why all the littlefinger hate?

[NorthSouthEastWesteros]

Making a villain a touchy-feely pedophile is a pretty effective way to vapourize any sympathy for him.

Technically he's a hebephile as Sansa has 'flowered. >helpful<

Seriously though, his whole 'doesn't that deserve another kiss?' 'Can I come into your castle?' 'Remember to call me Daddy' (okay I made that one up but still)

Urrrgh, Shudder

[Mikkel]

'Remember to call me Daddy' (okay I made that one up but still)

Meh, he probably said it just not "on screen"

(of course I'm joking, there's plenty of textual reasons to hate on LF, we don't need to make any up :D)

[Lord Illidan Stormrage]

Meh, he probably said it just not "on screen"

(of course I'm joking, there's plenty of textual reasons to hate on LF, we don't need to make any up :D)

Was it too graphical to be showed to screen? If yes then it's truly disturbing.

[NorthSouthEastWesteros]

Meh, he probably said it just not "on screen"

(of course I'm joking, there's plenty of textual reasons to hate on LF, we don't need to make any up :D)

Snort :D

Well he went out of his way to say he's not her father but we can play pretend.

Sorry he's just so cheesy I can see crappy 70's porno music in the background :D

[The Meeraculous Third Reed]

I don't care about tone, I care about importance. The Tyrell negotations and the return of the Redwyne hostage are exponentially more important to House Lannister than Jeyne Poole. So you saying that Littlefinger is not trusted to handle the latter, when he's trusted to handle the former is nonsense.

If you don't care about tone then you don't care about diplomacy. Also, I don't think I said he wasn't trusted to conduct Stark negotiations. I said he was chosen for the Tyrell negotiations but not the Stark one, and that showing an interest in Stark negotiations (which you've admitted are less important than those with the Tyrells) would just bring unnecessary questions.

That doesn't make it unrealistic. It makes it something Littlefinger doesn't want to do. This is why people are criticising him.

Yes it does make it unrealistic. It has an unrealistic chance of success. It's an unrealistically perverse and stupid gamble. It's would be action unrealistic with the times. It's an action that realistically nobody in their right mind would undertake.

I've never once argued Littlefinger is alone in being a piece of shit. This is just pettifogging to try and bandage a severely weak argument.

It's not though, because your bile for the Great One is clearly more than it is for other characters. We've seen it in this very thread with your belief that war is essentially purely to do with the Great One's actions.

That's not what unrealistic means.

You know perfectly well what I mean.

He seeks to use money; the crown incomes getting him the Master of Coin job, the Harrenhall incomes allowing him to marry Lysa, buying up the debt of Houses in the Vale securing his position as Lord Protector, his building of the Tyrell alliance with "gold reasons", his influence in King's Landing by bribing everyone with a pulse.

Littlefinger has no army, no strong political influence, he has gold. Tyrion himself declares;

Declaring he wouldn't have a use for more gold is just a spectacular misunderstanding of the character.

The Harrenhal incomes matter little in getting Lysa' hand. It's the title that does it. Buying up debt serves a purpose in that it paralyses other houses who may be hostile to him. So does bribing people. Ransoming Jeyne doesn't. The Great One uses money as a means to an end. Acquiring a nominal amount through Jeyne in a one-off payment is not going to make one iota of difference to his plan or ability to function in the way he does. Believing that he seeks gold above all else is a spectacular misunderstanding of his character. He seeks influence.

Because...?

As stated, Catelyn is a person who risks her neck for strangers. Why wouldn't she try and help the best friend of her beloved daughter?

Because it has never been registered at any point that she would care. The thought doesn't even enter her mind. Not to mention it would serve absolutely no functional purpose (unless Jeyne had information).

Not when they married. Robb married her because he wanted to preserve her honour, even though she was a stranger.

Oh please. I think it's pretty clear that Robb was falling for her by the time they knocked boots and got married. She was not a stranger when they married.

Catelyn could easily have left Brienne there.

Yet taking her was not by any means an act of extreme kindness that Catelyn pondered over before doing. Catelyn did nothing extraordinary to take Brienne with her.

The far safer option, for both Catelyn's well being and Robb's chances of a Tyrell alliance, would be to throw Brienne under the bus. If Catelyn was caught by Renly's forces, an extra warrior would mean nought. Catelyn does a very selfless and very damaging thing here to save an innocent.

Any chance of a Tyrell alliance died the moment Renly did.

Wrong;

Again, Robb's true north; his honour.

So the murder of two children (thereby directly breaking a rule set out by the King of the North) had nothing to do with Robb's decision to execute Karstark. Come on.

Because everyone thinks she's dead.

So when she was assumed dead all traces of her in Catelyn's memory were erased?

