TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

Game Of Thrones Is Relentlessly Sexist... But Not Against Women

desmay

May 21, 2015
33 upvotes
/r/MensRights
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/05/19/game-of-thrones-is-relentlessly-sexist-but-not-against-women/
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Game Of Thrones Is Relentlessly Sexist... But Not Against Women
Author

desmay

Upvotes 33
Comments 50
Date May 21, 2015 3:57 PM UTC
(11 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/36rmai/game_of_thrones_is_relentlessly_sexist_but_not/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/game-of-thrones-is-relentlessly-sexist-but-not.979653
https://theredarchive.com/post/979653
Red Pill terms in post
game
Top posts by desmay

People are tweeting #ItsBiggerThanKSU to support a male student accused of harassment by a college advisor

1742 upvotes
May 15, 2015
/r/MensRights

Marion Cotillard: "Feminism doesn't create equality, it creates separation."

1531 upvotes
May 18, 2016
/r/MensRights

Montana quarterback receives $245K settlement for university’s ‘unfair and biased’ rape investigation

1427 upvotes
February 19, 2016
/r/MensRights

LGBT Student Activist Group Says Gay Men Not Oppressed Enough to Deserve Representation

1052 upvotes
March 22, 2016
/r/MensRights

Nothing fascist here: Kaley Cuoco-Sweeting forced to apologize for saying she's not a feminist

781 upvotes
January 3, 2015
/r/MensRights

Woman Who Recorded Herself Raping 1-Year-Old Son Will Not Go To Jail

742 upvotes
January 31, 2016
/r/MensRights

Gays Against Feminism: Because gay people are not your property, feminists

726 upvotes
June 26, 2015
/r/MensRights

#WomenAgainstFeminism Creator Removed From Twitter For Quoting Radical Feminists

692 upvotes
December 30, 2014
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]Keiichi81 14 points15 points16 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Fictional rapes are indeed a growing problem that demands society’s attention. But it’s not the ones on Game of Thrones we ought to be worried about.

Nailed it!

[–]bertreapot 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

As well as exposing modern feminism’s fixation on “trivial bullshit” (to use the words of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, one of the last serious feminists), incidents like this also expose… well, what can we call it, besides sexism? These people will sit through hours of male characters – and even babies – being maimed and mutilated without even noticing, yet fly into a frenzy of moral outrage at the mere suggestion of a rape scene.

there we have it.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh, this never ending knee-jerk reactionism gets so fucking tiring. The outrage, the never ending outrage!

Every time it happens, more and more ordinary people will get the gist and just stop paying attention.

[+][deleted] 11 years ago* (11 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Vandredd 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

I actually disagree. There were complaints but the show did not have the audience or impact it does now. A better example would be how Ramsey treated Theon.....crickets, crickets everywhere

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

I don't recall anything like this. Senators saying they were done with the show and the like.

[–]Vandredd 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

It was the usual outrage machines. The show is just much bigger now and the outrage machines have more to gain.

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I'd think if anything the drogo rapes are far worse.

Ramsay is an evil human being. Him raping makes sense. It fits the narrative: rapists are evil.

Drogo though is presented as a good and noble character. He never repents and apologizes for the rape. Instead she uses sex to turn him in to a loving husband. He stopped raping her when she started consenting and then he turned in to a wonderful husband and everything was great for a bit (longer than average in that world).

That right there glorifies rape and domestic violence. How many women are in situations like that thinking that they can change him. If they just put up with a little more he'll come around.

That is a hell of a lot more concerning message than "known sadists will hurt people they have power over".

Dany and drogo read like the fantasy many abused women live with: take a few more hits and I can change him in to a loving husband and we can have a happy family. That shit leads to people staying in abusive relationships.

Ramsay and sansa? That will lead to nothing. That guy was already hated and creepy.

And yet feminists were largely silent there. Clearly there was some other factor involved.

[–]Demonspawn 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

And yet feminists were largely silent there. Clearly there was some other factor involved.

Other factor: Drogo was hawt and the women watching would have had sex with him willingly. On top of that, yes, Dynerys did convert this raging alpha into a good little lap dog via her golden vagina... the plot of every romance novel ever written. Ergo, it was a "good rape".

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Other factor: Drogo was hawt and the women watching would have had sex with him willingly.

Bingo.

On top of that, yes, Dynerys did convert this raging alpha into a good little lap dog via her golden vagina... the plot of every romance novel ever written. Ergo, it was a "good rape".

Double bingo.

That rape scene (scenes really) fit in to the female rape fantasy.

The one with Ramsay did not. It fit in with the reality of rape.

[–]Demonspawn 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The one with Ramsay did not. It fit in with the reality of rape.

Except, I've gotta agree with David (From what I've heard about it, haven't seen the scene yet myself): Sansa consented.

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah that's a possibility. It's definitely ambiguous. Either she's consenting because she has some ulterior plan or she is forced. Not sure.

I don't mind calling it rape but I'm not married to the idea (thankfully, stay away you Bastard!).

Frankly Sansa has gone too long without being raped. Not that I want anything to happen to her, she seems like a nice enough character.

But a pretty, naive girl walking around war torn westeros either without a guardian or with fairly evil guardians should have been raped, tortured, raped again, and finally flayed/murdered by this point.

It's a shitty world. Men with armies at their backs face worse fates.

For her to skip through it mostly unscathed is a bit unlikely.

[–]CapnMajor -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

"all women want to play out a rape fantasy with Jason Momoa and not me and not a white guy that isn't ripped and that leads to discrimination" is all I'm getting from this comment. This is gross.

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics -4 points-3 points-2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No, that's not at all what I wrote.

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

See my longer edit/explanation.

[+]DavidByron2 -14 points-13 points-12 points 11 years ago (34 children) | Copy Link

I pointed out that it seems like most MRAs don't know what the definition of rape is, when I showed that Sansa wasn't actually raped.

The outrage also misses another point: it isn’t even clear if Sansa was raped. The scene in question is her wedding night, and while she is clearly repelled by the brutal Ramsay Bolton, she also, it could perfectly well be argued, reluctantly consents to all of his requests.

Or perhaps they agreed with me, but were too easily cowed and shamed by feminists into attacking the truth rather than being seen "rapey".

The down voted thread is here:

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/36kqm7/apparently_a_lot_of_mras_dont_know_how_rape_is/

[–]ExpendableOne 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

What you're trying to accomplish by linking back to that post? You have your opinion, other people are allowed to have theirs. You had your argument, right or wrong it wasn't a popular one. Brining it up again just makes you seem petty.

[+]DavidByron2 -6 points-5 points-4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The article was censored by those who were against it. So no, there was no debate, only one side shutting down the other using force. Remind you of any group of people?

Brining it up again just makes you seem petty

I've been anti-feminist over twenty years. You think I give a flying shit about reputation? Cowing to feminists out of shame is fine if you're a coward, but don't start trying to slam other people like a White knight.

[–]ExpendableOne 6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

How was the article censored? Because nobody up-voted your post or your point of view? That's not censorship, it's just an unpopular post that got over-taken by more popular ones.

[+][deleted] 11 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[+]DavidByron2 -6 points-5 points-4 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

How was that a threat? He was just being an arse. If I've already agreed to do X for you and then you say, oh you better do it or I'll fuck you up son, is that a threat? You were already doing it. It seems more like a trick of manipulation.

Sansa could have chosen to play his game and turn around and said "get used to disappointment then" or something. The threat was without power because he can't afford to hurt her anyway.

But regardless even if you call it an explicit threat it wasn't a threat directed at making her have sex. Because she already was agreeing to that.

Simply put you can't force a volunteer.

[–]chocoboat 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Simply put you can't force a volunteer.

Are you arguing "it's not rape if you're married"?

[–]DavidByron2 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

No I'm saying it's not rape if you consent to sex.

