New Spider-Man satellite title by Slott and Bagley

[TinkerSpider]

I mean, hell, we keep discussing MJ and Anna Maria, and rightfully so, but what about Peter? His body was subjected to sexual activity against his will (and he's completely aware of it on the MJ issue) and/or without knowledge or consent.

Absolutely. Didn’t mean to leave Peter out, he was violated as well, apologies.

One of the best things about Spencer’s run was the acknowledgment that Peter had experienced trauma overload, with Mary Jane getting Peter to at least voice his emotions in ASM 60 while continuing to support him taking time to process what has happened to him.

[Webhead]

Absolutely. Didn’t mean to leave Peter out, he was violated as well, apologies.

Don't worry, no offense taken.

I just realized an alternate SpOck is very likely to show up in this new title.

[The BaRoN]

Slott has been on Twitter telling everyone non stop how he “gets” Spider-Man and those who don’t like his stuff probably love the bag head stuff.

He claims Peter should be the butt of jokes, I disagree and that’s why I won’t be picking this new book up because he has never got Spider-Man and we had to endure a decade of his clown Parker with self insert Otto garbage.

As for the Otto and MJ stuff, I was disgusted at the time but now I just want it erased and really find this weird praise of superior run to be quite disturbing.

[Matt Rat]

Slott has been on Twitter telling everyone non stop how he “gets” Spider-Man and those who don’t like his stuff probably love the bag head stuff.

The bag head stuff is actually entertaining. So guilty as charged.

And it only happens once or a couple of times compared to what Slott does to Peter routinely.

[The BaRoN]

The bag head stuff is actually entertaining. So guilty as charged.

And it only happens once or a couple of times compared to what Slott does to Peter routinely.

Exactly

Bag head is iconic because it was so rare and goofy, making him a clown every month is frustrating because I want to read Spider-Man and not Will Ferrell.

[Frontier]

Slott has been on Twitter telling everyone non stop how he “gets” Spider-Man and those who don’t like his stuff probably love the bag head stuff.

He claims Peter should be the butt of jokes, I disagree and that’s why I won’t be picking this new book up because he has never got Spider-Man and we had to endure a decade of his clown Parker with self insert Otto garbage.

As for the Otto and MJ stuff, I was disgusted at the time but now I just want it erased and really find this weird praise of superior run to be quite disturbing.

That's kind of ironic because it feels like Slott looks at stuff like Bag-Man Spidey and bases the character more on that.

[NC_Yankee]

Slott has been on Twitter telling everyone non stop how he “gets” Spider-Man and those who don’t like his stuff probably love the bag head stuff.

He claims Peter should be the butt of jokes, I disagree and that’s why I won’t be picking this new book up because he has never got Spider-Man and we had to endure a decade of his clown Parker with self insert Otto garbage.

As for the Otto and MJ stuff, I was disgusted at the time but now I just want it erased and really find this weird praise of superior run to be quite disturbing.

One thing I have learned about Dan Slott is to take absolutely nothing he says seriously. Why? Look at this quote: “Writing Spider-Man is a young man’s game.” ( Dan Slott). Or this one “The Fantastic Four was my dream job” ( Dan Slott). If he really believed either of those statements, then why did he give up the FF to write Spider-Man again?

[Dan Slott]

One thing I have learned about Dan Slott is to take absolutely nothing he says seriously. Why? Look at this quote: “Writing Spider-Man is a young man’s game.” ( Dan Slott). Or this one “The Fantastic Four was my dream job” ( Dan Slott). If he really believed either of those statements, then why did he give up the FF to write Spider-Man again?

If you're going to quote me, please quote me. I said that writing Spider-Man twice a month was a young man's game.

[Lee]

People need to take a step back and examine why they spend so much of their free time obsessively hating on a stranger whose only crime is writing comics they didn't like.

Is that good behaviour? Would you want your favorite Marvel heroes to act that way? Would your ideal Mature Adult Spider-Man comics have Peter Parker angrily bashing a comic book writer on the Internet, every day of his life, for years on end?

That's kind of ironic because it feels like Slott looks at stuff like Bag-Man Spidey and bases the character more on that.

The poster you're replying to is distorting what Dan Slott actually said.

[Dan Slott]

Slott has been on Twitter telling everyone non stop how he “gets” Spider-Man and those who don’t like his stuff probably love the bag head stuff.

He claims Peter should be the butt of jokes...

This is a gross mischaracterization of what I've said on Twitter.
You really have to work overtime to spin it this way.
It's kind of bizarre.

"Spider-Man comics should be funny.
And it's okay to make *him* the butt of the joke."

The post shows 4 examples.
3 where Spider-Man is making fun of someone, or having fun at their expense.
And 1 where Spidey is the butt of a joke.

That post is not claiming that Spidey should be the butt of jokes.
It's saying that Spidey can be the butt of jokes.

Spidey has been the butt of jokes numerous times in the Lee/Ditko run, the Lee/Romita run, and in most runs across his 60 year history.
This is nothing new.
This is a fact.

"There's a contingent of Spider-Fandom that gets annoyed by that, but, oddly enough, a lot of those fans look fondly back on the "Paper Bag Head" Spidey sequence from the DeFalco/Frenz run."

In no way does that part of the post say that people who don't like my stuff love the bag head stuff.
If you're reading that into that post, that's on you.
I'm pointing out that I find it ironic that people who claim to be annoyed by the idea that Spidey can be the butt of a joke are, many times, readers who will also make posts about fondly talking about the "Bag Head" sequence from the DeFalco/Frenz run.

I've seen that a LOT online with fans who have griped about Spidey being the butt of jokes, but then making a lot of positive "Bag Head" posts when Hasbro revealed the new "Bag Head" figure. And I'm not mad at that, I just find it weird and confounding when it does happen. That's it. The end. Full stop.

[Matt Rat]

Is that good behaviour? Would you want your favorite Marvel heroes to act that way?

Funny you say this, as a lot of Marvel heroes in several titles have acted in rather adolescent, obnoxious ways in modern times, from Johnny Storm, to the mutants of Krakoa, to Bruce Banner, to Tony Stark.

Would your ideal Mature Adult Spider-Man comics have Peter Parker angrily bashing a comic book writer on the Internet, every day of his life, for years on end?

Well, if comic book writing were a vocation of JJJ, maybe...

[Webhead]

People need to take a step back and examine why they spend so much of their free time obsessively hating on a stranger whose only crime is writing comics they didn't like.

Is that good behaviour? Would you want your favorite Marvel heroes to act that way? Would your ideal Mature Adult Spider-Man comics have Peter Parker angrily bashing a comic book writer on the Internet, every day of his life, for years on end?.

Respectfully, you only seem to engage people who have completely opposite viewpoints to yours, and do so in a very dismissive manner that mostly focuses on the negative and attacking straw men. Perhaps it would improve the forum experience to actually discuss the topics you'd rather talk about, while paying less attention to these users whose posts you consider detrimental?

[Lee]

I don't believe in being part of a community but turning a blind eye to toxic behaviour and hatred within that community. That would be almost the same as condoning it.

[Webhead]

I don't believe in being part of a community but turning a blind eye to toxic behaviour and hatred within that community.

If people talk and matters that otherwise don't violate any rules in a community can't be settled through discussion, then there's not much to do but move on to the next thing.

This bickering bogs down the whole thing and, because no one will take anything back, it just perpetuates the toxicity.

There's a writer a few posts above this one who believes answering to someone who will probably not change his mind, is more valuable than addressing the thousands of people who would actually like to read what he has to say.

[Dan Slott]

There's a writer a few posts above this one who believes answering to someone who will probably not change his mind, is more valuable than addressing the thousands of people who would actually like to read what he has to say.

I'm not "answering someone."

I'm setting the record straight where someone on this board was grossly misrepresenting what I've said online-- misrepresenting to the point of lying.

If someone were doing that about something you had said clearly and plainly elsewhere, I'd hope you'd feel free to do the same.

If people are interested in what I regularly say, they're more than welcome to send a follow request to my Twitter account.
I don't post really post here anymore. You can count on one hand the number of times I've jumped onto a thread here in the past five or six years. And I honestly don't really see me posting here in the future. This was just a quick reply to something that was clearly way off base.