Support NeoGAF

[Cybit]

Yet weird there is still only one who actually said legislate it which is the only one who is actively calling for censorship. The other two have strong opinions but aren't actively calling for legal action.

So you have 1 person calling for actual censorship and 99.9999% who are trying to have a discussion but yes let's conflate that one person so you can decry censorship and the lack of artistic freedom as if that's what's truly at stake.

Someone else has mentioned a third that wasn't in the books.

I said 3 with you because I misread your statement. I thought you said one and then listed two that weren't but now see you were only talking about 2 in total.

EDIT: I conflated someone saying they don't want it on TV with supporting legislation to get rid of it; which was wrong. My bad. I still think that from an overall view (beyond NeoGAF); there are plenty of folks who would happily push for a soft ban (not official, but just lots of pressure functionally causing a ban) of any rape scenes in media.

As for the "3" situations involving main female characters (distinct lack of concern for Theon, but, hey, he's a guy, so apparently he doesn't count) - spoilers ahead

1) Dany and Khal. In both mediums, it is statutory rape due to the age of Dany. In the books, Khal is "tender" (relatively speaking) towards her the first night, but as many people forget, after that first night, he is so brutal with her that she debates committing suicide. In the show, they have him be more brutal from the get go, but never hitting the level of the books. So it's about even

2) Cersei and Jaime; in the books it is shown as consensual from Jaime's POV, something Martin brings up when the TV episode airs, saying that the TV show is not being written from a character's POV, and thus may be more neutral. The TV showrunners admit that they tried to make it messed up consensual but based on critical response; it appears they failed in the execution. This might be the only one they added per se, but even then, it's at best a failure of execution rather than intent. Which is important if folks are saying "they deliberately added more scenes on TV"

3) Ramsay and Sansa; Sansa's character is merged with another character earlier on in the series (which, mind you, several characters have been merged into one on the TV show, so this is nothing new), and the character Sansa was merged with had a much worse form of this happen in the book. Can't say they added anything, they just changed the character it happened to.

I get people saying they don't like it; to each their own. It's a little weird that this scene (of all of them) is the breaking point, but on an individual basis, everyone has their own specific breaking point. But that's about all there is to it. Going further than that is trying to submit that your personal breaking point is the "one true breaking point" and that the TV showrunners are "bad people" or have "bad writing"; when it is more of a personal preference.

To me; the fascinating part is a) the complete glossing over of torture porn / rape happening to Theon for multiple episodes in the past and b) this unspoken conversation about whether male rape of a woman is significantly worse than everything else that has happened on the show. Memories of the Penn State Sandusky trial give me a sad answer for the first one, and I don't have any real thoughts of significance on the second point (not sure I can really bring anything to the table besides just listening).

Yeah you should probably read again my post.

Re-reading it; and ok, I see sort of where you are coming from, but let me ask you a clarifying question

Should viewers be upset at the character who did it, or the showrunners? I think people are not getting upset at the showrunners, but your post is ambiguous in that regard. If you meant not getting upset at Ramsay, then, yes, I agree, people should be upset at Ramsay if the scene was done correctly. But getting mad at the showrunners for being more faithful to the books than not?

 

[bengraven]

GoT got too popular for its own good.

Something tells me they won't make a Ramsay action figure.

Spoiler

so people don't make it rape the Sansa one...

 

[CornBurrito]

Glad I don't watch the show. Sounds like they've added a ton of really dumb scenarios that add nothing to the plot.

 

[POWERSPHERE]

This season is total garbage and this is the push for me to bin the whole show.

 

[Omegasquash]

This season is total garbage and this is the push for me to bin the whole show.

It came very close for me. It's not that a character got raped...I imagine that sort of thing would happen and it's in line with the character doing the raping. It's the fact that they go out of their way to say "hey this is rape and it's happening" that leaves me shaking my head.

But this season has done nothing but show me that they're obviously trying to cram it by making pretty sweeping cuts and changes. Given that I'm a fan of the books I don't really want to watch something that will spoil the end for me, even though there's no way I won't be spoiled on the end in the books because social media exists. Which makes me like the show even less.

 

[excelsiorlef]

That's only in this thread, and people willing to say it on a generally very anti-censorship board. Plus, if every time there's any kind of rape scene on TV, the same places decry it and try to make a big deal out of it; it's not a huge leap to think they're trying to demonize it so people don't ever show it for the controversy. Not all censorship attempts (especially in the US) are blatant moves.

Ok let's break this down

A) So let me get this straight, you're positing that the one person you quoted is actually what many of us here want to say but are just too afraid to on this board because you think of GAF as some sort of heavily anti-censorship board?

