[QUOTE=Killerbee911;5513725]Since the campfire stories are deifying and villainizing certain things which will lead to certain attitude . It is on you whether or not you want to think it is insidious in nature, Military, Churches, Political Parties and even schools indoctrinate their members.[/QUOTE]
She reduced the Mutant population by 98%.....I don't think it's called vilifying when a people speak the truth about perpetrators of Genocide
[QUOTE=BroHomo;5513753]She reduced the Mutant population by 98%.....I don't think it's called vilifying when a people speak the truth about perpetrators of Genocide[/QUOTE]
Like Killerbee mentioned he’s not just vilifying Wanda he’s also spent time deifying Magneto. He’s teaching these very young children to accept his world views without any sort of critical lens, which is pretty problematic coming from a centuries old man with a history of extremism.
[QUOTE=Kingdom X;5513305]Magneto may not be treated as an antagonist but Mystique, Exodus, Shaw, and Sinister definitely still are. Some of their schemes are more behind the scenes but I like the tensions that’s building.[/QUOTE]
I don't know, their actions should be acknowledged as antagonistic, right? Behind the scenes isn't quite the same, especially if the characters still treat them all as allies.
[QUOTE=Rang10;5513384]That is true. Someone should really check if the idea is good or just destruction for the sake of it.It's hard to dedicate to comics when in one storyline everything is undone
i don't get the idea that they are antagonist. they are part of the government[/QUOTE]
Yeah, there should be more care involved with such drastic turns.
[QUOTE=Kingdom X;5513578]Antagonist: a person who actively opposes or is hostile to someone or something; an adversary.
Mystique is clearly planning to take her revenge and revive Destiny. Shaw murdered Kate and is a direct adversary for the protagonists in Marauders. Exodus is indoctrinating children every time we see him and he attacked Cypher during XoS. Sinister has already betrayed the Hellions and likely plans on betraying Krakoa as a whole. Just because they're part of the government doesn't mean that they're not adversaries against our heroes.[/QUOTE]
Oops, didn't see this earlier. This sounds good, but what's the pacing and how are the actions framed in story? That's more a rhetorical question, I'm not reading anything other than X-Men so I can't judge this in greater detail. Hopefully these all have proper follow-through.
[QUOTE=Killerbee911;5513598]Yup this type of answer I expected to get , So 10 years all those big names and you can't throw stories in my face and go look you are wrong. Why? because does big names have not done actually do anything for the story for years at times mentioning them is false premise. The last good Magneto story was Cullen Bunn series, The last good Mr. Sinister was Kieron Gillen story, The good Legion story was Si Spurrier, The last good Apocalypse story was AoA, Mystique and Exodus frankly are overrated from terms of quality story.
Saying we have from these amazing villains to well nothing is falsehood because the good villains are used so much in bad stories they have loss their kick. I didn't say the characters I mention are great villains I said they are off to good start but they will never match the past villains when Magneto, Apocalypse and others are always sitting in front of them always being used in the big but bad stories. From 2008 to 2019 think of new impactful X-men villain made, Genesis and original Horsemen are already more impactful than ANY villain made during that period(I would say the same about Orchis as well). The intended thing is happening with franchise with big X-villains sitting in grey area now, Orchis has chance to be use in big impact story ,Arakko has chance to be used in big impact story. Saturne was elevated into heavy hitter. The Children of the Vault is being elevated into a heavy hitters. But hey you guys want more Blood of the Apocalypse, Mojo Worldwide, X-men Blue Mothervine stuff with Magneto and Emma acting unexplainable different I guess.[/QUOTE]
Would you like to relax? This isn't a fight, no one is gonna win here.
[I]You[/I] wanted a list of stories, don't get an attitude because my point doesn't meet your expectations. Argue the point or don't. We agree there's been a decade of terrible stories, so that means the protagonists have also suffered. You said they were good villains but most are recently introduced and haven't been used extensively.
Ultimately this is all beside the point, and not what I was arguing originally so don't presume to tell me what I think or want just because I have an opinion you don't like.
[QUOTE=Killerbee911;5513598]Yup..Shaw, Apocalypse and Mr Sinister have been running shenanigans from day 1. Mystique is about to be doing the same. Exodus and Magneto have been indoctrinating children with a philosophy that is not what classic X-men are about. Selene and Emplate feed on mutants it is only a matter of time they do something . Amahl Farouk is running around supposedly helping. You can be on the same side but have different goals and different methods of achieving those goals which leads to conflict. The villains where put on krakoa to implode the situation.[/QUOTE]
Do you understand that if these characters return to form and succeed in destroying Krakoa from the inside the protagonists will look like idiots?
[QUOTE=BroHomo;5513753]She reduced the Mutant population by 98%.....I don't think it's called vilifying when a people speak the truth about perpetrators of Genocide[/QUOTE]
Unless those perpetrators are on the Council, then it's fine.
All these secret agendas are going on but we've barely seen hide or hair of them actually advancing in the story the past two years. If it takes the better part of a decade to pay off on all these threads it's not unreasonable to start getting bored.
[QUOTE=BroHomo;5513753]She reduced the Mutant population by 98%.....I don't think it's called vilifying when a people speak the truth about perpetrators of Genocide[/QUOTE]
Genocide is a problematic word to use for what Wanda did. Most of the mutants were still alive albeit changed.
“Forced conversion” is a bit better… except mutants never choose to be mutants to begin with like with a religion, and, with sexual orientation, forced conversion is a torture that doesn’t work.
