No "ism" is an all or nothing proposition. Whedon might not be a perfect feminist, but who is exactly? I don't think the bad stuff he's done 100% cancels out the good stuff he's done.

The WW are not sires of the Wights. They're necromancers. It's a completely different concept, and no it doesn't "change everything". Lol @morons who look to vanity fair for understanding a GoT episode.

I didn't say the trope didn't exist. I said the common portrayal of vampires doesn't use it. The same way garlic isn't considered a vampire weakness.

its called google buddy. good luck if you cant figure out something so basic.

huh no im not upset. just google vampire movies for examples. not that hard.

Let's see, one film vs every other vampire movie ever made basically. Lol. Kk then.

I don't need to prove anything bc the common wisdom is that vampirism doesn't just get disabled by killing a sire.

Pro tip: No one cares. Most people don't consider that part of vampire mythos. Fight Night came out in the 80s lol. And it wasn't that good. So you can go take your meds now.

I could rattle off a list of vampire movies and tv shows that don't use that trope but Ok.

I guess but then you could kill all vampires in like two seconds

I don't think that's how vampires work dude.

Why were the Wights able to run around the perimeter of the lake before Jon could run across it?

But why won't they believe in White Walkers if they believe in dragons? Or dudes coming back from the dead by Melisandre? It's not like there's no evidence around the world of this stuff. Dany of all people has seen her fair share of magic. If she has any strength as a leader, it should be this worldly wisdom,…

Wow what a relevant compelling counter point made in a timely manner. You go willfully ignorant moral equivocator!

which suggests that you don't understand what culture is or how it works : ) …further proving the irrelevance of your moral analysis. Try getting in touch with the rest of society and then maybe you'll have a frame of reference from which to judge SoIaF's plot and characters.

Well they were hit directly with flames, which I would characterize as less sadistic that being slowly roasted in a suit of armor. Not particularly any worse than say, being burned by wildfire (which the Lannisters used on Stannis), or simply being gutted with a spear.
Also, Harry Potter is 20 years old, and a…

No she killed them instantly in combat, where as Rickard was slowly roasted alive. And the Starks were simply trying to get Lyanna back, whereas the Lannisters are bastards who have basically done everything Aerys did and worse. So yeah, I don't know. I guess you're the guy who read Harry Potter and rooted for…

The music industry used to be so big haha.

Sugar Ray and Smash Mouth are harmless in my opinion. The other stuff is pretty cringey though.

Nope. Those two words mean entirely different things.