The Instigator
wrichcirw
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
TheGreatAndPowerful
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Khal Drogo Did Not Rape Daenerys Targaryen

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 4 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/3/2014 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 19,505 times Debate No: 54663
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (65)
Votes (4)

 

wrichcirw

Pro

** This debate will contain massive spoilers about the HBO television series "Game of Thrones". If you do not wish to read about the series before watching it, then please do not read this debate. **

This debate is a "no scoring" debate. If you wish to leave an opinion about which position you found to be more convincing (i.e. an RFD), offer constructive criticism, and/or simply discuss the matter, there is a forum topic set up for this specific purpose here: (http://www.debate.org...)

This debate is impossible to accept. If you want to debate this topic, please either leave a note in the comments section or PM me, thank you.

Finally, this debate is about the television series and not the books. I understand there are significant deviations between the two.


Resolution


Khal Drogo Did Not Rape Daenerys Targaryen

This resolution involves the first two episodes of the first season of the series, during which the two consummate their marriage and have sex repeatedly afterwards, evidently to the displeasure of an extremely uncomfortable Daenerys.

First of all, to be clear, in a modern conception of rape, every single act of sex between Drogo and Daenerys would be considered rape for two reasons: 1) She was under-age (I believe 13 at the time, although in the show they do not make it clear, and the actress Emilia Clarke is herself 27), and 2) they did not share a common language, meaning that consent would have been impossible to establish in a modern court of law.

For this debate, the modern legal definition of rape is not valid... instead rape will be determined by the accepted standards of the television series.


Argument


Recently, there has been a lot of controversy surrounding a particular episode in the current season of Game of Thrones that involves Cercei and Jaime Lannister having sex in front of their dead son inside the holiest building in Westeros. In the books, this was consensual, as it coincided with the reunion of the two after years of separation. In the TV series, the director of the episode has been all over the place, in one breath clearly calling it "forced sex" and "rape" (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com...), then when asked point blank whether or not it was a rape, waffles with answers like "it was consensual by the end." (http://www.hitfix.com...)

The actor involved when asked the same question responded with "Yes and no," (http://time.com...) although he has since banned his children from ever watching the specific scene. (http://www.dailystar.co.uk...).

That scene (https://www.youtube.com...) explicitly involved Cercei saying "Stop!" repeatedly, and Jaime responding with "I don't care," while ripping her clothes off and forcing her onto the floor. Non-consent was clearly voiced, and so to conclude it was rape is plausible by most standards. Incidentally, the two are quite cool to each other as a result of that scene, and if anyone considers rape to be about an expression of power relations between genders as "the pervasive threat of sexual assault is used to limit women's sovereignty,"(http://www.theguardian.com...), Cercei makes it subsequently clear where the power lies, as in their next meeting she keeps Jaime waiting, addresses him as "Lord Commander", fully cognizant that her position as Queen (Regent) is the higher position, to which Jaime has no choice but to acquiesce (https://www.youtube.com...).

---

I bring up Cercei and Jaime mainly to put the resolution in its proper context. There are material differences between the Cercei/Jaime affair and the Drogo/Daenerys affair that would categorize one as rape and not the other.

First, did Daenerys ever say "No?". The answer is no. Khal Drogo said "no" repeatedly (apparently it was the only word he knew), but Daenerys, not once. (https://www.youtube.com..., last minute of the video). So, we do not have a clear, verbal indication of non-consent. Does she resist? She covers herself and cries...she is clearly uncomfortable with the entire concept...but did she agree to it? The answer here is clearly yes.

Marriage in the Game of Thrones setting is typically only recognized when it is consummated, i.e. the act of sex. This is clear when King Joffrey is murdered...Margaery Tyrell asks whether or not she is queen, to which her grandmother answers "less than you would have been if Joffrey had done you the courtesy of consummating the marriage before dying." (https://www.youtube.com...)

All of the political marriages in the series are inextricably tied to this concept of consummation (http://en.wikipedia.org...). This is true in every single political marriage in the series...the expectation is to produce (male) offspring to further the family lineage.

Did Daenerys agree to the marriage? Yes - their marriage was consensual. Therefore, she agreed to the consummation of the marriage as well, and so what looks like reticence on her part is irrelevant to the issue of consent, but is much more an issue of having "cold feet".

This is very, very different from Tyrion's marriage to Sansa, as Sansa had no choice in the matter...she is a Lannister hostage, and she does what the Lannisters command her to do. Tyrion is vocal that he will not rape Sansa...while Sansa's age is an issue (the actress who plays Sansa is herself only 17), the main issue is that such a marriage would have been non-consensual, and therefore any sexual act could very well be considered rape by the standards of the TV series (https://www.youtube.com...).


Conclusion


There is a lot of talk about rape in the series, but this is not one of those instances.

I await an intelligent rebuttal from my opponent.
TheGreatAndPowerful

Con

My opponent has set the stage:

"[R]ape will be determined by the accepted standards of the television series."

He has referenced the controversial sex scene between Jaime and Cersei in episode 4x03, Breaker of Chains. His criteria boils down to:


    • "Non-consent was clearly voiced..."

    • "...the two are quite cool to each other as a result of that scene..."

    • "...an expression of power relations between genders..."


My opponent then links sex with marriage. Marriage has the implication of sex via consummation, thus agreeing to be married equals agreeing to have sex. As a minor point this does not necessarily follow. Agreeing to have sex, generally, is not an agreement to any specific act of sex.

Regardless, my opponent asserts:

"First, did Daenerys ever say "No?". The answer is no."

"[D]id she agree to it? The answer here is clearly yes."

"Did Daenerys agree to the marriage? Yes - their marriage was consensual."

The situation is easy to follow as Daenrys does not have much dialogue. She has three scenes in which she speaks. We will analyze each.

Transcripts taken from here: http://foreverdreaming.org...

SCENE 1:

VISERYS: Daenerys! There’s our bride to be! Look – a gift from Illyrio. Touch it. Come on. Feel the fabric. Mmmm. Isn’t he a gracious host?

DAENERYS: We’ve been his guests for over a year and he’s never asked us for anything.

VISERYS: Illyrio is no fool. He knows I won’t forget my friends when I come into my throne. You still slouch. Let me see. (He pulls off her gown.) You have a woman’s body now. (She endures it as he strokes her breast.) I need you to be perfect today. Can you do that for me? You don’t want to wake the dragon, do you?

DAENERYS: No.

----------

Viserys, Daenerys' brother almost immediately puts her in an uncomfortable situation, stripping her naked and putting her at a psychological disadvantage. Then, without provocation, Viserys threatens her. "To wake the dragon." Seems like an odd threat. What does it mean?

https://www.youtube.com...

Oh. It means he beats her. So he's threatened to beat her unless she is "perfect" today. What is today? Well today is when she is presented to Khal Drogo, to gain his agreement to the marriage. In short, Viserys is saying: Get Khal Drogo to marry you or I will beat you.

My opponent makes a distinction and agrees that any Tyrion/Sansa interaction would be rape because the marriage was forced. Sansa was a Lannister hostage and forced to marry. Is Daenrys any difference? She is a "guest," yes, but not by choice. She has no where to go and is effectively a hostage to her psychopath brother who just threatened to hurt her if she doesn't get married to Khal Drogo. Is that not forcing her to marry?

Let's continue...

SCENE 2:

DAENERYS (pleadingly) I don’t want to be his queen. I want to go home.

VISERYS: So do I. I want us both to go home. But they took it from us. So tell me, sweet sister, how do we go home?

DAENERYS: I don’t know.

VISERYS: We go home with an army. With Khal Drogo’s army. I would let his whole tribe f*ck you, all 40,000 men and their horses too, if that’s what it took.

----------

I'll repeat my opponent's question: "[D]id Daenerys ever say 'No?'" Here it is. Here is her saying "No" to the entire ordeal. She did not say it to Khal Drogo, nor could she, but that is immaterial. She clearly objected and was against the very idea and only went along with it under threat of punishment and out of fear of her brother. He also states his sister's value to him: nothing more than a bargaining chip for him to attain power, at whatever expense.

And now, the final scene:

SCENE 3:

JORAH: A small gift for the new Khaleesi. Songs and histories from the Seven Kingdoms.

DAENERYS: Thank you, ser. Are you from my country?

JORAH: Ser Jorah Mormont of Bear Island. I served your father for many years. Gods be good, I hope to always serve the rightful king.

[DANY is presented with a chest with three dragon eggs in it.]

ILLYRIO: Dragons’ eggs, Daenerys. From the Shadow Lands beyond Asshai. The ages have turned them to stone, but they will always be beautiful.

DAENERYS: Thank you, Magister.

[KHAL DROGO rises and strides forward. DAENERYS follows him, looking sick with fear. The Dothraki crowd behind her as she goes. The KHAL leads her to a white mare.]

DAENERYS: She’s beautiful. … Ser Jorah, I don’t know how to say ‘thank you’ in Dothraki.

JORAH: There is no word for ‘thank you’ in Dothraki.

[The KHAL puts DANY on her horse and mounts his.]

VISERYS: Make him happy.

[The scene shifts to the seaside at sunset. The KHAL begins to unwrap DANY’s dress. She is sobbing. He touches the tears on her face.]

KHAL DROGO: No.

DAENERYS: Do you know the Common Tongue?

KHAL DROGO: No.

DAENERYS: Is ‘no’ the only word that you know?

KHAL DROGO: No.

[He takes off her gown and bends her down.]

----------

Again the demand from Viserys to submit to Khal Drogo. The threat of punishment goes unsaid. This is immediately before the "consummation," the consummation in which she cries in protest and attempts to cover up before being taken by a much more intimidating, physically stronger, Dothraki warlord.

Let's review my opponent's criteria again:

"Non-consent was clearly voiced..." - Daenerys clearly voiced non-consent.

"...the two are quite cool to each other as a result of that scene..." - Daenerys has no interaction with Drogo outside of his forced sex acts on her (until much later in the season)

"...an expression of power relations between genders..." - Daenerys is explicitly put into play to be sold, by her brother, for an army, so he can become King.

I submit that all of my opponent's criteria have been met and that this must be classified as a rape.
Debate Round No. 1
wrichcirw

Pro

I thank drafterman for an intelligent and substantive response.

