daredevilkink | The Defenders-only Discussion Post!

Entry tags:

discussion

The Defenders-only Discussion Post!

All Rounds & Other Useful Links | Rules | Mod Post | Fills: Completed & WIPs
The Defenders Prompt Post

Talk about the Defenders! Speculate, discuss, squee and debate. There's a thread for each episode so you can discuss what you've watched so far without being spoiled for future episodes - click on top level view to see only the first comment in each thread and stay spoiler-free.

Anon commenting is not mandatory for this post. Playing nice is always mandatory.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

My problem with it is that he's no longer taking issue with Matt's choices-- He's treating him like a drug addict. That was condescending and offensive.

While I don't agree with Foggy's stance I could totally see where he was coming from in Daredevil. I can't anymore. Call it Flanderization, I don't know, but I don't like it.

I think that's how they see it...

I guess Matt told Foggy the whole story with teh hand and after Elektra he told him he was giving up the suit and he did but he felt guilty for not doing anything and Foggy after the eartquake if not ebfore realized this and he is seeing his friend suffering internally for something he wants but trying not to do itso he goes the way he goes.

I get Foggy and his intentions but i also dont like how he fails to see what's right in front of him, how he fails to trust Matt. He said "Matt doesnt tell em anything" but why do you think is that?. It's because all he hears from you is judgement and it's frustrationg from both sides cause they want oen thing both have different points.

I do hope this ends in DDS3. I like the work the producers are doing with Matt and Foggy friendship but cmon it's been like one and a half year since Foggy find out, he has to eb more understanding now...

I see your point. Something definitely changed between Daredevil and Defenders in Foggy's tone/attitude toward Matt being Daredevil. Maybe not so much Flanderization as bad writing in Defenders?..

Or... another perspective... Foggy was responding to Matt as an addict because Matt at that point was clearly characterizing his relationship to Daredevil that way? He doesn't appear to have quit being Daredevil for anyone other than himself at that point as part of trying to process Elektra's death.

If Foggy understood Matt to have made the decision to "quit" Daredevil and thought Matt then needed his support in doing that, then it makes sense to me that he would try and support Matt in that on his terms. So if Matt decided to treat it like an addiction, he would too.

I didn't take Foggy mentioning Matt's knuckles as him being mean so much as him knowing Matt is trying and not realizing that Matt would take it as judgment.

I also read him giving Matt his caseload to remain busy as his way of letting Matt know that if Matt does sincerely want to quit and is struggling, Matt can come to him and he will do what he can. He even admits he doesn't figure it will work but it is something.

And then when Matt decides that Daredevil is something he needs to do later, Foggy tries to be equally supportive. He really in Defenders is just hanging back and trying to figure out what Matt needs from him is how I understood it. With Matt not necessarily knowing himself.

Just another way of looking at it. Although I get fully why some fans feel like it might not make sense.

That's how I read Foggy's behaviour too. And tbh, it's not like there are no grounds to compare Matt's Daredeviling with an addiction. Matt DOES exhibit signs of an addiction. *shrugs* I actually thought that Foggy's attitude improved since DD s2. In s2 he saw Daredeviling as Matt's constant and conscious choice (which it is, to an extent). In Defenders, he sees it like an addiction - as we've established; so he's less in Matt's face about how Matt should just stop and more about how to help Matt stop.

And yes, it's still about stopping. Because as far as Foggy's concerned, this is objectively and actively BAD for Matt (which it is, also to an extent).

But the comparison to being an addict doesn't work. Matt isn't the one who used that term, Matt always said DD isn't a separate entity from him, it IS him, and it was Foggy who told Karen Matt was an alcoholic to cover for DD. He's the one who set up the comparison (which is terrible now because JJ is an actual alcoholic and she still managed to H word and be supported by her friends). For Foggy, DD continues to be something negative, something to shun. He might love Matt, but he hates DD and in DD s2 Foggy didn't want to believe Matt and DD were the same person. Foggy has continued that in Defenders, but now he's a little more accepting, or at least he brought Matt the suit in order to keep Matt separate from DD. He's the one who told Karen that Matt doing it again is like maybe he's trying to tell them something. They just didn't want to hear it.

