Are you ready to be strong?

[Skanky Vamp]

My point is that these societies are inherently unfair anyway- that has nothing to do with Buffy or the spell.

It would have everything to do with the spell. You could be a normal person living under unjust conditions, living peacefully, and then these nightmares, etc are thrust upon you precipitating your death. How would that not be Buffy's fault.

You can say, well, the society is unfair, but then that puts you in a position of higher moral authority deeming which centuries old tradition is 'right' and which is 'wrong' not to mention the countless men and women that live within that society that may not have any issue with it. Sure, we may perceive said tradition as wrong, but our own societal traditions can be viewed just as inherently unfair by others.

 

[thetopher]

It would have everything to do with the spell. You could be a normal person living under unjust conditions, living peacefully, and then these nightmares, etc are thrust upon you precipitating your death. How would that not be Buffy's fault.

It would be the fault of the person killing the girl simply because she is 'demonic', it's really that simple. How is Buffy responsible for another person's ignorance?

Now if the girl was to suddenly go around abusing her power and slaying people then I could see your point and Buffy would share some of that responsibility.

You can say, well, the society is unfair, but then that puts you in a position of higher moral authority deeming which centuries old tradition is 'right' and which is 'wrong' not to mention the countless men and women that live within that society that may not have any issue with it. Sure, we may perceive said tradition as wrong, but our own societal traditions can be viewed just as inherently unfair by others.

I have no problem with saying that certain cultural norms in other societies are barbaric. I don't consider stoning, or genital mutilation or gang rape as punishment as anything other that utterly abhorant towards the women in those societies. I also don't doubt that women in those societies- who unable to do such simple things like vote- would also say that they are treated poorly and would change the status quo if they could.

There are some moral absolutes that should transcend societal differences.

 

[The Bronze]

I have no problem with saying that certain cultural norms in other societies are barbaric. I don't consider stoning, or genital mutilation or gang rape as punishment as anything other that utterly abhorant towards the women in those societies.

+1
I also have no problem taking the moral high ground here. I don't care how traditional something might be or which God might think it's cool. Some things are just wrong regardless.

 

[Skanky Vamp]

There are some moral absolutes that should transcend societal differences.

That is what led to the Salem witch burnings if I am not mistaken.

 

[thetopher]

That is what led to the Salem witch burnings if I am not mistaken.

Actually no, the salem witch trials- or any witch trials- happened because the same societal norms were transfered all over the place, which is different.

It started in Denmark, then was transferred to Scotland by King James. When he became King of Great Britian he had a book published about the many evils of witch craft- that later transfered over to America with the same brand of fairly toxic Puritanism took root. It wasn't one culture/religion enforcing its norms on another.

Also there were other cases where the motives had nothing to do with the society of the time- such as the famed Pendal witches in England being hanged because they were all land-owning widows without anybody to inherit.

 

[Taake]

There are some moral absolutes that should transcend societal differences.

Such as not claiming the right over another persons body or destiny.
Exactly, to tie into the topic, what Buffy does and exactly why she violates a number of young girls just as she herself has been violated with her power. Did she ask or want for it? Vociferously through out the show - no! So how come she suddnely thinks that being a Slayer is somehow a gift of being strong? It took her seven years and dying twice to get somewhere along the lines of being okay with it... regardless of what society they are in she is using her own power to condemn other girls to the destiny she has herself so very much loathed.

 

[thetopher]

I think Buffy struggled with it for precisly one reason- being the slayer made her alone. One girl in all the world who was 'condemned' to fight and ultimately die alone.
But now she, nor any other potential-turned-slayer will ever be burdened with that feeling of isolation again because there are others just like them who can share in that struggle.

 

[Skanky Vamp]

same societal norms were transfered all over the place, which is different.

They were not the same societal norms. They were, as you put it, moral absolutes.

Chris Gowan in "Moral Relativism" states that "the truth of 'moral judgements' is not universal but is instead relative to the values of a group of people." it was these moral absolutes that precipitated the Salem witch trials. It's why metaethical moral relativism states that there are no absolutes. What they called a moral absolute then, we look at, scoff and call a 'societal norm' today.

 

[The Bronze]

Such as not claiming the right over another persons body or destiny.

This is what Buffy does every time she saves a life. She could walk by and let people get devoured by vampires but she claims a right to defend their body and destiny and helps them. I'm cool with that.

Exactly, to tie into the topic, what Buffy does and exactly why she violates a number of young girls just as she herself has been violated with her power. Did she ask or want for it? Vociferously through out the show - no! So how come she suddnely thinks that being a Slayer is somehow a gift of being strong? It took her seven years and dying twice to get somewhere along the lines of being okay with it... regardless of what society they are in she is using her own power to condemn other girls to the destiny she has herself so very much loathed.

