Game of Thrones reduces rape to entertainment

By ABC's Jonathan Green

Updated May 21, 2015 12:39:27

Photo: Sansa Stark from Game of Thrones. (HBO)

Thirty-eight Australian women have been killed this year in violent acts. And on Monday nights we tune in to Game of Thrones to witness rape as entertainment. It's worth wondering at, writes Jonathan Green.

Spoiler alert. Trigger warning. All of that.

The rape of Sansa Stark that ends the most recent episode of Game of Thrones has caused what might even have been, who knows, an intended ripple of disquiet on the world's opinion pages and social media.

Twitter went off.

A US Senator was appalled.

For many other viewers it was also a last, difficult straw.

It's sort of easy to say. The rape of Sansa Stark. Just words. No consequence.

But of course, as is the way of television, once seen it can't be unseen. So that latest rape - Game of Thrones is no stranger to sexual violence - is part of our memories and subconscious now, for me as it is for the eight million Americans who watched, the half a million or so Australians ... and so on around the world.

Not that we should shy from the difficult or confronting, but that's not quite the issue here.

It's a quietly disturbing thing to have such ugly human extremity reduced to a deftly filmed narrative device. Just another plot point. And there is a transgression in this that gnaws at you. Suffering co-opted to entertain. And not actual suffering, of course; but might it almost be worse to recreate what in reality would be horror, simply for our amusement?

Get The Drum in your inbox

Subscribe to get The Drum delivered to your email twice a day, plus top news headlines and alerts on major breaking stories.

It's this sense of gratuitous inclusion, that the violence could not have been implied or alluded ... Sansa raped on the night of her wedding to the sadist Ramsay Bolton, while Bolton's brain-snapped torture victim - a sequence of excruciating degradations so endlessly documented in the last GOT season - Theon Greyjoy, is forced to watch.

We're sanguine about it, perhaps as an act of either self preservation or shared delusion, but it seems improbable that our continual exposure to acts of extremity, defilement and violence can't have some sort of slow, steady, deep impact.

Has there ever been a human generation as broadly familiar with all manner of brutalities ... all of them offered as amusement? Yes, the difference is that they are imagined rather than real, that we are spared by the subtle sub-conscious assumptions of theatre and performance, spared by the protective psychological prophylaxis of the fourth wall.

But the unsettling point is that we have come quietly to a moment in the history of entertainment where sexual violence can be a routine element in a piece of mass-appeal, zeitgeist TV. We have been assiduously desensitised to an ever escalating ubiquity of sights, sounds and violent, painful themes that for past generations would have been the stuff of horrific human extremity; glimpsed only by some, and then shatteringly transformative. Now they are entertainment.

And what if the Sansa rape was anything but gratuitous, what if sexual violence was central to the show's sprawling narrative?

Perhaps this is where we start to draw some sense of connection between the imagined world and the real, some uncomfortable resonances.

Lucy Hunter Johnston, in the Independent, wrote of the casual inclusion of rape as a routine Game of Thrones plot device:

Depictions of rape on screen can be powerful; shocking, yes, but effective when handled correctly, and television shouldn't shy away from it. But in Game of Thrones women are raped so often it's almost routine, and the assaults are used as a lazy signal that the Seven Kingdoms are pretty messed up, yeah?

In the Washington Post, blogger Alyssa Rosenberg took the argument a step further. For her, the rape was anything but a gratuitous narrative flourish, it was part of a central theme.

...this scene felt of a piece with the way I've always understood Game of Thrones and George R.R. Martin's Song of Ice and Fire: as a story about the consequences of rape and denial of sexual autonomy.

The saving grace? That this is, after all, just television, an insidious medium full of cultural power and subtle influence, but at the end of the day we can always switch the damn thing off. Rosenberg writes:

There's no requirement that anyone like any of these storylines or that anyone who feels exhausted from spending his or her days in a world marked by sexual violence retreat to a worse one for pleasure.

There's the thing, though, "a world marked by sexual violence" ... that's our world, our grim reality.

And perhaps this is where we should be most worried by Game of Thrones and its ilk, by the casual eradication of women in Grand Theft Auto, by the sexualisation of advertising ... by all the markers that together suggest a pretty compelling relationship between a lived-culture that can be brutal, sexually violent and dark, and the entertainment that reflects and suffuses it.

And perhaps we should wonder how the stakes were raised so high toward extremity in what we could watch for what is essentially fun.

And wonder too on whether a series like Game of Thrones, a drama that teases out "the consequences of rape and denial of sexual autonomy" might not work quite so well if the culture that consumed it did not recognise elements of that narrative construct in its own acts of flesh and blood.

Thirty-eight Australian women have been killed this year in violent acts. And on Monday nights we gather to witness rape as entertainment. It's worth wondering at.

Jonathan Green hosts Sunday Extra on Radio National and is the former editor of The Drum.

Topics: community-and-society, sexual-offences, law-crime-and-justice, arts-and-entertainment, television

First posted May 21, 2015 08:09:44

Comments (170)

Add your comment.

Please read the House Rules and FAQ before submitting.

frank baldock:

21 May 2015 8:19:34am

Only one thing to say, nobody is being forced to watch this rubbish, so what does that say about the state of humanity in the "western world"?

Reply Alert moderator
- Andrew Thomas:
  
  21 May 2015 8:34:58am
  
  Hi Frank,
  
  I am glad you hit poll position on this because your inference is right on the money.
  
  Entertainment is a reflection of who we are. It does not make us who we are.
  
  Only by being aware of our dark nature and inherent flaws as a species can we begin to address them. It requires a life long commitment to self awareness. Australians, perhaps like all cultures, like to think that we are upstanding, moral people.
  But the fact remains that even the slightest hint of fear or an opportunity to make a profit at another persons expense, and all too many of us very quickly do things that we know are wrong.
  
  Perhaps instead of trying to pretend we, as a people, faultless, we might do better to see our dark nature and, in so doing, move a little closer to people we really would like to be.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
  - Audax:
    
    21 May 2015 9:07:31am
    
    Hollywood pioneered the use of graphic violence as entertainment decades ago and have continued to refine their art ever since. Unless there is a suggestion that murder is somehow a lesser abomination than rape and that the graphic depiction of violence and killing is somehow okay, then this particular blend of electromagnetic neurotoxin should have been resoundingly condemned from the very first episode. It's pornography, plain and simple, no less abhorrent than the seediest obscenities sloshing round in the bowels of the internet. Yet the herd animals sitting in front of their TVs will continue to lap it all up as the producers seek ever greater permissiveness in order to sell their wares. In the end it's all about advertising- advertisers will vie for space in the midst of the most popular programs in order to shove their own form of narcotic down the throats of the masses. I have one word of advice when it comes to watching this audio-visual excrement. Don't.
    
    Reply Alert moderator
    - blax5:
      
      21 May 2015 10:42:10am
      
      I think it started with the otherwise so excellent movie 'The Sting'. It occurred to me after watching it for the second time (because I invited a friend, not because I had the intention to watch it twice) that I had rooted for the cheater. That was 1974, and then they took it from there.
      
      If ever there was only Pay TV, I'd go back to how I grew up, no TV, so I don't know what Game of Thrones is besides a big money making machine for Newscorp/Fox.
      
      Reply Alert moderator
    - Orion:
      
      21 May 2015 10:58:36am
      
      "Hollywood pioneered the use of graphic violence as entertainment.."
      
      Hahaha. Are you serious? Umm, gladiators in Roman times anyone? Public executions since forever just about everywhere? The list of examples predating Hollywood is endless. And they were REAL violence, not pretend.
      
      Reply Alert moderator
    - Audax:
      
      21 May 2015 11:47:25am
      
      Thank you Captain Obvious. I was actually referring to the electronic media and cinema, that can reach audiences of millions, rather than ancient Roman arenas that could seat a few hundred. Hollywood has turned the brutal into the sexy, glamourising violence and making it available in vast quantities. I'm not sure what point you are trying to make by pointing out that 'they were REAL violence', other than to suggest it was of better quality.
      
      Reply Alert moderator
    - Tomokatu:
      
      21 May 2015 12:44:34pm
      
      Audax tried to rewrite history to bolster a failing argument.
      "...than ancient Roman arenas that could seat a few hundred..."
      
      The medium size ones in large cities held 20-30,000. The biggest ones in the five largest cities held 60-70,000.
      
      Gladiatorial games were more popular than AFL, NRL or football.
      
      Reply Alert moderator
    - Todd:
      
      21 May 2015 11:11:27am
      
      Actually, it comes down to freedom of choice. We have it, despite you and Green wishing we didn't. Get over it. Meanwhile, the rest of us will enjoy some mature entertainment. Why must some be obsessed with the choices of others? I do not care if you are in middle of Das Kapital at the moment, depsite my opinion that is FAR more dangerous than watching GoT. And in terms of audio-visual excrement, again, that is a matter of opinion. I find reality TV has a similar effect to a frontal labotomy, but you will never hear me criticising those who watch it (other than just now) because I, for one, respect adults' decisions as to what they want to watch, read, play etc.
      
      Reply Alert moderator
    - Audax:
      
      21 May 2015 11:52:56am
      
      Well, you're in for a treat, because hollywood will continue pushing the boundaries in an effort to stimulate your prurient appetite and make more money. I recall an advertiser once boasting that 'it is impossible to underestimate the intellect of the viewing public enough..'
      
      Reply Alert moderator
    - barsnax:
      
      21 May 2015 12:55:19pm
      
      The fact that millions of people watch GOT proves that violence, rape, torture and all kinds of depravity is popular with the viewer. I agree with Todd. What one person finds repulsive another will find entertaining.
      
      While ever there is a market for this type of show, then producers will provide it.
      
      Reply Alert moderator
    - will_r:
      
      21 May 2015 11:58:35am
      
      The wowsers are out in force today.
      
      Wait, here's an idea. Let's enact legislation that BANS cinematic entertainment that anybody might find even slightly offensive.
      
      We should replace it with mandatory themes of tolerance and awareness of contemporary social issues in each script. These must, of course, be dealt with in a way that's approved by the Departments of Sociology and Gender Studies at our best universities, to ensure that the public are being exposed to the right ideas.
      
      Then I can at last choose not to watch high quality entertainment that is worthy of my morally superior eyes.
      
      I mean, why would I waste time watching TV when I could be doing other, more virtuous things with my time, like moaning on the internet.
      
      Reply Alert moderator
    - Todd:
      
      21 May 2015 12:13:28pm
      
      Haha, excellent.
      
      I love the way the Left are of intolerant of anything they do not like, bu then have the hide to preach tolerance for things they like but others may not.
      
      I am tolerant of all points of view other than those that seek to interfere with the quiet enjoyment of of an individual point of view ie I am not very tolerant of religion (Hard Right) and other forms of collectivism (Hard Left). I am happy for people to believe what they want, but I have problem with forcing that on others.
      
      Reply Alert moderator
    - geo:
      
      21 May 2015 12:57:50pm
      
      I don't think anyone got pleasure watching Sansa being raped, maybe the Green is projecting his own fantasies onto the rest of the GoT audience.
      
      Reply Alert moderator
    - Theos:
      
      21 May 2015 12:49:15pm
      
      "... like moaning on the internet."
      
      I'm not sure Mr Green would approve of moaning on the internet. Stop it, or you'll all go blind.
      
      Reply Alert moderator
  - Alpo:
    
    21 May 2015 9:17:18am
    
    "Only by being aware of our dark nature and inherent flaws as a species can we begin to address them".... Hitting the nail right on its head there, Andrew. Still, Greens' argument remains: to what extent, by showing rape as part of an entertainment program, are we actually normalising it? Or perhaps we are de-sensitising the viewers towards rape?
    
    It's important to be aware of ugly realities, but the point is to also spur us into action to control it, not making us turn our back on it. What we control of our inner nature and what we let go is the fundamental question of our ethics.
    
    Reply Alert moderator
    - Waterloo Sunset 2016dd:
      
      21 May 2015 12:08:29pm
      
      Well, surely, by that same standard we are promoting perversion in advocating same sex marriage, especially with children being adopted?
      
