If "Seeing Red" Had Never Happened...

[white avenger]

It is also heavily implied that Drusilla had a fetish for little children.

I've always thought that that had more to do with the fairly common vampire trait of preferring the blood of babies/children than anything sexual. The blood of the innocent seems to be the most desirable vintage for not just Darla, Angelus, Dru, Spike, but just about every vampire, in or out of the Buffyverse. Of course, the very idea of a vampire attack seems to have sexual undertones. Almost exclusively, male vampires choose young attractive female as their favorite prey.

 

[cryptwarmer]

I don't know if Dru's thing for children had any sexual implications or not, but I can totally see her getting off on watching Spike have sex with his other victims. They were evil bad vampires and he was all about going at it with gusto and would do ANYTHING to please his dark princess, who liked to cheer him on to excess.

 

[DeadlyDuo]

@cryptwarmer I just think if rape had been an intentional part of Spike's backstory then it should've been brought up when he was a villain. You don't just turn your romantic lead who you've spent time exploring in order to elicit sympathy from the audience, and go "oh by the way he used to rape". There's a reason why rape is used as part of the "rape is a special kind of evil" trope because it is used to make a villain seem the worst of the worst. You don't have any of your heroes near rape. Angelus was a rapist but ANGEL wasn't because of the distinction given to the two characters. Regardless of whether you think they are two separate characters or not, the show treated them as separate so Angel was kept away from rape.

It seems like backstory gets changed to suit the writers rather than remaining consistent eg in Season 2, Spike called Angel his "sire" but it was later revealed that it was Drusilla who turned Spike (which does work better from a story standpoint). Whedon's excuse "any vampire can be called a sire if they precede the vampire in the same blood lineage" (don't remember the exact quote) doesn't work for me because then that's like saying the Master could be considered Spike's sire despite the fact that neither has met the other. It just doesn't make sense. Outside of that one very ambiguous line in season 7, there was no indication that Spike had raped previously to the AR.

 

[thetopher]

I'm just gonna touch on a few points that have been brought up:

1) Did Spike 'cheat' on Drusilla? Well, that constitutes what vampires consider to be cheating. Did he have sex with other people/demons? Yes, that's confirmed. He slept with Pearl (one of the evil duo from A&F S9) and Angelus (intimate than one...) and probably Darla as well. But that is a human definition of cheating tbh, one that Spike almost certainly lost after the events depicted in those S5 'Destiny' flashbacks.
I don't think he loved anyone other than Dru though so he didn't cheat on her in that sense. Drusilla certainly reacted with shock to Spike's 'betrayal' post-S2 so I don't think anything remotely like that had happened before.

2) Did (soulless) Spike rape? Absolutely he did; there are enough hints to suggest that he has in the past; his reaction to 'frightened' Buffy in 'Halloween' has definite sexual overtones (come to think of it so does his initial confrontation with Buffy in 'School Hard'), then there's two of his scenes with Willow ('Lover's Walk' and 'The Initiative')- In the first he tells Willow 'I haven't had a woman in weeks' when he's just killed the female owner of the Magic Box, so we know he ain't talking about blood lust/feeding.
The Initiative one has definite sexual/rape overtones in its shooting/framing. Then there's Spike's admission to Buffy in S7 which can really only be taken as him admitting some of his most horrific crimes, invoking Dawn's name in the process.

And while rape is an especially odious and evil crime, when you have vampires who are admitted family annihilators and murderers of children then rape is not exactly a line that they refuse to cross. Saying otherwise is missing the point of vampires- they are pure ID, if it feels good they will do it because there is no reason NOT to. They will never feel bad afterwards because they don't have a conscience. It's the pleasure principal dialled up to the ninth degree.

3) Did Drusilla have a sexual 'thing' for children? Firstly, I say 'ew' and then secondly I say no. Drusilla had a thing for children because children represent lost innocence to her and a sense of family. Drusilla likes to have her 'family' around; Grand-mama, Daddy and her Spike. Her dolly's and such are simply an extension of that I reckon.

 

[DeadlyDuo]

1) Did Spike 'cheat' on Drusilla? Well, that constitutes what vampires consider to be cheating. Did he have sex with other people/demons? Yes, that's confirmed. He slept with Pearl (one of the evil duo from A&F S9) and Angelus (intimate than one...) and probably Darla as well. But that is a human definition of cheating tbh, one that Spike almost certainly lost after the events depicted in those S5 'Destiny' flashbacks.
I don't think he loved anyone other than Dru though so he didn't cheat on her in that sense. Drusilla certainly reacted with shock to Spike's 'betrayal' post-S2 so I don't think anything remotely like that had happened before.