That one post represents those of us in this thread who are critiquing the decision but we're just too afraid to admit it? That's your theory?

B) I don't give a crap what's happening outside this thread, I care that people in here we're trying to frame the conversation many of us are having in this thread as censorship. All you have shown is that in this thread aka in this conversation we are all having only one actively called for censorship. Which you then literally quoted and claimed to be the opinion of several. You turned one quote by one person into a supposed call to action by several. You have zero support for this accusation and have now fallen on yeah but that's what they really mean they're just too afraid to admit it. Congrats on your intellectual dishonesty.


C) People are free to decry and critique and creators are free to listen or ignore. Not censorship.

It's funny because as soon as I saw that one post by that one person, I knew it was going to be used as a weapon and be conflated to be representing more than just one person on the internet.

 

[Ambition]

cant take internet outrage seriously anymore...

It's become comical at this point.

 

[D1renegade]

Glad I don't watch the show. Sounds like they've added a ton of really dumb scenarios that add nothing to the plot.

Lol. Spoken like someone who doesn't watch the show. It definitely adds to the plot, but there are many who ignore that because of their own hidden agendas .

 

[Pluto]

1) Dany and Khal. In both mediums, it is statutory rape due to the age of Dany.

It's not statutory rape! That would require a law that says Dany cannot consent, I don't think such a thing exists in Westeros or Essos. What happened to her was rape but not statutory, in the show she's not a minor and obviously able to consent, she did so several times.

Even in the real world what is and isn't statutory rape isn't cut and dry, it depends on local laws and jurisdictions, what's statutory rape in one is consensual sex in another.

 

[Arthr2ShdsJcksn]

I have a problem with the scene. It wasn't explicit enough. This show trades in sex and violence, and I feel cheated. I watch this show to be titillated by disturbing imagery, and they shouldn't have pulled any punches here. I'm not suggesting they step into pornography, but this was pretty tame. I suppose they thought that Reek's face conveyed the horror enough, but it takes away from Sansa's experience. The scene was weak.

I thought this was HBO, not basic cable.

 

[Cybit]

Ok let's break this down

A) So let me gt this straight, you're positing that the one person you quoted is actually what many want to say but are just too afraid to say on this board because you claim it's an anti-censorship board?

That one post represents those of us in this thread who are critiquing the decision but we're just too afraid to admit it? That's your theory?

I imagine most of the people who are willing to post in the thread aren't wilting flowers and if they wanted flat out censorship; they would say as much. I don't think I'm being intellectually dishonest in saying there are people reading this thread (but not posting) who think there should be a soft ban or a hard ban on rape in media at all.

B) I don't give a crap what's happening outside this thread, I care that people in here we're trying to frame the conversation many of us are having in this thread as censorship. All you have shown is that in this thread aka in this conversation we are all having only one actively called for censorship. Which you then literally quoted and claimed to be the opinion of several. You turned one quote by one person into a supposed call to action by several. You have zero support for this accusation and have now fallen on yeah but that's what they really mean they're just too afraid to admit it. Congrats on your intellectual dishonesty.

I saw two posts that talked about the idea that rape should never being on screen; one that advocated for legislation. You're right; I'm conflating one who said it should never be on screen with being willing to advocate to remove it entirely, which is wrong of me.

I don't think the majority of people even against the scene in this thread are arguing for censorship. I'm looking back at my posts, and never do I say anything about you calling for censorship. Someone said that no one is calling for censorship, and a few of us pointed out that wasn't true. But no one accused you of calling for censorship as best as I can tell.

I do have an issue with people trying to justify their personal lines being crossed with "bad writing", "D&D adding rape" (and then using half-truth justifications when pointed out that they didn't actually add anything and instead toned it down significantly from the books...lots of characters have been merged from the books into the TV show, and never has anyone said it was "adding" storylines, except for this one situation, now it's called "adding". Seriously?), and making it some moral mountain to stand on rather than just admitting it crossed their personal line. If it crosses a personal line; that's fine - but don't try to rationalize it away as anything beyond that. Just own it. Don't say things like "it accomplished nothing" when it was literally the last scene of the most recent episode. Maybe D&D will screw the pooch later on - you can not have faith in them (and then say, based on that, I think it will end up being meaningless), but to say definitively that it accomplished nothing is a lie, through and through.

C) People are free to decry and critique and creators are free to listen or ignore. Not censorship.

It's funny because as soon as I saw that one post by that one person, I knew it was going to be used as a weapon and be conflated to be representing more than just one person on the internet.

