Game of Thrones - TV Series (NO BOOK SPOILERS)

Page 419 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,429
840
126
I doubt Tywin would have made the same mistake.
Fully agree.

Tyrion wouldn't likely have made that mistake either, unless he was totally desperate - last Hail Mary sort of deal.

Cersei OTOH made that deal simply because she's full of herself and bitchy, not because she had any viable long-term plan.
 

FallenHero

Diamond Member
Jan 2, 2006
5,659
0
0
This seemed inevitable. In the beginning there was some question as to whether or not High Sparrow was what he said he was, but everything since then implied there was only one way for this to end up. Reintroducing Cersei's cousin, the acolytes carving symbols into their foreheads...these dudes are true believers. And aside from maybe Little Finger, no one has more sins in Kings Landing than Cersei. The funny thing is High Sparrow didnt even have to have a scheme. It seems the smartest person this season so far was Cersei's uncle. He knew she didnt know wtf she was doing and left.

For most of the season I thought these episodes were kinda meh, but this one actually advanced two major storylines significantly. It was almost worth it to see Cersei's vainglorious shit eating grin that she's had the last 4-5 episodes wiped off her face.

I still dont understand Cersei's endgame thoughts. Who does she expect her son to marry so that the Lannisters remain in power? Every suitor that comes along she wants to murder or drive mad. And why does everyone follow her? She has no claim to power anymore. No one has verified that any order she has given has come from the king.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
109,388
27,110
146
Wow, only on the internet will people argue that "have sex with me or else" isn't technically rape if the person chooses sex. Go try that argument in court and see how it works "but your honor, I only threatened her to get her consent, it was consensual!" Lol. Because on the internet, everyone is right!

It's a completely indefensible position, but this is the internet. No matter how wrong you might be, the only option is to dig in and and stand your ground! :D

Dude has a history, though: probably the most stubborn poster on here in the last year, so he will never consider the possibility that he is wrong about anything. Ah well. :\

There must be some anger in real life, I suppose--gamersgate nonsense, RWM syndrome, whatever it is, this discussion is a projection of some slight being felt by "evil feminists ruining mah life!" Whatever it is, it's too late to turn back when one is convinced that that their RepressedWhiteMaleJusticeWarrior status must be heard.
 
Last edited:

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,816
83
91
I still dont understand Cersei's endgame thoughts. Who does she expect her son to marry so that the Lannisters remain in power? Every suitor that comes along she wants to murder or drive mad. And why does everyone follow her? She has no claim to power anymore. No one has verified that any order she has given has come from the king.

don't forget the prophecy that the season started with.

Queen you shall be... until there comes another, younger and more beautiful, to cast you down and take all that you hold dear.

Cersei is convinced that that's Margaery and is such doing everything she can to put the bitch down (although, from the viewer's POV, it could just as easily be Daenerys)
 

CZroe

Lifer
Jun 24, 2001
24,195
856
126
This seemed inevitable. In the beginning there was some question as to whether or not High Sparrow was what he said he was, but everything since then implied there was only one way for this to end up. Reintroducing Cersei's cousin, the acolytes carving symbols into their foreheads...these dudes are true believers. And aside from maybe Little Finger, no one has more sins in Kings Landing than Cersei. The funny thing is High Sparrow didnt even have to have a scheme. It seems the smartest person this season so far was Cersei's uncle. He knew she didnt know wtf she was doing and left.
You mean her brother Jaime?

For most of the season I thought these episodes were kinda meh, but this one actually advanced two major storylines significantly. It was almost worth it to see Cersei's vainglorious shit eating grin that she's had the last 4-5 episodes wiped off her face.



Yeah, her or Melisandre. I'm surprised some people are complaining about that prison scene. They dont really have any beef with Bronn, and he's a warrior like themselves so wtf, give him the antidote after making him squirm a bit. Better than killing off Bronn slowly after the worst fight scene in GoT. He deserves to go out like a boss.
How about leaving out the stupid poison thing all together? Save us from all those repeated shots with the same exact camera passes over and over and over. As hot as she was, that whole scene was amateur hour again.

