Sci-Fi & Fantasy Girlz discussion
Fantasy
>
Statistical Analysis Of Rape In Game Of Thrones
date
newest »
newest »
I dunno, I never finished reading the first one because if I really want to be depressed, I just have to watch the news. And I could probably summarize what I actually remember from that first book in a few short paragraphs. I skimmed a lot of it looking for something interesting.
Yoly wrote: "I read this post (well, skimmed through it trying to avoid spoilers because I haven't read the books or seen the show) about someone who did a statistical analysis of rape in Game of Thrones.This..."
Yoly, I've read 4+ of the books and became frustrated due to the deaths or dismemberments of so many characters. As many diehard fans comment, their favorite character is Tyrion. Well - I can't do a spoiler - but let's just say he was the last one in the story I was enjoying reading about. When I no longer enjoyed reading about him, I stopped. There is for sure tons of violence of all types, including sexual violence applied to nearly all female characters, and one (or more - do not know as I stopped reading) male character. Of particular distaste to me were not one, but two, brother-sister incest couples. One is central to the plot and their love tale goes on and on.
Admittedly I haven't read ASOIAF or watched GoT but wow.. that is a lot of rape. Like Yoly I'd be curious to see how these were counted. I've known people who were fans of the books that seemed more willing to accept the portrayals in the books vs the way it's done on the show so I wonder if the 214 number includes more mentions of other "offscreen" rape acts.
J.S. wrote: "Like Yoly I'd be curious to see how these were counted. ..."I'm pretty sure the count ignores the entire city full of raped women in the first book - counting only the ones Danaerys actually sees.
To be honest, I only got a couple of quotes from the books through reviews that weren't exactly glowing, and the quotes weren't what I would consider good writing either.The sheer amount of rapes though makes me absolutely unable to read any of this because, I have to admit, I simply hate rape as a plot device and the "romance" between Dany and Drogo makes me cry when I think about it, but not because of what happens to him but because of what he did to her. D:
Also, that people call this 'high' fantasy baffles me: it has exactly all the qualities of low fantasy because the only magical thing there is dragons.
Meh.
There are magical (supernatural) fantasy elements in addition to dragons, Sparrowlicious, but these are muted and downplayed through most of the first four books. As I said, I quit on book 5 so can't say about later books, nor have I watched the current season of the TV show.I've seen a lot of people referring to Dany as a strong female character and she's certainly that. But this girl is supposed to be 12 or 13 when it starts out, and her older brother gets rapey with her, then sells her to Khal Drogo. I understand what you say when you say the "romance" makes you cry and for that exact reason. Yes I have major problems with this type of story being promoted and so highly-praised. If it were portrayed in a realistic story today it would be child rape and sexual exploitation. If he were to be apprehended, charged and convicted, Khal Drogo wouldn't be "Mr. Romance" (and yes, I saw the episodes with "hot" Jason Momoa). He'd be Mr. Pedophile and be required to be kept separate from the rest of the prison population to preserve his life. And this character is one of the nicest guys in the books!
Wow, I don't want to think this has anything to do with the popularity of the series. I really, really, really hope this isn't why it is so popular, there has to be something else (in very large quantities) that makes people somehow overlook the sexual violence in these books, I mean, I hope.
I think people love fantasy, Yoly. I think most readers of these books "overlook" the negative aspects in favor of the positive aspects.As to fantasy books that lack the extreme violence and savage incidents ... the StoryBundle with numerous bestsellers (yah!) and books by MY FRIENDS too! Is on sale today!! A way to get numerous great books for a great price ...
https://storybundle.com/fantasy
George RR Martin is very good at creating characters the reader cares about. I was very invested in finding out what happened to my favourite characters in the first couple of books. I found the political manouevring interesting too. I skimmed over the more graphic parts and still enjoyed the read. But Martin kept adding more and more viewpoint characters, so the chapters about my favourites became fewer and further apart, so by Book 4 my interest was waning. By Book 5 there was hardly anyone left I cared about, and the violence and general misery had become so overwhelming I didn't finish reading it.
I have to confess to not reading these books either - for the very reasons that most of you have cited. I can do the odd rape scene, and I can cope with violence, but I don't know that I want to have a constant flow of it. There are also ways and means of writing it. You can imply things (which is sometimes more effective) or you can write it in graphic detail.I know GRRM often talks about 'historical accuracy,' as the motivation behind it all, but as an author myself, I know precisely how much we can mould the worlds we create. If it's fantasy, it doesn't have to have women constantly being raped - unless we choose to make it so.
