I guess I missed the point. Like, when he’s beating up an animal abuser, or public sexual deviant it makes more sense. He’s intervening to make people or animals safe, and the violence is more justified.
Burning a dude for making a quip is fucked up, and doesn’t align with what I thought the character was.
His violence here devalues his violence elsewhere. Apparently hes just violent whenever he’s inconvenienced or annoyed, not when he’s attempting to make others safe, or preserve some justice to the downtrodden
The comics you’re seeing here are mostly cherry-picked. I think the best way I’ve seen someone put it is that he’s sort-of a personification of the social contract.
While I wouldn’t describe Everett as actually being a bigot (I don’t think he actually has any beliefs except that the social contract must be followed), his fanatical adherence to the social contract means his behavior can swing wildly between being bigoted and being extremely progressive (sometimes progressive even for today). You just aren’t seeing the cartoons where he complains to his wife about her behavior (and finds out his wife can be just as aggressive, if not more so), or complains about how characters (who are now recognized as painfully offensive racial stereotypes) aren’t pulling their weight.
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with enjoying the comic for its progressive moments so long as you acknowledge that Everett is a product of his time and enforces the beliefs of the time.
I see you haven’t actually read the comic yourself. This one here is a completely normal one. The one’s you’ve been seeing where True beats people up for good reasons are exceptions to the usual pattern. Everett is usually petty and self centered.
I guess I missed the point. Like, when he’s beating up an animal abuser, or public sexual deviant it makes more sense. He’s intervening to make people or animals safe, and the violence is more justified.
Burning a dude for making a quip is fucked up, and doesn’t align with what I thought the character was.
His violence here devalues his violence elsewhere. Apparently hes just violent whenever he’s inconvenienced or annoyed, not when he’s attempting to make others safe, or preserve some justice to the downtrodden
The comics you’re seeing here are mostly cherry-picked. I think the best way I’ve seen someone put it is that he’s sort-of a personification of the social contract.
While I wouldn’t describe Everett as actually being a bigot (I don’t think he actually has any beliefs except that the social contract must be followed), his fanatical adherence to the social contract means his behavior can swing wildly between being bigoted and being extremely progressive (sometimes progressive even for today). You just aren’t seeing the cartoons where he complains to his wife about her behavior (and finds out his wife can be just as aggressive, if not more so), or complains about how characters (who are now recognized as painfully offensive racial stereotypes) aren’t pulling their weight.
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with enjoying the comic for its progressive moments so long as you acknowledge that Everett is a product of his time and enforces the beliefs of the time.
I see you haven’t actually read the comic yourself. This one here is a completely normal one. The one’s you’ve been seeing where True beats people up for good reasons are exceptions to the usual pattern. Everett is usually petty and self centered.
If you’re looking for a champion in a 100+ year old comic, you’re going to be very disappointed.
I’m not.
I do get curious why it’s so popular, I see it posted a lot