The Virgin and the Whore. Also: Buffy/Riley

[itsnotmymind]

I stumbled on a link through the su_herald that contained a gif set of Angel's morning after with Buffy in Innocence, comparing it to his rejection Darla's offer of sex and potential soullessness in Dear Boy. Gif set is here.

There's lots of interesting discussion beneath the gifs, but the thing that stands out to me the most is the virgin/whore dichotomy. I don't have much to say here that hasn't already been said by others, but I wanted to hash it out for my own thoughts.

In Innocence, Angelus (I hate the retcon of soulless Angel going by a different name, but I will abide by it in order to be avoid confusion) rejects Buffy because she's a virgin and unskilled in bed. He mocks her naivety. In Dear Boy, Darla concludes that Angel is dismissing their relationship and denying that she ever made him happy because she is not "fresh". She bitterly generalizes it to all men: "Guy gets taste of something fresh and he thinks he's touching god."

The one identical theme in both scenes is Angel's mockery and dismissal of the woman's feelings. He tells Buffy, "Lighten up. It was a good time. It doesn't mean like we have to make a big deal." When Darla is angry and hurt by his claim that she never made him happy, he says, "You know - you are getting awfully bent over this, Darla."

Angel's criticisms of the two are a reverse. Buffy is rejected by Angelus because she is bad in bed, and her romanticism of their sexual experience is a source of contempt. Darla is good in bed, but is unable to give Angel true happiness. Darla clearly loves Angel - she even says as much back in BtVS 1.7 - but her love is not good enough for Angel (even though, in fact, she discovers in The Trial that he loves her deeply). This is ostensibly because she's a monster, but even that has questionable implications because of the Fallen Woman trope (see, for example, the Supernatural episode Blood Brother, and Benny the vampire's attitude towards his now-vampire formally-human girlfriend, Andrea). And given Angelus' obsession with destroying virgins and the fact that Darla was a literal whore, it's hard not to see his rejection of her as at least metaphorically due to her sexual history.

And oddly, for both Buffy and Darla, Angel's criticisms are hurtful because they want him to love them, to value them for more than just their sexuality. Angel/Angelus makes it sounds like it was just about the sex, that he was just using them. Yet Angelus' obsession with destroying Buffy and Angel's obsession with saving Darla reveal it was much more complicated. But their respective roles as the virgin in need of protection and the whore who tempts Angel/Angelus with dark excitement always, always play a role in their relationships with Angel and how he views them.

-------------

On a somewhat unrelated note, I've seen at least one person recently dismiss Buffy as being attracted to Riley because he "safe", implying that her heart of hearts lies with Angel and/or Spike and if she were true to herself she would take the risk of being with one of them.


Let me take a moment to note what "safe" means in this context, when comparing Riley to Angel or Spike. "Safe" means that Riley does not have a history of trying to kill Buffy and her friends. The he does not have the possibility of losing a soul at any moment and turning viciously against Buffy. That he does not have a history of stalking her, or trying to rape her. That he does not have a century plus of brutal and vicious murder in his past. I don't know about you, but I would call that "basic requirements for a relationship".

True desire and "safety" are not, actually, incompatible - unless you, like soulless Spike, are of the opinion that "Great love is wild ... and passionate and dangerous. It burns and consumes." Of course, finding the relationship you want may require you to step outside of your comfort zone (which in fact Buffy did with Riley, many times, especially in regards to his role in the initiative which she wasn't always thrilled about). But finding the relationship you want should not involve dating someone who is untrustworthy and dangerous. That may or may not lead to greater intensity - but it will definitely not lead to greater happiness. And as Buffy pointed out, that kind of love burns out. The intensity doesn't last.

And I would argue that the #1 reason Buffy/Riley broke up was because Riley convinced himself that true love had to have the kind of intensity and darkness that Buffy had with Angel. And so he went behind Buffy's back and try to be darker. Surprise, surprise, it backfired. Riley's betrayal led directly to the end of the relationship.

Comments

[kikimay]

"Safe" means that Riley does not have a history of trying to kill Buffy and her friends. The he does not have the possibility of losing a soul at any moment and turning viciously against Buffy. That he does not have a history of stalking her, or trying to rape her. That he does not have a century plus of brutal and vicious murder in his past. I don't know about you, but I would call that "basic requirements for a relationship".

LITERALLY!!!! And everything you add about Riley starting to think that if she doesn't risk a nervous breakdown 24/7 for him too, it must be "fake love". Buffy struggled to embrace her relationship with him at first, because it was something very new and scary for her. So let's not downplay what happened in S4, please.

I think that most people see Riley as boring because the character isn't that attractive in terms of psychology in S4 and then becomes inconsistenly brooding in S5, also for the lack of chemistry with SMG, henceforth they categorize Riley/Buffy as "boring" per se. But it's kind of ... a nice, realistic relationship? Guys, c'mon.

Agreed on Angel's obsession over purity and virginity. That's why "Billy" is completely BS.

here courtesy of the Herald

[thenewbuzwuzz.livejournal.com]

Oh, so true. Angel is awfully bent over sex. ;)
Taking this into account, it's even more upsetting that the world Buffy lives in (unknown circumstances, Joss' sense of drama) seems to punish her for having sex with Angel.
Huh. Season 6 Spuffy also goes down the drain after they become sexually involved. Coincidence?

[itsnotmymind.livejournal.com]

I didn't like that line in Billy, because it sounds too much like people dismissing sexism in the real world. "Well, he doesn't *hate* women, look at all the women he loves!" or "He's not a white supremacist - he thinks he's better than everybody!" And you're left with the impression that only people with the purists of the pure ideologies count as sexists, racists, homophobes, etc.

i wasn't that into Riley and I didn't care much about his relationship with Buffy, but I don't like the way people dismiss it. Actually, I think part of the problem with Buffy/Riley is the Buffy was so busy seeing him as a Good Guy that she didn't realize it was more complicated than that. I mean...Riley isn't the villain so many fans paint him as (I love how he is so often characterized as both boringly good *and* a jerk who canon lets off too lightly), but he turned out to be not be as trustworthy as Buffy thought he was. And I mean, it was hard for Riley to date a woman who was the slayer and who had recently ended an intense relationship with a *vampire*. But just because fandom thinks Riley was boring doesn't mean that Buffy wasn't genuinely into the guy.

RE: here courtesy of the Herald

[itsnotmymind.livejournal.com]

Buffy/Spike are almost the opposite of Buffy/Angel in that regard: Buffy and Angel seem to feel their closest when they are being sexual. Buffy and Spike are at their most distant and dysfunctional when they are sexually involved.

The fact that both of Buffy's major vampire romances end up chaste because the sex leads to trauma is kinda not cool from a feminist perspective. Although a twisted part of me is amused that Buffy slept with a man and turned him into a monster, and slept with a monster and turned him into a man.

RE: here courtesy of the Herald

[thenewbuzwuzz.livejournal.com]

*nods* It is poetic. :) Though I also like to think they were all part man, part monster all the time.

[rebcake.livejournal.com]

I would say that all romantic relationships are by definition "unsafe" in the beginning. Your choice is to either commit yourself emotionally (fall in love) or to hold back and risk not connecting fully. It's a vertiginous feeling, that "falling" — scary and wonderful at the same time — but there is always emotional risk involved. The absolute worst choice, IMO, is to be so frightened that you never take the risk in the first place.

My opinion about Riley and Buffy is that the relationship was doomed from the start — in the episode titled "Doomed" — but that it was largely circumstances that doomed it. Joyce's illness combined with Riley's lack of job/purpose/superpowers created too much pressure on a newish relationship between young people. Very young in Buffy's case. Brain science tells us that young women are not fully formed as themselves until about 25 or so — men probably even later — which is a contributing factor to high divorce rates among young couples. That doesn't mean nobody should get involved in romance until they are 25, just that permanence is probably not in the cards. Anyway.

I don't think that Buffy is rejected by Angelus because she is bad in bed. I think that's what he implied, but it was pretty obviously not the truth. It could not have been bad at all if it led to perfect happiness, right? He's a master at getting to people's insecurities, and that's the lever he used in this case, but I hate to see it stated as fact that Buffy was somehow lacking. As if "bad" or "good" in bed is ever an objective truth. Bad or good match in bed, maybe.

I have read some interesting takes on whether it was Buffy's inexperience itself that made Angel so happy. Check out Third Wheel by shapinglight, in which the "Halloween" spell puts Darla into Buffy's psyche, rather than some generic noblewoman, leading to a different outcome in "Innocence". There are other, more light-hearted takes as well. One memorable one had Wesley explaining to S5 Angel that he would never lose his soul again by having sex with Buffy, because she's no longer a virgin, and that it was the deflowering that made him so happy, the putz.

I'm glad you posted this! It got the wheels turning for me this morning.

RE: here courtesy of the Herald

[itsnotmymind.livejournal.com]

That is also true.

[itsnotmymind.livejournal.com]

The absolute worst choice, IMO, is to be so frightened that you never take the risk in the first place.

It depends on the risk. There's a difference between, "He might dump me" and "Based on his past history, he might kill me". I walked away from a potential romance because the young man in question had a history of violent behavior. He tried to play the card that all relationships involve taking risk. I didn't buy it.

But yes, I do agree that Buffy did take a risk with Riley, simply in falling for him. The fact that people dismiss that because the relationship wasn't as risky as her relationships with two men with intense history of violence infuriates me.

I don't think that Buffy is rejected by Angelus because she is bad in bed. I think that's what he implied, but it was pretty obviously not the truth. It could not have been bad at all if it led to perfect happiness, right?

Good point! I should have said "inexperienced" rather than "bad". It's the inexperience that Angel comments on - after all, his only actual criticism is "You have a lot to learn about men", which again highlights that Buffy is inexperienced.

I'll check out that fix. It sounds intriguing. I've heard many people point out that the assumption that Angel and Buffy having sex again would automatically lead to Angel losing his soul doesn't make sense. In fact, someone once argued that the anxieties about losing the soul would probably be enough to keep Angel intact.

I'm glad you posted this! It got the wheels turning for me this morning.

Thank you!

[rebcake.livejournal.com]

There's a difference between, "He might dump me" and "Based on his past history, he might kill me".

Very, very true. I tend to vet potential romantic partners pretty thoroughly, so that's never been an issue for me, but you just never know what kind of other issues might come up. Due diligence, ladies!

I wouldn't say the difference in BtVS infuriates me, though. It's a show built on metaphor, and Our Heroine is larger than life, as are her suitors. Each pairing, each friendship, each villain has something interesting to offer to the narrative, even if we'd rather not live it ourselves.

[itsnotmymind.livejournal.com]

To be clear, I was talking about some of the reactions of fandom rather than the show itself. I love watching Buffy with her vampire romances, and just about all the characters are violent at least some of the time. But even still, I dislike that some fans dismiss Buffy's desire for a non-painful relationship as cowardly or not being true to herself...because last I checked, wanting a relationship with someone who wouldn't stalk you or try to kill you was a good. I get that people don't like Riley and Buffy/Riley - I'm not a huge fan, myself - but that doesn't mean that Buffy wanting a non-abusive boyfriend is somehow a sign that she's too willing to choose an "easy" or "safe" relationship.

[rebcake.livejournal.com]

Huh. Well, I don't think wanting a non-abusive relationship is somehow contrary to Buffy's nature. But physical harm is the least of her worries, and any man is capable of causing emotional harm: her dad, Angel, Angelus, Scott Hope, Parker, Riley, and Spike all injure her in some way or another, usually through abandonment.

I also think that she pretty clearly needs and wants somebody who can keep up with her. In universe, those guys tend to tread on the dark side far more than she. She's shown to be perfectly capable of physically keeping said guys in line. She's not like the rest of us gals in that way. Sure, she isn't thrilled with the attraction she has to guys that do have the power she needs/wants, because they are morally less than ideal. But what are her options?

There aren't any "normal" guys capable of matching her, and I don't think she even wants "normal" after a certain point. Certainly, she's not willing to give up her powers to achieve "normalcy" after her disastrous 18th birthday. I'm putting normal in quotes, because what does it even mean?

The show's built-in problem is that regular human romantic partners can't keep up with Buffy and supernatural romantic partners are shown to be morally suspect. The show's solution to this is the souled vampire, which is about as far from normal as you can get. If Steve Rogers showed up in Sunnydale, Buffy would be in good shape, romantically. But if she were to settle down with Joe Normal, she would be "settling" and ultimately unhappy. IMO.

[itsnotmymind.livejournal.com]

Hmmm. Stepping away from Watsonian issues of Buffy's characterization, it really bothers me that a female superhero is portrayed as being unable to date "normal" men. Male superheroes throughout the eons - Superman, Spider-Man, and even Batman to a certain extent - dated "normal" women, and in the case of Superman and Spider-Man their classic girlfriends, the first names people remember, were "normal", completely non-powered women (Batman maybe less so because of Catwoman).

Angel has no problem dating considerably less powerful women: Cordy's visions are decidedly non-physical, and Nina was pretty normal most of the month. Angel has problems in these relationships, but they have nothing to do with the lack of physical strength. When he and human Darla had intense interactions, no one seemed bothered by Darla's relative weakness. Of course they had lot more serious problems, but if one of them had brought it up, it would seem ludicrous. Compare that to Angel turning human in I Will Remember You, and Riley's conviction that Buffy won't be into him without his powers.

I used to read superhero comics, and it was a lot more common for male heroes to date civilian women than the reverse. Part of this was simply because there were less female heroes, but there was also a sense that a normal man and a super-powered woman wouldn't be interested in each other.

(and of course, when Willow starts getting really powerful, not only is it not physical strength but it also happens around the time she starts dating women - and she dates another witch)

And on a Watsonian level, I don't think there's any basis for thinking that Buffy requires a super-strong boyfriend. Riley was the one who had issues with losing his power, not Buffy. Buffy was devastated when Angel chose to become a vampire again in I Will Remember You. I do think part of Buffy's attraction to Angel was because she felt weird and different, and Angel was outside society. But just because she felt that way at sixteen doesn't mean it has to be that way forever. And in fact, Buffy had a very limited view of Angel. She never truly understood his darkness and the implications of his past until it was too late. If Buffy had really understood Angel's darkness, I'm not so sure she would have gotten involved with him. Once she loved him, she loved him. But she fell for him before she understood what he was keeping from her, when he was just letting her know in periodic, small doses just how bad it was.

[rebcake.livejournal.com]

Coming back to this late, as I was traveling.

I wrote my undergrad thesis on Lois Lane, so the human girlfriend to the superhero is a topic I've thought a lot about. Maybe things have changed some, but BY FAR the most frequent aspect of super/non-super romantic relationships is that the super feels that the relationship puts the non-super in danger, and they are often right. I'm not sure about Batman and Ironman, because they aren't actually super, just super-rich, which has its own set of problems. ;-) So, it seems to me that Buffy's dilemma is the same as every other superhero's, in this respect.

Angel's romantic history is so nonsensical, I have trouble finding the parallels. On the one hand, he thinks that Buffy should have "normal". On the other, he himself does not want to be "normal" ostensibly because it's dangerous for Buffy. IDEK with him...

The reality is that even super-powered Riley wasn't really doing it for Buffy in some ways, as we see in Buffy vs. Dracula, and she does get more protective once he's been powered down. This doesn't mean that it would never work, and that she couldn't get a certain amount of satisfaction out of their relationship. As with Angel, she was already committed when he changed, or when her perception of him did. I don't think it was working especially well for her, and obviously not for Riley, but she wasn't likely to end the relationship herself, without some triggering event.

[itsnotmymind.livejournal.com]

So, it seems to me that Buffy's dilemma is the same as every other superhero's, in this respect.

I disagree. Angel in I Will Remember You isn't concerned that he will be in danger - he's concerned that Buffy will be in danger. When Riley finds himself losing his powers in Out of Your Mind and is desperately upset about it, there's no indication that he's concerned for his safety. He tells Buffy, "You're getting stronger every day, more powerful. I can't touch you. Every day, you're just ... a little further out of my reach." Nor are concerns about his safety a factor in his break-up. In fact, as a soldier guy he continues to risk his life against demons and monster.

(Yes, Buffy is at times concerned about Riley's safety. But unlike civilian girlfriends, Riley takes Buffy's concern as proof that she thinks less of him. Riley's insecurity about this is a greater factor in their breakup then any danger he's in.)

I was a big Spider-Man fan, and the death of Gwen Stacey undoubtedly emphasized how dangerous it was for a civilian to be romantically involved with him. Yet that didn't stop him from having a long-term romance with Mary Jane Watson that led to their marriage. The marriage was eventually erased from continuity (and I stopped reading Spider-Man around that time), but it wasn't because of her being a civilian - it was because the higher-ups at Marvel wanted Spidey to be young and single and not a married man. Was there stress in the relationship because of the danger Mary Jane found herself in? Absolutely. Did the relationship fall about because MJ couldn't handle being in a relationship with a super-powered guy when her lack of super-powers made her ordinary? Uh, no. Nor do I recall many Spider-fans arguing that Peter couldn't be happy with a normal woman because of his powers and his unusual responsibilities.

The only famous classic superhero romance I can think of with a powerful woman and a male civilian is Wonder Woman/Steve Trevor - and even he is in the military. Female heroes rarely even reach the point where concern about the safety of their civilian love interests plays a major role in their romantic decisions because they don't even have civilian love interests.

On the one hand, he thinks that Buffy should have "normal". On the other, he himself does not want to be "normal" ostensibly because it's dangerous for Buffy.

I think for Angel it's a romanticization of Buffy's "innocence". And, in my opinion, very sexist - directly tied to Angelus' fetishization of Drusilla's "innocence". He thinks he can never have normal because of his past, but she can. Never mind that she has a fatal calling.

These days I don't think Buffy/Riley would have ever worked out, but not because he was a normal guy. It was because they had such wildly different expectations of the relationship, and I don't think they ever really figured out what the other was expecting. Riley thought love should be passionate romance between physical equals who fought side-by-side, and believed that was what Buffy had with Angel. Buffy wanted a loving but low-key relationship with someone she could trust.

People belittle what Buffy wanted as not being true to her heart, but I find it much more appealing then what she had with Angel. And note she only really fell for Spike in S7 when their relationship started to look like that. I don't know if she and Spike would have worked long term, either. Spike was a vampire with a horrific history, and with whom Buffy had a twisted history. But it might have worked. Buffy/Riley could not have worked because they wanted such different things. A different normal guy could have been a very different story.

[lokifan]

Just to say I 100% agree with all of this comment :D

[itsnotmymind.livejournal.com]

Thank you :)