View Poll Results: Does it Bother You if Diana Kills?

Voters
40. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes: She's a superheroine and is meant to act as a protector and not an executioner.

    20 50.00%
  • No: She's literally an Amazonian warrior and the daughter of Ares, the Greek god of war.

    13 32.50%
  • It doesn't matter to me either way.

    7 17.50%
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 46 to 56 of 56
  1. #46
    Astonishing Member Tzigone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    3,464

    Default

    I was going to say "no" but I disliked the add on of her literally being the daughter of Ares, which she absolutely should not be to me (she should be only Hippolyta's daughter). I think she should be willing, but not eager, to kill. Look for other options first, but kill when there aren't any other options that don't sacrifice/harm others.

  2. #47
    Fantastic Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    456

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AlexLyo View Post
    I am not sure I have a hard rule against Diana ever killing, but I definitely have an investment in the idea that Diana's beliefs in transformation and compassion mean that she should be accomplished in (and dedicated to) finding alternatives.

    It does make me wonder where, in the Modern Era of comics, Diana is supposed to have learned this transformative and compassionate philosophy from. There's often a sort of handwave explanation of "she is the pinnacle / representative of Amazon ideals and beliefs", but we're actually rarely shown an Amazon culture that is intentionally practicing the techniques of peacemaking and transformation in the Modern era.

    Prior to being on the island of Themyscira what we're usually shown of Amazon culture is very little - usually Amazons in armour, with weapons, who are warriors. There's sometimes an explicit mention that they were created to change the world or promote peace, but I struggle to recall when they're ever depicted actually doing it, or why they're then kitted out for war as warriors in that mission.

    Following their conflict with and enslavement by Herakles, and subsequent departure to Themyscira, it seems like the focus on them being dedicated to peace really comes into its own, but again we don't actually see how that is practiced other than as withdrawal and isolation from the world (which reads more as either a protective response to what they went through, or a punishment depending on who writes it). Mileage tends to vary depending on the writer, but most default to showing the Amazons as having a default martial response to any conflict that they become involved in. We don't often see any Amazon other than Diana respond to an enemy or an attack by trying to subdue, talk down, and/or ultimately seek to help an opponent.


    Are we then to understand that Diana's philosophy and approach is in contrast to her sisters rather than one she learned from them? And if she got it from them, how do the Amazons come by their ideas about what it takes to make peace? Why do we never see them practicing it? Why are forgiveness and compassion so important as principles to them? How do they transform someone away from doing harm and where did they learn to practice that in centuries alone? Was it mediating conflicts among one another?

    Rarely since the Golden Age are we shown specific cultural practices or beliefs that would indicate where Diana's own philosophy on peace, transformation and compassion would even come from. I love that she stands for those things, and it *seems* like she does so because she was taught to by her many sisters, but I'd love to know more about where it all actually comes from and what it means in practice for them as a whole culture.
    Does Diana's compassion and non-aggression make her special amongst the Amazons or did she learn it from the Amazons?

    I want her to learn it from the Amazons. Didn't Simone give the Amazon's a credo: Donít kill if you can wound, donít wound if you can subdue, donít subdue if you can pacify, and donít raise your hand at all until youíve first extended it

  3. #48
    Astonishing Member kjn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    4,917

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shimbo View Post
    Does Diana's compassion and non-aggression make her special amongst the Amazons or did she learn it from the Amazons?

    I want her to learn it from the Amazons. Didn't Simone give the Amazon's a credo: Don’t kill if you can wound, don’t wound if you can subdue, don’t subdue if you can pacify, and don’t raise your hand at all until you’ve first extended it
    Yes, that's correct (with reservation for exact phrasing). This is also part of why the point that AlexLyo raised is so important: Themyscira and the Amazons is central to the civilisation critique that is so central to Wonder Woman. Evil, warmongering, or aggressive Amazons guts Wonder Woman's heart as a character. Absent Amazons means that Wonder Woman's message loses its foundation.
    ęSpeaking generally, it is because of the desire of the tragic poets for the marvellous that so varied and inconsistent an account of Medea has been given outĽ (Diodorus Siculus, The Library of History [4.56.1])

  4. #49
    Astonishing Member John Venus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,646

    Default

    In the Golden Age, Hippolyta banished Circe to space specifically for her cruelty. I always thought that was a neat example of Amazons besides WW practicing what they preach.

    Though in general I always felt that the Amazons were also traumatized and thus skeptical of men due to their past experience with Hercules. Diana was born on the island and thus had an innocence which the other Amazons lacked and is thus better at practicing what the Amazons preached.

  5. #50
    Superman and Wonder Woman
    Join Date
    Sep 2020
    Location
    Duuuuuvvaaalll!!!
    Posts
    239

    Default

    Diana is one of the earliest heroes in comics with an actual morality against killing or letting others die. Many heroes back then would watch a criminal die and not help (Superman, Batman, Flash, etc.). She saved two assassins from dying in a fire. While I am for never killing under any circumstance, Diana is far too strong and compassionate to kill and writers can get creative with adding more tools to her disposal (get rid of the sword. Keep the shield).

    I'll accept last resort, but it shouldn't be used too much because writers wants her to kill.

  6. #51
    Spectacular Member Gitagon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2021
    Posts
    100

    Default

    Honestly I have no problem with most heroes killing, even those with no kill rules, but it should only be as a last resort.

    The problem is that comics and especially the movies have them killing even when it is completely avoidable.

  7. #52
    Astonishing Member marhawkman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    4,497

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gitagon View Post
    Honestly I have no problem with most heroes killing, even those with no kill rules, but it should only be as a last resort.

    The problem is that comics and especially the movies have them killing even when it is completely avoidable.
    Yeah writers MAKE it an issue for dumb reasons much of the time :/

  8. #53
    Black Belt in Bad Ideas Robanker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    6,617

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nyssane View Post
    Depends on the situation.

    Should she be killing Biff the Armed Robber when she could easily subdue him and hand him off to the authorities? Abso-effing-lutely not.

    Should she be killing a mythical monster who she knows will bring mass murder at every opportunity they get? Sure.

    Because Diana is such an experienced and skilled warrior, I think she's able to decipher whether her opponent can be stopped through reasoning (or nonlethal combat). If they can't, like Max Lord or Medusa, she has no other option -- she has to kill them to save countless lives.
    More or less this, but since the options are essentially carte blanche for murder or a hard line against it, I'd err on the side of "she's better than that" than a murder hall pass.
    May we never forget:

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaius View Post
    Daddy Zeus can hit the bricks.
    Truer words never spoken.

  9. #54
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    522

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marhawkman View Post
    Or if you aren't Human. 'cause Batman is happy to kill non-humans a lot of the time.
    This. So much.

    I apologise for going off-topic but this is one of the reasons I absolutely loathe Batman. Specifically that time in Swamp Thing.

    "So Batman will move mountains to save the life of Joker (a completely psychotic sadist who kills and tortures for fun), but he's A-OK with killing a guy who only wanted to help his wife?"

    Sorry. Rant mode off.

  10. #55
    Fantastic Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    270

    Default

    Is Wonder Woman a peacemaker or peacekeeper?

  11. #56
    Astonishing Member WonderScott's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    3,579

    Default

    She should subdue opponents and not kill them, because she believes in love, redemption, and the ability to change. (And shouldn’t be used as a murder-machine foil to Supes’ and Bats’ moral code.)

    What Wonder Woman should “kill” are her opponents’ ideas of bigotry, discrimination, inequality, inequity, and hate.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •