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.
When did that happen?
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.
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.
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.
Holy fuck
Oh, it’s even worse in full context.
Bullshit. The full context makes it significantly better because it reveals that isn’t just some random homeless man.