30 People Who Went Down In History As The ‘Bad Guys’, But Didn’t Actually Deserve That Title
Who writes history? And how often do we question the narratives that are presented to us? I bet the answer is not enough. And it's understandable, life would be exhausting if we constantly doubted everything we know and where that information came from. But we don't really have the luxury of taking the backseat and just accepting things as we're told they are. Not after so many "conspiracy theories" turn out to be true.
One Reddit user wanted to know what people were deemed 'the bad guys' by history, but didn't actually deserve this title. And people were eager to share their picks. There's more to history than the side we're taught in schools, or wherever else we've heard about it, and as it turns out, many people are villainized to fit a certain narrative, or the 'us vs. them' mentality.
Bored Panda collected the most interesting stories of people being vindicated after being portrayed as the 'bad guys' for years. Scroll down and upvote your favorite submissions, and if you think something is missing, make sure to share it in the comments below!
This post may include affiliate links.
Sinead O'Connor
Ripped up a picture of the Pope live on SNL in the 90s in a protest against covered up child abuse in the Catholic Church.
The world lost their s**t. She was demonized and professionally blacklisted for years, booed to hell at concerts, had her intelligence and sanity questioned, and was made into an international punchline. Even SNL disavowed her actions and wouldn't rebroadcast it.
And....turns out she was 1000% right.
That woman who spilled McDonald’s coffee on her lap.
She didn't even ask for that much, just enough to cover her medical bills. McDonalds refused, so she sued and ended up winning a few hundred thousand. McDonald's knew damn well their coffee was way hotter than legally allowed, but instead of just accepting it they slandered this poor lady. Her genitals melted. Melted, for f***s sake.
That woman who was accused of kidnapping children because her kids didn't have her DNA, but in fact her uterus had different DNA than the rest of her body.
Edward Snowden. The NSA deserved to be called out. Whistleblowers should not be chased out of the country.
So I grew up in a Christian school with a Christian history curriculum printed out of Pensacola Florida. They were dead set on convincing us that JIMMY CARTER is a villain in American history. It was a pretty hollow and nationalistic argument based almost solely on the signing away of the Panama canal.
S**t aged like milk in my head because jimmy lives on as the greatest former president to be around during my lifetime
Can't see any of the bush or trump building houses for the homeless with their own hands ..bravo Mr Carter
Richard Jewell. Security guard at the Atlanta Olympic who was blamed for the bombing.
Pharaoh Cleopatra, she was actually a pretty good ruler with her focusing more on her nation than just abusing her position for her own benefit, there’s even some records saying that she wasn’t even all that beautiful, she was however very intelligent with stuff like how she learned around 10 different languages
And let's face it, she recognized how powerful Rome was and tried to keep Egypt independent. It was just rotten luck that all this was happening at the same time as Rome was having an internal power struggle.
Janet Jackson deserved exactly none of the backlash she received for that Half Time Show disaster.
Everyone acted like her breast being exposed was an intentional part of the act despite how obviously it f*****g wasn't.
Meanwhile, Justin Timberlake gave the most bare minimum "I'm sorry you got offended" b******t ever, but he gets no punishment because he's a sexy white dude.
I have always thought it was planned. That when the backlash happened then everyone started backpedaling. She took the brunt of the blame but he is responsible too.
Captain Hazelwood of the Exxon Valdez.
He is often pictured on the helm of the Exxon swaying drunkenly going full throttle into the reef talking like a "pirate."
What actually happened.
Valdez's critical navigation equipment was out of commission, faxs sent to Exxon and Exxon told them to sail instead.
Coast guard budget cuts removed vessel tracking in the area.
Green and tired crew was on duty, request was made to relief crew. It was denied.
XO who was on Conn at the time was inexperienced on the passage and neither requested pilotage.
While Hazelwood did drink that day he was not in command of the conn at the time and was in his quarters resting.
Hazelwood made a comment that "He needed a drink." Because of how upset he was over the situation.
Exxon's PR paid off the media to blame Hazelwood.
