[ SECRET POST #2527 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2527 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.












Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 042 secrets from Secret Submission Post #361.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

No? I don't see where I said blame.

I said don't ignore. If bad shit had to be done, then admit it was bad shit and do something about it instead of acting like it was either out of their hands so not at all their fault, or acting like everything is fine and dandy because the heroes saved the day.

[(Anonymous)]

I don't see where I said blame.

instead of acting like it was either out of their hands so not at all their fault

Someone here is confused. I don't think it's me.

[diet_poison]

Then I don't really understand your point, because it was out of their hands. When the choices are "let millions of people die" or "wreck some buildings to save them", are you really going to imply that the former choice has ANY validity to it? And if it doesn't, then yes, it was out of their hands and they picked the only morally justifiable alternative. Therefore, no, they should not be held responsible for the damage done, unless they had an obvious opportunity to relocate the fight and didn't take it (which usually isn't the case ime).

I'm not saying the damage should be ignored. I am saying the heroes don't deserve to have it laid at their feet.

[dancing_clown]

YES. This is very well said.

[diet_poison]

thank you :)

[(Anonymous)]

its funny because as soon as you replace "beloved superheroes" with "faceless government military" even if they're doing the exact same thing, general reaction suddenly does a 180

[diet_poison]

Are you talking about fiction still? Because government millitaries are really not written the same way.

[(Anonymous)]

nope. in reality, the attention would be on the victims and whoever caused the destruction would, and rightfully so, be trying to make restitution to the victims... or facing a media firestorm for being hypocrites that care just enough about the people to save them but not to follow through and make sure the people whose homes, finances, and whathaveyou were destroyed are okay.

my problem with avengers was they never cared. destroy buildings, they Did What They Had To Do, then go relax with no though of who's going to pay for all the damages... welps, not them! they're the heroes, they did their job of saving the world, and now the job of making it livable again for dozens of people is... someone else's.

[greenvelvetcake]

Why should they pay for the damages? Say there is a house on fire, and the fire department puts it out with firehoses. This process damages part of the house, but far less damage than it would had suffered had it been burned to the ground. Should the firefighters have to pay for that damage?

[(Anonymous)]

This exactly. AYRT sounds like the kind of person who would send a bill and an angry letter to the fire department.

[diet_poison]

Excellent metaphor.

[elialshadowpine]

Coming in late (had this open from last night, decided to finish reading) -- this is actually why some states have Good Samaritan laws. Because people actually have successfully sued people who were just trying to save their damn lives.

[(Anonymous)]

Aside from Iron Man throwing money at the problem -- which it is probably safe to bet he did -- there's a limited amount the Avengers could do to make it livable again. And we don't know that they didn't do it.

[(Anonymous)]

1. The villains are the ones who "caused the destruction," not the heroes.

2. How are the heroes "hypocrites" for not trying to fix every conceivable part of the problem? We're not talking about a government, which collects taxes and has responsibilities and obligations to its citizens - we're talking about a group of volunteers who have just risked their lives to prevent huge numbers of people from dying. So you're saying that, because they have chosen to undertake that task, they are now responsible for any destruction that took place while trying to save lives, and that if they don't empty their pockets to fix it all, they're actively bad people (even if they aren't billionaires, or if they suffered serious injury themselves during the battle)?

You're totally right, the Avengers should've just stayed home and not caused any trouble. Then none of it would've been their fault, even if the entire planet was subjugated by alien invaders and the entire city of New York was leveled. They wouldn't want to break anything, after all.

[diet_poison]

I can't think of a single instance of Faceless Government irl actually playing the same role as a fictional hero, as in, stepping in to stop a clear threat that they didn't set up and for no personal gain. Government is a double-edged sword. I'm not sure that's a fair comparison.

As for your second paragraph, all that stuff would have happened after the shown canon time, so tbh we don't know how they reacted to it or what they said. I would not be surprised if Tony helped financially with it, or if he or Steve helped physically with the cleanup when they could. But either way, I'm not sure how you would expect them to include this remorse for something that, again, wasn't their fault during the movie when it would take up precious screen time and make the ending choppy and weird.

It still feels like you're basically blaming the heroes for what happened which is just...really backwards.

and whoever caused the destruction would, and rightfully so, be trying to make restitution to the victims

That would be the villains and it's unlikely they're alive. If they are, it would be 100% right to make them pay as much as they could for the damage, of course.

[elaminator]

Well said!

[diet_poison]

wow, two compliments on one comment. *blushes* thanks!

[nyxelestia]

standing ovation.gif

[ketita]

Late to the party, but I wanted to just tell you I really appreciate your comments in this thread. Holy hell, some people are really obtuse.

I think that a good RL example might actually be doctors. Let's say a person comes in with something potentially fatal, and the doctor does a procedure that results in the patient's death. That's why you investigate whether or not they did their best and made a reasonably sound decision in that instance - and if they did, they're not liable for malpractice.
The problem is, that when malpractice suits go crazy, doctors are afraid to do anything. Because if they don't get involved they won't get sued. This is actually a problem in the US. I have doctors in my family, and one time a lawyer who basically made his living doing malpractice suits came in with a heart attack, and the entire ER just kind of stood around helplessly because nobody wanted to take the risk of treating him. (in the end they got the most senior doctor).

My point is that I agree 100%. If you go after the "good guys" too much and hound them, one day they're going to decide it's not worth fighting because they can't take the backlash. Perspective is a really important thing to have. People aren't perfect, and it's a delicate balance between negligence and bad luck, but superhero stories tend to make things more clear-cut than in our world. If you've got aliens invading all over the place, I think it's pretty clear who the enemy is.

[diet_poison]

haha wow thanks :)

And...that's a really interesting parallel. I like the way you sum it up and totally agree.

[(Anonymous)]

I, on the other hand, understand you perfectly and you have a very good point.