The 2010s have replaced the 1990s as the worst period for Marvel Comics?

[Force de Phenix]

Latinx may have been created with good intentions, but it is highly offensive to the people it is meant to refer to. It is a deliberate bastardization of the Spanish language. Only 2% of Hispanics in the US prefer 'latinx,' while 40% find it offensive - other studies put it at 50%. Those numbers become even more lopsided in Spanish-speaking countries. Even some non-binary Hispanic people - the very people the term was created to be inclusive towards, have said that it's problematic because someone who speaks Spanish and not English would have a very difficult time pronouncing it since 'X' has a completely different sound in Spanish. The Spanish-speaking world has developed its own gender-neutral term, latine, which is easier for them to pronounce and works better linguistically.

In your opinion the tens of millions of people who are offended by latinx may be overreacting or misled by bad actors, but the reality is that that is the opinion of tens of millions of Hispanic people in the US alone.

What do they find derogatory about it in the study you're citing? In English you would pronounce it "latin exe." It was adapted for English. It isn't used to refer to non-binary people. It's used to refer to everyone. That's why it's called neutral.

[Ultimate Captain America]

Many Latinos say 'Latinx' offends or bothers them. Here's why.

[Force de Phenix]

Many Latinos say 'Latinx' offends or bothers them. Here's why.

Yeah, nothing in the article mentions anything about it being derogatory. It's not insulting. People just don't like how it sounds.

Government/official institutions are against its use, so at least you have powerful institutions that won't accept it to protect you, but forcing people not to use it because you don't want them to will only drive people to use it more. I never used it, but I'm starting to understand why people are.

It's counterculture and a breakaway from cultural norms.

[daredevil1]

I completely agree with the OP. The 2010s for Marvel were a disaster, and anyone who thinks they were great and better than the 90s is just a brown-nosing Marvel zombie at this point. Alonso was the worst EIC of all time, by far, because he so blatantly did not give a crap about the characters or understand how the industry even works. It also gave rise to uber-nerds getting power as creators, and going absolutely berserk in terms of abusing fans on social media. I didn't like some writers from earlier eras like Howard Mackie, but he seemed like a decent enough dude. Slott, Wacker, Spencer and their ilk truly... disturbed me with how they interacted, gatekeeping trolls drunk on their limited power who thought anyone speaking ill of them deserved harassment. So many paranoid and obsessive personalities, combined with abysmal stories and insulting marketing gimmicks, nearly collapsed the company.

[JudicatorPrime]

The 2020s aren't looking so hot, either, if we're being honest.

[skyvolt2000]

It also gave rise to uber-nerds getting power as creators, and going absolutely berserk in terms of abusing fans on social media. I didn't like some writers from earlier eras like Howard Mackie, but he seemed like a decent enough dude. Slott, Wacker, Spencer and their ilk truly... disturbed me with how they interacted, gatekeeping trolls drunk on their limited power who thought anyone speaking ill of them deserved harassment. So many paranoid and obsessive personalities, combined with abysmal stories and insulting marketing gimmicks, nearly collapsed the company.

So they are suppose to stand there while their co-workers get attacked for existing?
It's one thing to dislike a writer's work based on actually READING it but it's another to be toxic because they are NOT a certain demographic and dismiss their work without reading it.
While some of these fans do the EXACT same thing you accused them of doing?

Most of the stuff done in the 70-90s was OKAY by fans.
Yet now in 2000s-that same stuff is suddenly an issue.

Now we can't do new characters because folks will throw FITS.
Now we can't try books with establish folks because SOMEONE will throw fits.
When new talent are sought-folks take issues with them being hired. Yet those same folks will scream and holla about why do we get the same writers on books.
Then we get toxic fanbases.

Fans have to take their LUMPS in this too. Rise of uber nerds does not happen without them PANDERING to those folks.

For all the hate Slott gets there is STILL a line to buy his books. Why? Because of who is on the cover.

Fans can NOT keep crying about stuff when they cherry pick rage.
Variants
Events
POC
LGBTQA+
Certain talents

Marvel and DC get away with what they want because FANS allow it. They will do what they want because VERY few will do anything about it. We have over 2000 comics a month coming out a week.

Think a red flag won't go up if the top books were all from Boom Studios or Image? Or if CHip Z's top selling book was NOT Daredevil or Batman but his Image book?

What happens if those who DON'T like certain writers stop buying books no matter WHO is on the cover??

[Noodle]

gatekeeping trolls drunk on their limited power who thought anyone speaking ill of them deserved harassment.

The irony of calling them gatekeepers for calling out a group that based their movement's name around the world "gatekeep."

