The Ethics of S.P.Y.I.N.G: Are The Moral HighHorses Out of The Barn?

[Actionmage]

Yep.  When Coulson leads a raid and murders two guards, it's okay.

 

This incident from S1 was brought up in S2's premiere thread, as was the truth serum fake-out from the pilot.

 

We are dealing with folks who know more than the average citizen of the Marvel Universe, but they aren't omnipotent.

 

Let's talk about stuff like Coulson & Company's treatment of Brigadier General Talbot, minion deaths, and other moral questions spies have to live with here!

 

 

[ChelseaNH]

I think it's only fair to evaluate decisions based on the information available at time.  Given what Coulson and team knew at the time, they didn't have any justification for killing the guards, especially when non-lethal options were readily available.  But I don't expect the show to recognize, let alone grapple with, the issue because it's not that kind of show.

[kitlee625]

So I wish they would. I don't mind when my heroes make mistakes (if they didn't it would make for a boring show), but I want them to acknowledge it. They do show them trying to talk the guards into letting them enter first, but the fact that they did not use the Night-Night guns, without an explanation as to why not (even a quick, oh we don't have enough) I think was sloppy storytelling.

 

I do want them to get into more of the moral ambiguity this season, but again I think that we're going to have to use some willing suspension of disbelief. Like where does Ward go to the bathroom? Does someone bring him food? On a more serious note, I like that already we've seen them risk it all for the Quinjet and the cloaking technology that it has. To me, that's what I've wanted all along - making the hard calls and making sacrifices for the greater good. And we see that the mission was not a complete success, which also adds to the tension, the drama, and the stakes of each mission.

 

Was it right to risk it all for the Quinjet? Probably so. The narrative tells us that if they had all fled to the SUV, they would have been killed by Absorbing Man like Lucy Lawless and the mercenaries. But I like that the mission did not go off smoothly, and they'll have to deal with the fallout next episode.

Edited September 26, 2014 by kitlee625

[jhlipton]

re shooting of guards:

 

It appeared to me that several guards were shot in this episode. Was everyone (including the mercenaries) carrying "night-night" guns, or were those guards killed as well?

[kitlee625]

re shooting of guards:

 

It appeared to me that several guards were shot in this episode. Was everyone (including the mercenaries) carrying "night-night" guns, or were those guards killed as well?

 

If you mean the most recent episode (2x01) then I believe yes. I noticed them carrying ICERs and the characteristic burst of blue that they use to represent those bullets. Of course unclear where they have this seemingly endless supply of dendrotoxin, but hey, the magic of television.

[jhlipton]

Of course unclear where they have this seemingly endless supply of dendrotoxin, but hey, the magic of television.

 

It's derived from the same element used to make bullets during the 60s (when every "6-shooter" would have about 20 bullets).

[Actionmage]

At Izzy's mention of 'Doesn't everyone have a bionic arm' ( or whatever the correct quote is), I thought of Det. Misty Knight, of the NYPD.  Is the MCU at a place where we, the audience/Watchers, can talk about the ethics of "upgrading" humans?  In Deathlok/Mike's case it was intrusive and unasked for, even though it was life-saving.

 

If what we are believing about those nutty Koenig brothers is true, what's up with that? Aren't they sentient? Don't they deserve a vote in how many of themselves are made? This isn't Caprica!

 

Also, what is the morality of not destroying potentially world-ending artifacts? If the items are that potentially deadly, the non-sentient being ones, why not destroy them, if possible. The number of wrong hands becomes zero.

 

It makes me uncomfortable to know that SHIELD used to carry out murder as SOP for super-powered people who refused to commit to being a government agency's definition of "safe". That puts me in mind of the Psi Corp from Babylon 5. Then again, I think we were supposed to take that info and chew on it, feeling uneasy.

[Loandbehold]

 

Also, what is the morality of not destroying potentially world-ending artifacts? If the items are that potentially deadly, the non-sentient being ones, why not destroy them, if possible. The number of wrong hands becomes zero.

We did see SHIELD sending at least one of the recovered artifacts into space last season. Maybe some of them are too dangerous to even try to destroy, or they don't know what will happen should they try to do so. Of course, that's just wild speculation on my part.

 

 

If what we are believing about those nutty Koenig brothers is true, what's up with that? Aren't they sentient? Don't they deserve a vote in how many of themselves are made?

Do clones own the original DNA? They're created from a lab sample. Now, they should have rights as to how they, themselves, are treated, but I don't think they have control over the original DNA. We would need to know who the original was, and if they signed over the rights to their DNA to SHIELD. That's assuming that human cloning is legal in the first place.