I think it’s better to say there’s no analogy for Wanda did. She hurt most of the mutants, that’s true, but using the word “genocide” is a cheap use of this word.
[QUOTE=Zelena;5515554]Genocide is a problematic word to use for what Wanda did. Most of the mutants were still alive albeit changed.
“Forced conversion” is a bit better… except mutants never choose to be mutants to begin with like with a religion, and, with sexual orientation, forced conversion is a torture that doesn’t work.
I think it’s better to say there’s no analogy for Wanda did. She hurt most of the mutants, that’s true, but using the word “genocide” is a cheap use of this word.[/QUOTE]
That's the problem when an ethnicity metaphor is based entirely around laws of physics breaking purely fictional random super powers, with the people having these super powers still being (almost) entirely baseline human without them, since it's all related to just a single gene which for some shouldn't even work as they have no DNA anymore.
Because in the past when someone with an altered form was somehow affected by power damping over a longer time, their bodies would revert back to normal human appearance (in case of M-day this seemingly didn't always occur because the X-gene was removed entirely and suddently), meaning that for all the claim of being a full blown different species, their default form was still normal human, contradicting this claim and also showcasing just how fragile their source of power is.
There is no possible real world comparison to how to define it when these people lose their super powers, which are the sole thing by which they consider themself (or used to be by their enemies) a seperated species (not even ethnicity) from humans.
Which again makes no sense when they default to normal human form without their powers, are often born from humans and can still produce baseline human offsprings.
Something which is also logical problematic since with their powers being random, they have little to no cohesion and are better considered a massive number of small scale sub-groups or offshots of humanity if anything.
There are no force fields, spells, rayguns or super powers in real life which will make a person stop being of a certain ethnicity and make them default to appearing as another from it. You can't in one action remove a single gene from all black african people and they will suddently turn into white europeans. But by the mutant metaphor this is exactly what happend with M-Day.
So there is no fitting word for it, since there is no fitting real world comparision or logical to how to define such an act, because it's based around a purely fictional concept that was mainly created to give characters super powers without having to come up with multiple sources.
Once again, this showcases just how problematic it is to put so much direct focus on the mutant metaphor and why the whole "endangered species" narrative around M-Day and it's aftermath was such a load of dreck. Since it put focus on the thing which shouldn't be examined too much, because it breaks the logical comparision to real world situations it's supposed to reflect.
Before House of M mutants were implied to be a permanent thing, something that couldn't be simply removed or get rid of permanently (Days of Future Past downright showed that to get rid of mutants all of humanity would need to die), just like the people referenced by the mutant metaphor in real life, but lo and behold the comics suddently show it is entirely possible in the marvel universe and it's downright easy.
This was such a massive break of the narrative that it harms the applicability of the metaphor to a massive degree.
[QUOTE=Hizashi;5515238]Would you like to relax? This isn't a fight, no one is gonna win here.
[I]You[/I] wanted a list of stories, don't get an attitude because my point doesn't meet your expectations. Argue the point or don't. We agree there's been a decade of terrible stories, so that means the protagonists have also suffered. You said they were good villains but most are recently introduced and haven't been used extensively.
Ultimately this is all beside the point, and not what I was arguing originally so don't presume to tell me what I think or want just because I have an opinion you don't like.
[/QUOTE]
Relax? We are talking on the internet, If you are picking up some sort an attitude from what I typed that your assumption of what is happening, not me giving an attitude. Your point was X-men have all these big-time villains and look this era doesn't have anything comparable. My point was the X-men have all of these big-time villains and they have not produce amazing stories. AND the overuse of them has weakened the villain's mystique and prevent new big-time villains from popping up.
My point was to show that call out all those big names means nothing because have them around as pure villains didn't guarantee good stories. A ten-year period where hardcore fans can't call out a great story backs up my point. It ain't about winning or losing but I effectively prove my point. The point was Apocalypse was giving you stories at the level of HordeCulture.
We can see what the Hickman era is doing it removed old villains from being the direct antagonist and force every writer away from using them cheesy stories while making the X-line have to create new enemies. I am going to point out again the Casandra Nova is the only enemy in years to break through into the Classic mix of villains. If Genesis or Dr. Gregor maybe someone from Arrako breaks into the mix of classic villains the run has been successful. At worse the run has already elevated Saturne or Children of the Vault into threats to the X-men that fans take seriously.
[QUOTE=Zelena;5515554]Genocide is a problematic word to use for what Wanda did. Most of the mutants were still alive albeit changed.[/QUOTE]
Genocide also refers to remove culture and traits from existence. If there was something to remove pigmentation from Skin it would be genocide if you force people to take it you are literally trying to remove a race of people. Going well they didn't die hey is not genocide means you don't fully understand genocide. If America decides to invade Sweden and removes all trace of their culture and force them to intermingle what do you think is happening? Death isn't the only way to wipe out a group. Anyways a definition of Genocide
[QUOTE]The United Nations Genocide Convention, which was established in 1948, defines genocide as "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a [B]national[/B], ethnic, racial or [B]religious[/B] group, as such" including the killing of its members, causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group, deliberately imposing living conditions that seek to "bring about its physical destruction in whole or[B] in part", preventing births, or forcibly transferring children out of the group to another group[/B][/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=BroHomo;5513753]She reduced the Mutant population by 98%.....I don't think it's called vilifying when a people speak the truth about perpetrators of Genocide[/QUOTE]
Wanda stans are like Monica at the end of WandaVision when she's all like "I guess I'd probably have tortured a town full of people because I was a bit sad too! We're cool!".