Who's Pearl and what time period did he sleep with her in? (I've not read any of the comics). The Angelus thing came out of left field, they'd been no hint of it at all before Angel season 5, as for where it falls on the scale of intimacy, don't know since I think the writers deliberately left it open to interpretation for the audience.

2) Did (soulless) Spike rape? Absolutely he did; there are enough hints to suggest that he has in the past; his reaction to 'frightened' Buffy in 'Halloween' has definite sexual overtones (come to think of it so does his initial confrontation with Buffy in 'School Hard'), then there's two of his scenes with Willow ('Lover's Walk' and 'The Initiative')- In the first he tells Willow 'I haven't had a woman in weeks' when he's just killed the female owner of the Magic Box, so we know he ain't talking about blood lust/feeding.
The Initiative one has definite sexual/rape overtones in its shooting/framing. Then there's Spike's admission to Buffy in S7 which can really only be taken as him admitting some of his most horrific crimes, invoking Dawn's name in the process.

And while rape is an especially odious and evil crime, when you have vampires who are admitted family annihilators and murderers of children then rape is not exactly a line that they refuse to cross. Saying otherwise is missing the point of vampires- they are pure ID, if it feels good they will do it because there is no reason NOT to. They will never feel bad afterwards because they don't have a conscience. It's the pleasure principal dialled up to the ninth degree.

Spike finishes his sentence of "I haven't had a woman in weeks" with "unless you count that shopkeeper". Whilst I agree that some of Spike's scenes have sexual overtones, that doesn't mean that is necessarily what that scene is about eg the dorm scene with Spike and Willow played as an attempted rape with Spike turning up the music and pinning Willow down (obviously setting up the impotence metaphor) but Spike never went there with the intent to rape. He went there with an intent to kill.

Also in that Lover's walk scene, preceding that "I haven't had a woman in weeks" line, Spike is sniffing Willow's neck, or rather he's crying on her shoulder and catches her scent, which suggests he might be thinking of biting her which he confirms in the dorm scene when Willow's worried that she's not attractive enough to be "biteable" and Spike reassures that she is and that he thought about biting her in the Lovers' Walk scene.

To me, having Spike being a rapist doesn't make sense because of the role he plays in the series. Putting aside the vampire aspect, Spike is meant to be a hero, he's Buffy's love interest, he's meant to be considered a good guy and he's meant to elicit sympathy from the audience in season 7 when he is being triggered. To "reveal" that he's a rapist doesn't gel with any of that and actually goes against it. Buffy, whose meant to be this symbol of female strength and independence, is suddenly in love with a rapist? At what point should that be considered a good thing? Also if we're assuming that the "girls Dawn 's age" is referring to rape then that makes things even worse because they would be UNDERAGE girls which makes things even more sinister than if Spike had been raping adult women. What it would make Spike is something that should never ever be associated with a hero. In fact, If Spike is indeed those things, then he can't ever be a hero because of having crossed the moral event horizon.

During season 2, when Spike was a villain, where you could argue that Spike was possibly a rapist because "rape is a special kind of evil" is a villainous trope to make a villain even worse than they already are. However, the show went out of its way to show a more humane side of Spike with his care and devotion towards Drusilla when she was ill. He would apologise immediately to her when he upset her which contradicts the "vampires have no conscience" because how could he apologise if he doesn't feel bad about upsetting Dru? It doesn't make sense that when Spike is a villain, the show tries to humanise him, yet when he's an actual hero, the show tries to demonise him by implying that he is a rapist. It does not seem to be in line with what the show was aiming for with Spike in season 7.

Warren was a fun villain in season 6 at the beginning, however, when he tried to rape Katrina is when he became a proper evil villain. That is the "rape is a special kind of evil" trope in play. The minute that was introduced, the audience's perception of Warren changed for the worse. It would be hypocritical to reveal that Spike is a rapist and expect the audience to go "that's ok" yet with Warren expect him to be rightfully demonised for the same thing Spike has done in the past. In fact to have Spike be a rapist makes the entirety of the scoobies look bad and hypocritical that they fight along Spike quite happily and don't give a crap that he's a rapist yet when Warren does the same thing it's "oh no how dare he!" It's a double standard. Spike can't be a part of the scoobies if he's a rapist otherwise it completely compromises and undermines the scoobies' moral code.

3) Did Drusilla have a sexual 'thing' for children? Firstly, I say 'ew' and then secondly I say no. Drusilla had a thing for children because children represent lost innocence to her and a sense of family. Drusilla likes to have her 'family' around; Grand-mama, Daddy and her Spike. Her dolly's and such are simply an extension of that I reckon.