[ChelseaNH]

We did see SHIELD sending at least one of the recovered artifacts into space last season.

 

We saw a rocket fired into space, but it turns out the artifact it was supposed to be carrying was actually filed away for future reference.

 

I think it was a good idea to destroy things that were too powerful, but unfortunately it was subverted.  Although that probably wouldn't work with the Tesseract (and if it did, it would probably destroy the sun, so oops).

[Chicago Redshirt]

The one downside of the Hydra reveal is that it gives SHIELD an easy out for every unethical thing it's done or may do in the future.

 

Pretty much any decision that was made that wasn't done by Fury, one of our non-Hydra team, Hand and a select few could be either the direct work of Hydra agents who were moles or Hydra's influence on people who were bonafide SHIELD.

 

And going forward, it's pretty easy to justify almost anything and everything when you are fighting people who think that a plan to exterminate 20 million people who might get in the way is totally reasonable, and who are moral descendants of people who thought the Nazis were too easy-going.

Edited September 30, 2014 by Chicago Redshirt

[kitlee625]

Also actual descendants given that one of the new characters was an actual Hydra/Nazi agent, complete with fake German accent.

[John Potts]

While I can see the justification for hanging on to the weird shit they recover (in case the Avengers are out to lunch, or whatever), but it did have the effect of handing a massive uparming to HYDRA when they took over at the end of Season 1. So maybe a few extra safeguards might be in orderwhen it comes to things that can make an Earth Shattering Kaboom (along with a few internal checks to make sure your agents aren't secretly Nazis!).

[KirkB]

It was a bit of complacency and laziness on SHIELD's part. They had spent so many years squirreling this stuff away without anyone knowing about it (they thought) it simply didn't occur to them anyone COULD get around their defenses. Never mind the fact Hydra was alongside them the entire time, arranging for a lot of this stuff to fall by the wayside so they could get hold of it.

Edited September 30, 2014 by KirkB

[James Moar]

If what we are believing about those nutty Koenig brothers is true, what's up with that? Aren't they sentient? Don't they deserve a vote in how many of themselves are made?

 

Being big fans of multiplayer online games, they voted for "lots".

[Sarahastro]

The one downside of the Hydra reveal is that it gives SHIELD an easy out for every unethical thing it's done or may do in the future.

 

Pretty much any decision that was made that wasn't done by Fury, one of our non-Hydra team, Hand and a select few could be either the direct work of Hydra agents who were moles or Hydra's influence on people who were bonafide SHIELD.

 

Yeah the Hydra reveal offers them an easy out for all the morally-questionable decisions. That being said, I was pleasantly surprised that Coulson's resurrection wasn't blamed on Hydra. They also said that the decision not to actually launch the 0-8-4's into the sun came from Fury, not Hydra. So at least a few times they've pined some sketchy decisions on SHIELD instead of Hydra.

 

That being said, they need to be more upfront about how sketchy some of their decisions have been. If they want SHIELD to be gray, they need to own up to it.

[Jeezaloo]

they didn't have any justification for killing the guards, especially when non-lethal options were readily available.

 

Okay, so I guess we saw two different versions of the same episode? Because in my version, the two guards had decided to kill Coulson, would not listen to reason, and then actually tried to kill Coulson before he shot them. There were also no non-lethal options available in the version I saw (list the ones you saw if you'd like), and the pressure of a race against the clock to save a Special Snowflake from melting away due to a nasty gut shot.

 

I've never seen that moment as anything other than Coulson with his back to the wall making a really tough decision that wasn't "let these totally unreasonable gunmen kill me, a fellow agent of SHIELD".

 

As far as spying? Yeah, it's a spy-type show so those shenanigans are expected, aren't they? They saved Talbot from getting clobbered by the Absorbing Man, gave Talbot every chance to be reasonable before taking things up a notch (he broke the phone and threw it away while Coulson was trying to reason with him, remember?) ... they're the good guys and they're trying to get the job done with reason first - before they resort to the more drastic but still necessary measures.

 

They need Talbot off their backs so they can go after Hydra. The security of the world is at stake. They're trying to be as compassionate as possible but sometimes it takes a slap in the face to get someone's attention. Stubborn, wrong-headed Talbot needed it and he got it.

 

SHIELD are the good guys in a really bad world. If they seem to be in some gray area, that's just because SHIELD is a drop of water in a glass of black ink.

 

Good guys aren't perfect guys, you know? I don't understand how the two got conflated but they're not the same thing.

[Sarahastro]

they didn't have any justification for killing the guards, especially when non-lethal options were readily available.

Okay, so I guess we saw two different versions of the same episode? Because in my version, the two guards had decided to kill Coulson, would not listen to reason, and then actually tried to kill Coulson before he shot them. There were also no non-lethal options available in the version I saw (list the ones you saw if you'd like), and the pressure of a race against the clock to save a Special Snowflake from melting away due to a nasty gut shot.

 

I've never seen that moment as anything other than Coulson with his back to the wall making a really tough decision that wasn't "let these totally unreasonable gunmen kill me, a fellow agent of SHIELD".

 

So I agree with much of what you said, Jeezalo. Coulson's back was up against a wall -- he tried asking for help, and those guys tried to kill them. However, that scene still bothers me because we know that they have a non-lethal option on the Bus: the ICERs. It is never explained why none of them have ICERs with them, and instead they are all using real guns (at least as far as I can recall, I haven't seen that episode in a long time). It's very jarring to me because that is one of the few episodes where there aren't any ICERs. We see them use ICERs in "Tracks" and then they use them again in "Yes Men," so why are they conveniently absent in "TAHITI?" Given that they have them on board and that Coulson knows that they may be breaking into a SHIELD facility, it seems morally questionable that he took his team in with only real guns and no ICERs.

Edited October 1, 2014 by Sarahastro

[John Potts]

Jeezaloo Because in my version, the two guards had decided to kill Coulson, would not listen to reason, and then actually tried to kill Coulson before he shot them.

 

I'm pretty sure if I break into a Biological Weapons Facility without proper authorisation and refuse to stop when denied entry, I will get shot (even in the UK). The guards didn't open fire without warning, they asked for the password (which Coulson didn't know). Now it's entirely possible they were in fact part of some Evil organisation, but they seemed to be just soldiers doing their duty.

 

Plus Team SHIELD always had the option of using ICERs, but chose not to. (Even ICERs might have proved fatal, since the base subsequently blew up, but at least they would be attempting non-lethal means in that case).

[KirkB]

I think the whole episode required the team to be collectively stupid for a moment (overlooking the icers) in order to make a mortally questionable decision. Before that one episode they always went out of their way to use the icers. Part of it was probably Garrett's influence, since he obviously would not have had a problem with killing anyone, but mainly it was meant to make the audience take a step back and spark this very sort of discussion.

[kitlee625]

I really liked the interaction between Talbot and Coulson in 2x02 more than in 2x01. I know that we're supposed to see Talbot as a doofus, but in 2x01 I felt like Coulson was crossing the line. Did he really think that Talbot was going to cooperate after being kidnapped and strapped to a chair in the interrogation room? I prefer it when Coulson is persuasive and sneaky. I like that in 2x02 he was very clear that he's not going to stop (and that he's stronger than Talbot thinks), but also that he's choosing not to use that force against Talbot. Plus that exit with the cloaked ships was pretty cool, even if it does make you wonder why no one could feel the jets from a hovering plane.

[myril]

So I agree with much of what you said, Jeezalo. Coulson's back was up against a wall -- he tried asking for help, and those guys tried to kill them. However, that scene still bothers me because we know that they have a non-lethal option on the Bus: the ICERs. It is never explained why none of them have ICERs with them, and instead they are all using real guns (at least as far as I can recall, I haven't seen that episode in a long time). It's very jarring to me because that is one of the few episodes where there aren't any ICERs. We see them use ICERs in "Tracks" and then they use them again in "Yes Men," so why are they conveniently absent in "TAHITI?" Given that they have them on board and that Coulson knows that they may be breaking into a SHIELD facility, it seems morally questionable that he took his team in with only real guns and no ICERs.

 

In T.R.A.C.K.S.  they had still the first version of the night-night guns (with the ounce too much according to Ward, greyish, blue), more or less prototypes made by Fitz himself. Fitz had two of them, left one with unconscious Simmons in the train, while he and Skye went after Quinn. Skye went into the house with the one Fitz still had, and it was taken of her by Quinn. It is mentioned, Quinn's people had already the spec for it (Fitz probably had send them to Headquarter, Hub or so, what a huge hint, that there were connections, a mole!) but sure a working model was interesting for them. Later Ward has one (could be the one left with Simmons), and when they go into the house he pulls a second one. Coulson had only normal gun, and May, I think, had as usual no weapon. So in T.R.A.C.K.S they had 2, maybe 3 prototype night-night guns.

 

Could be they ran out of ammunition, given the pressure might not have been time to make any new.

 

In "Yes Men", the episode after T.A.H.I.T.I., Fitz shows May and Ward the new guns and rifles he now had for them, and tells them they are now called ICERs. They look closer to normal guns, are black, and as Ward gladly noticed, they lost the ounce.

 

Yes, they could have dropped a word about it, like no ammunition left, but an explanation is possible, why they had only lethal weapons going into the bunker. 

Edited October 1, 2014 by katusch

[jhlipton]

It does make you wonder why no one could feel the jets from a hovering plane.

 

CBJEs -- Comic Book Jet Engines.  Powered by Handwavium!

[Chicago Redshirt]

I think the whole episode required the team to be collectively stupid for a moment (overlooking the icers) in order to make a mortally questionable decision. Before that one episode they always went out of their way to use the icers. Part of it was probably Garrett's influence, since he obviously would not have had a problem with killing anyone, but mainly it was meant to make the audience take a step back and spark this very sort of discussion.

The thing is, I don't think that there was any thought in sparking any sort of discussion about the (im)moral nature of the act of breaking into the facility and killing two people. I think Coulson thinks it's A-OK because its' Skye's life at stake and we audience members are supposed to be right there with him.

[Actionmage]

The thing is, I don't think that there was any thought in sparking any sort of discussion about the (im)moral nature of the act of breaking into the facility and killing two people. I think Coulson thinks it's A-OK because its' Skye's life at stake and we audience members are supposed to be right there with him.

 

I'm going to  respectfully disagree with you on that point. The fact that even just us here are having the discussion, months after the episode aired, proves that if that were the case, TPTB failed in getting us to be mindless cheerleaders. You, for example, think it was simply an immoral act on the lead's part. Others agree with you. I and others see it as a gray area. There is debate. We count as the audience members you mentioned, Chicago Redshirt. 

 

I agree with you that there probably wasn't much conscious decision-making about how it would read to the public ( we are talking about the folks who refused to let us decide to like Skye on our own.) Yet Marvel, as a company, since the 60s has tried to tackle harder moral questions, like with the company-wide Civil War ( more details here: http://marvel.wikia.com/Civil_War_(Event).)  Maybe whoever is the Marvel liason noticed that the icers weren't being used but shut their yap so this kind of discussion would spring up.

 

I also don't believe Phil is okay with having to kill. Yes, he will kill, and with no hesitation once he feels he must, but he isn't taking pleasure from it.  That belief also extends to May, as far as I am concerned.

[Jeezaloo]

I still don't get the idea that good people have to be perfect, flawless people - or else they're automatically operating in some morally "grey area".

 

To me, a "grey area" would be May taking down a really evil guy ... and then stealing cash from his wallet to pay for repairs to her uniform that he damaged.

 

To me, a "grey area" would NOT be when you make the very best decision you can, in flawed circumstances, when you have your back against the wall with only a few options available to you.

 

Good guys are not perfect guys - they're just guys doing the best they can with what they have. The expectation that they'll make an omelet without cracking a few eggs (and that it is automatically morally suspect to crack those eggs) is just unrealistic IMO.

[Actionmage]

I still don't get the idea that good people have to be perfect, flawless people - or else they're automatically operating in some morally "grey area".

 

For myself, the only person I can speak for here, I agree that Good doesn't automatically equal Perfect. My husband has played characters in tabletop games- paladins- that other players had their characters want to kill. Why? He was a paladin. The characters hadn't even met. So I am firmly grokking what you are saying.

 

That doesn't mean Good People can't act in morally questionable ways. Letting a known felon escape from them or try to salvage the gravitonium? (Which was itself another tough call that Coulson made last year.)  Make no mistake, the team was not about evacuating that mansion or the grounds or the island (i.e., saving civilian lives), but taking back an asset in whatever form he was in. Also, again, it obviously weighed on Coulson that he had the doctor's current state on his ledger.

 

Dr. Hall, an asset of SHIELD, chose a gray path, precisely to keep the collateral damage to a minimum. As Hall told Coulson, he chose to willingly work for his sociopathic college bud because Quinn was the perfect storm of scary: rich, smart, and ruthless. In order to keep less ethical scientists from giving carte blanche to Quinn, Hall was trying to destroy the gravitonium. Letting Quinn do whatever else was okay, as long as the potential world killer was out of Quinn's money-grubbing hands, is gray. Not ensuring everyone's safety while taking off with what made things worse ( and worse due to your actions), is gray. 

