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.
Good, you at least understand she was "raped", now you're just confused about semantics.
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.
maybe you're hard of hearing? Sansa was crying out in obvious distress. And, ignoring the fact that Sam initiated things by asking Gilly to stay, when Sam had his own moment of distress,
Gilly stopped and asked if Sam was ok, double-checked, and only continued when Sam confirmed. Ramsay did none of this, and continued upon a course of action that made Theon/Reek cry.
They conveyed it perfectly well
apparently not well enough if you're still struggling with it
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.
you're right, its possible to be the victim of a rape even with the rapist being 100% tender/caring/loving. Ramsay would be guilty of rape
and battery, along with all his other crimes of torture/murder/etc.
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?
I agree that its rape because its rape. I don't agree with them otherwise, the show didn't go too far, Sansa doesn't deserve any more protection than any other character, although she's certainly been spared more than others.
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.
but it was rape... Sansa's noncompliance when Ramsay commanded her to take off her clothes (something Tyrion stopped Sansa from doing on her own accord), Ramsay then taking her forcibly when she didn't comply to his satisfaction, Sansa's own
obvious cries of distress with clear negative connotation (i.e. not merely an uncomfortable annoyance), and of course Theon weeping at the sight of what he was witnessing instead of just looking uncomfortable in an awkward situation
At the wedding, when they asked if she "takes this man." There was no threat of death for saying "no."
Yes there was. The Boltons murdered most of her immediate friends/family/court. If she did not comply and play their game, she would be a hindrance to their claim on the north and they would kill her just like the rest of her family, and just like how they have attempted to hunt down and kill Bran and Rickon upon discovering that Theon didn't actually murder the Stark boys.
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.
of course, we agree here, but while she was apparently willing to consummate the marriage, she was clearly not ok with how Ramsay wanted to go about it. That's all that it takes. Ramsay might be legal in terms of Westerosi standards, but not by modern IRL ones.
Again, I'll use the Tyrion example - Tyrion gave Sansa the power to make the choice that has been denied to her in this world even though it was completely within Tyrion's right to take her and have his way with her as her husband in such a realm.
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.
Again, putting yourself in a situation that increases your chance of getting raped does not mean you consent to any rape that happens.
Killing a guest in your home does not bode well in that world.
didn't stop many/most of the characters we've seen with the same situation. If I'm a Stark I sure as hell no longer hold
any faith in such hospitality "laws"
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.
coercion is a factor in rape, proving that Sansa was unable to give consent to Ramsay's sexual acts would be
easy to prove. Hell, the fact that Sansa is still a minor by our laws would be a slam dunk
before considering all the evidence.
I will 100% agree that Ramsay was within his rights in Westeros,
but that doesn't make it not rape in our eyes. Just like how slavery was considered justified at times in the past, now most civilized minds find it abhorrent.
...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 problem here is that such a contract pretty much could not exist in modern society, it would be like signing a contract to be someone's slave, it just wouldn't hold up because we have laws that prevent it. It doesn't matter if it was legal then, it wouldn't be legal now, and we would consider it equally wrong regardless of when/where it takes place.
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 why people shouldn't be so upset by the rape because Sansa took a calculated risk and suffered the consequence. That doesn't mean she wasn't a victim of rape by our standards
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.
maybe it helps give you peace of mind to pretend that she wasn't raped? but that's what the writers intended to convey
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.
it was just as bad as rape but it wasn't rape?
how about we call this spade a spade
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.
or she didn't speak up or undeniably revoke consent because she lives in a world where that has never been a legitimate option for her in such situations. Plus the moment she proves she's actually trying to play the Boltons and not play their game is the moment she's dead.
"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).
rape and sexual assault are generally synonymous, rape can be tender and loving by the rapist but that doesn't make it any less rape, albeit likely a whole lot less traumatizing than what Sansa suffered as it was pretty clear that the show's intention was to convey brutal sexual assault without actually showing it (that, I would argue, would be taking it too far)
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!"
She made a face because it was a tough pill to swallow and she knew that
when she consented.
humans with properly functioning brains and adept in social interaction are able to determine the difference between tears and cries of joy and those of distress
...except that somehow all of the actual facts end up being on the "not rape" side of the issue.
except that you're wrong about the facts
and about what constitutes rape
Facebook
Twitter