You couldn't rape your wife in the time period in which this show is based. She was required to put out anytime the husband wanted it.
Universe. We don't know the time period. I don't blame you. Most people think Star Wars is set in the future. :p

the gift

castle black, pt1
ser alastair crowley is still an asshole.

winterfell, pt1
sansa is in pretty rough shape, clearly being abused to hell by ramsay. theon finds ramsay sitting in the broken tower - i saw that coming a mile away.
Wasn't that later in the episode?

castle black, pt2
maester aemon's death is very well done, imo. i'm not sure why this scene (or most scenes, for that matter) needed to be split in 2.
I expected the fire to do nothing to his body, since he's a Targaryan. ;)

winterfell, pt2
it seems they keep doing this to get from A to C without covering B.

somewhere north of winterfell (known as "the gift")
stannis' momentum is fading. is he really willing to sacrifice his daughter for the thone? yikes!
My take: He needed Melesandra's invitation and his wife's approval to get with her before but now he's getting all grabby even when she didn't invite it. Also, what was that about the sellswords who left? "Only loyal to gold?" Sounds like they weren't very loyal if you were paying them and they left. Are they saying that he wasn't paying them? Then how did he ever expect them to fight?

castle black, pt3
the night's watch is made up of thieves, rapists and murderers, still. honestly, gilly being attacked could have happened the day after she arrived there. the wolf saving them was another thing i saw coming a mile away, but i expected the wolf to tear them up. this leads up to the most realistic sex scene ever in game of thrones. another gift.

mereen, pt1
tyrion convinces the slave buyer (don king?) to take him with jorah, and the buyer slaps a handful of coins into the trader's hand. in the very next shot, the buyer has more coins in his hand to flip around. perhaps more gifts?

as lousy as daario neharis is, his idea of killing every single master is probably danerys' best option.

king's landing, pt 1
lady olenna's usual prowess is totally ineffective against a true believer, but it was pretty clumsy the way the writers simply tried to pay him off. a better approach would have been "i know you don't want gold, so what do you want?"
Good point. That's more in line with what I'd expect from her just like I'd expect Cersei to threaten the guy when he turned on her. Neither had the reaction I expected.

dorne
jamie is ignorant of myrcella's total disconnect from the family, and fails to point out the obvious - they've already tried to kill you once.
It's fun watching her whine at him about not knowing her as if he's just an uncle when we know it's her father.

bronn's scene is fucked up. the poison is apparently activated by the sight of boobs. then she let's him off the hook. her gift to him? it could have easily clinked off the bars and landed out of anyone's reach, which could be a good way to kill someone off. at least we're treated to a little song which adds a lot to the sense of immersion. and the hot sand snake. gifts for us!
She was raising his heart rate so that the poison would move through his system faster. Still stupid. Poison always having an antidote is like Texas Hiker's expectation that every virus can be cured by throwing resources at it.

king's landing, pt2
baelish gifts olenna "a handsome young man" but if he's referring to lancel condemning cersei, wasn't that happening with or without baelish?

mereen, pt2
jorah sees danerys at the pit, and decides now is his time. he sweeps through the surviving fighters like the angel of death, only he doesn't actually kill anyone. the gift of life?. tyrion is trying to file his way out of chains like an old cliche when the guard chops his chains with a sword??? ok. the guard has given the gift of freedom, the freedom to run directly out to the fighting pit. anyway, tyrion announces himself as jorah's gift to her. will she keep him? no receipt so you can't return him. leave him in the closet? a ha! re-gift him!
All I could think of was "gladiator rip-off." Oh, and "what is she going to do when she finds out that they are directly defying her and fighting slaves instead of free men?"

king's landing, pt3
cersei brings margaery a gift of her leftover dinner, the first gift that's refused in this episode.

cersei's religious fanatics inevitably turn on her. i'm reminded of egyptian president and father of modern terrorism, anwar sadat.
Can't believe she wasn't ready with a return threat or something. Are we supposed to accept that this was a surprise to her?

no, you suck as a human being because it was rape and you're failing to empathize with that fact
I didn't fail to empathize. I refused to delude myself about WHY I was empathizing and called it what it was: A tough decision to follow through with with emotions beyond the technical circumstances. I said so specifically last week when I said that it was the same emotions as if it were rape, but that does not make it rape.

Either you're sociopathic, trolling, in massive denial, or are just straight up ignorant, maybe a combination of any or some others I might be missing. Sansa never consented to Ramsay's sexual advances, she never needed to revoke any consent because she never gave it. Then her cries of obvious trauma/distress would be enough to convince any jury with any shred of human empathy. Even the dehumanized Reek could see what you fail to.
Yes. She. Did. It's not even debatable. She never showed any sign of distress to Ramsay in the episode. Yes, she grit her teeth and made a strained face, but Ramsay never saw it. I guess Gilly raped Samwell by your logic. She heard his pain, knew about his desire to stay true to his vows, and moved on anyway. That BITCH.

no, she was raped in that scene and apparently many times after, at best the writers simply failed to convey that fact for people as apparently dense as you
They conveyed it perfectly well, but we are arguing about what happened in that episode, not what happened after. Even then, lots of deadbeats beat their women. They get charged with domestic abuse. They only get charged with rape if rape is also a factor. Domestic violence is not the same thing as rape.

the people calling for boycotts are likely hypocrites for failing to do the same to the crimes enacted upon Theon that are just as bad if not worse, or any of the other horrible things that happen to many other characters in this universe. If anything Sansa hasn't suffered nearly as bad as those who have had it the worst. Heck, this episode (7) is an excellent example of that fact when Theon/Reek shares that what Sansa is experiencing can get much worse...
Those people are idiots in more ways than that. they chose something that wasn't even rape before starting their crusade. Why do YOU agree with them?

wrong, and now it seems possible that your position might simply be one of severe overreaction. I'm not screaming "RAPE!", I'm simply acknowledging that she got raped. I have no more problem with Sansa getting raped than I had with Theon being brutally tortured.
Fair enough. We disagree about whether or not it was rape. I still have a problem with people simply deciding that "it was rape" without even considering what led to that. Every single person severely over reacting like that FIRST had to jump to the "RAPE!" conclusion, so i am addressing that too.

again, it is entirely possible to consent to rape. If someone presents you with the option of death or sex, not choosing death is not the same as consenting to lawful sex.
At the wedding, when they asked if she "takes this man." There was no threat of death for saying "no." There was simply the knowledge that she would be less able to assert herself over The North and remain home. There WAS the knowledge that she would have to consummate the marriage with intercourse that night if she said "yes." She said "yes." It was a tough pill to swallow for what she wanted, but it was what she wanted and was not forced upon her. Minutes earlier she could have asked the woman dressing her to help right away. Before that she could have told Baelish "no." Hell, in the room with Ramsay, she could have changed her mind and refused to consummate. Killing a guest in your home does not bode well in that world.

except it was rape, and would legally be rape in our society, although not most of Westeros (although some more civilized characters such as Tyrion would see it for what it really was)
Good luck proving that in the court of law. To have an equivalent situation "in our society," there would need to be an agreement that it be consummated with intercourse (since marriage does not come with that assumption here). Let's just say it was in the prenup. That *IS* consent. She didn't say or do anything that the witness (Theon) could testify as revoking the consent given when she accepted that agreement. She never called it off. It wasn't technically rape, therefore, it wasn't legally rape.

yes it would. In modern society, husbands and wives do not owe each other sex. That simple fact is what people are empathizing with, and some are simply too fragile to be watching Game of Thrones.
...but GUESS WHAT? The equivalent in modern society would be making a CONTRACT that says that the marriage is not valid unless consummated and that absolutely would show that her agreement to marry constituted consent. The show has spelled it out for us multiple times: A MARRIAGE MUST BE CONSUMMATED TO BE CONFIRMED. It is expected. It is PART of taking the vows, therefore the sex on wedding night is consented to BY the vows. No one is talking about sex that happens later on. This is a fantasy world where that situation exists, but that doesn't mean it wasn't consent. You do know what "expectation" means, right? It was UNDERSTOOD. You can't just ignore that part when transplanting the scenario in the context of our society.

this is where you fail to recognize the story being told here, I can only hope its because you are dense and/or in denial to try and protect yourself from imagining the horror of the truth; Sansa was raped, plain and simple, shit happens in this horrible world of Westeros, and Theon is right, it could be worse.
The story being told HERE (this episode) had progressed from the story being told THERE (the last episode). In THAT EPISODE, she had not been raped. Period. Not technically. Not legally. Not at all in any way.

this is where I think you're pretty badly screwed up, because now it seems like you're in denial that it was rape simply because you're upset with the fact that other people are irrationally upset with it. I'm not upset with it in that way, not at all. Does it suck that Sansa got raped? Sure, I wasn't enjoying that scene, but it happened, and for better or worse it will affect her character moving forward. Sometimes characters just up and die without doing something great like we expect them to (Ned, Renly, Robb, Oberyn...) Sansa getting raped is something I find far less objectionable than Catelyn getting her throat slit after watching her son get murdered right after his pregnant wife (and every other man/woman supporting house Stark)
It wasn't rape. As I have said before, it had all of the emotional impact of her being raped, but it that doesn't make it TECHNICALLY rape.

see its hard to get a read on you, maybe you're just caught up in the semantics of legality, when the simple fact of the matter is that it was and has been made crystal clear that Sansa was not ok with Ramsay's advances, and any level of consent she had previously given or implied no longer applied.
As far as we know it was within her expectations and that is precisely why she sucked it up and didn't speak up or undeniably revoke her consent. It's one thing to say that she might have been too intimidated, it's another thing entirely to say that she absolutely was and therefore DID revoke consent. Jsut because we don't like the guy and just because she doesn't like the guy doesn't make it any less HER CHOICE that she followed through with.

