The whole grudge on Spike Take 2

[Joan the Vampire Slayer]

Here's the original question that prompted this lively and controversial debate:

Now even though I am a Bangel as well as a Spuffy, I think it is unfair how people hold the attempted rape in Seeing Red on Spike. But what I find very odd, is that nobody ever holds Angel responsible for his actions in Season 2 of Buffy. Yes Angel didn't have soul, but neither did Spike in Seeing Red. Also, Buffy is no innocent angel in the attempted rape because she is responsible for this happening too, for the way that she just treated Spike like dirt and made the relationship very difficult and confusing. And when did ensouled Spike tried to kill Buffy in her sleep, not to mention her mom, and even succeed killing somebody that was a Scooby at one time? So I think that it's alittle unfair to compare souled Angel with ensouled Spike in a Spuffy/Bangel debate or thread.

Here's the last post in the thread:

I really don't see how someone can think it's not attempted rape.
He was trying (aka attempting) to force himself on her when she didn't want it (aka rape).

There isn't a single time (correct me if I'm wrong) before Seeing Red, where she was screaming and clawing to get away from him like she was in that bathroom.

Continue.

(You can read the original thread, here: The whole grudge on Spike.... - Buffy-Boards)

 

[white avenger]

Quote:
I really don't see how someone can think it's not attempted rape.
He was trying (aka attempting) to force himself on her when she didn't want it (aka rape).

There isn't a single time (correct me if I'm wrong) before Seeing Red, where she was screaming and clawing to get away from him like she was in that bathroom.


No, there wasn't, to the best of my knowledge. There was, however, at least one instance, in "Dead Things," when Buffy apparently HAD BEEN screaming, clawing, and biting, in the "We missed the bed again scene." And that was what Spike was trying to initiate in the bathroom in "Seeing Red." That pain, violence, and sheer lust was what their entire relationship had been up til that time, mostly initiated, apparently, by Buffy. Spike was just trying to continue what had been their normal behavior. That is in no way an attempt to excuse or lessen the impact of what happened there in the bathroom, only an attempt to explain WHY it happened.

I hate that scene and its implications for both Buffy and Spike as much as anyone here. I think that the scene was out of character for both of them. I do believe, however, that, as bad as "Seeing Red" was, it was necessary to the development of Spike's character. "Seeing Red" provided the catalyst for what resulted in Spike winning his soul. Without that, he would never evolved into the hero and Champion that he became.

 

[InsaneMystic]

Quote-linking doesn't work, as the thread part 1 is closed... so I just use "untagged" quotes this time. Post quoted from is this one by sk73. 🙂

First thing that comes to mind is in season 4, Something Blue.
While the gang thinks Willow is slowly getting back on track after the Oz breakup Spike has no problem noticing how depressed she still is and that she's actually very close to a total breakdown.

Which is a feeling Spike knows himself (see "Lover's Walk"). I think the same experience applies re: keeping the secret about Dawn to Glory. Spike knows how devastating it is to lose someone you care about, and he doesn't want Buffy to go through that because Buffy is cool and he wants to keep her around. (see below)

Having sex against his will and not experiencing it to change into mighty good fun halfway through, on the other hand is, as far as we know, not an experience he knows.

(I'll rewatch Smth Blue soon to check if I'm missing something here, but that's the difference immediately springing to mind for me.)

Was just suprised to see that you didn't think a soulless Spike could see it when I always considered that capability in Spike being the exact thing that makes him so different from most other vampires.

No, to me that's not quite the difference between Spike and your run-of-the-mill vampire (you're not missing the mark by far, but you missed it, IMO 😉 ).

The difference, to me, is that Spike is capable of liking people, liking them enough, in fact, as to apply the Golden Rule in a very limited version ("Don't do unto others as you don't want to be done to, if said others are cool and fun people.") to them. It's still a primitive form of "moral compass", and, in my opinion, doesn't deserve to be called empathy just yet, but the guy sure is getting FAR closer to it than we've seen in other vampires.

Oh, I thought we had established that Buffy did send clear signals for anyone (with a soul) to see.

Yes, we have established that, and I'm not receding behind that. However, the can of worms getting opened was a bigger one. 😉

My point is that bringing arguments like "but he could read minds" and "he wasn't looking for the signals" into play creates problems in general that go far beyond the bathroom scene. If the definition of rape relies on the need to be either telepathic or go Sherlock Holmes on looking for clues, that's a VERY BAD THING for anyone who's reckless enough to ever have sex without getting a signed and certified waiver of responsibility in writing beforehand. Your partner can always claim to have had subtle preservations, ex post facto... and with that definition of rape, you will be screwed (no pun intended) and be an easy mark for getting your last cent conned out of your pocket as "recompensation" for something that you had no reason to suspect was anything but consensual sex, but don't have a chance to ever prove to not be "rape" under your definition.

I know it's a bit paranoid to be scared of that, yes - but I do think my paranoia would make me an excellent legislator or lawyer due to having a "loophole radar". 😉

 

[Allie]

Ok, I think I misunderstood you before. What I thought you were saying before was that if you are not strong enough to fight someone off, or if you have slept with the person prior to the incident that it couldn't be rape. But I don't think that is what you meant, right? Sorry I am confused, lol, and I don't want to misinterpret what you are saying. I would also just for the record say that not fighting, is not agreement, if that makes sense. Some people in extremely traumatic experiences, freeze up or dissociate, as part of the survival instinct.

I think I was letting some things bother me, but I think I was taking it different that what you actually meant. I just want to make sure, lol.

 

[InsaneMystic]

Ok, I think I misunderstood you before. What I thought you were saying before was that if you are not strong enough to fight someone off, or if you have slept with the person prior to the incident that it couldn't be rape. But I don't think that is what you meant, right? Sorry I am confused, lol, and I don't want to misinterpret what you are saying.

Yep, that's not what I meant, so it's good you try to make sure. 🙂

The key to the "against someones will" part in the rape definition is not about physical fighting or sufficient strength (thank goodness it's not; on the average, the number of women who could physically fight off a man charged on adrenaline are few and far between, there's an irrefutable anatomical disadvantage 🙁), and it most definitely is not about previous sex (rape can and does happen within relationships; the relationship may well be consensual when a specific sexual enconuter within in it is not).

Instead, the key is giving a clear signal that the victim does not want the sex to happen. If that signal is missing, it is not rape, it's acquiescence, no matter if the sex was "technically" against the will of one participant.

I would also just for the record say that not fighting, is not agreement, if that makes sense. Some people in extremely traumatic experiences, freeze up or dissociate, as part of the survival instinct.

Very true. In almost all cases of "attack paralysis", as one might call it, there will have been a definite signal of "no, stop" before the victim freezes up, be it verbal or physiological (crying, eyes wide with fear, shaking incontrollably etc.). If the attacker is capable of empathy - which, I repeat, I think is not true of Spike - this is fully sufficient as a signal of no agreement, and if that line gets crossed, yes, it is rape.

I am almost 100% certain that Spike was, in the past, indeed a rapist who noticed the line (pleads of "no, stop", e.g.) but crossed the line willingly, as his victims didn't rate as "cool people" on his primitive moral compass.

However, in the bathroom, there was no such line perceivable to Spike, because, while Buffy was "someone cool", she had devalued all available signals beforehand. So no, it cannot justly be called rape. It was a rape experience for Buffy, that's true, but it was not a rape attempt by Spike, he was simply initiating sex in a form that had, between them, been established as consensual.

Buffy did not acquiesce, but neither did she give a clear signal (she tried with all her might to give one, but could not; she was powerless to do so due to the, possibly unique, circumstances); she, thus, seemed to be acquiescing to the sex from Spikes PoV. That's what makes the scene tragic, and it's what makes BOTH of them, Spike and Buffy, into victims of circumstance.

Spike had to, and did, take responsibility, for causing the experience for Buffy - he caused it against his will, but he did cause it, so even though it wasn't rape, it was a form of "reckless endangerment", so to speak. He was horrified to see that the primitive "moral compass" he had developed was not enough to prevent him to be the cause of pain (the not-so-sexy type), grief, and terror for "someone cool", so he went to remedy the situation immediately to prevent it from ever happening again by "getting a better compass", read: his soul. (This is pretty much the most noble thing one can do as your immediate first reaction after making a mistake, and it's a miracle that someone with primitive ethical values like Spike's would make the step, yet he did. In stark contrast to that, Angel, who while ensouled supposedly had to have more developed values, goes all "greater good, big picture, I know better than you so I decide (and I'll go mope about in later in private)" on more than one occasion when his actions led to hurting people.)

Buffy had to, and did, take responsibility, for causing the signals to have been devalued. She did not show the hypocrisy of playing innocent victim, and instead readily gave Spike a chance for redemption and forgiveness. Truly the mark of a heroine and role model, that.

 

[Buffy Summers]

Quote-linking doesn't work, as the thread part 1 is closed... so I just use "untagged" quotes this time.

You just type

to show the username.

