The handling of Barbara Gordon's character (or lack of it?) in The Killing Joke is something that sometimes leads to heated debate. I came across this comment.

"I've never gotten that objection to how Barbara is used in "The Killing Joke." It implies there is something wrong with using a character to further another character's story, which is ridiculous. Furthering stories is what characters are for. Fictional characters are not real people, they are objects that exist only for the purpose of telling stories.

No one makes this criticism about the many other characters who suffer or die to further another character's story. [i]No one says that Thomas and Martha Wayne were used badly in the origin of Batman, because they exist only to traumatize Bruce by their deaths[/i]. Ditto for Ben Parker, Abin Sur, and Yin Sen.

The only explanation for why this double standard exists that I can think of is that Violence Against Women, and especially Sexual Violence Against Women are topics many people find upsetting; and some people lack the emotional maturity necessary to realize that just because something upsets them, doesn't mean it's wrong, or that it makes a bad story. So they make up a bogus criticism that attacks one of the basic foundations of storytelling.

There is nothing wrong, either morally or from a storytelling perspective, with hurting or killing a character in order to make another character who loves them upset."

http://community.comicbookresources.com/showthread.php?81848-quot-Batgirl-and-the-Birds-of-Prey-quot-Solidifies-quot-Killing-Joke-quot-In-Rebirth-Continuity

Any thoughts? I think the statement is interesting.

The handling of Barbara Gordon's character (or lack of it?) in The Killing Joke is something that sometimes leads to heated debate.

I think you missed the context of the original debate by comparing to the Wayne parents.

The cover that was used to attract a potential buyer perpetuated the continuing violent misogyny in our society. The lack of sensitivity or empathy towards reducing violence towards women is what's grating, just to make a few measly dollars.

Nowadays, variant covers are a normal part of the sales machinery. Had that cover been offered as a variant rather than as a general sale, there might have been less of an outcry.

As for the story itself - pushing the boundary of 'decency' in making Barbara Gordon a pawn and a degraded victim to affect her loved ones deeply - TV and films rarely go this far. For comic books normally directed at teens, the writers of the book were announcing there are a large swath of adult readers of comic books who want mature themes. In that respect, that proved to be true as the film industry has capitalized with mature themes and comic book heroes.

I think you missed the context of the original debate by comparing to the Wayne parents.

I don't think so - that comparison was made by the original poster that I was quoting, not by me.

But you added this: "I think the statement in bold is interesting." regarding the parents.

No one says that Thomas and Martha Wayne were used badly in the origin of Batman, because they exist only to traumatize Bruce by their deaths.

Yes, within the context of the whole post - which is why I quoted the whole post and not just that one sentence.