Claire McCaskil and SJW rage on Game of thrones. (spoilers mentioned)

[spinner981]

Doesn't particularly matter in this context, as Sansa's rape was clearly awful in both.

There is a difference between something being lawfully illegal and simply being considered by someone to be 'awful'.

[THE Bigzoman]

Doesn't particularly matter in this context, as Sansa's rape was clearly awful in both.


Are you saying her consenting to marriage is relevant to whether she was raped?

- - - Updated - - -



The irony here is dripping.

No, but marrying someone knowing full and well what would happen afterward does. Especially when it's hinted that the character has ulterior motives.

Though I think this has already been explained about 3-4 times now; I honestly lost count.

[Seezer]

Yeah, but I do, infact, thanks to you I plan to watch Game of Thrones backwards, just to see if there are any hidden subplots and messages. Honestly whether they censor it or not, I am not going to watch it, and since I am against things like promoting rape, I am going to support those that do or have watched it protesting.

They aren't "promoting" anything. You're just reaching.

[Kasierith]

o man.

you dont understand the subcontext of like, the entire series, at all.

or youre purposefully ignoring the entire parable aspect of the story to prove a point?

idk, im gonna go with the former.

If you go over your post again, you actually didn't counter a single thing she said. You just warbled about it.

[Wells]

There is a difference between something being lawfully illegal and simply being considered by someone to be 'awful'.

I'm not sure what "lawful" means in a world where the law is just whatever the guy at the top wants. It renders this distinction entirely pointless.

[apples]

If you go over your post again, you actually didn't counter a single thing she said. You just warbled about it.

o sorry im not here to argue points.

im here to point out that no one knows what theyre talking about.

thought that was clear, my bad

Infracted - please post constructively

[Wells]

No, but marrying someone knowing full and well what would happen afterward does. Especially when it's hinted that the character has ulterior motives.

So marrying someone knowing they might try to have sex with you means its not rape regardless of whether you actually consent to sex?

[KrazyK923]

They aren't "promoting" anything. You're just reaching.

Indeed. If the scene is supposed to make people feel bad, which seems to be what they were going for with people who aren't looking to be upset at everything, how would that be promoting it?

Sansa's scene is promoting rape insomuch as the scene in Robocop where Red Foreman and his goons blow away Alex Murphy is promoting gun violence. Which is not at all because that's fucking ridiculous.

[Rhine101]

Wow.

In GoT a marriage is not official till husband and wife fuck. They are expected to shortly after the wedding.

Therefore , in the universe created in this tale, consenting to marriage is consenting to sex.


Yea it sucked and was not romantic. The guy is insane. What did you expect? In real life, it's rape. In game of thrones , it's a normal Tuesday. Anyone who does not get this is a moron and just raging cause they have nothing else going on in their life at the moment. Go rage about women being raped in real life in the fucking Middle East for crying out loud.

[KrazyK923]

They are expected to shortly after the wedding.

Especially in the North where they have the bedding ceremony. SO much so that Ned Stark is considered weird for not doing so with Catelyn on their wedding night.

Does that make it right? No. But it does raise the question of consent when a noblewoman from the North agrees to marry another "noble"man from the North with this knowledge in hand. And even FURTHER is called into question because of the Littlefinger/Sansa scene in the crypts of Winterfell when she vaguely tells Littlefinger next time he sees her, she'll be a married woman.

[THE Bigzoman]

So marrying someone knowing they might try to have sex with you means its not rape regardless of whether you actually consent to sex?

Implying that, once she entered the marriage, that she would've actually had a choice in the matter.

[spinner981]

I'm not sure what "lawful" means in a world where the law is just whatever the guy at the top wants. It renders this distinction entirely pointless.

You're the one making said distinction. If there is no law to make rape illegal in the GoT universe, you can't just use our world's laws to determine what is and isn't rape in the GoT universe.

[mickybrighteyes]

None of those conditions apply to Sansa, she's the eldest child of a noble house that still has holdings.

She's now the eldest of a broken house that had it's holdings taken for the most part. Winterfell was sacked and taken by the ironborn and then taken again by the Boltons. She's back basically only to maintain some semblance of peace between the northmen cause Bolton has bigger plans

[Wells]

Implying that, once she entered the marriage, that she would've actually had a choice in the matter.

She was clearly coerced into having sex with him. So what relevance is her agreeing to the marriage?

- - - Updated - - -

You're the one making said distinction. If there is no law to make rape illegal in the GoT universe, you can't just use our world's laws to determine what is and isn't rape in the GoT universe.

He had sex with her without her consent. That's rape. I'm not sure why you have some issue here.

[KrazyK923]

She was clearly coerced into having sex with him. So what relevance is her agreeing to the marriage?

- - - Updated - - -

He had sex with her without her consent. That's rape. I'm not sure why you have some issue here.

Because you're ignoring quite literally every single piece of relevant information about the universe of Game of Thrones to just yell about rape.

[THE Bigzoman]

Especially in the North where they have the bedding ceremony. SO much so that Ned Stark is considered weird for not doing so with Catelyn on their wedding night.

Does that make it right? No. But it does raise the question of consent when a noblewoman from the North agrees to marry another "noble"man from the North with this knowledge in hand.

The real world application of rape is kind of pointless because of this.

No rational woman in the real world would knowingly enter a relationship where, she would not only be raped, but in an environment where it is encouraged and condoned.

- - - Updated - - -

She was clearly coerced into having sex with him. So what relevance is her agreeing to the marriage?

- - - Updated - - -



He had sex with her without her consent. That's rape. I'm not sure why you have some issue here.

Do you even watch the show or read the books?

This is getting kind of sad.

[Hawgwash]

In this magical upside down world of dragons and lemon cakes, the selling of a 13 year old girl to a vicious warlord to be his sex slave trophy wife could very well be the epitome of autonomous consent.

[Wells]

Because you're ignoring quite literally every single piece of relevant information about the universe of Game of Thrones to just yell about rape.

I'm still waiting for some piece of relevant information that makes "sex without consent" not rape.

[Martymark]

It wasn't rape. He's gross, but she married him to gain political power she wanted, and she was fully consenting to having sex with him on the wedding night. It was a transaction, and no more rape than any hooker with a John.

[spinner981]

He had sex with her without her consent. That's rape. I'm not sure why you have some issue here.

In the law of our universe it is, but if there is no law that dictates that is what rape is in the GoT universe (I don't watch GoT, so I don't know), ie: sex without consent, then you can't really call it the same kind of 'rape' as you would call it in our universe. Perhaps it might be your opinion that that is rape in the GoT universe, but it is only an opinion.