Wait, is this thread the Wanda Thread too now?
[QUOTE=Killerbee911;5515620]Relax? We are talking on the internet, If you are picking up some sort an attitude from what I typed that your assumption of what is happening, not me giving an attitude. Your point was X-men have all these big-time villains and look this era doesn't have anything comparable. My point was the X-men have all of these big-time villains and they have not produce amazing stories. AND the overuse of them has weakened the villain's mystique and prevent new big-time villains from popping up.
My point was to show that call out all those big names means nothing because have them around as pure villains didn't guarantee good stories. A ten-year period where hardcore fans can't call out a great story backs up my point. It ain't about winning or losing but I effectively prove my point. The point was Apocalypse was giving you stories at the level of HordeCulture.
We can see what the Hickman era is doing it removed old villains from being the direct antagonist and force every writer away from using them cheesy stories while making the X-line have to create new enemies. I am going to point out again the Casandra Nova is the only enemy in years to break through into the Classic mix of villains. If Genesis or Dr. Gregor maybe someone from Arrako breaks into the mix of classic villains the run has been successful. At worse the run has already elevated Saturne or Children of the Vault into threats to the X-men that fans take seriously.
Genocide also refers to remove culture and traits from existence. If there was something to remove pigmentation from Skin it would be genocide if you force people to take it you are literally trying to remove a race of people. Going well they didn't die hey is not genocide means you don't fully understand genocide. If America decides to invade Sweden and removes all trace of their culture and force them to intermingle what do you think is happening? Death isn't the only way to wipe out a group. Anyways a definition of Genocide[/QUOTE]
The targeted group can defined by a different ethicity, race, religion but genocide is about a physical destruction of this group.
For the disappearance of the culture, I rather call that “forced assimilation”. But then before Hickman, did the mutants have any common culture?
Analogy is difficult. There was loss and hurt, that was true.
[QUOTE=Zelena;5515703]
For the disappearance of the culture, I rather call that “forced assimilation”. But then before Hickman, did the mutants have any common culture?
Analogy is difficult. There was loss and hurt, that was true.[/QUOTE]
Forced assimilation is genocide.
As for the culture thing,They did in Genosha but that was destroyed, They did in District X but that was destroyed. It is kinda hard to have a sustained common culture when every there is a large group of you they try to kill you. When you are thriving they want to destroy you for some of us this hit home. ala Tusla and Rosewood.
[QUOTE=Hizashi;5513206]Krakoa was [I]invited[/I] to join the UN? I haven't read or reread HoX/PoX in a long while, I guess I forgot that. I genuinely thought that the drugs were being used as leverage on the world stage.
[/QUOTE]
I'll have to re-read but Charles made a bid for Krakoa to be recognized as an independent country. I'm not sure how that process works in real life tho.
Some UN ambassadors visit one of the Krakoan embassies which was the #1 issue (either Houses or Powers) where we first see Magneto in his white costume.
[QUOTE=Killerbee911;5515727]Forced assimilation is genocide.
[/QUOTE]
I think you're right there. Below is the definition of genocide from the UN convention, and even though it sounds like it's about killing it isn't necessarily the case with genocide because it's about stopping a group from existing. So I completely agree with you here.
The United Nations Genocide Convention, which was established in 1948, defines genocide as "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such" including the killing of its members, causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group, deliberately imposing living conditions that seek to "bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part", preventing births, or forcibly transferring children out of the group to another group. Victims have to be deliberately, not randomly, targeted because of their real or perceived membership of one of the four groups outlined in the above definition.
[QUOTE=Big Joe;5516132]I think you're right there. Below is the definition of genocide from the UN convention, and even though it sounds like it's about killing it isn't necessarily the case with genocide because it's about stopping a group from existing. So I completely agree with you here.
The United Nations Genocide Convention, which was established in 1948, defines genocide as "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such" including the killing of its members, causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group, deliberately imposing living conditions that seek to "bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part", preventing births, or forcibly transferring children out of the group to another group. Victims have to be deliberately, not randomly, targeted because of their real or perceived membership of one of the four groups outlined in the above definition.[/QUOTE]
Whatever acception you give to the word, what Wanda did is not the usual meaning of the word. Without reaching agreement on the meaning of words, there’s no point using it to communicate… or only in a restricted group.
[QUOTE=Zelena;5516464]Whatever acception you give to the word, what Wanda did is not the usual meaning of the word. Without reaching agreement on the meaning of words, there’s no point using it to communicate… or only in a restricted group.[/QUOTE]
Fascinating.
The UN Genocide Convention definition of genocide is wrong. Okay, well I guess I learned something today.
[QUOTE=Big Joe;5516132]I think you're right there. Below is the definition of genocide from the UN convention, and even though it sounds like it's about killing it isn't necessarily the case with genocide because it's about stopping a group from existing. So I completely agree with you here.
The United Nations Genocide Convention, which was established in 1948, defines genocide as "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such" including the killing of its members, causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group, deliberately imposing living conditions that seek to "bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part", preventing births, or forcibly transferring children out of the group to another group. Victims have to be deliberately, not randomly, targeted because of their real or perceived membership of one of the four groups outlined in the above definition.[/QUOTE]
Even if you use that definition, it still isn't genocide since there was no intent to destroy; Wanda used her powers while she brainwashed and/or under mental duress.
[QUOTE=Triniking1234;5516617]Even if you use that definition, it still isn't genocide since there was no intent to destroy; Wanda used her powers while she brainwashed and/or under mental duress.[/QUOTE]
I guess that's a point that can be discussed, and it could easily be argued either way, but is entirely different to what I said. I'm only pointing out that genocide doesn't necessarily mean killing everyone, or the majority, in a group.
[QUOTE=Big Joe;5516612]Fascinating.
The UN Genocide Convention definition of genocide is wrong. Okay, well I guess I learned something today.[/QUOTE]
[Quote]
Killing members of the group
Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group
Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part
Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group
Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group[/quote]
Yup its fairly clear in the examples. M day was mass mutilation.
[QUOTE=Triniking1234;5516617]Even if you use that definition, it still isn't genocide since there was no intent to destroy; Wanda used her powers while she brainwashed and/or under mental duress.[/QUOTE]
And whether they would even qualify as a national, ethnic, racial or religious group is debatable.
[QUOTE=Alan2099;5516649]And whether they would even qualify as a national, ethnic, racial or religious group is debatable.[/QUOTE]
I agree, however I'd assume if mutants existed genetic group might have been added to the list.
I have no law training and absolutely no expertise in what might be worthy of any sort of international legal hearing, but I would hope, if I was a mutant, I'd be able to find a lawyer to advocate for me under the circumstances.
[QUOTE=Big Joe;5516692]I agree, however I'd assume if mutants existed genetic group might have been added to the list.
I have no law training and absolutely no expertise in what might be worthy of any sort of international legal hearing, but I would hope, if I was a mutant, I'd be able to find a lawyer to advocate for me under the circumstances.[/QUOTE]
Assuming of course you were one of those "Oh no! I lost the ability to fly!" mutants and not one of those "Terrific! I no longer have scales and don't sweat swamp gas anymore!" mutants
[QUOTE=Alan2099;5516719]Assuming of course you were one of those "Oh no! I lost the ability to fly!" mutants and not one of those "Terrific! I no longer have scales and don't sweat swamp gas anymore!" mutants[/QUOTE]
This is a valid point. I'm sure the mutants that could fly, read minds and teleport along with other useful abilities and more importantly pass as ordinary humans would love to put Wanda on trial and exact their pound of flesh. But what about those mutants (presumably the majority) with non-usefull abilities and cannot at all pass as ordinary human? The ones who have two heads or four nostrils or has the power to talk to cockroaches, are they clamoring for Wanda's head or are they thankful that they can live a normal life. Are they race/gene traitors if they don't want to become mutants again or should they be forced to accept their "gifts" because it's who they truly are and have no say in the matter? It's like in some stories where a mutant with a hindrance ability or appearance is shamed, attacked or called out for wanting a "cure" for their circumstance, but the one doing the shaming and calling out is a mutant who hit the genetic lottery in terms of appearance and abilities. It's pure classism and elitism amongst mutantkind. The powerful good looking ones deciding they know what is best for all. The notion that all mutants want vengeance against Wanda and desperately wanted to get their powers back rings as false. Maybe the one who could fly but not the one who could manipulate earwax.
[QUOTE=Killerbee911;5515620]Relax? We are talking on the internet, If you are picking up some sort an attitude from what I typed that your assumption of what is happening, not me giving an attitude. Your point was X-men have all these big-time villains and look this era doesn't have anything comparable. My point was the X-men have all of these big-time villains and they have not produce amazing stories. AND the overuse of them has weakened the villain's mystique and prevent new big-time villains from popping up.
My point was to show that call out all those big names means nothing because have them around as pure villains didn't guarantee good stories. A ten-year period where hardcore fans can't call out a great story backs up my point. It ain't about winning or losing but I effectively prove my point. The point was Apocalypse was giving you stories at the level of HordeCulture.
We can see what the Hickman era is doing it removed old villains from being the direct antagonist and force every writer away from using them cheesy stories while making the X-line have to create new enemies. I am going to point out again the Casandra Nova is the only enemy in years to break through into the Classic mix of villains. If Genesis or Dr. Gregor maybe someone from Arrako breaks into the mix of classic villains the run has been successful. At worse the run has already elevated Saturne or Children of the Vault into threats to the X-men that fans take seriously.[/QUOTE]
This was part of your comments:
[QUOTE=Killerbee911;5513598][B]Yup this type of answer I expected to get, So 10 years all those big names and you can't throw stories in my face and go look you are wrong[/B]...[B]But hey you guys want more Blood of the Apocalypse, Mojo Worldwide, X-men Blue Mothervine stuff with Magneto and Emma acting unexplainable different I guess.[/B][/QUOTE]
We're really gonna pretend there's nothing confrontational here? You're saying "gotcha", you're ascribing things to me that I didn't say. Let's have a conversation and take care with our words, yeah?
Those big names matter because they represent the pinnacle of antagonists and there's no excuse for so little to have been done on that front in the current era. I'm not expecting instant breakouts but we're getting nothing and the X-Office has had plenty of time; instead we get XoS and HG. A great villain is a component to a good story, but they can't make a good story all on their own - however, a quality antagonist can help narrative momentum and enhance the protagonist, that's just basic storytelling.
Conceptually there's no contest over which is superior between Apocalypse and HordeCulture, that's the issue of caliber. Not all of these character concepts are home runs, and even the ones that arguably are (like CotV) have barely been used and haven't tested the X-Men yet. For that matter, which concepts are 100% Hickman's and which are being brought out of storage?
We've had nearly two years of this current era across a dozen books or so and the pacing isn't helping the prestige of these antagonists.