 

[Misty]

I don't think Buffy was responsible for Spike raping her, but I think she is responsible for having sex with Spike because it was a cause of the abusive relationship. But I'm indeed against rape because it's awful to do to someone. But I'm also very against stalking and harassment (which Angelus did to Buffy in season 2) because I've sort been harassed. Although the girl that was harassing me on the phone wasn't trying to kill me or watch my house, but she did think I was her friend when I made it clear to her before that I didn't like her, but she looked me and my friends up in the phone book and started calling us like 24/7. But seeing as I've never really been in those situations that Buffy has been in with boyfriends, I don't know what it's like, but I think what bothered me most about Seeing Red's AR is that Buffy looked so weak and hurt.

 

[Flannen]

Which is a feeling Spike knows himself (see "Lover's Walk"). I think the same experience applies re: keeping the secret about Dawn to Glory. Spike knows how devastating it is to lose someone you care about, and he doesn't want Buffy to go through that because Buffy is cool and he wants to keep her around.

But that's exactly what empathy is. Being able to feel the same feelings for someone else. To say that Spike can only empathise at certain times or feel that way for feelings he has felt himself is a just an excuse as to why he doesn't stop himself in Seeing Red. He is capable of empathy, not only in certain situations but in general.

Empathy is a basic human feeling, with more and more research suggesting that it's a pretty basic feeling within most animals too. I don't want to get into a huge debate here because I won't change my mind, lol. The ability to empathise is a positive attribute of Spike's character that he puts aside in order to get what he wants, ergo I hold a grudge.

 

[Willow-Tree]

But that's exactly what empathy is. Being able to feel the same feelings for someone else. To say that Spike can only empathise at certain times or feel that way for feelings he has felt himself is a just an excuse as to why he doesn't stop himself in Seeing Red. He is capable of empathy, not only in certain situations but in general.

Empathy is a basic human feeling, with more and more research suggesting that it's a pretty basic feeling within most animals too. I don't want to get into a huge debate here because I won't change my mind, lol. The ability to empathise is a positive attribute of Spike's character that he puts aside in order to get what he wants, ergo I hold a grudge.

Lou, that's really contradictory to you defending Buffy. 😛

Buffy should be able to empathize, especially if you're saying a vampire can.

She chooses not to with Spike, and continues to hurt him.

 

[randiann]

Did you seriously just argue that Buffy didn't empathize with Spike by not allowing him to rape her, thus hurting Spike???

Rape is rape, people. It is unconsentual, unwanted sexual actions and it is wrong. Soul or no soul Spike has proven well before this episode that he is fully capable of a wide variety of emotions and of reading others emotions. Rape and attempted rape is not justified in any way by the victim's previous actions. If someone says no, it means no. It doesn't mean "well maybe, keep trying."

 

[InsaneMystic]

But that's exactly what empathy is. Being able to feel the same feelings for someone else. To say that Spike can only empathise at certain times or feel that way for feelings he has felt himself is a just an excuse as to why he doesn't stop himself in Seeing Red. He is capable of empathy, not only in certain situations but in general.

As to the whether what Spike can do is empathy or not, I think we won't reach common ground. Saying that it is would mean, to me, that the whole fuss about soul or no soul is moot... and then the Angel arc about "look I dropped two letters from my name, woe is me, I care now!" is dripping hypocrisy (and, see above, that'd disgust me more than mass murder in and of itself). If a soulless creature can feel empathy, then Angel = Angelus, the only difference is that when he calls himself Angelus, he is more likeable because at least he's honest about the whole deal, lacking the disgusting charade he puts on while he goes by his "us"-less nickname. Just because some old Gypsy lady conjured up a shiny light effect doesn't change feck about him, in this case, except for giving Angelus a cheap alibi for calling himself a hero and fast-talking himself out of the range of Mr Pointy's business end. Epic fail on the "curse" business for the Calderash, I daresay. 😀 The whole eating rats gig may well be one of Angelus' mind games... sure, he's taking a remarkably long view keeping the charade up for the better part of a century, but I wouldn't put that beyond a mastermind of manipulation like him. And he's even got an excuse for venting some pent-up steam whenever some gal gives him the happies. Now that's convenient! 😉

Empathy is a basic human feeling, with more and more research suggesting that it's a pretty basic feeling within most animals too. I don't want to get into a huge debate here because I won't change my mind, lol. The ability to empathise is a positive attribute of Spike's character that he puts aside in order to get what he wants, ergo I hold a grudge.

I also have to disagree with you here, in general. I think you take facts that are correct, but draw a conclusion out of them that goes too far.

