I am not sure what you mean by that, all I am saying is that the world isn't going to end due to a lack of bees. It would definitely hurt global food trade and production, but not to any kind of apocalyptic event and it would mostly affect humans. The world isn't going to end, it is just going to hurt a lot of industries and humans.
It all depends on what you consider "the world" and "survive". Like the planet will not literally die from global warming, but the environment will change to a point humans won't be able to survive easily like before. In the case of bees, "According to bee experts at the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, a third of the world’s food production depends on bees." So yeah the world will survive, but the global extinction of bees would drastically impact us negatively.
Sure, I don't disagree with that statement. I never implied that there would be no impact or consequences. But "the global extinction of bees would drastically impact humans negatively" is a FAR, FAR statement from "the world can't survive without bees", can we agree on that?
I really find funny how most of the writers cannot handle the fact that Poison Ivy is, indeed, a psycho Eco Terrorist who has good intentions but should not be given the reins to anything. So they either crank her to the point where she is pretty much an anti-villain, or crank it the other way till she starts killing indiscriminately in gruesome needlessly sadistic ways to compensate for the 'eco' part.
Or they just, I don't know, want to tell a different story? The curse, and blessing, of modern American comics is that these characters are flexible, especially the villains, you're free to change them up.
There's some interesting stories to be told where Ivy is still killing people, but hold the murder back to at least semi-reasonable targets, thereby calling into question if Batman is in the right to stop her, when she's taking down an evil he can't really do anything about.
it's because fundamentally eco terrorism is correct, humans are not exempt from the ecosystem and destroying it is going to kill humans, so the only appropriate answer is to stop the people responsible for causing humans to destroy the ecosystem, the people who set up that system.
I still maintain that TAS was the epitome of Batman as a character and the whole world around him, and he went downhill pretty fast outside of it. Hell even when he showed up in the Superman Series he already got infected with the Frank Miller bug that makes him a gigantic asshole that needs to overcompensate for the fact that he is human among super aliens.
100% Agreed. Best series, best Batman, best Joker, best Harley, best Freeze, etc. It gave so much depth to both Batman and his villains. They also had an excellent balance between cool fight scenes and Batman's detective work. And it was also a Batman with humanity and empathy, not just some vengeful edge-lord.
Batman is a loner, it's his nature. But I don't think the other DCAU series really painted him as an asshole. Gruff, sure, but nobody cared more about his teammates then Batman did.
Yes, I remember him meeting Superman in "The World's Finest" and them fighting, but that was Batman proving a point. Superman underestimated 'normal humans' which damn near got him killed when he confronted the Joker. Supes needed the reality check, which Batman did provide.
Loner or not, Batman's strengths narrative-wise is in his detective work and mental plays more than fighting like other superheroes. Batman TAS had a lot more investigation and less fighting than most DC superheroes at the time. The 90s Justice League cartoon managed to depict him well as a continuity of TAS because they made him unique rather than equal to the others, and played on his individuality.
That is true but it changes nothing. Earth's been through wilder shit than a big jungle. Nobody actually cares about 'the planet'. There's no need to save 'the planet'. The planet, short of an obliterating collision or something, will always be fine.
That's the focus of several of her plots. When she gets too close to victory and then has to contemplate if she truly believes saving the earth is worth exterminating humanity.
Depends on the writer. Some versions of the character want to wipe out *everything* that eats plants, which would destroy the ecosystem of the entire planet, some versions are barely more "supervillain" than real-life extreme environmental groups and just want to stop people from clear-cutting forests, and everything in between.
Homo sapiens, Homo erectus, Homo neanderthalensis, Homo habilis, and many more of the Great Apes have existed on Earth for 2 million years. We are of the planet and not an intrinsic threat to it. We must find a balance from this point onwards.We can start by curbing population growth, resource exploitation, and pollution.
It's the conundrum of modern superhero comics. The heroes fight to protect the status quo, the villains fight to change it. That works as long as you think the status quo is good. When the status quo is bad, and some of the villains are trying to change it for the better, then they have to add on 'but they change it by eating babies or killing puppies or something like that' to make us root for the guy stopping them.
Well that's the system of some hero/villain conflicts. Some villains like Lex Luthor also fight to keep the status quo as long as he remains at the top of it. It's a mixed bag though. Many villains of the 80s/90s have become more sympathetic both in their writing in modern day and their perception.
