A Straw Character exists in a work to represent a caricature of a position which the author wants to tear apart. Authors use these Strawmen because they have a position of their own to defend, and they want to make it clear who is right (namely the characters who agree with the author's opinion) and who is wrong. Yet sometimes — possibly at the time, possibly after some thought — the audience realizes that the Strawman made the better argument, even though his position was the "wrong" one.
A particularly persuasive Strawman can cause the audience to turn their empathy from the "heroes" and start Rooting for the Empire. The presence of this trope generally indicates bad writing (a good writer could make his case without needing a Strawman to demolish). Occasionally the Strawman's argument was as weak as intended in its native context, but Creator Provincialism or Values Dissonance cause different audiences to see its merits.
Invoking this trope cannot be done directly: the whole point is that it's a reaction the writer never intended. To invoke it, the writer would either have to be criticizing some other work or use a Show Within a Show format. If there's any awareness of this from the writers (and one might suspect subconscious awareness), expect a lot of unrelated Kick the Dog moments from the villains. Alternatively, the author may attempt to work around this trope by revealing that the villain may have been using a valid argument, but only as a cover to let them do whatever they want. This is also not a scenario where two people have a disagreement and both have valid points. A Strawman is, by definition, an overly simplified position that is so flimsy it can be easily toppled. If everyone is partially correct, no side is a true straw man - they're still not this trope.
Contrast Jerkass Has a Point, Dumbass Has a Point, and Villain Has a Point, where the author deliberately has a non-credible character hit the nail on the head. Compare and contrast Misaimed Fandom, which results when the characters opposing the author's view are wrong but the fandom misinterprets the story as saying they were right. See also: The Extremist Was Right, Informed Wrongness, No Mere Windmill, Alternative Character Interpretation, Do Not Do This Cool Thing, Broken Aesop.
open/close all folders
Anime & Manga
In Black Cat, Baldor's desire to murder Kyoko after her Heel-Face Turn is supposed to be a sign of how demented he is, which will make us root all the more when Train fights him and his partner, Kranz, to save her. Problem is, Kyoko, pre Heel-Face Turn, was not only a member of a group determined to plunge the world into chaos, but a Psycho for Hire who enjoyed burning people alive from the inside out, while kissing them. On top of that, her switching sides is motivated, not by the realization that what she's doing is wrong, but from fear of Big BadCreed, and a crush on Train. End result, Baldor comes off looking far more reasonable than he ever should when he recommends they just kill her. Happens again when one of the heroes tells him that just murdering your enemies is wrong. Cue one of the enemies she'd just spared blowing himself up to try and kill her. Baldor's maniacal laughter ends up being less Kick the Dog, and more "told ya."
This also leads into Could Have Avoided This Plot. If Saya had just killed Creed in their battle instead of distracting him none of the horrible things he did in the manga would have happened
In Code Geass, Suzaku and Lelouch call out the head of the Japanese Government in Exile for retreating to China when Britannia invaded rather than staying to fight. He protests that retreating and building one's forces is a perfectly valid tactic, and, well, it is. In fact, it's not all that different to Lelouch's own actions prior to the start of the series. Lelouch does the exact same thing in the next season. Of course, the real reason Lelouch is opposing him is because if he wins, Japan will just be a puppet of the Chinese Federation.
In Fafner in the Azure: Dead Aggressor, the island Tatsumiyajima wants to mostly be left alone from the rest of the world during the Alien Invasion by the Festum. They even pretend there is no alien invasion for their children; until they have to recruit them to pilot mecha. (And then abuse them when said children don't react well.) This is despite them having superior technology to fighting the Festum than the rest of humanity. Supposedly they are the good guys.
It would seem the series realized they had the good guys and the bad guys in the wrong places about half-way through the series; and unsubtly bunched together a lot of corrective Pet the Dog from the people we are supposed to root for and Kick the Dog moments from the people we shouldn't to compensate.
In Freezing, Scarlett Oohara is portrayed as being wrong for wanting to turn ordinary girls into artificial Pandoras to fight the Novas which plague humanity. The argument is that there is no point making civilians fight the battles when they're supposed to be the ones being protected, and that humans shouldn't try to reach for more than they have. Never mind that natural Pandoras are getting killed off faster than they can be born and that the current system is plenty cruel enough in that if you're born with the potential to become a Pandora, you have no other choice but to be one. Giving one a choice would be a huge benefit. Dr. Aoi Gendo, Oohara's main opposition, is okay with the Limiter system, which sends plenty of willing, once-civilian boys into the battlefield. Scarlett's point is then undermined since the E-Pandora project was never really meant to succeed in the first place. It was merely a publicity stunt to buy time for the Type Maria project. The girls who suffered and died because of the E-Pandora project did so for nothing.
The Leaf Village's elders' decision to keep Naruto on the Toad Mountain during Pain's attack to the village, as opposed to summoning him back to fight, was portrayed as unequivocally wrong, and Tsunade's outburst and calling them out for their lack of faith in Naruto (and in the anime, subsequent lecture to them about believing) was put as the right position. However, the elders' decision was not at all unreasonable, as the target of the attack was known to be Naruto himself, and there was no guarantee at the time that Naruto could fight, let alone defeat, Pain (a villain who had already killed Naruto's master, Jiraiya); the Elders even point out to Tsunade that it's tremendously risky to summon Naruto back, and that if she is wrong and Naruto is defeated, the consequences would be disastrous for the world. And then they were proven utterly right when Pain kicked the crap out of Naruto, who was saved only by a timely intervention by Hinata. The anime portrayed the decision as influenced by Danzo, adding more fuel to the discussion of Danzo's motives. Interestingly, in later arcs the Kages make the same conclusion of hiding both Naruto and Killer Bee to keep them safe during the war, with only Tsunade and the Tsuchikage objecting to it, and it's Gaara who shoots down Tsunade's argument of putting Naruto on the front lines.
The Raikage is painted as a stubborn-headed git for refusing to forgive and rescind the 'kill on sight' order of Sasuke for the suspected murder of his brother. The manga tries to make it so that the Raikage's desire for revenge is clouding his personal judgment to the point where he's willing to start a Cycle of Revenge, but the fact remains that A) Sasuke is still at large, working for a terrorist organization, B) Raikage's brother and other such targets hold the equivalent of a WMD, C) Raikage isn't the only person who wants Sasuke's head.
Another example would be Danzo's first act as Hokage. That is, declaring Sasuke a missing-nin who is to be captured or killed on sight. Naruto and Sakura insist Sasuke doesn't deserve it but not only did he defect three years prior to a village that was established to destroy Konoha, he also (as far as anyone knows) kidnapped and killed the Raikage's brother. If Konoha doesn't declare that Sasuke is a missing-nin, such an act would be tantamount to a declaration of war on Kumo by Konoha. Even if Sasuke was merely "misguided", no leader would declare a single soldier that was clearly in the wrong to be worth starting a war over.
In one flashback Orochimaru suggested Mercy Killing three orphans, on the grounds that a miserable life was all that awaited them. He was shown as a Jerkass for this with Jiraiya criticizing him for it and instead Jiraiya abandoned his mission in order to raise them. And it turns out their lives did suck, as Jiraiya left as soon as they had a basic amount of training, leaving them to fend for themselves in the middle of an on-going war. One of them was forced to kill the other, which eventually led him to side with the Big Bad, who only fed and reinforced his misery. Meanwhile the third supported his every move. These orphans would go on to kill Jiraiya and destroy the Leaf Village.
Back during the battle with Naruto and Neji, Neji claimed that fate has already been decided pretty much at birth and there is no way for Naruto, who is believed to be a failure, to change it. After Naruto managed to defeat him, Neji believs that Naruto is right and destiny can be changed meaning he does not need to be a Hyuuga branch. However, later Naruto is revealed to not only the son of the fourth Hokage and a Jinchuriki, he also inherited the will of fire by Hashirama, the reincarnation of the sage's younger brother and is the child of destiny that is prophecised by the toad elder. Coupled with the Uchiha's curse of love and power, it means that Neji is by all means right. The final nail in the coffin is when Neji sacrificed his life to save Hinata, effectively means that Neji will always remain a 'failure' branch of the Hyuuga clan elders.
Way back when Obito and Kakashi are arguing whether they should save Rin or not, Kakashi claimed that Rin is not as important as completing the mission, due to learning from Sakumo's experience only for Obito to shot him down stating that "Those who break the rules may be scum but those who abandons their friends are worse than scum" thus Kakashi eventually decided to go back and save Obito. But had Kakashi not save Obito, he wouldn't have become Tobi and being responsible for everything that happens in the current Naruto world. In other words, Kakashi and by extension, the Konoha villagers code is right all along when it comes to following ninja rules.
Although it was intended to come across as an example of Sasuke's callousness and self-absorption, at least some of his observations in chapter 693 is actually spot-on. Given that by this point Sasuke has repeatedly betrayed his friends, his village, his entire nation, and at the latest turn of events the entire social order of the continent, has openly announced his intention to murder everything that is good or just and take over the world as its new demon-powered overlord, and never had anything in common with or shown the slightest bit of affection or encouragement to Sakura in their entire lives, it makes absolutely no sense that she is still in love with him, and Sasuke is being entirely on-point to stop and lampshade that. It really interrupts the whole rhythm of a scene intended to show a megalomaniac's utter alienation from normal human emotion when you have to stop and go "... wait, that's actually true."
Pokémon: In Best Wishes 2, in the eliminatories of the Junior World Cup, Georgia and her Beartic suffer a Curb-Stomp Battle at the hands of Iris and her exceptionally powerful Dragonite, which Iris had only captured in the previous episode — or rather, Dragonite had decided to join Iris' team on his own accord. Georgia gives Iris a What the Hell, Hero? and tells her that she didn't win by her own merits, but because of her Pokemon's strength (especially since Dragonite wasn't obeying Iris at all). We are supposed to think Georgia is being a Sore Loser like she usually is, but her argument makes perfect sense — that instead of relying on Pokémon that she trained and fought alongside, she's just using a last-minute super-weapon she just found. She didn't work to train up the dragonite.
In another episode, Vector claims that Cream, a six year old, should be sent home to her mother rather than tagging along with Sonic and the others around the universe fighting a powerful and murderous alien force. While he steps over the line by trying to send her back by force, it's hard not to feel he has a strong point, especially since Cream shows far less physical capability in this interpretation. It's only worsened since, much like their arguments with Knuckles, the other team mates are belittling to his theories and angrily label him an egotist who should butt out.
A manga one-shot by Rumiko Takahashi called The Tragedy of P tells the story of an apartment complex where pets are forbidden. We're supposed to resent Mrs. Kakei, who's the most vociferous pet-opponent of all the members of the tenants' association, for the way she mercilessly throws out all tenants who are discovered keeping pets. But the thing is, the tenants' agreement clearly forbids keeping pets. Although Mrs. Kakei's stoic demeanor helps convey the image of her as cold and evil, the pet-keeping tenants did sign an agreement saying they wouldn't keep pets. So they're breaking their word and being dishonest, and we're expected to dislike Mrs. Kakei for not wanting them to.
Even more so as it's revealed that Mrs. Kakei had a beloved dog she was forced to give up after moving into the apartment complex, a decision that was emotionally devastating to her. But she still did it because that was what she agreed to do by signing the tenants' agreement. So her apathy towards her fellow tenants over breaking this rule makes perfect sense because she's upholding herself to the same standards that she expects of her fellow tenants, and because she didn't expect an exception for her beloved pet then nobody else should expect an exception either.
In The Twelve Kingdoms, given that Shoukou is a lunatic guilty of committing multiple atrocities such as hunting humans for sport, it's easy to write off his denouncement of the practice of having each kingdom's ruler chosen by kirin according to the mandate of heaven. However, when one takes into account that the kirin, as spirits of mercy and compassion, have an In-Universe alignment of Stupid Good (to the point that one of the first things a good king has to learn is when to ignore their kirin, since a kingdom cannot be run by compassion alone), that each king is bestowed with ageless immortality when they take the throne (and thus stay in power unless and until they go bad and have to be overthrown, which happens eventually in most cases), and that because each king is a Fisher King, a bad ruler causes all kinds of natural disasters in his or her kingdom (famine, plague, armies of rampaging monsters...), it's hard not to concede that Shoukou has a point.
The Koorime are made to appear to us as heartless bitches who would willingly condemn a child to death just because his mother made him with someonefrom a different race (albeit a demon) and he looks "a little" creepy at birth. Even his sister, by far the purest creature from the series, thinks their whole kind deserves to be killed for what they did to her, her mother, and her brother (although she also expresses that she sees it as a form of Mercy Kill). The problem is, their point is completely valid. All the male offspring so far have killed many Koorime, who can only reproduce at intervals of over a century. And Hiei was only saved by The Power of Friendship.
A minor example from the Dark Tournament arc is George suggesting Hiei attack Bui while the latter is busy removing his armor. While the girls chew him out for suggesting such a dishonorable act, they seem to forget a very important detail. The tournament isn't an officially sanctioned martial arts competition. It's Blood Sport where the only consistent rules are 1) No interfering with the match. 2) Stay in the ring. When most matches are won by killing your opponent, every fighter should be a Combat Pragmatist.
Grave of the Fireflies: An interesting protagonist example; the director Takahata intended for Seita to be seen as wrong for not swallowing his pride and returning to his aunt. Yet many saw Seita's actions as understandable, if not necessarily right.
From the Silver Age: Action Comics #176 Muscles For Money, where Superman decides to start charging money to save people. While it's certainly true that Superman was doing some reprehensible things (charging insane amounts, forcing people to sign contracts before he'll save their lives, etc) the primary argument seems to be that Superman doesn't deserve any sort of reward for the good he does. The worst part is when Superman politely requests the $10,000 reward for two criminals he brought in only to have everyone declare him a money-grubber for it, despite the fact that this is a reward the police themselves had offered and which anyone else besides Superman would have been given happily.
Since her return to The Avengers, Scarlet Witch has been attacked by several of her teammates for the events of House of M, even though The Children's Crusade established that she was possessed and manipulated by Doctor Doom. Her critics (namely The Vision and Rogue) are made to look like massive Jerkasses for attacking her, but House of M wasn't the first time Wanda lost control of her powers. There is definitely some logic behind the idea that having her on the Uncanny Avengers might be dangerous and counterproductive to the team's mission statement.
During the "War with the Runaways" arc of Avengers Academy, Hank Pym and Tigra plotted to take Molly Hayes and Klara Prast and put them into foster homes where they would never be found by their older "siblings". Predictably, when the Runaways found out, they attacked. While Pym and Tigra's plan sounded cold and heartless, and while Hank Pym is probably the last person who ought to be making decisions about other people's lives, it's worth noting that the arc was, in part, a follow-up to the unfinished "Home Schooling" arc from the Runaways series, the central thesis of which seemed to be that Nico and Chase were god-awful parental figures who seemed especially ill-equipped to help Klara, who was still showing signs of trauma from her near-death experience and who is powerful enough to accidentally kill someone if she gets too upset. Thankfully, at the end, Nico casts a spell to make each team see things from the other team's point of view, and thus the two groups are able to reach a peaceful compromise.
In the Chick Tract"Somebody Goofed" as well as the "edited for black audiences" version "Oops!", a man named Bobby overdoses on speed and as his friends and family are gathered around, a Christian shows up to tell them all about how Bobby is burning in Hell right now. When another man shows up to stop him we're supposed to side with the Christian. Of course, whether the Christian is right or not, moments after the death of a loved one is usually not the best time to preach to people (let alone say he's suffering eternal damnation for his choices), making the other man totally justified in trying to shut him up. Of course, this being a Chick tract, not only is this guy evil and rude and even assaulting the Christian for no apparent reason, the final panel of the comic reveals he was in fact Satan himself luring another soul to the lake of fire. Chick tracts tend to make the most epic straw men in the history of media.
It was supposed to be a nuanced exploration of whether or not compulsory registration for superheroes was necessary to curb catastrophic mistakes and potential abuses of power. Both sides were supposed to have valid points (but supposedly supporting the Pro-Registration overall). Unfortunately, due to insufficient coordination between the writing teams of different books (as well as a serious difference in the skills of the writing teams — the anti-reg side got J. Michael Straczynski), Mark Millar failed at making readers sympathize with the pro-registration side and both sides ended up looking like straw men, with the pro-registration side looking particularly monstrous. For starters, the SHRA criminalized the act of apprehending a criminal when you yourself are an average citizen, as well as SHIELD trying to arrest Captain America for refusing to join the pro-reg side and enforce the law, before it was actually signed into law. To make matters worse, the actual specifics of registration varied from book to book:
In pro-reg books, registration was treated as a prerequisite to a superhero being a crimefighter. Supers were given the option of not using their powers, getting trained in using them properly and to establish that they were not a threat to themselves or others, and going to prison. If they did not want to fight crime after they were finished being trained, then they didn't have to, and there was no indication that they would be forced. It was just shown that a lot of people chose to fight crime because they had made friends with their fellow trainees and they felt like they should use their powers for good. However, the pro-registration side was still not sympathetic because Tony Stark and Mr. Fantastic were portrayed as being jerks, who felt like they knew what was best, as well as committing some blatant crimes. But they were making excellent points throughout and if Mr. Fantastic's soothsaying math can be believed, it was the lesser of a few evils.
