PDA

View Full Version : What Spike ultimately wanted from B/Sin BtVS S6 vs. S7: demonmates vs. soulmates



MikeB
08-11-17, 08:20 PM
* In BtVS S5, Spike probably ultimately wanted some version of the Buffybot. He wanted Buffy to love all of him including his evil side and he wanted Buffy to not have any romantic feelings for Angel. But we got no hint in "Intervention" (B 5.18) of the Buffybot's love of Spike's William side.

Spike also seems to want only Buffy, Dawn, and he together.


* In BtVS S6, Spike ultimately wanted to sire Buffy and possibly he would have fought to put her soul back inside her albeit Buffy didn't know about the soul part. Even in "First Date" (B 7.14), Spike (or First Spike or Buffy's imagination) talks about "a crypt for 2 with a white picket fence".

Being vampires together is the only way for they to actually truly 'be together' but Buffy wouldn't 'lower herself' that far.

Spike probably wanted to separate Buffy from her friends and Dawn so it could just be Spike and Buffy together.


* In BtVS S7, Spike ultimately wanted Buffy and he in Heaven together. That is the subtext and text of the Church Scene in "Beneath You" (B 7.02) and a main reason Buffy was so freaked out and largely stayed away from Spike for weeks.

Spike forces a Platonic relationship with Buffy because he wants they to be more than flesh for each other and wants for they to truly be soulmates.

"Get It Done" (B 7.15) tells Spike that Buffy wants "Spike" not "William Pratt" and is in love with "Spike" not "William Pratt".

"End of Days" (B 7.21) and "Chosen" (B 7.22) tells Spike that Buffy still at least loves Angel.

In the Hellmouth, Spike is determined to die and go to Heaven, Buffy realizes this and decides to die with him; Spike refuses her because she doesn't truly love him i.e. William Pratt, William the Bloody, and Spike. And because she kissed Angel and still loves Angel.


Buffy in BtVS S7 never calls Spike, "William".

Spike after "Seeing Red" (B 6.19) didn't try to become human and Buffy knows that. Buffy in BtVS S7 was given around zero indication that Spike wants to be human and 'grow old' with Buffy. Even by Season 9 I don't remember Buffy's ever knowing Spike's surname. Interestingly enough, Beck (if canon) probably knows Spike's surname.

Anyway, Spike ultimately wanted to be in Heaven with Buffy and introduce her to his mother.

Vampire in Rug
08-11-17, 09:46 PM
So much of this is your own personal fanon.

Spike is not an overly religious guy, and we haven't seen him give much thought to the afterlife beyond being aware that it exists.

Being "determined" to die and go to heaven as some kind of self-reward surely defeats the whole purpose of heaven? Traditionally, believers are "rewarded" through the grace of whichever diety happens to be the correct one, or sometimes in fiction characters are redeemed through truly selfless acts of sacrifice. Surely it would defeat the entire purpose of heaven if Darth Vader's entire redemption can be boiled down to "oh sweet, here's my moment to get into the happy afterlife." If Spike was willing to die for the benefit of everyone on the planet, because it was truly the right thing to do, then I can imagine a merciful god/goddess/gender-neutral diety cutting him a break. But if he was literally doing it for the sole purpose of getting into heaven and it was a calculated and completely selfish act, then I hardly see how that's supposed to impress anyone, let alone God.

When did season 6 Spike indicate that he wanted to sire Buffy? Being chipped, he'd be completely reliant on her for his protection against the scoobies and probably Angel who would no doubt be looking to kill him if he sired her. I've got no doubt Spike probably fantasized about the idea on occasion, but it wouldn't be practical. Also, I don't think he'd want to risk her turning out nasty after his experience with his own mother. It would completely destroy his relationship with Dawn too.

If he sired her, why do you figure he'd want to reensoul her, when he himself didn't have one? His own soul wasn't important to him at all prior to Seeing Red, why should he care about Buffy's soul if he were to sire her? Not to mention that a reensouled Buffy would stake him on the spot.

Your idea that Buffy was willing to die with Spike has no basis in canon. Her instinct was to get him out of the cave, sure. But what purpose would it serve to stay and die with him?

Your idea that Spike's self sacrifice or his encouragement for Buffy to run had anything to do with her kissing Angel has no basis in canon. I don't know why you'd want to taint Spike's big heroic moment with the idea of him being a petty, jelous crybaby.

buffylover
09-11-17, 02:09 PM
Your idea that Buffy was willing to die with Spike has no basis in canon. Her instinct was to get him out of the cave, sure. But what purpose would it serve to stay and die with him?


She was willing to embrace the flame. :lol: For some reason, I can see MikeB's interpretation.

KingofCretins
09-11-17, 09:49 PM
It never once occurred to me in the moment or any time since that Buffy was considering staying there. Taking his burning hand was a show of faith and loyalty and regard, that she would rather her hand burn to a crisp than for her not give Spike his due when she surely knew he was on a one way ticket at that point.

And him telling her to go was not him talking her out of staying, it was him telling her she was out of time.

Skippcomet
10-11-17, 12:01 PM
....And on the day "pulled out of my ass" was redefined, we all sat, slackjawed, and read.

buffylover
10-11-17, 01:30 PM
It never once occurred to me in the moment or any time that I watched Buffy that I was considering that Buffy was coming out as gay also including (LGBT) within the Joyce scene in 'Becoming Part 2'. It never once occurred to me in the moment or any time that I watched Buffy that I was considering that Dawn was experimenting lesbianism by just going to Melinda's. It certainly (not) occurred to me in the moment or any time that I watched Buffy that the coach in 'Go Fish' was getting gay ganged raped. It never once occurred to me in the moment or any time that I watched Buffy that I was considering that I would never compared little mermaid within 'OMWF' etc... You see where I'm coming from.

Guess what, it's absolutely fine to express your versions because I have mine. And sadly if this bothers some people I can comprehend MikeB's interpretation, sorry I just can.

You truly don't want to perceive my interpretation based on the episode 'Chosen' and Spuffy's relationship. I best not if the forum clearly displayed a reaction with MikeB's. I compared mine with the end scene in Chosen on Thelma and Louise. :roll:

I just hope it's not MikeB because you guys really need to be careful because I can see the resentment horrible atmosphere with MikeB for some reason.

If it doesn't stop I will report!

Just saying. :)

KingofCretins
10-11-17, 02:14 PM
I'm all for speculative fiction and headcanon, I was actually thinking of starting a thread. If there is a fault anybody might need to consider working on it's in realizing when their fanon is fanon, though. I think the whole scene takes on a pretty foul note if what we actually saw was a low-key suicide attempt by Buffy averted by Spike with barely a word passing between them, personally. But I also got no indication in that story, as I said, nor in Joss Whedon's own commentary on said episode, that that was anything in the episode that wasn't put there by viewer or viewers.

Vampire in Rug
10-11-17, 07:00 PM
Buffylover, I'm of the opinion -and I think most people here feel the same, that so long as you're not hurting anyone, then you're welcome to believe whatever ideas you like. You're welcome to follow whichever religion you like. You can identify yourself with whatever pronouns you like. And you can certainly choose to interpret Buffy the Vampire Slayer however you like.

However, just because you deserve the freedom to express your ideas, that does not mean the rest of us have to treat your ideas with any degree of respect or pretend they have validity. If you want to be a Flat-Earther, then go right ahead. That does not mean the rest of us aren't allowed to disagree with, mock, or pick apart your opinions and ideas -especially if you choose to share them on a public forum.

I'm of the opinion that everyone in society deserves to be treated with a certain level of dignity and courtesy. I wouldn't want any physical harm to befall you or MikeB. I don't have malice towards either of you. However just because *you as a person* deserve dignity and courtesy, does not mean your ideas do.

As to your threat to report us to the mods, I don't feel that anyone has crossed the line of attacking MikeB in a nasty or personal way. I don't think pointing out how ridiculous his ideas are violates any sort of rule. He makes up his own canon, and it is simply unreasonable to expect anyone to treat his interpretation as being just as valid as their own. All interpretations are not equal.

Also, I'd be surprised if the mods even all that active these days or if they even care. I've previously reported MikeB for the rude way he tells people they need to rewatch the series if they disagree with him, and I received no response. I've reported a newbie who is clearly only here to (try) to inflame people, and again no response. There is one regular poster who is clearly a previously banned member using a different pseudonym, but I guess things are so quiet these days that pretty much anything goes.

buffylover
10-11-17, 07:44 PM
Buffylover, I'm of the opinion -and I think most people here feel the same, that so long as you're not hurting anyone, then you're welcome to believe whatever ideas you like. You're welcome to follow whichever religion you like. You can identify yourself with whatever pronouns you like. And you can certainly choose to interpret Buffy the Vampire Slayer however you like.

I certainly will because I have the right to do so.



However, just because you deserve the freedom to express your ideas, that does not mean the rest of us have to treat your ideas with any degree of respect or pretend they have validity.

I don't get this. I totally disagree with this everyone deserves respect do you think you need to read the (FAQ).

(No insulting Sounds obvious, I realize, but it needs to be said. We have had problems with this. So just respect one another.)



If you want to be a Flat-Earther, then go right ahead. That does not mean the rest of us aren't allowed to disagree with, mock, or pick apart your opinions and ideas -especially if you choose to share them on a public forum.

Is that an insult to me "flat-earther?" and plus why do you want to mock? that sounds like if we were in a school ground not on a discussion forum.



I'm of the opinion that everyone in society deserves to be treated with a certain level of dignity and courtesy. I wouldn't want any physical harm to befall you or MikeB. I don't have malice towards either of you. However just because *you as a person* deserve dignity and courtesy, does not mean your ideas do.

I just don't get this either. I thought people should respect idea's it's like art you can disagree showcase opinion but, always have that advice and respect also positivity.



As to your threat to report us to the mods, I don't feel that anyone has crossed the line of attacking MikeB in a nasty or personal way. I don't think pointing out how ridiculous his ideas are violates any sort of rule. He makes up his own canon, and it is simply unreasonable to expect anyone to treat his interpretation as being just as valid as their own. All interpretations are not equal.

Pointing and laughing that's sounds awful is that not humiliating?



Do you actually think Fred, Andrew, Dawn or Billy, in a realistic setting (no PC snowflake bullshit) would beat Xander in a straight up physical fistfight? Don't dance around the question, just say yes so that I can point and laugh.


Showcasing disrespect, bully, and belittling come on you should have that some kind of decency knows that's wrong. Everyone makes up interpretation hence my above posts. But it just seems to me when MikeB does it, it seems it causing reactions negatively feels to me truly uncomfortable. He the only one trying to make this forum alive.



Also, I'd be surprised if the mods even all that active these days or if they even care. I've previously reported MikeB for the rude way he tells people they need to rewatch the series if they disagree with him, and I received no response. I've reported a newbie who is clearly only here to (try) to inflame people, and again no response. There is one regular poster who is clearly a previously banned member using a different pseudonym, but I guess things are so quiet these days that pretty much anything goes.

Don't worry also I tried to.

Vampire in Rug
10-11-17, 09:34 PM
What exactly are you hoping for Buffylover? Is your endgame for us to just all agree that MikeB is right, and that all his interpretations of the show are correct? Are you aware of his canon where Spike closed Acathla with a spell? Are you aware of how he arbitrarily declares seasons X, Y and Z non-canon simply because he doesn't like them?

Is there any possible interpretation of the show that would be too "out there" and ridiculous for you? What if I claimed that Buffy is actually a guy in drag, and that he's been fooling all the other characters this whole time? Would that interpretation of the canon be just as valid as the next person's, or would it be okay to call it out as the ridiculous fanmade wish-fulfillment that it so clearly is? I ask again, is there anywhere you'd draw the line?




I don't get this. I totally disagree with this everyone deserves respect do you think you need to read the (FAQ).

