#I don't care as much if Characters agree because like...their view of Robin is way different than readers/writers

[signedsfs]

not to out myself but Yeah...I think it was all such a Bad Idea, and I. am a little confused about people who are generally so objective and analytical about most character choices Agreeing with him that it was a necessary choice to "help" Damian.

I have a vent fic wip that I may or may not finish so I just need to tell someone that I am...feeling so many things all the time about the consequences of the 16th birthday but...

primarily, right now, at this moment. without Robin/Bruce, Tim thought he would lose Dick and everyone else he knew through Robin. and then a little bit later when he quit for Jack, he got radio silence for Months until he became a potential victim, and even then it was just Cass stopping in to give the message and be like "I'll watch you to keep you safe 👁️👁️ ok bye" and he had actual Proof that without Robin, he would lose everyone.

and then. Dick "you're my equal (even tho I'm drastically changing your life without your knowledge or permission), you're my closest ally (even tho you don't even have a name to go out in the field to assist me as backup), I need you (even tho, as mentioned, I made a huge decision without your input because I didn't need it because I know best actually)" Grayson.

skipping over the fact that Dick didn't even have the time to say "you're fired" or anything resembling that, when Tim lost "Robin" to Damian, he felt like he lost everything else too. it didn't matter what Dick said about "equals" or "allies" or "needing". he already had Concrete Proof that it was all false. cheap words that are easily disproven do nothing in this situation, Dichard!

(disclaimer: I love and respect Dick Grayson, I just also think Dick Stopped Existing as soon as he made Damian his Robin for the most pathetic stupid illogical risky-ass excuse he could ever give for making anyone Robin (or a vigilante in general). "because he'll kill someone again". who the fuck says that?? who thinks "oh no oh god oh fuck this kid is gonna go off the rails he's gonna kill someone, I need to Put Him In A Place Of Power Over Oblivious Innocent Untrained People Who Are Expecting A Kind And Empathetic Hero To Save Them" hUH???? ok sorry, I just wanted to rant about what Tim "losing Robin" meant)

I agree with ya. Dick Grayson is fantastic, but it seems weird that he nuked his entire relationship with Tim (a very strong one that other fans have referred to them as "The Brothers") for the new kid.

Yes, Damian is a ten year old traumatized kid who just lost the dad he didn't really have the chance to get to know. Yes, Damian needed guidance, boundaries, and compassion.

But DC spent so much time and effort building up Tim and Dick's rapport only to obliterate it once the "blood son" came in (I also love Damian. This is not hate on the kid. This is confused commentary on DC's choices). It's just a strange idea, but that's also why it hurts so much when Dick does that to Tim.

Then you tie in Tim losing Robin by Dick to Tim's experiences before? Fuck. You are so right for that.

As far as the RR run, Dick could've handled Tim believing Bruce a bit better. I don't necessarily blame him for that one. I get why he wasn't supportive in the way Tim wanted, even though I would've chosen differently for my siblings.

Dick taking Robin, though? That was fucked up. I, honest to the gods, do not see how that was a justified course of action. I can understand his perspective, but it's still not okay. At all.

There's your very adequate analysis:

Robin, for Tim, is his tie to his loved ones. He has proof (twice) that without it, he does not have access to the people he cares about and his support system.

Dick said a lot of pretty words about "equals," but his actions were precisely contradictory to his "intentions."

Tim has had Robin taken from him before or had to give it up. He chose to go back despite this. He obviously feels strongly about being Robin

Damian has not proven, at this point, to be trustworthy as a vigilante (someone in power without oversight). He has instead shown use of excessive force

This isn't even going into the way he found out. That's just an extra layer.

The way Tim has repeated lost and regained Robin (even after RR) as well as his title as Red ROBIN are, to me, a sign that he's still trying to hold on. It's my belief that he would have moved onto a new title, like his predecessors, if it hadn't constantly been an unsure role.

His start was rocky as hell due to Bruce not initially wanting it. Tim had to prove himself and put himself into the costume.

He "quit" twice before it was taken from him in a traumatic way (nothing like being instilled with the fear that the position you've held for four years can suddenly be yanked out from under you without warning)

Damian and Jason both vehemently protested to him being Robin

It would make sense if all of these factors combined to Tim's unwillingness or inability to just let Robin go, especially when we factor in his reason to be Robin. Since Bruce never really gets "better" and continually falls back into bad habits, Tim needs to maintain his task of pulling Bruce back from the edge. We could also throw Jean Paul into this to further how Tim is forced to play as the barrier between a grown adult and their desire to harm others in the name of good.

So, Tim's time as Robin is marked by consistent instability while contrasted with his inherent position as Bruce's leash and the batfam fixer. While the other Robins did have times of doubt, the predecessors of Tim did not have the pervasive role insecurity with regards to Robin.

They had their big moment at the end and some smaller moments in-between, but not quite on the continous scale of Tim. Tim had three big moments and was still sucked back into Robin when Damian quit.

To be Robin is to earn Bruce's love and the ability to be part of the Wayne family. To lose Robin is the risk of losing that (at least to the perspectives of the Robins if not 100% the reality).

I'm not sure I'm articulating this accurately. Regardless, no wonder Tim clutches the title of Robin with bleeding hands no matter how much it cuts him and costs him.

[aingeal98]

Thinking about how happy Cass was when Steph became Robin because while she did agree with Bruce that Steph shouldn't be out on the streets fighting and it caused their first breakup, her issue was never against Steph as a person. If anyone didn't have a high enough level of fighting skill Cass would not want them in danger. But Steph kept stubbornly improving anyways and even though she might still not have been quite as good as Cass's anxiety would like, Bruce made her Robin which means Bruce must have changed his mind and now trusted Steph's potential and seen the same thing in her that made him take in Tim even though Cass doesn't fully understand that part yet. And Cass trusts Bruce so that's enough. Steph is happy Cass is happy they can spend time together which Cass loves and they don't have to fight anymore!

And then Steph gets fired and Barbara snaps at Cass and the next time Cass sees Steph she's so confused because why is she back in Spoiler gear now? Steph is Robin!

And even though Steph is going through emotional hell right now I think she understood there, the difference between Bruce and Cass. The way she didn't see back when they first fought. It's why she thanks Cass for her friendship even though it wasn't always smooth sailing. Even though she does have a right to be hurt and angry with Cass from before. Unlike Bruce, Cass isn't messing with Steph, jerking her around and treating her awfully for being a girl. She genuinely likes Steph and wants Steph to succeed and be a part of her life. Unlike so many other characters, she isn't unfairly biased against Steph. (She can be a jerk but she's an equal opportunity jerk. She'd treat any fighter on Steph's level the same, unless they have Bruce's approval in which case she'd trust the process. Doesn't make it fully OK but I think it's a nuance Steph appreciates in this scene.)

But then. But then. The next time they see each other war has broken out and Cass once again needs to step in and rescue Steph and.

It's the last conversation they have before Steph dies. She doesn't know Cass spent hours looking for her even in the middle of such a large turf war. She doesn't know how distracted Cass got, how passionate she was towards finding Steph even when Batman told her they couldn't afford it. She dies thinking Cass, while not viewing her like Bruce or Alfred does, still doesn't see Steph as an equal in any way that matters. And she's right! Cass loves Steph. Cass loves Steph more than she's loved any non family member in her entire life. Which doesn't change the fact that Cass does not think Steph should be out fighting, and she can only consider Steph an equal comrade when she's wearing the Robin uniform. Cass doesn't trust Steph's insistence that she's good enough, but she trusts Bruce's judgement. And Bruce is an asshole to Steph. Constantly.

They deserved to hash this out when Steph came back from the dead. Steph deserved to know how much Cass cared for her and she deserved to say exactly how Cass hurt her, no matter how good her intentions were. Cass deserved to tell Steph everything about how deeply the loss hurt her. And they both deserved the opportunity to agree on a second chance, to earn each other's full trust for once.

Anyways I'm having stephcass feelings tonight and I swear one day I will end up in the dc writers room and do... Well I'll do something to fix this that's for sure

[bitterrobin]

Y'know the fanon idea that Damian completely worships Batman (the mantle) and almost always respects Bruce to his own detriment has never made sense to me. Same with the popular notion that Damian's only goal, in his early years in Gotham, is to replace Bruce as Batman. From the beginning of his comic introduction, I thought it was clear that Damian had little respect for Bruce and Batman (not just Robin/Tim). Literally his first words to Bruce are "Father, I imagined you taller" with a sword to his throat. It was Damian's need for fatherly recognition and the explanatory environment of the League that made him act on killing the Spook - setting off the chain of events with Tim and eventually the story arc ending with the submarine explosion.

Like, yes, later on when Damian officially becomes Robin and more writers get their hands on him, he does start to believe in Batman and actually build a relationship with Bruce. (and then later on we get the company mandated "make Damian evil" comics that started to turn him the other way). Idk just thoughts being shared here. Obviously, the woobification of Tim has a hand in these ideas being so widespread, because some parts of fanon act like Damian spawned into existence purely with the goal of replacing Tim or Bruce. Like he barged into the cave and immediately said "I, a 10 year old, am going to dedicate all hours of my life into bullying a teenager! My goal in life is to physically and psychologically torment this one guy!" (And realistically, guys, I don't think Damian cares that much about Tim, and vice versa).

Also, I guess just super misguided/misinformed attempts to giving Talia and/or Ras reasons for training Damian that way they do (in fanon) and narratively giving a reason for why Damian is so aggressive when he first appears. Everyone forgets the true goals Ras has in running the League, and tbh, I don't think his dynamic with Bruce has ever been portrayed correctly in fanon. Like I've read some fics that portray the "Damian must be Batman" concept as something Ras ingrained into him - and while I don't think Ras wouldn't praise Bruce around Damian, they are still ideologically opposed. Same goes for the fanon monstrosity that is Talia - she would have a positive view on Bruce, even more so, but if people were being accurate to her character, she wouldn't be forcing Damian into the role of Batman when she knows what the mantle means and how it can warp a person. But they aren't accurate to her character, so its usually a "you must replace your father...because its what the right kind of son does" kind of justification.

Either way, I've always been more interested in Damian's arc as someone who thinks Batman/"crime-fighting" is stupid and then gradually and slowly starts to understand why Bruce does what he does even if he never fully agrees/can articulate exactly why killing is wrong (yet)....versus someone who has always wanted to be Batman and just gradually learns how to do that the "right" way (ie no killing, no in-fighting).

[fortheloveofarchons]

My opinions on Sunday from Honkai: Star Rail

C.W. Contains spoilers after the 2.2 Honkai: Star Rail Trailblazer Quest + theories and lore

.

.

.

I kinda agree with his philosophies and thinking... to some extent...

Okay hear me out!!!

We all know by now that Sunday's whole motive is to protect everyone and ensure that they won't have to suffer anymore (like when he states that he wants everyone to have seven rest days). I can empathise with his character so much, as someone who (as ridiculous and cowardly as it sounds) is afraid to face the harsh realities of life. I mean, even if he's set as a villain, he is as gentle and empathetic as his sister Robin, just that they both express it differently.

Seeing the cutscenes of him and Robin from their past to the present was just so immersive, because Sunday brings up some very demoralizing and harsh situations that he faced back then, and we, the audience, can understand and relate to struggling to cope with his disappointment, frustration, grief, and anger - all while often having little to no power to change things.

From the way Sunday is acting, he seems more like a traumatised parental figure (as we've seen the reason why Robin has to wear excessive neck accessories due to her being shot) who cannot let go and provide his care and safe environment for his loved ones.

Moreover, his ideologies felt surreal as I myself would take that path since I can relate to his trauma and ideals (and also as someone who has a sibling too)

His viewpoint is understandable, but...

Taking away the basic right of an individual's free will for safety is always a controversial issue.

As Himeko once called out Sunday, she states that he's just going to trap everyone in a bird cage through eternal slumber, which robs them their freedom and agency.

Plus, from what Robin said, if Sunday's plan worked, he's going to hurt himself too. Because Sunday will be in charge of everything and everyone, he won't even have time to rest, causing his body and mind to be exhausted to the bone (maybe possible cause his mind and body to corrode cause he needs to rest at one point)

Moreover, Firefly made a good point disapproving Sunday's point that he should not assume just because someone is weak doesn't mean that they should automatically escape to fantasy. It is up to you to be strong so you can fly into the sky, and that not everyone who is weak should be weak.

I remember someone commenting on Youtube stating that Sunday protects Robin so much, that Sunday doesn't even know how to protect himself for facing the outside world. It's kind of ironic considering that Sunday is supposed to be the protective, influential type of characters in Penacony, yet he barely knows how to fly. Robin, however, took the opportunity to spread her philosophies of Harmony and influence others in reality.

In conclusion, Sunday has the right idea, it's just that he has a terrible execution. But I know that there are some people who don't mind, I've been on Instagram to see a lot of people agreeing with his views... yes I'm talking about all those sunday stans cause I've seen a lot from them

(I ain't complaining plz we need more Sunday content!!!)

I mean-- in reality I wouldn't agree; but in this story, I would agree with him. (if we don't consider my simping and bias because that has the most influence)

Honestly, I'm hoping he gets a redemption arc because I really love him (I personally wouldn't mind if Sunday gets the Wanderer treatment from Genshin Impact if it means that Sunday will be playable), and hoping that he is really alive (as stated by the leakers that Sunday has a bunch of specific codes and emotion codes that's exclusive to playable characters).

That said, may we Sunday havers have more Sunday content and playable Sunday in the future!!! I'm gonna write a fic for Sunday so stay tuned!!

Let me know what you guys think of Sunday! Do you think he'll get redeemed? Playable? Alive?

PETITION TO MAKE EVERYDAY SUNDAYYY!!!!!!

[babblingeccentric]

Strawhat Real World Jobs

Yes Oda did give out alternate jobs for all the strawhats in an SBS but I will die before I accept Zoro as a cop and I have a few other quibbles and elaborations I'd like to put forth for Modern AUs. I want you to keep in mind that I'm writing this from a distinctly US American point of view so some of the job cultures may be slightly different to your locality.

Luffy- Firefighter: this one is correct. Luffy needs a job that is highly physical with low organization and intelligence requirements (sorry) This man is not going to college. He isn't a hero but there's no other legal way to get the adrenaline rush he needs. Also firefighters have a higher tolerance for fistfighting than other jobs, but not as much as construction. I think he could do construction labor if needed but I also think he would get bored. He would also be a PR nightmare as a professional athlete or wrestler. Could make it as a YouTuber but only if someone else edited his videos. Honestly YouTuber Luffy is your best choice if you want to preserve the feel of canon in a modern world.

Zoro- Cop: I'm sorry Oda but this is dumb as shit. Zoro would get asked to serve an eviction to a struggling mother of three or clear out a homeless encampment and quit on the spot. Or he would get into fights with other cops and get walled out and have to quit. He could still be a swordsman as a professional Kendo fencer? Athlete? Idk what they call those but he'd go on the pro circuit and absolutely decimate. He'd teach at a dojo in the off seasons. I'd also see him as an athletic trainer. I think Zoro could make it through college

Nami- Nursery School Teacher: While Nami is canonically very fond of children and quite good with them this feels like kind of a cop out. I think meteorologist suits her skills really well and I think she could kill it in the looks contest that weather anchors have to play.

Sanji- Stylist: I love this one so much. Idk what the original was but a stylist in the US refers to either a personal stylist which is a person who picks rich people's outfits or a hair stylist which is a person who cuts and styles hair, usually women's. Both jobs are associated with flamboyant gay men. He goes to his job and he gasses up women and calls men ugly for eight hours and then comes home and cooks Luffy dinner because he got texted a picture of the most fucked up eggs you ever did see that morning.

Ussop- Graphic Designer: I honestly have no notes. Yeah Ussop can hold down a steady job, and yeah it should be art focused. What is art but lying anyway?

Chopper- Grade School Teacher: This one is just so cute. He's got a childishness to him that makes kids like him and he has a soft caring personality that makes him good at his job. He can also be strict when he really has to. I agree Chopper would be a great elementary school teacher

Franky- Pilot: I guess? The thing is I think flying a plane for a job is both stressful and boring and I honestly don't think it suits him as well as say mechanic. I think Franky would be great as a mechanic souping up hot rods and doing weird custom jobs and he would be very entrenched in the local car scene. I also do just love mechanic characters

Robin- Flight Attendant: We all know this is just for Frobin reasons. And while the idea of a hand sprouting from your fold down tray to serve you your in flight meal is charming Robin deserves better than being Franky's beautiful assistant. Also I don't wish customer service upon her after all her suffering. I think she would be a great lawyer. She's smart, she's eloquent, she's poised- she'd kill it in the courtroom. She does corporate law for Crocodiles unethical company for a ridiculous sum before quitting to start her own firm and defending Luffy's numerous aggravated assault charges cause she likes him.