 

They are still heroes to me, but they aren't saints or angels.  Folks who try for doing the most Good for the most people in the best way open to them, ideally.

[Actionmage]

After this week's episode, I was wondering:

 

If Ward wasn't able to give Fitz info about the conditioning, would Fitz have killed Ward? ( I personally don't think he would, but...)

 

If Ward had actually died at Fitz's hand, would that have been on Coulson?  Coulson, no doubt from Simmons, knows what happened to the pair. To not have a failsafe/code so that Fitz isn't able to enter and do exactly what he started doing seems uncharacteristic for Coulson. Skye is supposedly the Superhacker Supreme, would it really be hard for her to encode the door lock/security system for the vault?   

 

Granted, the incident with Ward happened specifically when "everyone" was out; Fitz knew what he was doing. Mack signed up to be a mechanic, not a babysitter. Should Fitz have consequences to his actions?  Lots of folks seemed to agree with depriving Ward his oxygen on the thread page. When is that ever heroic, if it is?

[kitlee625]

That's an interesting question. For me, personally, I was not cheering Fitz on during that scene. I thought it was interesting and chilling to watch, and I'm surprised that the writers went that way, but I was not like "go Fitz go!" Not exactly for Ward's sake, but because I thought Fitz killing and torturing Ward was a pretty dark way to take Fitz's character.

 

I don't think that Fitz would have killed him. He's killed before, sure, but that was during a fight to save May's life. The way he framed it as showing Ward what happened to him, I think his goal was to deprive him of oxygen but not kill him. Because that's part of Fitz's complaint. That he did survive the ordeal but has been changed forever. If Fitz's goal had been to murder Ward, getting information about Donnie wouldn't have played into it. He would have been "thanks for that" and kept Ward in a low oxygen environment.

[Actionmage]

How do you deal with a single alien who just wants his ( allegedly) stolen daughter back after decades?

 

What should protocol be when the person you interact with may have a literal false face?

 

How far does Skye's need-to-know go? In my book, about Phil and the writing, as long as it doesn't potentially involve other agents, all the way. Other ops and tidbits? As far as Phil and/or May think. 

 

Was Simmons actually the best choice to send on an undercover operation? If Simmons turns out to be brainwashed, is it fully Coulson's responsibility? Simmons had to be feeling helpless about the Fitz situation and eager to feel useful. Coulson would see that as a plus, possibly.  Also, possibly, Jemma wanting to strike back at the organization that hurt or killed so many people, and was directly responsible for Ward, who in turn caused Fitz's situation.  So was it a good plan gone bad or was Coulson wrong for even thinking of using Simmons?

 

While I doubt that Morse and Simmons were the only SHIELD moles, are the other(s) deep enough in their cover to withstand the waves of paranoia that will result from two moles escaping Hydra? 

[Raja]

How do you deal with a single alien who just wants his ( allegedly) stolen daughter back after decades?

 

 

I may be wrong but the only aliens that we, as in the world has had open contact with are Asgardians. Don't these people show fear at all.

[Actionmage]

Since I was talking about Skye's (supposed) father, and his tendency to really go off when people are...discourteous, I wasn't meaning the Asgardians.  Whatever race they end up being, they aren't Earthers. Dad may have a blood claim to Skye, but she would be considered an adult here, on Earth. Skye may not want to leave. She may not want to leave with him.

 

How does SHIELD handle that kind of situation? Especially with the family angle and Skye willingly being a protector of this planet?

[Irishmaple]

Before Skye's father chose to align with HYDRA, I think SHIELD/Coulson should have acted according to Skye's wishes on this one as long as those wishes did not conflict with SHIELD's mandate.  Her father had kept himself mostly out of trouble.  He was nothing more than a rumour dangled by Raina and Ward, so he might have been considered moderate-risk before HYDRA crossed his path.  Now that's he has chosen HYDRA, I think all options are off the table.  Colluding with HYDRA makes him an enemy of SHIELD, which has to outweigh any personal interest of Skye's unless she chooses to resign and take Ward up on his offer.  I think Coulson might notice Skye breaking Ward out of his cell though.

 

Prior to that decision of his, I think Skye was right to feel she could take the lead.  Ward and Raina were willing to provide information, as long as they were properly motivated and both had obvious needs: Ward wants to talk to Skye, Raina wanted protection.  If Skye wanted to talk to her father, she allegedly has the competence to hide her signal and have that conversation without putting SHIELD at risk.  If she chose to meet with him, it would have to be under controlled circumstances since he is such an unknown.  SHIELD could choose the meeting spot, set the perimeter, and maintain an armed and visible presence to protect their asset, and deter any plot her father might have.  He would have to agree to any and all conditions set by Skye and/or SHIELD before entering the meeting spot.  If he tries to abduct or in any way harm Skye or the SHIELD agents, he doesn't get to leave.

