Concept snatched from here.

Do you think that superheros give children the wrong ideas about morality and how to deal with "right" and "wrong"?

On one hand, I think they can be great role models, making kids strive to "do the right thing." On the other, violence isn't the answer to most things, nor is breaking the law or destroying things (which is often what these superheroes are doing).

As a kid, I loved Batman. But I also realized that he was a rich slightly crazy dude, and I always found myself thinking about the consequences of his actions (but didn't he just blow that building up!?). But also of what he strives not to do...He never killed anyone, and if he did, it was an accident. He wasn't a cold blooded murderer, even when dealing with people who would have no problems killing him, or millions of other people.

Spoons (Please do not completely rely on spoons, discuss, debate!)
Do you think "superheros" are bad role models? If so, why? If not, why?
Would you let your kid watch or read superhero movies or comics?
Do the positives outweigh the negatives?
Did you idolize a superhero when you were a kid? If you did, do you think it was a good thing? Or did it negatively impact you in some way?

Reading Materials (Feel free to find your own, I just wanted to provide some.)
Top 10 Worst Comic Book Role Models
Superheroes: Positive Role Models?
5 Recent Movie Superheroes Who Are Good Role Models For Boys

I'm a little rusty on the debating, forgive me if I sound stupid.

I think it really goes down to context, in my opinion. In most if not all cartoons, there is violence in some way. It's how you perceive it, though, that matters. Watching Tom chase Jerry, and the roadrunner with the acme bombs and weights, doesn't make me want to go out and abuse mice and chickens...or whatever the heck the roadrunner was supposed to be :XD Just like watching/reading Superman didn't make me want to don a cape and fly through the streets defending justice and the American way!

Wait...wrong cartoon.

Anyone who decides to fly off a building just because Superman can, or rob banks because a villain did, needs some therapy.

EDIT;
I missed the point, didn't I? I'm lame. I'll edit this.

I think that they do, and don't. it's great that kids learn the ways of right and wrong in easy-to-understand ways. Sort of like the Bible. (Not bringing religion into this, @_@, just as an example). It's a book with stories and lessons to live life by. In most of those comics, at the end, there was a lesson to be learned from right vs. wrong.

If only real life was that way, where the good triumphed over bad and the superhero flew away with the damsel in distress in his arms. But sometimes, wrong does win over right and there's nothing they can do about. Comics don't show real life, and that sucks.

EDIT AGAIN;
If I seem stupid...it's because I am @_@ and tired. and just muddleheaded.

The comic book series Judge Dredd was intended as a sort of treatise on how all superheroes are inherently fascist. I would not say it applies to all of them, but often superheroes will act as judge, jury and executioner is the point. Should one person be allowed to go around beating up people who are suspected criminals? Catching them in the act is one thing, but when the police go after a suspect, they aren't aloud to jump in on them and start beating the crap out of them or kill them as some characters do. Also, it can beg the question "Does any one have the right to use the power they have over other people to enforce their morality or views?" The other side of looking at it is the Spider-man ethos: "With great power comes great responsibility." If you have the power to stop a crime, and actually crime doesn't need to enter into it, if you have the power to stop something bad of any sort from happening you have a moral responsibility to stop it. If a normal person sees a mugging occurring, and they jump in and stop it that is not really like fascism at all. So why should it be different for someone with power? In fact, there have been several stories in the news berating people who stand by watching as other people are injured or otherwise.

I think a lot of the classic series relaly were glorified fascism blended with national optimism, but today they have evolved into something different. There are superheroes who were previously murderers and assassins. There are vigilantes and anti-heroes who use questionable means and even while being the protaganist they may not be portrayed in a positive light by the author. There are even some popular classic series which explore how many of the supervillains who do horrible things are in some way a creation of the superhero and the possibility that he is responsible for them. I think it has really come into a true art form which is used best not as an instruction guide for how to solve crime but as metaphors for issues.

I would see no problem with letting my children read or watch superhero media.

I do find a funny point with them on the issue of destruction. The other day I watched The Cape and laughed as the classic superhero scene unfolded. The superhero stumbles upon a robbery of a store of some sort and intervenes, throwing the robbers into various store rack and windows and walls, destroying half the store. In the end, the hero probably caused more monetary damage than the robbers would have taken.

Well, personally, I don't think that comic books are the sort of thing SMALL children should be given, and I know it's on TV but it's the parent's responsiblilty to moniter what they are watching, if you don't want your kid to see it, don't complain to the station and ruin it for everyone else, simply turn it off.

But older kids, maybe 8+, 10+ if they are still kind of imature for their age, should be fine with them. They should be able to understand that they can't copy what the heroes are doing, but they are too young to look at it in the way the guy above me described it.

If it came to a point where the child starts to act out the scenes, then it's the parent's job to explain to them that the things in the comics aren't real, and why they can't do it.

People like them ones claiming that superheroes are bad influences should try paying more attention to their own child if they are so worried and leave the rest of us alone. (I say us, I'm not actually a parent, but one day...)

wow, Sora never really thought about this. He's been a superhero fan since he was born and it didn't really affect Sora like that. I think the comic books and shows that kids do watch makes them just want to do good............they really don't think to much into it.
To kids, it's just about beating the bad guy and becoming a good guy!

Originally Posted by Feral Fantom

I think a lot of the classic series really were glorified fascism blended with national optimism, but today they have evolved into something different. There are superheroes who were previously murderers and assassins. There are vigilantes and anti-heroes who use questionable means and even while being the protaganist they may not be portrayed in a positive light by the author. There are even some popular classic series which explore how many of the supervillains who do horrible things are in some way a creation of the superhero and the possibility that he is responsible for them.

I think this is an excellent summary of how the media has developed with time. I don't know about you guys, but in my lifetime I've always considered superhero genre to be almost exclusively adult. Children can appreciate the characters on some level, but a more complex emotional comprehension is required to fully understand the characters and the world.

I've never been fond of heroes such as Superman and Captain America precisely because, to me, they appear to be products of a bygone age. They embody the nationalistic roots of the superhero genre, and all that it entails - the supposed "good," but mainly the bad. They symbolise inflexible legalistic principles and undesireable traditions, including, to my eyes, more than a measured dash of misogyny. We live in a different world now. Our world - perhaps incorrectly, but that's another argument - now widely rejects these traditions.

Of course, I'm referring to the Western world. This is where the superhero genre originated, and largely where these arguments will remain. However, I have recently noticed the same rejection of fascist principles in media from another culture - Japan. Take, for example, the anime Panty and Stocking with Garterbelt, released in the last couple of months of 2010. The titular characters, Panty and Stocking, are Anarchy Angels, whilst the major antagonists are demons whose goal is to impose totalitarianism onto the world. The girls defy and destroy the demons' attempts at assimilating humankind, and undermine their obsession with "RULES!!!"

Another example that springs to mind is the video game Bayonetta. The protagonist is a dark chaos witch who ultimately thwarts the attempts of the light coven to revive their deity. The blur between the lines of good and evil in both of these examples is exceedingly complex. In Bayonetta, you essentially play on the "dark side," but the goal of the cold angelic world is obviously corrupt and harmful to all forms of life. This is despite the fact that the light witches see themselves as performing the ultimate good. (It is this misguided, clouded view of "good" which usually brands characters - and people - as criminally insane.) In P&Sw/G, the "Good" side is the traditional "Heavenly" side, but the roles are reversed - it is the demonic side which is legalistic rather than chaotic. This is a twist I find fascinating. On the flipside, in another anime called Angel Sanctuary, the ultimate villain, in another intriguing concept, is God. Heaven is once again portrayed as authoritarian and corrupt.

To return to the strictest interpretation of the genre, you can still see the same principles everywhere - the blurred line between good and evil. In the X-Men canon, Rogue is a character who lurches back and forth between the dark side and the good side, between antagonist and protagonist. Wolverine, always a "Good" character, embodies many dark characteristics. In the second part of the recent X-Men movie trilogy, the sympathy for the human villain character is strong, as his current hatred came about as a product of Xavier's incapability to help his mutant son. The whole structure of the mutant school, I felt, was shown to be flawed and embedded in traditions which were not helpful or tailor-made to EVERYONE - this was shown most poignantly in the movie by the young Pyro. His control of fire had the potential for both great good and terrible destruction, and because he couldn't find acceptance in the academy - because they had taught him with the mindset of limiting him rather than allowing him to flourish - he ended up turning to a teacher who would nurture him properly. The evil mastermind, of course.

Other works I'd like to cite include the recent Megamind. All you have to do is read its plot summary on Wikipedia to see that it's entirely based on the fine line between what makes a "hero" and what makes a "villain." In an unfinished work by one of my favourite artists, titled Lotte vs. the Dead, the conventions of the superhero genre are parodied, and the flaws of the system - such as the traditional superhero unwillingness to kill the villains - ultimately leads to their destruction.

I have mixed feelings about female superheroines. On the one hand, they reinforce stereotypical ideals of beauty and femininity, including both supposed good and bad aspects of "being a woman." On the other, they, especially heroines such as Catwoman, stand for female empowerment and independence... but only to a limited degree, as their stories often revolve around a male protagonist and love interest. I've yet to see a superheroine who I can be totally satisfied with.

My personal favourite superhero is Spiderman, especially as portrayed in the recent Spiderman trilogy. His struggle with his own human insecurities and role in life is endearing at every turn. The good and evil shown within himself, within the other characters and within the world is true to life. In essence, Peter Parker is a good guy who makes mistakes and tries to learn from them. He's a good guy, who's [i]trying/i] to be good, but has also slipped up and been blinded by rage and agony. This is the sort of "hero" which, perhaps, would be better to aspire to than faceless masks of authority such as Batman.

I always thought it would be bad to live in Townville, since the Powerpuff Girls knock more stuff down defeating monsters than the monsters do.

I never really thought of them as anything more than cartoons. TV isn't real was something I was aware of early on and now when I watch or read Batman I spend all my time figuring out the psychology of the character instead of whether it's right or wrong for him to do what he does, but then I've always felt that right and wrong were subjective and therefor irrelevant to the pursuit of objective facts, so I was never concerned with his moral compass or the impact he had on the public.

That being said I tend to like characters like Batman and the Punisher. The more screwed up they are the better because it gives me something to analyze.