Once again, she didn't know she was going to be assaulted on her wedding night. Awkward/uncomfortable sex is not the same thing as sexual assault.
"Assaulted?" So now we are assuming that doggy-style is assault? The bruises are from another episode and we had no reason to assume that he buggered her (or that the choice of orifice changes anything).

not consenting to Ramsay's sexual commands/advances when the time came is all that is necessary for it to be rape when Ramsay then proceeded to take her without that consent. Sex isn't something you sit down and agree to before having it and then there is no take-backs after that "handshake", if you're thrown a curve ball like surprise buttsex...oh but you already "consented", your ass is mine now!
It is there. No question. Are you even watching the same show? We have to sign a document and get it registered at City Hall or something while they have to consummate through intercourse. The show has made this very clear and even implied that a witness is somewhat normal/expected. It is why her marriage to Tyrian was nullified. She could have nullified the wedding by revoking consent. SHE FAILED TO DO THIS. She went in with the expectation of consummation which ABSOLUTELY IS PRIOR CONSENT and began voluntarily began taking her clothes off when he got rough by tearing her clothes off (which sometimes happens in rough consensual sex too). She took her clothes off for Tyrian too. It's an undeniably expected part of the ceremony. As for "buttsex," there was no way to know what orifice he was using. I assume that confirmation/consummation requires [ichinisan]vaginal intercourse[/ichinisan] and, thus, the potential for an heir, but who's to say it wasn't simply doggy style? Not sure how that changes anything.

It's a completely indefensible position, but this is the internet. No matter how wrong you might be, the only option is to dig in and and stand your ground! :D

Dude has a history, though: probably the most stubborn poster on here in the last year, so he will never consider the possibility that he is wrong about anything. Ah well. :\

There must be some anger in real life, I suppose--gamersgate nonsense, RWM syndrome, whatever it is, this discussion is a projection of some slight being felt by "evil feminists ruining mah life!" Whatever it is, it's too late to turn back when one is convinced that that their RepressedWhiteMaleJusticeWarrior status must be heard.
I seem to be defending it quite easily. That's because all the facts support me. I couldn't care less about the whole "gamersgate" crap. I had no idea what it was about for almost a year until I glanced at the thread here and never came back. I don't even know if "pro-gamersgate" means you support the anti-gaming SJWs or the anti-SJW gamers. Trying to categorize me using that is misguided. #notyourshield (yes, I picked up on that from my brief visit to the thread)

I have a PROBLEM with rampant idiocy spreading unchecked. I have a problem with people attempting to shame people for correcting people. I have a problem with the Internet becoming a place where people get dumber and dumber and mire in their stupidity while pushing back against any attempt to correct them ("GRAMMAR NAZI!"). I APPRECIATE it when someone corrects me and makes me less ignorant about something. I will never be ashamed to speak out and correct people. The people who have a problem with that are the people who have a problem in my eyes. They want to revel in their own blissful ignorance and they don't like being reminded that the world judges you based on your assumptions.

Remember this?
yQlvYWW.gif
ZOMG!
rrrrrrRRRRRRRRRAPE!
Lets keep that in the GOT thread pls.
It sounds like I'm in the right place to discuss this particular brand of idiocy. "It's rape because she made a face!" :rolleyes: She made a face because it was a tough pill to swallow and she knew that when she consented.

I let it go before I started typing. The issue isn't up for debate unless we start changing long-standing dictionary and legal definitions and go into hypothetical land. We might as well debate whether the sky is blue or green.

In any case it is an important point. Sansa would be a radically different character if all of that was consensual, given her behavior.
...except that somehow all of the actual facts end up being on the "not rape" side of the issue.
 

biostud

Lifer
Feb 27, 2003
17,304
3,424
126
Rape happens in married couples as well. Just because you're married doesn't mean that it is a free pass to violent sex.

Also she didn't actually marry of her own free will, but rather at gun point.
 
Mar 16, 2005
13,864
105
106
You mean her brother Jaime?


How about leaving out the stupid poison thing all together? Save us from all those repeated shots with the same exact camera passes over and over and over. As hot as she was, that whole scene was amateur hour again.


Universe. We don't know the time period. I don't blame you. Most people think Star Wars is set in the future. :p


Wasn't that later in the episode?


I expected the fire to do nothing to his body, since he's a Targaryan. ;)


My take: He needed Melesandra's invitation and his wife's approval to get with her before but now he's getting all grabby even when she didn't invite it. Also, what was that about the sellswords who left? "Only loyal to gold?" Sounds like they weren't very loyal if you were paying them and they left. Are they saying that he wasn't paying them? Then how did he ever expect them to fight?


Good point. That's more in line with what I'd expect from her just like I'd expect Cersei to threaten the guy when he turned on her. Neither had the reaction I expected.


It's fun watching her whine at him about not knowing her as if he's just an uncle when we know it's her father.


She was raising his heart rate so that the poison would move through his system faster. Still stupid. Poison always having an antidote is like Texas Hiker's expectation that every virus can be cured by throwing resources at it.


All I could think of was "gladiator rip-off." Oh, and "what is she going to do when she finds out that they are directly defying her and fighting slaves instead of free men?"


Can't believe she wasn't ready with a return threat or something. Are we supposed to accept that this was a surprise to her?


I didn't fail to empathize. I refused to delude myself about WHY I was empathizing and called it what it was: A tough decision to follow through with with emotions beyond the technical circumstances. I said so specifically last week when I said that it was the same emotions as if it were rape, but that does not make it rape.


Yes. She. Did. It's not even debatable. She never showed any sign of distress to Ramsay in the episode. Yes, she grit her teeth and made a strained face, but Ramsay never saw it. I guess Gilly raped Samwell by your logic. She heard his pain, knew about his desire to stay true to his vows, and moved on anyway. That BITCH.


They conveyed it perfectly well, but we are arguing about what happened in that episode, not what happened after. Even then, lots of deadbeats beat their women. They get charged with domestic abuse. They only get charged with rape if rape is also a factor. Domestic violence is not the same thing as rape.


Those people are idiots in more ways than that. they chose something that wasn't even rape before starting their crusade. Why do YOU agree with them?


Fair enough. We disagree about whether or not it was rape. I still have a problem with people simply deciding that "it was rape" without even considering what led to that. Every single person severely over reacting like that FIRST had to jump to the "RAPE!" conclusion, so i am addressing that too.


At the wedding, when they asked if she "takes this man." There was no threat of death for saying "no." There was simply the knowledge that she would be less able to assert herself over The North and remain home. There WAS the knowledge that she would have to consummate the marriage with intercourse that night if she said "yes." She said "yes." It was a tough pill to swallow for what she wanted, but it was what she wanted and was not forced upon her. Minutes earlier she could have asked the woman dressing her to help right away. Before that she could have told Baelish "no." Hell, in the room with Ramsay, she could have changed her mind and refused to consummate. Killing a guest in your home does not bode well in that world.


Good luck proving that in the court of law. To have an equivalent situation "in our society," there would need to be an agreement that it be consummated with intercourse (since marriage does not come with that assumption here). Let's just say it was in the prenup. That *IS* consent. She didn't say or do anything that the witness (Theon) could testify as revoking the consent given when she accepted that agreement. She never called it off. It wasn't technically rape, therefore, it wasn't legally rape.


...but GUESS WHAT? The equivalent in modern society would be making a CONTRACT that says that the marriage is not valid unless consummated and that absolutely would show that her agreement to marry constituted consent. The show has spelled it out for us multiple times: A MARRIAGE MUST BE CONSUMMATED TO BE CONFIRMED. It is expected. It is PART of taking the vows, therefore the sex on wedding night is consented to BY the vows. No one is talking about sex that happens later on. This is a fantasy world where that situation exists, but that doesn't mean it wasn't consent. You do know what "expectation" means, right? It was UNDERSTOOD. You can't just ignore that part when transplanting the scenario in the context of our society.


The story being told HERE (this episode) had progressed from the story being told THERE (the last episode). In THAT EPISODE, she had not been raped. Period. Not technically. Not legally. Not at all in any way.


It wasn't rape. As I have said before, it had all of the emotional impact of her being raped, but it that doesn't make it TECHNICALLY rape.


As far as we know it was within her expectations and that is precisely why she sucked it up and didn't speak up or undeniably revoke her consent. It's one thing to say that she might have been too intimidated, it's another thing entirely to say that she absolutely was and therefore DID revoke consent. Jsut because we don't like the guy and just because she doesn't like the guy doesn't make it any less HER CHOICE that she followed through with.


"Assaulted?" So now we are assuming that doggy-style is assault? The bruises are from another episode and we had no reason to assume that he buggered her (or that the choice of orifice changes anything).


It is there. No question. Are you even watching the same show? We have to sign a document and get it registered at City Hall or something while they have to consummate through intercourse. The show has made this very clear and even implied that a witness is somewhat normal/expected. It is why her marriage to Tyrian was nullified. She could have nullified the wedding by revoking consent. SHE FAILED TO DO THIS. She went in with the expectation of consummation which ABSOLUTELY IS PRIOR CONSENT and began voluntarily began taking her clothes off when he got rough by tearing her clothes off (which sometimes happens in rough consensual sex too). She took her clothes off for Tyrian too. It's an undeniably expected part of the ceremony. As for "buttsex," there was no way to know what orifice he was using. I assume that confirmation/consummation requires [ichinisan]vaginal intercourse[/ichinisan] and, thus, the potential for an heir, but who's to say it wasn't simply doggy style? Not sure how that changes anything.


I seem to be defending it quite easily. That's because all the facts support me. I couldn't care less about the whole "gamersgate" crap. I had no idea what it was about for almost a year until I glanced at the thread here and never came back. I don't even know if "pro-gamersgate" means you support the anti-gaming SJWs or the anti-SJW gamers. Trying to categorize me using that is misguided. #notyourshield (yes, I picked up on that from my brief visit to the thread)

I have a PROBLEM with rampant idiocy spreading unchecked. I have a problem with people attempting to shame people for correcting people. I have a problem with the Internet becoming a place where people get dumber and dumber and mire in their stupidity while pushing back against any attempt to correct them ("GRAMMAR NAZI!"). I APPRECIATE it when someone corrects me and makes me less ignorant about something. I will never be ashamed to speak out and correct people. The people who have a problem with that are the people who have a problem in my eyes. They want to revel in their own blissful ignorance and they don't like being reminded that the world judges you based on your assumptions.

Remember this?

It sounds like I'm in the right place to discuss this particular brand of idiocy. "It's rape because she made a face!" :rolleyes: She made a face because it was a tough pill to swallow and she knew that when she consented.


...except that somehow all of the actual facts end up being on the "not rape" side of the issue.

holy long reply
 

CZroe

Lifer
Jun 24, 2001
24,195
856
126
Rape happens in married couples as well.
Sure does.

Just because you're married doesn't mean that it is a free pass to violent sex.
Sure isn't, but violence not found until the following episode.

Also she didn't actually marry of her own free will,
Yes she did. It's not even disputable.

but rather at gun point.
Nope. There was NO threat indicated when she took her vows. None.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
346
126
"lady olenna's usual prowess is totally ineffective against a true believer, but it was pretty clumsy the way the writers simply tried to pay him off. a better approach would have been "i know you don't want gold, so what do you want?""

She thought he was a con man and therefore gold would be what he wants. And what else does she have to offer? The threat of cutting off food to people, she did that next.
 

Exophase

Diamond Member
Apr 19, 2012
4,439
8
81
Also, Dany nip-slip.

And after they employed every technique in the book to meticulously cover her. I don't care if they show her nude or not but the arm covers and stealth blanket robes are awkward and distracting.

Guess she didn't understand that she unleashed a true believer; not someone that could be bought.

I think she did understand that he couldn't be bought, at least not with money, otherwise she probably would have realized that the Tyrells (who have more money than the crown or Lannisters) would buy him.

Here's what I think she thought instead: that the High Sparrow wouldn't hurt people who have helped him out (Cersei, by giving him the position), that he'd protect his position (even if he's a true believer, he'd see it as a place where he could be more effective), and that Lancel wouldn't come forward with his confession since it'd be at his own detriment and since he said he'd forgiven Cersei.

And I think the High Sparrow actually is driven by more than religious purity. Olenna made a good point that he's focusing on the more harmless sins of visible targets when he could be taking down tons more and worse "sinners" of lower status. He's clearly been targeting the nobility. He has a very of-the-people mindset, and when Olenna threatens him he doesn't say that the gods will smite her, he says that the disenfranchised majority will rise against her.

That's what Cersei was missing here, that the High Sparrow legitimately wants to take down the powerful and give back to the powerless, and isn't going to see the crown as a respected institution that stands tall with the church.

At the very least, maybe king dickless will now get to murdering some cult assholes.

Like Cersei said, Tommen is in a bad situation because the Faith Millitant are basically keeping the prisoners as hostages and if things go bad can easily kill them. The response has to be strategic and surgical to remove them without this happening. What Tommen needs to do is send for his uncle Kevan to help him.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
346
126
Regarding rape, it seems a bit complicated.

Yes, one thing to deal with is the issue that in some cultures, including our own before the 1950's or so, sex was viewed as a marital obligation and there was no recognition of marital rape, so that we'd say such a situation was rape, while the society where it happened would not.

But there's more to it.

There's this gray area of 'unwanted sex' versus 'non-consensual sex'. And there's the issue of brutal sex versus gentler sex.

