Why is Batman the only major hero whose mental health is questioned so much?

[The True Detective]

Batman's sanity being questioned is a drawback of the attempt to make him more serious and relatively grounded. Realistically, anybody who does what he does would be considered nuts. If people want dark serious Batman, him being viewed as unstable and borderline as bad as some of his villains is the price you pay.

Green Arrow and Wildcat don't get questioned as much because they are not nearly as popular and also more entrenched in the wider DCU. Batman both is and isn't because he's popular in his own right and can exist in isolated "real world" versions. Unfortunately, most comic writers and film makers aren't actually all that committed to tackling serious issues like mental health, so the dark psychological elements of Batman are kind of surface level. He's harder to take seriously the more serious you take him and his world.

I feel like Selina's sanity gets questioned plenty. It's why they make such a popular couple. Plus Burtons Selina was crazier than his Bruce

Other dark and gritty heroes don't get questioned either, is Daredevil looked at as crazy for dressing in a devil costume? Arrow was a gritty take on GA and started of in a real world setting but I don't remember him being thought of as crazy because he was in a Robin Hood get up, same with the Batfamily members on Titans. They're not as popular as Batman but they aren't obscure D-listers either. Daredevil was one of the most watched shows on Netflix.

Other than Batman Returns Selina isn't usually portrayed as crazy for her catsuit, we never see characters react in stunned disbelief to seeing or hearing about a cat burglar in a cat costume. In the Nolan trilogy Batman was seen as a freak, no one ever commented on Selina's equally bizarre fashion sense. As if everyone just casually goes about their day in leather catsuits. When people 1st see Batman their reaction is usually a "is this for real, a man dressed like a bat?"

[marhawkman]

Other dark and gritty heroes don't get questioned either, is Daredevil looked at as crazy for dressing in a devil costume? Arrow was a gritty take on GA and started of in a real world setting but I don't remember him being thought of as crazy because he was in a Robin Hood get up, same with the Batfamily members on Titans. They're not as popular as Batman but they aren't obscure D-listers either. Daredevil was one of the most watched shows on Netflix.

Other than Batman Returns Selina isn't usually portrayed as crazy for her catsuit, we never see characters react in stunned disbelief to seeing or hearing about a cat burglar in a cat costume. In the Nolan trilogy Batman was seen as a freak, no one ever commented on Selina's equally bizarre fashion sense. As if everyone just casually goes about their day in leather catsuits. When people 1st see Batman their reaction is usually a "is this for real, a man dressed like a bat?"

Yeah, it's not the suit that makes Batman a freak

[bat39]

Yeah, it's not the suit that makes Batman a freak

Then what is it?

Childhood trauma? Loss of family? Propensity for violence? Vigilantism?

Because these apply to many other characters as well, as we've discussed throughout this thread. Characters who aren't considered 'freaks' or 'mentally unstable'...

[The True Detective]

Then what is it?

Childhood trauma? Loss of family? Propensity for violence? Vigilantism?

Because these apply to many other characters as well, as we've discussed throughout this thread. Characters who aren't considered 'freaks' or 'mentally unstable'...

I feel like the unspoken rule that seperates a character from being mentally ill and well adjusted is whether they're nice or not. He's seen as a jerk and cold detached person so his odd behavior is because he's a lunatic. The Batfamily and every other superhero are treated as nice warm friendly people so their equally odd behavior (beating up criminals while dressed in flamboyant outfits) is completely normal.

It doesn't make any sense to me but that seems to be the way it is, we don't use logic like that in the real world but we apply it to our fictional characters.

[marhawkman]

I feel like the unspoken rule that seperates a character from being mentally ill and well adjusted is whether they're nice or not. He's seen as a jerk and cold detached person so his odd behavior is because he's a lunatic. The Batfamily and every other superhero are treated as nice warm friendly people so their equally odd behavior (beating up criminals while dressed in flamboyant outfits) is completely normal.

It doesn't make any sense to me but that seems to be the way it is, we don't use logic like that in the real world but we apply it to our fictional characters.

WW and Supes, for example, you know why they're fighting people. with Batman? Not always so clear. With Wonder Woman and Superman you know they'll always try to do what's right and you don't need to worry about if they're secretly planning to kill you.

Then what is it?

Childhood trauma? Loss of family? Propensity for violence? Vigilantism?

None of those. The way he acts. It's in how he treats the people he claims are friends.

[The True Detective]

WW and Supes, for example, you know why they're fighting people. with Batman? Not always so clear. With Wonder Woman and Superman you know they'll always try to do what's right and you don't need to worry about if they're secretly planning to kill you.
None of those. The way he acts. It's in how he treats the people he claims are friends.

