Martin, Sexuality and Age (Formerly, 'Is George...?')

[JoanDrake]

One thing I see constantly in this thread is the idea that Martin is depicting the ancient or medieval world and rapine was a common thing in warfare then. That may be so but we should remain aware that more women were possibly raped on the Eastern Front in WWII than in the entire medieval period. Rape is an aspect of power, not sexuality, the only sexual thing about it is that its uses the sexual act. Rape is a weapon of terror and it has been used as such in war since the beginning of history and continues unabated to this day, as anyone familiar with present conflicts in Africa is more aware of than most. Martin would be extremely remiss in his efforts to portray his world "realistically" if he did not acknowledge this, as Tolkien and many other writers have failed to do (That is not a criticism of Tolkien, who was not trying for realism, but Martin is.)

 

[Michael Colton]

One thing I see constantly in this thread is the idea that Martin is depicting the ancient or medieval world and rapine was a common thing in warfare then. That may be so but we should remain aware that more women were possibly raped on the Eastern Front in WWII than in the entire medieval period. Rape is an aspect of power, not sexuality, the only sexual thing about it is that its uses the sexual act. Rape is a weapon of terror and it has been used as such in war since the beginning of history and continues unabated to this day, as anyone familiar with present conflicts in Africa is more aware of than most. Martin would be extremely remiss in his efforts to portray his world "realistically" if he did not acknowledge this, as Tolkien and many other writers have failed to do (That is not a criticism of Tolkien, who was not trying for realism, but Martin is.)

For my part in the last page or so, I am trying to answer the question someone brought up of why people seem to point out or react to sexual aspects in fiction as a whole more than death and other atrocities. I am certainly not arguing that these things should not be in fiction, merely saying it is understandable that the have a deeper effect on readers.

 

[Ursa major]

I think what has been skirted around here is that the issue is not whether sex is or is not more natural than death (or abusive sex is or is not more prevalent than violence that may or may not lead to death), but one of sensitivity. And I'm not referring to how sensitively the issue is dealt with on the page.

People really do seem to care a lot less about depictions of non-sexual violence than sexual violence. I expect there's not one single cause for this, although I would suggest that it's partly because there's been a lot of fictional (and unrealistic) violence depicted in the entertainment industries over the years (as it's a simple way to up the stakes), and because (real) sexual violence against women has been downplayed**, even in today's more enlightened world. So when stories are set in times where women were as near as can be chattels, it's bound to get some people's hackles up, as we haven't really got to a stage where women are truly seen as equal amongst all sections of society. And when our hackles are up, we can sometimes see things that, if they are there at all, are not necessarily there in the way we seem to see them.

This doesn't seem to be true of violence, not at a societal level. While the average levels of violence are less now than ever before (in terms if incidents per head of population), there has not been any recent general movement to crack down on it (because we have done so for generations). Violence in civil society is not seen as being less acceptable now than it was a few generations ago. It hasn't been "brought into the light"; we don't (outside of those with a bee in their bonnets about video games) often see stories containing violence as subliminally suggesting that such violence should be acceptable across society. Whereas we do know that there are people out their who want to turn the clock back on sexual equality (and we suspect that there are plenty more of them that don't shout about their views), including treating their wives as sexual property.


** - To the extent that people thought that rape was impossible within marriage (because marriage was seen to be giving consent to the husband for the duration of the marriage).

 

[Susan Boulton]

That may be so but we should remain aware that more women were possibly raped on the Eastern Front in WWII than in the entire medieval period. .)

It happened on all fronts in the last war. Not just the fronts. A lot of UK girls/women suffered in silence. Many never spoke up and took what happened to them to their graves. War affects a society in ways that it is hard to imagine.

In the end Game of Thrones is fiction, woven to fit the story the author wants to tell. It is not silly, but a bit futile to try to equate what the author has written or not written with any time period or real life scenario. The situations that arise in real life are far more complex and frightening than any work of fiction.

 

[Michael Colton]

I think what has been skirted around here is that the issue is not whether sex is or is not more natural than death (or abusive sex is or is not more prevalent than violence that may or may not lead to death), but one of sensitivity. And I'm not referring to how sensitively the issue is dealt with on the page.

To a large extent I would agree with this, I would just agree in the sense that the sensitivity is a combination of the personal/intimate elements of sexuality that I have mentioned in addition to the historical contexts that you have just mentioned. The two aspects combine to create a topic that readily affects people and thus causes them to react to or notice it in one way or another.

 

[Null_Zone]

To be honest I don't have a problem with Martin and the whole underage sex by current uk standards and don't believe it has anything to say about him as a person. Even in the western world we can't agree on an age of consent, not that long ago in the scale of things 12 was a perfect age to get married. Before Victorian morals kicked in under sixteen would live together at engagement and only get married when the girl was pregnant.

Many of the complaints are like that Daily Mail double spread, on one page the evil Pedro toggling pictures of fifteen year old girls, on the other close ups of a fifteen year old Charlotte Church commenting on her breast size.

People concentrate on the princess and ignore the heart of gold prostitutes for whom being a who're is a valid career choice but who in reality would be kidnapped young girls who have been repeatedly gang raped before being sold to the brothels.

The past was horrible by are standards, anything trying to be even vaguely realistic should horrifying.