Greetings u/ihatethiscountry76. This is r/menwritingwomen . It showcases examples of how men who write films, books, TV, and graphic novels characterize women.
For our Readers: Do these breasts twinkle with excitement? Bosom rising and falling like an empire? Or does it fall flat like pancakes with nipples?
Upvote this comment if you think the post is a good example of a man writing a woman.
Downvote this comment if this is another attempt at the historical use of bosom from an uncultured swine, or otherwise not a good example of a man writing a woman.
And if it breaks the rules, downvote this comment and report this post!
Thank you, I was going to point this out... it was SO creepy to see, so out of character for both of them! Just creepy af ... its like a father sleeping with his son's girlfriend who is also the daughter of his best friend... I mean im sure it happened in rl at some point in history, but still creepy af
Batman has groomed many children over the years, isolating them from their families and teaching them to hide what they're really doing to participate in a secret life of crime. This was the natural outcome.
1) Batman/Bruce Wayne never groomed in the way you're implying (which is absolutely disgusting by the way, the fuck is wrong with you 🤢).
2) All but Barbara Gordon were legally adopted by him (though I hate the fact that he adopted them mainly to be his sidekick fighting crime), and he made it very clear to Barbara that if she were to participate in such a war she would need to keep it secret (especially from her police commissioner father); she still decided to be a vigilante, of her own free will, anyway.
3) If Batman/Bruce Wayne is participating in a so-called "secret life crime", then so is the rest of the Justice League and their allies since they're all part of the same general group and spend roughly half their time together.
I was replying to u/quirkymuse who observed that it was very icky to see Batman sleeping with Barbara Gordon because "it's like a father sleeping with his son's girlfriend who is also the daughter of his best friend." Yes, it is. Because we criminalize that behavior.
Your post is exactly what I'm talking about. He's a billionaire that buys the loyalty of traumatized children by adopting them into impossible luxury and secret pacts, and he trains them to keep secrets from their families. That's all classic grooming behavior. Telling a child, "You must choose to keep my secret," and then giving them access to unlimited criminal power is billionaire grooming behavior. This isn't a fluke; this happens over and over again in many iterations of the comics. Occasionally these children that he recruited die or suffer catastrophic life changing injuries, like Nightwing's brain trauma or Oracle's loss of autonomy. What happened to Spoiler in War Games? What happens in The Killing Joke?
I'm sorry you find this offensive. Here are some related facts:
Key Aspects of Grooming
Deceptive Process: Grooming behaviors often appear normal or kind, making them difficult to identify in the moment. The primary difference between genuine kindness and grooming is the underlying intent to harm.
Building Trust and Connection: The groomer works to become a "special friend," mentor, or authority figure in the child's life, often by providing attention, gifts, or favors that make the child feel unique and valued.
Isolation and Secrecy: A key tactic is to separate the child from their support networks (family and friends) and encourage secrecy about their interactions. The child may be convinced that the "special" relationship must be kept hidden.
Boundary Erosion and Desensitization: The groomer gradually introduces inappropriate physical touch (starting with seemingly innocent hugs or tickling) or sexual topics/materials to desensitize the child and normalize the behavior.
Power and Control: The ultimate goal is to establish power and control over the child, making them less likely to report the abuse or leave the situation.
Grooming of Adults: The abuser may also groom the child's parents or other trusted adults (e.g., coaches, teachers) to gain unsupervised access and minimize suspicion.
Tell me more about how having sex with Batgirl isn't the completion of a grooming cycle? Someone in the DC Comics editorial office should have said, "This is not a good portrayal of our hero."
1) Batman didn't groom any of them; now if you want to say Batman train them be child soldiers then sure go ahead because that's exactly what he did, whether he realized it or not, but he didn't groom any of them nor has he isolated any of his children (A simple Google search will tell you that they actually had active social lives). All of his kids, whether adopted or biological, have also made it clear how they feel about him (good or bad) both to his face and behind his back.
2) Barbara was 25yrs old when she becomes Batgirl (1967, Silver Age; she also had a literal Ph.D. in Library Science and was the head of the Gotham Public Library at the time as well); she was between the ages of 18~20 during the New 52 comic reboot. The youngest they ever had her was 16yrs old during the "Batgirl: Year One" comic series (2004) and the animated series "The Batman" (2004–2008).