As always. On a video game forum, censorship is going to be a hot button topic for many of us, especially those of us who were in HS / college during Paducah / Jonesboro / Columbine. We've seen the slippery slope happen before; and we were potentially a Gore presidency (a few thousand votes in Florida) away from the media landscape being very, very different (Tipper Gore and Lieberman were both fans of much heavier regulation on violent media) than it is now.

It's not statutory rape! That would require a law that says Dany cannot consent, I don't think such a thing exists in Westeros or Essos. What happened to her was rape but not statutory, in the show she's not a minor and obviously able to consent, she did so several times.

Even in the real world what is and isn't statutory rape isn't cut and dry, it depends on local laws and jurisdictions, what's statutory rape in one is consensual sex in another.

You're right in that in the world of Westeros; it's not rape. In fact...that concept probably doesn't exist in Westeros at all. Women are treated like objects in Westeros. I believe the argument is being made for "3 added rapes" in terms of modern sensibilities, though. Statutory rape in the real world is a little weird, no doubt, especially once you get into HS age relationships. My point was that it's a stretch to argue that the Dany / Khal scene was "added for shock value" in being different from the books. In both mediums, it was not a completely consensual and happy relationship.

 

[CornBurrito]

Lol. Spoken like someone who doesn't watch the show. It definitely adds to the plot, but there are many who ignore that because of their own hidden agendas .

Can the show explain why

Spoiler

Littlefinger would ever allow Sansa to be in the same room as the Boltons?

Because that would never happen in the book. It's really fucking dumb and tarnishes Littlefinger's character a lot.

And yes that is correct, I don't watch the show. I don't watch it, because I prefer the book. I'm not hiding an agenda. I have a preference for the book. It isn't a secret. It isn't even bad.

 

[Cybit]

Can the show explain why

Spoiler

Littlefinger would ever allow Sansa to be in the same room as the Boltons?

Because that would never happen in the book. It's really fucking dumb and tarnishes Littlefinger's character a lot.

And yes that is correct, I don't watch the show. I don't watch it, because I prefer the book. I'm not hiding an agenda. I have a preference for the book. It isn't a secret. It isn't even bad.

Not yet; though a possible reason is

Spoiler

that after S3 before S4, Martin took the producers through the entire story arc of the series. It could be that Sansa ends up in the north sooner rather than later, and the showrunners, having seven seasons to do the entire series, took some narrative shortcuts to fit everything in. Alternatively, it could be that Sansa is going to turn on LF in TWoW, and they're setting it up in the TV show.

I think this is the season where the books vs TV show arguments change, because there's a decent chance the TV shows are going to be ahead of the books.

 

[Brerlappin]

I actually thought the scene in last weeks penny dreadful where they

Spoiler

rip out a fucking babies heart

was far worse than the rape in GOT

 

[Maxim726X]

So many people seem to mistake marriage as a sex-slave contract. It's really disturbing.

Hahaha what??

I'm relatively sure we're talking about a fictitious universe, in which it has been established that a woman is basically powerless to stop a man from having their way with the bride, sexually and otherwise.

Also relatively sure no one is condoning that kind of treatment in the real world in 2015.

I honestly can't believe I'm reading some of this tripe at this point. If this is how far you have to reach to make a point, you don't really have a point.

Glad I don't watch the show. Sounds like they've added a ton of really dumb scenarios that add nothing to the plot.

And of course you have an informed opinion on this matter, as someone who doesn't watch the show. We all appreciate your input into something you don't actively follow.

 

[CharminUltra]

Fortunately for Sansa, it looked like legitimate rape. Her female body should be able to shut the whole thing down.

 

[excelsiorlef]

I imagine most of the people who are willing to post in the thread aren't wilting flowers and if they wanted flat out censorship; they would say as much. I don't think I'm being intellectually dishonest in saying there are people reading this thread (but not posting) who think there should be a soft ban or a hard ban on rape in media at all.

A) That's unknowable and irrelevant.
B) You've also changed your narrative, your previous implication made no distinction between active participants in this thread and your now claimed silent pro-censorship observers that can't be quantified in any way. So...
C) Yes your initial post was intellectually dishonest.

I saw two posts that talked about the idea that rape should never being on screen; one that advocated for legislation. You're right; I'm conflating one who said it should never be on screen with being willing to advocate to remove it entirely, which is wrong of me.

Good on ya

I don't think the majority of people even against the scene in this thread are arguing for censorship. I'm looking back at my posts, and never do I say anything about you calling for censorship. Someone said that no one is calling for censorship, and a few of us pointed out that wasn't true. But no one accused you of calling for censorship.

