Everyone is of course free to dig deeper into the world of the novels how they please, but I rather feel that predicting or championing social progress in Westeros is ultimately futile. Themes like "feudalism doesn't work" and "the peasants get the shit end of the stick" do occasionally pop up, but the narrative doesn't seem to very interested in them, so why should I be?

In a series about dynastic power struggles between families, I feel that we are invited to be engrossed in these struggles. Declaring oneself to be on "Team Smallfolk" seems like missing the point to me. There is a overarching theme that these petty squabbles among the nobles is wasteful, but ignoring the supernatural threat of the Others is treated as a greater sin than wreaking havoc on the people they rule.

I don't think it's one thing or the other. I think Martin explores multiple facets of this society, and I would argue the series is absolutely interested in the workings of feudalism, and the plight of the smallfolk. Maybe they're not given a perspective, but their experiences are at least related to us via Arya and Brienne.

Also I really liked the discussion about Stephan's article however I think there was confusion about Patriarchy as a family structure and a male dominant society structure.

I have noticed that one of the female guest-hosts moaned at some of the statements of Stefan (when he joked about being an oppressed man at home for example). I don't think that was appropriate for a podcast. It's a bit disrespectful.

I have noticed that one of the female guest-hosts moaned at some of the statements of Stefan (when he joked about being an oppressed man at home for example). I don't think that was appropriate for a podcast. It's a bit disrespectful.

This seems to be a rather peculiar tipping point that would compel you to make your first forum post. Can you elaborate on how such a trifle would be more grievously disrespectful than typical podcast banter or general eye-rolling social interaction? I apologize if this response has come off as hostile or antagonistic, I don't mean to be inhospitable to intrepid forum newcomers, I'm just confused by text and subtext on display.

Wait don't they have Stonesnake's head? or was that squire whoevers head?

Qhorin sent Stonesnake back through the mountains in the hopes that the difficult terrain would prevent the wildlings from following him. That was the last we heard of him.

Well then I think the answer is obvious.... Stonesnack=Coldhands boom

I went and reread the chapter after I listened. I thought it was interesting that nobody pointed out that Qhorin Halfhand employed a torturer along with a tracker and a mountain climber.

I think the wolf dream Jon has of a tree that smelled like his brother was awesome forshadowing, because at the time you think it's metaphorical or something, but now we know it's actually very literal.

I also bet that the Halfhand brought Jon along with an idea toward both continuing his education as a likely future high officer in the Watch, if the mission went well, and with the knowledge that a young, fresh-faced warg would be more likely to be accepted by the Wildlings as a deserter than an older, more experienced ranger, if it didn't.

AH COLDHANDS IS REPEATEDLY MENTIONED AS ANCIENT!!
Also this was a great episode. I thought it was a lot of fun to listen to

I agree, though they are far from mutually exclusive. The conversation seemed to focus primarily on the ways patriarchy manifests in the great lords of Westeros, rather than generally, which I believe was Stefan's emphasis, not having read the essay.