[QUOTE=Triniking1234;5515816]I'll have to re-read but Charles made a bid for Krakoa to be recognized as an independent country. I'm not sure how that process works in real life tho.
Some UN ambassadors visit one of the Krakoan embassies which was the #1 issue (either Houses or Powers) where we first see Magneto in his white costume.[/QUOTE]
Thanks. That interaction couldn't have helped tensions...
[QUOTE=The tall man;5516898]This is a valid point. I'm sure the mutants that could fly, read minds and teleport along with other useful abilities and more importantly pass as ordinary humans would love to put Wanda on trial and exact their pound of flesh. But what about those mutants (presumably the majority) with non-usefull abilities and cannot at all pass as ordinary human? The ones who have two heads or four nostrils or has the power to talk to cockroaches, are they clamoring for Wanda's head or are they thankful that they can live a normal life. Are they race/gene traitors if they don't want to become mutants again or should they be forced to accept their "gifts" because it's who they truly are and have no say in the matter? It's like in some stories where a mutant with a hindrance ability or appearance is shamed, attacked or called out for wanting a "cure" for their circumstance, but the one doing the shaming and calling out is a mutant who hit the genetic lottery in terms of appearance and abilities. It's pure classism and elitism amongst mutantkind. The powerful good looking ones deciding they know what is best for all. The notion that all mutants want vengeance against Wanda and desperately wanted to get their powers back rings as false. Maybe the one who could fly but not the one who could manipulate earwax.[/QUOTE]
And this once again points out the folly of trying to force the mutant metaphor into a simple minority paradigm.
Magneto has not been a real antagonist for the X-men since Eve of destruction,HoM was made for the Avengers and X-men to think he was behind it until they discovered he didn´t do it so for all his years being a supporting character for either the X-men or the Avengers the last years I think this puts him firmly out of the antagonist side and it´s not a bad thing, because even in the movies or Cartoons he often took this side when a bigger menace showed itself so I would not say this is particular to Hickman´s X-men era at all.
Now about Mystique, Apocalypse and Sinister, I believe only Sinister has been painted as a real possible antagonist for the Krakoa era given his part on future events but hellions is making an argument about him being a little more complex than that while Mystique has personal reasons to support Krakoa and also personal reasons to want to attack it, while Apocalypse has been given reasons behind his behavoir around the years which is kind of strange but it´s the first time he has been shown any kind of development since the Age of Apocalypse.
I think the X-writers see this era as a way to create new antagonists with highter power level to deal with the kind of Strengt Krakoa has amassed which makes sense if this is a status quo that will stay for a while.
But I think soon there will be made a difference between what´s an antagonist to Krakoa the nation and an antagonist to the X-men as a super hero group. Appart from Nimrod and the Children of the Vault I don´t think Hordeculture or the Hellfire Children are supposed to be "the" antagonists for the next phase in the story, they are more like reactions to the change in the status quo.
On Krakoa,Utopia and Genosha and the UN: Only Krakoa and Genosha were recognized nations who also were part of the UN, Genosha had a human ambassador called Alda Huxley, who was also in charge of making Magneto their leader because she saw it as a way out of the civil war Genosha had at the moment.
Krakoa was recognized by the majority of the nations in the world, I think even Latveria but not everyone wanted to have a commercial treaty with them. The tension during the first encounter between the ambassadors and Magneto was because one of them was send to kill off Xavier before krakoa could have it´s vote to be part of the UN hence the confrontation with the US ambassador, the others had a mixed reaction, some supported Krakoa and other didn´t but had not plans to attack Xavier either.
I think the Gala will introduce some shake ups to the story now that Krakoa has been mostly explored as a nation so we possibly will see new or old faces as antagonists.The X-men will now become a similar team to the Avengers, they are now a force of protection to both mutants and humans but will be more well known in the world stage, Krakoa will possibly be a little more open to the world but also will extend itself into space.
[QUOTE=Kingdom X;5513832]Like Killerbee mentioned he’s not just vilifying Wanda he’s also spent time deifying Magneto. He’s teaching these very young children to accept his world views without any sort of critical lens, which is pretty problematic coming from a centuries old man with a history of extremism.[/QUOTE]
Indoctrinating has such Sinister connotations Read the issue again. Exodus can be grandiose...no doubt.. but what he tells the kids is no more indoctrinating than someone telling a story involving Red Skull and the heroics of Csp America
[QUOTE=gonnagiveittoya;5515333]
Unless those perpetrators are on the Council, then it's fine.[/QUOTE] such as?
[QUOTE=gonnagiveittoya;5515333]If it takes the better part of a decade to pay off on all these threads it's not unreasonable to start getting bored.[/QUOTE]
Why would someone continue on with something they find boring??
[QUOTE=Zelena;5515554]
Genocide is a problematic word to use for what Wanda did. Most of the mutants were still alive albeit changed.[/QUOTE]
Issue # you got this "fact" from? Whole other timelines stopped having Mutants
[QUOTE=Zelena;5515554]I think it’s better to say there’s no analogy for Wanda did. She hurt most of the mutants, that’s true, but using the word “genocide” is a cheap use of this word.[/QUOTE]I mean it is what it is
Cracks me up when I see people post something of this vein while in the same post they bring up the Pretenders 'mental illness' her 'abuse' at the hands of Magneto or the 'misogyny' of the writers
[QUOTE=Grunty;5515582]
Before House of M mutants were implied to be a permanent thing, something that couldn't be simply removed or get rid of permanently (Days of Future Past downright showed that to get rid of mutants all of humanity would need to die), just like the people referenced by the mutant metaphor in real life, but lo and behold the comics suddently show it is entirely possible in the marvel universe and it's downright easy.
