POLL: Steve Irwin: Man, Myth, or Monster?

Remove all ads!

Steve Erwin died getting stung through the heart by a Sting Ray in the Great Barrier Reef. Was he the same as all of us, or most of us? Was he an inspired conservationist who furthered the world's knowledge of dangerous animals and made a therefore legendary in his field impact? Or was he insane and cruel to both Human and Animal?

[ September 06, 2006, 21:25: Message edited by: Beren ]

Poll Information
This poll contains 1 question(s). 29 user(s) have voted.
You may not view the results of this poll without voting.

Poll Results: Steve Erwin: Man, Myth, or Monster? (29 votes.)

Steve Erwin: Man, Myth, or Monster? (Choose 3)
* Man - 62% (18)
* Myth - 41% (12)
* Monster - 14% (4)

 

*blink* where did you get the monster one from? There's one I've never heard - an idiot, maybe - but insane and cruel to animals... *laughs*

I suppose it's a shame that he's dead - but I do wish that the media would stop treating it as though Jesus Christ was killed by a stingray - it's not *that* important.

 

Apparently some old batty female media personality said that everything he did to animals made them terrified and his death was just nature striking back.

He was a great guy, totally bonkers but you couldn't help respect him for his enthusiasim, courage and ruggedness.

 

Steve was a man with a passion for the conservation of animals. He was a bit daft and sometimes scared me worse than a horror movie with the antics he pulled but he was not a monster by any means.

 

He was insane, but seemed like a great guy. Someone you would want to have a few with.

 

Jesus...how many Steve Erwin topics do we need here? He wasn't THAT incredible, folks.

 

Who is Steve Erwin? The croc guy was Steve Irwin.

 

@DR This is probably the fourth SI thread, I couldn't agree more.

@T2B dunno, but Mr.Erwin. sounds like a nice guy

 

Well, he was a man with a lot of enthuciasm, by any standards. I'll wager no completely sane person would do what he did, so I'll go ahead and say that he was more than a little daredevil, perhaps even really a little mad.

But you know how it is, when you play with knives, you get accustomed to them, and one day you cut your hand of due being overcasual about them.
I think that was what happened with Irwin, playing with fire. He probably had handled so many animals in his life that he just didn't realize the danger properly.

 

Actually police have stated that it was a freak occurance when he died. For reasons unexplained the ray struck at him as he passed overhead. He did nothing to provoke it, he was merely observing. That is the irony of his death - anyone would have died in that position and most would have considered it safe.

 

Oh really ? How many other people do you know, that as soon as they spot a black Mamba in a tree, they immediately climb into the tree to catch the snake instead of walking around the tree in a really wide circle ?

 

Even with the misspelling, I second DR statement.

Steve said in a 2003 interview that when/if an animal ever attacked him, it was his fault.

Rob Bredl

 

Steve Irwin was a man. The Crocodile Hunter was a Character. There comes a point where the man loses sight of being a man and becomes the character on TV. At that point, it becomes a myth.

 

Steve Irwin, love him or hate him, was the Jacques Cousteau of the era. Let him rest in peace, comfortable in knowing that he passed his passion for animals and conservation along to countless children.

 

He tormented animals to get them to react violently. That made for good TV, I suppose, but I'd still rather see an animal in it's natural environment reacting to the things in its environment, not some bloke trying to rile them up to make for good TV.

 

I only saw one other thread pertaining to it, and this was a poll so it seemed inbounds at the time. Excuse me for mispellinghis name, I'm sure that Mr. Erwin is a cool guy.

The only reason I threw monster in was because that was what my dad thought he was. He thought the Croc Hunter tortured animals and did stupid things that could endanger "re-enacters" of his stunts, and to top it off he thought the guy did it for more ratings so he could get more money. Everything I've read or seen about Steve Irwin said that his reptile zoo was non-profit, and all commercial proceeds from his shows and docs, was put toward expenses and further conservative efforts.

But why bother commenting on how you think there are too many threades about this and it wasn't that important? After all, you bothered commenting.

 

And I'll bother commenting too. Steve Irwin died several days ago, let the guy be. Why the heck make a discussion on what type of person he was when none of us know? Oh well, alot of people like to take selfish advantage of news like this I guess.