I was upset that Foggy called Matt after the earthquake and that it had apparently been a long time since Foggy wanted to get together. But Foggy had ulterior motives. He wasn't checking on his blind friend to see if he was okay after getting his flat shaken apart, he was checking on his blind friend to see if he was out Daredeviling. Foggy shows up with those case files, premeditated to keep Matt busy and off the streets. He's at least honest about it. But the way he says 'You can trust me too' is insulting. His tone of voice, the way he's upset at Matt's knuckles and Matt feels the need to hide them, like Foggy makes him ashamed of saving those kids? Of course he gets upset and wants to leave. I'm upset that Foggy tells Karen later that Matt never tells Foggy anything (anymore). Is that a surprise? If every time they get together Foggy spends time judging Matt and making him feel inadequate? I have hope that Foggy will accept DD and just be supportive. It seems like he will be eventually. At least he understands the suit is about protecting Matt, even though he said he brought the suit to give Matt the option to finally stop DDing for good. But when everyone was filing into that room after the explosion and Foggy and Karen are waiting for Matt, all the other Defenders had their great supportive accepting friends there for them, and then there's Foggy and Karen. They just really come across as the worst friends ever, comparatively.

This was brilliant and so well articulated. Thank you for this.

Accurate. But addiction metaphor or no, it obviously was MATT who was trying to quit this time. And Foggy was taking actions to support the fact that Matt was the one trying to quit.

Everything he was trying to do was based on the mixed signals he was getting from Matt (and really, has always gotten from Matt) about what Matt wanted from him and how he could support him.

And sorry, but you don't owe any friend a willingness to stand by life choices you think are dangerous or going to get them killed anyway. Especially when those life choices could also fuck up your own life peripherally in pretty epic ways.

Hear! Hear! I am so sick of people hating of Foggy.

I feel like he does the best he can with the information he has. It was so clear MATT wanted to quit Daredeviling. He felt responsible for Elektra's death, and felt his involvement had made things worse. He had either stated as much, or Foggy had read between the lines, (honestly, I think the level of insight Foggy has with how in the dark he's been kept is pretty amazing and speaks not only to how well he knows Matt, but also to the fact that he tries so hard to read Matt and help shows just how much he cares about him.)

Since MATT wants to stop, but is clearly having a bad time, Foggy is trying to help. I think him calling him was twofold. One-are you okay? Two- this is something that probably made it hard to stay away from Daredevil, how are you doing? Do you want help?

As for the "Matt doesn't tell me anything," I'm not mad he said it. He had EVERY right. I'm mad Matt's doing it.

Matt, and so many fans, are seeing any push back Foggy gives as "judgment" and justifying his actions, but they are missing the fact he's really concerned, and has been more than justified any time he got "judgy." (Matt shrugging off getting shot and in the head, anger and worry justified. Matt not showing up to a case HE took on when Foggy didn't want to; anger justified. Asking Matt how he's doing when he was he may have backslided on a self-appointed goal? Good friend. Slightly frustrated he had to state what he did to get the truth, but understandable.)

Matt shut Foggy out. Not the other way around. (Yet he's the first next reach out to Matt time and time again). Matt chased him away because he didn't accept Matt being Daredevil whole-heartedly, no questions asked. That is a big ask when Daredevil endangers both Matt's life and both their careers. He was also unwilling to answer Foggy's questions be fully or truthfully, which seems to bother Foggy most.

Matt may feel he doesn't owe Foggy an explanation. Fair enough. But the he can't expect Foggy to blindly accept Daredevil. He either loops Foggy in, or he should expect push back when what Matt is doing doesn't match the Matt that was carefully presented to him for a decade, or make sense with what Foggy knows. Matt can't have both secrecy and complete acceptance.

Foggy doesn't trust Matt? Matt doesn't trust Foggy. He never gives him the full picture. He also gave him reason to not trust him by lying to him for most of their relationship. He said at the end of season 1DD that he knew he hadn't earned back Foggy's trust, which implied he knew he needed to, but yet after he asks Foggy to trust him away, and FOGGY DOES!, he goes back to lying and half-truths. So I'm sorry, but I call BS on Foggy "not trusting Matt to do the right thing" or "not trusting Matt is being Daredevil because he has to" because neither of those things are clear to Foggy, and Matt only he his own secrecy to blame for that.

I agree with this take on Foggy. I love Matt but he has some major issues and has put his friends through hell (I love him precisely BECAUSE he is a flawed hero with lots of emotional baggage). And imo Foggy has acted like a reasonable human in response to all that.

