Neko Robin's Topics (206)

I'm cool with it. I got not remorse for that. If my mom did that fucked up shit to me I'd kill her too

This is... I stan this

Ummmm people doing fucked up shit to you doesn’t justify murdering them???

I think if you are a victim of domestic violence then it makes psychological sense to want them dead

Maybe according to you. I disagree. The punishment fits the crime. Would I murder someone? No. Do I find it justified? Absolutely. Just because our legal system doesn't accept murder (for good reason let's be clear about that) doesn't mean it isn't deserved.

Lol ppl who kill animals then move on to kill ppl are called serial killers. Not feeling it, plenty of ppl have abusive parents and they dont murder them. She wasnt abusive enough to justify being burned alive. Sry but no.

That's definitely not how being a serial killer works. Thats like saying I own a white hat and cook so I must be a chef. No, I cook to survive. He killed a dog that led to him getting beaten and starved and was in the way of his only source of food-> Justified. He killed a mother who only loved him for his way to get her into the palace and whenever that was threatened she beat him even though he risked his life to get her food -> Justified. I can understand how you don't agree but I'm completely fine with it. Kudos to him for getting revenge and away from that madness. No remorse

Right? His mom was bed bound by disease....how fucking intense do they think the abuse was? She is a victim too. She was a shit mom but not abusive to the point I think it was okay that he murdered her. Girls justifying him are the same women that made Ted Bundy a superstar and act like he’s hot. Fucking gross, why are people’s standards so low for people they think are attractive. If he was ugly people would not be chill with what he did.

Uh sorry you don't agree, but what makes you think your morals are superior to mine? Because mommy taught you murder was bad? I don't care if he was attractive or not. That's not swaying my decision at all. How about when Wolfgang killed the king? Was that bad too? I mean he could have imprisoned him instead right? His life was not in immediate danger nor was he suffering from inescapable abuse from the king. Just like the boy with his mother. So why is that any less evil? Because you feel so in your heart lmao? Wolfgang killed the king because he hated him. He was angry, and that was his due revenge. Why is this man not allowed to do the same? Because you get to draw the line on what murders are justified? "Well this guy was worse so I get to decide he gets to be killed and not the mom" You're not God. You make your own lines an I make mine. Supporting serial killers who prey on the innocent and justifying revenge on 1 individual are pretty different. Y'all really need to step the fuck off these moral pedestals you put yourselves on.

Lol I'm not gona argue and neither am I going to write a paragraph going into the psychological structure of a serial killer lmfao. I'm not going to take the time to school you here on a comic forum. You think he was justified good for you. #cantrelate

I think I confused your comment with another there for a second. I completely stand by his actions not being that of a serial killer (I did just read upon it and still completely disagree) I mean he didn't even take any pleasure from the kills but whatever. As for the rest of it, disregard as it was not meant for you. I get where you're coming from tho

lmao it’s a fucking comic. Chill the fuck out. But uh yeah actually, I do think I’m pretty morally superior to be able to distinguish between the facts that his dad was both a murderer and sexual predator who tortured dozens of children while his mom was like...just a sickly delusional bitch. So uh yeah, despite skimming through that nonsense you shat out all over the screen, yeah still think the murder or the king was SUPER justifiable and the murder of his mom was like....pretty fuckin wild and extreme. But in the end, like I said, it’s a fucking comic. Don’t burst a blood vessel over it.

Yo you do realize, I mean especially if he was just gonna burn the house down anyway....that he could have just left her? He could have literally just....left and it would have been a way easier and less fucking crazy way to get her out of his life than burning her alive.....but whatever.

I do not think he is a serial killer. I was simply remarking on the parallels of his psychological construction with that of the standard profile of some of our contemporary serial killers. I do not think the level of his mother's abuse warranted being burned alive. I feel that the author's depiction of his reasoning, history and subsequent actions sets him up as a sociopathic character which is at odds with her portrayal of him later on in the comic. My point being, although I like this comic, personally I feel that he is a poorly written character bc he is not in fact a mindless killer even though she set him up as one.

My thoughts exactly! Totally agree with you, it’s just bad writing. Part of why I’m really not liking season 2... I feel like the author took on too many ideas and characters.

I can understand that. I personally don't think he was set up that way, but I understand why you do.

I already addressed this with my comment about the king. He also could have been "left" a.k.a. imprisoned. But he wasn't was he? Why was he killed? Because Wolfgang hated him and wanted him dead. They both took revenge against a parent who mistreated them. I'll agree Wolfgang's was more morally justifiable, but both were worthy acts of revenge. If you beat your child, you deserve to die. I've seen what happens to physically abused children. I've seen it in 4 boys. A 7, 12, 50, and 17 year old. They all have one thing in common even though the length and amount of abuse was different. They're all broken in the same way. A crazy you can predict. Like someone built with a piece missing. A misery they'll never move on from. While I won't say this is the case for all abused children, its 4 for 4. Anyone who condemns their child to that, deserves to die in my eyes.

? I'm not mad. Sorry if the fact I poked fun at you made it seem that way. That's not what I meant by morals which you would know if you actually read my comment. I'm not making fun of you because I think you have bad reading comprehension. I'm aware you're able to understand that the two villains had different levels of evil. It's the fact that you think you get to decide who is worthy of dying and that your morals are the right morals that I find hilarious. People can disagree with you, and just because they don't feel the same way, that doesn't automatically make them wrong lmao.

You’re only basing your shitty argument on the fact of “I think I get to decide who deserves to live and die”. I have not claimed to think this over ALL situations or ALL people but in this situation it is incredibly clear to anyone who has their head screwed on straight that the murder of his mother was not morally gray it was fucking psychotic. Killing his dad is also not morally gray because his dad is a callous murderer and rapist who would continue to do both of those things if he had not been killed. That is the whole fucking point of the parallel here. Randolph killed his mom because he felt like it and lost control of his temper which illustrates how he is like his father whereas the new king killed his father and is morally just in doing so. That’s the whole fucking narrative being set up here. One lived in the shadows, has dark fucking hair as a literary device to designate him as the dark half of the siblings and the king and as a function in the story to illustrate him not receiving the golden blessing while his brother was born with golden hair and despite ALSO living in the shadows and on the street had ALWAYS held up his own moral standards about justice. You are not supposed to think what Randolph did was morally gray. Randolph burned his mother and house down on his own and put himself out on the street. Who did a similar thing???? Oh right!! The evil old king who burned down the house of the son who beheaded him with his mother inside forcing him out onto the streets. The parallel here could not be anymore obvious.

Like I said homie, I really just don't see it that way. "Anyone who has their head screwed on staright" you're just assuming the world is gonna fall in line with your morals. I have many friends who read this story. A lot of them don't like this scene and feel as you do but quite a lot of my friends agree with me. It's very arrogant of you to assume that when people don't agree with you they must be crazy lmaooo. You seem to be unable to address the fact that the king could have been imprisoned. That would have stopped all the murder and the rape. But Wolfgang didn't did he? He killed him for REVENGE anyone with eyes can see that. I think you're reading way too much into this with your whole light/dark theme and house burning. What else was he supposed to do? Slit her throat himself? Leave her to starve in agony? He was angry against an abuser and people ARE allowed to disagree with you. Not everyone just runs on endless forgiveness. Some things can't be forgiven for certain people. My argument still stands. You think you're morally superior and therefore you get to decide which death is justified. Anyone who disagrees with you is crazy in your eyes. What else can I say? You're going to have to learn one day that people will have different opinions when it comes to something abstract like morality. This gray area you say doesn't exist, absolutely does. You're just unable to see it. While that's fine, telling people they're crazy for seeing it, is not. I don't think you're able to grasp that fact, so this will be my last comment. I do understand your point of view, but you seem blind to mine, which leaves me talking to a brick wall.

Lmfao you wrote all that but at the end still managed not to say a single thing. You keep trying to dance around it but at the end of the day you just wanna write off what Randolph did so you can enjoy the writing. You have no real argument, you’re just saying you feel like what he did wasn’t that bad. Idgaf if you or your friends don’t care or disagree that what he did was cold blooded. He did what he did. It’s not really open to interpretation. You’re just allowed to shrug it off or pretend it was justified. I mean you act like it’s a question of morals to say that if I think killing is wrong the king should have just been imprisoned...but I never said killing was inherently wrong. One dude murdered a murderer and rapist, which I’m totally cool with. One killed because he was angsty and wanted to. My whole point was just that Randolph wasn’t FORCED to do what he did nor did he FEEL like he was forced to kill her to escape. He just did it...because he was angry at her...and to me that is a real bitch move. We don’t have to argue about it. I never told you to believe what I believe. I just called your motives for shrugging it off into question. At the end of the day we all know why. People forgive Randolph because they want to. They want to like him. So they forgive him and make excuses for him. I would be doing the same if the author wrote it in a way that I felt his actions were justified. But it wasnt. So I haven’t.

yeah. I'm so shock. the seme that i thought becomes the uke