Our adult kids have read/watched them, and they've both commented on the graphic, full frontal nudity, sex, and violence in the TV show, but assured me that the books are less graphic - or at least a bit less graphic.
I've read a pile of critiques, reviews and comments, but I still think that I probably don't want to read all of that yuck.
Another question springs to mind - what motivates people to read/write/watch such graphic nastiness? I have a dreadful time just killing a character off, let alone writing graphically about their violation...
I tried to read the first book, but I quickly got bored and dropped it. I do know some people who love the books and the shows, and they certainly do not condone sexual violence. Now, from what they tell me about it, the books don't sound like my cup of tea, although there are parts I might admire. But I do think that taking stats like that out of context can be misleading. GRRM wanted to make fantasy more "realistic: and "gritty" and I see the appeal in that -- although it doesn't appeal to me. Sexual violence is a large part of the reality on which his stories are based. That does not mean it's not gratuitous or that it is gratuitous -- that depends on context. So I can make no judgement there, not can I form any opinions one why others like the stories. I can only say that based on what I know, I've chosen (so far) not to read them.
Leonie wrote: "Another question springs to mind - what motivates people to read/write/watch such graphic nastiness? I have a dreadful time just killing a character off, let alone writing graphically about their violation... "That's a good question. I've written some scenes where I did try to make them as terrible for the character as possible and as uncomfortable for the reader as I could personally stomach. I think part of it is that some people just enjoy the "pain" from getting through the scenes and being able to continue on. At least for some of the stuff I've written, it was like a test, "Can you get through the story without quiting because you are about to read some horrible things."
Part of it might be feeling like if you skip the really nasty parts you are in essence 'cheating' the characters story. If GRRM is telling a story about a brutal time period and you like that part maybe he thinks that 'You don't get gory battle scenes and kings and other stuff without seeing what the impact of all of this violence on the less powerful truely is.' Sanitizing the story would basically make the impact of the violence less real.
And for some people, they just enjoy it as a pleasurable thing. The characters suffering gets them off. I've read a few stories where this seems to be the point of it and it gets boring pretty quickly because everything is terrible all of the time. It's like when someone has a feather fetish and everything revolves around feathers which I guess is great if you are really into feathers but in most cases it loses every other facet of storytelling.
Yoly wrote: "I read this post (well, skimmed through it trying to avoid spoilers because I haven't read the books or seen the show) about someone who did a statistical analysis of rape in Game of Thrones."Where's that post come from, Yoly?
Marina wrote: "George RR Martin is very good at creating characters the reader cares about. I was very invested in finding out what happened to my favourite characters in the first couple of books. I found the po..."That's the exact reaction I had Marina - there were too many points of view, and too little following the stories of those I cared about, or - too horrible about them so it was no longer enjoyable. And exact point I quit reading, also.
This is about the TV show, and a change in the plot and characters that isn't in the books, but the Mary Sue isn't going to cover Game of Thrones (TV) any longer:http://www.themarysue.com/we-will-no-...
I should also disclose here that George Martin's agent was my agent for 10 years ending Nov. 2014 and I have been unable to get a read for a book I wrote with a strong female protagonist, realistic relationships between mothers and daughters, and no rape/sexual exploitation. Far more realistic "battle" and war depictions based on actual wargames and extensive work with friends/family serving in military command, including students from diverse backgrounds.
I had my opinion of it before, now reading the Mary Sue article, I realize that a large number of TV and book fans don't care for these aspects of the story.
When I first heard the term "rape culture" I didn't give it much credence. It simply seemed too pat a term, and I rejected the "culture" aspect of the concept. Upon reflection, however, there are undeniable realities that are best described by putting them into that kind of verbiage.I mention it because I think one of the things that's been lost in translation between the books and the TV show is the role of rape culture and the core historical message in relation to it that GRRM was/is trying to convey.
GRRM's books, as I'm sure a lot of folks will know, are a loose fantasy interpretation of the period of the War of the Roses, and he uses various alternate characters for the main players of that conflict, as well as the cultures they are from. The Dothraki, for instance, are based loosely on the Mongols. (One could make an argument for a few other steppe horse cultures--but the Mongols are the most apt.)
