- 17 Posts
- 3 Comments
“never read a comic” part though just hurts any argument.
Actually, no, it doesn’t hurt any argument, and I will prove it to you.
Let’s look at some arguments against Batman.
“He beats up poor people.”
You could, again, say this about any rich superhero, but Batman doesn’t “beat up poor people.” Most of the people he fights are rich and wealthy crime lords who hurt innocent people in his city. That’s what the entire Court of Owls storyline is about. And even if the criminals are poor, these are still people who are going out of their way to choose to rape, kill, and maim people. The criminals who are criminals because they are poor—Batman gives them tons of job opportunities.
If someone is a pimp who pimps out underage girls, and is a rapist, an assassin, or a gang leader, should we not stop them because “they are poor”? Especially when they make so much money they could retire or go legit?
“He beats up the mentally ill.”
Again, Joker is doing what he’s doing because he wants to, and this is an insult to mentally ill people, because there are tons of mentally ill people who choose not to commit evil acts and want to treat their mental illness. Batman’s rogues gallery is not—and again, most supervillains are mentally ill—so this point is stupid.
“He recruits children.”
Teen Titans—the sidekicks of damn near every League member. And then they might say, “Well, they have powers.” They are still fighting threats that can kill them. Also, by this argument, you’re basically saying a teen should not be a superhero because he has no powers.
“Why doesn’t he use his wealth to help Gotham?”
Literally every comic, animated show, and movie shows he’s using his wealth to help Gotham.
People who use these arguments literally have not read a comic, nor are they Batman or DC/Marvel fans in general.
“probably just want to be included in the discussion”
If you have no real knowledge of something you can’t discuss it.
The people in my previous post have a problem with Batman being a billionaire and recruiting kids. If you were a real fan, you would suspend disbelief and realize it’s a fictional story. We watch Law & Order because they live in a world where cops actually care about victims, and we want to live in a world where cops are reformed and act like them. We are aware that it’s unrealistic, but we suspend disbelief.
Batman being rich—same with Iron Man—is just a part of the character, so suspend disbelief. Robin and Batgirl have been a part of Batman lore for centuries. The reason I say they aren’t real fans is because they aren’t—they hop on the Batman bandwagon hate train because it’s popular. That’s it.
They don’t have this same criticism for Green Arrow, Blue Beetle, Emma Frost, Kate Bishop, Swordsman, Sunspot, and every other rich superhero. They don’t have a problem with the rest of the league that recruits children as sidekicks. If you don’t like Batman because he’s rich and has a sidekick, that’s fine—but extend that same level of dislike to every other rich superhero. That’s all—be consistent.
If you are a real fan and have an issue with Batman, then I would have to assume this same argument applies to the characters I just mentioned.
In Absolute Batman, Bruce isn’t rich—he’s a working-class construction worker. And for an “altering what-if” story, that’s fine. But you still have to explain some things, because him being “poor” plays no part in the story at all. He still has gadgets, a Batmobile, a dump truck, etc. He never struggles with money, and Martha is still alive. So again, please explain: how does he have all this equipment if he’s not wealthy? And why be Batman if his mom is alive? Please explain this.
I made a post asking specifically for DC fans their opinions. The people who responded aren’t actual fans—they’re just people who think they are fans but have never picked up a comic in their life. My question is: why do non-fans try so hard to engage with real fans?? You aren’t a real fan of DC, Marvel, or anything superhero-related, so you don’t deserve to be in the fandom space.
The TikTok and Pinterest trend called the “old money aesthetic” is just a really fancy or classy lifestyle. It’s basically a preppy, Ivy League, business-casual style, and these clothes are things regular people can also buy. They have a bunch of them at Walmart, and you can get them on Amazon.
Even a middle-class person can get an old Mercedes or a Porsche. As for golfing, chess, and other “old money hobbies,” again, regular people can do that too. Regular people go to galas, plays, and basically live a super fancy lifestyle—it’s not limited to just “rich people.”
Do rich people do these things more? Sure. But again, calling it an “old money aesthetic” is dumb when classy or fancy people in general do this.
There are even YouTubers who teach regular people to be super fancy, like The Gent Z / Gentleman’s Collective and Jamila Musayeva, and neither of them come from “old money.” This is just a very classy and fancy lifestyle that anyone can really have, regardless of whether you are middle class, working class, or upper class.
I live in a socialist society, so basically everything is free. I don’t need money, so what’s to stop me from saying “fuck you” to my family and community, since I don’t have to work? I just want to party, sleep around, do drugs, and drink alcohol 24/7. I don’t want to work or help anyone that’s not me. What happens?
Do people actually care if a rich, beautiful girl dates a poor guy? Do people actually care if a 10/10 woman dates an “ugly” guy? People will see couples like that and say, “He’s out of her league.” Do people actually care about this? If Jessica Chastain, Angelina Jolie, or Alexandra Daddario dated a 25-year-old man (or woman) who works at a grocery store while attending college, would people actually care, judge, and look down on it? (Real people, not just keyboard people.)
If your son was a super wealthy multi-millionaire and lived in LA or New York, but he wasn’t famous and wasn’t close to your family members (brothers, nephews, nieces, etc.), would you tell them your son is rich?
Me personally, a lie by omission is still a lie, and hiding and keeping secrets from your family is wrong. I get that the son in this scenario could keep his wealth private from his extended family members if their situation is like mine—I only see my family, like my uncle and cousins, once a year, and that’s it, and we barely talk on the phone or social media. I don’t even follow them. But if my son got wealthy somehow, it would be morally wrong not to tell them.
Red pill ‘alpha’ guys claim wealthy men don’t care about a woman’s background and will date poor women, yet they often mock women seeking rich men. In reality, wealthy men tend to date within their social class. Look at Jeff Bezos, David Beckham, or Leonardo DiCaprio—these men date successful women who are already rich or from wealthy families. Even with large age gaps, the younger partners are still well-off. It seems red pill guys overstate the idea that rich men don’t care about a woman’s status when, in practice, they do.
For people who smoke cigars, how do you cut torpedo cigars?
Doesn’t That level of power automatically makes someone:
Publicly known (at least in business, government, media circles) Documented online, in filings, press, contracts, etc. Recognizable to anyone
Especially if the CEO is a person of color who came from a middle class background
Wouldn’t they be automatically famous?
Captain James T. Kirk
Captain Jean-Luc Picard
Logan Roy
Vito Corleone
Michael Corleone
Don Draper
Harvey Specter
This is a genuine question, because one of the reasons I left Christianity (I was raised Christian) was that I didn’t like how they hate gay people, are pro-life, etc., and overall are pretty hypocritical. But as I got older, I realized there are Catholics who are pro-choice, aren’t homophobic, and don’t have an issue with having sex before marriage, etc., and basically are not stereotypical religious people at all. But I have to ask—how do they justify this? I mean, it must be very confusing, because if the Bible does say being gay is a sin and you are not homophobic and are pro-LGBTQ+, then you are basically saying sinning is okay, which goes against their very religion. How about Catholics who swear? Basically, how do liberal Christians/Catholics justify their religion? Why be religious if you aren’t going to go all in?
People claim that Fiji Water, Acqua Panna, Voss, Waiakea and Evian are “rich people” water because they are “expensive” but they arent that expensive at all I personally have Voss, Fiji, Waiakea volcanic water, Acqua Panna and Evian and they aren’t expensive at al.
I’m writing a story about a biracial superhero. He’s in his 20s, and his dad is a extremely wealthy Black businessman. His mom is Japanese, and she comes from a wealthy family. I don’t want to give too much away, but there is something about his family’s history that resurfaces, and it connects to his powers. He is basically trying to find out what it is. My friend says the story is stupid and no one would want to read it.
Red pill ‘alpha’ guys claim wealthy men don’t care about a woman’s background and will date poor women, yet they often mock women seeking rich men. In reality, wealthy men tend to date within their social class. Look at Jeff Bezos, David Beckham, or Leonardo DiCaprio—these men date successful women who are already rich or from wealthy families. Even with large age gaps, the younger partners are still well-off. It seems red pill guys overstate the idea that rich men don’t care about a woman’s status when, in practice, they do.
This is literally the dumbest comment I have ever read.
“no kid in his twenties is watching a stupid nighttime soap opera from the 80’s”
Again, you are making a strong assumption here. First of all, the 80s soap opera was rebooted in 2017 on The CW. He could have watched the 2017 version, then watched the 80s version. Even if it was never rebooted, if this ‘kid in his 20s’ is super into film, TV, and movies, then yeah, he might watch soap operas. Non-fans of film might not, but if you are a real fan, you will.
“let alone waiting to change his last name to the douchebags from that show.”
Again, you are making a lot of assumptions here, which is weird and stupid. Considering (let’s assume this story is true), if he likes their last name and he truly doesn’t like or is disgusted with the current last name he has, then why wouldn’t he want to change it?
This is basically what you just said:
Post: My son hates their last name and wants to change his last name to ‘Stark.’ Iron Man is his favorite character.
Your comment: “This story is bullshit. No 22-year-old likes Marvel or superhero stuff. I don’t know this for certain, but I’m just going to make my own assumption and guess that no 22-year-old male likes superhero stuff, let alone is willing to change his last name to a character. I don’t know this dude, I’ve never met him, and he wouldn’t piss on me if I were on fire, but I’m just going to assume because…”