Never said you did. This started because a few people came in and starting talking about how this represented censorship in some form of another. Which again was not happening in the thread at all, and honestly is not happening outside this thread either.

Like I explained before when 99.999% of people who have issues with scene are not talking about censorship in this thread, saying no one is talking about censorship is a valid, albeit colloquial, statement. To say otherwise is an exercise in pedantry.

I do have an issue with people trying to justify their personal lines being crossed with "bad writing", "D&D adding rape" (and then using mealy mouthed justifications when pointed out that they didn't actually add anything and instead toned it down significantly from the books), and making it some moral mountain to stand on rather than just admitting it crossed their personal line. If it crosses your personal line; that's fine - but don't try to rationalize it away. Just own it. Don't try to spin doctor the reasons away with half-truths and saying things like "it accomplished nothing" when it was literally the last scene of the most recent episode. Maybe D&D screw the pooch later on - you can not have faith in them, but to say definitively that it accomplished nothing is a lie, through and through.

No they added it, I've been down this road before, that it happened to some other character in the book does not mean that it happening to a completely different character in the show instead is not adding a rape scene, it is. That scene with that character did not happen in the book, therefor it's been added. People talk in definites about TV series pre-maturely all the time, it's really not a huge deal. If they're wrong they'll be wrong, that's that. What constitutes bad writing is subjective. I'd argue that the scene was lazy but that's my point of view on it. You think it wasn't? Cool. I think it's unfair to say that if people are bothered by a scene that they can't say it's bad writing. Again you think it wasn't awesome! Feel free to make that argument as to why without saying the otherside is wrong because of emotions. Again writing is subjective, a lot of people thought TMNT was awful, I had a blast. Same with the numerous jokes and stuff in Age of Ultron, many thought it was bad writing, I didn't, but I don't dismiss those people who think of it as bad writing as being humourless or having some sort of emotional reaction, I accept that they think it's bad writing.

As always. On a video game forum, censorship is going to be a hot button topic for many of us, especially those of us who were in HS / college during Paducah / Jonesboro / Columbine. We've seen the slippery slope happen before; and we were potentially a Gore presidency (a few thousand votes in Florida) away from the media landscape being very, very different (Tipper Gore and Lieberman were both fans of much heavier regulation on violent media) than it is now.

Not acceptable, Tipper, Lieberman, Schwarzenegger and gang and all that jazz was active calls for video game censorship, the invocation of Columbine and what not was direct scapegoating not a slippery slope that was brought on by thought out criticism. Again 99.9% of everyone who had issues with the scene were not talking about censorship and the same is true outside this thread. Criticism is not censorship. So to conflate criticism with censorship and invoke the freaking video games trials (which spoilers anti-censorship won and won somewhat easily) of the 90s and early 2000s as justification for your fears that all this is really about wanting to censor art or will lead to censoring art is intellectually dishonest.

 

[Demon Ice]

GoT got too popular for its own good.

Yep. Got too mainstream. Everyone used to fairytale happy endings and plot armor for all the major characters can't handle it.

 

[cantthink9]

After reading all the comments I had to watch it. The hell are people complaining about man? Is it just because the show is THAT big that it's being attacked? Have these people not seen Sons of Anarchy?

Spoiler

Gemma is literally tied up to a fence and raped by a bunch of different people.

I don't know. Don't get me wrong this season hasn't been the best but people are overreacting to this scene, there has been worse.

 

[TheLegendary]

Clearly some people find the depiction of rape deplorable, so I get some outrage naturally will come up any time it's shown. But it's the book readers coming out of the woodwork to trash the show for doing it that I just can't follow the logic on.

How much more tasteful could the show have been with it? I've read all of the books and appreciate them for what they are but some people react as if the books are some untouchable masterclass of literature and the show writers are botching it. The story is about a shitty world with shitty characters in shitty circumstances. I keep hearing people ask how the rape in the show furthers the story or characters. Does the book go through the same analysis? Why does Reek performing oral rape need to be described in detail in the equivalent scene from the book? How are those details furthering the story for the characters there? Why couldn't Martin simply allude to it instead of go into grisly detail? At least the show turns away?

Not to mention that overall most of the sex in the books read like man-child erotic porn fantasies and are much more embarrassing than how the show has handled sex overall. I just can't get along with the selective culling that people do when comparing the books to the show. And I thoroughly enjoy the books except for the last one. The behavior is just really baffling to me though.

 

[anaron]

So Sansa was put in place of a minor character who literally only exists in the books to show how bad Ramsay is, because the showrunners were too impatient with her character to do anything interesting with it this season. And Sansa's rape is used, once again, to show how much of a fucko Ramsay is and to make us feel sorry for Theon, because at this point we're used to Sansa getting abused by fuckboy psychopaths. It's become one of the show's cliches.