The thing is, when GRRM presents his version of the Mongols he really tones things down. Even his version can be at points extremely unpleasant to read, but it compares not at all to what was the use of rape as a weapon of war during that period of time, and by that culture. If he were closer to the truth when it comes to the actual historical (and present, it must be said) cultural attitudes to the treatment of women, children or the relatively weak then the objections leveled by some of his critics would go nuclear.
Folks might disagree with me on this, but I am confident that GRRM's writing is meant to spoonfeed the real history of the period to a modern audience using the medium of fantasy to make it relatively palatable.
I'm sorry to say that the TV show has, more or less, lost my interest. It's got good production values, a pretty good cast (with a few notable exceptions) and they've kept the basic framework of Martin's novels, but they've either intentionally gutted his theme or misunderstood it so badly as to turn the product into something that runs counter to the ideas of the books. It's not a subversive presentation of historical events, but mainstream regurgitation of modern day standards and attitudes. So, the sexual violence of the TV show is presented to titillate the audience, reinforcing the warped values of rape culture, not as an illustration of the brutalities of the past, which serves as a warning/lesson to the present.
In short, the TV show embraces rape culture, glorifies it and makes it into a soda pop commercial--all glossy lenses and choreographed brutality. I don't object to pornography, even stuff of the kind that many people reject, just so long as it is presented for what it is. However, HBO has taken what should have been at least an objective and frank review of our past, and turned it on its ear. It's rape culture presented subversively as part of the the current geek culture in order to infiltrate pop culture.
Leonie wrote: "I have to confess to not reading these books either - for the very reasons that most of you have cited. I can do the odd rape scene, and I can cope with violence, but I don't know that I want to ha..."Simple: Humanity is full of people who are bloodthirsty.
Owen: If i want "realistic" and "gritty," I 'll just watch the (bleeping) 5 o'clock news or listen to NPR.
J.S.: See what I told Owen about NPR. ;)
Gary: If he's modeled the Dothraki after the Mongol hordes and the other cultures on the Wars of the Roses, in England, then the Dothraki are anachronisms because the Mongols were the late 12th to mid 13th century and the Wars of the Roses are late 14th to early 15th centuries, I think.
Let me check on that.
They were fought between 1455 and 1487, according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wars_of_... , Gary and the Mongol Empire was the 13th to 14th centuries.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_E...
Right, it's not a 1:1 thing. It's a "loose fantasy interpretation." He's playing around with several cultural components and interactions.
OK-disclosure here in fairness, I know George although we are more acquaintances than friends more because of distance than anything. Second-my academic background in history has for the last two decades focused on the so called Dark Ages-the real historical background for the world of the Game of Thrones. Rape in both war and marital alliances was common in the Dark Ages. To create a realistic story he would have at least had to refer to rape in the context of conquering. In terms of the rape which occur through involuntary marriage (remember it was not legally considered rape then which creates a moral limbo that Martin has to navigate.) A number of these relationships seem to me to have historical parallels as history is ripe with forced marriages some of which worked out and some did not. The woman was not always the victim in them either, sometimes it was the male who was far to young for sex-but was faced with an urgent need to produce an heir.
I find Martin's world to be very believable though yes brutal. We were brutal in the past and humans seem to be doing it to ourselves again.
My only real criticism of Martin's work is that he has killed off most of my favorite characters. The written work is clearer and to my mind more acceptable than the TV version. I am anxious to see how the next volume of the tale goes. I know as a writer what I would do with the characters (not telling in this forum---but thinking of writing him and kibitzing)
Note: I think the Dothraki are more modeled after the Huns. The 5 kingdoms clearly are Europe. The Dornish seems to be like mid-easterners. The brutality of the world are also heavily influenced by the mysterious "winters" which involve some serious planetary physics which most readers ignore or forget.
Too much of this criticism seems to be like one major critic who in critiquing a historical novel stated she wished a certain event had not been graphically included in the novel-even though the basis of the whole novel was that event of everything it influenced from that.
I am a Mongol researcher. They are often used for fantasy settings, and almost as often their culture is given no historicity but used and abused for fantasies of savagery. In fact, there is extremely little information in the sources on rape in the Mongols' wars. It is hard to research due to lack of material. I know, as I have a serious research interest in the question. Let's not leap to assumptions, that they used rape in war more than other societies.
