I've come across a few posts about the importance and sweetness of the relationship between Stephanie and Damian in the Batfam, and while I don't disagree that them having a close brother-sister thing going is good, I think the characterization of it as: "Stephanie is so good with Damian because she just treats him like the snot-nosed, bratty, good-hearted kid he really is" is… strange.
Because Damian isn't just that. That description of him is a kind of erasure, a kind of going partially un-seen, which most people don't actually take to kindly in the longterm. I mean, people can enjoy media and characters however they want, obviously, this just taps into a certain way of imagining trauma that bothers me. It usually goes: Character A is treated like they're volatile, damaged from growing up in a cult, fragile, you know –– whatever it is –– until Character B shows up and ignores all those obviously real factors, and somehow, it just works. Because apparently, that was the sort of "authentic connection" Character A really needed to heal.
I get the necessity of not reducing someone to their struggles or history; to seeing them as a whole person with agency. But that’s why pretending the hard issues and facets of them don't actually exist is an overcorrection in the other direction.
It happens a good bit in books and movies, as well as what I've seen in the Batfam fandom, especially if the story or take is contrasting how Bruce treats his kids vs almost anyone else, but very often the Kents or "Good Sibling [insert Batkid]". And there's some truth to it –– Sometimes, someone new is what a person needs. That unfamiliar space without baggage or just absent anyone who really Knows them. But then it usually isn't that the earlier approaches were "wrong", it's that sometimes, people will open up to strangers in ways they simply don't want to open up to others who have made themselves perfectly available for years.
(I'm aware Canon Bruce has not done this with Damian in all versions. In fanon stories or posts, he sometimes is prioritizing the kid, however, and because it isn't a perfectly tailored approach that everyone else can see isn't perfect because everyone except Bruce has some magical emotional acuity that can read Damian's mind and heart from moment to moment, apparently, he usually only gets push-back, eye-rolls, and "Let me draw it in crayon for you" talk-through's on How To Parent, often from Dick or Alfred, which I personally find infuriating. This isn't limited to Damian, of course –– this is often just how Bruce's attempts to "be a better parent" in fanon go.)
It just bugs me when characters are struggling to address actual issues someone has, and then the narrative just hands what it calls "emotional intelligence" to some other person who helps that same character heal in a shockingly small amount of time, with minimal effort, inconvenience, or cost. Like, Bruce is struggling with Damian, right? Then Damian visits the Kent farm or goes on a halfway forced shopping trip or cozy movie night with Stephanie and, without having to endure the distance, lashing out, difficulties, and undeserved scorn and defiance that *should* still characterize his reactions to someone attempting to get close to him, albeit in various ways, Ma Kent and Stephanie just… do it. By ignoring those sharp edges, and like a kid covering their eyes during hide and seek, assuming that means you can't see them either, those sharp edges just… go away? Damian feels seen and safe and understood, valued for who he is –– and boom! Instant strong ties and vulnerability unlocked.
Despite the fact that important parts of who he is, for good and for bad, just went completely ignored.
Stories have time constraints, sure, and sometimes, perhaps, people just want to see the pay-off, feel-good moments; but it just rubs me the wrong way when "gaining trust" is made comparatively effortless if you just "do it the right way," which usually means being highly verbal and a bit “respectifully” pushy, when actually? That's not how that works with most people, and most especially not traumatized kids. You need a sensible approach — and time. You usually have to go through a lot of tedious (not even necessarily intentional) evasion, misery, and hard stuff before you get to trust, and it can be one step forward, two back, sometimes for years. Often, you have to be willing to be kept at a distance, run around, and maybe even (seemingly randomly) hated here and there for a while.
To be fair, I do also just get sick of the "Bruce Wayne is bad at feelings" and "Bruce Wayne is bad at communicating" tags when, in fact, in the actual stories, he often isn't bad at either –– *everyone* involved is just in the process of learning about each other. (Or sometimes, in my opinion, the writer has everyone be bad at these things, but decides the characters are going to react as negatively as possible to Bruce specifically while reacting positively to each other –– which is fine, they can do that, but then the in-story events are not actually due to Bruce being 'bad at feelings' etc.)
Bruce could do something that nobody would mind at all if it came from Dick Grayson or Ma Kent, but *since it is Bruce*, they will kick up a fuss. And that is a real thing, with (especially traumatized) young adults bristling at authority figures or mentors or anyone "charged" with "taking care of them". Getting angry at that guy alone for doing things they wouldn't mind coming from someone else.
It doesn't mean Bruce has the emotional range or intelligence of a spoon. It means he took in traumatized kids.
turnnoffyourmind
dailybridgerton
gummygunk
romaincrisis
