He wasnât wrong.

#batman#bruce wayne#dc#dc comics#dick grayson#dc universe#batfam#dc fanart#tim drake#batfamily


seen from Malaysia
seen from China

seen from Australia
seen from United States
seen from Germany
seen from Russia
seen from China

seen from Romania

seen from United States
seen from Netherlands
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Australia

seen from Australia
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia

seen from Australia
seen from Saudi Arabia
seen from China
He wasnât wrong.

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch âą No registration required âą HD streaming
As a john w. fan, sometimes I feel like I'm stretching too much and maybe I'm reading the character all wrong, with all the things that were said about him post s2. Then he comes back and I'm all 'oh there's the character I love'. How do you deal with this?
I think that the problem with John is that he appeared in a few episodes, but he was still an important presence in absentia. We got to see him early in the game, we got to watch him act and to make up our own opinion of him basing on his actions and words, and then he died and he was passed on from writer to writer, distorted depending on what kind of plot device they needed.
People are free to alter their opinion of John completely basing on the stories that are told post-s2, but personally I use what I saw of him as the foundation for what I think of the character. When a story about John is presented to me, I compare it to what Iâve observed of the character, and try to make it fit that narrative. If it doesnât, knowing that there were many writers that wrote him without much caring for his earlier portrayal, I happily ignore that story/episode/whatever.Â
I mean, thereâs no denying that there are things about Johnâs writing that loudly clash with each other, so obviously any viewer is going to pick and choose what they want to keep as canon after they are done trying to stretch things their way (so, basically, the stretching is not your fault, anon. People who hate John have to do that too, there is literally no way of talking about Johnâs character without stretching).
As Iâve said, I start from what I see of John, so s1, his appearances in s2 and his appearance i s14 now (yay!). That is because stories can be made up, they can be distorted, on purpose or simply unwillingly because of the bias of the storyteller, I find things that are being said in absence of John to be much less reliable than what I can observe of him.
Like, for instance, I remember Bobby called him a coward. That is not at all what I have seen on screen in s1/s2. So I am going to think that Bobbyâs opinion is not an objective statement, because it clashes with Johnâs actions.
Zacharia said that John and Mary couldnât stand each other. Dean tells a story of a meet-cute that clashes with this. Given that I like Deanâs story and that Zacharia had every interest in shattering Deanâs view of his parentâs marriage for hiw own purposes, I am going to choose to believe that Zacharia was lying. Is this arguable? Obviously, feel free to believe what you will, but as a matter of fact there are two stories clashing and I am going to have to pick which one of them is lying (unless, for example, John and Mary met without remembering they did, and they couldnât stand each other, so the angels arranged for the meet cute to happen and stuff, but guess what? This is more stretching!)Â
Episodes in which John leaves Dean alone in a Boysâ Home, or he leaves Sam at home alone because they wanted to tell that story with Sully, clash with what Iâve seen of John: one of his defining traits in s1 was being overprotective. That was the whole reason for him clashing with Sam about Stanford, that was the driving force behind a lot of his actions. So I have two episodes in which writers decided âEh, I want to tell this storyâ and didnât care to try to make it coherent with what else was shown of John, and I canât keep them as canon in my head and have it make sense (short of saying that John suffered temporary madness, at least). I really have no choice but to choose if I want to keep John being overprotective or these two episodes, and Iâm obviously picking the former.Â
Other people are welcome to pick Bad Boys and Just My Imagination, add it to a list of stories told about John that can fit into the cold asshole narrative, and call it a day.Â
When the writing is incosistent, it ends up boiling down to personal preference.
I think that respecting Johnâs characterization on screen is a more solid argument, and that most things said/done in later canon can fit that narrative with a bit of stretching at times, and that is why I stand there on the issue.
So, basically, itâs not you, anon, itâs the writers. Love John and sleep soundly at night.
To whatever brought us together--- we owe you one.
insp.
samisadeangirl ha risposto al tuo fotoset â(insp)â
John did love his sons, and he had good intentions. But it's canon that he neglected them, let them (at least Dean) go hungry, and forced Dean to take on adult duties and raise Sam too young, all because he was more focused on revenge than being a father. Neither boys would be half as much of a mess now if he'd done his damn job as a parent.
He didnât let anybody go hungry: when he left them alone, they did have food or money to buy food, as proven by the fact that in Something Wicked Dean literally threw away a whole plate of pasta (or whatever it was) because Sam wanted Lucky Charms instead. If he had been starving, he would have eaten it instead of throwing it away.

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch âą No registration required âą HD streaming
will you please gif John and his boys to Dear Theodosia lyrics? "When you smile I am undone, my son. Pride is not the word Iâm looking for...There is so much more inside me now. You outshine the morning sun, My son. When you smile, I fall apart. My father wasn't around I swear that I'll be around for you. I'll do whatever it takes, I'll make a million mistakes I'll make the world safe and sound for you. Iâll bleed and fight for you, Iâll make it right for you and you'll blow us all away" THX!
Done! Thank you so much for the request, itâs been a while since Iâve giffed John! :D
Bobby Singer wasn't a better man than John Winchester was. Just off the top of my head, Bobby was an alcoholic, got friends killed, became a vengeful spirit ... I do like Bobby, and think he was a good stand in for the boys when needed, but in no way, shape, or form was he better than John.
strongly agree | agree | neutral | disagree | strongly disagree
I agree with the general concept, not so much with some of your examples: I donât think that becoming a vengeful spirit speaks of your character, and getting friends killed doesnât make you a bad person either, unless it was deliberate (otherwise, Sam and Dean would be the worst guys on the planet, probably).Â
This being said.
Bobby wasnât a bad guy, but no, he wasnât better than John either.Â
YOUR OPINION ON john haters :|
There are way too many and most of their arguments are based on headcanons that are turned into canon by their power of will, so that they can use them as weapons to attack John fans. And⊠anti tags? What are they?
This in the majority of cases of course, because I also know people who canât stand John and who are totally nice and whose blogs are amazing.Â
I just wish that people would use the correct tags and respect othersâ opinions, even when they are unpopular.
ask me my opinion on_?