It is interesting to just read the other side of the argument, though, just because I would've never thought about it that way. Overall I just wanna say it is so cool to have this discussion, to analyze and pick apart the characters' relationships and have interesting arguments about them. This is like all I want to do all day. Thanks guys :)

Um, if Foggy is only motivated by concern for Matt like you say, if everything he does regarding Matt are based on how much he cares about Matt, then why hasn't he been in touch with Matt for so long? Per Defenders, the only time Foggy checks in with Matt is when Matt's possibly backsliding into Daredevil. Do you think Matt doesn't see this, that this is what brings Foggy to see Matt? I'm just a viewer but my first question was why is this the first time they've gotten together in this long if they're friends, why does Matt sound so grateful, and the show is making the point that THIS is what brings them together. Not friendship, but lack of trust over how Matt is living his life. Foggy saying that Matt doesn't tell him anything is exactly what the show is selling for a reason, because Matt has finally shut Foggy out, or is still trying to (that Foggy still has a key to Matt's apartment is symbolic). But Foggy keeps coming back into Matt's life and every time he does it, it comes with strings or demands. Matt definitely lies or keeps secrets about so much. This isn't something you're born doing, it's something you learn by nurture, and Matt's used it as a survival tool because his life has proven that people only want him if he's useful or giving them what they want. He really does have massive trust issues. That's half the message of Defenders, isn't it? About trust? The other half of the message is about acceptance. Jessica Jones calls Matt out on his past, his abandonment issues, underscores everything with acceptance and offers trust, and she does it with shocking consideration and care, all in under five minutes. How different would things be if Karen and Foggy did this?

I'm not hating on Foggy at all, I love Foggy and I want him and Matt to be friends, but should they be? I've seen some people arguing that Matt needs to stop putting his friends in danger, but he's tried to do exactly that by stepping away from them, and people say well, he needs to stop being Daredevil then, and Matt did that, too, but still some say Matt didn't make an effort in trying to do what his friends wanted. The showrunners have talked about how all these people in Matt's life exert control on him, from Karen and Foggy to Stick, Elektra and Frank cycle through this too. Everybody wants Matt to change, they want him to conform to what they need him to be rather than what Matt needs to be. Foggy is included in that list, and this is where I question, in what world is that ever going to be a good friendship? From the beginning of the show, Matt's wanted acceptance, and Foggy's wanted Matt to be just 'his friend', no DD. As Stick said, they're both disappointed.

Matt doesn't trust Foggy any more than Foggy trusts Matt. Foggy tries to get Matt to trust him by saying he can tell Foggy things when we've had so many episodes that outline how this isn't true, and every time Matt tells Foggy the truth, Foggy makes him pay for it. They love each other, and they want to love each other and I guess that's the really important part, but right now they're just hurting each other. As much as I want them to be together and to be real friends, it's never going to work as they are. They both have to make a lot of changes but the big ones are trust and acceptance on Foggy's part and trust and honesty on Matt's side. It does seem like if Foggy can trust and accept DD, then Matt might manage the trust and honesty part. Those things go hand in hand.

I don't think that Foggy could both be seeing him for the first time since season 2 and checking ONLY to see if he backslid on Daredevil unless he's been talking to Karen, but not Matt, in the meanwhile. Otherwise he would have no idea he planned to give it up to know he backslid. When they had their last conversation in season 2 Matt was clearly planning to continue as Daredevil, and Foggy gave him idea of where to look for the Hand, knowing what he was doing. So short of talking to Karen or Matt he wouldn't know to "check in" because he wouldn't know he was trying to stop. I can't go bath ways. Either they haven't been in communication so Foggy expects Matt is just being Daredevil and not "checking in to see if he fell off the wagon," or they have been in limited communication.

Matt's statement as that they had gone a long time between meeting, but that it was a long time between meetings unlike before, and this saddened him.

I also fundamentally disagree that it is on Foggy to get in touch in the first place. Matt told him to leave, and he did, but not before Matt caused a lot of harm to their relationship. Castle case aside, though that was one of many unilateral decision Matt made throughout their practice and friendship, there was one key moment where Matt created great harm that has never been addressed.

When Foggy was shot, Matt left him, and he never came to see him. "But he was on the roof" "but he was trying to protect him." Foggy doesn't know that. You as the audience do, but Foggy doesn't. (Remember how he asked Marci if Matt was coming, if she saw him).