Buffy is not condemning anyone to anything. For one thing she's not capable of it, only Willow can cast that spell. Buffy just came up with the idea. The other girls aren't following in Buffy's footsteps. She was around in a time where potentials could blend in with normal girls and live a normal life. When she was called this all changed for Buffy because only she had the slayer power and had to use it to save the world. The potentials Buffy saved were being actively hunted and gutted and when they got their new powers had a choice of whether to use them or not. That is why the potentials present in Sunnydale democratically voted in favour of activation on behalf of their kind. There was certainly no violation from Buffy and I don't believe you could call Willows actions a violation either.

 

[thetopher]

They were not the same societal norms. They were, as you put it, moral absolutes.

If we're still talking about the Salem witch trials then it didn't have that much to do with morality and everything to do with religious hysteria. And in some cases not even that- morality didn't enter into it. It was a sweeping social phenonenon that hopped from country to country until it burned itself out.

As for their being no moral absolutes, that everything is relative to any situation, I respectfully disagree.
Buffy puts her own morality over a vampire's (or a potential victim's) every time she saves a life. She says 'that is evil, that is wrong' and stops it and nobody complains that she is being morally 'superior' for enforcing her views upon another. She does this all the time- even when the 'victim' doesn't wish to be saved (such as in S2 'Lie To Me')
So how is the spell different? Willow casts the spell and because of that somebody somewhere gets stoned to death by a bunch of fanatics. Either there's nothing wrong with that (because there are no moral absolutes and all societies are equal in those terms, so we as westerns can't judge/condemn those acts) and so Buffy isn't responsible, or there is something wrong with the society where the girl lived.
Whichever way you look at it Buffy isn't morally responsible for the girl getting killed, the society that allows women to be treated in such a way is.

 

[Firstina]

Such as not claiming the right over another persons body or destiny.
Exactly, to tie into the topic, what Buffy does and exactly why she violates a number of young girls just as she herself has been violated with her power. Did she ask or want for it? Vociferously through out the show - no! So how come she suddnely thinks that being a Slayer is somehow a gift of being strong? It took her seven years and dying twice to get somewhere along the lines of being okay with it... regardless of what society they are in she is using her own power to condemn other girls to the destiny she has herself so very much loathed.

They are already violated - they are potentials waiting to be called for their entire life. Some of them will never be, however. But fear and anticipation are always a part of their life.
Just like you don't choose to be born a woman especially in some traditions with misogynistic culture.
I bet some women don't even know that they can live in a different way because of religion or patriarcal restrictions. At least now they will have a memories, a knowledge, a feeling, an experience of an actual strong independent woman.

 

[Skanky Vamp]

Whichever way you look at it Buffy isn't morally responsible for the girl getting killed, the society that allows women to be treated in such a way is.

Whichever way I look at it Buffy is morally responsible because she facilitated it. She altered the lives of people she never knew, people that did not ask or may not have welcomed it. 

At least now they will have a memories, a knowledge, a feeling, an experience of an actual strong independent woman.

They will have memories and feelings of being killed in the dark by monsters. Suddenly the monsters they deal with on a daily basis would pale in comparison to the real monsters that Buffy gives to them.

 

[Firstina]

They will have memories and feelings of being killed in the dark by monsters. Suddenly the monsters they deal with on a daily basis would pale in comparison to the real monsters that Buffy gives to them.

Otherwise they would experience an immediate death with no chance of survival or some of them wouldn't even understand why they are being killed.
And if we are talking about potentials they are already aware that there are monsters out where they just don't have a power to handle that knowledge properly.

 

[thetopher]

Whichever way I look at it Buffy is morally responsible because she facilitated it. She altered the lives of people she never knew, people that did not ask or may not have welcomed it.

By that logic you could say that when Buffy saves a life she is then responsible for everything that person does with there life because she 'altered' it without their say so.
Example:
Buffy saves a person from being killed by a vampire. The next day that same person loses control of their car and causes a huge pile-up on the freeway.
Buffy is responsible for any deaths that happen in that accident because if not for her then it would never have happened.

 

[Taake]

"By that logic"... wow, couldn't disagree more there, and I don't see any logic in your statement. To me there's a difference to saving lives, an acute situation,... and willingly/ignorantly altering them to suit your own purposes.

They may have been Potentials but they could have gone their whole lives without knowing this. So Buffy telling Willow to activate them is a huge violation of their wills and lives. In their little "empowering" - can stand up, will stand up - segment of the episode we see very young girls being activated (say the one playing softball) so it's not just informed young women in Sunnydale who are coming into power (that would have been vastly different) but thousands of girls who gets no say in this and more importantly - will have no idea what's happening to them. Out of all of these thousands maybe one or two would have been called and actually had to experience becoming magnets for the forces of darkness, unalterably changed and undoubtedly headed for an early grave. Now it's all of them. (Going back to the empowering segment we see a girl standing up to what is presumably an abusive man in her life, she too is very young, what happens when she strikes him back and kills him? Much like Buffy did with Ted, only this time it's not a robot. By activating the potentials powers Buffy is playing God with their lives. She's not saving them.)

Why, just a few episodes earlier Buffy faces the Shadow Men and finds out how the first Slayer was made.
In her predicament they are willing to further "Slayer" her up, i.e. make her more demon, to which Buffy is horrified and promptly says

Buffy Summers: No, you don't understand! You violated that girl, made her kill for you because you're weak, you're pathetic, and you obviously have nothing to show me.