Empathy is NOT a supernatural clairvoyance/ESP thing. If there were such a thing as a human being who never felt sadness, said person looking at someone crying because of something the never-been-sad person's doing, a reaction of "why is water coming from this persons eyes?" and going right on with whatever he's doing to make them cry would not be lack of empathy. There's simply nothing to mirror, because the experience to relate to is not there within the empath's body of knowledge. I could not hold said (very hypothetical) person responsible for the pain caused by pushing on with what he/she's doing. There's not a drop of cruelty in knowingly making someone cry if you have no way of knowing "cry = sad".

And, likewise, it is not rape to have sex with someone yelling "no, stop" if you have no way of knowing "no, stop = this is against my will". Buffy - and again, Buffy alone is responsible for that part - had successfully established "no, stop" to be teasingly egging someone on into hot, fun, consensual sex. Whether or not "no stop" had been a rape signal with other people in Spike's past doesn't even enter the picture. It's Buffy, she's The Slayer. It may well be one of the several things setting her apart from the mundane girl next door, just like super strength, speed, and the odd visionary dream here and then. I cannot blame Spike for that.

Even if Spike were empathic, he could only compare to what he knows himself. In that case, though, you'd be right in saying he would not be able to ignore that there was a distinct difference in emotional tone between "no stop" = "try harder baby, you're getting there" and "no stop" = "please stop, you're hurting and scaring me". Being hurt and scared before, generically, are things a hypothetical empathic Spike would be able to compare to.

In my opinion, Spike is not able to feel empathy on that level, because if he could, not only would it stretch my suspension of disbelief o breaking point (having a "basic trait" other vampires lack removes Spike from being a vampire A LOT further than you and I a removed from a goldhamster; even evolutionary mutation can't account for that), but also the whole mythology makes no sense at all with the "soul thing" anymore - which, as collateral, destroys Angel's character totally. If the soul makes no difference about whether or not someone "feels" empathy, then Angelus had the choice of caring all along, because he must obviously have felt it. Holding that view makes no sense to me, unless we indeed assume that "Angel" is just the charade Angelus put up to make sure he keeps his get-off-the-stake-free card, and even gets to boink a (pretty gullible) Slayer in the process.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I doubt that you, as a Bangel, would be willing to pay the price of turning Bangel into the story of a gullible teenaged girl sleeping with the enemy, a mastermind manipulator (who happens to be a serial killer and rapist and, behind his charade of regret, still thinks there was no part of it all that wasn't fun) pretending to be a hero - just to be able to accuse Spike of trying to rape Buffy and hold a grudge for him. 😉

Besides, we'd then have to argue about whether Warren Meers had a "soul". He clearly didn't care, even though, being human, he must have had the basic trait of empathy. And don't even get me to open the box of worms labelled "free will" (tagged to the question whether or not The United States of Jasminia would have been paradise on Earth, and thus whether Angel Investigations was one of the most viciously destructive Big Bads the 'verse has ever seen). If having a soul forces you into a specific reaction about something you feel with or without it (which could well be the last straw of rationalization Bangels could grasp for 😛 ), proponents of "free will" should consider having a soul to be a Very Bad Thing Indeed. 😉

Rape and attempted rape is not justified in any way by the victim's previous actions. If someone says no, it means no. It doesn't mean "well maybe, keep trying."

In that case, Buffy not only attempted rape on Spike, but actually went through with it.

Thus, from a "retributive justice", eye for an eye view, not only did she bring it on herself, but she actually deserved it. Spike's actions in SR actually seem harmless compared to Buffy's actions in "Gone", if you put your theory to an absolute.

Less power to the "Spike is evil" tally, he still seems a nicer person than Buffy is. 😛

 

[Joan the Vampire Slayer]

Lou, that's really contradictory to you defending Buffy. 😛


Buffy should be able to empathize, especially if you're saying a vampire can.

She chooses not to with Spike, and continues to hurt him.

You're referring to how Buffy continued to hurt and use him in S6, right? If so, in all fairness to her, Buffy knew very well that she was hurting him. That's what was was "killing her" and so she left him. To escape the guilt that comes with using someone, she left, because she felt for him, as she admits to Angel later.

The ability to empathize is a positive attribute of Spike's character that he puts aside in order to get what he wants, ergo I hold a grudge.

Lou, I understand your grudge on Spike. You're not the only fan who us unable to forgive him for the grave mistake he made in attempting to violate Buffy.

But, can we really prove, though, that pre-soul Spike's empathic reactions were entirely constructed to fit any given situation? And on the same note, can we prove that Spike "ignored" his "ability" to emphasize when the feeling would not benefit a situation? The insinuation that Spike was ignoring Buffy's pleas in SR is a view I can't agree with. If Spike had entirely been ignoring her pleas for him to stop, he would have succeeded in raping her.

