Game of Thrones Season 6 Discussion Thread *No Spoilers*

[Facekicker]

People are surprised that Sansa got raped?

It was inevitable once she was left with that sadistic freak.

I think it was more that they showed it. They could have easily have had Ramsay grab her, throw her on the bed - and cut to credits. It would have served the same story purpose, without the shock of watching it, and watching Theon watch it.

A lot of these things that get complained about wouldn't get complaints if they did it once every 2 seasons or so, but it's like every episode they're trying to figure out how to make it more gratuitous. It's like when Futurama figured out Fry was a meme, and tried to become self-aware, it backfires.

Didn't they only show Theon's reaction?

They showed Sansa's face, and her moans/groans.

Pretty tame in comparison to other parts of the show.

Interesting to read this

Sophie Turner on that scene:

"When I read that scene, I kinda loved it. I love the way Ramsay had Theon watching. It was all so messed up. It’s also so daunting for me to do it. I’ve been making [producer Bryan Cogman] feel so bad for writing that scene: “I can’t believe you’re doing this to me!” But I secretly loved it. "

[downzy]

People are surprised that Sansa got raped?

It was inevitable once she was left with that sadistic freak.

I think it was more that they showed it. They could have easily have had Ramsay grab her, throw her on the bed - and cut to credits. It would have served the same story purpose, without the shock of watching it, and watching Theon watch it.

A lot of these things that get complained about wouldn't get complaints if they did it once every 2 seasons or so, but it's like every episode they're trying to figure out how to make it more gratuitous. It's like when Futurama figured out Fry was a meme, and tried to become self-aware, it backfires.

Didn't they only show Theon's reaction?

They showed Sansa's face, and her moans/groans.

Pretty tame in comparison to other parts of the show.

Interesting to read this

Sophie Turner on that scene:

"When I read that scene, I kinda loved it. I love the way Ramsay had Theon watching. It was all so messed up. It’s also so daunting for me to do it. I’ve been making [producer Bryan Cogman] feel so bad for writing that scene: “I can’t believe you’re doing this to me!” But I secretly loved it. "

Yeah, I kind of agree. Not that I condone rape of any sort (obviously), but it was wrenching in an interesting way to see how the producers and director designed that scene. It's what they didn't show, which was left up to the viewers' imagination, that haunts the viewer in this case. There have been far more brutal depictions of rape on this show prior to last night's episode (Daenerys' in the first couple of episodes of season 1 comes to mind), but having the camera limited to the reaction of the victims (Sansa and Theon) was brutal in its own way. Actually, if you watch the scene again, I'm not sure if we actually see Sansa's reaction to being raped by Ramsey. The camera seems to depict her dread as Ramsey continues to savagely disrobe her. It's really only Theon's reaction we see when Sansa gets brutalized (as noted by Sansa's screams).

They could have gone the other way and actually shown in graphic details Ramsey brutalizing Sansa, but I give the producers credit for coming up with a less gratuitous but still interesting and impressionable means to depict what was happening. The way they've set up this story, the scene was inevitable, but for good or bad, the only impression of the actual act given to the viewer could be derived from Theon's reaction and Sansa's off-camera cries. Again, it's highly disturbing, but not in the gratuitous manner this show is known for.

[AtariLegend]

People are surprised that Sansa got raped?

It was inevitable once she was left with that sadistic freak.

I think it was more that they showed it. They could have easily have had Ramsay grab her, throw her on the bed - and cut to credits. It would have served the same story purpose, without the shock of watching it, and watching Theon watch it.

A lot of these things that get complained about wouldn't get complaints if they did it once every 2 seasons or so, but it's like every episode they're trying to figure out how to make it more gratuitous. It's like when Futurama figured out Fry was a meme, and tried to become self-aware, it backfires.

Didn't they only show Theon's reaction?

They showed Sansa's face, and her moans/groans.

Pretty tame in comparison to other parts of the show.

