I was of two minds for some time. She became less important when she became a good slayer. If there was a good slayer, and they used her for the full series. it would have worked better.
For future reference, please don’t drink and post on the boards, Board Rules
Do you see a problem with - I dunno - one person killing another person?
I'm not that important (are any of us in the wider scheme of things?). I'm not sure that justifies my murder. My sons may dispute this.
Because Buffy was boring? I'll be honest, she's not my favourite character but I'd hardly call her boring.
Let me get this straight. You think killing a sister slayer qualifies Buffy to be a trainer of slayers? I see...
Technically, no. Technically she's one of two.
...and I give you Angel and Spike...
Nah...not really.
Ahh...
Before Faith went super bad, Buffy did use violent against Faith with a simple punch and left it at that. Is that not vengeance and was that not justified when Faith just did nothing. It is clear, the first act of violence between the sister slayers, was done by Buffy. True, I like Faith the most of the series as she is very interesting. It is just that, even when the series came to an end. It just felt natural they would fight again, because both slayers cannot be equal to each other.
Before Graduation Day Buffy was content to 'stop' Faith, not kill her. But after Angel she went at her cold-blooded. That's vengeance, and if Buffy had succeeded then one of the basic underpinnings of the shows philosophy is undone. 'Vengeance is bad when Anya or Holtz or Willow or Wood do it but its totz okay when I do it.' says Buffy.
But the time where Buffy acts violently towards Faith in S3 (and 7) are depicted as wrong-bad, so I don't see the problem. We're not supposed to cheer when Buffy behaves badly, we're meant to see that, for example, Faith hit a nerve or that Buffy is acting out of character. Generally that makes it okay/dramatically interesting rather than problematic.
The reason why Buffy and Faith didn't get along was nothing to do with them intrinsically being slayers, not really. It was how they both reacted to and used the power they were given; their stuff was deeper and more personal than just 'there's only supposed to be one, maybe we're not supposed to exist together'. Their slayerness was actually the thing that brought them together.
Why? In what way is it "natural" (and - if it is "natural" - we don't live in nature, we live in culture)? Why would you want to pit two women against each other (arguably, this is what patriarchy does: divide and conquer)? Why can't they be "same but different"? I can understand you not liking Faith but I really don't understand your reasoning.
Sister, is it not clear that Buffy always was fighting her friends from time to time. She was even fighting her sister. Since she was fighting her friends, who were not slayers -- is it not a given that she would have to fight Faith. They both could not be both good, and both being good and fighting to the bitter end. Just me, it would have been more interesting if Faith did win a fight with Buffy. Since that is the way of the university, a fight to the death -- Faith would have to die. They maybe sister slayers, but in this family there can only be one daughter.
They're equal in the sense they're both slayers. Their difference is cultural - not biological.
