In response to the Batgirl thing again

Okay, last one for the month, and not a moment too soon. I have a job tonight that, while I was originally going to go to, end the shift at 10:30, then come home and write a post about it, well, things happen, and I don't want to miss my quota because of unforseen circumstances.

It should be pretty cool, it's access control for a school dance. Fingers crossed it's like a middle school or something. Maybe I should keep my stubble to be more intimidating.

I just wrote a good reply to the reply of my comment on that Batgirl topic (see earlier post) and I've got it all control-copied, ready to go right here, but would it make sense in a vacuum, without the comment it's replying to? Actually, maybe it's fine. Plus, like I said, I've got to get cleaned up to go soon, I'll want to be gone in about an hour or so.

For some flavour, be aware that while responding and therefore while writing this, I was eating an apple, so yes, it took awhile to type it out one handed. Of course, maybe that difference is negligible, what with the fact that I barely type better than a one-to-one hunt and peck style.

I'd be in big trouble if they ever shifted the keys to straight alphabetic. Wait, actually, most people would be in trouble, so never mind.

Anyways.

"Oh, thanks for the response Colin, but I should clear up one point on my end. When I was asserting that there was no clue as to why Batwoman would treat Batgirl as an equal partner, or thereabouts, and suggesting a lack of evidence for their deciding to work together, I didn't mean to gloss over the points you brought up at all, rather I should have said "it's evident why Batwoman would thing Batgirl an admirable person, what with her conceding the brawl so quickly/humbly, but where was the clue to point out that Batgirl was a capable crimefighter."

It's not for nothing that there have been examples upon examples of various Bat-family members telling other super people and copycats to get out of the game, what with their lack of proper training/skills/temperment. That's what made it so noteworthy in the Aztek book when Batman specifically told the title character that he was clearly trained enough to be a superhero (though also this is likely evidence of a more than slight mary-sue treatment on the part of the writers towards Aztek).

I suppose, and this isn't a criticism of this issue, but rather the series as a whole, this ties back into the lack of reason given for why Batgirl IS Batgirl. Mind, this isn't me advocating for a grim'n gritty raison d'etre, I liked that Batgirl operated simply because this was something she was capable of doing. But the story has gone out of its way to show us a stumbling Batgirl- this was done to ameliorate the outrage against suddenly undoing a paralytic injury- but really, if Batgirl can't convincingly protect herself in these dangerous situations she's throwing herself into, how can she justify going out night after night?

This is actually where the grim n' gritty origin comes in handy. If you can handwave this irresponsibility by saying the character is driven to it regardless of their physical conndition, well, that explains it. I guess what I'm saying here is- what drives Barbara Gordon?

I may have fallen off my original train of thought, but hopefully the cars are connected?"