• @DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    0
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    I feel like that is a comic nerd specific context.

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

      • @DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        0
        edit-2
        8 months ago

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

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

        • @doctortran@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          0
          edit-2
          8 months ago

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

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

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

          • @DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            1
            edit-2
            8 months ago

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

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

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

            Nice “real context,” simp.