Really shitty writing.

yup

 

[soleil]

So many people seem to mistake marriage as a sex-slave contract. It's really disturbing.

No. No one is saying marriage is a sex-slave contract. People are saying that marriage WAS a sex-slave contract (not saying that it was justified, but that's how it was) in the Middle Ages, and also in this fictitious universe that is loosely based on the Middle Ages.

So Sansa was put in place of a minor character who literally only exists in the books to show how bad Ramsay is, because the showrunners were too impatient with her character to do anything interesting with it this season. And Sansa's rape is used, once again, to show how much of a fucko Ramsay is and to make us feel sorry for Theon, because at this point we're used to Sansa getting abused by fuckboy psychopaths. It's become one of the show's cliches.

Really shitty writing.

Well looking at it from the point of view of someone who is just watching and not reading the books, Sansa's rape was the end of the episode and we don't know yet how it will be used in terms of a plot device. But we do know that the camera focused on both Sansa's face and Theon's face, so the clue would hint towards both of them being affected, not just Theon. It seems like some of you wanted Theon excluded just so you can focus on the victim (Sansa), but I think it makes sense to include Theon's face so in future episodes you can make more of a connection on why he (if this happens) might rebel and possibly try to help/serve Sansa in the future.

 

[Nerokis]

Can the show explain why

Spoiler

Littlefinger would ever allow Sansa to be in the same room as the Boltons?

Because that would never happen in the book. It's really fucking dumb and tarnishes Littlefinger's character a lot.

And yes that is correct, I don't watch the show. I don't watch it, because I prefer the book. I'm not hiding an agenda. I have a preference for the book. It isn't a secret. It isn't even bad.

You don't watch the show, have zero context for the event in question, and yet seem so very sure it's "really fucking dumb" and "adds nothing to the plot." Come on.

Littlefinger is positioning Sansa to become "Wardenness of the North" or whatever, and positioning himself to be the one who benefits. I doubt he cares much what happens to her, so long as she isn't killed, and he knows no one would benefit from killing her (among the Boltons, anyway). It's a risky game, but his thing is managing chaos, so it seems to me the plan suits his character perfectly.

It's funny to see people pinning this controversy down to TV-book differences, like the books are absolved because it wasn't Sansa specifically who Ramsay horribly raped.

 

[Dreams-Visions]

Yep. Got too mainstream. Everyone used to fairytale happy endings and plot armor for all the major characters can't handle it.

Seems that way. I caught it again last night and it was decently done. How it affects the actions of characters going forward is something we'll find out in time.

 

[TheLegendary]

yup

Not true. The character of Jeyne doesn't just show up to show Ramsay is evil. There were plenty of other cases where the book already showed it. Plus Jeyne was around since the first book. So by that logic the events happening to Jeyne are just as if not more pointless than it happening to Sansa.

 

[Einchy]

So Sansa was put in place of a minor character who literally only exists in the books to show how bad Ramsay is, because the showrunners were too impatient with her character to do anything interesting with it this season. And Sansa's rape is used, once again, to show how much of a fucko Ramsay is and to make us feel sorry for Theon, because at this point we're used to Sansa getting abused by fuckboy psychopaths. It's become one of the show's cliches.

Really shitty writing.

I haven't read the books but from what I understand Sansa at this point isn't doing shit. She stays in The Eyrie and does fuck all.

I think it was smart of them to replace the fake Sansa with the real one. At least this way Sansa is actually in the thick of it all rather than seeing her in The Eyrie.

I mean, seriously, who wants to see that?

 

[Nerokis]

Well looking at it from the point of view of someone who is just watching and not reading the books, Sansa's rape was the end of the episode and we don't know yet how it will be used in terms of a plot device. But we do know that the camera focused on both Sansa's face and Theon's face, so the clue would hint towards both of them being affected, not just Theon.

Yeah, it's interesting how the emphasis on Theon's face ended up backfiring a bit on the writers. My interpretation was that they were making the scene less explicit, making it less disturbing for what you're seeing than for what you know is happening, and using Theon's face as a device to reflect the scene's horror.

Instead, though, many are interpreting it as Theon being the victim of Sansa's rape.

 

[Maxim726X]

yup

Nope.

And it's been explained about a million times in this thread, but it seems that people either just ignore it or double down on their point.

 

[WrenchNinja]

I haven't read the books but from what I understand Sansa at this point isn't doing shit. She stays in The Eyrie and does fuck all.

