• DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    I feel like that is a comic nerd specific context.

    Or maybe we’ve just agreed, as a society, not to bring it up, like that time Batman lynched a homeless guy and laughed.

      • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        It should be noted that Batman’s no killing rule is a later addition to the character, so early comics are cheating a bit.

        I think it says a lot about the original character concept and his position as a millionaire/billionaire regardless.

        • doctortran@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          I see you’re just going to deliberately leave out the context.

          That wasn’t a homeless person, it was a patient at the asylum. Hugo Strange had injected him and 4 others with grown hormone that turned them into mindless, rage filled monsters, and there was no cure. It’s needlessly violent and careless but that is in no way “Batman lynching a homeless man”

          I don’t know what it is with people on Lemmy trying to dishonesty reframe the legacy of that character just because he’s wealthy. It’s so petty and pointless.

          • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            1: Guess where 40’s asylums got a lot of their patients. Guess what happened to most of them if they did get released.

            2: There was a cure, Batman himself made it in the comic.

            3: Do you think being a victim of a medical experiment makes it better?

            Nice “real context,” simp.

        • Plastic_Ramses@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          4 days ago

          Huh, that is very interesting

          Also fwiw, by the end of year of writing, the batman writers settled on his “no killing” rule.

    • tal@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 days ago

      If Wonder Woman doing over-the-top BDSM qualifies, then there are some even more prime examples on /r/outofcontextcomics I see that I think I’ll submit.

      • doctortran@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        I mean, going to the original run of WW is almost cheating. Those were written with the explicit intent of depicting bondage, and more importantly, Wonder Woman breaking the bonds. Marston knew exactly what he was doing and how it would look.