actually guys. sam and amy kissed bc they felt it was the right thing to do. yk bc they were Supposed to like each other, right?? if this were different circumstances and they were normal ppl and dean was involved, he would be telling sam to just ‘go for it!’ bc that’s what he’s supposed to do, that’s what they’re supposed to do.
but really, they didn’t like each other, not like that anyways. amy didn’t kill ask sam to run away with her bc she Liked him. she asked him to run away with her bc she understood him. she knew exactly what he was feeling (and she knew what particular feeling he was lacking). because she felt the same things. she lacked the same feelings.
amy shoving sam into a closet when her mom came home WAS a symbol of queerness for the both of them. this was genuinely one of the most queer coded moments in the show. and dean killing amy, showing that when sam is with dean, he can’t 100% be himself, he has to hide some parts of himself bc hes scared dean won’t like it. dean killed the last person alive who sam had truly opened up to about things that he’s never opened up to dean or john or bobby about (other ppl being jess, brady, ruby etc.)
and i could go on and on about the demon blood/psychic storyline being super fucking queercoded as well if anyone would like.
77 notes
·
View notes
it's still so interesting to me that there's this lasting perception in fandom that dean is the one who doesn't want sam to have any relationships outside of the two of them and not the other way around when all evidence points to the contrary. dean regularly pushes sam to make connections with people but because he *checks notes* showed up at sam's apartment when he was scared about their missing father and got mad at sam for ignoring the outside world in order to play house while dean was fighting for his life and kevin needed him, that must mean dean wants sam all to himself i guess? apparently taking sam back to his apartment and telling him to go to amelia and offering to take him to visit sarah blake and encouraging him to go after eileen and and and just doesn't stack up against that one time he was traumatized and angry.
267 notes
·
View notes
#okay wait do y'all think that she wasn't going to try and murder Dean?#Do you think he was going to get through to her?#convince her somehow to not try to stab him?#that she was telling the truth at all in that scene?#because she was totally going to try and kill Dean#like 100% that was going to happen#and if Sam hadn't shot her then Dean would have had to kill her and that would have been so much harder on Dean#like it was disturbing that Dean had a 3 day old monster child that wanted to kill him but who was then killed by her uncle Sam instead#and even more disturbing that they then never mention her again#but these are also the guys who left their half brother in Lucifer's cage and didn't lose any sleep over it so...#and I love Dean but killing Amy was an asshole move#and there's kinda a difference between killing an active imminent threat and killing someone in cold blood after the fact @jinkieswouldyoulookatthis
I didn't want to clutter someone else's post but this was partially directed at me? I've talked about the whole "Emma vs Amy" debate quite a few times, but I'll share a few thoughts.
Amy is a present, unrepentant, fully cognizant, adult, serial murderer. She is not actually sorry about what she did in any way. She believes that slaughtering humans like cattle to feed them to her son was the morally correct action even if it wasn't the ethical action because it kept her son alive. She is not correct.
Emma is a brainwashed child who's been psychologically conditioned for a few days. She has never killed anyone and only wants to kill Dean because some women who abused her told her to.
Hunters like Sam and Dean primarily deal in punitive justice, not preventative justice—and what I mean by that is that Sam and Dean try not to kill people (with powers or without powers) who have never killed anyone.
While I think you're right to point out that a preventative justice component is in play, that is not primarily how Dean makes the decision to go after Amy, and the reason we know that is because Amy's son swears to kill Dean and Dean does nothing about it because the boy has done absolutely nothing wrong.
Dean's application of his personal code is consistent here. He kills Amy, who is a murderer who killed four people, but he does not intend to kill Emma or Amy's son—both of whom wanted to kill him—because neither has actually killed anyone and both may choose not to.
You say that Emma was going to kill Dean 100%, but you don't actually know that because we never got to see that future. You assume Amy would never have killed again, but when you add up "murderer who regrets absolutely nothing" and "child vulnerable to catching illnesses" you get "Mom who absolutely would kill again as necessary and who would feel zero remorse doing so just like the last time".
I don't personally think SPN gives us any reason to suspect that three days of psychological conditioning from a cult is too much to overcome. We have seen other characters overcome much more serious levels of psychological conditioning intended to make them killers. For example, Cas and Alex. I'm not saying Emma wasn't trying to pull the wool over Sam and Dean's eyes in the scene where Sam shot her, but I am saying that doesn't actually mean in any way that she couldn't be convinced to actually choose a different path.
Under the same litmus test with which you suggest Emma's condemnation, we'd also condemn season 2 Sam for his potential "future" crimes. We are killing monsters before they actually become those monsters... because of the dark path someone else intends for them to go down. Amy—again—is an active present unrepentant serial killer.
I think sometimes people misremember the scene where Sam kills Emma—recalling the scene as a scene where Emma lunges at Dean with the knife and Sam steps in just in time to save his life, or where Dean is unarmed and Emma has him at knife point. But that is not what happened. Emma quite literally brought a knife to a gun fight. Dean had a gun pointed at her, and if she was thinking straight at all, she would have left to avoid being killed if given the chance—especially when Sam arrived. And had she not, Sam could have shot her at that point—but Sam didn't wait to see what she'd do. He wanted her dead, because even if she ran, he didn't think they were equipped to deal with surprise attacks from Dean's Amazon child. That is the decision Sam made after a brief moment to consider, and it makes sense to me given the headspace he was in at the time and his assessment of Dean's headspace as well, but it does not make his decision consistent with his previous or future behavior regarding people who have been psychologically conditioned to kill.
My own frustrations are more with fandom, for a thought process that really really does not make sense to me, where Emma deserves to die but Amy deserved to live. I do not agree with that premise. I do not understand why so much of fandom has the perspective that a child who hadn't shed a drop of blood and who was acting in response to a cult's torture, who brought a knife to a gun fight and had already been driven into a corner where she had no choice but to surrender or run—doesn't deserve a chance to choose something else before she's barely lived and before she's heard a loving word in her entire life, but an adult with full cognizance of their actions who went through with killing four people and doesn't regret it should go on with their life and is "just a good mom doing what she had to" and killing that person is the bad thing. I don't understand that. I don't think Dean killing Amy was wrong at all in the "hunters kill supernatural murderers" show. The only thing Dean did wrong was lie about it and not take enough care to keep her son from seeing it happen.
292 notes
·
View notes
I really like how Amy was written in Frontiers! Still a romantic, but a bit more mature and thoughtful. It's a really nice evolution for her character
2K notes
·
View notes