I was scrolling through the tags on the post about Drusilla knowing Spike was in love with Buffy in FFL when I saw yours about why you thought it didn’t work. Could you go into more detail about why you think it’s nonsensical? I don’t necessarily disagree, because I always found the scene to be tacky, but I’d like to hear your thoughts.
This might be swinging the bat at the hornets nest but the Drusilla scene in FFL conflicts with the preexisting knowledge we have regarding Spike and Dru breaking up in Lover's Walk. In Lover's Walk Spike is in a state where he's super drunk and just over sharing, if Dru left him for the reasons shown in FFL, and that conversation happened, then we would have already found out about it in Lover's Walk.
Thus this Convo in FFL feels very off to me, but I think calling it nonsensical was harsh. Rewatching Season Two with a friend is reminding me that the buffyverse has so many continuity errors and getting upset at violations of continuity means writing off large sections of the show (Angel is said to be Spike's sire in School Hard for instance).
And I think you could argue that FFL doesn't work nearly as well without this scene. It's this episode that repositions and recontextualizes spike having killed two slayers as a sort of psychosexual obsession, and the way that this scene with Dru mirrors the Oz and Tara hallway scene in New Moon Rising, while probably not intentional, along with the whole scene where Spike and Dru use Slayer blood to get aroused, help reinforce this recontextualization.
So since I doubt that pointing out the continuity error would make the writer change the themes of the episode, saying "take it out of the episode" in my opinion is not necessarily the right fix, because there needs to be some way to tie the obsession to Buffy specifically, but I would have preferred something that didn't feel so jarring.