BatWatch

I'm taking a break from ComicVine forums for at least a week. I keep wanting to get on Off-Topic forums and discuss interesting to...

5487 274 102 160
Forum Posts Wiki Points Following Followers

BatWatch's forum posts

Avatar image for batwatch
BatWatch

5487

Forum Posts

274

Wiki Points

160

Followers

Reviews: 238

User Lists: 1

#1  Edited By BatWatch

@Vortex13 said:

@PsychoKnights: If it was me, taking your user name into consideration, I would pass lol.

You can trust me with your comics!

No Caption Provided
Avatar image for batwatch
BatWatch

5487

Forum Posts

274

Wiki Points

160

Followers

Reviews: 238

User Lists: 1

#2  Edited By BatWatch

@_Hawk_ said:

@PsychoKnights: I don't live in Arkansas, North Dallas. I was born there and went to college there.

Too bad. I've been toying around with the idea of finding some people to trade comics with, but I really don't have that much time anyway, so perhaps it is for the best. Where did you go to college, Fayetville.

Avatar image for batwatch
BatWatch

5487

Forum Posts

274

Wiki Points

160

Followers

Reviews: 238

User Lists: 1

#3  Edited By BatWatch

@_Hawk_ said:

The Wolverine

The Biker.

Shooting

How I spend my weekends

Hey, you live in Arkansas? Me too? PM me and maybe we can discuss borrowing comics from each other? We could do some sort of security. Just a thought.

Avatar image for batwatch
BatWatch

5487

Forum Posts

274

Wiki Points

160

Followers

Reviews: 238

User Lists: 1

#4  Edited By BatWatch

I was torn between Hulk and Cyclops.

Hulk is mindless and boring, but you can at least be interested in his personality as Bruce, and the fights are amusing in a banal sort of way.

I can't imagine ever reading a story just focusing on Cyclops though, and I don't much like X-Men in comics anyway. His powers are about as boring as can be.

Avatar image for batwatch
BatWatch

5487

Forum Posts

274

Wiki Points

160

Followers

Reviews: 238

User Lists: 1

#5  Edited By BatWatch

@KnightRise said:

@PsychoKnights: We're not even on thread topic anymore, I PMed you

@Enosisik: I was addressing a request from an individual in the first few comments.

True.

Avatar image for batwatch
BatWatch

5487

Forum Posts

274

Wiki Points

160

Followers

Reviews: 238

User Lists: 1

#6  Edited By BatWatch

I'm more of a DC fan, but I'm leaning toward going with Rhino. In truth, I think it would probably stalemate and they would go their separate ways, but I'm inclined to thinking Clayface would get it worse than Rhino. Rhino is tough, could, as others have said, probably keep his airways clear, and he would just pound Clayface into puddles. I don't think any of Clayface's weapons would do Rhino much damage.

Avatar image for batwatch
BatWatch

5487

Forum Posts

274

Wiki Points

160

Followers

Reviews: 238

User Lists: 1

#7  Edited By BatWatch

@wowylied said:

"forever" : another terms to tell "will be retconned in 5 issue

I am betting on captain america president, a new civil war or captain america going full punisher.

A Captain America President would be interesting. That is one plot line I have never seen before.

Avatar image for batwatch
BatWatch

5487

Forum Posts

274

Wiki Points

160

Followers

Reviews: 238

User Lists: 1

#8  Edited By BatWatch

@Pokeysteve said:

@PsychoKnights said:

@Pokeysteve said:

@PsychoKnights said:

I went for Ra's. He's clearly not insane, and he plans to kill most of humanity just because it would be beneficial for the environment.

@Pokeysteve said:

Lol only one of these characters tried to murder a dozen infants and then shot the woman in the head who tried to save them. Stupid thread.

If Joker is truly insane as he is often stated to be, then he is not aware of the consequences of his actions and is therefore no more evil than a mentally retarded man who gets upset, hits a child, and kills the child.

He's aware. He knows he'll be sent back to Arkham. Like people have been saying, it's a game to him. He can hurt, maim and murder all he wants and because people think he's "insane" he gets away with it scott free. I don't mean to offensive either but comparing a mentally retarded man to the Joker is ridiculous. Everything the Joker does is fun. It makes him laugh. Insane people for the most part have no emotions. They aren't emotionally capable of happy or sad.

I am also of the opinion that Joker is sane, but he is said in the comics to be insane. I suppose it is one of those issues where the opinion of the writers and opinion of the readers differ, but I have to take that into consideration. You can at least make a case for Joker being insane, and I certainly think he has some kind of mental disorder (almost certainly a sociopath). Ra's on the other hand is clearly perfectly aware of his actions.

Also, having no emotions has nothing to do with being insane.

Not knowing right from wrong is the legal definition of insane. With that guideline I'm positive Joker is sane. He gets off on the idea of doing wrong. Ras would clearly be the insane one in thinking that wiping out humanity is all good in the hood haha. Having no emotions factors in a bit. A lot of serial killers and mental patients feel nothing and that's the reason they're able to kill tens of people. I guess it'd be more of a characteristic than a requirement.

All right, I think we will have to agree to disagree (grins), but thank you for sharing your view with me.

