Question Opinion: Becoming, Part 2

[Skanky Vamp]

Had Xander told her the truth, she would’ve held back and Angelus would’ve won.

That's one possibility sure. There were other options she could have taken. But she wasn't give a choice. Just as she wasn't given a choice in becoming a Slayer. Just as she wasn't given a choice when Mr. Giles stole her powers from her. It was a recurring theme in the opening seasons, people (usually men) taking away her choices.

 

[thrasherpix]

I really don't know when a thread has gone off topic. It seems arbitrary to me.

Going by these standards, Buffy was depriving people of their choices by lying as well, from early seasons to later. She also used violence, though mostly against males (Faith a notable exception, but then Faith wasn't any ordinary girl, and Buffy always threatened those, even Kendra, if they hurt her boy candy which Faith did, and many men, along with women, would find Faith TOO rebellious, so in "need of punishing").

But then we know no matter how smart, powerful, capable a female, even with super powers, the males hold the power. Because deep down we all know they really do, you can put a jet engine in an old Ford from decades ago and it's not getting off the ground without a man behind the wheel who can apply the brakes any time he wants. (I'm not sure how much of that was serious and how much was snarkiness at societal attitudes, but it's definitely a mix, and meant "is thought to" to be rather than actually does, often by women themselves as much as by men, even when they patronize us with shows like Buffy the Vampire Slayer.)

 

[Tome]

Going by these standards, Buffy was depriving people of their choices by lying as well, from early seasons to later. She also used violence, though mostly against males (Faith a notable exception, but then Faith wasn't any ordinary girl, and Buffy always threatened those, even Kendra, if they hurt her boy candy which Faith did, and many men, along with women, would find Faith TOO rebellious, so in "need of punishing").

But then we know no matter how smart, powerful, capable a female, even with super powers, the males hold the power. Because deep down we all know they really do, you can put a jet engine in an old Ford from decades ago and it's not getting off the ground without a man behind the wheel who can apply the brakes any time he wants. (I'm not sure how much of that was serious and how much was snarkiness at societal attitudes, but it's definitely a mix, and meant "is thought to" to be rather than actually does, often by women themselves as much as by men, even when they patronize us with shows like Buffy the Vampire Slayer.)

Ok it took me a while to understand this post but I think I got it now.

You are arguing that it is hypocritical for people to criticize Xander over that decision when Buffy has made a good amount of questionable decisions herself that people tend to brush aside. And you are implying that this double standard has to do with people not holding women, in this case Buffy, as responsible for their own actions. Am I on the right track?

Well, to begin with, I am sure many people, including myself, would readily admit to you that they have criticized Buffy on many occasions. She was particularly flawed when it came to relationships and she could be a little too headstrong in the early seasons. However, I'm not sure I get your point about violence. The only times I can think of where she was unnecessary violent with someone was with Spike, and even then she was shameful and remorseful about it all. In every other case, she was either fighting someone who was attempting to kill her (or someone else) or she was doing her job as a Slayer.

I'm not sure where men holding the power comes into play here. You'll have to be clearer and more specific about that part, I think. Also, who is patronizing who with Buffy the Vampire Slayer? Wtf. You totally lost me there.

Now, for the OP, my first thought when Xander said that to Buffy was "Oh you little... *insert long list of expletives*"! I do not buy the theory that he did it to avoid the possibility of Buffy holding back... AT ALL. That's way too astute and strategic for S2 Xander, especially when Angel is involved. He did it because he wanted Buffy to kill Angel. He didn't like him and he let his petty jealously take over for a bit. The worst part of this for me is that Xander put his selfish, juvenile need above his best friend/crush's happiness. A big L for Xander there.

As for him never bringing it up after, I'm not surprised. Buffy would have hated his guts for a while.

 

[Stake fodder]

I do not buy the theory that he did it to avoid the possibility of Buffy holding back... AT ALL. That's way too astute and strategic for S2 Xander, especially when Angel is involved. He did it because he wanted Buffy to kill Angel. He didn't like him and he let his petty jealously take over for a bit. The worst part of this for me is that Xander put his selfish, juvenile need above his best friend/crush's happiness. A big L for Xander there.

I agree with this. I don't think Xander did much if any analysis of, "If I say this, then Buffy will...." It's possibly true that therefore Buffy was kept from holding back, though I think that's maybe not giving Buffy credit. Still, I think we can condemn Xander's choice, even if it inadvertently led to a good result.

