This is one of the reasons why I’m both not scared of earthquakes… and a bit terrified.
That’s the view from the hallway in the building where I live. the building was built on top of what once was the rest of THAT building in the picture. It fell completely, in September, 1985, during THE biggest earthquake in Mexico. The one that destroyed half the city, and that to this day? We commemorate every year.
But see? Every morning, when I go out, I see that half-destroyed building that hasn’t been fixed in almost 30 years. And I remember that the city survived. And that since then? We’ve improved both the way in which buildings are built, and how we react to earthquakes in the city. So… unless we get another 8.6? I’m not scared.
Of course, that’s a bit hard to remember at 9:02 when I’m still half asleep and the frigging building starts swaying as if it was drunk.
Soo… who harass the cast and crew bothering them with their personal agendas?
And wow, what a way to change things to their own liking.
And of course? There’s already someone calling ‘it’s a PR move’.
People, we can’t have it both ways. Either Jared’s twitter is what he thinks and what he wants to tweet -and thus, he’s to be held responsible when he tweets stupid things, as well as lauded when he doesn’t… or everything he posts it’s carefully planned by PR. And thus? It also counts for Misha’s twitter.
And even if it’s PR… let people be happy about what happens.
I have to admit, I laughed at Jared’s last tweet.
Still, given the fandom? I think maybe that petition to retire his tweet privileges might not be a bad thing…
(And, just to be evil… Does this mean that ‘Cheerleader Sam’ has a basis on the extended canon? Should we hate Jared for diminishing Sam? )
Apparently because Gadreel said that Sam wouldn’t die to save Dean specifically to rile up Dean that makes it true despite all evidence to the contrary and that makes Sam hateable.
But the bigger thing IMO is wtf should we want Sam to sacrifice himself for a man who is abusing him?
I usually don’t engage this kind of thing directly, but please, indulge me, I’m curious…
HOW is Dean TEXTUALLY Abusing Sam? Not your interpretation of the facts, whatever you have as head canon is your business and your business only, but, in TEXT.
Does Dean constantly and frequently punches or threatens Sam with violence if Sam doesn’t do what he says? No.
Does Dean forbid Sam to have friends outside a very short and Dean-approved list? No. The ONE time Dean disapproved Sam’s friendship with someone was Ruby. Since she was a demon hellbent into using Sam as a pawn to get Lucifer out… I think we can agree that there, Dean was right.
Does Dean constantly, relentlessly puts Sam’s effort down, mocks him for his achievements and never once says something good about Sam unless he wants something from him? No. There are many mocking instances, but Sam does the same. If we’re not allowed to call Sam abusive for never once telling his brother he is smart, no, the ‘princess’ comments are not abuse.
Does Dean in any way, form or shape controls what Sam does or doesn’t do, to the point that Sam can’t leave Dean’s side without permission? NO. We saw that just one episode ago.
You can interpret canon any way you want -hell, I’ve done it to paint Sam as the abuser - but you can’t say that is actual TEXT. Neither Sam nor Dean abuse the other, and that’s not what the writers are trying to say.
What Dean did was to disobey a DNR order, that’s it. Don’t try to paint it as something horribly wrong that completely undermines Sam’s personhood since the show itself has gone out of their way to ignore that point just as it ignores that Dean has no sense of self at all due to how he was raised. Those two are things that are interesting to talk about in meta, but we can’t claim they’re text because they aren’t. Textually, Dean will do anything for his brother because he loves him, and is not an abuser. Textually, at least until Season 7, Sam would’ve done the same. I have no idea where Sam stands right now in the heads of the writers -since they seem to think this is a healing situation- but if we are going completely by the co-dependant line? Sam is the one who gets the attention of Dean, so SAM cannot be the victim of abuse. Since he’s the one who sets the rules, the one who decides what happens.
Should Sam die for Dean? I don’t know. I don’t think so. And that’s a fair question. Should Sam die for ‘the man who abuses him’? Hell, first show me who that man is, in text, in the series without any interpretation, without using the word ‘subtextually’ or ‘we can assume’ or ‘we can infer’, and THEN, we’ll talk.
Thank you for providing the outline! Much love. <3
If this is how you follow outlines, I weep for your school teachers. Honestly
@sierranic already touched a lot of your points, but, let’s do this again.
(Although at this rate, I’ll never get to touch those other two metas paraded as textual proof, oh well)
(Also, warning. TL:DR. I’m starting to think it would be nice to cut it in two parts)
So.. you don’t draw a distinction between
"X is a racist" and "X said a racist thing"?
Good to know.
and no, if I said the same about Sam? I wouldn’t be getting called names. At least not by people like you. And it’s proven, by the comments in that excruciatingly offensive meta that hijacks female abuse victim’s experiences to make Sam an innocent victim of big bad Dean. Hell, when an abuse victim complained about said meta, she got called names and bullied out of the conversation, becuase apparently SHE had no right to demean a fictional character experience.
In reality, chances are that yes, a person who displays abusive behavior is abusive. Especially if it’s constant and relentless. However, in fiction? Things are different. Because you have to take in account both Watsonian and Doylean situations, not to mention the mind scape of the writers and the age where they were writing.
For example? Half of the literary heroes of the 18th centuries where horrible racists and misogynistic pricks. But leaving the analysis there? Without considering the age where they were written, the life of the author and the political situation? Is to make a horribly simplistic analysis of the situation.
Again, as I have been saying for ever: The problem here is that BOTH brothers have displayed abusive behavior, and BOTH brothers have been the victim of said behavior. Since the writers have made CLEAR that they’re not writing an abusive relationship, that it’s not their intent, then to start the conversation with “Dean (Or Sam) Is abusive” is to automatically put your own bias on the text. And if you’re not writing meta? If you’re just yelling “OMG, Stop liking Dean (or Sam) because they’re an abusive asshole”, you are misrepresenting the text. Which was my problem with the original post that started this new conversation. It was not about the impossibility of reading Dean as an abusive figure, but about the fact that Dean is not an abusive person IN THE SERIES, within the frame of the same.
Now, a meta analyzing WHY the writers don’t see the behavior as abusive and how problematic that is for real society? That sounds like one hell of a project, that would be very interesting to read. One comparing both brothers low points (as abusers) and low points (as victims)? Also interesting at hell.
But just screaming “The one I don’t like is abusive”, is pretty much not that discussion. In fact, it makes the discussion impossible.
Anonymous… you do realize that THAT is why people should realize that no, abusers don’t love their victims? Because it’s not valid as an excuse against the victim.
Saying “But he loves you” Is damaging as hell to the victim, because it puts the blame of the abuse ON THE VICTIM.
Yes the abuser might THINK he loves the victim, might even fool everyone including the victim into believing that he loves the victim. But in the moment he becomes an abuser (And for that, it’s not doing something abusive ONCE, it’s a constant thing) he is not loving the victim. He’s loving the power he has on the victim.
But hey, maybe ‘yes, he might think he loves you, but he doesn’t is too complex for you.
(This in regard to romantic, and platonic relationship abuse. Familiar abuse is far more complex, especially because we’re conditioned to ‘love’ our family by society and… that’s when it gets really icky. Still, if a family member abuses you? They’re not thinking of your well being. And they love themselves, and the feeling that abusing you gives them, more than they ‘love’ you)
In case anyone cares… Wow, 7.0 Richter feel awful! But it seems Mexico City survived again
@sierranic and juppschmitz, yes, thanks. It was 7.5 at the end of the day, but I’m fine and everyone is fine. Dizzy, Shaken, telling horrible jokes, but fine.
Important things first:
I’m ok, my family is ok (Even if Niece is very scared and her Mom is too -first earthquake for both). The houses are perfectly fine, and according to the news, bar a bit of broken glass an one tree that didn’t make it, the whole city is perfectly fine.
It wasn’t a 7.0, it was a 7.5. But still, not the worst the city has lived through, and I can say that we Mexicans learned long ago our lesson about when the earth moves.
Of course, if you know spanish and are squeamish about un-PC jokes, stay away from Mexican sites. In less than 10 hours, I’ve heard 4 jokes about the dead in the 85 earthquake, 5 about a very fat politician who was recently jailed for organizing a prostitution ring as the one to blame, 3 about Gabriel Garcia Marquez, 10 about religion and the end of the days, and 2 about the singer who is in a coma and had a song called “After the Earthquake”.
My cats, however, might be from the Moon. They are not happy at ALL about how they were woken up, and they’re still refusing to leave my side.
And now, back to our usual snarky answers ;)
Source New York Times
Tom is amused at how Jensen saying he doesn’t want to know about Wincest transformed into Jensen saying he didn’t want to know about Destiel.
Soooo…. Whose pairing Jensen doesn’t want to know about?
And who makes it all about Destiel? Because that was not a destieler
Also, I had no idea that a fight with Castiel was somehow Dean demeaning Sam.
Actually @sierranic proved how those were not, in fact, textual examples. I’ll do the same as soon as I check my house is not going to fall on top of me and my family is ok, If you don’t mind.
But I’ll tell you this: Stop belittling others experiences too. I’ve said once and again that abuse victims can identify with BOTH brothers for a reason. That still doesn’t make either abusive in te series itself.
It is very funny when the fans who claim to love Sam appafently think that sam’s only friend of note is the Killer monster. Oh, and nothing is worse than sending a fake text.
Because chocking your brother to death is just “following his orders” or something