About the Author - Lisa Macklem
I do interviews and write articles for the site in addition to reviewing a number of shows, including Supernatural, Arrow, Agents of Shield, The Walking Dead, Game of Thrones, Forever, Defiance, Bitten, Glee, and a few others! Highlights of this past year include covering San Diego Comic Con as press and a set visit to Bitten. When I'm not writing about television shows, I'm often writing about entertainment and media law in my capacity as a legal scholar. I also work in theatre when the opportunity arises. I'm an avid runner and rider, currently training in dressage.
Baelish' scheming is always a delight, especially when manipulating an abhorrent of a woman in Cersei.
ReplyDeleteFor me the only real stand out scene this week was Jorah and Tyrion's heart to heart...
ReplyDeleteIt showed some real emotion without feeling over-the-top or forced. Both Peter Dinklage and Iain Glen were brilliant!
I can't write what I think about the people who voted for the last scene...
ReplyDeleteThis. How that could have been a favourite scene for someone is beyond me.
ReplyDeleteI like how you couch Sansa's rape in prettied up language. Euphemisms are so much more palatable.
ReplyDeleteCersei, Cersei, Cersei how long before the Sparrow starts looking at your sins and asks the question of your children being bastards ? OOPS not so clean are we !!
ReplyDeleteI found the wedding be really beautiful. Sophia turned into this great actress and channels her inner Stark so well.
ReplyDeleteAnd why are people voting for the sex scene?
"Favorite" doesn't only mean that you like it/it's beautiful - it can also mean favorite powerful or series/character changing scene. It just means that it was the scene that stood out for you the most.
ReplyDeleteI canNOT wait for Cersei to get hers!
ReplyDelete"Favorite" doesn't only mean that you like it/it's beautiful - it can also mean favorite powerful or series/character changing scene. It just means that it was the scene that stood out for you the most.
ReplyDelete"Favorite" doesn't only mean that you like it/it's beautiful - it can also mean favorite powerful or series/character changing scene. It just means that it was the scene that stood out for you the most. (see above)
ReplyDeleteI loved the moment when Tyrion realized that Jorah didn't know about his father's death and how even though Tyrion hated his own father, he knew how painful this news was to Jorah....
ReplyDeletePart of the horror of that scene for me was Ramsey's euphemism.
ReplyDeleteYeah, I get that. I give U the character changing part. Overall I found the scene quite forced and put there just for the shock effect.
ReplyDeleteWe'll have to agree to disagree there. I thought the scene was exceptionally well done. We were forced to watch through Theon's eyes rather than the act itself.
ReplyDeleteConsidering the number of people I've seen who don't think it was rape at all, I'd appreciate it if real life media would stop using euphemisms. Call a spade a spade.
ReplyDeleteI agree. I thougt it was a horrible moment, but I was still kind of relieved the writers didn't make Sansa suffer what happened to Ramsey's bride in the books
ReplyDeleteWell, come back for my actual review. I will certainly mention the euphemism, but I will also talk about the rape.
ReplyDeleteYep. Completely agree.
ReplyDeleteIt was pervy to even list it on the poll. Especially to describe it in those words.
ReplyDeleteI disagree. The word favorite carries with it the implication of liking something.
ReplyDeleteSo now we rank our favorite torture scenes ?
ReplyDeleteSo now we applaud gratuitous sadism if it is well done ?
ReplyDeleteI wouldn't partake..
ReplyDeleteEven if I realize torture scenes sometimes need to be included in some episodes, I find them distasteful.
We always have.
ReplyDeleteThat's why The Passion of Christ was nominated for so many awards.
I can only tell you what the criteria is for "Favorite Scene" here at SpoilerTv.
ReplyDeleteIt's hardly "gratuitous" if there is a deeper meaning to what is going on. I wouldn't watch a show that I thought was that superficial.
ReplyDeleteBut you did not call Sansa's scene distasteful - you called it "powerful". Misters Dan and David indulged in some sick manipulation of their fans in this particular retrofitting of the story for TV.
ReplyDeleteThe two words are not mutually exclusive to me.
ReplyDeleteCase in point, the 1985 movie KIDS.
I found it utterly disturbing and often very distasteful, but yet powerful.
Likewise, I found the Sansa rape scene very well executed. It was visceral and disturbing. I can appreciate the skill used to make me feel that way. That does not stop me from finding torture and rape (and other violent acts) distasteful.
it does not matter if its is a "good" or "bad" feeling, I can appreciate scenes that make me feel strongly either way. Art is supposed to evoke emotion - not only happy emotions.
Look, you have your own opinion. I just feel that rather than being art it was more blatant exploitation.
ReplyDeleteWhat's the deeper meaning that couldn't be conveyed without Sansa's character regression?
ReplyDeleteI too cringed at our poll-mistress's choice of words for that particular poll item - merciful heavens what was she thinking - I plant my grayscaled foot firmly on the phrase used
ReplyDeleteI don't think you are going to convince anyone who is a fan of the books...
ReplyDeleteThe whole point is even WITH her character progression she was helpless to avoid this. Most women are helpless in this society - with some amazingly wonderful exceptions. All of whom have been through great trauma - as have most of the male leaders. Come back are read my review.
ReplyDeleteBy *this* do you mean the sex or do you mean the rape? Because my whole point is that WITH her character progression, she wasn't helpless at all. Keep the following points in mind when you write the review:
ReplyDelete1. Sansa should have no illusions about these guys - Boltons are her enemies and if she wants to avenge her family (the whole point of going there, really) then she needs to make them dead. She should also know that the Boltons aren't particularly fond of her either - they only need her for her name. What they did to Theon should only serve as a reminder of how cruel they could be. Unlike with Joffrey and Cersei, this time, she should be walking into it with her eyes wide open and either have a plan to ensure her own safety and well-being or be constantly working on one.
2. She should know that her name is the only currency she has. But unlike King's Landing, its worth a lot more in the North. Try to parley that into an advantage - ask Roose to invite other Northern Lords to witness the wedding (In the Books, Roose invites a lot of other Lords to *prove* to them that his son is marrying a Stark - the whole point of the wedding - and that their claim is legitimate now). Sansa could use the same thing here to delay the wedding (and therefore, the bedding) and get in touch with potentially powerful allies.
3. Littlefinger told her to "make this boy Ramsey her own" and she has seen Margery do that with Joffrey. Where are her attempts to charms Ramsey? She is getting a lot of information, left and right, Walda pregnant, Myranda jealous, Ramsey insecure etc. any of which she could use on Ramsey. I'm not saying that she should be able to hatch a Machiavellian scheme where her enemies take each-other out (though that would be awesome) - but atleast she should use it to get closer to her target.
4. She should've known and understood what was coming tonight and she should've prepared herself for it. Remember that great whore speech from Littlefinger in season 1 - I was expecting something like that from Sansa - Ramsay is never going to forget that she is a Stark who is supposed to hate him, but he can be made to believe that he is winning her over.
5. Or, if all this was too tough for her, she could've picked the escape option. She knows that people out there are willing to help her escape. She also knows that Stannis is close and he is likely to provide her with sanctuary. In fact, Stannis might actually welcome her with open arms - all the Northern Lords who are still loyal to Robb Stark would come flocking to his side now.
Sansa had all these options and her character progression is supposed to mean that she is smart enough to see them and brave enough to attempt them - she did nothing, which is why is looks like character regression.
The "sex" was rape. There is no distinction between the two. You, like Baelish, vastly over estimate Sansa. She is nowhere near doing any of those things. I will be writing my review based upon my reading of the episode - the entire episode.
ReplyDeleteThe "sex" was rape. There is no distinction between the two.
ReplyDeleteThere is a pretty big distinction - and its called consent. Sansa may not want to have sex with Ramsay, she may be revolted by the idea and the man - but she could still choose to agree to it rather than just letting it happen. She didn't and was once again a "bystander to tragedy".
You, like Baelish, vastly over estimate Sansa. She is nowhere near doing any of those things.
Sansa isn't capable of figuring out that the Boltons are monsters?
She isn't capable of asking Roose to invite other lords to the wedding?
She isn't capable of flirting with Ramsay? Smiling at him and talking to him?
She isn't capable of faking pleasure in his company?
They are not that hard - she should be capable of doing atleast some of those.
"She could choose to agree to it" ARE YOU SERIOUS? She did not want to have sex with him PERIOD. THAT is rape.