Interesting to read this

Sophie Turner on that scene:

"When I read that scene, I kinda loved it. I love the way Ramsay had Theon watching. It was all so messed up. It’s also so daunting for me to do it. I’ve been making [producer Bryan Cogman] feel so bad for writing that scene: “I can’t believe you’re doing this to me!” But I secretly loved it. "

Yeah, I kind of agree. Not that I condone rape of any sort (obviously), but it was wrenching in an interesting way to see how the producers and director designed that scene. It's what they didn't show, which was left up to the viewers' imagination, that haunts the viewer in this case. There have been far more brutal depictions of rape on this show prior to last night's episode (Daenerys' in the first couple of episodes of season 1 comes to mind), but having the camera limited to the reaction of the victims (Sansa and Theon) was brutal in its own way. Actually, if you watch the scene again, I'm not sure if we actually see Sansa's reaction to being raped by Ramsey. The camera seems to depict her dread as Ramsey continues to savagely disrobe her. It's really only Theon's reaction we see when Sansa gets brutalized (as noted by Sansa's screams).

They could have gone the other way and actually shown in graphic details Ramsey brutalizing Sansa, but I give the producers credit for coming up with a less gratuitous but still interesting and impressionable means to depict what was happening. The way they've set up this story, the scene was inevitable, but for good or bad, the only impression of the actual act given to the viewer could be derived from Theon's reaction and Sansa's off-camera cries. Again, it's highly disturbing, but not in the gratuitous manner this show is known for.

It's completely against her character arc, in the book she's no where near Ramsay and Ramsay ends up marrying some other poor girl.

The whole concept of putting Sansa in that position makes no sense. You're supposed to believe that she's learnt from her time in king's landing and little finger, that's she's going to learn how to play the game and yet here she is put in another abuse storyline. It's extremely poor from the producers who think that character should be defined by all this.

If you analyze where she was at the end of last season, she's went from the safest place she could realistically be in the show "the vale" to Ramsay for no logical reason.

Edited May 19, 2015 by AtariLegend

[Facekicker]

People are surprised that Sansa got raped?

It was inevitable once she was left with that sadistic freak.

I think it was more that they showed it. They could have easily have had Ramsay grab her, throw her on the bed - and cut to credits. It would have served the same story purpose, without the shock of watching it, and watching Theon watch it.

A lot of these things that get complained about wouldn't get complaints if they did it once every 2 seasons or so, but it's like every episode they're trying to figure out how to make it more gratuitous. It's like when Futurama figured out Fry was a meme, and tried to become self-aware, it backfires.

Didn't they only show Theon's reaction?

They showed Sansa's face, and her moans/groans.

Pretty tame in comparison to other parts of the show.

Interesting to read this

Sophie Turner on that scene:

"When I read that scene, I kinda loved it. I love the way Ramsay had Theon watching. It was all so messed up. It’s also so daunting for me to do it. I’ve been making [producer Bryan Cogman] feel so bad for writing that scene: “I can’t believe you’re doing this to me!” But I secretly loved it. "

Yeah, I kind of agree. Not that I condone rape of any sort (obviously), but it was wrenching in an interesting way to see how the producers and director designed that scene. It's what they didn't show, which was left up to the viewers' imagination, that haunts the viewer in this case. There have been far more brutal depictions of rape on this show prior to last night's episode (Daenerys' in the first couple of episodes of season 1 comes to mind), but having the camera limited to the reaction of the victims (Sansa and Theon) was brutal in its own way. Actually, if you watch the scene again, I'm not sure if we actually see Sansa's reaction to being raped by Ramsey. The camera seems to depict her dread as Ramsey continues to savagely disrobe her. It's really only Theon's reaction we see when Sansa gets brutalized (as noted by Sansa's screams).

They could have gone the other way and actually shown in graphic details Ramsey brutalizing Sansa, but I give the producers credit for coming up with a less gratuitous but still interesting and impressionable means to depict what was happening. The way they've set up this story, the scene was inevitable, but for good or bad, the only impression of the actual act given to the viewer could be derived from Theon's reaction and Sansa's off-camera cries. Again, it's highly disturbing, but not in the gratuitous manner this show is known for.

I thought it was more powerful that way. The show has already established in graphic detail just how sadistic and twisted Ramsey is and how Sansa is one of the few characters that hasn't been corrupted in some form or other.

People might not like how she has come this far only to end up in this situation but that is a far more interesting development than your usual Hollywood type ending.

[downzy]

People are surprised that Sansa got raped?

It was inevitable once she was left with that sadistic freak.

I think it was more that they showed it. They could have easily have had Ramsay grab her, throw her on the bed - and cut to credits. It would have served the same story purpose, without the shock of watching it, and watching Theon watch it.

A lot of these things that get complained about wouldn't get complaints if they did it once every 2 seasons or so, but it's like every episode they're trying to figure out how to make it more gratuitous. It's like when Futurama figured out Fry was a meme, and tried to become self-aware, it backfires.

Didn't they only show Theon's reaction?

They showed Sansa's face, and her moans/groans.

Pretty tame in comparison to other parts of the show.

Interesting to read this

Sophie Turner on that scene:

"When I read that scene, I kinda loved it. I love the way Ramsay had Theon watching. It was all so messed up. It’s also so daunting for me to do it. I’ve been making [producer Bryan Cogman] feel so bad for writing that scene: “I can’t believe you’re doing this to me!” But I secretly loved it. "

Yeah, I kind of agree. Not that I condone rape of any sort (obviously), but it was wrenching in an interesting way to see how the producers and director designed that scene. It's what they didn't show, which was left up to the viewers' imagination, that haunts the viewer in this case. There have been far more brutal depictions of rape on this show prior to last night's episode (Daenerys' in the first couple of episodes of season 1 comes to mind), but having the camera limited to the reaction of the victims (Sansa and Theon) was brutal in its own way. Actually, if you watch the scene again, I'm not sure if we actually see Sansa's reaction to being raped by Ramsey. The camera seems to depict her dread as Ramsey continues to savagely disrobe her. It's really only Theon's reaction we see when Sansa gets brutalized (as noted by Sansa's screams).

They could have gone the other way and actually shown in graphic details Ramsey brutalizing Sansa, but I give the producers credit for coming up with a less gratuitous but still interesting and impressionable means to depict what was happening. The way they've set up this story, the scene was inevitable, but for good or bad, the only impression of the actual act given to the viewer could be derived from Theon's reaction and Sansa's off-camera cries. Again, it's highly disturbing, but not in the gratuitous manner this show is known for.

It's completely against her character arc, in the book she's no where near Ramsay and Ramsay ends up marrying some other poor girl.

The whole concept of putting Sansa in that position makes no sense. You're supposed to believe that she's learnt from her time in king's landing and little finger, that's she's going to learn how to play the game and yet here she is put in another abuse storyline. It's extremely poor from the producers who think that character should be defined by all this.

If you analyze where she was at the end of last season, she's went from the safest place she could realistically be in the show "the vale" to Ramsay for no logical reason.

In my opinion, you're making the mistake of using the logic derived from the books and applying it to the show. They're now, and as I understand it for awhile, two completely different entities. My fiancé has read all of the books and even she has no clue where the show is going.

As for Sansa's storyline, it makes much more sense if you look at it from Little Finger's perspective. Ever since he broke her out of Kings Landing last season, he's been using her in his quest for power. Putting Sansa in Winterfell with the Boltons improves his ties with the current Warden of the North while he maneuvers to become the Warden of the North. Sansa has always been a rather clueless girl who, in the show at least, seems unable to remove her head from the sand. Her ability to read people is horrible and often trusts the wrong person. She made the same mistake with Little Finger as she made with Joffrey. So often just being a Stark has saved her from a truly terrible fait; this time it's forsaken her to one. It's definitely a break from form, but one that I think in this instance makes sense.

In that light, it makes perfect sense for her to end up at Winterfell with the Boltons as a result of Little Finger's manipulation. Does it make sense in reference to the books? No. But as someone who has no clue what happens in the books, I'd say that most developments have made sense up until this point.

[Georgy Zhukov]

You worry about Sansa throughout Seasons 2 and 3 because of Joffery and now she is finally raped it takes a lot away. It makes no sense for her to be in Winterfell because she was supposed to be hundreds of miles away and Stannis is already marching on to the Boltons at Winterfell. It just seems like a cheap way to end an episode.

[downzy]

You worry about Sansa throughout Seasons 2 and 3 because of Joffery and now she is finally raped it takes a lot away. It makes no sense for her to be in Winterfell because she was supposed to be hundreds of miles away and Stannis is already marching on to the Boltons at Winterfell. It just seems like a cheap way to end an episode.

I don't understand what you mean by "she's suppose to be hundreds of miles away." Why? Because of the books? If so, that doesn't make any sense. The divergence between the show and the books is supposedly growing larger and larger. To take issue with the television narrative at this point seems to ignore this trend in the last couple of seasons.

[Dan H.]

I'm fine with it, it's not as offensive to me as a book reader compared to completely removing the Iron Islands and cutting back the Dorne storyline

[Nosaj Thing]

In my opinion, you're making the mistake of using the logic derived from the books and applying it to the show.

