The wedding night is statutory. I would describe the later rapes as fairly violent. - Edit 1
Before modification by Camilla at 17/08/2012 12:13:49 PM
Yes, I've heard of that defence, but it does not really work. Or, rather, it misses the point. While the setting of the books may be "medieval" (though I note he is happy to change other sides to Medieval society, like the lack of dragons), Martin is very much writing from a present-day position (and within a present-day cultural context. His choice to present a 13-yearold girl's rape (yes) as an erotic seduction with an emphasis on consent (she is 13!) therefore really bothers me. The fact that he then goes on to describe violent rape of the same girl before she falls in love with her rapist is my second problem with the Daenerys storyline.
Don't even get me started on all the times I get "you shouldn't apply your contemporary values to SoI&F" by idiots who don't even realize they are doing exactly that with their pro-commoner, pro-feminist, pro-abolitionist arguments.The fact that women were raped in the Medieval period does not dictate Martin's way of presenting that.
Indeed, right is right and wrong is wrong. It is a completely different cultural standard than today, and you seem to want to judge these characters with today's standards, instead of losing yourself in their world.
THIS! While true in its own right, I hear it way too much from people who have not the faintest clue which one of us is using contextual standards and which one is operating out of modern prejudices. And then I can always go to the CMB where people are all too willing to ascribe archaic qualities to the standard of morality I use in discussing SoI&F. 
As I said, Martin writes within today's cultural standards. And the fact that he emphasises the seduction and consent in that scene really makes it worse as far as I am concerned.
I think Martin's point is that this creepy situation is what she's stuck in, and she kind of lucks out in getting a decent guy, for his culture and position. You're not supposed to be admiring the love story so much as understanding that women are often placed in such situations.And the scene as written does not portray violence. Individual consent is not an issue in the series, as it often was not in many cultures (calling it a medieval issue is grossly minimizing the scope of the practice, and rather unfair, considering that the medieval period spawned the only culture with a real "feminist" ideal; there could never have been a Seneca Falls without the Magna Carta, which was a product of its time). By all the laws and practices of that world and much of the real world, Daenerys had an obligation to cooperate in that scene, and both the power and the moral authority to engage in intercourse were entirely in Drogo's hands. His groping her is not sexual harassment, but the familiarizing touch of a man used to obtaining consent from an irrationally wary creature to participate in a cooperative physical endeavor.
It does not change the fact that a grown man is having sex with a 13 year old, and I have called Martin out for writing such a thing in the past, but I cannot see that scene being called rape by any standards aside from applying modern legal standards to a primitive & tribal culture, where 13 is on the cusp of middle age. The fact that intercourse is not pleasant for Daenerys does not change the fact that she is consenting to it nor does it make Drogo a rapist.
The issue of consent, especially in regard to marriage is touched on more fully in the rest of the series (if you have watched season 2 of the show you can probably guess another character whose arc shows the flipside of the societal expectations of marriage), and as djwilson300 notes, part of the reading experience of the story is sorting out the propaganda and family legends to the reality, which casts a new light on another supposed incident of rape from GoT, when more backstory is fleshed out in subsequent books.
I hope so. And I do approve of introducing early on what is to become important later. I hope this means I won't have to read any more about those banners, though.
ROFLMAO.This does not bode well.
I am also glad to hear he problematisest he Starks = good, Lannisters = bad. While it was not quite clear cut in the first book, it could do with some more shading in.
I think the gray areas in this situation are exaggerated. While the Starks are not always "nice" or in the right, morally, they are still the good guys. Even when one of them goes over to the Dark Side it is presented in such a way that I have trouble convincing people here that that character is now evil. IMO, the only way the Lannisters are ever justified or presented as "good" is in the PoV Trap (aside from Tyrion, of course, but his character is hardly static in that equilibrium you noted).