Batman vs Batwoman

  • 122 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
#51 Posted by V_Scarlotte_Rose (6532 posts) - - Show Bio

@durakken said:

@v_scarlotte_rose: underdog stories are almost never underdog stories when you look at the story. There is perceived underdogs that aren't really and those who are actually underdogs. Batwoman has literally no real chance to beat Batman on any level. Every stat that you can think to compare the two, Batman is superior. For it to be realistic for Batwoman to beat Batman it would require that she have something over him. She doesn't so she can't.

Stats might not be the only factor though. There's advantages either of them could have in the location they're in, clever use of gadgets, etc

Why would that be a thing? Perhaps you aren't aware of the world you are in, but showing women as inferior in any way generally leads to claims of misogyny, same with violence, same with many other things... It's not called out directly all the time, but the more in there the more likely it will be called out, no matter how much it isn't. This is the type of thinking that a lot of publishers, editors, and writers have and they think it will sell well so they do it.

I suppose some people might call it misogynistic if Batman wins, but I don't know if that would be fair, seeing as there's this notion of "Batman beats everyone".

It casts men as incompetent because it shows a man who has no way of actually being beat by this particular woman being beat by them. The only reasoning thus becomes "won because female" I'm not saying that her beating him under any circumstance would be misandrist... just just about anything they are likely going to write. And keep in mind I'm not saying this because of one incident of this type of stuff. It's all over the place, but people ignore it. They're blind to it because for them it's normal and when something is normal you stop seeing it.

Without knowing the circumstances of the fight, we don't actually know if she has no way of beating him.

Yes there are examples of both, without going through the issues just consider, that Kate's GF whom I always forget her name. When she was introduced she was Metropolis Commissioner... she was then reduced to Captain when she moved to Gotham... That makes sense. She was reduced to Lieutenant with Flashpoint... no reason for this. I would classify this as at least one instance of misogyny. Not extreme mind you but it's there.

Maggie Sawyer is her name. I don't think I could call this misogyny, as there isn't a clear indication that a demotion is anything to do with her sex/gender. Or is there?

On the other side, just count how many men who are not villains, enemies, portrayed well, etc. And I would guess there are probably less than 20 males in general in all 22 issues. This is not true when you look at male solo titles. You may think of excuses for it, but without getting into a more in depth talk and open analysis could one really say.


There aren't really many women who are portrayed well either though. Apart from Batwoman herself there's pretty much just Flamebird/Hawkfire, Maggie and Wonder Woman. Jacob is shown to be kind of flawed, but with her best interests at heart, and particularly supportive of Bette. Abbot was shown as a good guy, even sacrificing himself in the fight to save Gotham. And just last issue there's the Murder Of Crows who trained Batwoman, and now Hawkfire.

Plus, Killer Croc had a whole issue dedicated to him, and showed him to be a deep character, even doing some good in the end to protect the people he cares about. Even Mr. Freeze was shown as protecting Gotham.

And if the series was really so anti-men, wouldn't more of the villains be men?

I don't think the creators are misogynists/misandrists, but there is a lot of normalacy of this stuff and there is an apparent concerted effort to appeal to feminists and their accusations that is quite apparent with at least a few titles.

Feminism is about equality, so is there really a problem in a title appealing to feminists? And considering the lower number of female solo titles, and often less representation on teams, is it such a bad thing for a few titles to represent women well?

If you want more concrete examples I'd suggest instead of listening to me, simply look at the comics... or really anything around you... and think about what this stuff is saying about these genders from the presented information, both within that story and within the overall universe.

#52 Posted by FadeToBlackBolt (23238 posts) - - Show Bio

She'll win. Comic books love their double-standards, and a female hero beating the crap out of a male hero that she would get destroyed by is somehow empowering.

Reverse the roles and the male is going for a Heel-turn.

#53 Posted by Dernman (15690 posts) - - Show Bio

She cant beat him in a fight,straight up,prep or otherwise if he's giving his best too. I guess she could pull out some lame plot device like she did with Bane,OMG cord of doom.

She can win with a lot of one sided prep and back up though,I'm hoping that's what happens.

I'm not the biggest Bane fan but that was some bull right there.

#54 Posted by SupBatz (1848 posts) - - Show Bio

One. Kate is tougher than anyone's giving her credit for. The (second) zero issue of the current series demonstrates the extent of her training. She has tons of DEO tech. Batman is off his game at the moment. She has the element of surprise and time to prepare for the conflict. And she undoubtedly has Bette by her side, should she want her help.