In anti-reg books, SHIELD forcibly conscripted anyone who happened to have any kind of superpowers whether they wanted to fight crime or not, and the pro-reg heroes were Well Intentioned Extremists. When Luke Cage said he just was going to not use his powers and stay out of it, armed gunmen showed up at his door on midnight of the day the act went into effect. In Avengers: The Initiative, kids recruited were told that they either join the initiative, get their powers taken, or go to jail. Cloud 9, whose power was a little cloud that could make her fly, was recruited, turned into a sniper and sent to killing missions, even though she never wanted to use her power for crime fighting. In addition, Stark orchestrated an attack on Black Panther, foreign chief of state, because his wife (who had diplomatic immunity) refused to sign up. It was quite clearly a case of "work for us or else".
The first comic appearance of Alejandro Montoya/El Aguila (Marvel) has the hero returning to his home village and being attacked by random villain El Conquistador for being "the shame of Spain". Consider El Aguila has just mysteriously returned from (fled?) New York after living there for decades and constantly wears a rather ridiculous bright red and black Zorro-esque suit. Well...
At one point, one of the "newbloods" calls out Superman to argue against the notion that they have saved lives thanks to their willingness to kill the most dangerous supervillains. While the new "heroes" are clearly reprehensible and vile, the reader is almost certain to find themselves agreeing there are some criminals who should be taken down permanently, rather than being given relatively light sentences. They also note that the traditional heroes never had to deal with threats like Genosyde and the Murder Squad - if they had a better answer for those situations, the anti-heroes are all ears.
When Superman questions Wonder Woman about bringing a lethal weapon (a sword crafted by a deity) to quell a riot, she shoots back that not everyone has built-in deadly powers like heat vision or bullet-proof skin.
Considering that the Joker is an unrepentant mass-murderer that both the system and the 'classic' superheroes haven't dealt with yet, is it any surprise that the Magog's killing him is supported?
Magnus Robot Fighter eventually ascended the straw point — the hero accepted that the robots' reasons for rebellion were basically sound, and tried to arrange a peace. That is before it descended again, at which point Magnus even destroyed robots that were not rebellious.
Red Sonja — "She-Devil with a Sword" #1-7 has the Borat-Na-Fori religion, which practices human sacrifice. The Celestial, the antagonist, and some sort of strawman for organized religion, points out that his religion is the only thing keeping the entire realm from plunging into barbarism, and that Sonja is only going to make things worse by bringing him down. Turns out that he is absolutely right. At best, the moral of the story is that the Aztecs deserved what they got from the other Mexican Indians and the Spaniards.
We're shown that Thrash the Devil seems to be going on a Roaring Rampage of Revenge by tossing every last echidna into an alternate dimension in a major case of Sins Of The Father. However, while they weren't responsible for what happened to his people, the fact that the echidnas, an overly advanced civilization, sat there and did nothing concerning Dr. Robotnik/Eggman and allowed beings like the Dark Legion and Enerjak to wander freely, you can't help but wonder if he was in the right there, just in an odd way.
Mina is depicted as being overzealous and callous for making a public statement about how dangerous NICOLE is and indirectly starting a mass paranoia concerning her. However, as sympathetic as she is, NICOLE was shown to be extremely dangerous as a result of the Iron Queen corrupting her programming, leading to a takeover that led to the Mobians being enslaved and many supposedly legionized (ie. mutilated with cyborg implants). The Freedom Fighters are outraged by Mina's actions and label the public as being vindictive, but as she angrily pointed out, people had suffered because of NICOLE, and largely because they were cocky enough to neglect installing any security precautions into her software (it was implied they were taking precautions by that point, though had neglected to consult the public about it, by then it was too little too late).
Similarly, Hamlin is conveyed as smug weasel who uses a long-lived grudge against Sally to try and get the council to persecute her for disobeying orders. However, Sally was the one who created the Council in the first place, and then nonchalantly ignored them when they attempted to use democratic tactics. When Hamlin pointed out she was undermining their entire purpose (with some other members even agreeing with him), she gave up her refute and outright blackmailed the Council into siding with her. The fact that she so quickly assumed Hamlin of persecuting her out of spite (he was, but he also had completely legitimate reasons) and moaned about how he could be so heartless as to suggest that she was not acting entirely professionally just made her look like a self-righteous tool.
The reason for Hamlin's spite is the neglectful treatment that his old team received from the Freedom Fighters. While we're supposed to side with Hamlin over his team's being mistreated and forgotten, despite being an actual team that Sally personally trained, it falls apart because that team was called the Substitute Freedom Fighters. By definition, they go into action when the regular line up can't. Also, his team was led by Larry Lynx, who had volunteered to help Rotor in the past, so Hamlin and his teammates could've had more active roles if they had simply asked.
Pretty much any character who calls out Sonic or the other Freedom Fighters for being reckless. Compared to other interpretations, Sonic is more fallible because of his cockiness and his failures have much more dire repercussions. He sometimes accepts this shortcoming, but only whenever it falls straight on his head and even then it never lasts. Otherwise Sonic, as shown above, is actually pretty ignorant towards criticism, and in some cases is even hostile to those who try to handle things their own way (be it more stable or not).
When Jason Todd, the second Robin returned in the "Under the Hood" series, his primary goal was to take down the Joker. Towards the end of the mini-series, Batman tries to justify the Joker's continued survival by revealing he fears that his killing Joker would make for a line that he can never uncross, leading him to become nothing more than a Serial-Killer Killer. Jason, who has been set up as a murdering maniac now little different to the Joker himself, immediately shoots back a rebuttal about the Strawman Fallacy of this particular argument, asking why taking exceptional actions to deal with an exceptional individual, a monster whose list of crimes should have earned him the death sentence a dozen times over or more, would lead to those actions becoming the new default. As he points out, he's not saying that Batman should start killing crooks at random, or even that he should start lethally pruning his Rogues Gallery in general. Just that Batman should do what the legal justice system fails to do, and put the mass-murdering, psychotic, irredeemably evil monster that is The Joker to an end. It's telling that all Batman can muster in response is an empty apology and an insistence that he can't do that.
Very often it seems like is Magneto was right arguing that peaceful co-existence between humans and mutants is impossible, considering that no matter what the X-men do, the plot never seems to get any closer to reaching that, particularly because people in the Marvel Universe are Too Dumb to Live and suffer from Aesop Amnesia regarding that theme. It gets even worse that in a lot stories they seem willing to easily sacrifice any and all of their freedoms at a moment's notice, so quite often it would seem like the world would be better if the X-men let Magneto Take Over the World, since at least he doesn't go making the Green Goblin the most powerful man in America.
And Magneto himself seems to reinforce anti-mutant hysteria, since his Brotherhood often goes beyond merely defending mutants from human intolerance and ventures into outright terrorism.
Robert Kelly's arguments (such as comparing mutant registration to gun control) actually made sense to some readers and viewers. Then they turned an otherwise logical argument into an anvilicious allegory to McCarthyism when they had the senator hold up a "list of names of identified mutants", shifting the argument from "Some mutants are dangerous" to "All mutants are dangerous". Of course, once the killer mutant-seeking robots come in (and they always do), it seems clear that Kelly is Jumping Off the Slippery Slope, even if his arguments do have a grain of truth to them.
The first arc of Cable and X-Force involves the head of a Chick-Fil-A stand-in who bars mutants from eating in her establishments. When confronted, not only does she explain that her daughter was killed during Xorn's attack on NYC, but also points out that superhumans tend to cause insane amounts of collateral damage wherever they go. Thus, her desire to not see her customers and employees killed comes off looking pretty rational, all things considered.
In the New Mutants mini-series, Kevin Ford (AKA Wither) is hiding out in a junkyard after accidentally killing his dad with his disintegration abilities. While trying to lay low, he ends up killing the dog belonging to the junkyard's owner. A confrontation ensues, and at the last second, Dani Moonstar rescues Kevin and beats up his attackers. While we're supposed to root for Dani and not the bigoted junkyard owner, it's hard not to sympathize with him given that a mutant just trespassed on his property and killed his innocent pet. And then when Wither decides he doesn't want to stay at the school, after having no on-panel counselling or training to control his powers, and after having to be stopped from deliberately killing someone, Xavier just lets him go on his way. You're supposed to be on Xavier's side for letting a kid choose his own life, but when the kid has already killed someone and his mutant power is dissolving any organic matter he touches, you kind of feel like getting the cops involved might be a good idea, and maybe the pro-registration crowd have a point.
Anthropology: The story deals with the background pony Lyra trying to prove the existence of humans. Bon Bon her roommate does not believe her and can come across as frustrated and sarcastic in her denial, and we should see her as an insufferable skeptic, especially when she threatens to kick Lyra out, but she makes some fairly decent points: Lyra hasn't any real proof besides some books and dreams, something Twilight agrees with, her behavior is shown to be weird by the pony standards, and Lyra needs to improve her image to advance her musical career, which Rarity agrees with, and she only threatens to kick Lyra out when one of her stunts-bringing an apple cart to life to ride it like a car-nearly hurts somepony. Of course when Lyra comes back to Ponyville with not only proof of humanity, but the fact that she herself is human all that is left is her sarcasm and frustration.
In the Harry Potter/DC Comics crossover Ascension, Aresia is irredeemable for unleashing Circe in an attempt to kill Harry, believing him to have bewitched her fellow amazons. Her reasoning: a male magic user came to Themyscira and within a few days, all of the Amazons are literally lining up to have sex with him, all the while talking about how amazing he is. It's rather hard to argue with that logic.
Bitterness: The rest of the cast is absolutely right when they point out that Twilight was acting irrationally angry when she accused Cadance of being evil in A Canterlot Wedding, Part 1. However, we're supposed to take Twilight's side, even though in this fanfic she (A) rejected Applejack's apology, (B) acts like a complete bitch to everypony about what happened (even insulting her own brother), (C) has spent most of the fanfic twisting every pony's words, and (D) acting generally out of character throughout the fanfic.
About two-thirds of the way through Dumbledore's Army and the Year of Darkness, Zacharias Smith decides to leave the DA. When he does so, he explains that the DA is sounding more and more like a martyrdom cult with each passing day, and the focus of the group has changed from "Resist the Death Eaters" to "Die heroically". The DA counterargument is... to agree with every word he says and ask, "What's the problem with that?" Bear in mind that all of the members of Dumbledore's Army are teenagers, and Zacharias Smith (who was a strawman in canon!) suddenly becomes the Only Sane Man.
In The Empty Cage, one of the known differences in the seal from canon is that from the moment the vessel (Naruto) is destroyed, the Kyuubi will be banished from the human realm for a hundred years. A civilian is presented as being heartless for suggesting killing Naruto immediately to insure a hundred years of freedom from the Kyuubi. Except he's absolutely right and (although no one knows it at the time) it would also prevent Kyuubi from gaining knowledge of seals and freeing his brethren from ever being sealed again. Though, at least one person who disagrees with said civilian uses the justification that every day Naruto (really the Kyuubi) lives is another day added on to their hundred years of safety.
In-Universe example in Fallout: Equestria: Red Eye was raised in an earth pony supremacist stable, and frequently argues against it in his propaganda. Given that unicorns can do magic, pegasi can fly, and earth ponies don't seem to have anything special, it would be hard to argue that earth ponies are even as good as the other races, let alone better. Despite that, the arguments he quotes are pretty convincing. Most significantly, he would have died of old age had he not been given cybernetic implants that were only developed because of the stable's obsession with technology over magic.
Frigid Winds And Burning Hearts has Braveheart being court-martial by Blueblood in Chapter 8. We, the readers, are supposed to side with Braveheart, and feel that Blueblood is badly mistreating him. This would be easier if everything Blueblood says about Braveheart (that he's a violent, hateful street punk in Royal Guard's clothing who has yet to succeed at a single task he undertakes in the story) wasn't true.
Rainbow Dash/Supermare is taken captive by a General Ripper who believes that she is dangerous to Equestria. Surprisingly, she agrees that if she ever did go rogue then she would be a dangerous threat worth being removed.
Later, Alexander Silversmith presents a cynical but still plausible view of the world that comes in conflict with Supermare's.
The Secret Life Of Dolls: Anna is persistently paranoid and accusative of Edward, which the author condemns her for. However? Edward Tallen is a dangerous, antisocial dollpire — and just committed pre-meditated murder. This was darkly foreshadowed, when Anna insists that the reason she wants to kill Edward is that killing vampires is what her family does. Cleolinda says "Yeah, well vampires are supposed to eat people and he's not doing that!"
Film — Animated
In the Balto II: Wolf Quest, the wise elder leader of the wolf pack, who Aleu is fascinated by, is meant to be the good guy. He is very spiritual and preaches accepting change and realizing that you will never know anything; contrasting this is a young, loud, warlike wolf who scoffs at his elder's spiritualism and argues that the pack has to fight to defend itself. The elder's talk of a vague "Grand Design" and not fearing change would probably be received better if the entire pack wasn't on the brink of starvation. Admittedly, fighting a human development would not end well for the wolves, but... Spiritual Leader, why didn't you just say that in the first place?!
In The Little Mermaid, Triton is the intolerant Jerkass telling Ariel how cruel and evil humans are, and Ariel's idealistic views all turn out to be right. But remember, humans catch and eat fish, which are 100% sentient in this mythos. Of course, the humans in the film don't realize that, and Triton destroying all of Ariel's stuff was a dick move. It also doesn't seem to bother the Merfolk that some fish feed on other fish — assuming their race is entirely vegetarian.
In the live action film of 101 Dalmatians, the evil fashion exec Cruella Deville is dismissive of the idea that Anita, her employee, should leave her job in the event of marriage. This is meant to show Deville as callous and cynical, but her observation that marriage tends to deal a massive blow to a woman's career is unfortunately true.
The closest thing that 2012 has to a villain is Oliver Platt's heartless presidential adviser, who's an obvious Take That to George W. Bush and Dick Cheney — note that his name is Anheuser, presumably after Anheuser-Busch breweries. However, after the fifth or sixth argument where his level-headed pragmatism is contrasted with the Honor Before ReasonSave Everyone bleeding-heart attitude of the rest of the cast, you kind of have to wonder if maybe the writers did not secretly agree with him. Some examples:
He is heavily criticized for keeping the impending disaster a secret from the general public, although announcing the end of the world would've caused massive panic and hysteria and helped no one.
Dr. Adrian complains that "only rich people" are being let onto the Arks, to which Anheuser responds that the money they spent buying tickets is what funded the Arks in the first place. That and snarking "Oh, you mean life isn't fair?!" (No one seems to point out that those "rich people" won't be rich after the catastrophe. Even if they could take all their money with them, it'll be worthless in a world without an economy to back it up. They'll have to work just like everyone else.)
What also should be is the fact that the scientists gave the world governments a set time table for when the world was supposed to end, and the the world governments began their doomsday preparations based upon the timeline given to them. But when the end of the world started earlier than what was projected, Anheuser essentially has to make decisions on the fly which are morally ambiguous but are also realistic. He's supposed to be seen as evil for not wanting to save certain people, but considering the scientists keep feeding data that is consistently wrong it's hard to blame him for having to make such drastic decisions.
In Accepted, a high school senior rejected by every college ends up inventing one out of thin air. The thing spins out of control and becomes an actual, factual school set out of an old mental institution. The Dean Bitterman at the nearby traditional college wages an accreditation jihad against the upstart. The guy's a Jerkass, and the new school (with its emphasis on the students) is presented as a brave bastion of new educational methods. But as Dean Dick points out, the new place doesn't have a health center, more than one faculty member, or even a library. One doesn't have to be a crusty old academic to argue that a college should at least have a freaking library.
Dean Wormer's point of view in Animal House is understandable — no sane college administration would want the Deltas around, and the rest of the student body might well have been good and tired of their endless pranks, hell-raising and rule-breaking. The Deltas may have been Affably Evil, but evil they were nonetheless — a lot of the stunts they pulled would get people who tried them in Real Lifetossed straight into jail. That Wormer goes overboard ultimately justifies him being the villain.
In Billy Madison, Eric is supposed to be a Corrupt Corporate Executive who merely wants to run Madison Hotels. However, he is right when he points out that the company's fifty-thousand employees are not likely to have jobs for very long if the president makes his drunkard son (who only graduated because his father bribed his teachers) president of the company. Notably, before Billy strikes a deal to graduate legitimately, this actually does temporarily convince Billy's father to hand the reins over to Eric. It's also noteworthy that, after some Character Development, Billy himself concludes that he's not cut out for the management of a large company and turns it over to Carl, who is both competent and not a Jerkass.
In Brüno, Sacha Baron Cohen's goal as the titular character is to "expose the undercurrent of homophobia in American society". But he does this by assuming the character of an outrageously, nauseatingly flamboyant caricature of the worst stereotypes of homosexual men, (to say nothing of idolizing Hitler as Austria's greatest national character) and then engaging what is fundamentally sexual harrassment of various men who cross his path. The "homosexual hate" he encounters, in a lot of cases, feels less like homophobia and more like a perfectly natural response to being accosted by such an unpleasant, highly offensive individual.
In Cape Fear, Bowden gets the chief of police to try to drive Cady out of town before Cady has done anything illegal. Cady hires a lawyer who is portrayed as fussy and over-liberal, but who makes the entirely legitimate point that Cady is being harassed for no reason. Of course, Cady does not stay innocent for long.
Chairman Of The Board has a version of this mixed with Hilarious in Hindsight: Bradford, the antagonist, blasts Edison's management of the company while the latter is shown driving up the stock price and getting magazine covers amid his antics running the company. The only problem? He was running the company in almost exactly the same manner as a lot of dotcom startups at the same time, almost all of which went broke. Had Bradford not violated numerous laws in forcing Edison out, his fight for control of the company would have been justified to save it from Edison's "interesting" management style. In the meantime, Bradford would arguably have managed the company competently even if he was only looking to sell...one presumes he would have gotten more for a functional company than an asset-stripped wreck, after all.