.[/QUOTE]
Uh pretty sure Trask 'rid' his son of his powers for most of the kids life and that was before DOFp. But it's not like DOFP was the 616 anyway so rules were obviously different. 3 years after he wrote DOFP Claremont wrote the story Forges neutralizer gun stripped Storm of her powers
[QUOTE=Killerbee911;5515727]Forced assimilation is genocide.
As for the culture thing,They did in Genosha but that was destroyed, They did in District X but that was destroyed. It is kinda hard to have a sustained common culture when every there is a large group of you they try to kill you. When you are thriving they want to destroy you for some of us this hit home. ala Tusla and Rosewood.[/QUOTE]
Riiight Like I wonder if a lotta people just are not aware of their 'tone' of their wordse. But then I think...they probably do....then I get sad
[QUOTE=Hizashi;5516968]We're really gonna pretend there's nothing confrontational here? You're saying "gotcha", you're ascribing things to me that I didn't say. .[/QUOTE]
Yes, that wasn't confrontational(or it wasn't meant to be confrontational beyond the point of a normal discussion), and as an added bonus not everything in a post is aimed at an individual even though an individual tagged. Honestly, you were reading negative intent where none was intended but since I didn't mean that to happen I apologize for being confrontational or implying that you were saying something that you weren't in the post. I come on forums to have honest exchanges even with people who don't agree with my pov, We can disagree on things for the most part I am not trying to be a-hole.
[QUOTE=BroHomo;5517040]
Riiight Like I wonder if a lotta people just are not aware of their 'tone' of their wordse. But then I think...they probably do....then I get sad[/QUOTE]
Like with above some times we don't do best with words. Genocide is simply trying to wipe out a group of people on purpose, Obviously killing them is the simplest method. But "forced assimilation" is trying to wipe a group of people it is taking a group of people in your ranks to make them disappear hence wiping them out.
Another way of describing what happened is that Wanda forced sterilized the mutant population so that they couldn't create any more "mutants". The real-life application of something like that would be someone unleashed a virus that made minorities unable to produce pigment/melanin in their skin. Just like Wanda "hey didn't kill them " they just got rid of their ability to be their intended skin color and that shouldn't be seen as a bad thing because the entire world would be the same. The black people and other poc who are oppressed should be happy to be made white because then they wouldn't be hated anymore. We just forced them to physically assimilate and over time they will culturally assimilate and exist no more. [I]If a group of people who existed don't exist anymore from something someone did on purpose what is that called[/I]?
Mutant's powers good or bad are part of them. People should have seen how some people in the deaf community react to scientists talking about being able to remove certain genetic traits. I taught that people would be happy with the news but some people in that community don't see being deaf as a defect. They saw it as destroying deaf culture. The point is shouldn't just assume mucus boy and long neck are unhappy with what they are even if it seems bad to you.
More and More I want X-men to be less metaphor because at times it lets people escape from facing some of the ugly stuff. Too often people hide behind the danger of powers to escape the ugliness of mistreatment that is happening.
[QUOTE=Triniking1234;5516617]Even if you use that definition, it still isn't genocide since there was no intent to destroy; Wanda used her powers while she brainwashed and/or under mental duress.[/QUOTE]Ehhh not committing Genocide due to a technicality still wouldn't make sleep easier at nights
Also saying No More of something right beforeir becomes no more seeeems pretty cut and dry
Wouldn't ANYONE willing to go through with Genocide be seen as mentally unsound or 'under duress'
[QUOTE=Alan2099;5516649]And whether they would even qualify as a national, ethnic, racial or religious group is debatable.[/QUOTE]
How would they not? How would it be any different than Latin America the definition of what constitutes 'Latinx'
[QUOTE=The tall man;5516898]
This is a valid point. I'm sure the mutants that could fly, read minds and teleport along with other useful abilities and more importantly pass as ordinary humans would love to put Wanda on trial and exact their pound of flesh. But what about those mutants (presumably the majority) with non-usefull abilities and cannot at all pass as ordinary human? The ones who have two heads or four nostrils or has the power to talk to cockroaches, are they clamoring for Wanda's head or are they thankful that they can live a normal life. Are they race/gene traitors if they don't want to become mutants again or should they be forced to accept their "gifts" because it's who they truly are and have no say in the matter? [/QUOTE]
What kinda disturbed individual be thankful for Genocide? Theyd only be traitors if they try to 'pass' and live life as normal humans
[QUOTE=The tall man;5516898]
[B]It's like in some stories where a mutant with a ability or appearance is shamed, attacked or called out for wanting a "cure" for their circumstance, but the one doing the shaming and calling out is a mutant who hit the genetic lottery in terms of appearance and abilities[/B]. It's pure classism and elitism amongst mutantkind. The powerful good looking ones deciding they know what is best for all. The notion that all mutants want vengeance against Wanda and desperately wanted to get their powers back rings as false. Maybe the one who could fly but not the one who could manipulate earwax.[/QUOTE]
[B]This has literally never been an X-storyline lol quite the opposite[/B]
[img]https://i.imgur.com/2RLnNzh.jpg[/img]
Jeez do yall even read the cOmics or just watch movies/Tv and get on wikipedia?
there have been slaves who didn't mind it as much as most but these would exceptions to the rule
[QUOTE=Hizashi;5516976]And this once again points out the folly of trying to force the mutant metaphor into a simple minority paradigm.[/QUOTE]You keep saying that but You dont know any minority that'd rather not bd one?
Any at all
[QUOTE=Killerbee911;5517082]
[SIZE=4][B][COLOR="#FFA07A"][COLOR="#FFA07A"][COLOR="#FFA07A"][COLOR="#FF0000"]Another way of describing what happened is that Wanda forced sterilized the mutant population so that they couldn't create any more "mutants". The real-life application of something like that would be someone unleashed a virus that made minorities unable to produce pigment/melanin in their skin. Just like Wanda "hey didn't kill them " they just got rid of their ability to be their intended skin color and that shouldn't be seen as a bad thing because the entire world would be the same. The black people and other poc who are oppressed should be happy to be made white because then they wouldn't be hated anymore. We just forced them to physically assimilate and over time they will culturally assimilate and exist no more. [I]If a group of people who existed don't exist anymore from something someone did on purpose what is that called[/I]?
The point is shouldn't just assume mucus boy and long neck are unhappy with what they are even if it seems bad to [/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/B][/SIZE][B][SIZE=6]you.
[/SIZE][/B][/QUOTE]
Dude yes! Great metaphor lolDon't hurt them too too bad with the Truth
[QUOTE=Killerbee911;5517082][B][COLOR="#0000FF"]More and More I want X-men to be less metaphor because at times it lets people escape from facing some of the ugly stuff. Too often people hide behind the danger of powers to escape the ugliness of mistreatment that is happening.[/COLOR][/B]
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Killerbee911;5517082][B][COLOR="#0000FF"]More and More I want X-men to be less metaphor because at times it lets people escape from facing some of the ugly stuff. Too often people hide behind the danger of powers to escape the ugliness of mistreatment that is happening.[/COLOR][/B]
[/QUOTE]
Message so nice I had to quote it twice
[QUOTE=BroHomo;5517085]
[B]This has literally never been an X-storyline lol quite the opposite[/B]
Jeez do yall even read the cOmics or just watch movies/Tv and get on wikipedia?
[/QUOTE]
Didn't astonishing X-Men have this as a plot point?
It even led to a fight of Beast vs Wolverine since the X-Men didn't want the students to give in without much consideration.
That being said, how did things lead back to Wanda? If anything, I feel this proves the argument to move past this considering its ominous presence over the franchise. Everything always seems to go back to that one event. The villains are viewed as stale, but this isn't? Just food for thought. I know Hickman has essentially created a fix for the situation from Wanda, but some aspects that reference this era feel unneeded.
[QUOTE=Big Joe;5516612]Fascinating.
The UN Genocide Convention definition of genocide is wrong. Okay, well I guess I learned something today.[/QUOTE]
The word has been invented in 1944 and meant:
[QUOTE]The systematic killing of substantial numbers of people on the basis of their ethnicity, religion, political beliefs, social status, or other particularities.[/QUOTE]
And, then, in 1986, James Stuart Olson, Raymond Wilson, [I]Native Americans in the Twentieth Century,[/I] gave another meaning:
[QUOTE]The systematic suppression of ideas on the basis of cultural or ethnic origin; culturicide.
[I]
Native Americans in the twentieth century are no longer a "vanishing race" or a silent minority. They have survived centuries of cultural genocide inflicted on them by non-Native Americans— both the well-meaning and the self-seeking— […][/I] [/QUOTE]
So, during decades, “genocide” meant only one thing, mass murder with the intention of erase a group of people and it’s the meaning that has been used to qualify past events everyone knew about. It’s these past events I think about when I hear this word, these horrible pictures, these terrible stories told by survivors…
A new meaning may have been added to this word — and notice that it was said “cultural genocide” — the fact remains it is already a very loaded word with a specific meaning that has been linked to great tragedies in the 19th and 20th centuries.
So to me, whatever the UN says, I don’t see “genocide” in what Wanda did. It has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do in terms of horror and suffering. I have (little) hope people will use more carefully such words.
[QUOTE=Zelena;5517120]The word has been invented in 1944 and meant:
[/QUOTE]
You weren't around in 1944, At least I am assuming that to be true if not I am wrong with this next set of things I am choosing to say but for most your life, If you check what the definition of genocide is it would be what you are being told right now is genocide.
1948 the Genova Convention was adopted and it has defined what is Genocide, Article 2 of Genova convention has been around from 1949. Whenever a person has been punished for crimes of Genocide or countries/groups have been accused of Genocide it has been this definition
[QUOTE]any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
— Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Article 2 [/QUOTE]
ps
[QUOTE]Raphael Lemkin was a Polish lawyer of Jewish descent who is best known for coining the [B]word genocide and initiating the Genocide Convention[/B][/QUOTE]
But anyways moving on because this is not important in the grand picture but going whatever to "UN" explains a lot about your point of view.
[QUOTE=TheDeadSpace;5517113]Didn't astonishing X-Men have this as a plot point?
It even led to a fight of Beast vs Wolverine since the X-Men didn't want the students to give in without much consideration.[/QUOTE]
Indeed.
In Astonishing X-Men #2 (Whedon's run), Hank talks to Kravita.
- Kravita: I'm not playing, Dr. McCoy. There are people whose lives have been destroyed by unwanted mutation and I will give my life to help them. Whatever you and your X-Men plan to do, I won't--
- Hank: Stop. I'm not here to discuss the ethics of your "mutant cure". And I'm not here to destroy it. I just want to know if it works.
So, off-panel, Kravita gives Hank a sample for him to analyse it.
In #3, there's a 2-page pannel showing a line of 1600+ alledged mutants, outside the Benetech building, demanding the cure.
Also, in issue #3.
- Hank: It's not conclusive.
- Logan: But the sample looks good?
- Hank: So far it holds up.
- Logan: Get rid of it. Get rid of it now or I'll go through you to do it.
- Hank: Emma. She had no right to--
- Logan: She said she couldn't help it. She said you were like a billboard. Like Neon. Big neon sign, flashing: "I wanna get off. I wanna get out." Is that how it goes, McCoy? You've had enough? You wanna see how the other half lives their half-lives?
- Hank: The truth is that I don't know what I want. And that is none of your damn business.
- Logan: Wrong answer.
They fight for 2 panels, then it continues:
- Logan: You [B]Beast[/B].
- Hank: Don't push this, Logan.
- Logan: I ain't letting you--
- Hank: [B]I don't know what I am[/B]. I used to have fingers. I used to have a mouth you could kiss. I would walk down the street and... Maybe this is the secondary stage of my mutation or maybe Cassandra Nova was right. Maybe I'm devolving. My mind is still sharp, but my instincts, my emtions... You know what it's like to be out of control. What am I supposed to do, Logan? Wait until I'm lying in front of the studentes, playing with a ball of string? [B]I am a human being.[/B]
- Logan: Wrong. You're an X-Men. Some weak sister in the freshman dorm wants to drop his powers, I could care less. But an X-Men... One of us caves and it's over. It's an endorsement stamp for every single mutant to be lined up and neutered. And you know that. [B]You know that![/B] So either flush that junk down the john right now... or I'm gonna turn you into a throw-rug.
- Hank: Little man... [B]Enough![/B]
Then they fight again and Emma breaks the fight apart, using her telepathy.
I don't know... It's seems to me that it should be canon that some people who were affected by the M-Day were actually happy about it. Unless we assume all of them had been killed in Genosha by then.
[QUOTE=Zelena;5517120]The word has been invented in 1944 and meant:
And, then, in 1986, James Stuart Olson, Raymond Wilson, [I]Native Americans in the Twentieth Century,[/I] gave another meaning:
So, during decades, “genocide” meant only one thing, mass murder with the intention of erase a group of people and it’s the meaning that has been used to qualify past events everyone knew about. It’s these past events I think about when I hear this word, these horrible pictures, these terrible stories told by survivors…
A new meaning may have been added to this word — and notice that it was said “cultural genocide” — the fact remains it is already a very loaded word with a specific meaning that has been linked to great tragedies in the 19th and 20th centuries.
So to me, whatever the UN says, I don’t see “genocide” in what Wanda did. It has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do in terms of horror and suffering. I have (little) hope people will use more carefully such words.[/QUOTE]
I think you basically just said "the UN can stick it up their collective arses, I know better". Excellent.
[QUOTE=Big Joe;5517183]I think you basically just said "the UN can stick it up their collective arses, I know better". Excellent.[/QUOTE]
Apparently reading comic books makes you qualified to dismiss international law and standards.
I’m kind of confused as to why this is a discussion though... in-story EVERYONE refers to what Wanda did as mutant genocide, including the Avengers. Simply re-read Children’s Crusade and the event is treated with that gravity AND Wanda takes responsibility.
[QUOTE=Kingdom X;5517235]Apparently reading comic books makes you qualified to dismiss international law and standards.
I’m kind of confused as to why this is a discussion though... in-story EVERYONE refers to what Wanda did as mutant genocide, including the Avengers. Simply re-read Children’s Crusade and the event is treated with that gravity AND Wanda takes responsibility.[/QUOTE]
Why? Because removing the killing part makes some people more comfortable with what happened by making it seem lesser, It becomes it is not as big deal it becomes just a "bad thing" but "hey they are still alive so was it really so bad? the very worse way to do a bad thing didn't happen" "in fact we did some of them a favor". It is kinda scary how people can justify removing someone's identity even in pretend or how unintentional some arguments match up with things that real hate groups say, It makes you go okay I guess how that bad thing happened in real life.
But again I got to say again maybe the mutants don't need to be used as a metaphor for minorities as much as if their powers are going to be used to dismiss the bad things happening.
[QUOTE=Killerbee911;5517261]Why? Because removing the killing part makes some people more comfortable with what happened by making it seem lesser, It becomes it is not as big deal it becomes just a "bad thing" but "hey they are still alive so was it really so bad the very worse way to do a bad thing didn't happen" "in fact we did some of them a favor".[/quote]
Killing people and taking away their ability to fly is a rather huge difference.
[quote]It is kinda scary how people can justify removing someone's identity even in pretend
[/QUOTE]
I'd like to think the characters have more of an identity than just "I have powers."
Storm is still Storm even if she's powerless. Wolverine is still Wolverine. Gambit is still Gambit. Their identities remain intact.
[QUOTE=Alan2099;5517280]Killing people and taking away their ability to fly is a rather huge difference.
I'd like to think the characters have more of an identity than just "I have powers."
Storm is still Storm even if she's powerless. Wolverine is still Wolverine. Gambit is still Gambit. Their identities remain intact.[/QUOTE]
I mean if we are going to talk about without the full context then sure.
I think this idea that the majority of mutants have non useful abilities has been dropped. Its something I hear repeatedly. The majority of mutants like in My Hero Academia have abilities that could be very useful with the right training. Evolution incurs some advantage