“Bitch” Vs. “Jerk”: Where We Discuss Who The Writers Screwed This Week/Season/Ever

[sugarbabex23]

4 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

So it is true then that Dean has never done anything good or selfless in his entire life and has been nothing but a selfish, shitty coward from birth on? 

Because if it means that as a Dean-fan, I have to state that this is the truth, then sure, I`m excusing the character too much. Since I think this is bullshit.

That's not what Sam said it all. Sam was criticizing Dean for constantly putting Sam before the greater good and how that leads to bad things. He was criticizing Dean for saying that he was in the right for having an unknown angel (which turned out to be bad) possess Sam without his true consent or knowledge which led to the unnecessary death of Kevin and many other issues. Sam wasn't saying that Dean was a horrible person who is a completely selfish person. He was criticizing Dean for his constant hero complex towards Sam specifically and how it causes many problems for both Sam and the world at large. 

Edited July 30, 2017 by sugarbabex23

[Aeryn13]

Quote

That's not what Sam said it all. 

He made blanket statements like "you think you are doing more good than harm but you are wrong" - ergo, Dean is delusional about doing good. "You are certainly willing to make sacrifices when you don`t pay the price" - ergo Dean is a selfish coward. Nothing was in the context of Dean`s recent actions or actions in relation to Sam specifically. It was about Dean`s every action ever. So yeah, to me Sam was saying Dean is a horrible, unredeemable person, point blank.

If he wanted to say what you said above, he could have said that. Or the writers could have wrote such dialogue. They didn`t. They wrote something else. They wrote a general, gleeful condemnation of the character.

[sugarbabex23]

7 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

He made blanket statements like "you think you are doing more good than harm but you are wrong" - ergo, Dean is delusional about doing good. "You are certainly willing to make sacrifices when you don`t pay the price" - ergo Dean is a selfish coward. Nothing was in the context of Dean`s recent actions or actions in relation to Sam specifically. It was about Dean`s every action ever. So yeah, to me Sam was saying Dean is a horrible, unredeemable person, point blank.

If he wanted to say what you said above, he could have said that. Or the writers could have wrote such dialogue. They didn`t. They wrote something else. They wrote a general, gleeful condemnation of the character.

That's what you saw from your perspective. That's how you perceived it. I saw and perceived what Sam said differently. It's no different from when Dean called Sam "weak and pathetic" for battling a serious addiction or calling Sam a monster or calling Sam abnormal and inhuman, or saying he would hunt Sam if he didn't know him. Those things are just as hurtful yet you don't condemn Dean for saying those horrible things to Sam? Why are you demonizing Sam for being angry and saying hurtful things to Dean while he's angry at him when Dean has said just as hurtful things to Sam at the same time when he's angry? That is hypocritical.

Edited July 30, 2017 by sugarbabex23

[Wayward Son]

1 hour ago, sugarbabex23 said:

OMG, Season 9 was terrible. Dean was so abusive towards Sam with the whole Gadreel possession. I actually hated Dean during that season because of the way he treated Sam, lied to him, gaslighted him and made it seem like he was going crazy when instead, he could have told Sam the truth about the possession in the beginning. Dean definitely abuses his power when it comes to Sam and he most definitely did in Season 9. That's why when Sam said that speech in The Purge, I didn't feel that sorry for Dean because as harsh and hurtful as it was, Sam was also telling the truth. 

 

1 hour ago, CluelessDrifter said:

I don't think the possession itself was the problem.  It was Dean not telling Sam about it as soon as Sam was awake.  I don't think that's defending anything, because I acknowledge that not telling Sam was wrong. 

 

1 hour ago, DeeDee79 said:

I agree.

No, it wasn't the fact that Dean neglected to tell Sam once he woke that was the problem. It was the fact he aided Gadreel in the act of tricking Sam into the possession in the first place. Dean had the opportunity to communicate with Sam in the coma landscape. There needed to be such contact so that Sam could have said yes. What should have happened if Dean truly regards Sam as an equal, an adult capable of making his own decisions, was Dean sitting Sam down and explaining the situation to him. I'm not good at "Dean speak" but something along the lines of "Hey Sammy, you're dying and it's really bad. I've looked, but the only option is allowing an angel to possess you and heal your body in the process. Please Sammy, I'll keep an eye on things! And make sure he leaves you as soon as you're better". He should have let Sam have control of his agency and not consented to behaving like a common demon by condoning an act the show has equated to rape and torture. Had Dean taken this course of action it also would have negated the need for the further abuses  @sugarbabex23 outlined in their post. Instead the situation would have been handled in a manner respectful to manner and his right to self-agency. Of course Gadreel could have turned in such a scenario too, but at least it was a risk that blew up in Sam's face and not something forced on him. 

 

57 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

So it is true then that Dean has never done anything good or selfless in his entire life and has been nothing but a selfish, shitty coward from birth on? 

Because if it means that as a Dean-fan, I have to state that this is the truth, then sure, I`m excusing the character too much. Since I think this is bullshit.

I did think Sam was completely in the right to be angry over the Gadreel issue and what Dean did was plain wrong but that speech made me hate Sam. Because once more, it is not actions he attacks, it is Dean`s personhood with blanket statements. Like fucking always. 

So, are you saying you've never said overly harsh words in an argument? That in times of high emotion, when someone has truly hurt you, that you haven't gone further than you should have? Because I know I have and pretty much everyone I know has. It's a pretty normal human reaction to lash out when someone has hurt us and regret it. 

 

There is is absolutely nothing equivalent about Sam's words at the end of The Purge. A few harsh words is in no way equal to Dean conspiring to force an act on Sam he has always regarded as vile (just look at his comments at the prospect of a Michael possession), prolonged lying,  gaslighting Sam and making him fear for his mental health. Not to mention the consequence of this being a close friend being murdered by Sam's hand. 

 

IMO such attempts to equate the two are a perfect example of how many Dean fans are not being able to admit when he was wrong, or downplaying the severity of his actions in order to ensure he doesn't look too bad.

Edited July 30, 2017 by Wayward Son

[Aeryn13]

Quote

It's no different from when Dean called Sam weak and pathetic for battling addiction or calling Sam a monster or saying he would hunt Sam if he didn't know him. Those things are just as hurtful yet you don't condemn Dean for saying those things to Sam? Why are you demonizing Sam for being angry and saying hurtful things when Dean has said very hurtful things to Sam at the same time? That is hypocritical.

As I explained, Sam uses ad hominem attacks. Those bug me a lot. Dean attacks actions. For example, the monster thing? He said something like "if you do this willingly, then you are a monster". It calls into question an action, not a person wholesale. 

If Sam had said in the Purge speech how he hated what Dean had done wit Gadreel, that the act was horrible and selfish and unforgiveable to Sam, fair enough. Even if he had said something like "I wish you dead right now", fair enough. I can live with those statements. The only thing I had no problem whatsoever in the Purge speech was the "I wouldn`t save you" part. That was fine. And it was the one thing that hurt Dean the most.

But that`s the thing, I don`t care what bugs THEM the most in any given situation, I judge them and their behaviour by what bugs ME the most. I`m not either one, I don`t live in the show.  I hated Dean when he made the deal back in Season 2, really hated him. Because that action bugged the crap out of me.    

Sam simply shows more behavioural traits that I find distasteful and annoying. And in real life, I wouldn`t relate to either one. I`m not the outgoing, social partiyng type like Dean and I would find him exhausting and annoying in its own way. But Sam often drives me bonkers because he acts in ways that are "hells to the no" for me.  

Quote

  So, are you saying you've never said overly harsh words in an argument?

 I don`t use blanket statements, no, because I hate that with a fire of thousand burning suns.

And I never said one, i.e. the possession and the speech was the equivalent of the other. I said I hated Sam with that speech. I can think he had a right to be angry and Dean was in the wrong and still hate how Sam adressed it. It`s not an either/or for me.    

Edited July 30, 2017 by Aeryn13

[CluelessDrifter]

36 minutes ago, sugarbabex23 said:

I disagree. The possession itself was terrible and the fact that he didn't tell Sam about it was terrible. Dean was wrong about both the possession and not telling him about. Dean was just plain wrong in Season 9. 

3 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

No, it wasn't the fact that Dean neglected to tell Sam once he woke that was the problem. It was the fact he aided Gadreel in the act of tricking Sam into the possession in the first place. Dean had the opportunity to communicate with Sam in the coma landscape. There needed to be such contact so that Sam could have said yes. What should have happened if Dean truly regards Sam as an equal, an adult capable of making his own decisions, was Dean sitting Sam down and explaining the situation to him. I'm not good at "Dean speak" but something along the lines of "Hey Sammy, you're dying and it's really bad. I've looked, but the only option is allowing an angel to possess you and heal your body in the process. Please Sammy, I'll keep an eye on things! And make sure he leaves you as soon as you're better". He should have let Sam have control of his agency and not consented to behaving like a common demon by condoning an act the show has equated to rape and torture. Had Dean taken this course of action it also would have negated the need for the further abuses  @sugarbabex23 outlined in their post. Instead the situation would have been handled in a manner respectful to manner and his right to self-agency. Of course Gadreel could have turned in such a scenario too, but at least it was a risk that blew up in Sam's face and not something forced on him

Dean was putting Sam on life support by agreeing the possession.  The last time he spoke to Sam, he knew Sam wanted to live.  If this were a euthanasia case, then the person would be evaluated for depression before it was agreed upon to make sure the person was in the right frame of mind, not having a momentary dip, which is where Sam was at in his head, or he wouldn't have chosen whatever fake-Dean had planned to get out of his situation, and it wouldn't happen unless there were no other options available -enter Gadreel and possession.  I don't see that as a problem, so long as Dean tells Sam the first chance he gets, but he didn't do that, and that wasn't right.  

 

I will say that the hard-line arguments I've seen on the possession and not just the lying afterwards really makes me wish sometimes that those fans had gotten their way, that the show had ended there with Sam failing to complete the trials, and Dean riding off into the sunset alone, so I never had to hear it again, because there's no room to discuss any nuances in such debates.  It's 100% black or 100% white, which I find tedious.  This show is all about seeing and understanding shades of gray when it comes to both brothers, and this particular decision is no different.  The lying afterwards is a darker shade of gray than I would think is right, but it's still gray, and the possession is a lighter shade of gray that I would think is acceptable given the situation.  

Edited July 30, 2017 by CluelessDrifter

[sugarbabex23]

13 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

 

 

No, it wasn't the fact that Dean neglected to tell Sam once he woke that was the problem. It was the fact he aided Gadreel in the act of tricking Sam into the possession in the first place. Dean had the opportunity to communicate with Sam in the coma landscape. There needed to be such contact so that Sam could have said yes. What should have happened if Dean truly regards Sam as an equal, an adult capable of making his own decisions, was Dean sitting Sam down and explaining the situation to him. I'm not good at "Dean speak" but something along the lines of "Hey Sammy, you're dying and it's really bad. I've looked, but the only option is allowing an angel to possess you and heal your body in the process. Please Sammy, I'll keep an eye on things! And make sure he leaves you as soon as you're better". He should have let Sam have control of his agency and not consented to behaving like a common demon by condoning an act the show has equated to rape and torture. Had Dean taken this course of action it also would have negated the need for the further abuses  @sugarbabex23 outlined in their post. 

 

So, are you saying you've never said overly harsh words in an argument? That in times of high emotion, when someone has truly hurt you, that you haven't gone further than you should have? Because I know I have and pretty much everyone I know has. It's a pretty normal human reaction to lash out when someone has hurt us and regret it. 

 

There is is absolutely nothing equivalent about Sam's words at the end of The Purge. A few harsh words is in no way equal to Dean conspiring to force an act on Sam he has always regarded as vile (just look at his comments at the prospect of a Michael possession), prolonged lying,  gaslighting Sam and making him fear for his mental health. Not to mention the consequence of this being a close friend being murdered by Sam's hand. 

 

IMO such attempts to equate the two are a perfect example of Dean fans not being able to admit when he was wrong, or downplaying the severity of his actions in order to ensure he doesn't look too bad.

So much this! Thank you. What I said in an earlier post about those who have a preference for Dean not admitting when Dean screws up badly is playing out right before my eyes when it comes to the Gadreel possession. 

11 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

As I explained, Sam uses ad hominem attacks. Those bug me a lot. Dean attacks actions. For example, the monster thing? He said something like "if you do this willingly, then you are a monster". It calls into question an action, not a person wholesale. 

If Sam had said in the Purge speech how he hated what Dean had done wit Gadreel, that the act was horrible and selfish and unforgiveable to Sam, fair enough. Even if he had said something like "I wish you dead right now", fair enough. I can live with those statements. The only thing I had no problem whatsoever in the Purge speech was the "I wouldn`t save you" part. That was fine. And it was the one thing that hurt Dean the most.

But that`s the thing, I don`t care what bugs THEM the most in any given situation, I judge them and their behaviour by what bugs ME the most. I`m not either one, I don`t live in the show.  I hated Dean when he made the deal back in Season 2, really hated him. Because that action bugged the crap out of me.    

Sam simply shows more behavioural traits that I find distasteful and annoying. And in real life, I wouldn`t relate to either one. I`m not the outgoing, social partiyng type like Dean and I would find him exhausting and annoying in its own way. But Sam often drives me bonkers because he acts in ways that are "hells to the no" for me.   

Dean calling Sam weak and pathetic for having mental illness and battling addiction is attacking actions? Dean calling Sam a monster and inhuman is attacking actions? Dean saying that if he didn't know Sam, he would want to hunt him is attacking actions? Denying Sam's agency with the Gadreel possession is attacking actions? Gas lighting Sam and lying to him about the possession is attacking actions? Making fun of Sam's mental illness when the wall had broken in his head against his will is attacking actions? Insulting Sam for having demon blood pumping in his veins (which was something that wasn't his fault) is attacking actions? I'm sorry, but I strongly disagree. Dean has attacked Sam as a person on numerous occasions and he's done so without any supernatural influence or interference. The fact that Sam has normally both physically and personally attacked Dean when he was under supernatural influence (possession, demon blood addiction, soulless, etc) shows that Dean attacking Sam is way worse. Because Dean has attacked Sam and called him all those horrible things and said all those terrible things to him when Dean was completely, 100% himself. 

Edited July 30, 2017 by sugarbabex23

[DeeDee79]

3 hours ago, Wayward Son said:

IMO such attempts to equate the two are a perfect example of Dean fans not being able to admit when he was wrong, or downplaying the severity of his actions in order to ensure he doesn't look too bad.