I think it is Kant who has a whole ethics argument about whether it's wrong to lie even if it saves someone's life. This seems like the flip side of that debate!

 

[thrasherpix]

Ok it took me a while to understand this post but I think I got it now.

You are arguing that it is hypocritical for people to criticize Xander over that decision when Buffy has made a good amount of questionable decisions herself that people tend to brush aside. And you are implying that this double standard has to do with people not holding women, in this case Buffy, as responsible for their own actions. Am I on the right track?

Well, to begin with, I am sure many people, including myself, would readily admit to you that they have criticized Buffy on many occasions. She was particularly flawed when it came to relationships and she could be a little too headstrong in the early seasons. However, I'm not sure I get your point about violence. The only times I can think of where she was unnecessary violent with someone was with Spike, and even then she was shameful and remorseful about it all. In every other case, she was either fighting someone who was attempting to kill her (or someone else) or she was doing her job as a Slayer.

I'm not sure where men holding the power comes into play here. You'll have to be clearer and more specific about that part, I think. Also, who is patronizing who with Buffy the Vampire Slayer? Wtf. You totally lost me there.

Now, for the OP, my first thought when Xander said that to Buffy was "Oh you little... *insert long list of expletives*"! I do not buy the theory that he did it to avoid the possibility of Buffy holding back... AT ALL. That's way too astute and strategic for S2 Xander, especially when Angel is involved. He did it because he wanted Buffy to kill Angel. He didn't like him and he let his petty jealously take over for a bit. The worst part of this for me is that Xander put his selfish, juvenile need above his best friend/crush's happiness. A big L for Xander there.

As for him never bringing it up after, I'm not surprised. Buffy would have hated his guts for a while.

I can see how what I posted is confusing. In part because I was snarky at times, serious at others, and the tone didn't carry through. (Though I still don't know how serious SV is, or if he's having another laugh at us.)


Yet it's more than that, and since you seem to be sincerely trying to understand my perspective (understanding doesn't imply agreement), I feel I should attempt to explain the serious part.


The heart of the matter is that I see a pattern in which this is but one example that is disrespectful to female characters, infantilizing them. No matter how impressive one's abilities and accomplishments, a female will pretty much be at the mercy of one as Xander.

That's not not to let Xander completely off the hook. But I do think Xander's malice and power is being overblown here, as it is quite a bit. I get the impression that he's more or less being equated with the power and malice of Manners when Manners owned Angel with his words in the elevator to Hell. While Xander lied, and Buffy has every right to be angry over that (and Willow as well), it's not like she was at his mercy, that the power was all on him. (Could mention the lack of sleep and running on adrenaline fumes as well, which affect how people act, often in bad ways.)

If it were only once or twice that I thought it was blown out of proportion then it wouldn't phase me, but it's a pattern.

Also, there's a difference between respecting someone and liking them. Ms. Post is one of the other examples in this pattern. She has a brilliant mind. Cunning. Courageous. Brilliant. An able fighter. In real life (without the supernatural), I think Post would easily own Xander mentally or physically if Xander crossed her, though she'd probably just twist him around her finger (if she deigned to notice him at all) as easily as people think Xander can Buffy.

But it seems I'm in a small minority in blaming Post rather than Xander for Faith going after Angel (not to say I let Faith and Xander completely off the hook, and I wonder if even Buffy and Giles were factors of Faith doing as she did as well). Despite that Post did the work, and continued it until she got what she wanted, even after Xander said he no longer thought it was Angel (he wasn't lying when he thought it was, so changed his story, while Post was deliberately lying, and with more skill than Xander lying or telling the truth).

Because gods forbid a WOMAN have any responsibility or power compared to Xander. Or females who had lived independent lives with supernatural powers that even include Plot Slayer visions (my one snarky line in the post, though also with a bit of seriousness). Faith and Buffy have both proven able to live on their own, which would be impressive even as adults, let alone as kids which the system should be against. (And presumably Buffy didn't use any form of actual ID--based on that the LAPD and Watchers couldn't find her among other things I could mention--and yet did more than what many in their 20s could do today.) Of course they can be tricked and make mistakes even when meaning well, but it feels to me like in the rush to blame Xander over and over again that they're being disrespected.


This isn't to say women should be blamed. It's saying I find constantly blaming Xander to this degree to be infantilizing the female characters, more than Xander himself does at his worst. And when Xander is at his best, I find it easier to believe that he truly sees Buffy as his hero, as opposed to Buffy as a symbol for something great (but not to be taken too seriously).


I want to end this, so I'll close by saying it's a personal issue I struggled with in my youth. Even well meaning people made me feel weaker than I was despite what I accomplished. I was infantilized. So sometimes I react negatively to the insulting implications of the pattern I see that comes off as dismissive of females.

 

[thetopher]

Xander does show sign of regret. He shows up to help Angel more than once in season 3.

That's certainly one interpretation; but it could just as easily be read as Xander having compassion for his friend- Buffy- rather than regret to what happened as a result of his lie.
I can't remember him showing a single moment of empathy for Angel, to his face, the entire season. In fact, after Angel's return Xander's first instinct is to knowingly participate in the murder of a souled being; Angel himself.
Doesn't lend itself to the 'regret' interpretation.

He also had good reason to "sic Faith on him" though Giles handled it much more maturely, and I see that as more of the rogue Watcher that got Faith angry and primed to strike at something, first hostile against Xander, and then against Buffy/Angel, but teenage boy > Watcher who even played Giles for a fool when it comes to manipulation because no matter how experienced or super powered, Xander is in control. But seriously, Xander said what he thought, Faith (her anger and insecurities stoked by the rogue Watcher and Faith was pretty much looking for someone to hit) swallowed it, and kept at it even when Xander realized it wasn't Angel rather than telling her it was definitely Angel.

Lot to unpack here:

- Mrs Post skillfully manipulated both Giles and Faith. Faith got angry/frustrated and Giles got angry/British.
Xander never interacted with her so he cannot claim the same. Xander was never manipulated. He was just angry all by himself. And also, again (which was my point) he disregards the collective decision (after the meeting) to let Buffy handle Angel and instead decides it would be kinda neat to see Angel get staked.
My point is that Revelations reveals a Xander-pattern of putting what he thinks is best above a collective group decision. This is not a gender thing since Giles is clearly a dude, and yet Xander ignores the rest of them and their wishes because of feels.

- I don't for one minute think that Xander thought Buffy was kissing soulless Angel. He recognized what Buffy said in the confrontation-meeting/intervention, that Angel was ally-Angel again. He just didn't care and wanted him to die anyway.

- Faith wasn't particularly hostile towards Xander; she was confrontational I guess, because she wanted answers and happened upon Xander first.

- I wouldn't say that Xander is manipulative but he does see opportunity and acts impulsively (again). We know that Xander knows way more about Angel than Faith does; she's just heard the horror stories (told by Xander and Willow) about how awful he was. She tried asking Buffy (bluntly) about her relationship but was rebuffed (heh) and so knows very little about 'good' Angel.

So when Faith says 'I say I slay' to Xander, all he has to do is what he did with Riley in S4; explain in blunt, unsympathetic terms that Angel (with a soul) is a douche but he's not a real threat like Angelus is/was. He can tell her; 'not just yet, but be ready to slay if things go sideways cuz Buffy sure as hell won't'. That would make Faith understand the current situation and maybe make her feel more included/part of the group. This would be an example of Xander using his talky-mouth word powers for good, not evil.

Also I would make clear that Faith is not blameless here; she is way too ignorant of the sitch and way too head-strong and impulsive when she is on the warpath.
And its ultimately Post's final plea that causes Faith and Buffy to fight, not Xander.

Takes two to tango (Willow and Xander). Though that one was a bit too forced and contrived for me to accept without adding head canon.

Sure, and I never indicated otherwise, but this is about a certain character with a certain character trait; Xander will confront and criticize Buffy for things he is doing himself; lying, being secretive, etc.

And I'm a little gentler on Willow because at least she had the grace to feel bad about doing what she'd done when she got caught. Xander tries feeling bad but gives up because its too difficult and so spends most of the rest of the season snarking back at Cordelia.

Willow didn't have super powers in s2, it was a hail mary play that Willow THOUGHT she could do. All of Xander's experience with magic had been bad. And now Willow was with a concussion (when there are doubts for those not in the audience that she could do it even in full health), Giles was missing, the world was ending, and Buffy was likely to die for a murdering fiend. I'm not going to blame the boy for all the super powered girls messing up.

I was making the point that 'the collective group' had made a decision to try the resoulling spell; Giles warned Willow of the consequences and Willow wanted to do it anyway. Even after near death she wanted to try it again. That's commendable, and its not solely up to Xander to decide 'nah, Willow can't do it, I know better'.

And its not nobility that makes Xander lie to Buffy about Willow's choice, it is utter self-interest, in the moment, that makes him say what he said.

He's not that powerful, and he's as flawed as the rest of them, just as they're flawed as him.

Absolutely, I'm willing to criticize Buffy and Giles and Willow's bad decisions (and there are a whole bunch of them) but this is a Xander thread, about one of his worse character traits AND moments.
To be fair its rather mild compared with the rest of the Scoobies; slayer-poisoners and skin-flayers abound.

 

[Kendar]

Here' an important point to consider. Xander tells Buffy to kick his ass. Buffy goes in and is fighting full out. Can we agree on that?

Because if we do it's important to note that fighting full out she still fails! Angel succeeds in the ritual freeing Acathla, and Willow's success in the ritual is functionally irrelevant.

So unless you think Buffy would have fought better trying to delay until Willow finishes, Xander did the right thing. Depending on why you think he did it he may have done it for the wrong reasons.

 

[Faded90]

I think there’s a chance Xander telling the truth may have been irrelevant but that doesn’t actually matter - he still lied and I don’t believe for one minute he had noble ‘wanting to keep Buffy at her peak fighting ability’ reasons. I fully believe he had selfish motives behind his reason for it

To be honest the whole ‘Buffy would have held back’ doesn’t actually make sense to me. Angel is a vampire, Buffy could whale on him beating him black and blue for hours if she likes it’s not going to kill him. She doesn’t actually have any reason to hold back in an actual fight. Her thinking would have been the same in the fight as it was ‘keep Angel away from Acathla’. The world actually wasn’t at anymore risk if she’d known - she still killed ensoulled Angel when she needed to anyway.

 

[Ethan Reigns]

Angel has a broad streak of the Machiavellian in him. In "School Hard", Xander goes to get him. As they enter the school, Angel gets him in a headlock when he meets Spike and offers him a drink (of Xander's blood). When Angel meets Spike, we get this exchange:

Spike:- Come up against this slayer yet?

Angel- She's cute. Not too bright, though. Gave the puppy-dog, "I'm all tortured" act. Keeps her off my back when I feed.

Spike: People still fall for that Anne Rice routine? What a world!

Xander: I knew you were lyin'. Undead liar guy!

Angel: Wanna bite before we kill her? Hm?

Later, Xander says:

Xander: So when you gave him my neck to chew on,
why didn't you clock him?

Angel: I couldn't make the first move.
I had to see if he was buying it or not.

Xander: - And if he bit me? What then?
- We would have known he bought it.

I don't think at this point Xander is driven by jealousy. I think he is driven by PTSD and the knowledge that Angel is perfectly happy to play Buffy or anyone else for a fool when it suits him. And the knowledge that when the circumstances force Buffy to kill the love of her life, the 17 year old Buffy is likely to falter like she did at the mall. Full marks for Xander assessing the situation and choosing a comment that improved the probability of the earth not being doomed.

 

[Tome]

The heart of the matter is that I see a pattern in which this is but one example that is disrespectful to female characters, infantilizing them. No matter how impressive one's abilities and accomplishments, a female will pretty much be at the mercy of one as Xander.

That's not not to let Xander completely off the hook. But I do think Xander's malice and power is being overblown here, as it is quite a bit. I get the impression that he's more or less being equated with the power and malice of Manners when Manners owned Angel with his words in the elevator to Hell. While Xander lied, and Buffy has every right to be angry over that (and Willow as well), it's not like she was at his mercy, that the power was all on him. (Could mention the lack of sleep and running on adrenaline fumes as well, which affect how people act, often in bad ways.)

If it were only once or twice that I thought it was blown out of proportion then it wouldn't phase me, but it's a pattern.

Also, there's a difference between respecting someone and liking them. Ms. Post is one of the other examples in this pattern. She has a brilliant mind. Cunning. Courageous. Brilliant. An able fighter. In real life (without the supernatural), I think Post would easily own Xander mentally or physically if Xander crossed her, though she'd probably just twist him around her finger (if she deigned to notice him at all) as easily as people think Xander can Buffy.

But it seems I'm in a small minority in blaming Post rather than Xander for Faith going after Angel (not to say I let Faith and Xander completely off the hook, and I wonder if even Buffy and Giles were factors of Faith doing as she did as well). Despite that Post did the work, and continued it until she got what she wanted, even after Xander said he no longer thought it was Angel (he wasn't lying when he thought it was, so changed his story, while Post was deliberately lying, and with more skill than Xander lying or telling the truth).

Because gods forbid a WOMAN have any responsibility or power compared to Xander. Or females who had lived independent lives with supernatural powers that even include Plot Slayer visions (my one snarky line in the post, though also with a bit of seriousness). Faith and Buffy have both proven able to live on their own, which would be impressive even as adults, let alone as kids which the system should be against. (And presumably Buffy didn't use any form of actual ID--based on that the LAPD and Watchers couldn't find her among other things I could mention--and yet did more than what many in their 20s could do today.) Of course they can be tricked and make mistakes even when meaning well, but it feels to me like in the rush to blame Xander over and over again that they're being disrespected.


This isn't to say women should be blamed. It's saying I find constantly blaming Xander to this degree to be infantilizing the female characters, more than Xander himself does at his worst. And when Xander is at his best, I find it easier to believe that he truly sees Buffy as his hero, as opposed to Buffy as a symbol for something great (but not to be taken too seriously).


I want to end this, so I'll close by saying it's a personal issue I struggled with in my youth. Even well meaning people made me feel weaker than I was despite what I accomplished. I was infantilized. So sometimes I react negatively to the insulting implications of the pattern I see that comes off as dismissive of females.

Well, in that case, there was no way for Buffy to know Xander was lying. Are you implying that she shouldn't have trusted him? I don't even know why you're bringing up 'power' dynamics in this situation, but Buffy obviously trusted that her friend was telling the truth. She was, as you put it, "at the mercy of Xander".

I don't see the connection to the scene between Holland Manners and Angel at all. How did Holland lie to Angel? He told him the truth. He made him realize that the "home office" was here on earth. So, yea, not sure I follow there.

Ok, so you're saying that there is a pattern in BtVS of people blaming guys for decisions made by female characters? Examples would be helpful, in that case.

People blame Xander for poisoning Faith's mind about Angel because that's exactly what he did! Gwendolyn did no such thing. What she did was play with Faith's insecurities concerning the Scooby Gang not trusting her. And I don't know any viewer who wouldn't criticize Post for that. She was obviously disliked as a character. You're talking as if she got off scot-free in the eyes of the viewers. 😆

Ok, here you go again claiming that people always put the blame on Xander and infantilize the female characters. You need to give us actual examples of this. As I don't think there's much of a pattern at all. Xander tends to be blamed for things he actually did wrong. Just like most characters on the show.

As for your final point, I can see what you are saying. It definitely happens in real life, but I'm not sure that was really the case in Buffy the Vampire Slayer. I'm ready to be proven wrong, though, if you give me good examples.

 

[thrasherpix]

Well, in that case, there was no way for Buffy to know Xander was lying. Are you implying that she shouldn't have trusted him? I don't even know why you're bringing up 'power' dynamics in this situation, but Buffy obviously trusted that her friend was telling the truth. She was, as you put it, "at the mercy of Xander".

I don't see the connection to the scene between Holland Manners and Angel at all. How did Holland lie to Angel? He told him the truth. He made him realize that the "home office" was here on earth. So, yea, not sure I follow there.

Ok, so you're saying that there is a pattern in BtVS of people blaming guys for decisions made by female characters? Examples would be helpful, in that case.

People blame Xander for poisoning Faith's mind about Angel because that's exactly what he did! Gwendolyn did no such thing. What she did was play with Faith's insecurities concerning the Scooby Gang not trusting her. And I don't know any viewer who wouldn't criticize Post for that. She was obviously disliked as a character. You're talking as if she got off scot-free in the eyes of the viewers. 😆

Ok, here you go again claiming that people always put the blame on Xander and infantilize the female characters. You need to give us actual examples of this. As I don't think there's much of a pattern at all. Xander tends to be blamed for things he actually did wrong. Just like most characters on the show.

As for your final point, I can see what you are saying. It definitely happens in real life, but I'm not sure that was really the case in Buffy the Vampire Slayer. I'm ready to be proven wrong, though, if you give me good examples.

We have different interpretations on what happened. But some of the descriptions here in this very thread were way over the top about what he did, as if it were all on him, as opposed to him making a bad decision. He didn't take away Buffy's power as Giles once did by poisoning her, which is claimed, and I've seen it before.

Just as you dismiss my example, I dismiss that example that compares Xander's lie to Giles poisoning Buffy, and despite acknowledging valid points and interpretations on the other episode, I still don't buy your interpretation of it that way, nor see the one I saw as valid as being the whole story, it's just a friendly disagreement, even if I agree that Xander definitely could've handled it better. And in doing so mutually, I don't see a point in arguing about it, especially as I'm not sure when the mods will say this is gone beyond the borders of this thread and we need to start a new one (or maybe bump one of the older ones). The way our minds process it is so different as to make it pointless.

But as for the elevator scene...I did not say it was the same dynamic, I was saying others were acting as if it were. Others are saying Buffy's power was taken away. I'm saying it was not like that. Angel was momentarily defeated, and that's an example of having one's power taken away. In contrast, Xander's lie did not defeat Buffy or weaken her will and power as was claimed in this thread to many likes, an interpretation I strongly disagree with.

So I was contrasting actual disempowerment to the effects on Buffy. Unlike Angel who was brought low, dropping the glove in utter despair, Buffy kept fighting as she already was. At least with hindsight (which the other characters did not have), it made little to no difference to Buffy's immediate actions or the results after. Though Xander couldn't have known it, it probably wouldn't have made a difference in what happened immediately afterward had he told the truth.

Frankly, I wonder why the line was put in there at all unless it was deliberately designed to create controversy (and thus free advertising) for the show back then since I don't see what effect it actually had beyond a throwaway line in season 7.

 

[Plasma]

Buffy kills Angel and runs away for months. When she returns the rest don’t yet know that Angel was re-ensouled. What they do know is that Buffy has major trauma and they don’t really talk about it. Bad time to bring it up.

After they know Angel has returned, and Buffy kept it a secret, it just seems odd to at some point be like ”by the way, I lied about this thing”… which after everything, probably seems kind of small.

An additional point is that they can’t ever trust Angel like they used to. They thought they knew him and that he was their friend, then whoopsie daisy now he’s stalking them, attacking them, and watching them sleep in their beds.

You can tell someone all live-long day that Angel isn’t Angelus, but when the monster that attacked you and murdered your friend is wearing the same face as this supposed “ally”, it’s really difficult to reconcile that. I don’t think Xander would’ve ever apologized to Buffy, since there’s never going to be a guarantee that Angelus won’t come back for round 2. The only way to be sure is to have Angel dusted.

I think an additional point of conversation is that Xander likely…just didn’t care if Angel was back or not. None of them knew the extent of what happened and none of them could’ve possibly trusted that Angel was ever genuine in the first place. Willow claims she’ll put his soul back, but will that even fix anything at this point? The demon is still in there, even if it’s beneath a soul.

His line to Buffy could’ve been a “hey don’t hold back” sort of thing, but it also could’ve been him just choosing to take the safe route and eliminate any uncertainty with the situation. Xander sort of choosing the “greater good”, as it were.

 

[Tome]

An additional point is that they can’t ever trust Angel like they used to. They thought they knew him and that he was their friend, then whoopsie daisy now he’s stalking them, attacking them, and watching them sleep in their beds.

You can tell someone all live-long day that Angel isn’t Angelus, but when the monster that attacked you and murdered your friend is wearing the same face as this supposed “ally”, it’s really difficult to reconcile that. I don’t think Xander would’ve ever apologized to Buffy, since there’s never going to be a guarantee that Angelus won’t come back for round 2. The only way to be sure is to have Angel dusted.

I think an additional point of conversation is that Xander likely…just didn’t care if Angel was back or not. None of them knew the extent of what happened and none of them could’ve possibly trusted that Angel was ever genuine in the first place. Willow claims she’ll put his soul back, but will that even fix anything at this point? The demon is still in there, even if it’s beneath a soul.

His line to Buffy could’ve been a “hey don’t hold back” sort of thing, but it also could’ve been him just choosing to take the safe route and eliminate any uncertainty with the situation. Xander sort of choosing the “greater good”, as it were.

I just can't imagine Xander being this calculated in his approach there. I suppose I could be wrong, and that'd be me underestimating him, but it just doesn't fit with how Xander acted during those high school years.

As for the whole Angel(us) issue, I agree that it's definitely difficult to be trusting someone who could murder your friends the next time they get a little too happy.

 

[Taake]

Yeah, I don’t think he was calculated in that moment. He may have had underlying motives, but as he said it, I really think it was an instinctive ”don’t distract Buffy” kind of a thing.

 

[thetopher]

Agreed. I never saw Xander once steeple his fingers and go 'ah, yes, excellent' as he plotted to sacrifice Angel for the greater good.

That's more of a Giles thing.