[daredevil1]

So they are suppose to stand there while their co-workers get attacked for existing?
It's one thing to dislike a writer's work based on actually READING it but it's another to be toxic because they are NOT a certain demographic and dismiss their work without reading it.
While some of these fans do the EXACT same thing you accused them of doing?


What happens if those who DON'T like certain writers stop buying books no matter WHO is on the cover??

Uh yes... yes they are. That's what mature adults who supposedly have a lot more going on in their lives should do. This mentality that creators have some greater status as gods in comicdom and can behave as juvenile as they want is what's dumbed down the industry. No one is entitled to respect by their status regardless of their behavior, and they should get off social media if their egos are too fragile. Anyway this is how the threads devolve, when someone says something into the ether that people take huge personal issue with and it becomes a back and forth, and I'd like to opt out of that if that's all right with you.

The irony of calling them gatekeepers for calling out a group that based their movement's name around the world "gatekeep."

I have no idea what you're saying but if the implication is that the people I named are all progressive do-gooders who were merely "fighting evil" against Comicsgate or whatever, that's not true. Most of the time they antagonized for sport and used that as a smokescreen, or took it out on someone when they were having a bad day. I remember well when Slott told someone on here to go f themself for the crime of suggesting he didn't care about Spider-Man. Now that's true entitlement.

[Dr. Skeleton]

Marvel between 1990 and 1993 was the last time Marvel was at their best.

[Noodle]

I remember well when Slott told someone on here to go f themself for the crime of suggesting he didn't care about Spider-Man. Now that's true entitlement.

So is telling someone in an open forum that they don't care about a character they spent 7 years of their life writing.

[daredevil1]

So is telling someone in an open forum that they don't care about a character they spent 7 years of their life writing.

I think you're making apples and orange comparisons for both of these scenarios. It wasn't ironic that I called them gatekeepers since I'm not in Comicsgate nor is their every action a protest against it. And someone telling him he doesn't care about Spider-Man isn't exactly entitlement when he's on here engaging with fans and is more a reaction to his behavior, with his response beyond overblown. What they should've said was caring or having the most knowledge about a character doesn't make you qualified to write them or a good writer, so it's not an unreasonable thing to say.

[Noodle]

I think you're making apples and orange comparisons for both of these scenarios. It wasn't ironic that I called them gatekeepers since I'm not in Comicsgate nor is their every action a protest against it. And someone telling him he doesn't care about Spider-Man isn't exactly entitlement when he's on here engaging with fans and is more a reaction to his behavior, with his response beyond overblown. What they should've said was caring or having the most knowledge about a character doesn't make you qualified to write them or a good writer, so it's not an unreasonable thing to say.

If you're coming at someone with a hostile attitude, it's also not entitlement to treat them as such.

[FFJamie94]

If you're coming at someone with a hostile attitude, it's also not entitlement to treat them as such.

We've gotten to a point when someone can be a dick to a creator online, and then cry foul when that creator tells them to fuck off.
It's like, what did you think was going to happen?
Saying that, I do wonder how People would have treated the creators of the 90's online if Twitter and this site were a thing, would it be the same hostile reaction with People saying "The 90's creators don't care about the craft or characters. Todd Macfarline doesn't care about Spider-Man" etc.

Anyway, I get tired of this argument. I went through my "Comics aren't what they used to be" phrase 10 years ago, and I read the comics I missed out on and I missed out on some pretty cool stuff.
Anything that's new will be hated upon. I mean look at Star Wars, first the Prequels came out and People said they weren't as good as the originals. Then the sequels came out and now everyone loves the prequels for some reason, even through they are poorly written, poorly directed and are largely boring.
We convince ourselves that any type of media isn't as good as we remember, but that's the thing, memory can filter out the bad and leave us with something different in our minds.
I'm reading Stan Lee's Spider-Man run (and have been for the last few years) and it's cheesy and there's a few really bad issues in there. But from everyone else, you'd expect it to be a masterpiece when it's just really good. It's not a golden run, it's just an entertaining pulp comic. Nostalgia is a hell of a drug.

[Anthony W]

The 2020s aren't looking so hot, either, if we're being honest.

Well, at least we aren't DC! Marvel can hang it's hat on that.

[Username taken]

We've gotten to a point when someone can be a dick to a creator online, and then cry foul when that creator tells them to fuck off.

This point is very critical. A lot of fans want to be ass-hats to creators and then when the creators give it back to them they start to "cry".

Truth is, post-comicsgate we are well past that point. If anyone wants to talk shit to creators online, be prepared to get it back and get ratio'd in the process.