Did Catelyn abuse Jon for his whole life? - Part 2

[Minsc]

The major problem for Catelyn Tully is that Jon is Ned's firstborn son, looks every bit a Stark and is well-loved by the Northerners.

Just one simple correction, but Robb is older then Jon or at least according to Ned he is.

[Dagon Greyjoy]

¿Wasn't Jon born during the Rebellion and Robb after it?

[Minsc]

Robb was also born during the rebellion as he was conceived at the very beginning of it, while Ned said he had conceived Jon during the middle of the war.

[Lady Blue Rose]

Jon is part of the Starks' family and...........

Exactly! It is the father's prerogative whether or not he will recognize a bastard. It is also Ned's prerogative where and how his son will be raised, as well as who can and cannot live in Winterfell. Jon belonged wherever Ned said he did. And although not by name, the Starks never doubted that he was family.

Very true.

It's one thing to believe Jon should be raised as an equal highborn, it's quite another to treat a person with such general disdain. No one deserves that. It's not like Jon had a choice or deserved it by his actions.

Is there any doubt that much of Jon's self doubt/loathing is because of way Cat regarded him?

I can't wait til UnCat/Cat finds out Jon's true lineage. We might even get an apology but I doubt it.

Everything you said!

I know!! Commenting on how much I am looking forward to an UnCat and Jon encounter is what got me into this thread in the first place!

Unless being called son and brother or nephew does not deem you related or family than I don't know what does. Just because Jon did not have the Stark name does not mean he is not family to the Starks they do call him that. And yes Jon does have a right to be at Winterfell because Ned chose to give him that right. And there are other examples of bastards in Westeros being brought up by their father and along side their true born siblings

Very true! Ned made him part of his family, called him his son, and chose to give him the RIGHT to be brought up in Winterfell. Cat is not being nice by letting him be there and he is not asking her to do it, He is demanding that she do it because it is his right to give.

Well said. This has nothing to do with being a woman at all. If I could somehow reverse these genders I would hold the exact same judgement. I am not here to vilify Cat. She is actually one of the most moral characters in Westeros IMO. However, where it concerns Jon I feel she let's petty jealousy get the better of her. She has every right to be incredibly pissed off about her incredibly unfair situation. its just that she absolutely should have focused her anger at Ned.

I actually also like Cat and relate to her later on in the book. I think part of what makes Cat character real and human is precisely the fact that she is very guided by her emotions and at times lets them get the better of her. I think that was the main reason that guided her perception and treatment of Jon.

[Crystal Grower]

But why would Robb have believed that she'd been "very kind" if this were the case?

Robb took his beloved brother's word at face value.

Look, everything you are saying here is projection.

It's speculation, not projection, and not unreasonable given what she says to him.

We have no indication that Cat actually hated Jon. The comment she made was malicious and unthinking, and I don't believe it can be "justified," but there is no reason to project the notion that she hated him and wanted him hurt here, or that it was anything other than extreme grief that caused her to say it.

Why it's likely more than extreme grief:

-Jon was walking away and leaving Cat's life persumably forever. The default action is to do nothing. Instead, she stops him. She calls him by his name which is something never done before, and then she says it. The action here is not instinctive, like the urge to snap at someone when one is under stress and that person does something unintentionally annoying, and not bothering to suppress the actual action because of the stress. Rather, her action here requires deliberate initiative on her part. This, for me and likely many others, is one indication of her hatred towards him.

Your reading is decidedly not textually supported given the multitude of other quotes many of us have provided from Cat's own POV that show she has nothing against Jon personally.

Enough people draw different conclusions. Otherwise, there would be no debate, nor would this debate have been sustained over the course of the entire book series.

As has been discussed at some length here, Cat would be "glad" to hear him say he only had brothers (of the NW) because she was duly concerned with her children's inheritance rights. This still does not show hatred toward him.

Renouncing all bloodtides goes well beyond concerns over inheritance. Furthermore, it's far more likely that this gladness would be toward Jon if he says this before he joins the Nightswatch.

Way to pull this line out of the context in which Cat tells us directly she doesn't hate Jon.

Despite your claims, nothing in this quote has Cat telling the readers that she doesn't hate Jon.

And why should Cat let Jon stay?

Momentum: Jon has been raised in Winterfell his whole life. He is also not an adult.

Better question: if Cat is so unduly harsh and hateful of him, why isn't Ned jumping at the chance to take him to KL? Why are you overlooking that?

It's not overlooked because it's not relevant. I have always maintained that Cat is not unduly harsh toward Jon. Therefore, Ned by default wouldn't think of getting Jon away from Cat until she makes it known that she wants Jon gone.

Again, Cat is "damnably cruel" for not wanting to be put in a position where she is in charge of Ned's bastard, but Ned is not being called out by you for refusing to bring him to KL with him.

Ned thinks it's cruel for Cat to evict Jon, who wouldn't be an adult for another two year, from his home. Such an eviction would likely deprive Jon, a boy, of food and shelter.

Ned should not be condemned for not taking Jon because Jon's home is not with Ned.

This is pure nonsense. There is absolutely no support for the idea that Cat wanted to terminate Jon's relationships to his siblings outside of muddying the legal possibility that Jon could interfere with their inheritance.

1) She repeatedly asked Ned to send Jon away to be fostered. Since Jon's best friend is Robb, which everyone knows, sending Jon away would effectively end this relationship. Ned even uses this closeness to pursuade Cat to not evict Jon.

2) The same applies to Arya.

3) Jon thinks that Cat would be glad that he announces that he has no sisters.

Nor is there support for the idea that Jon felt this from servants and siblings as well.

This is not a claim on my part, but a very minor speculation. The most important part of this speculation is that it follows "While Cat likely did not make this known to Jon directly", which does fit with my position that Cat did not treat Jon extremely poorly.

Also, show me where this has affected Jon negatively.

Not textual, but a logical conclusion when one knows that one's close relationship with others is disapproved by someone intimately close to the person of power.

Because Winterfell is technically not his place, and Cat fairly did want to know who he was and why he was there. I understand that this may come as a shock, but Jon is, for all intents and purposes, a bastard, and as such, "should" not have been raised at Winterfell the way Ned had. Cat reminded him that as a bastard, Winterfell belonged to Robb rather than him, but she is technically right in this;

You are evading the my actual argument. The relevant part is this: "She was looking at him the way she used to look at him at Winterfell, whenever he had bested Robb at swords or sums or most anything."

Giving a Jon this look whenever he achieves something dampens his sense of accomplishment and pride in being competent.

I still fail to see how Cat hurt Jon so deeply, given that he doesn't reflect on being hurt by her.

Not deeply, but still she still hurted him. Also, we don't need Jon's explicit thoughts of being hurt to conclude that he was hurt.

I think there's also an issue getting lost here, which is that Cat's role to Jon doesn't have a modern translation as a step parent or the like, so I fail to see why her behavior could be classified as abusive by even a "more loose definition of the word."

She's not a step parent, and I have never made that point as an argument. However, my argument doesn't predicate on the proper role of a step parent.

[David Selig]

Cat, as a duty to Ned, her husband, lord Stark who decides what goes on in Winterfell, Cat should have gotten over her ish as a duty to NED not Jon. NED, please read carefully.

Ned never asked Cat for this, and the society norms are very clear that's not expected of her at all. How can it be her duty then?

On the other hand, her duty towards her own children and the interests of House Tully (whose Lord risked everything by joining the rebellion so his grandson would be a Lord of Winterfell) demands that she gives Jon the cold shoulder and make whatever possible to minimise the threat he represents.