Steve Trevor: Pacifist?

[daBronzeBomma]

There are examples in recent pop culture of a Male being a pacifist and not coming off as lame.

I can think of two, right off the bat:

Steven Universe, from STEVEN UNIVERSE, arguably the least toxic masculine hero ever. Dude never wants to fight and always seeks the least violent resolution to conflict.

And Ferdinand, from the animated movie FERDINAND (voiced by John Cena, of all people), about a bull in Spain who refuses to fight bullfighters.



It can be done with Steve Trevor, but it would take a deft touch by multiple writers for it to take hold.

[Jackalope89]

There are examples in recent pop culture of a Male being a pacifist and not coming off as lame.

I can think of two, right off the bat:

Steven Universe, from STEVEN UNIVERSE, arguably the least toxic masculine hero ever. Dude never wants to fight and always seeks the least violent resolution to conflict.

And Ferdinand, from the animated movie FERDINAND (voiced by John Cena, of all people), about a bull in Spain who refuses to fight bullfighters.



It can be done with Steve Trevor, but it would take a deft touch by multiple writers for it to take hold.

Just a heads up, Ferdinand is actually based on a children's book of the same name. It was one I read a number of times as a kid.

[daBronzeBomma]

Just a heads up, Ferdinand is actually based on a children's book of the same name. It was one I read a number of times as a kid.

I was surprised by how much I actually enjoyed that film. Definitely recommend it, esp if you have kids.

Anyway, "Dr. Steve" would probably the best way to inform his strong sense of pacifism. "First, do no harm" is the motto of any good physician.

And by becoming a doctor, specifically an emergency medicine specialist (which, this being comics, is completely possible without even a retcon, much less a reboot), Steve wouldn't always be rushing into places that demand personal violence as a response (unlike Wonder Woman and her super-heroic role)

Bring back Julia Kapatellis (resurrect her if you have to) and revamp her as Dr. Trevor's globe-travelling boss with diplomatic connections to get his Oddfellows (which could also include a revamped Trevor Barnes as "Barney Trevor", Steve's adopted/half brother) into hotspots to help the afflicted.

And his new work would organically bring him into frequent contact with Diana and the rest of her world.

[AmiMizuno]

That makes no sense him being in a organization he has international contacts also. So he doesn't need to be doctor for borders to have Diana get international contacts. Steve is match to Diana warrior. Not only that looking at MArston's steve wasn't even the type to always use violent. He would outsmart the villains. Steve only became more violent due to bad writers. If he is a doctor okay. But he would to be given a few different things. Not that bad. A else world story would be good. But Diana can easily heal people if they give her back her amazon tech. Steve and her can help each other. He would still need to know how to fight. Steve has been attacked by Diana's enemies more than once. His wit and skills have been able to make him survive.

[brettc1]

There are examples in recent pop culture of a Male being a pacifist and not coming off as lame.

I can think of two, right off the bat:

Steven Universe, from STEVEN UNIVERSE, arguably the least toxic masculine hero ever. Dude never wants to fight and always seeks the least violent resolution to conflict.

Oh, this again.

If fighting is a sign of toxic masculinity, what does that say about Wonder Woman herself?

Also, in Ferdinand nobody fights the bullfighters for him. But if you can't write a long running series of superhero comics without having some kind of throw down.

As as fight #2 demonstrates, Steven isn't a strict pacifist either. Or at least, if he is he isn't a very good one.

[Agent Z]

Oh, this again.

If fighting is a sign of toxic masculinity, what does that say about Wonder Woman herself?

Also, in Ferdinand nobody fights the bullfighters for him. But if you can't write a long running series of superhero comics without having some kind of throw down.

As as fight #2 demonstrates, Steven isn't a strict pacifist either. Or at least, if he is he isn't a very good one.

I don't think the dabronze is saying that fighting itself is a form of toxic masculinity. Just that Steve doesn't revel in it and tries to avoid it where he can. Like Diana tends to be written as.

[brettc1]

I don't think the dabronze is saying that fighting itself is a form of toxic masculinity. Just that Steve doesn't revel in it and tries to avoid it where he can. Like Diana tends to be written as.

On the other hand, in Steven Universe the character Amethyst loves fighting, even though she is female. As indeed Artemis of the Bana is often shown doing. Toxic femininity?

But back on track - as I stated before the biggest problem with having Steve as a pacifist who seeks alternatives to fighting is simply that Wonder Woman [if she is written in character] already does that.

[kjn]

If fighting is a sign of toxic masculinity, what does that say about Wonder Woman herself?

Fighting does not in and of itself denote toxic masculinity, just like Agent Z said. Rather toxic masculinity includes, among other things, a certain approach and relation to violence and violent behaviour. The Geek feminism wikia has a decent and short overview of various ways that toxic masculinity expresses itself.

My ideal Steve is rather close to the movie Steve. He does not like fighting, even though he is good at it when he has to. (Which is different from Diana, who I imagine as someone who loves a good fight, and at times could struggle with or feel ashamed of that feeling.) Both are good at talking their way out of conflicts, but they use slightly different strategies. Like Diana is better at mediating a peace treaty, but when you want to get a hundred refugees besieged by ISIS to safety, Diana is more likely to simply punch herself to a solution, simply because she can do so.

[brettc1]

Fighting does not in and of itself denote toxic masculinity, just like Agent Z said. Rather toxic masculinity includes, among other things, a certain approach and relation to violence and violent behaviour. The Geek feminism wikia has a decent and short overview of various ways that toxic masculinity expresses itself.

My ideal Steve is rather close to the movie Steve. He does not like fighting, even though he is good at it when he has to. (Which is different from Diana, who I imagine as someone who loves a good fight, and at times could struggle with or feel ashamed of that feeling.) Both are good at talking their way out of conflicts, but they use slightly different strategies. Like Diana is better at mediating a peace treaty, but when you want to get a hundred refugees besieged by ISIS to safety, Diana is more likely to simply punch herself to a solution, simply because she can do so.

Interestingly, many of the aspects mentioned in the article could be attributed to Artemis. It's an example of how Language needs to be used more carefully.

There is also a cultural aspect ay play regarding how the Amazons view combat. A bit disappointingly, the movie didn't take the opportunity to show Diana's reaction to having killed for the first time. Bit as Teagarden negotiation, one could argue that Diana is more likely to use it first because her powers give her a greater degree of safety and more options in responding to what happens next.

[kjn]

Interestingly, many of the aspects mentioned in the article could be attributed to Artemis. It's an example of how Language needs to be used more carefully.

Do note that toxic masculinity is something that holds on the social level, on the expectations that are placed from a group onto the individuals; a single person's beliefs are of secondary importance. It is not the desire to punch someone that makes for toxic masculinity; it is the expecation that one should punch someone that creates it.

[brettc1]

Do note that toxic masculinity is something that holds on the social level, on the expectations that are placed from a group onto the individuals; a single person's beliefs are of secondary importance. It is not the desire to punch someone that makes for toxic masculinity; it is the expectation that one should punch someone that creates it.

Which, in the context of the language, is attributed to an idea about being masculine. The language itself is an obstacle here, where there is an unconscious trend to define negative aspects as being innately male. And yet how does one then address the Bana and Artemis, who also have an expectation that one must fight.

Societies are made up of individuals and their beliefs.

Back to the issue of Steve being a strict pacifist, it still doesn't work for me. It's pretty clear he is going to be dead unless Diana is constantly protecting him. One could argue that is the case in the book anyway, but he also can't act to save anyone else when she's not around. In terms of philosophy it puts him in opposition to Diana herself, where one of them must inevitably be seen as less enlightened.

[AmiMizuno]

This is why I think Steve should be able to use some of the mythical weapons or armors. Why can't Steve be the one Diana truth to use a few of her weapons? If Diana is mixing both her mythical background with our world. Why can't Steve due the same? Being able to use the lasso well. Being able to have his own mythical weapons.

[daBronzeBomma]

I never said Pacifist Steve wouldn't ever fight. I said he would never want to fight. But when diplomacy and negotiation were clearly not options, and his or someone else's lives were in real immediate danger, then yes, Steve would act, decisively so, and later regret it had come to blows in the first place.

My main point was Steve's commitment to pacifism, while inherently not absolute, would exceed Diana's own not- small degree of pacifism. It's the one thing he's better at than she is.

Because there are times where Diana would relish personal combat, and IMHO, rightly so. Let her superhero it out with the villains.

There would never be a time when Steve would relish personal combat, even if he is adept at defending himself and others. Steve should be a better talker but often a better listener as well.

[brettc1]

I never said Pacifist Steve wouldn't ever fight. I said he would never want to fight. But when diplomacy and negotiation were clearly not options, and his or someone else's lives were in real immediate danger, then yes, Steve would act, decisively so, and later regret it had come to blows in the first place.

My main point was Steve's commitment to pacifism, while inherently not absolute, would exceed Diana's own not- small degree of pacifism. It's the one thing he's better at than she is.

Because there are times where Diana would relish personal combat, and IMHO, rightly so. Let her superhero it out with the villains.

There would never be a time when Steve would relish personal combat, even if he is adept at defending himself and others. Steve should be a better talker but often a better listener as well.

If he fights when he doesn't want to but feels he has no choice, he is not a pacifist.

Basically you are describing what Steve Trevor is right now.

[daBronzeBomma]

If he fights when he doesn't want to but feels he has no choice, he is not a pacifist.

Not true.

Pacifism is not a blanket monolith where everyone must be a follower to its most absolute extreme.

It is a spectrum of beliefs that include a lot of different interpretations, including one called pragmatic consequentialism, which is where I saw "Pacific Steve" landing in.

Basically you are describing what Steve Trevor is right now.

Is he still a part of ARGUS? Does he still carry a gun?

Then no, I am not.

Lois Lane doesn't carry a weapon, and she walks into situations at least as dangerous as any Steve would face.