Clearly she is having sex she'd rather not. The primary coercion comes from her situation of having to marry at all - which is the danger she faces from the Lannisters, but it's not only that, she herself accepted the marriage for deceptive motives where she is wanting to get revenge for the murder of her family.

So to that point, she is 'consenting', knowing the marriage will involve sex - she didn't know it would be so brutal - for her own agenda.

I think those are the confusing things.

- The danger she faces pressuring her to accept marriage and therefore sex makes it 'rapey'

- The consent for the purpose of deceiving and getting revenge makes it partly consensual

- The culture that her husband has the right to sex with her means they don't recognize marital rape while we do, makes it rape

- The contrast with Lannister's saying he would choose not to have sex with her until she wanted to even though he had the right to makes the 'marital rape' issue clearer

- The sadism and brutality of the sex makes it seem much 'rapier'.

Clearly you have a woman who does not want to have sex, much less be brutalized, having both forced on her - rape - but her consent to the overall situation, under both duress of fleeing the Lannisters and needing safety and her desire to get revenge on her husband's family.

She wasn't kidnapped into a forced marriage. She did marry under duress. And manipulation. Is it reasonable for her to expect another Lannister sex-free marriage?

In a way, littlefinger is the rapist as well, putting her in a situation not for protection but for his own benefit that requires her to get married and be brutalized sexually.
 
Last edited:

Dr. Zaus

Lifer
Oct 16, 2008
11,770
347
126
just because she's consenting to have sex, that doesn't give Ramsay the right to have his way with her any way he pleases, you can revoke consent at any moment and that moment came very quickly with Ramsay

While I'm sure it did, It did NOT happen on screen.
 

Childs

Lifer
Jul 9, 2000
11,450
7
81
You mean her brother Jaime?

No, her uncle. At least I think it was. He is in charge of the Lannister army. And when Cersei called that council meeting to say she represents the king he told her to f off and left. Jaime on the other hand, bought into Cersei's manipulation easily.

How about leaving out the stupid poison thing all together? Save us from all those repeated shots with the same exact camera passes over and over and over. As hot as she was, that whole scene was amateur hour again.

The poisoning was probably a nod to Oberyn, and it makes sense that his daughters would do the same thing. If the fight choreography was better it would have been awesome. It should have been awesome. Still kinda shocked it was so bad.

And if you are going to do repeated shots on something, it would be those boobs. I dont mind the jail scene. In fact, I'm gonna watch it again right now!
 
Feb 6, 2007
16,432
1
81
Is someone seriously arguing that Sansa wasn't raped? Even after they show her the next episode covered in bruises and willing to forgive Theon for killing her brothers if he can only stop Ramsay from raping her every night? That was already a difficult position to justify, given that the first sexual encounter took place with Ramsay forcing Theon to watch, but with the information from the most recent episode, it's literally impossible to arrive at the conclusion that Sansa is consenting to the sex. She is not. It is rape. Don't be a fucking moron.

Incidentally, before watching the episode before last, which I missed while on vacation, my friend warned me "it ends in a really disturbing way." I immediately started thinking "shit, they're gonna kill off Tyrion, or Jon Snow, or Brienne, or Bronn, or Arya...." Does it make me a bad person that I was actually relieved that all that happened was the horrifying rape of an innocent young girl (there's a sentence I never thought I'd type)? I mean, yeah, that was shitty, but at least she's still alive. And now we can look forward to revenge... which probably won't happen, because GRRM is a mean bastard.
 

Exophase

Diamond Member
Apr 19, 2012
4,439
8
81
Jaime on the other hand, bought into Cersei's manipulation easily.

How so? He didn't go to rescue Myrcella because Cersei manipulated him (by fraudulently invoking Tommen's authority or some other method), he did it because his daughter is legitimately in danger. And he's trying especially hard to atone because he feels guilty over contributing to his father's death.
 

TheFamilyMan

Golden Member
Mar 18, 2003
1,198
1
71
the gift
winterfell, pt1
sansa is in pretty rough shape, clearly being abused to hell by ramsay. theon finds ramsay sitting in the broken tower - i saw that coming a mile away.

[/URL].

I was under the distinct impression that Ramsay was in his room and Theon betrayed Sansa by taking the candle to Ramsay. Did I miss some dialogue when Ramsay shows Sansa and Theon the flayed & dead woman where he said he knew about the broken tower sign that Sansa could place?
 

Exophase

Diamond Member
Apr 19, 2012
4,439
8
81
I was under the distinct impression that Ramsay was in his room and Theon betrayed Sansa by taking the candle to Ramsay. Did I miss some dialogue when Ramsay shows Sansa and Theon the flayed & dead woman where he said he knew about the broken tower sign that Sansa could place?

