Neither squicks me as much as Buffy/Giles.
Buffy/Giles is a HUGE squick for me. Way way way more than Batman/Robin (whichever Robin you choose).
Illyria: We cling to what is gone. Is there anything in this life but grief? Wesley: There's love. There's hope...for some. There's hope that you'll find something worthy...that your life will lead you to some joy...that after everything...you can still be surprised. Illyria: Is that enough? Is that enough to live on?
'Shells'
Angel 5: Is That It? Am I Done?
[NAFDA] This is where we talk about the show! Anything that's aired in the US (including promos) is fair game. No spoilers though -- if you post one by accident, an admin will delete it.
Steph L. - Jan 11, 2005 11:29:23 am PST #3132 of 3531
Unusually and exceedingly peculiar and altogether quite impossible to describe
Connie Neil - Jan 11, 2005 11:33:28 am PST #3133 of 3531
brillig
I like some Buffy/Giles
But I understand the squick. I keep my darker pleasures to myself.
Matt the Bruins fan - Jan 11, 2005 12:46:52 pm PST #3134 of 3531
"I remember when they eventually introduced that drug kingpin who murdered people and smuggled drugs inside snakes and I was like 'Finally. A normal person.'” —RahvinDragand
Well, when you get right down to it I'd say it's a lot healthier to have an inappropriate relationship with an older mentor figure than with a clammy reanimated corpse that's going to turn evil and try to kill you. Yet, Buffy/Giles still seems ickier than the canon romance.
Camcam - Jan 11, 2005 2:14:19 pm PST #3135 of 3531
When you have to shoot, shoot. Don't talk. --Tuco
Let's face it, Buffy/Angel is not so squicky because he LOOKS like a reasonable age for Buffy (or did at the time). Appearance counts for a lot, unfortunately for some of us.
§ ita § - Jan 11, 2005 2:17:12 pm PST #3136 of 3531
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
I don't think age is a squick, unless one party is too young. I don't believe in too old, but I do believe in inappropriate interactions, and those have to do with relationships rather than age differences.
Also, Angel didn't act as old as Giles.
Steph L. - Jan 11, 2005 2:21:39 pm PST #3137 of 3531
Unusually and exceedingly peculiar and altogether quite impossible to describe
And yet, Giles/Xander? Not squicky at all.
Though I get that Giles really only had a quasi-parental relationship with Buffy. (I just wanted to see "Giles/Xander" on my screen.)
§ ita § - Jan 11, 2005 2:24:02 pm PST #3138 of 3531
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Giles really only had a quasi-parental relationship with Buffy
If she'd had a father in place, I could agree with the "only" and the "quasi." As it played out, he was more like a stepfather that just never had a Relationship with her mother, I think.
Beverly - Jan 11, 2005 2:25:13 pm PST #3139 of 3531
Days shrink and grow cold, sunlight through leaves is my song. Winter is long.
The thing is, Giles isn't and never was Buffy's father. And someday, she's going to be 30, 35, and the gap between a mature woman and an older man is not going to be as wide as it is between a teenager or young 20s and an older man.
And they have much in common, much that no one else on earth knows or shares, a uniquely shared POV in many cases.
Honestly--and I don't lay this out often because it's not the popular view on the board--slash simply for the novelty or the manipulation factor squicks me far more than an age gap. I think the age squick belongs to a very young POV. The squick isn't wrong, it's just one end of a spectrum. The other end runs to, as in toward, or perhaps through, pairings or groupings of entities regardless of species, gender, age, number of appendages, or lack thereof. And physical sex is (a very hot and enjoyable, granted) only a single way of expressing a multitude of emotional states.
Hrm. Sorry. Rant over.
brenda m - Jan 11, 2005 2:25:38 pm PST #3140 of 3531
If you're going through hell/keep on going/don't slow down/keep your fear from showing/you might be gone/'fore the devil even knows you're there
I think Steph's "only" was meaning yes-with-Buffy, no-with-the-others, rather than a qualifier on the B/G relationship. Or am I reading that wrong?
Topic!Cindy - Jan 11, 2005 2:28:14 pm PST #3141 of 3531
What is even happening?
It's because of the type of relationship they've had, that it squicks me. Giles was an authority figure over Buffy (as well as a father type, and that, granted is a squick for me too, but that's not because of age, it's because of roles), and for him to get romantically entangled with her takes away something lovely from his character that I don't want to go missing.