So I was thinking about the Gadreel possession storyline and the mark of Cain storyline and, as many people have pointed out, there are some obvious similarities which show an obvious double standard. I do find it relatively interesting that the mark of Cain came immediately after the Gadreel possession and yet the writers somehow either didn't see the double standard or didn't care.
Anyways, as most fans know, both storylines involve one of the brothers doing something against the other's will that backfires in some way and causes someone they care about to get hurt. However, both instances are at least mostly blamed on Sam and Dean never really apologizes for his part in either of them. When Dean tricks Sam into saying yes to Gadreel, it's Sam's fault because he was about to give up and leave Dean. When the whole thing backfires and people get hurt, it's not Dean's fault because he was just trying to save Sam. How was he supposed to know this random angel couldn't be trusted? Everything is justified. When Dean says he doesn't want to keep trying to get the mark off his arm and Sam continues to try without telling him, it's Sam's fault because he's lying to Dean. When Charlie dies because of it, it's Sam's fault even though everything she did was of her own free will. Basically, Sam can do no right and Dean can do no wrong.
I'd like to take a moment to look at the situations and think about how they're different for a moment. First of all, the stakes are different. If Sam had died, no one would be hurt except him, Dean, and Cas. If Dean had continued to carry the arm of Cain, he would've slowly turned into an indestructible monster, killing millions of innocent people, Crowley, Cas, and eventually Sam. After killing Sam, the curse would've been broken and he would've been left with all this death on his hands. In the case of the Gadreel possession, Dean's choice to trick Sam into saying yes was made for selfish reasons and only helped himself. In the case of the mark of Cain, Sam's choice to continue searching for a cure may have been selfish, but it was also an attempt to stop something unbelievably tragic from happening.
Also, Dean's choice to trick Sam into saying yes would've hurt Sam in ways I'm sure Dean wasn't unaware of. He knew abut Sam's trauma surrounding possession, but he did it anyways. Then he made Sam think he was going crazy in order to cover up the possession. He knew that Sam had gone through a period where he was constantly hallucinating and couldn't trust his own sanity. He also never told Kevin the truth which put Kevin in danger. If you honestly think this is ok or justifiable, please rethink your perspective. Plus, Dean never apologized and instead flipped the blame on Sam and became angry when Sam told him he wouldn't have done the same. Sam's choice to lie to Dean didn't involve tricking anyone into doing anything and then convincing them they're crazy when they start questioning him. He made a deal with Rowena, who was fully aware what she was getting herself into. He briefly tried to trick Charlie and Castiel, but quickly corrected his mistake and told them the truth. He didn't lie to either of them about the situation. They knew exactly what they were getting into and chose to do it anyways. Yes, Sam made mistakes. No, Sam was not 100% innocent, but he never claimed he was. Plus, Dean placed all the blame on Sam even though he had done worse. When Sam tried to apologize, Dean cut him off and told him he had no right to apologize.
Basically, the storyline are both similar and very different. Sam doesn't deserve the amount of hate he gets for either situation and Dean doesn't deserve to have every awful thing he does justified.