Brook- Detective: I'm not really sure why they picked this but I now want a detective story where Brook runs around solving mysteries (wait isn't that just skullduggery pleasant?)

Jinbe- Train Station Attendant: This is really cute, but we all know he'd be a retired yakuza boss. Maybe in some wild world where none of the strawhats turn to crime. I think he would be a local institution and know a lot of people and ask them about their families and such

[steveharirngton]

Here to say that it wasn't "out of character" for Robin to be nice to Nancy...

Why the fuck should she have been mean to Nancy?

Like, if Nancy was some evil bitch who abused Steve, I would have understood that.

But she's not!!!

The only bad thing Nancy did was vent out to Steve as DRUNK about Barb's death.

Her words were harmful, yeah, but maybe you kind of forgot (or just chose to ignore) that she had to sopport her best friend's death, and all the conseguences that brought, for nearly a year, and it's not like Steve did much to help her recover, aside from telling her to soppress her emotions (worst advice to give to a person with untreated PTSD).

Robin had no reason to be mean or something to Nancy.

And she also has no reason to be mean to Jonathan.

Like, Jonathan did a bad thing, taking that topless photo of Nancy (and I agree it should have been adressed), but he supported Nancy way better than Steve ever did.

And also, he hasn't done anything bad to Steve, aside from the fight (which yeah, Jonathan started, but Steve is the one who mocked him, his mom and his missing brother, in a very homophobic way), so there's literally NO reason for Robin to be mean to either Nancy or Jonathan.

What I want to say with this?

Stop treating Robin only as an extention to Steve, 'cause she's fucking not!!!!!

She's an indepent character, who shouldn't and WOULD NEVER base her entire life choices and motives around a man!!!!!!

And also stop shipping Stancy, if you clearly dislike Nancy this much!!!!!

robin canonically holds grudges. she spent years hating on steve because the girl she had a crush on, had a crush on steve and apparently steve spills crumbs all over the floor. what a dingus!

i don't know if you count rebel robin as canon, but in rebel robin it is mentioned that barb ditched her for nancy. ta da! a reason unrelated to steve!

anyways, when i said i wanted robin to be mean to nancy at first, i don't mean she should kill her at sight. it would have been better for nancy to try to be her friend instead. it would have been better to see nancy trying for once.

also, didn't you ever hold a grudge on behalf of your friend? didn't you ever want to just kick someone's ass because they hurt your friend? this isn't about making robin an extension to steve, this is about friendship.

i don't know about you but i would definitely side-eye the people who hurt my best friend.

that PTSD wasn't only happening to nancy. just because they had different ways of dealing with their trauma doesn't mean one of them is better than the other. steve was worried about not only his parents but also about nancy and her family as well. him wanting to try and move on does not make him a bad person.

ignoring the jonathan part bc i really couldn't care less about him. the reasons for robin to be mean to jonathan is stated above anyways.

she WOULD NEVER base her entire life choices around a man??? literally when did i ever say anything about her life should be revolving around steve?

steve and robin are best friends. im really worried about you not knowing what a good friendship is. friends talk, make plans, and consider each other in every situation. in stobin's case, robin has a monologue about wanting to combine with steve bc she thinks they're better together. go off and make this about something that isn't. that's what you do best.

just because i view nancy differently, doesn't mean i dislike her.

i don't ship stancy. i will however support them if they will end up together. what's important to me is steve's happiness.

that being said, i will ship whatever i want, that's none of your business.

[kiefbowl]

Finally another person that hates HIMYM as much as I do. There isn't a show that I hate more tbh, like there are shows I dislike, but that damn show is something else. Just like you I hate what they did to Robin(and she's the only character I kind of liked; I liked Ted when he wasn't trying to be like Barney and when he would actually call Barney out, which sadly wasn't too often)...and I hate how more often than not the show treated Barney's treatment of women as a joke, or rather the show rarely called him out, and i especially hate the way they ended his character arc, I was like "oh now he'll see women as humans" *eye roll*-- I hate that trope so damn much. The show had potential, and the premise was interesting, it's just that the show was filled with the worst tropes and some of the worst characters on today's tv(or ever, really). I just cannot for the life of me understand its popuplarity.

Also, oh my god yes, I totally agree with you on that final season. What the hell were the writers thinking?!

>"I liked Ted when he wasn't trying to be like Barney and when he would actually call Barney out, which sadly wasn't too often"

one of the most unaware things the show does is pretend Barney is a foil to Ted when Ted and Barney are extremely similar in their views of women. The difference is that Barney is always on, and it's always a goofy heightened reality, while Ted will be written fairly straight wrt wanting to sleep with women.

>"I hate that trope so damn much."

a baby daughter fixed me is definitely one of the worst tropes and also is sooooo fucking lazy. they didn't build a story around Barney in which him having a baby girl in the 11th hour would feel cathartic, that's why it feels so cheap. If he had conflicted feelings about his life and about fatherhood at all, it would still be a lazy and misogynistic choice, but it would at least follow some story logic. it's like a big ass trifecta of shit: Robin and Ted endgame, mother dead, Barney has a fucking baby.

Writing that reminds me that they have Robin "fail" both of her love interests by not being able to have children since children are obviously the one true ultimate goal in this story. A child fixes Barney, and Robin wouldn't have ever been able to do that for him. Truly ridiculous. But anyway I haven't gotten that far yet.

>"I just cannot for the life of me understand its popuplarity"

I have thoughts on this, looking back on old subreddits I think a lot of people hand waved unpleasant parts of HIMYM because they wanted to believe the set-up they were seeing was intentional. Most of it was not as intentional as believed and it ended up being poorly done for the actual planned ending. Case in point: the internal life of Robin is clearly not something the writers cared about. But because the story is focused on who she loves and wants to be in a relationship with, fans thought 'well the internal life of Robin is being treated seriously, so I will read into the subtext'. I think this also comes off because Cobie cares about Robin's internal life. I don't think the writers ultimately know why Robin loves Barney, but I think Cobie knows. I wonder if the writers ever really cared what the actors believed was true about their characters. There needs to be some give and take on this even if writers ultimately gets to decide how the story plays out.

Additionally, I think the five leads are very charming and elevate a lot of material, they all have exceptional physical comedy chops. People liked the characters when they were good, tried to close their eyes when they were bad, and hoped the good parts were leading somewhere satisfying.

[rezonan]

Why do people use OOC/Irrelevant stories to justify their hatred for characters?

I'll admit I got this question from reddit but seeing as you are a big fan of Iron Man and certain characters afflicted by this issue I thought I would ask

Comic book characters and the consistency of favored portrayals

Why do people do the exact opposite to justify how cool they think a character is?

Look this is probably the worst kind of question to ask me, back when I was in high school my classmates hated me cause when it came to arguments I would always 'Stand on the fence' or 'Never pick a side' and I agree, even when I disagree or agree I can't help but see the other side of things with some questions.

I think one of the biggest things comic fans need to accept with our medium is that, the only real continuity that exists is the one we try and brute force and make in our heads, some writers themselves don't really care, Geoff Jones ignored Batman previously basically begging for Hal Jordan to come back to life when he was The Spectre to writing Batman basically complaining that Hal was back because to him that is what he thinks Batman should act like with Hal, and considering he probably grew up with a comic like Dark Knight Returns the asshole authoritarian was probably was he knew of the character, who knows I don't know his personal life.

I think we can all say that you have fallen in love with a character based of Non Canon stories, Hell my favorite comic for Superman and the one that got me into liking the character was All-Star Superman. The exact opposite of that like what you asked tho, Hating a character because a story depicted them poorly whether it's canon or not is valid as well, I mean it's pretty damn short-sighted if they have been exposed to better represented sides of those characters, but it doesn’t change the impact they initially felt, wether they can get past that is on the person. Like for example, I fucking hated Superman growing up cause the first movies I remember seeing him in was the freaking Dark Knight Returns duology and certain parts of Young Justice Season 1 but overtime seeing better versions and representations of the characters and also hearing put fans on what he represents has pushed him up to my 5th favorite hero, I do understand not everyone can do this. People just want to support their view of the character.

I also do think people who hate certain characters do reach a lot of the time, sharing panels of stories older than their parents sometimes probably not even knowing what comic it even came from, just happy they have this image of the character they don't like being abusive or something. It's even worse then the he outright go out of their way to find these panels or stories to use for hate on purpose even after knowing it's generally agreed upon it's a shitty representation of the character. Seriously nobody should bring up All Star Batman and Robin as some 'Got Ya!' moment in an argument, just no. Sometimes some people have just predetermined in their mind they want to hate a character and will go out of their way to farm for anything that can paint them in the worst light possible.

With Iron Man it's people bringing up Civil War again and again and again continuously like the 40 years of stories before that don't show why Tony would never do any of that in his right mind. With Superman it's people bringing up injustice in literally any relation to him or people bringing up a scene of Jason Todd blaming Bruce for his death as evidence of how whiny he is even when one of the highlight lines of his first appearance as Red Hood is 'Bruce I forgive you for not saving me but-'

With characters like say, Hal Jordan, Magneto or Venom and meny more, it gets more interesting here. Here what the characters did that was bad IS/WAS(considering reboots in Hal's case) in continuity but a version of the characters that were received much more popularly then makes fans disregard these past appearances as wrong, say they have had this entirely new portrayal longer than they had that one or writers themselves will retcon them away by making them, in the case of former villians now refromed, seem less evil than they were. No no those people Magneto killed weren't innocent humans in the silver age, they were actually anti-mutant bigots that killed a little girl for being a mutant. One of my favorite examples of this is Hulk. Yes Hulk the rampaging monster from movies to series to comics, in comics in I think 2008 was retconned to have never and I mean never killed a single person in all his rampages In the in-universe 12 years at that point, not even indirectly because Bruce Banner was subconsciously calculating all the angles of where he would throw or smash stuff apprently. All those crumbled buildings, nope, nothing.

And you know what? I can agree with some of that (that Hulk retcon is still dumb) because let me tell you the real truth to all this.

Consistency

People love consistency, They don't care about Magneto killing innocents in the 60s or Venom eating people in the 90s, they care about the take that has been supported consistently in their view for longer or just showed more consistently in what they have seen. Even for the haters it's the same, if for example my only experience with Batman was All Star and Certain Post New 52 issues, I would be happy knowing I hate this borderline sociopathic dude that's what I know Batman as.

You see it even with the movies, When The Amazing Spider-Man came out you had people saying it was an inaccurate take or not liking the changes even though it was actually more comic accurate that what came before but fans of the Raimi movies have consistently seen Peter as a meek and nice kid before being Spider-Man not an asshole, they have consistently seen him with organic webbing not with web shooters. Anything that breaks the portrayal they have known the most if gonna make them react either well or badly. People who only knew Tony Stark from Civil War probably reacted well to his MCU version seeing as he broke the consistent borderline villian they knew him from the comics.

So the big issue is people trying to force their own consistent idea of a character on others when comics just aren't consistent, everyone like I said at the start has their own makeshift continuity in their head they made up with books they liked or think fit, the consistent portrayal they know about, so this is why you get people arguing about if Batman is the real identity or Bruce Wayne or if Clark Kent should wear trunks or not I could go on and on like if Wonder Woman should use a sword? Someone who is used to the New 52 version would say yes and someone used to the Post Crisis version would say no. Or maybe it's what love interest Spidey should end up with, people who say Gwen probably grew up with TASM and Spectacular Spider-Man. Better for people to just respectly discuss the takes of characters different people have instead of childishly pushing the version they have in their head as the correct version and putting down everyone else's pretty damn subjective takes. That's with superhero comics of course, the nature of what is canon and isn't and how fans of this stuff talk about it with different 'takes' is way more unique than talking about disliking MCU Spider-Man or talking about why you hate Sasuke or something.

I don't really have a good way to end all this cause that's just it, all about consistency if I didn't get that across the 10 times I used that word. As usual feel free to disagree with me and if possible tell me how and why.

[chestharrington]

I think s4 Steve kinda made sense. Imagine your first real gf tells you she loves you one day and the next calls you bullshit and then basically admits that your relationship is based on a lie. I think Steve flirting and dating around but never truly committing to anyone is him being terrified of letting himself go or be vulnerable. And then he's together with Nancy for the first time in a year, who let him believe it's all his fault, but now that he has changed, maybe he could get back to her. Even tho she hurt him, she was also the first person who saw his real side, plus being talked into persuing that relationship by his best friends certainly had an impact. I don't doubt he dreams of having a family with her because he never got closure from the breakup in s2 and still views her in rose-colored light rather than for who she truly is. Still I want more of him outside of romance. I want him in leading position because of his physical abilities (being a lifeguard and basketball team leader) and his survival instincts. Steve isn't stupid and I hate the Duffers for making him too dumb to get into college because his main reason for not going in s2 was so he can stay around for Nancy and protect her. He would still want to be in Hawkins for Dustin. He is also confused what he wants to do with his life so that could have been a better route to "loserfy" his character instead of making him incredibly stupid and the butt of all jokes.

Dustin and Steve hurt my soul in s4, I don't think Eddie was created for being the new Steve tho. He was created because the Duffers wanted to tap into the santanic panic, but ultimately, because Eddie being hunted was not because of DnD but because Chrissys body was found in his home. I agree he died a Steve death to give Dustin trauma. But also Steve had no reason to die in s4 so someone else had to give emotional impact on Dustin. The Duffers only view losing someone as the ultimate trauma, being tortured or seeing literal monsters is not enough to give characters a more emotional arc to overcome the things they saw.

Robin is not that different (her real personality shined through at the ebd of s3 already), I think she behaves in another way because she is comfortable around Steve and his friends. She doesn't have to mask or hide herself that much anymore. However, her wanting to be bff with Nancy in a way that made her look pathetic was ooc for sure. I discussed it with others but because the show has limited time we have to rush through stuff and complicated character relationships are cut short because of the need to get everyone to like each other so they can fight the overall evil. The Duffers are allergic to giving Nancy any growth. Other characters have to kiss her ass 24/7.

Jonathan idk he didn't have a real personality since becoming Nancy's boyfriend. In s4 I liked his arc? Sorta you can clearly tell he self medicates with weed to ease his anxieties. Like his entire thing is being the provider for his family. Will and El slowly grow up and don't need him as much, it's fucking with him. Plus, Nancy is not getting his financial problems, he simply doesn't know how to deal with it. He isn't a confrontational person so all of that plus general trauma from his dad and the past few years take a toll on him. And then he meets Argyle who is so chill and gets him weed and for a few hours everything is okay so he just is constantly high because it helps.

Sorry this was kinda long feel free to ignore lmao

The Duffers are allergic to giving Nancy any growth. Other characters have to kiss her ass 24/7.

And that is SOOOOOO true baefy

I think I agree w pretty much everything except the stancy stuff. I see what u mean however I think at it’s core it’s lazy writing and the writers simply don’t care enough to explore Steve’s character (or like 95% of the characters) any further than romantic interest w his *~soulmate~* Nancy.

Also unfortunately I don’t think Robin has anything to do w being more herself I think that maybe she is just played by a not great actress 😭

[stllts]

I just really wanna talk about Scooby Gang x The Fruity Four parallels

As we all know there are a bunch of parallels to be made with the two groups, even the actors said that they would joke about it whenever they have scenes together. However something that I always get a little stuck thinking about, is how people view this character and how the matches doesn't seem quite right in my books tbh.

Of course that the obvious matches are easy to go by at first, putting the girls as the girls and the boys as the boys. I'm not saying that you shouldn't view this in the way you want to, or think is the best, you don't even have to agree with me in all this. Is just that in my perspective, isn't it more fun to just go deeper into this thing?

Cause, even if the physical parallels aren't quite right, if we talk about it only in an character analysis basis, to me it makes no sense for Nancy to be Daphne, Steve to be Fredd, Robin to be Velma, and Eddie to be Shaggy.