I think this is a fair statement. People should stop discussing "in the books" because the show is clearly taking another approach by inserting and deleting stuff from the source material.

[bran]

You worry about Sansa throughout Seasons 2 and 3 because of Joffery and now she is finally raped it takes a lot away. It makes no sense for her to be in Winterfell because she was supposed to be hundreds of miles away and Stannis is already marching on to the Boltons at Winterfell. It just seems like a cheap way to end an episode.

I don't understand what you mean by "she's suppose to be hundreds of miles away." Why? Because of the books? If so, that doesn't make any sense. The divergence between the show and the books is supposedly growing larger and larger. To take issue with the television narrative at this point seems to ignore this trend in the last couple of seasons.

even though the show and books are separate the changing and cutting of things in the show from the books effects the show. martin has already said several times that some changes from the books were going to throw off tv story lines. the reason why sansa is at winterfell is because so many characters have been cut or are out of place(yara on both) that they are trying to fit round pegs into a square hole. some changes are fine and add to the show(robs wife at the red wedding) but when you make wholesale changes fans are going to notice something is off, book readers can give the context of why its fucked up.

[downzy]

You worry about Sansa throughout Seasons 2 and 3 because of Joffery and now she is finally raped it takes a lot away. It makes no sense for her to be in Winterfell because she was supposed to be hundreds of miles away and Stannis is already marching on to the Boltons at Winterfell. It just seems like a cheap way to end an episode.

I don't understand what you mean by "she's suppose to be hundreds of miles away." Why? Because of the books? If so, that doesn't make any sense. The divergence between the show and the books is supposedly growing larger and larger. To take issue with the television narrative at this point seems to ignore this trend in the last couple of seasons.

even though the show and books are separate the changing and cutting of things in the show from the books effects the show. martin has already said several times that some changes from the books were going to throw off tv story lines. the reason why sansa is at winterfell is because so many characters have been cut or are out of place(yara on both) that they are trying to fit round pegs into a square hole. some changes are fine and add to the show(robs wife at the red wedding) but when you make wholesale changes fans are going to notice something is off, book readers can give the context of why its fucked up.

Yeah, I understand why people who have read the books might take issue with storyline changes. There's nothing wrong with comparing what transpires in the show with what happens in the book. It's natural to prefer one to the other if there are changes. But I think it's wrong to suggest that logic is lacking within the show for why Sansa is in Winterfell. Personally, the show has done a good enough job as to why Little Finger has brought Sansa to Winterfell (improve ties to both the Boltons and the Lannisters). His knack for playing both sides, as has been evident the entire series, continues with his use of Sansa. The show does make it clear that Little Finger has little idea of who Ramsay is and the extraordinary evil that lies within him when it comes to women and his need to dominate and brutalize them. But if you accept the storyline as it relates to Little Finger, the rape scene is one of the more predictable scenes in the show. Once Sansa married Ramsay, what other outcome could there be?

Again, I agree that comparisons between the book and the television are bound to happen. It's fine for book readers to suggest that they prefer one version over the other. What I don't understand is the suggestion that the rape scene was gratuitous, unnecessary, and didn't make sense. What wouldn't have made any sense was for the show producers to ignore what was going to happen to Sansa should she be married to the monster Ramsay. What makes it difficult to watch is that Sansa has, for the most part, has relatively escaped from the grotesqueries of Westeros so far when compared to most of the other characters on the show, particularly the Starks (other than almost being raped by Kings Landing locals a few seasons ago). Though no longer as naive as she once was, up until Sunday's episode her own physical victimization has been relatively light. That all ended Sunday and it was horrifying to watch, as evident by Theon/Reek's own reaction (a man who has seen the worst and had the worst happen to him but was still left trembling and horrified by what unfolded in front of him).

Here's a good response to some of the criticism of the episode:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2015/05/19/the_rape_scene_on_sunday_s_game_of_thrones_was_necessary_and_sansa_deserves.html

[AtariLegend]

The show works best when it's adapting like little bits of Tyrion dialogue they add in trial scenes ect , not when they're trying to re-write stuff. The "stop bring up the books" crowd should mention the completely new storylines/sub plots the producers added that was better in the books? Missandei/Grey Worm?

[AtariLegend]

Personally, the show has done a good enough job as to why Little Finger has brought Sansa to Winterfell (improve ties to both the Boltons and the Lannisters). His knack for playing both sides, as has been evident the entire series, continues with his use of Sansa. The show does make it clear that Little Finger has little idea of who Ramsay is and the extraordinary evil that lies within him when it comes to women and his need to dominate and brutalize them. But if you accept the storyline as it relates to Little Finger

It makes no sense whatsoever for a guy "who doesn't trust a drunk" to trust someone he doesn't know that's family just happens to have a history of rapping/flaying people and even have it on their banners. It makes even little sense for LF the guy who started the current war by killing Jon, starting a war between Lannisters/Starks then killing Joffery and getting away with it without anyone knowing to not even know about Ramsay. Yes he's a risk taker, but he's a schemer he doesn't just roll the dice.

Littlefinger obviously loved Catyln and although he uses Sansa, you can't logically suggest he'd risk putting her after all his hardwork in a scenario where she'd probably end up dead or worse. Cerseri may be bat shit crazy, but the idea that she doesn't even ask LF more about Sansa when she herself distrusts him is just a bit of a jump.

I am using TV show logic here.

Edited May 20, 2015 by AtariLegend

[downzy]

Personally, the show has done a good enough job as to why Little Finger has brought Sansa to Winterfell (improve ties to both the Boltons and the Lannisters). His knack for playing both sides, as has been evident the entire series, continues with his use of Sansa. The show does make it clear that Little Finger has little idea of who Ramsay is and the extraordinary evil that lies within him when it comes to women and his need to dominate and brutalize them. But if you accept the storyline as it relates to Little Finger

It makes no sense whatsoever for a guy "who doesn't trust a drunk" to trust someone he doesn't know that's family just happens to have a history of rapping/flaying people and even have it on their banners. It makes even little sense for LF the guy who started the current war by killing Jon, starting a war between Lannisters/Starks then killing Joffery and getting away with it without anyone knowing to not even know about Ramsay. Yes he's a risk taker, but he's a schemer he doesn't just roll the dice.

Littlefinger obviously loved Catyln and although he uses Sansa, you can't logically suggest he'd risk putting her after all his hardwork in a scenario where she'd probably end up dead or worse. Cerseri may be bat shit crazy, but the idea that she doesn't even ask LF more about Sansa when she herself distrusts him is just a bit of a jump.

I am using TV show logic here.

I've always thought of LF as resourceful and with a good ear to the ground, but he's certainly not Varys. We're left to assume that LF has spent most of his time at the Vale of Arryn, which may be why he knows little of Ramsay's exploits at the time of him bringing Sansa to Winterfell (perhaps he had his spies pay more attention to the head of the family, Rouse). Regardless, the show does make it clear with LF's scene with Ramsay that he's woefully uninformed about committing Sansa to the House of Bolton. Again, Ramsay's exploits are well known in the book, but there's little indication other than his limited time in Winterfell to suggest that his reputation is well known within the context of the show. We might assume that his reputation for barbarianism in war and with enemies is well known, but his deranged exploitation and domination of women might be lesser known. The show hasn't given enough context to make this clear.

I don't think LF is risking Sansa in his mind, considering he knows that the Boltons need Sansa alive to help their ties with various tribes and lords of the North. He is making a risk by telling Cersei, but he's at least managing it by setting himself up to lead the military charge himself. We're still halfway through the season, there's likely more to his plan. Who knows what he has in-store should he lead a contingent of soldiers to Winterfell to conquer either Stannis or Rouse Bolton? Maybe he solidifies his holdings, marries Sansa, and takes the North for himself, which he'd then use as a platform to take over the remaining kingdoms of Westeros? Not saying that's going to happen, but perhaps that's his plan. I think LF risks and risks often, it's how all advances and accumulation of power occur. Leaving Sansa with Ramsay in Winterfell is just another calculated risk for LF. Considering what he revealed to Cersei once he reached Kings Landing, the plan makes more sense.

[Nosaj Thing]

The "stop bring up the books" crowd should mention the completely new storylines/sub plots the producers added that was better in the books? Missandei/Grey Worm?

I haven't read the books, but if you're going to complain about the show not being accurate "according to the books", then, with all due respect, stick to the books. The show will continue to disappoint you.

[OmarBradley]

I understand the argument that, "the books and the show are two different things." The producers have continuously said that and shown that they intend for the stories to be separate...... but IMO they're inherently not separate. It's the same characters.... it's the same world.... what if you took SW: A New Hope, adapted it into books, and had Vader kill Han Solo, Leia become a Storm Trooper, and Jar Jar Binks become a Jedi? Fans would be pissed, doesn't matter if they're supposed to be separate.

Now, I haven't read the books. But I have read a solid amount of ASOIAF wiki, and the stories in the books are much more interesting than what they've come up with on their own for the TV show, and that upsets me - that I won't get to see a screen adaptation of Martin's story..... I don't care about DB Weiss/David Benioff's GoT story, I want Martin's.

[downzy]

I understand the argument that, "the books and the show are two different things." The producers have continuously said that and shown that they intend for the stories to be separate...... but IMO they're inherently not separate. It's the same characters.... it's the same world.... what if you took SW: A New Hope, adapted it into books, and had Vader kill Han Solo, Leia become a Storm Trooper, and Jar Jar Binks become a Jedi? Fans would be pissed, doesn't matter if they're supposed to be separate.

Now, I haven't read the books. But I have read a solid amount of ASOIAF wiki, and the stories in the books are much more interesting than what they've come up with on their own for the TV show, and that upsets me - that I won't get to see a screen adaptation of Martin's story..... I don't care about DB Weiss/David Benioff's GoT story, I want Martin's.

That's a fair point. Martin's story is likely more interesting and deeper than what they've presented in the HBO series. One wonders, however, if the end destination will be the same in both accounts. The producers of the show have been told by Martin how he envisions the story ending. It's likely we'll all end up at the same place, but how we get there will be a bit different. (BTW, I'm not sure the drastic changes you mention in your Star Wars analogy holds up when compared to the show; sure, some time lines have changed and certain characters are not where they're suppose to be, but are the characters themselves drastically different from how Martin has written them?)

Perhaps the HBO version is just taking a shortcut due to technical limitations. The novels are sprawling and perhaps it's just not feasible to present the narrative as it's written in the books in a television format (ten episodes a year, six to eight month break in season production). Consider that were the producers/screenwriters for the HBO series to follow the novels faithfully the show would still be on book two, maybe book three. That would be fine for many, but think about how many times they would have had to recast several key members of the show had they followed this tract. I believe Sansa in the books stays in the Vale of Arryn, but can the show have a major character sit out for several seasons because Martin opted not to include her character in several books? For the sake of continuity, it would be hard for a viewer to accept either a much older Sansa should they stay with the same actor several seasons later (since she's relatively the same age when Martin writes for her character) or a different actor altogether. I know the show has recast some smaller roles multiple times (The Mountain, in particular), but I'm not sure it could work if they had to recast major characters.

I think with the technical limitations that such a sprawling narrative imposes, the narrative changes are justified.

Another solution is to stop reading all those wikis I thought about picking up the books a few years ago but I think I'll just wait until the show has run its course. That way I can enjoy the show for what it is and then enjoy Martin's version without feeling the need to compare.

[Black Sabbath]

Backlash over Sansa's "rape" scene is fucking stupid. Hardly a rape scene.

[Nosaj Thing]

In all honesty, the complaints should directed to how godawful the fight scene in the Water Gardens was. Really, that reminded me of grade C 1989 action movies.

[AtariLegend]

[Georgy Zhukov]

Backlash over Sansa's "rape" scene is fucking stupid. Hardly a rape scene.

She was raped, only an idiot would say otherwise.

[Black Sabbath]

Backlash over Sansa's "rape" scene is fucking stupid. Hardly a rape scene.

She was raped, only an idiot would say otherwise.

Did I say she wasn't? Compared to the Jamie/Cersei rape scene before it's nothing. Obviously she's raped, but they don't show anything. Same goes for a rape scene in the Sopranos before.

Not saying she wasn't raped, but what was in the last episode was hardly a rape scene and the backlash behind it is kind of ridiculous.

[Georgy Zhukov]

It is not what they show, it is what they didn't show. That is what makes it so disturbing. Plus Sansa is still a child, Ramsay is a grown man, she is forced into a marriage she didn't want and is raped in front of Theon. Yeah, Cersei's rape was disturbing and unnecessary but they have sunk to a new low with Sansa.

[Strange Broue]

I really don't see the appeal for this rape talk...

The mother of dragons raped countless times by Khal Drogo

Yet no pseudo libtards screaming for the banhammer....

[AtariLegend]

Actually people did complain about Danny's wedding night/compared to the book. The wedding night is completely consensual and plays out very differently when he leads her horse away. The only difference between now/then is alot more people watch the show now.

...And again the Jamie/Cerseri scene is completely different in the books too.