Spike Opinion Article

About Spike haters and double standards

Opinion by maryksand posted over a year ago

7 fans

Ok, here I go. First, I wanna apologize for my English, because it's quite bad (I'm Russian).

I was really impressed (in a bad way) by the comments most of Spike haters make all over the internet. All of those comments seem to be very alike: "Spike was bad, while Angel was good". I could never understand this statement. Let's see:

We have two soulless vampires. Angelus and Spike. They both where bad. Yes. Vampires are bad. Sorry, Stephenie Mayer. But even soulless Spike had more humanity than soulless Angel: when Angelus became a vampire, he killed all his family, while Spike tried to save his mother by turning her, because she was sick. Spike took care of Dru and loved her to pieces while Angelus awfully treated Darla. Now lets see what Angelus did to Buffy: he used a psychological terror on her, he killed Jenny, he tortured Giles, he tried to kill Buffy's mom (a person Buffy loved more than anyone in this world) while soulless Spike tried to protect Dawn even if it could coast him life. Soulless Spike let Glory torture him and was ready to die just not to "leave Buffy in pain". Buffy could have never known about his sacrifice if he had died during the torture. Soulless Spike took care of Dawn even after Buffy's death, because he promised her that. A soulless vampire keeps a promise given to a slayer. Buffy's dead, no one to impress. But he still keeps his promise. And it had nothing to do with his chip. Can you imagine Angelus act like this, even if he had a chip?

Can you imagine what could have happened if Glory had caught Angelus instead of Spike? Angelus would have probably told everything he knew about Buffy's life, helped Glory to kill Buffy's family and then Buffy herself... And no way Angelus would ever fight to death to bring his soul back for the one he loves. Anyway, soulless Angel caused Buffy so much pain that soulless Spike didn't even come close to.

Why do some people use things soulless Spike did against Spike with a soul? Same people don't use all those terrible things Angelus did against Angel or Bangel. Why? Because Angel had two names? Should we call soulless Spike "Spikelus" then?..

Spike and Spuffy haters always use an attempted rape in Season 6 against Spike fans. Again, in season 6 it was soulless Spike. A soulless vampire ALMOST did a bad thing yet stopped, went to fight to death to get his soul back and did everything to gain Buffy's forgiveness. Spike haters say: "What a monster!" Angel with a soul slitted his son's throat and refused of his own child, because this child had mental problems he couldn't deal with. Spike haters say: "What a hero!" They say that Angel did it "for his son's sake". Really? It's an excuse all the bad fathers use for ages. The worst thing was that only a couple of hours after that Angel goes to Sunnydale and seems to be all joky and jealousy and looks like he only cared about Buffy dating or not dating Spike...

Spike was horrified by the fact that he could "hurt a girl", he went hell knows where and fought to death to bring his soul back. The only vampire in history who did that. And did this for the one he loved. In season 3 when Angel was hurt by a poisoned arrow and only slayer's blood could cure him, Buffy only had to smack him a couple of times due to get him angry and he was totally out of control. Angel with a soul had nearly killed Buffy by drinking her blood. And he didn't stop like soulles Spike.

Angel with a soul let Darla and Dru kill people. Angel with a soul headed Wolfram and Hart and communicated with demons who killed innocent. No way Angel was ever better than Spike.

I don't hate Angel (he's one of my favorite characters and I'm a very big fan of David Boreanaz), but what I really can't stand is double standards.

Another thing Spike haters use against soulful Spike is that he didn't say sorry for killing Robin Wood's mother. (By the way, Angel wasn't that sorry about Jenny and he didn't stand on his neas bagging Giles to forgive him for killing the love of his life). Spike was a vampire, Wood's mom was a slayer. They fought, he won. It was a honest fight. Wood though had all the rights to ask for revenge. But instead of acting like a man and fighting Spike on his own, he asks Giles to distract Buffy and then uses Spike's trigger to fulfill his plan. I'm not even gonna remind everyone that Wood tried to stake Spike in his back once during the fight at school. Very manly. His mother should be proud...

I also don't get why Spike haters and a lot of Bangel fans (those who also are Spike haters. Thanks Merlin, not all the Bangel fans are Spike haters...) are all praying on what Giles said in Season 7 about Angel doing the right thing by leaving Buffy and Sunnydale (in season 3)? Giles in Season 7 and especially in that episode was shown as a person, who makes a HUGE mistake. I love Giles, but not in that episode. Those people are praying on someone who gave all that pro-Bangel speech only to distract Buffy to give Wood a chance to kill Spike... Can you imagine what would they say if it was Angel Wood needed to kill and Giles would say something good about Spike to distract Buffy? I can almost hear their angry screams: "Giles must die!"

So, what do we have? Double standards. None of this vampires was perfect. None of all the BTVS characters was perfect. They all had good and bad sides of their character. But double standards are always bad, there's nothing good about them...

5 comments

	swimchick said: I think Bangel is really overrated and Spuffy fans can admit when things are good or bad for Spuffy but Bangel fans who hate Spike/Spuffy are just really biased like you say. I like Bangel before s3, LOVE Spuffy the whole series. But I'm realistic about the flaws in Angel and Bangel. I'm not a hater, I just feel like I see things in a less biased way. But these are my opinions so not everyone has to agree. Plenty of people are fans of both and I think that's awesome because liking one doesn't automatically mean you have to hate the other. THEY DON'T OVERLAP! posted over a year ago.

	maryksand said: Yes, I also love the whole show and I was COMPLETELY ok with Bangel in S1-2. I even enjoyed it. In S3 after Angel came back from Hell I honestly thought he was over it. He was ready to move on. And I also never idealized Spuffy and it took a lot of time for me to become a Spuffy fan. I needed to see that Spike really loves Buffy and in Intervention he proved it. I love the development, love how he sacrificed everything for her. Even Joss said that he always liked Spike a little more than Angel because Spike chose to have a soul. I like Angel. He's far from perfect, but he's a good character. But I just don't get how can people say he was any better than Spike, because he never was. Angelus was more evel than soulles Spike and Angel did more bad things than Spike with a soul. They both where not perfect. Both had bad and good sides of their character. And I just don't get why Spike/Spuffy haters only baise on double standards. It's ridiculous. I love all the BTVS seasons, I'm even ok with Buffy/Riley and don't get all the hate this ship always gets. It all was a part of STORY. Buffy's story. And both Spike and Angel where very important parts of it. posted over a year ago.

	JesseIsLoveMD said: AMEN. This is an amazing article!! I couldn't have said it better myself! posted over a year ago.

	voxleo said: you forget that even before they were turned, Spike was the better man too. Liam was a drunken disrespectful whoring sod, which is why Darla picked him, and Dru (who was to become a NUN before Angelus ruined her) picked William the brokenhearted poet gentleman mama's boy- Angelus taught Spike everything he knew about evil, but both retained the same kind of integrity/honor they'd had as men. There's an ep of buffy or Angel (I forget which) where Angel rather shamefully seems to acknowledge or alludes to the fact that the wickedness does not simply come just because one is turned, but that it must have existed in the heart of the man. He doesn't actually say in so many words, but his quick and reluctant response to someone else's suggestion that the evil in someone else was BECAUSE of their vampness, betrays his own shame at the truth that it must be TAPPED rather than spawned in the person turned. In actuality the show (maybe even inadvertently) is an elegant example of the way Karma works, and how balanced action and consequences are even if we don't recognize it at the time. Spike has ALWAYS been the better man. Living and undead. Even loved better women, treated them better. If he were not having any integrity, he never could have struck deals with Buffy and even if he had wouldn't have held up his end (AND he did that when full on evil with some frequency, no chip at all) . Buffy would never have trusted him and simply have staked him long ago before the chip even entered the picture. Marsters says that he was supposed to be the sort of VERY WRONG guy for Buffy, but if that is so, then Angel was also that wrong no matter that he had been good first. In truth, if Buffy wants ANGEL over SPIKE, she is just doing that stupid stereotypically dumb girly thing of falling for the bad boy instead of the nerdy good guy who will be better to her and for her. Which might be a realistic thing that would happen, surely, but that certainly doesn't mean its the right choice. The only thing that Buffy could possibly find a more devoted companion in than Spike would be another creature likely to have a name like that: a DOG. posted 7 months ago.

	maryksand said: ^ That's an interesting take on the situation and approach to the analysis of two vampires' personalities and fundamental differences in them and their stories. Obviously, it's never been the debate of which one is a better character considering how incredibly complex and layered either of them is, however, it's the assumption of Angel being a better PERSON than Spike is what I have some major issues with despite the fact that I love and respect both characters. Liam and William were both lost people in many ways, one wasn't content with himself and his life therefore needing to lead a destructive life style to feel that he is worthy of something, other was pretty depressed about the lack of recognision when it comes to his creativity and writing skills but mainly about the fact that he was unable to impress and win the heart of an object of his passionate and poetic unrequited love. And they both, in some way, subconsciously or not, desired changes and that's what Dru and Darla offered them. Neither could quite fully embrace what kind of a drastic change it would be and what sort of harm the "soul for new life" trade is going to do (permanently) to both of them. The thing is, Spike, due to his incredible character progression and development, that included the highest and lowest points and a struggle with his invinsible vampire nature after he fell for Buffy, realized that while still being SOULLES. And he wanted to FIX it. To undo it. To bring it all back regardless of how much pain and guilt it puts him through. Angelus on the other hand never came to the realization of how destructive the influence of the monster inside him is, in fact, he enjoyed every bit of sadistic and masochistic tendencies he developed due to it. Liam was so self destructive while being alive and had, in fact, an even more serious inferiority complex than William who despite his fails was still content with being his mommy's son, and because of that Liam just let the monster take over him. As for Buffy, I personally don't think that by the end of the show she needed a life of a commitement and a relationship she would have had to put enormous effort into making work when she needed to put that effort into winning the war. That's why technically I view season 7 Buffy final as her loving both guys in a different way but not being ready to get into a relationship with either and face all the complications of what those relationships could bring. posted 7 months ago.