Annoyance of the day:

[lirazel]

People who flat-out say that Buffy didn't love Spike despite the fact that she said she did.

She said she did. The only reason we have to believe that she didn't is one thing Spike said, and since when do people believe anything that comes out of Spike's mouth? Boy can speak the truth that no one else will, but he also says a ton of b.s., and everyone knows it.

I just hatehatehatehatehatehate all of these people sitting around telling a woman (and it would be a woman--if a man said, it I think a lot less people would disagree with her) who finds it nearly impossible to say the words "I love you" even to people she regards as family (remember "Intervention"? That's canon) that she doesn't love someone when she said she did.

I don't have a problem with people quibbling over the nature of her love. You can argue that she didn't love him romantically or as much as she did Angel or whatever (I would disagree with the first one and re: the second, I would remind you that, as the_royal_anna says, we don't love in amounts. We love in ways). That's legit. But to say, flat-out, that she didn't love him even though she says she did takes agency away from Buffy in a way that I am entirely uncomfortable with and that DRIVES ME CRAZY, OKAY. If she had said she loved Riley (she didn't, did she?), I would be pissed at people saying she didn't love him, either. Uuuugh why does this annoy me so much?

Comments

[shipperx.livejournal.com]

Except it really isn't based in meeting up with ex's. It's in how she views the different men, whether or not she thinks they are "acceptable" or "aspirational" or whether she thinks that no matter what she may feel he is in some way "beneath her."

That's not "Yay! My ex has come back!" It's once you strip things down to what you think, whether you think he's actually good enough for you. Buffy may love Spike... but deep down I tend to think she may not think that she should. That he's beneath her and it embarrasses her a little.

[gabrielleabelle.livejournal.com]

I understand the argument you were making better now. I still disagree, obviously. And I think the canon evidence you use with which you back your claim is tenuous at best, but we're coming from such very different viewpoints that I don't know that any sort of middle ground can be reached. Also, I really should be studying for finals.

If my responses have seemed short, it's because I'm kinda shooting off replies whilst cramming. I think I've come across as brusque. This displeases me. I would offer a kitty icon, but I'm replying from email and so have to use my default. Pretend I'm using a kitty icon.

[shipperx.livejournal.com]

I think the canon evidence you use with which you back your claim is tenuous at best,

Clearly, however, I don't find it so. And I feel that I could come up with many incidents and lines to support why I came to view things this way. But I don't really see the purpose in making such an argument. I'm not particularly motivating to convince someone into doubting Spuffy more than they do (whatever level of doubt they may or may not have). I am a Spuffy. If I didn't think there was potential there for something good, I wouldn't be one. I want there to be Spuffies, Spuffy fic. I want to believe. Unfortunately, I'm less convinced of its execution than its potential.