Agreed.

 

[Slayerofslayers]

That's the thing about information being added about characters or storylines later on: sometimes it doesn't fit or make sense with what's been established before and it makes you wish they hadn't added it because it just confuses things. I always thought that Spike wouldn't cheat on Drusilla because he would get very jealous and upset the times that she would hook up with someone else, whether that was with Angelus or the Immortal or the Chaos Demon. So either Spike is a hypocrite and has double standards that it's okay when he does it or that contradicts with the way he acted towards Drusilla. But apparently later things said and suggest that he did so maybe the writers did think that because he was soulless as long as he didn't love anyone besides Dru that it made sense that he would hook up with others.

 

[thetopher]

Who's Pearl and what time period did he sleep with her in? (I've not read any of the comics).

Not sure. Pearl & Nash have been around since the 1930's I think (they're half-demons).
The reason I remember their encounter is that its specifically shown in a flashback in Spike: A Dark Place (A spinoff set during Buffy S9)

The Angelus thing came out of left field, they'd been no hint of it at all before Angel season 5, as for where it falls on the scale of intimacy

I tend to doubt it as well but its there in the dialogue. I tend to think Spike has too many issues with masculinity to have a fling with a guy, but there it is.

Again, its about what you consider 'cheating'. What would Drusilla consider cheating? We know that she slept with both Angelus and Darla on separate occasions, I think she'd be pleased that her family is, uh, 'getting along very well' lets say.
Vampires have different morals to humans, that extents to things like killing, eating and, no doubt, sexuality in relationships.

Spike finishes his sentence of "I haven't had a woman in weeks" with "unless you count that shopkeeper".

Okay. Fair enough, so he was talking about feeding.

To me, having Spike being a rapist doesn't make sense because of the role he plays in the series.

Putting aside the vampire aspect, Spike is meant to be a hero,

Spike is merely a male protagonist (one of several), which isn't the same thing as being a 'hero'. The show is about Buffy and her friends, it doesn't have a main male 'hero' character really. The closest they had was Angel (who became a villain for a while in S2) and he had to be written out shipped off to his own show so he could be a hero-type over there.

Spike was merely a 'romantic interest' in S6 and 7 and had for a long time been a murky shade of morality. People can (and have) debated about what emotions Buffy felt for Spike but basically it can be argued that (as always) Buffy tries to see the best in people that are attempting to better themselves (this isn't always the case but it applies to Spike I think).
That is why she can have feelings for somebody who- once upon a time- killed and ate and no doubt raped lots of very nice people. She did exactly the same thing with Angel. She even saw some of his handiwork- Drusilla, and yet she still undoubtedly loved him very much.


Can I ask: why is the rape thing a problem when we're talking about a demon who has slaughtered thousands? Killed men, women, children, two champions of good (slayers) and has left untold misery in his wake.
Why is it so hard to believe that he'd do this one particular crime- especially from what the viewer sees in S6. Vampires do what they want, when they want it- whether its shown or not, the only things they care about are their emotional attachments (which are always other vampires or people they intent to sire) and survival.
I mean, is it so unlikely that Drusilla might want to 'play' with her food and for Spike to join in? Would he refuse her? I somehow doubt it.

Even if 'Seeing Red' hadn't happened I'd just assume that Spike, being an evil vampire of note, had often done what he wanted to whatever victim crossed his path. That includes rape.

And I'm not talking about S7 Spike here but the demon; the monster not the man. They may have similarities but at the end of the day they have a very different moral code (I hope) and saying that one did these things does not make the other responsible.
You can root for and hope that S7 Spike is okay without 'endorsing' any or all of the crimes that he did. Hell, how could anybody watch 5 seasons of Angel when that's the guy who did all that horrible stuff? It's because of that change in behavior and/or morality. What they choose to do after.

 

[zianna]

Who's Pearl and what time period did he sleep with her in? (I've not read any of the comics). The Angelus thing came out of left field, they'd been no hint of it at all before Angel season 5, as for where it falls on the scale of intimacy, don't know since I think the writers deliberately left it open to interpretation for the audience.

A female demon, it was in Rome back in 1953 I think.
Spike (accidentally) saved her life by killing the black window demon she had just slept with, and she was feeling grateful, and actually it was Drusila putting all of that into Spike's mind (you saved the girl, what will be your reward now Spike? etc) and Spike replied that he would like a good booning which if I'm not mistaken in english argo means have sex with a woman from the "behind door" until you "finish".
LoL, I had totally forgotten about that!

Spike finishes his sentence of "I haven't had a woman in weeks" with "unless you count that shopkeeper". Whilst I agree that some of Spike's scenes have sexual overtones, that doesn't mean that is necessarily what that scene is about eg the dorm scene with Spike and Willow played as an attempted rape with Spike turning up the music and pinning Willow down (obviously setting up the impotence metaphor) but Spike never went there with the intent to rape. He went there with an intent to kill.

So if Spike was talking about feeding, why did he say UNLESS and why didn't he straight away include her?
Sorry to disappoint you, but again the ANSWER is BETWEEN THE LINES.
Spike didn't include the shopkeeper because he just fed of her without raping her first.
So he didn't have a woman in weeks, unless you count that shopkeeper he fed and killed some hours ago.

Also in that Lover's walk scene, preceding that "I haven't had a woman in weeks" line, Spike is sniffing Willow's neck, or rather he's crying on her shoulder and catches her scent, which suggests he might be thinking of biting her which he confirms in the dorm scene when Willow's worried that she's not attractive enough to be "biteable" and Spike reassures that she is and that he thought about biting her in the Lovers' Walk scene.

I've already replied you on that, so whay you're telling us (again) here is that Willow was really UPSET because vampires didnt want to bite her! Not that she was upset because Ozz had dumped her and nobody at the party was paying any attention to her, besides Riley who was using her to get info to get Buffy...yeah, sure, lol!

To me, having Spike being a rapist doesn't make sense because of the role he plays in the series. Putting aside the vampire aspect, Spike is meant to be a hero, he's Buffy's love interest, he's meant to be considered a good guy and he's meant to elicit sympathy from the audience in season 7 when he is being triggered. To "reveal" that he's a rapist doesn't gel with any of that and actually goes against it. Buffy, whose meant to be this symbol of female strength and independence, is suddenly in love with a rapist? At what point should that be considered a good thing? Also if we're assuming that the "girls Dawn 's age" is referring to rape then that makes things even worse because they would be UNDERAGE girls which makes things even more sinister than if Spike had been raping adult women. What it would make Spike is something that should never ever be associated with a hero. In fact, If Spike is indeed those things, then he can't ever be a hero because of having crossed the moral event horizon.

Spike hero, lol!
Antihero yes, acceptable. Buffy is a hero, not Spike who was a killer and killed thousands of people.
Killing one man per day lets say, for 120+ years, do the maths yourself...surely more than 40.000 people killed by him.
Oh, and Buffy had already fallen in love with a rapist ever since her S1. His name was Angel. It's not like the writers hadn't done that before.
Also, Angel actually did commit statutory rape back in S2 with Buffy who was UNDERAGE at that point. So again, it's not something that the writers hadn't done before.

During season 2, when Spike was a villain, where you could argue that Spike was possibly a rapist because "rape is a special kind of evil" is a villainous trope to make a villain even worse than they already are. However, the show went out of its way to show a more humane side of Spike with his care and devotion towards Drusilla when she was ill. He would apologise immediately to her when he upset her which contradicts the "vampires have no conscience" because how could he apologise if he doesn't feel bad about upsetting Dru? It doesn't make sense that when Spike is a villain, the show tries to humanise him, yet when he's an actual hero, the show tries to demonise him by implying that he is a rapist. It does not seem to be in line with what the show was aiming for with Spike in season 7.

Sorry but it totally does.
Spike was a soulless vampire committing unspeakable crimes for more than a century.

Warren was a fun villain in season 6 at the beginning, however, when he tried to rape Katrina is when he became a proper evil villain. That is the "rape is a special kind of evil" trope in play. The minute that was introduced, the audience's perception of Warren changed for the worse. It would be hypocritical to reveal that Spike is a rapist and expect the audience to go "that's ok" yet with Warren expect him to be rightfully demonised for the same thing Spike has done in the past. In fact to have Spike be a rapist makes the entirety of the scoobies look bad and hypocritical that they fight along Spike quite happily and don't give a crap that he's a rapist yet when Warren does the same thing it's "oh no how dare he!" It's a double standard. Spike can't be a part of the scoobies if he's a rapist otherwise it completely compromises and undermines the scoobies' moral code.

Well, WRONG.

Warren became a proper villain when he KILLED Katrina.
What he did to her before, is exactly the same with what Andrew and Jonathan did.
They all went together to chose a girl, they let him play with her waiting their turn. And actually we are not sure whether Warren had the time to actually rape her since she and he always had their clothes on, but Katrina calls it rape since that was the intention they had with her and they did rape her mind.

Andrew and Jonathan we never considered propler villains though.

 

[RomanticSoul]

So if Spike was talking about feeding, why did he say UNLESS and why didn't he straight away include her?
Sorry to disappoint you, but again the ANSWER is BETWEEN THE LINES.
Spike didn't include the shopkeeper because he just fed of her without raping her first.
So he didn't have a woman in weeks, unless you count that shopkeeper he fed and killed some hours ago.

To me it's not just what he says. But what he DOES while he is saying this to Willow. He's touching her. Wasn't he stroking her hair or something? Touching her intimately while talking about not having a woman in a while. How can there be any other meaning?

Spike hero, lol!
Antihero yes, acceptable. Buffy is a hero, not Spike who was a killer and killed thousands of people.

Hilarious, right? Soulles Spike a hero. Someone who has tortured and killed thousands and doesn't give a damn about it. What is a villain then?

 

[DeadlyDuo]

I tend to doubt it as well but its there in the dialogue. I tend to think Spike has too many issues with masculinity to have a fling with a guy, but there it is.

Agreed. That was my interpretation as well. I guess it's just the conflict of being led to believe one thing then suddenly being told another, and it just doesn't mesh well.

Spike is merely a male protagonist (one of several), which isn't the same thing as being a 'hero'. The show is about Buffy and her friends, it doesn't have a main male 'hero' character really. The closest they had was Angel (who became a villain for a while in S2) and he had to be written out shipped off to his own show so he could be a hero-type over there.

Spike was merely a 'romantic interest' in S6 and 7 and had for a long time been a murky shade of morality. People can (and have) debated about what emotions Buffy felt for Spike but basically it can be argued that (as always) Buffy tries to see the best in people that are attempting to better themselves (this isn't always the case but it applies to Spike I think).
That is why she can have feelings for somebody who- once upon a time- killed and ate and no doubt raped lots of very nice people. She did exactly the same thing with Angel. She even saw some of his handiwork- Drusilla, and yet she still undoubtedly loved him very much.


Can I ask: why is the rape thing a problem when we're talking about a demon who has slaughtered thousands? Killed men, women, children, two champions of good (slayers) and has left untold misery in his wake.
Why is it so hard to believe that he'd do this one particular crime- especially from what the viewer sees in S6. Vampires do what they want, when they want it- whether its shown or not, the only things they care about are their emotional attachments (which are always other vampires or people they intent to sire) and survival.
I mean, is it so unlikely that Drusilla might want to 'play' with her food and for Spike to join in? Would he refuse her? I somehow doubt it.

Even if 'Seeing Red' hadn't happened I'd just assume that Spike, being an evil vampire of note, had often done what he wanted to whatever victim crossed his path. That includes rape.

And I'm not talking about S7 Spike here but the demon; the monster not the man. They may have similarities but at the end of the day they have a very different moral code (I hope) and saying that one did these things does not make the other responsible.
You can root for and hope that S7 Spike is okay without 'endorsing' any or all of the crimes that he did. Hell, how could anybody watch 5 seasons of Angel when that's the guy who did all that horrible stuff? It's because of that change in behavior and/or morality. What they choose to do after.

For me, the main issue is the timing of these "revelations". In season 7, Spike was presented in a more heroic light because of the soul than he was pre-soul. They had 4 seasons of pre-soul Spike, including one where he was a full-on villain, yet they wait until he's at his most "heroic" phase and where he's meant to be eliciting sympathy from the audience before going "oh by the way he used to rape". It just seems counterproductive and contradictory.

Also they presented Angelus/Angel so differently despite technically being the same person pre-soul/post-soul so it's easier to see them as two different characters whereas Spike doesn't get that distinction.

I tend to doubt it as well but its there in the dialogue. I tend to think Spike has too many issues with masculinity to have a fling with a guy, but there it is.

I guess I always thought that Spike was better than Angelus in the sense that "even evil has standards" so whereas Angelus would go to the depths of depravity, Spike at least had a line that he wouldn't cross......but apparently not. Again it's the timing of the revelations because whilst it is widely considered what Joss says goes, at the same time it reeks of a change of story. So right now I feel conflicted because what I'd been led to believe suddenly doesn't match up with what is supposedly canon because it doesn't make sense why they would do what they did. The trope "rape is a special kind of evil" is just conflicting with what Spike's role is within the show. It feels like character assassination done in the final season so there's no undoing that canonically. Does that make sense?

I've already replied you on that, so whay you're telling us (again) here is that Willow was really UPSET because vampires didnt want to bite her! Not that she was upset because Ozz had dumped her and nobody at the party was paying any attention to her, besides Riley who was using her to get info to get Buffy...yeah, sure, lol!

Willow wasn't upset that she wasn't getting her throat ripped out, she was upset that it seemed like she wasn't attractive enough for vampires to want to bite her hence Spike's reassurance that he thought about biting her in "Lovers' Walk". Willow even comments that he "played the bloodlust kinda cool".

Basically the scene can work as a conversation of a sexual nature with the failure to "perform". However, that is NOT what the scene is about.

Spike hero, lol!
Antihero yes, acceptable. Buffy is a hero, not Spike who was a killer and killed thousands of people.

Season 4-6 Spike was presented as an anti-hero (helping the good guys despite not really wanting to be there), Season 7 Spike was presented in a more heroic light than he was pre-soul. Whether he should've been or not isn't the issue, the point is that he was presented in this more positive light in season 7 which is when the "revelations" came about. It doesn't make sense to have all that time pre-soul when Spike was morally grey and not bring this up then, yet bring it up at the most inopportune time when you are trying to elicit sympathy from your audience. They had 4 seasons to mention if Spike was a rapist yet they wait until the very last season when Spike's role has changed from what it was in 4-6 to bring it up. The timing just doesn't make sense.

Warren became a proper villain when he KILLED Katrina.
What he did to her before, is exactly the same with what Andrew and Jonathan did.
They all went together to chose a girl, they let him play with her waiting their turn. And actually we are not sure whether Warren had the time to actually rape her since she and he always had their clothes on, but Katrina calls it rape since that was the intention they had with her and they did rape her mind.

Andrew and Jonathan we never considered propler villains though.

Andrew KILLED Jonathan. It's wasn't the killing alone that made Warren a villain but the rape aspects before that. He deliberately used the mind control on Katrina (because she was his ex-girlfriend) to get her to be his sex slave, he killed her because she overcame the mind control and he couldn't have his way with her. He killed her in revenge. If he'd just walked up to her on the street and killed her, it would be bad but not as bad as what happened. What makes her murder worse is the motivation that lay behind it aka the preceding rape aspects.

 

[zianna]

Willow wasn't upset that she wasn't getting her throat ripped out, she was upset that it seemed like she wasn't attractive enough for vampires to want to bite her hence Spike's reassurance that he thought about biting her in "Lovers' Walk". Willow even comments that he "played the bloodlust kinda cool".

Basically the scene can work as a conversation of a sexual nature with the failure to "perform". However, that is NOT what the scene is about.

Then since Willow was thinking about attraction but Spike was thinking about feeding why didn't she say beautiful or attractive but used the word biting? And why when Spike said that he was thinking of biting her the previous year she was flattered?
Either they were both idiots, or they were both talking about the same thing: physical attraction which would eventually lead to biting aince Spike was a vampire.

Season 4-6 Spike was presented as an anti-hero (helping the good guys despite not really wanting to be there), Season 7 Spike was presented in a more heroic light than he was pre-soul. Whether he should've been or not isn't the issue, the point is that he was presented in this more positive light in season 7 which is when the "revelations" came about. It doesn't make sense to have all that time pre-soul when Spike was morally grey and not bring this up then, yet bring it up at the most inopportune time when you are trying to elicit sympathy from your audience. They had 4 seasons to mention if Spike was a rapist yet they wait until the very last season when Spike's role has changed from what it was in 4-6 to bring it up. The timing just doesn't make sense.

Spike is an antihero.
He starts hitting on Faith when he learns that Buffy was kicked out, just assuming it was her fault.
He then asks Buffy whether she wants him to make Faith a footnote in history.
He stays in Buffy's house knowing that he is a threat, he doesn't stop her from removing his chip although he was still in danger of a trigger, he doesn't cooperate with Giles to tell them what he did to his mother which would have eliminated the trigger had he talked about it with someone, and then he pretends to go eating Robin Wood because he tried to kill him and then he threatens to actually do so if he ever lays his eyes on him, and Robin actually had every right to want him dead at the point so instead of asking for forgiveness he makes more threats.
In Destiny he fights Angel and wins just to piss him off.
He goes and tortures that man in AtS just to get info out of him for the Fred/Illyria situation.
Angel offers him W&H's DIRTY money and an office somewhere else but LA and he agrees to take it, and then decides to stay in LA (before hearing about Angel's real plan).
And many more.

Now, you may agree with some of that, even with all of that.
That doesn't change the fact that a hero wouldn't act like that.
A hero wouldn't torture a human. A hero wouldn't have gone for the price in Destiny just for his selfish reasons (which were pissing off Angel and beating him for once). A hero would go immediately away from W&H the minute he was able to do so (he tells Angel it is wrong they stay there and they can't fight the beast from inside its belly but at the end he does the same instead of running away from it). A hero would never threaten to kil someone just because a person asks them too.

Andrew KILLED Jonathan. It's wasn't the killing alone that made Warren a villain but the rape aspects before that. He deliberately used the mind control on Katrina (because she was his ex-girlfriend) to get her to be his sex slave, he killed her because she overcame the mind control and he couldn't have his way with her. He killed her in revenge. If he'd just walked up to her on the street and killed her, it would be bad but not as bad as what happened. What makes her murder worse is the motivation that lay behind it aka the preceding rape aspects.

But Andrew then remorsed.
Up until that point, Warren could also have remorsed.
But Warren on the other hand went and tried to kill Buffy and by doing so he killed Tara.

And seriously, if you actually believe that rape is worse than murder, sorry but I believe there is something wrong with your morals...

 

[DeadlyDuo]

And seriously, if you actually believe that rape is worse than murder, sorry but I believe there is something wrong with your morals...

Sorry but I believe there is something wrong with your attitude.....

 

[zianna]

Sorry but I believe there is something wrong with your attitude.....

OK, then there is something totally wrong with MY morals since a rape is much much worse than cold blooded murder of 40.000+ people, many many of whom tortured with spikes.

 

[DeadlyDuo]

OK, then there is something totally wrong with MY morals since a rape is much much worse than cold blooded murder of 40.000+ people, many many of whom tortured with spikes.

I'm not talking about your morals, I'm talking about your attitude.

It is abundantly clear that we are not going to agree on this topic and that's fine. People have different opinions that don't always see eye to eye. However, there is a difference between going "let's agree to disagree" and doing what you're doing which is belittling my opinion just because it doesn't match yours.

I suggest we leave this argument where it is now, agree to disagree, and move on before it starts getting out of hand. What do you think?

 

[white avenger]

The goal of this tread is to find a different motivation, some event or action so powerful that it would make Spike come to believe that his lack of a soul was the only thing preventing Buffy from having a genuine relationship with him. In other words, what else would have Spike such a powerful desire to regain his soul?

Just a reminder of what this thread was originally intended to explore. Spike may or may not be a rapist, but it's his actions in "Seeing Red" that provided the catalyst that resulted in his acquiring a soul. If he had never gone into that bathroom, what other reasons could have served to send him on that quest?

 

[Dora]

Buffy was responsible for her own actions in season 6. In that very same scene, after Xander left, Spike called her out on her behaviour and Buffy's response was to do something to Spike (and it's very strongly implied to be a blowjob given the fact that Spike is stood upright and looking down, plus in season 7 on Buffy's date with Wood, when he feeds her the chocolate cake and she says it's the best thing she's ever had in her mouth, it cuts to Spike stood there).

Just because Spike's a vampire doesn't mean he should be treated like a thing. He's worked alongside the scoobies for several seasons, he helped them in the fight against Glory, he allowed himself to be tortured in the name of protecting Dawn. Spike has earned himself some respect from the scoobies, that doesn't mean they have to like him but they could at least treat him as a person.

Clem is a demon and everyone treats him as a person, Buffy gives him a hug in season 7.

But Buffy was not responsible for her actions in season six she was mentally ill, she confided in Spike because just as in dead mans party the Scoobies had moved on. They got Buffy back from heaven for totally selfish reasons. Spike new there was a good chance she would not be mentally OK he pinned Xander to a tree and told him he would have stopped the spell.Buffy felt worthless, she felt she had been kicked out of heaven she felt she deserved to be punished, she had been happy, dead, finished , in heaven .Spike is dead so Buffy confided in him . Spike stalked Buffy, confronting her once he found the chip only stopped working on her , saying she came back wrong what kind of demon are you pushing Buffy into deeper depression...Leading to the first sex. Buffy was horrified at what she had done, she slept the next night with garlic around her bed trying to avoid Spike. She got her hair cut off because Spike liked it and called her Goldilocks , Yes she did go to Spike in gone but as with as you were there were special circumstances that pushed her over what resistance she had to the depression she was self harming, Spike was Buffy self harming ( Gone becoming invisible , As you were Rileys Sam ) Spike was the main problem with Buffy depression coercing her into having sex dragging her back into depression, back into the dark ,back to death back when she was in heven happy, Buffy had given her life for Dawn, Dawn was life how often do we see Buffy saying I must get back to Dawn back to life and Spike talk her out of it. Spike wanted Buffy to stay depressed then he could abuse her .Rileys talk as I said gave Buffy the mental strength to finish it with Spike ,remember Buffy came out into the Sunlight out from the dark . She had stopped self harming , she had a long way to go after all the events in 5 and 6 and I think we never saw the real Buffy again. The attempted rape was Spike trying one last time to coercing Buffy into letting him get into her pants, but she was mentally strong enough to stop him and she had to physically , all the times she before said dont and no she was not mentally strong enough to stop him abusing her it was easier to give in to self harming to give into the depression the dark , but surely no and dont means just that no and stop unless your an evil and selfish ....but that is what Spike was....
As for working with the Scoobies were else would he go , he could not hunt because of the Chip, he needed the slayer ( Buffy Bot ) for protection, he had been killing his own kind. what else was he going to do? , there is great amount made of Spike looking after Dawn.....He did not care about Dawn when he was bonking Buffy, the opposite, he kept Buffy from Dawn not once did he say yes you should go to her.... totally evil totally selfish
 

