There has been a trend lately in North America to have our Superheroes kill. I find it sad, and feel that we have lost contact with what superheroes are, and why we have them. Superheroes from around the world have not changed their attitudes nearly so drastically as North American ones have. Some countries superheroes are very much based upon North American “Classic” ideology, and some have their own ideologies.

Recent “Heroes” that have immerged have been a lot more violent than I am comfortable with, and I think the one that disturbed me the most was a recent “Trans-media” series about Canadian heroes. The “Heroes of the North” is a video & comic series available online about Canadian super-soldiers. They state right in the first episodes that is what they are. They begin with origins, & have each character’s origin ending with them killing someone, sometimes a rival soldier (Non-super). But they define what I call super soldiers. They are not crime fighters, they are not there to help the population. They are created to defend the country from terrorists. That is a super-soldier. I may not like super-soldiers killing, but they do it for the defence of the country, and I don’t have to collect those comics or videos.

It really bothers me when superheroes start killing, though. Classic heroes like Batman or Superman, who both in their last reboots (Christian Bale Batman, & Man of Steel) killed. I don’t believe that any of the villains survived Batman’s wrath in those movies, and Superman would have found another way of dealing with Zod in the Man of Steel. Superheroes came out of depressions where the continent had so much crime that the regular people felt they had no hope, and were commonly committing suicide. Superheroes were people who had superpowers, sometimes that power was just caring, or money like “The Green Hornet” or “The Batman,” sometimes that actually had powers like “The Shadow” or “Superman” did. And yes, in the really old comics and radio dramas the bad guys died, but (from my research, if you see otherwise send me the cbr file) the Superhero did not kill them, they died trapped in their own evil plans. “Superheroes” are civilian, they help people. They stop criminals from hurting people, they let the justice system deal with criminals that have been stopped. They know that the moment they cross the line of killing that they are no better than the people they are trying to thwart. Superheroes don’t involve themselves in wars. The moment Superheroes act in war, they are super soldiers. And this doesn’t end well for us normals. For evidence of this take a look at Alan Moore’s “The Watchmen” or check out the movie by the same name, in which the Supers of America won the Vietnam War for the USA.

North American Super-heroes usually deal with internal problems. The Evil is human, and in modern times the evil is always major. Super heroes don’t stop crime anymore they stop super-crime. Police could stop a bank robber, Superman stops would-be-world-dominators. Where as in East Asia, the Evil is usually external, aliens, demons or monsters, almost never human. In Southeast Asia the superheroes defend the population from Supernatural evil: witches, werewolves, vampires and their like. Both East Asian and South East Asian heroes kill monsters and non-human threats to the world. They usually try not to, but to the populations of those areas, monsters need to be destroyed.

Now my experience with authentic superheroes from other countries is limited to a few sources. Cyber-6, and Captain Africa for example cover the European and African continents, but 1 hero does not a genre make. (Yes I know Cyber-6 takes place in Argentina, but it is written originally for an Italian audience). So it is hard for me to gather what the attitudes of the rest of the planet are towards Superheroes vs Super-Soldiers. I am open to learning however, if anyone wants to introduce me to a free comic (or one I can find for cheap) from the rest of the world. (And Captain Britain doesn’t count as a European Comic in my mind, as it is published by Americans for Americans).

Why do fast food restaurants call them “girl toys” and “boy toys”? Is there supposed to be a difference? Not long ago I got 2 children’s meals from the local fast food restaurant, and they ask if I wanted boy toys or girl toys, I said I wanted 1 of each. Generally my daughter will play with the “Boy toy” and unless it’s Barbie, my son will play with the “Girl toy.” (He used to, but my wife asked him to stop stripping the clothes off them.) This time I got home and took the toys out for them to see, I had a sword spinning pirate, and a super-villain’s race car that shot plastic missiles. So which is which, and why were they labelled boy and girl?

The concept of gender based toys is an old one, that when you think about it we propagate a lot. If you go to most major toy stores they have them divided clearly (Some even mark on the walls “for him” or “for her”) But you will have black sleek bows and arrows made like a ninja assassin would carry, with a boy on the box. Next to that you will have this pink bow covered in hearts and teddy bear stickers, with a girl on the box. Now I know a couple of girls that like archery, and they aren’t going to choose the pink cutsie bow, they’re going to sneak up in their ninja clothes behind you with their black or blue ninja bow and shoot you with that suction dart in your butt.

There is also a major misconception about how toys will dictate your emerging sexual preference (especially for boys). When I was young, a lot of people were certain I would be gay. Why? Because I had an easy bake oven, a small collection of dolls. I played house with my girlfriends.I really didn’t care for toy cars or GI Joe. I wrote poetry in grade school. I got invited to “girl’s nights out” in highschool. (I loved that. ^_~) I am a happily married straight man with 2 children. I’m just a nice guy. (please don’t post me and tell me I’m not.)

Even today these old fashioned attitudes of what girls should do and boys should do is everywhere. Yesterday I was at the post office and a woman came in with her little girl, about 4 years old. The little girl got bored, as anyone does in the line at the post office, and she starts crawling on the floor pretending to be a lion. Her mother’s first comment to me, like she had to defend her daughter’s actions was “She’s been playing too much with her brother.” I thought, but didn’t say “Nope, she just young and bored.” After a bit she bruised her knee, and much like one of my brothers would, sat there and calmly told her mother that it hurt, then started poking the bruise over and over and over, just to make sure it still hurt.

Now my question, do any children fit these gender molds we have set up as a society? If so, honestly why have I never met one that does completely. Why do we set up these molds? Is it because subconsciously we believe that is the way things should be? Is it something our parents and their parents trained us to do? What are your thoughts on this?

This is something Irish and I noticed right away when we arrived in Canada. Families don’t use transit. It’s strange. Since coming back to Canada, I have seen 1 family using transit, just one. And the father told me that their car was in the shop being repaired, and that was why. I have seen teenagers using transit, daycares and summer camps using transit, but not families.

So why does this surprise, you ask. Well I have gotten so used to the idea that everyone uses transit, which is the way it is in Korea, China, Japan, and the Philippines. Even if they have a car, most people in Korea use the bus & subway because of traffic or gas prices. You will see rich looking people, poor looking people, construction workers, and street merchants with their wares in a big bundle. Priests use the transit, students & families do too. In fact there is no School bus system, students that live far from their school need to take public transit, and they get there safe.

In China only people who have expensive cars drive them all the time. Transit is still the preferred way to go for people with economy class cars or similar. You still have students using transit to get to school, because unless you go to a private school, there is no school bus. Farmers carry their crops around on busses, merchants carry their wares on busses, and about 80% of the families use public transit.

One thing I think is a wonderful idea we should have adopted years ago in Canada is: at each and every bus stop, it has a list of the buses that stop there, and a basic route map for each of those buses. At the bus stop you can see (If you can read the local language) exactly where every bus goes from that stop. No need to look online (Unless you can’t read), or phone in to ask.

Japan has the oddest transit system I have ever encountered, but it works for them. When you get on a bus, you don’t pay, however you get a ticket. When you get off the bus you pay. This is because there is no general fare. You pay a certain amount for each stop you have traveled. So if you get on for 2 stops it is much cheaper than staying on the bus for 15 stops. The Japanese Subway is a similar thing, there is a different price for each station you want to go to. And if you need to transfer, there is a chance you have to get out and buy a different ticket (If the transferring line is a different transit company). Despite this odd paying system a lot of families use transit.

Japan also has women’s buses, these are buses with female drivers, and only women may travel on them. This was the Japanese response to the reality that a lot of women were being assaulted on busy busses, where it was too crowded to get away from the attacker.

In the Philippines most people cannot afford a car, and so many people take public transit, which comes in many different shapes and sizes. They have “tricycles” which are motorbikes with a 4 seat side-car welded to it, there are jeepneys, which looks like an army personnel carrier with a hard top instead of a canvas top. And there are a few buses. People also travel public mini-vans. Now the Philippines is the only place I have been that every vehicle in the public transit system is privately owned. Jeepney drivers get a license for a certain route, they are told how much they are allowed to charge, but they keep the profits. Tricycles replace most taxis. Mini-vans (Adventures) replace intercity buses.

So moving back to Canada from a place that very few people drive their own car to a place where cars almost outnumber the people, is a very odd sensation and it has been difficult for us as a family to get around without feeling conscientious. I will be getting my international license while abroad this time so I do not have to start the graduated system again when we return. (2 times is enough).