The smallfolk don't give a shit about Ned's household guard; why would they care about that when House Lannister is directly killing them. Or to put it more eloquently;

It is a very rare situation for the popularity of the crown to improve when people know they slaughtered women and suppliants. There are but few ways that works well in the PR department (a game which becomes very important due to Joffrey's douchery)

Jorah Mormont is not the fountain of knowledge he believes himself to be. His quote also suggests that the people don't care as long as there is peace. What the Lannisters do to Ned's household (admittedly Ned more than anything else) helps to accelerate the gears of war.

My argument isn't solely dependent on the household guard, it's dependent on what people may know. Jeyne may have been told by Sansa that Cersei and the Lannisters knew of Ned's plan to send her home (and therefore to act against the Lannisters) prior to events occurring. If the Lannisters had acted differently then much bloodshed could (very important word) have been avoided. Depending on when Sansa told Cersei, the problem of Renly could also have perhaps been nipped in the bud early days (thereby preventing the closing of the Roseroad that leads to KL starving). She may equally have not, but the fact that she may know more than is good is reason alone to keep her prisoner.

This isn't told to the smallfolk; this is told to Robb by Roose. Do you think Robb doesn't assume Ned's household dead? Do you think finding out they are dead is going to worsen Robb's image of House Lannister? How can it?

Who cares who tells whom at that point? The story can easily be passed on. The issue is that even Ramsay Bolton (who was trying his damnedest to frame Theon, which meant he was attempting to make the event look as horrible as possible) did not kill the women when he was sacking Winterfell. Not even when attempting to make an event seem as heinous as possible did he kill the women. I understand he wanted many of them for his own means, but slaughtering women and suppliants just doesn't seem like the done thing. Unless the Lannisters are really truly sure that Jeyne's potential PR could not in any way haunt them in the future (and they can't be 100% equivocally sure while the war hangs in the balance), there is no reason to trade Jeyne.

The Lannisters are already known as the family that killed Elia of Dorne and two babies! That burnt Castamere to the ground! That sacked King's Landing! Why do you think this incident is unique for them?

The Elia/KL incidents were incidents masked by the fact that the sack effectively ended the war (in addition to which, they happened in wartime, which Ned's arrest didn't Subtle difference but one that could influence thinking). They were further masked by the marriage of the "liberator" Robert Baratheon with Cersei. The Castamere incident was the result of a house rebelling for a second time and through Tywin wishing to re-establish power. The Lannisters never lost power in KL so had no need to act as if they had.

There is also the nature of short-termism. The Lannisters (and possibly Tyrells too, I'm not sure) are despised when the Roseroad is closed and King's Landing is starving. This almost leads to Joffrey's death in the riots. A few months later come his wedding Joffrey is almost popular again (Margaery assisted). The opinions of the smallfolk matter more in the city, where they can mob effectively, and Jeyne's stories, no matter how small the possibility is, and it's not large, could come back to haunt the Lannisters. It just makes no sense to release her.

As I've said, and you ignored, Cersei already seperated them. There's no potential for any problem.

After they'd spent time together.

Insofar as everything diplomatic is military; but Robb's terms aren't a military play.

Well they were, and the fact remains that if you look at who is traded over the course of the war, they all have military value. Such is the nature of hostage negotiations.

[Techelles]

Because it has never been registered at any point that she would care. The thought doesn't even enter her mind. Not to mention it would serve absolutely no functional purpose (unless Jeyne had information).

I guess I'm not surprised that someone who tries so hard to defend LF's atrocities doesn't quite get the idea that Robb and Cat are fundamentally moral people who actually give a damn about things like the responsibility of the nobility to those who swear them allegiance.

[The Meeraculous Third Reed]

So you're ignoring Robb Stark's financial situation, and banking on him counting coppers over helping a childhood friend? Again, a spectacular misreading of a character.

Again, it's not. Dicer has provided a pretty good explanation as to why negotiating for Jeyne monetarily is a non-starter.

Killing Jeyne's father doesn't make her 'not a noble' you know.

Yet it does leave her with absolutely no value whatsoever. None. House Poole are not providing swords that we know of, Jeyne has no family to be returned to (if any didn't go to KL they would most likely now be Bolton prisoners), they are contributing nothing to the war effort. She is for all intents and purposes a smallfolk in negotiation terms.

Yes they do, Sansa comes to Cersei the night before the coup. Ned and Sansa are never reunited again after the coup. There's zero opportunity for Ned to have told her anything about the will, about the coup, about anything.

Apart from in the months they'd spent living side by side in KL while Ned gathered evidence.

But they know they weren't present for anything damaging. There's nothing to tell.

Cannot know that 100%.

So? Do you think Cersei knows or cares? She ordered him to get her out of the city.

Yet never, as far as know, to relieve her from his presence/ send her to the Fingers. Also, I doubt the Great One cares for what Cersei knows or cares. Varys, Tyrion et al on the other hand are a different matter.