That argument doesn't work because not every iteration of Batman has other heroes existing in his world. OP specifically used the upcoming The Batman movie as an example. There aren't any other superheroes as far as we know so that version has no pre-established history of plotting against his allies. From trailers he doesn't look abusive towards Aflred or anyone else yet is still treated as a psycho in a costume.

In Batman: The Animated Series before the other JL members showed up and when he was much nicer there was a debate on whether he was just as crazy as the villains he took to Arkham. He didn't mistreat Robin or Batgirl at that time, wasn't super paranoid or anything but the other characters still thought he should be locked up in Arkham all because he was a freak to them. Simply for wearing a bat costume.

Anyway I don't see how you treat someone is a good barometer to sanity, I don't care if someone is the nicest person in the world if I see them on a park bench getting into a heated argument with an inanimate object I'm calling the men in white coats on them. They could be Mother Theresa or Ghandi it wouldn't make a difference. Being kind doesn't mean you can't suffer from mental health issues.

[marhawkman]

That argument doesn't work because not every iteration of Batman has other heroes existing in his world. OP specifically used the upcoming The Batman movie as an example. There aren't any other superheroes as far as we know so that version has no pre-established history of plotting against his allies. From trailers he doesn't look abusive towards Aflred or anyone else yet is still treated as a psycho in a costume.

oh, not Alfred, but....I think Alfred is an exception there.

In Batman: The Animated Series before the other JL members showed up and when he was much nicer there was a debate on whether he was just as crazy as the villains he took to Arkham. He didn't mistreat Robin or Batgirl at that time, wasn't super paranoid or anything but the other characters still thought he should be locked up in Arkham all because he was a freak to them. Simply for wearing a bat costume.

Yeah, an IN-universe dialog was at least in part rooted in that the police didn't trust Batman. Why was this? Batman tended to talk to them as little as possible, and some times the cops actually wondered if Batman was actually a super-VILLAIN who took out other villains as part of a turf war. Which mirrors how in many cases the JLA doesn't trust Batman. And, also, I would argue that in B:TAS, the various named cops(Gordon, Bullock, Montoya, etc) count as (non-super) heroes in their own right. These are the people who have enforcing the law as their job, and are trying to do the best they can. And they don't trust Batman because of the way he interacts with them.

Anyway I don't see how you treat someone is a good barometer to sanity, I don't care if someone is the nicest person in the world if I see them on a park bench getting into a heated argument with an inanimate object I'm calling the men in white coats on them. They could be Mother Theresa or Ghandi it wouldn't make a difference. Being kind doesn't mean you can't suffer from mental health issues.

Enh... That's a vivid analogy, but.... who does that(arguing with inanimate stuff)?

[The True Detective]

oh, not Alfred, but....I think Alfred is an exception there.Yeah, an IN-universe dialog was at least in part rooted in that the police didn't trust Batman. Why was this? Batman tended to talk to them as little as possible, and some times the cops actually wondered if Batman was actually a super-VILLAIN who took out other villains as part of a turf war. Which mirrors how in many cases the JLA doesn't trust Batman. And, also, I would argue that in B:TAS, the various named cops(Gordon, Bullock, Montoya, etc) count as (non-super) heroes in their own right. These are the people who have enforcing the law as their job, and are trying to do the best they can. And they don't trust Batman because of the way he interacts with them.
Enh... That's a vivid analogy, but.... who does that(arguing with inanimate stuff)?

You used Batman secretly creating ways to stop other heroes as an example when no other heroes are in The Batman, how does that factor into anything? Robert Pattinson's Batman doesn't automatically inherit the actions of other Batmen.

Again he's not the only one who acted that way, Robin wasn't exactly having in-depth conversations with any random cop either. He talked to Gordon and gained his trust and would regularly talk to Bullock and Montoya too. It's not like he'd never speak to them at all. Besides as a vigilante would it be smart for him to be openly talking to the cops anyway?

Lol it may be a strange analogy but the point still stands, odd behavior is odd behavior. If Batman is instantly labeled as crazy the second he's seen solely because of his costume, before his personality is known you have to do the same for every costumed hero. The reaction to seeing a man in a blue and red leotard with a cape should get an equal WTF reaction as a man in a bat costume and cape.

[SiegePerilous02]

Other dark and gritty heroes don't get questioned either, is Daredevil looked at as crazy for dressing in a devil costume? Arrow was a gritty take on GA and started of in a real world setting but I don't remember him being thought of as crazy because he was in a Robin Hood get up, same with the Batfamily members on Titans. They're not as popular as Batman but they aren't obscure D-listers either. Daredevil was one of the most watched shows on Netflix.

Other than Batman Returns Selina isn't usually portrayed as crazy for her catsuit, we never see characters react in stunned disbelief to seeing or hearing about a cat burglar in a cat costume. In the Nolan trilogy Batman was seen as a freak, no one ever commented on Selina's equally bizarre fashion sense. As if everyone just casually goes about their day in leather catsuits. When people 1st see Batman their reaction is usually a "is this for real, a man dressed like a bat?"

I have never watched Arrow, but some of the reactions I have seen of it state that's it's basically even more Batman lite that what GA is usually accused of, including an Oracle type figure. And I guess some episodes question his sanity? Idk.

Anyway, those other heroes don't have as many stories that lean into the possibility of them being mentally unwell as Batman does, even within his own books. So that's why nobody brings it. It's not really a double standard, the Bat writers actively encourage this interpretation of him.

I feel like the unspoken rule that seperates a character from being mentally ill and well adjusted is whether they're nice or not. He's seen as a jerk and cold detached person so his odd behavior is because he's a lunatic. The Batfamily and every other superhero are treated as nice warm friendly people so their equally odd behavior (beating up criminals while dressed in flamboyant outfits) is completely normal.

It doesn't make any sense to me but that seems to be the way it is, we don't use logic like that in the real world but we apply it to our fictional characters.

Things go a little beyond being "not nice" when he has multiple contingency plans to take out the people who are supposed to be his friends that get hacked and result in more lethal variants. One time resulting in the deaths of a lot of people, including several Amazons. This happens more than once and insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

Bruce is the victim of lots of bad writing, and it makes him look like a sociopath under certain writers. Cold and detached demeanor doesn't go well with a lot of his actions

[SiegePerilous02]

You used Batman secretly creating ways to stop other heroes as an example when no other heroes are in The Batman, how does that factor into anything? Robert Pattinson's Batman doesn't automatically inherit the actions of other Batmen.

Again he's not the only one who acted that way, Robin wasn't exactly having in-depth conversations with any random cop either. He talked to Gordon and gained his trust and would regularly talk to Bullock and Montoya too. It's not like he'd never speak to them at all. Besides as a vigilante would it be smart for him to be openly talking to the cops anyway?

Lol it may be a strange analogy but the point still stands, odd behavior is odd behavior. If Batman is instantly labeled as crazy the second he's seen solely because of his costume, before his personality is known you have to do the same for every costumed hero. The reaction to seeing a man in a blue and red leotard with a cape should get an equal WTF reaction as a man in a bat costume and cape.

When the man in the red and blue leotard is seen flying, shrugging off bullets and missiles and shoots lasers from his eyes, there are far more pressing things to react to than his fashion sense

[NK1988]

Excellent post, DC wants to have their cake and eat it too when it comes to mental illness. They can't on one hand write Bruce as being crazy but treat his sidekicks and cohorts as 100% normal at the same time. He's crazy for fighting crime in a costume? You have to treat EVERY other hero who does like this too especially other Batfamily members. The crazy things the other Batfamily members do are seen almost as cute little quirks and not signs of deeper mental issues.

It's like how on Batman Beyond Bruce was looked at as crazy for being Batman for so long, "kids stuff" as Barbara put it as if being a vigilante is a childish and unhealthy way to handle things that a normal person should eventually walk away from. Clark was still Superman long after Bruce retired, he seemingly couldn't easily walk away from life as a hero any easier than Bruce could.

Superman was never thought of as weird for still wanting to fight crime at his age, I suppose him having powers made it more normal but with the Batman Beyond suit Bruce is basically superhuman anyway so I don't see how age would factor into it too much.

With Batman Beyond, the irony is that Terry McGiness has a clean bill of mental health. No one in or out of universe regards him as crazy for wanting to continue the Batman legacy, even though it's supposedly the legacy of a disturbed individual.

Hell, when Dick was Batman no one considered him crazy either. And I haven't read a Jace Fox story yet but I'm willing to be his mental health isn't questioned much either.

Funnily enough, when it comes to the Bat-family in general, vigilantism is often presented as a positive choice which helped them channelize their trauma, rage or sense of duty into a positive direction.

Becoming Robin is said to have helped Dick cope with the trauma of losing his parents and shaped him into the good man and hero he is today. Becoming Robin possibly saved Jason from a life of crime. Becoming Batwoman was Kate Kane's way to serve after being deprived of military service, and saved her from the depression she suffered after the premature end of her military career.

If turning to vigilantism was a positive choice for all of them, then why isn't it one for Bruce, who started it all?

Superman's mental health, IMO, is a whole other can-of-worms. Especially in the versions where he becomes a hero either because Jonathan Kent said he should, or the hologram of Jor-El. And especially in the versions where he's actively had to hide his identity (and even develop a 'false' persona as Clark Kent) since childhood. Imagine what it must feel like to discover at a young age that you have powers that other people don't, but you need to forever hide them from others and pretend to be someone else. And that you're an alien and the sole survivor of a dead planet. And that it's your responsibility to use your powers to save the world. And then when you grow up, you spend half your time as a ''mild-mannered'' (which sometimes means bumbling and cowardly) reporter and the other half as a celebrity superhero who's expected to save everyone all the time, demonstrate God-like powers, but preserve as image of perfect humility and confidence against all odds.

Not saying Superman has mental health issues, but I wouldn't be surprised if he does...

I don't know the comics as well as you all but I do know the DCAU and I think you're all fundamentally missing the point. It isn't being Batman that is the problem, it's that Bruce Wayne has no real life or substance.

You mentioned Terry and Clark - they both go on to life healthy lives. Why? Because Terry never stops being Terry and Clark never stops being Clark. They put on costumes but they have never once lose sight of who they truly are. As such, they can hang up the cape and return home to their loved ones.

In the DCAU, Bruce specifically put on the Mask when he lost his last chance at happiness. Batman is nothing more than a disguise he wears to run away from his problems. And yet we know from Beyond that he still, even in the privacy of his own mind, only calls himself "Batman" and NEVER "Bruce Wayne."

But he's not really Bruce Wayne either if we consider Bruce Wayne to a billionaire playboy. That's also just a mask. So...who is he? He's not Bruce Wayne, he's not Batman, they're just disguises he wears when appropriate. He's perpetually lying to himself and the world. That is what makes him more unstable than other heroes.

I love this panel from The Dark Knight Returns

[phantom1592]

Other dark and gritty heroes don't get questioned either, is Daredevil looked at as crazy for dressing in a devil costume? Arrow was a gritty take on GA and started of in a real world setting but I don't remember him being thought of as crazy because he was in a Robin Hood get up, same with the Batfamily members on Titans. They're not as popular as Batman but they aren't obscure D-listers either. Daredevil was one of the most watched shows on Netflix.

Daredevil is frequently seen as crazy. If being generous, he's only bi-polar... but He's had enough personality shifts from various writers it's been worked into his character now. Sometimes he's dark and gritty, some times he the scarlet swashbuckler. Sometimes he's a benevolent man out to help people... sometimes he's just looking for someone to hurt. The way they wrapped the original black armor storyline in the 90's was for him to straight up to have mental breakdown and fight his various personas.

[marhawkman]

Again he's not the only one who acted that way, Robin wasn't exactly having in-depth conversations with any random cop either. He talked to Gordon and gained his trust and would regularly talk to Bullock and Montoya too. It's not like he'd never speak to them at all. Besides as a vigilante would it be smart for him to be openly talking to the cops anyway?

When you're trying to be a crime fighter, does it make sense to screw over the legit law enforcement?

In the case of Robin, he's the sidekick and they don't really give him crap for it because they know he's just doing Batman's bidding.

[The True Detective]

When you're trying to be a crime fighter, does it make sense to screw over the legit law enforcement?

In the case of Robin, he's the sidekick and they don't really give him crap for it because they know he's just doing Batman's bidding.

Screw them over? Huh? He's a vigilante technically he's a criminal, if he fraternizes too much and too openly with the GCPD it shows the public they're in cahoots with a criminal. Besides that using BTAS as an example again he IS trusted by most of the police, even Bullock who grew to respect him. They wouldn't have a signal to contact him if they didn't trust him. Dick was a grownass man, sidekick or not if you think it makes Batman untrustworthy to not talk to the cops, which he did often, then they'd think the same of Robin.

I think everyone is missing the main point of the thread, The Batman is what made OP create it in the 1st place so I'm not sure why y'all are bringing up stuff from the comics. Battinson has no history of scheming to take down allies, isn't shown or said to be abusive to friends, police or anyone else in trailers or interviews.

Going solely off what we've seen and have heard about the movie 99% of the stuff "Batjerk" has done in the comics does not apply to him. Despite that I just know they'll be a scene where Bruce dressing like a bat is commented on painting him as crazy but Selina wearing a catlike outfit will be treated as normal.

[marhawkman]

Screw them over? Huh? He's a vigilante technically he's a criminal, if he fraternizes too much and too openly with the GCPD it shows the public they're in cahoots with a criminal. Besides that using BTAS as an example again he IS trusted by most of the police, even Bullock who grew to respect him. They wouldn't have a signal to contact him if they didn't trust him. Dick was a grownass man, sidekick or not if you think it makes Batman untrustworthy to not talk to the cops, which he did often, then they'd think the same of Robin.

It comes up as a plot point several times that Batman's "assistance" off the books, is problematic for legal reasons due to it sometimes making evidence inadmissible in court due to there being no way for a judge to verify the evidence is legit. Why? due to lack of proper evidence collection, and of course how Batman can't be called to court. And yeah, at least one time a villain got acquitted due to lack of admissible evidence. And a lot of this was due to Batman being a loner vigilant who didn't talk to the cops as often as he should.