PDA

View Full Version : Lan's warder bond


Anaiya Sedai
02-21-2017, 08:51 AM
I'm pondering.
How do the mechanics work of Lan and Moiraine's bond snapping but the bond also being passed to Myrelle? Why doesn't this protect Lan from the death rage?
Surely, if the bond has been passed, then it hasn't actually broken, just the connection to Moiraine.

GonzoTheGreat
02-21-2017, 10:30 AM
It is probably that it was not passed in a peaceful way. Perhaps a rock climbing analogy may help. Since I have hardly any experience in rock climbing, I've never made any big mistakes there and am thus an expert in it.

Take the bond as a safety rope holding you to rock, attached at a (supposed) strong point. Then consider the attachment to Myrelle a second rope, attached somewhere else. Normally, no tension at all would be put on this second rope. Ordinarily, if the bond is passed, the first rope gets detached from its strong point and reattached at the other point. (Or the other way around, if those pesky health and safety people are looking.) Thus, there is never any extraordinary tension on the ropes, and everything is peachy. But when Moiraine died*, the first anchor point was lost and the standard rope came loose entirely. So suddenly there was a big jerk on Lan and he was hanging by the emergency rope. In this analogy, it is the "big jerk" which triggers the death rage, and the emergency rope which makes it possible to maybe survive that.

Does this clarify things?
If so, what did I overlook?

* Or maybe didn't quite die; some debate is possible about this.

Anaiya Sedai
02-21-2017, 11:44 AM
Well, supposedly the bond was broken because the link between the worlds was broken by the doorway melting. Only that the bond wasn't broken, it was disconnected and passed.

Sarevok
02-23-2017, 07:02 AM
Why doesn't this protect Lan from the death rage?


Wasn't that bond passing set into place specifically to prevent the death rage? Do we have any indication it didn't work as intended?

Anaiya Sedai
02-23-2017, 07:37 AM
I'm not sure, that's sort of what I was thinking but also, Myrelle has experience saving warders from the death rage, so it could have just been that, Moiraine wanted to preserve Lan for Nynaeve because she wanted Lan to be happy

Cary Sedai
02-26-2017, 10:43 PM
I haven't read it in a long time, but doesn't he sort of start to freak, but then she's gone and he just stops?

I think I should do a reread...

Terez
02-28-2017, 05:21 AM
I'm not sure, that's sort of what I was thinking but also, Myrelle has experience saving warders from the death rage, so it could have just been that, Moiraine wanted to preserve Lan for Nynaeve because she wanted Lan to be happy
I have to wonder if Moiraine had any idea what Myrelle's methods were. Guessing not.

"I have never seen you as a pet," Moiraine said sharply, "and neither does Myrelle."

Anaiya Sedai
02-28-2017, 07:39 AM
No, I'm assuming she didn't. or maybe she thought Nynaeve would prefer Lan in Myrelle's bed but alive, to him having killed himself avenging Moiraine.

fionwe1987
02-28-2017, 09:52 PM
I have to wonder if Moiraine had any idea what Myrelle's methods were. Guessing not.
Moiraine's Cairheinin sense of propriety probably never let her imagine anything like what Myrelle did. 3 husbands is far outside Moiraine's abilities to imagine.

As for the question, this is how I understood it:

Moiraine didn't know how she might end up dying when she made the arrangement with Myrelle, so she only hoped this eventuality would come to pass when her death was unexpected and therefore did not leave any opportunity to release Lan before death. In the event, she did foresee her death, but couldn't release Lan peacefully because that would have let the cat out of the bag.

I suspect they did something to the bond to make sure that the snapping of Lan's bond to Moiraine triggered an automatic bond to Myrelle. I suspect that Lan's connection to Myrelle was there in some form even before Moiraine's death, but it exerted no force till his bond to Moiraine snapped. I suspect this was something like how Elayne and Aviendha bifurcated the bond to allow Rand to simultaneously be bonded to three women.

So when Moiraine "died", her link to Lan snapped, and that's why he felt the death rage. But his bond to Myrelle also kicked in, protecting him from it a bit, and soon after Myrelle could feel the new bond, she must have activated a compulsion to make Lan come to her with all haste.

greatwolf
03-02-2017, 08:09 PM
So was Lan bonded to two AS at once? He should have noticed if he was. Unless it was masked or the bond is rather different from what we expect.
But obviously he was able to locate Myrelle and she him, almost immediately after Moiraine's bond snapped.
But AS are said to have been passing the bond when facing death for centuries(?) so it may have been a practiced craft. Especially among the greens.

Daekyras
03-03-2017, 08:11 AM
I listened to that section of tFoH a couple of days ago.

Lan is ridiculously calm after the death of moiraine. Has a long conversation with rand and tells him he can feel the other woman out there to the west.

If I remember correctly he makes a bee-line for her. Just passing straight through war zones etc. He was injured when he got there. and angry.

I also don't think Myrelle took him for a "plaything". She slept with him(as Moiraine knew she would) but I never read it as a Fun time plaything. She was trying to rehabilitate him from his grief/"death rage".

Terez
03-03-2017, 05:41 PM
She basically raped him, since she used the bond to Compel him.

Cary Sedai
03-03-2017, 09:37 PM
She basically raped him, since she used the bond to Compel him.


Gah! You're right! I never thought about it before. :mad:

Nazbaque
03-04-2017, 09:27 AM
This is just guess work on my part but what I think happened was that at some point Moiraine and Myrelle did the bond passing a part of the way attaching Myrelle to Moiraine's end of the bond but not removing Moiraine from it. Later when Moiraine went through the doorway she was able to complete the process. Her ability to do this is plausible as the passing can be performed without the Warder being present and it was supposed to happen automatically if Moiraine were to die. Afterall this was set to happen before Moiraine visited Rhuidean and got her visions of likely futures.

My second piece of guess work is on the nature of the death rage. If someone close to you dies it causes you pain. What causes this pain is not so much that the life of someone dear to you is over (though this can of course be very tragic in itself) but that their part in your own life is now over with no going back. The grief is about the void that person left behind. For Warders and Aes Sedai the void of loss is on a completely different level, but stricktly speaking actual death is not necessary just as we can believe a close person to be dead (the classic example of shipwreak survivors living on a remote island comes to mind).

Lan's bond had passed to Myrelle and he believed Moiraine was dead. Even though Moiraine was in reality still alive, Lan's experience was exactly the same as that of a Warder whose Aes Sedai had died (and had arranged the bond to pass to another upon her death which might indeed make a significant difference).

As for Moiraine not being aware of Myrelle's methods I have no doubt that she knew exactly what they were and quite probably understood why they worked better than Myrelle did. Cairhienin are all about maintaining a prim facade in public while getting to all sorts mischief in private. Myrelle's polygamy might initially shock them but I suspect that afterwards quite a few of them would think her to be something of a prude, what with her insisting on marrying a man just because she was sleeping with him.

Anaiya Sedai
03-04-2017, 04:48 PM
I did wonder whether Lan's experience was more normal grief than the normal warder death rage, but I the impression I got from the descriptions of him when Egwene goes to confront Myrelle and Nisao, makee think that there is more to it,and more than the anger at being compelled and raped by Myrelle.

Nazbaque
03-04-2017, 05:30 PM
"Raped" may be a bit hasty. Possible of course, but we don't actually know the details. Lan was not in a calm and rational state of mind so making a choice he regretted later was entirely possible.

Davian93
03-04-2017, 08:34 PM
"Raped" may be a bit hasty. Possible of course, but we don't actually know the details. Lan was not in a calm and rational state of mind so making a choice he regretted later was entirely possible.

I would imagine Myrelle used compulsion on at least some level...so it would likely be considered rape in a legal sense.

Granted, it was "for his own good" in her mind but its definitely a moral gray area.

Nazbaque
03-04-2017, 09:17 PM
I would imagine Myrelle used compulsion on at least some level...so it would likely be considered rape in a legal sense.

Granted, it was "for his own good" in her mind but its definitely a moral gray area.

Legally yes. There are crimes that are more about risky behaviour that could have caused serious harm rather than actually doing so. Traffic violations for example.

I guess it depends on how the victim feels about it. If Lan didn't feel violated, then that's at least a lesser form of rape. Something like the difference between murder and attempted murder, though this largely depends on how one defines rape. Is it the act or the harm that matters?

Davian93
03-04-2017, 09:36 PM
Legally yes. There are crimes that are more about risky behaviour that could have caused serious harm rather than actually doing so. Traffic violations for example.

I guess it depends on how the victim feels about it. If Lan didn't feel violated, then that's at least a lesser form of rape. Something like the difference between murder and attempted murder, though this largely depends on how one defines rape. Is it the act or the harm that matters?

I definitely agree its one of those great moral questions...she's doing a bad thing for a good purpose. I'm sure he didn't mind it too bad...though I'd imagine that Nynaeve was a little pissed.

Terez
03-04-2017, 11:35 PM
I would imagine Myrelle used compulsion on at least some level...so it would likely be considered rape in a legal sense.

Granted, it was "for his own good" in her mind but its definitely a moral gray area.
She was shown using Compulsion from the very beginning, so it's not a huge mystery; we know she used it.

"Be quiet," Myrelle hissed. In a louder voice, she called, "Come to me." The horse did not move. A wolfhound mourning his dead mistress did not come to a new mistress willingly. Delicately she wove Spirit and touched the part of him that contained her bond; it had to be delicate, or he would be aware of it, and only the Creator knew what sort of explosion might result. "Come to me."

GonzoTheGreat
03-05-2017, 04:35 AM
That's not Compulsion; using Compulsion is prohibited for AS. This is a different weave with a different name, so it is (legally speaking) not the same thing. The fact that for all practical purposes it is indistinguishable from Compulsion has no legal importance whatsoever.

The fact that if an Ashaman did that sort of thing with a bonded AS then the WT would be hugely indignant and call it a crime is of course also totally irrelevant. That the WT would be correct according to our standards but hypocritical according to its own is just an indication of how widely different morals can be interpreted.

Nazbaque
03-05-2017, 07:21 AM
She was shown using Compulsion from the very beginning, so it's not a huge mystery; we know she used it.

Used it at that point yes. We don't know if she used it to make him have sex with her. It might be where she drew the line. Also you might consider that as saving Warders from that self destructive state of mind is a priority with her, she then wouldn't do anything to make the condition worse. Offer sex? Yes. Attempt to seduce him? Yes. Force it on him? No.

Then again this logic depends on an Aes Sedai being rational so it might very well prove to be wrong.

Terez
03-06-2017, 12:14 AM
Used it at that point yes. We don't know if she used it to make him have sex with her. It might be where she drew the line.
It's just hard to believe that, if she needed it at that point, she wouldn't have needed it to get him to have sex with her.

Daekyras
03-06-2017, 07:16 AM
If she used compulsion to make him have sex with her she raped him and is one of the biggest monsters in the series.

I don't think we're supposed to read it that way.
She used the bond to soften him up but I think she seduced him.

Nazbaque
03-06-2017, 11:04 AM
It's just hard to believe that, if she needed it at that point, she wouldn't have needed it to get him to have sex with her.