[–]chocoboat 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

How was there consent?

[–]DavidByron2 -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Like I just said (1) she just got married and (2) she was taking her clothes off

[–]Vandredd 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

How did you think this post was a good idea?

[–]DavidByron2 -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You're one of those people who think lying and sucking up to feminists is a good idea i assume?

[–]Vandredd 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Assuming doesn't seem to be working for you.

[–]dungone 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It's pretty clear that this was a particularly nasty rape, but in either case, it helps to pick out battles carefully to things that are actually worth taking a stand on.

[–]DavidByron2 -5 points-4 points-3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It wasn't a rape. As for "clear" that sounds like a phrase used by someone who doesn't have any argument. Apparently is wonderfully clear to everyone except they just can't put into words why. I'll tell you what that means: prejudice.

If you have a strong feeling you're right but have no ability to say why that's prejudice.

Now if you have any actual reasons for thinking it's rape try telling me at the link above.

[–]Demonspawn 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

David, your committing the cardinal sin of holding a women responsible for her choices and decisions when there are negative consequences. That's just plain wrong and evil and misogynistic!

And even here, in "MRA" land, that's not acceptable. Even in the place where people think equality is possible, they still can't hold a woman responsible for her choices and decisions like they would a man.

And now you understand why I consider equality an unworkable pipe dream: even the most "egalitarian" of men won't hold women as responsible for their own decisions as they hold men. It's why even egalitarianism has the end result of becoming a female supremacy movement.

[–]DavidByron2 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

And the Daenerys rape of her husband gets settled the opposite way. Daenerys is a hot chick so even though he had absolutely no choice or ability to consent, that's no rape because well obviously he's gonna love it.

Consistency? Not so much.

[–]chocoboat 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

Sorry but you are wayyy off base here.

A hyperviolent murderous psychopath who is well known to torture anyone who displeases him tells her "you don't want to displease me, we don't get to get this marriage off to a bad start". Then the psychopath rips off her clothes and starts having sex with her.

There was no sign at all that she wanted to have sex, she gave no consent, and she had no ability to say "no" due to his implied threat that she would be tortured or killed if she displeases him. If you think that isn't rape, I don't know how else I can explain it to you.

Now, this doesn't make GoT a bad show. And there shouldn't be rules banning certain things from happening in works of fiction, all of that is nonsense. But what Ramsay did in that episode damn sure was rape.

[–]DavidByron2 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

There was no sign at all that she wanted to have sex

(1) she just married him

(2) she was taking off her clothes

Short of a signed document in her own blood I think those are about as good a signs as you can get.

she gave no consent

as above.

she had no ability to say "no"

Except to say "no".

due to his implied threat that she would be tortured or killed if she displeases him

Which she knew was mostly bullshit because his father would have him killed for doing something that stupid. In any case you can't force a volunteer. She wanted to be there so what is the purpose of pretending he threatened her? Let's say in his own mind it was a threat. So what? She was there under her own plan of action.

If you think that isn't rape, I don't know how else I can explain it to you.

Well you can show she didn't consent. You know like the definition of rape?

[–]chocoboat 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

WTF, dude. You really have a lot to learn. Have you even tried looking at this from the woman's viewpoint yet?

A murdering psychopath threatens to kill you if you disobey and then tears off your clothes and starts having sex with you. Would you be ok with that?

I mean, how can you even begin to describe that scene as two people choosing to have sex with each other under their own free will, without anyone being forced into something under duress?

[–]DavidByron2 -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I'm tired of this nonsense. If you can't address why you think it wasn't consensual then don't bother commenting any more. No more of this emotional irrational shit. or is that what you mean by "a woman's point of view"?

[–]fameisforassholes -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

1.) she never said yes. 2.) there was a threat of violence if she said no.

Lol, troll.

[–]chocoboat -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Can you not read? She didn't want to have sex with him. He threatened her with violence and then tore her clothes off and fucked her. She never gave consent, and would have said "no" except she knows that doing so means he'll hunt her like a wild animal and have dogs tear our her throat.

Exactly what the fuck about the above is "emotional" and "irrational"? Please point out the flaws in my argument where I illogically appeal to emotion or am simply irrational.

[–]DavidByron2 -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Zero content.

[–]fameisforassholes -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

He's just a troll.

[–]fameisforassholes -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Don't worry about it, DavidByron is just a troll. Look at his comment history. It's sad, really.

[–]fameisforassholes 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Affirmative consent bro. Do you know what it is?

[–]DavidByron2 -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The new feminist lynching law?

[–]fameisforassholes 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Attempt at a witty comeback instead of an actual answer. From your post history, I think you're just a troll trying to stir people up. Lots of people in men's rights realize you're a bloody idiot looking through your comments too, it's kinda sad. You don't actually know what you're talking about.

[–]climate_control -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

The problem is that the people in that thread are incapable of separating the events of the show from real life in medieval times, and real life in modern times.

Marriage was a defense against rape in England and Wales until 1991, which was about 700 years after the show's approximate IRL time period. As such, its very difficult to see how Ramsay could be accused of committing a crime, in the context of the show or that time period IRL.

Did Sansa consent? In one sense yes, she consented at the marriage ceremony, where she was fully aware of the implications of that consent.

Did she do it under duress? Yes, of course, but nearly everyone in the show/book does everything their forced to due under duress of some kind. Her marriage and its consummation were certainly more consensual than Daenarys with Drogo, where she was essentially sold to him like an object.

So why does everyone care all of a sudden? Because they associate with Sansa. Daenary's marriage / consumation was done when we barely knew her. Because Sansa had been here before, with Tyrion, and he couldn't do it. We thought she had plot armor, we were wrong.

But also because Theon watched. That's one of the big reasons here why everyone is so upset. Even if she consented to marriage and the sex she knew went with it, she didn't consent to an audience, right?

Wrong. She knew it was a possibility. Remember the Red wedding? Remember when a group of people went off to watch Catelyn's brother's wedding night sex?

This was a common medieval custom, for high status semi-arranged marriages to have their consummation witnessed. Look at what Tyrion did, abdicate his duty due to empathy/weakness depending on the point of view. Often times it was the Bride's own mother who witnessed the events, so having it be a close "family" member wasn't even that unusual.

So lets just get to the real reason people are upset, and why Sansa's marriage night was controversial, but Daenery's wasn't. Its because we liked and new Sansa. Its because we thought she'd always be safe. Its because we hate Ramsay, but loved Drogo, even though their both remorseless psycho killers, but Drogo was hot and stupid, while Ramsay is cunning.

[–]DavidByron2 -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

People are beginning to move to the feminist redefinition of rape to mean "anything the woman doesn't like". That this is happening with MRAs to is a very serious matter than needs to be discussed, so of course these white knights within the movement seek to censor the discussion.

They pretend they aren't agreeing with feminists but in the end all they have is, "Oh but she really really didn't like this sex, so it really is rape this time."

[–]climate_control -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I'm not sure if I agree they are trying to censor anything. They probably think that Ramsay is the worst possible person to defend, for any reason, even if he's technically innocent just this once.

Its sort of the same as the feminists who still defend UVA Jackie, because she's technically innocent of making false allegations in a criminal sense because she didn't go to the police.

In both cases, you're right, but you're still wrong because nobody cares.

[–]DavidByron2 -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

because she's technically innocent of making false allegations

Yeah she did go to the police eventually, after the Rolling Stone article they came to her.

[–]climate_control -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It doesn't count if they came to her if she didn't file a report with them. Just being questioned, which is what I believe happened, isn't the same, even if she repeated her lies.

But this right here is what I'm talking about, nobody cares about the distinction.

[–]DavidByron2 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No lying to the police is lying to the police whether you "make a report" or not. In any case you don't have to talk to the police to make a false accusation.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter