wanda will never be forgiven but there arent any ways to actually punish her, so its just empty spitefull words
Why single out Wanda when Cassandra Nova killed 16 times as many mutants as her?
I do think M-Day is a big deal. It's absolutely horrible to depower mutants and take a way a part of them like that. I don't agree with the whole "powers or sexuality/race/whatever shouldn't matter!" thing. But I just don't think it's as bad as actually murdering others.
I know that for Krakoa, death can be undone, so the depowering brings up a more complicated issue. But when it comes to the intent and the actual harm itself, it's not as bad, or at least it wasn't when it happened. So I find it a bit questionable that they're even telling stories about it to the kids, preying on their fear and anger and pride, and using that to promote the Crucible.
cassandra nova has had her neck cracked, put into a mass of flesh, a tsunami trown at her and jean forced her to learn compassion, cassandra nova is a villain and is treated as such.
wanda commited genocide over fake vibrator babies and daddy issues and shes an avenger
I dont need to? We aren't talking about the real world, we're talking about comics, and that was Xavier's dream. What we have now isn't his dream, but it's almost the polar opposite in terms of cultish segregation, which is just as, in my opinion anyway, childish and simplistic.
Again, I think that will be one of the points Hickman makes by the end. Integration, not isolation. Acceptance, not dominance. Freedom of choice, not weird extremism that feigns choice but punishes those that disagree or dont fit in.
I will raise my throne above the Stars of God
I agree with you, she was betrayed by editorial, especially X-Office.
Children's Crusade settled that canonically though.
It's unfortunate for the people who like(d) hating on Her, but that's 15 years of their lives hating on something she didn't do.
Their loss.
I believe it was "they are still Inhumans, even without the mist triggering their transformation"...
But yeah.
The hypocrisy is going strong here.
"The means are as important as the end - we have to do this right or not at all.
Anything less negates every belief we've ever had, every sacrifice we've ever made."
"Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely."
"No justice, no peace."
Gandhi was not single-handedly responsible for Indian freedom from colonial oppression. There were violent revolutionaries battling the British, and without them, Gandhi would have Ben a nice distraction, but not an end. And that all is without even mentioning that Xavier’s dream was, ultimately, passive. “Take it and smile” is not how you win acceptance. For all that Gandhi as nonviolent, he was absolutely NOT passive. He was not content to wait for the British to get bored and go away. Nor was he hoping that eventually the British would come to see the Indian people as having value. He wanted them gone, and he used non-violent tactics to make colonial oppression cost more than it profited.
So, not a terribly good example...