Because she doesn't want to be more demon, she doesn't want to be more Slayer extraordinaire and have her humanity violated. But she's fine doing this to others? She's fine creating other Slayers that can kill for her... They have the slayer-hood in them true, but as mentioned, the majority of them would probably have gone on to live normal lives. And her little idea took that from them.

And for nothing to boot.
I mean, if they had spent some time researching the amulet from Wolfram and Hart they could have found out what it did. Because without it, even with those extra potentials, Buffy and her whole merry band of misfits would eventually have been overrun by uber-vamps and died. Meaning, the potential
activation was a stall tactic, not a necessary move to win the battle. They were just little less fodder for the cannons than they had been as human girls.

 

[Skanky Vamp]

By that logic you could say that when Buffy saves a life she is then responsible for everything that person does with there life because she 'altered' it without their say so..

Incorrect. There is a difference between ones actions affecting someone on a personal level, especially temporarily, and ones actions TRANSFORMS (since you didnt like the word alter) the fundamental aspects of countless people they never come in contact with. 

she doesn't want to ... have her humanity violated. But she's fine doing this to others?

Exactly! It's the holier than thou, "I know what is right for EVERYONE" attitude, so their opinion does not matter. 

I mean, if they had spent some time researching the amulet from Wolfram and Hart they could have found out what it did. Because without it, even with those extra potentials, Buffy and her whole merry band of misfits would eventually have been overrun by uber-vamps and died. Meaning, the potential
activation was a stall tactic, not a necessary move to win the battle. They were just little less fodder for the cannons than they had been as human girls.

Or conversely if they found out what it did in the first place they never would have had to violate countless innocent victims.

 

[gite63]

And for nothing to boot.
I mean, if they had spent some time researching the amulet from Wolfram and Hart they could have found out what it did. Because without it, even with those extra potentials, Buffy and her whole merry band of misfits would eventually have been overrun by uber-vamps and died. Meaning, the potential activation was a stall tactic, not a necessary move to win the battle. They were just little less fodder for the cannons than they had been as human girls.

I always thought that. Which made the difference was the amulet, not the brand-new Slayer army; whitout it, they would have lost the battle - too many uber-vamps to contain. Deus ex machina! 

Example:
Buffy saves a person from being killed by a vampire. The next day that same person loses control of their car and causes a huge pile-up on the freeway.
Buffy is responsible for any deaths that happen in that accident because if not for her then it would never have happened.

Not the same thing. Buffy and Willow's actions are more like a doctor kidnapping a person and altering his/her body to make it stronger, even more beautiful (I would like that), but without consent. The doctor would think "no harm in doing that, I'm making he/she better", but...

 

[Skanky Vamp]

like a doctor kidnapping a person and altering his/her body to make it stronger, even more beautiful (I would like that), but without consent. The doctor would think "no harm in doing that, I'm making he/she better", but...

That sounds reminiscent to what happened to River Tam.

 

[thetopher]

"By that logic"... wow, couldn't disagree more there, and I don't see any logic in your statement. To me there's a difference to saving lives, an acute situation,... and willingly/ignorantly altering them to suit your own purposes.

But there is no difference here. Buffy is saving the world and therefore the lives of everybody in that world- that is her 'own purpose'- to save the lives of all those girls that are inadvertantly transformed. It's not like Buffy's being selfish here, she's simply making a tough call. Without the 'violation' then they have no life to choose with as far as I can see.

Incorrect. There is a difference between ones actions affecting someone on a personal level, especially temporarily, and ones actions TRANSFORMS (since you didnt like the word alter) the fundamental aspects of countless people they never come in contact with.

She transforms them rather than having their lives ended. It's a violation but the alternative to what we are shown is certain death.

And I don't agree with this whole 'without the spell the amulet would've been enough on its own' theory. We don't even know HOW the amulet was activated but we do know that it wasn't instantaneous, it took a lot of time to work its magic.
Perhaps it needed for Spike to be in some sort of life or death struggle- the point is we don't know anything apart from what we are shown, and what we are shown its far from conclusive to say 'well turns out that Willow's spell wasn't needed after all.'
If Spike had stood alone in the Hellmouth with just Buffy and Faith at his side then all three of them would've been overrrun and killed within seconds.

 

[gite63]

That sounds reminiscent to what happened to River Tam.

That's pretty sad, because I LOVED Firefly: I had to google "River Tam", because I didn't remember her...

Since the show ended, I've nener seen it again (the movie I saw once, or twice). I need to buy the DVD. 

If Spike had stood alone in the Hellmouth with just Buffy and Faith at his side then all three of them would've been overrrun and killed within seconds.

I haven't thought of that, but yeah, you're right: the three of them could have been killed before the amulet started working, even if the Potentials were with them. In that case, we can say that the spell was necessary to save the world - but still was a violation of the girls' bodies - and lives. After complaining so much about the men who did it to her, Buffy should be a little uncomfortable in doing it to others.