Well Amazons Attack is over. What do you think???

[Manic]

A deadly what weapon?

 

[BrianWilly]

Bee.

Stygian killer hornets, technically.

But bees. My God.

To be fair, they factored more into the Wonder Woman portion of the story than the Amazons Attack portion.

Gimme a sec...

 

[BrianWilly]

Here we go.

 

[Manic]

They attacked with bees?! My God.

 

[BrianWilly]

Stygian Killer Hornets!

 

[Kitsune]

They attacked with bees?! My God.

Wasn't that an episode of Futurerama?

 

[Darthphere]

Bee.

Stygian killer hornets, technically.

But bees. My God.

To be fair, they factored more into the Wonder Woman portion of the story than the Amazons Attack portion.

Gimme a sec...

Here we go.

[YT]e6i2WRreARo[/YT]

 

[Tropico]

You're right. Why are you always right?

Always? Nah, probably like 45% of the time or something like that. Except answering questions in the "Stupid" sticky threads where I try to be a 100% right since people are really asking for info.

I don't think Aristotle and you were going to reach a middle ground any time soon, especially since Civil War crept into the argument. You were (are?) always pro-registration and it's obvious that Aristotle is against it. He has said that he has a bias in favor of DC and although I think you're pretty even when it comes to both companies, you were favoring Marvel. You both had your own bias in regards to the subject at hand and then Civil War crept into the mix which made it worse. Again, I feel that arguing this much over this mini is a HUGE waste.

Aristotle, you're entitled to your opinion; but even you consider it to be sub-par work. Saying that the negative commentary might be due to writer hate is mistaken, many of the posters that mentioned the writer said that it was strange that this was his work and that it was probably a corporate/editorial order that was responsible for his poor showing. Many people here have viciously bashed Marvel for things DC has done before and not commented when DC does it so it's not like people are out to get DC or are harder on DC than Marvel.

 

[TheCorpulent1]

[YT]e6i2WRreARo[/YT]

What. The. ****.

 

[Aristotle]

Did you read this story? It's revealed in issue five that the Banas were working with Hippolyta and the Amazons all along.

Yeah, but I don't think it's made clear whether everything the Bana did was well-known to the Amazons. Hippolyta may have been giving orders or whatnot, but there's no indication that the Amazons were aware of everything that the Bana were doing. Besides, can the Amazons be held responsible for the actions of their leader, and of a different branch of their military force?

It makes no difference who ordered it; if there's an innocent child in front of you and your sword is the one that cut its throat, then you are to blame. You get no sympathy. You get no excuse. Law and order and judgment do not function that way.

No excuse, of course not. But it is PLAUSIBLE. Did you even read the passage of mine that you quoted? It begins with my saying "I'm not excusing them at all." My point on this has been that it is plausible, and not misogynistic in the least, because the American soldiers behaved just as badly.

We're not talking about enemies in the field. We're not talking about terrorist actions. We're not even talking about prisoners of war.

Prisoners of war? The prisoners the American soldiers were guarding were detained for the biological fact of their gender and tenuous associations with the Amazons. Curtailing freedom on a mass level is as evil and dangerous an action as is the murder of civilians. It may not be the same, but it is not to be tolerated, and it is a moral outrage. The American soldiers can be seen no more favorably than can the Amazons.

I have no idea what you're trying to say here.

Clearly, you do.

Please don't tell me you just compared Amazons Attack to the Bible.

No, to Milton's Paradise Lost.

Just because the literary archetypal plotline exists in other stories doesn't mean that it exists here or that, even if it does exist here, that it's accomplished with any skill whatsoever.

The skill of the writing has never been my point. Or hadn't you noticed that I called the mini "sub-mediocre"?

So...the Amazons fall from grace, mirroring falls from grace in other stories. So? It's still stupid and it's still done without any tact to speak of.

Then let that be your argument! But don't attack AA on grounds of implausibility! The corruption of a perfect being is not without precedent in literature!

By your own admission you're stretching the hell out of these points.

I admitted that about one point, the least important one.

What does this have to do with anything at all? People act stupid in real life, so it's okay for them to act stupid in Amazons Attack?

Yeah, that's exactly my point.

Except that you specifically say it doesn't make any of it right, so I don't even understand why you're bringing this up.

It's not morally right. Whether the evil is committed in reality, or in fiction, the perpetrator is committing an act not morally right. But that's no reason to keep it out of a story. If we kept all morally wrong actions out of comic books, there would be no bad guys.

The worst that the American government did here was to round up innocent women suspected of having a connection to the Amazons and incarcerate them in temporary prisons. And then they realized they were being stupid, and then let them go. All this is bad, and unconstitutional, and unwarranted, but guess what? It's several times less atrocious than bombing those women and then slicing their throats.

Sorry, but I don't devalue freedom as you do. Without freedom, life is meaningless. You're one of these people that agreed with Tony in Civil War, aren't you?

Tony Stark was a manipulative *****e before who saw things mechanically and "For the greater good" as if he's running the world like a corporation; now he's a manipulative *****e who saw things mechanically and "For the greater good" as if he's running the world like a corporation.

Also, he's participated in the murder of his friends, he's unleashed dangerous superhumans on the world, and he has fostered circumstances conducive to the assassination of the Marvel U.'s greatest hero.

Explain this, because you're going to have to do a little better than "it's just not." Why is it not misogynistic to turn an entire race of warrior women -- who have been portrayed in nearly the entirety of their existence as wise, compassionate, good, and fair -- into bloodthirsty warmongers who slaughter innocents for absolutely no reason and spout psychotic exposition at every turn.

I can see the decision to do that as possibly having implications in gender politics, and possibly fostering subconscious sexism. But misogyny is the HATRED of women. It is like misanthropy, but for women. That is a conscious thing. I really don't see how this decision can be misogynistic.

That was then. And now? Isn't this just every ranting misogynist's wet dream come true? "HA! I knew it! Those damned feminists pretended to be good and understanding and peaceful, but what they actually want to do all the time is kill men and act crazy because they're WOMEN and all women, especially the feminists, are just crazy senseless manhaters who hate penis and men and want to destroy all our good old-fashioned AMERICAN values."

Perhaps that will be explored in the Wonder Woman title. I would certainly hope so.

That's

the message the Amazons Attack delivered from day one. And it is as offensive and tactless now as it was then.

Again, then: if that's what you feel, let the misogyny and sexism you perceive be your attack. But don't **** around with things like "implausibility" and the way the Amazons were portrayed. You're talking about a much larger-level issue than Amazons burning Kansas and killing kids, or about whether this is consistent with Hippolyta's past portrayals.

 

[Aristotle]

They killed innocent people. They killed children. They could have said no, and they didn't. They are responsible for their actions.

Quite so. But their actions are also very understandable.

What the Amazons did was ten times worse than anything Tony did, and they're victims of mob mentality, while he's evil?

They're victims of mob mentality because there was a mob of them. There was only one Tony. He did that all himself. Furthermore, while the Zons may have been more overtly destructive, what Tony set in motion will, if there's any realism in the Marvel U., be the final undoing of the American experiment. He has, in a huge way, undermined the basic principles of what the USA is supposed to stand for.

He was trying to keep people safe. He was honestly trying to do the right thing. He's an arrogant, stubborn prick who should have handled the situation completely differently and has a lot to make up for, but he's not evil.

He can't make up for what he did, because it was not to do the right thing. All the public hand-wringing, all the furrowed brows for the benefit of Spider-Man in private, none of that changes the fact that what he did, he did to save face and burnish a public image and get more control over things. It took hell and high water to get Tony to put down the BOTTLE for Chrissake, but all it takes to get Tony to murder his friends is some ****head at a funeral with a hanky who doesn't understand how the world works? Right. We've seen superheroes in many universes withstand attempts to mind-control them into murdering their friends, but all it takes for Tony Stark is a superhuman-related accident that wasn't even the fault of a hero? Right. No, this guy wasn't trying to keep anyone safe. What he did, he did for Tony Stark.

 

[Manic]

I hardly see the relevance of discussing the actions of Iron Man and Hippolyta. They were clearly replaced by a Skrull and White Martian, respectively.

 

[Kitsune]

I hardly see the relevance of discussing the actions of Iron Man and Hippolyta. They were clearly replaced by a Skrull and White Martian, respectively.

Or maybe it's the other way around, and this is just a prelude to the next big DC/Marvel crossover event.

 

[TheCorpulent1]

That would actually be kind of cool. Too bad Marvel's outselling DC too much for any good will to be left between the two.

 

[fifthfiend]

Is it because it's easy to argue with a mini called "Amazons Attack"? Is it because everyone hates Pfeiffer? I don't know.

You seem to have this continual need to attribute all opinions contrary to your own, to some deep-seated need of the opposing party to find some, any excuse to hate whichever given writer or comics company for some reason completely irrespective of the actual work said writer or company produced. It's happened in a lot of threads now and it's really kind of weird.

I mean I don't know what reason you would think so many people have for hating Pfeiffer that is somehow utterly disconnected from, you know, the comic books that he writes. Did you think Pfeiffer maybe somehow went to all of our grade schools, where we've harbored a lifelong grudge against him ever since he beat us out for the lead role in the school play? Was Pfeiffer perhaps the jerk boyfriend of the girl who would never date us, because she thought of us as "just friends"? I mean, what?

 

[TheCorpulent1]

I never tried out for any school plays, so apparently I can't hate Pfeiffer.

 

[fifthfiend]

You hate him because he was the best at everything in gym class and he used to tease you for being the fat kid. He used to call you "Ho-Ho Face" and "Fatty-Fats the Fatty" and then one time he stole a pair of your underwear and hoisted them up on the school flagpole, so everyone could see how big your underwear had to be to fit your fat ass.

 

[TheCorpulent1]

Wow. Pfeiffer wasn't too creative as a kid, huh?

Also, I didn't really get fat until 5th grade. I was skinny as a rail before then.

 

[Manic]

You hate him because he was the best at everything in gym class and he used to tease you for being the fat kid. He used to call you "Ho-Ho Face" and "Fatty-Fats the Fatty" and then one time he stole a pair of your underwear and hoisted them up on the school flagpole, so everyone could see how big your underwear had to be to fit your fat butt.

His momma!

 

[fifthfiend]

Wow. Pfeiffer wasn't too creative as a kid, huh?

Well, he did grow up to write Amazons Attack.

 

[TheCorpulent1]

Well, he did grow up to write Amazons Attack.

Touché.

 

[mybotisgone]

Hey, if racial profiling is OK and dandy, why the hell not gender profiling? It operates on the same principle. And while I find both ideas repulsive and disgusting, it's clear that "repulsive and disgusting" has been a goal of the United States government since the birth of the nation. And, in all fairness, a goal of the people too. You can't rightly disagree with such policies if you keep voting for the people who dream them up. As for the soldiers: what soldier would follow a shoot-to-kill order against unarmed protestors? What soldier would follow an order to massacre a village? What soldier would follow an order to bomb civilians? I know I run the risk of derailing the thread, which I said I didn't want to do...but these examples are serving to demonstrate my point. Soldiers do as they are told, and militaries wouldn't work if this wasn't the case.

SO??? is someone told a soldier to kill his whole family then he'll do it with out question?

What. The. ****.

maybe this will help.t:

Did you think Pfeiffer maybe somehow went to all of our grade schools, where we've harbored a lifelong grudge against him ever since he beat us out for the lead role in the school play? Was Pfeiffer perhaps the jerk boyfriend of the girl who would never date us, because she thought of us as "just friends"? I mean, what?

Well when I look at his bio on Wikipedia it says that he was a newspaper editor.t:

 

[Kitsune]

They attacked with bees?! My God.

That's gonna sting.\

 

[Fledermaus]

 

[Manic]

I wonder if the amazons raped any men during their pillaging. Would be interesting to see about a dozen pregnant amazons in the near future.