.... Okay I am seriously at a loss on where I should start. It's like you have no idea what it means to be a person instead of a program. You are basically treating Lan as if he were a robot that acted the exact same way in any situation. He is a person with complex and at times conflicted emotions. His mental state is a set of variables not constants. He makes choices that you can't always predict. The number of things Myrelle might have tried in her efforts to save him and the various ways Lan might have reacted add up to a massive amount of plausible scenarios. For example: what if, in private, Myrelle cried because Moiraine was dead? What would Lan feel at that moment? There are so many things I can imagine happening between the two of them before anything sexual took place that I find it seriously baffling that anyone's imagination is incapable of going beyond rape.

Davian93
03-06-2017, 11:37 AM
I would say that there's a near zero chance that she didn't use compulsion to rape him. I mean, they basically hit us over the head with it.

Granted, she thought she was doing it to save him and she was probably right to an extent. Though Egwene's method of giving him a mission to protect Nynaeve was probably more effective than anything of course.

Daekyras
03-06-2017, 01:36 PM
I would say that there's a near zero chance that she didn't use compulsion to rape him. I mean, they basically hit us over the head with it.

Granted, she thought she was doing it to save him and she was probably right to an extent. Though Egwene's method of giving him a mission to protect Nynaeve was probably more effective than anything of course.

I don't think RJ intended it to be read as rape.
That is the action of a villain. She is not written as a villain.

The only other example of non - evil character raping someone is tylin forcing Mat at knife point. And even then it is played for "laughs".

But compulsion is a magnitude of evil beyond that.

Davian93
03-06-2017, 07:02 PM
I don't think RJ intended it to be read as rape.
That is the action of a villain. She is not written as a villain.

The only other example of non - evil character raping someone is tylin forcing Mat at knife point. And even then it is played for "laughs".

But compulsion is a magnitude of evil beyond that.

I don't think he meant it to be that way either necessarily...its more of a moral shades of gray type of situation. It'd be like a 1st year philosophy class type of question:

1. Is it wrong to rape someone if, in doing so, you save their life?

or

2. Would you kill one person if it meant saving five others? (ie is murder always wrong) In this scenario, all 6 people at risk are innocents so it not a "would you gun down an assailant" type of scenario.

Nazbaque
03-06-2017, 07:14 PM
I don't think he meant it to be that way either necessarily...its more of a moral shades of gray type of situation. It'd be like a 1st year philosophy class type of question:

1. Is it wrong to rape someone if, in doing so, you save their life?

or

2. Would you kill one person if it meant saving five others? (ie is murder always wrong) In this scenario, all 6 people at risk are innocents so it not a "would you gun down an assailant" type of scenario.

A bit tougher: Is it possible to rape a nymphomaniac?

Davian93
03-06-2017, 07:35 PM
A bit tougher: Is it possible to rape a nymphomaniac?

Of course it is...just drug them first. A passed out person cannot give consent.

Terez
03-07-2017, 09:35 AM
.... Okay I am seriously at a loss on where I should start. It's like you have no idea what it means to be a person instead of a program. You are basically treating Lan as if he were a robot that acted the exact same way in any situation.
I am not. I am treating Lan as if we know him, and while he was trying to make Nynaeve give up on him I don't think he would have gone so far as to cheat on her without Compulsion.

Nazbaque
03-07-2017, 11:10 AM
I am not. I am treating Lan as if we know him, and while he was trying to make Nynaeve give up on him I don't think he would have gone so far as to cheat on her without Compulsion.
A part of Lan wants to die. Another part insists that his death must be a sacrifice that hastens the Shadow's defeat. He seeks a way to justify his suicide so that he can die in peace. So he won't lead others to death with him. The reason he let Moiraine bond him was the fact that dying while protecting her mission was more meaningful than taking out as many Shadowspawn as he could before he was finally overwhelmed. Well Moiraine is dead so he has to find a different way his death can benefit the war, but there is a new problem. His death would break Nynaeve and knowing that he can't die in peace. So she must be made to hate him. Sleeping with another woman is the ideal solution. Nynaeve will hate him and while he hates himself for hurting her his death will make up for it and Myrelle will pay for hurting Nynaeve too as she has to feel his death through the bond. That is how Lan sees matters.

A keypoint in understanding Lan is seeing that he isn't noble at all, but extremely selfish in a certain roundabout and subtle way. It's all about being able to die in peace. "Death is lighter than a feather. Duty is heavier than a mountain." When he can convince his own pride that he has done his duty, he will let himself embrace the death he has desired for so long.

GonzoTheGreat
03-08-2017, 04:45 AM
Nazbaque, that entirely ignores all the other cases that we know about where a Warder's AS died and the Warder then immediately went into an insane suicidal rage. Do you have a specific reason for thinking that this well documented feature of the Warder bond is nothing more than superstition, or are you merely guessing that it is because that helps your argument?

Davian93
03-08-2017, 09:23 AM
Nazbaque, that entirely ignores all the other cases that we know about where a Warder's AS died and the Warder then immediately went into an insane suicidal rage. Do you have a specific reason for thinking that this well documented feature of the Warder bond is nothing more than superstition, or are you merely guessing that it is because that helps your argument?

Yeah, pretty much this.

Nazbaque
03-08-2017, 12:01 PM
Nazbaque, that entirely ignores all the other cases that we know about where a Warder's AS died and the Warder then immediately went into an insane suicidal rage. Do you have a specific reason for thinking that this well documented feature of the Warder bond is nothing more than superstition, or are you merely guessing that it is because that helps your argument?

When or where did I suggest that the death rage is a superstition? I don't think I did, but either way Lan's case is pseudo death rage Moiraine being alive. I assume it is well mimicked as Myrelle thinks it is genuine, but that doesn't prove there is no difference whatsoever. Then there is the fact that Lan is exceptional even among Warders so it is not safe to assume all rules apply. But you obviously think my analysis doesn't account for it. How?

Davian93
03-08-2017, 01:08 PM
When or where did I suggest that the death rage is a superstition? I don't think I did, but either way Lan's case is pseudo death rage Moiraine being alive. I assume it is well mimicked as Myrelle thinks it is genuine, but that doesn't prove there is no difference whatsoever. Then there is the fact that Lan is exceptional even among Warders so it is not safe to assume all rules apply. But you obviously think my analysis doesn't account for it. How?

The most logical explanation is that the death rage is caused by the sudden severing of the weave (ie ripping it out rather than a clean release) is what causes the death rage so when Moiraine's link to the real world was violently severed like it was, for all intents and purposes as far as Lan was concerned, she died.

Kinda similar to stilling versus burning out probably.

Nazbaque
03-08-2017, 01:10 PM
The most logical explanation is that the death rage is caused by the sudden severing of the weave (ie ripping it out rather than a clean release) is what causes the death rage so when Moiraine's link to the real world was violently severed like it was, for all intents and purposes as far as Lan was concerned, she died.

Kinda similar to stilling versus burning out probably.

And?

Davian93
03-08-2017, 02:01 PM
And?

ie...its not pseudo or mimicked. Its the same "death rage" that any Warder who has had their AS die.

Nazbaque
03-08-2017, 02:12 PM
ie...its not pseudo or mimicked. Its the same "death rage" that any Warder who has had their AS die.

Meaning that in your opinion the Aes Sedai's actual death is meaningless? Are the emotions she goes through in her final moments also meaningless?

This is still in no way in conflict with my analysis on Lan.

Davian93
03-08-2017, 02:13 PM
Meaning that in your opinion the Aes Sedai's actual death is meaningless? Are the emotions she goes through in her final moments also meaningless?

This is still in no way in conflict with my analysis on Lan.

Exactly, clearly it has more to do with how the bond is broken, not the actual event.

Nazbaque
03-08-2017, 02:29 PM
Exactly, clearly it has more to do with how the bond is broken, not the actual event.

So I'll ask again. How is this in conflict with my analysis?

Davian93
03-08-2017, 02:35 PM
So I'll ask again. How is this in conflict with my analysis?

You calling it pseudo or just mimicking...that implies that Lan is only feeling it because he thinks he should, not because of a legitimate reaction.

Nazbaque
03-08-2017, 02:48 PM
You calling it pseudo or just mimicking...that implies that Lan is only feeling it because he thinks he should, not because of a legitimate reaction.

No it doesn't. It simply means that the state of mind is achieved without the normal cause.

But you still keep dodging the question. How does it affect the analysis which you objected to before the use of those terms? Stop lazying around and clearly state your points in detail.

Honestly if you keep going like this, you seriously have no business to complain about southpaw.

Davian93
03-08-2017, 04:23 PM
But it is the normal cause...the snapping of the bond. The mechanism of that snapping is simply a little different is all.

Nazbaque
03-08-2017, 05:23 PM
But it is the normal cause...the snapping of the bond. The mechanism of that snapping is simply a little different is all.

And that is not the point. Either way you fail to demonstrate how this is in conflict with the analysis. Walk us through how this would prove the analysis wrong or be forever know as "southpaw II"

Daekyras
03-09-2017, 08:32 AM
The reason I think of this as different is because Lan does not immediately fly into anything.

He is very calm afterwards.

Myrelle can feel all of the anger that is in Lan. But she doesn't know where its from. And its normal for her to assume its something she has come across before.

but...meh. I dont think Lan is faking or mimmicking it. I think he is incredibly angry about what has been done to him without his permission. And of his own behaviour in trying to suppress his feelings for nynaeve.

It makes way more sense to me that way than for it to be some delayed death rage that he somehow kept in tact and avoided succumbing to despite moving through battles on his way to salidar.

Nazbaque
03-09-2017, 02:36 PM
The reason I think of this as different is because Lan does not immediately fly into anything.

He is very calm afterwards.

Myrelle can feel all of the anger that is in Lan. But she doesn't know where its from. And its normal for her to assume its something she has come across before.

but...meh. I dont think Lan is faking or mimmicking it. I think he is incredibly angry about what has been done to him without his permission. And of his own behaviour in trying to suppress his feelings for nynaeve.

It makes way more sense to me that way than for it to be some delayed death rage that he somehow kept in tact and avoided succumbing to despite moving through battles on his way to salidar.

Lan has been shown to have a great deal of emotion. He is simply very accomplished in controlling himself. It might be this ability in general that makes the difference between him and other Warders or it might be that dealing with these particular emotions isn't new for him. A Warder's life is hard, but they manage it by making that one duty the center point of their life. Whatever they had to endure was bearable so long as they managed to keep their Aes Sedai safe. So when that one supporting pillar is removed the despair is unbearable. Lan however is a king whose land has fallen to the Shadow. He has been dealing with that his entire life. Despair is not a new emotion for him. He feels it likely as much as any other Warder would, but he has experience most of them do not.

Daekyras
03-09-2017, 04:06 PM
Lan has been shown to have a great deal of emotion. He is simply very accomplished in controlling himself. It might be this ability in general that makes the difference between him and other Warders or it might be that dealing with these particular emotions isn't new for him. A Warder's life is hard, but they manage it by making that one duty the center point of their life. Whatever they had to endure was bearable so long as they managed to keep their Aes Sedai safe. So when that one supporting pillar is removed the despair is unbearable. Lan however is a king whose land has fallen to the Shadow. He has been dealing with that his entire life. Despair is not a new emotion for him. He feels it likely as much as any other Warder would, but he has experience most of them do not.

Naz- im confused. Your other points seem to imply Lan is faking his death rage.

But your response to me seems to be saying hes just handling it well?

Nazbaque
03-09-2017, 07:37 PM
Naz- im confused. Your other points seem to imply Lan is faking his death rage.

But your response to me seems to be saying hes just handling it well?

Not at all. He isn't faking anything of course he isn't, but he remains in control.

Is it really that hard to believe that someone is able to stay in control of themselves in spite of massive emotion?

fionwe1987
03-10-2017, 02:16 AM
I don't think RJ intended it to be read as rape.
That is the action of a villain. She is not written as a villain.
Neither is Alanna, yet RJ has multiple characters state quite clearly that they view a forced bond as rape.

The only other example of non - evil character raping someone is tylin forcing Mat at knife point. And even then it is played for "laughs".
Alanna as well, and it isn't shown to be funny at all.

But compulsion is a magnitude of evil beyond that.
And yet one he clearly has Myrelle commit, has Alanna try on Rand, Logain use regularly... I don't think any of this is proof, really.

I'm inclined to believe Myrelle did use Compulsion. Even if not to directly force Lan, to make him generally cooperative enough. When Egwene first sees them, Myrelle touches Lan and he flinches. I always read that as a sign of Lan not wanting to be touched by her, and having endured it anyway.

As for the bond not really breaking... Nynaeve very clearly feels that when she delves him. And Myrelle is the foremost expert on Warders with broken bonds. She may be all sorts of things, but a complete idiot she is not. Given she could feel everything he could feel, it beggars belief that she would be hoodwinked into thinking Lan's bond was broken if it wasn't. Not to mention that it wouldn't have passed to her if it hadn't...

Daekyras
03-10-2017, 05:39 AM
Neither is Alanna, yet RJ has multiple characters state quite clearly that they view a forced bond as rape.


Alanna as well, and it isn't shown to be funny at all.


And yet one he clearly has Myrelle commit, has Alanna try on Rand, Logain use regularly... I don't think any of this is proof, really.



Alanna bonds without permission and dries to compel Rand with the bond(something Lan and Moiraine discuss in book 4 and he says she had never done to him). And the bonding condemned by many people and seen as akin to rape. No-one has argued against that. but does anyone condemn her using the bond to compel? or any of the other warders who were compelled by the bond? It seems accepted to me.

But that is not the rape we are discussing.

Did Myrelle commit Sexual rape of Lan? I don't think there is evidence to say she does. You think there is. the flinch just read to me as him being on a hair trigger and he would have flinched at any touch- like a wild horse- at that point.

Having different opinions on the same piece of writing is perfectly fine.

But she is not condemned or is it remarked on in the way Alanna is.

So are we to assume that Alannas is a worse crime? since it results in comment but myrelle does not?

Unless Im forgetting something and Alanna Physically rapes someone in the series similar to Tylin but I missed it? (note- that might have happened in the blank spot of book 8 that I just can never remember)

GonzoTheGreat
03-10-2017, 01:14 PM
Well, with Alanna there is the whole "now if someone kills her that will totally screw up the DR" thing. Which I'd mentioned as a risk she (and all other AS) seemed to totally ignore for some reason, even though what she did could be counted as treason against the Light.

But if one assumes that she just bonded "a man", then it is no bigger deal than a sul'dam slapping a collar around an AS. Is the latter as bad as rape?

greatwolf
03-10-2017, 05:17 PM
The bond changes the physiology of the warder. He isn't like other men and he isn't exactly AS. So when an AS dies, why does it trigger a "death rage/wish" in the warder and not in AS when their warders die?
Initially I thought it might be a result of the warder actually experiencing the psychological trauma of death. But if that were the case, then AS too would experience it and would know exactly what the warder was going through.
Since they don't, I have to conclude that the snapping of the bond causes psychological change or trauma or both. So if Lan isn't in his right mind, would it be considered criminal to administer a little therapeutic rebalancing by tweaking the bond?

greatwolf
03-10-2017, 05:21 PM
But if one assumes that she just bonded "a man", then it is no bigger deal than a sul'dam slapping a collar around an AS. Is the latter as bad as rape?

Of course. Slaves are regularly raped. And making a " noble" a slave and subjecting them to that kind of cruelty...
Am surprised you even ask.

Daekyras
03-13-2017, 06:36 AM
The question isnt really about "is it as bad as rape" and more along the lines of "is it the same as rape".

I think it is not. Its a different crime.

I also dont think Myrelle rapes Lan.

@Greatwolf- That's not what Gonzo asked...

Terez
03-18-2017, 02:06 AM
Bumping because spam.

fionwe1987
03-19-2017, 02:06 PM
The question isnt really about "is it as bad as rape" and more along the lines of "is it the same as rape".

No, no it isn't. I brought this up because you made the argument that RJ wouldn't have a "good" character like Myrelle do something as villainous as rape.

In world, forced warder bonds are considered as bad as rape, yet a character who more or less falls on the same "good" zone as Myrelle, Alanna, does force a warder bond. Heck, by forcefully transferring Lan's bond, Moiraine did pretty much the same thing too.

Thus, the idea that someone like Myrelle wouldn't be shown doing something like rape is shown to be false. A forced warder bond doesn't have to be the "same" as rape for this to be true.

Nazbaque
03-20-2017, 02:30 PM
No, no it isn't. I brought this up because you made the argument that RJ wouldn't have a "good" character like Myrelle do something as villainous as rape.

In world, forced warder bonds are considered as bad as rape, yet a character who more or less falls on the same "good" zone as Myrelle, Alanna, does force a warder bond. Heck, by forcefully transferring Lan's bond, Moiraine did pretty much the same thing too.

Thus, the idea that someone like Myrelle wouldn't be shown doing something like rape is shown to be false. A forced warder bond doesn't have to be the "same" as rape for this to be true.

What matters here is the individual's view on morality, not the world's and I rather think both Alanna and Myrelle disagree with that view.

Would the rest of the world still judge them to be as bad? Yes, but that is not the point. You say that if they would do this then surely they wouldn't refrain from that, but if in their opinion the latter is a much more immoral thing to do, then you might very well be wrong.

fionwe1987
03-20-2017, 09:48 PM
What matters here is the individual's view on morality, not the world's and I rather think both Alanna and Myrelle disagree with that view.

Would the rest of the world still judge them to be as bad? Yes, but that is not the point. You say that if they would do this then surely they wouldn't refrain from that, but if in their opinion the latter is a much more immoral thing to do, then you might very well be wrong.

No, the world's view matters, since that is what RJ is intending to be the moral weight we assign to entirely unreal things like Warder Bonds. The question at issue is if RJ would have a "good" character do something as villainous as rape. It seems pretty clear he would.

Nazbaque
03-21-2017, 01:16 AM
No, the world's view matters, since that is what RJ is intending to be the moral weight we assign to entirely unreal things like Warder Bonds. The question at issue is if RJ would have a "good" character do something as villainous as rape. It seems pretty clear he would.

But it doesn't prove that a specific character would do something much less that they actually did do it. All you are proving is that WoT isn't perfectly divided into Heroes and Villains. It's one of the series' strengths that you can't quickly deside what the characters would do based on which side they are on.

GonzoTheGreat
03-21-2017, 04:51 AM
In the same way Ishamael wasn't really bad at all; he merely had a different idea of what was good.

Nazbaque
03-21-2017, 07:07 AM
In the same way Ishamael wasn't really bad at all; he merely had a different idea of what was good.

You really don't have a mind that can handle points midway between the extremes, do you?

GonzoTheGreat
03-21-2017, 07:29 AM
When Alanna bonded Rand, she tried to enslave him. She failed at that, not because of anything she did or wanted, but only because he was too powerful.

I think that the Seanchan who collared Egwene were wrong, and that what they did was evil. They did not think so, as has remained clear throughout the series.

There are definitely midpoints between the extremes, but in my view what Alanna did (and what the Seanchan did) falls well to the evil side of that midpoint. The Seanchan thought that female channelers needed to be leashed, the AS thought that Rand needed to be leashed. Both thought that all other male channelers had to be killed, though the Seanchan were more honest about that.

Nazbaque
03-21-2017, 08:02 AM
When Alanna bonded Rand, she tried to enslave him. She failed at that, not because of anything she did or wanted, but only because he was too powerful.

I think that the Seanchan who collared Egwene were wrong, and that what they did was evil. They did not think so, as has remained clear throughout the series.

There are definitely midpoints between the extremes, but in my view what Alanna did (and what the Seanchan did) falls well to the evil side of that midpoint. The Seanchan thought that female channelers needed to be leashed, the AS thought that Rand needed to be leashed. Both thought that all other male channelers had to be killed, though the Seanchan were more honest about that.

Well the thing is that nothing we do is evil in itself. Or good. Acts in themselves are useful or harmful and which it is can change based on desired results. Good and evil are decided by motives. The Forsaken did many harmful things and on a massive scale, but what makes them evil are the purely selfish motives behind those deeds.

fionwe1987
03-21-2017, 10:11 AM
But it doesn't prove that a specific character would do something much less that they actually did do it. All you are proving is that WoT isn't perfectly divided into Heroes and Villains. It's one of the series' strengths that you can't quickly deside what the characters would do based on which side they are on.

Yes, and that is all I intend to prove, with this. It was a direct rebuttal to a statement which assumed the contrary, as you might have known had you read the entire discussion.

fionwe1987
03-21-2017, 10:16 AM
Well the thing is that nothing we do is evil in itself. Or good. Acts in themselves are useful or harmful and which it is can change based on desired results. Good and evil are decided by motives. The Forsaken did many harmful things and on a massive scale, but what makes them evil are the purely selfish motives behind those deeds.

Wait a minute... I don't see an explanation of Seanchan leashing of female channelers that isn't based on selfish motives. They greatly fear the channelers, so they enslave them, and then use their destructive powers anyway. Way more than free channelers in other continents do, in fact.

It is a selfish, hypocritical, evil act.

Alanna's was no better. The best explanation people can come up with is "she was emotionally unbalanced due to her Warder's death", which doesn't change the moral underpinning of her actions at all. She explicitly states that she tried to control Rand the moment after she bonded him to Kiruna. The motive was clearly control, clearly selfish, and just as clearly doesn't leave much room for interpretation as an acceptable action.

GonzoTheGreat
03-21-2017, 11:47 AM
They believe that they are doing good. Doesn't that automatically mean that it isn't selfish?

Nazbaque
03-21-2017, 12:15 PM
Yes, and that is all I intend to prove, with this. It was a direct rebuttal to a statement which assumed the contrary, as you might have known had you read the entire discussion.
I am almost a third of this discussion. You just expressed yourself vaguely.

Wait a minute... I don't see an explanation of Seanchan leashing of female channelers that isn't based on selfish motives. They greatly fear the channelers, so they enslave them, and then use their destructive powers anyway. Way more than free channelers in other continents do, in fact.

It is a selfish, hypocritical, evil act.

Alanna's was no better. The best explanation people can come up with is "she was emotionally unbalanced due to her Warder's death", which doesn't change the moral underpinning of her actions at all. She explicitly states that she tried to control Rand the moment after she bonded him to Kiruna. The motive was clearly control, clearly selfish, and just as clearly doesn't leave much room for interpretation as an acceptable action.