However Hazelwood was charged with only one charge which was for pollution. He proved he was not a drunkard and retained his captain's license. Even getting offers to sail again which he turned down.
The real villains are mass media, False News, and comedians but Exxon's PRs spending power to keep the blame off them.
Hazelwood passed away last year after the annv of the spill.
Random fact the Valdez sailed until 2008 under different name Oriental Nicety
A family member was on the jury at Captain Hazelwood's trial and they said Hazelwood was completely thrown under the bus by Exxon.
Amanda Knox. She was accused of [taking out] her college study abroad roommate after extremely sloppy investigation, WILD claims, cruel tabloid journals calling her all kinds of s**t shaming names and asserting that she [unalived] the roommate because she (roommate) wouldn’t agree to a threesome, the true [criminal’s] DNA being all over the damn place, etc. etc.
She was cleared of all charges later on but she and her equally innocent beau spent YEARS in prison in Italy for it.
bro. what is up with this censoring. I can't even understand this anymore, [taking out] sounds like a date fr and I started reading it like why would they be mad about a date??
Niccolo Machiavelli.
Machiavelli didn't invent the idea of lying or ruthlessness. He made an observation about what worked and tried to get a new gig.
Now his name is synonymous with "heartless manipulator".
Hades
He barely cheated on his wife and was loyal.
He only kidnapped Persephone because Zeus told him to.
He's a good father.
He doesn't cause death, only what happens after.
Also he named his Dog Spot, adorable.
People always act like he's evil and malicious. But in all reality he's a sweet guy.
Marie Antoinette never said “let them eat cake” when she heard that her people couldn’t afford bread.
She was executed out of frustration for how bad things became during the French Revolution and was wrongly misattributed for the ideology of someone in power being out of touch with being poor.
Well, to be fair, she and the rest of the French nobility actually were absurdly out of touch. That said, the French seem to be willing to riot at the drop of a hat, so there's that, too.
Julius Caesar.
His murderers expected the people to rejoice upon being freed from the “tyrant.”
Instead the people wept and rioted, they loved Caesar because (unlike most of the senators) he truly cared for the people and sometimes would spend all night writing up laws, he is the reason the grain bill worked to feed to neediest. He grew up with the common man and it’s often forgotten how much he did for them, there is a reason the people loved him more than the senate.
Was he perfect? No. Did he try and gain power? Yes. But Is an dictatorship worse than an oligarchy? It’s clear that Rome was in much better hands with Caesar than the Senate.
Anyone that is familiar with the movie 300 is aware of how it sanitises the Spartans and how it demonises the First Persian Empire.
The reality is that the First Persian Empire or the Achaemenid Empire was pretty forward thinking for the era; this is the empire that freed the Jews from the Babylonians and gave the world the Cyrus Cylinder which some regard as the first bill of rights.
As for Sparta? It was a militaristic society based on Social Darwinism (centuries before the birth of Charles Darwin) and it had a greater percentage of slaves than Persia ever did.
Edit: I am not suggesting that the First Persian Empire was perfect, I am just pointing out the historically inaccurate and racist portrayal of Persia in the movie 300.
Well I think that with the giant beheading monster in the film they weren't aiming for historical accuracy.
Malcolm X. History basically taught me he was the gunslinging MLK Jnr. counterpart, but really, they agreed on a ton of s**t and worked together a lot. In fact, Malcolm did a whole lot more outside of just civil rights, and arguably did more than MLK. MLK is remembered more because he was more outspoken (and the speech has kinda been overstated)
The sad fact is that MLK is held in such high regard because those in power felt less threatened by him. Simply put, he's more palatable for white folks.
A lot of the women of history who have been treated as sluts/liars/manipulative/[criminals] etc. Example being Erzabet Bathory - a woman with money and power and her uncle wanted it so she gets locked in a room and goes down in history for bathing in the blood of virgins. Not saying she was a good person necessarily, just that the idea that she[unalived] hundreds of local young women so she could bathe in their blood is bollocks. And there are many more women who gets treated the same.
Really, many of those who lost and whose story gets written by those that won
There's an excellent book series by Vicki León called "Uppity Women."
Vlad the Impaler. He was fighting the invading Turks, and resorted to scare tactics. It worked.
It was the 1400s. people got away with savagery left and right back then. I don't think Vlad was doing anything worse than, say the Ottomans, who have a long, proud tradition of torture.
In the film Titanic the character Murdoch [unalived] someone, took bribes and generally came across as a right s**t. He was a real life person who was actually a hero and saved many lives. His living relatives were so disgusted that the VP of Fox travelled to Dalbeattie to personally apologise and presented a £5000 donation to Dalbeattie High School to boost the school's William Murdoch Memorial Prize.
Honestly, I'd say King John of England. Many of the troubles during his reign were directly caused by his brother Richard I preferring to gallivant around Europe and the Middle East.
10,000 upvotes. John ended up paying for Richard's sins/crimes/stupidities/etc. He was very interested in law, in fact, and was known to be very lenient when hearing appeals from commoners, IIRC. He also provided for his out-of-wedlock offspring in an era when most didn't bother to admit they had 'em. And his family dynamic was so f*cked up it's amazing he survived to adulthood, really.
In brave heart, William Wallace gets betrayed by Robert the Bruce which never happened, he was loyal to the end
Braveheart is 99% fiction. William Wallace was not a commoner, he was an adult when his father died, he never even met Isabella of France much less got her pregnant, his wife (if she existed as that's also in doubt) was called Marion not Murran, he didn't have an Uncle Argyle, kilts weren't worn for about another 300 years after the events of the film. I could go on and on. 😆
Not a guy but rather an organisation.
The IRA are practically the sole reason that Ireland is an independent country today, yet their legacy has forever been tainted by an offshoot organisation (the Provisional IRA) to the point that most people outside of Ireland simply view their entire history as terrorists and criminals.
I mean, *technically*, that's exactly what they were. It's just that they won (mostly). The Sons of Liberty were terrorists in colonial America, but when the Continental Army won, they became founding fathers.
All of the Black Panthers.
Any American should see it as reasonable to start a militia in order to protect your family, friends, and community from a corrupt and [criminal] state. [Taking out] cops was justice.
Ironically, the Black Panthers are the reason California has such strict gun control laws. They began openly carrying their weapons -- the same kind of "show of force" that police departments put on to intimidate the public into good behavior -- and the state legislators freaked the f**k out and started passing restrictions on gun ownership.
**Herbert Hoover.** He was a lifelong humanitarian and had a reputation as an excellent administrator, which led him to win the Presidency of the U.S in 1928.
- But less than eight months after he took office, the world was rocked by one of the worst economic depressions in history.
- It was also during Hoover’s Presidency that mass media like radio and newsreels started spreading wildly, and Hoover was a breathtakingly awful speaker with poor public relations skills.
So Hoover got trounced in the next election by FDR’s abundant optimism and wide toothy grin, and was forever tarred in history as being the uncaring standoffish bureaucrat who ignored all the hardships of the Great Depression from his White House perch.
It didn't help that Mafia culture was so strong and that he was prolonging prohibition, if I remember correctly.
Richard III. Demonised by the Tudors, in part due to his curved spine (now confirmed) and their political agendas. He might have been a good King or a bad King/person but it is difficult to determine as the records that followed his death are so incredibly bias.
Caligula.
A lot of the stories of him being mad were just posthumous propaganda by his political opponents. Considering the horrific abuse by Tiberius he suffered as a child, Caligula was remarkable well balanced.
Environmental factors at the time are known for causing madness. Making his horse a general is funny.
Napoleon, there wasn't really a ''bad'' or a ''good'' side in the Napoleonic wars
Carol Baskin. They found her husband alive . People still think she fed her husband to tigers.
The sheriff's department has stated, as of january 2023, that there is absolutely zero proof that her husband is alive. She stated he was, but what else would she say? Oh, "my husband is dead, I killed him."?
My standards usually limits my reading to 1-3 out every 10 articles on BP (I'm not into Cringe or AITA); and, of those articles I do view, I never make it past the first 10 or so Posts therein... However, with this article I found myself reading all the Posts, AND a good majority of (often correcting / informed) Reader Comments! Thank You All - Such Fun!! 🙂
Agreed, it’s getting tough to find positive or happy BP thread nowadays, so much anger. Agreed, good post 🙂
Load More Replies...
Yes and no on that one. She did have her mom killed. But, that certainly wouldn't have happened if the mom didn't brainwash and abuse her the way she did (not to mention the cons she got away with because of the munchousein by proxy (sp?).
Load More Replies...
I would add Kathleen Folbigg. She was convicted of killing four of her children over a decade, but now medical evidence is getting conviction overturned. Two of the children have been shown to have a gene that would cause ear;y death and the others are likely to have the same gene.
Richard iii should be on here for sure- he was a man who favoured the common man over his on retainers, he cared about justice, education, the printing press and the church. He didn’t execute George, he didn’t usurper the throne, he wasn’t a tyrant or a monster. And there’s no evidence to say he killed the princes and there’s more to say they survived. He was a good man and a social reformist in the late 15th century, he’s just seen as a monster because Henry vii had to legitimise his flimsy claim to the throne
Ulysses S Grant. He wasn't a bloody butcher and corrupt president. As a general his campaigns DID produce more casualties than the american public was used to seeing but, HE FOUGHT. Especially in the overland campaign, both he and lincoln understood that the army of northern Virginia needed to be pushed to its breaking point. As a president he supported eaqual rights and passed the KKK act which let the federal goverment prosecute the KKK and other terrorist organizations. Yet who do we remember as the greatest general of the War of the Rebellion? Lee.
The more you read of these the stupider they get with someone justifying vlad the impaler and godamn napoleon
I’m not sure questioning blind, rampant demonizing is actually the same thing as “justifying”, though. It’s ok to have a nuanced understanding of things.
Load More Replies...
My standards usually limits my reading to 1-3 out every 10 articles on BP (I'm not into Cringe or AITA); and, of those articles I do view, I never make it past the first 10 or so Posts therein... However, with this article I found myself reading all the Posts, AND a good majority of (often correcting / informed) Reader Comments! Thank You All - Such Fun!! 🙂
Agreed, it’s getting tough to find positive or happy BP thread nowadays, so much anger. Agreed, good post 🙂
Load More Replies... Yes and no on that one. She did have her mom killed. But, that certainly wouldn't have happened if the mom didn't brainwash and abuse her the way she did (not to mention the cons she got away with because of the munchousein by proxy (sp?).
Load More Replies... I would add Kathleen Folbigg. She was convicted of killing four of her children over a decade, but now medical evidence is getting conviction overturned. Two of the children have been shown to have a gene that would cause ear;y death and the others are likely to have the same gene.
Richard iii should be on here for sure- he was a man who favoured the common man over his on retainers, he cared about justice, education, the printing press and the church. He didn’t execute George, he didn’t usurper the throne, he wasn’t a tyrant or a monster. And there’s no evidence to say he killed the princes and there’s more to say they survived. He was a good man and a social reformist in the late 15th century, he’s just seen as a monster because Henry vii had to legitimise his flimsy claim to the throne
Ulysses S Grant. He wasn't a bloody butcher and corrupt president. As a general his campaigns DID produce more casualties than the american public was used to seeing but, HE FOUGHT. Especially in the overland campaign, both he and lincoln understood that the army of northern Virginia needed to be pushed to its breaking point. As a president he supported eaqual rights and passed the KKK act which let the federal goverment prosecute the KKK and other terrorist organizations. Yet who do we remember as the greatest general of the War of the Rebellion? Lee.
The more you read of these the stupider they get with someone justifying vlad the impaler and godamn napoleon
I’m not sure questioning blind, rampant demonizing is actually the same thing as “justifying”, though. It’s ok to have a nuanced understanding of things.
Load More Replies... 