That's why there are 2 Magnetos -- the one who is perfectly logical and fighting to save those like him, and the one that commits 3 different genocides before breakfast
This is when they good villains, because people can relate to needing change. But also, the change they suggest/attempt is usually painful to society as a whole in the short term, to the point it is often tasteful even if they have a point.
I find it pretty lazy when they take a reasonable position "too far" by adding in unrelated cruelty. Why not just have them be actual heroes that fight to improve the world? As it is now, most superheroes are basically just cops with more physical power and stricter personal morals. But even a "good cop" is never going to improve the world we live in. I think it's a failure of imagination. The writers would have to acknowledge and confront real problems.
The big two comics universes are both committed to unending continuity where relatively little ever changes, and to making their universes at least pass at first glance for the world outside your window. Those combine to make it so heroes can never really effect positive change. Any genius invention or novel political solution can never last, just like any other change in comics, and so we keep drifting back to the same status quo.
Yeah it's kinda hard to root for Superman and his whole 'humans need to determine the fate of the world themselves' when we have actual living people that would JOKE about how Lex Luthor is small potatoes, and too moral to have amassed such wealth. We have ACTUAL Rich people worse than fictional Super Villains... Even if it wasn't by pre-emptive violence, Supes and Wonder Woman could literally fix America's, or even the WORLD's Democracy over night. All Debates happen with the Lasso of 1/?
Truth around your neck, they ask basic questions, Will you use your position to only enrich those around you? Will you intentionally harm the public at large for personal gain or profit? Will you intentionally unfairly target and persecute minorities or those of a vulnerable position. If any of those questions are YES, you no longer Qualify, and your party has to submit a new Candidate. 2/2
Basically as soon as the comic's code got abandoned. The most infamous was Bruce Wayne in the comic Long Halloween, but there have been many, many comics involving men mind-controlled by her found in a state of undress with the implication obvious.
The thing is, over time characterization changes. And that's not a bad thing, especially in properties as long lasting as comics. And we all have our preferences, mine just happen to be before this current wave where most of the popular attractive >
DavedandConfused
We could see the beginning of an oligarch war
deetatron
illmx
SLCtechie
I’m not missing him already.
KenjiKando
I rooted for Ivy like 99% of the time. Still my fav batvillain and no live action movie would dare to give her the respect she deserves.
PixelSprite64
TheMountainIsBreathing
Violaquin
Get’em Pam!
beegobuzz
Yay! We're helping!
GuysJustWannaFish
I hear they have the best knees
pgdave
Keeping in mind, of course, that in North America, the honeybee is an invasive species and a poor pollinator of native plants.
JaceCameron
Bees ain't ever hurt no one that didn't deserve it or start it.
ThrowAwayAcct0000
Cartoon villains run everything. Its time for cartoon heroes to step up.
Poipoine
If you liked that you could enjoy the Harvey quinn tvshow, they dispose of a bunch of ceo and greedy corporates
AyatollahBahloni
Greedy CEO's need to clean up their act, but they won't.
DarkSock
SnailsAgainstTungstenSpheres
Beads
EatPieLander
JackedUpGinger
Cake!
Violaquin
WITNESS ME!!!!
JoeT85
a bumble bee and a wasp. know the difference
OccasionalManatee
It's popular memery to hate on wasps, but many wasp species are also pollinators.
stauffalopagus
Yeah but fuck ‘em anyways
WorkerLurker
I keep them from my house but encourage them in the woods outside
TheVampireDante
Swap wasps with hornets then. There's no reason for those fuckers to exist other than to be an angry nuisance.
jumpbus360
Give him to the bees.
IAmDrBanner
Not that I don't like bees, but the world can absolutely survive without the bees. I have no idea where this whole thing came from.
CrabbyBlueberry
Most of the bees they worry about in America are from Europe and don't actually belong here.
IAmDrBanner
I am not sure what you mean by that, all I am saying is that the world isn't going to end due to a lack of bees. It would definitely hurt global food trade and production, but not to any kind of apocalyptic event and it would mostly affect humans. The world isn't going to end, it is just going to hurt a lot of industries and humans.
Xenarion
It all depends on what you consider "the world" and "survive". Like the planet will not literally die from global warming, but the environment will change to a point humans won't be able to survive easily like before.