This broke them for Foggy. He considered them family. He would do anything for Matt, (and has on multiple occasions put himself in the line of fire metaphirucally or potentially literally once), for Matt, but Matt didn't show. I think that's when Foggy gave up on them as anything more than casual friends, and let himself be pushed away, because if he meant as much to Matt as Matt meant to him, he felt he should have been there.

Expecting Foggy to be the first to reach out after that because Matt's had bad stuff happen in his life and is damaged is unreasonable. Yet, Foggy reaches out first anyway, because Matt won't.

The key may be symbolic, but so was "look for manholes" in DD 2. It was a "you're gonna do what you do, and I may not approve, but if you loop me in, I can help."

Back to my point though. Matt did real damage to their relationship. Why is the onus on Foggy to make the first move and fully accept Matt when Matt has not reached out AT ALL to Foggy, or in anyway died to right the damage, (casually saying he's sorry in passing in the office actually made it worse, because it made it seem like it was a small thing, when for Foggy it was huge). So I feel, yes, everything Foggy does is because he cares about Matt, but he's keeping a distance because he feels that they are not on equal ground (i.e. Foggy values Matt's friendship more than the other way around) , and that Matt opening up enough to tell him the truth would show he's letting him in, whereas otherwise they can't be more than casual friends despite Foggy feeling Matt is his family.

Yes Matt is damaged and has learned not to trust. That's not an excuse. You break it, you fix it. He hasn't even tried. Yet Foggy still reaches out. Imperfectly, but HE's THERE. Showing up is step one.

Matt needs to tell son truths (at least in why he left, at least on why he didn't reach out), to START repairing the relationship before he expects acceptance. Because the way it look now to Foggy, Matt didn't care enough about him to check in on him, or make the first move to let him back in by explaining why he was unavailable to check in. That small piece is huge.

SA

I guess my biggest problem with anyone saying Foggy needs to accept Matt fully for Matt to be honest. he needs to the first move or his not a good friend. That Matt is damaged and not trusting and fleeing is what he knows, so it is on Foggy , is that if Foggy does that, it really makes him the "adult" in the relationship in a way far more conscendnf ting than some people read the bar scene. It would be tantamount to saying "you're so damaged you can't make or maintain healthy relationships, so I have no expectations that you will bring anything to thus friendship other than you, while I fix everything and pretend you never manipulated me or hurt me. I have all the responsibility here, because you're broken."

DA

When does Defenders say the only time they meet is for this reason? Matt said it had been a long time, but that is an indeterminate amount of time. They used to see each other everyday, so a few weeks would be forever in comparison. They aren't as close as they were, that doesn't mean the only reason they met is for Daredeviling check-ins.

Also if Matt is trying to stop because in his own words "getting involved only made things worse," and Foggy knows this, how is him seeing if Matt is struggling to do that, and offering him alternatives to help him met his self-stated goal not friendship? I think checking in is a form of friendship, (even if it could be argued it's also condescending). [Furthermore, even if it was completely condescension, "I don't think you can take care of yourself. Are you okay? Try this, it will be better for you." Which I really don't think it was. But even if it was, the motivation to do that would be concern for Matt's life. Which is still concern, although a condescending form in a misguided act of friendship, which is still friendship. If Matt leaving to 'protect his friends' as misguided an act as that is, especially unexplained, is something you consider Matt trying to be a good friend, surely trying to convince your friend to give up something that you have almost seen him get killed multiple times is also an act of friendship. So I think other anin's concern theory is true).

As for his gratefulness, I feel like he has to have known that he screwed Foggy over in S2 of DD. Whatever his reasons were, he didn't show up in court, he didn't show up in the hospital, and the thing he probably worries about most and I imagine Foggy probably worries about least of the list, Foggy got shot (in Matt's opinion, because of him). The fact Foggy is willing to reach out to him at all probably is completely unexpected for Matt, because Matt is extremely self-punishing, and he feels he doesn't deserve it.

I'm not sure what you mean by "every time Matt tells Foggy the truth, Foggy makes him pay for it," because the times Matt told Foggy the whole truth and not part of it and then said "you wouldn't believe me if I told you" as a short cut are minuscule, and most times there was way more in play. And every time Foggy "made him pay" by what I assume is anger and disapproval it's when the act is done and Matt is telling the truth after things have gone south, because it's seeped into Foggy's life, (see examples below), and he is trying to justify his actions. Foggy gets angry not so much because Matt is telling him the truth, but because of how he is telling him the truth (which is essentially "I know (x) but it's because (y) and so it's really not a big deal that (x) happened in comparison to (y) because I must/must not (y).") The one time he tells Foggy the truth ahead of time (taking down Fisk), Foggy actually supports him, even if he is a little hesitant because he's worried.