She doesn't become potentially damaging because you keep saying it. It contradicts everything Cersei says to Littlefinger about the girl.

Cersei is not a fount of knowledge nor of thinking ahead/understanding the potential of her actions.

Off to a bad start here.

No, Tywin never justifies the sack as a way of getting into Robert's good book. I mean, how could he? Robert had King's Landing. Aerys army was destroyed on the Trident. Why would Robert thank Tywin for sacking a city Robert wanted to possess? Tywin did this to solidify his reputation as a person you don't fuck with.

No, Robert didn't. He was most likely to win eventually, but he did not have KL. Robert refers to what Tywin did as something that had to be done. Indeed, it's implied he's almost glad they did it.

..we had come late to Robert's cause. it was necessary to demonstrate our loyalty.

That is what Tywin says to Tyrion. If that isn't an exercise in PR, I don't know what is.

No, this is the justification he uses for killing Elia, Aegon and Rhaenys. This he justifies because he knew Robert didn't want to be seen killing children, and Tywin was more than happy to do it. So as we can see, Tywin is perfectly happy to use bad PR to advance his standing.

Yes but he was able to cancel this out by marrying Cersei to the (popular at that time) Robert.

And so why would a man who wanted this persona be scared of having it re-enforced with the Red Keep slaughter?

Because they served different purposes.

What?

They invade the Riverlands over Tyrion's arrest. They remind people of Castamere through song.They keep Clegane around and protect him specifically because;

They dismissed Barristan, and hung the innkeeper at the Crossroads for being present at Tyrion's arrest. They executed people in open court after the Blackwater.

The Lannisters are not, and have never tried to appear just. They try to appear strong. The Jeyne story aids this narrative.

If that was the case then surely they would release her?

He says when an enemy has bent the knee you help them up, but the Starks had not bent the knee, and refused to do so, hence this Tywin-ism is completely irrelevant to our discussion of Jeyne.

Well I was unsure of the quote.

You don't need a POV to get textual evidence.

If you are asking for intimate knowledge of what exactly was discussed by whom in the lead-up to the RW, then without a POV you are going to struggle to get textual evidence. However, with the evidence we have, we know that the RW was planned with such secrecy that Tywin would not even tell his son about it.

Hey, if you want to make a thread about how Varys is despicable, I'm all ears, but I'm only pointing out the cockless wonder is pulling off moves Littlefinger appears too scared off.

Well you weren't pointing out anything, because this was a response to a quote from someone else. I was simply highlighting the strange hypocrisy that leads one to list the Great One's crimes as being the act of a most horrendous man (not necessarily disagreeing) and yet not flicker an eye-lid for mass infanticide.

[Jasta11]

I guess I'm not surprised that someone who tries so hard to defend LF's atrocities doesn't quite get the idea that Robb and Cat are fundamentally moral people who actually give a damn about things like the responsibility of the nobility to those who swear them allegiance.

I think you're wasting your time with him. Anybody that calls Littlefinger the ''Great One'' (lol) and attempts to rationalize putting an 11 years old girl in brutal sex slavery as completely normal is not worth it IMO.

[The Meeraculous Third Reed]

I guess I'm not surprised that someone who tries so hard to defend LF's atrocities doesn't quite get the idea that Robb and Cat are fundamentally moral people who actually give a damn about things like the responsibility of the nobility to those who swear them allegiance.

I've never defended his atrocities on a moral level. At any point.

I think you're wasting your time with him. Anybody that calls Littlefinger the ''Great One'' (lol) and attempts to rationalize putting an 11 years old girl in brutal sex slavery as completely normal is not worth it IMO.

I've never said it was normal and I've never tried to morally justify it.

[Kittykatknits]

I've never defended his atrocities on a moral level. At any point.

I've never said it was normal and I've never tried to morally justify it.

So what? You're making an argument to defend his use of sexual slavery which is repugnant no matter the particulars of the argument.

[Broken Fox]

Third Reed,

[Dicer]

Some posters here seem to be conflating any discussion or debate about any of Littlefinger's actions with accepting and justifying his reprehensible actions. Discussing whether there was any sense in Littlefinger going behind the Lannisters backs and secretly trying to ransom Jeyne Poole to the Starks is not the same as defending his putting her in a brothel for God's sake!

That is not what we are discussing. We are discussing whether LF should have ransomed Jeyne to the Starks. We are discussing if it was feasible for LF to do so. If it was worth the risk to ransom her, whether the Starks would have accepted paying large amounts of money, whether LF would have got into trouble with the Lannisters if they had found that LF had gone behind their back and ransomed off Jeyne, whether he is the type of person who would have smuggled her out at risk to himself, whether she was worth smuggling out etc. etc.

