Have a question about how the TVTropes wiki works? No one knows this community better than the people in it, so ask away! Ask the Tropers is the page you come to when you have a question burning in your brain and the support pages didn't help.
It's not for everything, though. For a list of all the resources for your questions, click here. You can also go to this Directory thread
for ongoing cleanup projects.
I HIGHLY recommend putting some of this into folders and summarizing the main points. This is a LOT to ask for people to go through on ATT
Ready with the folders.
OK, part of the point of all these cleanup threads is so secondary discussions don't take place elsewhere. Crossposting to ATT defeats the point.
The TRS was closed not for misuse, but because Designated Hero does have a cleanup thread you can consult.
Locking so discussions can take place there instead.
Edited by Synchronicity
Ah, Civil War II, the comic book that reignited the old discussions about who is the hero and who is the villain in Marvel's Civil War. I really want to figure out, once and for all, who is the real Designated Hero of the story.
Civil War II gives us Captain Marvel, following in the footsteps of Iron Man in the first Civil War and who went a little crazy with her methods while using a Inhuman precog, Ulysses, to combat crimes. She went around trying to arrest her allies and others for things that haven't happened yet, and ignored people when they tried to tell her that the precog wasn't really seeing the future, at least not with 100% accuracy. Having indirectly caused the deaths of War Machine and Bruce Banner, she grew more stubborn in her beliefs and went on to imprison an innocent woman, tried to arrest Miles for a crime he may not commit, and put Iron Man in coma when he opposed her. This was explained in Ultimates 2015 partly as having her Go Mad from the Revelation of the Marvel Universe's floating timeline thanks to Galactus showing her. While some fans still love the character, others are unsure that she should be the female face of Marvel.
The actions of either Tony or the Inhumans during Civil War II are not mentioned in the page, but they do have entires, albeit for different reasons.
"I guess we're ignoring the fact Tony kidnapped a man and tortured him, all to get those experiment results which are tainted as a result of said torture. And he assaulted a head of state to do it by tresspassing on their sovereign territory. But the Inhumans are jerks I guess, so they deserved it huh? Yeah, I have a bone to pick with the Inhumans vs X-Men entry too, as it ignores the fact the Inhumans are trying to find a cure for the X-Men, trying to keep them from being harmed by the cloud and the mutants do not explain that they're already out of time to find a cure and just attack them outright with no provocation. The entry even ignores how the crossover ends, with Medusa herself learning that the cloud is about to saturate the atmosphere and kill all mutants... and then she instantly kills the cloud herself because that's the only solution obviously, basically revealing this entire war could've been avoided if the X-Men just told the Inhumans the truth."
"But hey, better to find an easy person to blame in both cases, right? And both events do suck, a fact I won't argue, so who cares if we leave out other details that kinda show that this tropes more easily applies to the other side of the fighting. Frankly, I haven't heard one solid defense for what Carol should've done when Tony attacked her. And if we're using alt. Universes to justify the Mutants actions in Iv X, then fine! In another universe, as detailed in the lead up to Infinity Warps, Carol broke off her engagement with Tony to free Miles from his prison bubble thing... and took what appears to be a mortal blow from Tony's Carolbuster suit in the process."
"Tony. Was Trying. To Kill. Carol Danvers. Period. I find this continued attempt to blame Carol for putting the guy who ASSAULTED HER into a coma very "Victim Blaming" of its proponents. Like if a wife puts an abusive husband into a coma, suddenly she's a criminal too I guess? Next woman who knocks out her rapist and gives him brain damage, charge them with attempted murder, right? And sure, Tony didn't do anything nearly as bad as that... but he did commit Kidnapping, Torture and Terrorism in a short span of time. Yet he does not pay for a single one of his crimes and the comics community forgives him just as easily it seems."
"Tony deserves to be called what he is in the story, as the comic is clearly on his side and even ends with Carol throwing herself onto her sword in anguish over her mistakes while Tony's "death" is lamented as a tragedy. It's not, he attacked her, he got what was coming to him. He's the designated hero of CW 2, not Carol. Carol was presented as the misguided antagonist at best while Tony was allowed to run rough shod over her and scream on his soap box. She never got a chance to present her case! EVER! And we keep blaming her for things that other people did! It's ridiculous!"
"The entry should be switched around, the comic clearly sides with Tony Stark. By definition of trope, the author isn't trying to excuse Carol's actions, they are trying to excuse Tony. He suffers no real lasting consequences for his actions, while Carol has to repeatedly blame herself for things she didn't do! And the same goes for Iv X, as that comic is very clearly on the mutant's side. Neither entry fits the trope and is just someone complaining about characters not being perfect. And the implication that Carol should've let Tony punch her face into the pavement and not defend herself, while ignoring everything he did, SCREAMS sexist bias in my opinion."
"Those are my criticisms, feel free to discuss."
So, what do we do here? I'm perfectly aware that Designated Hero had a TRS clean-up thread, but it was closed because people were using the trope simply to criticize heroes didn't like.
By the way, I already asked this question at Is this an example? to get a proper consensus.
Edited by MasterHero