Sam still wants to be the SNAG white knight, I think
I dunno. Banging Ruby doesn't sound like something a SNAG would do. First and second season Sam, sure. Now? He's been down too many dark roads. He needs an Ellen his own age. (NOT Jo.)
I'll take Dean, if no one else does. I can at least use him for a sex toy on the side. Or a friend with benefits. I've always found that the manly men are thin on the ground. Better to take what you can get, just be aware of the disclaimers and never, never take it serious.
Just because...we hear the phrase "man's man" all the time.
Is there such a thing as a "woman's woman?" Or are the ideas that go into that too wildly divergent? I thought of this when Bev wrote Sam would want a pretty princess, but one who knew how to use a variety of weapons as well as enjoy bubble baths and pedicures.
A man's man is a fairly simple topic, yes? But a woman's woman...can there really be agreement? To keep it (slightly) on topic, are there any "women's women" in the SPN verse?
Ellen. Pamela.
Tamara wasn't, for all she and her hubby were a team--they had large, big holes that weren't covered in that partnership, and a good team doesn't.
Sarah was on her way to it, I think. With a little work, she'd make it. Under the fashion and the makeup there was a good strong sense of self, a competence, and an adaptability a woman's woman has to have.
Okay. It's a term I think Consuela, or possibly Nutty, coined: competence kink. I think in order to be classified as a man's man or a woman's woman, an individual has to be competent. With some things it takes practice, but the attitude, the belief in one's ability--that's adult.
competence kink. I think in order to be classified as a man's man or a woman's woman, an individual has to be competent. With some things it takes practice, but the attitude, the belief in one's ability--that's adult.
Oooh. I love that term. And it's completely true.
I dunno. Banging Ruby doesn't sound like something a SNAG would do.
Against his will, (Papa!) Against his will (Sorry, uncontainable G&Sism there). Banging Ruby was not only something he felt was wrong on moral grounds because of the possession, it was also wrong to take comfort when Dean had no comfort or hope of it. But it also went against Sam's image of who he was. He clings to the persona he crafted at Sanford, has hoped on several levels to be able to reclaim that persona, believing it who he should be, and who he wants to be.
First and second season Sam, sure. Now? He's been down too many dark roads.
Exactly. But he's still struggling to balance parts of himself that retain that need for normal against the later-acquired toughness and disregard for niceties. The impatience with things not focused on his goal: getting Dean back, keeping himself human, controlling the elements of himself that threaten to swamp his humanity, compassion, and personality. He looks at his former self with some belief that's who he *should* be, even while he's letting go of the possibility of ever being that soft and accomodating again.
Truth is, I think because of Sam's personality and the way John and Dean raised him, there was always a wide and deep streak of implacable in Sam. A narrow-eyed, single-hearted focus that neither John nor Dean came by naturally. Even if his life had worked out with Jess and law school, Sam would have been an SOB in court, ruthless and quick to use every weapon in his arsenal to win. Arguing with Jess and angry enough? He'd have brought that steely resolve into it, and he'd have fought dirty. He may, and probably would, have been genuinely contrite and done the pretty to apologize, partly because he really didn't want to hurt those he loved, and partly because the person who did that wasn't part of his self-image.
I think a lot of the social niceties Sam practiced were a self-delusion to cover up the ruthless bastard he can be when he's on point.
John had to acquire his hard-assery, as has Dean, and Dean's still working on it. Beneath the tough guy we all know Dean's a marshmallow. Beneath the SNAG, we all know Sam's a straight razor.
He needs an Ellen his own age. (NOT Jo.)
I don't know. I think he needs someone who won't be bulldozed, but honestly? He's not, and I doubt he ever will be a real man's man. He needs a woman who can manage him, and that takes wiles a woman's woman wouldn't use.
What? Yes, I have given Sam's character, and it's development, some thought.
::is all ya'll's bitch::
The guy described above--the man's man? John or Dean, I'm not picky, that's all I want. I'm thinking either could do that Sam move about lifting up on the lap with one hand. I'll be in my bunk.
A narrow-eyed, single-hearted focus that neither John nor Dean came by naturally. Even if his life had worked out with Jess and law school, Sam would have been an SOB in court, ruthless and quick to use every weapon in his arsenal to win. Arguing with Jess and angry enough? He'd have brought that steely resolve into it, and he'd have fought dirty.
This makes me wonder how much he takes after his namesake. One thing I found interesting about ITB was how much it undercut some of our assumptions about what John must have been like. Here's a guy who was willling (apparently without reservation) to get the VW van his beloved thought they should get. It's also interesting that he seemed affable and kind and patient after having returned from the war.
I think a lot of the social niceties Sam practiced were a self-delusion to cover up the ruthless bastard he can be when he's on point.
Yes. This. Beverly, as always, is wise.
He needs a woman who can manage him, and that takes wiles a woman's woman wouldn't use.
Huh. Interesting point. So in a way, would a redeemed (or mostly redeemed) Ruby be his ideal woman? I'm not sure what I think about the idea, but it's an idea that does have me thinking.
I'm still hazy on this concept of man's man, possibly because I'm cheerfully butcher (my love of surface femme aside) than most men, possibly because that's not how I think of gender in my own little warped head. Plus, man's man to me implies a man who is most comfortable in the social company of men, adept at masculine things, whatever those are.
Mostly, in a partner of either gender, I look for someone comfortable enough with the self to not feel like they're in a constant state of facepalm being around me. Thus, I gravitate to freaks and weirdos, for that's my comfort zone.
I look for someone comfortable enough with the self to not feel like they're in a constant state of facepalm being around me
That's kind of how Jamie from "Monster Movie" came across to me.