      Reply Alert moderator
    - whogoesthere:
      
      21 May 2015 12:55:44pm
      
      Rape effects the person being raped in a negative way. Your comparison only works if there is clear evidence that children raised in other situations other than one biological father and mother effects children in a negative way.
      
      Reply Alert moderator
  - sdrawkcaB:
    
    21 May 2015 9:32:59am
    
    What? Have an open and honest conversation with self?
    
    Great idea but its never going to happen in large numbers.
    
    Reply Alert moderator
  - RGR:
    
    21 May 2015 9:57:50am
    
    Exactly, it's just a reflection of the world. The show isn't glorifying rape, I'm pretty sure it was reflected as a terrible thing to have done to this girl. Isn't that the message you want to send? So what's the problem?
    
    If sexual violence wasn't depicted on tv we would have Drum articles saying that TV isn't adequately addressing the plight of women in the society.
    
    Obviously a slow news day.
    
    Reply Alert moderator
  - Jay Somasundaram:
    
    21 May 2015 9:58:52am
    
    Come on! Why do you think businesses spend billions on marketing, and politicians on propaganda? When we are repeatedly subject to a message, even when we start off by knowing it is untrue, we become acclimatised, and then believing it to be true.
    
    The messages we are bombarded with are not simply on rape. They are more broadly on violence, fear, and anger. And computer games are far more effective than traditional methods of indoctrination: players are actively engaged, with rapid, frequent feedback reinforcing learning.
    
    Reply Alert moderator
    - Todd:
      
      21 May 2015 12:22:13pm
      
      Please, Jay, spare me.
      
      You are a rabid coalition supporter, right? And I am a rabid Libertarian. What you are saying is that if there was a "vote Greens" 24 hour channel that you had the OPTION of viewing at all times, then would become "acclimatised", then you would believe it is true, then, following your logic, you would have no choice but to vote Greens. I read much of what the Greens say, but I will never vote for them. I do agree with some of their policies (generally their social policy) and respect that they are the only party, along with the LDP, that opposed the Lib/Lab metadata laws. However, I am able to engage in crtitical thought and make my own decisions. And so can most people. This idea that ficition can change people's core belief system is..well...entirely fictional.
      
      Reply Alert moderator
- thelad:
  
  21 May 2015 8:38:01am
  
  Exactly. I've never watched GOT because I choose not to fill my mind with images of gratuitous violence and sex. But obviously a lot of people do...
  
  Reply Alert moderator
  - Tomokatu:
    
    21 May 2015 9:39:13am
    
    I read the first book in the series (remember BOOKS?) long before the TV show was released and chose not to pursue the series.
    
    Reply Alert moderator
  - Tabanus:
    
    21 May 2015 10:03:46am
    
    If you have never watched the program, how do you know that the scenes are "gratuitous"?
    
    But anyway, do you also avoid books that contain violence and sex? Your bookshelves must be pretty bare.
    
    Violence and sex are integral to human life: to pretend otherwise is to avoid reality. So how can writers and/or artists not include them in their works?
    
    Reply Alert moderator
    - Adman:
      
      21 May 2015 12:20:45pm
      
      Shh. High horses on the moral high ground have no need to view something to know about it. You wouldn't want facts getting in the way of preconceptions would you?
      
      Reply Alert moderator
    - andrewk:
      
      21 May 2015 12:37:28pm
      
      I think the key word is 'gratuitous'. It's easy to not include gratuitous violence in one's works, and by definition it detracts nothing from the work.
      
      What is gratuitous is a matter for judgement, but that doesn't prevent each person from making their own judgement about it.
      
      Reply Alert moderator
    - thelad:
      
      21 May 2015 12:59:46pm
      
      Tabanus, the excesses of GOT have been well documented - are you suggesting that GOT doesn't contain gratuitous sex and violence? Or are you just being argumentative?
      
      As to your second point - my bookshelves are full. But I choose to read authors who know how to use sex and violence to further the narrative, not as titillation for their readers. There is a big difference.
      
      Reply Alert moderator
  - tree frog:
    
    21 May 2015 12:43:29pm
    
    The author of GOT based it on the 14th century War of the Roses.
    
    The two rival branches were the Lancaster's and the Yorks. In GOT the names are the Lannisters and the Starks, a clear immitation of the original protaganists.
    
    Political marriges at the time were normal and a woman was considered chattel/property up until the 18th century. If a man married a woman, her consent to her husband was not required.
    I'm not saying it was right, just saying how it was.
    
    We have not been civilised for as long as we would like to believe.
    
    (and some useless information for you, the only reason GOT has dragons is because a friend of George R.R. Martin said "its got to have some dragons!" and George complied)
    
    Reply Alert moderator
- foxy:
  
  21 May 2015 8:58:39am
  
  Watching TV is something you do for recreation and years ago something like what Jonathan describes was more likely found on pornography sites, or late night viewing, now it is mainstream.
  
  There have been many many of these scenes on TV before and will be again, they are also at the movie theatres, and not always with an "R" rating.
  
  I find it tiresome that Jonathan and his fellow journos ignore this sort of thing, unless it is the topic du jour, of the day, then suddenly they are all about it.
  
  Jonathan regularly pillories conservatives for example, then bemoans publicly the lack of civility in society, dear me, one can only call this, hypocrisy.
  
  So I take this entire article and bandwagoning and yet another example of the left's recreational outrage, it certainly is not a position they hold constantly, it comes down to fashion doesn't it?
  
  We know it's not any kind of principle driving these mass produced outrage sermons, it's just taking a side, momentarily while it is in the spotlight, to be forgotten when the next shiny thing comes along, shallow is the byword of the left's journos.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
  - toot:
    
    21 May 2015 11:46:39am
    
    Foxy, what has the fact that, in your opinion, "Jonathan regularly pillories conservatives" got to do with him being concerned about "the lack of civility in society"? The two are not mutually exclusive or even contradictory. Politicians of all flavours regularly pillory each other, as does the Press. It was when the LNP was in opposition that the art of "pillorying" the government of the day became an art form. Still, that has nothing to do with being concerned about graphically showing rape and violence on TV, movies and in books.
    
    Your assertion that "it's not any kind of principle driving these mass produced outrage sermons" and that "shallow is the byword of the left's journos" is laughable. Perhaps, you are trying to do exactly what Jonathan suggest shows such as GOT do, i.e. make your version of politics, by drip feed, the only version that is pure and true. As Jonathan states "it seems improbable that our continual exposure to acts of extremity, defilement and violence" (your continual banging on about what you consider to be left-wing insincerity, which is a bad, bad thing in your world)"can't have some sort of slow, steady, deep impact." That's just what politicians try to do with their constantly repeated 3 and 4 word slogans. Their aim is to have some "slow, steady,deep impact" on our collective psyche.
    
    Reply Alert moderator
- anton:
  
  21 May 2015 9:30:05am
  
  Don't think it is just the western world that views the rape and abuse of women as entertainment.
  
  You are correct of course no one is force to view this stuff. It seems to be hard wired into men to want someone anyone to attack and conquer.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
- Audax:
  
  21 May 2015 10:19:00am
  
  Hollywood pioneered the use of graphic violence as entertainment decades ago and have continued to refine their art ever since. Unless there is a suggestion that murder is somehow a lesser abomination than rape and that the graphic depiction of violence and killing is somehow okay, then this particular blend of electromagnetic neurotoxin should have been resoundingly condemned from the very first episode. It's pornography, plain and simple, no less abhorrent than the seediest obscenities sloshing round in the bowels of the internet. Yet the herd animals sitting in front of their TVs will continue to lap it all up as the producers seek ever greater permissiveness in order to sell their wares. In the end it's all about advertising- advertisers will vie for space in the midst of the most popular programs in order to shove their own form of narcotic down the throats of the masses. I have one word of advice when it comes to watching this audio-visual excrement. Don't.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
  - Sarah:
    
    21 May 2015 11:05:26am
    
    1/ The rape scene that is being discussed was not "graphic". It was implied. It occurred off-camera.
    
    2/ there are no commercials during Game Of Thrones.
    
    Reply Alert moderator
  - Tabanus:
    
    21 May 2015 12:18:07pm
    
    Have you ever read Homer?
    
    Talk about graphic violence! Descriptions of spears hitting people in the mouth, disembowelling etc. Story tellers sang it for hundreds of years to appreciative crowds.
    
    And while dating the "Iliad" is difficult, I would say it predated Hollywood by a few thousand years.
    
    Have you seen the Amphitheatrum Flavium? (You may know it as the Coliseum). Apparently thousands of animals and humans died in various gory ways for the entertainment of the Roman public.
    
    Not a Hollywood producer in sight.
    
    You must try to avoid blaming everything you dislike on the USA. It is not hard to find other targets.
    
    And perhaps consider that the "masses" (I take it you consider yourself above these) are not all "herd animals". Many are quite intelligent and can differentiate between fiction and reality. Get to know some - you may be surprised.
    
    PS I am intrigued by "bowels of the internet" as a metaphor. Do many people see the internet as a being? If it has a bowel, does it have a mind?
    
    Reply Alert moderator
  - prison:
    
    21 May 2015 12:50:28pm
    
    I agree with other people who have said that this is the highest quality production that has been produced for TV, yet you disregard the show despite its massive following and merits. You don't have to watch it, but at least try to understand why people watch it beyond simple 'sheep' mentality.
    
    Most of the people speaking against GoT don't even watch it. This commentary is driven by ignorance and manufactured conditioned false outrage.
    
    The show is an artistic masterpeice, not only visually but in terms of social commentary. It is not trying to endorse violence or poor treatment of women at all but helps us understand how the civilised parts of the world have evolved while reflecting on the fact that in some parts, these things still occur. The point is to generate thought and discussion. It isn't simply a mindless show about gore looking for cheap shock value trills.
    
    For me, I never feel happy watching it. Thats not the point...but it does make me reflect on society and question my own moral compass. I enjoy the quality of the production.
    
    Reply Alert moderator
- Eagle:
  
  21 May 2015 10:29:31am
  
  And neither was the audience. No one watched Sansa being raped; it wasn't shown. That it occurred was depicted with plot context and by Theon's distress. Her rapist has previously been depicted as a vile psychopath who hunts people for sport; and with whom Sansa had been forced to marry; hardly a unlikely turn of events given his character. Anyone viewing this scene after all the suffering and misery that Game of Thrones has depicted is a moral hypocrit.
  
  We have seen the most grotesque death and torture depicted in graphic detail; none of which is far fetched in a world that includes such savagery as the Syria Civil War (which averages 2 - 300 deaths per day). To single out a specific off - camera event five seasons in merely demonstrates just how mindlessly selective many have become when discussing human misery. Mr Green ' s position isn't just objectively wrong, it actively creates the type of arbitrary outrage that allows so many atrocities to go unnoticed; because they aren't the 'right' type of violence.
  
  As an aside I feel sorry for the actor playing Ramsay Bolton; whose obvious talent has no doubt lead him to be a truly hated face in entertainment.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
  - PETER:
    
    21 May 2015 12:14:43pm
    
    SPOT ON
    
    Reply Alert moderator
  - Cynicmonster:
    
    21 May 2015 12:31:12pm
    
    "To single out a specific off - camera event five seasons in merely demonstrates just how mindlessly selective many have become when discussing human misery."
    
    Twitter explodes in outrage over a tv show while women in Syria are being raped and murdered - grotesque when implied on a screen in your house but seemingly ignored when it happens in reality in countries far, far away.
    
    "As an aside I feel sorry for the actor playing Ramsay Bolton; whose obvious talent has no doubt lead him to be a truly hated face in entertainment."
    
    Felt a bit this way about the actor who played Joffrey. They do their job very well indeed.
    
    Reply Alert moderator
- Dapsta :
  
  21 May 2015 11:06:55am
  
  If you actually watch the scene, then you would know we aren't meant to sympathise with the rapist. I would assume the viewer is asked to sympathise with the victim.
  