3) The only time Barbara and Bruce Wayne have ever slept with each other was during the animated version of "The Killing Joke"; but not once in the entirety of the comics has that thought ever crossed either of their minds to do such a thing since the people who wrote the comics actually had enough morals to know better (unlike the pervert that was in charge of writing the animated version of "The Killing Joke").
4) Batman is not a criminal he literally fights with and for the Justice League and literally holds the title of superhero
5) I honestly feel like you're projecting whatever you've gone through onto Batman/Bruce Wayne because the circumstances of what has happened in the animated version of "The Killing Joke" has triggered you; This is so, I suggest leaving the post and the thread as it's obviously detrimental for you.
Then it's a good thing that the Justice League and co. is a globally recognized and accepted vigilante group that many different governments and countries like to call upon in times of need
Yes, Barbara Gordon has been many different ages in different version of the comics; Batman is definitely a criminal even if you apply the "hero" label to some criminals, that's the point of an anti-hero, obviously. Clint Eastwood is a criminal in The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly, but he's still the hero of the film.
The entire plot of the Civil War comics/movies is about whether or not "metahumans" and other vigilante types ought to be recognized as criminals and/or subject to laws; you're obviously not talking about this in good faith and projecting some kind of sinister motive onto me somehow? Good luck. I hope you find the peace of mind you're looking for about this one specific instance that triggered you.
Sweetheart I'm not the one that needs to find peace of mind after being triggered over a non-canon compliant movie, that's you (your tangent proved that); especially when your last comment all but calls Batman a criminal/sexual predator/groomer that's indoctring children into a life of crime. And now you're showing the fact that you don't even know what you're talking about by saying the "Civil War" comic storyline is DC when "Civil War" is Marvel, DC has never had a Civil War storyline like that.
These are the closest you're going to get to a "Civil War" storyline:
1) Injustice: Gods Among Us
. Following Joker tricking Superman into killing Lois Lane and destroying Metropolis, Superman establishes a global regime to enforce peace through authoritarian control. Batman leads an insurgency against this new order. This story explores similar themes of security vs. liberty but on a multiversal scale and is an alternate-universe (non-canon) story.
2) Kingdom Come
. Published a decade before Marvel's Civil War, this acclaimed limited series (also an out-of-continuity "Elseworlds" story) explores a generational clash. Older, traditional heroes led by Superman come out of retirement to rein in a new generation of reckless, violent antiheroes whose actions lead to a major disaster and government intervention.
3) The Dark Knight Returns
. This classic Frank Miller story features a retired Batman returning to action, which puts him at odds with a government-sanctioned Superman, who works for the U.S. government. The government has essentially outlawed most vigilante activity.
4). Tower of Babel
. In mainstream DC continuity, this arc saw a villain use Batman's secret contingency plans to neutralize every member of the Justice League. This event caused significant internal conflict and distrust among the heroes, focusing on accountability and the ethics of secret identities (mainly amongst themselves).
5) At least learn to use Google so you can get your facts right about the DC Universe without looking like a fool.
Yeah I know Civil War isn't DC, that's super obvious, it's part of a billion dollar franchise that illustrates the point about vigilante criminality. You're acting like you've never heard of anti-heroes before so I thought maybe something popular would be familiar to you.
Also, in case you need clarification The Good The Bad The Ugly with Clint Eastwood is ALSO not DC.
No shit Clint Eastwood's "The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly" isn't DC, but you also said Clint Eastwood's so there's never going to be any confusion to begin with; but you didn't do the same for Civil War especially since you followed it up with "metahuman" which is DC only and will end up causing confusion to those that don't know the difference especially with what this current thread is about. Another thing is that in "The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly" Clint Eastwood made it clear that he wasn't the good guy and that he never portrayed the character to be.
While Marvel's "Civil War" does touch on whether or not a superhero can be considered a "criminal", the main storyline has to do with mandatory government registration, freedom (or lack thereof), and civil rights (Luke Cage even compares the Superhuman Registration Act to slavery)
I understand what you're trying to do by using Marvel's Civil War the way you are but the Civil War storyline isn't so black and white (Don't forget that where Iron Man was all for the Registration Act and even helped Congress push it through, Captain America was against it) and doesn't actually have any bearing on what we're talking about; especially since you're trying to use it as a way to paint Batman as a pedophile who grooms children while also convincing them to start a life of crime. While Batman did trained children to essentially be child soldiers (which anyone with common sense agrees is a bad thing), he did not groom them sexually let alone isolate them from anyone (Dick Grayson's Robin is a good example of this); The animated version of "The Killing Joke" is the only instance of Barbara having a fucked up and controversial sexual relationship with Batman since that was not present in the original comic and was widely criticized for changing the dynamic of their mentor-mentee/father-daughter relationship.