His case is almost exactly how I imagined a CON case would be for this resolution, and I am fully prepared to rebut it.

Before I begin, I will first make a correction to CON's statement:

"Agreeing to [marriage], generally, is [] an agreement to [the] specific act of sex [on the evening of the marriage]."


Rebuttal


R1) First, I will dissect the three scenes CON proffers and add more analysis.


Scene 1

Yes, Viserys (Vis) is an abusive prick. This does NOT mean that he robs Daenerys (Dany) of a voice. This is evident in how Dany does indeed initially object to the marriage in scene #2.

Somehow, from Vis being a prick, CON concludes that Dany never had a choice in anything, to include even where they are staying. Nonsense. A map of Essos shows that Vis and Dany had their pick of cities to choose from between Pentos and Vaes Dothrak, and probably chose Pentos simply because it was the closest city to King's Landing across the Narrow Sea:



Vis treats Illyrio as if he's a future subject of his kingdom, not as a gracious host, and Illyrio most certainly does not treat Vis as if he had any real power over him. They easily had their choice as to where they would stay and how they would manage their private affairs.

This is very, very different from Sansa's situation. Sansa indeed had no choice in her marriage to Tyrion nor any choice about leaving King's Landing without Lannister approval.


Scene #2

Here CON brings up Dany's initial objection to the marriage...however there are also many, many other observations to make from this quick dialogue:

1) Dany and Vis had the exact same goals - to go home, back to Westeros, specifically to King's Landing.
2) Dany does not have a better idea as to how to go home.
3) Yes, Vis is one hellova prick that would not mind seeing his sister engage in an orgy as long as it resulted in him getting what he wanted.

Well, it most certainly sounds like from the dialogue that Vis convinced Dany that his plan was the best chance they had to realize their dream of going home - never mind the snide comment at the end. This, and not any visible threat, silenced Dany's objections, meaning that she was convinced of the logic of the plan, and agreed to it. It's a fair trade - Drogo gets a bride with a name of tremendous worth, the Targaryens get their army, and Illyrio sends the Dothraki back to Vaes Dothrak peacefully, thus leaving Pentos unharmed.


Scene #3

CON's purpose in bringing up this scene is only the last line, where Vis makes it clear that at this point, there is a lot riding (pun intended) on Dany's ability to perform. Vis's comment, while threatening, is no more threatening than having a contractual obligation hanging over your head that you've yet to meet. And, this particular contract is exceptionally threatening - we know that Pentos routinely bribes the Dothraki in order to deter them from sacking the city (http://gameofthrones.wikia.com...), so for Dany to break this agreement would probably cause the Dothraki to kill them all and sack the city.

In the forum thread attached in round #1, a very good example of skydiving was brought up. Once you jump out of that plane, there are certain steps you must take such as pulling the chord, or else your experience at skydiving will become fatal. Similarly, once this marriage was agreed upon, there were certain steps all parties involved had to take, else the experience would become fatal. One of these steps was that the marriage had to be consummated, something that Dany agreed to do upon agreeing to the marriage.

The real question to ask is did Dany jump off this particular plane? The answer is of course...she agreed to the marriage and went through with the ceremony...it's time to pull the chord on the chute and do the dirty with Drogo.


R2) To address CON's concluding remarks:


1) CON: ""Non-consent was clearly voiced..." - Daenerys clearly voiced non-consent."

Dany was clearly convinced of Vis's plan, meaning that her objections were overcome. That the marriage ceremony happened as a consequence clearly speaks to this. Dany was not a slave.


2) CON: ""...the two are quite cool to each other as a result of that scene..." - Daenerys has no interaction with Drogo outside of his forced sex acts on her (until much later in the season)"

This is an invalid comparison...CON is stretching the significance of a rape scene between Cercei and Jaime to explain the interactions between Dany and Drogo. The two scenes are materially different.

The show does a very good job in depicting Dany's circumstances. In the very first scene of the second episode, we're treated to Dany's new lifestyle, all within 5 minutes of screentime - it consists of eating horse jerky, visible apprehension of Drogo, and getting carried off her horse almost on a stretcher. IMHO this was a great choice by the show's producers to depict how hard it was for Dany to adjust to her new life, and is much, much more believable than the book's rendition of their night of consummation, where we're led to believe that Drogo, without any words, is able to seduce a woman he's never met over one evening without any wining or dining and get her to have sex with him in order to consummate a long-term arrangement like a marriage. IMHO that's insulting to a woman's sensibilities and decision-making capabilities...you would think something so important would take longer than a couple minutes of caressing and foreplay to resolve.


3) CON: ""...an expression of power relations between genders..." - Daenerys is explicitly put into play to be sold, by her brother, for an army, so he can become King."

This is something that Dany agreed to do, because Dany and Vis, no matter how dysfunctional their relationship, wanted the exact same thing - to realize the power of their Targaryen heritage.


Conclusion


My case stands - the marriage was consensual, agreeable to both Vis and Dany, and thus consummation was expected and consensual. This was not rape.
TheGreatAndPowerful

Con

Consent:

My opponent has conceded that Daenrys objected to the marriage. However, my opponent then imagines that consent was somehow granted simply because Daenerys and her brother have the same goals and she lacks a different plan.

