Buffy's Boyfriends

Spikes relationship with Dru was like his with Buffy , Dru went with Angelus, Spike did not attempt to rape her so she could feel love, but knock her out and kidnapped her....surprise that did not work out ? and she left him for another demon

I disagree. Spike's relationship with Dru was a much happier one that lasted for over a century. Also Dru never actually ditched Spike during Season 2, she was sleeping with both men , as Angelus referred to her as giving Spike "pity access".

Also Dru wanted Spike back in Season 5 (though that was so the writers could push Spuffy by removing Sprusilla as an obstacle).

Like, we've seen Spike's movement from nice to mean with Drusilla. At the start of S2, he is patient, loving and caring. After he finds himself in the wheel chair and Angel joins them, he starts to get frustrated and increasingly bitter and mean, until he finally knocks Drusilla out and abducts her.

I don't think Spike knocked Dru out just so he could have her for himself. Sure that played a part in it, but he was also removing her from a situation that would've gotten herself killed. His whole deal with Buffy hinged on Dru being able to leave alive. As he said "there's no deal without Dru". Buffy would've killed her for killing Kendra. Drusilla put up quite a fight so Spike was forced to use force to get her out of there. She did leave him for another demon so he wasn't forcing her to stay with him.

Also it could be argued that displaying dominance is a desired characteristic amongst vampire hierarchy. Dru accused Spike of going "soft" which led him to believe that tying her up and torturing her, aka displaying dominance, would make her love him again.

Most of the vampire groups we see have a dominant vampire (usually male) that the other vampires follow without question. Sunday is really the only dominant female we see. Darla depends on whether you view her in comparison to the Master or the Whirlwind. The alpha vampire keeps the other vampires in line by displaying dominance eg punishing failure or just physically reminding them who's in charge. Harmony was the "alpha" vampire in her group in Season 5, however because she didn't display dominance, the minions started getting restless and Mort was looking to kill her and take over to which the other minions agreed. In Season 2, Angelus was able to swan in and take over as alpha vampire because Spike was stuck in a wheelchair and thus unable to defend his leader ship position. Angelus was using Dru in Season 2 to rub it in Spike's face, however it still annoyed him that Dru was still cavorting with Spike instead of giving Angelus exclusive access. Given everything that Angelus put Dru though, there's nothing to suggest that Dru wasn't just reacting to Angelus' dominance in the way he'd trained her to over the years.
 
That is exactly why I think soulless Spike is such a great character. People are contradictory and paradoxical. There are very few people like Angelus in the world, while there are loads of people who ware kinda like Spike.
Ironically this is exactly the problem with Spike (and other demons) in later years. The more you try to humanize them or attribute humanity to them, the more muddled it all gets. I mean Spike is people to you, meaning Buffy killing his kind is genocide. After all if they are all so human, surely what the slayers have done for centuries is wrong. If there is such a special snowflake vampire like Spike, who doesn't need a soul because he has a partial one already (so to speak), then there are others like him. But Buffy, and even Spike, continue to kill vampires without asking questions. However no one kills Spike. Why exactly is Spike exempt from dusting in S2-6? I'm still waiting for the in-show justification. And no, the chip doesn't count because it's utter BS and doesn't suddenly make Spike not a vampire anymore. And frankly, if it's not ok to kill an evil vampire then it's not ok to kill all the other ones either.

And if Spike is so human, it makes his actions even worse. Because it means that he had choice and agency. Which makes him even more deserving of dusting because he is one of the worst vampires ever. I'll never understand why so many of his fans try to humanize him to such a degree. The negative implications that brings with it are willfully ignored however.
 
I mean Spike is people to you, meaning Buffy killing his kind is genocide. After all if they are all so human, surely what the slayers have done for centuries is wrong.

The way I see it is that Slayers and vampires have an unspoken understanding that when they both meet, only one of them is going to walk away.
 
Spike's on the cusp. His ego is beginning to form - he's reality testing. It's what the ego does. He couldn't kill - lesson learned. There's every evidence Buffy is envious of Joyce's affection for "little Pumpkin Belly" (compare inter-uterine/neonatal existence to Buffy's description of heaven). There's every evidence Buffy fears Joyce was unaware how much she loved her (Intervention I think). There's also evidence she thought Joyce couldn't love her because she was a slayer (see The Body). There's every evidence Buffy's "depression" is melancholia - a failure to grieve. Buffy's relationship with both Spike and Dawn is inextricably linked to her feelings for Joyce (losing Joyce is the biggest trauma in her live). Most of these feelings are unconscious but are threatening to surface. When they do surface, whether they involve love or hate (often impossible to separate), they're often displaced. Some make it to consciousness but the ego protects itself through denial. Much of the above can be applied to Spike. The Jury is out on how much agency is involved - that is, whether a choice is really a choice. Buffy is not culpable for the AR but is partly responsible for the situation beforehand. If she's not accorded agency, she might as well be the Bot.



It could be me but I see the inconsistency as a constancy of the character - and I don't see him as any more variable than her. I think by the time we get to S6/7, while the characters may still have faith in the humanist subject, the text doesn't. It's moving towards the postmodern multifaceted, fragmented self and there's a critique of enlightenment thought. If you look at the structure of S7 it's in keeping with the flows and folds characteristic of contemporary postmodernism.

Oh for goodness sake!

Don't take my word for it , when people complained about the Spike being naked so much, either with his shirt off or just in his sock , Noxon replyed..... who wouldn't what to see James naked....the viewers who complained for one ?

Not all Bangel fans are immune to Spike's charms.
Not all fans who are immune to Spike's charms are bangel fans.
Also, not nearly half of the audience are Bangel fans 🙂 - well not anymore - maybe back when the show aired.

Either way - I understand your point, I just felt the need to... clarify.

I hate Spike totally and I am certainly no Bangel fan at all , but he gets a sort of pass as Buffy loved him


It is demon-love, not human love. Human love can be many things (good or bad) but demon love is always destructive.
I agree that Buffy never loved Spike though, not even in S7; that whole thing had a strong whiff of guilt about it, about her making amends because she 'used him' and how he 'got a soul for her' and is suffering because of it.

Demon love then needs to be explained, even birds and animals care about there partners, In fool for love Buffy is injured badly by a ordinary vamp who got lucky, yet we never see Spike once after they started bonking meeting Buffy, seeing she makes it home from work OK etc , sure his there earlier episodes because his is Stalking her. DMP he turned up fore that horrid bonk by the garbage ( watch Buffy's face really not wanting it to happen ) , but she later fights the penis monster alone ,Willow saves her , the lone vamp in the Church yard in As you were , Spike is just waiting for sex with Buffy at her home , the demon that the Trio sets on Buffy could have stabbed her anywhere luckily in her Arm ( why did he not finish Buffy off ) , in fact the only time I can think of Spike fighting along side Buffy was in Dead things but then he only chased after her looking for sex, so explain please what sort of love is demon love
 
The more you try to humanize them or attribute humanity to them, the more muddled it all gets.
I happen to think muddled is good. Do you wanna see Buffy fight the battle droids from Star Wars? It would make Buffy an action show like an other.
And if Spike is so human, it makes his actions even worse. Because it means that he had choice and agency. Which makes him even more deserving of dusting because he is one of the worst vampires ever. I'll never understand why so many of his fans try to humanize him to such a degree. The negative implications that brings with it are willfully ignored however.
Personally, I don't think Spike has free will as defined in moral philosophy. Spike is very clear on this himself. He repeats it over and over again. I guess you could argue that Spike has more control than he lets on, but I don't think that really changes anything for me. Real people with addictive personality can they but very often they don't and keep committing the same abuses over and over again.

This seems to go against the point you made earlier, though. If non-snowflake vampires are victims with no agency, then killing them should be more problematic than killing people who has agency but still chooses to do evil, such as Faith and Ford.
I hope there are more people in the real world who are better than those two
220px-Riley_Finn.jpg
 
Demon love then needs to be explained, even birds and animals care about there partners

Demon love- as I see it- is ultimately selfish because demons are selfish; they cannot see past their own needs.
I mean, Spike could see past his own needs to Buffy's needs (because he was fundamentally romantic at heart this mattered more than his own needs) when he loved her in late S5/early S6 but that changed as soon as he saw an opportunist.
Spike always has been opportunistic in his evil.
 
I happen to think muddled is good. Do you wanna see Buffy fight the battle droids from Star Wars? It would make Buffy an action show like an other.
Exceptions to any rule are a good thing. It makes things interesting. The reason why Angel worked as a concept was that his rule breaking was clearly defined, however it was also muddled. And the various characters all had different opinions on the subject.

However once you humanize evil to such staggering degrees it puts everything into question, most of all the premise of the show. For me in order to support Buffy's slaying, the line between evil/demon and good needs to be clear. Because otherwise what Buffy is doing is nothing short of racism and genocide. Once it becomes clear that there as many harmless as there are harmful demons, it makes the 'stake/kill first' policy a wrong one. Because really, how racist to kill someone on sight just because they look differently or have a different diet. And the same goes for vampires. Once you humanize them to the point where vampire whores don't kill by choice, where the likes of Spike babysit little girls...that's when it all goes to hell. Then you add in someone like Anya and it makes it even worse.

This seems to go against the point you made earlier, though. If non-snowflake vampires are victims with no agency, then killing them should be more problematic than killing people who has agency but still chooses to do evil, such as Faith and Ford.
No, it doesn't go against any of my points. Since my stance is that vampires need killing, no ifs no buts. The souls of the dead deserve to move on. Vampires are demons who kill, I don't see anything wrong there with killing them. However the show inventing new rules regarding vamps and how much agency they are capable of, changes the entire premise of the show.

What do Faith and Ford have to do with vampires btw? Did I miss when they were vampires with agency?
 
I happen to think muddled is good. Do you wanna see Buffy fight the battle droids from Star Wars? It would make Buffy an action show like an other.

I think its best if you explore evil without humanizing it too much; most of the Big Bads on the show are given human motivation to one degree or another.
On the other hand exceptions to the rule should have clear explanation; we got that with Angel very early on but the intent with Spike was truly confused, which is a bad thing in telling a story; the writers didn't know how to tell the viewer why Spike was so 'human' or exceptional, so the natural assumption is that under the right circumstance many vampires can do what Spike did.
This undermines one of the basic premise of the show; vampires are evil, static and don't change/grow up (they represent what Bufyf is not, which is why- metaphorically- she slays them), they are a mere mockery of the life of the person they stole; Jesse, Vamp Xander and Willow in 'The Wish'- we knew them when they were good and being turned into a vampire makes them a twisted, monstrous version of their previous self.
 
Once you humanize them to the point where vampire whores don't kill by choice, where the likes of Spike babysit little girls...that's when it all goes to hell.
I don't think either of these examples proves that vampires have agency, especially not the first one. The vampire prostitutes are simply lazy. The moment they run out of costumers, they will be out killing again, but they find it more convenient to have their pray come to them. Spike takes care of Dawn, because he is obsessed with the idea of making Buffy love him. Just as Angelus has spent his entire unlife rebelling against his father, Spike is trying to undo the rejection he faced from Cecily. Sometimes that makes Spike do good thing, but I don't think it makes him good, because he does not chose to do these things. When Spike wakes up realising he has fallen in love with Buffy, his first reaction is horror, because he knows he will be compelled to do anything he can to make her accept him.
No, it doesn't go against any of my points. Since my stance is that vampires need killing, no ifs no buts. The souls of the dead deserve to move on. Vampires are demons who kill, I don't see anything wrong there with killing them. However the show inventing new rules regarding vamps and how much agency they are capable of, changes the entire premise of the show.

What do Faith and Ford have to do with vampires btw? Did I miss when they were vampires with agency?
You said that an evil person with agency is more evil than an evil person without agency. From that perspective, a vampire with agency (or an evil human) should be more stakeworthy than a vampire without agency, no?
 
You said that an evil person with agency is more evil than an evil person without agency. From that perspective, a vampire with agency (or an evil human) should be more stakeworthy than a vampire without agency, no?
We were talking about vampires, not people. Last I checked anyway. And any vampire with agency who can chose other than evil, is more deserving of dusting than regular vamps if they chose to do evil.
 
We were talking about vampires, not people. Last I checked anyway. And any vampire with agency who can chose other than evil, is more deserving of dusting than regular vamps if they chose to do evil.
Well, then there is no problem. Whether or not you believe vampires have agency, they are still dustable.
 
If not all vampires are evil (or at least able to integrate into society as presumably Spike had done to avoid dusting--I'd argue on that myself, but that's another topic) then slaying them all is essentially homicidal profiling. Furthermore, such homicidal profiling and similar reactions does much to justify the evil that vampires do given their desperate situation (that is, they're forced to be evil to survive as opposed to they're evil because they're demons wired to be evil).

Which can be a good story line as I've read and seen such before, but in such a case, the vampire hunters (in this case Buffy) are typically shown as the bad guys (or they take a more nuanced view which means not treating vampires as monsters until they're proven to be, as opposed to treating all vampires as monsters unless one proves more useful active, or just really hot, as Buffy would be said to do if this were the case, making Buffy the monster).
 
This is an interesting subject! The way I make sense of it is: No one is entirely good or evil. Everyone has shades of good and bad, so if all vampires were evil/dust-worthy, that would translate to mean every problem has a simple, absolute solution. Not much self reflection would be required of Buffy to grow, or recognise nuance or exercise judgement - all important skills for a leader. The protagonist/Slayer is always right, and every obstacle she faces has one solution only - to slay. Since Buffy is a show about metaphorically slaying the demons/ obstacles/ challenges one may face in life, I think it makes sense that there are grey areas, because life isn't that simple. Also, the show displays the evil humans are capable of - such as Warren, or Ford.

It's laid out rather succinctly in Season 2's Lie to Me when Buffy asks Giles to lie to her - here's the exchange:

Buffy: Does it ever get easy?

Giles: You mean life?

Buffy: Yeah. Does it get easy?

Giles: What do you want me to say?

Buffy: (looks up at him) Lie to me.

Giles: (considers a moment) Yes, it's terribly simple. The good guys are always stalwart and true, the bad guys are
easily distinguished by their pointy horns or black hats, and, uh, we
always defeat them and save the day. No one ever dies, and everybody
lives happily ever after.


Buffy: Liar.
 
The way I make sense of it is: No one is entirely good or evil. Everyone has shades of good and bad, so if all vampires were evil/dust-worthy, that would translate to mean every problem has a simple, absolute solution. Not much self reflection would be required of Buffy to grow, or recognise nuance or exercise judgement - all important skills for a leader. The protagonist/Slayer is always right, and every obstacle she faces has one solution only - to slay. Since Buffy is a show about metaphorically slaying the demons/ obstacles/ challenges one may face in life, I think it makes sense that there are grey areas, because life isn't that simple. Also, the show displays the evil humans are capable of - such as Warren, or Ford.

I agree that shades of gray are interesting, but if there's no line at all, then it takes the fun out of the show, because we're watching mass murder, as others have said. As late as Season 7, Buffy is still willing to slay vampires as soon as they rise. She doesn't monitor them to see if they're "good" or not, or try to give them some kind of psychological profile.

The show is also careful to say that Buffy doesn't have jurisdiction over humans, because there are laws and courts and prisons to handle them. If all demons are essentially the same as humans, then there should be some form of demon justice system, not just a rogue executioner.
 
Mrs Gordo
Mrs Gordo
Demon Justice System - makes me think of like a Vampire/Demon version of Law and Order... (insert Law and Order sound effect)
Oh there's definitely a distinction between humans and demons (which is why Buffy doesn't have jurisdiction over them.) It just goes to prove that it's a complex question given that even souled non-vampiric people are capable of great evil. But I'm in agreement that there has to be a line, because she is after all the Slayer.
 
My guess is that Buffy's position as slayer is population control. She keeps the numbers down, those smart enough to stay off her radar stay alive whilst those unlucky/stupid enough to run into her have to fight to the death.

Whilst that works with vampires (and their first instinct seems to be to attack so Buffy is kind of acting in self-defence when she stakes them), it gets complicated with demons because there are good demons out there.
 
You didn't notice that the murder, torture, stalking and rape attempts stopped?
You didn't notice that the murder or the torture have stopped since season 4 ? As for the stalking and the rape attempts, that's something particularly relate to the story of Spuffy, not something Spike did to everyone. And of course it stopped in season 7, that's logical for the continuity of Spuffy but concerning Spike, the character more directly, that's not a big change because that's not something he usually does !


But how would the First torture him if he didn't feel guilt and shame for what he'd done ? It's precisely because of the soul that the it's able to get to him.
So, you are saying that because of the soul Spike can feel guilt and shame and pain ? and that's why the First can torture him ?
I disagree because :


ShowyDenseChrysomelid-max-1mb.gif


Didn't he feel guilt and shame for what he had done ?

6ffae8fa198fc9769d30a8dcdeb2f83b.jpg


Doesn't he look sad, in pain ?

Does he have a soul at theses moment ? Nope, and he felt the pain, the shame and the guilt.. So, sorry but what you said is not what I understood from what the show showed us.
 
Ironically, Spike is perhaps the best representation of an abusive, dangerous partner, doing better than Pete or Warren. If abusers were so obvious as to be like Warren and Pete then there wouldn't be all the questions of why women (and sometimes men) stay. Many batterers will express admiration for the women they abuse (especially at first) and make them feel like she has the power rather than him. They can say the same things Spike said to Buffy about how she makes him feel and it's all fuzzy at the time, and when it gets violent or scary, then it's that their love is hot and passionate. Eminem says something very similar to Spike in his song Love The Way You Lie (which I consider the perfect Spuffy song, btw), and plenty of batterers can express what is probably genuine remorse and guilt, only to do it again later. Sometimes he performs acts of penance, but god help her if that's not enough to prove she should stay with him.

And not all women are dependent upon such men financially, as some make more money than the men who abuse them. Most to all western nations make it relatively easy to leave an abuser if it's money that's the problem (not to say it's a magic carpet ride or that he can't use the same system to harass and even terrorize her in response, but plenty of organizations will help women trying to leave if she can't get a lawyer, and if he's dominating her through finances then he can be forced to pay if they're already married through a system that makes it even easy for women not abused and not poor to get big payments).

It comes down to they think it's an isolated incident and that he's sweet who even respects her (most of the time), even when 1 time turns into 20, because of how he seems to love her so, a feeling that very well may be sincere (those whom we love the most can also hurt us the most and the easiest, and the instinctive response is to hurt back in one way or another, so combined with poor impulse control and poor anger management I can see why there's so much domestic violence).

And in actuality I love my mom and dad, and they violently attacked each other and me (though rare for me as I knew when to get out of the way, but as a kid I gave tours to my friends that described how certain dents in the wall got to be there from the exchanged violence between my parents), though I do think they did the right thing in divorcing and I'll never leave myself vulnerable to them. Hell, I think my dad is still a better man than Spike ever was, including season 7, despite all his flaws, though seeing Spike and Buffy exchange punches does remind me of the violence he and Mom inflicted on each other. (Note, I said a "better man than Spike," which should not be construed to say "a good man" even if I do see redeeming features in my dad rather than as some simplistic brute like Pete from Buffy.)

Btw, I've heard one share of how her ex put a gun into her face but he put it away and hugged her before leaving when she cried, something I remember when I see the scene where Spike visits a crying Buffy while he's holding a shotgun.

Another reason is what often happens when she does leave. In some cases the stalking (such stalkers can probably relate to Spike in his stalking phase), assaults, and violence happens (up to murder, which may include more than the woman who finally left him, including the kids) It can lead to situations like in Seeing Red. When my mom left Dad (though she did provoke him out of spite and legal strategy as opposed to she just left), I spent some time crying under my bed one day (when I was 13) because I was sure Dad was going to kill Mom and probably me, too (and maybe he would've had the cops not intervened). As said on Buffy, love makes you do the wacky.

But it's not just that, but how he can threaten to harm or kill himself, and she may still love him despite all the abuse, essentially holding himself hostage (hell, one guy who wasn't abusing me beyond taking advantage of my generosity tried to make me continue pandering to him by implying he'd kill himself if I stopped). Spike does that as well, even after he accepts (unlike many in the audience) that he can't actually "win" her. And sometimes it works, and as many will warn her not to fall for it she'll keep it secret as much as she can (as Buffy did with Spike in both seasons 6 and 7, and even sided with him just as many battered women will side with her abuser against her own family and friends and even outside legal authorities that try to intervene whether or not she wants them to). But all too often that means the cyle of abuse will continue, despite the persistent (and pernicious) fantasy otherwise.

If Marti wanted to make a feminist message rather than an all too common love story (in fiction) then she could've capitalized on this.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom