Why Buffy should never have kids...

[palabravampiress]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v70/Old_Master/GIFS/POSTOFTHEDAYAWARD-1.gif


One of the most popular fanfic ideas is the idea in which Buffy has kids. Usually, she either has them with or raises them with one of her vampire lovers. But I think Buffy should never have kids. Period. I'm really glad she sleeps with women and vampires. Thank goodness she can't reproduce with them! lol.

I am watching a story on GH that totally reminds me of Buffy. Hear me out. Buffy has two killers-with-hearts-of-gold guys as the primary figures in her love life, right? These guys are very closely related to one another not just in terms of the women with whom they choose to comshuck, but also in terms of a shared past and similar social standings. Buffy's life is filled with violence. The lives of her friends and her primary love interests are filled with violence.

On GH, Carly has two primary love interests (excluding her current husband, curiously enough) who are killers-with-"hearts-of-gold." These guys, a mob-boss and his enforcer, aren't directly related, but they are self-proclaimed brothers who have slept with most of the same women (and swapped sisters). They are sometimes at odds with one another, but they love each other, too. Their pasts and futures are tied. All three of these characters live in the violent world of the mafia.

Twelve years ago, they brought a child into that world. Now, that child is incredibly screwed up. He's been kidnapped multiple times, looks up to his parents' violence and even threatens to use his mob connections against people, openly aspires to inherit the business when he grows up, nearly killed his biological father, (when he was 8) accidentally shot a woman, (bought a gun on the street to "protect" his family) and, now, has been shot in the head while in the line of a richocheted bullet intended for his father (or, arguably, for one of his fathers). While he's in surgery, the parents (Carly, the mob boss, and the enforcer) are tearing each other apart with the blame game. There is plenty of blame to go around. I mean, actual custody of the kid was gained by hanging the kid's biological father (coincidentally, the biological brother of the mob enforcer) on a meathook and forcing him to sign away his parental rights. The whole thing is a mess. The poor kid is terribly, terribly screwed up. Their other kids (one belongs to Carly and the mob boss, one belongs to the mob boss and the D.A., and one belongs to the mob enforcer and a nurse) are pretty much doomed to similar fates if things don't change. The point here seems to be that violence begets violence and that the three parents involved have acted wrongly by bringing children into their messed up, violence-filled lives.


Every time I look at the unholy trio of GH, I can't help but see the Angel/Buffy/Spike triangle. Any kid of Buffy's would be constantly surrounded by danger. It will likely have Angel and Spike as very questionable male role models (although it will, fortunately, also have more stable influences from people like Giles and Xander). The adults in its life will suffer violent deaths. It will likely be kidnapped and/or tortured by supernatural rivals. Out of necessity, it will be raised to live and die by the sword and, for the irony of it, would probably be fated to be turned into a vampire at some point. I mean, just as GH's mafia spawn has turned into a mini-mobster who is the reflection of the very worst of his parents, Buffy's kid would probably turn into a mini-Scooby who is the reflection of the worst of his parents, that being the demon side. They already kind of played this story out with Connor, who grew up into a very poorly adjusted kid away from whom Angel was obliged to walk away for the benefit of the kid and his potential victims. It's really the best way to take a story like that.

So, yeah... Buffy should never have kids. It can only end badly. Agree? Disagree?

 

[eunsoma]

Seriously this is an extremely intelligent post and I agree 100% with your opinion. Buffy's children wouldn't last in this world. Her enemies would kidnap her kids in the blink of an eye. Just look at how many times Dawn had been napped, and she's Buffy sister, arguably an adult. It's a fact that the people around Buffy are unsafe - not her fault, but the truth. Her friends need to 'play it safe' in the way they live, or they would have been killed years ago. The thing is, these people are adults, quite capable of saving themselves, or even escaping danger, kids are not.. Even Buffy's friends who couldn't escape bad guys are now dead, take Jenny Calandar for example.
Angel's child, Connor... As a baby, he lasted like less than a month. I know that he was all unique, and therefore targetted, but I'm sure that the baddies would hold an even greater grudge against Buffy, as she instigated the Slayer spell, and brought all the new Slayers out.
Like in the case you've highlighted above, the attackers wouldn't even need to be aiming for the child, wrong place, wrong time and it'd be no more. And lets face it, that wouldn't take long in Buffy's life...
Really good thread topic, by the way.

 

[palabravampiress]

Thanks for participating, eunsoma! And thanks for the rep points, WA and TV!

Thank you for mentioning Robin! I forgot about him for a second. Robin Wood turned out remarkably well-adjusted, considering... don't you think? Of course, I think it is in his favor that his mother was killed when he was a toddler. Upon his mother's death, his value as a potential hostage or target decreased considerably.

That actually leads me to another thought: Buffy is already one of the (if not the) longest lived slayers, and she has died twice. Any child that Buffy brought into the world could probably expect to end up orphaned, just as Robin was orphaned. Considering the circumstance, however, being orphaned might not be so bad. Who do you think would raise Buffy's orphaned child? Dawn? The father (assuming he's a person and not some weird sort of mystical energy or something)? If that happened, would Buffy's child be able to live a relatively normal life, or would it get tangled up in the slayer world as Robin did?

This doesn't even get into the question of "what if the father was one of the vamp boys?” because... argh! That's a whole other can of worms (and one that was already addressed with Connor). I think two anomalies of that sort would be two too many, and so I'm voting for a human father. Well, actually, I'm voting for no kids, so no father, but the hypothetical kid would be Buffy + human spawn. Maybe Xander. Then again, if you’ve been keeping up with the comics, you know that doesn’t necessarily have to discount a certain one of the vamp boys as the potential sperm donor. Not that either of them would qualify as suitable father figures, regardless of current alive/dead/undead or souled/unsouled status at any given time.

With so much potential for danger, I am not at all surprised that the writers chose not to bring a child into Buffy’s life. In fact, I am actually rather pleased. Why, though, do you think fanfic writers so often make that choice? And do you think that choice is likely to change in the comics? I ask because even if the child is not Buffy’s, I think the huge increase in the number of slayers must have resulted in a huge increase in the probability that a slayer will have a child. In fact, it seems highly likely that a slayer was probably pregnant when she was activated by the scythe. It even seems highly likely that a slayer was already a mother when she was activated by the scythe. In any group of women of childbearing age, one can expect to find at least a few mothers and expectant mothers. It’s the biological imperative at work. I kind of think the comic writers have been remiss in not addressing that issue thus far. One of the logical consequences of Buffy having activated all of the slayers is that of having activated slayers who were mothers or mothers-to-be at the time of activation, thereby unintentionally forcing children into the slayer world just as their mothers were forced into that world by the scythe spell. How do you think the comics will handle this issue?



EDIT: Oooh! Thanks for the Post of the Day ribbon!

 

[Joyce Summers]

Sometimes your posts are so wordiful all I can do is nod and agree and my short post seems lame in comparison. Haha

But you've brought up so many good points. With Buffy's life, I don't think children could ever fit in there. The closest Buffy has ever gotten is Dawn and even she had some serious issues in season 6 despite the fact that she was raised, at least according to all their memories, in a perfectly normal, loving family dynamic.

Sadly, I don't think Buffy is meant to have children. If we go along with the whole fate/destiny thing and say that every single person on this Earth has one main purpose. For some it is just to be there for someone else (This would be Xander in the Buffyverse I think), some are even meant to be the villain of the piece- that is sadly their lot in life, some are meant to find The One, some are meant to help others, some are meant to be great businessmen (Anya? Haha), some are meant to teach, to learn. And some are meant to be Mothers and Buffy is not part of that some. Her sole purpose is to be the Slayer and sadly that cancels out all else.

Yes, like The First Slayer said, she is full of love and perhaps it's that would stop Buffy ever having children anyway. She said to Satsu she hates letting people love her because people who love her get hurt so I definitely don't think, with that thought process, she would ever want to bring a child into the world.

Plus it's just not practical. Living the life she leads the kid would be constantly in danger, not to mention as you already said the child would more than likely end up being orphaned just like Robin was. The hills would not be alive for this kid. And I do always think it strange that so many fanfic writers have Buffy as a Mom. For me it just seems weird....she just doesn't seem to be the Mom type. More like the cool aunt. I could see her totally nurturing and doting on Dawn's children, but never choosing to have her own.

I just don't think Slayers are meant to have children...from what we saw of the clips of Nikki Wood, for a Slayer, saving the world comes first and the child comes second. 'The mission is what matters'.

Plus, imagine when the kid reaches an age, say his/her teens, where they have the ability and understanding to learn about what their Mom was like in the past. There's some pretty disturbing things to find out about your Mother. Spuffy comes to mind....

 

[Allycat]

Sorry, but I completely disagree with you. You cannot compare Buffy, Spike, and Angel, to a couple of mobsters, just because there's also a love-triangle going on.

Out of necessity, it will be raised to live and die by the sword and, for the irony of it, would probably be fated to be turned into a vampire at some point. I mean, just as GH's mafia spawn has turned into a mini-mobster who is the reflection of the very worst of his parents, Buffy's kid would probably turn into a mini-Scooby who is the reflection of the worst of his parents, that being the demon side.

Where did you come up with the notion that children are necessarily a reflection of the worst of their parents? If that were true, then with each generation the world's population would get a little bit worse every time. While it's true that some children turn out worse than their parents, I would like to think that most are a little bit better, as a result of people always trying to be better parents than their own parents were. I think that perhaps a better way to look at it is to think that children always turn into an exaggerated reflection of their parents. Thus a mobster-child would be worse than this parents, whereas a hero's child would be even better.

Another thing I wonder about is if you have looked beyond s7/8 Buffy and beyond Spike and Angel. Yes, Spike and Angel have been great loves in Buffy's life, but she's with neither of them now, and might not ever be again. If Buffy were to have children (apart from it officially being impossible with a vampire, unless helped by a renegade ex-PTB), it could be someone other than Spike or Angel. Half of who the child is going to be is determined by the father's DNA, so the choice of father has a tremendous impact. Not to mention the fact that the situation in which a child is raised is obviously also partially determined by who the father is and what his station in life is.

Also, it wouldn't have to be now either. During S8 Buffy is roughly 23, going on 24. My mother didn't have my younger brother until she was 37 and I know that's not a record by a long way. It could easily be another 10 years before she would even decide to have kids. Who knows what the world looks like at that point? Most importantly, she might have stopped slaying at that point, deciding to leave that task to younger girls.

I think the most important problem I have with your theory is that there are too many variables. You can't say someone should never have kids based on what her life's been like from her 16th to 24th birthday and based on who's she's dated in those years, because that is no guarantee for her life is going to be like and who she's going to date from her 24th to her 40th birthday.

 

[palabravampiress]

I don't think Spuffy (specifically) would even rank on the list of disturbing things to find out. I mean, most of the scoobies didn't get the view we got, anyway. They just knew they had a sexual relationship. Most of us know (or suspect) and can deal with the fact that our moms had a few girls gone wild moments in thier younger years. lol. Heck, before she dated my dad, my mom dated hicks and addicts who occasionally show up in the paper or the obits as criminals or morons. Whenever this happens, my mom gets kind of sad for the way the guy turned out, my dad makes fun of her prior taste, and then the matter is dropped. At least Buffy's lovers tend to end up as hero types who go out saving the world.

The kid would, however, probably have to find out and deal with the fact that its mom was a slayer, that she died a couple of times, that she literally crawled out of her grave, that she made a habit of sleeping with dead people, that she upset the balance by activating all of the slayers, and, most likely, that the kid was some kind of accident or anomaly. It also seems likely that Buffy's death would be tied to taking a risk or making a poor judgment call in order to protect the kid rather than to do what needed to be done (kind of like when Giles said Dawn might have to be sacrificed and Buffy didn't want to hear it). Heck, the kid might even have to live with the knowledge that an apocalypse was actually successful in part because its mom tried to save it specifically instead of the world in general. But at least the kid could take comfort in the fact that its mom "saved the world a lot." That is pretty cool.

But really... what about the children of newly activated slayers? We can all pretty much agree that the life of a slayer's kid is a crappy hand to be dealt... and Buffy dealt it when she activated the slayers. I don't think Buffy intended to hurt anyone. In fact, I think she genuinely wanted to share her power in a sisterhood, girl-power, let's save-the-day and defeat-the-big-bad kind of way. It was a good way to end the series. But now that we have the comics, we have to think about the practical consequences of that decision. One such consequence is that the balance is out-of-whack, another is that world governments now fear and target slayers, another is that the occasional nut-job slayer (like Dana or Genevieve) creates a liability issue, and another is that crime is sometimes required to in order to fund slayer operations. The comics are dealing with all of those issues. But one consequence is the fact that Buffy has effectively forced thousands of others (and their families) into a lifestyle and a destiny that she, herself, often resented having forced upon her. Just as Buffy and her friends and families paid the price, these new slayers and their friends and families will also pay the price... and so will their children. When and how do you think the comics will address this issue?

 

[Evilyn]

I also have to disagree. You are saying that she shouldn't have children based on the assumption that her life will continue as it is currently. Well, we know from Fray that there is an ultimate good/evil battle and that all things of the demon nature are gone from the world for centuries. Done so by a slayer and her friends. Of course we don't know the specifics, but assuming this happens during Buffy's lifetime, within reason, she could have children and they not have to suffer what the slayer's life would bring.

I also think that given the opportunity, she would be a fantastic mother. It's completely different when you carry that baby inside of you for 9 months and then watch it grow through the years than it is mothering a sibling. Having children tends to change women. And Buffy's always been pretty good with natural instinct, I believe the same would stand true with maternal instinct.
I think more than anyone, Buffy deserves the unconditional love a child gives. And if it is Buffy and the Scoobs that banish demons from existence, then that would be a very good reward for her, in my opinion.

 

[palabravampiress]

Good points, you guys!

I don't think that children are necessarily a reflection of the worst of their parents. Rather, I think that children who are raised in extremely violent environments usually grow up to reflect those violent environments. I'm not saying the love triangle is the common denominator but, rather, that the violence is the common denominator. The love triangle in one situation just reminded me of the other. Heck, Angel and Jason (the enforcer) are cut from the same cloth. For real. Spike and Sonny? Not so much. Thank God. I can only handle one Sonny. Even so, aside from the mafia/supernatural difference, the non-traditional family structures and exposure to things like violence and kidnapping are likely to be similar.

You are right that Angel and Spike may not be in the picture at all. You're even right that the picture may have changed even more in the next ten years or so. Buffy really changed everything when she activated all of the slayers. No one knows the future. My argument, however, is based on the fact that Buffy is currently in charge of a rogue, international demon fighting force, has made many enemies in the demon world over the years, and has already died twice. Anything can happen. That doesn't mean it isn't valid to use the past to predict future patterns. Buffy is a slayer. To me, it seems more likely that Buffy will continue to live as a slayer than that she will retire to some quiet, remote little suburb and live a peaceful life in which she is forever unmolested by demons and untroubled by impending apocalypse. Like the mafia, I don't know if slayerdom is something from which you ever really manage to walk away completely and cleanly. I think it's way too optimistic to assume that that's even an option for Buffy. Maybe a newly activated slayer could have that option, but Buffy? I feel like she's already in too deep.

I am basing my opinion on Buffy's life between her 15th and 24th birthdays not because of who she's dated, but because of who she's been. She's been a warrior. She's been killed. She's been brought back to life. She's been the head of something billed by the government as an international terrorist organization! I think these things have painted a pretty permanent target on her head -- and I'm thinking that she'd pass that target on down to her offspring, as well. The people she's dated have been warriors, too. That's why I bring it up. Out of necessity, so have her friends and family (at least to some extent). They've also been targets and victims. I bring up her lovers and her friends and her family because with very few exceptions, the people in Buffy's life are as entrenched in her violent world as is Buffy herself. It only makes logical sense that Buffy's child would be entrenched in that world, as well.

You're right. There are a lot of variables. A lot could change. And there is Fray to consider, now that Joss has sort of made it canon by referencing it in the comics (disclosure: I have not yet read Fray). Buffy and the slayers could vanquish all evil once and for all, making the world safe for humans and even for slayers. In that scenario, sure, Buffy could safely have a kid. I even agree with Evilyn that if that were the case, that would be a very good reward for Buffy and that Buffy would probably be a good mom.

I'm just saying that, based on everything in Buffy's life up to this point, it seems far more likely that her child would be raised in a dangerous, violence-filled environment and grow to reflect and/or be damaged by that experience than that it would be raised in a safe, nurturing environment and grow to reflect that experience. Your scenario could happen and may even be endgame; I just think that, given everything we know up to this point, my scenario is more likely. In the U.S., the average age of first birth is in the mid-twenties. That being the case, I think Buffy’s experiences between the ages of 15 and 24 are very likely to influence any children she might have – and, dare I say it, I think those experiences are far more relevant than speculation about how her life might turn out based on what a loosely affiliated future comic says. I don’t think it’s fair to say that just because anything, including the Fray option, could happen in the future, nothing in Buffy’s life up to this point should be considered as a valid argument against her having children.

By the same token, maybe I was hasty in making the blanket statement that Buffy should never have children. If circumstances change drastically, then yes, maybe she could consider it. But unless things change very drastically – as in the Fray scenario or if Buffy is sucked into an alternate dimension in which she is no longer a slayer or something – I really don’t think it would be a wise thing to attempt. For Buffy not to take her violent lifestyle up to this point into consideration before deciding to be a mother, well, that would just be… irresponsible.

 

[Joyce Summers]

Evilyn- But isn't the theory that banishing all demony things from existence included Slayers? And that's why there weren't any till Fray? I always thought that was how the story went, in which case Buffy would never have the chance to have children/

And I agree Buffy could be a good Mother, she could be a very good Mother, but I don't think that's who she is and I don't think it's who Buffy thinks she is either. I don't ever see her fully sitting down and planning to start a family...if I were to consider it for some reason I see it being a very long time from now. I somehow seeing her being those "late-life Mommies"...you know around 40? When she's fully gotten her life together, presumably everything is right with the world and someone else is doing the whole fight the demons legacy thing. Otherwise, I believe she would deem it too dangerous to raise a child.

And I don't know- for some reason I just can't imagine Buffy with children. I imagine her in the 'Aunt Category'.

"Buffy deserves the unconditional love a child gives"- I don't know whether I quite agree with that statement. It makes it sound as though 'Well after all Buffy's done, let's give her someone that loves her no matter what crap she pulls'. That statement there was purposefully crass and blunt by the way- I'm not saying Buffy is always pulling crap. My point is, how can 'deserving' unconditional love be seen as a reason to give someone a child, so-to-speak. That isn't why someone has children, just so they can be unconditionally loved. If anything it's so they can give the unconditional love to the children. If a child is had just because of deserving unconditional love than that's very selfish reasons in my view. I may have misinterpreted what you said, but that's how I read it.

 

[Tranquillity]

Ha, this discussion is going on at Dark Horse boards too. Yeah, i must agree with those who can't see Buffy as a mother. I've read fanfics that make her have a child and I have always found them a bit cringe-worthy (direct me to a good one if you know of one, i'm happy to read...) they seem to have more to do with the romantic idealism of motherhood/babies and the notion that the creation of a child would somehow inextricably link her to one or the other of her vampire lovers who are invariably (and miraculously) the father. That's not motherhood, that's romance fiction. Dawn is Buffy's shot at motherhood. She got it, she's giving it a good go but she's not perfect. How we see her interact and respond to Dawn is an excellent blueprint of how she would be to her own child - she would love it tremendously, endlessly, but the job, the duty, would get in the way and cause a detached kind of mothering, fine for an instant teenager but not so great for an infant and child. Just my opinion. I also just don't see Buffy pineing for motherhood - she has a boatload of maternal responsibility with both Dawn and her army of little girls.

Of course this might change if somewhere down the line things changed and she somehow got to retire...

 

[Lou]

Hmmmmm.....a good debate....YUMMY!

I'm not even sure what side I'm on.

I will say these things...

Where did you come up with the notion that children are necessarily a reflection of the worst of their parents? If that were true, then with each generation the world's population would get a little bit worse every time. While it's true that some children turn out worse than their parents, I would like to think that most are a little bit better, as a result of people always trying to be better parents than their own parents were. I think that perhaps a better way to look at it is to think that children always turn into an exaggerated reflection of their parents. Thus a mobster-child would be worse than this parents, whereas a hero's child would be even better.

While that makes sense, a child raised in a "monster" world or "mobster" world where people they love can get killed at any given moment by a demon (or man with a gun) with a grudge is hardly the same as my kids seeing the fact that I have the patience of a May Fly. Kids learn from how their parents handle situations. They see "This is how they handled it" and "This is the result". If they see the result is good....Mom fights, vampire dies. They want to do that bigger and better.

If we assume Buffy's life continues on the path that it has been, I'm not sure kids would be a great idea.

ON THE OTHER HAND, when I got pregnant, I stopped all my "wiley ways". Not that I had many, I'm a goody two shoes. Driving on the interstate seemed like an "unnecessary risk" and still does most of the time. She does have a chance, since she's not the only Slayer, to dye her hair, change her name, settle down (probably not with Spike who seems to get in all sorts of trouble while not trying) and raise a litter of kiddos.
Buffy doesn't strike me as "emotionally motivated" as Carly. I think she's more capable of weighing the danger of being what she is vs. leaving it.

Assuming she wouldn't or couldn't leave it behind, I don't think she could have kids. Or if she DID have kids, I think she'd end up giving him or her up like Angel did.

I think the parallels are eerie though. Poor Michael. He's such a good little actor too.

 

[eunsoma]

what happens to slayers when all the demons are banished?? (sorry, I haven't read the comics) If Buffy was able to live on after the demons were banished I think it'd be wonderful for her to have children, as I think she should enjoy life - for a change.. At the moment though, going by what her life has been like, it doesn't seem wise.
That's another really interesting point you've raised palabravampiress, I wonder what will happen to potentials who already had kids before they were slayerised..? I think if I were a slayer and had had a kid already, I'd probably ignore the calling and raise my child to keep them from dangers... It's not like there's no other slayers to do the job.

 

[anyatara]

Well; it wouldn't have happened anyway, 'cause vampires can't have kids (Except in the case of Connor, but that had exceptions and stuff), but it's been said many a time that they're not meant to have kids. And I don't think Buffy ever really thought about having kids, I mean in Bad Eggs, she defiantly didn't, and with all the times she had to save Dawn, I don't think she'd want that for her kids aswell. The only time she seemed to take an interest in it, is in 'First Date' when she finds out that Robin is the son of a slayer, but I think when she saw how much it hurt him that his mother was killed, that kinda put her off the idea.

 

[palabravampiress]

Well, it could have happened with Riley or Parker. I'm glad it didint, but it could have. And it could happen with someone in the future, too.

Seriously, though... that automatic birth control thing must be a perk when it comes to sleeping with (un)dead people.