Supernatural Bitterness & Unpopular Opinions: You All Suck

[DittyDotDot]

15 hours ago, FlickChick said:

Chicago hosted the first Supernatural con and my daughter has attended every one - except this year. She is tired of exactly what is mentioned here and has come to think that it is a waste of time and (ever increasing) money. The crowd is getting younger and louder every year as the con-goers like my daughter tire of same questions, and the increasing focus on the person asking the question instead of the guys. It's really sad that these conventions have devolved into this. I also, don't watch the con videos any more.

Awww, I feel bad for you and your daughter that your fun tradition is no more. That said, the crowd does make me cringe a lot lately. They are younger and louder--which I'm actually okay with--but it's the lack of boundaries and the sense of entitlement that turns me off watching the con videos anymore. And, they feel somewhat scripted in their answers instead of the off-the-cuff stuff we used to get. But, I guess that's to be expected since they've all been doing them for so long--and they do so many of them--that they've become routine.

So, have you and your daughter started a different Supernatural tradition yet? ;)

[Aeryn13]

Quote

The thing is, with Creation cons, they only have the Js for one day, where JIB has them for two (dunno about Asylum, but I think so?)

Yes, European Cons usually go the weekend because the actors are normally not gonna fly in more just a day anyway. They also schedule things at the same time, maybe not the mainliners if possible but having a Jensen panel and a Misha photo op at the same time can easily happen. Creation tries to keep that from happening. Europeans Cons are less pricy but you don`t get reserved seating. That is you queue for your seat and then fight to keep it.

Basically, there are different positives and negatives for either. 

With Creation, IMO they wanted a combined panel for Sunday (two, counting the Gold panel) because it`s work-wise for them. If there was enough demand Creation would probably try and politely approach them for solo panels but at this point I don`t see that happening. After all, you can spend even more money on the meet and greets. 

Personally, I find Con vids boring these days because the same old and same old and all the "this is my life story, give me attention and focus" stories bore me. That`s what professional counseling is for, not the shared time with 800 other people who also paid top dollar for it.   

[Pondlass1]

"Are you going to have more children?"  That floored me.  I thought the questions were vetted?

[gonzosgirrl]

11 hours ago, BlueSapphire said:

Jared's every bit as thoughtful and articulate as Jensen in his answers, and I see his answers being every bit as good. 

Solo panels are never going to happen at Creation Cons.

Jared is thoughtful and articulate about his passions, absolutely, and kind to his troubled fans. It's just unfortunate that he so often interrupts and/or takes over whether the question is for/about him or not. Or he goofs around/acts silly while Jensen is talking, until he just doesn't bother trying to finish. It doesn't usually seem to bother Jensen, but it sure bothers me, especially when it's the rare occasion that he's answering a question about Dean or the show. The opposite very rarely happens.

[Pondlass1]

3 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

It doesn't usually seem to bother Jensen

Jensen must have oodles of patience.

[FlickChick]

7 hours ago, DittyDotDot said:

Awww, I feel bad for you and your daughter that your fun tradition is no more. That said, the crowd does make me cringe a lot lately. They are younger and louder--which I'm actually okay with--but it's the lack of boundaries and the sense of entitlement that turns me off watching the con videos anymore. And, they feel somewhat scripted in their answers instead of the off-the-cuff stuff we used to get. But, I guess that's to be expected since they've all been doing them for so long--and they do so many of them--that they've become routine.

So, have you and your daughter started a different Supernatural tradition yet? ;)

Unfortunately, no. It is sad, though. She has already told me that she'll miss going this year, but still can't bring herself to pay all that money for what we've been getting. :( We talk about the show of course on a regular basis. I guess that will have to be enough. Thanks for asking. :)

[FlickChick]

6 hours ago, Pondlass1 said:

Jensen must have oodles of patience.

He does have a lot of patience. And of course he cares for Jared, so he lets most of it roll off him. But I have seen Jensen stop Jared from fooling around when he wants to say something and can't get a word in edgewise. Frankly, Jared looked surprised and didn't interrupt as often after that. But those instances are rare. I would love to see Jensen in a meet-and-greet, but will not pay the exorbitant price in addition to the con entrance fee. 

[rue721]

From the Bitch v Jerk thread:

6 hours ago, ahrtee said:

Add to that the fact that it was also probably what Dean remembered most about his Mommy, that he'd seen the terrible danger the family had already been placed in, and that John was lost in grief and unable to protect them at first, and it became the most important thing to him, the main thing that connected him to Mary.  And as, over the years, John started the training specifically because of the danger and the need to protect Sam above everything else, Dean pretty much had no hope of overcoming that early conditioning.

I think that Dean's focus on Sam came more from himself and his own needs than it did from either parent.

I think that in general, Dean tried to give Sam what he himself most wanted or wished he could have, as a way of living vicariously through Sam. He wanted Sam to keep his childhood innocence for as long as possible, because he wanted to have a taste of childhood innocence. He wanted to reassure Sam that everybody, including/especially the baby (i.e. Sam) would be protected and safe, because he himself wanted to feel protected and safe, etc.

Also, both Mary and John were only children, so I expect that they were both pretty much flying blind in terms of fostering a sibling relationship between their kids. To me, it also seems pretty natural that that would result in them unwittingly fostering more of a parent/child kind of dynamic between their sons than most siblings would have. John in particular not only didn't have any siblings, he didn't grow up with a father, either, so he really had to have been making it up as he went along.

I think that Dean's "save Sam" thing was coming from him putting a lot of value on reassurance and protection (more than Sam himself did), being genuinely terrified of losing Sam, and basically redirecting his natural instinct to care for himself into care for Sam. I think it was easier for him to turn that instinct outward rather than inward, for whatever reason. I think in general, Dean has trouble with self-reflection and dealing with his own feelings. Not that he's not "good" at it -- I think he's actually pretty astute -- but he seems to try and avoid doing it when he can.

5 hours ago, catrox14 said:

Since it's never been shown or even implied that Dean did anything so egregious and harmful to Sam that Sam would have reason to excise him out of his life when John was the one that told Sam to never come back, not Dean, I'm of the opinion that it was Sam's choice to cut off that relationship and Dean did adhered to those terms until John disappeared.

I think that Sam figured that Dean had taken their dad's side in the estrangement (which he more or less had, although I don't think it was for the reasons that Sam assumed at the time), and assumed that they just weren't going to be close. I think that Sam also didn't think of them being close as children the way that Dean did, and he just kind of closed the door on that part of his life without really taking into account what that would mean for his relationship with his brother. I think that he figured he was leaving Dean and their closeness behind just like he was leaving behind the rest of his weird childhood.

I think that, if anything, Sam having a picture up of his parents is actually a sign of him having given up on having a relationship with John. I think in his mind, he was basically an orphan putting up a photo of his long-lost parents. Whereas, his brother wasn't long-lost, they just weren't close anymore as adults.

5 hours ago, sugarbabex23 said:

Maybe it's just my personal experience but I hate when older siblings (normally the oldest sibling, let's be honest!) overdo it and play "second parent" to younger siblings. An older sibling is not a parent, they are just a sibling who happens to be older than a younger sibling.

I feel like the scenario on this show is different, in that it seems like Dean was babysitting his brother a lot, and in relatively difficult situations where he was going to have to take real responsibility for Sam's (and his own) basic needs and safety. I mean, babysitting alone overnight in a strange town is already a pretty high stress situation to put a kid in, but on top of that, John seemed to have been relatively unreachable in general, and Dean had been told to be on guard against literal child-murdering monsters roaming the streets (monsters that cops or 911 couldn't hope to help them with). And it seemed like a lot of the mundane day-to-day ended up being left to Dean, too, in that Sam and John didn't have a great relationship, and John wasn't even necessarily around for a lot of the day-to-day anyway. And to me, it really seemed like Dean took those responsibilities fairly seriously and maybe even liked/enjoyed/took pride in his role in the family. To me, when one kid is genuinely responsible for the other, that's not a situation where there are two siblings who just happen to not be the same age, that's a situation that's instead pretty much bound to create a parent/child kind of dynamic.

From what we've heard/seen on the show, I do think that they had a pretty bad childhood, although what I think was bad about it might be different from what other people think. To me, that just seems so incredibly lonely. The us-against-the-world mentality and the constant moving around and chaos and the way that literal physical safety always had to be at the forefront of everything and John not necessarily even sleeping at home every night just seems like such an unbearably lonely way to grow up. And both Sam and Dean, especially Dean, do seem really cut off and socially isolated even now. I think that's depressing.

Edited July 30, 2017 by rue721

[Katy M]

2 hours ago, rue721 said:

John in particular not only didn't have any siblings, he didn't grow up with a father, either, so he really had to have been making it up as he went along.

He had a stepdad, or something, although we're not sure exactly when he came into the picture.  But, he was dad enough for John to say that he was a mechanic from a family of mechanics.  Unless his mom was a mechanic.

[catrox14]

I don't usually post fan fic things here but this gif set spoke to  the disappointed Cas fan in me when I think about how shitty the writers treated Cas by the end of s12.  Gave him no redemption and killed him. WTF show. BOO!!!

It's not B v J because it's my bitterness about Cas right now.

 

[Wayward Son]

4 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

I don't usually post fan fic things here but this gif set spoke to  the disappointed Cas fan in me when I think about how shitty the writers treated Cas by the end of s12.  Gave him no redemption and killed him. WTF show. BOO!!!

It's not B v J because it's my bitterness about Cas right now.

 

OMG this gif is my life LOL

[DeeDee79]

1 hour ago, catrox14 said:

I don't usually post fan fic things here but this gif set spoke to  the disappointed Cas fan in me when I think about how shitty the writers treated Cas by the end of s12.  Gave him no redemption and killed him. WTF show. BOO!!!

It's not B v J because it's my bitterness about Cas right now.

 

LOL! I feel the same way Cas; the writers have been doing you a disservice for a long time!

[Wayward Son]

This is me when I'm forced to think on how the writers treated Castiel in season 12.

 

[7kstar]

On 7/30/2017 at 5:07 PM, rue721 said:

On 7/30/2017 at 11:48 AM, sugarbabex23 said:

Maybe it's just my personal experience but I hate when older siblings (normally the oldest sibling, let's be honest!) overdo it and play "second parent" to younger siblings. An older sibling is not a parent, they are just a sibling who happens to be older than a younger sibling.

It depends on the situation.  Sometimes the older sibling is put in the position of protection and gets mixed messages from the parent.  No they aren't the parent but usually the younger sibling doesn't get the weight the older sibling is being forced to deal with either.  As an older sibling I relate to Dean, the weight he tried to ignore but couldn't due to near death experiences for his baby brother. 

As an adult I can now sit back and say not my problem but Dean still hasn't been able to totally let that go.  I also hated what they did with Mary this season.  I almost wished she hadn't been brought back.  The potential could have been interesting but like many storylines, they have failed more than they have risen to new exciting heights.  JMO.

[catrox14]

2 hours ago, Wayward Son said:

This is me when I'm forced to think on how the writers treated Castiel in season 12.

 

I'm going to steal this for the spoilers thread

[sarvenaz]

Hello everyone! 

I'm a long-time lurker but only recently have I become a member. I hope you guys don't mind me getting comfy here? These forums seem to be just the place to be. Anyways, as for my UOs 

- I really enjoy the later seasons ( post season 5 ) as much as I enjoy the first few one. In fact, I kind of think the first three are over-rated. Would we actually have wanted the boys to hunt a ghost for every single episode for 12 seasons? I think the main reason people enjoy them is because of the sense of Deja vu that they bring. 250+ episodes of MOTW would have been boring. 

- After the first three episodes of season seven, I'd rather skip 14 episodes and go straight to episode 17, where Cas returns to the show. I find the whole hallucination story line to be tedious and over-stretched. Especially since the show barely dealt with Dean's PTSD. 

- I hate that apparently in the show, we cannot have one of the boys being strong or mature without the other one regressing a few whole seasons. 

- Though I love Bobby to death, I do not want him back for season 13. Especially if he's going to go back to be the boys answer to every question they have. I actually like it that the boys have started to become more independent over the season, though I don't like they have a very small circle of friends surrounding them.

- I sincerely hate that whole "Boohoo princess" line of Bobby's.

- I think Sam becoming a leader at the end of season 12 was completely unnecessary and cliched. Who was Sam giving the speech for? All the hunters were already prepared to fight. They didn't need a pep talk IMO. 

- I wish the writers would stop having Castiel manipulated by everyone and everything in the universe. How long has it been since the last time we saw Cas make a good decision, stand by it, and get rewarded?

Ugh.

[DeeDee79]

4 hours ago, sarvenaz said:

Hello everyone! 

I'm a long-time lurker but only recently have I become a member. I hope you guys don't mind me getting comfy here? These forums seem to be just the place to be. Anyways, as for my UOs 

- I really enjoy the later seasons ( post season 5 ) as much as I enjoy the first few one. In fact, I kind of think the first three are over-rated. Would we actually have wanted the boys to hunt a ghost for every single episode for 12 seasons? I think the main reason people enjoy them is because of the sense of Deja vu that they bring. 250+ episodes of MOTW would have been boring. 

- After the first three episodes of season seven, I'd rather skip 14 episodes and go straight to episode 17, where Cas returns to the show. I find the whole hallucination story line to be tedious and over-stretched. Especially since the show barely dealt with Dean's PTSD. 

- I hate that apparently in the show, we cannot have one of the boys being strong or mature without the other one regressing a few whole seasons. 

- Though I love Bobby to death, I do not want him back for season 13. Especially if he's going to go back to be the boys answer to every question they have. I actually like it that the boys have started to become more independent over the season, though I don't like they have a very small circle of friends surrounding them.

- I sincerely hate that whole "Boohoo princess" line of Bobby's.

- I think Sam becoming a leader at the end of season 12 was completely unnecessary and cliched. Who was Sam giving the speech for? All the hunters were already prepared to fight. They didn't need a pep talk IMO. 

- I wish the writers would stop having Castiel manipulated by everyone and everything in the universe. How long has it been since the last time we saw Cas make a good decision, stand by it, and get rewarded?

Ugh.

Welcome Sarvenaz! Great post :)

[sarvenaz]

15 hours ago, DeeDee79 said:

Welcome Sarvenaz! Great post :)

Thank you!

Another bitterness of mine, (Because I've been thinking about it for a very long time and I haven't come up with an answer yet,) is how the consent issues for Ruby and Sam were never addressed. Was the girl inside Ruby still alive? And if she was, I would not believe for one second that Sam would have agreed to have a relationship with Ruby while there was some else inside her alive. ( Not that her meat suit being dead makes this any more right) . I remember her being in a Coma. Does that mean she was not conscious of what was happening to her body?

[ahrtee]

4 minutes ago, sarvenaz said:

Thank you!

Another bitterness of mine, (Because I've been thinking about it for a very long time and I haven't come up with an answer yet,) is how the consent issues for Ruby and Sam were never addressed. Was the girl inside Ruby still alive? And if she was, I would not believe for one second that Sam would have agreed to have a relationship with Ruby while there was some else inside her alive. ( Not that her meat suit being dead makes this any more right) . I remember her being in a Coma. Does that mean she was not conscious of what was happening to her body?

Ruby 1 was still there (and they never addressed her); but Ruby 2 (Gen) had been declared brain dead and therefore was supposedly an empty vessel (alive but with no soul occupying it).  She proudly told that to Sam, and declared "I recycle."  

TBH, I don't think consent  really means that much, since the angels (who need consent) never tell their vessels what it actually will entail (as Jimmy told the boys how terrible it was for him, and during the angel wars they never mentioned that the vessels might explode; not to mention how many were killed by demons or other angels.)  It's just that the angels have a good reputation, so people are willing to give consent without asking any relevant questions.  

[DittyDotDot]

15 minutes ago, sarvenaz said:

Was the girl inside Ruby still alive? And if she was, I would not believe for one second that Sam would have agreed to have a relationship with Ruby while there was some else inside her alive.

From I Know What You Did Last Summer:

RUBY: Proof. This body is 100% socially conscious. I recycle. Al Gore would be proud.
SAM: You grabbed a coma patient?
RUBY: You didn't want me to take a body with someone in it, and I made sure that the spirit was gone. Apartment was empty. You happy?

Edited August 30, 2017 by DittyDotDot

[catrox14]

6 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

SAM: You grabbed a coma patient?
RUBY: You didn't want me to take a body with someone in it, and I made sure that the spirit was gone. Apartment was empty. You happy?

And this just pinged a whole other can of worms.  I know I know.

Is this saying that a coma patient doesn't have a soul or that this particular coma patient was dead? Or that the soul is in limbo when someone is in a coma?

Was it ever verified that it was a soulless meatsuit? Did they have a way to do that back then? Ask Cas or Tessa? Or another angel?

[ILoveReading]

Welcome Sarvenaz

The problem with their explanation is that s6 made it null and void when they established that meat suits could still survive without a soul.  That souless bodies were still some what autonomous.  So Ruby's meat suit suddenly because a souless vessel that was incapable of consenting.  

[sarvenaz]

8 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

From I Know What You Did Last Summer:

RUBY: Proof. This body is 100% socially conscious. I recycle. Al Gore would be proud.
SAM: You grabbed a coma patient?
RUBY: You didn't want me to take a body with someone in it, and I made sure that the spirit was gone. Apartment was empty. You happy?

Oh!I must have missed this while searching it up! 

But still, I don't think any kind of relationship with Demons or Angles would be consensual, even if the vessel/meat suit was dead or with no spirit. It is still that person's body, even if they are no longer using it.....

[Wayward Son]

1 minute ago, catrox14 said:

And this just pinged a whole other can of worms.  I know I know.

Is this saying that a coma patient doesn't have a soul or that this particular coma patient was dead? Or that the soul is in limbo when someone is in a coma?

Was it ever verified that it was a soulless meatsuit? Did they have a way to do that back then? Ask Cas or Tessa? Or another angel?

IIRC she wasn't just a coma patient Lying in a bed. The scene we got was the girl flatlining and the doctors were about to proclaim her dead, only Ruby possessed her and "revived her" before they could. 

[sarvenaz]

1 minute ago, ILoveReading said:

Welcome Sarvenaz

The problem with their explanation is that s6 made it null and void when they established that meat suits could still survive without a soul.  That souless bodies were still some what autonomous.  So Ruby's meat suit suddenly because a souless vessel that was incapable of consenting.  

Thank you!

I always wonder if Castiel were to leave his vessel, since Jimmy too is gone, would it die or would it become a soulless human?

[catrox14]

Just now, Wayward Son said:

IIRC she wasn't just a coma patient Lying in a bed. The scene we got was the girl flatlining and the doctors were about to proclaim her dead, only Ruby possessed her and "revived her" before they could. 

Ahh. Thanks. I have little recollection of that episode because I loathe that episode. LOL

[DittyDotDot]

4 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

The problem with their explanation is that s6 made it null and void when they established that meat suits could still survive without a soul.  That souless bodies were still some what autonomous.  So Ruby's meat suit suddenly because a souless vessel that was incapable of consenting.  

The girl was dead, as I recall. They were taking her off life support at the moment Ruby possessed her. I think the idea was supposed to be she had died a while back and her family kept her body alive with the machines. It was an empty vessel, not just a soulless one.

 

ETA: What @Wayward Son said.

Edited August 30, 2017 by DittyDotDot

[Wayward Son]

4 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

Ahh. Thanks. I have little recollection of that episode because I loathe that episode. LOL

Although it does raise a different question. If the girl is dead then Ruby technically possessed a corpse. Are there any other known instances of this occurring?

[ILoveReading]

1 minute ago, DittyDotDot said:

The girl was dead, as I recall. They were taking her off life support at the moment Ruby possessed her. I think the idea was supposed to be she had died a while back and her family kept her body alive with the machines. It was an empty vessel, not just a soulless one.

 

ETA: What @Wayward Son said.

It's still a souless meatsuit that Ruby possessed without permission, especially if she slipped in just as the person flat lined.

[catrox14]

3 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

Although it does raise a different question. If the girl is dead then Ruby technically possessed a corpse. Are there any other known instances of this occurring?

I think it's fair to say that a lot of demons were running around in otherwise empty meatsuits. Meg was essentially dead after she fell. They when they exorcised her she did die.  IMO, demon!Dean was basically running around in his dead meatsuit.

Hell for all I know Dean is still really dead. It's never been explained why he didn't die when the Mark was removed. Wasn't it said that it was the Mark that kept him alive? So once that was removied shouldn't he have dropped dead?

Edited August 30, 2017 by catrox14

[ahrtee]

10 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

IIRC she wasn't just a coma patient Lying in a bed. The scene we got was the girl flatlining and the doctors were about to proclaim her dead, only Ruby possessed her and "revived her" before they could. 

And according to the rules (as in IMTOD and like Bobby) supposedly her soul had already been retrieved by a reaper and wasn't going to go back into the body.  Whether it's immoral to possess someone's soulless/dead body is another question, but not one that SPN has ever particularly cared about.  

9 minutes ago, sarvenaz said:

I always wonder if Castiel were to leave his vessel, since Jimmy too is gone, would it die or would it become a soulless human?

I think it's been established that Jimmy's body had been destroyed and the new "vessel" was recreated specifically for Cas (Jimmy is in heaven with Amelia).  

 

4 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

Although it does raise a different question. If the girl is dead then Ruby technically possessed a corpse. Are there any other known instances of this occurring?

 Abaddon's army possessed all those dead soldiers, and in Jus in Bello they said that the FBI chief had probably been dead for a while.  

Edited August 30, 2017 by ahrtee
Clarification.

[Wayward Son]

3 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

It's still a souless meatsuit that Ruby possessed without permission, especially if she slipped in just as the person flat lined.

I believe the writing team intended for us to see the flat line as an indication the girl was physically dead and her soul had passed on.  Anything else is overthinking it IMO. 

 

I think there is meant to be a difference between a corpse (like the one Ruby possessed) which has died both body and soul and a souless being like Sam whose soul was mystically missing, but the body existed independently, but that's just IMO.

2 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

Abbason army possessed all those dead soldiers, and in Jus in Bello they said that the FBI chief had probably been dead for a while.  

 

4 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

I think it's fair to say that a lot of demons were running around in otherwise empty meatsuits. Meg was essentially dead after she fell. They when they exorcised her she did die.  IMO, demon!Dean was basically running around in his dead meatsuit.

Hell for all I know Dean is still really dead. It's never been explained why he didn't die when the Mark was removed. Wasn't it said that it was the Mark that kept him alive? So once that was removied shouldn't he have dropped dead?

Ah yes, thanks for the clarification guys :)

[catrox14]

Just now, Wayward Son said:

I believe the writing team intended for us to see the flat line as an indication the girl was physically dead and her soul had passed on.  Anything else is overthinking it IMO. 

Overthinking it? Thinking about something and how it fits in canon isn't really overthinking, is it? LOL

What else would we talk about if we didn't think or "overthink" these matters LOL

[Wayward Son]

2 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

Overthinking it? Thinking about something and how it fits in canon isn't really overthinking, is it? LOL

What else would we talk about if we didn't think or "overthink" these matters LOL

I think trying to equate a soulless being like Sam in S6 or the victims of Amara in S11 with a corpse is over stretching and overthinking the situation, but that's just MO

Edited August 30, 2017 by Wayward Son

[DittyDotDot]

1 minute ago, ILoveReading said:

It's still a souless meatsuit that Ruby possessed without permission, especially if she slipped in just as the person flat lined.

Right. That's what I said. It was an empty vessel. Demons never get permission to take possession.

I was speaking to the question concerning whether Sam agreed to have a relationship with Ruby knowing there was a girl trapped in there. That wasn't the case and not only did Sam know the girl's spirit had already moved on, he had insisted Ruby let her previous vessel go.

5 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

Although it does raise a different question. If the girl is dead then Ruby technically possessed a corpse. Are there any other known instances of this occurring?

I think there have been quite a few times. Didn't Crowley possess a dead meatsuit once or twice? And, I believe Abaddon's meatsuit was reanimated somehow, but I think Josie's spirit was probably released with the devil's trap bullet to the head...I'd guess anyway.

[catrox14]

2 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

Ah yes, thanks for the clarification guys :)

I think it's supposed to be considered worse for a demon to possess a meatsuit with a soul still in it, because the person inside remembers all the terrible things the meatsuit made them do. 

Just now, Wayward Son said:

I think trying to equate a soulless being like Sam in S6 or the victims of Amara in S11 with a corpse is over stretching and overthinking the situation, but that's just MO

I'm sorry I don't understand. Who was making that equation? I feel like I missed something LOL

[Wayward Son]

1 minute ago, catrox14 said:

I think it's supposed to be considered worse for a demon to possess a meatsuit with a soul still in it, because the person inside remembers all the terrible things the meatsuit made them do. 

I'm sorry I don't understand. Who was making that equation? I feel like I missed something LOL

Perhaps I misunderstood their post, in which case I apologise in advance, but ILoveReading described Ruby's meatsuit as a "soulless meat suit". I was pointing out that IMO there is a difference between a corpse and a soulless being like Sam or Amara's victims in s11. 

 

I think one could argue the questionable action of Sam's was the fact he participated in necrophilia, but I don't think there were consent issues as the body was physically dead and the soul moved on when Ruby possessed it. 

[ahrtee]

I think maybe we're confusing "soul" with "brain."  The brain is what keeps the body functioning and thinking/planning/remembering.  The soul is what gives it morality/humanity/whatever you might want to call it.  So a body without a soul can keep living and making cold, calculated decisions (like Soulless Sam or any of Amara's victims) but a body without a brain can't survive unless a demon (or angel) moves it.  

[ILoveReading]

10 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

Perhaps I misunderstood their post, in which case I apologise in advance, but ILoveReading described Ruby's meatsuit as a "soulless meat suit". I was pointing out that IMO there is a difference between a corpse and a soulless being like Sam or Amara's victims in s11. 

 

I think one could argue the questionable action of Sam's was the fact he participated in necrophilia, but I don't think there were consent issues as the body was physically dead and the soul moved on when Ruby possessed it. 

i could be misremembering the scene but if Ruby took possession before death was official then I see the body as a souless meat suit.  Taking possession while it was still alive, regardless makes it a souless meat suit, IMO.  Even if it wasn't souless, it was still a person who was incapable of consenting.

Even back in s4 I found that explanation flimsy at best and s6 just muddied the waters.

Edited August 30, 2017 by ILoveReading

[ahrtee]

26 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

Hell for all I know Dean is still really dead. It's never been explained why he didn't die when the Mark was removed. Wasn't it said that it was the Mark that kept him alive? So once that was removied shouldn't he have dropped dead?

His body was healed, not occupied.  We saw DemonDean heal himself, which was supposedly a byproduct of the Mark,.  

[Wayward Son]

1 minute ago, ILoveReading said:

i could be misremembering the scene but if Ruby took possession before death was official then I see the body as a souless meat suit.  Taking possession while it was still alive, regardless makes it a souless meat suit, IMO.  Even if it wasn't souless, it was still a person who was incapable of consenting.

Even back in s4 I found that explanation flimsy at best and s6 just muddied the waters.

The death was official in the sense the body had flatlined and was dead. It wasn't official in a legal sense as the doctor didn't get the chance to do the whole "time of death blah blah blah routine" 

[catrox14]

1 minute ago, ILoveReading said:

Even back in s4 I found that explanation flimsy at best and s6 just muddied the waters.

I think they were trying to find a way to make Sam boinking Ruby a little less icky. I always thought, what would have happened if Ruby decided to be an asshole when she and Sam were fucking and she smoked out during sex. Like she's climaxing, Sam thinks she's just screaming in pleasure so he doesn't bother to open his eyes, and WHOOPS. LOL

They should have just left that whole moral quandary for Sam out of the equation. I would have actually had more sympathy for Sam, and IMO, it would have really driven home the point that Sam was so screwed up after Dean went to Hell that he didn't care if he was screwing a demon possessed human.  Like I would have known that Sam was a completely fucked up person making horrible choices.

And it sure didn't make Ruby more sympathetic for me, because well she was already a demon and not to be trusted.

[ILoveReading]

1 minute ago, catrox14 said:

I think they were trying to find a way to make Sam boinking Ruby a little less icky. I always thought, what would have happened if Ruby decided to be an asshole when she and Sam were fucking and she smoked out during sex. Like she's climaxing, Sam thinks she's just screaming in pleasure so he doesn't bother to open his eyes, and WHOOPS. LOL

They should have just left that whole moral quandary for Sam out of the equation. I would have actually had more sympathy for Sam, and IMO, it would have really driven home the point that Sam was so screwed up after Dean went to Hell that he didn't care if he was screwing a demon possessed human.  Like I would have known that Sam was a completely fucked up person making horrible choices.

And it sure didn't make Ruby more sympathetic for me, because well she was already a demon and not to be trusted.

Exactly.  They should have left the whole thing out because it was always skeevy. 

What happens if the demon kills the possessed person? There is no longer a soul there. but the body is technically alive . Does that make it okay for the demon to do what they want with the body? 

[Katy M]

52 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

And this just pinged a whole other can of worms.  I know I know.

Is this saying that a coma patient doesn't have a soul or that this particular coma patient was dead? Or that the soul is in limbo when someone is in a coma?

Was it ever verified that it was a soulless meatsuit? Did they have a way to do that back then? Ask Cas or Tessa? Or another angel?

The doctors were about to declare her dead when Ruby possessed her and she sat up shocking them.  No, nobody ever verified it.  Ruby could have been lying, but I don't think she was and I don't think we were supposed to think she was.

[catrox14]

6 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

His body was healed, not occupied.  We saw DemonDean heal himself, which was supposedly a byproduct of the Mark,.  

I don't think it was shown that Dean's powers were so strong that he kept himself alive.  We never saw him use any other demon powers, like teleportation or flinging people across the room with a flick of his wrist, like Cain.  It wasn't clear to me if Dean healed him himself or the Mark healed him.  IMO, if the Mark is what resurrected him, then it was also the thing that was continuing to keep him alive and heal him, which is why I fully expected him to drop dead once the Mark was removed.

[Katy M]

1 minute ago, ILoveReading said:

Exactly.  They should have left the whole thing out because it was always skeevy. 

What happens if the demon kills the possessed person? There is no longer a soul there. but the body is technically alive . Does that make it okay for the demon to do what they want with the body? 

This is probably going to be an unpopular opinion, but I say yes.  If the soul is no longer int he body, the person is dead and has gone to heaven or hell, or is just hanging out in the veil, you can do whatever you want with the body.  The person doesn't care about it any more.  The only time it would make a dfference is if the family/friends/loved ones of that person were around, then obviously it would be upsetting to them .

2 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

I don't think it was shown that Dean's powers were so strong that he kept himself alive.  We never saw him use any other demon powers, like teleportation or flinging people across the room with a flick of his wrist, like Cain.  It wasn't clear to me if Dean healed him himself or the Mark healed him.  IMO, if the Mark is what resurrected him, then it was also the thing that was continuing to keep him alive and heal him, which is why I fully expected him to drop dead once the Mark was removed.

I think it doesn't matter if he healed himself or the mark healed him. If he was healed, he was healed.  He wouldn't suddenly be unhealed just because he didn't have the mark any more.  I think maybe you're thinking of the mark more as a pacemaker that is actually keeping the heart beating.  Whereas it may have been more of a (my mind went blank I forgot what they're called) thing that shocks your heart once and it's good to go.  You then don't need it anymore.

[catrox14]

3 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

What happens if the demon kills the possessed person? There is no longer a soul there. but the body is technically alive . Does that make it okay for the demon to do what they want with the body? 

Demons are not angels, they have never needed permission so for me, who cared that Ruby found a soulless meatsuit.  The whole point of possessing human meatsuits was so a demon could get topside and not be in Hell anymore, hence why demons would keep the meatsuits walking and talking and functional for as long as they wanted to use that particular meatsuit, like with Meg 1.0.

Ruby wasn't just trying to say out of Hell, she was trying to raise Lucifer, so for me her finding a 'ecomeatsuit' was just so Sam didn't have to feel bad about fucking a demon. LOL It was just so dumb.

[catrox14]

11 minutes ago, Katy M said:

I think it doesn't matter if he healed himself or the mark healed him. If he was healed, he was healed.  He wouldn't suddenly be unhealed just because he didn't have the mark any more.  I think maybe you're thinking of the mark more as a pacemaker that is actually keeping the heart beating.  Whereas it may have been more of a (my mind went blank I forgot what they're called) thing that shocks your heart once and it's good to go.  You then don't need it anymore.

I get what you mean. I guess I can see it both ways.  It's just hard for me to forget 'The Mark wouldn't let him go" WRT to Cain.  I always wondered if Dean hadn't killed Cain (HE IS NOT DEAD IN MY HEAD), then when the Mark was removed from Dean shouldn't it have been removed from any bearer? Or was that just special to Dean because Rowena used his hair? (Never not gonna laugh at the convenient baggie of Dean's hair :):):)).

And so that I guess leads me to my bitterness over the complete lack of depth or explaining anything about how demon!Dean worked or what he could or not do. BAH! LOL

[DittyDotDot]

30 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

I think maybe we're confusing "soul" with "brain."  The brain is what keeps the body functioning and thinking/planning/remembering.  The soul is what gives it morality/humanity/whatever you might want to call it.  So a body without a soul can keep living and making cold, calculated decisions (like Soulless Sam or any of Amara's victims) but a body without a brain can't survive unless a demon (or angel) moves it.  

Yeah, I think the confusion here is that the girl Ruby possessed wasn't just in a coma and her body was functioning all on it's own; she was brain dead and the only thing keeping her body from decomposing were the machines that were pumping oxygen and blood through her system. They took her off life support and she was dead for a few seconds before Ruby jumped in her. I think it was supposed to be that Ruby hopped into a dead corpse. Maybe the better option would've been for her to have jumped someone at a morgue for that to be clear?

Now, does it make it any better that Ruby possessed a dead body or a live one? I'd say yes and no. At least there wasn't a poor girl trapped in there, but that girl probably did have friends and family who were traumatized by her coming back from the dead and then disappearing. 

1 hour ago, sarvenaz said:

But still, I don't think any kind of relationship with Demons or Angles would be consensual, even if the vessel/meat suit was dead or with no spirit. It is still that person's body, even if they are no longer using it.....

Personally, I'd have preferred they just didn't go the route of Sam and Ruby having sex, but I don't think there's really any consent issues here. Think of it like a hermit crab. They find a shell to carry around and protect them, but when they outgrow that shell, they find a new one. They don't get to dictate what happens to the previous shell anymore. 

[Aeryn13]

Quote

I think they were trying to find a way to make Sam boinking Ruby a little less icky.

They admitted this back then. The writers` room as a whole didn`t even think about it but Gamble, who was invested in Sam. spoke up. If not for that, noone would have even thought about any consent issues. The nepotism duo probably dreamed about having Ruby possess a dog for the actual deed. 

Personally, I can`t look at those scenes anymore that the actors are a real life couple. Sometimes I`m weird like that, some real life couples, I can watch onscreen love-making scenes of and still disassociate in my mind to see the characers and with some, I see a home-movie and nope out of there.