I think it was smart of them to replace the fake Sansa with the real one. At least this way Sansa is actually in the thick of it all rather than seeing her in The Eyrie.

I mean, seriously, who wants to see that?

She's learning to manipulate. But I suppose being tortured and raped is preferable to some.

 

[WAR recon zero]

In ny perspective she is using sex to use him.

You'll see

 

[TouchMyBox]

In a society where sexual consent is a hot topic that confuses many to the point where colleges are offering classes on the subject, isn't it kind of a good thing to have horrible depictions of rape in a consensual grey-area in popular media? Like maybe people will watch that, have an epiphany and go "oh, just because they're married doesn't make it any less awful" etc.

Not that I'm strongly for or against the scene, just throwing out ideas.

 

[ultron87]

I haven't read the books but from what I understand Sansa at this point isn't doing shit. She stays in The Eyrie and does fuck all.

I think it was smart of them to replace the fake Sansa with the real one. At least this way Sansa is actually in the thick of it all rather than seeing her in The Eyrie.

I mean, seriously, who wants to see that?

There are plenty of story choices that aren't a) Sansa in the Eyrie and b) Sansa gets raped.

 

[Maxim726X]

There are plenty of story choices that aren't a) Sansa in the Eyrie and b) Sansa gets raped.

You are watching the show, right?

I find it interesting that people are boiling down her character into 'rape victim' instead of someone who is trying to gain a position of power again, through any means necessary.

She literally resigned herself to this a few episodes ago. Did we all forget that or something?

 

[Nerokis]

She's learning to manipulate. But I suppose being tortured and raped is preferable to some.

I haven't read a single page of the books, but based on what I've heard, my understanding is the same as the person you quoted: she's still in the Vale, and not getting much character development at all. But from those events, you squeezed out "she's learning to manipulate," and you're satisfied.

In the show, she's instead in Winterfell. She's in the midst of an ongoing storyline that could very well end up being pretty interesting. What's your takeaway? "Torture and rape." Surely you can see how that's a bit one-sided, right? I don't know the specifics of the books, but in this version, she's dealing with real challenges, and what happened in the last episode was a potential turning point for her character. She's positioned to do something of actual significance for the story, and in the meantime, has been showing remarkable strength and grace.

People keep saying that "being raped" wasn't the only alternative to being in the Vale doing nothing, but it's not like "being raped" is going to be what defines her storyline in the first place.

 

[gosox333]

I mean for all we know this is a huge turning point for Sansa. We aren't scripted by the books anymore, we don't know what this even means for the story anymore.

I guess that's where all of the reactions are coming from. People aren't used to being in this situation of pure suspense. We've always known what was going to happen next. This time we don't, and I think a lot of people don't realize that these events we're seeing might have unknown consequences down the road.

I think that's where I stand. Be outraged once it's shown to be pointless shock filler, but not until it is.

 

[ultron87]

You are watching the show, right?

I find it interesting that people are boiling down her character into 'rape victim' instead of someone who is trying to gain a position of power again, through any means necessary.

She literally resigned herself to this a few episodes ago. Did we all forget that or something?

I'm not criticizing her story choice. I'm criticizing the writers who sat down and decided that this was what was going to happen in their adapted Sansa story. They chose this. The story isn't a run away train they have no control over. They decided "Sansa is going to get raped this season."

The people running the show also chose to shoot the scene in a way that portrayed her as a terrified screaming rape victim instead of someone making a decision and dealing with the unpleasant consequences. If they'd shot it differently I could've been more okay with it.

 

[soleil]

Yeah, it's interesting how the emphasis on Theon's face ended up backfiring a bit on the writers. My interpretation was that they were making the scene less explicit, making it less disturbing for what you're seeing than for what you know is happening, and using Theon's face as a device to reflect the scene's horror.

Instead, though, many are interpreting it as Theon being the victim of Sansa's rape.

Yep. People are just reading way too much into it.

Also it seems that just because rape is a sensitive subject, everyone expects every fictional piece (book, movie, TV show, whatever) to handle rape in a manner where the goal is to give a voice to the victim and to forward the cause of feminism. And if the rape isn't depicted with this specific goal in mind, then people get mad. I personally don't think it's healthy to the arts for people to demand that all sensitive subjects be depicted/handled the same way or for the same goals.

 

[Maxim726X]

I'm not criticizing her story choice. I'm criticizing the writers who sat down and decided that this was what was going to happen in their adapted Sansa story. They chose this. The story isn't a run away train they have no control over. They decided "Sansa is going to get raped this season."

The people running the show also chose to shoot the scene in a way that portrayed her as a terrified screaming rape victim instead of someone making a decision and dealing with the unpleasant consequences. If they'd shot it differently I could've been more okay with it.

No, they decided 'Sansa is going back to Winterfell... And the only way this makes sense is if she marries. The only individual in Winterfell right now who this makes sense for is Ramsay. Ramsay is a crazy, psychotic cunt. Sansa realizes that the only thing she has for her right now is her last name, and her beauty. She also realizes that if she wishes to rise to a position of authority again she's going to have to sacrifice even more.'

There is literally no other scenario that would have made sense. Would Ramsay suddenly indulge in his soft, sensitive side? Now, Sansa and Theon both have a reason to take him down when the time comes, and I think it's clearly headed in that direction. It makes perfect sense, both in terms of story development and character depictions and tendencies.

 

[Always-honest]

not sure i understand. Ramsey is a horrible character who does horrible things. Why does that mean they think lightly about rape? I wasn't that shocked. Given what he did to Theon i would never take him for a making love kinda guy.

 

[Nerokis]

The people running the show also chose to shoot the scene in a way that portrayed her as a terrified screaming rape victim instead of someone making a decision and dealing with the unpleasant consequences. If they'd shot it differently I could've been more okay with it.

This is incredible. It's because rape is a horrible thing that the scene is controversial, but you're expecting Sansa to react stoically to being the victim of it? Just "someone making a decision and dealing with the unpleasant consequences?"

She's shown a lot of growth, and has done an amazing job hiding her fear/discomfort/whatever through all she's been through recently. It makes sense that she would fail to do so this time. It didn't start out that way. Initially, even though she knew what was coming, she managed to retain her composure, as you described. But it eventually became too much, and it's not difficult to understand why.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

It's Game of Thrones. It's big on repetition of boring character development tropes.

 

[PsychoSoldier]

I'm not criticizing her story choice. I'm criticizing the writers who sat down and decided that this was what was going to happen in their adapted Sansa story. They chose this. The story isn't a run away train they have no control over. They decided "Sansa is going to get raped this season."

The people running the show also chose to shoot the scene in a way that portrayed her as a terrified screaming rape victim instead of someone making a decision and dealing with the unpleasant consequences. If they'd shot it differently I could've been more okay with it.

That's an extraordinarily reductive way to put it. I sincerely doubt they set out to get Sansa into a rape scene, more than likely they tried to figure out a way to accelerate Sansa's plot and decided that the best way to do so was to put her into Winterfell. The rape scene was likely a result of that decision.

But that's the tough thing about writing, ultimately. Do you make the safe decision that keeps a fan favorite out of harms way or do you make what is a more interesting choice to you and as a result something terrible happens to someone the viewers like?

I doubt that anyone sat down to write this season and worked hard to make sure a Sansa rape was in there somewhere. You can disagree with the way they shaped the story but being reductive about it doesn't strengthen your point.

As far as how it was shot, no matter how it was shot it was going to be unpleasant. It should have been unpleasant to watch, and I think them showing Theon's face instead of Sophie's face was an attempt to make it less gratuitous.

 

[hohoXD123]

Not sure I understand why people are only dropping the show now because of the rape scene. We had a rape scene near the start with Daenerys, why not drop it then? Did they for some reason think it was a one time thing?

 

[Cybit]

Never said you did. This started because a few people came in and starting talking about how this represented censorship in some form of another. Which again was not happening in the thread at all, and honestly is not happening outside this thread either.

Like I explained before when 99.999% of people who have issues with scene are not talking about censorship in this thread, saying no one is talking about censorship is a valid, albeit colloquial, statement. To say otherwise is an exercise in pedantry.

In this thread I don't think the censorship argument is really going on outside the little digression.

No they added it, I've been down this road before, that it happened to some other character in the book does not mean that it happening to a completely different character in the show instead is not adding a rape scene, it is. That scene with that character did not happen in the book, therefor it's been added. People talk in definites about TV series pre-maturely all the time, it's really not a huge deal. If they're wrong they'll be wrong, that's that. What constitutes bad writing is subjective. I'd argue that the scene was lazy but that's my point of view on it. You think it wasn't? Cool. I think it's unfair to say that if people are bothered by a scene that they can't say it's bad writing. Again you think it wasn't awesome! Feel free to make that argument as to why without saying the otherside is wrong because of emotions. Again writing is subjective, a lot of people thought TMNT was awful, I had a blast. Same with the numerous jokes and stuff in Age of Ultron, many thought it was bad writing, I didn't, but I don't dismiss those people who think of it as bad writing as being humourless or having some sort of emotional reaction, I accept that they think it's bad writing.

A) I haven't seen people referring to situations where characters are merged from the books into the TV shows as "additions", generally speaking (see: Martells). That's why I felt it was sort of disingenuous to throw that in now. If you (personally) see situations where characters (and storylines) are merged as "additions", then I can see the argument that it was "added". But I see additions as "something new" not "something merged".

B) I guess I get skeptical when only one specific type of situation (man raping a main female character) happens to always be the "bad" writing; it makes me think that "bad writing" is being used as a proxy for personal dislike. It may come across as pedantic, but to me it is an important distinction. I'd argue the scene from the book (and ergo, the TV show) was probably unnecessary; but GoT/ASOIAF is, if nothing else, long and gratuitous.

Not acceptable, Tipper, Lieberman, Schwarzenegger and gang and all that jazz was active calls for video game censorship, the invocation of Columbine and what not was direct scapegoating not a slippery slope that was brought on by thought out criticism. Again 99.9% of everyone who had issues with the scene were not talking about censorship and the same is true outside this thread. Criticism is not censorship. So to conflate criticism with censorship and invoke the freaking video games trials (which spoilers anti-censorship won and won somewhat easily) of the 90s and early 2000s as justification for your fears that all this is really about wanting to censor art or will lead to censoring art is intellectually dishonest.

My apologies for not being clear - but I'm not saying it is necessarily a rational fear; just that a video game forum, because of what happened in the 90s, is liable to be a bit jumpy about the whole censorship thing. As said earlier - in this thread, I don't think many folks are saying censorship, which, seeing as this is a video game forum, sort of makes sense. But my point is that people in a video game forum are jumpy about censorship in general because of all of that.

Aside: My memory is fuzzy, but I thought they did try to use the "criticism into censorship" thing in the late 90s for violent video games though? At least for Tipper Gore / Lieberman? Thought their arguments went from "it's bad" to "it's bad for you" to "save the children"?

 

[rexor0717]

Man, Sansa is going to have to get some major payoff to even come close to all the shit she has been put through.

 

[Captin Quacker]

Fortunately for Sansa, it looked like legitimate rape. Her female body should be able to shut the whole thing down.

to this day I still can't believe he said that on national tv

as for the topic at hand we've seen people get decapitated, burned alive, and watched a man get his head crushed all of which happened on screen and the biggest issue people have is this?

 

[WrenchNinja]

I haven't read a single page of the books, but based on what I've heard, my understanding is the same as the person you quoted: she's still in the Vale, and not getting much character development at all. But from those events, you squeezed out "she's learning to manipulate," and you're satisfied.

In the show, she's instead in Winterfell. She's in the midst of an ongoing storyline that could very well end up being pretty interesting. What's your takeaway? "Torture and rape." Surely you can see how that's a bit one-sided, right? I don't know the specifics of the books, but in this version, she's dealing with real challenges, and what happened in the last episode was a potential turning point for her character. She's positioned to do something of actual significance for the story, and in the meantime, has been showing remarkable strength and grace.

People keep saying that "being raped" wasn't the only alternative to being in the Vale doing nothing, but it's not like "being raped" is going to be what defines her storyline in the first place.

I don't think much will come from her storyline in Winterfell. I don't see any potential turning point for her character here, she'll be even more angry and scared and that'll be it. Maybe she'll light the candle and help will show up but I doubt she'll do anything more than that. With the books, the focus was on Theon as it was his story. If you want to give them the benefit of the doubt here, you're free to. But I don't know, they've been botching story lines left and right, especially with the land of bad fight planning & fight choreography and the Inquest of Loras' birthmark

 

[CornBurrito]

You don't watch the show, have zero context for the event in question, and yet seem so very sure it's "really fucking dumb" and "adds nothing to the plot." Come on.

Littlefinger is positioning Sansa to become "Wardenness of the North" or whatever, and positioning himself to be the one who benefits. I doubt he cares much what happens to her, so long as she isn't killed, and he knows no one would benefit from killing her (among the Boltons, anyway). It's a risky game, but his thing is managing chaos, so it seems to me the plan suits his character perfectly.

It's funny to see people pinning this controversy down to TV-book differences, like the books are absolved because it wasn't Sansa specifically who Ramsay horribly raped.

Littlefinger not caring what happens to Sansa? He might as well be a different character from his book counterpart.

 

[PsychoSoldier]

I feel the writers are doing an okay job given how much chaff is in the two books that they needed to cut to make for an interesting story.

If I wasn't desperate to know what happened to those characters there's no way I would have put up with going through both of them.

 

[SaganIsGOAT]

People are being too sensi about this