 

[Willow-Tree]

Just to be clear...

I did/am not justifying Spike's rape attempt. No one is saying that it is not an attempted rape. Get over it. Drop it. It's done with.

We have now moved on to another subject, which was the subject in the first place:

Like InsaneMystic said before, Buffy raped Spike, according to everyone's logic. The only difference? The gender issue. Don't deny it. A girl raping a guy is far more taboo in terms of general thinking than a man raping a woman. But it can happen, and... it kinda did.

And to Flannen, I was not objectifying your hatred for Spike's actions, I was merely saying that Buffy should empathize if Spike should have to.

 

[faeriegrrl27]

Well, I have my own take on Spike moral compass and how it relates to Seeing Red. I think I've posted about it somewhere, but not in this particular context.

I think that when Spike got infatuated/fell in love with Buffy, he wanted to make her happy. And in order to do that, he took on the morals that he saw in her. Because he'd seen Buffy take care of victims, he tries to make them more comfy to impress her in Triangle. And that's just early on. As time went on, I believe her morals actually became *his* morals. But prior to this, there'd been very little discussion of rape and even less where both Buffy and Spike were concerned. Therefore, he wasn't exactly able to know that it was wrong. I mean, a vampire has no morals and Spike his cool because he learns some. But, presoul, he could only learn what he was taught and it had either not been addressed or not been addressed to such a degree that it made an impression exactly what rape was and why it was bad. As Ben's been saying, prior to this, the signals Buffy gave out were ones that indicated foreplay. We could see the difference, but Spike wasn't able to because Buffy hadn't taught him the subtle differences in that area. He was able to be observant about other situations (ie Lover's Walk, Something Blue) because those were feelings he'd experienced. So far as we know, he was never raped and he was never taught what exactly rape was (expanded beyond the general definition that everyone knows) and why it was so awful. I'm not at all excusing Spike. I believe rape is the worst thing that can happen to someone, but, as has been discussed, I think we're all just trying to see both perspectives.

 

[Buffy Summers]

In that case, Buffy not only attempted rape on Spike, but actually went through with it.

What? Explanation of that one is needed.

 

[InsaneMystic]

What? Explanation of that one is needed.

It's a point LadyLavinia has brought up more than once on these boards. (I'm too lazy to search and link right now, but I'm sure if you search for her nick, you'll find lots of posts in regards to it.) I often disagree with her views, but I'm definitely with her on this one.

Spike clearly said "no" and "get out" before the ripping off his shirt scene in Gone; Buffy, apparently, went on for, erm, what Bill Clinton called "inappropriate relations" after that, without his permission and ignoring his no.

Also, she didn't wait for an ok when entering his crypt invisibly, she just started messing around with him without saying that it's her, freaking him out.

If, as randiann argues, "no" never, ever can mean "try harder baby", regardless of what happened before in the relationship, and sex over a "no" is always rape - then yes, Buffy Anne Summers raped Spike in "Gone", while Spike "merely" attempted it on her in SR.

 

[Allie]

Buffy never forced herself on Spike, so therefore not rape! And saying she DESERVED it, is just sick and wrong. No one EVER deserves it. I think that this has gone too far, it crossed a line. And I think this discussion needs to be closed, before it gets worse.

 

[InsaneMystic]

Buffy never forced herself on Spike, so therefore not rape! And saying she DESERVED it, is just sick and wrong. No one EVER deserves it. I think that this has gone too far, it crossed a line. And I think this discussion needs to be closed, before it gets worse.

Sorry if that got to you. I am not saying that she deserved it, because I'm not into the retributive justice thing. There were other posters here - specifically TheVoid - who argued for retributive justice (see his point about the "murder tally" about Spike and Wood), and argued that "sex over no = always rape".

I can not see how, within that logic, Buffy would not "deserve" it. Which is a main point why I think concepts like "retributive justice" and "justified vengeance" are unworthy of a civilized society.

 

[Buffy Summers]

InsaneMystic agrees: I knew that much, lol... but is there an easy way to get the nifty blue triangle link-thing in, too? 🙂

You add the post id after the username, like

You need to mouseover the number in the top right corner of the post to find the postid.

 

[Eleftheria]

Sorry, but when exactly did Buffy force herself on Spike? I NEVER heard him complain about anything. In "Gone" he wanted her and he liked it, but he was disappointed by the fact that she used her invisibility to feel free and not to care about others' opinions. He didn't push her away, he didn't yell at her, he didn't say "stop you're hurting me" ok?
There is absolutely no comparison between SR and Gone. Spike even when he was in pain, he liked it.