Page 5 of 14 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 207
  1. #61
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    23,747

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by darkseidpwns View Post
    Contribute to what? this debate is settled. You're just strawmanning as usual. You just want to kill so thay he doesn't have any authority over some c lister you like .
    I'm strawmaning? And the debate isn't settled just because you say so

  2. #62
    Mighty Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,412

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    Iíd say torture and privacy violation are on par with murder, if not worse. Especially as the former two are typically seen as less sympathetic from a legal and moral standpoint.
    And if the Gotham legal system is such a hindrance, again, why does he bother?


    Honestly, yes. And Iíd say the same of any cape too.
    Tbh, I wouldnít be on the writersí case about this nearly as much if they didnít keep milking these contrivances for cheap drama. If youíre not going to have Bruce kill the Joker after his most recent killing spree, donít have it be the main point of debate in your book. If youíre not going to resolve the corruption in Gotham, donít have your characters repeatedly point it out and the do nothing about it. At best, this just makes superheroes look like useless masochists.
    well, yes, superheroes ARE useless sadists and masochists if you actually stop to think about what they're doing. as you say, it looks even worse if they keep recycling the same characters and narratives over and over again. that's part of why everybody was tripping over themselves to praise Alan Moore's "Watchmen" comic. he made the cruel impotence of serial costumed superhero narratives the central plot-point and theme.

    I'm not sure I would put torture and privacy violation at the same level as murder. seems like you're over-stating your case to make a point. I think I can respect where you're trying to go with this. but I disagree with you in the way that you wrote it.

    torture and violating another person's privacy are not usually seen as more reprehensible than murder. this is reflected in the lower levels of punishment associated with those crimes.

    however, in certain cases murder looks less evil to the average person because it's nearly impossible to excuse the act of torture or privacy invasion as 'crimes of passion': they are, by their very nature, always premeditated. so, from the perspective of motive, they tend to be harder for the defendant to worm their way out of it by making an emotional plea or begging for sympathy.

    back on topic: some versions of Batman have killed. and sometimes it's even been accepted. people loved Burton's "Batman". even though in the final act he clearly knew that his actions would lead to the Joker's death at the end of the film. when I was a kid I strongly disliked that Batman murdered the Joker in that story. now, I don't object to it nearly as much. it's obviously not "my" take on the character - but the character is interesting and flexible enough to allow for alternate versions.

    speaking of films: take "the Dark Knight" as another example. Batman obviously kills Harvey Dent - but he's let off the hook by most people because he was trying to save the life of a child. when the child declares "he didn't do anything wrong" it's supposed to be excused as the ignorance of youth. and, sure, if he was rescued from possible death by Batman killing Two Face it's all good.

    Golden Age Batman (and Robin) killed with a regularity that would be considered alarming in this day and age. but most people didn't sweat it.

    also, for the casual viewer, the impact of Batman killing is far less than it would be for that of a life-long and die-hard fan of the character.

    there's still plenty of room for debate. personally, I think the notion that Batman doesn't kill is a flexible aspect of his character. it's not impossible for him to kill -- but it should be exceedingly rare.

    and, obviously, the main reason Batman shouldn't be murdering the Joker is mostly because it would be a foolish editorial decision to allow one of the most popular characters in comics (aka the Joker) to get written out of stories. it's a fictional bit of entertainment with the intent of making money. Batman stories can be light-hearted and goofy or alternately dark and sadistic. it's part of why the character is so enduring and iconic... the concept is flexible enough to work in a variety of narratives and styles.

    as an aside to darkseidpwns: what is this gibberish supposed to mean?
    Contribute to what? this debate is settled. You're just strawmanning as usual. You just want to kill so thay he doesn't have any authority over some c lister you like .

  3. #63
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,412

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Totoro Man View Post
    well, yes, superheroes ARE useless sadists and masochists if you actually stop to think about what they're doing. as you say, it looks even worse if they keep recycling the same characters and narratives over and over again. that's part of why everybody was tripping over themselves to praise Alan Moore's "Watchmen" comic. he made the cruel impotence of serial costumed superhero narratives the central plot-point and theme.

    I'm not sure I would put torture and privacy violation at the same level as murder. seems like you're over-stating your case to make a point. I think I can respect where you're trying to go with this. but I disagree with you in the way that you wrote it.

    torture and violating another person's privacy are not usually seen as more reprehensible than murder. this is reflected in the lower levels of punishment associated with those crimes.

    however, in certain cases murder looks less evil to the average person because it's nearly impossible to excuse the act of torture or privacy invasion as 'crimes of passion': they are, by their very nature, always premeditated. so, from the perspective of motive, they tend to be harder for the defendant to worm their way out of it by making an emotional plea or begging for sympathy.

    back on topic: some versions of Batman have killed. and sometimes it's even been accepted. people loved Burton's "Batman". even though in the final act he clearly knew that his actions would lead to the Joker's death at the end of the film. when I was a kid I strongly disliked that Batman murdered the Joker in that story. now, I don't object to it nearly as much. it's obviously not "my" take on the character - but the character is interesting and flexible enough to allow for alternate versions.

    speaking of films: take "the Dark Knight" as another example. Batman obviously kills Harvey Dent - but he's let off the hook by most people because he was trying to save the life of a child. when the child declares "he didn't do anything wrong" it's supposed to be excused as the ignorance of youth. and, sure, if he was rescued from possible death by Batman killing Two Face it's all good.

    Golden Age Batman (and Robin) killed with a regularity that would be considered alarming in this day and age. but most people didn't sweat it.

    also, for the casual viewer, the impact of Batman killing is far less than it would be for that of a life-long and die-hard fan of the character.

    there's still plenty of room for debate. personally, I think the notion that Batman doesn't kill is a flexible aspect of his character. it's not impossible for him to kill -- but it should be exceedingly rare.

    and, obviously, the main reason Batman shouldn't be murdering the Joker is mostly because it would be a foolish editorial decision to allow one of the most popular characters in comics (aka the Joker) to get written out of stories. it's a fictional bit of entertainment with the intent of making money. Batman stories can be light-hearted and goofy or alternately dark and sadistic. it's part of why the character is so enduring and iconic... the concept is flexible enough to work in a variety of narratives and styles.

    as an aside to darkseidpwns: what is this gibberish supposed to mean?
    Contribute to what? this debate is settled. You're just strawmanning as usual. You just want to kill so thay he doesn't have any authority over some c lister you like .
    He doesn't like Batman/Superman not killing because the writers hold them up as the supreme moral authority in the DC verse because of it. This in turn means that if less popular characters get in to conflict with them over killing then Batman/Superman will always come out on top and look better because of their rules. You pick up a Batman comic you automatically have to believe that he is so good that he can solve problems without killing. Otherwise you might as well stop bothering because no amount of training or fancy toys are overcoming actual weapons. There's a heck a lot more questionable/unbelievable things in the Bat verse before the question of killing even comes up. There are certain things inbuilt to characters that one needs to accept. When I want to read about someone who solves his problems by killing I go read Deathstroke or Midnighter.

    But when a person wants "justice" for Manchester Black/Huntress/C lister that ends up in conflict with Batman/Superman then I think said person might as well find another hobby.
    Last edited by darkseidpwns; 05-06-2017 at 10:43 PM.

  4. #64
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,412

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    I'm strawmaning? And the debate isn't settled just because you say so
    You just compared murder to privacy violation after all. Its settled with in any Batman material if one bothers to read (or watch) it.

    Also Batman doesn't torture either so your equivalency is false, Batman has never permanently crippled, disfigured or maimed any human being intentionally.
    Last edited by darkseidpwns; 05-06-2017 at 10:44 PM.

  5. #65
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    23,747

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by darkseidpwns View Post
    You just compared murder to privacy violation after all. Its settled with in any Batman material if one bothers to read (or watch) it.

    Also Batman doesn't torture either so your equivalency is false, Batman has never permanently crippled, disfigured or maimed any human being intentionally.
    You do know what torture means right?

  6. #66
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,412

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    You do know what torture means right?
    You do realize there is a difference between interrogation and torture right?

  7. #67
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    23,747

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by darkseidpwns View Post
    You do realize there is a difference between interrogation and torture right?
    Pretty sure interrogation doesn't mean smashing people into walls or dangling them off roof tops

  8. #68
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,412

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    Pretty sure interrogation doesn't mean smashing people into walls or dangling them off roof tops
    Yeah it involves kissing and cuddling them until they give up the required info,puhlease. Even teen age fist cuffs end up with wall smashing and dangling someone with the intent of never killing them is so laughably pedestrian that I dont even know what to say.
    Maybe you should do some research on actual torture.

  9. #69
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    23,747

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by darkseidpwns View Post
    Yeah it involves kissing and cuddling them until they give up the required info,puhlease. Even teen age fist cuffs end up with wall smashing and dangling someone with the intent of never killing them is so laughably pedestrian that I dont even know what to say.
    Maybe you should do some research on actual torture.
    are you serious? The mental gymnastics in this post are worthy of an Olympic gold medal
    Last edited by Agent Z; 05-06-2017 at 11:32 PM.

  10. #70
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,412

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    are you serious?
    Were you serious when you compared privacy violation with murder?

  11. #71
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    23,747

    Default

    Yes I was. I also compared torture to murder as well. And that's still less ludicrous than you claiming Batman doesn't torture people.

  12. #72
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,412

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    Yes I was. I also compared torture to murder as well. And that's still less ludicrous than you claiming Batman doesn't torture people.
    Your logic= since Batman punches people he might as well kill them too.

    I guess each and everyone of us has been "tortured" every time we ran in to a street fight.

  13. #73
    Extraordinary Member dietrich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    8,963

    Default

    Lol at privacy violation is on par with murder.

  14. #74
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    23,747

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by darkseidpwns View Post

    I guess each and everyone of us has been "tortured" every time we ran in to a street fight.
    Again do you actually know what torture is?
    Last edited by Agent Z; 05-07-2017 at 02:04 AM.

  15. #75
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,412

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    Again do you actually know what torture is?
    Do you know what murder is?

Posting Permissions

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