There's definitely some who were better than others, though I dunno if I'd go so far as to say any of them were truly, purely good people. Of course, it's been a long damn time since I read the old myths so my memory certainly isn't anything to be relied upon here.
I know.That's being charitable.
"We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another, as if we were one single tribe."
~ Black Panther.
Prometheus is a good god. And he’s punished for it.
That's true. Most of the surviving myths are from Athens, within a certain time frame, right?
Memory is hazy as hell but didn't Sparta have a much higher opinion of Ares than Athens did?
Makes one wonder how we'd look at the pantheon if we had more compete records.
"We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another, as if we were one single tribe."
~ Black Panther.
Last edited by Gaius; 05-07-2020 at 09:26 PM.
The Amazons, who mutilated themselves to be more efficient man-killers, routinely murdered and/or abandoned their innocent, infant male children to satisfy a mass-pathological misandry (hatred of males). Zeus, one of several serial rapists among the Olympians, is equally abhorrent and immoral...
But, it seems, one of these offensive parties can be ..forgiven?
COMBINING THE BIGBADITUDE OF THANOS WITH CHEETAH'S FEROCITY, IS JANUS WONDER WOMAN'S GREATEST SUPERVILLAIN?...on WONDABUNGA!!! Look alive, Kangaliers!
This has been argued to be bunk by several scholars.
Given how many sympathetic and heroic takes there are of Zeus, including from DC, I'm not sure what you're complaining about here. There are way more villainous depictions of Amazons than there are of Zeus in modern times. Most don't even call him a rapist not even the ones where he's a villain.But, it seems, one of these offensive parties can be ..forgiven?
Last edited by Agent Z; 05-09-2020 at 12:43 AM.
I also like Steve in Rucka and Scott's Rebirth run...but generally I find him to be a nuisance when he's in Loverboy mode. I definitely think a woman who will live as long as Diana should be able to have different love interests at different times in her life. I understand why DC is reluctant to do this, because a woman who has many different boyfriends is usually considered to be "loose" and they don't want their premiere heroine tarnished in any way. But I think writing real relationships for Diana would actually be a worthwhile endeavour, especially since so many people complain about her being too perfect or too remote.
...but to be clear, I don't want her having these kinds of relationships with every member of the Justice League. When they did that with Lois Lane on Smallville, she was very cringe-worthy. I'd like to see Wonder Woman meet different types of guys in her own comic book and have relationships that have arcs to them. Her always being with Steve is a bit of a cop-out. Just because he was the first doesn't mean he's the best.
Overall I think my beef with this lies more with DC editorial. If they'd maintain a consistent vision for the character over the course of a few years, then a good writer could allow Diana to have a mature and interesting relationship with one guy and then spend some time solo and then meet someone new. It wouldn't feel like throwing ideas to the wall and seeing what sticks....or giving her a boyfriend for three issues and then making him disappear because editorial gets cold feet (aka Rama).
I didn't particularly like her relationship with Tom Tresser, but now that that's in the rearview mirror, I think it's a noteworthy relationship. Diana was allowed to be attracted to someone, pursue a relationship and then confront the fact that they had different goals or that perhaps she was being motivated by less than perfect impulses. Plenty of women get anxious about having a kid and latch onto someone decent not because he's Mr. Perfect but because the biological clock is ticking. It was kind of an ugly thing for Diana to do, but now that I think about it, it was very human and how refreshing was that? When was the last time she actually was allowed to have an "imperfect" reaction to potential mate?
I just view Steve as the death of any real potential in Diana's story. If he's the perfect guy for her from day one then she's basically been sold off into the arms of one man so to speak. I'd like to think a feminist icon would be able to have her own journey, have different kinds of relationships and be free the way a man is.
Overall, I much prefer Steve as the older brother that Perez made him out to be. It gave Diana a man to have a relationship with that would never be sexual and I think that that was a really cool thing to do. It honoured Steve's legacy in a way, but put him in a place where he wouldn't be an obstacle to Diana's growth as a human being. If writers failed to do anything interesting to build on their relationship, that's not so much a problem with him being a friend as it is their lack of creativity or DC's lack of investment in the character. Are they basically saying Steve is only worthwhile when he's kissing Diana? This is a common problem with soap operas as well. Soap actors often say that if they aren't involved in a love story they're basically on the chopping block.
I think Chris Pine worked so well in the movie because moviegoers want to see female characters fall in love. It would have been much braver for DC to just let Wonder Woman be a solo heroine, but I do think Gal and Chris had wonderful chemistry and their relationship in the movie was well-written. So now they're stuck with audiences expecting that from every Wonder Woman movie even though the character has been killed off, LOL.
The bottom line is I think we're going to continue to see Steve evolve as a character because he still doesn't perfectly fit into Diana's life. Back when she was his secretary in World War II it made sense for them to constantly being each other's orbit. Now he's a soldier and she's a super heroine with other responsibilities and also an ambassador, and it's not like they're constantly going to be in each other's faces. I think DC wants them to be Lois & Clark, but they'll never be Lois & Clark unless Steve continues to evolve and new ideas are folded into things. I kind of hope that doesn't happen. I kind of hope we go back to the Perez approach of allowing Diana to have men in her life not just for sexy times.
I guess we'll have to wait and see what happens over the course of the next 20 years.
Last edited by DisneyBoy; 05-14-2020 at 10:31 AM.
But with Rucka's and Scott's run, it's exactly what happened. She had a lot of relationships on the island. Man or woman, it doesn't matter, a relationship is a relationship. She was with women and now she is with a man, so she had a journey about that.I'd like to think a feminist icon would be able to have her own journey, have different kinds of relationships and be free the way a man is.
I mean the issue is that both Batman and Superman while having different relationships still have one main love interest. Diana has to be the same. What would have to work for Steve not just has a love interest but has a character in general? I rather like it if he was an adventure type guy. He knows how to use magical items. He might not be able to beat Cheetah but he can smartly use magical weapons to keep her busy. Steve can work has a damsel but he needs to be balanced out.