Edited October 24, 2014 by Irishmaple

[Actionmage]

Is anyone concerned that Simmons might copy The List and try to figure out how to genetically stop them? Or join Bobbi and Mac's "support group"?

[Malbec]

I think that would be a really interesting route to take Simmons.  Because for me, the thing is -- while she's a bit extreme in her grief over Trip, she's not totally wrong.  They're dealing with a completely new and unknown biological phenomenon.  They really don't know what it's going to do.  For all they know, it really could be the equivalent of smallpox being introduced to the Americas, or rabbits being introduced to Australia.  Even in cases where the introduction isn't malicious, the effects can still be devastating.

 

I hope, but I'm not optimistic, that the writers don't just reduce it to "Simmons being emotional / hurting Skye's feelings" because while I don't know if I agreed with everything she said in 2x11, I don't think her concerns should be blown off entirely.

[KirkB]

No, you're right, Simmons made some very valid points. The problem is, from the standpoint of the other characters she was being emotional over Tripp's death and so her concerns are going to be, if not ignored, downplayed. Skye will be worried, as will Fitz, but if they stop and think about it neither one would actually believe that Simmons wants to put a bullet in Skye's head once she realizes she has super powers. 

[Sakura12]

I think if Simmons found out now she might and think she was helping Skye. Which is why I agree with Fitz in waiting until Simmons has some more time to deal. It's going to blow up in their faces because it's tv. But Simmons is on a rampage now, even May looked worried. 

[Malbec]

Really?  Because Simmons, to me, seems like she might benefit from the reality check that Skye's an Inhuman. Unless they are taking her down a road of total sociopathy, I would hope that being able to put a face -- a trusted, friendly face -- on the issue would cool down her attitude at least somewhat. 

 

Idk, to me, the whole "let's protect Simmons from her own discovery because she's emotional" thing seems kind of patronizing to her.  If she's not fit for duty, by all means, take her off duty.  But if she's regarded as fit, then she should be treated that way.

[Sakura12]

Maybe not shoot her, but want her locked away and contained. I do not think she will be as understanding as Fitz. I have a feeling she will angry and blame Skye for Tripp's death. They are after all setting up future Marvel movies and the future includes the Civil War storyline. 

[Lady Calypso]

Idk, to me, the whole "let's protect Simmons from her own discovery because she's emotional" thing seems kind of patronizing to her.  If she's not fit for duty, by all means, take her off duty.  But if she's regarded as fit, then she should be treated that way.

 

 

I get that, absolutely. I do think, however, that Fitz means well and I don't think he feels like he's protecting, or patronizing, Simmons. I think that he just wants to give her, and everyone, enough time to calm down about the already new discovery about Raina and then inform them about Skye. He definitely didn't say that he wanted the secret kept for a long time, just a little while so things can calm down. Do I think Simmons is wrong? No, absolutely not. She has legitimate concerns that do need to be addressed, and it's clear Simmons isn't happy with killing people with powers, but I think she sees it as a necessary evil if needed be. Sure, she was basically implying that the Inhumans should be killed and not really experimented on, because they could be dangerous or contaminated and they need to be stopped, but I don't think it'll be easy for her once she finds out about Skye. In fact, I don't think she'd kill Skye at all, which would be hypocritical but, again, understandable.

 

I'm more worried about Coulson and what he'd do to Skye, actually. I mean, he'd still be all 'YAY SKYE'S AN INHUMAN, LET'S ALL DANCE AROUND' but I'm kind of curious to see what he would do. He seems curious about people with superpowers and I wonder if he'll use his new status as director to...I dunno, experiment on Skye or even use her for his own personal gain. I actually think that he would and that would be even worse. Fitz seems to want to treat Skye as a normal (in)human being, but would the others give her that kind of respect, especially with something so new to them?

[KirkB]

Coulson, pre-Tahiti, probably would have done whatever Fury told him to regarding super powered individuals (with the likely exception of Captain America). Since he was brought back, and experimented on, I can't see him doing it to anyone else, or allowing it. Especially not to Skye, who he seems to regard as a daughter, which is just adding to the inevitable rematch with Cal. As for Simmons, she's a little confused right now. She's angry and sad about Tripp, of course, and on some level willing to condone violence against Raina because she has actively killed people who meant her no harm. I don't think she's suddenly anti-super powers, since in her talk with Skye when Skye brought up the Avengers Simmons didn't say she had any problem with them, just that they wouldn't be necessary if it weren't for things like the tesseract and the obelisk.

Edited March 4, 2015 by KirkB

[Sakura12]

Elizabeth Henstridge agrees with me. 

 

t was heartbreaking to see how negatively Simmons (Elizabeth Henstridge) reacted to Raina's transformation, telling Skye she wanted to exterminate Raina without realizing Skye was going through the same thing. So we had to ask: would Simmons really put down Skye if she knew the truth about her new powers?

 

"In the mindset she's in right now, yeah, I think so," Henstridge revealed. "Simmons is shutting down and she's taking orders from Coulson [Clark Gregg] and just doing it. As she sees it, the stakes are enormous and she can't let this happen again. She can't go through this again. She's taking a very scientific route. It's her way of grieving. She's traumatized. She's turning to science to try and get some absolutes.

 

http://www.eonline.com/news/631736/agents-of-s-h-i-e-l-d-will-the-team-really-turn-against-an-inhuman-skye-find-out-what-the-cast-reveals

 

Simmons views any one with powers as a threat to the safety of everyone else. She's not wrong, Skye's powers do make her dangerous to herself and others. I think if she did find out in last nights episode, Simmons would've been on team put Skye down and rationalize it as it's for her own good or as Skye is no longer Skye, she's been taken over by an alien disease. Skye wouldn't want to hurt people so lets make sure she never can. It will all be very scientific response not an emotional one. 

[Humbugged]

Elizabeth Henstridge agrees with me. 

 

 

 

Simmons views any one with powers as a threat to the safety of everyone else. She's not wrong, Skye's powers do make her dangerous to herself and others. I think if she did find out in last nights episode, Simmons would've been on team put Skye down and rationalize it as it's for her own good or as Skye is no longer Skye, she's been taken over by an alien disease. Skye wouldn't want to hurt people so lets make sure she never can. It will all be very scientific response not an emotional one. 

Was there not an episode in Season 1 where she wanted to cut someone with powers open to see how it worked ?

 

And Skye's mother had the Welcome Wagon job for new Inhumans that Coulson thought that Skye would be good at in episode 109

[KirkB]

I have no problem with Simmons being willing to kill someone like Raina, who was already murdering people right and left for no good reason, or even touting the idea of killing a powered person who is clearly a threat in general. What I do have a hard time with is the idea of Simmons finding out Skye has powers, grabbing a gun and shooting her in the head. A person clearly dangerous or threatening, yes. A friend? No. Well, wait, with one caveat. If Skye's powers were going out of control and threatening to bring the building down on everyone, Skye herself begging someone to stop her, and Simmons being the only one close enough, then for the good of the many I could see her killing Skye. But there would be an overwhelming and specific reason. I can't see Simmons turning into a psychopath who starts running around executing anyone with powers. Hell, that means she'd have to go after the Avengers too and she doesn't seem to have an issue with them.

Edited March 5, 2015 by KirkB

[ChelseaNH]

Half the Avengers -- Iron Man, Black Widow and Hawkeye are, as far as we know, unenhanced humans.  And Thor has powers, but he's an extraterrestrial, not an enhanced human.  Captain America and the Hulk are the only two who really qualify.

[KirkB]

No, you're right, and I realized later I didn't post everything I was thinking about. Simmons being willing to kill seems strange, since she is usually portrayed as a quiet and nice character, but it's not that she ever had an issue with killing. In the past, with someone like Mike, killing him wasn't her first instinct but that doesn't mean she would be unable to do it if it was necessary. In this case she's not avowing that they round up all super powered people and execute them, just that anyone affected by the obelisk might be dangerous and they should be ready to kill Raina if she threatens them again. Once she finds out Skye has powers she's going to be hurt and angry Fitz and Skye were hiding it from her, but she's not going to insist they just kill her. Skye could be a threat though, especially if it turns out she can't control her new found abilities, and if it fell to Simmons to stop her it would hurt but I think she could do it.

Edited March 6, 2015 by KirkB

[Actionmage]

(I am responding to the Argument scene at the end of "What You Become")

 

The stupid "argument" scene would be at home in an amateur soap production. Showing regret at the person you are vociferously arguing to imprison hears you yelling about them and you look embarrassed (Mac)?  Only if you have no conviction. Either she's a danger and you talk to her about your fears or you don't think she's a danger and you didn't mean for her to hear you "accidently" "play Devil's advocate" or some other horseshit.  I don't mind Mac feeling strongly because, even if I disagree with his plan, he has a point about the potential damage until Skye can handle her powers.

 

Either she is something to have been taken off-planet ( due to power instability) or you you are planning on offing her or worse. Why fight to keep her, as the building is being shaken? As some sports fans say, are you rooting for laundry? She presents as "human" so no Kree or Asgardian is going to get their grubby galactic mitts on her?  If something bad happens to her, her fellow humans will do it?

 

Then Jemma and her "It's different with Skye" bull.  As Fitz pointed out, Jemma's all "kill, kill" when it's Raina and other unknown persons, but conventionally pretty Skye gets special treatment/handling because Jemma knows Skye. Granted, Raina is a criminal, but both women underwent the same process. Apparently, they also have our Kree pal to thank for conveniently "forgetting" every convo about destroying Raina, eradicating potential power-wielding folks like they are a plague, and other such things. Then they have the adamantium balls to look Fitz in the face and say that Skye should have been honest with them!  Riiiiight. The marginalized person needs to trust all the extreme-talking violent-action folks to not extremely and violently do something when they reveal a bombshell of 'I am the very thing you want to extremely, violently eradicate.' 

 

I...and to have Mac deliver the line feels wrong, double especially as he's lying to everyone but Bobbi and his choking out Hunter at the end.

[Malbec]

In all honesty, I was perturbed by Skye's decision to walk into a heavily populated area -- a hospital no less -- with an earthquake power she knew wasn't fully under her control.  How many surgeons had their scalpels near major arteries in their patients' bodies when Skye lost control?  How many post-surgery patients were taking their first walk?  To me, that is a situation where Skye was under a moral obligation to speak up, to Coulson or May if not anyone else.

 

It just frustrates me with the writing on this show, that on the one hand Coulson gives speeches to Bobbi about how he doesn't consider any casualties acceptable, and yet an incident in which Skye very likely caused injuries to civilians is just, welp, who cares, the damage happened offscreen.  To me, focusing on the actual implications of her power would be a lot more compelling as a source of drama (and ethical debate) than the questionably-written dissent among the team.

 

As far as Mack and Simmons are concerned, I almost don't feel like evaluating them ethically because I'm so ???? on the writing for them.  I feel like both of them could be written as reasonable counterpoints to Coulson, particularly Mack who seems to be reacting to his own experience being possessed, but so far they aren't. 

[Sakura12]

Skye wanted to tell Coulson, Fitz stopped her and I get it, she's scared, doesn't know what's happening to her and she's trying to pretend she's normal. Raina said she hurts every time she moves, it makes me wonder what Skye feels. We saw with Gordon that it's not an easy transition and he had someone there to guide him through it. Skye has no one right now.

 

Coulson can't handle Skye, but he's always been emotionally attached to her for some reason. I think they should make it the Kree blood in him that attracted to Skye to have it makes sense. That's also what makes Coulson a terrible Director, he doesn't think beyond what he wants. Skye might be safer or the world could be safer if she's with another race of super powered beings that can handle her powers. 

 

Of course this is probably leading up to Skye joining her people and going with he crazy father.

[Malbec]

Yes.  I totally understand where Skye was coming from, that she was scared and in denial and that it was therefore easy for Fitz to talk her out of telling (and while I seem to be alone on this, I thought it was really not his place to do that, well-intentioned though he may have been).  And although I understand Skye's reluctance to tell, Coulson and May have had her back from more or less day one.  Not trusting at least one of them with her secret was a head-scratcher to me.

[KirkB]

It's clumsy. That's the thing for me. Skye wanting to tell the truth and Fitz convincing her to keep it, until lives were being threatened because of the power they were hiding, and only then coming clean in time to cause a rift among the team is just clumsy writing. They wanted to have people pick sides and decided to use Skye as the catalyst because she's all about the powers now and doesn't really have anything else to do. Not a knock on Chloe Bennett, she is clearly doing the best she can with what she's being given. As for the specific points being made, it's kind of hard to argue against Mac's about them (presumably meaning normal humans) needing protection from those with powers when the building is literally being brought down around them by one of those people with powers. Sif and Pete wanting to kill her is extreme but since Simmons seems to be on the same page (except with Skye) not too extreme apparently. Honestly, I'd rather see a team of agents united against a common foe like Hydra or the Inhumans rather than a bunch of people fighting with one another until something big and dramatic happens to finally get them on the same side again, which you know is what's coming.