in fact, I have watched the pilot. I'm still right.

[pocochina]

I read through this post and would like not to let it pass without comment. In the first part of my response I will do my best to explain how Dean’s behavior toward Sam meets a lot of the criteria for intimate partner abuse, because the OP does not seem to grasp the argument we are making. I will assume good faith, though - this is a difficult

Comments

[cuddyclothes]

They're running a counter-programming at AMC, a "Walking Dead" marathon. Early in the first season, Carol has an abusive husband, and I immediately thought of all of these discussions. She's laughing with the other women while they do laundry, while her husband watches. He gets angry at her pleasure, and pulls her out. Another female character calls him out, and he throws wet laundry in face. The wife keeps pleading for the others to leave them alone, and her husband hits her across the face. Then one of the main characters comes and beats the living shit out of the husband. Several seasons later, she talks to the male lead about how she didn't want to be alone, how she was "weak." And she wasn't weak any more.

ETA: I have major PTSD but it hasn't made me repeat the pattern. I made that decision.

[pocochina]

I still haven't seen The Walking Dead, but generally, yeah, I think those narratives about the more cut-and-dried conventional presentations of abuse are valuable and I don't mean to suggest otherwise, but there's a lot to be said for this exploration of the thornier stuff that wouldn't make it on Lifetime. And part of that is that the choice to do better is there. It might be hard, but it's there, and it ought not be dismissed.

[cuddyclothes]

I didn't mean to say that about it being cut and dried...believe me, The Walking Dead is nothing like Lifetime! It was that I was reminded of the emotional dynamics we've been discussing between Sam and Dean. It was the husband's "who the fuck are you to tell me what to do" attitude that reminded me of Dean's angry bluster. As far as PTSD goes, both Winchester boys would have PTSD from the jump, between their father and what they had to deal with constantly. Nobody will ever change my belief that John was an abusive, controlling father. It was nice that he was sweet to the boys right before he died, but that does not make up for what he put them through prior to that

[pocochina]

Nobody will ever change my belief that John was an abusive, controlling father. It was nice that he was sweet to the boys right before he died, but that does not make up for what he put them through prior to that.

Oh, totally. Dean learned his bullshit somewhere. It doesn't mean he cannot help himself or that he's entitled to cause pain because of it (especially not to Sam, since even under the stupid ~cosmic justice~ rubric, John put Sam through quite enough as well). People adapt; sometimes those adaptations are perverse.

Dean came busting in saying THERE IS NEVER ANYTHING I WOULD PUT IN FRONT OF YOU when in fact we'd seen him do that for a good part of S8.

ha, yup. Dean's ~poor bruised fee-fees have been leaving Sam in the dust for a long time.

That response of Dean's really angered me, because it did not seem to come from a truly loving place. Screaming at someone who is that vulnerable is showing love? I don't think so.Yes, exactly. It takes a pretty special kind of asshole to make "I don't want you to die" be just blatantly

[percysowner]

Oh, totally. Dean learned his bullshit somewhere. It doesn't mean he cannot help himself or that he's entitled to cause pain because of it (especially not to Sam, since even under the stupid ~cosmic justice~ rubric, John put Sam through quite enough as well). People adapt; sometimes those adaptations are perverse.One theory that came up this year was that yes, John was abusive, but that he only abused Dean. And there were TONS of people who bought it! The rationales went from the YED told Dean that John cared more about Sam, so it must A) be true and B) must mean that John never abused Sam. Others stated that John's orders to Dean to protect Sam meant that John would never have abused Sam. The third group were firm in their belief that Dean would have thrown himself in front of Sam to protect him from John, because Dean was the perfect protector and martyr who loves his Sammy more than life and who would take blows for him or sacrifice food and bravely and willingly starve himself to save Sam one moments pain. When I noted that John

[pocochina]

the YED told Dean that John cared more about Sam, so it must A) be true

AZAZEL = ONLY RELIABLE NARRATOR VOICE OF TRUTH OBVS. lol.

Like. Just because Dean rationalizes John's abuse of Sam - what was it, back in Bugs? when Sam pointed out John was a jackass to him and Dean was like "no, he had to put you in line!" like, he was only shitty to you because you DESERVED it! - doesn't mean WE have to accept it.

Dean was the perfect protector and martyr who loves his Sammy more than life and who would take blows for him or sacrifice food and bravely and willingly starve himself to save Sam one moments pain

Yeah, really wish people would acknowledge the blatantly obvious, that "Dean did everything he could reasonably be expected to do" =/= "everything Sam could reasonably need to develop as a person." Nobody would let a school-age child be the sole caretaker for a puppy, because they just can't handle that, even if they are very good kids who do their best.

When I noted that John told Dean to kill Sam basically if he got out of line,