Women not being allowed to kill.

[kittyfantastico]

I'm going through and watching Angel for the first time. I just watched Supersymmetry in Season 4 (so I haven't seen anything past that). I was highly annoyed at the end that Gunn killed Professor Whatshisname. This is the second time that a man has made a big deal out of protecting a woman from the emtional pain of killing someone who totally deserved to be killed by that woman. Remember when Angel stopped Cordelia from killing the mysogynist Billy only to do it himself?

I was on board when Gunn said they shoudln't kill him at all because they weren't killers of humans (although I'm not in general really buying into the idea that there's such a difference between humans and demons, but whatever). But once he went the extra step of saying that it isn't so much that they shouldn't kill him as that FRED shouldn't kill him, I was annoyed by that.

The professor specifically hurt Fred, and however many others, and Fred has more right than anyone to give him a taste of his own medicine by sending him to Pylea. I think that was poetic justice and better than killing him outright. But Gunn took that right away from her by snapping the professor's neck himself.

In the same way, Cordelia had more of a right to kill Billy. He had hurt tons of women, tried to hurt her, and was brought back in a twisted way to save her so she felt responsible. She had a right to kill him, and it was strange that Angel wouldn't let her.

The whole thing is way more sexist than I usually expect of Joss.

[snizapman6294]

i don't really think it's that women aren't allowed to kill... just that in the examples you gave:

Gunn wanted to protect Fred from the pain and suffering that killing another human being brings.
and
Angel was a little pissed that Billy put his little spell on him and wanted to kill Billy himself.

i mean i see what you're saying, and i don't disagree, but i think most of these actions can be justified or explained in a different way.

[kittyfantastico]

But why is it more valid for Gunn to forcibly protect Fred from her own decisions than for her to do the same? I also don't really see why Fred gets any less pain and suffering out of what happened-- basically forcing her boyfriend's hand to the point where he killed someone that he didn't want to kill-- than she would have gotten out of sending the guy to Pylea to fend for himself. I don't think its a given he would have died in Pylea, maybe he knows enough magic to manage, but it would have been poetic justice and perfectly fair. How is Gunn snapping his neck first any better?

Angel specifically said he did it to keep Cordy from becoming a killer, but I'm sure he was also feeling a little pissy. Still, Coredlia had a right to be just as pissy as him, and she was about to kill him when Angel stopped her.

The whole thing is very paternalistic. I want to protect you from your own adult choice to become a killer (of humans* who indisputably deserve it) and so I'm going to become a killer instead. The moment worked better when Giles was killing Ben for Buffy, since he really is like a paternal father figure to her, but it bothers me a lot more when its a boyfriend who ought to be an equal.

*Not sure Bily was completely human, but whatever.

[kittyfantastico]

I'm trying to think what other examples there are of killing humans. Obviously Buffy killed tons of creatures, but most of them were demons and therefore in the show's morality system its considered ok. Did Buffy ever kill a human? She shot at those knights who were chasing Dawn, and they were human, but I guess that was more self defense and not up close and personal. I know Angel killed all those lawyers (not counting the humans he killed as Angelus) and no one stepped in to stop him from feeling the consequences of that. Willow killed Warren and it was pretty strongly portrayed as wrong, even though I think he totally deserved it. If Willow hadn't gotten all weird otherwise, that killing would have been totally fine in my book. People were trying to stop her from doing it in that same protective way.

Did anyone ever try to protectively stop a man from killing someone who 100% deserved to be killed by that man?

[Hellbound Hyperion]

But why is it more valid for Gunn to forcibly protect Fred from her own decisions than for her to do the same? I also don't really see why Fred gets any less pain and suffering out of what happened-- basically forcing her boyfriend's hand to the point where he killed someone that he didn't want to kill

It isn't, and she doesn't. The act of killing the guy was going to be terrible for at least one of them, but Gunn clearly thought Fred had gone off the deep end (she went to Wesley for help - kind of a no-no at the time) so he thought doing the act himself, rather than letting Fred do it, would be better. Of course, it wasn't - as you've probably seen, this episode sets off a chain reaction that ultimately leads to Gunn and Fred ending their relationship.

but it bothers me a lot more when its a boyfriend who ought to be an equal.

And of course, it ends the relationship, because he no longer thought of her as an equal and she knew it. It may seem a bit haphazard at times, but that's because the writers honestly had no idea what to do with Gunn up until the last season, so he gets tossed around a bit and some things just come out wrong on-screen.

[kittyfantastico]

I actually haven't seen any episodes past that, like I said in the first post. But I'm happier with that moment if it is treated later like a bad thing that he did it.

I'm also confused about how all of a sudden someone sent Fred to Pylea. I always thought she accidentally read a spell out of that book in the library. Did the professor give her that book, or did he actually do the spell, or what? That was rather unclear, but not that important I guess.

[Hellbound Hyperion]

I'm also confused about how all of a sudden someone sent Fred to Pylea. I always thought she accidentally read a spell out of that book in the library. Did the professor give her that book, or did he actually do the spell, or what? That was rather unclear, but not that important I guess.

The professor probably knew enough about Fred to know what kind of stuff she'd like to study while working in the library, so he just left the book lying around for her to pick up. So he didn't send her there himself - her natural curiosity gets her into trouble, which it tends to do.

[jellymoff]

Angel didn't kill Billy-Lilah shot him.

[willowsummers]

I thought the Gunn and Fred thing was just because he cared about her, regardless of her being a female and simply would rather have that pain that her have it. And I thought that Angel was afraid that Billy would hurt Cordelia, so he'd rather do it himself.

Neither of these things bothered me, but I like it for men to care about me. Even if it does seem a little old fashioned. I want someone to think I'm strong and that I CAN do things for myself, but not that I always have to. I think that's just part of caring about someone. I'd do it for them too.

[Hellbound Hyperion]

Dec 7, 2009 19:44:16 GMT -5 jellymoff said:

Angel didn't kill Billy-Lilah shot him.

I don't think that's necessarily in question, just the motivation for Angel wanting to do it himself.

Lilah killing him was obviously important to the theme of the episode.

[kittyfantastico]

I had forgotten that Lilah was the one who shot Billy in the end, but I was thinking of the part where Cordelia wants to kill Billy and Angel stops her, specifically to protect her from being a killer. He intends to kill Billy himself; I'd forgotten that he doesn't manage to. So I think my point still stands.

<i>I want someone to think I'm strong and that I CAN do things for myself, but not that I always have to. I think that's just part of caring about someone. I'd do it for them too. </i>

I think this attitude might have fit this episode if Fred had said they needed to stop the professor by killing him or sending him to another dimension, but had seemed reluctant to do it herself, but was going to do it anyway because she thought it was necessary. If Gunn had then gone off and sent the professor to Pylea himself to save Fred from having to do it, that might work with how you're seeing it. But Fred wanted to do it, and she was in fact in the process of doing it-- Gunn was creating a much more dangerous situation for all of them by refusing to let her be an adult and stand up for herself. They could have all been sucked into that portal due to Gunn's interference. He managed to make the whole thing worse-- he actually KILLED the professor instead of just sending him to Pylea, and he proved that he doesn't trust his girlfriend or think that the man who tortured her and killed others counts as a monster as bad as any demon who may or may not actually intend to hurt anyone (don't forget, they kill baby demons too).

And besides, if you were dating Gunn, based on this episode he wouldn't LET you do it for him too.

Now, if she was just randomly trying to kill someone who upset her, she'd be in the wrong. But she was absolutely right that they kill monsters every day and this guy wasn't any different, and also right that she wasn't technically killing him, just giving him the same chance he'd given to others. If he's so good at magic he might do just fine there, or immediately escape. There's absolutely no guarantee that they're killing him, but they're stopping him from his nefarious plans. Gunn seems to think that actually snapping the guy's neck is somehow better than that, after all his talk about not killing.

[willowsummers]

Fred didn't LET Gunn do it for her either. He kind of had to steal the chance. I always liked it that he did that. It's one of my favorite moments in their relationship and it always makes me cry. I do understand why it bothered Fred though because she had just said right before that she didn't ask Gunn to help her because she loved that he was such a good person.

[kittyfantastico]

She did ask him and Angel to be involved at the beginning, at least implicitly, when she first announced the professor had to die. When they started trying to talk her out of it, she decided to go do it on her own. But she wasn't against them all planning to kill him from the start.

When you look at the actual outcomes, Gunn looks like an idiot. Gunn doesn't want the professor to be killed, so Fred decides to compromise by sending him to Pylea, which is really a fair and just outcome (ignoring her the possibility that he knows how to open a portal back and kill them in their sleep next week). Gunn still doesn't like that, so instead he KILLS the professor that he didn't want to be killed before sending him through the portal. I thought he was just going to shove the guy in the portal, but the neck snap made zero sense.

Not to mention if he hadn't snapped the guy's neck, they probably could have brought him back from Pylea after a few days with him having learned his lesson, and then, I dunno, crippled him magically somehow so he couldn't do any more portal opening. Wes could have helped with that. There were plenty of better outcomes that were ruined by Gunn's sudden, stupid neck-twisting.

Give Fred the chance to see if she does feel bad about sending him to Pylea, and there's still a chance to undo it. Kill the guy outright right there, and you've ruined the outcome of this episode on pretty much every level-- you don't trust or respect your girlfriend's right to make adult choices for herself, you're a giant hypocrite, and everyone is just as truamatized or more as they would have been before.

[henzINNIT]

In Gunn and Fred's case, he took a moral bullet for her because he knew it was absolutely wrong yet she wouldn't rest until it was done. There wasn't sexist motivation in there even though I can see how it would appear as such. And Pylea? That wasn't where he was going. It was clear that the Professor wouldn't survive.

Angel's waay more old fashioned so I think him "protecting" Cordy from getting blood on her hands is kinda sexist. In the end though, I can't see how it could play out any other way. Of course Angel is going to try and do all the dirty jobs himself.

Supersymmetry is an ass episode anyway, lol.

[Angel Beast]

I think in Angel and Cordy's case Angel didn't want to see Cordelia possibly end up like Faith did after she killed a man.

[kittyfantastico]

<i>And Pylea? That wasn't where he was going. It was clear that the Professor wouldn't survive.</i>

I really don't think they said that at all. I think Gunn even said something like "he wouldn't survive in Pylea" which I think is strongly up for debate. In any case, its far more likely he'd survive a trip to some other dimension than that he'd survive having his neck snapped. We know tons of people who've survived trips to other dimensions. And even if he didn't survive, it would be perfectly fair poetic justice-- just like how in Disney movies the bad guy always falls off a cliff instead of being stabbed directly by the hero, but they end up just as dead off screen.

[henzINNIT]

Dec 20, 2009 20:30:36 GMT -5 kittyfantastico said:

<i>And Pylea? That wasn't where he was going. It was clear that the Professor wouldn't survive.</i>

I really don't think they said that at all. I think Gunn even said something like "he wouldn't survive in Pylea" which I think is strongly up for debate. In any case, its far more likely he'd survive a trip to some other dimension than that he'd survive having his neck snapped. We know tons of people who've survived trips to other dimensions. And even if he didn't survive, it would be perfectly fair poetic justice-- just like how in Disney movies the bad guy always falls off a cliff instead of being stabbed directly by the hero, but they end up just as dead off screen.

There's a big difference between the bad guy falling off a cliff and them being pushed down it.
It wasn't Pylea. Fred and Wes looked for a horrible place to send him, and the words she spoke to open the portal were Egyptian according to the transcript.

The dialogue was:

FRED
Go away, Charles! You asked me not to kill him, and I'm not. Not exactly.

GUNN
Sure you are. No way he could survive that.

[lightandmagic]

I think it's poetic justice really. He sends her to a land where humans are treated as cattle, and frankly, it's amazing that she survived through it for five years. She, in turn, would send him to probably an equally as bad place. Perhaps worse.

Look at the condition she comes back in as well. She's forced to live in a cave for five years and essentially loses her grip on reality/sanity. It's just an awful, awful thing to do to someone, worse than killing them outright in my opinion.

So she comes back, has managed to come to grips with what happened, and discovers that someone purposely sent her there. Frankly, I think she has just cause to inflict the same punishment upon him. It's also alluded he has done this to other people aside from Fred as well. So it comes down to that he's actually just an awful human being, and Fred wanting to essentially gain revenge on someone that caused her to be tortured for five years seems like a good reason to do so. If I were in Gunn's position, I would have let her be. She's a grown up and can make her own choices, and she was well aware of the possible consequences. I also highly doubt it would have changed her character, other than maybe a sense of satisfaction.

The one thing that always bothers me about both Buffy and Angel is that every action that is slightly unethical is suddenly the worst thing ever. Fred essentially just wanted poetic justice, and sending that man ultimately would have been no harm to society, I would argue it would benefit it, so I don't see the issue.

[willowsummers]

In my opinion, they go back and forth. Some things are considered way evil and they shun the person for them and other things they are lenient with the person and allow them all of these excuses. It seems realistic because people do that, but it's really frustrating.

[N.D.U.O]

I was thinking not only on the women not being allowed to kill, but also on the thin line between chivalry and sexism, like in Awakening, Angel saying he doesn't want Cordy or Fred downstairs when he loses his soul? Why? Because they will immediatly break into tears?