  I don't take anyone comments on subject matter without knowing it. Especially a very detailed story like GOT", where each scene is there for a reason. There's a lot of story to get through so they don't waste film on that show.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
- Jim:
  
  21 May 2015 12:16:11pm
  
  Frank that is not true at all. If you see a car crash you are going to look. It is a natural response. It does not mean that we have degenerated. The people who control Hollywood are putting this filth out for various reasons and it is not just for ratings. Google 'who controls Hollywood?' Also learn about the art of propaganda.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
- Paul:
  
  21 May 2015 1:01:35pm
  
  Excellent point. I would go further to say show also deals with war, murder, incest, religious persecution, curruption, betrayal, sadistic mutilation, kidnapping, slavery etc, etc.
  
  The show is not condoning any of it but it is written to as part of a storyline which takes place in a very real world, in which, like our own world, all of these things exist. If you don't like it don't watch.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
Tomokatu:

21 May 2015 8:22:24am

As this world becomes more populated with us, we are forced willy-nilly into closer proximity. Because of the inherently violent nature of our killer ape ancestry, that's a guaranteed immediate increase in violence of all kinds.

There is no cure beyond either to increase space between us or a really, really profound mutation in our brain structures. Mutations cannot be predicted or controlled so we either reduce population densities everywhere or colonise space.

Reply Alert moderator
- Audax:
  
  21 May 2015 9:15:50am
  
  Oh so true. We are a species of two legged rats that now populated the planet in plague proportions. We are clever enough to dominate the Earth, displacing and eradicating other species at our whim, but not clever enough to limit our numbers.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
- Alpo:
  
  21 May 2015 9:22:22am
  
  All true, but let's not forget that very big chunks of our behaviour are controlled by regions of the brain that are flexible, dynamic.... "plastic" (as the scientists would say). So, our most basic "instincts" can still be modulated, to a great extent, by our brain. Training the brain (education) does help.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
- Fenix:
  
  21 May 2015 9:35:24am
  
  I read a sci fi recently (called 'elegans', on Amazon) which dealt with the concept of a new species of human arising on Earth. This species was superior because it was LESS greedy and impactful on the planet, reproduced at a lower rate, lived for hundreds if not thousands of years and had a measure of telekinesis. The reaction of Homo sapiens to this new species.. destroy it! And that's exactly what would happen. For a new species to gain ascendancy, the old species must give way, but when it comes to the most intelligent, greedy,
  unimaginably violent creature that has ever walked the Earth, Homo sapiens will not go quietly. We are doomed, and even the concept of our own evolution is doomed. We would rather kill ourselves off and take the rest of the planet with us than yield to a better type of human.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
- Fenix:
  
  21 May 2015 10:18:03am
  
  I read a sci fi recently (called 'elegans', on Amazon) which dealt with the concept of a new species of human arising on Earth. This species was superior because it was LESS greedy and impactful on the planet, reproduced at a lower rate, lived for hundreds if not thousands of years and had a measure of telekinesis. The reaction of Homo sapiens to this new species.. destroy it! And that's exactly what would happen. For a new species to gain ascendancy, the old species must give way, but when it comes to the most intelligent, greedy,
  unimaginably violent creature that has ever walked the Earth, Homo sapiens will not go quietly. We are doomed, and even the concept of our own evolution is doomed. We would rather kill ourselves off and take the rest of the planet with us than yield to a better type of human.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
  - mick:
    
    21 May 2015 10:53:39am
    
    "We are doomed, and even the concept of our own evolution is doomed."
    
    Rubbish, we're inching civilisation forward ever so slowly, and every so often we are reminded of the perils of mankind, for example ISIS right now.
    
    There has always been entertainment, and it might not suit you, but that's more about choice than determination.
    
    You can be a miserable naysayer, a doomsayer who regularly demands his fellows change their ways, and we tolerate you all, but would also ask that you tolerate us.
    
    It's the same with the climate cranks, peak oil hysterics and all the other people who demand we must do this that or the other.
    
    Your lack of tolerance changes nothing.
    
    When we stop tolerating your lack of tolerance however, then you will have cause to be concerned.
    
    Currently you enjoy our tolerance while you shout at us and call us names, for the time being.
    
    Reply Alert moderator
    - Dave:
      
      21 May 2015 11:28:32am
      
      "You can be a miserable naysayer, a doomsayer"
      
      It's a simple fact of biology, no matter how uncomfortable, that no dominant species has ever remained very dominant. We're at the top of the tree as at right now bit we've been lucky to avoid nuclear war by the skin of our teeth only a generation ago and now the evidence of the world's environment creaking at the seams is mounting.
      
      Homo sapiens is headed for, at the very least, a significant population crash one way or another. Biology guarantees it, it's only a matter of time. Sorry for being a 'miserable naysayer', or as I prefer, a realist.
      
      Reply Alert moderator
    - Fenix:
      
      21 May 2015 12:00:22pm
      
      Now if you're not going to take this discussion seriously.. Inching civilisation forward? Where's the evidence of that? Because our population is proliferating? Because we are able to dig up more stuff out of the ground? Because there is a class of electronic device that holds billions of people in a state of constant stupefaction? Because we have, as a species, changed the very climate of the planet we live on? Or is it because we now possess weaponry that can obliterate an entire world? This is civilisation? Inching forward? Wow.
      
      Reply Alert moderator
MCW:

21 May 2015 8:25:26am

It's the staple of the movie and television industry. Movies set in or directly concerning wartime. Movies about hostages. Crime. Brutality. It is almost impossible to go to a movie that does not contain a large dose of specific violence, or is set in a world of violence. The movie industry is out of ideas.

Reply Alert moderator
- Nein:
  
  21 May 2015 9:49:39am
  
  Yes, you'd almost think they're a reflection of the real world we live in.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
  - Audax:
    
    21 May 2015 10:30:14am
    
    Correct. And the hideous soon becomes the norm, we become desensitised to the worst excesses the human mind can conceive and revel in the make believe gore while TV and movie executives rake in billions of dollars and exhort the producers and directors to strive for ever uglier and graphic depictions. Well done, humanity.
    
    Reply Alert moderator
- evo:
  
  21 May 2015 10:28:11am
  
  True MCW.
  There is a saying that the weaknesses of mankind are greed, lust and anger.
  The antidotes: generosity, purity and kindness.
  There are a number of film-makers who are involved in scripting works based on the latter grouping of human traits.
  Obviously, Game of Thrones is an example of what happens when people are out of ideas that would help humanity evolve in a natural manner.
  Even chimpanzees are evolving, is it too much to ask that film and game makers to join the party?
  
  Reply Alert moderator
  - graazt:
    
    21 May 2015 12:46:00pm
    
    If you're "helping" humanity evolve, then it's directed, not "natural". In the sense that those who control the tools determine the outcomes.
    
    There's less rape and violence than there once was (at least in our society).
    
    So, how do we direct evolution in your preferred direction? Censorship?
    
    Reply Alert moderator
Nina O'Leary:

21 May 2015 8:31:12am

I asked my 17 year old to not watch it , he also restrained himself. rubbish in rubbish out I say...Now... Who wants to play cards?

Reply Alert moderator
- Haderak:
  
  21 May 2015 9:12:00am
  
  The Game of Thrones card game is pretty awesome! Good idea.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
Paul01:

21 May 2015 8:31:52am

Jon, I agree with the majority of what you write but I feel I need to point out that males also get raped and are the victims of violent acts.

My advice to Sansa would be to wait her time and get him while he sleeps, a good cast iron frying pan should be sufficient to her needs.

Lastly, I won't see it Jon, market manipulation and corporate geo-blocks have stymied the free market so badly that I will have to wait for a DVD release or some such old time caper to avoid being labelled a thief by the same market manipulators.

Reply Alert moderator
- John51:
  
  21 May 2015 10:20:26am
  
  Paul01, better reading the books though I have had to wait a hell of a long time for the next book in the series.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
auntyslessfavouriteson:

21 May 2015 8:33:00am

Modern Mass Media has for a long time had it's agendas to push, it has decided to be the lightning rod for change (interracial relationships, same sex marriage, drug use) are they reflecting society or are they trying to coerce society?
Do we re introduce state censorship? or do Parents need to act as the guardians of there children's minds determing what and when ideas are introduced to impressionable minds?

Reply Alert moderator
- Alpo:
  
  21 May 2015 9:29:11am
  
  Of course parents cannot relinquish their responsibility as educators. Although this also involves controlling what kind of stuff the child accesses through the media at what age, an even more important issue is what the parents do to help the child process whatever experience s/he may have had or may have in the future. In other words, how to build resilience in the child.... That's a bloody tricky one!
  
  Reply Alert moderator
Applaudanum:

21 May 2015 8:35:45am

While I'm not a viewer of the show, I assume we aren't meant to sympathise with the rapist. I would assume the viewer is asked to sympathise with the victim.

By contrast, how many men have been matter-of-factly bumped off in the show without exploring the impact of those losses on family and friends?

Reply Alert moderator
- Chris L:
  
  21 May 2015 9:47:31am
  
  An excellent point. No complaints over all the murder and torture... but rape is apparently going too far!
  
  Fantasy, along with other genres of fiction, are often used to explore modern issues. If we ban one specific subject from such exploration we're just sweeping it into a corner and pretending it doesn't exist.
  
  This is where all the fuss about the subject of rape, in shows or in stand up comedy or whatever, is actually counterproductive. If the people who protest actually want attitudes toward rape and rape victims to change... well... we have to be able to explore the subject and talk about it and think about it.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
- Living in a cloud castle:
  
  21 May 2015 10:16:39am
  
  The perpetrator is portrayed as an A grade psychopath. Who I suspect will get his comeuppance within a couple of episodes, perhaps at the hands of his (recently raped) wife.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
  - Applaudanum:
    
    21 May 2015 11:46:59am
    
    Thank you for confirming what I suspected. Heck, why be modest, confirming what I 'knew' without having watched a single second of the program nor seen any advertisements or promotion.
    
    How did I attain this remarkable clairvoyance? Because it was ridiculously obvious that it would be the case. Given that the premise of nasty people, the ones we're not supposed to sympathise with, doing nasty things to good people has been a regular device in movies, tv, theatre, books and nursery rhymes since the advent of storytelling, one can only ponder at the reasons behind Green's article today.
    
    Perhaps we need to go back to the early writers of Ancient Greece or the Roman Empire for our good, clean, non-threatening literature such as Homer, Sophocles, Ovid etc. You remember the sort of thing, stories that were forgotten about for 1000-2000 years and rediscovered during the most amazing period of intellectual advancement the world had seen, the renaissance, and considered to be far superior all-round to their contemporary writings.
    
    Green's article runs counter to the lived experience, perceptions and musings of citizens at the dawn of the 21st century. Now, I'm all for a bit of a shake up for our conventional wisdom, logic and behaviours in order to re-asses where our society is at. Yet I cannot find a single thread or hook in this article that places it outside of a year 7 wish fulfilment exercise.
    
    They say that modern mainstream entertainments are pitched to the intelligence of 11 year olds. Green's article would presumably be pitched a little higher. Unfortunately his understanding of his topic is demonstrably lower than the intended age range would suggest.
    
    Reply Alert moderator
- Good Grief:
  
  21 May 2015 11:44:44am
  
  I agree with your view, and I say GoT has done a spanking good job making people repulsed by that scene. Did people come out thinking, "man, what that man did was horrible", or did people come out thinking, "man, I wanna do the same thing"?
  
  I mean, what's the point of censoring something that happens in real life and we want to get the message through that it is a horrendous thing to do? While I didn't see the scene for myself, it seems to have gotten the message through to people that rape is bad, and that only bad people do it.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
Alex A:

21 May 2015 8:39:00am

I find it interesting that it's rape that always creates this response but other, possible more harsh atrocities are ofter brushed over or ignored. GoT also reduces torture, murder and genocide to entertainment, but that's not brought up. It's not until rape is the crime that anyone seems to care.

We've had how many body horror "torture porn" films? How many "Saws", "Hostels" or "Human Centipedes"? We've had a TV show where the protagonist was a serial killer, a show were we where the audience would hope that the killer would be able to keep on killing and not get caught.