Depends how you define "respect". If you define it as common courtesy and the absence of malice, then yeah, I agree that everyone deserves that. That said, basic respect does not mean I need to agree with your ideas or, -in the context of this forum, your interpretation of the Buffyverse. If you claim something that blatantly contradicts the show and claim it as canon, then expect to be called out on it. That's not us being rude or nasty, that's you (or in this case, MikeB) being unreasonable by expecting the rest of us to entertain his personal fanon.




(No insulting Sounds obvious, I realize, but it needs to be said. We have had problems with this. So just respect one another.)

Please point out one instance in this thread where someone has insulted MikeB. As I said earlier, respecting him does not mean accepting his ideas as a valid interpretation of the show.



Is that an insult to me "flat-earther?" and plus why do you want to mock? that sounds like if we were in a school ground not on a discussion forum.

No, I was not calling *you* a flat-earther. I was coming up with a hypothetical ridiculous worldview that one is perfectly entitled to subscribe to, but should expect to be called out on if they do, especially if they try to push said ideas onto others publically. A person should be entitled to believe whatever ridiculous ideas make them happy, but they can't reasonably expect others to entertain these ideas.

If MikeB believes Buffy wanted to commit suicide in Chosen until Spike talked her out of it, he's entitled to that interpretation. But that doesn't make the rest of us jerks for disagreeing or pointing out why that was clearly not the writers intent in the episode.



I just don't get this either. I thought people should respect idea's it's like art

Again, is there any possible interpretation of the show that would be just too ridiculous for you? If not, if everyone's ideas are equally valid, then why discuss the show at all if we can each write our own canon and it all counts?

I think you're uncomfortable with the idea that sometimes people can just be flat-out wrong.




Showcasing disrespect, bully, and belittling come on you should have that some kind of decency knows that's wrong.

And now you're the one breaking the rules via taking things off-topic by quoting something I said in a completely different and unrelated thread. For context, MikeB was ranking "power levels" and presumably how well a character would do in a fight. He placed Xander below Dawn, Fred, Andrew and Billy. Presumably this stems from a need to shit on any character he percieves as being "against" Spike (i.e. Angel, Xander, Riley, Wood, Nikki, Darla, Faith sometimes).

I think the idea of a tall male in his physical prime like Xander being unable to beat a skinny teenager (Billy), a skinny female (Fred), a teenage girl (Dawn) or a wimpy loser (Andrew) in a one-on-one physical fight in a realistic setting is indeed ridiculous and laughable. Perhaps I was a little blunt, but I think even Mike knows how ridiculous it sounds that Xander would lose to Dawn/Fred/Andrew/Billy in a fight, hence his reluctance to answer my question in a straightforward manner. Instead, he had to dance around the idea by saying that Dawn had a higher "power level" than Xander because she was more important to Spike, therefore she'd beat the bigger, stronger guy in a fistfight somehow.


Everyone makes up interpretation hence my above posts.

Not everyone's interpretation exists for the sole purpose of putting their favourite character up on a pedestal. But more importantly, you don't have to accept everyone's interpretation. You don't, I don't, MikeB doesn't and god knows Joss Whedon himself wouldn't accept some of the weirder stuff if he ever stumbled onto this forum.



But it just seems to me when MikeB does it, it seems it causing reactions negatively feels to me truly uncomfortable.

Well, given that MikeB's rather unique manner of posting has caused him to be banned from Slayalive, pretty much the only other active Buffy forum, would you consider that maybe, maybe the problem here is not "everyone else is being mean"?

buffylover
11-11-17, 11:14 AM
What exactly are you hoping for Buffylover? Is your endgame for us to just all agree that MikeB is right, and that all his interpretations of the show are correct? Are you aware of his canon where Spike closed Acathla with a spell? Are you aware of how he arbitrarily declares seasons X, Y and Z non-canon simply because he doesn't like them?

Firstly, when did I state that 'everyone' should accept with MikeB representations?

Really I would dear to hear MikeB thoughts on that particular scene with the Acathla and Spike.


Is there any possible interpretation of the show that would be too "out there" and ridiculous for you? What if I claimed that Buffy is actually a guy in drag, and that he's been fooling all the other characters this whole time? Would that interpretation of the canon be just as valid as the next person's, or would it be okay to call it out as the ridiculous fanmade wish-fulfillment that it so clearly is? I ask again, is there anywhere you'd draw the line?

I did state it in my post above.


Please point out one instance in this thread where someone has insulted MikeB. As I said earlier, respecting him does not mean accepting his ideas as a valid interpretation of the show.

I wasn't on about this thread I was on about this side of the buffyforums as you as a user but, that said it's not just you.

It just occurs I seen the tension on this thread about to abrupt because I tell you now it wasn't just this thread and it wasn't just you that makes an discomfited ambiance. For example, someone used this emoji (:err:) for not wanting to claim MikeB's post but, why use that emoji was it so embarrassing to claim. Which (I) thought was truly insulting and hurtful.

You can see the fraction and the reaction that I caused because I actually see his point of view. Kingofcretins didn't get thanked because he made valid points, he got thanked because I saw MikeB interpretations and everyone wanting MikeB to feel like an outcast because Stoney didn't thank my post and it just verbalizes volumes. But, you need to remember that's (how) (I) felt.

What happens if a mod did this you would argue?



No, I was not calling *you* a flat-earther. I was coming up with a hypothetical ridiculous worldview that one is perfectly entitled to subscribe to, but should expect to be called out on if they do, especially if they try to push said ideas onto others publically. A person should be entitled to believe whatever ridiculous ideas make them happy, but they can't reasonably expect others to entertain these ideas.

Here is (me) thinking you were.


If you want to be a Flat-Earther, then go right ahead.

So why do I want to be a flat-earther? you must think that I was.



Again, is there any possible interpretation of the show that would be just too ridiculous for you? If not, if everyone's ideas are equally valid, then why discuss the show at all if we can each write our own canon and it all counts?

Again I mention this in the above post. It's like visa versa if you don't respect people's post and different opinions why are you on a discussion forum.



And now you're the one breaking the rules via taking things off-topic by quoting something I said in a completely different and unrelated thread. For context, MikeB was ranking "power levels" and presumably how well a character would do in a fight. He placed Xander below Dawn, Fred, Andrew and Billy. Presumably this stems from a need to shit on any character he percieves as being "against" Spike (i.e. Angel, Xander, Riley, Wood, Nikki, Darla, Faith sometimes).

I was just giving an example of your attitude and the bitterness towards MikeB. It was truly unneeded. It's like when he gives reason on editing his post why is that so bothersome?



I think the idea of a tall male in his physical prime like Xander being unable to beat a skinny teenager (Billy), a skinny female (Fred), a teenage girl (Dawn) or a wimpy loser (Andrew) in a one-on-one physical fight in a realistic setting is indeed ridiculous and laughable. Perhaps I was a little blunt, but I think even Mike knows how ridiculous it sounds that Xander would lose to Dawn/Fred/Andrew/Billy in a fight, hence his reluctance to answer my question in a straightforward manner. Instead, he had to dance around the idea by saying that Dawn had a higher "power level" than Xander because she was more important to Spike, therefore she'd beat the bigger, stronger guy in a fistfight somehow.

Really, I think that within my personal perspective I love women empowerment I have to admit I really dislike the attitude and stating and automatically assuming female is weaker and that the male would win because of their Physique this sounds sexist. I dislike it but, I respect it if you think that. Because a female could be creative, smart and a survivalist or even stronger! Hence why I think Mike B was trying to state Freds is a survivalist which is a feat.



Not everyone's interpretation exists for the sole purpose of putting their favourite character up on a pedestal. But more importantly, you don't have to accept everyone's interpretation. You don't, I don't, MikeB doesn't and god knows Joss Whedon himself wouldn't accept some of the weirder stuff if he ever stumbled onto this forum.

Probably Joss would show some professionalism and respectfulness because it should be hoped-for.

Stoney
11-11-17, 12:17 PM
You can see the fraction and the reaction that I caused because I actually see his point of view. Kingofcretins didn't get thanked because he made valid points, he got thanked because I saw MikeB interpretations and everyone wanting MikeB to feel like an outcast because Stoney didn't thank my post and it just verbalizes volumes. But, you need to remember that's (how) (I) felt.

That's really not why I thanked King. People thank for different reasons and we can't know why they did. Sometimes I will 'thank' just for people contributing and regardless of whether I agree with everything they put (the reviewers on the rewatch for example). But most often I will thank because I agree with what someone else has said, particularly when/if I'm not going to comment myself. In this case it was the latter, not to try to ostracise MikeB, but just because I don't agree with that interpretation but align more with King's point of view and the reading of the scene he gave. :)

buffylover
11-11-17, 12:40 PM
Can have an answer to why you didn't thank my post? Please.

So why do you always seemed to thank my post on the fan art section? but, not when I'm around forum agreeing with specific users? this is not the first time I have a vibe you don't like me around here on this side of the forum for some reason. Sadly you don't fool me, Stoney. :)

Oh and yes it was you who did that emoji (:err:) about not wanting to claim MikeB post. Interesting.

Stoney
11-11-17, 01:23 PM
Sorry I thought I did address why I hadn't thanked you or MikeB on this thread this time. I was thanking the points of view I agreed with and King's reading of the scene was what met most closely with my own. I don't think it is fair to decide that you know what the motivations are for someone thanking one post and not thanking another, which is the only reason why I'd replied. The assumption I'd thanked King to make MikeB feel like an outcast and not because of the content of King's post just simply wasn't true. It wasn't about who, it was about the interpretation I was supporting. I'm not trying to 'fool' anyone.

I don't know what the emoji thing is relating to, but sure, I accept it is something that I used somewhere in response to an interpretation that MikeB posted. Without looking back at the context though I can't comment on what I was thinking or whether I can see if it was mean.

I often thank your posts in the fan art section because you are putting in time/effort to try and keep something happening in that section of the site and I appreciate you doing that. However, when I thank for specific pieces of art it is usually because they are incredibly good and I'm thanking to show that I like them. So basically there can be varying reasons.

buffylover
11-11-17, 01:51 PM
Sorry I thought I did address why I hadn't thanked you or MikeB on this thread this time. I was thanking the points of view I agreed with and King's reading of the scene was what met most closely with my own. I don't think it is fair to decide that you know what the motivations are for someone thanking one post and not thanking another, which is the only reason why I'd replied. The assumption I'd thanked King to make MikeB feel like an outcast and not because of the content of King's post just simply wasn't true. It wasn't about who, it was about the interpretation I was supporting. I'm not trying to 'fool' anyone.

Sorry to me it felt like a gang up sorry that's how I felt. You didn't give me a reason for why you didn't thank (my) post just really curious. I just really wanted to know because coincidentally I stated I can just see MikeB interpretations.

So you are saying you don't have any resentment towards MikeB? Mind it doesn't come across that way to me. Because it wasn't just in this thread.


I don't know what the emoji thing is relating to, but sure, I accept it is something that I used somewhere in response to an interpretation that MikeB posted. Without looking back at the context though I can't comment on what I was thinking or whether I can see if it was mean.


:o Hey! I never posted that Cordelia Chase was sleeping around trying to get acting jobs, that was MikeB. :err:

EDIT: who posted that statement I mean, not who was sleeping around trying to get acting jobs! :lol:

Yeah, I thought this was horrible. Felt downgrading and very unappreciated a little rude. (to) (me).



I often thank your posts in the fan art section because you are putting in time/effort to try and keep something happening in that section of the site and I appreciate you doing that. However, when I thank for specific pieces of art it is usually because they are incredibly good and I'm thanking to show that I like them. So basically there can be varying reasons.

It's funnier enough my Spuffy illustration was based on MikeB representation. I actually got inspired by it.

TimeTravellingBunny
11-11-17, 02:03 PM
Can have an answer to why you didn't thank my post? Please.

So why do you always seemed to thank my post on the fan art section? but, not when I'm around forum agreeing with specific users? this is not the first time I have a vibe you don't like me around here on this side of the forum for some reason. Sadly you don't fool me, Stoney. :)

Oh and yes it was you who did that emoji (:err:) about not wanting to claim MikeB post. Interesting.

Jesus. Not this again. Try to understand this: you do not have the right to demand that people thank your posts. No one is obliged to thank anyone's posts, and no one is obliged to explain to anyone why they gave thanks.

This is not the first time you've done this - attacked other posters for most random and benign things (I was scolded by you in the Buffy rewatch thread for simply asking Stoney once when the next Dollhouse review would be up - in the Dollhouse thread), demanded other posters to explain why they give thanks and why they didn't thank your posts, complained about supposedly sensing a hostile atmosphere on the forum - when you are really the one being hostile and creating a hostile atmosphere. Try to learn basic netiquette before you start lecturing others about it. If the mods weren't that inactive, I would have reported you several times already for your passive aggressive attacks on me and other posters.

buffylover
11-11-17, 02:07 PM
Vice versa. :)

Stoney
11-11-17, 02:34 PM
Sorry to me it felt like a gang up sorry that's how I felt. You didn't give me a reason for why you didn't thank (my) post just really curious. I just really wanted to know because coincidentally I stated I can just see MikeB interpretations.

Yes, I didn't thank your post because I don't see his interpretation. As I said, I was thanking on this occasion based on what I personally agree with.


So you are saying you don't have any resentment towards MikeB? Mind it doesn't come across that way to me. Because it wasn't just in this thread.

I don't hold resentment towards MikeB, I don't often agree with him or choose to engage directly with him, but I don't resent him.


Yeah, I thought this was horrible. Felt downgrading and very unappreciated a little rude. (to) (me).

As far as I remember I was trying to be lighthearted about the whole thing whilst also making the correction as I think it is understandable to not want to be attributed as having said something that I hadn't said and which I don't agree with. The emoji was directed at the situation of being incorrectly named. It was unfortuante in that I had chosen to not engage in a discussion over the original post, but was being accidentally drawn in. Sure using that emoji wasn't necessary but I wanted to make it clear I was not keen at all to have that opinion placed at my feet, whilst, as I say, being somewhat lighthearted. I can see that such a response can be seen as negative towards the original point of view because it was, I really did want to clearly separate myself from the original statement which I personally had actually found unpleasant.

As we've said before when there have been misunderstandings in the past, it is often tough to gauge tone in people's posts and sometimes something that wasn't meant in an unpleasant way at all sadly comes over as such to others. It rarely seems to have been deliberately intended to upset or offend. It's unfortunately a side effect of the mods not being present on the board so much any longer, there isn't the 'official' judgement on when/where lines are breached being made and such examples being visible to the community to use. Sadly it can then result in arguments and accusations about what we have posted that are just a new confrontation created that is stressful and unpleasant.


It's funnier enough my Spuffy illustration was based on MikeB representation. I actually got inspired by it.

Do you mean The Lion piece? Where your inspiration originated from for it is interesting but likely very separate to what I see in and appreciate from it. There's a lot to love about that piece whether you know where it comes from or not. :nod:

buffylover
11-11-17, 02:53 PM
Yes, I didn't thank your post because I don't see his interpretation. As I said, I was thanking on this occasion based on what I personally agree with.

I didn't feel that way but, again that's just me. At least now I know. :)



I don't hold resentment towards MikeB, I don't often agree with him or choose to engage directly with him, but I don't resent him.


But, I hope you respect him as a user.


As far as I remember I was trying to be lighthearted about the whole thing whilst also making the correction as I think it is understandable to not want to be attributed as having said something that I hadn't said and which I don't agree with. The emoji was directed at the situation of being incorrectly named. It was unfortuante in that I had chosen to not engage in a discussion over the original post, but was being accidentally drawn in. Sure using that emoji wasn't necessary but I wanted to make it clear I was not keen at all to have that opinion placed at my feet, whilst, as I say, being somewhat lighthearted. I can see that such a response can be seen as negative towards the original point of view because it was, I really did want to clearly separate myself from the original statement which I personally had actually found unpleasant.

As we've said before when there have been misunderstandings in the past, it is often tough to gauge tone in people's posts and sometimes something that wasn't meant in an unpleasant way at all sadly comes over as such to others. It rarely seems to have been deliberately intended to upset or offend. It's unfortunately a side effect of the mods not being present on the board so much any longer, there isn't the 'official' judgement on when/where lines are breached being made and such examples being visible to the community to use. Sadly it can then result in arguments and accusations about what we have posted that are just a new confrontation created that is stressful and unpleasant.


Yes to me it was unnecessary to use that emoji it was humiliating to me because if you did that to me admittedly I would feel embarrassed for me as a user.

Yeah, but whats so hard to respect others?



Do you mean The Lion piece? Where your inspiration originated from for it is interesting but likely very separate to what I see in and appreciate from it. There's a lot to love about that piece whether you know where it comes from or not. :nod:

Well, sadly your interpretation of my 'Lion' piece would be probably wrong because I did, in fact, get inspired by MikeB post.

I even stated way before I created that entry. Look here.


Oh, my I have to admit this is a very poetical point of view MikeB because I can totally see and imagine the aesthetic value where you are coming from Buffy embracing the flames with Spike. Thank you, this is a concept art in its self you inspired me for my next challenge within the fan art section! :hug:


http://www.buffyforums.net/forums/showthread.php?16163-Spuffy-discussions/page16

Vampire in Rug
11-11-17, 07:28 PM
Well Buffylover, it looks like you have well and truly driven this thread off-topic. Not that it matters all that much, really.


Firstly, when did I state that 'everyone' should accept with MikeB representations?

Well you sure seem to be getting upset when people disagree with MikeB, or point out why he's wrong.


Really I would dear to hear MikeB thoughts on that particular scene with the Acathla and Spike.

For quite a while now I've been meaning to open a thread about it.



It just occurs I seen the tension on this thread about to abrupt because I tell you now it wasn't just this thread and it wasn't just you that makes an discomfited ambiance.

There was no tension in this thread until you got all defensive in post #6 of this thread and threatened to start reporting people. Nobody was being nasty or rude to MikeB, we were just pointing out how some of his ideas had no basis in canon. It was you who brought hostility and negativity to this thread. Not me, not Stoney, not KingofCretins.

Also, you have no right whatsoever to demand people to start "thanking" you for your posts. Thanking is a completely personal choice and it's really nobody else's business why someone might dish out thanks or choose not to. Frankly, I'm a little appalled that you feel entitled to have your posts thanked or that you demand an explanation why some posts were thanked and not others, as though it's any of your business at all.


everyone wanting MikeB to feel like an outcast because Stoney didn't thank my post and it just verbalizes volumes.

I don't think anyone here feels actual feelings of hostility towards MikeB. I wouldn't wish any actual hardships on him in real life. However, his bizzare opinions invite criticism, that's a simple fact. Don't make me (or others) out to be the bad guy when we point out where his weird ideas don't line up with canon.

As for him being an "outcast", I don't think he's trying to win any popularity contests here, I suspect being well liked isn't high on his priority list, hence his "unique" posting style. So long as he can continue to praise Spike and bash Angel, I don't think Mike much cares what other people think about him.


What happens if a mod did this you would argue?

If a moderator posted in this thread, their words would certainly carry more weight than yours.




So why do I want to be a flat-earther? you must think that I was.

This is the last time I'm going to address this point. At no point did I suggest that *you, personally* were a Flat-Earther.

I was using Flat Earth Society as an example, because it was the most ridiculous worldview that I could think of. My point is, that if you *wanted* to be a Flat Earther in this completely hypothetical situation, then that would be your right. You can believe whatever you want and express whatever opinions you want.

However, you cannot expect other people to mollycoddle your opinions or treat them as valid.

Some people claim to be "otherkin", animal spirits in human bodies. If they want to believe that fantasy, that's fine. But they cannot expect me to buy into their bullshit and treat it seriously.

MikeB can come up with whatever bizzare fanon he wants if it helps him get greater enjoyment out of Buffy the Vampire Slayer. But he cannot expect us to treat his interpretation as the correct one. He often asserts his opinions as facts, and when that happens he's just asking for his opinions to be picked apart.

I find it a little weird that you're getting more offended over this than MikeB usually does, buffyfan.




Again I mention this in the above post. It's like visa versa if you don't respect people's post and different opinions why are you on a discussion forum.

I certainly respect some people's opinions less than others, but that's a pretty normal part of human interaction...



I was just giving an example of your attitude and the bitterness towards MikeB. It was truly unneeded. It's like when he gives reason on editing his post why is that so bothersome?

There's no bitterness, in fact a lot of Mike's posts bring me great joy. The Acathla spell is the best meme, and I'll always be greatful to him for it.

As for why he always needs to give reasons for editing his posts, it's not "bothersome", but it is kinda amusing how OCD it is. If I edit this post to fix a spelling error or something, do you think people actually care or want to know why I edited the post? Of course not. I do find it kinda funny that he's got this compulsion to catologue such a useless bit of information when it's clearly there for his own benefit, not for anyone else's.



Really, I think that within my personal perspective I love women empowerment I have to admit I really dislike the attitude and stating and automatically assuming female is weaker and that the male would win because of their Physique this sounds sexist.

Sexual dimorphism is a real thing, and frankly I'm not sorry if saying so flies in the face of today's PC snowflake culture. Why do you think men and women's professional sports are separated? Don't get me wrong, Rhonda Rousey could kick the shit out of most guys in the general population if she needed to. But Fred and Dawn are no Rhonda Rousey. Neither are Billy or Andrew for that matter -both of whom are male, so where does sexism come into it?

Nick Brendan is a bigger, stronger guy than Amy Acker or Michelle Trachenberg, anyone with common sense would recognize that he is probably more physically capable than them. The same goes for the hypothetical skinny teen Billy is based on, and I'd wager that Andrew is supposed to be weaker than Tom Lenk actually is.

I do find it somewhat tasteless to speculate on how well a normal human male character could beat up a normal human female character, but MikeB is the one who brought that topic up in the power-level thread, not me. I just pointed out how ridiculous it was that Xander would rank beneath Dawn/Fred/Andrew/Billy.


Because a female could be creative, smart and a survivalist or even stronger! Hence why I think Mike B was trying to state Freds is a survivalist which is a feat.

The general gist of that thread was "whom could beat whom". Fred could beat any other character in a physics test, Xander knows the most about construction, Willow knows the most about computers, Lorne has the best singing voice and Willy the Snitch can pour the best cocktails. Everyone has different skills that might be useful in different situations. But that's not what the thread was about. At least not until Mike wanked "power level" to really mean "how important is this character to Spike."

Because let's be honest, the real reason Xander ranked so low amongst the normal human characters is because he's too anti-Spike.

buffylover
11-11-17, 08:30 PM
Well Buffylover, it looks like you have well and truly driven this thread off-topic. Not that it matters all that much, really.

I'm not the only one.



Well you sure seem to be getting upset when people disagree with MikeB or point out why he's wrong.

So where is the post when I say that 'everyone' should all accept MikeB interpretations then? Not upset more noticing the negativity and rudeness towards the user.



For quite a while now I've been meaning to open a thread about it.

You should no one is stopping you. More negativity and humiliation. Who are you?



There was no tension in this thread until you got all defensive in post #6 of this thread and threatened to start reporting people. Nobody was being nasty or rude to MikeB, we were just pointing out how some of his ideas had no basis in canon. It was you who brought hostility and negativity to this thread. Not me, not Stoney, not KingofCretins.

It wasn't going to end up with cupcakes, was it? you totally don't fool me. It's funnier enough I gave a link to a thread to Stoney how MikeB inspired me within my illustration. Guess what, guess who replied.



Also, you have no right whatsoever to demand people to start "thanking" you for your posts. Thanking is a completely personal choice and it's really nobody else's business why someone might dish out thanks or choose not to. Frankly, I'm a little appalled that you feel entitled to have your posts thanked or that you demand an explanation why some posts were thanked and not others, as though it's any of your business at all.

I'm also little appalled how you have the audacity that people's post shouldn't be respected.

You and TTB don't understand my attention it's not about not getting thanked it's more of the person THE connection with the user especially Stoney within the fanart. But you don't know this so it's like a punch to the stomach. Now I know she clearly doesn't have that respect that I thought she did towards me as a user.


I don't think anyone here feels actual feelings of hostility towards MikeB. I wouldn't wish any actual hardships on him in real life. However, his bizzare opinions invite criticism, that's a simple fact. Don't make me (or others) out to be the bad guy when we point out where his weird ideas don't line up with canon.

So where is the professionalism? the welcoming, the appreciating, and the positivity.



As for him being an "outcast", I don't think he's trying to win any popularity contests here, I suspect being well liked isn't high on his priority list, hence his "unique" posting style. So long as he can continue to praise Spike and bash Angel, I don't think Mike much cares what other people think about him.

So do you admit that you 'outcast' him because he doesn't care? It's also you need to relise it's more people on the forum for example (me) that don't want to see this on a discussion forum I thought we were all mature and adults.



If a moderator posted in this thread, their words would certainly carry more weight than yours.

So you don't respect my feelings then?



This is the last time I'm going to address this point. At no point did I suggest that *you, personally* were a Flat-Earther.

I was using Flat Earth Society as an example, because it was the most ridiculous worldview that I could think of. My point is, that if you *wanted* to be a Flat Earther in this completely hypothetical situation, then that would be your right. You can believe whatever you want and express whatever opinions you want.

So why do I want to be a flat-earther? you must think that I was. Hence my conclusion you did try insulted me.



However, you cannot expect other people to mollycoddle your opinions or treat them as valid.

But, maybe show some curtsey and respect maybe? Is that so hard?


Some people claim to be "otherkin", animal spirits in human bodies. If they want to believe that fantasy, that's fine. But they cannot expect me to buy into their bullshit and treat it seriously.

No one is telling you to take it seriously but consider someone feelings maybe and the forum.



MikeB can come up with whatever bizzare fanon he wants if it helps him get greater enjoyment out of Buffy the Vampire Slayer. But he cannot expect us to treat his interpretation as the correct one. He often asserts his opinions as facts, and when that happens he's just asking for his opinions to be picked apart.

He can surely do his own interpretation of the show.



I find it a little weird that you're getting more offended over this than MikeB usually does, buffyfan.

Yeah because it's not just MikeB on the buffyforums remember we are all Buffyfans.






There's no bitterness, in fact a lot of Mike's posts bring me great joy. The Acathla spell is the best meme, and I'll always be greatful to him for it.

I thank him also for inspiring me towards my fanart.



As for why he always needs to give reasons for editing his posts, it's not "bothersome", but it is kinda amusing how OCD it is. If I edit this post to fix a spelling error or something, do you think people actually care or want to know why I edited the post? Of course not. I do find it kinda funny that he's got this compulsion to catologue such a useless bit of information when it's clearly there for his own benefit, not for anyone else's.

Is that not what it's meant for? Again petty easy targeting negative scorning.



Sexual dimorphism is a real thing, and frankly I'm not sorry if saying so flies in the face of today's PC snowflake culture. Why do you think men and women's professional sports are separated? Don't get me wrong, Rhonda Rousey could kick the shit out of most guys in the general population if she needed to. But Fred and Dawn are no Rhonda Rousey. Neither are Billy or Andrew for that matter, so where does sexism come into it?

Nick Brendan is a bigger, stronger guy than Amy Acker or Michelle Trachenberg, anyone with common sense would recognize that he is probably more physically capable than them. The same goes for the hypothetical skinny teen Billy is based on, and I'd wager that Andrew is supposed to be weaker than Tom Lenk actually is.

I do find it somewhat tasteless to speculate on how well a normal human male character could beat up a normal human female character, but MikeB is the one who brought that topic up in the power-level thread, not me. I just pointed out how ridiculous it was that Xander would rank beneath Dawn/Fred/Andrew/Billy.

"Really, I think that within my personal perspective I love women empowerment I have to admit I really dislike the attitude and stating and automatically assuming female is weaker and that the male would win because of their Physique this sounds sexist. I dislike it but, I respect it if you think that. Because a female could be creative, smart and a survivalist or even stronger! Hence why I think Mike B was trying to state Freds is a survivalist which is a feat."



The general gist of that thread was "whom could beat whom". Fred could beat any other character in a physics test, Xander knows the most about construction, Willow knows the most about computers, Lorne has the best singing voice and Willy the Snitch can pour the best cocktails. Everyone has different skills that might be useful in different situations. But that's not what the thread was about. At least not until Mike wanked "power level" to really mean "how important is this character to Spike."

Here is me thinking that is was more about feats like you see in comicvine.

Stoney
11-11-17, 09:59 PM
You and TTB don't understand my attention it's not about not getting thanked it's more of the person THE connection with the user especially Stoney within the fanart. But you don't know this so it's like a punch to the stomach. Now I know she clearly doesn't have that respect that I thought she did towards me as a user.

I really don't understand this. I only originally responded because you asserted that I had thanked someone for a reason other than what I had. I didn't want to leave a misrepresentation/misunderstanding of my intent (to agree with King's points) left uncorrected, but it became more than that as you then wanted to address my emoji use with MikeB in the past. I considered the post you quoted and responded about it. But now it has moved on to my attitude towards you as a user/artist.

In terms of my respect towards yourself, I acknowledged the effort/time you put into the fanart section within my posts, I repeatedly praised your fanart and I acknowledged that even though I don't agree with MikeB's interpretation which inspired your piece I can still appreciate the piece itself. When you asserted that any appreciation I had would be 'wrong' I just didn't know what to reply because I wasn't dismissing where your inspiration came from but was saying I loved the piece regardless of whether or not I had any level of personal appreciation for what inspired it. I don't think I was disrespectful or dismissive towards your art or you as a user, far from it in fact.

I really don't understand what is going on here and I don't want to continue to engage in what feels to be a continuously shifting annoyance towards me. I haven't at any stage intended to disrespect you and I'd like to leave it with that clearly stated.

Vampire in Rug
11-11-17, 10:18 PM
Buffylover, I've explained my position. Nobody has said anything nasty or personal towards MikeB. We have only critiqued his bizzare personal canon which is completely fair game. If you still feel the need to report us to the mods, please go right ahead. I've reported MikeB in the past for rudely saying "you need to watch episode X again" and as far as I'm aware nothing happened.

Nobody owes you a "thanks" for any of your posts. Nobody owes you an explanation for why they "thanked" someone's post.

Any person is welcome to whatever fantasies, delusions or ideas make them happy, but when they present these ideas as fact, they are open to criticism. While I think pretty much everyone deserves common human decency, not all ideologies deserve "respect." Some people think it's ok to use their phones in the theatre. Some people think everyone needs to know that they are really a raccoon spirit in a human body. Some people are against vaccinations. I don't owe these ideas my respect. I'll treat the people with basic decency, but I don't need to pretend that their ideas have any merit whatsoever.

No, we don't "outcast" MikeB. I think he does that to himself with the way he makes everything revolve around how awesome Spike is. I think he does that to himself when he posts in almost every single thread about how Angel should be killed. Or how all the female characters serve only to satisfy Spike's sexual desires. Or how if you disagree with his interpretation you need to watch the episode again until you agree with him. Or how anything he doesn't like is non-canon. Or how even the writers of the show/comic are wrong when they contradict him. And so on.

buffylover
11-11-17, 10:19 PM
I really don't understand this. I only originally responded because you asserted that I had thanked someone for a reason other than what I had. I didn't want to leave a misrepresentation/misunderstanding of my intent (to agree with King's points) left uncorrected, but it became more than that as you then wanted to address my emoji use with MikeB in the past. I considered the post you quoted and responded about it. But now it has moved on to my attitude towards you as a user/artist.

Well, I'm sorry if you don't understand this I will make it clearer than. First of MikeB interpreted a specific interpretation, then clearly when I stated that I could see his vision it seem to me that the forum clearly showed a reaction by thanking 'Kingofcrentins'. I just thought you would maybe just appreciate my post based on our connection and respected it my visions that I could see MikeB interpretation, well you liked it through all of out my artwork.



In terms of my respect towards yourself, I acknowledged the effort/time you put into the fanart section within my posts, I repeatedly praised your fanart and I acknowledged that even though I don't agree with MikeB's interpretation which inspired your piece I can still appreciate the piece itself. When you asserted that any appreciation I had would be 'wrong' I just didn't know what to reply because I wasn't dismissing where your inspiration came from but was saying I loved the piece regardless of whether or not I had any level of personal appreciation for what inspired it. I don't think I was disrespectful or dismissive towards your art or you as a user, far from it in fact.

It felt to me you only thank my art within the other side but, when I do try and discuss on this side you seemed to be cold with me for some reason showcasing a disconnection I should already know this from other incidences with you because it's not the first time.



I really don't understand what is going on here and I don't want to continue to engage in what feels to be a continuously shifting annoyance towards me. I haven't at any stage intended to disrespect you and I'd like to leave it with that clearly stated.

I have now seen you differently.

Gosh... VIR basically just respect.

Vampire in Rug
11-11-17, 10:33 PM
I have an idea. If I set up a PayPal account, and we can come to a fair arrangement that we both agree on, I'm willing to "thank" every single post you make from now on. What do you think is a fair price to pay me per "thanks"? It's obviously important to you, so for a small fee, I'm willing to offer you a guaranteed "thanks", every single time. I don't think you'll ever see a better deal than this.

buffylover
11-11-17, 10:34 PM
I have an idea. If I set up a PayPal account, and we can come to a fair arrangement that we both agree on, I'm willing to "thank" every single post you make from now on. What do you think is a fair price to pay me per "thanks"? It's obviously important to you, so for a small fee, I'm willing to offer you a guaranteed "thanks", every single time. I don't think you'll ever see a better deal than this.

Cringe you are actually proven my point even more so thanks. :lol:

vampmogs
11-11-17, 11:51 PM
Buffylover, I've explained my position. Nobody has said anything nasty or personal towards MikeB.

http://imageshack.com/a/img923/1253/Q6nS72.gif (https://imageshack.com/i/pnQ6nS72g)

You repeatedly hound him every time he makes a post or a thread, you make snide remarks about him in other threads when he’s not even posting, you’ve belittled him for explaining why he edits his posts, you've brought up several times now that he was banned from Slayalive, you've mocked him for having "OCD", and you were petty enough to call yourself an ‘Arbiter of Canon’ which is clearly a vindictive swipe at MikeB. You even just admitted that you’ve considered starting a thread about his Spike & Acathla theory knowing damn well that nobody but MikeB agrees with it. So what purpose could it possibly serve other than to give you the warped satisfaction of bullying and humiliating him over something that he said years ago?

You've even ridiculed him for typing like he's "on the spectrum" without ever considering that he might actually, ya know, be on the spectrum. It's f#cking laughable that you of all people can try and claim that nobody has said anything personal or nasty about him when he clearly annoys you and you haven't been at all shy in expressing that. People absolutely have said personal and nasty things towards MikeB, myself included, and you more than anybody, so at least own it.

The innocent act is cowardly and lame. There's plenty of people on here (including in this thread) that I don't like and have made personal attacks towards both publicly and in PM. Absolutely. How hard is it to admit that? Why lie? You can think buffylover's obsession with the 'Thanks' feature is embarrassing and lame (which it is) and that her lovey dovey "we must love and share everyone's opinion!" is a crock of shit (which it is) and still own up to the fact that there's a small group of you who do nothing but bully MikeB incessantly and pick him apart for fun – and you’re the ringleader. You're an absolute jerk to him and you know it.

Stoney
12-11-17, 05:52 AM
Well, I'm sorry if you don't understand this I will make it clearer than. First of MikeB interpreted a specific interpretation, then clearly when I stated that I could see his vision it seem to me that the forum clearly showed a reaction by thanking 'Kingofcrentins'. I just thought you would maybe just appreciate my post based on our connection and respected it my visions that I could see MikeB interpretation, well you liked it through all of out my artwork.

But I explained why I had thanked King, because I agreed with his reading of the scene. I didn't agree with MikeB's which you were supporting and that is why I didn't thank your post. That I appreciate your art I don't think means that I should support any ideas you agree with or post and your incorrect assertion/accusation of why I had thanked King was unfair and reasonable for me to want to correct the misrepresentation of my intent.


It felt to me you only thank my art within the other side but, when I do try and discuss on this side you seemed to be cold with me for some reason showcasing a disconnection I should already know this from other incidences with you because it's not the first time.

But I haven't been cold to you. I've shown open appreciation in this thread for what you have done in the fanart section and for your art. Again, liking someone/their work shouldn't mean you have an obligation to show appreciation for anything they say or that they choose to support. I think I've been perfectly reasonable and shown my respect towards you by responding to the issues you have raised and praising your art which I love. If this has somehow made you see me differently I can't do anything about that but I really am not going to continue to pour time into an exchange which has become unnecessarily unpleasant.

buffylover
12-11-17, 10:29 AM
The innocent act is cowardly and lame. There's plenty of people on here (including in this thread) that I don't like and have made personal attacks towards both publicly and in PM. Absolutely. How hard is it to admit that? Why lie? You can think buffylover's obsession with the 'Thanks' feature is embarrassing and lame (which it is) and that her lovey dovey "we must love and share everyone's opinion!" is a crock of shit (which it is) and still own up to the fact that there's a small group of you who do nothing but bully MikeB incessantly and pick him apart for fun – and you’re the ringleader. You're an absolute jerk to him and you know it.

I'm a (he) but, that's okay. :)

About the 'THANKED' system this includes Stoney also.

I absolutely disfavor the thank system this is the reason why I missed the old forum layout because I always had favored giving out 'rep' to me it felt more professional somehow more private whilst the thank system to me seems more of an instrument of authority to certain members showcasing that some members feel their opinion are invalid. To me, it feels not genuine somehow especially on this side of the forum a petty game of showcasing a popularity contest. If it's Lame and embarrassing but, I'm sorry that's how I feel.

Stoney if you truly agree with 'Kingofcrentins' that's super all right because it's obviously just my problem and sensitivity within the thank system.

I wasn't trying to state that 'everyone' must love and share everyone's opinion it was more of respecting someone else's view. Disagree sure but, have that professionalism criticism mature Basically, it's in the (FAQ).

KingofCretins
12-11-17, 04:04 PM
My other most widely used forum has the following emotes to react with


like
dislike
agree
disagree
funny
winner
informative
friendly
useful
optimistic
creative
wish I would have said that
come on man
best post ever


Just for scale and context. Our system here now is actually far less vulnerable to abuse than the rep system was. Interpreting a "thank"as a passive/aggressive dig at someone, that seems to be brought to the equation by the audience. I took it as Stoney sharing my sense of Buffy as essentially not suicidal. We have never known the character to love a Romeo & Juliet style self-destructive love; she could have jumped into Angeles arms, after all, could she not?

MikeB
19-11-17, 11:52 PM
All caught up



Vampire in Rug

* Not once in my original post did I say anything posted within it was canon. It seems you are using a straw man argument (SA). Canon is not debatable; canon is fact.

I continue to debate that Buffy was in love with Spike in BtVS S6 because it’s debatable even though “Lessons” (B 7.01), “Beneath You” (B 7.02) and the rest of BtVS S7 makes little sense if Buffy wasn’t in love with Spike in BtVS S6.


Spike is not an overly religious guy, and we haven't seen him give much thought to the afterlife beyond being aware that it exists. Already in “Doomed” (B 4.11), we see Spike’s saying, “Goodbye, Dru. I’ll see you in hell.” In “Beneath You” (B 7.02), Spike asks Buffy regarding his getting his soul back, “It’s what you wanted right?” Then his next sentence is his looking upwards and asking, “It’s what YOU wanted, right?” Then Spike expounds/ soliloquys that he considers/reasons that the very act of his getting his soul backs should mean that he will be forgiven for all his wrongdoings, that Buffy will love him, and then he literally embraces “God” and asks Buffy, “Can we rest now? Buffy, can we rest?”

Again, it seems you don’t remember very basic things about the Buffyverse. Gods are fact. Hell dimensions and heavenly dimensions are fact.


* Buffy in “The Gift” (B 5.22) died partly-to-mostly because she considered/reasons she’d go to heaven (and possibly be reunited with Joyce). “Death is your gift.”


* We’re discussion the Buffyverse, not ‘the real world’.


* Regarding “Chosen” (B 7.22), Buffy wanted Spike to be with her and the battle against the First Evil was already won. Spike saw an opportunity to destroy Sunnydale and probably/certainly close the Hellmouth. And go to Heaven.


* Common sense states that Spike in BtVS S6 ultimately wanted to sire Buffy. BtVS S7 gives indications/implications such as Spike’s siring his mother.

Spike and vampire Buffy would obviously no longer be with the Scoobies and Spike would simply dust Angel if Angel became a ‘mortal’ threat to Spike.


* After “Afterlife” (B 6.03), Spike isn’t as close to Dawn as he was before.


* Spike in BtVS S6 ultimately wanted Buffy to want him to sire her. He wouldn’t likely sire her against her will; however, it’s possible that was an implication in “Wrecked” (B 6.10) when he told her, “If you keeping being such a bi)ch, then I may bite you.”


* Spike in “Crush” (B 5.14) chose a chance with Buffy over centuries more years with Drusilla because he was changed enough that the sight of Drusilla’s killing and feeding horrified him. Spike in BtVS S6 probably wouldn’t want an evil Buffy and the Buffybot wasn’t a vampire Buffy.


Your idea that Buffy was willing to die with Spike has no basis in canon. Other than “Chosen” (B 7.22), “Just Rewards” (B A 5.02), BtVS S8, BtVS S9, BtVS S10 and BtVS S11 (I maintain that Season 10 and Season 11 cannot actually be canon).


Regarding “Chosen” (B 7.22), Buffy was increasingly risking her life every moment she stayed with Spike. The “flaming hands” thing happens when Buffy clasps his hand and he clasps his hand on top of hers. The flames come from the insides of their clasped hands and seems mystical or whatever given that and given Buffy doesn’t have any burn marks and Spike’s hand wasn’t “burning”.

Spike was more important to Buffy than everyone else combined in BtVS S7. Buffy would consider/reason Spike would go to heaven and she would go to heaven with him.

As-is, the only reason Buffy survives is Spike’s essentially telling her to go and hers somehow running fast enough to run across rooftops and catch up to a speeding bus.


Your idea that Spike's self sacrifice or his encouragement for Buffy to run had anything to do with her kissing Angel has no basis in canon. Other than “Chosen” (B 7.22), “Just Rewards” (B A 5.02), BtVS S8, BtVS S9. If Spike’s wasn’t concerned about Buffy/Angel, he would have gone back to Buffy after “Destiny” (A 5.08).


I don't know why you'd want to taint Spike's big heroic moment with the idea of him being a petty, jelous crybaby. That seems like a straw man argument.

Buffy committed suicide in “The Gift” (B 5.22). Spike’s dying in “Chosen” was more “heroic” than that simply because Faith was out of prison and now there were at least dozens of Slayers in the world. And Sunnydale was destroyed and the Hellmouth closed.

But Spike died mostly because he saw his chance to go to heaven.

____________________________________

* I tell people they need to rewatch a certain scene, episode, Season, or series if they are clearly not remembering something.

In this very thread, more than one poster posted that Buffy clasped Spike’s flaming hand. That’s not what happens in the scene.

____________________________________

* What is your explanation regarding why Spike didn’t simply stand up and stake Uncursed Angel in “Becoming Part II” (B 2.22)? What is your explanation for Spike’s not making sure Acathla wasn’t going to open and why Spike speedily drove away instead of ensuring that Acathla wasn’t going to send the world to a hell dimension?

We know Spike can do magic. We know Spike can hire people. We know Spike somehow managed to make Drusilla unconscious. Either Spike suddenly became extremely stupid or Spike had already ensured that Acathla wasn’t going to ‘swallow the world’ into a hell dimension.


* I remember Joss Whedon’s saying that he hasn’t been much involved with the comics since BtVS S8 outside of the abortion storyline and wanting Buffy and Spike together.


* One is not entitled to deny science.


A person should be entitled to believe whatever ridiculous ideas make them happy The problem becomes when such ideas become actions.


* Trying to say Xander would beat up Billy the Vampire Slayer in a one-on-one will always be beyond laughable. Anyway, such things can be debated in this thread: http://www.buffyforums.net/forums/showthread.php?19836-Overall-power-rankings-of-beings-good-and-bad-including-the-PTB-WR-amp-H-etc


Not everyone's interpretation exists for the sole purpose of putting their favourite character up on a pedestal. You’re referring to what and whom?


Well, given that MikeB's rather unique manner of posting has caused him to be banned from Slayalive, pretty much the only other active Buffy forum, would you consider that maybe, maybe the problem here is not "everyone else is being mean"? “given that MikeB's rather unique manner of posting has caused him to be banned from Slayalive”.

Banned from SlayAlive on 03-11-2015 04:34 PM
Wenxina banned me from SlayAlive on 03-11-2015 04:34 PM (http://slayalive.com/showthread.php/3723-Buffy-the-Vampire-Slayer-Season-10-11-quot-Love-Dares-You-quot-Pt.-1/page7 #121) Copy and pasted on 2015, 03-16

Hmm, Slayalive.com’s account is currently suspended. The relevant posts are in spoilers.



http://slayalive.com/showthread.php/3737-Buffy-the-Vampire-Slayer-Season-10-12-quot-Love-Dares-You-quot-Pt.-2/page5


02-26-2015 07:49 AM #89
Wenxina


Originally Posted by MikeB
BtVS 10.12 bullet points and analysis



DISCUSSION OF THE COVERS:

* To begin, the regular cover is bizarre or telling.

- The regular cover shows a vamped-out Spike in the middle of Buffy and Spike literally separating them. It clearly implies that Buffy and Spike aren’t going to ‘be together’ in BtVS 10.12 and are going to ‘break up’ in the Issue. Remember that covers are essentially advertising and marketing material. Remember that this cover was out in mid-November 2014 C.E. Readers of the comics who consider the covers canon and/or what actually will happen in the Issue would assume that not only are Buffy and Spike not going to ‘be together’ in BtVS 10.12, they are going to “break up” and they are going to “break up” because Spike is evil. Remember that BtVS 10.09 came out in November 2014 C.E and that Spike in it told Buffy that if he lost his soul that she should immediately dust him. It’s likely most readers assumed that Buffy and Spike weren’t actually going to have sex in BtVS 10.12 and certainly they weren’t going to ‘be together’ in BtVS 10.12. And that’s simply because of the cover. It’s likely many assumed that Buffy and Spike in BtVS 10.12 were going to be seriously considering dusting Spike. And that’s simply because of the cover and because of what Spike said to Buffy in BtVS 10.09.



BUFFY/SPIKE GRAVEYARD SCENE:


* I assume Spike’s left hand while kissing Buffy is loosely on the outside of her right arm near the elbow partly because her Scythe is in her right hand.


* Other than Buffy’s in BtVS 10.10 overhearing Spike’s telling Xander that Spike wants Buffy/Spike to remain good friends, I’m not sure why Buffy would consider hers kissing Spike to be “out of nowhere”.


* I’m not sure why Buffy continues to speak of Buffy/Spike as if it only existed in BtVS S6. Buffy and Spike were clearly together in BtVS S7 and unless Buffy is extremely bad at math—which she’s not—Buffy and Spike had sex with each other in BtVS S7.


* Buffy looks at Spike with a level of love and affection that she’s never looked at anyone else. This includes “Showtime” (B 7.11), “Chosen” (B 7.22) (both the first Basement Scene and in the Hellmouth Scene), Buffy-Buffybot to Spike in BtVS 9.07, and here in the Graveyard Scene in BtVS 10.12.


* Spike to Buffy, “I’ve pined for you for ages.”

Um, WHAT?!!! That lines makes far less than zero sense. So far, this Graveyard Scene seems written from an Alternate Reality or Alternate Universe version of the Buffyverse.

No matter what one wants to consider Buffy and Spike’s relationship in BtVS S6 and BtVS S7, the only way that Buffy could have been even more with Spike is if she had him sire her (and that’s only because it would allow them to be together forever. Spike could have gotten Buffy’s soul to be in vampire Buffy).

In addition, how was Spike pining for Buffy when he died in “Chosen” (B 7.22) instead of being with her, he didn’t go back to her for years after “Chosen” and then only did because he was needed to stop the world-ending danger (BtVS 8.35), then left her again for months at a time after BtVS 8.39. In “Damage” (A 5.11), Andrew Wells flat-out told Spike that Buffy would be ecstatic that Spike’s alive and would welcome Spike with open arms (and legs). Spike could have been with Buffy since “Chosen” and he decided to mostly stay away from her.


* Spike to Buffy, “Feeling okay on my own.”

Um, what? Even if all the Spider and Co. stuff, Illyria stuff, Beck etc. stuff from IDW is canon, Spike has still been ‘on his own’ for most of post-“Not Fade Away” (A 5.22). Even in AtS s5, Spike didn’t actually pursue Winifred Burkle. Even if he was sleeping around during AtS s5, he still was ‘on his own’.


* Spike’s telling Buffy, “I’ve pined for you for ages. But I was startin’ to get used to the notion of us as friends.” would only make any sense if Buffy and Spike were NEVER together.


* Spike also is talking to Buffy as if they never had a relationship during BtVS S7. In addition, he tells her she didn’t want him when he was soulled even though it’s clear they had sex with each other in BtVS S7 and it would have been clear to him in “Potential” (B 7.12) at-latest that Buffy remained sexually attracted to him.


* Spike’s comparing his “pining” for Buffy to Xander’s pining for Buffy is simply beyond stupid and beyond ridiculous. Buffy/Xander never happened.


* Regarding Buffy’s deciding to be with Xander in BtVS S8, Spike seems to ignore or not recognize that Buffy only decided that because Xander was the only guy around available to her and Buffy hadn’t had sex with a male since “Chosen” (B 7.22).


* Spike to Buffy: “After [being with a Slayer]—Angel. Again. But not the Angel when he was a boring private eye in L.A. who would’ve played house with you. Mad god Angel.”

That whole thing is directly opposed to canon. Buffy was glowified and/or controlled into having sex with AngelTwilight. And even if one doesn’t want to acknowledge that, the private eye part has Spike referring to an Alternate Reality or Alternate Universe version of the Buffyverse. Spike knows Angel’s perfect happiness clause is why Angel moved away from Sunnydale. That alone is enough reason why Buffy wouldn’t move to Los Angeles to be with Angel. The other reasons are obviously Buffy’s mission as the Slayer, hers not wanting to leave the Scoobies, etc.


* Spike to Buffy: “Seems t’me you always want what you can’t have.”

The validity of that depends on how Spike defines have. Until Cursed Angel broke up with Buffy, he was pretty much her puppy in BtVS S1 through BtVS S3. Until Riley Finn broke up with Buffy, he was pretty much her puppy in BtVS S4 through “Into the Woods” (B 5.10). By the time Buffy got with Spike, she knew Spike wanted to be with her. In “Once More With Feeling” (B 6.07), he sings to her: “You know you’ve got a willing slave. And you just love to play the thought that you might misbehave.” In “Normal Again” (B 6.17), he tells Xander that Buffy turned Spike “into her soddin’ sex slave.”


* Spike to Buffy: “I says Yes, then what? A month later you get bored and develop a sudden desire for Andrew? Willow? Giles?”

Again, Spike seems to be discussing an Alternative Reality or Alternative Universe version of Buffy. Even the Buffy/Angel stuff in “End of Days” (B 7.21) and “Chosen” (B 7.22) is largely because Spike in “End of Days” rejected Buffy’s wanting to discuss Buffy/Spike’s future together.

Buffy/Satsu wouldn’t have happened had Spike been with Buffy. Even with the glow and control, SuperBuffy might not have had sex with AngelTwilight had Buffy been with Spike.

In addition, given how much time since “Chosen” (B 7.22) that Spike has been away from Buffy, it’s obvious that she hasn’t tried to get with any of Andrew Wells, Willow Rosenberg, and Rupert Giles; therefore, it makes around zero sense that Spike could think she’d suddenly pursue them after being with Spike again.

In addition, even if no stuff in IDW ever happened, that’s some disgusting gall and hypocrisy from Spike. Since “Chosen” (B 7.22), Spike’s had sex with Harmony Kendall on two separate occasions (“Destiny” (A 5.08) and A&F 9.20). Spike in BtVS S9: Spike kissed Morgan and was attracted to Morgan. If Buffy and Spike weren’t together after BtVS 8.39, Buffy’s had sex around 3 times (including once while being glowified and controlled into doing so) since “Chosen” (B 7.22). And if all the stuff in the IDW is canon, add in Spider and Co., Illyria and Fred, Beck, and Drusilla.

- Side note: it seems Spike knows Buffy wasn’t with the Immortal.



SPIKE AND XANDER CONVERSATION IN THEIR APARTMENT:


* First off, it seems Spike’s entire nonsense in the Graveyard Scene is based on that Spike asked Xander what Spike should do when Buffy approached Spike and told him she wants to be with him. That conversation most likely happened directly after the conversation Spike had with Xander in BtVS 10.10 in which Spike told Xander that he wants Buffy/Spike to remain “proper friends”.

Given we know from later in BtVS 10.12 that Spike does actually want to ‘be with’ Buffy and does want to be having sex with her, that conversation in BtVS 10.10 itself doesn’t make much sense and it makes around zero sense that Spike would have ‘turned Buffy down’ during the Graveyard Scene in BtVS 10.12.

Frankly, again, this makes most of Season 10 regarding Buffy/Spike not make sense. It’s been obvious that Buffy and Spike want to be together. Why wouldn’t Spike have ‘made a move’ on Buffy? The comics have made readers wait years later for something that should have been happening since probably BtVS 9.02 at-latest (really, it should have been happening since BtVS 8.40).


* The Spike and Xander apartment is on the 3rd floor from the top of the building. That means that the Buffy, Willow, and Dawn apartment takes up part of the 3rd floor and 2nd floor from the top of the building and that none of the Scoobies lives on the top floor of the building.


* Spike’s taking relationship advice from Xander is beyond laughable. Spike’s taking Xander’s advice to “[give] [Buffy] the same bloody speech” that Xander gave Buffy in Tibet is beyond laughable. Again, this seems a Spike from an Alterative Realty or Alternative Universe. Giving the same speech means Spike considers Buffy/Spike and Buffy/Xander comparable. And that makes around infinitely less than zero sense.


* No, Xander, you were still in love with Buffy in BtVS 8.31 when you rejected her. Your rejection of her was all about that you reasoned she didn’t actually want you and didn’t actually romantically love you.


* How could Spike possibly consider that Xander is a better ‘love guru’ than he is? Spike was with Drusilla for over 118 years (1880 C.E. through 1998 C.E. and after) and Drusilla turned him into the Big Bad. Harmony Kendall was Spike’s rebound relationship and she ended up probably the most successful and most important vampire in the world. In terms of usefulness, Spike/Harmony is probably comparable to Xander/Anya. Buffy Anne Summers turned Spike into a hero. I don’t know if Spike actually knows of Xander’s high school relationships. But none of those compares favorably to Spike’s relationships. Xander dumped Anya at the altar. Xander sided with Severin and Simone Doffler against Buffy and Co. and now Xander and Dawn are no longer a couple.

Spike’s getting relationship advice from Angel makes far more sense than Spike’s getting relationship advice from Xander. Angel/Darla lasted for around 150 years. Buffy didn’t even kill Angel after BtVS 8.39. And even Angel/Drusilla lasted multiple times longer than any of Xander’s relationships.

Spike’s getting relationship advice from Xander is far sillier than if Harmony Kendall seriously asked Buffy for money.


* I can understand why Xander could consider Spike/Drusilla, Spike/Harmony and BtVS S6 Buffy/Spike were “unhealthy” relationships for Spike.

We don’t know if Spike actually considers those relationships were “unhealthy” for him. Whom would Spike think he should have been with from 1880 through 1998 C.E. and after instead of Drusilla? Spike was happy with Drusilla and they painted towns red across the world. Harmony Kendall was rebound for Spike and she was useful during BtVS S4, BtVS S5, AtS s5, and A&F 9.20 to him. In BtVS S5 through BtVS S7, whom would Spike think he should have been with instead of Buffy?

- Side note: Clearly, Spike hasn’t told Xander about any of the stuff in IDW (if canon) and hasn’t told Xander about the BtVS S9: Spike stuff regarding Spike/Morgan.


* Why would Spike listen to Xander’s advice regarding Xander’s love for Dawn? Dawn doesn’t seem to want to be with Xander.



ANDREW WELLS’S TELLING THE SCOOBIES ABOUT THE DEMON LORD AND ITS GOLEMS:


* Andrew Wells to the Scoobies refers to the Sculptor as a “demon lord”.


* Giles knows a lot about The Sculptor.


* Willow can give witches and warlocks temporary power boosts.


* How old is Buffy supposed to be? Is she in her 30s years of age?


* Unless Dawn is wearing a training bra or something, her breasts are drawn too small.



THE SCOOBIES’S AND THE OAKLAND COVEN MEMBERS’S FIGHTING THE GOLEMS:


* Where is Spike’s sword?


* Doesn’t Andrew Wells have access to weapons? Why is he fighting with no weapons?


* Xander uses a flame gun thing against the golems.


* Dawn’s using a crossbow against the golems. Is Buffy still that firearm opposed?


* Willow’s clearly a fraction as powerful here as she was in Quor’toth (A&F S9).

It seems odd that none of the Scoobies were attacking the Sculptor. The Sculptor and the golems are nowhere near as dangerous as Maloker. It seems the Scoobies should have been able to defeat the Sculptor as well as defeat the golems.


* Andrew Wells’s coven woman friend now thinks he’s awesome because of how well he did against the golems.


* There’s no evidence that Giles knows of Willow/Aluwyn and it seems Giles should know that Xander and Dawn aren’t together, and Buffy and Spike aren’t together yet. Andrew Wells’s kissing Clive is literally the ONLY “summer of love” thing happening among the Scoobies when Giles makes that “it’s the summer of love for everyone but me” statement. Yet Giles acts of if every member of the Scoobies except him is in love and in a loving romantic physical relationship.


* Andrew’s “perfect self” is kissing a guy and helping beat a demon lord’s minions and that’s it?


* After the potion ‘wears off’, why is Andrew’s body back to being its BtVS S7 self? Andrew in Season 10 was ripped. Where did the muscles go?



THE ENDING BUFFY/SPIKE STUFF:


* Buffy’s being willing to have a Platonic Relationship with Spike is something she also was willing to do in BtVS S7 because he was forcing that on her. She did accept a date from Principal Robin Wood in “First Date” (B 7.14) and the stuff with Cursed Angel happened in “End of Days” (B 7.21) and “Chosen” (B 7.22). And Buffy is years older in BtVS S10 than she was in BtVS S7. How long was she going to be willing to wait for Spike to want to be physical with her again? Does Buffy no longer want children?


* Does Buffy actually think Spike and she would be “rushing into things” if they started having sex again? If they weren’t together after BtVS 8.39, it’s been anywhere from around 5 years to around 11 years since they’ve had sex with each other.


* Buffy’s reaction to Spike’s telling her he’s in love with her seems to be part-angst.


* It seems Buffy’s sexual appetites haven’t changed much from BtVS S6. She still ‘likes it rough’.


* Dawn isn’t creeped out by Buffy and Spike’s starting to have sex with each other.


* Giles’s reaction to Buffy’s and Spike’s having sex with each other makes me wonder if Giles was so against the Scoobies having relationships in BtVS S7 largely because Giles wasn’t in a relationship himself and was jealous of the Scoobies being able to ‘get some action’.


* Does Giles actually believe that none of the Scoobies should be having sex until he himself has sex again? Or does he believe that the Scoobies simply shouldn’t make him aware of theirs having sex?


* It seems Dawn—and Xander?—doesn’t know that Spike relatively recently had sex with Harmony Kendall.


* I have around zero sympathy for Giles. Giles should be happy he’s alive. Giles betrayed Buffy and the Scoobies in BtVS S7. He betrayed Buffy and the Scoobies in BtVS S8. He didn’t tell anyone that his soul could belong to Eyghon. He didn’t warn Buffy that her soul might belong to Eyghon. That he could be concerned about her soul belonging to Eyghon gives an added layer to his “Flooded” (B 6.04) anger at Willow because of hers resurrecting Buffy.

Buffy herself hasn’t had much sex since “Chosen” (B 7.22). Giles told Willow to not use the Vampr book to change his appearance. It doesn’t seem to occur to him to use a glamour so that potential dates would see him as his middle-aged self.


* I have mixed feelings regarding the Issue not actually showing Buffy’s and Spike’s having sex with each other. While ‘letting our imagination fill in the blanks’ was good storytelling in “As You Were” (B 6.15) and “Chosen” (B 7.22) because of the ambiguity regarding whether they finally were ‘making love’ with each other, such ambiguity regarding what Buffy and Spike are doing sexually in BtVS 10.12 is maybe not as necessary. We haven’t actually seen a Buffy/Spike sex scene since “Dead Things” (B 6.13) and we were subjected to the SuperBuffy/AngelTwilight stuff in BtVS 8.34.


* Is that a TV in Spike’s room? It so, it’s huge.


* Post-coital, Buffy is sleeping very content and happy on Spike’s chest. But after he awakes, she’s still content and happy ‘hugging’ her pillow.


* I don’t know what Spike’s dream was. But I’m not sure how likely it is that Spike went out one night and killed a couple. Spike lives with Xander and the Scoobies all live in the same building very close to each other.

- I don’t wish to speculate regarding this including whether there’s any connection to Cursed Angel’s situation in A&F S10. @MikeB : There was an official complaint filed regarding your post above, and I tend to agree that it does cross the line in terms of misogyny and bad taste. This isn't the first time that people have voiced their displeasure about your opinions and the way you express them. This is a fandom that's largely focused on complex characters, both male and female. There's a troubling pattern in how you seem to equate Spike's alphaness to his sexual prowess and how many women want to get with him. In fact, you constantly bring up Spike's harem, Morgan, Beck, etc to indicate that Spike cannot actually be currently celibate because he doesn't lack in opportunity to get some. It's even more disturbing that you seem to frequently reduce characters, both male and female, to have no other motivation beyond sex, and as frequently as possible, if it's at Spike's leisure, all the better. Perhaps you're confused as to where you crossed the line. Begin at the various times that you've mentioned the size of Buffy and Dawn's breasts or butt, the comment about welcoming Spike with open legs, the times you seem to think that a woman's prerogative is to please a man, and perhaps one of the most deplorable points made in the above post, the rapey suggestion that Giles use a glamour to trick women into being with him. This is an official warning about your posts.

twilight, Stelian, Alan_81, buffythecomicslayer, UndeadCaliAmerican, VampSlayer, Miss Kitty, angeliclestat, Vampire in Rug, Morphia, Stoney, Cordelia Chase, Bunny Hearts, withoutpassion thanked for this post.


02-26-2015 09:17 PM #90
MikeB


[Wenxina:] There was an official complaint filed regarding your post above, and I tend to agree that it does cross the line in terms of misogyny and bad taste. Misogyny means “hatred of women”. Either you don’t know what the word means, you’ve forgotten some of the most basic and essential things I’ve said regarding the post-BtVS S8 comics, or for some other reason you decided to use the word misogyny. I’ve said at least several now during or since BtVS S8 or whenever that Drusilla is my favorite character. I’ve said many times during and since BtVS S8 that Harmony Kendall is essentially the most important and valuable vampire in the world. I’ve repeatedly said post-BtVS S8 in defense against those who want Drusilla and Harmony killed that Angel deserves to be dusted far more than Drusilla and Harmony do. I’ve said that Drusilla and Harmony shouldn’t be killed off. I’ve said since A&F S9 was announced that Faith Lehane was being ‘dragged down’ and ‘lessened’ and whatnot in order to prop up the sales of Angel’s title.

If anything, I’ve probably been the most ‘pro-women’ of any of the regular posters who continue to discuss the comics. And o this Board and on BF, I’ve been second only to DorothyFan in my support of Willow’s needing to get her magical powers back and have been second only to DorothyFan in how supportive I’ve been of Willow post-BtVS S9: Willow: Wonderland.


[Wenxina:] This isn't the first time that people have voiced their displeasure about your opinions and the way you express them. Disagreeing with my opinions and regards is simply that. What you posted reads to me as if I shouldn’t post things that some posters disagree with and that I shouldn’t post things that might upset how those posters like to view the Buffyverse.


[Wenxina:] This is a fandom that's largely focused on complex characters, both male and female. Unless you’ve essentially forgotten around all of my posts on this Board, I don’t see how you can seriously consider that I don’t consider the characters to be complex.


[Wenxina:] There's a troubling pattern in how you seem to equate Spike's alphaness to his sexual prowess and how many women want to get with him. Spike’s “alphaness” as relates to his “sexual process” does relate to the women he’s been with and who want to be with him. Spike is the “alpha” of the Buffyerse regarding that especially if the IDW stuff is canon. I’m not sure what you mean by “Spike’s alphaness”. I’ve said that pre-New Rules Vampires, Drusilla was the most powerful female vampire in the world and that Dracula was the most powerful male vampire. Willow has been the “alpha” in the Buffyverse since “Grave” (B 6.22). I’ve said that Morgan is more powerful than Spike.


[Wenxina:] In fact, you constantly bring up Spike's harem, Morgan, Beck, etc to indicate that Spike cannot actually be currently celibate because he doesn't lack in opportunity to get some. Huh? Again, you seem to not remember what I’ve posted or whatever else led you to post that. I don’t recall my once saying that Spike in Season 10 before BtVS 10.12 had sex with anyone in Season 10. I know that some posters in various Boards had been speculating that Spike was ‘with’ Dylan.


[Wenxina:] It's even more disturbing that you seem to frequently reduce characters, both male and female, to have no other motivation beyond sex, and as frequently as possible, if it's at Spike's leisure, all the better. Huh? First off, I need to say that no matter what readers think of how I discuss sexual desire, sex, sexual attractiveness, etc., it’s simply not possible that any of that can be anything more than a small fraction as disturbing as continuing to support Buffy/Angel post-BtVS 8.39, especially how the aftermath has been dealt with post-BtVS 8.39. Secondly, not only is your statement complete rubbish—again, you seem to not remember what I’ve posted or whatever else led to you post that—, you seem to not understand such a basic thing about BtVS S10. Xander wants to be having sex with Dawn again. That’s most of his motivation in BtVS S10. Giles outside of the magic stuff is entirely focused on his sex life. Andrew Wells’s main thing in BtVS 10.12 is discovering that he may be a homosexual and second to that is how he may feel about his maybe being a homosexual. And Buffy and Spike outside of dealing with the New Rules of Magic stuff have been about their relationship and whether it should be physical again.


[Wenxina:] Perhaps you're confused as to where you crossed the line. Begin at the various times that you've mentioned the size of Buffy and Dawn's breasts or butt, Frankly, unless you don’t want posters ever discussing how ‘buff’ or ‘not buff’ the male characters are and/or should be and tell posters to never discuss the bodies of the male characters, such a statement is the definition of sexism. My comments regarding Buffy’s and Dawn’s figures have always been that they should be drawn how Sarah Michelle Gellar’s and Michelle Trachtenberg’s figures were.


[Wenxina:] the comment about welcoming Spike with open legs, Really? That was offensive? Given this post of yours, it seems I couldn’t even say something such as, “Regarding post-“Destiny” (A 5.08), Andrew Wells in “Damage” (A 5.11) informs Spike that Buffy would have been ecstatic that Spike’s alive, would have gleefully been in a relationship with him, and would have gleefully had sex with him again.” “Welcomed Spike back with open arms (and open legs)” was simply my using brevity.


[Wenxina:] the times you seem to think that a woman's prerogative is to please a man, That’s complete rubbish. What are these “times”?


[Wenxina:] and perhaps one of the most deplorable points made in the above post, the rapey suggestion that Giles use a glamour to trick women into being with him. I could see how some would find Rupert Giles doing such a thing to be unethical. But saying its rape is too far. Giles would simply look as he did as a middle-aged man. His emotions and behavior would still be as they are. He’d simply present as a somewhat childish and immature middle-aged man. But I assume that around all who say that would be rape wouldn’t say that aside from the fact that Angel statutorily raped Buffy, he would have always been raping her because instead of looking like a corpse that has been decaying for around 240 years, he looks as Liam of Galway did when he was 27 years old. And that Spike was raping Buffy throughout BtVS S6 and after because instead of looking like a corpse that has been decaying for around 120 years, he looks as William Pratt did sans eyeglasses when William was 25 years old.

P.S. I haven’t read through this thread and will read through and give a response to it after I’m done going through the various BtVS S10 threads I still need to get through and through the other threads I still need to get through.


02-27-2015 06:59 AM #92
Wenxina


Originally Posted by MikeB
Misogyny means “hatred of women”. Either you don’t know what the word means, you’ve forgotten some of the most basic and essential things I’ve said referring the post-BtVS S8 comics, or for some other reason you decided to use the word [i] misogyny. I’ve said quite a few times now during or since BtVS S8 or whenever that Drusilla is my favorite character. I’ve said many times during and since BtVS S8 that Harmony Kendall is essentially the most important and valuable vampire in the world. I’ve repeatedly said post-BtVS S8 in defense against those who want Drusilla and Harmony to be killed that Angel deserves to be dusted far more than Drusilla and Harmony do. I’ve said that Drusilla and Harmony shouldn’t be killed off. I’ve said since A&F was announced that Faith Lehane was been ‘dragged down’ and ‘lessened’ and whatnot in order to prop up the sales of Angel’s title. Misogyny can manifest itself in many ways including, but not limited to, denigration of women and sexual objectification of women. And don't get me started on the Buffy "still likes it rough" comment. And seriously, the "Well, I said good things about women here and here and here" argument doesn't mean that you can't have made any misogynistic comments. It just means that you haven't always made those comments. Therefore, saying that you've said X in the past doesn't mean that you have never been misogynistic.


Originally Posted by MikeB
If anything, I’ve probably been the most ‘pro-women’ of any of the regular posters who are continuing to discuss the comics. And this Board and on BF, I’ve been second only to DorothyFan in my support of Willow’s needing to get her magical powers back and have been second only to DorothyFan in how supported I’ve been of Willow post-BtVS S9: Willow: Wonderland. Seeing someone's worth only if they have power and serve a particular utility is hardly pro-women. Sorta missing the actual point, actually.


Originally Posted by MikeB
Disagreeing with my opinions and regards is simply that. What you posted reads to me as if I shouldn’t posts things that some posters disagree with and that I shouldn’t posts things that might upset how those posters like to view the Buffyverse. There's a difference between disagreeing with you about your stance on Angel and when you posts pretty gross things about women. The first is allowed, though I will say that the repetitious nature of the mantra is tiresome. The second case is not. Ever.


Originally Posted by MikeB
Unless you’ve essentially forgotten around all of my posts on this Board, I don’t see how you can seriously consider that I don’t consider the characters to be complex. I can seriously consider it because you've shown very little appreciation for nuance and your posts constantly reflect that.


Originally Posted by MikeB
Spike’s “alphaness” as relates to his “sexual process” does relate to the women he’s been with and who want to be with him. Spike is the “alpha” of the Buffyerse regarding that especially if the IDW stuff is canon. I’m not sure what you mean by “Spike’s alphaness”. I’ve said that pre-New Rules Vampires, Drusilla was the most powerful female vampire in the world and that Dracula was the most powerful male vampire. Willow has been the “alpha” in the Buffyverse since “Grave” (B 6.22). I’ve said that Morgan is more powerful than Spike. Your entire worldview of Spike as the alpha male is based on his sexual prowess. That relates to the complexity issue.


Originally Posted by MikeB
Huh? First off, I need to say that no matter what readers think of how I discuss sexual desire, sex, sexual attractiveness, etc., it’s simply not possible that any of that can be a small fraction as disturbing as continuing to support Buffy/Angel post-BtVS 8.39, especially how the aftermath has been dealt with post-BtVS 8.39. Secondly, not only is your statement complete rubbish – again, you seem to not remember what I’ve posted or whatever else led to you post that –, you seem to not understand such a basic thing about BtVS S10. Xander wants to be having sex with Dawn again. That’s most of his motivation in BtVS S10. Giles outside of the magic stuff is entirely focused on his sex life. Andrew Wells’s main thing in BtVS 10.12 is discovering that he may be a homosexual and second to that is how he may feel about his maybe being a homosexual. And Buffy and Spike outside of dealing with the New Rules of Magic stuff have been about their relationship and whether it should be physical again. Do I need to point out the lack of nuance and complexity again. And discussion of sex and sexuality are fair game, especially since the show has never really shied away from addressing those issues. It's the way you objectify women and focus not on their actual characterization that's problematic.


Originally Posted by MikeB
Frankly, unless you don’t want posters ever discussing how ‘buff’ or ‘not buff’ the male characters are and/or should be and tell posters to never discuss the bodies of the male characters, such a statement is the definition of sexism. My comments regarding Buffy’s and Dawn’s figures have always been that they should be drawn how Sarah Michelle Gellar’s and Michelle Trachenberg’s figures were. Discussion of male bodies usually tend to skew towards utility and power. Discussion of female bodies tend to skew towards desirability. There is a fundamental problem in how disparate those talking points are and the fact that you seem to ignore or deny while continuing to perpetuate that problem is troubling.


Originally Posted by MikeB
Really? That was offensive? Given this post of yours, it seems I couldn’t even say something such as, “Regarding post-“Destiny” (A 5.08), Andrew Wells in “Damage” (A 5.11) informs Spike that Buffy would have been ecstatic that Spike’s alive, would have gleefully been in a relationship with him, and would have gleefully had sex with him again.” “Welcomed Spike back with open arms (and open legs” was simply my using brevity. I mean, you could, but really, that would be fanfic. Fairly certain that Andrew doesn't say that Buffy would be "ecstatic that Spike’s alive, would have gleefully been in a relationship with him, and would have gleefully had sex with him again.”

ANDREW
Yeah. She was rounding slayers up in Europe, decided she liked it there, I guess. You think that, um...
(puts the penny in his mouth)
uhh. Uhh. Uhh.
(disgusted, he spits the penny out; it falls to the ground)
Think she needed a break from California. Wait a minute. She doesn't know you're alive, does she?

SPIKE
I don't think so. I mean... I don't know. Does she?

ANDREW
No. N-no. She can't. I mean... I—I would've heard about it. We would've had a conference call.
(Spike sighs)
Why haven't you told her?

SPIKE
"Hello, Buffy. It's Spike. I didn't burn up like you thought. How are things?"

ANDREW
Uh...do you want me to tell her? 'Cause I—I'm really good with those...uh, delicate personal—

SPIKE
No. Don't tell her. I'll take care of it.

But once again... you've simplified Buffy and Spike's relationship to basically being about sex, and therefore completely ignoring the developments of Season 7. And your use of "brevity"... perhaps stick to long-form next time. If you think you were being funny, so did Dane Cook...


Originally Posted by MikeB
That’s complete rubbish. What are these “times”? Specific example? Your post about Sam, and how she must be real pleased with herself that she can "satisfy" Riley after he's been with two slayers. Just writing that summary made angry.


Originally Posted by MikeB
I could see how some would find Rupert Giles doing such a thing to be unethical. But saying its rape is too far. Giles would simply look as he did as a middle-aged man. His emotions and behavior would still be as they are. He’d simply present as a somewhat childish and immature middle-aged man. But I assume that around all who say that would be rape wouldn’t say that aside from the fact that Angel statutorily raped Buffy, he would have always been raping her because instead of looking like a corpse that has been decaying for around 240 years, he looks as Liam of Galway did when he was 27 years old. And that Spike was raping Buffy throughout BtVS S6 and after because instead of looking like a corpse that has been decaying for around 120 years, he looks as William Pratt did sans eyeglasses when William was 25 years old. This segment of your post is the epitome of class... Adios. Last and final warning. You may check out the rules of conduct here: http://slayalive.com/showthread.php/...layAlive-Rules

INTERESTING THAT THERE WERE ZERO THANKS AND ZERO LIKES FOR THAT POST OF WENXINA’S



http://slayalive.com/showthread.php/3723-Buffy-the-Vampire-Slayer-Season-10-11-quot-Love-Dares-You-quot-Pt.-1/page6

03-11-2015 04:34 PM #121
Wenxina


Originally Posted by MikeB
@Wenxina
* If Giles started dating 12 years olds, it’d make him a pedophile. It’d not only be “super creepy”, it’d be super illegal.

For all intents and purposes, he's a 12-year old kid right now. I'm not sure if anyone could make a real case of the whole mess. But yes, it could be potentially illegal. And even if it weren't, it's super creepy.


Originally Posted by MikeB
Huh? Would it be okay for a grown man to be sexually attracted to Claudia from Interview With the Vampire and to have sex with her?

One of the issues raised in Interview with the Vampire is that Claudia ages internally; she's a woman trapped in the body of a girl. In a way, she would probably be able to commiserate with Giles.


Originally Posted by MikeB
* What Xander was doing with Severin and Simone Doffler is many times worse than attempted rape. @MikeB: You're done here. This statement is, well, let's just say that given your previous infraction about misogyny and conduct, this is the icing on your ban cake. Your often clumsy and ridiculously one-sided defense of Spike and trying to absolve him of his every sin by running silly, off-key, and inane comparisons is beyond tired. But your trying to defend the attempted rape on any level at all, that just earned you the boot. Enjoy the other forums, but you're no longer welcome here.

Vampire in Rug, SuzyLee123, withoutpassion thanked for this post.
Vampire in Rug, SuzyLee123, Elpiniki Kappa liked this post.

Wow, that took a while to ‘format’: because Slayalive was down, I had to edit the Word document so it would format well enough on BuffyForums.


Anyway, only 4 posters—including Vampire in Rug publically agreed with Wenxina banning me from SlayAlive.

In my opinion, SlayAlive proved to not be an open forum and I remember it used to be more active than BF but within a few weeks after my banning BF was more active than SA and it has been ever since.

In my opinion, these two things are the most relevant reasons why Wenxina banned me:


Originally Posted by MikeB
Disagreeing with my opinions and regards is simply that. What you posted reads to me as if I shouldn’t posts things that some posters disagree with and that I shouldn’t posts things that might upset how those posters like to view the Buffyverse. There's a difference between disagreeing with you about your stance on Angel and when you posts pretty gross things about women. The first is allowed, though I will say that the repetitious nature of the mantra is tiresome. The second case is not. Ever.


Wenxina: Your often clumsy and ridiculously one-sided defense of Spike and trying to absolve him of his every sin by running silly, off-key, and inane comparisons is beyond tired. Remember, this these posts were made during Season 10.

____________________________________

* Post-BtVS S8, I don’t see how praising Spike and bashing Angel can objectively be bad.

____________________________________

* Xander hasn’t been anti-Spike since “Sleeper” (B 7.08).

____________________________________


No, we don't "outcast" MikeB . You’re the only username on BF who thanked or liked Wexina’s banning me from SA.


with the way he makes everything revolve around how awesome Spike is. Hyperbole.


when he posts in almost every single thread about how Angel should be killed. Reasonable and sales of post-BtVS S8 wouldn’t be so low if readers were okay with how Angel post-BtVS S8 has been handled.


Or how all the female characters serve only to satisfy Spike's sexual desires. I’ve never suggested or implied that.


Or how if you disagree with his interpretation you need to watch the episode again until you agree with him. Wrong. I say such things when a poster clearly doesn’t remember the scene or episode the poster is posting about.


Or how anything he doesn't like is non-canon. I remember Joss Whedon’s saying the Brad Metlzer’s Buffy/Angel stuff was fan fiction. Outside of the abortion storyline, I remember Joss hadn’t been much involved in post-BtVS S8 until this new Giles series.


Or how even the writers of the show/comic are wrong when they contradict him. By my saying that only Joss Whedon is the arbiter of Buffyverse canon unless something simply cannot be canon? I remember pointing out how bizarre and silly it was for posters to quote Scott Allie as if Allie was the arbiter of Buffyverse canon. Or they’d quote a writer of the comics.

I also remember how bizarre and silly it was for posters to say anything from Season 10 can retcon or change the canon of the TV BUFFYVERSE.



buffylover


I just hope it's not MikeB because you guys really need to be careful because I can see the resentment horrible atmosphere with MikeB for some reason. In my opinion, I was treated unfairly during my last days on SA. Regarding BuffyForums, there are relatively few regular posters nowadays (and this Board has been more active than SA since within a few weeks after my banning from SA) and that makes “representation” worse.

In addition, I debate the debatable stuff and the perhaps controversial stuff.


If it doesn't stop I will report! I’ve only reported when something very egregious is posted. I remember PointMan’s calling me a troll and I remember reporting that. I remember KingOfCretins making a post that said something like the way I discuss Spike’s powers and abilities was akin to someone posting about Xander’s powers and abilities as if Xander was a Super Saiyan.

____________________________________


everyone wanting MikeB to feel like an outcast because Stoney didn't thank my post and it just verbalizes volumes I’ve never been an outcast on Buffyverse forums; if anything, I’ve been one of the most significant and consequential posters since I first started in 2005 C.E.

____________________________________

* I use the Thank and Like system to note which posts I’m going to copy and paste into Word to read later. Without it, I’d have to re-read through an entire thread, which I wouldn’t do.

Generally, I use/d “Thank” to mean “Thanks for the contribution to the thread” and “Like” means “I agree with almost everything or everything written in this post.”

BTW, before I was banned from SA, I had a rep power of 10, which even after I’ve been off SA for over 2.5 years would put be at the top end of posters on SA.



KingofCretins

* I don’t debate anything that can’t possibly be canon.


* I remember that Jane Espenson said the original script for “Chosen” (B 7.22) was much more “Spuffy”. In my opinion, the main reason Buffy/Angel and Buffy/Spike is written as-is is because AtS s5 was picked up and it was assumed Sarah Michelle Gellar was going to do 5 AtS s5 episodes.

Nevertheless, the episode is titled “Chosen” (B 7.22), Buffy shoos Angel away in favor of being with Spike, Buffy tells Spike she loves him, the flaming hands thing happens, etc.

____________________________________

“Becoming Part II” (B 2.22) and “Chosen” (B 7.22) aren’t comparable given Angel was literally going to a hell dimension and Buffy in “Chosen” would consider Spike and she would go to a heavenly dimension.



vampmogs

* I had to look up what “on the spectrum” means, and, no, I’m not “on the spectrum”.