Supernatural Bitterness & Unpopular Opinions: You All Suck

[ahrtee]

52 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

Close but no cigar!  Lol!  I'm only interested if they actually gave someone money, since the issue was whether or not Dean would have sent Cas off without a penny - so the credit cards to Claire and Mary count (to me) but not the 'food and supplies' for Kevin.  Besides, they weren't exactly sending Kevin off on his own as he was staying on Garth's boat as I recall.  And since we didn't actually see them pay for either bus ticket, I think that's also too ambiguous to say that giving people cash is something that Sam and Dean are in the habit of doing as they send people off.  JMO, of course.  

Money is actually the least of the issue in caring, and giving money to complete (or near) strangers doesn't suggest the same level of "caring for family" that Dean has shown over and over with Cas:

He's always tried to teach Cas about being human and help him get by in the real world (even if he did tease him about it).

He's stood up for/protected him from angels and demons. 

He looked for/worried about him over and over whenever Cas was missing/in danger (from angels or otherwise)/taken over by various evil beings.  I don't remember any time when there was any kind of threat to Cas when Dean *didn't* worry about him.

He carried Cas's freaking trenchcoat with him for a year when he thought Cas was dead.

He also declared unconditionally that Cas was his brother.  

To me, that shows the same kind of caring that he has given only to his family.  Therefore, it doesn't make sense *to me* that he would just kick him to the curb without at least making sure he can take care of himself.  

Did they show Dean giving Cas money? No.  Do they have to?  Not necessarily, because, as others pointed out, the implication that he would take care of him makes sense to me, given Dean's character and his worry about family.  Or to put it the other way, it *doesn't* make sense that he wouldn't worry about Cas, given how many times he's stressed about his safety in the past.  

But I guess most of it depends on people's perception of Dean's character.  Those who think that he's oblivious, unaware of others' needs, or just uncaring, will believe that he just let Cas go.  Those who think he's protective of his friends/family, a caregiver and worrier, will believe that he gave him money.   But in the absence of any *onscreen* verification either way, people will believe whatever they want to, and it seems nothing is going to change anyone's opinions.    

[catrox14]

23 minutes ago, Bessie said:

I thnk he probably did help out Castiel, but those boys have been pretty fricken clueless at times. How bout Magda (I think that was her name) who was just a kid that had to be severely traumatized after being tortured by her mother and witnessed the murder of her father and brother. And the boys just leave her at a bus stop. Really compassionate there, boys!

The boys didn't leave her there. The CPS people did. They were long gone. So that one isn't on them at all.

[SueB]

1 hour ago, catrox14 said:

The boys didn't leave her there. The CPS people did. They were long gone. So that one isn't on them at all.

I think it's fair that they left her to what they thought were competent CPS people going to live with an Aunt in California.  The BMoL post-event murder thing was not a reasonable to expect.

As for not giving Cas money... honestly, I can see either way. But I'm leaning toward not giving him money.  But not because Dean was being mean to Cas but because he didn't appreciate Cas' circumstances (even though he SHOULD have).  Cas was living out of the back of the Gas & Sip and had a toothbrush and one pair of clothes to his name.  So, it doesn't seem like he had money.  But if you recall, Dean also forgot Cas needed a ride in "Heaven Can't Wait".  

It's like Dean has this blind spot regarding Cas.  And honestly, he shouldn't ... but he does.  Dean seems to see Cas as all powerful and yet he also sees him as child-like.  He told him to "get your ass back to the Bunker"in 9.1 and then says he's 'above this' job at the gas n sip.  And it COULD be chalked up to inconsistent writing.  But it's consistently inconsistent IMO.  Like he really has a hard time wrapping his head around Cas' competencies.  Dean unambiguously has zeroe'd in on Cas' "heart", he knows Cas will always want to do the right thing.  Like 100% of the time.  Even if it's a dumbass idea.  And he keeps track if Cas is powered up or not.  But it's like he forgets basic competency of living is a work in progress.  Now, in S12, we had him explaining how to talk to the waitress.  He called it a "teaching moment".  So maybe at mid-season of S9, Dean realized how much a "fish out of water" Cas really was.   

[RulerofallIsurvey]

2 hours ago, ahrtee said:

Did they show Dean giving Cas money? No.  Do they have to?  Not necessarily, because, as others pointed out, the implication that he would take care of him makes sense to me, given Dean's character and his worry about family.  Or to put it the other way, it *doesn't* make sense that he wouldn't worry about Cas, given how many times he's stressed about his safety in the past.  

I don't know.  That's not enough to convince me, because on the other hand, if Dean was so worried about Cas like family, then it doesn't make sense to kick him to the curb at all.  Then it will be pointed out that well, Gadreel basically gave Dean an ultimatum: Cas goes or I do and if I do then Sam dies.  And of course the Dean Prime Directive of Save Sammy kicks in.  To which, I'd say: exactly.  Dean was under tremendous stress at that moment, and so I don't think it unreasonable for Dean to not completely appreciate Cas' circumstances as @SueB pointed out.    ::shrug:;  It's not that I think Dean's character is lacking in some way as I think some people are interpreting this opinion.  

Edited September 9, 2017 by RulerofallIsurvey

[DittyDotDot]

6 hours ago, SueB said:

As for not giving Cas money... honestly, I can see either way. But I'm leaning toward not giving him money.  But not because Dean was being mean to Cas but because he didn't appreciate Cas' circumstances (even though he SHOULD have).  Cas was living out of the back of the Gas & Sip and had a toothbrush and one pair of clothes to his name.  So, it doesn't seem like he had money.  But if you recall, Dean also forgot Cas needed a ride in "Heaven Can't Wait".

That's pretty close to my take on it, except I still imagine that he tossed a credit card or cash his way while also shoving him out the door before Sam figured out what was really happening. But, yeah, part of the point of the storyline, IMO, is that Dean didn't understand why Cass would have difficulty being a human. He couldn't see it from Cass's point of view of never having to worry about food and shelter previously. But, I also think Dean realized what Cass was going through after he saw him at the Gas 'N Sip and I think he realized he may have not handled that situation properly. 

So, as long as they learn and grow, I feel like they're not horrible people. 

[AwesomO4000]

2 hours ago, catrox14 said:

IMO, what happens on screen is considered canon. And at the same time not everything that is canon  in the past must be shown on screen each time for it to stand as canon in the future, like Dean giving Cas food or money. IMO, if the thing that was common in the past, changes then yes, that change should be addressed on screen in some way.  Dean evicting Cas is a change to the past and it was shown why Dean did it. If it had never been shown why Dean did it, then I would be saying' NOPE, party foul" that's a change and it needs to be shown.  YMMV  

In a lame example, we don't see Dean and Sam stopping to pee and eat all the time to understand that yes, they will eat and pee since it was established once that they do stop to pee and eat, it's not necessary to show that for it to be true in the now or in the future.

