This topic is mostly for anti- bangel fans, so I'm sorry if I offend anyone. 🙂 Anyway, something that I just realized the other day while watching Buffy is that when Buffy and Angel started going out, she was around fifteen years old. And Angel was about 200- something. Now, say that we judge this off of how old he was before he was a vampire, which would be 26. To be quite frank, Angel is a teeny bit of a pedophile. 😀 And nowadays, he could probably get arrested, because it's illegal to date and have sexual interactions with a minor. Which he did. And well, I happen to find that a little creepy. Or rather a lot creepy. Also, Dawn in season seven was the same age as Buffy when she started dating Angel, someone almost twice her age. Try to imagine Dawn in Buffy's place, doing all the things Buffy did. It's freaky and weird, right? 😀 I'm just glad that she and Spike didn't start their relationship until she was 20, and Spike didn't love her 'til she was 19. Even RILEY had a more appropriate age wise relationship with Buffy. 🙂 So anyway, sorry if this topic had already been made. 🙂
Thoughts? Was I the last one to notice this? Any arguments? [Bangel fans, that one's for you 😀]
Personally, this is something
I struggle with regarding their relationship. I can see the justification for both arguments and why the age difference would bother some and not others. It's just personal opinion, really. Yet this doesn't change the facts; he was two lifetimes older than her.
I get the argument that he saw that she was much more mature than other girls, and that he fell for her "heart", and I don't doubt he fell for her because he could relate to her. You don't choose who you love, it chooses you, right? I doubt he wanted to fall on love with Buffy! After all, wouldn't it have spared both of them so much pain? I got the idea he felt an undeniable pull towards her.
YET
Angel had been through so much more in his life then she had. He'd lived two lifetimes. His whole outlook, life experience, and worldview simply couldn't be compared on her level. One of the arguments supporters of this 'ship use for the justification is this theme that
love is "ageless." I like this idea, I just don't know if I believe it as being an appropriate justification for a older man dating a minor. Since Angel is a vampire, human rules don't apply I guess, which would explain why Giles never mentioned the age difference as being an issue.
I guess what I'm saying is that I honestly still don't know how I feel about this. I feel like his behavior with watching her get called was definitely bordering on stalkerish, but his intentions were certainly good. When we think of the word "pedophile" we usually think of a man who has the intention of taking advantage of or hurting a younger girl. I don't believe for a minute this is what Angel was doing. He never took advantage of her, but I do believe there is an interesting dynamic going on regarding the fact that she was soooo young when he fell for her.
Surely, he was physically attracted to her along with being able to relate to her. Does it bother some people that this was the case? Yes, and it should. I guess it just boils down to whether or not this bothers you or not. And it's totally OK to say "Yes, it does bother me, and this is part of the reason Bangel doesn't work for me." And its OK to say "Well, love is ageless, and it didn't matter how old she was or how old he was."
Ugh. Hopefully that little post of mine made some sort of sense.
I guess nobody who 'ships Bangel really takes my comments on the two too seriously considering my obvious infatuation and devotion to Spuffy - but I do think I have and do consider all sides of the arguments regarding this.
You're certainly not the first person to notice this.
We talked about this pretty extensively in the "Bangel: On the Bubble" thread. Go check it out.
---------- Post added at 02:07 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:58 PM ----------
I'm not going to particularly argue with the fact, cos it's a fact but its nothing something I have a problem with. It's weird and creepy if you want to see it that way, but seeing as we're more directed to see Angel as a 200 year old vampire as opposed to a 20 something human turned vampire it's not really something that bothers me. At the end of the day, that's not what I would actually use the term 'paedophile' to describe myself anyway. Angel was not a sexual predator, not like a 'paedophile' is.
And I really don't think the argument that Spike didn't love her til twenties suffices as an argument. A lot of people say that Spike has had an 'attraction' to Buffy since he first joined the series in season two, when Buffy was seventeen. I see things like 'look how he looks at her dancing in the Bronze.' Ok then, I will. Oh look, a twenty something human-turned-vampire looking at a seventeen year old, in an extremely sexual way! Need I say more? At least with Angel it was about love at that time. But with Spike? That's pure, sexual and 'innappropriate' lust...😉
So if Angel is, so is Spike.
Also, I think it's important to note in a fantasy show, rules of "reality" just don't really apply. This is why they could get away with Bangel and the general audience wasn't offended or disturbed by it. I mean, we have all sorts of representation of "unorthodox" or non-traditonal dating in this show; interracial, intersexual, interspecies even. So, dating someone two lifetimes older than you could be just another example of this non-tradtional dating theme Joss has been working with, get what I'm saying?
And I actually agree about that scene with Spike in the Bronze. That
was inappropriate.