Also, I see absolutely no reason why Kate is the weakest (or second weakest for that matter) member of the Bat-Family. She's proven herself plenty of times. And while she might not be able to take down Batman in a straight fight, I see absolutely no reason why she wouldn't pose as much of a threat, if not more, than any other member of the family.

Also, people getting bent out of shape because she took down Bane is ridiculous. She knew what she was going up against: amazing strength. So she prepared with a cable that would use Bane's own strength to contain him. You can call that "plot device rope" or you can call that legitimate planning and using her enemy's greatest asset against him. If Batman had done the same, I doubt we'd see as much whining about it.

#55 Posted by entropy_aegis (15437 posts) - - Show Bio

@supbatz said:

One. Kate is tougher than anyone's giving her credit for. The (second) zero issue of the current series demonstrates the extent of her training. She has tons of DEO tech. Batman is off his game at the moment. She has the element of surprise and time to prepare for the conflict. And she undoubtedly has Bette by her side, should she want her help.

Also, I see absolutely no reason why Kate is the weakest (or second weakest for that matter) member of the Bat-Family. She's proven herself plenty of times. And while she might not be able to take down Batman in a straight fight, I see absolutely no reason why she wouldn't pose as much of a threat, if not more, than any other member of the family.

Also, people getting bent out of shape because she took down Bane is ridiculous. She knew what she was going up against: amazing strength. So she prepared with a cable that would use Bane's own strength to contain him. You can call that "plot device rope" or you can call that legitimate planning and using her enemy's greatest asset against him. If Batman had done the same, I doubt we'd see as much whining about it.

Fair enough but if Batman had taken down Bane similarly then I'm sure we'd have scoffed at it as well. I see no reason why Bane shouldn't have caught the rope mid air and then chucked it right back at her.

#56 Posted by Durakken (1591 posts) - - Show Bio

@v_scarlotte_rose:

Stats might not be the only factor though. There's advantages either of them could have in the location they're in, clever use of gadgets, etc

I'm not talking about just physical stats. I'm talking about his tech, his preparedness, his paranoia, his physical abilities, etc Anything you can compare, he has her beat.

I suppose some people might call it misogynistic if Batman wins, but I don't know if that would be fair, seeing as there's this notion of "Batman beats everyone".

Trust me, they'd have that. I'm not 100% confident in this. I can only think of a few times that I have seen a woman full out blasted by a man, often times when they do the woman is shown to be victorious, but more often than not when there is a fight there is almost always a buffer zone of some sort. Minions, weapons, or "equal men" that take the hit and then somehow the woman is captured or just gives up. This type of stuff is hateful to both sides. It's not right for Ivy, Harley, Selina to always be portrayed as ultimately reasonable and give themselves up... where as I'm pretty sure you'd be hard pressed to see a fight between Batman and his male villains end with anything but a fight...which by the way, if you think about it, it's sickening. Almost all of the male villains are no where near as strong, fit, fighters, etc as the female villains. Out of the 30 some villains I can think of, there is like 4 or 5 strong males, followed by all the female characters and then all the rest of the males in terms of strength.

Without knowing the circumstances of the fight, we don't actually know if she has no way of beating him.

At best, she is as strong as a Year 1 Robin with a few interesting toys that wouldn't work against Batman, that I can think of, even if you surprised him with it and it hit him 100%, everything she has, they'd be ineffective. There might be something she could do, but I doubt the creative team would ever be able to pull something off that would work.

Maggie Sawyer is her name. I don't think I could call this misogyny, as there isn't a clear indication that a demotion is anything to do with her sex/gender. Or is there?

There is no reason to do it. That is the thing. You should never make those types of changes without a significant reason for doing it. Their thinking is likely, "well she's younger so she wouldn't be that rank any more", ok but then she also wouldn't be in Gotham and that eradicates her character in general and all you are doing is using a lose template (this is a problem throughout the new52) of the character and not the actual character...and then you have to turn to why did her and Renee break up? Why make that change? And then you get "Well she's no longer The Question so the story is different" ok...so what? No matter what you are changing the story, why not implement it in the least depowering way? And that leads to thoughts like maybe the reason they did that is that 3 gay character might be a problem and we want to use Maggie as the police contact since she's female so we have to throw out Renee. So the chain of trying to figure out why they'd make these changes ends with the thoughts that the creative team is likely homophobic and sexist... which is weird considering the content.