Alanna fears that ta'veren without Aes Sedai guidance will lead to the Shadow's victory. That is her main motive. You can look at it from a lot of angles and find a lot of other motives which are probably all true to a degree, but fear of the Shadow's victory is on top. Mostly it adds up to her being a coward as well as arrogant, but not evil.

Most Aes Sedai are brainwashed to believe things will go wrong without their supervision and especially if a man is in charge. Something similar applies to the Seanchan in regards to women who can channel. The individuals who believe the doctrains can be called many things from mentally lazy to willfully blind, but "evil" requires for them to be aware of the harm they do.

GonzoTheGreat
03-21-2017, 01:47 PM
People can do things that are evil because they are deceived into thinking them good. That doesn't make the action anything other evil, though it may mean that the perpetrator isn't evil.

The AS deceived themselves into thinking that if they enslaved others that would be good. The Seanchan were apparently tricked into such a thought patter by Ishamael. Both attitudes, when put into practice, are evil. Individuals who fell for it may have been either evil, just stupid, or both. Ishamael managed to combine being evil and stupid with being smart. As did Tuon, for that matter.

Nazbaque
03-21-2017, 02:47 PM
People can do things that are evil because they are deceived into thinking them good. That doesn't make the action anything other evil, though it may mean that the perpetrator isn't evil.

The problem with thinking of any act as automatically evil even if you admit the perpetrator might not be, is that your mind starts taking the same kind of shortcuts that lead people into doing harmful things and believing them to be good.

Davian93
03-21-2017, 03:27 PM
People can do things that are evil because they are deceived into thinking them good. That doesn't make the action anything other evil, though it may mean that the perpetrator isn't evil.

The AS deceived themselves into thinking that if they enslaved others that would be good. The Seanchan were apparently tricked into such a thought patter by Ishamael. Both attitudes, when put into practice, are evil. Individuals who fell for it may have been either evil, just stupid, or both. Ishamael managed to combine being evil and stupid with being smart. As did Tuon, for that matter.

Protip: Most "evil" people who do awful things don't think they're the bad guy...

fionwe1987
03-21-2017, 09:05 PM
They believe that they are doing good. Doesn't that automatically mean that it isn't selfish?
"Good" for whom?

The Seanchan believe what they're doing is good for the non-channeling part of society. Even ignoring how ripping channelers away from their loved ones obviously harms more than just the channelers, doing "good" for one part of society at the expense of another hardly qualifies as actually good. Otherwise, we'd have to concede some slavers' arguments that slavery helped the white folks, and thus supporting slavery and fighting for it wasn't selfish but about promoting "good".

I am almost a third of this discussion. You just expressed yourself vaguely.
It is interesting that you think because you posted a lot it means you understood things well. Evidence seems pretty clear that the opposite is the case...

Alanna fears that ta'veren without Aes Sedai guidance will lead to the Shadow's victory. That is her main motive. You can look at it from a lot of angles and find a lot of other motives which are probably all true to a degree, but fear of the Shadow's victory is on top. Mostly it adds up to her being a coward as well as arrogant, but not evil.
No, there is absolutely nothing which says that she fears the Shadow will win if she didn't do what she did. If such were the case, nothing Faile said would have stopped her from bonding Perrin.

Her belief is more in the line of Elaida's... wanting perfect control to satisfy your selfish fears that someone else may not act in a way that is perfectly aligned with your views. Her actions in forcibly bonding Rand are no different than Elaida's in having him kidnapped.

In fact, knowing what we (and the Aes Sedai) know of ta'veren, controlling them is by definition an act of defiance of the Pattern's will. You do not have to bow to every whim a ta'veren has. You do not have to accept everything they say. But you cannot seek absolute control over their actions either. They're meant to be a destabilizing force. You deal with them upfront, and pay the price for it.

Most Aes Sedai are brainwashed to believe things will go wrong without their supervision and especially if a man is in charge.
Since when is this an acceptable excuse for an immoral act? If you're so dumb as to fail to learn from Bonwhin's lunacy, you cannot possibly use that to mitigate the weight of your actions.


Something similar applies to the Seanchan in regards to women who can channel. The individuals who believe the doctrains can be called many things from mentally lazy to willfully blind, but "evil" requires for them to be aware of the harm they do.
Come now... the hypocrisy of the Seanchan is not some deeply buried one that is hard to see. If using the One Power is wrong, and inevitably corrupting, then no one should use it, period. You cannot both say it is wrong, and then use it by proxy and claim everything is fine. The harm caused by the use of the One Power in battle is pretty obvious. As is the harm caused by chopping off body parts to force obedience in damane, or causing them immense pain. These are not acts that a non-channeler cannot comprehend.

By your logic, Ishamael isn't evil either. He thinks he has a perfectly good reason for doing what he does. Heck, Semirhage genuinely does seem to believe her abilities mean people owe her chance to take her pleasures on them, and Greaendal genuinely thinks the world cannot match her standards, so she is teaching them a grand lesson by adopting hedonism to the fullest. Are these people not evil too??

Davian93
03-21-2017, 09:37 PM
Most Aes Sedai are brainwashed to believe things will go wrong without their supervision and especially if a man is in charge.

To be fair, in Randland, that isn't just "most Aes Sedai", its "most women". This is a universe where the Original Sin (the taint, Breaking, etc) was caused by a man, not a woman so you get the polar opposite of the traditional judeo-christian mindset that men are superior. Women pretty much run most of Randland whether its AS advisors or Womens Circles or Aiel Wise Ones or actual rulers (Tenobia, Berelain, Morgase, etc).

Kimon
03-21-2017, 09:51 PM
To be fair, in Randland, that isn't just "most Aes Sedai", its "most women". This is a universe where the Original Sin (the taint, Breaking, etc) was caused by a man, not a woman so you get the polar opposite of the traditional judeo-christian mindset that men are superior. Women pretty much run most of Randland whether its AS advisors or Womens Circles or Aiel Wise Ones or actual rulers (Tenobia, Berelain, Morgase, etc).

The Eve story is messed up on many levels, as her crime was essentially just educating and civilizing Adam so that he wouldn't be such an ignorant savage. Not to mention the fact that the serpent (Satan) thus stands as not just the enemy but also as the embodiment of civilization, with god and pure virility thus standing for stupidity. This is also not a theme isolated to Judaism. It is very similar to the story of Prometheus, with Prometheus, like Satan, being punished for civilizing man by Zeus, who wanted to keep us docile and stupid, and then Zeus sent down Pandora, the woman, to curse and mislead us. It's also similar to the origin story of Athens, with its explanation for why only men, and no longer women, were allowed to vote, as they had the audacity to vote for Athena, and her useful gift/bribe of the olive tree, while the stupid men all voted for Poseidon and his useless bribe of the salt water spring.

As an aside, I don't think that RJ intended for us to read what Myrelle did as rape, nor to assume that she used actual compulsion on him (i.e. rape) for the sex within their "marriage". That seemed intended to be read as purely consensual. What it seemed like RJ was critiquing here was more specifically the practice of arranged marriage, especially when done without the consent of both participants.

Mind you, that doesn't mean that we have to agree with RJ, and not view that as akin to, in not equal to rape. He certainly treated this as distinct almost certainly in part (or in whole) due to the fact that the victim here was the man, not the woman. This is even more obvious with how he treats the scene with Tylin quite clearly raping Mat, with Elayne et aliae reacting to that realization with amusement rather than horror.

Davian93
03-21-2017, 10:58 PM
While I definitely agree that Tylin raped Mat I think Mat's biggest issue with the situation was more about that he wasn't the chasing, dominant partner in the relationship.

fionwe1987
03-22-2017, 02:59 AM
This is even more obvious with how he treats the scene with Tylin quite clearly raping Mat, with Elayne et aliae reacting to that realization with amusement rather than horror.
While it is true that in-book Elayne isn't ever chastised for her reaction, this kind of reaction (basically an "asking for it") is distressingly common among men when told of a woman in a similar situation in our world. So while I have several issues with how RJ dealt with the whole thing, I don't think the gender inversion is broken by Elayne's reaction.

While I definitely agree that Tylin raped Mat I think Mat's biggest issue with the situation was more about that he wasn't the chasing, dominant partner in the relationship.
Its not just that. If you re-read those parts, Mat is genuinely terrified and mortified at several points, especially when she starves him unless he has sex with her.

Nazbaque
03-22-2017, 03:19 AM
It is interesting that you think because you posted a lot it means you understood things well. Evidence seems pretty clear that the opposite is the case...
You said that I hadn't read the discussion. I said I am more than a third of it. It is very interesting how you assume everyone thinks exactly like you and it's somehow their fault when what you say is misunderstood. Such as just now when you make a claim and then misunderstand the obvious rebuttal.

No, there is absolutely nothing which says that she fears the Shadow will win if she didn't do what she did. If such were the case, nothing Faile said would have stopped her from bonding Perrin.
Absolutely nothing? Seriously? You are so caught up in interpreting the words your way you can't even see the other possibilities. Good grief you are close minded.
Her belief is more in the line of Elaida's... wanting perfect control to satisfy your selfish fears that someone else may not act in a way that is perfectly aligned with your views. Her actions in forcibly bonding Rand are no different than Elaida's in having him kidnapped.
This is your personal interpretation again.
In fact, knowing what we (and the Aes Sedai) know of ta'veren, controlling them is by definition an act of defiance of the Pattern's will. You do not have to bow to every whim a ta'veren has. You do not have to accept everything they say. But you cannot seek absolute control over their actions either. They're meant to be a destabilizing force. You deal with them upfront, and pay the price for it.
Why do you assume an Aes Sedai would act logically? A green one at that. Look how Siuan Sanche tried to make things go her way even when Min told her of things that were already fated to be.

Since when is this an acceptable excuse for an immoral act? If you're so dumb as to fail to learn from Bonwhin's lunacy, you cannot possibly use that to mitigate the weight of your actions.
Acceptable excuse? All I said was that they aren't evil. There is a lot to be desired in them as people. The world isn't black and white. Evil is at the extreme end of the spectrum good is at the other. If you can't see all that fits in between you are just as mentally immature as Alanna.

Come now... the hypocrisy of the Seanchan is not some deeply buried one that is hard to see. If using the One Power is wrong, and inevitably corrupting, then no one should use it, period. You cannot both say it is wrong, and then use it by proxy and claim everything is fine. The harm caused by the use of the One Power in battle is pretty obvious. As is the harm caused by chopping off body parts to force obedience in damane, or causing them immense pain. These are not acts that a non-channeler cannot comprehend.
You expect people to think. RJ was very clever with that. A whole lot of real world history happened because the vast majority of people don't think.

By your logic, Ishamael isn't evil either. He thinks he has a perfectly good reason for doing what he does. Heck, Semirhage genuinely does seem to believe her abilities mean people owe her chance to take her pleasures on them, and Greaendal genuinely thinks the world cannot match her standards, so she is teaching them a grand lesson by adopting hedonism to the fullest. Are these people not evil too??
The difference between the Forsaken and Seanchan is that the Forsaken think. They choose to do harm for their own personal satisfaction. The Seanchan are raised to believe that all these nasty things are the price of an orderly society. If they really thought about it they would see how wrong it is but they don't. The Forsaken grew up in the Age of Legends. They know that the things they do are harmful. They know that they are not choosing a lesser evil in service of the greater good. They do it all for themselves and themselves alone.