And didn't they also have basic ass thugs absolutely beat her ass, someone trained in hardcore martial arts and is able to take down metahumans (let alone regular ass everyday humans), and cause her to miscarry?
I hate "cripple the bitch" so fucking much it's insane. The worst part is that Oracle is such a good concept and provides disabled rep really well, but it comes from this shit.
Does any artist regret their impact on culture as much as Moore does?
The Killing Joke, for all its flaws, is a good comic but it should’ve been left alone. Unfortunately between it, The Dark Knight Returns (I doubt the author of that one regrets anything) and the exact wrong impact Watchmen had on fans and creators, superhero comics ended up prioritising edge and “darkness” for an unnecessarily long time.
The Killing Joke didn’t need an adaptation but that the adaptation actually made it worse by having Barbara and Bruce hook up🤢 Who asked for this? If I remember correctly the DCAU also tried to do that. Even if it was supposed to be the characters making a mistake (I’ve heard this somewhere) it’s still why?
AFAICT Moore thought that he was writing something like an Elseworlds story that wouldn't be canon going forward.
I don't like how it happened because The Killing Joke basically just turns Barbara into a prop for a conflict between a bunch of men, but I do think that Barbara was better as Oracle than she ever was as Batgirl.
It's 100% better as an elseworld story, since one of the key elements of the novel's conclusion is whether or not Bruce finally decides to kill Joker. There's also not really a reason why it has to be in the main continuity.
I suspect that we can blame producer Bruce Timm for that. For some inexplicable reason he keeps pushing this bizarre Bruce/Babs pairing despite being the only person on Earth who isn't grossed out by the notion.
You suspect wrong. Bruce Timm is not a writer, he's a producer (in the context of The Killing Joke) and character designer (for the DCAU). The person who wrote that part of the Killing Joke movie is comic book writer (and scourge of Wonder Woman fans) Brian Azzarello. Every other instance where there's something BruceBabs related in the DCAU, has other writers attached. That Batman Beyond Tie-In comic that explains Nightwing's absence? No involvment of Timm. You only think that Bruce Timm ships them cause Sarcastic Chorus sucks at research and took correlation as causation.
Timm's also confirmed that his new Batman show won't have a Bruce and Barbara romance, and he apparently even had to explain why to an executive who suggested doing it (his exact words, "I'm not stepping on that third rail again.").
I’m confused. Killing Joke was released in 1988. The DCAU started in 1992. Unless you’re talking about the Killing Joke adaptation, which Moore wasn’t involved with to my knowledge.
They're clearly talking about the adaptation, since there's no romance between Batman and Batgirl in the original comic... but it also kind of seems like they don't know that the comic exists and think that Alan Moore wrote the adaptation and then traveled back in time a decade to give an interview about it before it existed?
It's one of the most controversial plot points in comic history, together with One More Day where Spiderman makes a deal with the Devil (Mephisto) to safe his aunt, and it is all to get Peter and Mary Jane unmarried. Because they weren't able to write stories for a married superhero. 😕
Ignoring the timeline in the post title and the horrible misogyny in the editors comments...
Paralyzed Barbara Gordon as Oracle was a great character. She was unique; a disabled woman that was a main character instead of a side character, immensely capable in her role as "the woman in the chair" overseeing others, and shown as being capable in everyday life/defending herself instead of being treated as vulnerable and in need of protection.
As Batgirl, she's just one of dozens of generic "acrobatics and utility belt" heroes.
So despite the horrible way it happened (both in-universe and in real life) the outcome was IMO very good, and changing her back into Batgirl was a stupid move on DC's part.
Batgirl and Batman never hooked up in the comics. That was made up entirely for the movie, and was in it purely because of Bruce Timm's fetish for that ship.
DC did have a misogyny problem for a long time and it was primarily because they kept hiring men who were already problematic in how they wrote women...Alan Moore being just one example. It's gotten much better in the past couple of decades but yeah...The Killing Joke should have stayed on the writing room floor and the Joker's crippling of Barbara should not have been made canon. We did get Oracle out of it, but still...