In the end the fact is, there is no reason for the demotion, so we have to look at what's left if not for legitimate story reasons and it ends up being sexist/homophobia. Of course there is always the possibility of just an incredible level of stupidity, but Maggie is one of those important unimportant characters that most people probably don't know much about and so decisions involving her likely has to be discussed by the higher ups but in broad terms and I'd bet that the thinking ended up being something close to what my line of reasoning was and it ends up being about her being female and gay unfortunately rather than anything about her actual character.

There aren't really many women who are portrayed well either though. Apart from Batwoman herself there's pretty much just Flamebird/Hawkfire, Maggie and Wonder Woman. Jacob is shown to be kind of flawed, but with her best interests at heart, and particularly supportive of Bette. Abbot was shown as a good guy, even sacrificing himself in the fight to save Gotham. And just last issue there's the Murder Of Crows who trained Batwoman, and now Hawkfire.

Plus, Killer Croc had a whole issue dedicated to him, and showed him to be a deep character, even doing some good in the end to protect the people he cares about. Even Mr. Freeze was shown as protecting Gotham.

And if the series was really so anti-men, wouldn't more of the villains be men?

Jacob = is chastized early about his financial position within the family, Abbot = villain and dogmatic, croc = villain and very broken, Freeze = villain and crazy, Murder of Crows... there are so many problems with that scene, but that entire scene is pretty much "we're all big strong skilled men and even though she appears to do everything wrong, looks week, and all these other negative things, she bested us so she must be awesome" Taken into context with everything we know it's insulting. She was a hero for longer than Kate and got nearly killed because she was "incompetent" and then even that is the case she still somehow is better than these 6 men? one of which is training his daughter to be a criminal and "can't stop telling dirty jokes" and one who has anger issues...not to mention the incompetency they are showing in the panels and what they are saying... yeah >.> I know it sounds like I'm nit picking but I'm really just thinking it through and wondering why these guys are being portrayed in x way vs these other characters. It's hard to say whether these guys are just bad at what they're paid to do or have a whole bunch of views that are stereotypical which have these horrible assumptions about everyone. To me this looks more like a series of "Black people like chicken and watermelon" type stuff one after another and I'd be just as angry if I saw those as I am when I see it when they're done with men and women.

Feminism is about equality, so is there really a problem in a title appealing to feminists?

I know that is the general lie that is told, but people who think that are wrong. Feminism is not about equality. Feminism is about women's rights. From there, there are different sects that claim that they are about equality. And I say claim, because I've never met a feminist that acts in accordance with promoting equality. They'll say they do, but when you look at their actions they aren't. Even if we strip them down to the base and they were, like MRAs (Mens Rights Activists) generally are, there are still 2 problems with both groups. Within the 2 viewpoints the argument is that all men/women are more priveleged/oppressed in all areas. This is idiotic to even suggest and there is no point to talk to anyone that believes this schlock. Luckily...most people don't, but they still subscribe to an ideology that does have that inherently in their definition. The 2nd problem is similar to the first. It's that no matter how well intentioned a person might be while maintaining these ideologies/viewpoints they are trying to solve issues that are either a) inherently unsolvable or b) only solvable by taking into account both groups honestly and formulating solutions, but both groups are inherently opposed to this by definition.

Some try to argue this is just a sub sect of humanism and to some degree that is right, but it's a bastardized incorrect form, that is largely dishonest which is generally cause by feminist propaganda and MRA reactionary speaking points. I'm personally moving beyond Humanism, because humanism doesn't seem correct to me when you take into account the reasoning capabilities of humans vs other humans and thinking about non-human animals mental capabilities vs humans, the prospect of aliens, and thinking about ethics, but that's probably a much longer deeper philosophical debate that very few people will likely to have for the next 30 some years.

And considering the lower number of female solo titles, and often less representation on teams, is it such a bad thing for a few titles to represent women well?

Here's the thing... They don't show women well.

Batgirl = Based on the worst depiction of the character and continues the worst part of that depiction.

Birds of Prey = I haven't read much of, but I don't think boring is representing women well...especially not when 3 of the women characters on there that I know of are villainous, crazy, broken in some way

Catwoman = Kleptomaniac Psycho thief with anger issues that has a fixation on shiny things and has other major emotional issues.

Katana = Crazy mercenary with a romantic relationship with her sword

Supergirl = Incompetent lost child even though she is technically adult and has a major problem accept reality.

Wonder Woman = I haven't read it past the 3rd issue... From what I read it wasn't about her and it was inferior to all her other appearances...

World's Finest = There is so much wrong with this title

Batwoman = I find it generally disrespectful to DC, it legacy, and to be poorly written, and bad art for a comic (it's not bad art, just wrong for a comic)

Voodoo = Awesomely strong female character who is comfortable with her sexuality and treats people as people while comfortably dealing with a pretty cool issue... oh wait... it was canceled v.v

I agree that there needs to be more female solo titles. I agree that there needs to be more female representation, and I think they are letting a lot of their best characters go to waste as most of their best characters in my estimation are in limbo or not being used to their maximum ability. The fact is that if you look at the sales charts the way that they flow is pretty much Triple A character titles first 20ish titles, All the women titles are between 20 and 40. (all but 2 are above 35) and then the rest. I think they should be putting out more female titles, but DC is bad at business it appear so meh.

#57 Edited by DeathpooltheT1000 (12509 posts) - - Show Bio

This would be my reaction.

#58 Edited by Breadspread (774 posts) - - Show Bio

If she does beat him this thread is going to be the place to be! Can't wait to see what happens!

A good writer can make anything happen.

#59 Posted by SoftMachineOo (140 posts) - - Show Bio

10 actually, because it would feel like they just want to make Batwoman look good...

#60 Posted by TDK_1997 (15064 posts) - - Show Bio

She would win and I know it and that is why I won't get mad because I know it's going to happen even if I don't want to.

#61 Posted by karenlover (41 posts) - - Show Bio

its ok if someone like shiva beat him but even with prep she should not be able to take down the batman.

#62 Posted by Black_Arrow (3941 posts) - - Show Bio

She is going to beat him with the power of bad writing. Seriously the writer didnt knew anything about Bane. Bane would have beaten her without much difficulty.

#63 Posted by V_Scarlotte_Rose (6532 posts) - - Show Bio

She is going to beat him with the power of bad writing. Seriously the writer didnt knew anything about Bane. Bane would have beaten her without much difficulty.

Are you blaming the editor too?

Because it's the same editor on all of the Batman group of titles, and Bane has appeared in other New 52 issues, and he obviously approved this story.

#64 Posted by Black_Arrow (3941 posts) - - Show Bio

@black_arrow said:

She is going to beat him with the power of bad writing. Seriously the writer didnt knew anything about Bane. Bane would have beaten her without much difficulty.

Are you blaming the editor too?

Because it's the same editor on all of the Batman group of titles, and Bane has appeared in other New 52 issues, and he obviously approved this story.

yeah I blame the editor too. He should read more bane, and he is the one who make bane use venom again

#65 Posted by SupBatz (1848 posts) - - Show Bio

@supbatz said:

One. Kate is tougher than anyone's giving her credit for. The (second) zero issue of the current series demonstrates the extent of her training. She has tons of DEO tech. Batman is off his game at the moment. She has the element of surprise and time to prepare for the conflict. And she undoubtedly has Bette by her side, should she want her help.

Also, I see absolutely no reason why Kate is the weakest (or second weakest for that matter) member of the Bat-Family. She's proven herself plenty of times. And while she might not be able to take down Batman in a straight fight, I see absolutely no reason why she wouldn't pose as much of a threat, if not more, than any other member of the family.

Also, people getting bent out of shape because she took down Bane is ridiculous. She knew what she was going up against: amazing strength. So she prepared with a cable that would use Bane's own strength to contain him. You can call that "plot device rope" or you can call that legitimate planning and using her enemy's greatest asset against him. If Batman had done the same, I doubt we'd see as much whining about it.

Fair enough but if Batman had taken down Bane similarly then I'm sure we'd have scoffed at it as well. I see no reason why Bane shouldn't have caught the rope mid air and then chucked it right back at her.

Okay, fair enough. Bane is supposed to be a major baddie so I can see him possibly catching the rope before it got to him. But I still don't think it's enough reason to belly-ache over Bane's depiction (for the above mentioned reasons). His appearance was little more than a glorified cameo and shouldn't elicit as much hate as it has been.

Batman may be a different story. But as I said before, she has surprise, prep, DEO tech, Batman off his game, and her own impressive and judging by a lot of the comments on this thread, underappreciated, training and combat skills on her side. I don't expect her to take down Batman. I expect a stereotypical battle ended without a victor. But I think that that would be more than fair when the situation is considered.

#66 Posted by V_Scarlotte_Rose (6532 posts) - - Show Bio

@supbatz said:

@entropy_aegis said:

@supbatz said:

One. Kate is tougher than anyone's giving her credit for. The (second) zero issue of the current series demonstrates the extent of her training. She has tons of DEO tech. Batman is off his game at the moment. She has the element of surprise and time to prepare for the conflict. And she undoubtedly has Bette by her side, should she want her help.

Also, I see absolutely no reason why Kate is the weakest (or second weakest for that matter) member of the Bat-Family. She's proven herself plenty of times. And while she might not be able to take down Batman in a straight fight, I see absolutely no reason why she wouldn't pose as much of a threat, if not more, than any other member of the family.

Also, people getting bent out of shape because she took down Bane is ridiculous. She knew what she was going up against: amazing strength. So she prepared with a cable that would use Bane's own strength to contain him. You can call that "plot device rope" or you can call that legitimate planning and using her enemy's greatest asset against him. If Batman had done the same, I doubt we'd see as much whining about it.

Fair enough but if Batman had taken down Bane similarly then I'm sure we'd have scoffed at it as well. I see no reason why Bane shouldn't have caught the rope mid air and then chucked it right back at her.

Okay, fair enough. Bane is supposed to be a major baddie so I can see him possibly catching the rope before it got to him. But I still don't think it's enough reason to belly-ache over Bane's depiction (for the above mentioned reasons). His appearance was little more than a glorified cameo and shouldn't elicit as much hate as it has been.

Batman may be a different story. But as I said before, she has surprise, prep, DEO tech, Batman off his game, and her own impressive and judging by a lot of the comments on this thread, underappreciated, training and combat skills on her side. I don't expect her to take down Batman. I expect a stereotypical battle ended without a victor. But I think that that would be more than fair when the situation is considered.

Considering the plot, and reason she'll be fighting him, I'm not necessarily expecting a real take down either. Whatever happens, I'm definitely interested in seeing how it goes

But yeah, her skills, training and experience do seem to be underappreciated, as she does seem to be pretty tough.

#67 Edited by drgnx (3566 posts) - - Show Bio

If she wins I would be like "ok" ... Then move on, probably check this thread to gauge reactions and trolling .... Beyond that probably wouldn't really care ... There are cases for both, so it can go either way depending on who has better prep for the fight!

#68 Posted by TheBournePoster (1794 posts) - - Show Bio

@drgnx: There isn't a case for Batwoman to win, unless Bruce is in a coma.

#69 Edited by V_Scarlotte_Rose (6532 posts) - - Show Bio

@drgnx: There isn't a case for Batwoman to win, unless Bruce is in a coma.

How can you be so sure though?

#70 Edited by TheBournePoster (1794 posts) - - Show Bio
#71 Posted by V_Scarlotte_Rose (6532 posts) - - Show Bio

@thebourneposter: I can't necessarily think of advantages for either of them. They're both strong, well trained, have useful equipment.

Is there anything we can directly compare that we can base discussions on?

#72 Posted by Ravager4 (1627 posts) - - Show Bio

@thebourneposter said:

@v_scarlotte_rose: Give me one advantage Batwoman has.

The DEO, the element of surprise, allies to help her with the ambush...

Honestly, you people are all acting like Batman knows this is coming and they're going to fight fair and square, one on one. That is most certainly not the case. The circumstances of the confrontation will favor Batwoman entirely, she wouldn't be trying to take him on otherwise. I know it's hard for some Batman fanboys to believe, but he is not infallible, he can be taken by surprise, and he can be beaten, given the right circumstances.

#73 Posted by TheBournePoster (1794 posts) - - Show Bio
#74 Posted by Ravager4 (1627 posts) - - Show Bio

@thebourneposter said:

@nico4ever: That's not what the cover implied.

And as we all know, what's on the cover of a comic is always exactly what happens within the pages. Right? ...right?

#75 Posted by TheBournePoster (1794 posts) - - Show Bio
#76 Edited by Ultra_beleco (184 posts) - - Show Bio

Batwoman is really strong. Her training was absurd tough, both physicaly and mentally (as shown in Batwoman 0 ) Her gadgets may not be better than the ones Batman has but I'm pretty sure he is not prepared against all of them because some are prototype that were just invented when she uses.

She also beat Batgirl (Barbara) Easily not a long time ago in hand to hand combat, was able to protect herself against bandits, while drunk and in high heels and constantly fight metahumans a lot of times stronger than her. She is not that weekling.

#77 Edited by drgnx (3566 posts) - - Show Bio

@drgnx: There isn't a case for Batwoman to win, unless Bruce is in a coma.

What are you basing this assessment on?

#78 Edited by V_Scarlotte_Rose (6532 posts) - - Show Bio

Batwoman is really strong. Her training was absurd tough, both physicaly and mentally (as shown in Batwoman 0 ) Her gadgets may not be better than the ones Batman has but I'm pretty sure he is not prepared against all of them because some are prototype that were just invented when she uses.

She also beat Batgirl (Barbara) Easily not a long time ago in hand to hand combat, was able to protect herself against bandits, while drunk and in high heels and constantly fight metahumans a lot of times stronger than her. She is not that weekling.

@supbatz said:

One. Kate is tougher than anyone's giving her credit for. The (second) zero issue of the current series demonstrates the extent of her training. She has tons of DEO tech. Batman is off his game at the moment. She has the element of surprise and time to prepare for the conflict. And she undoubtedly has Bette by her side, should she want her help.

Also, I see absolutely no reason why Kate is the weakest (or second weakest for that matter) member of the Bat-Family. She's proven herself plenty of times. And while she might not be able to take down Batman in a straight fight, I see absolutely no reason why she wouldn't pose as much of a threat, if not more, than any other member of the family.

Seeing as this issue is being brought up, I'll post a quote from it:

It's easy to imagine I left Gotham as Kate Kane, and came back as Batwoman. But that's oversimplifying it all. To this day, I wonder if you knew exactly where you were sending me, what they would do.

Your "Murder Of Crows" you called them. The men you worked alongside for years, doing god knows what in every hell-hole around the globe. You trusted them with your life, so why not mine? But more than once, I questioned whether or not they had gone off the reservation.

The first two years were an adventure, leaping across buildings in Tokyo, ripping along a Swiss mountain-side in a glider suit, weaving through London traffic at a hundred miles an hour on a motor-cycle.But those last twelve months were the hardest lessons, and they nearly killed me. I had left Gotham thinking that I had already suffered so much, that I knew pain, but I didn't know anything...

In a torture chamber beneath Paris, I had all that ignorance stripped away. I learned what it felt like to run thirty-six miles with four broken ribs and lungs burned by tear gas, to climb six stories with a dislocated arm and a ruptured achilles, to endure seven days of nonstop electro-interrogation and sleep deprivation and water boarding.

I left Gotham thinking I knew how to hold my own in a fight. In a boxing ring in Serbia, I had that overconfidence beaten out of me. I learned how to fight with a concussion, blind and deaf, even standing in a puddle of my own blood. I left Gotham a soldier, believing I knew how to survive.

And then I crossed the Sahara on foot, living off insects and snakes and a teaspoon of morning dew. I left Gotham believing I knew depravity, as if watching the nightly news or trolling true crime blogs could somehow tell me all I need to know about inhumanity.

And then I spent two weeks in a basement in Prague, surrounded by crime scene photos, listening to audio tapes of kidnapped runaways being tortured by psychopaths who slipped through the system again and again, watching web cam footage that no one will admit exists, directed and starring a half dozen serial killers and their victims...

And she's also had medical training in Africa, won several gymnastics trophies, and explosives disarming training in Belfast.

#79 Edited by Ravager4 (1627 posts) - - Show Bio

@thebourneposter said:

@nico4ever: Actually, that's usually true.

lol, what comics have you been reading? A cover seldom shows exactly what happens in the pages. In some cases, the cover isn't even close to what happens. In most cases, though, a cover is just a general promotion for the story, meant to capture your attention. The only thing that you should take away from that cover is that Batwoman and Batman are going to confront each other. It in no way is showing you exactly how their fight is going to go down, that's what reading the story is for.

We already know, for a fact, that the DEO is helping Batwoman plan, that her father, and Flamebird are going to be assisting her, and that they're planning to take Batman by surprise, because they know they have to. To think that they're just going to throw that all away so Batwoman can straight up fight Batman one on one is a ridiculous assumption.

#80 Edited by TheBournePoster (1794 posts) - - Show Bio

Batman's training was a cake walk too. From this, yes she is tough. She can take a hit. But that's nothing more impressive than anything Batman's done.

#81 Edited by Ravager4 (1627 posts) - - Show Bio

@v_scarlotte_rose said:

@ultra_beleco said:

She also beat Batgirl (Barbara) Easily not a long time ago in hand to hand combat,

I would just like to clarify this. In that particular scenario, Barbara wasn't actually trying to fight back at all, but rather diffuse the situation before it got out of hand. She was using her head, rather than just charging back with her fists, because she knew that Batwoman wasn't a bad person and so there had to be more to that current situation. Granted, her outdated information on Batwoman led to her taking a couple good wallops in the process, but had she been legitimately trying to fight, the fight would not have gone as it did.This was clarified by Gail Simone herself, who wrote that issue.

#82 Posted by DeathpooltheT1000 (12509 posts) - - Show Bio

@v_scarlotte_rose: Experience, Batman take down Deathstroke several times, but it was based on the fact he knew he was going to face him and Deathstroke dont, still most of times this happened, Dathstroke take Bruce and beat the crap out of him by the fact he is better in every level.

This is how your logic and Batwoman fans in general logic works.

Batwoman wins = good writting based on the fact she is well written because is a not obvious out come.

Batman wins = bad writting for being the obvious out come of this fight.

Saddly people over looks good writting, the winner is the better fighter at that point, the only way this to be good writting is if Batman is hurt or weak for some reason, Batwoman just cant compare herself with Batman, Casandra Cain can do it based off her past, but still it would depend in she having the upper hand, Batman gets a plan to beat her or find a weakness he would win.

Still is obvious this victory would be based on making Batwoman look great and amazing, by making Batman look like a hack and badly, this is like when they make Superman look bad so Batman looks well, is bad writting.

#83 Posted by deaditegonzo (3690 posts) - - Show Bio

-10?

#84 Edited by Ultra_beleco (184 posts) - - Show Bio

@nico4ever: In that scene Batgirl also speaks about the rumors that Batwoman is incredible tough and impossible to K.O.

Even if Batgirl was holding back Her skills are still pretty impressive.

#85 Posted by Ravager4 (1627 posts) - - Show Bio

@ultra_beleco: Well yes, I'm just trying to clear up some of the "Batwoman easily defeated Batgirl" claims, considering the one who lost wasn't actually trying to fight back.

#86 Edited by drgnx (3566 posts) - - Show Bio

@deathpoolthet1000 said:

@v_scarlotte_rose: Experience, Batman take down Deathstroke several times, but it was based on the fact he knew he was going to face him and Deathstroke dont, still most of times this happened, Dathstroke take Bruce and beat the crap out of him by the fact he is better in every level.

Have they fought since the reboot????

This is how your logic and Batwoman fans in general logic works.

Batwoman wins = good writting based on the fact she is well written because is a not obvious out come.

Batman wins = bad writting for being the obvious out come of this fight.

Saddly people over looks good writting, the winner is the better fighter at that point, the only way this to be good writting is if Batman is hurt or weak for some reason, Batwoman just cant compare herself with Batman, Casandra Cain can do it based off her past, but still it would depend in she having the upper hand, Batman gets a plan to beat her or find a weakness he would win.

Still is obvious this victory would be based on making Batwoman look great and amazing, by making Batman look like a hack and badly, this is like when they make Superman look bad so Batman looks well, is bad writting.

You're basing a lot of this on pre-52 stuff!

As of the new 52, there isn't much to compare their limitations. Batman has more feats because he has consistently appeared in 6+ comics per month since the relaunch. But Authors are not limited by feats when writing a story, the we are when we are in the battle threads. They can actually exploit limitation of characters, or lack of clarified limitations. The truth is we don't don't what either characters physical or technological limitations are, the DOA gives BatWoman gear as "they" see fit which makes it very hard to gauge her limitations there alone.

Batman has had more experience, but that in itself is not a guarantee either.

#87 Edited by Ultra_beleco (184 posts) - - Show Bio
@nico4ever said:

@ultra_beleco: Well yes, I'm just trying to clear up some of the "Batwoman easily defeated Batgirl" claims, considering the one who lost wasn't actually trying to fight back.

Well Batwoman just landed one punch and Batgirl was like: "OH MY GOD I'M ABOUT TO HAVE A BABY!!!"

But I apologize because I never new about the clarify of Gail so I had no Idea I dint get the scene completly.

#88 Edited by SupBatz (1848 posts) - - Show Bio

@v_scarlotte_rose: A very appropriate quotation for the discussion. Thanks for posting.

Batman's training was a cake walk too. From this, yes she is tough. She can take a hit. But that's nothing more impressive than anything Batman's done.

Nobody is trying to say that Batman is not impressive. The only point trying to be made is that Kate has a fair shot in her own right.

We should also recognize the possibility that there will not be a fight, by the way. Batwoman and her family are already planning on attacking the DEO. If they manage to take down the DEO before Kate goes toe-to-toe with Batman, then the reason for the two to fight would be eliminated.

#89 Posted by TheBournePoster (1794 posts) - - Show Bio

@supbatz: No, she doesn't. Batman is stronger. Batman is faster. Batman is smarter. I guess we can call equipment even. Batman is more skilled.

#90 Posted by SupBatz (1848 posts) - - Show Bio

@thebourneposter: Yes. But Batwoman has the element of surprise, lots of preparation time, Batman is still off of his game from Damian's death, and tons of allies ready to help her.

I completely agree that in a straight fight with none of these other factors present, Bruce has Kate beat. Kate would put up a hell of a fight (her skills cannot be denied) but Bruce is just the epitome of crime fighting. But that doesn't mean that he's unbeatable. Other factors do exist. And it all depends on how things are executed.

#91 Edited by DeathpooltheT1000 (12509 posts) - - Show Bio

@drgnx: Saddly dont, but this is not about the 52, is about the bigger picture of writting.

Alos based on the second thing you writte, Jason could go and kill Batwoman, since we dont have evidence that point he cant do it.

#92 Posted by V_Scarlotte_Rose (6532 posts) - - Show Bio

@v_scarlotte_rose: Experience, Batman take down Deathstroke several times, but it was based on the fact he knew he was going to face him and Deathstroke dont, still most of times this happened, Dathstroke take Bruce and beat the crap out of him by the fact he is better in every level.

This is how your logic and Batwoman fans in general logic works.

Batwoman wins = good writting based on the fact she is well written because is a not obvious out come.

Batman wins = bad writting for being the obvious out come of this fight.

Saddly people over looks good writting, the winner is the better fighter at that point, the only way this to be good writting is if Batman is hurt or weak for some reason, Batwoman just cant compare herself with Batman, Casandra Cain can do it based off her past, but still it would depend in she having the upper hand, Batman gets a plan to beat her or find a weakness he would win.

Still is obvious this victory would be based on making Batwoman look great and amazing, by making Batman look like a hack and badly, this is like when they make Superman look bad so Batman looks well, is bad writting.

Actually I already said that I'd be fine if Batman won, if Batwoman won, or if it ended in a draw. My opinion on the writing will be based on what I think of how the fight is done, and not necessarily the winner.

I'm not trying to say that Batwoman definitely will win, I'm just saying that without knowing the circumstances of this particular fight, it doesn't seem reasonable to say that Batman will obviously win.

#93 Posted by drgnx (3566 posts) - - Show Bio

@drgnx: Saddly dont, but this is not about the 52, is about the bigger picture of writting.

Oh, okay, got where you're coming from now!

#94 Posted by V_Scarlotte_Rose (6532 posts) - - Show Bio

@supbatz: No, she doesn't. Batman is stronger. Batman is faster. Batman is smarter. I guess we can call equipment even. Batman is more skilled.

Can you prove any of these in any official way?

#95 Posted by TheBournePoster (1794 posts) - - Show Bio

@v_scarlotte_rose: There is no "official way."

Strength: I don't think you're disputing this.

Speed: Has Kane ever dodged bullets? Batman has, multiple times.

Intelligence: This is not being disputed.

Skill: We can pull the every martial arts card, but more than that, he fights far more impressive opponents and knows every nerve strike.

#96 Posted by ShadowX (1207 posts) - - Show Bio

I will be glad if she beats him. 100% happy.

#97 Posted by crest (261 posts) - - Show Bio

dont underestimate the power of awesome cleavage

but ya bats wins

#98 Posted by Wolverine08 (45541 posts) - - Show Bio

Batwoman should not be able to beat Batman......... like at all.

Online
#99 Posted by ULTRAstarkiller (6456 posts) - - Show Bio

Batman fighting Batwoman should be like Deathstroke vs Nightwing. Batman/DS acknowledge how good she/he is but it always ends in a stomp. Thats how this battle should go lol

#100 Posted by KingRobbStark (165 posts) - - Show Bio

I would be furious. Of all the DC characters they would pick one of the weakest, and most uninteresting character in the DCU. Batwoman? Really? What is with this infatuation with Batwoman all of a sudden? She would not stand a chance against Dick, Jason, Todd and even Damian, and now we're to believe she can beat one of the most iconic characters in comic history? Pshhh. I would rather see Batman get beaten by either Dick, Clark, Diana, MMA, or motherfucking Alfred.

This edit will also create new pages on Comic Vine for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Comic Vine users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.