>and a lazy way to get "motivation" for any character to do
>something. sorry, that's how i feel. it literally took me
>out of the show. and not in a good way, like it was a shock
>twist or anything.

I hear you, I do. It's a disgusting scene and the public backlash reflects that sentiment. I'm not trying to change your mind about how you *feel* about it, I'm just trying to illustrate why it's *necessary*.

> everyone knew a marriage to ramsey was not
>going to be a good thing, so i just don't see why it was
>necessary.

Agreed, and Sansa knew it wasn't going to be a good thing either. Except she still did it. Why? Because she's now in a position to do something about the Boltons. THAT is why it was necessary, and is entirely consistent with her character and the storyline. Everything you're protesting would be a departure from both.

>i addressed to frank above the fact that yes, the
>repercussions haven't played out. so there's the off-chance
>that this rape brings something new to the story, but i'm
>doubtful. happy to be proven wrong though.

This is what I don't get about the backlash. No one knows what's going to happen, so why are people so adamant about the scene being unnecesary?

>sansa already has plenty of motivation to want to see theon's,
>ramsey's, and roose's head on a spike on the walls of
>winterfell. the rape made no difference there.

Sure, I basically agree with you. But Sansa's motivation was never the issue. Her dilemma was being in a position to DO something about it. And the fact that this is the first time she's been *physically* brutalized. I don't know how many times I've needed to explain that.

>ramsey we already knew was a psychopath, so no difference
>there. so that leaves theon.

And Ramsay is now a married man. I agree the scene was less about him vs the other two, but trying to downplaying his role isn't going to change the impact of the scene.


>theon's situation i addressed a little bit more in depth on my
>second reply to frank, too. for him to have any redemption,
>he would have had to do something right then, right there.
>obviously, that wouldn't work with the timing of stannis'
>march, etc.

Why does it have to be something right then, right there? You completely ignored the prior scenarios I detailed. If he stops/injures/kills Ramsay, then what? Does that mean Roose just falls over and dies and Littlefinger makes Theon Warden of the North? Or what happens if he fails to stop him? He's already familiar with the depths of Ramsay's depravity so why would he risk doing something "right then, right there"?

What could Theon possibly do in his cowed state to redeem himself in that room, right then right there? I'm honestly asking you these questions, these aren't rhetorical.


>that's fine that if, in his mind, he does something later (say
>kill roose or ramsey or whatever) that he feels redeems
>himself. but then sansa should end him with a quickness.
>otherwise any sort of post-rape redemption that the writers
>try to sell would feel extremely forced and in bad taste.

These are some pretty bold claims not knowing how the season actually plays out. I'm willing to bet that these will be found untrue come the next few episodes.