• Thank you for visiting Buffy-Boards. You obviously have exceptional taste. We just want you to know that:
    1. You really should register so you can chat with us!
    2. Twelve thousand people can't be wrong.
    3. Buffy-Boards loves you.
    4. See 1 through 3.
    Come on, register already!

Buffy and the "worthiness" of her relationships

Mrs Gordo

Bangel extremist...
Jul 11, 2017
Black Thorn
The sebxbot hasn't happened yet when Buffy said that line.
Fair enough. You can replace sex bot with: kidnapping and torturing her boyfriend at the time, bragging about how great it feels to kill slayers, conspiring with Adam to bring about some strange new world order, attempting to kill her friends, etc. etc.


Jul 29, 2016
Fair enough. You can replace sex bot with: kidnapping and torturing her boyfriend at the time, bragging about how great it feels to kill slayers, conspiring with Adam to bring about some strange new world order, attempting to kill her friends, etc. etc.
All good reasons for why Buffy wouldn't want to date Spike that she could've used. "You're beneath me" is not one of those reasons.

Also Spike kidnapped Angel in order to restore Dru back to health. It's no different than Buffy trying to kill Faith in order to save Angel from the poison.
Last edited:

Fool for Buffy

I'm just being a big nerd again
Jun 2, 2017
Personally I think Buffy deserves the pedestal from a "suitor" and then if she ends up in a relationship with them they grow to being equal. I think that happened with Bangel and Spuffy. (I'm including the comics) I'm not sexist but I am a little Buffyist. She is the queen surrounded by princes desperately trying to be worthy to be her king. Or some better analogy.
Last edited:

Monkey Pants

Bored Now
Feb 17, 2016
Black Thorn
People saying that one or more of Buffy's suitors isn't worthy isn't because she's perfect, and it's not because she's a woman, but it is because most people want to see anyone with someone who treats them right. Sometimes one person just isn't as good as the other. Buffy saying that an evil vampire who murders people is beneath her is perfectly valid lol.


Member of the Church Of Faith
Dec 23, 2013
The Moot, England
I honestly don't give a hoot about 'worthiness' when it comes to Buffy's suitors. That's partly because I'm not a shipper that's attached to any one of Buffy's relationships in particular.
But its also because I feel that primarily a romantic relationship should be dramatic and interesting more than answer the question 'are they good enough?'; to me that question only becomes an issue when the guy starts acting entitled towards Buffy. Then I tend to react negatively.

But many in the fandom is different; they like to think: Buffy is super-pretty and athletic and a hero and has nice hair and who doesn't want all that? So, who gets it? Who deserves her most? Let's have a competition to see which vampire is bestest for her. bleugh

Damn it if it's something that's built into many in the fandom and, to a large extent, also encouraged by the writers.
Angel and Spike even have a big brawl about who is most worthiest for Buffy. It's a sh*t episode.

I've noticed that when it comes to discussions about Buffy and her relationships, the "worthiness" of her potential suitor always seems to crop up. I find this very annoying as, not only does it place Buffy on a pedestal as if the sun shines out of her backside, but it also lessens another (often male) character by essentially telling them that they are not good enough for Buffy because she is too good for them.
I sympathize with this view to a degree, given that- with the exception of Angel (and Owen)- Buffy rarely has to DO anything to get a romantic relationship. She does the pursuing thing with Angel a little bit but every other suitor always approaches her; a couple of dudes in S2, Scott Hope, Parker, Riley, Spike, that guy at her birthday party who got stabbed; its like they all target her to one degree or another.

Buffy never has to bother going 'hnm, I like this person but they might not be into me, maybe I should try flirting or asking them for coffee...'

Nope, she never has to do that (being under the effect of a love spell doesn't count), so it becomes about the guy proving themselves with their initial approach and tactics; Scott Hope asked Willow for help/advice, as did Riley, Parker was all sneaky and vulnerable, Spike stalked her or showed up randomly at her house.

Even Faith asked her out on a date on two separate occasions.

It's all rather old-fashioned really. Maybe the writers felt like the female had to conform to some demure role as being the one who 'has to be wooed'?
Or maybe they deliberately didn't want Buffy to come across as some man-chasing loser who can't be happy without a date?

So were they being unconsciously being patriarchal in their view or perhaps deliberately trying to be feminist?

Whilst Buffy is well within her right to reject Spike because she doesn't want a relationship with him, to tell him "you're beneath me" is an incredibly cruel thing to do. Spike is a person, he has feelings.
Well context in this does matter. Spike had basically stated that, when the time came, he would kill Buffy 'and have a real good day'. That's a straight-up threat (since she did not realize that this was some sort of weird chat-up line on Spike's part) and so Buffy responded with 'screw you, it will never be you, you're a loser'.
That's remarkably restrained actually given their shared past what with all the fights to the death.

It's like, I don't get upset when Buffy calls Faith a loser in 'Enemies' because, at the time, she's teamed up with 'Angelus' and is whining about how nobody appreciates her. Screw that, Buffy has every right to say cruel-mean to a baddie, given the circumstances.

With the exception of Spike, who was treated as inferior within the show thus setting a baseline of fans views of him as a romantic partner, fans can be very critical of Buffy's relationships, elevating her almost to god like status where male characters have to "prove" they're "worthy" in order to be accepted as a romantic partner by fans (this can also lead to ship wars as everyone has a different few on which character is "worthy" of Buffy).
I do find that this view of Buffy extends well beyond her romantic relationships, and I often find it weird.
People say that her friends are 'bad friends' because they are mean to Buffy or argue with her or call her out about stuff. Or maybe her little sister is being a brat to her. Or that Giles is an incredible evil, betraying father-figure because 'reasons'. Basically; they all dared to hurt Buffy.

But in perspective character conflict is generally GOOD in a TV show, its dramatic and interesting as long as its written well enough, and BtVS's characters (and various interactions) were often its strongest positive.
Being the main character Buffy is going to be involved in most of the character conflict and drama. The show pretty much revolves around her, much more so than AtS revolves around Angel it has to be said.
None of this means that these people are 'unworthy' of being in Buffy's life. That's just stupid troll-logic.

Quite frankly there are posters who lionize her to a ludicrous degree seemingly because she is the main character.
Well so is Angel and nobody ever claimed that he's perfect (in fact he's hated by a large section of the fandom for a variety of reasons) and so neither is Buffy. She has flaws, she screws up, she makes bad choices in every single season (apart from maybe S1) but that's okay; that's what makes her interesting and worthy of analysis and fantastic. She has flaws, she struggles, she overcomes, she grows, she changes, she triumphs.
All of the characters do that, no reason why Buffy is some sort of exception.
Top Bottom