Why the Xander hate?

[prophecygrrl]

And why should Cordelia's sexuality be off-limits? Because she's a woman? In a supposedly feminist show, you do realize that's a decidedly unfeminist approach, don't you? And Cordelia doesn't seem bothered by this, perhaps because she's self-aware enough to realize that Xander's remarks are perfectly fine considering the context, i.e. as a response to her insults.

Female sexuality is often policed in a way that male sexuality is not, and considering the frequency and go-to nature of such comments, I think the more relevant question is why it's considered on-limits (is that even a phrase...? "On-limits"? Whatever. 😛) in the first place. It's not as if having sex or even simply being sexual is a negative or shameful quality to have. But if it's treated as such, then yes, I think it is fair to call it slut-shaming.

I don't think it really matters if Cordelia is bothered by it or not. I'm bothered by it.

 

[Icarium]

And I imagine the only reason Cordelia doesn't slut-shame anyone herself is because she typically targets losers who don't have much of a social/dating life, and because she goes for (arguably) more hurtful subjects, like someone's looks or social status. Until Buffy's love for Angel turned him into Angelus, that is:

Didn't you get the message? Cordelia was trying to help Buffy by saying that. And that makes it okay. Somehow. I guess she also tried to improve Xander's fashion sense and make him study harder with her insults. What a good Samaritan!

When any of the other scoobies or vamps makes an error--ie fails to do what's "right"--it is always in the pursuit of the greater goal to better the world.

I beg to differ. Angel trying to lose his soul on purpose by sleeping with Darla? Him again wiping out his friends' memories? Anya's second stint as a vengeance demon? Dawn's shoplifting? Willow's abuse of Tara? Tara casting a spell and lying about her supposed demon nature? Really, everybody made mistakes, often of the selfish variety which had nothing to do with their mission. Xander didn't really a have monopoly in that respect at all.

But when the to-go response is to constantly compare her to a sex worker or sneer at her clothing?

Constantly? Really?

 

[The Unspoken]

Female sexuality is often policed in a way that male sexuality is not, and considering the frequency and go-to nature of such comments, I think the more relevant question is why it's considered on-limits (is that even a phrase...? "On-limits"? Whatever. 😛) in the first place.

Policed? It's Cordelia that goes out of her way to insult people, and when Xander goes for a retort, I guess he targets her 'weak spot'. He also insults her intelligence, so it simply fits in with the 'clueless bimbo' archetype he perceives her as (prior to becoming a couple).

It's not as if having sex or even simply being sexual is a negative or shameful quality to have. But if it's treated as such, then yes, I think it is fair to call it slut-shaming.

Well, the show certainly had no trouble depicting Parker's hookups as something negative, so I'd say your accusations of women bashing are unfounded.

And no, I don't think being sexual is a negative or shameful quality to have. But Cordelia's attempts to manipulate Owen or Angel into dating her while bad-mouthing Buffy behind her back? Yeah, I think those should be 'shamed', because they're pretty crappy things to do.

 

[prophecygrrl]

And no, I don't think being sexual is a negative or shameful quality to have. But Cordelia's attempts to manipulate Owen or Angel into dating her while bad-mouthing Buffy? Yeah, I think those should be 'shamed', because they're pretty crappy things to do.

That's what I said, lol. There's plenty to criticize Cordelia for. She's so mean and insensitive. Have at it, hoss. I don't really care and I kind of like it, because as much as I like Cordelia (like turns to love later on), I like seeing people stand up to her too.

Well, the show certainly had no trouble depicting Parker's hookups as something negative, so I'd say your accusations of women bashing are unfounded.

What does Parker have to do with anything though? He was an ass who manipulated girls into sleeping with him. That's not really the same thing as just being sexual or sexually active.

 

[The Unspoken]

That's what I said, lol. There's plenty to criticize Cordelia for. She's so mean and insensitive. Have at it, hoss. I don't really care and I kind of like it, because as much as I like Cordelia (like turns to love later on), I like seeing people stand up to her too.

But if we go by your criteria, criticizing her for her behavior in these instances would be considered slut-shaming. She is being sexually assertive after all. Frankly, I think it's very unrealistic to demand that the characters adhere to a strict raging bitch/slut-shaming dichotomy. Considering how Cordelia behaves, one would have to go out of their way to not disrespect her feelings.

What does Parker have to do with anything though? He was an ass who manipulated girls into sleeping with him.

It served as an example of how the show does 'call it' when women are somehow in danger of being treated wrongly, so bringing common media depictions of female sexuality into this doesn't help your case any.

 

[Taake]

Couldn't agree more. People get so easily offended around here it sometimes feels like I'm running around a school yard. As I've said before I think it's a cultural difference. Australians can take a bit of heckling.

Most of us can but it is still preferable to keep a polite tone in the threads as things are more easily misunderstood in this format.


That said I will remind you guys to not only stay civil but to keep to the topic of the thread as the discussion seemed to have taken a sharp-left turn onto Cordelia-lane.

Please guys, be polite or we'll close.

 

[Gum Gnome33]

I beg to differ. Angel trying to lose his soul on purpose by sleeping with Darla? Him again wiping out his friends' memories? Anya's second stint as a vengeance demon? Dawn's shoplifting? Willow's abuse of Tara? Tara casting a spell and lying about her supposed demon nature? Really, everybody made mistakes, often of the selfish variety which had nothing to do with their mission. Xander didn't really a have monopoly in that respect at all.

Yes, they were all big mistakes. But you're missing my point. They are repeatedly excused in the fandom and sometimes by other characters on the show, because the characters who make them are ultimately in the pursuit of something much bigger. It's considered forgivable that the lose their footing. If the good they did wasn't so effective, it wouldn't necessarily be so. That's Xander.

 

[The Unspoken]

Yes, they were all big mistakes. But you're missing my point. They are repeatedly excused in the fandom and sometimes by other characters on the show, because the characters who make them are ultimately in the pursuit of something much bigger. It's considered forgivable that the lose their footing. If the good they did wasn't so effective, it wouldn't necessarily be so. That's Xander.

Xander isn't in pursuit of the greater good? I must have imagined the summer where he assumed the alter ego of 'Nighthawk' in Buffy's absence. Or actually, pretty much all 8 seasons of the show.

But even if we accept your premise, that would basically mean people simply hate the character for being an adolescent who's living his life, which I find even more bizarre.

 

[Gum Gnome33]

Xander isn't in pursuit of the greater good? I must have imagined the summer where he assumed the alter ego of 'Nighthawk' in Buffy's absence. Or actually, pretty much all 8 seasons of the show.

Yes, I've seen the show, too. What I said in my previous post is that they are in pursuit of the greater good and consistently *effective* thanks to their powers and their training. Xander does pursue good, of course. Constantly. He's always trying. But because he's human and ONLY human, he fails a lot. When he does, the audience isn't quick to say, "oh that's because he's the leader/aiding the leader directly so he's constantly burdened with problems," or "he couldn't have possibly done any better." It's always "Wow, Xander really screwed that up!" Xander= us. Just think about how little credit he gets for saving the world in season 6. If Buffy had done the same thing, it would be "she cleverly realized that what she needed to do was put down her weapons and reason with Willow...and boy, she got there just in the nick of time, it was incredible!" From my experience, Xander's act is often regarded in the fandom as brave, sure, but heroic? Not as much. The lack of superpowers carries a certain stigma in the fandom and I think sometimes that's why it can be easy to point a finger at Xander. Again, that's not to say that he doesn't screw up...a lot.

 

[Icarium]

Yes, they were all big mistakes. But you're missing my point. They are repeatedly excused in the fandom and sometimes by other characters on the show, because the characters who make them are ultimately in the pursuit of something much bigger. It's considered forgivable that the lose their footing. If the good they did wasn't so effective, it wouldn't necessarily be so. That's Xander.

Everyone is excused for their mistakes in the show most of the time, Xander included. It's the fandom that is divided as to whose mistakes are excused and who gets to demonized, naturally along the lines of whom people like and whom they don't.

Yes, I've seen the show, too. What I said in my previous post is that they are in pursuit of the greater good and consistently *effective* thanks to their powers and their training.

But Xander is far more effective than some of the superpowered characters. In the early seasons he saves Buffy more often than Angel does and that's even ignoring Angel's stint as the Big Bad. Oz and Dawn's powers are more of a burden on them than an asset, Tara's magic is useful once in a blue moon, etc. Disliking him on the basis on effectiveness seems positively weird to me. 🙂

 

[Gum Gnome33]

Everyone is excused for their mistakes in the show most of the time, Xander included. It's the fandom that is divided as to whose mistakes are excused and who gets to demonized, naturally along the lines of whom people like and whom they don't.

But Xander is far more effective than some of the superpowered characters. In the early seasons he saves Buffy more often than Angel does and that's even ignoring Angel's stint as the Big Bad. Oz and Dawn's powers are more of a burden on them than an asset, Tara's magic is useful once in a blue moon, etc. Disliking him on the basis on effectiveness seems positively weird to me. 🙂

Well, it seems weird to me too, but you're twisting my words. I stated that the ones who are consistently effective are given more excuses, and the magnitude of Xander's effectiveness is played down.
I don't think Xander is far more effective than some of the superpowered characters--especially if you are referring to Oz and Dawn. Oz doesn't use his werewolf alter-ego to do anything for anyone, and Dawn does nothing, as a Key. And I wouldn't consider them superpowers anyhow, since, as you said, they are basically just a burden to the characters and nothing more.
Yes, Xander can be quite effective, but as I've pointed out it doesn't happen often and when it does, it isn't heralded as a heroic act in the same way as it is when a truly "powerful" character is involved. So the way I see it, when he does something great, the reaction is "Well, another more powerful character could have done the same thing, but Xander happened to be there," or, "It didn't take much," (ie just CPR or talking to Willow). When he screws up, he isn't entitled to the same excuses that an extremely powerful hero in the 'verse gets to wear. And for the record, I'm not saying I think of Xander or any other characters this way. My point is to illustrate a possible reason for the distinction in the fandom with which Xander is seen. And yes, people will always ultimately side with the character they like more, but they have their reasons. Xander's blatant humanity might influence that. It might hit too close to home.

 

[BuffyElevated]

Well, it seems weird to me too, but you're twisting my words. I stated that the ones who are consistently effective are given more excuses, and the magnitude of Xander's effectiveness is played down.
I don't think Xander is far more effective than some of the superpowered characters--especially if you are referring to Oz and Dawn. Oz doesn't use his werewolf alter-ego to do anything for anyone, and Dawn does nothing, as a Key. And I wouldn't consider them superpowers anyhow, since, as you said, they are basically just a burden to the characters and nothing more.
Yes, Xander can be quite effective, but as I've pointed out it doesn't happen often and when it does, it isn't heralded as a heroic act in the same way as it is when a truly "powerful" character is involved. So the way I see it, when he does something great, the reaction is "Well, another more powerful character could have done the same thing, but Xander happened to be there," or, "It didn't take much," (ie just CPR or talking to Willow). When he screws up, he isn't entitled to the same excuses that an extremely powerful hero in the 'verse gets to wear. And for the record, I'm not saying I think of Xander or any other characters this way. My point is to illustrate a possible reason for the distinction in the fandom with which Xander is seen. And yes, people will always ultimately side with the character they like more, but they have their reasons. Xander's blatant humanity might influence that. It might hit too close to home.

This is a great post... Really smart and I agree a lot about how the reason people criticize Xander's actions it's because he's "only human" and it hits closer to home than the stuff going on with the ones with special power.s

 

[caitaintdead]

Yes, I've seen the show, too. What I said in my previous post is that they are in pursuit of the greater good and consistently *effective* thanks to their powers and their training. Xander does pursue good, of course. Constantly. He's always trying. But because he's human and ONLY human, he fails a lot. When he does, the audience isn't quick to say, "oh that's because he's the leader/aiding the leader directly so he's constantly burdened with problems," or "he couldn't have possibly done any better." It's always "Wow, Xander really screwed that up!" Xander= us. Just think about how little credit he gets for saving the world in season 6. If Buffy had done the same thing, it would be "she cleverly realized that what she needed to do was put down her weapons and reason with Willow...and boy, she got there just in the nick of time, it was incredible!" From my experience, Xander's act is often regarded in the fandom as brave, sure, but heroic? Not as much. The lack of superpowers carries a certain stigma in the fandom and I think sometimes that's why it can be easy to point a finger at Xander. Again, that's not to say that he doesn't screw up...a lot.

I think Xander saving the world by helping Willow was definitely heroic. A wonderful moment for Xander. The lack of superpowers though doesn't change how I feel about it one bit. Take Doctor Who for example - I love Martha Jones, she's one of my favourite characters of all time and she had no superpowers. Or John Casey from Chuck - no superpowers.

Xander isn't me for the record. Thankfully 😉

I don't think I would suit facial hair.

/me stops shaving face 😉

 

[whedonist]

It is the same thing in France, I know many people who have a problem with Xander. I understand the reasons you all gave. But I must say that all these reasons kinda make me like him even more. Because he is human, full of flaws but also of great qualities. In the 3 first seasons, okay, he can be a pain in the butt and too judgemental. But I think he was really funny and endearing because he reminded me of me. I also lack self confidence, I'm not the smartest girl and I also make a lot of jokes to "protect myself".
Xander really grew in the last seasons. He got a job, a girlfriend and proved more than once that he was essential to the Scooby Gang. I admire his devotion, his courage, how he tries even if sometimes he screws up. It's not because a character has several flaws that he is a douchebag. If everybody was perfect, how boring would it be? I love Xander's humanity and I see a lot of myself in him <3

 

[TheChosenTwo]

Wait... there's Xander hate? *gets her pitchfork and torch*
Where are those people?

 

[caitaintdead]

Wait... there's Xander hate? *gets her pitchfork and torch*
Where are those people?

Bring it...

I don't hate the guy, but I don't like him very much at all. He's your classic douchebag.

 

[BuffyElevated]

Bring it...

I don't hate the guy, but I don't like him very much at all. He's your classic douchebag.

He's not a douchebag. He just has the guts to say out loud what everyone else is thinking, and very bluntly.

 

[Marisa]

I have realized recently about Xander that i don't hate him but I do disagree with some of his ways. For example I don't feel he can judge Spike with a girlfriend like Anya. Does that make sense? That lately has been bugging me a lot but overall I still like Xander I love him more early on though.

 

[caitaintdead]

He's not a douchebag. He just has the guts to say out loud what everyone else is thinking, and very bluntly.

So then why do I like Anya, Spike, Cordelia and myself?

 

[zobothehobo]

He's not a douchebag. He just has the guts to say out loud what everyone else is thinking, and very bluntly.

I don't think it's that he has the guts to say what everyone's thinking very bluntly. I think he has the balls to be vocal about the judgement he makes. We all make judgement even when we have no right to... but you don't voice them... ESPECIALLY if you have no right to even make this judgement. But Xander is the opposite. He voices them and especially when he doesn't have the right to even make the judgement. It might be what everyone's thinking, but that doesn't mean it's his place to judge.