Khal Drogo Did Not Rape Daenerys Targaryen

Before I begin my final round, I note that CON objected in the comments to the map in my prior round. PRO/CON have agreed to replace it with this map from HBO's website: (http://viewers-guide.hbo.com...). While the map is less detailed, it does not change PRO's argument.ClosingFrameworkI will first draw out the framework under which PRO/CON are currently operating:1) CON has not objected to the skydiving analogy, that there are some choices that once made come with dire consequences if not executed properly, and that the political marriages in Game of Thrones are quite dangerous and fit this analogy.2) Marriage for those from Westeros in the Game of Thrones environment necessitates consummation the evening of the wedding ceremony, without which the validity of the marriage is questionable.From these two points, it naturally follows that if someone agrees to a marriage out of their own volition, they also agree to have sex on their wedding night, that sex would have been consensual, and that there would be negative consequences to deviating from this, the severity of which depends upon the political ramifications of the wedding.---DisagreementThe only source of disagreement is whether or not Dany agreed to the marriage. CON would have you believe that "[Dany] was repeatedly threatened into marrying and having sex with Drogo," which is simply not valid and assumes far too much. When Viserys makes a threat, it's a threat...when he does not, it is not.In scene #1, Vis directly threatened Dany. Again, this has to be taken into the context of the skydiving analogy...they are meeting Drogo later that day and are preparing for the meeting. They are NOT discussing whether or not they should go through with this...they are already going through with it, i.e. they've already jumped out of this particular plane and must at least meet Drogo.Illyrio notes that had Drogo not been satisfied with Dany, he would have made his displeasure known ().In scene #2, CON equates the statement "[Vis] would let [Drogo's] whole tribe f*ck [Dany]," to mean that "[Vis] has control over who Daenerys sleeps with." This doesn't make any sense. If someone had control over a situation, they wouldn't "let" something happen...they would "make" something happen. If anything, Vis's statement here conveys a severe LACK of control over Dany.This is the key scene for this debate, as they discuss the marriage, Dany voices an objection, and Vis addresses it reasonably and with confidence. Yes, he is ridiculously snide, condescending, and objectifies Dany to an extreme degree...but he does NOT threaten her. Any insinuation of such is unsubstantiable.Re: scene #3, I will correct a statement I made in the prior round, that "Vis lets it known that Dany is in a precarious position, and that she had better make Drogo happy. This is a threat..." Replace with "this is threatening..." Vis's statement here is threatening, but is not a threat...again, it merely describes Dany's precarious position.Throughout his analysis, CON imagines Vis making threats when there are no evident threats. Vis does make threats, but only in regards to "waking the dragon". Dany has low self-esteem and confidence, but she does indeed possess her own mind and voices her thoughts as she sees fit. That her voice led to the marriage evidently means that she agreed to it. Their situation is adverse, but they are still capable of making their own choices.ConcessionI would also like to note that CON does NOT dispute that Dany possesses free will and was not a slave. With this concession, CON's entire case falls apart. If Dany had free will, then she chose to get married out of her own volition. The rest of the debate then becomes insubstantial in comparison...with this concession, the resolution is easily resolved in favor of PRO.CON has also completely and utterly avoided the comparison with Sansa's marriage. I don't blame him...it's materially different from Dany's and destroys his case by showing what someone robbed of free will would do in a marriage. Sansa is a Lannister hostage, she cannot say what she wants to say and she cannot do anything but unquestionably obey her captives else face severe punishment. Any sex that Tyrion would have had with her would have to be taken in the context of a non-consensual marriage and would thus constitute rape. Dany was not a slave to Vis, and her marriage to Drogo was not a product of Vis's will trumping Dany's but was something that both agreed would bring them closer to home.This becomes extremely important in regards to how CON misinterprets Dany's views on marriage...he says that Dany "is talking about consensual marriage, which does not apply in her case," and thereby assumes his argument without explanation. The actual explanation is simple - Dany is talking about a Dothraki marriage, characterized by free will, choice, and thus consent. Dany's own marriage was also a Dothraki marriage, and thus shared these qualities with what CON labels a "consensual marriage".EtcOn Chess - CON does not discuss how it is clear that Dany did not see any relevance between her desire to go home and her marriage to Drogo, hence her objection. Vis made this connection, and thus addressed Dany's objection. Did Dany have any more to say? No, she did not. This describes a checkmate scenario, yes? Where you can't move without your opponent "checking" your move? Or in this case "checking" your arguments?ConclusionI thank drafterman for engaging in a debate with a focused attention to detail, as it has made this debate much more worthwhile than one without such detail.I simply ask audiences to consider both cases, and to ask yourself how you could possibly be coerced to do something if you possess free will? I also want to remind audiences that the show depicts tremendous amounts of misogyny and rape...but not in this instance. Thanks for reading this debate. =)