Please don't act as though Dean fans never admit when he's wrong and pretend that Sam & Cas fans never do the same. All Dean fans are not the same so please don't lump us all into this description.

[Aeryn13]

Quote

 Dean calling Sam a monster and inhuman is attacking actions? Dean saying that if he didn't know Sam, he would want to hunt him is attacking actions?

I gave the exact example with the monster thing above on while it was. Just as the "if I didn`t know you, I would wanna hunt you" was about Sam`s specific actions at that point. So yes to your question. 

Quote

The fact that Sam has normally both physically and personally attacked Dean when he was under supernatural influence (possession, demon blood addiction, soulless, etc) shows that Dean attacking Sam is way worse.

And there we go, somehow Sam gets excuses for how his behaviour is better. He said and inferred that Dean is pathetic and weak numerous times on the show while being completely himself. I`m quite unhappy that Dean took it so often because I would have called Sam out on this shit ages ago. And if he whined about it, I would have doubled down on it. 

I have more sympathy for Dean than the show does and I call Sam out on more shit than the show does. If I found the show less biased, I would find less reason to do either. 

[DeeDee79]

3 hours ago, Aeryn13 said:

And there we go, somehow Sam gets excuses for how his behaviour is better. He said and inferred that Dean is pathetic and weak numerous times on the show while being completely himself. I`m quite unhappy that Dean took it so often because I would have called Sam out on this shit ages ago. And if he whined about it, I would have doubled down on it. 

Right after the statement that Dean fans make excuses for his actions. More often than not Dean is demonized in order to paint Sam as defenseless, brutalized and cowering in the face of his brute of a brother. The implication is insulting to both characters.

[sugarbabex23]

23 minutes ago, CluelessDrifter said:

Dean was putting Sam on life support by agreeing the possession.  The last time he spoke to Sam, he knew Sam wanted to live.  If this were a euthanasia case, then the person would be evaluated for depression before it was agreed upon to make sure the person was in the right frame of mind, not having a momentary dip, which is where Sam was at in his head, or he wouldn't have chosen whatever fake-Dean had planned to get out of his situation, and it wouldn't happen unless there were no other options available -enter Gadreel and possession.  I don't see that as a problem, so long as Dean tells Sam the first chance he gets, but he didn't do that, and that wasn't right.  

 

I will say that the hard-line arguments I've seen on the possession and not just the lying afterwards really makes me wish sometimes that those fans had gotten their way, that the show had ended there with Sam failing to complete the trials, and Dean riding off into the sunset alone, so I never had to hear it again, because there's no room to discuss any nuances in such debates.  It's 100% black or 100% white, which I find tedious.  This show is all about seeing and understanding shades of gray when it comes to both brothers, and this particular decision is no different.  The lying afterwards is a darker shade of gray than I would think is right, but it's still gray, and the possession is a lighter shade of gray that I would think is acceptable given the situation.  

Again, I respect your opinion but I disagree. There was nothing moral or right about the angel possession no matter what way you try to spin it. Possession on this show is akin to rape and what Dean did with the angel possession was essentially let an angel rape Sam mentally, spiritually and physically. I find what Dean did to be abhorrent and the most despicable action that any character on Supernatural has taken.

[Wayward Son]

5 minutes ago, CluelessDrifter said:

Dean was putting Sam on life support by agreeing the possession.  The last time he spoke to Sam, he knew Sam wanted to live.  If this were a euthanasia case, then the person would be evaluated for depression before it was agreed upon to make sure the person was in the right frame of mind, not having a momentary dip, which is where Sam was at in his head, or he wouldn't have chosen whatever fake-Dean had planned to get out of his situation, and it wouldn't happen unless there were no other options available -enter Gadreel and possession.  I don't see that as a problem, so long as Dean tells Sam the first chance he gets, but he didn't do that, and that wasn't right.  

And I disagree that Dean thought Sam was "having a dip" as you put it. What Dean feared was Sam saying no to the method of healing proposed by Dean due to his previous experiences with Lucifer and Meg. The episode itself is very clear about this: 

 

Quote

DEAN 
No, it's Sam's call. There's no way in hell he'd say yes to being possessed by anything.

EZEKIEL 
He would rather die. 

DEAN nods ruefully.

The episode is very clear. Sam was ready to die if there was no acceptable way to save him. If he was simply sucidial he would never have agreed to the vague promises. Dean knowingly chose to disrespect Sam, to treat him like his personal puppet, by withholding crucial information that Sam needed to make an informed choice in case said choice wasn't the one Dean wanted made. Dean's behaviour in the first half of season 9 was abusive. 

 

Note the "first half of season 9" portion of that sentence. It is not a sweeping statement about their relationship throughout the show. 

 

6 minutes ago, DeeDee79 said:

Please don't act as though Dean fans never admit when he's wrong and pretend that Sam & Cas fans never do the same. All Dean fans are not the same so please don't lump us all into this description.

You're right. When I am done with this post I will edit my post to say "many" Dean fans as opposed to an all encompassing Dean fans. However, I do find that the percentage of Dean fans willing to defend anything is higher than the other two. For instance most Cas fans I know, while we can understand what drove him to it, will agree breaking Sam's wall was a major crossing of the line, or that Sam's actions in late season four were wrong. Yet most Dean fans regard forcing possession on Sam, knowing it was something he would rather die than experience, to be just. 

 

21 minutes ago, Aeryn13 said:

And I never said one, i.e. the possession and the speech was the equivalent of the other. I said I hated Sam with that speech. I can think he had a right to be angry and Dean was in the wrong and still hate how Sam adressed it. It`s not an either/or for me.    

Then why should Sam still be hated seasons later yet Dean is long forgiven for his actions, if what Dean did is worse than what Sam said? 

 

In in regards to that scene I experienced a similar level of hate for Dean the moment he said he'd do it again. Partially because of the issues I said above, but also because of what that says about Dean. Kevin died, someone he was meant to care for and protect, and Dean regards that as an acceptable sacrifice? Ive chosen to give Dean the benefit of the doubt and assume he was being overly defensive because if he truly means that then Dean needs to be securely locked up for the protection of those around him. 

[sugarbabex23]

9 minutes ago, DeeDee79 said:

Right after the statement that Dean fans make excuses for his actions. More often than not Dean is demonized in order to paint Sam as defenseless, brutalized and cowering in the face of his brute of a brother. The implication is insulting to both characters.

I must be watching a different show because this fandom and the show constantly demonize Sam and always make him wrong while making Dean out to be a saint that can do no wrong. 

[DeeDee79]

3 hours ago, Wayward Son said:

You're right. When I am done with this post I will edit my post to say "many" Dean fans as opposed to an all encompassing Dean fans. However, I do find that the percentage of Dean fans willing to defend anything is higher than the other two. For instance most Cas fans I know, while we can understand what drove him to it, will agree breaking Sam's wall was a major crossing of the line, or that Sam's actions in late season four were wrong. Yet most Dean fans regard forcing possession on Sam, knowing it was something he would rather die than experience, to be just. 

Many is correct; most is assuming. I personally see both sides of the Gadreel incident since I like both characters. Dean should have told Sam but I can see how he was afraid that Gadreel would abruptly leave Sam to die from his injuries. Sam was right to be angry about the possession & the lying but ripping into Dean beyond his feelings for said possession was brutal and intentionally hurtful.  After the scene wrapped I was disappointed that the writers went there to make a point.

[Aeryn13]

Quote

Then why should Sam still be hated seasons later yet Dean is long forgiven for his actions, if what Dean did is worse than what Sam said? 

Well, any viewer is free to forgive or not forgive or hate/love the characters as they see fit so I`m not sure I can answer this question. For me personally I have a hard time with it because it feeds into my ongoing problem with Sam and in a larger context the show, how it treats Dean, how it treats Sam etc.

Those things just got worse and worse last Season and will probably go even worse than that next Season. I favour Dean, that`s never gonna change. So it simply isn`t and will never be fun for me to watch episode after episode after episode where he does nothing significant, not in terms of action or anything else. While I perceive for Sam to be propped in the foreground. If they simply killed Dean off - and maybe show a small measure of respect and give him a decent death - it would be a lot easier.  

[DeeDee79]

3 hours ago, sugarbabex23 said:

I must be watching a different show because this fandom and the show constantly demonize Sam and always make him wrong while making Dean out to be a saint that can do no wrong. 

I think you are watching a different show or at least through a biased lens. The show that I'm watching shows two brothers that both make mistakes & can be dicks in equal measure. Fandom often distorts that story that is being played out on screen IMO. I certainly haven't read any posts on this site from Dean fans that would recommend him for sainthood and turn a blind eye to his mistakes. Even the ones that have admitted that they hate Sam ( and not all of us do ) have still disliked some of Dean's actions.

3 hours ago, sugarbabex23 said:

Possession on this show is akin to rape

Please do not equate what happened to a fictional character with rape.

[Wayward Son]

7 minutes ago, DeeDee79 said:

Please do not equate what happened to a fictional character with rape.

But the show itself has always portrayed possession as being a metaphor for rape and torture. When that happens naturally viewers are going to make that connection.

[DeeDee79]

3 hours ago, Wayward Son said:

But the show itself has always portrayed possession as being a metaphor for rape and torture. When that happens naturally viewers are going to make that connection.

That doesn't make it any less disgusting especially for viewers that have actually experienced sexual assault.

[sugarbabex23]

10 minutes ago, DeeDee79 said:

I think you are watching a different show or at least through a biased lens. The show that I'm watching shows two brothers that both make mistakes & can be dicks in equal measure. Fandom often distorts that story that is being played out on screen IMO. I certainly haven't read any posts on this site from Dean fans that would recommend him for sainthood and turn a blind eye to his mistakes. Even the ones that have admitted that they hate Sam ( and not all of us do ) have still disliked some of Dean's actions.

Please do not equate what happened to a fictional character with rape.

The show itself has compared possession to rape. Please watch the show clearly. Possession is akin to rape on the show canonically. 

[DeeDee79]

3 hours ago, sugarbabex23 said:

The show itself has compared possession to rape. Please watch the show clearly. Possession is akin to rape on the show canonically. 

I watch the show clearly. I don't agree with your description and I stated why.

[Wayward Son]

3 minutes ago, DeeDee79 said:

That doesn't make it any less disgusting especially for viewers that have actually experienced sexual assault.

So if a show depicts rape, the actual act rather than a supernatural verse equivalent,  then is it disgusting to discuss it as such because it happened to a fictional character? I'm not trying to offend, just to clarify what is being asked / said here.

Edited July 30, 2017 by Wayward Son
Swapped "it is" to "is it" because one sounds like a statement rather than a question.

[sugarbabex23]

5 minutes ago, DeeDee79 said:

That doesn't make it any less disgusting especially for viewers that have actually experienced sexual assault.

The possession that happened on the show can and has been compared to rape and sexual assault in canon on this show. There have been numerous people that have openly admitted that they themselves have been sexually assaulted/raped and they have said the same thing about possession on this show. The fact that people who have survived sexual assault and rape say that what Dean did with the angel possession is akin to sexual assault/rape says something. If I'm gonna trust the opinion of someone regarding possession on this show, it's those that have actually experienced violation of some sorts (and I've experienced sexual harassment myself). 

Edited July 30, 2017 by sugarbabex23

[DeeDee79]

3 hours ago, sugarbabex23 said:

The possession that happened on the show can and has been compared to rape and sexual assault in canon on this show. There have been numerous people that have openly admitted that they themselves have been sexually assaulted/raped and they have said the same thing about possession on this show. The fact that people who have survived sexual assault and rape say that what Dean did with the angel possession is akin to sexual assault/rape says something.

That's fine. I still don't agree and I don't like the descriptor. And I don't think that all victims of sexual assault would agree just because you've read accounts from those that do.

Edited July 30, 2017 by DeeDee79

[sugarbabex23]

3 minutes ago, DeeDee79 said:

That's fine. I still don't agree and I don't like the descriptor.

Maybe you don't like it because it puts Dean in a bad light? But the reality is, it's canon that possession is akin to rape on this show and nothing is going to change that fact in canon. You can disagree with the descriptor all you want. It doesn't change the comparison between possession and sexual assault/rape that occurred in canon on the show. 

Edited July 30, 2017 by sugarbabex23

[DeeDee79]

3 hours ago, Wayward Son said:

So if a show depicts rape, the actual act rather than a supernatural verse equivalent,  then it is disgusting to discuss it as such because it happened to a fictional character? I'm not trying to offend, just to clarify what is being asked / said here.

Why would it be interesting to discuss actual rape? No matter how you present it whether supernatural or reality some people don't like to see it nor do they like events on a sci fi show that is not based in reality to be compared as such. You don't have to agree with my viewpoint and I respect that.

[CluelessDrifter]

43 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

And I disagree that Dean thought Sam was "having a dip" as you put it. What Dean feared was Sam saying no to the method of healing proposed by Dean due to his previous experiences with Lucifer and Meg. The episode itself is very clear about this: 

By dip, I mean what Sam was experiencing was a dip in his resolve to live, because he saw no other way out of his situation, but he still wanted to live, and the proof is in his actions.  He wouldn't have stopped the trials if he didn't want to live, which is where he was on dying before he went comatose, and he wouldn't have chosen to live if he didn't want to live when fake-Dean offered him the opportunity to do so.  The moment in between where he was considering dying - a dip. As soon a he woke up, Dean should have told him, but he didn't, and as I said, I don't think that was right, nor do I think it was a good tactical decision by Dean - All IMO of course.

Edited July 30, 2017 by CluelessDrifter

[DeeDee79]

3 hours ago, sugarbabex23 said:

Maybe you don't like it because it puts Dean in a bad light? But the reality is, it's canon that possession is akin to rape on this show and nothing is going to change that fact in canon. You can disagree with the descriptor all you want. It doesn't change the comparison between possession sexual assault/rape that occurred in canon on the show. 

Seriously??!! That is your assumption and a false one at that. I have my own, personal reasons why that descriptor is a hot button for me. Don't dismiss it as a way to defend Dean which I frankly think is beyond ridiculous. I am so done with this conversation.

Edited July 30, 2017 by DeeDee79

[Wayward Son]

1 minute ago, DeeDee79 said:

Why would it be interesting to discuss actual rape? No matter how you present it whether supernatural or reality some people don't like to see it nor do they like events on a sci fi show that is not based in reality to be compared as such. You don't have to agree with my viewpoint and I respect that.

Sorry I didn't mean that it's interesting to discuss it for the sake of discussing it. I meant if a show, any show, portrays the act of rape should that scene be off limits for discussion? Again, I was looking for clarification not to argue. 

 

Anyways, although I think such a descriptor is fitting, out of respect for those who it can make feel uncomfortable I will refer to possession by the more generic "Violation", which could be used to describe a number of things as opposed to one specific thing. Is that acceptable? 

 

To be clear in case tone doesn't translate well. I'm not being sarcastic or anything like that. I have no desire to cause anyone real life upset, so I'm trying to clarify to avoid doing so in future.

[DeeDee79]

3 hours ago, Wayward Son said:

Sorry I didn't mean that it's interesting to discuss it for the sake of discussing it. I meant if a show, any show, portrays the act of rape should that scene be off limits for discussion? Again, I was looking for clarification not to argue. 

 

Anyways, although I think such a descriptor is fitting, out of respect for those who it can make feel uncomfortable I will refer to possession by the more generic "Violation", which could be used to describe a number of things as opposed to one specific thing. Is that acceptable? 

 

To be clear in case tone doesn't translate well. I'm not being sarcastic or anything like that. I have no desire to cause anyone real life upset, so I'm trying to clarify to avoid doing so in future.

Thank you! I think violation is a much better descriptor! I'm sorry if it seems as though I'm up on my soapbox; I'm not trying to be combative.

[sugarbabex23]

6 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

Sorry I didn't mean that it's interesting to discuss it for the sake of discussing it. I meant if a show, any show, portrays the act of rape should that scene be off limits for discussion? Again, I was looking for clarification not to argue. 

 

Anyways, although I think such a descriptor is fitting, out of respect for those who it can make feel uncomfortable I will refer to possession by the more generic "Violation", which could be used to describe a number of things as opposed to one specific thing. Is that acceptable? 

 

To be clear in case tone doesn't translate well. I'm not being sarcastic or anything like that. I have no desire to cause anyone real life upset, so I'm trying to clarify to avoid doing so in future.

You're right. Violation is a much better word. I agree with you and I apologize if I've offended anyone. 

[Wayward Son]

22 minutes ago, CluelessDrifter said:

By dip, I mean Sam experiencing was a dip in his resolve to live, because he saw no other way out of his situation, but he still wanted to live, and the proof is in his actions.  He wouldn't have stopped the trials if he didn't want to live, which is where he was on dying before he went comatose, and he wouldn't have chosen to live if he didn't want to live when fake-Dean offered him the opportunity to do so.  The moment in between where he was considering dying - a dip. As soon a he woke up, Dean should have told him, but he didn't, and as I said, I don't think that was right, nor do I think it was a good tactical decision by Dean - All IMO of course.

After the discussion about rape vs violation I feel wary of using a real life example, but I'm struggling to get my point across otherwise. So I'm going to put it in a spoiler tag. 

 

Warning - this may be triggering for those with experiences of cancer be it direct or indirect.

Spoiler

Yes, I agree that Sam wanted to live and he wasn't suicidal, which is why he should have been allowed to make an informed decision on whether he wanted to live by using the treatment offered to him. In the same way a cancer patient has the right to determine if they wish to go through with chemotherapy and other forms of treatment or not. 

Edited July 30, 2017 by Wayward Son

[CluelessDrifter]

4 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

After the discussion about rape vs violation I feel wary of using a real life example, but I'm struggling to get my point across otherwise. So I'm going to put it in a spoiler tag. 

 

Warning - this may be triggering for those with experiences of cancer be it direct or indirect.

  Hide contents

Yes, I agree that Sam wanted to live and he wasn't suicidal, which is why he should have been allowed to make an informed decision on whether he wanted to live by using the treatment offered to him. In the same way a cancer patient has the right to determine if they wish to go through with chemotherapy and other forms of treatment or not. 

But there wasn't time for that.  It was stressed multiple times that time had run out, which to me means that they were looking at a matter of seconds and why I'm fine with the possession as long as it bought them time to tell Sam what was happening, which isn't what Dean did.

[DeeDee79]

3 hours ago, CluelessDrifter said:

It was stressed multiple times that time had run out, which to me means that they were looking at a matter of seconds and why I'm fine with the possession as long as it bought them time to tell Sam what was happening, which isn't what Dean did.

This along with Dean calling Cas to get his opinion of the angel offering help is why I don't hold it against Dean too much for allowing the possession. My disappointment came in when he didn't tell Sam about the possession when his conscious seemed to be telling him to do so but I'm at a loss of how he could have done so when Gadreel was threatening to leave Sam high and dry.

[Res]

1 hour ago, DeeDee79 said:

Many is correct; most is assuming. I personally see both sides of the Gadreel incident since I like both characters. Dean should have told Sam but I can see how he was afraid that Gadreel would abruptly leave Sam to die from his injuries. Sam was right to be angry about the possession & the lying but ripping into Dean beyond his feelings for said possession was brutal and intentionally hurtful.  After the scene wrapped I was disappointed that the writers went there to make a point.

I wish I could do more than just like this post! As a solid Dean fan, I was whole heartedly pissed when the writers took the scenario to the lengths they did in the Season 9 premiere and absolutely hated it the moment Dean sent out that prayer, knowing where it would lead. Did I understand where he was coming from? Yes. Did I agree? No. In fact, I was praying he would just let Sam die instead but knew that would get him crucified by fans as well. It was no win for him then. After the possession, every time he didn't fess up to Sam, I was more and more ticked at him. But I still find the Purge speech over the top for several reasons, mainly because as Aeryn13 stated it attacked Dean's core person and not his actions as well as the fact that it wasn't a heat of passion response. This was days, possibly weeks, later before Sam stated it. It was cold, calculated and premeditatedly aimed to destroy Dean and Dean's psyche as much as possible. Was Sam still angry at the time? I don't doubt it but he had enough time to think through things logically, which means that he had time to understand why Dean did it and what position Dean was in and to know that he, Sam himself, had to agree to the possession in the first place or it couldn't happen. He can still be pissed about it all but as stated above, if that is the case, make it explicitly clear that under NO circumstances should Dean EVER do that again and attack the actions. I wouldn't have had a problem in the world with that speech.

 

As a side, considering it aired not too long after I received a similar type speech from someone I loved, spent a quarter century of my life with and had sacrificed my relationship with family and friends for, that whole "you just did it because you don't want to be alone" crap still sets me off. After that, I am definitely NOT with that person anymore. Yes, I am alone but much happier now than with him. Wish Dean (or Sam, for Sam fans) would do the same some times. Lately, I enjoy the episodes more when they are separated because at least it's different than the same old tired routine.

[Reganne]

12 minutes ago, Res said:

I wish I could do more than just like this post! As a solid Dean fan, I was whole heartedly pissed when the writers took the scenario to the lengths they did in the Season 9 premiere and absolutely hated it the moment Dean sent out that prayer, knowing where it would lead. Did I understand where he was coming from? Yes. Did I agree? No. In fact, I was praying he would just let Sam die instead but knew that would get him crucified by fans as well. It was no win for him then. After the possession, every time he didn't fess up to Sam, I was more and more ticked at him. But I still find the Purge speech over the top for several reasons, mainly because as Aeryn13 stated it attacked Dean's core person and not his actions as well as the fact that it wasn't a heat of passion response. This was days, possibly weeks, later before Sam stated it. It was cold, calculated and premeditatedly aimed to destroy Dean and Dean's psyche as much as possible. Was Sam still angry at the time? I don't doubt it but he had enough time to think through things logically, which means that he had time to understand why Dean did it and what position Dean was in and to know that he, Sam himself, had to agree to the possession in the first place or it couldn't happen. He can still be pissed about it all but as stated above, if that is the case, make it explicitly clear that under NO circumstances should Dean EVER do that again and attack the actions. I wouldn't have had a problem in the world.

I think it was a heat of passion moment for Sam.  I believe what may have set Sam off was that Dean said he would do it all over again.  This was an action that had cost Kevin his life.  Someone who had been a friend to both Sam and Dean and yet with those words, it almost seemed as those Dean didn't regret it.  I don't fully blame Dean for wanting to save Sam and he had no idea when he made those plans that it would result in Kevins death....but in the end, he would do it all over again even with the knowledge that it would kill one of their friends.  

 

I don't think Dean was perfectly innocent in that conversation and I can see why that would upset Sam in that moment.... even though I didn't like what Sam said in the purge either.

[MysteryGuest]

5 minutes ago, Reganne said:

I think it was a heat of passion moment for Sam.  I believe what may have set Sam off was that Dean said he would do it all over again.  This was an action that had cost Kevin his life.  Someone who had been a friend to both Sam and Dean and yet with those words, it almost seemed as those Dean didn't regret it.

Then by this argument, I guess we should assume that Sam would choose to allow Dean to succumb to the effects of the Mark of Cain next time, if he had it to do over again?  He wouldn't lie about burning the Book of the Damned, keep Rowena chained up to do his bidding, ignore countless warnings about the dangers of removing the Mark, put Charlie's life at risk and ultimately get her killed, and then release The Darkness?

The reality is that he would do it again, and Dean will have Sam possessed again, if that's the only way to save his life.  The show is going to continue to put both brothers' lives in peril, and have the other brother do whatever it takes to save them.  That's the whole show.  If it weren't, then this show would have ended in season one when Dean would have died from heart failure.  Or in season two when Sam would have died from a knife wound to the back.  Or season three when Dean would have died from loss of blood and organ failure.  And on and on and on...

I find it bizarre that people are angry about the fact that their favorite character's life was saved by whatever means necessary.  Would you have preferred the alternative?  If so, then I think you're watching the wrong show.

[DeeDee79]

6 minutes ago, MysteryGuest said:

Then by this argument, I guess we should assume that Sam would choose to allow Dean to succumb to the effects of the Mark of Cain next time, if he had it to do over again?  He wouldn't lie about burning the Book of the Damned, keep Rowena chained up to do his bidding, ignore countless warnings about the dangers of removing the Mark, put Charlie's life at risk and ultimately get her killed, and then release The Darkness?

The reality is that he would do it again, and Dean will have Sam possessed again, if that's the only way to save his life.  The show is going to continue to put both brothers' lives in peril, and have the other brother do whatever it takes to save them.  That's the whole show.  If it weren't, then this show would have ended in season one when Dean would have died from heart failure.  Or in season two when Sam would have died from a knife wound to the back.  Or season three when Dean would have died from loss of blood and organ failure.  And on and on and on...

I find it bizarre that people are angry about the fact that their favorite character's life was saved by whatever means necessary.  Would you have preferred the alternative?  If so, then I think you're watching the wrong show.

I adore this entire post!

[Reganne]

38 minutes ago, MysteryGuest said:

Then by this argument, I guess we should assume that Sam would choose to allow Dean to succumb to the effects of the Mark of Cain next time, if he had it to do over again?  He wouldn't lie about burning the Book of the Damned, keep Rowena chained up to do his bidding, ignore countless warnings about the dangers of removing the Mark, put Charlie's life at risk and ultimately get her killed, and then release The Darkness?

The reality is that he would do it again, and Dean will have Sam possessed again, if that's the only way to save his life.  The show is going to continue to put both brothers' lives in peril, and have the other brother do whatever it takes to save them.  That's the whole show.  If it weren't, then this show would have ended in season one when Dean would have died from heart failure.  Or in season two when Sam would have died from a knife wound to the back.  Or season three when Dean would have died from loss of blood and organ failure.  And on and on and on...

I find it bizarre that people are angry about the fact that their favorite character's life was saved by whatever means necessary.  Would you have preferred the alternative?  If so, then I think you're watching the wrong show.

I am not angry about what Dean said actually.  I am bringing it up because I think it was one of the reasons why the purge speech happened in the first place.  I think it triggered what Sam said.  He got angry and in the heat of the moment, said what he did.  Still doesn't mean I liked what Sam said either.  I can point out how both brothers were in the wrong without being angry at either of them.

[Wayward Son]

2 hours ago, CluelessDrifter said:

But there wasn't time for that.  It was stressed multiple times that time had run out, which to me means that they were looking at a matter of seconds and why I'm fine with the possession as long as it bought them time to tell Sam what was happening, which isn't what Dean did.

I think we will have to agree to disagree on Dean's motive. As I quoted in an earlier post, IMO the information given to Sam was vague because he feared Sam would rather die than allow possession. He didn't consider Sam an equal who should be allowed to make a decision about his own agency. I don't think the writers would have included that exchange if we were meant to think the information was kept from Sam due to a lack of time. 

 

1 hour ago, Reganne said:

I think it was a heat of passion moment for Sam.  I believe what may have set Sam off was that Dean said he would do it all over again.  This was an action that had cost Kevin his life.  Someone who had been a friend to both Sam and Dean and yet with those words, it almost seemed as those Dean didn't regret it.  I don't fully blame Dean for wanting to save Sam and he had no idea when he made those plans that it would result in Kevins death....but in the end, he would do it all over again even with the knowledge that it would kill one of their friends.  

 

I don't think Dean was perfectly innocent in that conversation and I can see why that would upset Sam in that moment.... even though I didn't like what Sam said in the purge either.

Exactly! As I mentioned earlier, I was pretty annoyed too when I heard that! I've chosen to give Dean the benefit of the doubt and assume he only said it out of defensiveness. Otherwise I'd be forced to argue he needs to get locked up for the safety of everyone else. When other people become disposable pawn to be sacrificed at a moments notice there is something seriously wrong. 

[RulerofallIsurvey]

19 hours ago, DeeDee79 said:

That being said, I don't think that Dean resented Sam going to school.

That being said, there is no hard and fast evidence that Sam cut off Dean, or if it was Dean who cut off Sam or kind of mutual loss of contact thing.

18 hours ago, ahrtee said:

The intent (at least my intent) was to avoid bitter "discussions" and just note that, "no, I disagree with this," not claiming "you're an idiot for saying this."  

Oh, but you are a dreamer if you honestly think this is how it would work!  LoL!

I still have two more pages of comments to catch up on so I don't know if this has been addressed:  I don't know about anyone else, but personally, I think posts about whether or not the forum should have a dislike button are way, WAY off topic and something that should be taken up with the moderators and not vetted here.  

[DeeDee79]

9 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

That being said, there is no hard and fast evidence that Sam cut off Dean, or if it was Dean who cut off Sam or kind of mutual loss of contact thing.

Did I say that there was?

[sugarbabex23]

Personally, if I were Sam, I probably would have cut contact from my family and wouldn't want anything to do with them. I think Sam's family were terrible to him and mistreated him in many ways. He was pretty much abandoned, lied to, John mistreated him and disowned him and Dean has also treated Sam poorly. I think Sam grew up in dysfunctional family and I do not blame him for running away from all of them. If I were Sam, I would run away too and I would be ashamed of my family. 

Edited July 30, 2017 by sugarbabex23

[companionenvy]

3 minutes ago, DeeDee79 said:

Did I say that there was?

No, but within the last couple of days, multiple posters have. When actually, all we know is that a) Dean and Sam had not had contact for at least two years before the start of the pilot b) that Dean believes that Sam would not have picked up the phone if he had called.

From that, any of the following is possible:

1.  Dean called or tried to speak to Sam many times, only to have been rebuffed.

2. Dean called once or twice in the immediate aftermath of the fight, Sam, still angry, didn't pick up, and Dean gave up.

3. Dean was furious at Sam, and never tried to make contact.

4. Dean sadly decided that it was best to let Sam live his own life, and never tried to make contact.

5. Dean interpreted Sam's decision to leave and hasty words upon leaving as a decision to cut Dean out of his life completely, and never called because he was terrified to have those suspicions confirmed.

Personally, I think 2 or 5 are the most likely. But that's just my gut. 

[DeeDee79]

2 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

No, but within the last couple of days, multiple posters have. When actually, all we know is that a) Dean and Sam had not had contact for at least two years before the start of the pilot b) that Dean believes that Sam would not have picked up the phone if he had called.

From that, any of the following is possible:

1.  Dean called or tried to speak to Sam many times, only to have been rebuffed.

2. Dean called once or twice in the immediate aftermath of the fight, Sam, still angry, didn't pick up, and Dean gave up.

3. Dean was furious at Sam, and never tried to make contact.

4. Dean sadly decided that it was best to let Sam live his own life, and never tried to make contact.

5. Dean interpreted Sam's decision to leave and hasty words upon leaving as a decision to cut Dean out of his life completely, and never called because he was terrified to have those suspicions confirmed.

Personally, I think 2 or 5 are the most likely. But that's just my gut. 

2 & 5 seem the most logical to me as well.

[RulerofallIsurvey]

17 minutes ago, DeeDee79 said:

Did I say that there was?

Perhaps I should have quoted your entire post:

Quote

I agree & I don't think that it was the fact that Sam went to college; it was that he cut himself off from Dean. Further into the show Dean brags about Sam's smarts and the fact that he went to Stanford so I don't think that falls in line with someone who's resentful of the fact that their sibling went off to better themselves. I know now that someone is going to remark "but what about all of the times that Dean threw it back in Sam's face that he left them, left hunting, forgot about them, blah blah blah....." to which I say if you have siblings and they do anything that pisses you off or hurts your feelings ( I have 2 brothers so I know of what I speak ) you go for the jugular. It's not always logical or true, it just is what it is. That being said, I don't think that Dean resented Sam going to school.

According to my elementary school English teacher,  "he cut himself off from Dean" is a statement.  A statement automatically implies a belief of fact.  It it certainly does not imply that perhaps it was Dean who cut off contact from Sam or that it was perhaps a mutual loss of communication.  If you meant otherwise, it was not clear.  

[DeeDee79]

3 hours ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

Perhaps I should have quoted your entire post:

According to my elementary school English teacher,  "he cut himself off from Dean" is a statement.  A statement automatically implies a belief of fact.  It it certainly does not imply that perhaps it was Dean who cut off contact from Sam or that it was perhaps a mutual loss of communication.  If you meant otherwise, it was not clear.  

Huh, so I did. There has been alot said on this forum within the last few hours that have been upsetting for me so my memory of previous posts didn't immediately jump to mind. Further, I see that my statement was precluded by "I don't think" which means that it's just my take on events.  Also, I know perfectly well what the definition of a statement is. I don't think that the sarcasm is necessary to make your point. If that's not how you meant it then my bad.

Edited July 31, 2017 by DeeDee79

[ahrtee]

1 hour ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

I still have two more pages of comments to catch up on so I don't know if this has been addressed:  I don't know about anyone else, but personally, I think posts about whether or not the forum should have a dislike button are way, WAY off topic and something that should be taken up with the moderators and not vetted here.  

If you read my post, I wasn't *asking* for a dislike button or asking if others wanted it.  My actual words were: "I wish we had a "thumbs-down" button for posts we disagree with but don't feel like debating."  Considering how many people comment "I wish I could like this post more than once," I think wishing I could *dislike* it seems reasonable.  

Any further discussion on my part was explaining why I would like it, not trying to get approval for one, because, yes, if I (or anyone here) really wanted to ask for one, it would have to go through the mods.  Personally, I don't think the few posts on this were "way, WAY off topic," but if you did think it was so OT, you should probably take that up with the mods yourself. 

Edited July 31, 2017 by ahrtee

[MysteryGuest]

7 minutes ago, sugarbabex23 said:

Personally, if I were Sam, I probably would have cut contact from my family and wouldn't want anything to do with them. I think Sam's family were terrible to him and mistreated him in many ways. He was pretty much abandoned, lied to, John mistreated him and disowned him and Dean has also treated Sam poorly. I think Sam grew up in dysfunctional family and I do not blame him for running away from all of them. If I were Sam, I would run away too and I would be ashamed of my family. 

Of course their family was dysfunctional.  The mother was burned to death on the ceiling of the nursery by a demon, in front of the father and 4 year old son.  The father understandably lost his shit after that, and became obsessed with finding what killed her.  This involved dragging his young sons around with him, leaving them at times with other people, and eventually leaving the younger brother in the care of the older brother, who by the way was still a pretty traumatized young child himself.  

Since the father needed the help of the oldest son to keep the younger son safe, he was tuned in pretty quickly to the reality of things that go bump in the night.  Both he and his father tried their best to keep the youngest son from learning about what was really out there because they wanted to protect him, wanted him to have as "normal" a life as possible...whatever.  Obviously, that only worked for so long.  

Youngest son grows up, decides he doesn't like this life so much, has butted heads with his father most of his life as a teenager (as many parents and children do), and decides to leave and go to school.  Father is probably angry that he can't control this son, but I think mainly he's scared to death of what could happen to him on his own.  The oldest son has spent most of his life caring for both the father and his brother, so he has a pretty mixed bag of reactions to his brother's going to school...jealousy, fear, resentment, abandonment, etc.  Youngest son is certainly within his rights to do what he wants, but the reactions of his father and brother are absolutely to be expected, considering the horrifying life they've led.  

I'm sorry, but based on all of this, Sam wasn't any more abused than Dean was.  In fact, he at least got a few years to just be a kid that Dean never got, and some time away at college.  John pretty much sucked as a parent, but in his defense, he didn't really have a road map for how to survive what they went through.  I think, all things considered, they're not as dysfunctional as they could or should be.

[rue721]

On 7/29/2017 at 6:59 PM, DittyDotDot said:

I think it's like almost everything on this show, a two way street--well, in this case since John was involved I guess it was a three-way street...what would be a three-way street though? ;)

An intersection. ;)

20 hours ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

I simply do not understand how anyone - Supernatural fan or not - can contort a younger sibling going off to college to get an education into 'abandoning' an older, perfectly capable sibling.

 

19 hours ago, sugarbabex23 said:

I'm sorry but I find it so weird that Dean resented Sam for going to college. I find it weird that an older sibling would feel abandoned or resent their younger sibling for going out into the world and making a life for themselves.

I feel like what's getting lost is that the Winchesters seem to have been a pretty dysfunctional family (at least after Mary's death), so the level of stability and functionality that they had achieved by the time Sam was 18 was probably very hard-won and delicate -- and Sam leaving probably completely upset that hard-won, delicate balance and really fucked up how the family functioned or even if it could function.

In fact, it sounds like their relative peace/stability did fall apart during the time he was at college because then next thing we know, Dean is showing up at Sam's college apartment saying he needs help because their dad is missing (and presumably dead) and he's very worried and can't do things alone anymore -- and then it turns out that *even weirder,* John was actually fine at that point but had decided to go radio silent for his own misguided/crazy person reasons.

That's not to say that Sam *shouldn't* have left (I think it's probably good that he did, and I give him props for having the strength to do it).

But I don't think it's a question of whether the choices that Sam was making for his own life were valid, I think the crux of the issue (for Dean at that time) is that Sam didn't try to mitigate or even seem to consider what the consequences his choices would have on the rest of the family or on the family as a whole. Would it have been reasonable to expect Sam to worry about preserving the family's stability at that stage in his life? Probably not. But Dean was also living in and had always lived in that same nuthouse of a family and probably had no idea what was reasonable at that point, either. Really, Dean's expectations were pretty much bound to be unreasonable, because his frame of reference was completely screwy. Which is why I thought that Henriksen's take on it was so interesting and such a breath of fresh air.

Also, I think Dean took the collapse of their (relative) peace/stability especially hard because he had apparently been very conscious of whether the family was functional, and had worked especially hard to get them as functional as possible. I heard John's apology/thank you to him later on, about leaning so hard on him, etc, as an acknowledgement of that.

I dunno, much as I can relate to Sam, I really feel for Dean there, in that I'm like, yeah, it is fucking hard to keep a shitshow like that on the tracks, and Dean managed to do that, and then it was SAM of all people who derailed it out of the blue?

And just when Sam was finally an adult and could have helped keep it on the tracks even more than before, too.

And then later on, it turns out that Sam apparently didn't even realize, let alone appreciate, any of the work that went into keeping them as together and normal as they were, for all those years? I think that was what was sticking in Dean's craw during the Dark Side of the Moon memories.

That said, I think Dean's perspective has shifted significantly over time. I think that those struggles were all a long time ago now, and things turned out OK in the end, so his feelings have mellowed with time. And I think he's also gotten to the point of figuring that people are responsible just for their own choices, and even then, a lot of how things turn out is the result of forces way beyond everyone's control anyway -- and I think that that perspective has mellowed him out a bit, too.

But anyway, what I think tends to get forgotten in the "is it really that bad that Sam went to college?!" discussions is that his departure probably destabilized the whole family and everyone in it, and after they had apparently fought (or at least Dean had apparently fought) VERY hard for the stability that they had. Again, not to say that that makes Sam's decision "wrong" (I don't think it does), I just bring it up as a possible factor for why Dean reacted so strongly.

18 hours ago, sugarbabex23 said:

Sam was 18 years old when he left for college. Which means that Sam was an adult and was legally able to make his own decisions. Neither Dean or John were responsible for Sam anymore. The fact that both John and Dean resented Sam for going out into the world and making a life to better himself (something that is considered to be very normal in everyday families) is just very abnormal and bizarre.

I think the issue is that John believed that Sam was shirking his duty (to society), that he was being selfish by refusing to hunt and that people were going to die as a result. And I think Dean felt betrayed when Sam left, because he felt like Sam fucked him and the family over when he did. I think it's pretty key that Dean didn't strike up a partnership with anyone else, and when he really needed a partner (once John was missing, and it seemed like Dean thought there was a strong possibility he was dead), he went back to Sam -- and *only* Sam -- for help. In Dean's mind there seemed to be a specific job (Dean's hunting partner) that Sam was refusing to do, and he took Sam's refusal personally AND it was a legitimate obstacle professionally. I think Dean believed that Sam was shirking his responsibilities to the family/Dean, as well as shirking his duty to help save people and kill things, and he was straight up pissed off about it.

I think both John and Dean eventually changed their minds, but Dean's sense of betrayal remained for at least a while longer.

[RulerofallIsurvey]

8 hours ago, shang yiet said:

Quite keen to see Sam step up as leader of Team Free Will. I didn't see any complaints when Dean was the leader.

Actually, I'm fine with Sam not being Leader of Team Free Will.  I'd prefer a much more equitable relationship between the brothers myself instead of one being the "Leader" or not.

6 hours ago, sugarbabex23 said:

ETA: I also think Sam is the strongest character in the show. He's been through so much yet he's still standing. He's been beaten down by people he loves as well as his enemies and he still keeps on going. That's incredible and I admire Sam for his persistence. Because I don't even think I would be in one piece if I went through even the slightest of what Sam has gone through. 

I think both Sam and Dean are equally strong characters.  I don't think I'd be in once piece if I'd been through what either of them have.

14 minutes ago, DeeDee79 said:

Huh, so I did. There has been alot said on this forum within the last few hours that have been upsetting for me so my memory of previous posts didn't immediately jump to mind. Further, I see that my statement was precluded by "I don't think" which means that it's just my take on events.  Also, I know perfectly well what the definition of a statement is. I don't think that the sarcasm is necessary to make your point. If that's not how you meant it then my bad.

To the best of my recollection, since the discussion had been about the whether or not Dean resented or was angry at Sam for going off to college , based on the way your sentence, "I don't think that it was the fact that Sam went to college; it was that he cut himself off from Dean."  was structured, it made it sound like the "I think" referred to the reason Dean was angry at Sam, not who cut whom off from contact.  

I realize there has been a heated discussion going on in this thread - over more than just the last few hours.  And I think I've read a few posts where it seemed like tempers were running high.  My comments were not intended to jump into all that.  I'd be lying if I said there was absolutely no sarcasm intended in my comment.  However, it was in direct response to the sarcasm I read in your "Did I say there was?" post.  Because that read as pretty sarcastic to me.  

12 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

If you read my post, I wasn't *asking* for a dislike button or asking if others wanted it.  My actual words were: "I wish we had a "thumbs-down" button for posts we disagree with but don't feel like debating."  Considering how many people comment "I wish I could like this post more than once," I think wishing I could *dislike* it seems reasonable.  

Any further discussion on my part was explaining why I would like it, not trying to get approval for one, because, yes, if I (or anyone here) really wanted to ask for one, it would have to go through the mods.  Personally, I don't think the few posts on this were "way, WAY off topic," but if you did think it was so OT, you should probably take that up with the mods yourself. 

I did read your post.  If you read my post you would see that I never said you'd asked for one.  However, saying that you *wished* there was a dislike button and the ensuing discussion thereof, falls under the category of "whether or not the forum should have a dislike button", imo.  As for taking up with the mods in the future: I will.  Thank you.