So I'm gonna give you guys my personal opinions about who should be who:

Nancy is definitely Velma. They are the smart ones, the ones who holds more information about stuff, the ones that comes up with a plan at the spot, and the most observant of the group. They are quick thinkers and resourceful. They know where to look for clues, where to look for information, and who to talk to first. Both Velma and Nancy are viewed like the nerdy miss perfects, but they are also both very ambitious young ladies that are always proving to everyone how badass they can also be, and how well they can hold themselves alone.

Steve is Daphne, not only because both are usually put aside byeveryone as just being the pretty face of the group and the dumb one, while also having their potential being looked down on, but also because they are usually the ones that don't care about being face first with danger if it's for the safety of the others/benefit of the plan. Like Daphne, Steve is very caring with everyone in the group, the one that is always making sure everybody is doing ok, the most loyal of the crew, no one gets left behind in their watch. They are both hopeless romantics, they like seeing people in love, they like seen people being happy, principally if this people are their friends. They are the mom friend through and through.

Eddie is no doubtlessly Fred. The crafts makers of the bunch, the ones who know where to get stuff, how to build stuff, how to get the group going. Let's not forget that it was Eddie the one who gave the ideas of where they could get weapons, what they could use as a vehicle, where he could hide while people were looking for him. He is a dnd master after all, so he knows how to build traps for his players, and he knows how to command and guide a group like no other. Fred is not a know it all like Velma is, but he knows his stuff much like Eddie, he might not be academically smart, but he is smart in his areas. Plus Eddie drives a van, so the parallel is somewhat there already lol.

And finally, Robin is Shaggy. And yeah, I know it may not look like it at first, but you gotta admit they are both a ball of anxiety at all times, plus they are also the ones always looking for the worst case scenarios in all situations. A lot of people look at Shaggy like he is just the scared one of the group, but Shaggy is also the person who is always there for others much like Robin is. And yes they might be scared about most things, they might even have a list about the things that scare them the most, but is not like they aren't going to help anyways even if it's against their safety principles. Their chaotic energy is usually what pushes the groups to go at the right places most of the times, even if on accident they both got a instinct for finding what the group needs, and without them alot of the times the group wouldn't be even able to move forward.

So yeah, this are all my intakes on that matter. Hope you guys like it, and let me know what you all think in the comments maybe lol. That's all I have for today.

[strangertheories]

You sound like a smart person in your post so I gotta ask ... you honestly believe Robin and Nancy is something that could potentially happen on the show? Somewhere in the same ballpark of likelihood as the literal canon ship Byler? And that it would if the writers were trustworthy and good?

Have you lost your mind about Natalia joking around in interviews? There is a love interest for Robin and two for Nancy. There was absolutely nothing implied between Nancy and Robin. Getting them suddenly together would objectively be shit writing. Read fanfic as much as you want but be serious right now. And don't compare that to Byler, it's insulting.

This is so backhanded haha, my smile just dropped after the first line whoops. First of all, thanks for saying I sound like a smart person, I appreciate it. Secondly, I don't think Ronance is genuinely going to become canon, but I think it could and should. It makes sense for the characters and even if they didn't mean to, a lot of Robin and Nancy's interactions can be read as romantic. Especially because Robin is more nervous and awkward around girls she likes and then immediately is nervous and awkward around Nancy. Not to mention the hand holding and the way they look at each other. I really don't think it's objectively shit writing for them to get together, especially because the actors are on board. But I also don't think it's bad writing for it to not happen, I just think it would be cool.

Someone who's better with tone than me can correct me, but I didn't feel like Natalia was joking around. She said that she likes Nancy having a girlfriend and that they (Maya, Charlie, Joe and her) have a group chat where they share Ronance memes which doesn't sound like she was just joking around to me. But I agree that they're really pushing Robin and Vickie and the whole Nancy love triangle, so it's probably not going to happen. I literally said I don't have faith in the writers to commit to Ronance in the post and that I'll still ship them no matter what's in the show. So telling me it's not gonna happen doesn't really change anything.

And I don't think it's insulting to comparing how I feel about Ronance to how I feel about Byler? I think that Byler could and should happen and would make sense but I'm not sure if the writers will commit and that my approach to it is disappointed but not surprised. As in I think it's a missed opportunity but I'm not gonna be shocked it that's the case. Which is exactly how I feel about Ronance as well. Plus that I'll keep on shipping it even it's it not canon, because that's genuinely how I feel about both ships. I know there's more proof for canon Byler and I never said that it was just as likely as Ronance, only that I feel the same way about the ship. I definitely think Byler is more pushed than Ronance in terms of marketing and in conventions though.

Maybe I worded it poorly in the post and I'll definitely go back and edit the original post to avoid confusion, but that's my thoughts on the subject. Considering you're a Byler shipper, maybe you'd empathize on not sending people asks saying that the ship they like can't happen? Like will it happen? Probably not. But I also don't really care. I know they have love interests, but Mike also has a love interest and I'm not saying that Byler isn't going to happen because of that. There are tons of people who say Byler would be poor writing too, but that's not stopping me from wanting it to happen.

Sorry if this came off as aggresive or vibe killing! I'm always so nervous I'm gonna ruin the mood in a fandom space so I hope this wasn't angry sounding as that's not what I intended to express. Thanks for the ask anyways.

Edit - I added this to the original post:

I'm not saying that they're both going to be canon or that they're equally as likely to be canon, I'm just saying that if it's not I'd view it as a missed opportunity if that makes sense.

[luanna801]

Despite everything, does Birds of Prey #8 still hold up?

So the simple answer to that is that, for me (and I can't really speak for anyone else), yes, it does.

But because I'm me, I'm also going to go a bit deeper here. And for some reason, this got SUPER long, so I'm breaking it into multiple parts and putting this under a cut:

Part 1: Chuck Dixon and His Politics

To start with, I'm assuming that by "despite everything", you're referring to Chuck Dixon's frankly horrifying politics (as seen in his bizarre recent series Alt-Hero), and the understandable backlash against him as both a person and a writer as a result.

I get this, absolutely. It's honestly a very complicated thing for me to know that Dixon wrote some of my favorite comics in the late 90s and early 00s, and also know that he's someone whose beliefs I find repugnant in so many ways. And it isn't just BoP #8 - Dixon's runs on Birds of Prey, Nightwing, Robin and so on in that era were incredibly influential. He basically WAS the Batfam in that era. He created the Birds of Prey team. He co-created Stephanie Brown. He had a huge influence on shaping Tim Drake's character and the various relationships between the Batfamily members. In many ways, Dixon is responsible for the incarnation of the Batfam that I love.

Nor can you pretend that his politics have nothing to do with his writing, because Dixon's values have always informed what he writes, to good and bad (like his rather infamous statement that "superhero comics are, whether die-hard fans like it or not, ostensibly children’s comics and perhaps not the forum to be informing children of homosexuality, heterosexuality, or sexually transmitted disease", an obviously questionable statement since he wrote numerous heterosexual romances in his comics but disapproved of gay characters being included, or included in what he considered the "wrong" ways.)

I will argue that, from what I can tell, Dixon definitely wasn't always as extreme a conservative as he is now - current Chuck Dixon would never have written this scene, for example, and would probably criticize it as the kind of "pushing a SJW agenda scene" he now condemns if someone else had written it. Some of the values 90s/00s Chuck Dixon promoted in his comics were, in fact, things I agree with and enjoyed about them. You don't have to be a conservative to enjoy wholesome family dynamics or a subtler approach to sex and romance, even though I obviously disagree with certain things he excludes from his definition of "family friendly".

I also think that, overall, 90s/00s Dixon wrote female characters with respect and nuance, and while he may not have always gotten it right, he also clearly cared deeply about writing Babs as a badass, complex, lovable disabled character, and he wrote some of my favorite scenes with her in that era. And while his writing definitely had some issues with characters of color, I'd argue it was no worse than most comic writers of the time, and better than some who are avowedly liberal (like Devin Grayson).

None of this is me trying to be like "Well, twenty years ago Chuck Dixon was Good and Unproblematic Actually", but I do think that he seems to have become alarmingly radical over time, in a way that I think goes far beyond anything that was ever reflected in his classic comic runs. And when it comes to BoP #8 specifically, I think you don't really see much political subtext in it, even to the degree that this was already present in his writing then. So if you can appreciate any of his work in spite of his current politics, BoP #8 is a good bet. But to those who can't appreciate anything he wrote anymore, I obviously understand.

Part 2: "Holding Up":

I think when we ask if a work “holds up”, we’re usually talking about something that was popular when it first came out, but might be viewed differently now because of how society’s shifted over time, whether that’s with regard to serious social issues, or just our standards for what we consider good storytelling (for example, we might criticize the special effects in an older movie for not “holding up”, where the original audience might have thought they looked awesome.)

The thing is, though, I didn’t read Birds of Prey #8 when it first came out, or anywhere near it. It was published in August 1999, when I was only seven years old, and I didn’t even become a comic fan until long afterwards. At a guess, I think I first read it sometime in 2012, shortly after I started becoming a serious DC/Batfam fan (the first post about it on my old blog is from January 2012, but I’m not sure if I’d read the full comic yet or just seen certain scenes/pages posted.) So in a sense, the fact that I read it well over a decade after it was originally published and loved it in the first place is proof that it holds up, or at least did then.

I can only imagine how much more exciting it must’ve been to read it when it first came out, honestly - Dick and Babs weren’t a couple yet then, nor had they ever been despite some flirting, and unless I’m mistaken it’s the first time an entire issue had been devoted to their relationship and their potential romance like that. It must’ve been incredibly exciting for shippers to read it and realize DC was actually serious about those two, and watch the relationship continue developing over the next several years.

But that wasn’t my reading experience. By the time I came along, nothing in that issue was remotely new or groundbreaking, and yet I loved the heck out of it and still do.

On the flipside, I’m sure there are people who read it at the time who absolutely hated it, and would say to this day that it can’t possibly “hold up” because it was never good to begin with. I got into a debate a while back (seven years ago, if you can believe it!) with a fan who clearly feels that way, and while I still think a lot of the points they raised don’t hold much water, I’m sure there are plenty of people who share their opinion.

Part 3: Disability Representation

Obviously, one of the biggest questions in whether BoP #8 “holds up” - and a far more loaded one than whether it holds up as a good romance issue (which I think most Dick/Babs shippers at any rate would agree it does) - is whether it holds up as good representation of a disabled character, and specifically of a disabled character finding romance.

I certainly see fans, to this day, using some of the panels from this comic as an example of the strength and confidence Babs had in her role as Oracle, and what was lost when DC took that away:

Babs: Y'know, a lot of the time it's like you Batguys want me to hold onto the past because you can't get over it. Understand -- I have. I have a new life now, one I like -- one that fulfills me. It's not the same one I had before, but it's good. Maybe even better.

But she also talks about how difficult the healing process was and that to some degree she’s still not “over it”, which I suppose could make the representation either better or worse, depending on your perspective:

Babs: Everyone talks about 'closure' now. When tragedy strikes they say you need 'closure'. What a crock. I wanted revenge. Swear you won't tell anybody... part of me still does. I remember that night every time I answer the door. And I think about what was taken from me.

Personally, I like the complexity! That she’s not just some perfect aspirational figure, but feels like a real person with messy and conflicting feelings about what happened to her. She’s allowed to be proud and confident in her new role, and yet a part of her is still angry and bitter and in mourning about what she went through. That feels real, to me.

Then there’s the romance angle: I’ve certainly seen this issue (and more largely, this arc) praised for how it defies stereotypes by giving a disabled character a fulfilling love life, and showing a disabled woman as unambiguously romantic and desirable. At the same time, some people might not appreciate how Barbara’s insecurities, which at least partly stem from her disability, are treated as an obstacle to the relationship (“I don’t like to be pushed around”). They might find that stereotypical or demeaning. Similarly, I’ve certainly seen people who find Dick’s attitude pushy or condescending, and feel he should just be listening to Babs rather than pushing her to heal on his terms:

Dick: You know better than that, Babs.

Babs: Does that mean you'll get me down?

Dick: That means you have to trust me.

Ultimately, I’m not a member of the disabled community and I’m definitely not paraplegic or a wheelchair user, so it’s not really for me to say how this issue holds up as disabled representation. I’ve pointed out some elements I think are strengths and some possible criticisms, but that’s all I can really say. Ultimately, it’s for the people actually being represented here to decide if they think this still holds up in that regard.

So those are my overly-long thoughts! The tl;dr is yes, I definitely think it holds up and I still love it. But there are a lot of factors to consider, and I certainly know there are others who would feel differently. I’d welcome other people adding their thoughts, if anyone thinks I missed something relevant or has more to contribute to the conversation!

[stxleslyds]

If you misunderstood, it's my fault, I tried to articulate it correctly but failed. I’ll be used the fact that it was past 2am as an excuse… But I was calling Lobdell's Jason rude, in this case. It wasn't necessarily that he was rude without reason (because your example of Ducra telling him to bow was rude of her, I agree there, and there will be more examples), it was more so that he was rude at all. It was a stark contrast between what Winick had shown, and Lobdell now did. (I might be biased against Lobdell and therefor interpreting Jason's actions much more unkindly, but idk, they were just so different?) It was like Winick's writing of Jason worked well with how Jason was written pre-death, whereas Lobdell's writing of Jason worked better with those post-death/pre-resurrection flashbacks (I don't have the option to add images, but there are a plethora of moments). I think I mostly send the previous ask because, at least to me, that contrast between the Lost Days and the All Caste made Jason (Lobdell’s version) feel especially rude. Maybe it wasn’t so bad, but my bias might have made it seem considerably worse… I hope I make sense, and if not, I apologise for that...

Hello again Anon! Thank you for writing to me again!

And yeah, I completely agree with you that there is a very clear difference between how Jason was written (in general and personality wise) by Winick and Lobdell. I am known to be a big Winick fan and a clear hater of Lobdell so you and I are on the same page.

The thing that is different and makes Winick’s whole characterization better is that he is a good writer and when he was given the opportunity to expand on his lore, he did it amazingly. He had six issues to explain three years of Jason’s history and he gave a lot of context to what had happened before UtRH and how Jason came to be the man with the motivations that he had in that book.

I see it like Winick worked with the idea of Jason as he was before his death and built from that. Jason was a sweet boy who had a very complicated life and was “saved” by Batman from an unknown future. But as he kept working with Batman their differences in morals and how they viewed criminals made themselves clearer, Batman didn’t pay much attention to the fact that Jason viewed the world differently and that led Jason to feel neglected. From feeling like that is that Jason jumped when he found a connection to his first family, he wanted a parental figure to care and love him (he clearly wasn’t feeling like Bruce was giving him that). When that parental figure betrayed him and he found himself dying he wanted Bruce (his dad) to come and save him because he was just a kid.

Winick took all that and built from there, he gave us a Jason that wasn’t angry at Bruce for not coming in time, he didn’t even blame Bruce for his death (or himself), he was just angry and disappointed when he found out that Bruce had learned nothing from what had happened to Jason. Jason really believed that after he died Bruce would have opened his eyes to the cruel reality that is Gotham and that the Batman’s ways aren’t enough or even good.

Lobdell changed all that, he made Jason angry at the fact that Bruce didn’t save him, he then made Jason feel like he was responsible for his own death and was one of the first in pushing the narrative that Jason was a bad Robin or that being Robin wasn’t something that Jason had wanted to begin with.

Those differences changed Jason completely, and in Lobdell’s case led Jason to be a character that was hard to like. He was mean to Roy, he objectified women and acted like a hormonal teenager even after being resurrected (at times). So, I truly understand where you are coming from. It’s just that I don’t think that Jason being rude was the problem (or the main problem) it’s everything surrounding it, his past before death was changed for no reason at all and then his past after death was also changed for no reason at all.

When you find yourself reading content with a character that was very carefully developed and then jump directly into the mess that was New 52 RHatO then the bad writing, bad characterizations and obvious character assassinations are going to slap you in the face.

I know because I watched the UtRH animated movie (written by Judd Winick) then read Red Hood/Arsenal, then read UtRH and sadly after reading that masterpiece I jumped directly into New 52 RHatO and I wanted to just scream forever.

So, all in all, like I said in our previous “conversation”, I didn’t really feel like Jason was rude in his training, he just had a very difficult personality, and he acted in not so nice ways that were never called out as bad, and all that happened because Lobdell was writing a self-insert version of Jason and he obviously didn’t see (at the time) anything wrong with the way he was writing Jason. He did make some changes in Rebirth, when it comes to his personality and his relatability, Jason was more likable then, but first we had to suffer through those two books from hell that Lobdell wrote.

And going back to how Lobdell perceived the events of UtRH and how he brought them to light in his own books, well Anon, I am glad to inform you that I made a post all about it some time ago. In there I deep dive in how Lobdell re-wrote Jason’s intentions and motivations in UtRH and made him look like a bad man that only wanted to hurt Bruce because his father hadn’t gone on a killing spree for him.

If that was what you had meant, then you and me are on the same page completely! I will link here that post; it was called “RHatO’s Perception of UtRH and DitF”.

If you check that post out let me know what you thought! Thank you again for sending me another ask and I hope you have a wonderful day!

[myonepiece]

can I ask what are your thoughts about people on tiktok cancelling oda for being "misogynistic"??? I'm a woman and misogyny is a huge word so I got shocked and see what they were talking about and its about this interview where female fans are complaining about the girls characters design and fanservice and he said he cares more about his male audience thats why. One piece is shounen and is male dominated, and you know how they like the non realistic big boobies and hips though I agree that there's too much fanservice and nami and robin's old design were better. But the fanservice criticism is understandable as a woman I would also like a diverse body image for women like how Isayama creates his fem characters which is chefs kiss. Oda draws them poorly (in my opinion) but I like how THEY ARE WELL WRITTEN. I love their mommy milkers but I agree the new fans or anime watchers who's gonna start watching it might feel uncomfy but setting aside their design THEIR BACKSTORIES ARE GOOD. And he writes Zoro as someone who sees women snd men equal so I don't see how he's misogynistic 😅 Misogynist hates women, Oda doesn't hate women he just said that his target audience are men bc op is shonen after all.

I literally love female characters in op they're well written comparing to other shonen that's the same age as one piece that has the same fan service but the girl is just quirky, submissive and has no personality at all. Like Naruto the women are so poorly written and could've had more potential.

Maybe its because I'm already used with the way he drew them but I really love their timeskip faces, they got more drip before I still love them especially Robin

ooo yes interesting, I hope I covered everything in this <3

TW- body image

I’m going to start by saying this is a touchy subject because my body/self-image issues are pretty bad and I don’t like talking about bodies, but I have a lot to say about this specific topic. I do not think Oda is a misogynist, as you said he does write Zoro as someone who views men and women as equal, and a mysoginst wouldn’t do that. he hasn’t done anything in the show that says he hates women, it’s simply his portrayal of them- and more specifically their bodies. that being said, I have a problem with the way he has his female characters look- of course the details and overall animation are amazing, and yes their bodies (especially boobs) are drool worthy, but he could definitely... tone it down a bit. in japan typically are skinny and have low body fat, but the more curvaceous aspect of Oda’s characters are pretty far-fetched. I get why he does it for the men watching, and while that does sound slightly misogynistic, mostly like a stereotypical misogynist, it isn’t- at most it’s sexist. I think that the way the characters look will cause a lot more body image issues in young girls (or just people in general) and that definitely isn’t his plan. it’s giving an unhealthy and unrealistic expectation of women, and maybe more specifically asian women. if he could simply make their boobs a little smaller and overall make their body shapes a little less “perfect” because seriously ALL of them have hourglass bodies except for a few of the villains. and honestly Oda, stop making the glow up so drastically!! Alvida, the large round women who Cody was sailing with when he met Luffy (the very first episodes for reference), was punched by Luffy and flew away, only to show up later and team up with Buggy but she had “glown up” because of Luffy’s punch- she lost all body fat and was left with an hourglass body shape and was then called one of the most beautiful woman in the sea. I mean COME ONE- a fucking punch, Oda?! more statistically speaking, Oda is making his characters follow the beauty standard, I realized this was accurate when Robin’s skin tone changed so drastically as well as Usopp’s, and really all of theirs did- we could have done without that. 

so back to the misogynistic aspect, Oda writes all of his character’s backstories the same, and they’re all awesome. also they typically all show power and fight, if he was a misogynist then I’m willing to bet we owuld get a lot more sorrow and weakness from the females, lots more battles fought exaggeratingly horrible and lost, or always being saved by the men (when in fact some of the men have been saved by the women). while we could do without so much “princess/female needs help saving kingdom/town/something” it’s not too bad. the fanservice is a bit extreme, I hate how they have to show so many bath scenes for the girls and how Nami usually has sideboob/boob in general showing, I find it kind of insulting myself but that’s only my self esteem issues- which I’m sure other people have and feel the same way, so you’re not alone if you do feel that way about it. and when Nami’s boobs tend to pop up from her top, I’m thinking of those scenes in the outfit she wore during the episodes she met Sanji’s brothers. and the fact that when she hugs people their faces go directly into her cleavage doesn’t need to be so drastically pointed out, we don’t need a close up or anything Oda but... thanks? 

one big thing that proves he’s not a misogynist is that a lot of high ranking characters are female; Portgas D. Rouge, Charlotte LinLin (Big Mom), Boa Hancock, Tashigi, Tsuru, Catarina Devon, Alvida, Jewelry Bonney, ect.

he also has a lot of powerful female characters that had large impacts on characters (ex. their mothers) such as: Kuina, Olvia Robin, Bell-mere, Nojiko, Toki, etc.

he also has a number of male characters that are extremely anti-misogynist like Sanji and Zoro as well as Luffy. while Sanji is slightly sexist, he shows no hate towards women, he literally worships them. Zoro and Luffy are much better example because they’re neither sexist or misogynist, neither have any problem fighting a woman. in fact Zoro hates that women are seen as weaker and his whole childhood ass well as life was impacted by Kuina who was trying to prove herself because she was a female and eveyone underestimated her and thought she couldn’t be/wasn’t a swordsman- Zoro expressed his anger at that because he doesn’t see why anyone would think that. and Luffy simply just couldn’t care less about what gender someone is.

so all in all, Oda is not a misogynist, his portrayal of female characters is sexist at most but he is no woman-hater.

[bigskydreaming]

Posting anon because I don't want to upset my friends who stan Tim, but that post about the roots of why Dick started going from fandoms golden boy to being actively disliked really hit home. Friends who I agree with on over 98% of other topics just can't let go of Dick giving Robin to Damian and then going on to commit an entire laundry list of other crimes against Tim, especially citing how he'd just lost his recently adopted new dad, Bruce, and turning it into a trauma olympics so that Tim wins and Dick fans sound like assholes for insisting Dick was hurting, as well. It feels like many of these fans only came into comics with or during the Nu52, and then went back to read the Red Robin series, after the fact, so many of them missed out on the Dick being a loving big brother phase, and they jumped straight into Dick being "mean" to Tim, Tim and Jason now as best buddies, Dick being absent in Bludhaven or Chicago, and Jason being there and now best friends with Dick's old friends and in the process saying that it's Dick's fault and what a poor friend or boyfriend he was to begin with.

Yeah, thing is, there’s always going to be a slight disconnect when it comes to reading the stories as they happen vs only coming across them years later and reading them in hindsight and a highly condensed form and time frame. BUT this fandom makes this particularly....exaggerated, as a phenomenon, by not just focusing on specific characters at the expense of others, but by not really putting any effort into at least knowing the CONTEXT of what’s going on with the other characters in the same family as the ones they’re focusing on.

Like, I’m VERY familiar with the hugely prevalent trend that is stories in the Battle for the Cowl era focusing on everything Tim had lost, and that’s why Dick not appreciating/respecting/understanding what Tim was going through at that time was such a huge offense (even though again, this is already blatant revisionist history as Dick very much DID care about what Tim was feeling and going through, just not in the specific way Tim wanted him to, ie total and unconditional acceptance of everything he said and believed, no matter what it might cost Dick to believe it only for it to turn out not to be true).

But I’m just saying, the reason this skewed perception of their respective losses, as though Dick didn’t also just lose his second father and thus know exactly how that felt.....like, the reason it bugs so much in particular is not just because I hate Trauma Olympics in general, but additionally.....when you’re familiar with the whole context and time frame of EVERYTHING that was going on at the time of those stories....things look very, very different.

To be perfectly clear, its not that Tim hadn’t suffered a huge series of losses, and everything he was feeling and how much he was reeling was valid. I’ve never once disputed that and I never will. Dude went through a lot, and that’s not in question. He had only lost his first father a couple years before this, as well as believing Steph was dead for most of it, and having lost Connor not long after Jack died.

BUT.

But but but but but.

The thing that is NEVER mentioned or acknowledged in ANY of these stories, the HUGE disconnect that is responsible for making it seem like Dick is so out of touch and just can’t fathom these kinds of losses himself....

Is the stuff with Jack, and Steph and Connor, all happened in a very specific time frame. It was a few years before BftC’s release in real world time, like, these events unfolded over the course of the first three or four years of the 2000s, and while comic book time is messy and inconsistent, it was always pretty clear that they all happened within a span of just a couple years.

But while comic book time is inconsistent and hard to pin down, its actually very easy to keep concurrent stories concurrent. Like its not always easy to say was there a year between this story and this other one, or was it two years or even five....but it IS easy to say, well however long these events took to unfold, we know these events in this story took place at the same time as these events over here in this other story, because they’re referencing these events in both stories and have characters crossing over.

Point being, no matter how long before Bruce’s believed death the losses of Jack Drake, Steph and Connor took place....AT THE EXACT SAME TIME.....

The Blockbuster story happened. And then the aftermath.

And I’m not just talking about Dick’s circus being burned down, or his apartment building targeted and blown up with everyone of his neighbors inside it, or the break-up of his relationship with Babs, and the rape by Tarantula....

I’m also talking about how seven months after that, in comic book time, and thus slightly after the deaths of Jack and Steph, and literally just issues before the loss of Connor.....Slade and the Society of Supervillains blew up Bludhaven.

So by all means, I’m down with stories focusing on how Bruce’s believed death impacted Tim because it compounded all the other losses he’d suffered in the years leading up to that. Anchors away with the angst there.

Its just really, REALLY annoying to see this hammered home repeatedly with the CORRELATING idea that Dick, by comparison, was just fiiiiiiiiiine, or at most was JUST struggling with Bruce’s death.

When by any viewing of comic book time, the context was very clear.....the long, extended and absolutely brutal string of losses Dick suffered during the Blockbuster story and its aftermath, that he was specifically targeted as an individual, to have those losses inflicted just to hurt him, to take away the things he cared about....his childhood home the circus, his current home and community he’d made for himself, and then literally the entire city he’d dedicated himself to protecting....

All of this, too, happened in the couple years before Battle for the Cowl, at the exact same times Tim was undergoing his own losses.

So the constant focus on everything Tim lost but JUST everything Tim lost, and using this to FORCE even more of a divide between Dick and Tim than the comics ever put in there, and all by emphasizing the idea that Dick just didn’t care about everything Tim was going through, he just didn’t UNDERSTAND what Tim had lost or what it was like to lose THAT much, THAT close together, in THAT short a span of time.....

I mean.

Just.

Lulz for days, y’know?

[thattimdrakeguy]

Hi! I've seen you say a couple of times you didn't like the Red Robin series from before Tim's writing got taken out back and shot, and since I agree with you on a lot of Tim-stuff but i really liked that run i was wondering why. And if you don't want to get into it that's totally fine, but is there any chance you could direct me to a post where you did discuss it? I just really like your perspective even when I don't agree so I'm curious why you disliked that series.

I have a really complicated view on the series because it’s not so much that I don’t like all of it, it’s just I don’t like where it was starting to go.

The first arc is enjoyable to read for me (mostly).

It plays like how Tim probably would in the nightmare-ish situation that he’s put into. He’s confused and conflicted the entire time, and doesn’t fully know what’s going on. He’s a bit more violent because he’s angry (Tim did have moments of anger even if people aren’t always aware of it), he’s in the shadows more. It just feels like Tim having a mental breakdown and dealing with his crap situation.

So overall that part of it is good to me even if I don’t like overly edgy stuff.

–

The scene were Tim becomes Red Robin is awful though, everyone’s out of character.

Tim wouldn’t punch Damian unless Damian attacked first, or he thought Damian was going to attack someone.

Dick wouldn’t just strip Tim of Robin without talking to him first about it. Dick knows Tim has depression, and Dick knows the pain of having Robin taken away from you.

and Damian seems completely uneffected by his dad (the only reason he’s really there) being killed, almost the point he seems happy about it because of how the artist draws him being sassy and smirky without a sense of deflection (him in general is out of character here).

It’s a really crappy scene to me. Just absolutely bad. It feels like it was written in 5 minutes because they realized they forgot about it. One of my least favorite scenes in any of those character’s history.

–

The reason why I don’t like it though, is more of how it seems to slightly turn after that first arc, after he beats Ra’s and what not. It feels like FabNic (who took over at that point), just did not care about Tim, and how the character is. It felt like he wanted to turn him into a Batman Jr type and not really write who Tim is.

I don’t feel like Tim would have a hit-list type deal, I don’t feel like he’d try to kill Boomerang, or I guess more accurately, do anything that in the long run would result in his death. Just the overall turn they make Tim take as a character feels more like they wanted him to be closer to an anti-hero or Batman than how he’d actually be.

Just the fact they tried to give him his own Catwoman makes it feel more like they wanted him to be more Batman Jr, then his own self.

He was offended when YJ implied he would ever have a way to figure out how to defeat them, and he cried when he thought Bruce killed someone.

You could say it was a matter of his negative character development, but if I’m remembering correctly there was a few moments before FabNic took over where Tim said he was getting better, and seemed to be wanting to improve even if he didn’t want to fully admit he needed to improve because he didn’t really like who he had to be during that first arc.

So for him to go on and do these gritty Batman-esque things and even full anti-hero things just feels very un-Tim. Even just Tim’s views on becoming like Batman, and how strong his will is shown to be to overcome situations a kid like him shouldn’t be able to overcome, makes it feel like doing that is at least a touch out of the way for him.

I don’t feel like Tim would do those things even at where he is in the Red Robin story, because Tim has felt guilty for feeling like he was responsible for someone losing their life because he wasn’t fast enough, even to the point of PTSD from feeling like he resulted in someone dying. I don’t feel like Tim could ever kill someone willingly like how they imply in the last issue of Red Robin. It could’ve been the worst note for the last hint of Pre-New 52 Tim for the time being to land on, because it didn’t set up who Tim was. It feels more like it was setting up how New 52 Tim was going to be.

Every time I get to that part of the series I feel like I’m reading stuff written by a guy who didn’t have an interest in Tim because he thought him being a geeky dweeb wasn’t cool or interesting, so he tried to take advantage of his gritty life during the first arc and before and turn him into someone that they personally liked.

There’s glimpses of Tim still there. There’s moments that feel like Tim, the inner monologue has dweebie comments that feel like Tim. Moments of softness that feel like Tim, and even what Tim was like during the first arc.

It’s just that other stuff there that feels almost like there was a editorial note to make him someone different than who he was. Like Tim didn’t matter, just what they wanted to have in a character.

Something about it just started to feel too disconnected from Tim to feel like the natural continuation of the character from that point.

Too much like a vague selfish desire was there to change what wasn’t broken.

Then it continued into the New 52 Tim where he was a borderline sociopath at some moments and didn’t feel like Tim at all.

To me the New 52 Tim was just exaggerating the stuff set up for a decent chunk of Red Robin to the point that Tim was almost completely unrecognizable as a character.

I guess in a way I’m trying to say it was starting to set-up that decade of bad Tim writing that’s still having trouble with getting better.

So many misinterpretations have came from Red Robin because the latter problem of it tries to hard to change him rather than show how he actually is. So people have this view of him as being a master-manipulator. Which admittedly has started before Red Robin, but really set into process after.

It started a process of Tim being unrecognizable in a way that’s still being felt today.

Other characters have changed but they still feel recognizable. During parts of Red Robin it feels like they didn’t want for him to be nearly as recognizable.

So I just have difficulty liking Red Robin because of it.

It gets put on a pedestal for being the best Tim series, but doesn’t do a good job of showing how the character is because eventually it gets so focused on changing him into something he’s not.

In a way it’s not so much the quality of the writing, it’s more of the ability for it to care about it’s main character, and I don’t feel like it cares about Tim.