Two extra thoughts about 5.17

[ratherastory]

Back home, and I think LJ is letting me post again...

So why is it that when SAM wants to have a normal life and a family, it's wrong and selfish and hurtful to his family, but when DEAN wants it everyone goes "AAAAAAAWWWWW!"

Is it because Sam actually tried to get it for himself, whereas Dean is apparently willing to throw himself on the proverbial grenade? What?

The double-standard makes me sad.

:(


Also, I am SERIOUSLY ANNOYED by the Whore of Babylon thing. Come on, SPN. You can stop being so blatantly misogynistic any day now. :(

Comments

[sothcweden.livejournal.com]

This is my own personal canon: I think it's a contrivance of the writers as much as anyone that Dean is the woobie, and Sam is the bad guy. (Not that I agree with that!) They both act like assholes sometimes, but I think a lot of fans feel protective of Dean because we saw, more than once, how Dean lost his childhood to the quest, while Sam had Dean to care for him and got to leave and go to college, and have a little bit of a life of his own, which Dean couldn't even contemplate until S3. And Dean's Issues with abandonment/loss are brought up and jumped up and down on (5x16!) more often, while we don't get inside Sam's head as often, if memory serves.

From the beginning, the story has been told largely from Dean's perspective on the world (the importance of "saving people, hunting things"), and I really think Dean believed Sam was being selfish by leaving to go to Stanford when there were people out there who needed saving. Part of that was likely the fact that he was as much Sam's parent as sibling, and by leaving, Sam was -in a way- betraying the ideals Dean believed in, and it's difficult for parents to accept choices made by their children that go against their values. So, since Dean is our POV character, that attitude bleeds over.

This is just my thinky thoughts on the subject. Feel free to disagree and tell me I'm wrong!