Greetings u/ihatethiscountry76. This is r/menwritingwomen . It showcases examples of how men who write films, books, TV, and graphic novels characterize women.
For our Readers: Do these breasts twinkle with excitement? Bosom rising and falling like an empire? Or does it fall flat like pancakes with nipples?
Upvote this comment if you think the post is a good example of a man writing a woman.
Downvote this comment if this is another attempt at the historical use of bosom from an uncultured swine, or otherwise not a good example of a man writing a woman.
And if it breaks the rules, downvote this comment and report this post!
(Vote has already ended)
To be fair, the animated adaptation was the one that made Batgirl fuck Batman, that wasn't in the comic.
Thank you, I was going to point this out... it was SO creepy to see, so out of character for both of them! Just creepy af ... its like a father sleeping with his son's girlfriend who is also the daughter of his best friend... I mean im sure it happened in rl at some point in history, but still creepy af
Batman has groomed many children over the years, isolating them from their families and teaching them to hide what they're really doing to participate in a secret life of crime. This was the natural outcome.
What the hell are you talking about?
1) Batman/Bruce Wayne never groomed in the way you're implying (which is absolutely disgusting by the way, the fuck is wrong with you 🤢).
2) All but Barbara Gordon were legally adopted by him (though I hate the fact that he adopted them mainly to be his sidekick fighting crime), and he made it very clear to Barbara that if she were to participate in such a war she would need to keep it secret (especially from her police commissioner father); she still decided to be a vigilante, of her own free will, anyway.
3) If Batman/Bruce Wayne is participating in a so-called "secret life crime", then so is the rest of the Justice League and their allies since they're all part of the same general group and spend roughly half their time together.
I was replying to u/quirkymuse who observed that it was very icky to see Batman sleeping with Barbara Gordon because "it's like a father sleeping with his son's girlfriend who is also the daughter of his best friend." Yes, it is. Because we criminalize that behavior.
Your post is exactly what I'm talking about. He's a billionaire that buys the loyalty of traumatized children by adopting them into impossible luxury and secret pacts, and he trains them to keep secrets from their families. That's all classic grooming behavior. Telling a child, "You must choose to keep my secret," and then giving them access to unlimited criminal power is billionaire grooming behavior. This isn't a fluke; this happens over and over again in many iterations of the comics. Occasionally these children that he recruited die or suffer catastrophic life changing injuries, like Nightwing's brain trauma or Oracle's loss of autonomy. What happened to Spoiler in War Games? What happens in The Killing Joke?
I'm sorry you find this offensive. Here are some related facts:
Key Aspects of Grooming
Tell me more about how having sex with Batgirl isn't the completion of a grooming cycle? Someone in the DC Comics editorial office should have said, "This is not a good portrayal of our hero."
1) Batman didn't groom any of them; now if you want to say Batman train them be child soldiers then sure go ahead because that's exactly what he did, whether he realized it or not, but he didn't groom any of them nor has he isolated any of his children (A simple Google search will tell you that they actually had active social lives). All of his kids, whether adopted or biological, have also made it clear how they feel about him (good or bad) both to his face and behind his back.
2) Barbara was 25yrs old when she becomes Batgirl (1967, Silver Age; she also had a literal Ph.D. in Library Science and was the head of the Gotham Public Library at the time as well); she was between the ages of 18~20 during the New 52 comic reboot. The youngest they ever had her was 16yrs old during the "Batgirl: Year One" comic series (2004) and the animated series "The Batman" (2004–2008).
3) The only time Barbara and Bruce Wayne have ever slept with each other was during the animated version of "The Killing Joke"; but not once in the entirety of the comics has that thought ever crossed either of their minds to do such a thing since the people who wrote the comics actually had enough morals to know better (unlike the pervert that was in charge of writing the animated version of "The Killing Joke").
4) Batman is not a criminal he literally fights with and for the Justice League and literally holds the title of superhero
5) I honestly feel like you're projecting whatever you've gone through onto Batman/Bruce Wayne because the circumstances of what has happened in the animated version of "The Killing Joke" has triggered you; This is so, I suggest leaving the post and the thread as it's obviously detrimental for you.
Regards 4 - that doesn't make what he does legal. Being a vigilante is illegal. He is a criminal. For actually good reasons, but still a criminal.
Then it's a good thing that the Justice League and co. is a globally recognized and accepted vigilante group that many different governments and countries like to call upon in times of need
Yes, Barbara Gordon has been many different ages in different version of the comics; Batman is definitely a criminal even if you apply the "hero" label to some criminals, that's the point of an anti-hero, obviously. Clint Eastwood is a criminal in The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly, but he's still the hero of the film.
The entire plot of the Civil War comics/movies is about whether or not "metahumans" and other vigilante types ought to be recognized as criminals and/or subject to laws; you're obviously not talking about this in good faith and projecting some kind of sinister motive onto me somehow? Good luck. I hope you find the peace of mind you're looking for about this one specific instance that triggered you.
Sweetheart I'm not the one that needs to find peace of mind after being triggered over a non-canon compliant movie, that's you (your tangent proved that); especially when your last comment all but calls Batman a criminal/sexual predator/groomer that's indoctring children into a life of crime. And now you're showing the fact that you don't even know what you're talking about by saying the "Civil War" comic storyline is DC when "Civil War" is Marvel, DC has never had a Civil War storyline like that.
These are the closest you're going to get to a "Civil War" storyline:
1) Injustice: Gods Among Us . Following Joker tricking Superman into killing Lois Lane and destroying Metropolis, Superman establishes a global regime to enforce peace through authoritarian control. Batman leads an insurgency against this new order. This story explores similar themes of security vs. liberty but on a multiversal scale and is an alternate-universe (non-canon) story.
2) Kingdom Come . Published a decade before Marvel's Civil War, this acclaimed limited series (also an out-of-continuity "Elseworlds" story) explores a generational clash. Older, traditional heroes led by Superman come out of retirement to rein in a new generation of reckless, violent antiheroes whose actions lead to a major disaster and government intervention.
3) The Dark Knight Returns . This classic Frank Miller story features a retired Batman returning to action, which puts him at odds with a government-sanctioned Superman, who works for the U.S. government. The government has essentially outlawed most vigilante activity.
4). Tower of Babel . In mainstream DC continuity, this arc saw a villain use Batman's secret contingency plans to neutralize every member of the Justice League. This event caused significant internal conflict and distrust among the heroes, focusing on accountability and the ethics of secret identities (mainly amongst themselves).
5) At least learn to use Google so you can get your facts right about the DC Universe without looking like a fool.
Yeah I know Civil War isn't DC, that's super obvious, it's part of a billion dollar franchise that illustrates the point about vigilante criminality. You're acting like you've never heard of anti-heroes before so I thought maybe something popular would be familiar to you.
Also, in case you need clarification The Good The Bad The Ugly with Clint Eastwood is ALSO not DC.
No shit Clint Eastwood's "The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly" isn't DC, but you also said Clint Eastwood's so there's never going to be any confusion to begin with; but you didn't do the same for Civil War especially since you followed it up with "metahuman" which is DC only and will end up causing confusion to those that don't know the difference especially with what this current thread is about. Another thing is that in "The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly" Clint Eastwood made it clear that he wasn't the good guy and that he never portrayed the character to be.
While Marvel's "Civil War" does touch on whether or not a superhero can be considered a "criminal", the main storyline has to do with mandatory government registration, freedom (or lack thereof), and civil rights (Luke Cage even compares the Superhuman Registration Act to slavery)
I understand what you're trying to do by using Marvel's Civil War the way you are but the Civil War storyline isn't so black and white (Don't forget that where Iron Man was all for the Registration Act and even helped Congress push it through, Captain America was against it) and doesn't actually have any bearing on what we're talking about; especially since you're trying to use it as a way to paint Batman as a pedophile who grooms children while also convincing them to start a life of crime. While Batman did trained children to essentially be child soldiers (which anyone with common sense agrees is a bad thing), he did not groom them sexually let alone isolate them from anyone (Dick Grayson's Robin is a good example of this); The animated version of "The Killing Joke" is the only instance of Barbara having a fucked up and controversial sexual relationship with Batman since that was not present in the original comic and was widely criticized for changing the dynamic of their mentor-mentee/father-daughter relationship.
Yeah the Batgirl segment was so tone deaf and creepy it's kinda of impressive how much they missed the mark there.
And didn't they also have basic ass thugs absolutely beat her ass, someone trained in hardcore martial arts and is able to take down metahumans (let alone regular ass everyday humans), and cause her to miscarry?
I hate "cripple the bitch" so fucking much it's insane. The worst part is that Oracle is such a good concept and provides disabled rep really well, but it comes from this shit.
See, that wording right there says volumes about DC Comics and the relationship they often have with female characters.
Does any artist regret their impact on culture as much as Moore does?
The Killing Joke, for all its flaws, is a good comic but it should’ve been left alone. Unfortunately between it, The Dark Knight Returns (I doubt the author of that one regrets anything) and the exact wrong impact Watchmen had on fans and creators, superhero comics ended up prioritising edge and “darkness” for an unnecessarily long time.
The Killing Joke didn’t need an adaptation but that the adaptation actually made it worse by having Barbara and Bruce hook up🤢 Who asked for this? If I remember correctly the DCAU also tried to do that. Even if it was supposed to be the characters making a mistake (I’ve heard this somewhere) it’s still why?
AFAICT Moore thought that he was writing something like an Elseworlds story that wouldn't be canon going forward.
I don't like how it happened because The Killing Joke basically just turns Barbara into a prop for a conflict between a bunch of men, but I do think that Barbara was better as Oracle than she ever was as Batgirl.
It's 100% better as an elseworld story, since one of the key elements of the novel's conclusion is whether or not Bruce finally decides to kill Joker. There's also not really a reason why it has to be in the main continuity.
Uhm, actually🤓☝️
The Batman/Batgirl sex thing doesn't happen in the comic, only in the movie. And it was an attempt at giving her more agency in the story... Somehow?
I suspect that we can blame producer Bruce Timm for that. For some inexplicable reason he keeps pushing this bizarre Bruce/Babs pairing despite being the only person on Earth who isn't grossed out by the notion.
You suspect wrong. Bruce Timm is not a writer, he's a producer (in the context of The Killing Joke) and character designer (for the DCAU). The person who wrote that part of the Killing Joke movie is comic book writer (and scourge of Wonder Woman fans) Brian Azzarello. Every other instance where there's something BruceBabs related in the DCAU, has other writers attached. That Batman Beyond Tie-In comic that explains Nightwing's absence? No involvment of Timm. You only think that Bruce Timm ships them cause Sarcastic Chorus sucks at research and took correlation as causation.
Timm's also confirmed that his new Batman show won't have a Bruce and Barbara romance, and he apparently even had to explain why to an executive who suggested doing it (his exact words, "I'm not stepping on that third rail again.").
I’m confused. Killing Joke was released in 1988. The DCAU started in 1992. Unless you’re talking about the Killing Joke adaptation, which Moore wasn’t involved with to my knowledge.
They're clearly talking about the adaptation, since there's no romance between Batman and Batgirl in the original comic... but it also kind of seems like they don't know that the comic exists and think that Alan Moore wrote the adaptation and then traveled back in time a decade to give an interview about it before it existed?
3edgy5me
It's one of the most controversial plot points in comic history, together with One More Day where Spiderman makes a deal with the Devil (Mephisto) to safe his aunt, and it is all to get Peter and Mary Jane unmarried. Because they weren't able to write stories for a married superhero. 😕
Marvel just seems to hate having set canon couples.
And then a little over a year later they blew up a 15 year old boy, god DC was edgy in the 80s
Ignoring the timeline in the post title and the horrible misogyny in the editors comments...
Paralyzed Barbara Gordon as Oracle was a great character. She was unique; a disabled woman that was a main character instead of a side character, immensely capable in her role as "the woman in the chair" overseeing others, and shown as being capable in everyday life/defending herself instead of being treated as vulnerable and in need of protection.
As Batgirl, she's just one of dozens of generic "acrobatics and utility belt" heroes.
So despite the horrible way it happened (both in-universe and in real life) the outcome was IMO very good, and changing her back into Batgirl was a stupid move on DC's part.
Batgirl and Batman never hooked up in the comics. That was made up entirely for the movie, and was in it purely because of Bruce Timm's fetish for that ship.
DC did have a misogyny problem for a long time and it was primarily because they kept hiring men who were already problematic in how they wrote women...Alan Moore being just one example. It's gotten much better in the past couple of decades but yeah...The Killing Joke should have stayed on the writing room floor and the Joker's crippling of Barbara should not have been made canon. We did get Oracle out of it, but still...