During the reveal, he is not just telling the truth he is exposing that he has been lying their entire friendship, making Foggy question everything. Yes, Foggy said some unkind things, but Matt actually "paid" very little since he paid in justified anger (Matt lied for years, did countless things under false pretenses, involved their firm in illegal activity without even telling Foggy), in no way apologized, or did anything other than try to justify his actions while not acknowledging at all that what he did hurt Foggy. I should clarify, I am not saying Matt needs to apologize for being himself, but he does not to apologize for hurting Foggy. They are related, but not the same thing.

Later, he told the truth (sort of?) when he got shot in the head, and he tried to minimize it before Foggy got truly nasty. (Come on, Matt as good as said that he, a short range hand-to-hand fighter, was better equipped for taking down a trained, military-precise person with a long-range weapons than several trained cops who also have long-range weapons, so it was okay for him to go out again less than 24 hours after getting shot in the head because it was necessary. And that Foggy was being dramatic for thinking it was a big deal.)

In the bathroom in the courthouse, Matt only told him a partial truth, and in a "you wouldn't believe me if I tried" attitude that was infuriating to Foggy. Also, even if he hadn't, Foggy is allowed to be human and get mad, and then cool off. They lost a major witness, and Matt was involved, even if unintentionally and indirectly, why does Foggy need to be so perfect that he doesn't get angry? Why doesn't Matt who has on a few occasions thrown things in anger, and in the bathroom tried to physically grab Foggy in anger and desperation, have any responsibility to acknowledge that sometimes anger is a natural part of life, friendship and relationships, (damaged past or not)?

The comparison to Jessica is not the same. She came down on him when he lied too. She was upset with him when his action effected her and he didn't keep her in the loop. That she acknowledged he and abandonment issue, (which she discovered by invasively searching his past by the way), made a connection because she's experienced bad things too, which she knows he knows, and showed understanding. That is not acceptance of his life or his choices. Understanding is not equal to acceptance. (Equally Foggy is not without understanding. Part of the reason he and Matt were friends was because he never doubted Matt was capable because he was blind. He saw Matt as self-sufficient, brilliant and as a person not a disability. He also responded with whatever understanding he had to any truth Matt told him about his dad.) She didn't justify his actions, nor should she, nor should Foggy.

I think Matt sees things too simplistically. All or nothing, absolutism, (Foggy could be hurt by what I do, so I will leave so he will not be affected. Foggy was shot because of me, I am bad for him. Vigilantism produced Frank, so it is bad, and I should stop. Me getting involved with the Hand led to Elektra's death so all I did was bad so I should stop being Daredevil. Foggy is mad at me so he rejects me. Foggy doesn't completely get Daredevil so he never will. Elektra love me, so we are good together. Elektra killed someone so she is bad. I can't tell you the truth, because you might disagree or be upset.) A with me or against me mentality. The end justifies the means. I will not apologize for being me or doing the right thing. Any push back is judgment or rejection.

Foggy sees things differently, and more complexly. Things are a combination of right and wrong (this man is in a motorcycle gang and doubtlessly violent, but he also donates food to the needy every year. This man did bad things and went to jail, and rightfully so, but he loves his daughter and I want to help him do right by her. It is good to help a woman get away from her abusive husband, but it bothers me that you are hurt, and I am not sure it's worth losing you. I love, and I don't like that what you do as Daredevil hurts you, but I would still lie to cover for you, or risk my life or career to help you do it. I think you should balance your life and sometimes step back from Daredevil, what you can't? Well if it's go, go all the time or not at all, then not at all is preferable because the other will get you killed. I would rather you take cases than be Daredevil, but I still acknowledge that what you did/do as Daredevil is heroic [i.e. "Being a different kind of hero" implies that being DD is being a hero]. You can tell me the truth, because even if I disagree or am upset, I will still help you, and I will still love you.) I want to be with you, but I want you safe, and I really don't understand why you are doing this when you're risking so much, (which just leads to Matt getting mad instead of explaining in terms of yes, I know what is at risk and I still chose this for x reason, or no I didn't think of that, but it is still worth it for this reason), but if push comes to shove I am always in your corner whether or not I totally agree (someone else asked if Foggy bore any legal responsibility after choosing to come back. I think he does, and I think he thinks he does, even if he is a little resentful that he had to make the choice between upholding the law which he strongly believes in and swore to uphold, or helping Matt, whom he loves). The ends might be desirable, but one is still responsible for the mess they made along the way. I am not asking you to apologize for being you or doing what you think is right, but I am asking you to consider how what you do affects other people, and apologize or make reparations if your actions along the way hurt them. Acknowledge that your actions have consequences that hurt me or someone else. That is not the same as saying everything you did is wrong, and pointing it out to you when you seem to be avoiding it is not judgment but a reality check from someone who cares enough to hold you accountable and is also kind of hurt that you don't seem to understand that what you do has affected them and you seem to be downplaying it.

Acceptance is not all or nothing. Caring about someone does not mean thinking everything they do is good for them. Loving someone does not mean agreeing with them all the time, or that you will never hurt them, or make mistakes.

Foggy can only do so much. I think saying "they both made mistakes and both need to change" is simplistic, but better than putting Foggy fully at fault. Yes, Foggy made mistakes, but Matt's are an immovable roadblock until he deals with some of his abandonment issues and other issues that seem to cause him to be unable to own up to his mistakes, or do anything other than wallow in them the few times he acknowledges them, and to assign an undue amount of judgment and malice to what Foggy is saying. It's not necessarily fault, but it is key that Matt needs to change his hardline point of view for the friendship to be anywhere near equal ground. Anything short of that is Foggy accepting anything Matt dishes out while supporting Matt, because accepting Daredevil the way Matt wants is accepting that any collateral damage to their work or relationship is okay because Matt's doing good as Daredevil, and thus Matt apparently can't be held accountable for anything he does along the way. It would be taking the majority of the burden because Matt needs him, and he wants Matt, but Matt is not ready to give support or understanding to the level he gets it.

Have either of you considered that a more fair comparison to Jessica would be Foggy is seasons 1 of Daredevil?

Matt lied to Jessica and the rest of the team. She was mad. She learned more, she decided there was a reason and decided to trust him.

In season 1 of Daredevil Foggy finds out Matt lied. He is angry. He learns more about Fisk, and he reaches out in an olive branch to Matt. He acknowledges that DD has a part to play, and when Matt goes out to stop Fisk, Foggy trusts him. He tell him to "go be a hero" and trusts he has to do this.

Admittedly it's not a perfect match, but I think closer to Jess accepts him fully, or differentiating that understanding is not acceptance.

However, if after Jess' act of trust, Matt started doing the same stuff. Withholding from the group and endangering them, I don't think understanding him would prevent her from being angry.

Likewise, when Foggy acknowledged Fisk needed to be stopped by both the law and DD and trusted Matt, Matt followed that by escalating DD until he was going every night, getting hurt all the time, lying or neglecting to mention what he was doing, and eventually not showing up for work.

Foggy might accept there's a place for DD, but Matt took it to an extreme, and wasn't honest about it. In light of that, Foggy's worry, and then anger when his worry was ignored or belittled, and eventual wariness and mistrust when the cycle repeats and worsens bring them both down all while Matt still minimising show bad things have gotten until it became undeniable and then at that point he pulled a 180 and tried to shove Foggy out the door because it's too dangerous and too big a deal, (and to hard to face that Foggy had a point and he let him down).

Side note, Matt's send off to Elektra (we keep hurting each other. You believe something I can't support, and asking you to change it is asking you to be someone else, so we need to be apart), and his attempt to push Foggy away, (I won't apologise for who I am, start again with out me, I hold you back) seemed very parallel. I think in Matt's mind he was Foggy's Elektra in that Foggy was against vigilantism and Matt was a vigilante and to be otherwise would not be true to himself. I also think Matt is making a false parallel.

Matt's "true north" to borrow a phrase from Claire, is doing what he believes is right according to personal conviction. He believes murder is wrong, therefore what Elektra does is wrong, but she doesn't see it that way, putting them at odds and making them hurt each other and better off without each other. I think he believes Foggy is this way too, and that Foggy believes vigilantism is illegal and that makes it against his value system based on upholding the law (even though he is willing to fudge the law he thinks for him it is his moral truth), therefore what Matt does is wrong, but Matt doesn't see it that way, so they are at odds and hurt each other, and so they might be better off without each other too.

He's wrong on two counts. One, he misses Foggy because he relied on him more than he acknowledged and so he was not better off without him. Two, his assumption about Foggy's values is wrong.

Truth is, for Foggy, his true north is taking care of people and doing what preserves relationship. Basically he values maintaining relationship over an absolute moral conviction. That's why it's not as simple as not helping Matt even when it bothers him to do so because he has some problem with the legality of DD, (for Matt it would be; you follow my values or I leave), because his truth is putting people over ideals. Matt's safety. Matt's needs.

I think those who side with Foggy and those who side with Matt have a different moral hierarchy much like the men themselves.

Matt is straight up Kohlberg, where the highest form of morality is adherence to personal conviction. People who agree with this can't see why Foggy can't get onboard with Matt's convictions. There are who he is and he has to live them. Didn't he say he wouldn't apologise for who he was and explain about the sirens and his conviction that he had to protect the city? He needs to do that to be morally right. It is his conviction and who he is.

Foggy, on the other hand is straight up Gilligan, where the highest form of morality is considering the needs of everyone in the group and putting the group functionality, needs, and unity first by making sure to maintain the group and relationship when making choices. Interestingly Gilligan's theory was created because most women fall at this level, which is two steps down from the top of Kohlberg's ladder of morality, and she believed that women view the world differently rather than that they were morally stunted. Now obviously the scales are bigger than gender since I believe Foggy as a male may have a more Gilligan compatible view, and I am guess not everyone siding with Matt is male, though I am unsure. At any rate, from Foggy's point of view, Matt is consistently putting personal needs about the needs and functionality of the group, (I.e. showing up to court late because his activity as DD is so prolific it's cutting into his obligations. Downplaying his injuries or the needs of other for him to be well. Downplaying Foggy's concern that Matt might not be able to continue practicing with him because he may die or get disbarred. Making unilateral decisions about the practice.), and furthermore he is not trying to restore group harmony and seems to rebuff any statement Foggy makes to this point about how his actions affected other. Those are major problems if maintains group order and harmony, and valuing the others in the group over ideal is your view of strong morality.

There's a disconnect there. It is not simple on either side.

Being more Gilligan myself, I don't see Matt repeatedly giving Foggy chances to get out as a positive thing, or even an in anyway respectful thing as others do. Yes, he's saying, if you disagree, and this bothers you, you are free to follow your own conscience and leave, but it shows just how fundamentally he misunderstands Foggy. Leaving is the exact thing that would be the worst thing Foggy could do according to his value system. The most against his conscience. Instead I see him repeatedly devaluing his relationship with Foggy, by being willing to end it so flippantly. So much so, that eventually Foggy stops trying for as hard for a while, because things have fallen that far.

SA

Also law. Matt see law as right and wrong. If a law is wrong according to your conviction, you don't follow it or work to change it. Foggy sees law as maintain order and community in society, thus why he is willing to overlooking breaking the law if it is for the greater good, but vigilantism is a problem, not so much because it is illegal, but because it is illegal to maintain order and harmony by creating an agreement instead of letting each follow their own moralit which could disrupt the community. Also why Foggy gets more critical in season 2 when copycats apparent. Originally he thought DD may do more harm than good because he helped people, but if he inspires copycats that kill people, that get themselves or others hurt, or simply send the message that each can follow their own beliefs no matter who it hurt, now DD is a problem because it is more harm than good. (I really think this is what he meant by "you can't create danger [i.e. Copycats like Castle] and then protect us from it [and act like that's a noble thing to do], that's not heroic, it's insane." Not that he thought Matt was inventing danger as some have posited.)

Way late, but I agree with all of this, anon.

>>And sorry, but you don't owe any friend a willingness to stand by life choices you think are dangerous or going to get them killed anyway. Especially when those life choices could also fuck up your own life peripherally in pretty epic ways.

Foggy left Matt in s1 and came back. Matt stayed out of Foggy's life but Foggy is the one who came back to him. Supported him and helped make a bunch of those legal, and otherwise, choices that Matt is blamed/credited for. Foggy, on his own, is guilty of premeditated collusion and accessory to that Fisk case. And you know that's the only case that matters in this universe lol.

In s2 Foggy said he didn't want to 'do this again' and Matt told him 'then don't.' Foggy has that out again, to leave Matt's life for good, but he continues to stay.

And then there's Defenders. So at what point is Foggy responsible for his own choices regarding Matt's life? It's not one or the other, it's everybody making terrible decisions and not being able to give up this half-ass friendship.

TBH it seems like Foggy was THISCLOSE to understanding Matt and DD in Defenders, maybe about to have a serious discussion with Karen about how the road to hell is paved with good intentions, and then Matt dies. Whatever is going on in Foggy's head, it can't be good because there is responsiblity there, and not just half-asses responsibility. But when Matt returns, does Matt dying mean Foggy finally gets out of Matt's life for good, completely, or does he stay again? I'm not interested in blame, I know how I feel, I'm interested in where they go from here.

Foggy sees them as separate because Matt went to great lengths to present them as separate for 10 years! Yeah he only started vigilantism a few years ago, but the Devil was always there, and he HID him from Foggy and carefully presented another persona. No wonder Foggy is confused.

It is groundbreaking when he realizes Matt's telling him something, and he was allowed six months or a year of confusion or denial after 10 years of lies and believing something else. Be fair. (Especially since he seems to be trying, but Matt's not happy that he's not there yet).

The other three were honest from the beginning. None of the hid their abilities, or hiw they used them. Trish knew. She helped when Jess was Jewel. Claire knew before there was anything between her and Luke. Colleen knew. Danny told her from the start.

I don't know what Karen's deal is. She was pro-vigilante, and has only know Matt a short time, but calling Foggy a bad friend when comparing him to people in the know and trusted is completely unfair.

Claire was also anti-vigilante in season 2, begging Matt to stop, and then she took the 1 train up to Harlem and immediately started telling Luke to pick up the pace on becoming hero of Harlem, and it starts in on that thing that she's magically attracted to helping "people with abilities" and this is her spiritual purpose in life. I didn't get that transition at all.

I think she said in LC that she left Hell's Kitchen because all of this madness but ehre she was plunegd right back through anotehr one. I think she just adapted but i think she thinks thisw ay because she knew too good for this world Luke. I dont think she would've been that pro vigilante if she would've known the Punisher lol

One difference is, Matt was getting really badly hurt and dying when Claire begged him to stop. Luke is just not as vulnerable - he can't be sliced up or shot like Matt can. Not sure that totally explains Claire's 180 but, could be part of it.

I would buy it but she was talking about helping vigilantes for a living long before she met Luke.

DA
I made this comment in another post.
I understand Foggy and Karen pov because they still dont grasp the idea of their friend risking his life. I could see it from Foggy Who so far has only seen Matt getting Hurt and almost dying but Karen has seen the heroe yet she judges him and wants him to stop.

I agree i was mad at Foggy when he said that Matt doesnt tell him anything and i Felt like he knows why is that but does not want to accept it.
I feel like Foggy and Karen are good representations of People Who had been lied to by someone close to them. I guess Matt must have told them about the hand and Elektra and told them he was going to stop and he did it but they still werent trusting him cause Matt lied to them before and Matt didn't go to them cause they will only worry and judge and he is done with that.
I found unfair that Last bit about the supportive friends. For me, those people for the other defenders knew since the beggining about the abilities of their love ones. Foggy and Karen didn't and no matter what anyone could say they lost their friend for someone elses battle....

In the end Claire's Words to Foggy were on point and i hope Foggy realises that and when Matt comes back he can understand him more.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

The Defenders-only Discussion Post!

Re: Episode 2 Discussion

Re: Episode 2 Discussion

Re: Episode 2 Discussion

Re: Episode 2 Discussion

Re: Episode 2 Discussion

Re: Episode 2 Discussion

Re: Episode 2 Discussion

Re: Episode 2 Discussion

Re: Episode 2 Discussion

Re: Episode 2 Discussion

Re: Episode 2 Discussion

Re: Episode 2 Discussion

Re: Episode 2 Discussion

Re: Episode 2 Discussion

Re: Episode 2 Discussion

Re: Episode 2 Discussion

Re: Episode 2 Discussion

Re: Episode 2 Discussion

Re: Episode 2 Discussion

Re: Episode 2 Discussion

Re: Episode 2 Discussion

Re: Episode 2 Discussion

Re: Episode 2 Discussion

Re: Episode 2 Discussion