It’s something that has been annoying me for a very long time. Why the writers of Game of thrones/house of the dragon feel the need to make so many antagonists sexual predators.
I’m gonna take 3 very obvious examples:
Joffrey Baratheon: Did we need the se*ual assault and murder of the two prostitutes to understand what kind of boy he was. We saw him torture Sansa again and again, killing kids, being a coward…Did we really need to see him torture those women? Some will argue that it was to show us what man he would become but I think we got a pretty good idea of what kind of man he was.
Ramsay Bolton: he was the worst monster you could imagine, he r*ped women (off screen), chase them with his dogs, tortured Theon, skinned people alive for fun. We knew who he was, what he was. The r*pe of Sansa was just to shock the audience, it was no character development, certainly not for Sansa, that girl went through so much already, way too much. That scene was just made to make people talk about the show on social media.
Aegon II Targaryen: we could have for once in the got universe an antagonist major who was not born a monster but become one but the writers may have realized that we would feel too much sympathy for the boy after seeing as a teenager victims of abuse so they decided to kill that sympathy and use the most despicable way to do so. They made him a r’*apist. I remember a producer of the show saying that it would be different in hotd, if someone was r*pe the trauma would be focused on the victims, they would not make a r*pe scene for nothing. It may have been true for Alicent but not for Diana, her trauma will never be addressed and let’s be real if we ever see her again it would be for her death scene. The only thing her agression brings is the scene between Aegon and Alicent and since Alicent is really religious, if Aegon had a consensual sexu*l relationship with another maid or a prostitute the scene would have be the exact same. They wanted us to hate Aegon and the green before the start of the dance. It can also either be seen as excuse of the abuse « see, he was rotten from the start, they were right » or he was beaten up and treated like shit by his family so now he hates women and r*pe them. I’m really angry about Aegon.
Bonus (yeah it’s the kind of post with bonus): we all choose to forgot about it because it was so stupid and unnecessary but Jaime did r*pe Cersei in front of the dead body of their youngest son. But apparently both Cersei and Jaime forgot about it.
I would not make a post about Dany because I really wanted to talk about the way the antagonists of the shows were written and how it was always women who were victims but their trauma was never addressed. most of the time it was useless, or just use as a tool to make us hate a character faster so their work as writers would be easier (don’t have to write a nuanced character) but of course I think about her too, it’s a little different because her trauma was indeed addressed in the show, even if they waited s7 to use the word r*pe. But the way D&D filmed the scenes was to be remembered and once again shock the audience, it was also traumatic for Emilia.
You can write a good antagonist without making him a r*pist, in the fact those 3 characters would still have been great villains without that.
I need everyone to know that the ship Götheborg, the world's largest ocean-going wooden sailing ship, answered a distress call the other day.
Imagine waiting for the coast guard or whatever to show up and instead a replica of 18th century merchant ship pulls up and tows you to the coast.
perhaps controversial idk i’ve never seen anyone talk about it but i do agree with what mike said about them using el’s powers too much and depending on her and solely her (which is not an assumption lmao they shut the fireworks idea down because they were relying on her) i just don’t think he went about it right but i understand why he’s like that and while el can make her own decisions and only el, she would do anything for them even if it kills her so it’s not like she’s doing things out of her own interest or benefit resulting in unnecessary and harmful sacrifice so it’s not that simple
Also, like, “Arya’s only nine”, she’s been in sewing classes since she was a toddler. She should be able to embroider and make a few simple things(at age seven, kids in the 19th century were expected to make a shirt, for example). If she doesn’t know how to do simple embroidery, at this point she basically doesn’t want to learn. Sorry, not sorry, these are basic skills.
every person can feel freddie’s presence in their souls when they sing MAMAAAAAA UUHHHH, I DONT WANNA DIE, I SOMETIMES I WISH I’VE NEVER BEEN BORN AT ALL with all the air in their lungs i’m not joking
version of spn where dean is openly bisexual the entire time and definitely fucks a priest during a job and sam is does his judgmental little "dude" and dean is like "i already went to hell once man,, what's the worst that could happen" and everytime there's a new bad guy or apocalypse sam is like "this is bc you fucked a priest" and eventually he says it in front of Cas who does his little squint and head tilt and just
"You what?"
I was going to file my taxes today. Oops
We in Finland have a long tradition of re-naming the royals to fit our language, so a king George is in our history books Yrjö, and Elizabeth is slightly more understandably Elisabet. But since Elizabeth II reigned so long, I never realised the board of Finnish language has in the meantime renewed their recommendations and now in the official press, Charles III is just Charles III, not Kaarle III like we all expected him to be. Charles sounds like some random bloke was just dragged off from the streets to be the King, Kaarle sounds like an actual king. My friends are at the moment arguing what to call him and many are stubborly calling him Kaarle. I am of the opinion that if you are any royal worth your salt, you should be getting a weird, awkward Finnish name for Finnish use.
We in Finland have a long tradition of re-naming the royals to fit our language, so a king George is in our history books Yrjö, and Elizabeth is slightly more understandably Elisabet. But since Elizabeth II reigned so long, I never realised the board of Finnish language has in the meantime renewed their recommendations and now in the official press, Charles III is just Charles III, not Kaarle III like we all expected him to be. Charles sounds like some random bloke was just dragged off from the streets to be the King, Kaarle sounds like an actual king. My friends are at the moment arguing what to call him and many are stubborly calling him Kaarle. I am of the opinion that if you are any royal worth your salt, you should be getting a weird, awkward Finnish name for Finnish use.