As much as I love Stiles Stilinski, I would never say he's... I dunno, unproblematic?? The whole point of loving him, for me, is that he IS flawed. He's relatable and upsetting and real. I don't agree with all his actions or what he says every time. I love seeing his character develop and CHANGE because, again, he's not a perfect, flawless person. He's breakable and human and flawed. Arguing he's a bad character because he's flawed and fucks up sometimes misses the point of... I dunno... writing a character???
When he shouts at Scott about how some people are human, I didn't feel it as a jab at Scott's "monstrosity". I felt it as a jab at Stiles' own insecurity and knowledge of his own flaws (and disbelief in his own self "unworth" lol? making up words evurrday cuz why else would I have a ling degree, amirite?). Yes, because Scott had his own doubts and insecurities, perhaps he took it differently and it hurt him in a way Stiles did NOT intend. Because, again, they are fallible people. Different things hit people differently (obviously). It showed perfectly how far apart these friends had fallen, actually. Neither could see the other's point of view.
In a very basic way: the part of the Stiles fandom that sees Stiles as an Ultimate Hufflepuff, True Pack Mom, soft boy, I don't.... really get? To me, he is, and always will be, a total Slytherin. He's clannish, ambitious(kinda?), determined and driven, and rather selfish, and very cunning. He cares about the people HE cares about and he will throw himself into the fire (or the ice water that legit kills him for... 16 hrs?) for those select important people. Everyone else can go burn. I LOVE KouriArashi's (did I remember that correctly?) Searching Ceremonies series because they capture SO WELL this dichotomy of his personality: he's a Denmaker and wants to take care of the people he loves. However, he's also capable of being the Lefthand, getting his hands dirty and making questionable choices for the sake of the ones he loves.
His "everyone else can go burn" mentality is NOT a "good" trait, but it's the leading part of who he is and it's actually kinda relatable. And, because he's a FANTASTICALLY written, grey moralled teenager played by an amazingly charismatic actor, there's a whole lot more to him, he also changes and develops throughout the show. But he is NOT a "perfect, does no wrong, and has zero flaws" character.
And this is my big beef with a certain circle of Scott fans. There's a whole lot of viciously defensive people who will go on for PAGES AND PAGES about how perfect and wonderful and flawless and amazing the Scott is. And, even worse, the writing of TW wants the watchers to believe it, too. Some fans believe this is intentional and Scott is just an unreliable narrator. Power to you. But I'm old and cynical and I hate JD, so I honestly believe it's just bad writing. He really is that kinda bland 1D character. Using the defense/argument that "My character is more perfect and morally superior than yours" is a dumb argument. Characters are supposed to be flawed, are supposed to grow and change. We're supposed to disagree or cringe through their actions and choices, so we can cheer on their visible growth!!
Scott's a bad character because he doesn't grow. Not because he does bad things.
Stiles is good character because he does grow, even if he does do bad things.
2087
baratheonpilled
gummygunk
janainaart
titsay
turnnoffyourmind
origamiaround
yousharknotpass