Avatar image for batwatch
BatWatch

5487

Forum Posts

274

Wiki Points

160

Followers

Reviews: 238

User Lists: 1

#9  Edited By BatWatch

@KnightRise:

black guy, yes. But altering that to "So I saw this black and he went to all the other blacks...", can you see why that generalization in diction and syntax might offend people?

Okay, I see how it could be taken that way, but I still think you are being overly sensitive. I’m sure if I had time I could find a host of quotes from respected black people who refer to the black community as simply blacks. If someone told me, "Whites are not listening to the problems of the black man," I might object to his point, but I would not object to being called white.

Are coloured and negro part of your (and hopefully, not anyone's) vocabulary? So why use that particual terminolgy?

Nobody in this conversation has used that terminology. You are getting off topic.

Empathy is key,

I do not claim to be able to feel what a black individual feels. It would be presumptuous of me to claim that.

and society has evolved past that manner of speech, I had assumed.

Political correctness has nothing to do with evolution. If anything, it devolves a society empowering “offensive” language and increasing the societal taboo of acknowledging differences by implying that blackness (or any multitude of other prohibited words/concepts) is somehow bad.

Sorry but were you implying that I, personally, was disregarding your points and name calling?

Yes, though it was perhaps unfair to say that you disregarded my points. You did give thoughtful feedback (which I appreciate), but I don’t think you directly responded to my basic point which was that political correctness takes words that gave offence to only an oversensitive few and then declares it offensive to all.

Because I wasn't, at least not on purpose.

You called my response childish. I think that is pretty clearly an insult. It is also incorrect.

I don't recall anyone mentioning anything remotely political, until you stated that liberals immediately rob our lexicons of offensive words.

Liberals rob people of words. Every time I say someone is retarded, those around me flinch as if I just dropped an F-bomb…worse actually, but it is merely a statement of fact. Those with exceptionally low IQ’s are retarded, yet the liberals keep on deciding that words which refer to people with mental difficulties are offensive, so they come up with new terms every few years. This is the clearest field in which the silliness of political correctness is visible. Retarded, special ed, special needs, handicapped, handicapable, exceptional…the terms keep on changing because liberals do not like the connotations the words take on, but you cannot give retardation a different name and suddenly make it a good thing. It will always have a negative connotation because it is a negative thing. Those who are cruel will use these terms to be mean. You cannot stop it. Those who are not cruel will just use these terms as statements of fact, yet because of political correctness, all people, the cruel and the kind, are condemned when using words which should be simply factual. As I’ve implied before, the liberals are only creating more ways for people to be offended.

It is true that nobody mentioned politics before I mentioned liberals. What is your point? Liberals are the ones behind the political correct movement, and those that jump on the political correctness prohibition wagon are almost always liberals. Am I at fault for pointing this out?

So yes, I did call such brash statement fairly childish.

It is unfortunate that you find it offensive for political machinations to be pointed out to you. Again, I do not know many children who make their views clear by attributing an argumentative point to a rotten political ideology, but perhaps you have encountered very gifted children in your lifetime. Again, in my experience, children are usually quick to break out the insults.

If you were refering to me in the third sentence, I find that snide. If not, I think its a misfortune that you've encountered such (hypothetical?) people.

It refers to you and many others. I would suggest that rather than focusing on whether or not my comment is snide, you should consider whether or not it is accurate.

Thank you for the more polite elements of your comment.

Avatar image for batwatch
BatWatch

5487

Forum Posts

274

Wiki Points

160

Followers

Reviews: 238

User Lists: 1

#10  Edited By BatWatch

@KnightRise said:

@Lone_Wolf_and_Cub: @PsychoKnights said:

@ShootingNova said:

Could you please not refer to them as "blacks"?

This is one of those situations where somebody tries to make someone feel bad for using a term which pretty much offend nobody. All this political correctness does nothing but make more words "bad words." Over time, the words which are found offensive become larger and larger because as soon as the liberals hear that one person is offended by a term, nobody is allowed to use it without their disapproval.

Anyway, regarding the use of the word black, I will only consent that it has a negative connotation if you are willing to condemn BET as racist against blacks.

In regards to political correctness in general, stop deciding that words are offensive. Homosexuals are gays, people with IQs less than 70 are retarded, and really short people are midgets. It's not offensive, it is simply the meaning of the words.

You're missing the point of what he was asking, was referring to using the phrase "blacks" to refer to black people. No one in this thread is taking offense to using black to refer to Americans of African emigrate decent. But discarding the people part while discussing "blacks" (or "gays, Jews, and cripples") is dehumanizing. Those words have other connotations than simply their dictionary definition, so why call someone something they don't want to be called? Also, your kneejerk reaction to instantly lambast liberals is fairly childish. And BET is abominable.

So saying black people is okay, but saying blacks is not? Sure, that is not an arbitrary distinction at all. Everybody knows that blacks, whites, Jews, and any other name of an ethnic group is referring to a group of people. I would say it is those that think that the term black is a bad thing which have race issues.

I hear black people call each other black all the time. I don't think I've ever heard a black guy telling a story say, "I saw an African-American gentleman..." No, they say, "There was this black guy..."

There is nothing childish about pointing out that liberals constantly come up with new terms to prohibit seemingly thinking that you can change people's attitudes by changing their language. However, new terms come into being which come to mean the same thing, and then the liberals just have to prohibit new terms. I find those that are childish are usually those that resort to name calling rather than addressing people's argumentative points. Of course, that is just my experience.