The film expects the viewers to side with the neighbors who harass the title characters for deciding to celebrate Christmas by taking a cruise. Their daughter went off on a Peace Corps assignment thus making the first time in almost two decades they have time for themselves. Except, the annual Christmas lights competition in which the neighborhood competes annually would count against them having a family out of town and not competing, and they could not have that. The entire plot of the movie is because the neighborhood wants a certificate or a trophy to put in Town Hall for a year.
Hypocrisy comes from the ending moral about Christmas being about togetherness and love. The husband is portrayed as being selfish and petty for resenting the neighborhood finally getting him to join their traditions (complete with Unsportsmanlike Gloating and insults) and still wanting to go on the cruise. Said cruise was a romantic gesture and an attempt to spend long deserved time alone with his wife, a much better symbolism of Christmas' virtues than bullying someone in excess for the sake of winning a contest.
In The Class, a French teacher (François Bégaudeau) struggles to teach grammar to his often apathetic students. Though the students are fleshed out and late in the film the teacher is disrespectful and called out for it, thereby avoiding Straw Characters, the audience is expected to take his side about the necessity of grammar. Not all agreed with it, though.
Ebert: As the students puzzle their way through, I don't know, the passive pluperfect subjunctive or whatever, I must say I sided with them. Despite the best efforts of dedicated and gifted nuns, I never learned to diagram a sentence, something they believed was of paramount importance. Yet I have made my living by writing and speaking. You learn a language by listening and speaking. You learn how to write by reading. It's not an abstraction. Do you think the people who first used the imperfect tense felt the need to name it?
In the hilariously anvilicious and NarmyLifetime Original MovieCyber Seduction: His Secret Life, the mother of the protagonist freaks and panics upon learning that her son is looking at Internet porn. The father is very unconcerned and does not think there is anything abnormal about a teenage boy looking at porn. We are expected to consider the father an oafish buffoon over this fact of life.
Various characters from the government and military are depicted as being callous, paranoid, and inhumane when they immediately imprison the injured alien visitor and attempt to interrogate him about what he's doing on Earth. Even though the viewers are supposed to be disgusted with their behavior, there's one minor problem; Klaatu is indeed planning to destroy the entire human race, taking all of a day and a couple interviews to verify it as the right course. The "inhumane" government officials were completely correct to treat him as an enemy.
There's even some of this in the 1951 original. The humans are lambasted for "striking first", but the craft landed with little warning in a capital city, Klaatu walks directly at the humans with an object held up that snaps open unexpectedly within melee range — and didn't expect humans to flinch? While the soldiers are still in error for firing (in a first contact situation you don't shoot someone just for doing something you don't understand, because they're an alien life form — lots of things are probably going to be happening you won't understand), their error is still entirely understandable because making sudden moves during a very tense situation where people are already pointing guns is not going to end well.
In the film of The Devil Wears Prada, Miranda Priestly delivers a "The Reason You Suck" Speech to her poor, put-upon assistant Andrea, who just wants to be a writer and doesn't understand why everybody looks down on her for not being a fashionista. The problem is that she works for the editor of a fashion magazine. Miranda's speech shows quite nicely that problematic though it is, the industry influences everyone and is ignored at one's own peril. Moreover, thinking that you're "above" the field you work in is not a professional attitude or one you should display in front of your boss and coworkers, who have slaved and sacrificed to succeed in an intensely cutthroat line of work.
In Dragonslayer, King Casiodorus is presented as a villain whose great crime is creating the lottery by which innocent virgins are sacrificed to the dragon Vermithrax. The thing is, though, the lottery worked. Casiodorus tells the story of how his brother Gazerick, a brave warrior king, went out to try and slay the dragon. Vermithrax killed Gazerick and all his men, then laid waste to whole towns in retaliation. The point is underscored when Galen's first bungled effort at dragonslaying provokes a slaughter. Casiodorus's solution of pacifying the dragon with a handful of sacrifices was far better. Even though Casiodorus is later shown to be a hypocrite who accepts bribes to keep rich ladies out of the lottery, then jettisons the whole scheme when his own daughter offers herself up, no one ever presents a compelling answer to his argument: Better a few should die that many may live.
A frequent problem in Cowboy Cop type movies, particularly Dirty Harry, where the wishy-washy liberal superiors chastise Harry for his flagrant abuse of the rights of the suspect and ignorance of police procedure. But the thing is, they are right, and Harry would be a terrifyingly dangerous person in real life. This whole issue was deliberately acknowledged in the earlier film, Bullitt, where the superior turns out to be completely right: it's not good to be a loose cannon. Dirty Harry itself acknowledged this with the second movie, with the primary antagonists being a group of Cowboy Cops. It is instructive to note that despite all the other rules he breaks, Harry never actually killed anyone outside standard law enforcement rules of engagement.
Even in the first movie, Harry isn't portrayed as completely in the right. Everyone seems to forget (probably because the sequels retconned it) that at the end of the movie, he quits the force because things just don't work. Also that the killer goes free because of Harry's misconduct (though see the Hollywood Law entry about this): it's certainly not the case that Harry's methods get things done in spite of being unconventional and illegal. Legally, his apprehension of Scorpio was perfectly legal except for the confession (which wouldn't be necessary for a conviction).
Defied in the sequel, though. The death squad is killing some pretty rotten people who've slipped through the system, but also indiscriminately murders innocent bystanders and hangers on, and even a fellow officer who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.
In Dobro Pozhalovat, ili Postoronni vhod vospreschen ("Welcome, or No Entry unless Invited"), a Russian film about a child expelled from summer camp, the camp director Dynin is a horrrible Obstructive Bureaucrat who clearly doesn't understand children while sucking up to his superiors. Yet his reasons to expel Innochkin (the main protagonist) are absolutely valid. Innochkin already taught everyone to fence with sticks, resulting in injuries, broke the curfew repeatedly, and now swam across the river despite this being strictly forbidden. Not only is Dynin right in no longer wanting to carry responsibility about Innochkin (though he is a very good swimmer, he could still drown), but unless an example is set other children may start crossing the river too - and not all of them are such good swimmers. Removing innochkin from camp was the only sane oprion.
A few Godzilla movies have the debate over killing Godzilla or capturing him for study. While it's true that the traits that enable the monster to exist could lead to immeasurable benefits for humanity, they won't be much good if he keeps smashing cities or infrastructure in general.
The title character of Hitch makes some very valid points about continuing with one's life, adapting, and moving on after a relationship goes sour. He gets called out on this by one of his clients who outright calls him a coward for not chasing after one's love; granted, in the client's case, the breakup was because of a misunderstanding, but on Hitch's case there was a very clear and valid reason for it. As expected, since the film is a Romantic Comedy, Hitch gives in and goes great lengths to get back his love interest even after several rejections, incurring extreme behavior and injuries to himself. Try imagining how that would work in Real Life.
In Home Alone 2, Kevin's mother slaps the hotel concierge for telling her not to go out looking for Kevin by herself, even though he points how huge and dangerous New York is.
As the page quote demonstrates, I Am Sam is one of the worst offenders. More than a few critics and viewers couldn't help agreeing with the "bad guys" that, no matter how wonderful of a person Sam was, he wasn't capable of raising a child.
In The Incredible Hulk, General Ross is wrong because he is obsessed with weaponizing the Hulk Out for an army of Super Soldiers. At one point, he says "As far as I'm concerned, that man's whole body is property of the US government". In a way, he is right: Banner tested the procedure on himself, and that automatically made him the government's responsibility, since the experiment was Backed by the Pentagon to begin with. Ideally, the solution would be to give Banner a place to relax and be humanely treated while they work on a cure/synthesize it. However, Banner is determined to prevent the Hulk from being weaponized, so he stays on the run until he finds a cure. Of course, Ross could have saved himself a lot of trouble if he hadn't lied to Banner about the project's purpose (radiation treatments instead of Super Soldiers) so he could recruit a knownTechnological Pacifist for such a project in the first place — except that he seems to believe that most scientists ARE Technological Pacifists in the Marvel Cinematic Universe.
In Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, two government agents angrily interrogate Indy after Russian spies kidnap him and an old partner of his, murder several American soldiers at a top secret test facility and make off with an alien corpse. Considering what just happened and that Indy's old partner was working with the Russians, the interrogation doesn't seem that unnecessary. Bear in mind this is set during the Cold War.
In Iron Man 2 Senator Stern is an ass and a member of HYDRA, and Hammer is an idiot, but both of them make a lot of valid points in the senate hearing. Tony is a loose cannon, his suit is a weapon (whether he likes the term or not) of the sort that would ordinarily be denied a private citizen, and he is acting totally independent of anyone who could review his actions or rein him in if he gets out of control. None of these things are remotely desirable traits in someone who is trying to be a one-man police for the whole world. Notably, SHIELD agrees with Stern and Hammer that while Iron Man is useful, Tony Stark is too unstable. They still call him in for Avengers, on the grounds that they've hit the Godzilla Threshold.
In La Haine, the more one observes the main characters and their tendency to escalate every small issue into violence, the more one feels the police are absolutely right to treat them with suspicion and loathing at every turn, including the use of force. Though it is no doubt a Grey and Grey Morality tale, it is not that hard to be Rooting for the Empire.
Ebert's review of The Life Of David Gale, which is a different type of this trope wherein the movie's central characters go so ridiculously far to show that their position is right, you can not help but be disgusted with them. The characters were going for "the death penalty is wrong because an innocent man can potentially be executed". What they actually proved was "if you deliberately conceal the evidence that you are innocent from the court until after its too late to do anything, it will arrive too late to do anything". Well, duh.
Many critics who disliked Lions for Lambs felt this way about Tom Cruise's character. A Senator with Presidential ambitions, his role in the film is an interview with anti-war journalist played by Meryl Streep discussing his new plan for Afghanistan. The Senator outlines a reasonable plan and makes some good points, but the film basically expects us to side exclusively with Streep's character simply due to her being anti-war and it being an anti-war film.
In Look Who's Talking Too, the mooching brother-in-law is essentially a strawman for everything that is not a Proper New York City Attitude, including the fact that he has a gun. However, it is a little difficult to argue with one of his rationalizations for having it:
"You know, you people really amuse me, stockpiling your canned food and your water in case of disaster. But when the shit really hits the fan and you're sitting over here with your stuff, and the guy next door has a gun, who do you think's gonna go hungry? Him, or you?"
The villains of the movie, the InGen corporation, are portrayed as evil because they want to recapture the dinosaurs from Isla Sorna to recoup their losses from the first film. While they were pretty ruthless, as well as dicks with the exception of two (hunter Roland Tembo and his buddy Ajay), their argument that the dinosaurs are their rightful property does have merit. When the heroes call them out on destroying the island's "natural" environment, the Corrupt Corporate Executive points out that they created the dinosaurs and introduced them to the island in the first place, millions of years and thousands of miles from their actual long-gone natural habitat. The heroes have no counterargument to this other than starting a fight. This is one of those cases where what's right legally may or may not be what's right morally, but it's certainly not as cut-and-dried as Malcolm's party (or his detractors) likes to present it.
It also doesn't help that Spielberg deliberately took out two scenes that made Roland and Ajay themselves much more sympathetic, in which Roland saves a woman being harrassed in a bar, and it's made clear that the baby T-Rex's broken leg was an accident (the final cut implies they did it deliberately).
One of the "heroes" steals the ammo of the hunters. In other words, he removes their primary means of defense against the dangerous dinosaurs on the island, making him responsible for manslaughter. Even in-canon, the protagonists aren't exactly sympathetic.
The unofficial James Bond film Never Say Never Again introduces us to a new M who orders Bond to go to a health farm after he fails a training exercise - an act in which we the viewer are clearly meant to believe makes him some kind of tinpot dictator or Obstructive Bureaucrat that is unable to register just how badass Bond is. But if you take off your fan hat for a second and analyse the situation from his point of view you suddenly realize that he is absolutely correct. He has an ageing senior field agent of the elite 00 unit who failed an exercise because he wasn't being careful enough, who drinks heavily, who smokes like a chimney, who frequently gambles, who is open to all sorts of S.T.D.s thanks to his womanising, who is not a team-player and has a diet rich in fatty heavily salted foods. Even by the standards of the 80's you simply can not let an active agent who is licensed to kill anyone he pleases behind enemy lines carry on like this.
Nine Months is all about a man (Samuel) who finds out his girlfriend (Rebecca) is pregnant; needless to say, it's a surprise pregnancy and neither of them are really sure if they want to go through with it at first. Samuel himself doesn't really accept it until close to the end of the pregnancy, but Rebecca accepts it pretty early on and starts preparing for motherhood. Great pains are taken to paint Samuel as wrong for being reluctant to have a kid, veering into Strawman territory at several points, but the kicker has to be early on when Rebecca gets worried that the cat Samuel owns might be a problem, as a cat can lie on a baby's face and smother it. She tries to convince Samuel to get rid of the cat, and we're supposed to side with her and think Samuel is an uncaring jerk for putting his pet ahead of his baby...except that, as Samuel says, the cat is fifteen years old, so it would be a surprise if it lived long enough to see the baby born, the cat has no teeth left, and the poor thing hardly moves. No vet would agree to put down an otherwise healthy pet that's just old, and giving it up to a shelter would be heartless because a cat that old is unadoptable, so it would be put down after a few months anyway instead of living its final days in comfort with a loving owner. Samuel point-blank refuses to get rid of the cat and the matter is dropped for the rest of the movie.
Patch's roommate is supposed to be a Jerkass whose hostility is motivated by his frustration over Patch's subversive antics. When Patch calls him out after he turns Patch in for suspected cheating, the roommate replies he has seen how little Patch actually studies and asks how Patch still manages to get such high marks. The viewer has yet to see Patch do much studying either, so it seems primed for Patch to defend himself to show he knows the material. Instead, Patch launches into another speech attacking the roommate for being a Jerkass, and the viewer is left to assume Patch wears his smart hat offscreen because he is the protagonist, so he could not possibly be cheating to excel in an academic system he has such little regard for.
One line by Adams about how "it's not like getting involved with your patients causes you to explode" completely destroys the movie's moral when one character getting involved with a shady patient causes them to be shot in the head. Adams's methods directly caused a main character to die, but we are not supposed to notice that. The real Patch Adams himself was upset regarding his depiction in the movie, saying his method was more like the middle ground offered above-help patients keep a positive attitude with good humor, but still, you know, practice real medicine.
None of the above is helped by the fact that at no point do we ever see Patch actually making patients better. He makes patients feel better, but he never actually treats their diseases and/or injuries to make them healthier. Granted, many of the patients he dealt with were terminally ill or simply suffering the ravages of old age, and granted helping patients keep a positive attitude is a good thing, but it should never be a substitute for actual, factual medical treatment.
At one point, frustrated at how people can be denied medical care if they don't have insurance, Patch and his friends open up a "clinic" and start seeing patients for free. Without having a medical license or any sort of certification from the state. When they run out of basic supplies, they concoct a plan to steal them from a hospital. These are serious crimes and Patch and his friends should have been turned in to the authorities.
Ned's girlfriend, when you really think about it. Dewey has been bumming at their place for months if not years, while continually refusing to get a steady job and therefore doing little to contribute to the rent. Ned keeps doing whatever he can to accommodate him because they were in a band years ago, while Patty is just supposed to put up with this. It doesn't change the fact that she seems to take joy in Dewey's suffering, but anyone would be frustrated by that point.
The fact of the matter is that most aspiring rock stars, no matter how committed they are to their dreams of music stardom, will not succeed and will have to find some other means of paying the bills. It's not because their drive wasn't strong enough, simply that at some point, reality sets in and you have to find a way to provide the basic necessities for yourself. Of course, the dilemma that the movie sets up is something of a false one — a lot of people simply parlay their rock star dreams into another career involving music, such as teaching or writing about it. And of course, at the end of the movie, Dewey and Ned do just that by setting up an after-school rock music teaching program. But the way Dewey acted like it was either one or the other doesn't reflect reality.
It's hard to blame Dewey's band for firing him — just watch Dewey in action during the opening scene. The fact that they win the battle of the bands without him only proves their point.
It doesn't exactly make parents "tightly-wound" for being upset that their kids are learning nothing but rock music, and no academics, for weeks or months on end. Even many rock-loving parents would be bothered by how this would set their kids up for some serious educational problems later in the area (for being behind all the other classes in their grade). They might even sue the school for not checking Dewey's creds. In their case, it's not as extreme as the others in the movie as they are shown to just want what's best for their kids (as seen by their horrified reaction when Dewey accidentally implies he touched the students).
In the film version of Sgt. Bilko, the villain is a military higher-up who wants to run Bilko out of the Army for essentially running a team of Neighborhood Friendly Gangsters out of an American military base, and also for getting him blamed for a crime Bilko committed and getting the villain transferred to Alaska. Since this is actually a completely reasonable thing to do from any objective viewpoint, the villain is made to accomplish his goals through methods even more criminal and underhanded than Bilko's, in order to make sure he doesn't get the audience's sympathy.
In the Killer Bee movie The Swarm, Michael Caine's character, Dr Bradford Crane, is clearly supposed to be the hero and Richard Widmark's General Slater the villain. The trouble is that all of the schemes for dealing with the bees suggested by Slater all seem eminently sensible but are shot down by Crane on the grounds of the "environmental damage" (even after the bees have already blown up a nuclear reactor, killing upwards of 30,000 people) whilst none of Crane's schemes actually work until the end. On top of that, Crane defeats the swarm of bees by setting an oil slick on fire, even though that is not exactly great for the environment.
