- Jul 29, 2016
The point is we see ONE interaction between the guy and Xander and you're writing him off as an "absolute douchebag" despite the fact that we see him and his friends being genuinely nice to Buffy without expecting anything in return. We never see the guy again after this episode.So your arguments are now "but what about Xander...?", "but what about Cordy...?", "but what about Buffy...?" At least we've moved past pretending this guy isn't a jerk, I guess.
We see Xander and Cordy being unpleasant to both each other and other people on several occasions, yet because we also see them being nice and in a lot more episodes, we don't judge them on their negative actions. That's a little double standards.
Isn't it possible that the guy just takes issue with Xander and is targeting any potential weak points rather than having a general dislike of people in the service industry? We see him being mean to one person, we see him being nice to another, that is not enough to judge what sort of person he is as a whole.
Also my original post was about liking the fact that the college guys are genuinely trying to cheer Buffy up rather than trying to get her drunk enough so she'd sleep with them. I consider that a positive of the episode. You're the one that seemed to take umbrage to that statement which is what kickstarted this argument off.
Buffy seems quite happy to let Spike be part of the team. She's happy to have him protect her mother and sister despite him being "a soulless, murderous vampire who just boasted about how he's going to "have a real good day" and kill her one day (after earlier admitting to how he sexually "got off" on murdering another Slayer). It had nothing to do about his occupation or social class and everything to do with his morality (or lack-thereof)." She's happy to have him risk his life alongside the rest of the scoobies, he's good enough for all that, but dating him, what an unthinkable concept!Buffy said that Spike is "beneath her" because he's a soulless, murderous vampire who just boasted about how he's going to "have a real good day" and kill her one day (after earlier admitting to how he sexually "got off" on murdering another Slayer). It had nothing to do about his occupation or social class and everything to do with his morality (or lack-thereof). You're reaching.
Buffy has every right to reject Spike on grounds that they have a very different moral outlook. HOWEVER, to use the words "you're beneath me" which pointedly (though unknowingly) echoes Cecily's words is distinctly diminishing another person's sense of self-worth, making them feel like they're not good enough or "worthy" of someone's time.
The whole "but what about Xander...?", "but what about Cordy...?", "but what about Buffy...?" as you so put it isn't going off on a tangent, it's related back to the guy's behaviour in this episode. Why are you writing him off as an "absolute douchebag" based on one interaction, yet giving a free pass to the other characters who also demonstrate such behaviour?