion Tanner]

Poor jaegrM. Don't beat this person (prob a guy) up because you are reading too much into his topic. He wanted to look at the placement of some of the main non-male (what am I supposed to call them) characters. What is the difference if he chooses to focus this thread on only non-male characters? I've read some crazy topics on here regarding characters' sexuality (this one was today) and the conversation did not turn into anything other than discussion on the topic (not the OP's thoughts/motivations for bringing it up)

He was a dummy to lump in all female characters (how different are Lollys Stokeworth and Arya Stark). But some of these characters are actually at a cross-roads where my opinion on them will take a 360 turn if things play out as they look on the surface (Sansa taking part in a mini game of thrones up in the Vale, Arya killing an innocent just because she has been ordered to do so) Enough so, that I have read the topic searching for actual opinion in lieu of finger-waving.

Brienne is too hard to judge for me: Would she be turning on Jamie if she handed him over? If she did not, is she double-crossing whatever form of Catelyn Stark is out there?

[OberynBlackfyre]

I believe, if you check, she asked the slavers to give up 168 of their own. That was the point IIRC.

so if they gave up their own, then they are what? (rhymes with pavers)

[OberynBlackfyre]

I never said she was a villain, but you could argue it. She's a villain to a great deal of Essos.

nay not Essos, she's a great villain to the slave trade.

[JaegrM]

He was a dummy to lump in all female characters (how different are Lollys Stokeworth and Arya Stark). But some most of these characters are actually at a cross-roads where my opinion on them will take a 360 turn if things play out as they look on the surface (Sansa taking part in a mini game of thrones up in the Vale, Arya killing an innocent just because she has been ordered to do so) Enough so, that I have read the topic searching for actual opinion in lieu of finger-waving.

Brienne is too hard to judge for me: Would she be turning on Jamie if she handed him over? If she did not, is she double-crossing whatever form of Catelyn Stark is out there?

Thank you.

[Daenerys is my queen]

Ok.

I know I should just stfu because this is going badly for me, but I want to repeat, I REALLY didn't mean a black and white Good and Evil.

Villain was a wrong word to use apparently, I put it in quotes to imply that, but apparently that wasn't enough.

Brienne COULD have something up her sleeve.

Arya MIGHT not lose herself to vengeance and murder.

What I'm saying is women, way more than men are being positioned by Martin to make more defined major light/dark decisions, that will affect how they're viewed by a large percentage of readers.

Is Martin doing this on purpose?

Coincidence?

IMO every character,male or female has to choose between light and dark. And to me, a character is either mostly good or mostly bad. Of course a good character can do bad things and a bad character can do good things but to me what someone is truly like in their heart is what counts. :)

Love is accepting someone for who they are, flaws and all. I'm not very fond of Jaime's redemption myself, but that's also because the next step is a Cersei redemption arc, which would just destroy the series in my eyes.

I have my eye on you. <_<

You really think Cersei will have a redemption arc? Cause I don't.

Have they changed how words work?

I know, right. :lol:

[Bright Blue Eyes]

no he sent 2000 men he KNEW were innocent to certain death.....I don't see your point.

War is war. Dany was simply paying blood for blood, because shes a DRAGON

When and where? And don't say "show".

[R'hllor's Bastard]

Have they changed how words work?

Yes, but not recently, figurative language has been around for quite a long time.

[OberynBlackfyre]

When and where? And don't say "show".

wth are you talking about?? When Robb feinted on the major part of the Lannister force so the Whispering Wood could happen...?

[mormont]

[mod] Really, people, this is not the 167th iteration of the Dany-slavers debate. Stay on topic: that's not the topic. [/mod]

[Winter's Knight]

Yes, but not recently, figurative language has been around for quite a long time.

Eh?

Literal language refers to words that do not deviate from their defined meaning. Figurative language refers to words, and groups of words, that exaggerate or alter the usual meanings of the component words. Figurative language may involve analogy to similar concepts or other contexts, and may involve exaggerations. These alterations result in figures of speech.

For example, the sentence "The ground is thirsty" is partly figurative: "Ground" has a literal meaning, the ground is alive and therefore it needs to drink and it feels thirst. Readers immediately reject a literal interpretation and confidently interpret the words to mean "The ground is dry," an analogy to the condition that would trigger thirst in an animal. However, the statement "When I first saw her, my soul began to quiver" is harder to interpret. It could describe infatuation, panic, or something else entirely. The context a person requires to interpret this statement is familiarity with the speaker's feelings. Lacking this context, a person can give the figurative words a provisional set of meanings, but cannot correctly interpret the figurative utterance until acquiring more information about it.

So how is "villain" figurative?

[JaegrM]

The context a person requires to interpret this statement is familiarity with the speaker's feelings. Lacking this context, a person can give the figurative words a provisional set of meanings, but cannot correctly interpret the figurative utterance until acquiring more information about it.

I already said, I made a mistake by using the word because people apparently didn't understand what I meant

[Pyrrhus of Epirus]

Personally I think he's onto something. With the exception of Cersei, most of the other "main" female characters started off leaning more towards the decent side. But as the events played out through the books, by this current book, I've found myself pretty much not trusting any of the current female characters, as they've all been corrupted by one thing or another, or at the very least is on the verge of being corrupted. I really hope Stannis deals with Melisandre, I still don't trust her.

[Florina Laufeyson]

Ewww. Gender again...ugh...

Personally, im pretty sure every single character regardless of their gender has the potential to go down any road they chose. It really doesnt matter if they are male or female, every character with any importance seems to meet a moral fork in the road. Even Cersei could go the way of a heroine but...i doubt it given her arc and choices. Same thing with Roose. As for the OP's idea, no i dont see it. Just as i dont see Bran or Jon or Davos or even Tyrion becoming an outright villain.

[R'hllor's Bastard]

So how is "villain" figurative?

Scroll up, There were at least 3 posts explaining the figurative nature of "villian" in the op.

[OberynBlackfyre]

I think it's hard to talk about villainy or heroism in a book that purposely contains the theme that humanity has motivation/capability/requiem to do both, and even both at the same time.