#oh he's a strict mean teacher? the entire wizarding world hinged on his choosing goodness

[lilithofpenandbook]

Serious question, what makes you think that just because Lily got with him that there was any good in him at all? Why is Lily supposed to be this good judge of character? She's no goddess of virtue- some could argue she was actually a bad friend to Snape, considering that not only did she nearly laugh when Snape was being assaulted, she stormed off when he lashed out at her despite him clearly being the vulnerable one in that situation. He was physically at the mercy of two other boys, and potentially in physical danger yet not only does she storm off, she joins them in mocking him? She's not the embodiment of goodness, she's on the exact same level as Snape!

As for it being a "teenage boy thing", Harry himself called out that BS. He said it himself, he was also fifteen, and he sympathised with Snape in that situation. The Marauders were not the norm, they were the outliers for being exceptionally awful with no good reason. James had nothing to "grow out of", if he ever did (and it's strongly implied that he very much kept up his bullying, he only learned how to hide it better), because all the horrible stuff he did were actions and "maturing" was literally an inaction and he still damaged another person so badly that just his face on someone else was able to trigger that person so badly. Snape doesn't react to Harry the way he does for fun, he reacts that way because James seriously damaged him.

And James is also the worst person out of all the Marauders. Remus you can argue was afraid of losing his friends (or worse, becoming their enemy- he saw what they did to Snape). Sirius can have some tiny grace because he did come from a bad home (and even then, the abuse he faced at home was mild at best- his parents and he clashed because he rebelled against them first, and he ran away first). Peter could be understood because he probably felt vulnerable and chose to protect himself by cheering on the bullies. But James? He has absolutely no excuse to be who he was.

He was an only child. He was "well loved and even adored". He was ludicrously rich. He was good at Quidditch. He literally had every single thing, yet he still chose to be an asshole. There was no abusive home you can blame for his behaviour, not any insecurities or weaknesses. He was the most privileged of the lot, yet still he chose to be an asshole. And that's disgusting enough, but his target being Severus Snape, the half-blood from a small Northern town who was so poor it showed on his appearance and not traditionally masculine to boot, was disgusting. Why not Mulciber or Avery, who actually did hurt people and were proud of their beliefs? Why not Regulus, who was a Voldemort supporting fanatic? Why the poor halfbood from an abusive home? Because James was just as bigoted and prejudiced as every other pureblood and merely disguised it.

Him telling Lily he'd never call her a mudblood means absolutely nothing in that moment, when he caused the very thing to take place by bullying another mudblood. And yes, Severus is a mudblood, perhaps even more so than Lily. He's basically a muggleborn, having grown up in a muggle town with a muggle (not even muggleborn or a squib) father, and a mother who could easily have been muggleborn herself, and worse: he's poor, something pure-bloods look down on other pure bloods for being. If James truly was an advocate for muggleborns, as he tried to claim, he would have been Severus' first defender, not his abuser.

Additionally, who was the first person to begin bullying Snape? James. Who gave him the nickname "Snivellus", an attack on his masculinity? James. Who attacked him in the worst memories flashback? James.

And no, James saving Snape from Remus meant absolutely nothing. He's part of why the prank happened. He cared nothing for Snape's life and was just less mad than Sirius and could realise the consequences for himself and Sirius would be horrible if Remus actually hurt Severus.

And no, Lily marrying him also means nothing on his maturity. She was a very ordinary girl, not some saint, and it's no surprise she'd marry him- he was a rich pure-blood and she was a muggleborn from a lower class (but not as low as Snape) and they were heading to a war where muggleborns' place in the wizarding world were being threatened. It would only make sense to marry the rich pure-blood boy, it guaranteed her financial and social protection. She is not a sign that he supposedly matured.

If anything, looking at Sirius's behaviour, we can guess that if James lived, he would not have matured at all. Sirius was a secondary school bully, and still tries to behave like one. James, his double act, would have been no better.

I'm not denying James loved Harry or Lily, or that he loved Sirius either (although his relationship with Peter and Remus seems questionable). But being capable of love does not mean he was not a completely awful person. Look at Lucius, who also loved his wife and child dearly, yet was also a pretty awful person. And out of all the Marauders, James was the worst one. He did the most harm, and had absolutely no reason to do any of it.

The Marauders are fascinating to me in canon BECAUSE of how awful they are. I enjoy hating them! I enjoy Sirius being an awful cruel hypocrite who's completely unaware of it because it's entertaining. I enjoy James being a piece of trash because it's entertaining to hate him. I find Remus fascinating because he's no better than the others despite his sad helpless act. I think Peter's utterly ridiculous and it's hilarious. I enjoy them as villains. I do not condone what they've done to anyone at all, in fact I despise it all, I just enjoy hating them. They're the worst people ever and that's entertaining because it's also fiction.