Was it right for LF to put Jeyne in a brothel? NO. I think we can all agree on that. I think Third Reed agrees with that. Let's move on from accusations of being rape apologists and defending sexual slavery.

Yeah, I am done with this discussion.

[The Meeraculous Third Reed]

So what? Your making an argument to defend his use of sexual slavery which is repugnant no matter the particulars of the argument.

I've not defended that either though.

When Jon Snow chops Janos Slynt's head off for disobeying him, most readers were happy. Do these people defend the death penalty? I doubt they do, but they rationalise it within the scenario it is presented.

Tyrion set the Blackwater alight, and burned thousands of people alive. I've never felt the need to defend Tyrion on that account (and I don't like Tyrion very much) because I rationalised the use of the Wildfyre in the scenario it was presented.

When Davos Seaworth continues to serve a man who burns people alive on a semi-regular basis, people rationalise his continued support for the greater good when deciding how to defend Davos. Same concept can also be applied (less so) to Stannis.

When people chant their support for Wyman Manderly, the man who kills, cooks and eats human beings out of spite (and to prevent his granddaughter having to marry one), are we defending cannibalism? Murder? No. We do however rationalise it within the context of the scenarios in which they were presented.

When we place the pushing of Bran out the window into our understanding of Jaime's changing character, people do not defend Jaime's pushing Bran out the window, but it is worth factoring in as to what makes him the man he becomes.

None of this is relatvism. I've never attempted to defend what the Great One does on any kind of moral level. I've never said the ends justify the means. I do however place what he does into the context of how (and why) he is able and allowed to operate and understand that there is at least some epistemic difference between the world of the books and the world outside this forum.

[lady m]

I've not defended that either though.

Yes you have. When you say his only two options were prostitution or death, you're defending forcing Jeyne into sexual slavery as a valid option. When it's morally grotesque. I'd also say, he has lots of other options besides that, he owns a lot of businesses where he could put her to work in a way that is not related to sex. If he had to put her to work in one of his brothels he could have made her a scullery maid, or a washer woman or scrubbing floors, there's lots of things required to make a high end brothel work besides just sex.

[MasterJack]

who cares about jeyne, 100 000+ men/women died horribles ways since the wars started. She owes LF her life as well as her abuses. LF is a Dark-Grey character to me, not pitch black as lot of you are saying.

[Kittykatknits]

I've not defended that either though.

<snip>

None of this is relatvism. I've never attempted to defend what the Great One does on any kind of moral level. I've never said the ends justify the means. I do however place what he does into the context of how (and why) he is able and allowed to operate and understand that there is at least some epistemic difference between the world of the books and the world outside this forum.

This thread isn't about Jon, Stannis, Tyrion, Manderly, or anyone else. If you want to discuss the morality of their actions, start a thread about it.

I've read through post after post of your presenting LF as someone in an either/or situation WRT to Jeyne: a life of prostitution or death. None of that is supported by the text as Cersei's instructions to LF was to get Jeyne out of the city. Otherwise, Cersei didn't care at all, she just wanted Jeyne separated from Sansa. You've somehow gone from that to this either/or in an attempt to explain away his options. It's repugnant. LF could have had her mucking stables, working in a kitchen, sweeping floors, becoming a silent septa, or any other option. Yet, the man chose to give her over to a brothel where she was obviously tortured and trained. This death or life of prostitution argument paints LF as a man who saved Jeyne's life when there is absolutely nothing in the text to support this position.

And as to defending on moral level or ends justify the means, well sometimes, if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck.....

[Queen Sansa Stark]

who cares about jeyne, 100 000+ men/women died horribles ways since the wars started. She owes LF her life as well as her abuses. LF is a Dark-Grey character to me, not pitch black as lot of you are saying.

We never get told specifically what happens to those people. With Jeyne, however, it is told in detail what exactly happens to her. She is a child and her fate is worse then death. Nobody, and I mean absolutely nobody, should go through the pain she went through.

[Lord Bronn Stokeworth]

A woman in a marriage still has some protections that a sex slave does not. If Cersei just disappeared into an unmarked grave, does anyone think Tywin would not have reacted? But what does a sex slave have to protect her?

I am not saying women in arranged marriages had it good. But they at least had some protections that a sex slave lacks.

[A Man Has Said]

Betraying Ned in the throne room scene (where Cersei tore up Robert's will) is just one strike against him. He also falsely put the blame on Tyrion for the assassination attempt on Bran. Plus his pedophilic and manipulative use of Sansa. Plus his despicable use of Sansa's friend Jeyne.

When he's not being amoral he's being positively immoral. What's not to hate?

[Eating My Wings]

who cares about jeyne, 100 000+ men/women died horribles ways since the wars started. She owes LF her life as well as her abuses. LF is a Dark-Grey character to me, not pitch black as lot of you are saying.

I do care. And Petyr is so black that Planck's law apply to him.