Sansa Starks rape is not meant to be fun. Entertaining? Maybe, it's there to help support the overall narrative of the series. I doubt many people where enjoying themselves when the watch that scene.

Reply Alert moderator
- Asininedrivel:
  
  21 May 2015 9:41:25am
  
  "I find it interesting that it's rape that always creates this response but other, possible more harsh atrocities are ofter brushed over or ignored."
  
  Exactly! Anyone who is tuning into GOT is surely aware of its context. The betrayal, casual depravity and shocking violence are ample food groups which the audience happily gorges on week after week, season after season. To enlarge your pious gland based on one scene is pushing the boundaries of hypocrisy imo.
  
  Also (as has been pointed out) there is an "off" switch that our so seemingly easily offendable society seems to ignore. Don't like it? TURN IT OFF*. I believe Johnathon may have written a piece not so long ago about society's endless quest to be easily (and loudly) offended by things.
  
  *Perhaps try reading a book - even one of the Game of Thrones books the show is based on (and for the record the scene portrayed last night is positively family friendly compared to the utterly horrific version in said books).
  
  Reply Alert moderator
- Miriel:
  
  21 May 2015 12:27:57pm
  
  Alex A: "I find it interesting that it's rape that always creates this response but other, possible more harsh atrocities are ofter brushed over or ignored."
  
  Yes, because flaying and castration are SUCH pervasive problem in our society today.
  
  Sexual violence against women is an ongoing pernicious problem in our society today. That's why people object to it being trivialised as entertainment.
  
  This is the third time Game of Thrones has portrayed the rape of a major female character. In two of those examples the show turned consensual sex into rape without showing any consequences to the characters. The show has a problem.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
- graazt:
  
  21 May 2015 12:51:01pm
  
  Yeah, there was no collective soul-searching required when Ned Stark got beheaded in Season 1.
  
  Or about the normalisation or red wedding events and how they resonate with us due to their narratives reflecting aspects of our own cultural heritage.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
gerard oosterman:

21 May 2015 8:39:30am

The days of Smokey Dawson and Rin Tin Tin have long gone since. Move over and watch incest, rape and beheadings you old fogeys.
I find watching The Drum on TV about the only thing worth watching, even there, conflicting commentators sometimes seem to fly off the handle. Did you see Bruce Haig and Ruddock getting into 'robust debate? Loved it!

Reply Alert moderator
- seres:
  
  21 May 2015 10:40:42am
  
  Yes, a very unscripted debate indeed, not like the usual posturing from Ruddock: Baird rarely 'manages' the debates, usually wants to contribute with her opinions rather than listening to the participants, but this Drum really was instructive. As for GoT, the TV ads are such a turn off!
  cheers
  
  Reply Alert moderator
  - Helvi :
    
    21 May 2015 11:11:36am
    
    seres, too much giggling if it happens to be an all girl show, all talking over each other, I can't make heads or tails...
    
    Reply Alert moderator
BEE:

21 May 2015 8:41:06am

I love GOT. Sansa's rape was very confronting to watch and I found myself disturbed by it long after. Shouldn't that be the measure? Yes you may proffer an opinion and spin it as an indictment on social complacency regarding violence against women but it should be the personal internal moral compass that dictates the condemnation not a finger pointing broad stroke encompassing us all. I'll let my conscience decide.

Reply Alert moderator
- Oaktree:
  
  21 May 2015 9:16:38am
  
  Hi Bee. I agree to a point. Rational, educated adults are able to choose or not choose to watch this stuff, and remain sensible members of society. Unfortunately a lot of people do not particularly discriminate about their own or their, often quite young children, and these are the people who accept what they see unquestioningly. Neither does it occur to them that this rubbish might affect their children's view of the world. This type of material has had huge effects on behaviour. One example is the modelling of Australian criminals on the organised crime feature in The Bill. No doubt there are worse features of modern "entertainment" affecting our social dangers now.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
  - Helvi:
    
    21 May 2015 11:36:56am
    
    Oaktree, I stay home for the Danish 'The Legacy' on SBS, and like it so much that I'm happy to put up with the ads.
    
    I also enjoy ABC's latest tele-movie, Jane Campion's 'Top of the Lake'.
    
    Reply Alert moderator
  - Sarah:
    
    21 May 2015 12:04:12pm
    
    GOT is rated MA. It is not intended for little children and I have never heard of anyone letting young children watch it.
    
    As for Australian organised crime being modelled on the events in The Bill - can we have some clarification on this?
    
    Reply Alert moderator
- sdrawkcaB:
  
  21 May 2015 9:28:24am
  
  It had no effect on me.
  
  Its just a tv show.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
- mike j:
  
  21 May 2015 11:12:33am
  
  It's certainly an indictment on a society enamoured of female victimhood that consummating a marriage you enter into of your own free will is considered a 'rape'.
  
  No doubt you'll be cheering when she murders her new husband.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
DocT:

21 May 2015 8:41:25am

"We're sanguine about it, perhaps as an act of either self preservation or shared delusion, but it seems improbable that our continual exposure to acts of extremity, defilement and violence can't have some sort of slow, steady, deep impact."
Brilliantly put Jonathan, thank you. Our society loves to be titillated from the comfort and safety of our lounge chairs. We are not going to give that up despite the inevitable effects of the "...slow, steady, deep impact" you refer to. I might feel that there are no behavioural consequences on myself through exposure to this material and regard any move to restrict access as an example of that deadliest of sins, censorship. But what about those more vulnerable to influence? The disturbed, the teenaged, even the pre-pubertal, regularly exposed to such images as they are forming an image of an exciting or even normal adult life? Hand wringing over sexual violence is meaningless as long as we keep pumping out degraded sexuality for the entertainment of the masses.

Reply Alert moderator
- graazt:
  
  21 May 2015 12:54:12pm
  
  "but it seems improbable that our continual exposure to acts of extremity, defilement and violence can't have some sort of slow, steady, deep impact."
  
  Well it hasn't yet. if actual incidents of the sorts of crimes being normalised is anything to go by.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
Adman:

21 May 2015 8:43:22am

Hundreds if not thousands of men and women have been killed on screen in Game of Thrones, often in grisly gory HD detail. A whole wedding party was eliminated in the 'TV plot twist of the decade' in the Red Wedding. Theon was tortured physically and mentally over an extended period, only part of which involved having his penis cut off.

All the while the comments were 'Best TV ever', 'setting a new bench mark' etc. Now that another horrible side of war and conflict has been shown, all of a sudden it is 'They have gone too far!'. The hypocrisy of the moral hand-wringers is what has gone too far.

Reply Alert moderator
- john c:
  
  21 May 2015 9:33:08am
  
  You have nailed it. Agree totally.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
- Eye in the Sky:
  
  21 May 2015 9:40:32am
  
  "The hypocrisy of the moral hand-wringers is what has gone too far."
  
  Let's assume for a moment Adman that you're a male. If you express an opinion on any topic, does that mean that you represent the opinions of all or even a majority of males? I think you would agree that that's not the case.
  
  So, if Jonathon Green by your definition is a hand-wringer, his opinions don't necessarily reflect those of all hand-wringers.
  
  I mention all of this to explain that Jonathon Green's article would only be an example of hypocrisy if he has previously expressed (either publically or privately) what good television Game of Thrones is or if he belongs to a group (say, Hand-wringers For Better Television) who have done so.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
  - Adman:
    
    21 May 2015 11:08:34am
    
    Hypocrisy need not be the result of an action, but can also be the result of inaction. Green, as someone with numerous platforms on which he is able to share his opinions, only decides now to lament at the 'gratuitous' violence on offer. That only now have they gone too far.
    
    By ignoring the previous 'gratuitous' acts of violence, and by not even referencing the sexual violence committed against Theon, which in my opinion was much worse than that committed against Sansa, Green has shown his hand. Violence against men and women is okay, sexual violence against men is okay, the line is drawn at sexual violence against women. If that is not hypocrisy, then I do not know what is.
    
    Reply Alert moderator
    - Tomokatu:
      
      21 May 2015 12:54:26pm
      
      Adman claimed a bit much in saying: "...Hypocrisy need not be the result of an action, but can also be the result of inaction..."
      
      Disagree. Hypocrisy requires either an action or expression of an opinion. Neither is "inaction".
      
      Reply Alert moderator
- Chris L:
  
  21 May 2015 9:57:51am
  
  Apparently Alfie Allen, who plays Theon, gets mail from people who have experienced abuse thanking him for his performance. It turns out that seeing a character deal with such an issue helps them deal with their own situation.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
  - Adman:
    
    21 May 2015 10:42:45am
    
    I did not know that. This seems to show that positives can come out of characters experiencing trauma on our screens.
    
    Reply Alert moderator
- sdrawkcaB:
  
  21 May 2015 10:30:34am
  
  I agree.
  Moralizing over a TV show that is cast in a time of global war with a dose of magic and fantasy thrown in is the part that is shocking.
  
  So a character who has had the empathy meter wound to beyond the end stop is raped in marriage by a character who has not graduated to the level of even having an empathy meter. How shocking.
  
  This really is a first world problem.
  
  For some it may have been compounded by the bag of Twisties they were eating at the same time only had small ones and in searching for a large one, they got Twistie crumbs caught under their fingernail. I think its time for everyone to get serious and engage in some good and solid internet activism. Lets resurrect 'Kony 2012' and start tweeting. That will fix it.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
awake:

21 May 2015 8:43:52am

I have watched this TV product, once. I did not watch it again, the reason is I just think it is stupid. Now it has moved into the grotesque showing rape as entertainment.

Why is the question, it is supposed to represent reality, bestiality, the human conditions or just more rubbish.

A perfect disgrace, unnecessary and degrading.

Reply Alert moderator
- sdrawkcaB:
  
  21 May 2015 11:09:17am
  
  Assuming I watched the same show as everyone else, there was no showing 'private parts' and if one turned on at the instant the rape started, one would not know what was going on.
  
  No-one died. No-one was injured. It was just a function of television.
  
  Contrast that to most Australians supporting the turning of our backs on the desperate people sitting in clapped out, leaky, Indonesian fishing boats. In this instance people do die and people are injured.
  
  Is that also a 'perfect disgrace, unnecessary and degrading.'?
  
  Reply Alert moderator
- prison:
  
  21 May 2015 11:16:42am
  
  i think you need to be awake (and actually watch it) to see the parallels with modern society and realise that it is purely artistic comment with the goal of challenging these preconceptions, but not endorsing rape or violence.
  
  Id say that as someone who loves to watch the show every week, these outrageous acts further reinforce my own set of morals and stance against all forms of violence, rape, torture and deception. Thats the point.
  
  I find the nude scenes the most unnecessary though - but then you can argue that much of what in the show doesn't need to be there. Its there both to entertain AND challenge our own moral compass. For me, this is what I expect from a good work of art or artistic performance
  
  If anyone watched this rape scene and didn't feel at least uneasy and disturbed - if you truly thought it was entertaining or could relate to what was going through Bolton's mind, then you should be seeking help.
  
  If you don't want your own moral compass tested, at least don't let your own ignorance on the subject be used to limit what others can do.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
Factsseeker:

21 May 2015 8:54:14am

There are more issues than just depicting rape Jonathan. The reality is that ever since video games were invented, violence against men has been glorified and repeated a millions times a day all around the world. The trend today is for women now 'kicking ass' and beating up men in video games. Where has Jonathan been the past 30 years ? Killing men has been glorified for so long now that we barely raise an eyebrow when we read in the media of men being assaulted or killed in the country or elsewhere in the world. Remember the real life king-hitting entertainment killings in Aus and how the judges squealed when the minimum sentence for this type of murder was raised from 4 years in some states in Aus. Jonathan, you should campaign for all gratuitous violence to be removed from video games including any rape or violence against women. All violence is barbaric in the 21st century Mr Green. All Violence.

Reply Alert moderator
- Michael:
  
  21 May 2015 9:22:23am
  
  Don't blame computer games, that is a myth which has been debunked time and again.
  
