This question is mainly for Marvel fans, but the character Daredevil is a superhero/vigilante who’s a lawyer, mainly a defense attorney. I get he’s about upholding justice and helping the little guy, but wouldn’t it make more sense for the character to be a prosecutor or a civil rights attorney rather than a defense attorney?

I get not everyone is guilty, and a lot of people get screwed over, but let’s be honest: most of the time, defense attorneys defend people who are, more often than not, guilty of crimes. If Matt’s whole character is about justice, wouldn’t it make more sense for him to be a prosecutor, use his hearing to decide if the person is guilty or not, and achieve justice that way? Or become a civil rights attorney?

This question is mainly for Marvel fans, but the character Daredevil is a superhero/vigilante who’s a lawyer, mainly a defense attorney. I get he’s about upholding justice and helping the little guy, but wouldn’t it make more sense for the character to be a prosecutor or a civil rights attorney rather than a defense attorney?

I get not everyone is guilty, and a lot of people get screwed over, but let’s be honest: most of the time, defense attorneys defend people who are, more often than not, guilty of crimes. If Matt’s whole character is about justice, wouldn’t it make more sense for him to be a prosecutor, use his hearing to decide if the person is guilty or not, and achieve justice that way? Or become a civil rights attorney?

As adults, do you still watch kids’ cartoons, either old or new? Or do you only watch mature shows?

Animals are alive; they are living beings, same with bugs and insects. What do you think goes through their minds? Especially insects like flies, ants, spiders, etc., especially when they’re so small and can die so easily?

For example, if a police officer unjustly kills a Black woman in cold blood, and the victim’s cousin’s daughter is a defense attorney who helps get the officer acquitted, would she be morally wrong for defending him?

Usually, financially stable parents who pay for their kids’ clothes, phones, cars, etc. will say, “I paid for it, so it belongs to me.” But in extremely wealthy families that are 3 or 4 generations deep with hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars, what actually belongs to who?

At that point, the money may not have originally come from the parents themselves — it could’ve been inherited from grandparents or great-grandparents and passed down through generations. So can parents in those families still say, “It’s my money because I paid for it,” when the wealth itself wasn’t originally theirs either?

Watching Law & Order, you see how prosecution works, at least on a surface level, but how is it different in the U.K.? Or is it more or less the same?

There are a lot of famous people in the world, but the Kardashians get the most hate. Why?

Should businesses, big or small — from Walmart down to a family-owned grocery store — be legally allowed to kick you out because of what you wear or say? For example, if someone wears a Nazi shirt, a KKK shirt, or has a Nazi tattoo on their body, should a business be allowed to kick them out? And, just to be fair, this applies to both the left and the right. If someone walks in wearing a pro-Palestine shirt or a Black Lives Matter shirt, should a business be allowed to kick them out too?

If you’ve seen the The Boys series finale, then you know what I’m talking about — but how can Vought International possibly save the entire concept of “superheroes” after everything that’s happened?

Sure, a lot of people probably still feel like “not everyone in that group is the same.” Characters from Gen V are genuinely good people, and Starlight is obviously one of the few real heroes. But still, like Billy Butcher said, the next Homelander is always right around the corner.

Even if Stan Edgar and Vought were suddenly like, “Okay, we can’t make the same mistakes again,” and both Vought and the government genuinely tried to make superheroes more controlled and decent, how do you even fix public trust at that point?

And honestly, it doesn’t even have to come from a good place. If Homelander wanted to, he could literally destroy the world. Corporate executives and government officials are still human beings living on Earth — they wouldn’t want to die either. So logically, it makes sense they’d try to create a system where superheroes are at least somewhat stable and manageable.

But my question is: in-universe, how the hell do you actually save it after all this? Most people probably wouldn’t trust superheroes ever again.

Do you think defense attorneys who defend cops who unjustly killed Black people—or people in general—are ‘bad people’? Like the lawyer who defended the cop that killed Sonya Massey—were they ‘bad people’?

I see a lot of AI slop music on YouTube, and I think it’s gross. AI is genuinely for people with no talent and who are lazy, but what really pissed me off was seeing a Michael Jackson AI song. Fuck the person who did that. How are you going to disrespect the GOAT like that? Do you think we should report these videos?