Teaching Mrs. Tingle: the title character is a high school Sadist Teacher who has it in for the lead character, who is just trying to become valedictorian. At the start of the film, Mrs. Tingle gives a C grade to a project she worked six months on, a historical recreation of the diary of a girl accused of being a witch during the time of the 1692 Salem Witch Trials. Except that the diary describes witch-burnings, whereas the accused witches at Salem were all hanged, except for the one man who was crushed, meaning the teacher was well within her rights to mark the assignment down.
In X-Men, Senator Kelly casts all manner of aspersions on mutants, and we're supposed to side against him because he's the antagonist. But when you get down to the actual arguments he uses, his concerns start to sound rather reasonable. For instance he cites a report of a mutant girl who can walk through walls, and asks "what's to stop her from walking into a bank vault, or into the White House?" Not only does the film never offer up a counter-argument against this, but in the second film a mutant actually does use his powers to sneak into the White House and nearly assassinates the President.
Let's face it- many of the mutants are walking weapons, and non-mutants rely purely on their goodwill for them not to take over - the heroes are shown as people who can kill you with a single touch, kill you with a single (unshielded) look, read your mind, control your thoughts, withstand being shot while slicing you up, hit you with lightening, and freeze you to death. And that's just the good guys.
X2: X-Men United: The villain in X2 is so extremely anti-mutant that he would experiment on and enslave his own son to exterminate them all. In the process he enslaves another mutant to attack the president of the US, just so he can offer a target for the president to authorize an attack on. Before the strike, though, an objection is made that the target is a school. The villain responds sarcastically, "sure it is," showing x-ray imagery of a secret jet underneath the school's basketball court. A dispassionate observer should note, actually, that that is actually extremely suspicious. Normally schools don't have military-grade equipment hidden in their facility, and after all "schools" in some parts of the world have been used as recruiting centers/supply bases/etcetera by terrorist organizations before—both for the purpose of camouflage, and making attacks on them politically troublesome. The president then orders a non-lethal infiltration and capture mission, which from his position is entirely reasonable.
X-Men: Days of Future Past presents the inverse of the situation seen in X1. This time, it's the government who takes the side of the mutants at Trask's Senate hearing and refuse to give the funding he needs to create the Sentinel program. The problem is that Trask has very well-founded fears that the audience can sympathize with. He correctly points out that the U.S. and Russia nearly went to war in the course of a single battle as a result of mutant intervention (which they officially deny, but are later seen to have removed several pieces of clothing and technology from and stored). After the Paris Peace Accord incident, he then points out that the participants include a man who can direct metal (and is the prime suspect/convicted prisoner in the death of a sitting U.S. President), another who believes that mutants will drive humanity into extinction, and a third who can shapeshift into anyone and order a nuclear strike if she felt like it. It doesn't justify his genocidal tendencies towards mutants, but there are some very real fears.
In the made-for-TV movie Zenon: The Zequel, General Hammond (no, not that one.) arrives to decommission the station, which was still suffering the after-effects of the sabotage in the previous film. His actions are seen by the main characters as evil. Here's what he really does: decommission an unstable space station before it falls to Earth, doing untold damage, attempt to apprehend a girl who thinks it's ok to smuggle aboard a shuttle, chase after spaceship thieves, and other actions perfectly in line with what any good soldier or policeman would do.
In Gross Anatomy, the protagonist, Joe Slovak, lambastes the administration of the medical school where he is a student after his roommate and best friend is "invited to leave," that is, informally expelled. The problem is that said roommate was caught using amphetamines. The protagonist objects that medical students are only human, not superhuman, and that the school's expectations of them are too high, and that the school should be more understanding and compassionate toward a student who needed speed to get through his classes. We're clearly meant to side with Slovak and his roommate, but the problem is this: would you want to be a patient of a doctor who needed amphetamines just to pass his first year of medical school? Moreover, most doctors passed their first years without speed. Also, arguably the school is being compassionate by washing out a student who can't hack it as a first-year, rather than waiting for him to accrue tens of thousands of dollars more in student-loan debt when they have to expel him later. A doctor who washes out as an intern after being graduated from medical school doesn't get all his student loans magically forgiven. He still has to pay them back, but without the income of a full-fledged licensed physician.
The Anita Blake: Vampire Hunter series is full of this. Richard (the avatar of the author's ex-husband) frequently rants against the murder, rape, hypocrisy, greed, and general bad behavior of the Mary Sue protagonist, allegedly to show what a self-hating mess he is. The author is apparently unaware that he's the only one who makes any kind of logical, intelligent points about the heroine — and she doesn't even dispute the things he says.
Happens sometime in the Circle of Magic books. In Daja's Book, the protagonists butt heads with an arrogant University mage named Yarrun Firetamer. Yarrun is dead wrong about the fire risk in the valleynote the forest has so much dead brush matter in it from fire suppression that it's more dangerous than ever, a bit of Truth in Televisionand pays with his life but he has an illuminating conversation with Daja in which he points out that workers of "ordinary" magic do highly necessary work such as sanitation, preventing food spoilage, etcetera, and deserve more credit than they usually get. He also defines learning as "when other people can work their spells as you do and get the same results." Replace "spells" with "experiments" and you have a key part of the Scientific Method. But Daja dismisses his opinions as more "bile."
* In the Chronicles of Narnia, this happens frequently, as Lewis likes to use strawpeople.
Friedrich Nietzsche had this reaction to Dostoevsky's Raskolnikov, from Crime and Punishment: Raskolnikov at first believes himself to be an Übermensch, but is wracked by guilt and eventually gets his redemption through a religious (specifically Orthodox Christian, as this was Dostoevsky's religion) experience. Nietzsche regarded the religious redemption bit as bull and disdained Raskolnikov's feelings of guilt, but agreed with the unreformed Raskolnikov's Ubermenschian perspective.
In the second Death World book (the Harry Harrison series), a major character exists solely so the Author Avatar (and Mary Sue) can explain to him the virtues of moral relativism. Only problem is, while the character is a dog-kicking Designated Villain, the arguments he makes against relativism aren't really shot down, just ignored in favor of the main character being made to look much cooler than him.
The Dean in The Fountainhead exists mainly to mouth bad arguments in favour of classical architecture so that Howard Roark can humiliate him, but his fearful reaction to Roark's total indifference to the thoughts and feelings of others seems totally sensible given that that kind of chill, unemotional disregard is generally associated with sociopathy.
In Harry Potter, Zacharias Smith, who is skeptical about Harry's version of events after Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, is portrayed as a Jerk Ass for not immediately believing Harry. The fact that Zach does not have the privileged viewpoint of the readership, and that Harry has been very close-mouthed about what happened, does not help.
Isabel Allende's The House of the Spirits provides an example of this trope. Esteban Trueba's feudalistic views on his workers are unacceptable by today's standards. Still, it would indeed be quite idealistic (if not downright unreasonable) to believe that barely literate people are fully qualified to participate in political life. Apparently it never occurs to him (or more likely, this was the entire point) that they won't get to be qualified by being kept out, either. Increased education for the peasants might help, but of course Don Trueba would hardly support that.
In the Inheritance Cycle, Galbatorix can be seen as this. While later books established him as being thoroughly evil and tyrannical, his depiction in early books left him looking pretty good for many readers. His rise to power (in which he won humanity's superiority over the elves and killed the all-powerful dragon riders) is portrayed as a Moral Event Horizon, and he wants to stomp out the urgals, a warlike species whose rite of passage is to find something, anything, and kill it. He's done plenty of unsavoury things and isn't to be praised, but he's made humanity safe and superior, and even his enemies acknowledge that his insanity doesn't touch most of his subjects. And he is the established power, with a clear-cut law, as opposed to the Varden, who will gladly accept you into their group provided you A.) follow your flawed and suicidal orders to the letter, and B.) be sure to always shower praise on Eragon, the elves, and your visionary leader, Nasuada. In the end it isn't so much that the Strawman Has A Point, but that the other side is so self-righteous and annoying the reader finds it hard to root for them.
In LARP: The Battle for Verona, the main characters' home, the island of Verona outside of Washington, is invaded by Mongolians who use Medieval weapons, and the main characters, who have no military or combat training, but who do Live-Action Role Playing, want to help free it. The US military gives very good reasons for them not to — i.e., they're citizens with no military or combat training, no real weapons and no guarantee they could get any, no real idea what they're going up against, and any action they might take in their ignorance might make the situation worse, including getting the people of Verona killed. The "argument" the main characters put forth essentially comes down to "we just want to be cool" and that they're somehow more qualified to attack people who use Medieval weapons because they use replica Medieval weapons once a week. Somehow the military thinks these are good points and lets the main characters and their LARP friends go in to save Verona.
This is a problem with the series of books, as noted in the Slacktivist's deconstruction of it. The main heroes are such Jerk Sues that many of the people with whom they argue come off looking much better by comparison. For example, in the first chapter, a drunk Texan wakes up and sees the carnage wrought by the Rapture (plane crashes, etc). He is mocked as a silly drunk by the narrators, but he is the only one to express any sort of horror at the proceedings. In the next book, we are clearly supposed to cheer for the alleged hero as he is insubordinate to his boss — whose main crime seems to be being a woman who does not fawn over him and expects him to do his job.
Verna is constantly presented as a no-fun, uppity woman who thinks Buck is a pompous Jerkass. And she's right.
The "heroes" are supposed to be callous to the suffering at this point, as they have not been "saved" and are still unrepentant sinners. The problem is, even after they are saved and supposedly become model Christians, they still consider others' suffering an inconvenience. The only notes of genuine regret or contrition come from the supposedly un-saved.
In the fourth Maximum Ride novel, Max is furious that, after she and the Flock come to the government's attention, they would dare to try to put them in a boarding school. A few of their concerns — being told they would be studied to a certain extent, etc. — were valid, given their history. Several others not so much, especially when Max basically tells them "we've had it harder than you and we know better". It's kind of difficult to argue that they are properly prepared to move to civilian life when they decide to dive-bomb the Pentagon for amusement and then are surprised that there's retaliation.
In John Milton's Paradise Lost, Satan argues against God invoking democracy, free speech and egalitarianism. This sounds more plausible nowadays that it would have at the time. The speech is so persuasive that a lot of critics think it's meant to be that way, for one reason or another, William Blake famously viewing Milton as "of the Devil's party without knowing it." However Satan states in the speech there can be superiors and inferiors because he doesn't want his angels to revolt against him, and later admits he's just being a jerk to humanity because they have Paradise while he doesn't.
The Pale Woman in the Realm of the Elderlings novel Fool's Fate actually has a very good point: reviving an apex predator with the capacity to wipe out humanity and no real reason not to is a pretty darned stupid idea. It is primarily the political implications that drive Fitz to oppose her, though.
In the first half of the New Jedi Order series, there's a schism in the Jedi Order over whether or not it is acceptable to use leftover Imperial projects and superweapons against the Yuuzhan Vong. The Jedi in favor are called radicals and, just to make sure we know that their viewpoint is immoral and evil, the authors made them willing to kidnap children and perform other heinous acts to get what they want. No one, including Luke, seems to be able to explain to us how killing Yuuzhan Vong with superlasers is more evil than fighting them with conventional weapons. Later authors in the series recognize this as a strawman and offer the argument of superweapons being inefficient wastes of resourcesnote another squadron of warships is a more versatile use of money and manpower than a Death Star that are for terrorizing civiliansnote Yuuzhan Vong civilians aren't in a position to affect policy, not fighting wars.
In the Fate of the Jedi series, Galactic Alliance Chief of State Natasi Daala enacts various policies to rein in what she sees as the unchecked power that the Jedi have within the Galactic Alliance. Coming off a major galactic civil war started by a corrupted Jedi who enacted a coup and seized control of the Alliance, she is not entirely without precedent or reason to be concerned over potentially uncontrolled actions by Force Users. These policies grow excessively draconian and begin to cost her public opinion due to various publicized incidents. However, instead of using the mounting public pressure and political scandals resulting from her actions to legally reign in Daala's excesses (as had already proved effective in overturning the siege of the Jedi Temple and dissolving the Court of Jedi Affairs), the Jedi embark on a coup to remove her from power that involves taking hostages, attacking government facilities, killing the appointed acting Grand Master of the Jedi, Kenth Hamner, and removing Daala from power to install Hamner's killer as part of an acting Triumvirate over the Alliance.
The Turner Diaries: a strawman proclaims the "heroes" of the book as "depraved, racist criminals." He's supposed to be a strawman, yet this is a 100% accurate description of the "heroic" white supremacist Right Wing Militia Fanatic group known as the Order (that went on to inspire an actual group of depraved, racist terrorists by the same name, whose exploits included murdering a critical Jewish talk show host in his own driveway).
Twilight: Anyone who disagree's with or doesnt like Bella is automatically wrong, no matter how right they are.
In the novel New Moon, Bella is annoyed that Jessica won't talk to her, and thinks that Jessica is being petty and evil. This is after Bella has ignored everyone for four months, used Jessica to get Charlie off her back, ditched her shortly into the movie to pine over Edward, and then nearly frightened Jessica to death by walking up to a very dangerous-looking biker in a bad part of town that Jessica clearly wanted to avoid, all because Bella thought it may be the same one that Edward rescued her from before.
In Breaking Dawn, Leah calls Bella out on some of her more selfish actions in trying to manipulate and keep Jacob with her despite knowing full well how much it hurts Jacob to be around her knowing that she's chosen to die and become an undead monstrosity with Edward over a life with him. Even Bella admits that she's being selfish, but chooses to keep doing it anyway. Everyone else gets angry at Leah for upsetting Bella, including the guy Leah was trying to stand up for. And any point Leah made is completely forgotten.
The part where Aro says that humans now have technology that could be used to hurt or kill vampires, so since there's no way of knowing that Renesmee will always be able to keep vampires a secret she's a vulnerability. The response to this is something along the lines of "Aro is a big mean jerk who just wants to destroy the Cullen family for loving each other" and nobody bothers to refute his point until Alice conveniently shows up with another half-vampire. Aro is actually kind of right, though, especially since Renesmee's superpower involves sharing her thoughts with people, and Bella finds out she has the ability to project her power over an area (if she ever experiences any Power Incontinence she could end up accidentally sharing random things with random humans).
Charlie gets both this and Informed Wrongness. His daughter is creepily obsessed with a guy who has never displayed any attributes aside from being equally creepily obsessed with her and being an asshole and also gives him no reason to assume he isn't an abuser (which, by real world standards, he is). The narrative pretty clearly wants theheroes reader to side against Charlie, even when Bella and Edward team up to casually manipulate and bully him into letting her do whatever she wants. Charlie really hadn't been wrong about anything in the entire story.
In New Moon he's trying to get Bella help when she's clearly depressed. He points out (correctly) that she's just going through the motions and that it would be better if she lived with her mother rather than staying in the town that has too many painful memories. And the readers are supposed to side with Bella, who refuses to move on with her life and even exploits Jacob's infatuation with her, because the only way she can find any measure of happiness is playing games with her life which causes her to hallucinate Edward telling her to stop risking her life.
An in-universe example appears in George Orwell's 1984, in the form of Emmanuel Goldstein, a strawman politician invented by the ruling party in order to draw out dissidents. Orwell uses Goldstein in order to set out his own views of totalitarian societies; in the book he is entirely correct, but the authorities do not even try to suppress his message. Instead, they attempt to condition the population into being unable to comprehend an objective reality.
In Thief of Time, Susan's boss is depicted as a hopeless mess of an educator because her school uses the "learning through play" method. It's claimed that parents send their children there only as a last resort when "normal" methods fail. This seems to be a dig at non-traditional educational systems such as the Montessori method, with an added insinuation that any good teacher can make any five-year-old sit in a desk and learn arithmetic from a lecture. However, increasing bodies of evidence indicate traditional methods aren't actually the most effective (not to mention that some children genuinely have special needs and straight-up can't cope in a traditional learning environment). Some non-traditional methods have actually shown to be highly effective at teaching skills like reading. They're also hardly the product of newfangled hippie thinking; Maria Montessori established her first Casa de Bambini before World War One.
The Older Son in the parable of the Prodigal Son is probably one of the oldest examples. The guy mostly exists to complain about the fact that his turd of a little brother is getting all the respect for dragging his sorry butt home after wasting all his inheritance money and generally being a turd, while the older son has been obedient and worked hard all his life and has never been rewarded. Dad scolds him for not celebrating that his brother is once again part of the family. Yeah, it's a metaphor about the value and meaning of repentance, but the older son does have a literal point: why bother working hard when the rewards for being a turd are so much better?
In Dragonlance, especially the original novels by Weis & Hickman, one is supposed to take the viewpoint that the gods are patient, long-suffering parents who have been wrongfully scorned by their mortal children, and that those mortals who argue that the gods are the ones who have done wrong and do not deserve mortal reverence, like Tanis Half-Elven, are misguided fools at best. Thing is, the story of the Cataclysm essentially involves the gods devastating the world with a massive destructive event, stealing away all sources of healing magic beforehand, and then, when the angry survivors demand to know why the gods have done this to them, the gods respond by turning their backs on mortalkind and leaving them to suffer without healing spells for centuries after. It's hard not to say that mortals don't have legitimate reasons to be angry with their gods in this setting... but, of course, the authors fully support the viewpoint that the gods are in the right and so events proceed accordingly.
All in the Family had this problem a few times. Audiences were always supposed to see Archie Bunker as wrong, no matter what, even if he actually made more sense than Mike. Most egregiously is the infamous exchange in "Archie and the KKK Part 1" where Mike tries to justify people looting and stealing because they were poor and needed it. Archie rightfully points out that it's still stealing, and most of the people that did steal, stole way more than they needed even if you want to argue they needed to because they were poor.
During a Flash Forward to a hundred years in the future, where historians are debating the role and morality of the actions of Sheridan and his disciples, an aged Delenn tells them off for talking drivel and listening only to what they want to hear. But from the point of view of real historiography they're presenting valid viewpoints given the data available to them. After all, extraordinary claims do require extraordinary evidence, and given how momentous Sheridan's actions were it would be very unprofessional for a historian to unquestioningly buy into the story. On the other hand, Delenn was a close friend, confidant, and lover of Sheridan, so it's understandable that she'd stick up for all of the friends and family she had at that time. Doesn't mean that she's right for doing this, but it makes her position a little more reasonable. The charitable interpretations of the scene run head on into J Michael Straczynski's own words in the DVD Commentary, in which he outright declares that the scene was an expression of his disgust with historians who try to explain events in terms of large-scale social, economic and geopolitical forces, who he thinks are pathetic losers who just want to tear down the Great People who achieved things.
Garibaldi and Sheridan's fight in Season 4. Later it's revealed that Garibaldi had been manipulated by telepaths and they make up after Garibaldi apologizes. Upon reflection, though, Garibaldi's critiques of Sheridan make a lot of sense - Sheridan really is building a huge army loyal to him personally, he's encouraging or at least allowing a cult of personality to build up around him stating that he has mystical powers, and he's leaving his friends and co-officers out of the decision making process. Since Sheridan's a fictional character he never abuses his position, but he continues to wield massive, essentially unchecked personal power from this point for the rest of his remaining lifespan. In real life, Garibaldi would be perfectly correct to not approve of this, and Sheridan never really addresses concerns on these points.
The Beast: This review of this Made-for-TV Movie points how the characterization in the film suffers badly from this trope. We are meant to cheer for the Designated Hero Whip Dalton and boo the Designated Villain Schuyler Graves. Unfortunately, practically the only sign we're given that Graves is evil is when he's criticizing Whip for destroying a raft that Graves was trying to claim as his property — perfectly legitimately in accordance with maritime law.
The Knights of Byzantium in season 5 are pretty harsh: they plan on killing Buffy's younger sister, "The Key", to prevent a Hellgod from another dimension from using her to open a portal back to her dimension that would plunge this world into chaos. As hard as it is to blame Buffy for defending her sister and going against this, the fact remains that in doing so she is risking the fate of the entire world merely to attempt to save one magically created metaphysical entity that Buffy falsely believes to be her sister. Looking at things from a rational standpoint, what the Knights are trying to do makes perfect sense, and in fact Buffy comes to agree with that after a few years of Character Development, telling Giles in season 7 that if given the choice again she would sacrifice Dawn for the good of the world.
The Social Worker from the episode "Gone". We're meant to hate her for making Buffy's life harder and cheer Buffy on when she's invisible and gets revenge, but really, Buffy's in no state to look after a teenage girl with issues, even if she is her sister, especially considering the way she handled that was by making the social worker look like she was insane to her boss. Way to make sure that other children are being looked after, Buffy.
Xander is portrayed as a Strawman after the initial shock and dismay of Angel being back from hell has worn off on the Scoobies. The audience is supposed to feel that Xander is just being jealous and can't understand the love that Buffy and Angel share. Except that he is totally correct in that Angel is a huge threat, which he proved in the previous season when he lost his soul. Everyone eventually gets over the fact that they were tortured or attacked except for Xander and brings up that Buffy should slay or at the very least not be in contact with him several times over the next few episodes, for which Willow and Buffy admonish him. Buffy assures them that she is keeping things professional, but every time we see them they are making out. This wouldn't be a problem if she knew exactly how far she could go before he would lose his soul, but the terms of his curse are vague at best and it can be broken by other means.
Ironically, Buffy and Xander end up on the opposite side of the argument when it turns out that Anya, Xander's vengeance demon ex-fiance, is responsible for several deaths. Buffy instantly decides she's a danger and needs to be killed, Xander disagrees because... well, Anya's their friend and they're kind of used to them turning evil by now. In the end, Willow Takes a Third Option.
Willow's first meeting with the Wiccan group where she meets Tara. The Wiccans dismiss Willow for suggesting they try actual magic, as they would do in any real life school. They're protrayed as being close-minded posers, despite the fact that The Masquerade is in effect and as far as they're concerned, Willow's suggestion is no more valid than it would be in real life.
Carrusel: Jorge tells on Bibi, since Bibi was cheating on a test. The audience is supposed to take Bibi's side, since Jorge is such an abominable character overall. But cheating is wrong. It is unfair for Bibi to cheat and get away with it. And at age 9, nobody will be faulted for saying it loud and immediately instead of waiting till later and telling the teacher in private.
Castle: Captain Gates is seen as a hard-ass who wants Castle gone from the precinct, in direct opposition to former Captain Montgomery's permissive role with him. She is seen as only keeping him on at the Mayor's word, and each time she can (when Beckett's not officially in the precinct anymore) she jettisons him. But of course she has the point that Castle's not a cop and shouldn't be there when the person he's basing his novels on is not in the precinct...no matter how helpful he truly is to the investigation.
Casualty: One rather odd storyline expected the audience to hate locum consultant Dominic Carter because registrar Tom Kent holds a grudge against him for an incident when Dominic covered up a mistake made by a junior colleague and Tom reported him. Yet most of the time Dominic was the one in the right. He treats a teenage girl who fell down some stairs for the injuries she sustained and tells her to see her GP about feeling unwell. She later turns out to have meningitis but she was showing no symptoms when Dominic examined her. When Tom calls Dominic out on this, Dominic points out Tom also failed to diagnose her so Tom punches him, escaping punishment after a half-hearted apology. Then Dominic wants to declare a baby with severe hypothermia dead but Tom insists on continuing with a resuscitation and gets his heart going again. He's hailed as a hero but Dominic rightly points out the child is still seriously ill and even if he survives will probably be brain-damaged. Dominic is promptly sacked as a liability. To compound the problem, Tom then tries to attack colleague Dylan Keogh simply because he told the truth when questioned about Tom punching Dominic and Dylan resigns (although that's mostly down to not being able to work with Tom when he's sleeping with Dylan's ex-wife), meaning Tom has cost the department two doctors. Who exactly is the liability?
Any time anyone doubts the legitimacy of offender profiling, particularly when it's the only evidence for an arrest. In real life, profiling has never been proved to be effective and tests show "experts" have no more success with it than laymen. See here
In the episode Tabula Rasa, there is an especially egregious example where Hotchner is testifying at a criminal trial. When the defense lawyer claims that the FBI's "profilers" are doing is simply cold reading, Hotchner responds by cold reading the defense lawyer. This of course defeats this lawyer despite actually proving his point. Even though Hotchner was correct in his predictions, this does not prove anything of value. If that was a real defense lawyer that had been intelligent, he should have called a fake psychic to do the exact same thing as a rebuttal witness. Of course at the end of the episode, as always, they end up proving themselves correct with other evidence.
In "The Sontaran Stratagem", the Doctor insists that he is going to handle the situation and that Colonel Mace of UNIT should listen to him and not attack the Sontarans who has already killed several dozen people and are warming up a full force invasion. While the Doctor is right that something fishy is going on with the Sontaran tactics and that UNIT could easy be crushed if the Sontarans actually tried, Colonel Mace is dealing with an alien invasion; he knows that attacking that building may end with all of his men dead, but he points out that they cannot simply sit around and wait to be conquered.
In the serial "The Invasion", aspiring glamour photographer Isobel suggests getting proof of the Cybermen's presence in the sewers by going down to take pictures. The Brigadier agrees, but intends to use his own men instead, on the basis that such a situation is no place for a lady. Isobel blows up at how backward and sexist he's being, but the Brig refuses, and both girls gang up on Jamie for agreeing with him and both she and Zoe walk away in a huff to get the pics themselves with Jamie worriedly tagging along, which ends up getting a police officer and a UNIT soldier sent to rescue them killed. While it could easily be argued that the Brig was in the wrong to assume they could not handle themselves for being women, it might have been better to let trained and experienced soldiers do the dangerous work, and neither of the girls are called out for their reckless actions getting two men killed. To add insult to injury, Isobel's photos end up being useless since she's never done any surveillance or dim-lighting photography.
Both Harriet Jones and Torchwood One are presented by both the Doctor and the script writers as being entirely in the wrong for activities such as harvesting alien technology. Problem is that the Doctor is reckless who treats death like a game and he is someone who is not likely to be there when the Earth needs him and he is actually responsible through his indirect actions for a good portion of the threats the Earth encounters - the Master becoming Prime Minister being the best example. We need people like them (and UNIT) to guard us in a very dangerous universe.
The Doctor does have a point, in that killing those who were retreating doesn't look good and for good reason goes against the rules of warfare. However these arguments are never brought up.
In "Journey's End" the Doctor is disgusted when his clone destroys the Dalek fleet and treats him like a monster even though the Daleks are fanatical mass-murderers who never negotiate, and letting them live would inevitably lead to countless more deaths. They had just come close to destroying the Universe and it probably wouldn't be too difficult for them to try again, considering from what we see the Doctor was just willing to leave them like they were, when it probably wouldn't be too difficult for them to recover.
"Parting of the Ways" has the Doctor decide not to destroy Earth to destroy the Dalek Fleet, saying he prefers to be coward rather then killer. However from what we see the Daleks have probably just killed most of the inhabitants of Earth and those that survive are either going to be exterminated or turned into Daleks, which is clearly A Fate Worse Then Death. If not for a literal Deus ex Machina the Daleks would have probably conquered and destroyed many more worlds.
ER: Kerry Weaver was seen as a villain for wanting people to follow rules and policy.
Not so much for being a stickler to the rules as for being a Rules Lawyer where her subordinates are concerned, but playing fast and loose with them when she saw an opportunity to advance herself, or to avoid blame by shifting it to someone else. A much better example would be the early portrayal of Dr. Anspaugh. We're supposed to see him as gruff, unyielding and unfair to poor Carter, who wants to switch his residency to emergency medicine. He does come around, but really, his arguments against residents just switching residencies on a whim ring true.
Frasier: In "Room Full of Heroes", Niles begins to say, in-character as Martin, that he and Frasier were disappointments to him. Martin sharply cuts him off and says he's portraying him as a "drunken judgmental jackass." While Niles was certainly over the line and had indeed had a few beers, considering how Martin treats the two of them and routinely expresses exasperation about their behaviour, it's hard not to see why Niles would think this way.
In "The One With The Cat", Phoebe encounters a cat and suddenly gets the vibe that it's reincarnated from the spirit of her dead mother. Fair enough — except the cat has an owner, an eight year old girl to be precise — and Phoebe refuses to give it back. It doesn't sound like she's joking either, she seems serious about it. When Ross calls her out on it, Phoebe basically accuses him of being intolerant of her beliefs and he is eventually pressured into apologising to the cat. Behind Phoebe's back, the others actually agree with Ross, but they don't support him when he actually confronts Phoebe. While Ross could've been a tad calmer about the whole thing, even contemplating the idea of stealing someone else's pet was definitely low of Phoebe.
Joey not wanting to share food is portrayed as a selfish character trait. Except in the episode the girl he doesn't share food with simply grabs it off his plate without even asking. And on the second date she orders a salad and then asks to eat some of his food as well. Joey has a right to be annoyed since if she wanted to eat his food, why didn't she order it for herself? In other episodes he seems happy enough to let Phoebe have some of his food when she asks nicely whereas this girl simply looks at his food, asks "are those stuffed clams?" and then reaches out to grab one.
In the season 5 finale Emily wants to call off the wedding and move it to a later date because the venue has undergone sudden construction work. Monica tries to explain to Ross about how Emily has been dreaming of her wedding her entire life and thus her wishes come first. Except Ross, Joey, Monica, Chandler and Ross's parents had flown all the way from America to England and they had already spent a fortune on planning the wedding so Emily's wanting to move the wedding last minute comes across as pretty unpractical.
Gilmore Girls: Mitchum Huntzberger is portrayed as villainous for telling Rory he doesn't think she has it after she does some work experience at his newspaper. The thing is Rory is incredibly sheltered, doesn't join in with any ideas at a meeting about using university students (such as herself) to cover events and when told this she meekly accepts it instead of showing any sort of anger or telling him he's wrong.
Kurt relentlessly pursues Finn, knowing full well that Finn is straight. He orchestrates their parents into getting together to get closer to Finn. When they move in together, they end up sharing a room. Kurt redecorates it romantically and Finn, fed up with Kurt's advances, gets angry and ends up using the word "fag." Kurt's father Burt hears that and throws Finn out of the house for it. While it's obvious Finn should not have used that word, Kurt's behavior was straight-up sexual harassment. While the writers intended the scene to make Finn the wrong one, over the hiatus, they heard fans' reactions and in season two wrote in a scene where Burt calls Kurt out for his dishonesty and how things would be different if Finn pursued a girl that way.
Bryan Ryan, a guest character played by Neil Patrick Harris, is an ex-glee-clubber who goes on a crusade against school arts programs out of his own frustration that his singing and acting career didn't exactly pan out. While the point is lost in how far he takes it—basically encouraging the kids to give up on the arts altogether—he's not wrong that most of them will not make it in showbiz and that they should have back-up plans to avoid being miserable in adulthood. The show doesn't help by having background characters like Tina be the ones to argue for their arts dreams.
Upon his return, Jesse St. James is painted as a massive Jerkass for pointing out things like being talented isn't an excuse not to practice and rehearse. More than a few people in fandom agreed, and some even went so far as to say they were hoping New Directions didn't win at Nationals, since the fact that they weren't preparing any songs, weren't prepared to practice, and really didn't care showed they didn't deserve to win that year, and agreed with the decision in the finale.
In another episode, Will wants Emma to embrace that she has Obsessive Compulsive Disorder by wearing it printed on a tee shirt in front of the club. She chickens out and instead says her flaw is that she is a ginger. When Will confronts her, she says that she did not confess she has a serious mental disorder because as a staff member, it is highly inappropriate to talk about such things with students. And while she does later admit that that was just an excuse and goes out in the ending number with a shirt reading OCD, she was initially quite right that her personal psychiatric health is not a subject she should discuss with her students.
In "Guilty Pleasures", Jake wants to sing a Chris Brown song (his musical guilty pleasure), but is railed on by the girls of the New Directions for liking Brown's music, due to Brown's abuse of Rhianna. He defends his position by claiming that you can enjoy someone's music even if you don't approve of the person's actions. It's clear that we're not supposed to agree with him, but it's hard to argue with his point.
The Gruen Transfer: In "The Pitch" segments, some topics, while unsellable, do get mighty-convincing ads. This is naturally intentional, since the whole point is to demonstrate exactly how effective advertising can be.
Prejudice had a double-version; a lawyer for a guy who killed a Black man based the Insanity Defense on his client's racism being so strong that he had to be insane. Except when the defendant gets on the stand to rant against Blacks, his complaints weren't the rants of an insane nutcase; rather, he made nuisance complaints about talking during movies and other stereotypical differences between Whites and Blacks that numerous Black comedians have pointed out as part of their routines. He only "had a point" inasmuch as whomever he was presumably plagiarizing and the sensibility of his arguments undercut his defense as well; he was supposed to be an irrational madman but he came across as a guy who watched too many Chris Rock films.
Serena Southerlyn was an in-universe version; anytime a defendant had a liberal-leaning defense, she'd jump to their side (i.e. a homeless man claims homelessness made him kill), saying things like "You don't think his lawyer has a point about homelessness being a problem?" She oscillated between just playing the Devil's Advocate and outright missing the point that, in this case, not everyone who is homeless goes off and murders someone (indeed, many homeless people have been the victims of murder, since they are unusually vulnerable). Further, one can agree homelessness is a problem without viewing being a homeless person as by itself a defense to murder charges.
An episode where a boy has raped a celebrity, allegedly due to the influence of listening to and idolizing a radio shock jock. The shock jock is portrayed as a complete asshole who cares more about freedom of speech than his point — at one point, he refuses to testify that the perpetrator admitted he'd raped the girl while he was on his show. However, the only reason that he even has to testify to this fact is because the censors took his show off the air in mid-broadcast, before the boy made the confession. Meaning if not for the rampant desire to censor him (which the protagonists of the show shared) there would be a taped, nationally broadcast confession. He is a complete asshole, but he does have a good point.
An episode where a man's DNA is found in a dead victim (but with no visible sign of sexual trauma). Benson says his DNA will tell everything. This is fairly shocking considering two episodes earlier she was framed for murder with a technique that removes DNA from blood samples and replaces it with someone else's.
One episode had the detectives interrogating a man whom they suspected of raping a disabled woman. The man insists that the sex was consensual. When the detectives scoff at this, the man chides them for assuming that just because someone is in a wheelchair, he/she is incapable of sexual desires or feelings. While his point is undermined by the fact that he's guilty, it's a valid point just the same.
Another episode has a woman allegedly raped by her policeman husband. While the squad is very clear that, uniform or no uniform, rape is rape, the marital-rape issues cause more squad-room debate. At one point, when the case has devolved into he-said-she-said and Alex states that the charges may have to be dropped, Cragen asks her if they really want to risk sending the message that a woman claiming her husband raped her had better be battered too. Well, maybe not battered, but since one's mate's DNA in/on one's person is hardly evidence of rape by itself — yeah, some other physical evidence would be helpful. The case is further compounded by the wife often physically attacking her husband, including one on-screen instance where she smacks the back of his head with a frying pan (and not in a comedic way).
One episode has a boy who has a psychotic episode and shoots two of his classmates, and so the SVU team blames the pharmaceutical company that produced the pills he was on at the time. When confronted, the representative from the company makes some very valid points: the medication was sent only to people who had already been prescribed it previously, it was sent completely free of charge, the instructions were very clear that it wasn't meant to be taken by children, and it was prescribed to the boy's mother and not the boy himself. The fact that the boy's school demanded he be medicated or he would be expelled doesn't matter. The fact that the mother's HMO refused to cover regular therapy (with a doctor who didn't think the boy needed to be medicated at all) doesn't matter. The fact that the boy's mother, who gave him the pills without reading the instructions or consulting a doctor, continued giving them to him after he developed severe insomnia and paranoid schizophrenia, doesn't matter. All that matters is that Big Pharma is bad, and that's why the CEO is arrested. Granted, the CEO was morally shady (he had pills sent directly to patients through doctors' lists) and he's not charged with murder — only for reckless endangerment and misuse of the mail — but the audience is still expected to think of him as directly, morally culpable for the killings. For extra fun, consider that the doctor who gave his patient list to the pharmaceutical company did it specifically so that his patients could get, free of charge, the medications they needed but couldn't afford!
The boys from Malcolm in the Middle often have legitimate excuses for acting out (e.g abusive parents who constantly gripe about how much they’ve sacrificed) it's just that they go so overboard that they lose any sympathy points. For example in "Charity" when Lois forces the boys to help out at a church to build character. They quickly learn that every thing they’ve been giving away is better then anything they own. Trading their own stuff can be seen as Throw the Dog a Bone however they soon set up their own black market.
Memphis Beat: Dwight and the other cops are issued smartphones. They prefer their regular phones, and treat them with contempt. Dwight even quips "there's an app for that" just before he uses his to break a window. Problem is, smartphones can actually increase productivity and effectiveness, with proper training, which Dwight and Co. admittedly had not received (yet). Also, Dwight was risking damage to an expensive phone and associated services on the Memphis taxpayers' dime.
Fan-hated Sam Bosco actually has a pretty good point when he says Jane has damaged the team by persuading them to resort to illegal tactics repeatedly in the pursuit of justice. Once, when Rigsby and Cho are trying to convince him to let Jane off for bugging his office, he asks in return if they'd be willing to do borderline illegal things for him in return. When their immediate answer is yes, he reveals that it was a Secret Test of Character which they absolutely failed since as cops they shouldn't be so willing to break the law. He's absolutely right. note And if they had said "no", he could've asked why they're willing to do it for Jane.
While Jane is an excellent detective, he's also a con artist and expert at manipulation who takes great delight in getting people to commit crimes which he can then nail them for, or using other illegal methods to solve cases.
This is played with (usually consciously) with King Uther. The man hates magic due to the fact that it killed his wife, and his genocide of all those who practice magic, no matter how benevolent, is seen as terrible. And yet, most the time the threats against Camelot are entirely magical in nature (though in turn, many of Camelot's magical enemies are striking against Uther out of vengeance of what he's done to them). It's a vicious circle.
Other times, Uther has to make tough decisions about how to rule, and though he's often portrayed to be in the wrong, it's not difficult to see his point when he refuses to help a small village in a neighbouring kingdom because sending armed knights in to help might be construed as an act of war, or when he cuts off supplies from the lower towns during a famine because he needs what little food is left to feed the knights and thus maintain Camelot's safety. That first one falls through though in the Series 2 finale, when its revealed that while he was unwilling to risk war on account of a peasant village getting wiped out, he was willing to send soldiers in order to exterminate the last dragonlord, who at this point was completely powerless, was outside his kingdom, and if anything had only helped him. Balinor's initial willingness to let Camelot get wiped out is Disproportionate Retribution, but can you honestly blame him?
Why is Abby right about her colleague's familial relationships? Because... well. Why is she right when she decides they should all reconcile with their fathers? Understandable with Gibbs, since it's just old resentments, sort of understandable with Tony considering that his father really does care about him behind the dismissiveness and manipulativeness. Not even a little bit understandable with Ziva, whose father left her to be tortured to death, without going to help or diverting a single piece of his considerable resources towards helping her. Though he had no problem trying to get her arrested for murder afterwards, even though she was innocent. Yes, Abby? Why should Ziva try to fix their relationship? Yes? WHY?
Abby has another one in the episode Dog Tags, where a "drug sniffing" dog is believed to have killed his handler. The same dog attacks and hurts McGee in the beginning of the episode, yet he's treated like crap for not trusting the dog that attacked him. Not only that, the evidence throughout most of the episode points to the dog as the killer, so McGee has even more reason not to trust the dog. What is Abby's counterargument? Animals Are Innocent and dogs are man's best friend. And yes, she really does use the "dogs are man's best friend" line as a reason why the dog should be trusted. Of course, Abby forces McGee to take care of an animal that he not only clearly dislikes, but also attacked him. And then she yells at him for having shot the dog when it was trying to kill him. A German Shepherd is attempting to maul him and he was supposed to... what? Pet it?
And in the finale she tops herself yet again by browbeating McGee into adopting the dog he very much wants to avoid. The dog that is still growling at him.
The Monroe Republic might be a violent group of thugs, but they are also the closest thing to law and government in this part of the wasteland ("Chained Heat"). The writers are clearly well aware of this; all of the villains have sympathetic motivations, and their families are frequently mentioned ("No Quarter"). Then you have Monroe becoming so deranged that he's killing loyal friends and soldiers out of paranoia, and trying to use a nuke ("The Song Remains the Same") and anthrax ("The Love Boat") to kill off all his enemies. The other parts of the former USA have been shown to be better places to live compared to the Monroe Republic ("The Night the Lights Went Out in Georgia").
Miles might be a JerkassAnti-Hero, but he not only survived the last 15 years in good shape, but he went from being the leader of the Monroe Militia to becoming completely anonymous, despite living (undisguised) in the middle of a city with a whole army hunting him ("Pilot"). The characters don't take his advice as much as they probably should.
Rachel in "The Longest Day" has now taken turning the power back on as her motivation. She's only doing it because she's trying to avenge her dead son, Danny. While she is right to point out that they can't save everyone, she also undermines her position by threatening to abandon Aaron. Aaron, who came with her voluntarily and saved her life due to a broken leg that happened because of a chain of events that she started. Then in "Children of Men", she accuses Monroe of killing Danny to his face, and when he tries to point out that he wasn't even there when that happened, she yells at him to stop making excuses. They both have a point, because Monroe has been making excuses for his horrible behaviour, and Rachel is clearly going after Monroe Republic members, even if they didn't do the deed in question.
Roseanne: Leon is portrayed as wrong for wanting to fire Roseanne, even though she really is a lazy and sometimes intimidating employee who backtalks him almost every time he asks her to do something, even if that thing is something completely reasonable for an employer to ask of an employee. Of course, Leon is often a bit of a jerk in his own right.
A number of characters have tried to force Clark/The Blur out of hiding and into the spotlight of the public eye. Since the series as a whole was building to Clark eventually coming out as Superman, the arguments for Clark staying hidden became less credible over time. The evil reporter from Season 2 who tried to forcibly expose Clark's secret argued that the public had a right to know about a powerful alien living in their backyard, which makes sense from a purely ethical standpoint of journalist ethics (as well as the aforementioned fact that the public would eventually find out about him), even if Clark does indeed have a right to a private life. There was also the corrupt DA from Season 9 who wanted The Blur to show his face and answer for a series of screwups that were blamed on him that were really the fault of the Wonder Twins trying to impersonate their favorite hero; his corruption was revealed last-minute as a means to give the Wonder Twins a heroic gesture and kill any debate on whether or not the Blur should have to reveal himself to clear his name.
In the early episodes of Smallville, any interaction Clark had with Lex fell into this. The one that stands out the most however is "Memoria". In it, Lex was trying to regain his lost memories from "Asylum". When Clark tried to stop him, he ended up getting captured, and when Lex called him out on this, Clark's only excuse was that in trying to stop his father Lex repeatedly stoops to his methods and innocent people get hurt. However, this falls on its face when you realize that the only reason Clark got hurt was that he was trying to stop Lex because, as Lionel said, for his own selfish reasons. What Lex was doing only affected himself and that was his decision. Lionel wouldn't have known about it if Clark didn't get involved.
Every instance of Jonathan and Pete telling Clark that Lex couldn't be trusted through seasons 1-3 fall on there, as given the events of "Shattered" and "Asylum", not only did Lex protect Chloe by taking on all of the responsibilities of stopping his father, but throughout his stay in Belle Reve he never even hinted to Lionel that someone else had information, or used Clark's secret to bargain his way out. All of this proved that Lex not only could have been trusted with Clark's secret but would have protected it. A lot of bad thing probably wouldn't have happened if Clark had just told him from the get-go.
While it's true that Lex and Lana both became insufferably smug, they still had legitimate points when it came to protecting Earth from a potential Kryptonian/Phantom Zone/other alien invasion. In Seasons 5 & 6, Lex and Lana start sniffing around about Kryptonian technology, trying to learn everything they can about it. Clark gets very upset about this, but Lex and Lana repeatedly note that if aliens like Zod or Brainiac ever return, learning how their technology works just might end up being the thing that saves humanity from them next time, which is a perfectly defensible viewpoint. Indeed, Clark and the JLA themselves start incorporating bits of alien tech later on in fights against Zod and other threats.
Bates has legitimate concerns about Teyla as a security risk, but because she's part of the main cast they get dismissed and his nose rubbed in her trustworthiness when she proves it.
In "Condemned", the governor is portrayed as an evil and corrupt politician who sends people to their death to serve his own interests of protecting himself from the Wraith. But they've reached a level of technological advancement that generally isn't allowed by the Wraith, and if people are going to be culled either way, isn't it better to have the technology (and accompanying higher standard of living) that goes with it? On the other hand, he's shown very clearly to be going too far with it. Originally getting fed to the Wraith was reserved for only the most serious crimes; it proved such an effective deterrent that pettier and pettier criminals had to be sentenced to death for them to keep up the quota, and in the end, people were getting sent to the island for the mere suspicion of committing a crime.
It's still a genuine moral quandary though. If Wraith cullings are an unavoidable fact of life, chosing the least valuable members of your society to be taken, in exchange for being left in peace, is arguably a legitimate choice. The Atlanteans have the luxury of taking the self-righteous position because their civilian population is not at risk. Of course, whether the Wraith can be trusted to honour the agreement in the long term is a completely separate question.....
Senator Kinsey. While his character very quickly evolves into a Jerkass, the episode that introduced him had him find out about the Stargate program and shut it down. Why? Because it's a big drain on the defense budget with few or no returns. Hammond and SG-1's arguments are based entirely around their own experiences, which Kinsey obviously doesn't have access to and he simply doesn't trust them enough. At that point in the show, the main method of interplanetary travel is via the Stargate, so shutting it down and burying it seems like a good enough plan to prevent further alien incursions, and Kinsey doesn't believe Teal'c that the Goa'uld are fully capable of reaching Earth in starships. SG-1 turns out to be right, Earth barely survives the attack, and the team is hailed as heroes, while Kinsey is forced to back off. Later on, he Jumps Off The Slippery Slope, losing any likeability. Additionally, later on, the program does indeed start paying for itself (figuratively speaking).
Once shutting down the SGC is no longer an option, plenty of power-hungry scumbags try to take it over to advance their own agendas, always citing the main characters' actions in earlier episodes to try and portray them as unreliable and dangerous. Except that from an outsider's perspective Hammond and SG-1 frequently make incredibly questionable and risky decisions, and it would be worrying that the SGC's flagship team are constantly influenced or taken over by alien technology.
In the first season episode "The Nox", SG-1 is portrayed as in the wrong for not listening to the Nox and leaving immediately, and the Nox were justified in both preventing them from capturing Apophis and barring them from ever returning. Except that SG-1 wouldn't leave because they were defending what they thought were defenseless villagers against Apophis, and the Nox were deliberately unhelpful and deceptive. The writers seemed to have realised this, as aside from a single episode later on the Nox are never seen again.
Star Trek: The Original Series: Elaan of "Elaan of Troyius" is clearly meant to be a deeply unlikeable character, being spoiled, petulant and rude constantly and to absolutely everyone - but she's being dragged off to a planet she despises and forcibly married to someone she doesn't like for the sake of politics and is very vocal about it. Her bad temper is not particularly unwarranted, given the circumstances. Kirk's crippling sexism throughout shown towards her doesn't help the audience take his side, at one point threatening to spank her - and let's not forget she's the ruler of a whole world - if she doesn't start behaving. In the scene immediately before he shares this pearl of wisdom with Spock:
"Mr. Spock, the women on your planet are logical. That's the only planet in the galaxy that can make that claim."
A common criticism of Star Trek: Insurrection, in which Picard and his crew mutiny rather than remove people who aren't even native to a planet, number less than 1000, who're sitting on a literal fountain of youth that could save the lives of millions...all during the Dominion War, a conflict the Federation is badly losing at this point, where it could turn the tide in their favor. What's even worse, is that if the Federation and its allies lose the war, they predict that over a hundred billion people will die. Of course, strawman villains are used to shore up Picard's side as being right - the bad guys just want the fountain of youth because they're plastic surgery addicts, so by the movie's logic this makes it okay. Even many cast members (including the director, Jonathan Frakes), felt that in this case removing the Baku would have been acceptable.
In "Time Squared", Dr. Pulaski (who, to put it mildly, was not well-liked by the crew) tells Troi that she's concerned Picard's fear and doubt over the situation with the future Picard could be potentially paralyzing, and says the time may come that she'd have to relieve him of duty. Troi basically tells her to shove it, but when the vortex shows up, Pulaski is proven right: Picard, uncharacteristically, keeps going back and forth with himself out loud about what to do.
Worf. As noted in this compilation, Worf's frequently the Only Sane Man in any situation by suggesting they be prepared for hostile or belligerent aliens that might threaten the ship, only for the others to ignore him completely, then suffers an ass-kicking for his trouble when it invariably turns out he was right all along. Michael Dorn even mentioned having seen the video in a Q&A and found it hilarious.
A great many episodes have situations in which they have an opportunity to do something that would be very advantageous for the crew, only to have Captain Janeway refuse for reasons typically related to the Prime Directive. Some character inevitably complains about her decision and points out that her moral arguments for why they can't take advantage of the opportunity don't actually make any sense, but they're always portrayed as being wrong, while Janeway is right.
In the pilot episode, we're supposed to see Janeway's decision to destroy the Array that brought them to the Delta Quadrant in order to protect the Ocampa, rather than using it to get home, as a noble choice. However, Tuvok pointed out that destroying the Array would not only leave them stranded but could be considered a violation of the Prime Directive because it would affect the balance of power in that sector. He's waved off with a one sentence bit of "wisdom" from Janeway about how they're already involved so the Prime Directive no longer applies. When B'lanna also objects, she's told to shut up because Janeway is the captain. What's frustrating is that they undermined the whole dilemma by having Tuvok mention that the Array would take several hours to use without the Caretaker's help and that was before a Kazon ship crashed into it, disabling the self-destruct and God knows how many other systems, so they probably couldn't use it in the time they had.
In "Gravity" the audience is supposed to agree with Tom Paris that the human way of being in touch with our emotions and having them in our lives is the right way, in contrary opposition to the Vulcan master who taught Tuvok to suppress his emotions. Paris has a real problem with accepting that Vulcans aren't humans. Vulcan emotions are far more volatile, erratic and all-consuming than human's (whose emotions are less violent), and for a Vulcan being in love can be legitimately destructive, and not in the metaphoric sense that humans use. (Note that a lot of writers overlook the canon about the true nature of Vulcan emotions and basically treat them as being really stuck-up, repressed humans.)
To elaborate, Vulcan society was stuck at the tribal level for a much longer time than human society was, due to their inherently violent nature preventing them from working together in all but the most basic capacities. Surek and his ideaology of suppression of emotions was what allowed Vulcan civilization to exist in the first place. A Vulcan without control over his emotions is pretty much Axe Crazy. While a Vulcan can control his worse emotions while expressing his healthy ones, it's like an alcoholic having a single drink. Too much risk for too little reward.
Lt Mortimer Harren from the episode Good Shepherd has Janeway brand him a murderer and has the other members of the Away team shun him for killing an alien creature that had intruded upon the Delta Flyer (that had been disabled by a then unknown source), possessed a member of the crew and then proceeded to try and drain every last drop of power. Her justification is that it could have been an innocent and possibly sapient creature that didn't mean them any harm. This immediately falls apart however when a moments thought reveals that at that exact point in time when he shot it there was a 50% chance that he had just saved the whole team from an invading alien that wanted to steal their bodies and a 50% chance he had just saved the team from a harmless creature that was nonetheless about to suck their batteries dry (and with it their oxygen and heat). What's worse is that she has faced this choice multiple times before when a member or members of her crew have been inadvertently been put at risk and in those instances she straight up saw no problem in executing them herself for what she saw as the greater good - Tuvix springs quite nicely to mind.
In Unexpected, Tucker's complaints about how various parts of the engine room are extremely unsafe is played as him being comically irrational due to the mood swings brought on by his unexpected pregnancy. However, this is accomplished by him showing how the handrail on the service lift, if grasped, is so close to the edge that it will sever the fingers of the passenger on the bottom of the floor above, which is something to warrant extreme concern.
In "Fortunate Son" we're obviously supposed to disagree with the humans on the freighter who are trying to attack a base of Nausicaan pirates because the humans tortured a prisoner for information and the man in charge, Matthew Ryan, is clearly obsessed. However Ryan has a point. So far Starfleet and the Vulcan's haven't done a single thing to stop the pirate attacks and the freighters have to endure constant attacks by far stronger pirates. The episode itself seems to unconsciously admit this when Archer can't think up a good counter to Ryan's complaints. Just two episodes after this episode is "Silent Enemy". A bunch of alien repeatedly attack Enterprise without provocation, injure their crew members and make it very clear they aren't going to stop. Archer's response to someone doing this to his ship? Righteous anger and threatening to fight back with everything they've got! Why does that sound familiar?
Archer in "The Hatchery." He decides they have to keep it running; when the crew protests, Archer says it's the same as if they'd found a nursery full of humanoid babies and saving the hatchery could serve as a point of truce between them and the Xindi, relating a story where soldiers in the Eugenics War called a truce so they could move the battle lines away from a school. Pretty in-line with Star Trek's themes of respecting life even in forms we're unfamiliar with, right? NOPE. This is irrational behavior that leads to Archer genuinely jeopardizing the mission and T'Pol has to mutiny against him. The only reason Archer wants to save the babies (weird, alienbug babies, guys!) is because he got some egg gunk on him that made him reverse-imprint. Once Phlox fixes it, he's perfectly happy to ditch the hatchery with the Hand Wave that "they'll survive until a Xindi ship finds them."
The episode has this problem as it's clear that the reverse-imprint hasn't brainwashed Archer, just made him consider protecting the eggs top priority. When there's no real threat, his excuses are pretty reasonable and the crew accept them with only mild trepidation. As things progress and the crew has more and more reasons to want to get the hell out of there, Archers excuses become more and more forced and non-sensical. It's difficult to say whether the writers of the episode disagreed with his initial reasons, or if they thought those initial reasons were at least somewhat acceptable.
In the episode "That’s a Bunch of Bull", Regina stopped trusting Lovita’s work when she refused to admit she made a mistake on the lunch forms. It turns out that a vegetarian student caused a problem when they erased the order of hamburgers and Regina ends up apologizing to Lovita. The problem is that Lovita never even looked at the forms opting instead to watch her soap operas. So even if the student didn’t change the form if there was a mistake Lovita never would have seen it.
When Steve first took a run as acting principle is also a good example of this. Steve was shown as entirely unready for the position needing Regina to swoop in and save the day. The problem was that before she left, Regina never got anyone to take over Steve’s normal duties; no, in addition to his normal jobs such as teaching classes, being the faculty adviser, etc., he had to do Regina’s job as well. In addition, while Regina and Cedric was shown helping him, they were mostly focused on they wedding plans and in most instances actively sabotaging him, such as Regina not telling him that the sister school was visiting. Heck when Regina came back all she really did was tell everyone to do their job.
The Supersizers Eat: Discussed Trope in the episode dealing with cuisine during the Restoration period. During the episode, one source of food comes from a pamphlet written by a monarchist which contained recipes attributed to Oliver Cromwell's wife — the joke being that these recipes (and Puritan culture) were bland and uninteresting. Giles and Sue actually found those dishes to be much better than much of the other Restoration food, because they emphasized simple flavors rather than the bizarre flavor combinations which were the norm under the Restoration spirit of excess.
True Blood: Due to Creative Differences, the struggle of the vampires to "come out of the coffin" is intentionally analogous to the civil rights struggles of gays. Against the vampires is a religious sect sworn to kill them who are supposed to be seen as a bunch of corrupt and bigoted fanatics. However, the show pulls no punches in showing how vampire society is still built around killing humans. The religious sect brings up a number of valid points against allowing vampires to live in human society; most vampires really are a threat to public safety. In attempting to use vampire stories to argue for gay rights, they accidentally accept all the worst stereotypes of gays in real life.
The Waltons: In the episode "Founder's Day", Jason must complete one final assignment before he can graduate from the conservatory. Jason is uncomfortable with the assignment because it involves composing a piece of music in a genre that he's unfamiliar with so he refuses on the grounds that he has to be true to himself (meaning he only likes working with HIS brand of mountain hick music). The audience is expected to side with Jason but the truth of the matter is that the professor has every right to assign whatever assignment he deems necessary to pass his class and it is Jason's job as a student to abide by those guidelines. Also, a person in a creative field such as music should be open to experimenting and challenging themselves. Jason comes off as lacking creativity and talent but the show wants you to root for him as he whines about working on music he doesn't believe in. John-boy had the same issue. He called himself a writer but would refuse to work in fiction because he lacked imagination.
Wire in the Blood: Played with. Penny Burgess, a manipulative journalist who has sex with a police officer for inside information, points out that it is wrong to arrest a suspect on purely circumstantial evidence and release his name to the public. Because she is a villain, the audience isn't encouraged to take what she says seriously and none of the other characters agree with her, but she is proven right when the man they arrested commits suicide in prison and is later proven to be innocent.
Wizards of Waverly Place: Stevie hatches a plan to allow all wizards to keep their magical powers. Normally, only the winner of a competition between siblings retains said powers. The fallout of such a competition has been shown to invariably break families apart. While she she may be rather extreme in her measures, she made a good point, yet Alex and friends ignore her and proceed to kill her accidentally.
In the Wonder Woman unaired 2011 pilot, Diana has dinner with a Senator who expresses concerns about the way she does things — namely, using Cold-Blooded Torture to get information from criminals, giving the metaphorical finger to Reasonable Authority Figures, and outright committing slander by holding a press conference to accuse Liz Hurley's character of being a murderous Corrupt Corporate Executive and admitting that she doesn't have any proof besides gut instinct. In fact, the only reason she's meeting the Senator is to get justification so she can go after Hurley. Of course, since Wondy-In Name Only is the hero of this story, she's ultimately presented as right.
The BBC/Starz series The White Queen, insofar as it wants to present the characters who accuse Queen Elizabeth (Elizabeth Woodville, the wife of Edward IV, not the more famous daughter of Henry VIII) of witchcraft as irrational paranoiacs who are nuts to believe in witchcraft, and at the same time also presents the Queen as an actual witch, with very real supernatural powers. George, Duke of Clarence, and his wife, Isabel Neville, seem to be portrayed as being irrational when they accuse the Queen of using witchcraft to summon the storm that killed their son, except that, in the show, she did exactly that! So even though the show clearly wants us to have no sympathy for George, and a great deal for Elizabeth, who is, after all the main protagonist, the fact is that George, and the other characters who accuse her of witchcraft, are completely correct in at least most of their accusations against Elizabeth.
On at least one occasion, the audience is supposed to support Jack in his hatred of the 'wishy washy liberal human rights lawyer' who (quite correctly) calls Jack on his tendency to illegally hold people with no firm evidence and then torture them into giving him information. In Season 4, Jack even yells "How can you sleep at night!" at a human rights lawyer brought in to defend one of Jack's prisoners who has every right to have an attorney. Season 7 attempts to address this tendency with a few scenes of introspection but ultimately still cheers Jack on as he runs around shooting and kidnapping people. Jack has had torture fail before, and at least on one occasion tortured someone who really didn't know anything, but the writers didn't do more more than have Jack angst instead of showing real consequences of using torture that have been around since Medieval Europe (indeed, that were why torture was abolished to begin with) — not that it can make people tell you the truth, but that it can make people tell you anything you want, even if they're not actually guilty of anything. Police states make use of torture not primarily for obtaining information, but confessions, which can be trotted out as "proof" later.
In Season 5, Lynn McGill is portrayed as being mentally unstable for accusing almost every single member of CTU of conspiring against him. However, since many of them, from Buchanan on down are seen to have been conspiring against McGill, or at least keeping vital information from him, he does have something of a point.
Calvin and Hobbes: Calvin is meant to be seen as hilariously paranoid for fearing his babysitter, Rosalyn; whenever he tries to tell his parents how "evil" Rosalyn is, they defend the teenager and imply that Calvin has so many problems with her because he brings them on himself with his behavior. In fact, while Rosalyn isn't evil, she is a bad babysitter: repeatedly charging the parents more and more money in exchange for doing practically nothing, since instead of actually watching Calvin she works on her homework (okay, that's understandable, but what was stopping her from working on it earlier?) or calls her boyfriend Charlie on the phone while gossiping about Calvin and his parents behind their backs. One can understand her frustration at Calvin's many pranks and misdeeds, but Rosalyn wouldn't have that problem if she interacted with Calvin to make sure he didn't get into trouble (and, to her credit, she does eventually do just this and there are no problems).
A September 2009 Funky Winkerbean storyline has Susan defending Wit, the story of a middle-aged woman dying of cancer, as the choice for the School Play against parents who want their kids to perform something light and fun instead of a drama with challenging and potentially depressing ideas. The message being True Art Is Angsty and should be explored over lighthearted far. However, the snarking blogs The Comics Curmudgeon and Stuck Funky, comments sided with the parentsin this situation, pointing out it would be tough to stage with high school students and lack appeal to teens and their families. Thus they would not sell tickets which would cause them to lose money thus possibly forcing cutbacks in the art department. Why not do something light and fun that many people will want to see instead? It did not help the argument that the story was interpreted as a giant Take That, Critics! at readers unsatisfied with Funky's Cerebus Syndrome.
On more than a few occasions, WWE will dabble in political storylines, and since WWE, due to the sheer mechanics of the medium, among other problems, is almost incapable of subtlety, the characters in question will invariably become strawmen. However, WWE's fanbase is large enough and diverse enough that it's an inevitability that at least some of their fans will agree with the bad guys or disagree with the good guys.
During his 2009 feud with Jeff Hardy, Punk was portrayed as the villain for pointing out that Jeff, who had twice been suspended from the company due to his drug issues, was hardly a good example for people to let their children look up in contrast to himself, who wore his straight edge lifestyle on his sleeves - further compounding this is that Jeff didn't really have a response better than "I'm a free spirit!".
His July 2012 Face-Heel Turn was motivated by the fact that, despite being the WWE champion since November the prior year, he was frequently being subsidised in favor of John Cena to the point that his WWE title match took place before the Money in the Bank ladder match for a shot at the WWE title at any time over the course of the next year.
"The "Pipe Bombshell" from AJ Lee in which the champ verbally eviscerated the Total Divas cast as "interchangeable" women who only got air-time because of the reality show, and not because they were the best in the business like her; that AJ got over with ring work and charisma and not by being "useless" eye candy who could wear $4,000 heels but couldn't "lace up my Chuck Taylors"; and that AJ single-handedly restored credibility to the division and was in it for the job and not in it for the modeling fame. This was supposed to make AJ look like a petty mega-bitch heel...except that to pretty much everyone, all of that was true. The wrestling audience gave AJ a huge ovation as all the Total Divas cast could do was yell things like 'bitch' at her. The promo proved so ineffective in getting the crowd behind the Total Divas and away from AJ that there was no follow-up, giving AJ the first and final word on the subject.
In Deadlands: Hell on Earth, the Anti-Templars, who draw upon the corrupting power of the Reckoners so they have the strength to try and save everyone are supposed to be the villains, and the far more self-righteous and judgmental Templars the good guys, to the point that in the Last Crusaders sourcebook, the authors outright state that the Templar's way of abandoning those who do not meet their standards is the right way, under the adage "if you aren't part of the solution, you're part of the problem". Many fans, however, see the noble intentions for which the Anti-Templars are willing to damn themselves and consider them more heroic than the Templars will ever be. Given that the Templar archetype in the corebook comes with fluff-text about him punishing a town for looking down on him when he was pretending to be a harmless beggar by forcing the adults to be Cannon Fodder for a Suicide Mission against a bandit camp and the children to be slaves to help a town he does consider "worthy" prepare its defenses, well...
Mage: The Ascension had this pretty bad. The Technocrats were set up as a terrible conspiracy bent on destroying art and imagination and generally ruining the world. Except... they were responsible for every good thing that's happened to common people throughout history, from better farming to television. And they're also the only people who are organized and powerful enough to actually land a blow against the supernatural powers that be and saving countless people with their, admittedly harsh, actions. White Wolf released handbooks for each of the Technocracy Conventions, each including copious Kick the Dog moments intended to justify their position as villains. Of course, this implies that it was those actions, not their underlying ideology, that was wrong. In Mage: The Awakening, White Wolf was a little more careful to have the terrible conspiracy not be quite so benevolent this time.
The Coalition States. On the surface, they're a hardcore anti-magic, xenophobic tyranny whose leader is deliberatelyPutting on the Reich because he considers the post-apocalyptic remnants of lore about Nazi Germany to depict a culture worth emulating. On the other hand, a lot of the depicted Dimensional Beings in the setting are either highly unscrupulous or outright evil AND more powerful than human beings, whilst magic isn't necessarily entirely Black Magic, but does have a lot of bad elements to it that means that seeing it as The Corruption isn't entirely wrong. Spells having the ability to come alive spontaneously and promptly seek to kill every sentient being in sight simply to draw upon their Potential Psychic Energy in order to sustain themselves is the least of the objectionable aspects of magic in the Megaverse.
Doc Reid's Rangers, from the sourcebook on the Vampire Kingdoms of Mexico. There's a lot wrong with most of the Rangers, especially Doc Reid himself, but when it comes down to the "Nazi concentration camp like" experiments on vampires, it's kind of hard to not see them as Kick the Son of a Bitch. Wild Vampires are little more than mindless, blood-sucking animals whose bite is infectious; they are basically nothing more than a blood-drinking Zombie Apocalypse. A Master Vampire is a monster who willingly sold his or her soul to a Vampire Intelligence and then chose to create as many vampires as possible in order to let it manifest itself on Earth. The only arguably innocent vampires are Secondary Vampires, who were merely the victims of the Master Vampire... and even then, they're still ruthless blood-sucking predators whose bite spawns Wild Vampires, making them heralds of the swarm.
In Werewolf: The Apocalypse, the Wyrm, strangely, has a point. The other aspects (creation and stasis) broke the balance first, it's just trying to bring things back to the original intended balance by covering their roles itself... poorly, because it's Destruction (also Corruption, but only because of said broken balance), but still.
Channel4's game The Curfew is meant to be a look at the oppressive checks and Orwellian surveillance instituted in a hypothetical UK in the year 2027 by the Shephard party, where most are legally bound to be in by 9PM, and immigrants have to earn "citizen points" before becoming citizens, or moving from citizen Class B to the privileged Class A. The player's job is to listen to and play through the stories of the four people they're stuck in a hostel with so they can figure out which to give information that might topple the ruling regime. While the question of what human and civil rights are and should be is an interesting one, the event that propelled the party into power was a major, catastrophic nuclear attack on Great Britain, which had been preceded by a major economic depression. The titular Curfew is aimed at preventing another such attack.
However, there was also a fan-made version (again using real mothers), one of whom laughed when she saw the same images, creeping out the younger people around her.
In The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, the Khajiit trading caravans are banned from entering the cities of Skyrim because the people of Skyrim suspect the Khajiit are criminals and thieves. This is obviously a commentary on real-life fears of outsiders and racism. Trouble is, almost every Khajiit you meet in the game is involved in some form of criminality. The trading caravans themselves fence stolen goods for the Thieves Guild...so they are criminals. They're also Skyrim's primary (if not sole) source of Moon Sugar and Skooma, the latter of which is illegal. This may be a matter of a cycle of poverty, since Khajiit struggle to get legitimate work outside Elsweyr, which resets the scale somewhat. And strangely, none are seen in the Thieves Guild itself.
The Khajiit's point of view makes a considerable amount more sense once you learn that Khajiit have no concept of ownership, or at least not the same way other races do. Not that it helps their case much.
The Jackal from Far Cry 2, on his interview tapes, sounds a lot more logical than the game seems to want you to think of him as, given the tape descriptions. While many of them are blatantly MORALLY wrong, his logic to justify what he does makes a scary amount of sense. This is especially invoked in the tape asking him why Africa, when he gives the interviewer a small Hannibal Lecture, asking him if there's someone else's home he doesn't care about that he should sell weapons in. He might have been intended to be right all along, given that his ultimate goal is to help all the refugees and sane people escape the nation while the two warring factions all kill each other, and he even kills himself in the process to make sure his arm dealing can't cause another conflict like the one in the game.
It's not actually an issue of trusting them because they aren't part of the equation. The Mavericks, no matter how well-intentioned, are always meant to be the bad guys. The issue is that innocent Reploids are all-too-often being treated with fear and hostility, which lead many to go Maverick.
In Pokémon Black and White, Team Plasma's position on the immorality of owning and fighting with Pokémon was a smidge too hypocritical to win many fans to their side but does make the rest of the cast less likeable, as few compelling or complete retorts are ever made.
Barret Wallace in Final Fantasy VII is meant to be a seen as a revenge-driven hardhead who's lost his way because of the people who died as a result of his actions. However, when being called out by Cait Sith he says that casualties have to be expected in a war. That's allegedly supposed to be a weak and arrogant excuse, given Cait's response to it, but he has a valid point. He and three others (Cloud had just joined at the start of the game, and Tifa usually stayed home to take care of Marlene.) have been fighting a war against Shinra, who have an army of supersoldiers and robots and literally run the entire planet while the ignorant populace eats out of their hand. Even worse, the draining of the Lifestream, which Shinra uses as energy, has mortally wounded The Planet. (Which is sentient as well as alive itself... it's complicated.) It's stated several times that The Planet is dying, and the amount of time until it has left, according to Bugenhagen, the authority on the subject? "Maybe ten,(years) maybe a hundred, but not long." What the hell was Barret and the rest supposed to do, start an awareness campaign? Should they have gone around passing out paper pamphlets while the entire world and everything in it heads towards Armageddon? Not to mention, for all his talk of what Barret shouldn't have done, Cait doesn't give any suggestions on what he could've done instead, namely how exactly those casualties could've been avoided.
The point is that both are correct. The cause and fight against Shinra is correct and they are destroying the planet, but Barrett himself has that on a side-note to let him fight the Shinra for revenge, in a sort of the ends justify the means. There are times where Barrett isn't really as careful of the planet as he usually is, such as when he's freezing up north but thinks Midgar is more comfortable and dozing off during the Study of Planet Life topics.
General Damon in Valkyria Chronicles is Ambition Is Evil personified; he happily sends Squad 7 on suicidal missions as a meat shield for his own soldiers just to pad his own win-loss ratio. This comes to a head when he captures Selvaria, swooping in after the battle is over to take credit, and has her pistol-whipped to knock her out. Welkin and Alicia act like this is just the most horrible thing ever, but Damon counters with a pretty solid piece of logic: she's a Valkyria. The only safe way to take her alive is to do it while she's unconscious and unable to use her magic powers. When she regains consciousness, she uses those powers to detonate a castle and destroy the entire army in very short order.
Combines with Harsher in Hindsight with the Theramore Deserters in World of Warcraft who insist that the Horde is just waiting to butcher them all while Jaina tries playing nice. They're meant to be a bunch of warmongers who can't accept that the Alliance isn't actively at war with the Horde anymore. Then a few years later, Garrosh bombs Theramore out of existence.
In Jay Naylor's comic Original Life, the small girl Angelica was created as a strawman into which Naylor stuffed everything he hated, from politics to spirituality to musical taste. She's also widely considered the most likeable and sympathetic character in the strip since she seems to be one of the few characters that doesn't act like a complete Jerkass to everyone around her. For five months, she's been waging a campaign against the strip's Objectivist protagonists, and most reader reaction is rooting for her.
While Suzette from Precocious is typically set up as a hateful feminist extremist, she does make a valid point about gender roles in this strip, where she rants against the Double Standard present in most advertising.
Near the end, Kazuo is made to appear jealous and desperate by pointing out that he's upset Miharu is dating Makoto because he's a terrible person. While we're meant to see Makoto as the good guy and Kazuo the needy jealous ex, Kazuo is exactly right - Kazuo voiced his opinion because Makoto was so petty and jealous that he grabbed Miharu by the wrist and dragged her away from Kazuo without telling him. On top of that, while we're supposed to be sympathizing with Makoto's relationship, it's hard to feel like Kazuo is crossing any boundaries when Makoto is literally dating Miharu because he never stopped cheating on his own fiance to aggressively pursue Miharu while she was still in love with and planning to marry Kazuo. And as we are supposed to be thinking Makoto is this great guy that Kazuo doesn't understand, Makoto is at that moment screaming at Miharu in public (though out of earshot of Kazuo) for being too stupid to understand what Kazuo "really" wants. The scene ends with Miharu apologizing to Makoto, seemingly proving Kazuo right about what a terrible boyfriend he is, though the story presents her apology as a romantic moment sealing them as a perfect couple.
In Kazuo's final scene in the main storyline, he is again portrayed as a villain for angrily telling Makoto that he treated Miharu and her family's business like they were his property and he'd gotten his hands on both with no effort. Makoto angrily rebuffs that he "worked hard" to get what he wanted and that Miharu seems to "not care" that he "acts like an idiot." We are intended to take Makoto's side, but Kazuo is dead right - Makoto is literally dating Miharu entirely because Kazuo's father literally started beating him up to pressure him to end his engagement with Miharu. Makoto only has the restaurant because in spite of him not keeping up his end of the bargain and marrying Karen, his parents bought the restaurant anyway because the Ogawas inexplicably like him. On top of that, Makoto is clearly still treating Miharu like his property because he is presuming to speak for her and has, on this subject in particular, berated her into apologizing to him or blatantly ignored her. Furthermore, while Makoto is angrily telling Kazuo he's a "puppet of his parents", Kazuo points out that Makoto's had an easy life because his parents give him everything he wants. Makoto's dispute that he works hard is rather weak when his parents are constantly shown bending over backwards to get him whatever he wants, even if its extremely expensive or time-consuming. And how does the story end to prove that Makoto works hard? He calls his parents and arranges for them to let him quit his job so he can date Miharu full time. As the call is not shown, it appears that Makoto got no opposition whatsoever. Miharu is elated that he made all her choices for her. In the original script, it even read like they were literally letting him sponge off them without him ever planning to get another job. But no. We are really supposed to think Kazuo is being petty and jealous of the greatness that is Makoto, despite him once again being the only voice of sanity in the closing pages of the comic.
Kazuo just racks these up. Even earlier in the comic, Miharu decided the way to magically solve his abusive homelife was to get Kikuko to pretend she was in love with him and willing to marry him, all to convince Kazuo to enter cooking contests. Miharu felt this would teach him he had a choice. When Kazuo finally realized the entire thing was her manipulating him, we're intended to feel that he's crossed a line and hurt Miharu by confronting both Kikuko and Miharu. Instead, especially given later events in the story, it's hard not to feel sorry for him - his father actually beats the crap out of him whenever he tries to assert himself, and now he's learned that Kikuko's warming up to him was all a lie. Not to mention, winning a cooking contest would not fix his homelife. Much later in the comic, after he's Driven to Suicide, Miharu finally admits to Makoto that her plan was stupid, but the story wants us to think she's being too hard on herself.
In the Sonichu webcomic, several trolls are on trial for murdering a character. The trial is quickly derailed to have more to do about their respective webcomics, and one of the characters, stoned off his mind, complains about the author's lack of work ethic. There are several tirades about letting the author write as he wants, but the stoner was right. Not updating can be a serious detriment to the success of any franchise. Sadly, this was played dead serious (literally, as this was used as evidence for their executions), rather than lampshading the hell about the absurdity of it all.
ThisSubnormality comic was probably intended as a massive Take That to professional sports, but it ruins it by making Brian the Brain seem like a whiny elitist and the other two characters intelligent guys who just enjoy turning him off and relaxing every now and then. In fact, "Take a break from intellectualism every now and then" is probably a better moral than "Watching sports will make you an idiot misogynistic racist homophobic criminal". It's just as easy to take the comic as intentionally arguing the former moral, rather than the latter. Rowntree himself commented that it could be interpreted either way, and the comic is meant to point out the "cognitive dissonance regarding hockey in particular".
Neopets: Xandra did have a legitimate point: the Faeries do comparatively little for Neopia, and yet everyone idolises and reveres them. However, her response was... well... there aren't many people who'd say that crashing Faerieland into Neopia was the right thing to do, shall we say.
In Super Mario Bros. Z, Shadow argues that they should leave Princess Peach in Bowser's hands while they instead focus on finding the last of the Chaos Emeralds and stopping Turbo Metal Sonic, which Sonic uses as an excuse to call him out on how he's become more of an asshole since Mobius was destroyed. However, while he was a jerk in how he put it, Shadow is right that Bowser is a Harmless Villain who outright told them that he wouldn't hurt Peach, Turbo Metal Sonic is an Omnicidal Maniac who will happily butcher his way across the Mushroom Kingdoms looking for the last Chaos Emeralds while they are distracted, and once they have those last Chaos Emeralds they can transform into a group of Super Mode versions of themselves and lay waste to Bowser's whole army in the blink of an eye.
Stan Smith of American Dad! is often portrayed as a bigoted self-serving sociopath who causes havoc over even the slightest problems caused in his perspective, however given he lives in a Crap Saccharine World where half the cast are almost as bad as he is, he does actually often have a reason to be annoyed (e.g. his Control Freak in-laws taking over his house uninvited, his wife becoming a surrogate mother behind his back, pretty much any disagreement he has with either Hayley or Roger) it's just his depraved overzealousness causes him to take much nastier measures that gives the other side the higher moral ground.
The animated special The Berenstain Bears' Easter Surprise has Boss Bunny quitting his job as the Easter Bunny, resulting in the seasons getting stuck on a permanent winter in Bear Country. When we first meet Boss Bunny, he is cast off in a negative light, not caring about Easter and calling spring a bore. Brother pleads with him to come out of retirement and make Easter possible so the seasons can return to normal. However, Boss Bunny clearly is too old and worn out to continue Easter preparations and his body can't take the hassle anymore. Seasons getting stuck aside, setting up the factory, making truckloads of candy, painting millions of Easter eggs and caring for employees year after year add up to a pretty taxing job.
This was a frequent occurrence on Captain Planet with the character Wheeler, who was portrayed usually as an arrogant and obnoxious jerk and hence always wrong, despite the fact that he often made sense. In one episode, he was mocked and declared selfish due to his opposition to keeping endangered and injured animals picked up in the groups travels on Hope Island, despite the fact that not taking exotic species out of their natural habitat is a perfectly valid Green Aesop on its own. This is not the only example. He has been "wrong" to espouse two entirely contradictory positions in two separate episodes, and was somehow wrong both times — even when the episodes came to the same conclusion. See The Complainer Is Always Wrong for details.
In Danny Phantom's final episode, Phantom Planet, Sam's is visibly upset with Danny getting rid of his powers and calls him selfish for doing it. He actually questions why what he did was selfish. Many people have actually taken Danny's side of the argument as his reasons were justified; his wanting to be normal again was to protect his family from the ghost hunters searching for him, and in keeping with the perception that he was no longer needed as Amity's protector. It doesn't help with the Alternative Character Interpretation for Sam.
The Fairly OddParents has its most infamous episode, "It's a Wishful Life", where Timmy receives no appreciation for his good deeds. While the kid can be a jerk, he had every right to be upset with no one appreciating his work. Bickles was ungrateful simply because Timmy used a different shade of blue for a painted background that others wouldn't have noticed or cared about; AJ was ungrateful simply because Timmy bought a computer that was obsolete as of 5 seconds ago, then used the expensive computer as a door stopper; and Timmy's parents were ungrateful simply because Timmy knew nothing about the "dirty yard contest" they were competing against the Dinkleburgs for and spent untold hours (as far as they knew) making the garden beautiful to show his love for them.
The failed pilot for The Groovinians has the Big Bad tell the artistic heroes that nothing in life is free and that they have to pay bills if they want to stay in their new home. This, of course, is presented as corporate greed and the villains making life harder for the heroes. Except viewers, even other artists, agreed more with what the bad guy was saying.
An example that occurred to the writers happened in the Justice League episode A Better World. In it, Batman gets into a debate/duel with his Justice Lord counterpart, about the latter's seizing control of the world. Originally, League!Batman was meant to convince his counterpart, but after writing a particularly apt line for Lord!Batman note "You grabbed power!" "And with that power we've made a world where no eight year old boy will ever lose his parents because of some punk with a gun!" the writers couldn't come up with a compelling counter argument. In the episode proper, League!Batman concedes the point, and later gets through to Lord!Batman by pointing out how much their parents would have (dis)liked the new Gotham.
King of the Hill often centered on Hank opposing some person or organization that conflicted with Hank's view of life, and Hank is almost always portrayed as being the correct person in these conflicts, though many of the apparent straw men often had good enough positions. In one particular episode, Hank butts heads with a man who has a less-than-flattering interpretation of the Alamo (namely, that the Texans involved were a bunch of drunken cowards). The other man points out the logic behind his views, such as citing Sam Houston's troubled life and documented alcoholism and pointing out that the only people who know exactly what happened at the Alamo are long dead so all they have to go off of is historical records. In the end, Hank is dissuaded from smashing up the stage when he realizes that it's wrong to censor someone else just because you don't like their message, but he insists on giving a speech to relate the bare facts of the battle before the play begins.
The Canterlot Elite in "Sweet and Elite" are depicted as smug elitists for treating the ponies from Ponyville as boorish hicks. In addition to their assorted bad behaviours at the Grand Galloping Gala (the highest profile national annual party), Rarity's friends crash and trash the Canterlot Garden Party (the second highest profile national annual party), making one wonder if the reputation for being boorish hicks is at least somewhat deserved. Indeed, for the Gala, Celestia deliberately invited the main characters in hopes of "livening up" the party, and afterwards claims it was the best one in a long time because the Mane Cast engaged in disruptive behavior, culminating in Fluttershy screwing up a party which is, for her, exceedingly boring, further adding fuel to the fire.
In "Bats!", the viewer is supposed to take Fluttershy's side of the conflict and agree that the bats shouldn't be driven off the farm. The problem is that Applejack's reasons for wanting the bats gone, namely that they'll destroy the entire apple crop if they stay too long, is a completely valid concern, especially in light of the fact that an infestation had happened in the past and the farm had barely survived.
Spike's Heroic Self-Deprecation in Equestria Games is perfectly justified. His little anthem shtick was probably extremely offensive towards anyone from Cloudsdale (they were not entertained: they didn’t laugh, and, judging by the audience’s reactions, they seemed furious), while the heroic actions he can take credit for basically amount to being in the right place at the right time—any other pony would have probably done the same. Other ponies trying to chalk it up to him senselessly being self-conscious, outright ignoring how he humiliated himself in front of thousands of spectators (along with how long it took him to light the torch, followed by his embarrassing failure to light the picture he signed on fire) is somewhat bewildering.
In Rocket Power, a group of Moral Guardians lobby to put a ban on Skateboarding, biking, running, and rough-housing on the boardwalk and pier after Merv Stimpleton steps on a skateboard and falls down. (Presumably one of many other accidents, not just when someone carrying boxes was shown as stepping on the skateboard and falling down). They're depicted as strawmen, but if you ask anyone who lives around a town like that, that ban isn't exactly that unreasonable due to safety reasons. Meanwhile, the kids had to be told not to skate around an extremely crowded area. The episode at least acknowledges this through Ray; he points out that regardless of Mr. Stimpleton's Disproportionate Retribution, the kids did hurt him and hadn't yet apologized, and Otto and Co. care more about having fun than someone getting hurt.
In The Secret of Kells, the Abbot is portrayed as being an obstinate Philistine obsessed with building a wall to fortify Kells instead of letting the monks, who are artists and illuminators, get on with their true work of creating beautiful manuscripts. This would be fair if it weren't Dark Ages Ireland, which is constantly under threat from marauding Vikings — who do, in fact, turn up and burn the abbey to the ground. One can argue that the wall didn't work to keep the invaders out, but if everyone had taken the project more seriously, it might have been completed on time.
In South Park, Cartman tries to get Family Guy cancelled via persuasion that the terrorist Muslims would attack if they showed Muhammad uncensored. While he merely wants it off the air as he hates it, he did make a point that showing it would be catastrophic since they would attack America. though it ended up being subverted at the last minute, the terrorist Muslims DID retaliate, but they did so via poorly made clip making fun of Jesus, president George Bush, and other Americans/
The SpongeBob SquarePants episode "Stuck in the Wringer" has Patrick glue Spongebob into the titular device for no reason other than his own stupidity. When this proceeds to ruin Spongebob's day, even rendering him unable to eat, Patrick clearly does not care. Spongebob eventually loses his patience and yells at Patrick, who fully deserves it. The crowd watching them then give Spongebob a dose of What the Hell, Hero? for treating his friend like that. The writers want us to agree with them.
Peter Parker is often depicted as a jerk for wanting to work alone. While it's true that this incarnation of Spider-Man is waymore stupid anddickish than usual, Spidey's arguments to defend himself are pretty valid. His "friends" are a bunch of jerkasses who frequently harass and disrespect him with little to no reason at all, force themselves in his life without any consent from his part and know much more about him than he does about them. And that's not forgetting about Nick Fury, who for all the claims to be a responsible authority figure, has little to no respect for his recruit's privacy and promises (he placed security cameras in his house, and their initial agreement clearly stated that Peter doesn't need to work in a team if he doesn't want to). Therefore, Spider-Man has no actual reason to trust any of them, completely ruining the lessonof working in a team.
This comes up again in "The Incredible Spider-Hulk" where Fury acts like Spidey's whining again about his PR problem when it's clear that Jamerson constant berating him has begun to affect his ability to fight crime.
When Lance joined the X-Men, Scott does not trust him and eventually accuses him of being behind a series of joyrides which have totaled the various X-Vehicles. He is presented as being in the wrong for not trusting Lance and being so apprehensive, in order to motivate Lance to stick with the Brotherhood, even after Scott realizes he was being a dick about it and apologizes. However, Scott had every right to be suspicious as Lance had been an aggressive criminal and was only interested in joining because of his crush on Kitty. Scott even did try to welcome him at first, but became dissuaded when Lance repeatedly did things for the fun of angering Scott including lying about going on joyrides when he did not.
Magneto had schemes such as evolving the mutants he deemed to be 'worthy', and assembling a group of followers to his cause, in preparation for the inevitable war against humans when the world finds out they exist. Xavier always felt he was taking an extreme stance against humanity and opted to reveal themselves when they were ready...except there was one rogue SHIELD agent who deemed mutants a threat to humanity and built a Killer Robot with advanced weaponry to go after Wolverine and the larger X-Men and Brotherhood members, though Magneto arranged the battle was brought to the world's attention. The result is a widespread witch-hunt against mutants leaving them on the run. Xavier was conveniently out of commission thanks to Mystique, but one wonders what his reaction would be to see police around his school.
In season 2 of Young Justice, G. Gordon Godfrey is an incredibly biased, inflammatory, and paranoid newscaster who constantly criticizes the Justice League unfairly, is suspicious towards aliens in general, spreads obvious misinformation and propaganda, and is revealed in the finale to be working for the villains. Unfortunately, his fundamental message of promoting public accountability of the League does ring true, however obvious it is that the heroes are in the right. The League keeps a lot of secrets from the public for arbitrary reasons; they don't even publicly announce a team member's death to avoid "people thinking we're mortal". They are an organization of superhumans and nonhumans responsible for the safety and security of the entire Earth, but they really aren't beholden to anyone except themselves. In more than a few ways the Justice League still acts like a secret group of vigilantes, despite being an extremely powerful public institution that consistently interferes in global affairs.