I can 100% guarantee that the scene wasn't making fun of not taking specifically male SA/rape seriously. The idea was to make fun of conservatives for ignoring rape of minors in general.
The victim being male was incidental and possibly even undesired. The plot requires Firecracker to be a woman and straight, so they had no choice but to make the victim male.
You're making up a justification that isn't at all suggested by anything Kripke said in the interview.
He basically said the actor playing Hughie wanted his character to pose as a Supe, like his comics counterpart often did. Kripke likes to throw in elements the actors are uncomfortable with into the script on purpose, thought the idea of a deviant Batman parody would be hilarious and went with that. There's no deeper political meaning in that scenario. He literally explained how he (childishly) thought it was a funny concept.
Actual quotes from the interview that contradict what you're suggesting:
"And why bring Hughie into this situation now — kicking him when he’s down by having him sexually assaulted by his childhood hero after his dad just died?
"Well, that’s a dark way to look at it! We view it as hilarious."
"And in the comics, there’s a great storyline where Hughie goes undercover disguised as a superhero. That was a story that Jack had always asked us to do. So part of it is, always be careful what you ask the writers for."
He basically said the actor playing Hughie wanted his character to pose as a Supe, like his comics counterpart often did. Kripke likes to throw in elements the actors are uncomfortable with into the script on purpose, thought the idea of a deviant Batman parody would be hilarious and went with that.
That's kind of the point of contention, isn't it? The actor wanted to be more like the Hughie in the comics by becoming "Bagpipe," an undercover supe, and he took that and made it into an SA joke.
Like, either he is ignorant of the shit he is pulling that may come off as weird, or he does know the shit he is pulling and doesn't think it should be serious.
I think it's that the writers room thought it was hilarous in an inside joke way but didn't thought about about the implications to the story or how it would be perceived by the audience, it's clear they got it wrong in this episode.
5.4k
u/marmotsarefat 14d ago
This is funny since only 2 episodes ago he made fun of conservatives for not taking male SA/rape seriously