In the case of bees, "According to bee experts at the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, a third of the world’s food production depends on bees." So yeah the world will survive, but the global extinction of bees would drastically impact us negatively.
IAmDrBanner
Sure, I don't disagree with that statement. I never implied that there would be no impact or consequences. But "the global extinction of bees would drastically impact humans negatively" is a FAR, FAR statement from "the world can't survive without bees", can we agree on that?
Skullwriter
I really find funny how most of the writers cannot handle the fact that Poison Ivy is, indeed, a psycho Eco Terrorist who has good intentions but should not be given the reins to anything. So they either crank her to the point where she is pretty much an anti-villain, or crank it the other way till she starts killing indiscriminately in gruesome needlessly sadistic ways to compensate for the 'eco' part.
cesarser4
She really redeemed herself in Batman: Arkham Knight.
luckybreak91
Or they just, I don't know, want to tell a different story? The curse, and blessing, of modern American comics is that these characters are flexible, especially the villains, you're free to change them up.
There's some interesting stories to be told where Ivy is still killing people, but hold the murder back to at least semi-reasonable targets, thereby calling into question if Batman is in the right to stop her, when she's taking down an evil he can't really do anything about.
blaghart
it's because fundamentally eco terrorism is correct, humans are not exempt from the ecosystem and destroying it is going to kill humans, so the only appropriate answer is to stop the people responsible for causing humans to destroy the ecosystem, the people who set up that system.
MoonRiverFrost
Her logic is sound to me. I just don't have the superpowers to implement.
KingKelloggTheWaffleHaggler
People also kinda ignore the fact she sexually assaulted people
mdizzly
is that worse than the murders?
KingKelloggTheWaffleHaggler
...both are bad
AsheLake
Killing can be justified. The other really can't.
KingKelloggTheWaffleHaggler
Inever thought of it like that. That's true
Xenarion
Once again TAS did it best.
Skullwriter
I still maintain that TAS was the epitome of Batman as a character and the whole world around him, and he went downhill pretty fast outside of it. Hell even when he showed up in the Superman Series he already got infected with the Frank Miller bug that makes him a gigantic asshole that needs to overcompensate for the fact that he is human among super aliens.
Xenarion
100% Agreed. Best series, best Batman, best Joker, best Harley, best Freeze, etc. It gave so much depth to both Batman and his villains. They also had an excellent balance between cool fight scenes and Batman's detective work. And it was also a Batman with humanity and empathy, not just some vengeful edge-lord.
LuminoZero
Batman is a loner, it's his nature. But I don't think the other DCAU series really painted him as an asshole. Gruff, sure, but nobody cared more about his teammates then Batman did.
Yes, I remember him meeting Superman in "The World's Finest" and them fighting, but that was Batman proving a point. Superman underestimated 'normal humans' which damn near got him killed when he confronted the Joker. Supes needed the reality check, which Batman did provide.
Xenarion
Loner or not, Batman's strengths narrative-wise is in his detective work and mental plays more than fighting like other superheroes.
Batman TAS had a lot more investigation and less fighting than most DC superheroes at the time.
The 90s Justice League cartoon managed to depict him well as a continuity of TAS because they made him unique rather than equal to the others, and played on his individuality.
swedeonamoose
One of those villains that make 50% sense and 50% would completely fuck up the planet if they actually succeded with their plans.
RearAdmiralObvious
Im not allergic to poison ivy so I'd say she's fine xD
CanadianCobraChicken
I'll take those odds
ElbowDeepInAGoblin
The planet, or the livability of the planet for humans? I think the planet would be fine.
swedeonamoose
Her planet spanning jungle thing would basically destroy the habitats for a lot of animals as well.
Masonrig
She says as much and calls it a failed project in later stories
ElbowDeepInAGoblin
That is true but it changes nothing. Earth's been through wilder shit than a big jungle. Nobody actually cares about 'the planet'. There's no need to save 'the planet'. The planet, short of an obliterating collision or something, will always be fine.
L3NTON
That's the focus of several of her plots. When she gets too close to victory and then has to contemplate if she truly believes saving the earth is worth exterminating humanity.
Gonz000
hotaru251
to be fair Ivy wouldnt fk up the planet...her goal is wiping out humans...humans are the greatest threat to planet.
Gerokeymaster
Depends on the writer. Some versions of the character want to wipe out *everything* that eats plants, which would destroy the ecosystem of the entire planet, some versions are barely more "supervillain" than real-life extreme environmental groups and just want to stop people from clear-cutting forests, and everything in between.
BananaParagon
Homo sapiens, Homo erectus, Homo neanderthalensis, Homo habilis, and many more of the Great Apes have existed on Earth for 2 million years. We are of the planet and not an intrinsic threat to it. We must find a balance from this point onwards.We can start by curbing population growth, resource exploitation, and pollution.
Violently, if necessary.
lDanielHolm
We're a threat to the current ecosystem but we couldn't really put the planet in danger if we tried. Earth will recover just fine.
Gogoglovitch
It's the conundrum of modern superhero comics. The heroes fight to protect the status quo, the villains fight to change it. That works as long as you think the status quo is good. When the status quo is bad, and some of the villains are trying to change it for the better, then they have to add on 'but they change it by eating babies or killing puppies or something like that' to make us root for the guy stopping them.
L3NTON
Well that's the system of some hero/villain conflicts. Some villains like Lex Luthor also fight to keep the status quo as long as he remains at the top of it. It's a mixed bag though. Many villains of the 80s/90s have become more sympathetic both in their writing in modern day and their perception.
PhailRaptor
That's why there are 2 Magnetos -- the one who is perfectly logical and fighting to save those like him, and the one that commits 3 different genocides before breakfast
LeSethX
This is when they good villains, because people can relate to needing change. But also, the change they suggest/attempt is usually painful to society as a whole in the short term, to the point it is often tasteful even if they have a point.
xizar
Hashtag("Killmonger was right.")
AsheLake
I find it pretty lazy when they take a reasonable position "too far" by adding in unrelated cruelty. Why not just have them be actual heroes that fight to improve the world? As it is now, most superheroes are basically just cops with more physical power and stricter personal morals. But even a "good cop" is never going to improve the world we live in. I think it's a failure of imagination. The writers would have to acknowledge and confront real problems.
Gogoglovitch
The big two comics universes are both committed to unending continuity where relatively little ever changes, and to making their universes at least pass at first glance for the world outside your window. Those combine to make it so heroes can never really effect positive change. Any genius invention or novel political solution can never last, just like any other change in comics, and so we keep drifting back to the same status quo.
ElChupaNuggra
Yeah it's kinda hard to root for Superman and his whole 'humans need to determine the fate of the world themselves' when we have actual living people that would JOKE about how Lex Luthor is small potatoes, and too moral to have amassed such wealth. We have ACTUAL Rich people worse than fictional Super Villains... Even if it wasn't by pre-emptive violence, Supes and Wonder Woman could literally fix America's, or even the WORLD's Democracy over night. All Debates happen with the Lasso of 1/?
ElChupaNuggra
Truth around your neck, they ask basic questions, Will you use your position to only enrich those around you? Will you intentionally harm the public at large for personal gain or profit? Will you intentionally unfairly target and persecute minorities or those of a vulnerable position. If any of those questions are YES, you no longer Qualify, and your party has to submit a new Candidate. 2/2
MikuJess
As opposed to the 100% fucking up the planet of the people she's fighting. I'd take my chance with her.
SometimesISayHistoryStuff
They've kinda turned her into an anti-hero recently. But older versions she was pretty genocidal, and a rapist. So... I dunno, not really a fan.
wurth
A vine is just a vegan tentacle.
MisterLemons
kirby422
I'll admit I've hardly seen the comics, but when was she raping people? and Whom?
SometimesISayHistoryStuff
Basically as soon as the comic's code got abandoned. The most infamous was Bruce Wayne in the comic Long Halloween, but there have been many, many comics involving men mind-controlled by her found in a state of undress with the implication obvious.
The thing is, over time characterization changes. And that's not a bad thing, especially in properties as long lasting as comics. And we all have our preferences, mine just happen to be before this current wave where most of the popular attractive >
SometimesISayHistoryStuff
female villains keep getting their rougher edges filed down and their more vile character traits ignored. But that is completely a me issue.
IceWeaselX
Batman, for one.
Her whole thing for a while was mind control via pheromones. Stuff happened. Mostly handwaved after the victims were released.
Emrys12
And how is fictional mind control akin to rape?
eastherbunni
She has plants that emit "sex pollen" basically
ScourgeOfAges
I saw Sex Pollen open for Paramore at the wiltern theater back in 09' I think. Great show.