Good and evil are exclusively for those who think. The rest of humanity is too immature to be either. They aren't good. They are mentally lazy, cowardly and shallow. But they aren't evil.

GonzoTheGreat
03-22-2017, 05:31 AM
Absolutely nothing? Seriously?
You know, you could, in theory, try to back up your assertion with quotes from the books. If you actually did that, it might actually give you some credibility. At the very least, it would put the ball in our court, with us having to argue why the passages you cited do not support your case. As it is, since you haven't quoted anything, it is a reasonable conclusion to say that you have nothing.

Nazbaque
03-22-2017, 05:44 AM
You know, you could, in theory, try to back up your assertion with quotes from the books. If you actually did that, it might actually give you some credibility. At the very least, it would put the ball in our court, with us having to argue why the passages you cited do not support your case. As it is, since you haven't quoted anything, it is a reasonable conclusion to say that you have nothing.

And your proof for your stance is?

Now I don't think that the lack of quotes is proof of being wrong. But since you insist that it is I must now assume that you admit being wrong seeing as you don't present quotes for your stance. Too bad your admitting such isn't proof of me being right, isn't it?

GonzoTheGreat
03-22-2017, 08:14 AM
Why do you assume an Aes Sedai would act logically? A green one at that.
My own position is that Alanna is indeed Green, and not Black. Thus, she can not lie when she makes an outright statement as she is doing here:
The question should not have caught Alanna by surprise, yet it did. She hesitated, then drew out a chair and sat, arranging her skirts before she answered. "It was the logical thing to do, with him right there in front of us. It should have been done long ago. You could not – or would not." Like most Greens, she was somewhat amused by other Ajahs’ insistence that each sister have only one Warder. What Greens thought of the Reds having none was better left unsaid. "They all should have been bonded at the first chance. They are too important to run loose, him most of all." Color blossomed suddenly in her cheeks; it would be a good while yet before she had full control of her emotions again.
Now, her logic was seriously flawed, as it depends on the assumption that Bonwhin was correct to try to take control of a ta'veren. However, the fact that she overlooked this (to us obvious) detail can be ascribed to a combination of her emotional state and Verin's meddling. That does not change the fact that she did base her decision in logic.

Alanna tried to control Rand, as the following part shows:
"If you had to bond a man without asking him," Kiruna demanded in that commanding voice, "why, by the Light most holy, have you not used the bond to bend him to your will? Compared to the other, that is only slapping his wrist."
Alanna still had small control of her emotions. Color actually flooded her cheeks, partly in anger by the way her eyes flashed, and assuredly partly in shame. "Has no one told you?" she asked, too brightly. "I suppose no one wants to think of it. I certainly do not." Faeldrin and Seonid looked at the floor, and they were not the only ones. "I tried to compel him moments after I bonded him," Alanna continued as if noticing none of it. "Have you ever attempted to uproot an oak tree with your bare hands, Kiruna? It was much the same."

And as for the comparison with rape, that's one that is straight from the books:
Cadsuane scowled over the cup at her. She might have. There was no difference between what Alanna had done and a man forcing himself on a woman, but, the Light help her, she might have, had she believed it would help her reach her goal. Now, she no longer considered even making Alanna pass the bond to her. Alanna had proved how useless that was in controlling him.
Now, which specific quotes can you provide to show that Alanna did not act based on logic, and that what she did was not considered comparable to rape?

Alternatively: what quotes are you willing to produce to defend rape as "not evil"?

Davian93
03-22-2017, 09:01 AM
While it is true that in-book Elayne isn't ever chastised for her reaction, this kind of reaction (basically an "asking for it") is distressingly common among men when told of a woman in a similar situation in our world. So while I have several issues with how RJ dealt with the whole thing, I don't think the gender inversion is broken by Elayne's reaction.


Its not just that. If you re-read those parts, Mat is genuinely terrified and mortified at several points, especially when she starves him unless he has sex with her.

I agree. I think that the relationship between Mat and Tylin is definitely somewhat a product of RJ's generational upbringing and that it stems quite a bit from the theory that "a man can't be raped by a woman". We know that that theory is completely wrong but RJ was a guy that was born in the 40s and grew up in the 60s so his generational perspective was quite a bit different than ours I think.

So what read to him and many others as "lol, Mat got what was coming to him as a womanizer" is more "Wow, that's pretty bloody disturbing". Even if Mat ended up enjoying it in the end and clearly he did get some pleasure out of it, he was most definitely not a willing partner and Elayne's reaction to his plea about being raped definitely didn't help.

fionwe1987
03-22-2017, 09:36 AM
I agree. I think that the relationship between Mat and Tylin is definitely somewhat a product of RJ's generational upbringing and that it stems quite a bit from the theory that "a man can't be raped by a woman". We know that that theory is completely wrong but RJ was a guy that was born in the 40s and grew up in the 60s so his generational perspective was quite a bit different than ours I think.

So what read to him and many others as "lol, Mat got what was coming to him as a womanizer" is more "Wow, that's pretty bloody disturbing". Even if Mat ended up enjoying it in the end and clearly he did get some pleasure out of it, he was most definitely not a willing partner and Elayne's reaction to his plea about being raped definitely didn't help.

Yup. RJ worked from the assumption that men can't be raped, it seems, so he felt this was an inversion that could be tongue in cheek while, as Harriet has claimed, being maybe informative on the subject of "actual" rape. But the whole house of cards comes crashing down because, of course, this is "actual" rape. Its sad, really. RJ had a chance for a really strong storyline that he frittered away.

Nazbaque
03-22-2017, 10:00 AM
My own position is that Alanna is indeed Green, and not Black. Thus, she can not lie when she makes an outright statement as she is doing here:

Now, her logic was seriously flawed, as it depends on the assumption that Bonwhin was correct to try to take control of a ta'veren. However, the fact that she overlooked this (to us obvious) detail can be ascribed to a combination of her emotional state and Verin's meddling. That does not change the fact that she did base her decision in logic.
Behaviour based on flawed logic is not logical behaviour. The assumption that her emotional state is getting in the way is a sound one. It is quite expected that she is not capable of logical behaviour in this state which you yourself just stated. Now me I'm fairly sure she can't be logical even when she has her emotions in check, but here that is something of a moot point.

Now it is shown several times that Aes Sedai can be untruthful so long as they themselves believe it. Many illogical people believe themselves to be logical. Thus Alanna's claim at being logical proves nothing.

Alanna tried to control Rand, as the following part shows:


And as for the comparison with rape, that's one that is straight from the books:
It is Alanna's view on the matter that counts not the world's and not Cadsuane's. If Alanna doesn't acknowledge the harm she is misguided but not evil.
Now, which specific quotes can you provide to show that Alanna did not act based on logic, and that what she did was not considered comparable to rape?

Alternatively: what quotes are you willing to produce to defend rape as "not evil"?
You haven't yet provided any proof on her being logical. Quite the reverse. You also have not provided a quote in which Alanna or Myrelle acknowledges that forceful bonding is the same as rape.

Rape not being harmful is a bit tricky, but it would depend on how one defines rape. It is certainly difficult to imagine how one might rape for the greater good. If the species were on the brink of extinction, one could say that breeding was a duty regardless of emotions or sexual preferences, but in those circumstances the rapist isn't allowed to enjoy the act which might defeat the whole purpose. Then again there is such a thing as guilty pleasure which just might give us some wriggle room. But this doesn't seem to apply to Lan and Myrelle in any case.

GonzoTheGreat
03-22-2017, 10:42 AM
Behaviour based on flawed logic is not logical behaviour. The assumption that her emotional state is getting in the way is a sound one. It is quite expected that she is not capable of logical behaviour in this state which you yourself just stated. Now me I'm fairly sure she can't be logical even when she has her emotions in check, but here that is something of a moot point.Using that standard, no human can ever use logic at all, since we can never be perfect.
Of course, you seem to use a similar "only absolute evil is real evil" standard, so that figures.

Now it is shown several times that Aes Sedai can be untruthful so long as they themselves believe it. Many illogical people believe themselves to be logical. Thus Alanna's claim at being logical proves nothing.It proves that she believed that what she did was logical.
Actually, I agree with her there. I think that the flaw in her reasoning was not in her logic, but in her assumptions. It is the Garbage In, Garbage Out problem, wherein you will end up with untrustworthy results even with impeccable logic if you start out from faulty axioms.

It is Alanna's view on the matter that counts not the world's and not Cadsuane's. If Alanna doesn't acknowledge the harm she is misguided but not evil.
Using that same standard, no psychopath is evil either. After all, they don't consider their actions to be harmful; at most they think they made a mistake in being found out.

Rape not being harmful is a bit tricky, but it would depend on how one defines rape. It is certainly difficult to imagine how one might rape for the greater good.
Defenders of slavery in the USA managed that one. They started out by assuming that men are lustful and violent. Then they added that they wanted to protect white women from that. So the fact that slave owners raped their female slaves might not be nice, but it was definitely for the good. You can read this in this post (https://freedmenspatrol.wordpress.com/2014/05/21/we-love-the-white-woman-so-much/), which is part of a blog on the preludes to the American Civil War. It also quotes a former slave woman who didn't agree with the sentiment, but I suspect that when she still was a slave no one had bothered to ask her.

But this doesn't seem to apply to Lan and Myrelle in any case.
In that case, Myrelle's argument is that she is saving his life. She may even have been right, though (as Egwene demonstrated) there was a far simpler and more moral alternative to her course of action.

fionwe1987
03-22-2017, 11:07 AM
It is Alanna's view on the matter that counts not the world's and not Cadsuane's. If Alanna doesn't acknowledge the harm she is misguided but not evil.
Double standards, much? You claimed Semirhage's views on her actions don't matter. You claimed she knowingly does harm, whereas in her view, she's just taking a little payment for saving someone's life. Guess she's not evil either eh?

Nazbaque
03-22-2017, 11:39 AM
Using that standard, no human can ever use logic at all, since we can never be perfect.
Of course, you seem to use a similar "only absolute evil is real evil" standard, so that figures.
We can work around our limits. It is about admitting that logic is above you. You can't decide what it is you can only observe it. It is quite depressing how often the logical answer is "we don't know".

The point in this is that when an assumption demands that someone is logical it can so easily fall apart simply because being logical is so damn rare.
It proves that she believed that what she did was logical.
Actually, I agree with her there. I think that the flaw in her reasoning was not in her logic, but in her assumptions. It is the Garbage In, Garbage Out problem, wherein you will end up with untrustworthy results even with impeccable logic if you start out from faulty axioms.
Faulty axioms are flawed logic in themselves. What was the logical ground for making such an assumption? Obviously flawed as the assumption was false. Then it becomes a basic logical clause. Logical conclusion(True) AND flawed axiom(False) = False. Thus Alanna is not logical.

Using that same standard, no psychopath is evil either. After all, they don't consider their actions to be harmful; at most they think they made a mistake in being found out.
Not all psychopaths are like that Gonzo. Some truly don't understand that what they do is wrong. Some believe themselves next thing to a god and entitled to cause as much harm as they want. The former is dangerous but not evil, the latter is evil.
Defenders of slavery in the USA managed that one. They started out by assuming that men are lustful and violent. Then they added that they wanted to protect white women from that. So the fact that slave owners raped their female slaves might not be nice, but it was definitely for the good. You can read this in this post (https://freedmenspatrol.wordpress.com/2014/05/21/we-love-the-white-woman-so-much/), which is part of a blog on the preludes to the American Civil War. It also quotes a former slave woman who didn't agree with the sentiment, but I suspect that when she still was a slave no one had bothered to ask her.
I meant a legitimate greater good. Thinking up bullshit excuses is different. So is hiding behind a legitimate greater good when in reality you're doing exactly what you wanted.

Seanchan "greater good" may not really count, but even if it did a sul'dam that took pleasure in disciplining the damane was evil. The greater good was just an excuse not the actual motive.
In that case, Myrelle's argument is that she is saving his life. She may even have been right, though (as Egwene demonstrated) there was a far simpler and more moral alternative to her course of action.
Assuming Lan was forced at all which remains unproven. The point would still be in Myrelle accepting that it was a wrong thing to do. She is from Ebou Dar after all and the people there had some peculiar notions on what women can do to men as demonstrated by their queen.

But it seems you missed my point in how one defines a rape. Tell me Gonzo, do you understand the term "masochist". If you do I invite you to consider the difference between being raped and being ravished.

Nazbaque
03-22-2017, 11:52 AM
Double standards, much? You claimed Semirhage's views on her actions don't matter. You claimed she knowingly does harm, whereas in her view, she's just taking a little payment for saving someone's life. Guess she's not evil either eh?
Do you actually understand the word "knowingly"? If in her view she is claiming a payment she still understands that it causes harm. Moreover she isn't causing the harm because she thinks it is necessary, but because she wants to.

Alanna's view was that Rand needed to be under Tower control. She is wrong as we know but she did not bond him from personal desire using the greater good as an excuse. Misguided is not the same as evil.

GonzoTheGreat
03-22-2017, 11:54 AM
If you do I invite you to consider the difference between being raped and being ravished.
Which of those two is a closer analogue to the way in which Rand was bonded?

Nazbaque
03-22-2017, 12:10 PM
Which of those two is a closer analogue to the way in which Rand was bonded?

I was thinking of Mat in this one actually. But since you ask I'd say what Alanna did to Rand would be one and what Elayne did to Birgitte would be the other. That was forced bonding too after all. Curious how it has been absent from the discussion.

Davian93
03-22-2017, 12:36 PM
I was thinking of Mat in this one actually. But since you ask I'd say what Alanna did to Rand would be one and what Elayne did to Birgitte would be the other. That was forced bonding too after all. Curious how it has been absent from the discussion.

I think that because Elayne did it as a purely selfless act to save her life...there were no ulterior or selfish motives on her end like there are with Alanna.

I also imagine that Elayne would have willingly released the bond had Birgitte requested it. There is no evidence that supports that supposition but I base it on what we know about her character and her striving to be a good, fair ruler.

GonzoTheGreat
03-22-2017, 12:40 PM
What Elayne did was not aimed at getting power over Birgitte. The only goal was saving her life. If it had been possible, then Elayne would have asked, and she would probably have honoured a refusal.
What Elayne did was emergency medical aid.

In the case of Mat, I would say that it was rape. Legally all right, obviously, what with Tylin being queen and all, but rape nonetheless.

Nazbaque
03-22-2017, 12:50 PM
What Elayne did was not aimed at getting power over Birgitte. The only goal was saving her life. If it had been possible, then Elayne would have asked, and she would probably have honoured a refusal.
What Elayne did was emergency medical aid.

In the case of Mat, I would say that it was rape. Legally all right, obviously, what with Tylin being queen and all, but rape nonetheless.

So you don't understand the difference between being raped and being ravished. Not sure if you have fully explored the concept of a masochist either.

Davian93
03-22-2017, 01:00 PM
So you don't understand the difference between being raped and being ravished. Not sure if you have fully explored the concept of a masochist either.

Mat was 100% raped by Tylin.

Nazbaque
03-22-2017, 01:15 PM
Mat was 100% raped by Tylin.
Not sure if you truly understand the difference. Do you understand and apply it to this or is it that you don't understand and can't see other alternatives?

Davian93
03-22-2017, 01:39 PM
Not sure if you truly understand the difference. Do you understand and apply it to this or is it that you don't understand and can't see other alternatives?

He said no, he tried to physically stop her. She then pulled a knife on him and forced him.

And yes, I do understand the definitions of both words. Regardless, Mat was raped at knifepoint.

Nazbaque
03-22-2017, 01:51 PM
He said no, he tried to physically stop her. She then pulled a knife on him and forced him.

And yes, I do understand the definitions of both words. Regardless, Mat was raped at knifepoint.

Seeing as that might result in either one you clearly don't. You are focusing on what happens before the act when the difference is in what happens after and during.

I'll ask again. Do you understand the concept of a masochist?

GonzoTheGreat
03-22-2017, 01:54 PM
A somewhat more difficult case: was Morgase raped or ravished by Rahvin?
I would say she was raped, but if I understand Naz correctly then he would say that she wasn't.

fionwe1987
03-22-2017, 02:01 PM
Not sure if you truly understand the difference. Do you understand and apply it to this or is it that you don't understand and can't see other alternatives?

Here is how ravished is defined:

archaic
seize and carry off (someone) by force.

dated
(of a man) force (a woman or girl) to have sexual intercourse against her will; rape.

literary
fill (someone) with intense delight; enrapture.
"ravished by a sunny afternoon, she had agreed without even thinking"

Barring the final definition, which says nothing about consent, the original meanings of ravish are quite clearly synonymous with rape.

The third meaning definitely cannot be used for sexual pleasure enforced at knife point.

Put simply, in its original meaning, ravish already contained an implication of force (it comes from the latin rapere which means "to seize" and is also the root for rape.

In modern literary usage, that implicit concept of force is removed, but its pretty clear that if you "fill someone with intense delight" against their will, modern usage calls for using the word "rape". Thus, the difference between rape and ravish in modern usage is at least partially about the implicit connotation of force.

Do you actually understand the word "knowingly"? If in her view she is claiming a payment she still understands that it causes harm. Moreover she isn't causing the harm because she thinks it is necessary, but because she wants to.
Are you claiming sul'dam and Seanchan society at large don't know that the a'dam causes pain and harm? They're accidentally causing pain while thinking they're coddling the damane?

No. They know they cause harm. They believe that that harm is acceptable because it makes them feel safer. They are knowingly trading the harm caused to channelers for their personal sense of security and control. This is not all that far from Semirhage wanting to trade her ability to Heal for her personal pleasure and sense of control.

Alanna's view was that Rand needed to be under Tower control. She is wrong as we know but she did not bond him from personal desire using the greater good as an excuse. Misguided is not the same as evil.
So how do you square that with Nazis who perpetrated the Holocaust because they felt it was the right thing to do for the Reich? Surely, several of them genuinely believed that, rather than wanting to do so out of any "personal desire". Were they merely misguided?

fionwe1987
03-22-2017, 02:02 PM
A somewhat more difficult case: was Morgase raped or ravished by Rahvin?
I would say she was raped, but if I understand Naz correctly then he would say that she wasn't.

Think of compulsion as a fantasy analogue of GHB or any other date rape drug. The conclusions draw themselves...

Nazbaque
03-22-2017, 02:37 PM
A somewhat more difficult case: was Morgase raped or ravished by Rahvin?
I would say she was raped, but if I understand Naz correctly then he would say that she wasn't.
Well that is a bit tougher.

For the moment I'll go on a tangent. Is blackmail a robbery or is it a completely different crime? If the price of silence is sex rather than money, is it then rape or simply blackmail? The victim is after all giving consent.

By my thinking it is the harm that defines rape and since the blackmail victim would feel sexually violated and thus in spite of technical consent what happened was a rape.

I think it is safe to say that once Morgase found that she had been under Compulsion she felt sexually violated and thus what happened was a rape.

There are many ways to force someone to have sex. Drugs, blackmail, physical force. If they feel violated they were raped. If they feel excited they were ravished.

Legally it is best to treat it as rape regardless, but that is because it is practically impossible to prove how mental damage was caused.

Mat was forced yes. Did he feel violated? To me it doesn't seem so. More that he lost his masochistic virginity and was somewhat confused by the whole thing. He certainly doesn't act as if he were traumatised.

Davian93
03-22-2017, 02:44 PM
So how do you square that with Nazis who perpetrated the Holocaust because they felt it was the right thing to do for the Reich? Surely, several of them genuinely believed that, rather than wanting to do so out of any "personal desire". Were they merely misguided?

They were just following orders...

Davian93
03-22-2017, 02:47 PM
Well that is a bit tougher.

For the moment I'll go on a tangent. Is blackmail a robbery or is it a completely different crime? If the price of silence is sex rather than money, is it then rape or simply blackmail? The victim is after all giving consent.

By my thinking it is the harm that defines rape and since the blackmail victim would feel sexually violated and thus in spite of technical consent what happened was a rape.

I think it is safe to say that once Morgase found that she had been under Compulsion she felt sexually violated and thus what happened was a rape.

There are many ways to force someone to have sex. Drugs, blackmail, physical force. If they feel violated they were raped. If they feel excited they were ravished.

Legally it is best to treat it as rape regardless, but that is because it is practically impossible to prove how mental damage was caused.

Mat was forced yes. Did he feel violated? To me it doesn't seem so. More that he lost his masochistic virginity and was somewhat confused by the whole thing. He certainly doesn't act as if he were traumatised.

No, they were raped regardless. Ravish is an archaic outdated term that shouldn't apply to either. It falls into the same bucket as the so-called "rape fantasy". A great example of this is when Rhett Butler rapes Scarlett in the film version of Gone With the Wind. Its portrayed on-screen as a ravishing and that she ended up enjoying it after the fact but it was 100% a rape under the law.

All the Mat/Tylin scene really demonstrates is RJ's outdated concepts and belief structure when it comes to rape.

Women have been known to orgasm and feel pleasure during even a forcible fairly violent rape. That doesn't make it a ravishing as its simply a physical almost involuntary response to the stimulus. Its rape no matter what.

Mat was raped.

Nazbaque
03-22-2017, 02:50 PM
Are you claiming sul'dam and Seanchan society at large don't know that the a'dam causes pain and harm? They're accidentally causing pain while thinking they're coddling the damane?

No. They know they cause harm. They believe that that harm is acceptable because it makes them feel safer. They are knowingly trading the harm caused to channelers for their personal sense of security and control. This is not all that far from Semirhage wanting to trade her ability to Heal for her personal pleasure and sense of control.


So how do you square that with Nazis who perpetrated the Holocaust because they felt it was the right thing to do for the Reich? Surely, several of them genuinely believed that, rather than wanting to do so out of any "personal desire". Were they merely misguided?

Your mind is closed. You want it to be so that only evil people do harm. You want mental shortcuts for labling someone as evil and thus defining what they do as harm. Your mind goes round and round and round. Harm is done so they must be evil and because they are evil what was done must have been harmful. And since you of course are a good person nothing you have done has ever been harmful. Or the harm you did ended up being good because it was done to evil people.

Nazbaque
03-22-2017, 03:00 PM
No, they were raped regardless. Ravish is an archaic outdated term that shouldn't apply to either. It falls into the same bucket as the so-called "rape fantasy". A great example of this is when Rhett Butler rapes Scarlett in the film version of Gone With the Wind. Its portrayed on-screen as a ravishing and that she ended up enjoying it after the fact but it was 100% a rape under the law.

All the Mat/Tylin scene really demonstrates is RJ's outdated concepts and belief structure when it comes to rape.

Women have been known to orgasm and feel pleasure during even a forcible fairly violent rape. That doesn't make it a ravishing as its simply a physical almost involuntary response to the stimulus. Its rape no matter what.

Mat was raped.

See? Your mind is so innocent. You don't understand what it means to be a masochist. You insist all women are alike in this. Your mind can't understand being excited when dominated. To you it is a taboo and you can't contemplete the subject in a collected frame of mind.

You can't even tell the difference between mental emotion and physical sensation.

Davian93
03-22-2017, 03:30 PM
See? Your mind is so innocent. You don't understand what it means to be a masochist. You insist all women are alike in this. Your mind can't understand being excited when dominated. To you it is a taboo and you can't contemplete the subject in a collected frame of mind.

You can't even tell the difference between mental emotion and physical sensation.

Masochists give consent and are willing. That's the huge difference. Its not about how violent or dominant a partner is to determine whether or not its rape, its whether they gave consent.

This isn't exactly rocket science here.

Nazbaque
03-22-2017, 03:49 PM
Masochists give consent and are willing. That's the huge difference. Its not about how violent or dominant a partner is to determine whether or not its rape, its whether they gave consent.

This isn't exactly rocket science here.

You really don't get it. At all. You really can't accept that someone would feel differently in that situation. Why do you insist other people are like you?

Davian93
03-22-2017, 03:59 PM
You really don't get it. At all. You really can't accept that someone would feel differently in that situation. Why do you insist other people are like you?

Are you dense? He literally says no for all intents and purposes and then tries to physically stop it from happening before being held at knife point.

It wasn't play acting, it wasn't some S&M thing. It was a rape.

TITLE: Crown of Swords
CHAPTER: 29 - The Festival of Birds
''What are you going to do?" he mumbled through his teeth. A stretched neck put a strain in his voice. A stretched neck among other things. "Well?" He could try grabbing her wrist; he was quick with his hands. "What are you going to do?" Quick enough, with the knife already at his throat? That was the question. That, and the one he asked her. If she intended to kill him, a shove of her wrist right there would drive the dagger straight up into his brain. "Will you answer me!" That was not panic in his voice. He was not in a panic. "Majesty? Tylin?" Well, maybe he was in a bit of a panic, to use her name. You could call any woman in Ebou Dar "duckling" or "pudding" all day, and she would smile, but use her name before she said you could, and you found a hotter reception than you would for goosing a strange woman on the street anywhere else. A few kisses exchanged were never enough for permission, either.

TITLE: Crown of Swords
CHAPTER: 29 - The Festival of Birds
"You can't do this to me," he mumbled at her, and if his voice was a touch breathy and shrill, he surely had cause. "Watch and learn, my kitten," Tylin said, and drew her marriage knife.

Totally consenting there and playacting. Clearly.:rolleyes:

Davian93
03-22-2017, 04:10 PM
TITLE: Crown of Swords
CHAPTER: 38 - Six Stories
"You listen to me! That woman won't take no for an answer; I say no, and she laughs at me. She's starved me, bullied me, chased me down like a stag! She has more hands than any six women I ever met. She threatened to have the serving women undress me if I didn't let her—"

Yup, sounds like he's just playing hard to get. Maybe he shouldn't have worn that sexy green coat or that black hat. He should have known better.

Nazbaque
03-22-2017, 04:10 PM
Are you dense? He literally says no for all intents and purposes and then tries to physically stop it from happening before being held at knife point.

It wasn't play acting, it wasn't some S&M thing. It was a rape.





Totally consenting there and playacting. Clearly.:rolleyes:

Dav you don't understand what a masochist is. You just don't.

Davian93
03-22-2017, 04:19 PM
Dav you don't understand what a masochist is. You just don't.

Right because its such a difficult concept to understand.:rolleyes: They get off on pain and humiliation to an extent while acting as the submissive partner. Being dominated so to speak. However, and this is key, they agree to that setup, they aren't forced. Hence the whole concept of safe words in that area of sexual play.

Sure, they might be held at knife point and "forced" in a manner that might look like what happened to Mat but the outward appearance is the only thing that is the same given that Mat clearly did not consent either at the time or in his explanation about it to Elayne where he clearly still viewed it as a forced act on his part.

There is nothing in Mat's background or character development that suggests that he is or ever was or ever wanted to really be a masochist. His behavior up to that point and afterward was always that of someone who pursues people that want to be pursued and who only engages your standard consensual acts of sexual pleasure. He even reflects on that while thinking about how Tylin was not that way.

Again, this isn't rocket science, it isn't a "you just don't understand masochism", its you being wrong about what happened and refusing to admit that.

Maybe you can post the definition of masochism like you tried with ravish vs rape and we can all see how wrong you are.

For you to be right, you first have to prove Mat was indeed a masochist. Then you have to show that he consented to being dominated like that.

Since neither happened...good luck I guess.

Nazbaque
03-22-2017, 04:48 PM
I read the Tylin stuff as Mat discovering a completely new side in his sexual nature. It fits in with what he feels when he leaves Ebou Dar and later when learns of Tylin's death.

You have a case of what I call reverse Stockholm syndrome. People can't accept that a hostage might legitimately sympathise with their captor so they lable such a phenomenon as a mental affliction. You can't accept that someone might feel that way. I really don't understand why this is impossible for you. Maybe you are emotionally incomplete. Maybe you just don't have the imagination. Maybe your culture has brainwashed you. The way you lost your cool over it is probably some sort of sign, but I really can't understand this lack in you. It's like trying to explain the concept of colour to someone who was born blind.

fionwe1987
03-22-2017, 06:06 PM
There are many ways to force someone to have sex. Drugs, blackmail, physical force. If they feel violated they were raped. If they feel excited they were ravished.
No. If they gave consent, you can call it whatever you want. If they did not give consent, it is rape. If they withdrew consent half-way through and the act persisted, it is rape.

Mat was forced yes. Did he feel violated? To me it doesn't seem so.
In the text, he definitely says he feels violated, as Dav amply proved.

Your mind is closed.
You appear not to have one. Are you capable at all of having a discussion without resorting to personal insults?

You want it to be so that only evil people do harm. You want mental shortcuts for labling someone as evil and thus defining what they do as harm. Your mind goes round and round and round. Harm is done so they must be evil and because they are evil what was done must have been harmful. And since you of course are a good person nothing you have done has ever been harmful. Or the harm you did ended up being good because it was done to evil people.
:rolleyes: This is not an argument, it is simple raving. Never once did I say all harm is committed by evil people, or that only evil people can do harm. Or even that one evil act implies the person is irredeemably evil. But please... continue fighting the straw man instead of addressing the issues with your position.

Also, it seems mighty convenient to call a rape "loss of masochistic virginity". The first time someone forces you without your consent is rape, even if later, such situations turn out to excite you so you consent to role play such situations. It is bonkers that such obvious facts have to even be discussed in this time. I guess the Age of Trump has brought out the crazy everywhere.

Davian93
03-22-2017, 09:53 PM
I read the Tylin stuff as Mat discovering a completely new side in his sexual nature. It fits in with what he feels when he leaves Ebou Dar and later when learns of Tylin's death.

You have a case of what I call reverse Stockholm syndrome. People can't accept that a hostage might legitimately sympathise with their captor so they lable such a phenomenon as a mental affliction. You can't accept that someone might feel that way. I really don't understand why this is impossible for you. Maybe you are emotionally incomplete. Maybe you just don't have the imagination. Maybe your culture has brainwashed you. The way you lost your cool over it is probably some sort of sign, but I really can't understand this lack in you. It's like trying to explain the concept of colour to someone who was born blind.

No, not really. I fully accept that there really is no such thing as "normal" when it comes to sexuality and sexual preference. Everyone has their own quirks and their own so-called "fetishes" whether its being dominated or dressing up as a female dragon or male rabbit (aka: being a furrie) or wanted to be pegged by their girlfiend to masturbating into articles of clothing that they acquire from strangers online, etc. etc. All of those are cases I've worked on and granted security clearances to over the years and they're just the tip of the iceberg. None of those are really odd or weird and neither is being a masochist. As long as all parties are willing and its consensual, there is no real harm to any of it...in fact, its far healthier than those people that repress their natural urges or preferences.

That all said, I don't see that as the case here with Mat given his own actions and behavior as well as the comments I referenced. All of his actions indicate that he felt it was akin to rape, not masochistic roleplay that he secretly wanted.

Nazbaque
03-23-2017, 02:49 AM
No, not really. I fully accept that there really is no such thing as "normal" when it comes to sexuality and sexual preference. Everyone has their own quirks and their own so-called "fetishes" whether its being dominated or dressing up as a female dragon or male rabbit (aka: being a furrie) or wanted to be pegged by their girlfiend to masturbating into articles of clothing that they acquire from strangers online, etc. etc. All of those are cases I've worked on and granted security clearances to over the years and they're just the tip of the iceberg. None of those are really odd or weird and neither is being a masochist. As long as all parties are willing and its consensual, there is no real harm to any of it...in fact, its far healthier than those people that repress their natural urges or preferences.
But you still have this blind spot. You keep using the word "consent" with masochists. To some relationships this is appropriate, but it seems you don't understand that sometimes the partner isn't a sadist. It's like you can't see the possibility of pleasure in it.
That all said, I don't see that as the case here with Mat given his own actions and behavior as well as the comments I referenced. All of his actions indicate that he felt it was akin to rape, not masochistic roleplay that he secretly wanted.
Have you ever experienced conflicted emotions? Mat found a new pleasure, but a part of him keeps telling him he shouldn't feel pleasure from it. His main reaction is embarrassment. It's very nearly the classic pattern of a tsundere's guilty pleasure.

GonzoTheGreat
03-23-2017, 06:06 AM
Your mind is closed. You want it to be so that only evil people do harm.
I don't think that is what any of the others are arguing, and it definitely is not what I am arguing.

I think that Alanna, who was overall a good person, did evil when she forcibly bonded Rand. I think that Tylin, who was overall a good person, did evil when she raped Mat.

Davian93
03-23-2017, 09:14 AM
But you still have this blind spot. You keep using the word "consent" with masochists. To some relationships this is appropriate, but it seems you don't understand that sometimes the partner isn't a sadist. It's like you can't see the possibility of pleasure in it.

Have you ever experienced conflicted emotions? Mat found a new pleasure, but a part of him keeps telling him he shouldn't feel pleasure from it. His main reaction is embarrassment. It's very nearly the classic pattern of a tsundere's guilty pleasure.

That's a very dangerous path to go down...you could flip the genders and argue that any female that felt physical pleasure while being forced to have sex at knife point wasn't actually raped and indeed was a masochist instead. Sounds pretty awful when you put it that way...but I guess since Mat is a guy and he "enjoyed it", its completely okay or something.

Also, every psychological text I've ever read on the subject (and that's quite a few given what I do for a living) states that such a relationship requires consent by both parties...otherwise, its abuse, its rape, its illegal, etc.

fionwe1987
03-23-2017, 10:37 AM
That's a very dangerous path to go down...you could flip the genders and argue that any female that felt physical pleasure while being forced to have sex at knife point wasn't actually raped and indeed was a masochist instead. Sounds pretty awful when you put it that way...but I guess since Mat is a guy and he "enjoyed it", its completely okay or something.

Also, every psychological text I've ever read on the subject (and that's quite a few given what I do for a living) states that such a relationship requires consent by both parties...otherwise, its abuse, its rape, its illegal, etc.
Indeed. Weird, isn't it, how people reduce Mat's experience to "he secretly wanted it" despite all evidence to the contrary? I think some people just cannot fathom that a man can be raped. I only wish RJ had played his cards right here. It could have been such an excellent story arc.

And you're completely correct, of course. BDSM hinges on consent and accepted limits. Otherwise it is rape.

C Rutherford
03-24-2017, 06:13 PM
That's a very dangerous path to go down...you could flip the genders and argue that any female that felt physical pleasure while being forced to have sex at knife point wasn't actually raped and indeed was a masochist instead. Sounds pretty awful when you put it that way...but I guess since Mat is a guy and he "enjoyed it", its completely okay or something.

Also, every psychological text I've ever read on the subject (and that's quite a few given what I do for a living) states that such a relationship requires consent by both parties...otherwise, its abuse, its rape, its illegal, etc.

Or not flip the genders. Since a chief pleasure inducer in men is the prostate gland located in the anus, she could have had anal sex with him, forced him to have pleasure physically even as he also felt violated. I don't think RJ had anywhere near that level of sexual awareness, let alone in mind when he wrote that but the idea that physical pleasure and mental duress can't co-exist simply refuses to acknowledge the scope of the human body. Any doctor who has worked an emergency room probably has at least one story about how great physical and mental trauma actually induced physical arousal to some incredibly surprised and chagrined patients.

On topic, I was disappointed it wasn't mentioned in the Companion when Moiraine had the bond poised to shift to Myrelle. Especially since the Companion seemed to contain a significant amount of the notes he had made to cover the proposed third prequel.

fionwe1987
03-24-2017, 08:05 PM
On topic, I was disappointed it wasn't mentioned in the Companion when Moiraine had the bond poised to shift to Myrelle. Especially since the Companion seemed to contain a significant amount of the notes he had made to cover the proposed third prequel.
Yeah, there's a lot that was missing in that travesty.

Daekyras
03-25-2017, 05:58 AM
Back on page three of this thread there was an interesrlting conversation about whether a forced bond(like alanna) was at the level of an actual physical rape. (I still dont thibk it is)
.

This changed to discuss various things amongst others being elaynes bonding of birgette. Its fascinating to me that different people can have genuinely different interpretations of these scenes and its always been great for me to read threads like this here and to try and participate.

Then the thread takes a turn for the shit. Im not around much. I wish i was or that the conversation was as vibrant as it once was but I cant read something like this without getting angry.

Nazbaque- you are talking absolute tosh. Im not sure if you are doing it just to provoke a response or if you really believe the stuff youre saying. Both are bad.
But if you genuinely have the undrstanding of what rape is that your messages up above imply than you are not a person i ever want to have even a casual internet connection with.

GonzoTheGreat
03-25-2017, 07:23 AM
Back on page three of this thread there was an interesrlting conversation about whether a forced bond(like alanna) was at the level of an actual physical rape. (I still dont thibk it is)
Actually, it may be worse. A rape is very bad, but, apart from the memory*, once its done it is over. A forced bonding goes on and on and on.
With a rape, there is at least a possibility of killing the rapist and thereby getting out of it. With a forced bonding, killing the perpetrator is suicide.
With a rape, the official view is that the rapist was wrong and the rapee a victim. With a forced bonding, the authorities (the WT at least) is on the side of perp and against the victim.

* And possible physical side effects, which, for the sake of simplicity, I'll assume to be zero here.

Daekyras
03-25-2017, 09:20 AM
Actually, it may be worse. A rape is very bad, but, apart from the memory*, once its done it is over. A forced bonding goes on and on and on.
With a rape, there is at least a possibility of killing the rapist and thereby getting out of it. With a forced bonding, killing the perpetrator is suicide.
With a rape, the official view is that the rapist was wrong and the rapee a victim. With a forced bonding, the authorities (the WT at least) is on the side of perp and against the victim.

* And possible physical side effects, which, for the sake of simplicity, I'll assume to be zero here.


That assumes you see killing the rapist is revenge. A lot of people would condider that damages the person doing the killing even more.

And the WT might not be on the aide of the perp. We havent seen anyone go and complain...

GonzoTheGreat
03-25-2017, 10:09 AM
Killing the rapist during the rape will at the very least stop it. Or prevent a second rape. Or help someone else from falling victim to the same.

We have seen a whole bunch of AS who knew about it, and not a single one of them said that it was against Tower law. Not one of them seemed to think that what Alanna had done was a crime. Many thought it was against custom, but that's not enough for the WT to publicly support a man against an AS, is it?

fionwe1987
03-25-2017, 10:23 AM
Killing the rapist during the rape will at the very least stop it. Or prevent a second rape. Or help someone else from falling victim to the same.
For sure, but if there's PTSD associated with the rape (as it often is), confronting and killing the rapist isn't particularly likely to help that.

We have seen a whole bunch of AS who knew about it, and not a single one of them said that it was against Tower law. Not one of them seemed to think that what Alanna had done was a crime. Many thought it was against custom, but that's not enough for the WT to publicly support a man against an AS, is it?
True, but on the other hand, when Siuan and Egwene were blackmailing Myrelle, they seemed pretty certain the Hall would punish them severely. Not as much as a rapist truly deserves, but neither was there any implication that the Tower would be "on their side".

GonzoTheGreat
03-25-2017, 12:13 PM
True, but on the other hand, when Siuan and Egwene were blackmailing Myrelle, they seemed pretty certain the Hall would punish them severely. Not as much as a rapist truly deserves, but neither was there any implication that the Tower would be "on their side".
Was there any implication that Lan would be released from his Warder bond?
I don't think so. Which means that the rape victim does stay property of the rapist. For a historical example, see Deuteronomy|22:28-29.

Kimon
03-25-2017, 12:20 PM
This is somewhat topical, albeit real world, and with the victim a woman, but these circumstances aren't all that dissimilar to Mat's:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39392147

The alleged victim, who worked in hospitals in Turin, said the defendant had forced her into sexual acts and threatened to stop providing her with work if she did not comply, the Corriere della Sera newspaper reported (in Italian).
Asked why she had not reacted to the alleged assault more strongly, she told the court: "Sometimes saying no is enough but maybe I did not use the force and violence that in reality I should have used, but that is because with people who are too strong, I just freeze."

Apparently like Elayne, the judge wasn't particularly sympathetic.

The court in Turin ruled last month that the woman saying "enough" to her colleague who allegedly attacked her was not a strong enough reaction to prove she had been sexually assaulted.
The alleged victim is now facing charges for slander, reports said.

The reaction from courts isn't usually so egregiously unjust as that of this one in Turin, but this is illustrative of why so few rapes are reported.

GonzoTheGreat
03-25-2017, 12:31 PM
To be fair to the Turin court: courts in Italy seem to be very prone to victim blaming. A couple of years ago, a judge decided that another case couldn't have been rape, because it would have been impossible to get the woman's skinny jeans down her legs if she hadn't voluntarily cooperated. And of course, it's not only rape cases where Italian courts are nuts. You may remember that infamous earthquake prediction trial of a decade or so ago too.

fionwe1987
03-25-2017, 01:44 PM
Was there any implication that Lan would be released from his Warder bond?
I don't think so. Which means that the rape victim does stay property of the rapist. For a historical example, see Deuteronomy|22:28-29.

“Mother .*.*.” That was almost a gasp. “.*.*. I was explaining possible penalties.” She drew a long breath, and went on more definitely. “The Hall will have to invent them as they go, of course, but I think they might well start with making these two pass their Warders to others, since they seem so fond of it.”

Excerpt From: Robert Jordan. “Wheel of Time [07]: A Crown of Swords.” iBooks.

“It is very simple,” she said in a firm voice. “Without my protection, you will very likely lose your Warders, and almost certainly wish you’d been skinned alive by the time the Hall finishes with you. Your own Ajahs may have a few choice words for you, as well. It may be years before you can hold your heads up again, years before you don’t have sisters looking over your shoulder every minute.”

Now, Siuan said they'd have to pass their bonds, which seems entirely to miss the point. Egwene merely said they'd lose their Warders, which seems more sensible and to the point. I took it to mean Myrelle would lose Lan as well, not just her other Warders.

That said, given that Lan would almost certainly want to kill himself minus the bond, I have no idea how the Hall would have dealt with him. Asked Nynaeve to bond him if he was willing, but what if he said no to that?

Anaiya Sedai
03-28-2017, 09:21 AM
I'm assuming that Egwene would have taken into consideration the fact that Lan was passed over to keep him alive, and Nynaeve's feelings for him.

GonzoTheGreat
03-28-2017, 11:45 AM
Oh yes, assuming that an AS is being reasonable and considerate is indeed always a very interesting bet.

Davian93
03-28-2017, 12:09 PM
I'm assuming that Egwene would have taken into consideration the fact that Lan was passed over to keep him alive, and Nynaeve's feelings for him.

Well, the Amyrlin might have considered that but I'm not sure Egwene would have.

fionwe1987
03-28-2017, 07:02 PM
Well, the Amyrlin might have considered that but I'm not sure Egwene would have.

Don't you mean the reverse? Egwene's thoughts during the scene reveal she did take those factors into consideration. But completely powerless as she was, she couldn't have done anything to gainsay the Hall.

Davian93
05-03-2017, 10:08 AM
From Terez's notes thread:

Myrelle took Lan to her bed; this was to last until she had begun making him think of life again, to however small a degree, it being her belief that fucking makes you center on life rather than death. She had to use the bond to compel him, sometimes, which she found both odd and somewhat insulting.

Guess that settles that...Myrelle did compel him to bed her...and it insulted her that she had to.

connabard
05-03-2017, 12:02 PM
cool motive, still rape

that whole story line always made me uncomfortable

fionwe1987
05-03-2017, 03:57 PM
cool motive, still rape

that whole story line always made me uncomfortable

Definitely rape. As someone pointed out, aCoS seems to be filled with rapes, the threats of rape, and the consequences (or complete lack thereof) of rape.

Davian93
05-04-2017, 08:58 AM
cool motive, still rape

that whole story line always made me uncomfortable

Oh, its definitely rape...there was just some debate previously as to whether or not she compelled him with some of us saying she did and others saying that she did not. Its nice to have confirmation that it was indeed compulsion at work.