|
|
Post by dupersuper on Mar 18, 2015 19:33:42 GMT -5
I think WRONG beliefs (the Klan is a great example), are different from what Dixon is likely talking about. Say he's pro-life, pro-tax cuts, and pro-Iraq war. None of those are WRONG, but he's probably right that he would get hammered by a large percentage of left-leaning comic fans. the highlighted isn't morally wrong, but the Republican model of this ("trickle down") has been about as close to proven wrong as an economic theory can get. |
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Mar 18, 2015 19:49:48 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on Mar 18, 2015 20:19:08 GMT -5
I might have a little bit more time for these people if they had a clue what they were talking about:  |
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Mar 18, 2015 20:28:05 GMT -5
I might have a little bit more time for these people if they had a clue what they were talking about: None of that is anywhere near the same as what was not only done to Babs, but continually mentioned since it happened. To go back to your Jim Gordon point, I say this, yes that is every bit as repugnant as what was done to Babs...but was that moment allowed to define him? Did we see an image of Jim stripped down and lead around in bondage gear every time he faced the Joker? The answer is no. Heck, it's a small sample size I know, but judging from the reactions here most didn't even recall that Jim had been assualted. The same can't be said for babs and that is why the continued references to that dark point are so troubling for many. |
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on Mar 18, 2015 20:33:46 GMT -5
Heck, it's a small sample size I know, but judging from the reactions here most didn't even recall that Jim had been assaulted. That's evidence of another issue of concern: when something happens to a woman it matters, but when something happens to a man it is blown off or doesn't even register. |
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Mar 18, 2015 20:45:57 GMT -5
Heck, it's a small sample size I know, but judging from the reactions here most didn't even recall that Jim had been assaulted. That's evidence of another issue of concern: when something happens to a woman it matters, but when something happens to a man it is blown off or doesn't even register. That doesn't seem to be it at all, because as I said one was repeatedly referred to over the years and the other had zero impact on the character what so ever and was never showed again. There for it doesn't register because of some bias but rather simply because of the way the human brain stores and processes memory, repeated instances are remembered while singular instances(barring some related life altering event) are cycled out. |
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on Mar 18, 2015 20:53:37 GMT -5
That doesn't seem to be it at all, because as I said one was repeatedly referred to over the years and the other had zero impact on the character what so ever and was never showed again. There for it doesn't register because of some bias but rather simply because of the way the human brain stores and processes memory, repeated instances are remembered while singular instances(barring some related life altering event) are cycled out. That might be part of it, but I don't think it's the whole story. The comic is a perennial bestseller, and presumably people have read it more than once. So why would they only remember one scene? |
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Mar 18, 2015 20:56:40 GMT -5
That doesn't seem to be it at all, because as I said one was repeatedly referred to over the years and the other had zero impact on the character what so ever and was never showed again. There for it doesn't register because of some bias but rather simply because of the way the human brain stores and processes memory, repeated instances are remembered while singular instances(barring some related life altering event) are cycled out. That might be part of it, but I don't think it's the whole story. The comic is a perennial bestseller, and presumably people have read it more than once. So why would they only remember one scene? Because that one scene has been continually reinforced and allowed to define a character in a way that isn't true for Gordon. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,862
|
Post by shaxper on Mar 18, 2015 20:57:06 GMT -5
As I recall, the ultimate focus of Jim Gordon's torture by the Joker was his being forced to witness what the Joker did to his daughter, even in spite of being stripped down and poked and prodded, which (by the way) strongly implied that what the Joker did to Barbara went far beyond merely stripping her down in a comparable fashion, so the central violation was always of Barbara. That was the part Jim held onto afterward pretty much every time the instance ever came up. It was never about what was done to him, either in his mind or the Joker's. Barbara was the true victim.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2015 21:21:16 GMT -5
I think WRONG beliefs (the Klan is a great example), are different from what Dixon is likely talking about. Say he's pro-life, pro-tax cuts, and pro-Iraq war. None of those are WRONG, but he's probably right that he would get hammered by a large percentage of left-leaning comic fans. him celebrating gay marriage being overturned in California is not a hypothetical. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2015 22:03:37 GMT -5
That doesn't seem to be it at all, because as I said one was repeatedly referred to over the years and the other had zero impact on the character what so ever and was never showed again. There for it doesn't register because of some bias but rather simply because of the way the human brain stores and processes memory, repeated instances are remembered while singular instances(barring some related life altering event) are cycled out. That might be part of it, but I don't think it's the whole story. The comic is a perennial bestseller, and presumably people have read it more than once. So why would they only remember one scene? because Commissioner Gordon hasn't been rolling around in a wheelchair for 25 years |
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Mar 18, 2015 22:14:51 GMT -5
I think WRONG beliefs (the Klan is a great example), are different from what Dixon is likely talking about. Say he's pro-life, pro-tax cuts, and pro-Iraq war. None of those are WRONG, but he's probably right that he would get hammered by a large percentage of left-leaning comic fans. him celebrating gay marriage being overturned in California is not a hypothetical. And by "hammered" by the left, I assume that means he would be criticized. Or somebody might call him a homophobe!
How dare they!
|
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Mar 18, 2015 22:21:29 GMT -5
I think WRONG beliefs (the Klan is a great example), are different from what Dixon is likely talking about. Say he's pro-life, pro-tax cuts, and pro-Iraq war. None of those are WRONG, but he's probably right that he would get hammered by a large percentage of left-leaning comic fans. the highlighted isn't morally wrong, but the Republican model of this ("trickle down") has been about as close to proven wrong as an economic theory can get. I agree (at least, they way the republicans do it... theorically it can work).. it doesn't make you a bad guy if you think it does, though. It probably makes you either a rich guy or extremely naive. @ Dupont: marriage rights is a tough one. While it's certainly an indication of being a bigot (which most certainly is one of those things that is WRONG), it's not necessarily so... I wouldn't judge JUST on that fact alone. |
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Mar 18, 2015 23:11:48 GMT -5
"I'm not a bigot, but I think it should be illegal for homosexuals to get married because ..."
I can think of several ways to finish that sentence but I can't think of a way to finish it that is consistent with the opening clause. Unless we're working with a definition of "bigot" that allows a special exemption for the "religious."
|
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Mar 18, 2015 23:32:44 GMT -5
Heck, it's a small sample size I know, but judging from the reactions here most didn't even recall that Jim had been assaulted. That's evidence of another issue of concern: when something happens to a woman it matters, but when something happens to a man it is blown off or doesn't even register. As a man, I'm absolutely fine with this.
I think that, on average, men threatening women with physical violence should be viewed much more harshly than a woman threatening me.
There are a few things, like custody battles which Slam mentions, where society really is unfair to men.
But I'm larger, stronger, and harder to physically dominate than the huge majority of women, and I'm a big 'ol wuss. My earning potential for the same work is greater, and my chances of obtaining a really high level position in government or industry is exponentially greater. I'm judged much less harshly for my appearance, especially since I'm a fat sack of crap who can barely dress himself. I don't have to worry about getting raped - at least this isn't a day to day concern of mine. I'm never expected to wear high heels, and I'm not expected to go through the bizarre scarification rituals to symbolize my entry into womanhood. (I do not understand ear piercing. I just DO NOT.) Also, I can't have kids which is fine because that #$%^ looks like it hurts. And if I do have kids I can kind of half-ass the child rearing and make the woman do all the work and that is perfectly socially acceptable.
Being a dude in America seems less annoying, more financially rewarding, and less generally nerve-wracking. The teeny little price I pay for these advantages is that I don't get to whine about being a victim. That is way more than fair! Yay!
|
|