  You don't think that movies did it before computer games?
  You don't think war was glorified in WW1 and WW2?
  
  Think again.
  
  Violence has been glorified for a very long time. It is time we grew out of it.
  But if you think computer games are to blame then how about you look at State of Origin from the beginning and the crowds cheering on grown men beating each other with their fists as 'the biff' gets more attention then the game.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
- Chris L:
  
  21 May 2015 9:59:56am
  
  Violence was glorified in the theatre and poems of the ancient world. There's nothing new or recent about it.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
ribald:

21 May 2015 8:55:19am

i'll be watching mad men instead!

Reply Alert moderator
- Bernie:
  
  21 May 2015 10:59:05am
  
  I prefer Mad Dogs
  
  Reply Alert moderator
Michael:

21 May 2015 8:55:31am

It took you how many seasons to come to this conclusion?

There is rape is season 1. Violence for the sake of violence in season 1.

The first book contains more. Martin's fascination with graphic rape and violence adds nothing to the story and to make it graphic in order to illicit an emotional response is the tool of a poor author.

I do not feel the show is any better. I stopped watching season 1. You know what was coming and what to expect. You have seen it time and again in the show and NOW you are upset about it.
Now?

I wonder if your upset at the moment is because of your perceived value of the victim? I wonder this because the rape and degradation of women in the show and books has been ever present, but you take it to task now.

Reply Alert moderator
IanM:

21 May 2015 9:00:14am

Homicide rates in Australia are currently between 200 and 250 per year. I've seen dozens, possibly hundreds of "entertainment" homicides on TV and film over the past few years, often in graphic detail, but strangely no contribution here from Jonathan Green about what effect such exposure might be having on Australian society.

Personally I haven't found myself inclined to commit crime because of what I see on TV, but I'm prepared to accept that some others might. I also agree that violence against women is completely unacceptable, but men are typically nearly twice as likely to be victims of homicide in Australia than women. Perhaps if journalists like Jonathan Green focussed on victims of violent crime in general, rather than selecting sub-sets of the population, we might achieve a more balanced debate.

Reply Alert moderator
QC Bob:

21 May 2015 9:01:42am

Manslaughter and murder are not rape so not sure what stating "38 women killed this year" has to do with the topic.

MSM treat war as entertainment and that is real.....not a fictional story. The world we live in has desensitised us to violence. Don't blame HBO, blame the war mongers in our society. Not the first film where rape has been depicted. Art is meant to be confronting. If you don't like don't watch but don't nanny the rest of us into watching sanitised entertainment.

Reply Alert moderator
foolking:

21 May 2015 9:02:33am

So here I am sitting on the couch trying to deal with yet another extreme act of violence, I would have changed the channel but a couple of the characters were engaging my stomach muscles tight.
Slowly I rationalise these acts as a part of a normal viewers life, they all cope therefore it is normal to be entertained in this way and a normal part of the day to experience artificial extreme violence.

The power of television and its message is chronically underestimated except by those who seek to profit from it.
One of the most difficult parts of being an adult is trying not to shrivel up, lay down defence mechanisms and trust people. To not become selfish and remote. Fear in some form is always present lingering in the background.
I am at least in part the sum of what I experience and my coping mechanisms and yet it is me who will be accused of stifling freedom of expression by wanting change.

Reply Alert moderator
splod1:

21 May 2015 9:04:28am

It beggars belief that any man who has a girlfriend, any man who has a wife, any man who has daughters or any female relatives can so compartmentalise his brain that he can be entertained by rape on film and not imagine that the victim could be a woman who is dear to him. Sure, it's only fiction and you don't have to watch it. The trouble is that many are watching it, and the "normalisation" of sexual violence that it promotes is a threat to our culture and to ourselves.

Reply Alert moderator
- Bev:
  
  21 May 2015 11:07:33am
  
  So the fact that males (of all ages) are subject to all sorts of violence and murder does not worry you or make you think it could be (To use your terms) your father, brother, son or any of your male relatives or friends.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
- Gumby:
  
  21 May 2015 11:43:17am
  
  I wonder if people understand that the "rape scene" is not "entertainment". You're not supposed to enjoy it. You're supposed to hate it and by extension, hate the person doing it. You're supposed to be rooting for his downfall. He's "the bad guy".
  
  Do people not understand this? No one watches game of thrones and sees the rape or torture in it and thinks "oh that's nice". It doesn't normalise it, at all. Ramsey Bolton is completely hated.
  
  If it was normalising sexual violence, it would be done in a way that made it acceptable in the show. It's not. He's a monster and he's portrayed as a monster.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
- Chris L:
  
  21 May 2015 12:47:02pm
  
  This is where certain feminist principles work against themselves. Society is supposed to change its attitude toward rape and the victims of rape... but we're supposed to achieve this without talking about rape or acknowledging its existence in any public forum.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
Jon C:

21 May 2015 9:04:32am

> but might it almost be worse to recreate what in reality would be horror, simply for our amusement?

Ever heard of a horror movie Jonathon? We depict the horrific for entertainment all the time, because horror is a human emotional experience and the purpose of entertainment media is to elicit emotional responses in the audience.

We have an entire article here pointlessly pontificating on this particular moment of horror, with the sexual abuse and mutilation, beatings, torture, flaying, and mental abuse of another character in the scene is given a single throwaway mention.

To so elevate the abuse of one type of person over another is despicable.

Reply Alert moderator
Artania:

21 May 2015 9:05:29am

I would say, not only the movie industry is out of ideas (same with the game industry), but they are populated with rotten people. And the worst is, we are sustaining their existence by watching or buying this rubbish. Shame on us, shame on the whole humanity...

Reply Alert moderator
Southernskies:

21 May 2015 9:10:00am

I'm surprised it took that long for Sansha to be further abused. The mental and emotional abuse even from Episode 2 has been constant.

I've only watched Season 1 (on DVD), so am a long way behind in the plot. I was expecting it during Season 1, with the way her betrothed treated her. Especially after her father was executed.

Reply Alert moderator
Alan:

21 May 2015 9:22:17am

Domestic violence has many more victims and is much more terrifying to it's victims than any organised terrorism.

Our governments response is pathetic and misdirected. Abbott was ready to bomb Iraq before the US. $1 billion in bombs and training will make not a shred of difference to Iraq, or IS or anyone else. Just a show of "strong on terror" for political purposes.

A fraction of that money would make a big difference to truly terrorised Australian women. Just no votes in it. The victims of domestic violence are not a core LNP constituency.

Reply Alert moderator
Luke:

21 May 2015 9:25:14am

I find it interesting that many commentators are isolating that rape scene from the episode to espouse on.
A few minutes before we had Lorus not only being forced to deny his sexualtity but then actually being condemned ( like literally ) for it by a faith that holds homosexuality to be depraved and heterosexuality to be sacred even more so when the establishment is concerned... gosh does that sound familiar?
Yes the rape was confronting, but it does fit within a context of contrasting some of our values, both about sexuality and our repect of our betters. Why is Ramsay able to do what he does.... because he's noble, not good or smart or anything else. Why did so many priests get away with so much bad behavior for so long... likewise.
Finally, for all the people who blame women for not leaving violent relationships, perhaps that episode can let them contemplate on how exactly Sansa could extract herself...

Reply Alert moderator
black parrot:

21 May 2015 9:25:45am

Rape, pillage and pay-TV; it's all about the bottom line :(

Reply Alert moderator
Manfred Particleboard:

21 May 2015 9:25:59am

Aaaaand Agatha Christie turns murder into what exactly?

It's only now you realise violent crime is a staple of television?

Reply Alert moderator
whogoesthere:

21 May 2015 9:29:16am

I haven't watched GoT but I read most of the books until I got bored with them. It's set in a world dominated by violence, rape being just one form.

Violence has always been part of entertainment, until relatively recently public hangings were huge entertainment. Now we watch (mainly) pretend violence as entertainment.

From what I have read, on a per capita basis there is no evidence that our societies are more violent than in the past so I'm not sure any link can be drawn, Green says "Has there ever been a human generation as broadly familiar with all manner of brutalities", I'd say yes, most of them in fact, but for them it was real brutality they became enured too.

Reply Alert moderator
JD:

21 May 2015 9:36:43am

One has to wonder, is Jonathan just as incensed by the gratuitous sex, violence and rape in Australian productions or, is it just Game of Thrones because it isn't Australian. Also, add to the mix that the Game of Thrones coming on Wednesday is Season 5 ... read that, this is the 5th year of the series. Where has Jonathan been for the past 4 years of the series? Consistency is the true sign of conscious and activism, not targeted obsession such as this and also Jonathan's claims of barbarism with the recent executions in Bali. Where was Jonathan when the 'Bali Bombers' were similarly executed?

Reply Alert moderator
- ynicmonster:
  
  21 May 2015 12:55:17pm
  
  "Also, add to the mix that the Game of Thrones coming on Wednesday is Season 5 ... read that, this is the 5th year of the series. Where has Jonathan been for the past 4 years of the series?"
  
  I was wondering this too. After 55 episodes, violence only now becomes an issue?
  
  Reply Alert moderator
Cat:

21 May 2015 9:42:07am

Well said J.

I have never seen one minute of Game of Thrones and I avoid all violent films. I particularly dislike films which show serial killers hunting prey, male or female.

What I cannot understand is the willingness of some women to allow themselves to be subjected to filmed violence.

I feel more strongly about this today after catching up with the Foreign Correspondent report on young girls from the UK who have gone to Syria to become ISIS brides. One was yammering on about Western feminism and how the only role for women was wife and mother.

Reply Alert moderator
- Chris L:
  
  21 May 2015 12:57:50pm
  
  I recall watching I Spit On Your Grave where a woman is gang raped and then seeks revenge. Watching the rape seen did not make me feel like trying it out for myself and it certainly didn't make it seem "normal" to me. In fact it was a highly disturbing scene, and deliberately so. If anything that movie pushed the audience to think about the victim and what she went through.
  
  I'm not recommending it as a great movie, the production values, dialogue and acting are all terrible, but it still managed to get its point across.
  
  My own point is that condemning such depictions or expressing outrage at their existence in sympathy with real life victims, as Mr Green seems to be doing, is to figuratively shoot oneself in the foot (if you'll forgive the violent analogy).
  
  Reply Alert moderator
Tony-Zzzz:

21 May 2015 9:42:45am

Oh well, don't watch it. The premise for the whole show is arcane and decrepit anyway.

Reply Alert moderator
- Grumpy:
  
  21 May 2015 1:09:24pm
  
  And just what premise is that?
  
  Reply Alert moderator
ianian:

21 May 2015 9:45:45am

As a matter of politics/principle/??? I do not give any of my money to Rupert/Foxtel/Austar and my mobile broadband data plan in a rural area can't handle TV/film downloads. So escape some influences on the overcrowded, stressed, rat packs in the cities.
But this article does encourage my prejudices that Foxtel subscribers are degenerate morons that take drugs and toss coins to rape each other, without other interests.
On a more serious note, I wonder how many serious assaults or murders of women are motivated by sexuality of whatever form, versus valuable property, custody of children, psychological instability under attack, etc.

Reply Alert moderator
schneids:

21 May 2015 9:46:11am

It's not just Game of Thrones, of course. Turn on commercial television any night and it's awash with the most appalling tortures, bashings, knifings, gun fights and sexual assaults. Americans in particular are utterly obsessed with guns.

Why do we find this stuff entertaining yet condemn it in real life? I find it unwatchable, though my partner, a perfectly normal, well-adjusted woman, watches it. I just leave the room and get on the internet or read a book.

Reply Alert moderator
Zathras:

21 May 2015 9:46:20am

Was it more entertaining to watch and cheer on real history unfolding like the "Shock and Awe" bombing of Baghdad - lots of fireworks but no shattered bodies to worry about and a victory in itself?

We have become desensitised to all sorts of violence in society when suffering refugees are no more than a means to a political end and the brutal slaughter of cattle is treated differently from the live baiting of greyhounds.

This is who we are.