ReplyDeleteAnd that's the difference between being a player in the game and a pawn. You think Cersei wanted to have sex with Robert after the first time? Did Margery want to have sex with Joffrey? Did Osha want to have sex with Theon?
ReplyDeleteWomen on GoT have limited weapons available to them - but sex is one of them. They often have sex with people they don't want to sleep with in order to gain the necessary advantage. That is a choice that Sansa abdicated - which makes her a victim and a pawn, not a player.
I find your definition of consent abhorrent.
ReplyDeleteSo, by your definition, if a woman doesn't want to have sex with a guy, but does so anyway because she has something to gain from it or because she wants to manipulate him - she was raped?
ReplyDeleteLoras' trial !!
ReplyDeleteRape, according to Black's Legal Dictionary, "unlawful sexual intercourse committed by a man with a woman through force and against her will..... without consent and usually by force or threat of injury."
ReplyDeleteAs for your question - "if a woman doesn't want to have sex with a guy" - I don't need to go any further than that to determine it is rape. Any other niceties you want to hang on your explanation are simply coercion.
A woman may want to have sex for many reasons - but if she doesn't for _any_ reason, and still feels that she has to, it is rape.
AGREE! Thanks for adding it here - it was definitely on my long list.
ReplyDeleteRape, according to Black's Legal Dictionary, "unlawful sexual
ReplyDeleteintercourse committed by a man with a woman through force and against
her will..... without consent and usually by force or threat of injury."
Looks like Black supports my definition against yours. I see the term "against her will", but not "against her want".
As for your question - "if a woman doesn't want to have sex with a guy" -
I don't need to go any further than that to determine it is rape. Any
other niceties you want to hang on your explanation are simply coercion.
So, according to you, "woman wanting to manipulate a man" or "woman expecting to gain something from him" - that's the same as a man coercing a woman? Your definition is the abhorrent one.
A woman may want to have sex for many reasons - but if she doesn't for _any_ reason, and still feels that she has to, it is rape.
So, by your logic:
Cersei didn't want to have sex with Robert for 17 years. (that she did it regularly to hide the true parentage of her children was Robert coercing her).
Margery wouldn't want to have sex with Joffrey. (that she would've to consolidate her power is Joffrey coercing her)
Osha didn't want to have sex with Theon. (That she offered it herself to get a chance at rescuing the Starks at night was Theon coercing her).
So, basically, all three women were raped (Margery *would've* been raped, but still) and Cersei had the worst of it. She was raped repeatedly for 17 years.
Clearly _you_ are not a lawyer. Neither the law nor common decency support your views.
ReplyDeleteFavorite LIKE scene: Jorah/ Tyrion
ReplyDeletePowerful (but disturbing) scenes: Sansa/ Ramsay (and Sansa/ Myranda):
Altho Sansa gets raped at the end of the episode - both that scene and her scene with Myranda are powerful. the scene with Myranda (and Theon) shows us that Sansa isn't just gonna 'suffer' as she did in Kings Landing. she (to a certain extent) knows how fucked up Ramsay is and she knew (to a certain extent) what would happen on her wedding night (obviously not the theon part) - to me she's just biding her time - enduring Ramsay until the right mmt to strike. (- she has started to play the game of thrones - which is above all a game of patience, and using things to your advantage - also really cant believe that Petyr would leave her with the boltons with a bit more in her arsenal)
So from this I do think Ramsay will continue to abuse her in the sick way that he does - but I do hope it wont be like Jeyne in the books... Sansa (and Petyr?) have something planned...
King Lear is my favourite Shakespeare play. it is also the most bleak, despairing play written prior to the twentieth century. "Liking" something does not mean you endorse what you see, or that it makes you feel good. It means that you find its artistry somehow profound or powerful. Admittedly, in the internet age, when the concept gets reduced to things like "favouriting" 5,000 web pages, or "liking" every third cat video you see, that notion can get lost.
ReplyDeleteSo you object to euphemisms with . . . a metaphor? ;-)
ReplyDeleteHa! XD
ReplyDeleteActually both do. And I don't have to be a lawyer to know that.
ReplyDeleteThe last scene was so horrible it made me cry. And that is the reason I voted for it - it was the only scene in this episode that left/awekened feelings in me.
ReplyDeleteMy two law degrees would indicate that a law degree does give you a better understanding of the actual law. Thankfully, you are simply wrong.
ReplyDeleteTwo law degrees should give you a better understanding, but they seem to have failed to do so in your case. By the very definition you provided, rape is "unlawful sexual intercourse committed by a man with a woman through
ReplyDeleteforce and against her will..... without consent and usually by force or
threat of injury" - the key phrase being "against her will", not "against her desire". A woman can consent to having sex with a man she does not desire sexually in order to accomplish other goals and that is not rape.
But, there is an easy way to prove me wrong - show me a case where a woman of sound judgment consented to have sex with someone she didn't want to sleep with, without any threat or coercion present and later claimed rape and the courts decided in her favor. Because that would demonstrate that the court does not see a difference between "want" and "will".
I don't have to "prove" you wrong. You are. It's not consent if she doesn't want to have sex. Clearly, you have trouble with the English language. You are also "arguing" two totally different scenarios.
ReplyDelete"A woman can consent to having sex with a man she does not desire sexually in order to accomplish other goals" is NOT the same as having "sex with someone she didn't want to sleep with."
I'm done discussing this with you.
A claim without proof is meaningless. So yes, you do have to prove me wrong. Didn't they teach you that in law-school?
ReplyDeleteAnd clearly, you are the one having a problem with the subtleties of English language if you equate "want to have sex" with "consent". "Want to have sex" speaks only to sexual desire - it says nothing about any other aspects of the situation which may affect the decision making process. These other aspects may result in the woman agreeing to have sex even if she doesn't want to - but as long as those other aspects are not some form of force, coercion or threats, its not rape.
I pity the women in your life.
ReplyDeleteAnd I pity those who take legal advice from you. What does that have to do with anything?
ReplyDeleteAbout five minutes if internet searching:
ReplyDeletein D.C., you could be charged with first degree sexual abuse if you
cause a person to submit to a sex act using any of the following
tactics: by physically forcing them; by threatening them; by rendering
them unconscious; or by drugging them. This crime can be punished with
up to life in prison. You could be charged with second degree sexual
abuse if you have sex with someone when you have reason to know that
they are incapable of knowing what's going on, incapable of saying no,
or incapable of "communicating unwillingness" to have sex. This crime
can be punished with up to 20 years in prison. In these crimes, the
rapist is aware that their victim does not want to participate in the
sex act, and does it anyway ("no means no"), or is aware that their
victim cannot consent, and does it anyway ("passed out means no").
Misdemeanor sexual abuse requires a less stringent standard of
consent. Under D.C. law, the misdemeanor charge applies to "whoever
engages in a sexual act or sexual contact with another person and who
should have knowledge or reason to know that the act was committed
without that other person's permission." This crime can be punished with
up to six months in prison.
(from http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2009/11/09/legal-consent-morning-after-regret-and-accidental-rape/)
Note: active resistance, active assertion of "no" on the part of the victim are not necessary for second-degree or misdemeanour conviction. Consent does not legally = explicitly saying yes, and lack of consent does not legally = either active resistance or explicitly saying "no." It IS rape if the "rapist is aware that the victim does not want to participate" "or is aware that their victim cannot consent."
Can someone choose to have sex for reasons other than actually wanting to have sex with the other person? Of course. Prostitutes (of all genders) do it all the time, and I'm sure many other people do it as well, for numerous reasons. Does that therefore mean that unless someone explicitly resists or says no, but acquiesces, or does not actively resist, that person has not been raped? It absolutely does not.
Nice hijacking of the thread, btw: what any of this really has to do with Sansa's situation is opaque. Sansa manifestly did not want to have sex with Ramsay. Ramsay manifestly knew this. The consequences for resistance or refusal were pretty clear--and pretty clearly a lot worse than those for not resisting. There is not a lot of room for ambiguity about the fact that Sansa WAS raped.
Can someone choose to have sex for reasons other than actually wanting
ReplyDeleteto have sex with the other person? Of course. Prostitutes (of all
genders) do it all the time, and I'm sure many other people do it as
well, for numerous reasons.
This is the crux of my whole point. Sansa could have agreed to have sex with Ramsay in an attempt to seduce him or fool him into thinking that he was winning her over. This level of deception isn't beyond her and had she done so, she would've maintained her agency and not been a victim of rape.
However, on the show, Sansa was raped. Nothing ambiguous about that.