She was not convinced that Viserys plan was the way to go, she was intimidated into doing so. If I tell you to give me your money, and you refuse, and then I hold a gun to your head, and then you give me your money, did convince you to give me your money?

No, I didn't. You did it out of fear and intimidation and I would still be guilty of robbery. Viserys comments are not simply that he would not mind seeing his sister engage in an orgy - which is a passive statement - but that he would actively work to bring that about if it would get him what he wanted.

The takeaway here is that his sister has no free will that he recognizes and defiance will result in being physically abused.

At the end of the day we have explicit, irrefutable statement, agreed upon by my opponent that Daenerys objected to the marriage and nothing to suggest she changed her mind. She was bullied into silence.

A Captive:

It is clear from dialogue that Daenerys is, essentially, a captive of her brother. Beyond the subordinate role of women in Westerosi society, Viserys clearly is domineering and controlling of his sister. In his mind he is already king and she is a subject that owes him complete obedience. The idea that the mere existence of other cities means Daenerys was free to go is absurd.

A Contract?

My opponent equates the situation with a contractual obligation that Daenrys must now oblige. He seems to have forgotten that Daenerys was threatened into this "contract" to begin with and contracts made under such circumstances are null and void. Daenerys objected to the arrangement and went through with it under duress as a result of the threats of her brother. My opponent acknowledges that Viserys threatened Daenerys.

He futher asserts that Daenerys agreed to the marraige.

I respond: Prove it. Provide any scene in the show that demonstrates Daenerys' agreement to this marraige. All I see is her being threatened and intimidated into passively going along with what she has been forced into.

Concluding Remarks Support:

1) CON: ""Non-consent was clearly voiced..." - Daenerys clearly voiced non-consent."

"Dany was clearly convinced of Vis's plan, meaning that her objections were overcome. That the marriage ceremony happened as a consequence clearly speaks to this. Dany was not a slave."

There is no clear evidence that she was convinced of anything except for the fact that she would suffer physical punishment if she did not acquiesce. Furthermore, the mere existence of the marriage ceremony is proof of nothing, since you admit the forced marriage of Sansa to Tyrion does not permit him to have sex with her.

Result: Non-consent expressed, no consent ever expressed. In this situation, the clear and unequivical statement of non-consent trumps any perceived and unstated consent, especially since it relies solely on your assertion that it is obvious.

2) CON: ""...the two are quite cool to each other as a result of that scene..." - Daenerys has no interaction with Drogo outside of his forced sex acts on her (until much later in the season)"

"This is an invalid comparison...CON is stretching the significance of a rape scene between Cercei and Jaime to explain the interactions between Dany and Drogo. The two scenes are materially different."

Not so. You raised this point to demonstrate that the sexual act caused a divide between them, further reinforcing it as a non-consentual sex act. I do the same here.

3) CON: ""...an expression of power relations between genders..." - Daenerys is explicitly put into play to be sold, by her brother, for an army, so he can become King."

"This is something that Dany agreed to do, because Dany and Vis, no matter how dysfunctional their relationship, wanted the exact same thing - to realize the power of their Targaryen heritage."

Where? Provide a single scene where Daenrys agreed to anything. The ends do not justify the means.
Debate Round No. 2
wrichcirw

Pro

From what I can tell, CON has staked this entire debate on an "all chips down" emphasis on one primary disagreement between PRO/CON - whether or not Dany had free will before she got married.


Dropped Arguments


Before I address this central argument, I will first note what CON dropped:

1) Once the marriage was agreed upon, the arrangement was as life-threatening as skydiving. For Viserys to threaten Dany at this point has nothing to do with whether or not she was coerced into the marriage to begin with - the marriage itself was a threatening affair, and Vis was simply adding emphasis to this point to ensure that Dany did not mess up. CON's scene #3 point has been fully rebutted.

2) Vis and Dany had the exact same goals - to return to Westeros and claim the crown in the name of their family.

3) Vis and Dany had their choice of locales for residence in Essos, and probably chose Pentos simply because it was close to King's Landing.

4) None of the scenes show that Dany was forced into the marriage. Most just show that Vis was an abusive prick, something that PRO/CON readily agree upon.

5) Scene #2 is the only scene that involved a discussion about the marriage. In that scene, there was no coercion.

6) Dany lived a hard life after getting married. Everything was hard...even the sex was hard.


Given that Dany was not a slave, all of this is easily enough to substantiate that Dany was not raped on her wedding night, because Dany agreed to the marriage, and all marriages were expected to be consummated.


Rebuttal


Was Dany a slave?


This is now the central question of the debate. Most of CON's other objections have been dropped by CON upon rebuttal.


I will proffer an analogy:

Imagine a game of chess, with Vis and Dany as players. We all know that there are certain positions that would compel a player to move as their opponent wanted if that player wanted to win, but the player still has free will to move his or her own pieces as they see fit. The question that CON poses then is not whether or not Vis is a better player than Dany, but rather whether or not Vis is moving Dany's pieces against her will.

In scene #2, we evidently see Dany voicing her own arguments against the marriage, essentially questioning how it was relevant to them going back to King's Landing. Vis then offers his own arguments, that this was exactly how they were going home...with an army. Dany had nothing to say to this. There was no coercion from Vis in this scene.

This is akin to Dany moving a piece, and then Vis moving his own piece, and then Dany forfeiting the game, acknowledging checkmate. Vis then rubs it in her face afterward with the snide comment about the orgy. Again, there was no coercion from Vis in this scene...he does not ever order or threaten Dany to marry Drogo. Vis is simply a better player at the game at this point - he does not move Dany's pieces. Dany is simply a terrible player at this point, although she learns very quickly after getting married.

This simple argument addresses about 80% of CON's prior round. It proves that Dany consented to the marriage, and was not forced into it.

This scene illustrates what marriage meant to Dany: (https://www.youtube.com...). In the scene she saves female captives from becoming slaves. When confronted about the apparent Dothraki "right to rape", Dany rebuts that if they want sex, they should do it properly, via marriage. This strongly implies that 1) once a woman is given free will, 2) that woman expresses that free will via consent to marriage. This describes Dany's views on marriage, and thus Dany's own marriage as well.

---

Just to put all this in perspective:

In CON's three scenes:

1) In scene #1, Vis threatened Dany about looking good the day they were to meet Khal Drogo
2) In scene #2, there were no threats at all in an open discussion about the PRO/CONs of the marriage, and PRO (Vis) won that argument, fair and square. This is the only relevant scene from CON in regards to consent to marriage.
3) In scene #3, after already agreeing to the marriage, Vis lets it known that Dany is in a precarious position, and that she had better make Drogo happy. This is a threat, but not relevant as to whether or not she was coerced into the marriage.

Yes, Vis is a prick that abuses Dany on a whim. He does not threaten her all the time, and she still speaks her mind when she wants to.

This contrasts heavily with Sansa, who whenever she was around a Lannister, would do and say exactly what she thought the Lannisters wanted her to do and say. Sansa was indeed a Lannister slave of sorts, most certainly a hostage under intense coercion who could not speak her mind.


Other Minor Points


1) CON needs to prove that "Viserys clearly is domineering and controlling of his sister." There is simply no evidence that Vis controlled Dany. Dany still spoke her mind, and Vis did not beat her for it (contrast to Sansa, who was beaten if she ever spoke out against her captives, which she did only once and was struck by a Kingsguard for it https://www.youtube.com...).


2) CON states that the Cercei/Jaime affair "demonsttrate[d] [sic] that the sexual act caused a divide between them," which is true because that was rape. There is an evident difference between Dany and Drogo...it is through sex that brought them closer together. See the difference?

Furthermore, Cercei/Jaime were never married, so the whole deal with consummation (which is central to this debate) was not relevant. This makes it even more evident that Jaime raped Cercei.


3) One other thing to remember is that Vis and Dany are Targaryens...given their traditions, they were most likely to marry each other. Another motivating factor for her to agree to the marriage may have been to prevent a marriage to Vis. This is more evidence of consent by Dany.


Conclusion


CON has staked everything upon Dany being a slave robbed of free will. She clearly wasn't - a contrast to Sansa's plight puts it in perspective.

She freely agreed to the marriage.
TheGreatAndPowerful

Con

Dropped Points?

1 through 3 are not points I dropped. In both rounds I have argued and supported that the marriage was not agreed upon, that their agreement upon ultimate goals does not constitute agreement on specific strategies and that the mere existence of other cities does not constitute freedom to choose any as a place to live in freedom.

4 and 5 do not reference any points I dropped but are instead bare assertions made by my opponent. I do not know why he says I dropped points here, except to give the impression that I have conceded to his argument. I haven't. I've shown where and how she was forced and coerced into the marriage.

Other Points:

"In scene #2 ... There was no coercion from Vis in this scene."

Daenerys voices no arguments. She simply says she does not want to be Khal Drogo's queen - she does not want to get married to him. She simply wants to go home, but does not know how to get there. Viserys argues his point, but Daenerys' lack of rebuttal does not constitute consent or agreement. There is nothing in this scene, or any other scene between now and the marriage/consummation that suggests she was convinced to change her mind.

The coercion is obvious. Viserys berates her by saying that it could go much worse for her if that is what it took. The implication clearly being that she should stop voicing objections and be satisfied with what she is getting. Her response is a blank stare followed by an aversion of eyes. This is consent to you?

The Chess Analogy:

"It proves that Dany consented to the marriage, and was not forced into it."

The chess analogy depends on the existence of players who have agreed to play the game according to the rules. Daenerys never agreed to anything. My opponent can't show she agreed to anything. Daenerys has the vague and abstract desire to go "home." This does not, in itself, translate to a specific desire to go home in a certain manner, nor does it translate into an agreement or consent to any specific strategy for going home.

Daenerys View on marriage:

I fail to see how this is relevant to the question at hand. Daenrys is talking about consensual marriage, which does not apply in her case because she never consented.

Pro's "perspective:"

"1) In scene #1, Vis threatened Dany about looking good the day they were to meet Khal Drogo"

Yes, he threatened her within the context of getting Khal Drogo to agree to marry her.

"2) In scene #2, there were no threats at all.. This is the only relevant scene from CON in regards to consent to marriage."

My opponent continues to play off the last line as some fantasy of Viserys. It is not. It is a window into his mind with regards to the worth of his sister. It is a threat about how bad things could get for his sister should Viserys choose to make it worse.

It is not merely the only scene from me, it is the only scene in the show, prior to the marriage, that addresses the consent to the marriage and Daenerys expresses non-consent. Clearly. Explicitly. Unequivocally. It is now upon my opponent to demonstrate where and when and how this changed.

"3) In scene #3... This is a threat, but not relevant as to whether or not she was coerced into the marriage."

This is a misrepresentation. There is no "after already agreeing to the marriage." My opponent keeps asserting the existence of this agreement. SHOW IT. My opponent agrees that this is a threat, a threat to ensure that Daenerys sleeps with Khal Drogo, something he knows she doesn't want to do, because she said so. It is not relevant to her coercion to the marriage (since they are married at that point) but it is still relevant as to whether the sex act was consensual or performed under duress and is rape.

"[S]he still speaks her mind when she wants to."

She speaks her mind - once - and is threatened into silence for it.

Minor Points:

"1) CON needs to prove that "Viserys clearly is domineering and controlling..."

I have proved this. It is evident in his demeanor and way of speaking to and about her. Without asking, he strips her naked and fondles her. Without provocation he threatens her. He explicitly talks of her as merely a bargaining trip with which he has purchased an army. Consider his words "I would let his whole tribe f*ck you..." In other words, he has control over who Daenerys sleeps with. Him. Not her.

Daenerys spoke her mind and he threatened her with gang rape. Later he would actually strike her for speaking out against him. The threat to "wake the dragon" only makes sense if you understand what it means, which is a clear indication she has "woken" it before. She knew what it meant.

"2) ...it is through sex that brought [Daenerys and Drogo] closer together. See the difference?"

Much later. The existence of consensual sex does not negate the existence of non-consensual sex. The fact that Daenerys would later willingly sleep with Drogo does not make their first encounter consensual and not rape. That kind of logic is horridly misogynistic.

"3) One other thing to remember is that Vis and Dany are Targaryens...given their traditions, they were most likely to marry each other..."

There is no indication in the show that she ever expected to marry Viserys. This is hereby dismissed.

Pro's Conclusion:

"CON has staked everything upon Dany being a slave robbed of free will."

Wrong. I have staked everything about the fact that Daenerys clearly expressed non-consent to the marriage and was repeatedly threatened into marrying and having sex with Drogo.

In contrast, my opponent has staked everything on this imaginary agreement to the marriage, arguing that consensual consummation naturally follows.

My opponent needs to show some scene, some piece of dialogue that demonstrates this agreement.

He can't and he won't. He is hoping that readers will interpret Daenerys stunned silence to her brother's admission will somehow be interpreted as her being convinced of his "argument." To my opponent, this is consent:

Debate Round No. 3
wrichcirw

Pro

Before I begin my final round, I note that CON objected in the comments to the map in my prior round. PRO/CON have agreed to replace it with this map from HBO's website: (http://viewers-guide.hbo.com...). While the map is less detailed, it does not change PRO's argument.


Closing


Framework


I will first draw out the framework under which PRO/CON are currently operating:

1) CON has not objected to the skydiving analogy, that there are some choices that once made come with dire consequences if not executed properly, and that the political marriages in Game of Thrones are quite dangerous and fit this analogy.

2) Marriage for those from Westeros in the Game of Thrones environment necessitates consummation the evening of the wedding ceremony, without which the validity of the marriage is questionable.

From these two points, it naturally follows that if someone agrees to a marriage out of their own volition, they also agree to have sex on their wedding night, that sex would have been consensual, and that there would be negative consequences to deviating from this, the severity of which depends upon the political ramifications of the wedding.

---


Disagreement


The only source of disagreement is whether or not Dany agreed to the marriage. CON would have you believe that "[Dany] was repeatedly threatened into marrying and having sex with Drogo," which is simply not valid and assumes far too much. When Viserys makes a threat, it's a threat...when he does not, it is not.


In scene #1, Vis directly threatened Dany. Again, this has to be taken into the context of the skydiving analogy...they are meeting Drogo later that day and are preparing for the meeting. They are NOT discussing whether or not they should go through with this...they are already going through with it, i.e. they've already jumped out of this particular plane and must at least meet Drogo.

Illyrio notes that had Drogo not been satisfied with Dany, he would have made his displeasure known (https://www.youtube.com...).


In scene #2, CON equates the statement "[Vis] would let [Drogo's] whole tribe f*ck [Dany]," to mean that "[Vis] has control over who Daenerys sleeps with." This doesn't make any sense. If someone had control over a situation, they wouldn't "let" something happen...they would "make" something happen. If anything, Vis's statement here conveys a severe LACK of control over Dany.

This is the key scene for this debate, as they discuss the marriage, Dany voices an objection, and Vis addresses it reasonably and with confidence. Yes, he is ridiculously snide, condescending, and objectifies Dany to an extreme degree...but he does NOT threaten her. Any insinuation of such is unsubstantiable.


Re: scene #3, I will correct a statement I made in the prior round, that "Vis lets it known that Dany is in a precarious position, and that she had better make Drogo happy. This is a threat..." Replace with "this is threatening..." Vis's statement here is threatening, but is not a threat...again, it merely describes Dany's precarious position.


Throughout his analysis, CON imagines Vis making threats when there are no evident threats. Vis does make threats, but only in regards to "waking the dragon". Dany has low self-esteem and confidence, but she does indeed possess her own mind and voices her thoughts as she sees fit. That her voice led to the marriage evidently means that she agreed to it. Their situation is adverse, but they are still capable of making their own choices.


Concession


I would also like to note that CON does NOT dispute that Dany possesses free will and was not a slave. With this concession, CON's entire case falls apart. If Dany had free will, then she chose to get married out of her own volition. The rest of the debate then becomes insubstantial in comparison...with this concession, the resolution is easily resolved in favor of PRO.

CON has also completely and utterly avoided the comparison with Sansa's marriage. I don't blame him...it's materially different from Dany's and destroys his case by showing what someone robbed of free will would do in a marriage. Sansa is a Lannister hostage, she cannot say what she wants to say and she cannot do anything but unquestionably obey her captives else face severe punishment. Any sex that Tyrion would have had with her would have to be taken in the context of a non-consensual marriage and would thus constitute rape. Dany was not a slave to Vis, and her marriage to Drogo was not a product of Vis's will trumping Dany's but was something that both agreed would bring them closer to home.

This becomes extremely important in regards to how CON misinterprets Dany's views on marriage...he says that Dany "is talking about consensual marriage, which does not apply in her case," and thereby assumes his argument without explanation. The actual explanation is simple - Dany is talking about a Dothraki marriage, characterized by free will, choice, and thus consent. Dany's own marriage was also a Dothraki marriage, and thus shared these qualities with what CON labels a "consensual marriage".


Etc


On Chess - CON does not discuss how it is clear that Dany did not see any relevance between her desire to go home and her marriage to Drogo, hence her objection. Vis made this connection, and thus addressed Dany's objection. Did Dany have any more to say? No, she did not. This describes a checkmate scenario, yes? Where you can't move without your opponent "checking" your move? Or in this case "checking" your arguments?


Conclusion


I thank drafterman for engaging in a debate with a focused attention to detail, as it has made this debate much more worthwhile than one without such detail.

I simply ask audiences to consider both cases, and to ask yourself how you could possibly be coerced to do something if you possess free will? I also want to remind audiences that the show depicts tremendous amounts of misogyny and rape...but not in this instance.

Thanks for reading this debate. =)
TheGreatAndPowerful

Con

Disagreement

"The only source of disagreement is whether or not Dany agreed to the marriage."

I concur. And I have shown where Daenerys explicitly disagreed with the marriage. My opponent has not shown where she changed her mind or ever agreed.

Scene Analysis

"Scene #1 ... they are already going through with it"

My opponent's argument is essentially that, situations have consequences and that Daenerys' agreement to engage in this situation is also an agreement to the consequences. Specifically, agreeing to marriage and, therefore, agreeing to the consequence of consummation.

Yes, "they are already going through with it," but against the wishes of Daenerys. She is threatened to "go through with it" and again threatened when she objects and then threatened again for good measure.

"#Scene 2 ... If anything, Vis's statement here conveys a severe LACK of control over Dany."

In saying that you can "let" something happen, the implication is that you have the power to stop it. If you have the power to stop something, you are in control of it. In this context "let" is synonymous with "give permission to." Viserys is saying that permission to have sex with Daenerys is his to give, not hers.

"Dany voices an objection, and Vis addresses it reasonably and with confidence."

This is all that really matters to this debate. You agree to it and cannot show where she changes her mind. It is irrelevant to matters of consent how Viserys response to her objection. The only relevant aspect is her objection.

"Scene #3 ... 'This is a threat...' Replace with 'this is threatening...'"

Threatening - having a hostile or deliberately frightening quality or manner.[1]

I don't see how this changes things in terms of placing Daenerys in a state of duress with respect to her marriage (and subsequent consummation) to Drogo.

Concessions

"Dany possesses free will and was not a slave."

Sure. I concede that. It's also immaterial. Sansa had free will and wasn't a slave. It was never a requirement to demonstrate that Daenerys was literally a slave. In fact, Sansa had more opportunity to leave Kings Landing than Daenerys had to leave Pentos. The Hound, before he fled, offered to take Sansa back to Winterfell and Sansa refused. Yet my opponent offers Sansa's marriage to Tyrion as one of non-consent and agrees that consummation in this situation would be rape.

It is entirely incongruous to portray Sansa's marriage to Tyrion as non-consensual, when she had more freedom than Daenerys, yet conclude Daenerys' marriage consensual.

"CON has also completely and utterly avoided the comparison with Sansa's marriage. "

My Round 1:

"My opponent makes a distinction and agrees that any Tyrion/Sansa interaction would be rape because the marriage was forced. Sansa was a Lannister hostage and forced to marry. Is Daenerys any difference?"

My Round 2:

"[T]he mere existence of the marriage ceremony is proof of nothing, since you admit the forced marriage of Sansa to Tyrion does not permit him to have sex with her."

I did not address the issue explicitly in my Round 3 because it was not necessary to. My opponent only raised the issue in terms of arguing that Daenerys isn't literally a slave (which I don't disagree with) and in terms of claiming Viserys isn't controlling and domineering of Daenerys. I address the second point, though I didn't reference the Sansa comparison.

This is the second time my opponent has claimed I conceded points I did not. At this point I would be suggesting a penalty in terms of conduct.

"[H]e says that Dany "is talking about consensual marriage, which does not apply in her case," and thereby assumes his argument without explanation. The actual explanation is simple - Dany is talking about a Dothraki marriage, characterized by free will, choice, and thus consent. "

So she's not talking about consensual marriage, she's talking about marriage characterized by consent? That makes no sense.

Etc

"Did Dany have any more to say? No, she did not."

Exactly. Thank you. My opponent essentially concedes the argument here. Daenerys objected and did not change her mind. She was checkmated - that is, forced - into a position from which she had no moves she could make. Granting consent is a move one takes freely. A person cannot be forced into granting consent.


[1]https://www.google.com...
Debate Round No. 4
65 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by wrichcirw 2 years ago
wrichcirw
Again, please continue this discussion in the forum specifically set up for that purpose.
Posted by rross 2 years ago
rross
Actually, I DON'T have to prove that she was raped. You had the BoP to prove that she wasn't. Hard to prove a negative, so I've even allowed you shared burden, and you still don't meet it.
Posted by wrichcirw 2 years ago
wrichcirw
Actually, please don't comment here. Please comment on the thread specifically set up for discussion.

http://www.debate.org...
Posted by wrichcirw 2 years ago
wrichcirw
"did she want sex or not? The balance of the evidence - as presented by Con - is that she didn't."

What exactly constituted evidence to you?
Posted by wrichcirw 2 years ago
wrichcirw
I mean, it's interesting what kind of arguments you can make if you first assume the argument to be true.

If I were to assert that the sky is made of blueberry pie and then assumed it to be true, then I could conclude that the sky is edible.

If I were to assume that Dany was raped, then I could make all kinds of arguments about Khal Drogo being a rapist and Vis and Illyrio being slaving pimps...but you simply cannot assume the argument. You need to first PROVE that she was raped.
Posted by wrichcirw 2 years ago
wrichcirw
Hmm...well, you essentially ignored the entirety of my argument and fabricated the point about marital rape.

---

" if someone is forced to have penetrative sex against their will, then it's rape. Whether or not we hold the perpetrator guilty is another matter."

If someone consents to having penetrative sex, then it's evidently not against their will.

---

" That is the defining quality - did she want sex or not? The balance of the evidence - as presented by Con - is that she didn't."

If you consent to skydiving knowing full well that it also entailed consent to jumping off the plane but then subsequently refuse to jump off the plane, did you still consent to jumping off the plane?
Posted by rross 2 years ago
rross
Oh well. I'd just like to make two points.

First, I was surprised by Con's concession that rape is permissible in marriage. I don't think this is true at all, even historically. If someone takes something from your shop and leaves without paying, for example, you're not entitled to break into their house and take something of equal value. If someone doesn't honor a cheque, you're not allowed to pin them down in the street and search their pockets for payment. And if your spouse won't have sex with you, you're not entitled to rape her.
I understand that marital rape was not a crime until recently, but I think that has more to do with the private-public distinction rather than tacit permission for spouses to rape each other. So I don't think that Pro established consent through marriage AT ALL, and I'm surprised that Con conceded this point.

The second point is in relation to this idea of rape from two perspectives. To go back to the shop example. If a toddler takes a toy from a shop without paying, is it theft? I think the answer is that it IS theft, but that the toddler is not considered to be "a thief" as such, and is not determined as guilty because of extreme youth. Nevertheless, the item has been taken without payment. It's the same from the shop's perspective.

Similarly, if someone is forced to have penetrative sex against their will, then it's rape. Whether or not we hold the perpetrator guilty is another matter. Pro seemed to be arguing entirely the latter case. That is, he was trying to determine Kal Drogo's guilt or innocence. However, the more important perspective is that of Daenerys Targaryan. That is the defining quality - did she want sex or not? The balance of the evidence - as presented by Con - is that she didn't.
Posted by wrichcirw 2 years ago
wrichcirw
Just to remind anyone reading this debate, there is a forum topic set up with the specific purpose of discussing the resolution:

http://www.debate.org...
Posted by wrichcirw 2 years ago
wrichcirw
You're assuming the argument. There is indeed no need to do that...it doesn't stand on its own logic.
Posted by Oryus 2 years ago
Oryus
Well, there's no need to argue that rape isn't rape, but hey- to each their own, right?
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Greyparrot 2 years ago
Greyparrot
wrichcirwTheGreatAndPowerfulTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: I think Pro proved Dany agreed to the marriage.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
wrichcirwTheGreatAndPowerfulTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: no score
Vote Placed by rross 2 years ago
rross
wrichcirwTheGreatAndPowerfulTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: see comments
Vote Placed by Ragnar 2 years ago
Ragnar
wrichcirwTheGreatAndPowerfulTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Joke: "Khal Drogo said 'no' repeatedly" Does that mean she raped him? "Viserys is saying: Get Khal Drogo to marry you or I will beat you." The resolution is not if Viserys raped her (even by surrogate), but if Khal Drogo did. Khal Drogo may have been a bad lover, but such is not the same as rape.