Reply Alert moderator
Tafari:

21 May 2015 9:47:10am

O tempora O mores has this ever happened before, this violence and degradation for entertainment on stage?

Well only for the past ten thousand years or so.

We are reaching the point of total absurdity in our political correctness. If we can not face issues then we try to brush them under the carpet while still lapping up the drama of the moment.

Green says "Yes, the difference is that they are imagined rather than real" That is always the nature of all modern mummery one hopes. There are a guzzillion great works of art that display all sorts of horrors in whitewashed glory; that are a homage to the violence in human imagination. Those are the evil ones that the wowser angasm junkies should be on about. The ones that show or allude to some sexy glorification of violence as if it were a wonderful pretty thing. Go read your bible and see what people do to each other.

That the world's Twits can indulge their ritual right to be offended on their smartphones all they like but ninety nine point nine percent will never raise their pinkies to actually enter the fray to help, though they might film it to get off on, later on the net.

It is a deep and ancient hypocrisy. One is reminded of the ancient logic that women could not be hung drawn and quartered out of propriety so they were burnt alive instead to preserve decorum.

Humans do terrible things when they get the chance, both men and women. If you cant realize that rape and torture are what human, males and females, do when they get the chance, and war and power afford them that chance then those impulses will never be attenuated. Still less will it happen if it is treated to glorification through allegory and whitewashing.

"The Rape of the Sabine Women" or the "Rape of the Daughters of Leucippius" never warned any one, either perpetrator or victim, of the horror of rape.

Game of Thrones type violence tells a much more honest story, and is worth considering much more than a thousand sanitized wowserisms.

Reply Alert moderator
Tabanus:

21 May 2015 9:47:33am

I have not yet watched any of this season of GOT (thankyou for no "spoiler" alert Mr Green) but have no doubt that the rape is not shown as a good thing but something evil, committed by a character whom nobody would admire.

But I am interested in the sudden interest in the show's plot and events by Mr Green. He finds it necessary to decry a rape scene, yet apparently was not too concerned with beheading, a topical method of execution that is the favourite of certain groups who see it as the only way to deal with those of differing religious beliefs.

He also had no urge to hit the keyboard when a detailed emasculation was shown on screen.

Not to mention hundreds of brutal deaths in all manner of painful ways.

What could be the reason? Could it be that the victims were, in the main, men?

Is it only violence against women that prompts an outcry from certain commentators?

Possibly so. While I support the campaign against domestic violence (though the silence regarding the disproportionate rate on "remote communities is disgraceful and cowardly), how many of those alarmed by the "one a week" statistic know the other statistics?

That 2 out of 3 murder victims are male, and that 2 out of 3 of all murder victims are killed in domestic circumstances?

Given there are about 250 murders a year in Australia, about one male a week is killed in domestic circumstances.

A statistic that is never mentioned.

As always, it is far more dangerous to be a male in Australia than to be female.

Reply Alert moderator
- Tabanus:
  
  21 May 2015 10:45:26am
  
  Apologies to Mr Green - just saw the "spoiler" alert at the very top of the article.
  
  No excuse other than I had very low caffeine levels.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
  - Tomokatu:
    
    21 May 2015 12:59:43pm
    
    "... had very low caffeine levels."
    
    I understand your pain,Tabanus. I have suffered though the same horror.
    
    Reply Alert moderator
MA:

21 May 2015 9:47:36am

I agree, rape should not be shown as entertainment. However from my point of view neither should homosexuality acts such as continual music videos depicting men kissing, or the gay mardi gras. So I suppose it comes down to peoples preferences. Some deplore one but not the other, so who choses whose right?

I do believe that our moral standards are declining and sanctioned if not subtlety condoned by what we see on TV and media.

Reply Alert moderator
- whogoesthere:
  
  21 May 2015 10:26:30am
  
  In the past it was 'moral' to imprison (or worse) people who were gay, it was legal for a husband to rape his wife, for a parent or teacher to beat a child. It was 'moral' to send poor men down coal mines which drastically shortened their lives.
  
  So I guess it does depend on how you define moral standards.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
ibast:

21 May 2015 9:54:57am

Many TV series use Rape as entertainment at some point. Downton Abbey is a recent example that comes to mind. It wouldn't suprise me if Neighbours and Home and Away have done it a few times over the year.

There is a high level of violence in GoT in general and it is meant to be depicting a semi-historical era where violence and rape were much more prolific.

So I'm not buying into the premise of this article, the GoT is particularly bad.

So long as they are not glorifying it, then it's par for the course.

Reply Alert moderator
Ben:

21 May 2015 10:04:02am

I'm not sure if "amusement" is the right word. The basic ethos of the moralizer goes something like this: "I don't like this, so you shouldn't watch it; I don't like this, so you can't read it, etc." That this is uncomfortable to watch, as indeed it is, is hardly a reason to condemn it. I mean, what's your point? Is it that we should only watch what is pleasant... like the news? And, in all fairness, it wasn't graphic, in the way that the film Irreversible is, for example (which is perhaps an unfair comparison) and it did allude to it in the sense that it only showed her face, and Theon's face, but no, you're right, it didn't weakly allude to it - to do so really is cheap. To show the consequences and the realities of actions does the opposite of trivializing them; to trivialize and to gloss over is to exploit, not the other way around. And incidentally, would you have a problem with the show Vikings doing roughly the same thing, (albeit with less psychological power-play i.e. the monstrous Ramsay Bolton)? Surely not; I mean, vikings! GOT just made you cringe more, presumably, because it has drawn better characters in a more enthralling story.

Reply Alert moderator
Waterloo Sunset 2016dd:

21 May 2015 10:07:55am

I remember reading The Canterbury Tales. I only ever thought it fictional.

It's the same with moving picture entertainment: it's fictional.

Reply Alert moderator
- Alfie:
  
  21 May 2015 10:39:38am
  
  Indeed. Jonathan is just having a Sarah Sea-Patrol moment.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
Jakob:

21 May 2015 10:08:14am

Game of Thrones touches on many themes of control and power, it's what the whole show is about. The players want to win a throne.

Why we watch is pretty obvious. People love sex and violence, but when it crosses into sexual violence that causes "offense".

But our societies favor violence. It is much easier to see violence in all our medias than to see acts of sex, even though all of us are born from sexual acts, but hardly any of us will die violently.

Perhaps being less offended by sex might help. Things like seeing a woman breastfeeding shouldn't even be a thing.

Reply Alert moderator
Gobe:

21 May 2015 10:08:41am

In the scene, the woman (Sansa) who had just been married, did not verbally say no or decline sex, in fact she complied with her husbands demands to strip off. Clearly it was painful judging by the off screen cries of pain, and obviously weird that he was forcing his servant to watch, but to me that's not rape, just rough, weird, CONSENSUAL sex.

If she had of said no, and had not complied with his requests, then you could say it's rape, as it is she willingly went along with his request.

But let's just imagine that's not what happened, let's say she did say no and try to fight him off. TV shows and movies are a reflection of society. The character Bolton is supposed to be an absolutely despicable, nonredeemable, torturous person. Should we just take the bits we like from society and show those? Should we cover up the 'bad things' we don't like and just pretend they don't happen or exist? By never showing things like rape, you make it seem as if it never happens, and victims feel like it must be their fault since no one ever talks about it.

Reply Alert moderator
- mike j:
  
  21 May 2015 12:03:42pm
  
  Reflect on the society we live in, where clearly consensual sex (after a clearly consensual marriage) is universally decried as 'rape'.
  
  The female victim lobby is a state-sponsored juggernaut. The brainwashing is real.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
- thelad:
  
  21 May 2015 1:06:35pm
  
  If she had HAVE said no!
  
  what are they teaching in schools these days...
  
  Reply Alert moderator
Steve:

21 May 2015 10:09:16am

Firstly, I am disappointed the author bought into the "GTA hates women" nonsense. GTA doesn't discriminate on gender, race or religion. *EVERYONE* is free to be murdered equally. I am also further disappointed by the author buying into this callow assertion that exposure automatically leads to desensitivity and automatically to an acceptance then perpetration of the behaviour.

And further, isn't every event in GOT (or any narrative, for that matter) merely a plot point? Was the poisoning at the red wedding (or whatever the hell it is, all my GOT knowledge is hearsay) merely a plot device? Or was that particular piece of violence not so "gratuitous" or far less amusing as to not warrant an indignant article?

As usual, violence against humans is not the issue. Violence only becomes a problem when it's aimed at a group smaller than "all of humanity". As usual, art is held down and metaphorically raped (see what I did there?) by critics and censors alike because it doesn't conform to whatever their narrow view of reality is. If you don't like it, vote with your feet/eyes/hands and stop engaging with it.

And finally, simply by suggesting the rape scene was written "for our amusement" and that audiences "gather to watch rape as entertainment" is not just silly hyperbole, but it's also insulting to viewers who may be watching the show for any number of other reasons, rather than to cheer on a rape.

Reply Alert moderator
p.a.travers:

21 May 2015 10:11:38am

I think your trying to say that you will always try to be a responsible caring male! I just wouldn't watch that rubbish! I did feel,however seeing a few photos of French female protestors against that IMF ,fellow from France,that, their protest topless fisty fiesty and aggressive and with bodies that were quite appealing as well,show that women can if need be and with some physical oppurtunity to do,be pretty intimidating,if need arises! I get that feeling often off female police in Australia.Often very attractive because they know if need be where male balls are. Don't construct a helpless female society,when there are plenty of examples of women in this country,who just wont allow that to happen.I don't need to live my life according to some stated matter,like,"I disapprove of rape,even as entertainment", to me, that is folly.I also recently read on the computer that after twenty different female partners,it is extremely unlikely that a male would suffer from prostrate cancer.Probably very true,but does one need to be protected from that cancer ,by insuring one is such a wonderful male in some way,the anti prostrate cancer officers, make sure that when it fizzes out for one of them,you are gracefully received by the next anti male prostrate officer!? It maybe better to actually feel some sort of competition with women,making sure it is really fair,for no other reason,than stopping phoniness,which regresses into some sort of exploitative senses of reality.To oversexualise matters simply means ,maybe power of doing so is the only matter that is relevant.

Reply Alert moderator
John51:

21 May 2015 10:17:11am

Jonathan, a good question, but if you have read the books let alone watched the series the Game of Thrones, a drama fantasy series, it simply reflects the world around us in a different form and world. You can see the same male dominated power struggles and brutalities going on around the world even now.

As for history this certainly reflects the norm of the largely male dominated and religion influenced times of the Middle and Dark Ages and especially of the period of the Roman Empire. Rape as with murder, torture and crucifixion have been part of all those periods of our history. We would hope we have improved since those times but you often have to wonder.

Too often in drama series and books there are the good guys and the baddies. What we tend to see in the Game of Thrones there are no real good guys and the ones that are better than the rest of them all too often tend to be the ones that get killed off. In this it probably more reflects real life than most drama series and books. In this series there are more shades of gray than black and white.

What i would suggest is read the books. I found that much better even for the quality of the directing and acting. The only problem with reading the books is you have to wait so long for the next one to come out which tends to be years.

Reply Alert moderator
Mick:

21 May 2015 10:21:01am

No one is forced to watch this show, many people do however. Many people watch other violent shows and are brave enough to admit that they enjoy them, no matter how uncouth that may make them seem to the staid, cardigan wearing, hand-wringing morals police amongst us.

Apparently it's not the countless examples of violence against men in the show, the decapitations, the burning alive or anything else that gets this authors goat, it's when violence is directed at a woman that it goes too far.

Which is it? Are women to be considered equal to men in all things or are they to be treated like delicate and weak things that need to be protected?

Reply Alert moderator
Al:

21 May 2015 10:25:59am

1. GoT is full of violence, in all manner and forms. Where was the outrage when the Mountain crushed the Prince of Dawn's head with his bare hands, when Ned was beheaded in front of his children, or when a pregnant woman was stabbed in the stomach and murdered?
2. Sansa is raped by a villain, a psychopathic character who also hunts and kills people with dogs, and mutilates victims for pleasure. The rape of Sansa is not casual entertainment. We are meant to hate him, and his rape of Sansa (a virtuous protagonist) in front of Theon (another of Ramses' victims) reinforces this. We don't enjoy the rape of Sansa, we are horrified by it. It is a narrative device intended to make the demise of Ramses sweeter.
3. Rape and murder occur, full stop- but not to the extent that they once did. Legislation around and protection from this are stronger (in the West) than they have ever been before, and social norms are generally egalitarian (rape within marriage, domestic violence, honour killings, vengeance killings, religious killings, etc.) are outlawed, although there is no denying that some may still get away with this in the West. We watch stories like this to remind us how bad things once were (or could be), and to reinforce that things are not like this now. People are entertained by the absurd and the grotesque because it is frightening, funny, and sickening. Whether or not this 'ought to' be entertaining is a question for psychologists and philosophers, not an opinion piece columnist.
4. I watch GoT because I enjoy stories, classics or junk- depends on my mood; and I enjoy film, for narrative composition, character portrayal, and most especially, special effects.
5. I am educated and work in public health, including violence research. I can differentiate between fantasy and reality. Most people can.

Reply Alert moderator
Terry:

21 May 2015 10:27:34am

Rerality is, Jonathon, that throught large swathes of human history rape within marriage was not only commonplace but also effectively sanctioned by the heirarchies of the so-called 'Christian' churches of the day.

GOT is a 'fantasy' show, admitted. But nevertheless it remains a reflection on the human condition and especially upon its past. Does the depiction here glorify the once commonplace practice of rape within marriage? Does it romanticise or encourage the practice? Or does it simply depict a harsh, brutal and uncomfortable reality regarding our past history? Seeing it has left you feeling uncomfortable and so it should. Perhaps if being confronted with such harsh truths is too disturbing for you then you should look to other viewing materials.

Reply Alert moderator
Grumpy:

21 May 2015 10:28:14am

I watch GoT and have read the books. The rape of Sansa Stark in the book (although it was a different character) was toned down significantly as it was rape involving her and two males.

It was very confronting to watch although most of the scene involved a shot of Theon Greyjoy's face as he was forced to watch.

I took something different away from it. Theon standing, watching, crying and doing nothing to intervene to stop this appeared to be. to me, more of a commentary on society standing by and doing nothing whilst wailing and wringing their hands.

I dare say that most of the people deriding what goes on in GoT have never watched it nor read the books and only see the violence and sex and condemn it for that. Yes it is full of bad, horrible, manipulative characters to be sure but there is such a strong element of right and just people in there also. People of noble character, who defend others weaker than themselves, who believe in keeping promises and staying the right path even if it means their demise.

To say that the rape of Sansa Stark was entertainment is to also put the Jodie Foster movie The Accused in the same category.

Reply Alert moderator
Culex:

21 May 2015 10:31:37am

"And not actual suffering, of course; but might it almost be worse to recreate what in reality would be horror, simply for our amusement?"

I suppose you would have wanted a boycott of "Schindler's List." I mean, fancy reducing the Holocaust to casual entertainment for our amusement.

This was not a casual act on the part of the script-writers. It was included deliberately and was depicted the way it was for narrative purposes. It marks a massive development in Sansa's character and drives home just how monstrous her new husband is. The interesting part will be how the next few episodes handle this development, and how it plays out over the rest of the GoT series.

It was a nasty scene and I imagine that it would be very unpleasant (if not traumatising for some) viewing for most of the audience. But think about it this way - it could have been alluded to, or only hinted at. They chose to depict it the way they did for a reason, and it wasn't just crass titillation.

Reply Alert moderator
Gone to the races:

21 May 2015 10:38:01am

Game of Thrones is simply Lord of the Rings for adults. It is a
riveting television production. Try ISIS if you want real brutality.

Reply Alert moderator
Vague:

21 May 2015 10:48:23am

Are you getting mixed up with art that is there to amuse and art that is there to confront?
Sansa is a beloved character, and after that scene I could not speak for a full hour I was so shocked. It was engineered for minimum voyeurism and maximum emotional resonance.
If you can watch that scene and not feel sorrow that that was, and is still the lot of so many women and girls married off for advantage, then that is a fault in YOU, not the show.

Reply Alert moderator
Clicky The Robot:

21 May 2015 10:49:10am

" we have come quietly to a moment in the history of entertainment where sexual violence can be a routine element in a piece "

Have you not watched films or TV before? How about the rape scene in the 1973 western, High Plains Drifter? The (male) rape scene in Deliverance (1972), The Outlaw (1943), Wild At Heart (1986) and many more going back to the start of film. 30's-60's films, TV and novels are full of men slapping women to calm them down, roughly kissing them while they resist and so on. Check out some of Picasso's work while you're at it, or ancient Greek and Roman sculpture.

Reply Alert moderator
Harquebush:

21 May 2015 10:54:49am

Sexual deviancy is a common feature in decaying civilisations as are celebrity chefs, ever greater sporting spectaculars and corruption.

Reply Alert moderator
mike j:

21 May 2015 10:55:18am

What rape?

The woman consented to a (second) wedding she had every opportunity to avoid. 'No' means no, but SHE DIDN'T SAY IT. Consummating a marriage is rape, now?

Welcome to the post-feminist 21st Century, where women are victims of their own free choices.

Sansa married Ramsey to pursue her own (homicidal) agenda, knowing full well what was involved. How on Earth is she a victim? Should we expect an equally outraged article when she murders her husband?

I forgot... women don't 'murder' their husbands at the ABC. They engage in 'justifiable homicide' in retaliation for 'domestic abuse' they 'couldn't escape'.

Reply Alert moderator
- SayWHAT:
  
  21 May 2015 1:07:22pm
  
  Thank the Gods someone pointed out the elephant in the room, I thought I was missing something...
  
  Reply Alert moderator
Hudson Godfrey:

21 May 2015 10:56:50am

I don't watch this series so I'm unqualified to comment on the specific dramatic content, but if it was near the end of an episode then I imagine some will be watching extra keenly for how it is resolved in the next instalment.

Two things I think are palpable here: Jonathan is to be congratulated for confidently taking a position that doesn't come naturally for a lot of blokes, but should.

Second: We're comfortable with murder on our television screens but we aren't comfortable with a crime ranked as lesser by our justice system.

I find it appallingly frustrating in this modern age that our necessary sensitivity to the violation of a woman compounds her sense of victimhood adding that layer of shame and embarrassment which subverts open condemnation because the crime is sexual. We've all seen that statistics that show most rapes still don't get reported.

I don't just want to stand with Jonathan I was us to go further, and even to reject the whole notion that sexualisation even intersects with crime of rape. For some people sexualisation very much does exists within society, and I understand why they find it problematic. Occasionally though I think they have their priorities wrong, and this would be one of them because in relation to rape it just can't help to speak in those terms.

It is only when we realise that the way other people sexualise a woman is an externality whereas she herself cannot be sexualised more or less than how she chooses to be as a human and therefore sexual being in the world. When we take the opportunity to set sexual politics themselves and taboos aside and deal with the real rights and wrongs of consent versus violation, then we might be able to face this crime for what it is like adults.

At some point we decided to worry less that murder mysteries fed homicidal fantasies, and a more mature society is going to draw a lot brighter line against rape when we stop worrying about men having rape fantasies. I don't and nor do I know any other men who would say they do, much less fail to join me in expressing utter repugnance at the very suggestion.

Reply Alert moderator
prison:

21 May 2015 11:03:16am

GoT is one of those strange shows which you look forward to watching every week but without fail feel disappointed when it finishes. It never seems to finish on a high note - but it leaves lingering thoughts.

There is a lot of money spent on this show and the scale is enormous. I think the desire to challenge the norms and push the boundaries of what we consider acceptable in society reflect a darker time add odds with our current steralised and controlled existence. The treatment of women in this show is just one of many areas where are preconceived ideals are tested - it seems like everyone is challenged or degraded in some way except that usually it is the good people who suffer.

I find it interesting because it actually reflects society. On one hand, the population likes to think we live in some kind of civilised utopia full of fairness and equal rights, yet our government pushes an agenda of greed and corruption and pushes a similar conflict of extremes. How do we go to church on Sunday morning pretending to adhere to charity in Christiantity while letting people die at the borders and cut our foreign aid budget?

I couldn't watch the rape scene - it was disgraceful and unnecessary just like many of the nude scenes are in the show. It does reflect a certain conditioned outrage though when you consider that in a previous season, the other man in the room had his genitals cut off in the show by the man in the room currently doing the rape. The intention is clearly to show how evil this person is, not to normalise this behavior. Still, I was unable to watch and horrified like everyone else (in both examples). Having said that, I agree that given rape and violence against women is a current issue in our society that we should consider limiting artistic expression to avoid the possibility normalising this behavior in the minds of some who would have watched it.

From another respect, if seen from the perspective artistic comment, this outrageous act has got people talking and furthered the cause against this violence. Those saying the show is rubbish should try to see it from that perspective and realize that artistic expression does not mean that the artist endorses the behavior portrayed. I would encourage people who do not watch the show to watch it to see the true context and to help avoid making uninformed assumptions about it.

Reply Alert moderator
Bernie:

21 May 2015 11:13:06am

Meanwhile we Australians do not bring ourselves to even raise an eyebrow as to what is being revealed in the Royal Commission into Child abuse. I have heard myself a good catholic woman state that those appearing before it "are only in it for the money".
Meanwhile we Australians do not even raise an eyebrow from the carnage in the Middle East that is a direct result of our invasion there.

Reply Alert moderator
JQR:

21 May 2015 11:17:12am

I'm a writer, and I often ponder whether or not to include violent episodes in my work (and within 'violence' I include psychological violence). I believe that I ought not to shy away from violence, for the simple reason that art ought to deal with things that matter - the things in real life that cause us so much consternation. Obviously there is no point in having books and movies which spend all of their pages dealing with the nuances of packing the dishwasher. The question then becomes: how ought the artist to depict violence? I don't think there was anything titillating in the scene depicting the rape of Sansa. Far from it.

As a side point, I wonder how many of those outraged about GOT vote for the Coalition? The invasion of Iraq was a shocking crime against humanity, and its perpetrators are war criminals. Yet people don't seem to worry all that much about that. Real people - well into the hundreds of thousands - were and continue to be killed and raped in your name. I doubt books and movies and video games were to blame for the Iraq war.

Here's what we should do. Let us learn from the horrors depicted in GOT and stop pursuing power and all of the pathetic material things that we think we need so much. For it is power and our material greed that lie behind so many of the world's problems.

Reply Alert moderator
steve3:

21 May 2015 11:22:43am

Never watched an episode of Game of Thrones.

I like to watch Science Fiction without too much violence and romantic comedies for entertainment.

If I want to see war, rape and destruction I watch the news.

Reply Alert moderator
philly:

21 May 2015 11:26:25am

There was a time when films depicting graphic portrayals of rape or torture were usually confined to the sidelines- shown in obscure fringe cinemas or at avant-garde festivals for critics to debate over. Now a torture-porn film like 'Hostel' can receive a mainstream cinema release. Its hard to believe that way back in 1916, when the documentary/propoganda film 'The Battle of the Somme' was shown in British theatres, people in the audience fainted or burst into tears upon viewing the scenes of re-enactments of the battle which showed soldiers getting shot. Now we barely flinch when Brad Pitt in the movie 'Fury' forces a young tank crewman to execute an un-armed German prisoner begging for mercy. The film 'Joan of Arc' (2000) featured, as one of its early scenes, a graphic rape/murder scene when the child Joan witnesses the brutal killing and defilement of her older sister by a thuggish English knight. When I had the misfortune to watch it at a cinema, two people got up and walked out during that scene. Perhaps because that particular film was a commercial flop, it slipped under the radar because I remembered no controversy in the media at the time. Game of Thrones is very different, being one of the most popular and widely viewed television series of all time. To include such scenes of rape and torture affects a much wider audience, including many younger and more sensitive viewers, drawn to it by its hype, popularity and easy accessibility thanks to the internet. Yes, it can be argued that sometimes such scenes could be justified- such as in the Chinese film 'Nanking: City of Light' which depicted the atrocities committed by the Japanese army in Nanking in 1937 including a graphic scene depicting Chinese women forced to submit to multiple rapes by Japanese soldiers (at least one of the actors playing the Japanese was so traumatized from filming this scene, he was rendered mute for several days afterwards). But this is a film depicting an historical event and is intended to evoke horror, sympathy and sadness from the viewer. By contrast, such scenes in GoT seem so calculated, so lip-smackingly contrived, it aroses nothing but disgust from myself.

Reply Alert moderator
Theos:

21 May 2015 11:33:59am

In my humble opinion, GoT is heavy viewing, but is arguably the best television show ever made. It is full of extreme violence, sex and major characters seems to be killed off every other episode. But it is full of brilliant acting, amazing scenery and costumes and some of the most engaging story telling ever witnessed on the small screen.

I find the criticisms made by Mr Green as selective and even somewhat silly. It is a drama - a gritty and dark drama - and bad things happen. These bad things are things that really did happen in Medieval Europe (which is close to the GoT Universe), and still happen to this day in parts of the world.

To be consistent, Mr Green should criticise all programs in which crimes or the mistreatment of people are depicted - which would be almost every TV program ever made. Or at the very least, those programs depicting serious crimes - which is still almost every TV program ever made.

Anyone not living under a rock for the last 5 years knows full well what sort of program GoT is. If it is not to your taste, or if you find any of it's story lines or content unpleasant or offensive, then exercise your gods given right to not watch it. But I love it and choose to watch it.

Reply Alert moderator
AL:

21 May 2015 11:34:04am

Out of sight, out of mind - did the author have the same objection to the depictions of rape in the best selling books by George RR Martin as he has to the tv series? I wonder..

This thread is proof of how a fictitious tv series can contribute to the discussion of important social issues. Why would you not want that?

Instead of dissecting whether or not 'entertainment' means 'enjoyment and pleasure' or something more meaningful, perhaps we can return to the real issues.

Reply Alert moderator
oldfella68:

21 May 2015 11:34:59am

The media at its worst again trying to link this to D V have seen this in thousands of movies and television shows. My main point is you and the rest of the media have been MISSING IN ACTION for years on DOMESTIC VIOLENCE and we are given this garbage story. Go and have a go at our do nothing captain Abbott chaos about domestic violence.

Reply Alert moderator
Andrew:

21 May 2015 11:38:20am

I watch GoT!
I watch it because it happens to be one of the (very) few series that has actual decent production values, a decent script, plot and storyline.

I watch GoT because there is simply NO free-to-air TV that is anywhere near good enough. Its all reality TV, all the time, which is simply the worst kind of rubbish ever to have hit the TV screen.

The shows that aren't reality-based are - for the most part - so boring and banal that I would rather watch paint dry.
Australian 'drama' shows like 'Wonderland' and 'House Husbands' are just awful. Badly scripted plots about self-obsessed, narcissistic people who inspire no-one and nothing. In fact you can say that of just about all Australian made free-to-air drama. It's unimaginative rubbish.

Tonight's offering on the commercial free-to-air channels:
Channel 7 - Surveillance Oz Dashcam ('coz I really want to see what other people film from their cars. Hello! Youtube!)
Channel 9 - The Footy Show (a bunch of buffoons who stopped being funny years ago)
Channel 10 - Masterchef (continuing that TV station's long-running obsession with reality TV, in the belief that this will; somehow save them from financial ruin).

And don't bother looking at the other digital TV stations - they just show endless repeats of long-dead TV series that nobody else wants (Dear OneHD, what makes you think I want to watch 12 hours of Masterchef repeats on the weekend?).

I watch GoT, and I regard it as a work of fiction.

I watch it because it is well produced, well scripted, and well acted. I don't regard it as 'real', but then it doesn't pretend to be.

Reply Alert moderator
Theos:

21 May 2015 11:42:19am

And just to be slightly controversial but completely factually accurate, there are more murders, executions, acts of incest, rapes, torture, racism, sexism, unicorns, dragons and genocides in the Christian bible than there would be in 100 episodes of Game of Thrones. Perhaps Mr Green should be outraged that that particular book is available to children.

Reply Alert moderator
- PCROSBY:
  
  21 May 2015 12:34:39pm
  
  Theos - just because there is violence in the Bible, that doesn't mean that we have to perpetuate this, let alone proffer this as 'entetainment. Ye God. Ye Got.
  
  Somewhere along the line we must protest, say stop! We have a choice, since 'homo sapiens can be better or worse than any other animal in our universe.'
  
  Reply Alert moderator
- Bernie:
  
  21 May 2015 12:45:20pm
  
  Hear, hear.
  
  Reply Alert moderator
Steve_C:

21 May 2015 11:57:24am

"For many other viewers it was also a last, difficult straw."

I'm left wondering a number of things after reading Mr Green's opinion piece...

Firstly: did he watch it? If he did not, is he merely reiterating/regurgitating the opinions of others who he is now prepared to accept without question?

Secondly - and in the light of my first 'difficulty' in accepting Mr Green's assessment; "what does Mr Green feel regarding Fred Nile's approach to dictating to his 'family first' followers what is and isn't "the last straw"?

And lastly; Mr Green cannot be promulgating the idea that it is OK for him to know what 'freedom' is or is not, by arguing against a show that in many ways demonstrates to those who (either through naivety or inexperience) are incapable of recognising these sorts of characters in 'real life'?

Is he truly advocating against the educational value - which he is apparently inured against, of laying bare the natures of the worst elements of humanity so that those who may well not recognise such characters (or the many shades of grey variants of them that do exist in the real world) in the reality that's around them constantly, rather than in the limited time available to such a show/performance?

Perhaps there are some who would be seduced by what they don't understand - but, it's been my experience (and something clearly something Mr Green clearly has not experienced), that those who would behave like the characters in this particular show, will always find a way to do so regardless of any inspiration they might pretend such fiction has provided them. Any excuse is good enough to avoid what they know is their due after all...

And in the end... I'm ultimately left wondering that if Mr Green actually watched the show - in order to be speaking with more authority on the matter than merely quoting the words of others; did he do so by streaming a 'pirated copy', or did he pay the full Aussie market rate for the legal version?

Reply Alert moderator
homejoker:

21 May 2015 12:05:52pm

Law and Order: SVU is an entire TV series that has sexual (mostly) crime at its core, not to mention all the varieties of crime thrillers on offer on commercial TV these days. Why single out GoT? Maybe the crime is not depicted in those other TV shows, but surely the underlying premise is that these show are using "rape/sexual violence/ murder as entertainment"?

Reply Alert moderator
Andrew English:

21 May 2015 12:12:20pm

It would be interesting to know how many of these armchair critics of GoT watched a movie called High Plains Drifter in 1973, in which there was a very graphic rape scene involving the hero, Clint Eastwood. That movie is now considered one of the great early movies of his career. The rape scene in GoT is an assumed one and is far less graphic than the movie from 40 years ago. Yes, rape is abhorrent but suggesting it does not occur or should be off-limits in movies for some high moral reason makes little sense. If you don't like GoT, don't watch it, but if you do, be prepared for some confronting scenes. You cant just cherry pick this one for criticism just because you don't like the genre. The rape scene in Girl with the Dragon Tattoo was much more graphic and yet the movie was quite outstanding (IMHO).

Reply Alert moderator
polony:

21 May 2015 12:27:39pm

Although Sansa is not raped in the books, the material draws extremely from Shakespeare's writings. The only reason Shakespeare doesn't sue regarding this plagiarism is that his current situation makes legal action difficult.

In Shakespeare, as well as The Rape of Lucrece, Lavinia in Titus Andronicus, and Miranda (offscreen) in The Tempest being brutal, Shakespeare found comic value in rape via mistaken identity. This is despite mistaken identity rape still being rape due to the lack of informed consent.

It is reasonable for works drawing strongly from Shakespeare and similar to have similar details, simply for consistency. Any depiction of societies similar to historical to European societies, with characters copied from history plays, would be very ahistorical without a lot more sexual violence than modern Australia, along with inconvenient women being much more easily executed.

Although a distinction could be raised that Shakespeare was writing in a different era, current texts drawing from his work would need considerable reframing to not reflect this. While an argument could be raised that Tyrion Lannister is portrayed much more positively than Plantagenet Richard III, contradicting a different prejudice, Shakespeare's solvency depended on Tudor Elizabeth I.

Reply Alert moderator
Herr Kaleun:

21 May 2015 12:32:22pm

So far in GoT:

* Greater amounts of men have been killed in combat, probably because it is socially acceptable for men to fight.
* GoT advertising actually states, as per the book, "All Men Must Die".
* More men have been tortured, including several graphic scenes and a male having his penis cut off.
* Thousands of slaves lose their genitalia, forced to kill pets, all for the purpose of building the 'perfect' army.

And.No.One.Complains. The ABC Drum does not even find it an issue.

Yet, this one scene where the driving force is illustrating just how bad Ramsey Bolton is, and not aimed to find entertainment in rape, and media and twitter explode in outrage. Is it to profit from site visits (probably) and also because, men are considered expendable and our value is less than that of women.

GoT is fiction, and tells a compelling story. If we must find outrage over it, then let's attack Clockwork Orange, Deliverence, and every other form of fiction where sexual violence is shown (or implied, like the latest GoT episode). No one has found a link between on screen violence and actual rape or murder.

It's time we stopped this outrage culture.

Reply Alert moderator
Wal from Adelaide:

21 May 2015 12:55:44pm

Having been a fireman in England, I have seen more than my share of violent death. You can watch as many TV shows and movies, but to be faced with the real thing, one could not imagine your response. Soldiers, Paramedics, Police, people who work in Emergency Wards know that however you depict these events on a screen, it would never prepare you for reality. To read some of the comments on this subject, I find interesting to how some people would deal with reality.

Reply Alert moderator
HistoryRepeats:

21 May 2015 1:01:17pm

This article is shrill and ridiculous.

It's a drama. Your not mean to enjoy the scene (which isn't even shown) - you're mean to sympathize with the victim.

Madness. So you can't make a show that is supposed to be about Feudal power an not reflect that feudal lords aren't psychopaths?

It's not a comedy or a game show. It doesn't glorify violence it just acknowledges how barbaric humans can be.

Reply Alert moderator
phil:

21 May 2015 1:05:10pm

The most universal storyline is where good triumphs over
evil, Good triumphing over the somewhat unpleasant does
not have quite the same ring.
A lot of GOT is based on english history from a time when
this level of violence was commonplace .This is adult entertainment
maybe mr green should confine himself to disney.
Personally i await the coming episodes,
Winter is coming

Reply Alert moderator

Add your comment.

Please read the House Rules and FAQ before submitting.

Game of Thrones reduces rape to entertainment

Get The Drum in your inbox

Comments (170)

frank baldock:

Andrew Thomas:

Audax:

blax5:

Orion:

Audax:

Tomokatu:

Todd:

Audax:

barsnax:

will_r:

Todd:

geo:

Theos:

Alpo:

Waterloo Sunset 2016dd:

whogoesthere:

sdrawkcaB:

RGR:

Jay Somasundaram:

Todd:

thelad:

Tomokatu:

Tabanus:

Adman:

andrewk:

thelad:

tree frog:

foxy:

toot:

anton:

Audax:

Sarah:

Tabanus:

prison:

Eagle:

PETER:

Cynicmonster:

Dapsta :

Jim:

Paul:

Tomokatu:

Audax:

Alpo:

Fenix:

Fenix:

mick:

Dave:

Fenix:

MCW:

Nein:

Audax:

evo:

graazt:

Nina O'Leary:

Haderak:

Paul01:

John51:

auntyslessfavouriteson:

Alpo:

Applaudanum:

Chris L:

Living in a cloud castle:

Applaudanum:

Good Grief:

Alex A:

Asininedrivel:

Miriel:

graazt:

gerard oosterman:

seres:

Helvi :

BEE:

Oaktree:

Helvi:

Sarah:

sdrawkcaB: