(no subject)

[kelios]

Just because someone thinks a course of action is right doesn't make it so.  Just because someone wants a course of action to be right doesn't make it true.  History is full of examples of this, and John Winchester is just one more.  Beyond that....

John's journals are not a reliable source of information on how he treated his children.  People who abuse often don't think that they are doing wrong; I doubt that John would write:
"Today I came home to find that my 11 year old son, who I left alone with his 7 year old brother for several days with nothing to eat but Lucky Charms and Spaghettios, tucked his brother into bed and ran across the street to play video games, even though I told him not to.  He almost got his brother killed!  I beat him and told him not to do it again--that will teach him!"  (I know John didn't beat Dean in that instance, I'm using it for dramatic effect.)

It's much more likely that he would write something like this:
"Dean left Sam alone AGAIN today and almost got him killed!  What do I have to do to make him see he has responsibilities?"
Which takes all the blame off John (where it squarely belongs, for leaving them alone for several days to begin with) and puts it on Dean, who reacted in a completely normal way to the frightening, frustrating situation he was in.

Even Dean's accounts of what happened is suspect, not only because of the amount of time that has passed, but because he is too emotionally involved to see it clearly.  By the time this incident occured, John had already destroyed any sense of self worth Dean had that wasn't directly tied to Sam's welfare, and Dean would have been desperate for any scraps of approval John deigned to cast his way.  His need for John's approval and his own sense of worthlessness fed on each other in a self-destructive cycle that left him unable to see John as anything but right and himself as anything but wrong.

Just because Sam and Dean hugged John and were glad to see him doesn't mean that he was a good father to them or showed them affection.  In many abusive relationships, the abused loves the abuser and will often defend him and his actions.  Dean's comment to Sam about how John yelled at them, but they deserved it was awful to hear, because I've heard similar statements so many times before: "It's my fault he hit me, I made him mad.  I deserved it."  I know it's not quite the same, but emotional abuse is still abuse, and there is no doubt in my mind that Dean was emotionally abused.  His low self esteem, complete inability to see his own worth, his reckless disregard for his own life and well-being, his willingness and even desire to die (as expressed in Croatoan and when he tells Sam about the deal)....all of those things indicate abuse to me.

As for how they turned out....I don't think John has anything to be proud of there.  They both have self-esteem and co-dependency issues, not to mention anger management and self-control.  Dean finds it nearly impossible to form lasting relationships, and Sam is amoral and obsessive.  And that's just the tip of the iceberg. 

And there's the big question that has always troubled me: Why was John a hunter to begin with?  Why did he decide that other people were more important than his family?  Don't get me wrong, I agree that saving people is important, and a good thing to do; I'm glad that we have policemen and firemen who risk their lives to protect us all.  But those people don't bring their children to work with them--because it's dangerous.  For the same reason, John should never have taken Sam and Dean into the situations he did.

John had a responsibilty to his children to look after them and protect them, which hunting often prevented him from doing adequately.  He didn't need to go after every evil thing on the planet--he could have given his chldren a safe and stable home while still doing research and making contacts that would allow him to begin hunting when they were old enough to understand and take part.  He could even have trained them still.

Comments

[nicenicegirl.livejournal.com]

i agree with you. John just leaving his kids to fend for themselves has always bothered me, and the way he treated them.

and you are exactly right, John's not going to go around promoting the abuse he did to his children, he thought in his warp, twisted mind that he was doing the right thing.

i totally understood Dean's pain in that last episode

[kelios.livejournal.com]

Thanks. This is actually part of a response to another post I read the other day, I just forgot to put it on private while I worked on it lol. But I really, truly think that saying "John did the best he could" is such complete and utter BS. There are so many other things he could have done....just thinking about the way he treated those kids kinda makes my blood boil (in a tv show kind of way lol).