Amber wrote: "Gary: If he's modeled the Dothraki after the Mongol hordes and the other cultures on the Wars of the Roses, in England, then the Dothraki are anachronisms because the Mongols were the late 12th to mid 13th century and the Wars of the Roses are late 14th to early 15th centuries, I think..."I've been told there are dragons in the books too. If so, I'm not sure how that squares with the Dothraki being anachronisms. It sounds more like fantasy to me. ; )
Bryn - actually you are wrong about the lack of research on rape in Mongol wars. DNA has shown that Mongol influence affected conquered populations far beyond what we think we know about their intermarriage patterns. This is likely to have come from rape and sex with slaves (which by our view is tantamount to rape.)
Cameron, hi, I know the DNA study that displays descent. I'm not a science type, but I ask where this is different to the evidence that every person in Europe can trace to royalty and most of them to Charlemagne? I think that study is misused in the popular press.
Sorry to be Off Topic. Part of my explanation is that for centuries afterwards, descendents of Chinggis were highly sought after as marriage partners wherever Mongols had trod. Royals felt they had to claim Chinggisid descent -- Chinggisid charisma was a Thing -- and daughters of the house were hugely eligible for the elite, over a wide area, for several centuries. I'm tentative on this, but mustn't this be a factor?
Gary: Hadn't thought of that. Being a "loose" one as you put it, since I do not read him...his books are not to my taste. Nor have I seen the show. No cable.Cameron: If he's using it in that way, "Rape as a form of conquest," then he should probably have also used the way the Europeans treated the First Peoples of the Americas since 1493. In fact, there's a petition about the way a current film is portraying Native Women by Adam Sandler ( http://www.thepetitionsite.com/125/56... ). A petition I have already signed.
Owen: Good point.
Bryn: Epic Lloyd and Nice Peter's YouTube project, Epic Rap Battles of History, explored this in their battle between Genghis Khan and ...the Easter Bunny. It was their 8th episode. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WA4tL...
Cameron wrote: "Bryn - actually you are wrong about the lack of research on rape in Mongol wars. DNA has shown that Mongol influence affected conquered populations far beyond what we think we know about their inte..."Allow me to point out this: "what we think we know..." Given what we think we know, we are in the realm of speculation here. As a simple example, things like intermarriage patterns tell us next to nothing about how much fooling around was going on elsewhere. And to equate most sex outside of marriage with rape is as problematic as assuming sex within marriage was mostly consensual. At best, these are proxies for applying modern value judgements to acts that are not observable within the historical record.
DNA evidence is no magic bullet. It has to be used with great care, and it often isn't. The basic rule is that if you going looking for almost anything it, you can almost always find it.
Amber, thanks for the Easter Bunny. I need a laugh. Owen, thanks for your points on DNA. I don't see historians tackle this, because I think, like me, they don't know what to do with DNA evidence; while the DNA people have no clue about Mongol history. So it's left to bounce around the internet.
Bryn wrote: "Owen, thanks for your points on DNA. I don't see historians tackle this, because I think, like me, they don't know what to do with DNA evidence..."Thanks and welcome. You are quite correct. As either a physicist with a strong history background, or a historian with a physics degree (depending one which "resume" I want to flaunt), these things drive me bonkers. The historians sometimes misapply the data due lack of understanding the math; the math types might solve the "wrong" problem because they're ignorant of the history; neither side really knows how to communicate with the other, then it gets all shaken up and filtered thru popular outlets that often don't understand either, and in the end, much goofiness results.
Bryn: You're welcome.Owen: That was sort of the problem Hari Seldon had with his "pyschohistory:" "The historians sometimes misapply the data due lack of understanding the math; the math types might solve the "wrong" problem because they're ignorant of the history; neither side really knows how to communicate with the other, then it gets all shaken up and filtered thru popular outlets that often don't understand either, and in the end, much goofiness results."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hari_Seldon and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychohi... for members of this group who don't know anything about Asimov's FOUNDATION series.
I have to point out here that the DNA studies I am talking about were done by biologists and interpreted by anthropologists. They also seemed to prove a lot of what historians had already speculated, although there were also many surprises (e.g. the recurrence of certain European genes in Asian populations.) Most historians did not need to "tackle this" as it simply supported their speculations, although I do know of some that will add material to reprints of some of their work reflecting recent DNA discoveries.