You didn't miss anything. Theon is just as much a broken piece of garbage as he's been for a while.

I could at least understand him being too cowardly to help Sansa out of fear of retribution, but he could have just blew off the request. Either he's so paranoid now he thinks Ramsay will find out about anything that anyone ever says or does or he really does feel loyalty to him despite understanding how cruel he is.
 

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,568
3
0
I was under the distinct impression that Ramsay was in his room and Theon betrayed Sansa by taking the candle to Ramsay. Did I miss some dialogue when Ramsay shows Sansa and Theon the flayed & dead woman where he said he knew about the broken tower sign that Sansa could place?

My interpretation was he was going to help Sansa and didn't know Ramsay was going to be in the tower. Then when he found Ramsay there he improvised. Would also fit Ramsay's MO of constantly testing Theon.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,429
840
126
I'd accept the castle being blown up with Theon, Sansa, and Ramsay in it, just so all this rapey discussion would end.
 

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,816
83
91
My interpretation was he was going to help Sansa and didn't know Ramsay was going to be in the tower. Then when he found Ramsay there he improvised. Would also fit Ramsay's MO of constantly testing Theon.

The candle was supposed to be placed in the window of the broken tower... Probably not somewhere Ramsey would house his study.
 

SolMiester

Diamond Member
Dec 19, 2004
5,331
17
76
no, you suck as a human being because it was rape and you're failing to empathize with that fact


Either you're sociopathic, trolling, in massive denial, or are just straight up ignorant, maybe a combination of any or some others I might be missing. Sansa never consented to Ramsay's sexual advances, she never needed to revoke any consent because she never gave it. Then her cries of obvious trauma/distress would be enough to convince any jury with any shred of human empathy. Even the dehumanized Reek could see what you fail to.


no, she was raped in that scene and apparently many times after, at best the writers simply failed to convey that fact for people as apparently dense as you

the people calling for boycotts are likely hypocrites for failing to do the same to the crimes enacted upon Theon that are just as bad if not worse, or any of the other horrible things that happen to many other characters in this universe. If anything Sansa hasn't suffered nearly as bad as those who have had it the worst. Heck, this episode (7) is an excellent example of that fact when Theon/Reek shares that what Sansa is experiencing can get much worse...


wrong, and now it seems possible that your position might simply be one of severe overreaction. I'm not screaming "RAPE!", I'm simply acknowledging that she got raped. I have no more problem with Sansa getting raped than I had with Theon being brutally tortured.


again, it is entirely possible to consent to rape. If someone presents you with the option of death or sex, not choosing death is not the same as consenting to lawful sex.


except it was rape, and would legally be rape in our society, although not most of Westeros (although some more civilized characters such as Tyrion would see it for what it really was)


yes it would. In modern society, husbands and wives do not owe each other sex. That simple fact is what people are empathizing with, and some are simply too fragile to be watching Game of Thrones.


this is where you fail to recognize the story being told here, I can only hope its because you are dense and/or in denial to try and protect yourself from imagining the horror of the truth; Sansa was raped, plain and simple, shit happens in this horrible world of Westeros, and Theon is right, it could be worse.


this is where I think you're pretty badly screwed up, because now it seems like you're in denial that it was rape simply because you're upset with the fact that other people are irrationally upset with it. I'm not upset with it in that way, not at all. Does it suck that Sansa got raped? Sure, I wasn't enjoying that scene, but it happened, and for better or worse it will affect her character moving forward. Sometimes characters just up and die without doing something great like we expect them to (Ned, Renly, Robb, Oberyn...) Sansa getting raped is something I find far less objectionable than Catelyn getting her throat slit after watching her son get murdered right after his pregnant wife (and every other man/woman supporting house Stark)


see its hard to get a read on you, maybe you're just caught up in the semantics of legality, when the simple fact of the matter is that it was and has been made crystal clear that Sansa was not ok with Ramsay's advances, and any level of consent she had previously given or implied no longer applied.

Once again, she didn't know she was going to be assaulted on her wedding night. Awkward/uncomfortable sex is not the same thing as sexual assault.


not consenting to Ramsay's sexual commands/advances when the time came is all that is necessary for it to be rape when Ramsay then proceeded to take her without that consent. Sex isn't something you sit down and agree to before having it and then there is no take-backs after that "handshake", if you're thrown a curve ball like surprise buttsex...oh but you already "consented", your ass is mine now!

Yeah, that's all fine in the modern world we live in, however.........this is a fictional TV series and TBF, a lot of the series depravity is already a part of our history!
Crying foul over a fictional story seems silly to me!
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY