Wonder Woman Controversial Opinions Part 2

[Guy_McNichts]

I agree, that the most notable instances of them interacting that occur to me is when she's used to prop up Batman's ego is why I don't care for writers trying to make some meaningful friendship between them.

Yeah, when writers do try to build up their relationship, it's almost always from Diana's point of view. So it amounts to her gushing about how great Bruce is while we get nothing from him. It makes their relationship completely one-sided and, as you said, only serves to build him up.

I know some will say Bruce just keeps his emotions guarded and really does care about her deep down, but it's comes across as hollow and, at worst, makes Diana look like a dope pining over a guy who barely notices her.

I also don't really see someone like Wonder Woman overlooking Bruce's frequent underhanded/duplicitous nature when it comes to his relationships with others. Such as his contingency torture plans for seemingly every member of the League.

Agreed. I don't see Diana, someone who so values truth and trust, would like one of her supposed friends being someone who studies her weaknesses and sees her as a thing.

[AmiMizuno]

The general thing it's Hope Superman and Wonder Woman are Close. Superman and Batman are closed but Batman and Wonder's woman are not close.

[Sacred Knight]

Not sure how controversial but...

I don't see Wonder Woman and Batman as friends. Acquaintances, sure. Co-workers with a mutual respect, absolutely. But actual friends...as in they share a deep bond and kinship akin to what either of them have with Clark respectively? I don't buy it.

I just don't see Bruce really caring about Diana any more or less than any other hero he interacts with...he's certainly never shown he does as far as I've seen...and I don't see Diana enjoying the company of someone who treats her so coldly.

And, if we're honest, the only reason we're supposed to think they have some deep, meaningful bond is because they're part of Trinity. It's an obligated afterthought.

Agreed. An older style Batman, like the Bronze Age, you can easily see him being friends with lots of people. But the Batman of today? No, she wouldn't be friends with him. Honestly the thing they most have in common above all else is that they each consider Superman their best friend. Clark's their only real tie. And I even wonder how much it makes sense for Superman to be friends with modern day Batman anymore. He's just not a very pleasant person all around these days. But apparently that's what the readers eat up.

[kjn]

I don't see Wonder Woman and Batman as friends. Acquaintances, sure. Co-workers with a mutual respect, absolutely. But actual friends...as in they share a deep bond and kinship akin to what either of them have with Clark respectively? I don't buy it.

I just don't see Bruce really caring about Diana any more or less than any other hero he interacts with...he's certainly never shown he does as far as I've seen...and I don't see Diana enjoying the company of someone who treats her so coldly.

And, if we're honest, the only reason we're supposed to think they have some deep, meaningful bond is because they're part of Trinity. It's an obligated afterthought.

I pretty much agree. One other piece of this puzzle is the way that Batman is put on a pedestal by modern DC, as the most important man of the highest status, and that requires treating women as accessories swooning over him. The two most egregious examples here are Babs and Diana.

But from an ideological standpoint, and in what the characters represent, they are near-opposites. Batman is at the core about the protection of a patriarchal class-based society. Wonder Woman is about a feminist critique of patriarchy, and the society she grew up with is really a feminist and communist utopia. You think Hal Jordan and Oliver Queen had arguments over politics? Those would be nothing to those that Batman and Wonder Woman would have…

[SiegePerilous02]

Agreed. An older style Batman, like the Bronze Age, you can easily see him being friends with lots of people. But the Batman of today? No, she wouldn't be friends with him. Honestly the thing they most have in common above all else is that they each consider Superman their best friend. Clark's their only real tie. And I even wonder how much it makes sense for Superman to be friends with modern day Batman anymore. He's just not a very pleasant person all around these days. But apparently that's what the readers eat up.

I pretty much agree. One other piece of this puzzle is the way that Batman is put on a pedestal by modern DC, as the most important man of the highest status, and that requires treating women as accessories swooning over him. The two most egregious examples here are Babs and Diana.

But from an ideological standpoint, and in what the characters represent, they are near-opposites. Batman is at the core about the protection of a patriarchal class-based society. Wonder Woman is about a feminist critique of patriarchy, and the society she grew up with is really a feminist and communist utopia. You think Hal Jordan and Oliver Queen had arguments over politics? Those would be nothing to those that Batman and Wonder Woman would have…

I agree that modern day Batman doesn't make sense as a friend for Wonder Woman, Superman or really anyone because he's basically a shell of what he used to be. Bronze age Bats would be great friends with Diana (and seemingly was, albeit not the same degree he was with Clark), but not the one we have now.

But I disagree that Batman is at his core a defender of the patriarchal class-based society. He primarily solves mysteries and foils Joker Fish plots and stops shape shifting mud men, and using his money to help people on multiple fronts. It may be at the core of the current guy due to the unfortunate decisions they've made with him and trends they've reaffirmed over the years, but the character as a whole? When he's written well, not really. It's definitely nowhere near a core aspect of him the way dismantling the patriarchy is for Diana. I wouldn't like them to further write him that way just to engineer conflict with Diana.

[Gaius]

Yeah, when writers do try to build up their relationship, it's almost always from Diana's point of view. So it amounts to her gushing about how great Bruce is while we get nothing from him. It makes their relationship completely one-sided and, as you said, only serves to build him up.

I know some will say Bruce just keeps his emotions guarded and really does care about her deep down, but it's comes across as hollow and, at worst, makes Diana look like a dope pining over a guy who barely notices her.



Agreed. I don't see Diana, someone who so values truth and trust, would like one of her supposed friends being someone who studies her weaknesses and sees her as a thing.

Yeah, versions of Bruce from The Brave and the Bold or Adam West I could see them having a cordial acquaintance/friendship but when it comes to modern comics Bruce, DC and writers clearly only view her as valuable friendship because she can be a cheerleader for him (even when there isn't a romantic subtext to it).

[Ascended]

I'm not sure why anyone would be friends with modern Bruce. I feel like, if these characters acted in a way that supported their personalities and character traits, they wouldn't even let Bruce in the League, much less consider him a friend. Modern Batman edges closer to the villain line with each year and I'm honestly just waiting for Diana to decide he's too far gone and either organize a big intervention or just take his ass down.

Bronze Age Batman is a different animal; that guy was alright. The dude we have now feels like he's one more dead Robin away from completely losing it and taking over the world.

But when written as something other than a horrible d-bag, I think Bruce and Diana have a really fun Odd Couple kind of dynamic. I don't think they really agree on much but they still recognize that they're after the same basic goals, with different ideas of how to get there. You know, sort of like Democrats and Republicans used to be, back before everything became cripplingly partisan and dysfunctional.

Setting the details of their respective politics aside I feel like a proper Batman-Diana friendship should look a little bit as if John McCain and AOC decided to be besties (if McCain was still alive, I mean).

[SiegePerilous02]

If DC were to reboot or anything in the near future, I'd honestly be fine with them making Batman go full villain and having a combo of Wonder Woman, Superman and Nightwing take him down to put the nail in the coffin. It'd pretty much be a mercy killing for Bats at this point and I'd love a clean slate for a new version that is more in line with Adam West and pre-COIE.

But while it may be cathartic for those three characters to do it, it would still reaffirm bad trends for Bruce. To bring this back towards Wonder Woman, I feel like "rich, entitled, patriarchal white guy" is the equivalent trend for Bruce that "blood thirsty warrior woman and not much else" is for Diana. His has been going on longer that we unfortunately have gotten used to it, while hers is overall worse because she gets so much less focus in general that it can cause a lot of harm when it does turn up.

[lotchj]

Agreed. An older style Batman, like the Bronze Age, you can easily see him being friends with lots of people. But the Batman of today? No, she wouldn't be friends with him. Honestly the thing they most have in common above all else is that they each consider Superman their best friend. Clark's their only real tie. And I even wonder how much it makes sense for Superman to be friends with modern day Batman anymore. He's just not a very pleasant person all around these days. But apparently that's what the readers eat up.

I agree with your comments!! I just don't get what is so great about Batman!! I don't buy his comics or DVD's, i don't like him!! As much as some writers try to push WW and Batman as a couple! I could never get why WW would want to be in a relationship with a person like Batman!? Again i don't find Batman likeable!!

[kjn]

But I disagree that Batman is at his core a defender of the patriarchal class-based society. He primarily solves mysteries and foils Joker Fish plots and stops shape shifting mud men, and using his money to help people on multiple fronts. It may be at the core of the current guy due to the unfortunate decisions they've made with him and trends they've reaffirmed over the years, but the character as a whole? When he's written well, not really. It's definitely nowhere near a core aspect of him the way dismantling the patriarchy is for Diana. I wouldn't like them to further write him that way just to engineer conflict with Diana.

Oh, Batman might not have been intended as that from the beginning, but white rich patriarchy underlies everything about Batman, partly because of who he is, partly due to his mission. There is a reason why Hiketeia pretty much required Batman as an antagonist—I don't think it would have worked with anyone else as as story.

To me, that is an element that is part of Batman even in the Adam West era. He is here to protect and preserve society against the deranged elements that threaten to disturb its equilibrum.

[Gaius]

If DC were to reboot or anything in the near future, I'd honestly be fine with them making Batman go full villain and having a combo of Wonder Woman, Superman and Nightwing take him down to put the nail in the coffin. It'd pretty much be a mercy killing for Bats at this point and I'd love a clean slate for a new version that is more in line with Adam West and pre-COIE.

But while it may be cathartic for those three characters to do it, it would still reaffirm bad trends for Bruce. To bring this back towards Wonder Woman, I feel like "rich, entitled, patriarchal white guy" is the equivalent trend for Bruce that "blood thirsty warrior woman and not much else" is for Diana. His has been going on longer that we unfortunately have gotten used to it, while hers is overall worse because she gets so much less focus in general that it can cause a lot of harm when it does turn up.

Yeah, I get it as a snarky response to the pedestal DC has put him on for the past few decades but I'd say it's a rather uncharitable read on him or why people like him. Same with as you said about Wonder Woman but also for Superman as the "nice but naive and dumb farm boy".

[marhawkman]

Oh, Batman might not have been intended as that from the beginning, but white rich patriarchy underlies everything about Batman, partly because of who he is, partly due to his mission. There is a reason why Hiketeia pretty much required Batman as an antagonist—I don't think it would have worked with anyone else as as story.

To me, that is an element that is part of Batman even in the Adam West era. He is here to protect and preserve society against the deranged elements that threaten to disturb its equilibrum.

Is he a white patriarch? sure. Does he believe that only white men should have political, or economic power? umm... NO.

He's basically the "anti-Robin Hood" but, well, Robin Hood was considered a criminal for good reason. People in modern times take the story to mean something far different than what it originally meant. Yes, the writer painted Robin Hood as the "good guy" but only in the context of the lesser of two evils. Robin Hood was a social commentary about an event in British history where the king signed a law requiring peasants to pay for the privilege to use what were formerly free public use lands. This is why the rich in the Robin Hood story were painted as being worse than wandering thugs. The wandering thugs didn't want any more money than they needed to pay for food and ale at the pub. The rich were basically trying to force the commoners into being little more than slaves.

Thing is though a lot of Batman's villains are upper-class people who could be considered "white patriarchs" in their own right. So no, he's not trying to protect the upper class either.

[SiegePerilous02]

Oh, Batman might not have been intended as that from the beginning, but white rich patriarchy underlies everything about Batman, partly because of who he is, partly due to his mission. There is a reason why Hiketeia pretty much required Batman as an antagonist—I don't think it would have worked with anyone else as as story.

To me, that is an element that is part of Batman even in the Adam West era. He is here to protect and preserve society against the deranged elements that threaten to disturb its equilibrum.

Beyond being who he is and what he was born into (not necessarily how he behaves and what he does with his money, depending on the version), I don't really agree. When you say it's the core of the character the way it dismantling the patriarchy is a core of Wonder Woman's character, you're saying it's essential for him to work. But the issue was what you're ascribing to Batman is going to be seen as inherently negative while Wonder Woman's mission is inherently positive.

And Wonder Woman's villains represent the evils she fights that oppose this mission. Mars and his cohorts are the patriarchy, Cheetah and Veronica Cale are women tearing down other women, Psycho is misogyny, Giganta is barbarism, Poison is terrorism, etc. The villains Batman spends the majority of his time fighting disturb society, but that's because they are all narcissistic assholes who hurt people for personal gain or gratification and flush money down the toilet for their vanity project death traps. The Joker doesn't care about class differences or the patriarchy, he's just out to hurt whoever he can. Most of his villains don't, so Batman isn't defending that against them. Maybe some versions of Selina and Ivy, but I think that can also be giving the two of them too much credit and requires absolving some of their own questionable actions. There is also villains like Carmine Falcone, Rupert Thorne, Roland Daggett and Ferris Boyle whom he fights that exhibit more of that behavior than he ever could.

There's definitely versions of him this applies to, but I think applying that to all versions including the Adam West version is a bit eye roll inducing. If stopping supervillains is all that represents, then every superhero in the genre is guilty of it and doesn't seem fair to single out Batman for it due to his (let's be honest) plot device money. Including Superman, working class Spider-Man or even Wonder Woman herself.

Yeah, I get it as a snarky response to the pedestal DC has put him on for the past few decades but I'd say it's a rather uncharitable read on him or why people like him. Same with as you said about Wonder Woman but also for Superman as the "nice but naive and dumb farm boy".

Yes, if it's a trifecta of crappiness in getting the Trinity wrong:

Wonder Woman: she's a warrior who is lethal and not much else, the Amazons need to be taken to task for their perceived misandry.
Superman: Naive, ineffectual farmboy who is good for saving us from natural disasters but otherwise just stands in front of the American flag and dispenses empty platitudes without changing anything.
Batman: rich white billionaire, so of course there can't be anything ethical or heroic about him, he's toxic masculinity personified. He must also be shoved everywhere while exhibiting these qualities, sending mixed love/hate messages to the fanbase

If I was an editor, I would veto all of this crap so hard if I could.

[Ascended]

Yeah, as much as I dislike the character Batman has become, he's not just some "rich white dude, therefore awful" character. I get why people come to that conclusion and there are elements of the Bat mythos that can be said to support the view, but it's cherry picking stuff while ignoring everything else. It's no more true to his character than Diana being a sword swinging barbarian or Clark being an idiot farmboy.

[Gaius]

Not sure if this goes here but I've kind of become unsympathetic to the argument that "Wonder Woman is hard to write for", at least when I hear it coming from writers and other creative people involved with her. The more I hear it, the more it just ultimately sounds like an excuse to me why a particular writer's interpretation of her or story involving her wasn't received well/set the world on fire.