Re: Hari Seldon - how many were aware this is now REAL?http://gdeltproject.org/
The spinning globe identifies various world events in real-time and the data goes back to 1979. It is adding records at the rate of hundreds of thousands a day - from world news sources (print, online, tv, radio) and numerous languages, more also being added all the time.
Yes, I am writing an article about the creator, data scientist Kalev Leetaru, for Analog Magazine.
I never started watching Game of Thrones because i tried reading the books, i couldn't get passed all the sexual acts that were taking place, that's just me though, i want to read something that is not so, how would i out it? "SEX" i guess would be the word, same with movies, the writer or director can hint at the idea, and I'd like to think we could all get what is going to happen or did happen, depending how they lay out the scene, but to almost have that be the driving force behind the over all story is not what i like. I could have been a fan, it is right up my alley, knights, dark forces, but all the sexual things is not for me.
I wasn't, Amy but it sure sounds like a hoax to me, considering that I used to read ANALOG but I haven't seen an issue (either paper or online) since 1995!Janis: Then don't read the EARTH'S CHILDREN series, especially the fourth book of the series THE PLAINS OF PASSAGE, by Jean M. Auel. Too much sex AND too damned much repeating of descriptions of glaciers, loess, mammoths, etc. (a.k.a "infodump").
Amber wrote: "I wasn't, Amy but it sure sounds like a hoax to me, considering that I used to read ANALOG but I haven't seen an issue (either paper or online) since 1995!
Janis: Then don't read the EARTH'S CHIL..."
Thanks for the tip Amber avoiding that one.
Janis: Then don't read the EARTH'S CHIL..."
Thanks for the tip Amber avoiding that one.
Don't even watch the movie version of the first book in the series, Janis. THE CLAN OF THE CAVE BEAR is one of the FIRST three movies that led to the creation of the PG-13 rating. The other two? GREMLINS and INDIANA JONES AND THE TEMPLE OF DOOM.
Unfortunately i did already see the movie, but it was a long time ago
Ugh. Ditto. Mom watched it with me. She didn't like it either. She said it was kind of raw. I said, "That's why, according to the textbook for my English class called FILM AS LITERATURE, the MPAA decided to create the PG-13 rating."She said she hadn't known that, then I told her what I said yesterday about GREMLINS and INDIANA JONES AND THE TEMPLE OF DOOM being the other two movies.
Amber wrote: "I wasn't, Amy but it sure sounds like a hoax to me, considering that I used to read ANALOG but I haven't seen an issue (either paper or online) since 1995!Janis: Then don't read the EARTH'S CHIL..."
Amber, it's no hoax, it's real. Kalev has developed it pretty much on a volunteer basis, but it is officially supported by Google and runs on Google's servers. NOAA has used it and has a demonstration for weather events.
It predicted where Osama bin Laden would be within 20 km. 3 months before they actually got him, just based on the type of news reports and "language" it saw in the area where he eventually was located. It's predicted other conflicts around the world, based on "matches" between the types of statements made by various leaders in public and in people's comments/responses in the past.
Re: Analog - I will be the first female to write an "Alternate View" column in that magazine (think it is scheduled for Jan - which means like November will be on sale) in the column's 70 year history. The article about Kalev and GDELT is a separate, longer article. I have also written a guest editorial that will be there in October issue.That nobody reads.
Like I said, Amy, I haven't seen an issue of ANALOG since my Jr. year of HIGH SCHOOL!
I don't watch TV at all. More because I can't afford a cable or satellite bill than for any other reason.
I can't even do that that because on a budget of $731, there's just no money with which to buy a computer and internet for it after all bills have been paid, including $451 for rent and $130 a month for a housekeeper.
This is the conclusion:
Rape acts in Game of Thrones the TV series (to date): 50
Rape victims in Game of Thrones (to date): 29
Rape acts in ASOIAF the book series (to date): 214
Rape victims in ASOIAF (to date): 117
I haven't watched the show or read the books, but everyone and their mother has recommended these books as "must read". I have a question: Are these books really worth reading given the amount of sexual violence? Are these scenes constantly in your face? Are the books worth reading anyway?