Just a reminder of what this thread was originally intended to explore. Spike may or may not be a rapist, but it's his actions in "Seeing Red" that provided the catalyst that resulted in his acquiring a soul. If he had never gone into that bathroom, what other reasons could have served to send him on that quest?

Not sure if he would, he knew Buffy would have been happy if he went and got a soul , why did he not go and get one before ? if you love someone why not make them happy why not impress Buffy by getting a soul for her ? that would have shown his love .No he stormed off because he could no longer get into Buffy pants , he never mentioned a soul when he left just the chip either he changed his mind or the demon played a trick on him. I think all this i did it for you was nonsense...he did it for himself how else could have a possible any chance of being with Buffy

 

[white avenger]

Not sure if he would, he knew Buffy would have been happy if he went and got a soul , why did he not go and get one before ? if you love someone why not make them happy why not impress Buffy by getting a soul for her ? that would have shown his love .No he stormed off because he could no longer get into Buffy pants , he never mentioned a soul when he left just the chip either he changed his mind or the demon played a trick on him. I think all this i did it for you was nonsense...he did it for himself how else could have a possible any chance of being with Buffy

This point has been hammered constantly from the very moment that the episode aired. Joss confirmed that Spike went to Africa expressly to get his soul returned. There was never any other intention. He didn't want the chip removed, and he didn't want any sort of revenge on Buffy for rejecting him. He want to get his soul, because he thought that by doing so, he would become the sort of being that Buffy could indeed love. That is canon, because that is what the creator of the series planned to happen. Whether you or I want to accept it or not (I had my doubts at the time, just like everyone else) that is the fact. Spike went to Africa to get his soul. It was what he wanted all along, and that is exactly what the cave demon gave him.

With that point established, the question remains: other than the attempted rape, what event or condition could have been used to convince Spike that he needed to have his soul restored?

 

[Dora]

This point has been hammered constantly from the very moment that the episode aired. Joss confirmed that Spike went to Africa expressly to get his soul returned. There was never any other intention. He didn't want the chip removed, and he didn't want any sort of revenge on Buffy for rejecting him. He want to get his soul, because he thought that by doing so, he would become the sort of being that Buffy could indeed love. That is canon, because that is what the creator of the series planned to happen. Whether you or I want to accept it or not (I had my doubts at the time, just like everyone else) that is the fact. Spike went to Africa to get his soul. It was what he wanted all along, and that is exactly what the cave demon gave him.

With that point established, the question remains: other than the attempted rape, what event or condition could have been used to convince Spike that he needed to have his soul restored?

Right if you take what JW says as gospel, what would make Spike go and get his soul as I wrote before LOVE to be what Buffy would want......People do thing for the people they are in love with Spike was not in love with Buffy he was obcessed with the Slayer. Spike went and got his soul after he tried to rape Buffy ....why else than to get back in Buffy good books and a chance once again to get into her pants .And it possible worked in Chosen, but then JW has changed his mind about that

 

[white avenger]

Right if you take what JW says as gospel

Well, it's his show, his characters, he has creative authority, and he has said definitely on numerous occasions that Spike WAS in love with Buffy and that he DID go to Africa with no other intent than to have his soul restored. That makes it 100% canon, so, yeah, that pretty much means that it is gospel.

 

[Dora]

Well, it's his show, his characters, he has creative authority, and he has said definitely on numerous occasions that Spike WAS in love with Buffy and that he DID go to Africa with no other intent than to have his soul restored. That makes it 100% canon, so, yeah, that pretty much means that it is gospel.

If Spike was in Love with Buffy he had a sick way of showing it punching the one he loved in the face , Stalking them , sexually abusing them , trying to rape them , then Bragging to every one about the relationship the same relationship that Buffy did not feel confident to tell her friends about, yup that's love......I pity you if that's the only love you find