Is Peter Parker truly a loser compared to other heroes?

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Nice try. Please avoid putting words in my mouth.

Can you issue a denial then, an explicit one confirming that people who save lives do not indulge in self-sabotage? That in real life we would not apply this discourse and this non-definition of self-sabotage to actual people who risk their lives to save others.

Which would be a good argument if not for the fact that they flat out said they didn't care about his secret identity. Did you actually look at the images I linked to?

Look at the second page or the second link and the final two panels where the other Avengers mock Spider-Man for having a secret identity.

MKSM - Avengrs mock Spidey.jpg

Peter expresses concerns about his identity and then Tony Stark comes in and makes light of Peter's issues. And again what Peter says in response, he's not a trillionaire like Stark, nor is everyone he was once close to long dead because he outlived them like Cap...circles back to the issues of why Spider-Man's situation is different. Peter operates on fewer resources than other heroes do. That's what that entire conversation is about.

Self-Sabotage is a real thing, a real word, it refers to people who are so troubled that they are totally unable to function. That isn't the same thing as being poor, nor is it the same thing as not being a corporate owner, nor is it the same thing as making mistakes or errors in judgment.

Again I need to make this clear:Just because you make mistakes, doesn't mean you are self-sabotaging, because it implies that healthy sane and rational people aren't capable of making mistakes.

The mistakes Peter Parker makes are human mistakes, and emotional mistakes. In other words, Peter's mistakes are meant to be the mistakes of a healthy normal adult. Something we are supposed to understand and relate to, they aren't the symptoms of someone suffering serious mental debilitation.

I honestly don't see any rational argument or counter to this.

[NC_Yankee]

Yeah, that's my point. Peter being open with people makes his life better.



Which causes him to take on too much all by himself.

But he has someone who time and time again helps him with those issues. Besides what red blooded guy would not prefer a woman looking like MJ to hanging out with The Avengers?

I don't know if this is what you mean, but at no point did I say Peter shouldn't date MJ.[/QUOTE]
The entire point is opposites attract. Peter is an introvert and MJ is an extrovert, and they work well together. She helps him with his weakness and vice versa. The Dr. Phil approach of getting opening up and letting people into your business does not work ( especially in 2020). People look for your weakness and this is reality not just in fiction. Sort of like a Miranda Warning: “Whatever you say can and will be used against you.” My entire point is by having a stable ( or as stable as possible, because being Spider-Man is dangerous work) relationship, Peter is a winner.

[Frontier]

Other superheroes who have public identities do a much better job of protecting their loved ones than Peter. In fact, Peter not telling his girlfriends what they're in for is far more of a danger to them than a superhero targeting them.

I don't think that's fair to Peter. Most heroes who have public identities don't really have normal lives or interact with civilians as much as Peter does, most of them are either in the life as fellow Superheroes or can take care of themselves in the way a normal civilian can't.

The only girlfriend who was probably put in more danger by not knowing was Gwen but I don't think Peter telling her would've ended well at the state she was in. MJ knew and she made the choice to be with Peter, which is unique to her and has caused her enough drama in and of itself.

And Peter has saved his loved ones on numerous occasions.

Spider-Man has had allegiances with villains or morally questionable individuals like Puma, Black Cat (whom he teams up with later on), Prowler, Punisher, Solo, Deadpool and Silver Sable.

Some of those you listed are generally more on the lawful side of the moral line when Peter puts his faith in them, and Peter is far more likely to go against the Punisher than he is to pat Castle on the back.

Yeah, that's my point. Peter being open with people makes his life better.

To a certain extent. But sometimes letting people in can cause it's own hangups (looks at Jonah).

Which causes him to take on too much all by himself.

He wouldn't really be Spider-Man if he didn't though.

[phantom1592]

They aren't paid nearly enough to do what they are doing right now, and many of them do so without having the proper equipment, and many of them are risking their lives because anti-mask people are harassing them, threatening them, and others are refusing to comply with safety protocols.

Again, explain to me how this is self-sabotage?

Because again, it is their job. Whether they are paid as much as they deserve is irrelevant, it's still their chosen profession and they have that responsibility to be there on their shift. My sister is a nurse dealing with all this garbage... but what she does NOT do, is listen to a police scanner and run out every time there is someone sick or injured. She does her job, then goes home. A clear work/civilian line is drawn that Peter doesn't do. He rushes out every time there's even a mention of a crime taking place regardless of whatever else he has going on.

First thing i see when I look up 'Self-sabotage' is this definition. Behavior is said to be self-sabotaging when it creates problems in daily life and interferes with long-standing goals.
The most common self-sabotaging behaviors include procrastination, self- medication with drugs or alcohol, comfort eating, and forms of self-injury such as cutting.

That's textbook pete. He doesn't do the 'most common' methods, because he's a comic book character with comic book problems, but Behavior that creates problems in daily life that interferes with long standing goals... Oh yeah. That's practically Stan Lee's mission statement for Spider-man.

This is another fallacy...i.e bullied kids are potential school shooters or potential supervillains, which is an absolutely false and pernicious idea.

All Bullied kids? No. Peter Parker??? Oh yeah! His first thoughts are always how much life would be easier without his enemies... or how to use his powers and genius to better himself. Uncle Ben's death and the burglar shook his world and made him a hero... but what if he had NOT ever seen the burglar? What if Ben was killed in random crime and the lesson was 'Good people die! Better be strong and strike them first"

Remember this is the way Peter was written in the early days.







Peter has more of a 'villian' background then a lot of his villians ever did. It would NOT have taken much to push him over to some kind of mad scientist type that other heroes would have to stop.

[TheCape]

To a certain extent. But sometimes letting people in can cause it's own hangups (looks at Jonah).

It might be an unpopular opinion but as much as i like Jonah, i think that he is the last person that deserves to know about Peter's secret, maybe i need to read Zardasky run better, but i never liked that move (worse is that he told him before May)

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Because again, it is their job. Whether they are paid as much as they deserve is irrelevant, it's still their chosen profession and they have that responsibility to be there on their shift.

Well if you have superpowers that give you speed, strength, endurance, and abilities beyond normal people, then it is your responsibility to use them to help people and save lives.

If you disagree, well then I need to remind you that this is the point of the original story of Spider-Man by both its creators -- Stan Lee and Steve Ditko. Trying to say that it's not Peter's job or responsibility to use his powers to save people, is annulling the entire foundation of the character, the story, the franchise.

First thing i see when I look up 'Self-sabotage' is this definition. Behavior is said to be self-sabotaging when it creates problems in daily life and interferes with long-standing goals.
The most common self-sabotaging behaviors include procrastination, self- medication with drugs or alcohol, comfort eating, and forms of self-injury such as cutting.

That's textbook pete.

Can you present us the panels and pages where Peter cuts himself deliberately to hurt himself, where he takes drugs and alcohol and pigs out?

Or for that matter when he procrastinates, i.e. "I'll save that guy later or I'll stop that bad guy next week" or when he is Peter Parker, "Nah who cares about those errands".

Peter Parker??? Oh yeah! His first thoughts are always how much life would be easier without his enemies... or how to use his powers and genius to better himself.

Peter becomes a celebrity showboat and performer to earn money. That was his first instinct in AF#15. He wanted to be Justin Bieber not Doctor Horrible.

Peter has more of a 'villian' background then a lot of his villians ever did.

How is a boy driven by love for his adopted parents, and seeks to earn money to help them out, and indulges in harmless celebrity pursuits a "villain background"?

[Agent Z]

Can you issue a denial then, an explicit one confirming that people who save lives do not indulge in self-sabotage? That in real life we would not apply this discourse and this non-definition of self-sabotage to actual people who risk their lives to save others.

I never once claimed people who such a thing are self-sabotagers. So I'd like to know why you're demanding that I make a denial of this when you were the one who made the comparison between the self-sabotaging Spider-Man and medical professionals.

Look at the second page or the second link and the final two panels where the other Avengers mock Spider-Man for having a secret identity.

And if you bothered to read the first two panels you will see this little dialogue exchange:

Steve: Isn't this something we could help you with Spider-Man? I only ask because Nick's in a parallel reality for the next seven days and can't get a signal on his cell phone.

Peter: Well, y'know, Fury already knowing my secret identity and everything makes it all a little less complicated than you guys helping me out.

Scott: What are you talking about? Nobody here's going to ask you who you are. To be honest, I'm not even that interested.

Emphasis mine.

Peter expresses concerns about his identity and then Tony Stark comes in and makes light of Peter's issues. And again what Peter says in response, he's not a trillionaire like Stark, nor is everyone he was once close to long dead because he outlived them like Cap...circles back to the issues of why Spider-Man's situation is different.

Peter bringing up his secret identity in this situation is absolutely worthy of mockery. His aunt has been kidnapped by someone who knows he is Spider-Man. At this point, the secret identity ship has sailed. And frankly, his disgusting comment about Steve's loved ones all being dead at this time is far worse than Tony's comments about the problems that come with secret identities (one of which Peter is actually inflicting on himself by being this stubborn). If I were Steve, I'd have tossed his ass out a window for his lack of tact. And again, no one in that room wanted to make Peter reveal his identity.

Peter operates on fewer resources than other heroes do.

In this moment, those heroes are offering their time and resources to Peter with no strings attached. And what does he do? Turn them down.

That isn't the same thing as being poor, nor is it the same thing as not being a corporate owner, nor is it the same thing as making mistakes or errors in judgment.

Okay, I feel you need to understand this; not every criticism about Peter Parker's decisions is class discrimination. You can acknowledge that Peter has crappy lot in life and still criticize his poor decisions.

Again I need to make this clear:Just because you make mistakes, doesn't mean you are self-sabotaging, because it implies that healthy sane and rational people aren't capable of making mistakes.

There is no sane, rational universe where Peter Parker would qualify as a sane, rational adult. He sure isn't acting like one in the images I linked.

The mistakes Peter Parker makes are human mistakes, and emotional mistakes.

This is a meaningless platitude. Every mistake a human being makes is human and rooted in emotion.

In other words, Peter's mistakes are meant to be the mistakes of a healthy normal adult. Something we are supposed to understand and relate to, they aren't the symptoms of someone suffering serious mental debilitation.

I'm sorry but if you can read Spider-Man comics and come away that Peter isn't suffering some serious mental issues due to the numerous traumatic events that have occurred in his life since he was a teenager which have in turn greatly hurt his decision-making skills and caused him no end of suffering, I don't know what more I can say to you.

[phantom1592]

Well if you have superpowers that give you speed, strength, endurance, and abilities beyond normal people, then it is your responsibility to use them to help people and save lives.

If you disagree, well then I need to remind you that this is the point of the original story of Spider-Man by both its creators -- Stan Lee and Steve Ditko. Trying to say that it's not Peter's job or responsibility to use his powers to save people, is annulling the entire foundation of the character, the story, the franchise.

Peter's problem is that he takes on TOO MUCH responsibility. He feels it's his responsibility (whether it is or not) to help everyone at all times... but he also has responsibilities to keep his promises, do his job on time and when he's supposed to.... and that often gets pushed to the side.

Can you present us the panels and pages where Peter cuts himself deliberately to hurt himself, where he takes drugs and alcohol and pigs out?

Or for that matter when he procrastinates, i.e. "I'll save that guy later or I'll stop that bad guy next week" or when he is Peter Parker, "Nah who cares about those errands".

That's not HIS issue. Some people cut themselves. Not EVERYONE who self-sabatoges is a cutter. The definition is 'Behavior is said to be self-sabotaging when it creates problems in daily life and interferes with long-standing goals.' That's it. Cutting and drugs are examples, but it's not the end all and be all. Peter repeatedly follows a behavior that interferes with his goals. End, stop.

Peter becomes a celebrity showboat and performer to earn money. That was his first instinct in AF#15. He wanted to be Justin Bieber not Doctor Horrible.



How is a boy driven by love for his adopted parents, and seeks to earn money to help them out, and indulges in harmless celebrity pursuits a "villain background"?

Doctor Doom wanted to use his intellect to rescue his mother from a hell dimension... how did he become the greatest supervillan on the planet? Arrogance and pride. And Peter had a TON of those. the fact that his thought bubbles were traditionally "Someday I'll show them all..." or "They'll regret mocking me..." is straight up villain bubbles.

I loved an introduction from Frank Miller one time on Daredevil that started out with 'He should have been a villain." He goes on about how he was poor kid from a broken family and a drunken father who was bullied all the time by the stronger kids... but there was 'something' inside that kept him from crossing that line. It was a great little article. But yeah... a lot of that applied to Peter too. Arrogance and Pride can be the backbone of many a mad scientist. And most of the early villains he fought were scientists who wanted to rob the people who belittled them for a quick way to make some money.

If he didn't have the spider-powers? What would HE have done to make some extra money?

[Revolutionary_Jack]

I never once claimed people who such a thing are self-sabotagers.

Thank you.

And if you bothered to read the first two panels you will see this little dialogue exchange:

So how is it wrong for Peter to ask for Fury, who he already has a rapport with? It's perfectly understandable. He came to Fury but ran into the Avengers.

His aunt has been kidnapped by someone who knows he is Spider-Man.

Which as he mentions in those panels makes it more important for him to keep a secret, and not less so.

If I were Steve, I'd have tossed his ass out a window for his lack of tact.

Metaphorically that's what happens, since the entire scene goes nowhere.

Okay, I feel you need to hear this; not every criticism about Peter Parker is people judging him for not being rich.

American culture so rarely talk about, or even acknowledge, the reality of class that it makes it more important to emphasize and highlight than otherwise. Especially since in real life, people always downplay social criticisms by making it about character and personality.

There is no sane, rational universe where Peter Parker would qualify as a sane, rational adult.

Someone needs to inform Stan Lee, Steve Ditko, Gerry Conway, Roger Stern, Tom Defalco, David Michelinie, Matt Fraction, J. M. DeMatteis, J. Michael Straczynski, Paul Jenkins and for that matter, Mark Millar circa MK:SM. They wrote the character as a sane and rational person. Obviously they were wrong to do so.

Every mistake a human being makes is human and rooted in emotion.

No. You can make mistakes in a rational state, i.e. look at data, information and conclude wrongly, or make a small oversight here and there, and so on. You can act on what you think is the right and moral thing, only for that to become severely misplaced. You are basically arguing that nobody in history can make mistakes if they were able to suppress emotions, that's just not true...not empirically true, not historically true. People can simply be wrong.

I'm sorry but if you can read Spider-Man comics and come away that Peter isn't suffering some serious mental issues due to the numerous traumatic events that have occurred in his life since he was a teenager, I don't know what more I can say to you.

That is the subtext you derive from this, it's the interpretation you formulate about the character. But again, that's absolutely not the intent of writers and that does not in the least bit reflect and represent the nature of the character and stories on average.

Spider-Man has a sense of humor, a self-deprecating view of life, he's warm and personable in his interactions with his Aunt, his wife, and his friends. He has a rounded personality going from dark to light. He's capable of laughing at himself and others. That makes him an entirely normal person by the standards of most psychologists. The default of Spider-Man is the quippy dude who swings from building to building not an a--hole who gets hit by a truck.

What you describe applies to Batman where numerous writers have written and approached the character with the subtext that he's mentally unbalanced, and it makes sense to see him that way.

[Frontier]

I'm sorry but if you can read Spider-Man comics and come away that Peter isn't suffering some serious mental issues due to the numerous traumatic events that have occurred in his life since he was a teenager which have in turn greatly hurt his decision-making skills and caused him no end of suffering, I don't know what more I can say to you.

I think it's amazing he's as relatively sane and stable an individual he is considering all the @#$% he has had to go through since he was a kid.

[TheCape]

I think it's amazing he's as relatively sane and stable an individual he is considering all the @#$% he has had to go through since he was a kid.

You could aply to most in the Marvel Universe, if i learned something about reading superhero comics is that most heroes and some supporting characthers had an inhuman mental resilience, if anything realistically most of then should be insane, but they are not and are strong enougth to deal with blows that life gives then, so for me Peter never has more mental issues than anyone else, he just a higth standards for himself and he hates when he doesn't meet then and many superheroes are like that (Cap, DD, Cyclops, Reed, just to name a few)m

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Peter's problem is that he takes on TOO MUCH responsibility.

The foundation of the character is that he should use powers responsibly. Any attempt to argue that or counter it, will annul the foundation of the character. And in fact that often happened in Dan Slott's run, which at times reads like a parody of Spider-Man...but the issue is that it happens in a straight, mainstream version and not some parody single issue version.

That's not HIS issue. Some people cut themselves. Not EVERYONE who self-sabatoges is a cutter. The definition is 'Behavior is said to be self-sabotaging when it creates problems in daily life and interferes with long-standing goals.'

As any psychologist will tell you, complex behavioral problems are not to be reduced to single sentence statements because it can be easily misapplied and misconstrued so as to be applied to anything, which is what is happening here.

Self-Sabotage means a consistent pattern that makes it so people cannot function in the least bit.

Cutting and drugs are examples, but it's not the end all and be all.

It sets the general parameter for what should be considered baseline self-sabotage behavior. That's why the definition focuses on that, so that people don't conflate, as is happening here, general vague go-getter assumptions and use that to apply against people who don't seem to be getting to where they should be going. Psychology is about making you a better, healthy, and whole person. That does not, necessarily, involve having a good career, a glittering resume, or a great success in a field.

Peter Parker in most respects qualifies as a perfectly healthy and normal person, mostly because he has a sense of humor, he's warm and friendly to his family and loved ones when he does interact with them.

And Peter had a TON of those. the fact that his thought bubbles were traditionally "Someday I'll show them all..." or "They'll regret mocking me..." is straight up villain bubbles.

By that logic, every person on this planet when speaking out of turn or in anger, has muttered villain monologues.

And most of the early villains he fought were scientists who wanted to rob the people who belittled them for a quick way to make some money.

After becoming Spider-Man, Peter didn't go to the laboratory and submit his blood to tests and experiments and so on. He decided to go pro-wrestling to get some bread. His first instinct was entirely legal and entirely harmless celebrity chasing. There's nothing criminal there in his actions to suggest otherwise.

If he didn't have the spider-powers? What would HE have done to make some extra money?

If Peter didn't have powers, he'd go to college on scholarship, and work for one of the big companies (Oscorp, Stark) and so on.

Peter didn't want to rule the world or anything. He wanted fame, respect, and money. There's nothing to compare him in AF#15 to any villain.

[NC_Yankee]

I think it's amazing he's as relatively sane and stable an individual he is considering all the @#$% he has had to go through since he was a kid.

You are exactly right. Sure Peter has his issues, but who does not? If Peter was insane he could have easily killed Osborn after Gwen died. Did he? No. Same applied to The Burglar after Uncle Ben. The lessons that he learned from Aunt May and Uncle Ben are exactly why he did not become like Sin Eater, Otto or Norman ( all of whom did not have happy childhoods). There are a lot of aspects of Spencer’s run that I like, but maybe number one is the fact that it is Peter Parker that keeps Spider-Man grounded more then the other way around. I could actually see things getting better for Peter post-Kindred. Obviously MJ ( as I have constantly discussed), but with the rise of Miles some of the responsibilities that Peter has put upon himself may very well be lessened. Why? There is more then one Spider-Man.

[Steel Inquisitor]

I think it's amazing he's as relatively sane and stable an individual he is considering all the @#$% he has had to go through since he was a kid.

I think that's just because he's a serial super-hero and he's popular. Ordinary people would break completely under the consistent horror that is being a super-hero in a super-hero universe.

[Agent Z]

So how is it wrong for Peter to ask for Fury, who he already has a rapport with? It's perfectly understandable. He came to Fury but ran into the Avengers.

Fury isn’t available. The Avengers are. And again, they do not care about his secret identity and were willing to help. One of them has super speed and the other can shrink so it isn’t like stealth will be an issue.

Which as he mentions in those panels makes it more important for him to keep a secret, and not less so.

Again, no one in that room was asking for his secret identity. He is the one who makes a big deal out of it. The Avengers may have criticized him for having one but they weren’t going to make him reveal it. This was a problem entirely of Peter’s invention.

Metaphorically that's what happens, since the entire scene goes nowhere.

On that we can agree.

American culture so rarely talk about, or even acknowledge, the reality of class that it makes it more important to emphasize and highlight than otherwise. Especially since in real life, people always downplay social criticisms by making it about character and personality.

There is a time and a place for everything. And honestly, a lot of the instances of you bringing up class in discussions about Spider-Man are less about an honest examination of this theme and more about you trying to gas Peter up over other characters you dislike or apathetic to.

Someone needs to inform Stan Lee, Steve Ditko, Gerry Conway, Roger Stern, Tom Defalco, David Michelinie, Matt Fraction, J. M. DeMatteis, J. Michael Straczynski, Paul Jenkins and for that matter, Mark Millar circa MK:SM. They wrote the character as a sane and rational person. Obviously they were wrong to do so.

Yeah, superhero writers aren’t always the best judges of what qualifies as rational behavior.

Btw, do you think Nick Spencer is wrong when he says Spider-Man's bad publicity is partly his own fault?

People can simply be wrong.[/U][/I][/B]

Except for Spider-Man apparently.

That is the subtext you derive from this, it's the interpretation you formulate about the character. But again, that's absolutely not the intent of writers and that does not in the least bit reflect and represent the nature of the character and stories on average.

What writers intend and what the story shows are not always the same thing.

Spider-Man has a sense of humor, a self-deprecating view of life, he's warm and personable in his interactions with his Aunt, his wife, and his friends. He has a rounded personality going from dark to light. He's capable of laughing at himself and others. That makes him an entirely normal person by the standards of most psychologists.

Most psychologists will tell you that being able to joke with friends does not preclude having severe mental problems. By your logic, Deadpool is a mentally balanced person.