IMO, Dean's history with caregiving others via food or money, implies that even when he told Cas he had to leave, I don't see him sending him off empty handed, be it money or food. That IMO would be OOC for Dean to do thus, I don't need to see to think he would have done it. And as guilt ridden as Dean is most all the time,  he would have given Cas money or food if nothing else than to assuage his own guilt.  And all of that IMO, comports with Dean's past canon history so I don't need to see it again to think he would have done the same thing again.

I would agree with you except for this being the Carver era. And apparently for him as show runner sometimes, it didn't matter what was shown in the past - even multiple times in the past in some cases - as being usual behavior. If he decided a character would do something differently, it became canon whether he explained it well or not. Sam not looking for Dean is a good example. There had been many times before Sam looked for Dean when he went missing or tried to get him back, even when he was dead: "What Is...", "Mystery Spot", after "No Rest...", "Point of No Return", "Time After Time..." that last example very similar to Dean going missing at the end of season 7 and with much less to go on than Sam had in the Dick Roman case, but the explanation Carver had Sam give this time was some supposed "agreement" they had... which Sam had again never before honored. Even the explanation that he thought Dean was dead held no water, because what evidence did he have that Dean was dead? That he never confirmed that made no sense to me.

But even if some people buy that that was somehow not out of character for Sam, then there was an even better example with Kevin. Kevin for sure was not dead when Sam saw him disappear, and Sam knew Crowley had him. Am I supposed to believe that it was in character that Sam wouldn't at the very least summon Crowley and try to get Kevin back? Apparently yes. Even though we had at least one example in the past when an acquaintance went missing with much less to go on and Sam went to great lengths to at least look for her - Ava. As far as I remember, no good explanation was ever given as to why Sam made this behavioral change. Sam said something about "nothing says family like the whole family being dead"... except he had no evidence that Kevin was dead, so that makes no sense. Carver just decided to change Sam's usual behavior, and so he did. No explanation given. To add insult to injury, even though Carver has Sam do these things, he has Sam say "Look, I'm still the same guy, Dean." Really? Thanks for nothing, Carver. But we the viewers had to accept that behavior of Sam's as canon anyway, explanation or not.

See my explanations below for further clarification...

1 hour ago, ahrtee said:

But I guess most of it depends on people's perception of Dean's character.  Those who think that he's oblivious, unaware of others' needs, or just uncaring, will believe that he just let Cas go.  Those who think he's protective of his friends/family, a caregiver and worrier, will believe that he gave him money.   But in the absence of any *onscreen* verification either way, people will believe whatever they want to, and it seems nothing is going to change anyone's opinions.

I disagree. I will sometimes change my opinion - and have done so in the past, and have even stated so in posts before  - if I think a better explanation is given.  And my reason for thinking Dean likely didn't give Castiel money has nothing to do with my perception of Dean's character at all. It actually has to do with who wrote the episode. The writers who wrote the episode are the same writers who had Sam in just one of their episodes... hell one scene: 1) say that nope feeling like a "warrior" (In this case saving someone) did nothing for him, likely never did. 2) say that in the year off that he took with Amelia he had something he never had before - a normal life. That he got to see what that felt like (implying it was for the first time) 3) have a flashback which implied that no one in his life ever before Amelia ever celebrated his birthday.

1. Highly unlikely - it was Sam who insisted he wanted to go back to their reality from the "French Mistake" one because "We don't even mean the same thing here, man" meaning that Sam enjoys making a difference. But apparently I'm supposed to believe that Sam thinks now that maybe he never enjoyed being a hunter, and supposedly this is maybe even canon.
2. Bullcrap! His time at college with Jessica was feeling what it felt like to have a normal life and he loved Jessica. Implying that this didn't happen or that somehow he didn't love Jessica as much as Amelia I call bullcrap on. Sam also after getting a taste of that normal life had decided he didn't really want normal he "wanted this" (him and Dean hunting). And stated so multiple times in the series. To imply that he never did and/or always just wanted a normal life, I also call bullcrap on. Now I know there are people who will disagree with me on that second point, but I think the first one concerning Jessica is fairly solid. Again, I'm supposed to see Sam as maybe never having had a "normal" time in his life before.
3. I'm supposed to believe Dean - who shot of a bunch of fireworks in a field with Sam once - never took little Sam out for cake for his birthday at any point? Or that baking cookies for you just because Jessica never made Sam a birthday cake? Sure we never saw that, but still it seems fairly unlikely to me. But apparently I'm supposed to see that as canon.

So could I see these writers having Dean not give Castiel money? You bet I could, because based on just that one example above for Sam from season 8, they apparently aren't always so good at getting characterization correct in my opinion.

So while I myself am not so sure and see both sides of this - both @catrox14 and @SueB make compelling arguments - it likely doesn't matter so much, because if I had to guess, I'd say not give him money, because that's what I think Buckner and Ross-Lemming intended when they wrote it. Because sometimes, they suck... In my opinion.

[RulerofallIsurvey]

5 minutes ago, AwesomO4000 said:

because if I had to guess, I'd say not give him money, because that's what I think Buckner and Ross-Lemming intended when they wrote it. Because sometimes, they suck... In my opinion.

Lolol!  And then there's this^.

[DittyDotDot]

5 hours ago, AwesomO4000 said:

I'd say not give him money, because that's what I think Buckner and Ross-Lemming intended when they wrote it. Because sometimes, they suck... In my opinion.

Only sometimes? ;)

[ILoveReading]

The whole Dean asks Cas to leave the bunker never made sense to me.  Because the very next episode they had Sam and Dean fixing an angel finding machine and Gadreel had no objections to that.  

It seems to me that a machine lighting up exactly where Sam was standing would be a far bigger clue to Sam that something was going on, then a possibility of angels coming looking for Cas.

It's why I sometimes wonder if the writers have any clue what the previous one did. 

[AwesomO4000]

14 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

Only sometimes? ;)

Heh, okay I should say "mostly they suck."

There are a few somewhat notable exceptions though: "Of Grave Importance" and "Soul Survivor" especially, but I also enjoyed "Blade Runners" and "The Hunter Games" and even some of "Oh Brother Where Art Thou."

Edited September 9, 2017 by AwesomO4000

[gonzosgirrl]

I don't know how unpopular it is, but I am most assuredly bitter, and I pray to Chuck that Supernatural doesn't end its run under Dabb.  In my opinion, his showrunnership (is too a word) is the worst thing that ever happened to the show and everything I hear about the new season only reinforces it.

[Pondlass1]

On 9/8/2017 at 11:17 PM, ILoveReading said:

's why I sometimes wonder if the writers have any clue what the previous one did.

There's no show bible for reference.  No writers' room. They write in isolation.  Each with their own fav storyline.  And Dabb provides little cohesion. That's why we lost Sam & Dean along the way so many times this season.  Dabb was all about Mary and the BMOL. Season 12 really wasn't much about S&D was it?  Many episodes they could have slept in.  And right from the first episode '....we don't care about the sun almost wiping out life on earth, or how you fixed it.... just give us names of American hunters... don't know why we want them or what we're going to do with them, or even why we're asking you since you seem to work independently but..."  WTF??!

Robbie Thompson went a little bit nuts with his Charlie character marysue-ing all over the place.  He reined it in thankfully towards the end.  Now we have Dabb, who's apparently fixated on  Lucifer & Son.  Nothing against Mark P - he's a good solid actor - but Lucifer ain't no  Crowley.  He's just plain galling.

 I am looking forward the the AU episodes and the AU characters we meet.  Might be something new and interesting there. I'd love to see an AU Dean just to give Jensen a chance to flex his acting muscles, but doubt they'd go there.

[DittyDotDot]

It seems to me the actual unpopular opinion around here is: I'm fine with what Dabb's done with the show. I enjoyed quite a bit of S12, more than I enjoyed of S8-10 combined, probably. Would I like the show to be more? Sure. But for a show in it's 13th season, and after four different showrunners, it's pretty remarkable the show is still plugging along at all. I'm looking forward to S13 myself.

1 hour ago, Pondlass1 said:

There's no show bible for reference.  No writers' room. They write in isolation.

While I agree they don't seem to have a show bible--which is totally ridiculous--I believe they do in fact have a writer's room. The writer's do tend to write more on their own when it's time to knuckle down and write the final draft of a script, but they break stories and hammer out the details together. And, from what I can tell, each script gets scrutinized by the whole room, so every writer has read every script at some point. Whether or not they watch the finished product--or rewatch episodes to refresh their memory from time to time--is more the question, IMO. Some seem to, and it shows, other's not so much, and that also shows.

Edited September 11, 2017 by DittyDotDot

[Wayward Son]

While I was musing on my reply to Catrox below, I got thinking. Dean's incessant and reckless need to ensure Sam isn't dead is actually a Campbell family trait. When Sam is dead or in danger of being so Dean has proven time and time again he is willing to sacrifice himself and others to ensure Sam comes out of things unharmed. He sacrificed himself when he made that deal with the crossroads demon in All Hell Breaks Loose Part 2, he sacrificed the eternal fate of Adam's soul, without a second thought, when he chose for Death to resurrect Sam and he sacrificed Benny's life when he killed Benny in order to ensure Sam had a guide to getting out of purgatory. Then there was his murder of Death without stopping to consider the potential consequences of killing Death himself*. Dean has proven time and time again a recklessness when it comes to Sam's life. He has cast aside family members he doesn't feel that same familial bond with, he has cast aside friends and even put the fate of the world itself at risk. This is behaviour very similar to Mary when she chose to resurrect John with barely a thought for her parents during the deal made during In the Beginning, or Samuel Campbell who was willing to place the life of the daughter he cared for above the lives of the grandchildren he had no real connection to. The reckless and selfish behaviour displayed by Dean on numerous occasions is very much a family trait and further proves Dean is far from morally superior to the others and certainly wasn't adopted.

 

*I am aware the writers took the easy way out nothing happened re Death's death, but Dean didn't know that would be the case. 

** Please don't respond with examples of when Sam, Cas etc have done equally horrible things. This isn't about bitch vs jerk. I am not saying Dean is any worse than the others. I am saying he is equal to the rest of them in terms of moral fiber. 

 

On 9/8/2017 at 6:19 PM, catrox14 said:

Riddle me this. Why wouldn't Dean have given Cas money or at least the rest of the burritos? What about Dean makes you believe he didn't? 

ETA: I don't mean this in a challenging way or to get you to change your mind. I'm legitimately just trying to understand your viewpoint.

As I outlined above (leaving Adam in the pit, killing Benny etc) Dean has consistently displayed a ruthless and selfish streak when he feels Sam is in danger and acts upon his "take care of Sammy" directive. In light of that, I find it perfectly in character for Dean to  have not give Castiel money in his rush to get Cas out of the bunker to ensure Sam was kept safe from "Ezekiel's" threat. 

Edited September 11, 2017 by Wayward Son

[Katy M]

25 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

*I am aware the writers took the easy way out nothing happened re Death's death, but Dean didn't know that would be the case. 

I am honestly quite annoyed by that.  And that we are still waiting for these "cosmic" consequences that Billie promised.  I'm even semi-annoyed that the only thing that happened when they broke open the leviathan tablet was that a prophet was awakened.  With the lightning and thunder, or whatever, and Dean remarking that it sounded like the universe was saying stop, well, you should stop and if you don't, you would think there would be more consequences besides a prophet being awakened and majorly inconvenicing hospitals by every woman almost ready to do so went into labor. 

[ILoveReading]

31 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

*I am aware the writers took the easy way out nothing happened re Death's death, but Dean didn't know that would be the case.

I was so disappointed in that the writers just ignored it.  I can speak for a lot of my fellow Dean fans when I say they were very disappointed too.

[companionenvy]

56 minutes ago, Wayward Son said:

As I outlined above (leaving Adam in the pit, killing Benny etc) Dean has consistently displayed a ruthless and selfish streak when he feels Sam is in danger and acts upon his "take care of Sammy" directive. In light of that, I find it perfectly in character for Dean to  have not give Castiel money in his rush to get Cas out of the bunker to ensure Sam was kept safe from "Ezekiel's" threat.

I don't disagree with you in principle that Dean is willing to be reckless to the point of selfishness when Sam is in danger (as is Sam when Dean is in danger), but I don't think these are the best examples. 

There was no way that both Adam and Sam were getting out of the cage. Dean was given a choice, and he chose Sam. I suppose I could see an argument that the more heroic thing to do would have been to save Adam, who was more of an innocent in the whole affair and hadn't gotten a choice about jumping into the pit, but I think almost anyone would have done what Dean did in this case. Maybe Sam vs. a random five year old child would have introduced a different moral calculus, but that wasn't the scenario at hand. Both Sam and Adam were adults who had been screwed over majorly by supernatural forces. Only one was Dean's beloved brother, and the other was a virtual stranger. No contest.

Dean was asking Benny to put himself at risk, but Benny chose to stay in purgatory. He could have gotten out if he had wanted to. Dean also asked Benny; he didn't force him. 

I don't think it is in character for Dean not to have given Cas money because giving Cas money would have taken very little time, and I don't think it would be credible for Dean to believe that if Ezekiel saw that he was taking five minutes to get some stuff together, he was going to leave Sam to die. There was no countdown clock. Asking Cas to leave to protect Sam is, IMO, in character, but not doing it in the way he did. 

However, I agree with those who don't think we're supposed to assume that Dean gave Cas money. At the very least, he doesn't seem to have given him any kind of sufficient support. The show goes out of its way to show us how poorly Cas is faring once he leaves the bunker. If someone wants to fanwank that Dean gave Cas all the money he could spare and Cas just ran out of funds, or that Dean tried to stay in touch with Cas but Cas was too ashamed and hurt to let him, there's room to do that, but it isn't the most reasonable extrapolation from what we see on screen, which is that Dean more or less left Cas high and dry. Which I think is totally out of character for Dean, to the point where I tend to blame crappy writing rather than Dean. 

Edited September 11, 2017 by companionenvy

[trxr4kids]

5 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

Which I think is totally out of character for Dean, to the point where I tend to blame crappy writing rather than Dean. 

The Carver years imo are full of examples of Sam and Dean both doing things that seemed completely OOC to me for who they were and where they were at in their lives at the time but alas it's all cannon now, stupid show.

[Casseiopeia]

13 hours ago, gonzosgirrl said:

I don't know how unpopular it is, but I am most assuredly bitter, and I pray to Chuck that Supernatural doesn't end its run under Dabb.  In my opinion, his showrunnership (is too a word) is the worst thing that ever happened to the show and everything I hear about the new season only reinforces it.

I couldn't agree more and sadly it looks like Dabb is going to take the show to it's end.

[Pondlass1]

52 minutes ago, ILoveReading said:

I was so disappointed in that the writers just ignored it.  I can speak for a lot of my fellow Dean fans when I say they were very disappointed too.

I'm a Julian fan and  I'm still bloody miffed. We lost a great character. There was absolutely no need for Dean to kill Death.  The spell was underway - darkness was about to be released and the Mark gone.  Death's death was for nothing.  We can only hope it didn't take and he'll pop up somewhere in the future.  I don't think Julian is committed to another gig.

I think the issue with Cas is the same as for Mary.... also Kevin, etc.  The actors are not regular cast members so writers must continually  have them sent off somewhere (that doesn't make sense).  Kevin, for instance?  Why on earth would they put him on a rusty boat when the bunker has rooms and levels and all sorts of places to hide and be safe (although that revolving front door is a bit of an issue).  Same thing with Mary.  Why have her stomp off and need space?  She could've stayed at the bunker and been nicer.  We don't have to see her everyday.  Just a mention she's around or gone to visit Jodi or something.  Same thing with the concocted Dean tells Cas he must leave scenario.  I can't even remember why.  Something about Ezekiel.  

Thing is... why do writers feel that a character that's not in every episode must be sent off somewhere?

[Katy M]

9 minutes ago, Pondlass1 said:

I'm a Julian fan and  I'm still bloody miffed. We lost a great character. There was absolutely no need for Dean to kill Death.  The spell was underway - darkness was about to be released and the Mark gone.  Death's death was for nothing.  We can only hope it didn't take and he'll pop up somewhere in the future.  I don't think Julian is committed to another gig.

From a show point, there was no reason to kill Death.  But, from Dean's viewpoint, he didn't know that the spell was underway and Death said that if Dean didn't kill Sam, he would.  For Dean, that was enough of a reason.

[gonzosgirrl]

1 hour ago, companionenvy said:

I don't disagree with you in principle that Dean is willing to be reckless to the point of selfishness when Sam is in danger (as is Sam when Dean is in danger), but I don't think these are the best examples. 

There was no way that both Adam and Sam were getting out of the cage. Dean was given a choice, and he chose Sam. I suppose I could see an argument that the more heroic thing to do would have been to save Adam, who was more of an innocent in the whole affair and hadn't gotten a choice about jumping into the pit, but I think almost anyone would have done what Dean did in this case. Maybe Sam vs. a random five year old child would have introduced a different moral calculus, but that wasn't the scenario at hand. Both Sam and Adam were adults who had been screwed over majorly by supernatural forces. Only one was Dean's beloved brother, and the other was a virtual stranger. No contest.

Dean was asking Benny to put himself at risk, but Benny chose to stay in purgatory. He could have gotten out if he had wanted to. Dean also asked Benny; he didn't force him. 

I don't think it is in character for Dean not to have given Cas money because giving Cas money would have taken very little time, and I don't think it would be credible for Dean to believe that if Ezekiel saw that he was taking five minutes to get some stuff together, he was going to leave Sam to die. There was no countdown clock. Asking Cas to leave to protect Sam is, IMO, in character, but not doing it in the way he did. 

However, I agree with those who don't think we're supposed to assume that Dean gave Cas money. At the very least, he doesn't seem to have given him any kind of sufficient support. The show goes out of its way to show us how poorly Cas is faring once he leaves the bunker. If someone wants to fanwank that Dean gave Cas all the money he could spare and Cas just ran out of funds, or that Dean tried to stay in touch with Cas but Cas was too ashamed and hurt to let him, there's room to do that, but it isn't the most reasonable extrapolation from what we see on screen, which is that Dean more or less left Cas high and dry. Which I think is totally out of character for Dean, to the point where I tend to blame crappy writing rather than Dean. 

Dean didn't make Cas leave on a whim, he was emotionally blackmailed into it, and it was clear (at least to me) that it was tearing Dean up to do it.  I just don't buy that the guy who refused to leave Purgatory until he found, and at least tried to rescue, Castiel, would just turn him out onto the street with nothing.

[ILoveReading]

Dean is also the only character who gave Adam a second thought.

[Pondlass1]

Oh @Katy M Dean's sick, tangled, crazy brotherly codependence is the stuff of a million psychology theses.  If only Dean could love ME the way he loves Sam ::sigh::

[companionenvy]

8 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

Dean didn't make Cas leave on a whim, he was emotionally blackmailed into it, and it was clear (at least to me) that it was tearing Dean up to do it.  I just don't buy that the guy who refused to leave Purgatory until he found, and at least tried to rescue, Castiel, would just turn him out onto the street with nothing.

I didn't say he made Cas leave on a whim, and he was absolutely emotionally blackmailed into doing it. I also agree that Dean Winchester as established over (at that point) eight plus seasons would not have kicked out Cas with nothing. If asked, the current crop of writers might even say that Dean gave Cas money, fake credit cards, etc.

What we saw on screen is another matter.

[gonzosgirrl]

7 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

I didn't say he made Cas leave on a whim, and he was absolutely emotionally blackmailed into doing it. I also agree that Dean Winchester as established over (at that point) eight plus seasons would not have kicked out Cas with nothing. If asked, the current crop of writers might even say that Dean gave Cas money, fake credit cards, etc.

What we saw on screen is another matter.

I know you didn't say that - and I realized after I hit submit it might read that way. Sorry! I was just establishing my reasoning for the next sentence. :)  Agreed, we didn't see it on screen, but the conversation was whether or not it could be reasonably assumed that he helped him out with some money or a card. And what did we see onscreen? I'm not positive of the timeline (and neither is Superwiki) but some time does elapse before we see Cas again. He could have used up whatever Dean gave him, or maybe not used it at all if he was still feeling guilty, or is pissed about having to leave, etc. Since it is never addressed, and given what we know of Dean and his past with Cas, I think it's more logical and reasonable to assume he did what he could.

Edited September 11, 2017 by gonzosgirrl

[companionenvy]

28 minutes ago, gonzosgirrl said:

know you didn't say that - and I realized after I hit submit it might read that way. Sorry! I was just establishing my reasoning for the next sentence. :)  Agreed, we didn't see it on screen, but the conversation was whether or not it could be reasonably assumed that he helped him out with some money or a card. And what did we see onscreen? I'm not positive of the timeline (and neither is Superwiki) but some time does elapse before we see Cas again. He could have used up whatever Dean gave him, or maybe not used it at all if he was still feeling guilty, or is pissed about having to leave, etc. Since it is never addressed, and given what we know of Dean and his past with Cas, I think it's more logical and reasonable to assume he did what he could.

Gotcha, and no problem. I guess my thinking is that what we saw on screen seemed to be designed to establish that 1)Dean was doing something shitty under duress and 2) that Cas was without resources and not in any kind of regular communication with Dean. Since those are the takeaways of those scenes, for me, I don't feel authorized to "read in" mitigating factors (i.e, the possibility that Dean had actually given Cas a substantial sum of money and Cas had exhausted it/been mugged/ had his fake card declined, or that Dean called to check in on him regularly and Cas kept him at arm's length) in the way I might if an issue just hadn't been addressed at all.

For instance, I could believe easily that Dean  checked in on Krissy (from Adventures in Babysitting), especially after Garth went MIA (as far as he and Sam knew), without seeing it, because a) I think it is plausible to think he might have done if he had a moment between crises and b) I don't think it is the kind of thing we'd expect to see on screen. Most importantly, it doesn't violate any narrative the show is pushing. By contrast, if Krissy came back as a villain and Dean was made to feel guilty about not keeping tabs on her,, I wouldn't then assume, "Well, he might feel guilty about not doing more, but I bet he checked on her sometimes over the years," even though that might not technically be incompatible with the story as shown, because once the storyline becomes "Dean was irresponsible," I have to assume he actually is being irresponsible unless I actually see evidence to the contrary. To me, Dean giving Cas any kind of significant help during s9 is the latter kind of case. Frankly, even if he'd given him some leftover food and spare cash, I would have expected to actually see as scene where that happened. As it is, what we're seeing, IMO, is Dean being OOC. 

[Katy M]

11 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

Gotcha, and no problem. I guess my thinking is that what we saw on screen seemed to be designed to establish that 1)Dean was doing something shitty under duress and 2) that Cas was without resources and not in any kind of regular communication with Dean. Since those are the takeaways of those scenes, for me, I don't feel authorized to "read in" mitigating factors (i.e, the possibility that Dean had actually given Cas a substantial sum of money and Cas had exhausted it/been mugged/ had his fake card declined, or that Dean called to check in on him regularly and Cas kept him at arm's length) in the way I might if an issue just hadn't been addressed at all.

I don't think dean gave Cas a "substantial" amount of money.  Just whatever cash he had in his wallet.  Maybe 2 or 300 dollars.  That would have been long gone in a week or two, probably.

[ahrtee]

1 hour ago, companionenvy said:

What we saw on screen is another matter.

I think that's the point.  *We didn't see ANYTHING.*  It's entirely up to the audience to decide what happened, and they can interpret however they choose.  However, IMO Dean being so callous/coldhearted that he would *deliberately* throw Cas to the curb without a second thought is so OOC (as you pointed out) that I it doesn't make sense to me.   

I can see him either not thinking about it at the time (because of the stress of the situation or because it didn't occur to him that Cas might need help.)  But that doesn't explain why *Sam* didn't question him about it, which would have reminded him at least.  Even if he didn't think about it till after Cas left, he could have called and offered help (or at least asked if he needed anything) as soon as he realized it.  Cas did still have his cell phone. 

 I just looked up the transcripts, and we have Dean telling Cas "sorry, buddy, you can't stay," and Cas looking shocked.  Cut to black..  No additional scenes to show packing,  sad farewells, or any chance to slip him any money or advice.  To me, that would be the time--when Cas is about to leave and Dean is watching guiltily that he would ask, "Do you need anything?"  Now at that point, I could see Cas saying, "no, I'll be fine," out of pride, and thus leaving without any money.  But that wouldn't be on Dean.

The next episode shows Dean coming back from dropping off Kevin in Branson and Sam looking for a way to "help Cas" (which turned out to be the angel tracker.)  The *only* thing that was mentioned was:

SAM: All right. Well, first, I think I might have found a way to help Cas.

[DEAN looks up suddenly concerned]: Did you talk to him?

SAM: No.  And, by the way, I still don't understand why he left in the first place. I mean, the bunker is the safest place for him. Bartholomew and -- and who knows how many other angels are out there, gunning for them.

DEAN: Hey, look, nobody wants him here more than I do, okay? But, uh, he felt like he'd bring trouble down on us, so he had to split.  But if you got a way to help him, I'm all ears.

(emphasis mine)

Sam wasn't angry or upset with Dean.  He could have said, "I still don't understand why you didn't at least give him some money/a ride/a credit card to tide him over."  Or even "are you sure he'll be allright?"  He didn't seem in the least concerned, which to me, seems to indicate one of two things:

1.  He assumes/believes/knows that Dean *did* give Cas money/help; or

2.  He also doesn't think it's important or necessary to give Cas money.

And in case anyone wants to argue that Gadreel was influencing Sam, I'd say that there was no hint that Gadreel was influencing anything about Sam except when he was actually in control, and there was no reason why Gadreel would want Cas left penniless or in trouble--he just wanted him away from the bunker, not dead.  

So it all boils down to personal interpretation again, and how much you want to read behind the lines.  If you're only going to accept things that actually were shown (or acknowledged) onscreen, then Sam didn't actually kill the nurse in season 4.  

Edited September 11, 2017 by ahrtee
Wrong season. Oops.

[DittyDotDot]

5 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

But that doesn't explain why *Sam* didn't question him about it, which would have reminded him at least.

Sam did question Dean about it in the next episode. Sam wasn't aware Dean had kicked him out, Dean told him Cass left of his own volition.

Edited September 11, 2017 by DittyDotDot

[ahrtee]

2 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

Sam did question Dean about it in the next episode. Dean told him Cass didn't want to stay and left of his own volition.

Sam only wondered why Cas had left.  He didn't question whether Dean gave him any money or help.  I quoted the actual conversation in my post.  My point was that if Sam was really concerned (or believed Dean had done something wrong by *not* giving Cas any help) he would have mentioned it.  He's never been shy about expressing his opinion when he thinks Dean is wrong.  

Edited September 11, 2017 by ahrtee

[DittyDotDot]

10 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

Sam only wondered why Cas had left.  He didn't question whether Dean gave him any money or help.  I quoted the actual conversation in my post.  My point was that if Sam was really concerned (or believed Dean had done something wrong by *not* giving Cas any help) he would have mentioned it.  He's never been shy about expressing his opinion when he thinks Dean is wrong.  

My impression was that Dean had told Sam a lie about why Cass left--it was one of the many lies Dean had to tell Sam in order to keep the angel inside Sam a secret--so, I don't think whether Dean had given Cass money was really on Sam's mind as much as why Cass had left to begin with.

Edited September 11, 2017 by DittyDotDot

[companionenvy]

18 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

So it all boils down to personal interpretation again, and how much you want to read behind the lines.  If you're only going to accept things that actually were shown (or acknowledged) onscreen, then Sam didn't actually kill the nurse in season 4

I think at this point we'll just have to agree to disagree about what the show was suggesting about the extent of help that Dean may or may not have given Cas, but there's a major difference between saying "in this case, I think assuming a missing scene contravenes the purpose of the scene we do get" and "anything not shown on screen must not have happened." One is a reasonable - if hardly inarguable -- perspective, the other is just silly. 

[ahrtee]

25 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

My impression was that Dean had told Sam a lie about why Cass left--it was one of the many lies Dean had to tell Sam in order to keep the angel inside Sam a secret--so, I don't think whether Dean had given Cass money was really on Sam's mind as much as why Cass had left to begin with.

But now you're back to interpreting based on what you believe, not what was shown, which is where this discussion started in the first place--which was about what was actually shown or said vs. what was implied/believed, based on your interpretation of the character.  And that was actually my point, which I've said several times already:  that in the absence of anything canon, people can (and are expected to) fill in the blanks themselves.

Frankly, I don't think Dean told Cas anything other that what was specifically said in Slumber Party quoted above:  

42 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

But, uh, he felt like he'd bring trouble down on us, so he had to split.  

 And again, Sam didn't seem particularly worried in either case.  But that's my interpretation, so we can agree to disagree. 

18 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

I think at this point we'll just have to agree to disagree about what the show was suggesting about the extent of help that Dean may or may not have given Cas, but there's a major difference between saying "in this case, I think assuming a missing scene contravenes the purpose of the scene we do get" and "anything not shown on screen must not have happened." One is a reasonable - if hardly inarguable -- perspective, the other is just silly. 

Perfectly happy to A to D.  But I don't follow your statement about a missing scene "contravening the purpose" of any scene*.    I was merely giving an exaggerated example to question those who did seem to be saying that "if it wasn't shown, it didn't happen," and sorry if you misunderstood.  However,  I don't think any perspective or opinion should be called "silly."  

 

*ETA: unless you're saying the actual purpose of the scene was to show that Dean *didn't* give Cas any help?  At which point, all I can say is, "in your opinion..."  By their nature missing scenes are open to all interpretations, even "silly" ones.

Edited September 11, 2017 by ahrtee

[Katy M]

14 minutes ago, DittyDotDot said:

My impression was that Dean had told Sam a lie about why Cass left--it was one of the many lies Dean had to tell Sam in order to keep the angel inside Sam a secret--so, I don't think whether Dean had given Cass money was really on Sam's mind as much as why Cass had left to begin with.

What I've wondered is if Sam even spoke to Cas after the final scene.  Sam thinks Cas left on his own.  In Holy Terror, Cas thinks Sam knows that Dean told him to leave.  It's hard to see how a goodbye scene went down (unless Gad took over for it which is possible) without at least one of them realizing their mistake.  If Sam is asking Dean in the next epi why Cas is leaving, logic would say he would have asked Cas himself had he had the opportunity.

[DittyDotDot]

3 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

But now you're back to interpreting based on what you believe, not what was shown, which is where this discussion started in the first place--which was about what was actually shown or said vs. what was implied/believed, based on your interpretation of the character.  

Frankly, I don't think Dean told Cas anything other that what was specifically said in Slumber Party quoted above:  

37 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

But, uh, he felt like he'd bring trouble down on us, so he had to split.  

 And again, Sam didn't seem particularly worried in either case.  But that's my interpretation, so we can agree to disagree. 

I guess I don't get your point. I was just responding to your question why Sam didn't question Cass leaving. He did, but Dean told him a lie about why he left. The line you keep quoting is Dean saying that Cass split on his own volition because Cass felt he would would bring the angels down on them--which we know is a lie because we saw Gadreel tell Dean to kick Cass out and saw Dean tell Cass he had to leave in the previous episode. Which is also supported later in both Heaven Can't Wait and Holy Terror. I don't understand what about Dean telling Sam a lie is me making it up, that's what we saw on screen.

[ahrtee]

1 minute ago, DittyDotDot said:

I guess I don't get your point. I was just responding to your question why Sam didn't question Cass leaving. He did, but Dean told him a lie about why he left. The line you keep quoting is Dean saying that Cass split on his own volition because Cass felt he would would bring the angels down on them--which we know is a lie because we saw Gadreel tell Dean to kick Cass out and saw Dean tell Cass he had to leave in the previous episode. Which is also supported later in both Heaven Can't Wait and Holy Terror. I don't understand what about Dean telling Sam a lie is me making it up, that's what we saw on screen.

I think we've been talking about two different things.  I didn't ask why Sam didn't question Cas leaving.  I believe, just like you, that Dean told him a lie about why he left, and Sam accepted it.  My question had to do with Dean offering Cas money, and was specifically about why Sam hadn't asked Dean if he'd given Cas any money or offered any help before he left, not about *why* he left.  My actual quote:

54 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

Sam wasn't angry or upset with Dean.  He could have said, "I still don't understand why you didn't at least give him some money/a ride/a credit card to tide him over."  Or even "are you sure he'll be allright?"  He didn't seem in the least concerned, which to me, seems to indicate one of two things:

My point was not to question what we actually saw on screen, but to give my interpretation about what happened between "fade to black" on ep. 3 and Dean coming back into the bunker in ep. 4.  I've already stated what I believe, and this question was just to give another thought that might support my opinion, but I have no problem with others disagreeing.  

[catrox14]

For me, Dean's behavior with Saving Sam is pathological because of Dean being a parentified child. As  @CluelessDrifter laid out point by point it was always canon, and was confirmed as of 12.22 in canon. MO, even if Dean was adopted at birth, he would have done the same thing because of that parentification.

IMO, the only way Dean will ever be free of that pathology is for Dean to get therapy, or die himself. He will NEVER not try to save Sam. And that is NOT the same thing as Dean being unable to live without Sam himself. He did for a long time in their twenties, and he did with Lisa. Dean traded his life for Sam's because of that pathology. I think I've said this before but to me, if  Dean couldn't live without Sam he would have just killed himself the first time Sam died, but he didn't. He took steps to ensure Sam lived even if it meant he died. He'll do everything else to make sure Sam lives short of selling his own soul again, so yay for a positive step for Dean??

[DittyDotDot]

3 minutes ago, ahrtee said:

I think we've been talking about two different things.  I didn't ask why Sam didn't question Cas leaving.  I believe, just like you, that Dean told him a lie about why he left, and Sam accepted it.  My question had to do with Dean offering Cas money, and was specifically about why Sam hadn't asked Dean if he'd given Cas any money or offered any help before he left, not about *why* he left.

Okay, I must have misread you're post. Sorry. Anyway, I think the answer as to why Sam didn't ask Dean if he gave any money to Cass is in the lie, but that's probably just me.

[catrox14]

I don't see the correlation between Dean lying about why Cas left and him possibly not giving Cas money because of the lie. Those are separate things. If Dean really needed Cas to stay away from the bunker wouldn't it have behooved Dean to make sure Cas had no reason to return and giving him some money would have done that? 

Sam believes Cas left on his own. Sam wouldn't have a reason to wonder if Dean gave hiim money. Money wouldn't be in the conversation at all.

Money has never been a concern with Cas who still had to go to restaurants and participate in human things and he still had to pay for things before he was human. I'm fact we have seen Cas pay for things so Cas did have money. How did Cas come to have money in the past?

[Katy M]

5 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

I don't see the correlation between Dean lying about why Cas left and him possibly not giving Cas money because of the lie. Those are separate things. If Dean really needed Cas to stay away from the bunker wouldn't it have behooved Dean to make sure Cas had no reason to return and giving him some money would have done that? 

Sam believes Cas left on his own. Sam wouldn't have a reason to wonder if Dean gave hiim money. Money wouldn't be in the conversation at all.

Money has never been a concern with Cas who still had to go to restaurants and participate in human things and he still had to pay for things before he was human. I'm fact we have seen Cas pay for things so Cas did have money. How did Cas come to have money in the past?

I honestly don't remember Cas ever paying for anything pre-season 9.  Why would he have to?  He didn't eat. So, he didn't need food, or beverages for that matter.  He didn't  sleep, so he wouldn't need a hotel room.  He never changed his clothes, so he wouldn't need clothes.  Apparently angels don't get dirty because he once told Hannah that they didn't need to shower.  That seems like a money saver right there.  And I know he said that he drank a liquor store that one time, but we weren't there and didn't see him actually pay for anything.  He could have made himself invisible and just flown off a bottle at a time, making the proprietor wonder where it had all disappeared to. 

[catrox14]

He didn't need to eat but in s10 he paid for Claire. 

How did he drink the liquor store id he had no money? Did  he steal it all? Regardless Cas had to pay for gas for his pimp mobile that he drove in s9. Then he had to pay the tow truck driver in S10. He changed coats and ties between s8 and s9. Did he just happen to steal a similar looking trenchcoat? I think he changed ties between s5 and s6.

I'm not being snarky. I'm legitimately asking.

Cas seemed like before s9 he was trying to participate in human social behavior from time to time and some of that involved money.

Edited September 11, 2017 by catrox14

[Katy M]

57 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

He didn't need to eat but in s10 he paid for Claire. 

How did he drink the liquor store id he had no money? Did  he steal it all? Regardless Cas had to pay for gas for his pimp mobile that he drove in s9. Then he had to pay the tow truck driver in S10. He changed coats and ties between s8 and s9. Did he just happen to steal a similar looking trenchcoat? I think he changed ties between s5 and s6.

I'm not being snarky. I'm legitimately asking.

Cas seemed like before s9 he was trying to participate in human social behavior from time to time and some of that involved money.

Post heaven Can't WAit, I think at some point in time, Dean showed him how to do credit card fraud.  It wasn't shown, but yes, he had money and he had to get it from somewhere.  Before s9, I honestly don't think he ever used money. We didn't see it.  And, yes, I think he stole what he drank, probably out of a store that was closed.  Getting in wouldn't have been an issue.  Unless it was warded.  LOL, I just got a visual of the store owner coming in in the morning. "Not again. That's it.  I'm warding for angels."  

[catrox14]

8 minutes ago, Katy M said:

Post heaven Can't WAit, I think at some point in time, Dean showed him how to do credit card fraud.  It wasn't shown, but yes, he had money and he had to get it from somewhere.  Before s9, I honestly don't think he ever used money. We didn't see it.  And, yes, I think he stole what he drank, probably out of a store that was closed.  Getting in wouldn't have been an issue.  Unless it was warded.  LOL, I just got a visual of the store owner coming in in the morning. "Not again. That's it.  I'm warding for angels."  

What about his clothing? He did change his ties a couple of times. Did he steal the ties? LOL What about his underwear? I mean a meatsuit till sweats right? Or does it?  Like how does that work with the meatsuit. He got the cravings from Jimmy to eat burgers...so did he need to ...digest and vacuate said burgers later? Why am I thinking about these things? 

[Katy M]

17 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

What about his clothing? He did change his ties a couple of times. Did he steal the ties? LOL What about his underwear? I mean a meatsuit till sweats right? Or does it?  Like how does that work with the meatsuit. He got the cravings from Jimmy to eat burgers...so did he need to ...digest and vacuate said burgers later? Why am I thinking about these things? 

If they didn't have to shower, I don't think they sweat.  And, it's canon that they don't have to shower.  Cas said it point blank to Hannah in Girls Girls Girls.  Maybe he stole them.  Jimmy probably had some money in his wallet at the time Cas possessed him. Plus credit cards that may have been OK for a one month of usage until he didn't pay the bills.  Maybe somebody gave him ties.  Maybe he stole them.  Maybe angels can magically change their clothing.  And I'm not being snarky about that.  If Gabriel could entirely change his appearance, which he did in Mystery Spot and Changing Channels, why can't an angel change the appearance of his clothing?  And, Cas could disappear within seconds and be back with an object.  You move that fast, you may accidentally collect stuff you didn't even mean to. Who knows?  

[auntvi]

Straight from Castiel's mouth in 12.2 Mamma Mia, no sweat:

 

SAM: Let me ask you a question, uh, Mick is it? Why would we believe any of this?

MICK: Lads...if I wasn't sincere, if I meant you harm, there's a dozen ways I could've come in here and taken you all prisoner instead of being unarmed. Not to mention I powered down all the wardings in this shack so your attack dog could come in. I reckon you could finish me off without breaking a sweat. Am I right?

CASTIEL: I don't sweat under any circumstances.

 

Love that! IMO, the best line he's had in ages!

[Whimsy]

On ‎2‎/‎15‎/‎2017 at 10:46 AM, SilverStormm said:

A friendly reminder:

This is not a debate thread. We expect everyone to respect each others opinions; there are no 'right' or 'wrong' opinions here, only differing ones. Respecting opinions includes stating yours without being overly caustic, whether it be a positive or negative one, because as the laws of physics dictate; every action has an equal and opposite reaction.

 

Thank you.

As a reminder, per this mod note from February, this is not a debate thread.  We've had to hide some posts due to debating.  You may have a new mod team, but we are trying very hard to uphold the same level of modification as before.  Please abide by they same rules.

Also, if you have an issue, do not try to mod others.  Report them and let us handle it. 

[Wayward Son]

Moved from the spoiler thread! There are no spoilers just discussion of the season 12 finale.

11 minutes ago, catrox14 said:

Dean did say he wanted to see if they would work but I don't think it's clear if they were made from archangel blades or not. Either way they didn't kill Lucifer.

Why would Cas have tried to kill Lucifer with a regular angel blade, unless he thought it would work in the AU? Or he had an archangel blade but it didn't work. I don't think it's entirely clear IMO. Unless someone has some other information

Because Dabb considers Castiel to be an absolute idiot, and therefore of course he'd charge at Lucifer with the wrong weapon. This is the same guy who considers Cas to be too incompetent to even complete a simple vampire hunt. Dabb also wrote First Blood IIRC.

[TaurusRose]

I stopped watching SPN religiously after S5 and only dropped in sporadically through S7. I thought SPN should have ended after S5 and after binge watching S8-12 on Netflix, I stand by my original opinion.  I'm amazed that SPN still has an audience, this show is crap.  The introduction of Rowena, Mary Winchester, Claire, and Alex annoyed me to no end. Castiel has been reduced to a sappy, dumbass sad sack. I hope he is dead because he bears no resemblance to the badass angel he was when he first appeared. I never favored him becoming besties with the Winchesters and got so sick of Dean's moralizing and judging a superior being, I couldn't stand it. I wished that Cass had put the big smite on him more times than I could count.

Crowley, in his badass form and in small doses, was entertaining, but he wore out his welcome as well when they neutered him and made him Dean's bitch, too. Why the fuck didn't they get rid of Lucifer and Mary? It's hard to say which of them I hated more. SPN has never known how to pull the plug on characters, especially ones that either they or the fans fall in love with.  Apparently, it didn't matter if said characters became a drain on the show. I really despised the whole BMoL storyline and don't get me started on the spawn of Lucifer. I'm pretty sure I won't bother with S13 when it hits Netflix, it almost hurt (literally) to finish S12. Carry on my wayward sons indeed.  Blech.

Edited September 13, 2017 by taurusrose
Punctuation

[SueB]

I have an unpopular opinion: I don't mind Bobby's "Boo Hoo Princess" speech.   In fact, I think it was the right approach under the circumstances.  

First, Dean WAS giving up.  "I don't know if he ever was." (my brother, speaking about Sam).  Bobby, IMO, rightly wanted to try and still save Sam.  And it's what Dean wanted as well, once he was able to see past the very valid hurt and anger.  Bobby knew that's where it would ultimately land. But he was also short on time.  And Dean letting that horrible exchange fester would have been a lot harder to come by.  So, Bobby telling Dean to reach out to Sam was, IMO, the right answer.

Second, Sam was hopped up on demon blood.  They had firmly established the addiction plot.  So, while Sam needs to be held accountable for his decisions, he's ultimately out of control.  And although the first intervention failed, they needed to try again or risk never getting Sam back.  Which is ultimately NOT what Dean wanted.

Speaking harshly to Dean and essentially telling him to "suck it up" was a variation on "play through the pain".  Just like Dean and his incomprehensible (to Kevin) football analogies, Dean knows sometimes the only way to deal with pain is to ignore it until the crisis is over.  They were in mid-crisis, and letting Sam go would be a big mistake.  So "Boo Hoo Princess" was Bobby-speak for "suck it up".  Bobby wasn't saying Sam was right.  He was saying 'don't throw Sam away.'  

Comparing Dean to John was the PERFECT angle.  John WAS a stubborn asshole.  And Dean had to interject between Sam and John enough to know that John's approach was a failure.  So telling Dean he was acting like John was a way to put it in a perspective Dean was really familiar with.  And when he called Sam, he mentioned "I'm not Dad."  So, IMO, the technique worked.  Dean isn't John, and that's a good thing.

"Family is supposed to make you miserable" is classic Bobby.  Surly.  But Bobby's point was that you stick with them anyway.  

Bobby wasn't defending Sam. He was speaking harshly to Dean to prevent him from making the same mistakes that John did.  Mistakes that he KNEW Dean would ultimately regret.  And the "Boo Hoo Princess" part was Bobby SHOCKING Dean by being such an asshole.  Bobby had already shown concern for both Sam and Dean on more than one occasion.  The empty bottles Dean remarked on when he came back from the dead was a sure indicator that Bobby cared for Dean.  And Dean knows that.  He said in "Lazarus Rising" that Bobby was like a father to him.  

Yes, Bobby could have laid it out more carefully and supported Dean but IMO that was less likely to get through to Dean than taking a harsh approach.  Dean responds to Bobby's authority and being criticized by him is going to get Dean's attention.  

When Sam and Dean went their separate ways for an episode in S5, Bobby didn't do the "Boo Hoo Princess" routine to either.  It wasn't necessary.  They had more time to work out their own shit.  That was not the case with addict Sam running off w/ Ruby to go kill Lilith at the end of S4. 

Finally, Bobby HAS shown sensitivity to Dean in the past and definitely in the future (see 7.01 when he keeps probing Dean on his own mental state). And even in that harsh conversation, Bobby told Dean he was a better man than his Daddy ever was.  I don't think the harsh approach did long-term damage.  Because I think Dean was smart enough to see what Bobby was doing.  [Note: if you compare that to demon-blood-drinking, siren-drugged Sam's Boo-Hoo, there's a world of difference in the damage. THAT moment was cruel. And it stuck with Dean looong after.]

 

Bottom Line for the TL; DR: Bobby knew exactly how to get through to Dean.  He needed to truncate the fight because they were out of time.  Taking a "play through the pain" approach was far more likely to get the outcome he (and ultimately Dean) desires.  Bobby has demonstrated in the past and in the future that he is looking out for Dean.  In this moment, the surly asshole approach was the right approach,  IMO.