Immoral X-Men #1 Review/Spoilers

[useridgoeshere]

C'mon now. The X-Men being on better terms with Apocalypse than the Avengers is ridiculous. **** they treated Sabretooth nicer than they have the Fantastic Four, who they mindwiped while Sabretooth is free to do whatever he wants

Let's see ... Reed invented a way to wipe out Mutants. Reed and Tony built Orchis' base where they've successfully reignited Sentinels and created Nimrod. And Reed and his team invaded Krakoa, including their seat of government, while falsely accusing them of kidnapping a child. And that doesn't even get into all the other things he's done over his history.

Yeah, it's a real mystery why Reed isn't trusted with Mutant erasing technology. LOL.

[gonnagiveittoya]

I mean they thought they had kidnapped Franklin because earlier they rolled up with several former supervillains to their front door to bring him to another country and any time the FF asked any questions (since they're, y'know, his parents), they treated the FF like the enemy, and then suddenly their kids go missing. Thinking Krakoa is involved makes a ton of sense, especially since they clearly weren't gonna take no for an answer anyways. That whole book was terrible manufactured conflict that could end in ten seconds if the X-Men treated Franklin as a person and not a potential utility for the state

And again, like I mentioned: Sabretooth, Nature Girl, countless others who've done far worse after being given amnesty, but in some books they barely give Earth's mightiest heroes the time of day? Everyone in the Hickman days was very OOC

[gonnagiveittoya]

And which part are you the expert on here, gonnagiveittoya? The being rich part? Just so we know you're speaking from a place of experience.

I really don't get your point, would it be antisemitism to compare Starship Troopers to Nazis? Comparing fictional characters to similar people irl is not uncommon. Just because you're a fan of said character doesn't make those comparisons inappropriate or even inaccurate

[davetvs]

You don't get most points, that's clear to us all. It is inappropriate for the reasons I've already laid out: it trivializes a serious, triggering, and abhorrent action for the purposes of an online stan war. It's pathetic at best, and offensive at worst. Funny how these criticisms are thrown at "Emma Frost" and not "The Writers and Artists Dictating The Behavior of the Fictional Character." And why is that? Because Emma and Storm used to be enemies? Oh okay. That sounds like the perfect scenario to throw child molestation into the conversation to you?

[gonnagiveittoya]

It's not a stan war thing, it's frigging textual analysis. There's no shortage of comparisons made between Professor X and magneto to MLK and Malcolm X. Those comparisons aren't off limits because it's a character you liked being compared to a person you don't.

It's not unfair to compare Emma's past (and present) actions involving children as exploiting them for her own ends. There are examples less than a year old of this happening. It's happened many times in the characters history. Just because you stan her doesn't make pointing that out some awful thing and an attack on you personally, unlike your attacks on me.

[ExodusCloak]

I'm just saying it's weird how some characters who did far worse things get a free pass and other characters who have done far less bad, and even already had redemptive arcs when they did do bad, are like hated. Wanda had like 3 big redemption arcs before Trial. And that was Dooms fault to begin with and Krakoa seems to be on fine terms with him!

Like with Exodus and Apocalypse it's like pobodys nerfect but they apparently can't get over Captain America

That was actually Wandas fault. It was alleged it may be Dooms fault or Doom lied to tryy and protect her. But what we were shown in HoM and CC is that it was actually Wandas fault. Hence why Leah wrote the Trial.

If we are going for real world comparisons which I mean Storm as Queen of Wakanda was basically Imelda Marcos, Cyclops Churchill which aren't very flattering. Emma was more like Hillary in some ways. Niether is very flattering.

The Hellfire viewed mutants as commodities like gold or a certain type of tank which is a little difficult to compare to the real world because there is no real world comparison unless you attach lasers to dolphins or bombs to dogs. But if super powered beings did exist I'm sure a niche market would open up. The Ghislaine comparison makes as much sense as calling T'Challa Prince Andrew or bringing up the Storm /T'Challa statuary rape (Diana/Charles) thing its a massive overreach or Xaviers grooming activities akin to Weinstein or his private army akin to Blackwater.

Just like how people see elements of characters they like in themselves they can also see elements of characters they don't like in others. But just because you have a lot of squares doesn't mean you can force it through a circle.

[OldManLogan]

It's not a stan war thing, it's frigging textual analysis. There's no shortage of comparisons made between Professor X and magneto to MLK and Malcolm X. Those comparisons aren't off limits because it's a character you liked being compared to a person you don't.

It's not unfair to compare Emma's past (and present) actions involving children as exploiting them for her own ends. There are examples less than a year old of this happening. It's happened many times in the characters history. Just because you stan her doesn't make pointing that out some awful thing and an attack on you personally, unlike your attacks on me.

You may not have attacked anyone directly, but you did attack people's reading comprehension a bunch of times, and this whole discussion only started because of your "wait, does anyone really consider Emma Frost a hero?" answer. That wasn't targeted at Emma's character, it was targeted at people/fans who disagree with you. Also, that answer was very condescending to begin with, since you know the answer to that AND the person you responded to wasn't even talking about her being a hero or not, just how much lack of nuance this version has. Which was then followed by a bunch of "well, actually" answers from you to anyone that disagreed with you. You don't get to pick who anyone considers a hero or not.

And you're doing it again in this very post. It's not "frigging textual analysis", it's your opinion. You said before it's not your "responsibility to ignore that history because the fans don't like it"... well it's not anyone's obligation to agree with your analysis to begin with. Again, really condenscending considering you're the one telling people they're ignoring parts of the text when no one was pointing to you the many stories that contradict the things you're saying.

It honestly seems to me that your problem is less with Emma herself and more with anyone having a positive opinion of her.

[Krakoa]

I dunno, who is and isn't supposed to be a good guy isn't consistent. Wanda is treated as Satan and her name is literally used as a slur for two years, but everyone forgets about Apocalypses past and Nova becomes a sassy grandma type? The Avengers are enemies in COTA but Nature Girl and Sabretooth go free in their books?

Thank God Sins of Sinister has had the villains actually going back to being villains again. Hope it's a trend that keeps going into Fall of X.

I mean, the vast majority of characters didn’t let Nature Girl or Sabretooth go free or want them to. And the Avengers have been treated as friends in most books.

And I find it hilarious when anyone talks about Xavier mind wiping Reed as this horrible thing when Reed & co literally did the exact same thing but more extremely to Captain America.

[gonnagiveittoya]

I'm not sure "but the Illuminati did it too" is a strong argument for it being done to Reed being right

[gonnagiveittoya]

You may not have attacked anyone directly, but you did attack people's reading comprehension a bunch of times, and this whole discussion only started because of your "wait, does anyone really consider Emma Frost a hero?" answer. That wasn't targeted at Emma's character, it was targeted at people/fans who disagree with you. Also, that answer was very condescending to begin with, since you know the answer to that AND the person you responded to wasn't even talking about her being a hero or not, just how much lack of nuance this version has. Which was then followed by a bunch of "well, actually" answers from you to anyone that disagreed with you. You don't get to pick who anyone considers a hero or not.

It's not that unreasonable to bring it up. There's a difference between being a fan of a villain for being a good villain and being a fan of a villain because you think they're a hero. Like Red Skull and Galactus and Mister Sinister are great characters, but being popular villains for how they're written isn't the same as someone claiming they like them as heroes. Like we've seen tons of examples with Punisher about how there's people who are fans of Punishers stories and there's also people who co opt him as a pro-gun ideal for bumper stickers and such.

And you're doing it again in this very post. It's not "frigging textual analysis", it's your opinion. You said before it's not your "responsibility to ignore that history because the fans don't like it"... well it's not anyone's obligation to agree with your analysis to begin with. Again, really condenscending considering you're the one telling people they're ignoring parts of the text when no one was pointing to you the many stories that contradict the things you're saying.

You are correct that people did not provide evidence that contradicted the arguments I made or the examples I used.

[OldManLogan]

It's not that unreasonable to bring it up. There's a difference between being a fan of a villain for being a good villain and being a fan of a villain because you think they're a hero. Like Red Skull and Galactus and Mister Sinister are great characters, but being popular villains for how they're written isn't the same as someone claiming they like them as heroes. Like we've seen tons of examples with Punisher about how there's people who are fans of Punishers stories and there's also people who co opt him as a pro-gun ideal for bumper stickers and such.

I don't know, for me it is absolutely unreasonable. Your problem is how fans of a character enjoy her, not with the characterization itself. If you don't see the problem with that, there's not much I can say here. Your Punisher example is just another instance of you trying to tell fans what their character's like.
Also, Emma Frost has been an anti-hero for almost 3 decades now. She's not comparable to Red Skull, Sinister and Galactus at all, and the mere fact you used those as a comparison says a lot.

You are correct that people did not provide evidence that contradicted the arguments I made or the examples I used.

If you wanted people to offer evidence to the contrary, you simply shouldn't be as dismissive as you were. When your problem is how people enjoy the product and not the product itself, there's no point in providing evidences, and again, no one is obligated to even do so in the first place. But you have the obligation to respect people's opinions, no matter how much you disagree with them. But sure, I'll bite.

Her role in Devil's Reign regarding Isabelle;
The Progenitor judging her by using her guilt in regards to her dead students (even though they were already reborn in Krakoa);
- On that note, she was the only one shown to mourn Santo when he died in X of Swords. Saying Emma doesn't care about the children at this point is just ignoring the obvious, IMO;
Helping with Krakoa's funding by establishing its economy;
Her funding the Marauders to rescue mutants that needed help around the world;
- Actually, her funding a lot of X-Men projects throughout the years, including but not limited to Generation X, Utopia and the X-Mansion;
And since you named Firestar, in-universe Emma is the only reason she is even a part of the team.

To name a few.

She is an anti-hero and has been that for decades. That means she'll do good things for selfish reasons, bad things for the greater good and all the many variations in between, including moments of genuine good intentions and genuine jerk behavior.

[The tall man]

I don't know, for me it is absolutely unreasonable. Your problem is how fans of a character enjoy her, not with the characterization itself. If you don't see the problem with that, there's not much I can say here. Your Punisher example is just another instance of you trying to tell fans what their character's like.
Also, Emma Frost has been an anti-hero for almost 3 decades now. She's not comparable to Red Skull, Sinister and Galactus at all, and the mere fact you used those as a comparison says a lot.


If you wanted people to offer evidence to the contrary, you simply shouldn't be as dismissive as you were. When your problem is how people enjoy the product and not the product itself, there's no point in providing evidences, and again, no one is obligated to even do so in the first place. But you have the obligation to respect people's opinions, no matter how much you disagree with them. But sure, I'll bite.

Her role in Devil's Reign regarding Isabelle;
The Progenitor judging her by using her guilt in regards to her dead students (even though they were already reborn in Krakoa);
- On that note, she was the only one shown to mourn Santo when he died in X of Swords. Saying Emma doesn't care about the children at this point is just ignoring the obvious, IMO;
Helping with Krakoa's funding by establishing its economy;
Her funding the Marauders to rescue mutants that needed help around the world;
- Actually, her funding a lot of X-Men projects throughout the years, including but not limited to Generation X, Utopia and the X-Mansion;
And since you named Firestar, in-universe Emma is the only reason she is even a part of the team.

To name a few.

She is an anti-hero and has been that for decades. That means she'll do good things for selfish reasons, bad things for the greater good and all the many variations in between, including moments of genuine good intentions and genuine jerk behavior.

How about her role in the whole mothervine fiasco that was doing harm to mutants, or when she was ruling New Tian and was throwing fellow mutants onto re-education camps, or when she was selling out fellow mutants to General Callahan to save her own ass? There are many reasons for some readers not to be a fan of Emma Frost. She's an elitist, snobbish, vain, egotistical, power hungry individual, and everything she does is to benefit her own self interest. Now she as her fans and good for her, but she is not free from criticism nor negative posts. Have you seen the hate Xavier, Beast and Logan get on these boards, or the Avengers for that matter? Far more than any Emma receives but yet I don't see any impassioned defense of those characters. So long as it's not a character's appreciation thread and posts aren't directed to other posters then there is nothing wrong with criticizing a character. Too often some will criticize Xavier, Hank or Logan but then start clutching their pearls if Emma gets some herself. It goes both ways.

[BobbysWorld]

Its not the existence of criticism, its the form the posts take. Say what you will, but nobody's running around comparing Logan and the Avengers to real world child molesters or their fans of implicitly stanning such a person. Its that simple.

[gonnagiveittoya]

Her role in Devil's Reign regarding Isabelle;
The Progenitor judging her by using her guilt in regards to her dead students (even though they were already reborn in Krakoa);
- On that note, she was the only one shown to mourn Santo when he died in X of Swords. Saying Emma doesn't care about the children at this point is just ignoring the obvious, IMO;
Helping with Krakoa's funding by establishing its economy;
Her funding the Marauders to rescue mutants that needed help around the world;
- Actually, her funding a lot of X-Men projects throughout the years, including but not limited to Generation X, Utopia and the X-Mansion;
And since you named Firestar, in-universe Emma is the only reason she is even a part of the team.

To name a few.

She is an anti-hero and has been that for decades. That means she'll do good things for selfish reasons, bad things for the greater good and all the many variations in between, including moments of genuine good intentions and genuine jerk behavior.

First of all: Cap pitched her for the X-Men, specifically because Firestar didn't want to talk to Emma specifically because of the horrible things she's done to her in the past when she was a child.

Running Krakoas economy and government doesn't exactly disprove the idea that she only helps when it's something that benefits her interests.

If you're talking about helping mutant kids, how about when she faked a vision of the future in New Mutants because Morgan and Escapade were two mutants who weren't as onboard with Krakoa, and showed her a graphic hallucinations (that she probably created, btw, since Destiny didn't have a real vision about it) of her best friend dying violently and making Escapade think she was repsonsible. And then sent her on an incredibly dangerous mission. To make her more "loyal" since she was one of the only mutant characters with any major role who had questions about Krakoa. And that was far more recent than the Santo stuff.

Seriously though, Emma's abuse isn't some distant past factoid, there are examples just a few months old. Arguably a few days old with Sins of Sinister turning her more back to her classic self

[OldManLogan]

How about her role in the whole mothervine fiasco that was doing harm to mutants, or when she was ruling New Tian and was throwing fellow mutants onto re-education camps, or when she was selling out fellow mutants to General Callahan to save her own ass? There are many reasons for some readers not to be a fan of Emma Frost. She's an elitist, snobbish, vain, egotistical, power hungry individual, and everything she does is to benefit her own self interest. Now she as her fans and good for her, but she is not free from criticism nor negative posts. Have you seen the hate Xavier, Beast and Logan get on these boards, or the Avengers for that matter? Far more than any Emma receives but yet I don't see any impassioned defense of those characters. So long as it's not a character's appreciation thread and posts aren't directed to other posters then there is nothing wrong with criticizing a character. Too often some will criticize Xavier, Hank or Logan but then start clutching their pearls if Emma gets some herself. It goes both ways.

You're wasting your time with the mothervine thing, I said in my post she has done plenty of bad. I've read those stories.
Don't really know what was the point of bringing Logan, Xavier and Hank up, as I have never criticized ANY of those characters here. If you directed this at an Emma fan that was constantly bashing them, I would understand, but that's not the case here. I like all of them and one of them is even among my favorites. If you feel there's a lack of people defending them when people go overboard, you can defend them yourself.

Also, Hank really doesn't belong on this list, as a lot of the criticism he receives comes from people that do like him to begin with. It's been a rough decade for him and fans long for the fun guy he used to be. The criticism he receives is never from someone telling his fans they're not enjoying him the right way.

And again, criticize the character all you want, that's not the problem here, and I feel my above post made that pretty clear. You're acting as if people are complaining about the criticisms to the character, and again, that's not the problem.

First of all: Cap pitched her for the X-Men, specifically because Firestar didn't want to talk to Emma specifically because of the horrible things she's done to her in the past when she was a child.

Sorry, but this isn't a matter of opinion, you're factually wrong here. Cap gave Emma the idea, by comparing his experience with Rogue to Emma's experience with Angelica, but it was Emma that made the pitch:

Attachment 129790

EDIT: Wooo, had forgotten Emma actually apologized to Angelica in front of everyone here. Worth pointing out, since her "never apologizing" comes up pretty often, even though it didn't particulary happen on this thread.

Running Krakoas economy and government doesn't exactly disprove the idea that she only helps when it's something that benefits her interests.

Yes, as I said, she'll do good things for selfish reasons. That's what antiheroes do. Even though in this case it's not that selfish, afterall she's explicitly working in bringing the dead Genoshans back.

If you're talking about helping mutant kids, how about when she faked a vision of the future in New Mutants because Morgan and Escapade were two mutants who weren't as onboard with Krakoa, and showed her a graphic hallucinations (that she probably created, btw, since Destiny didn't have a real vision about it) of her best friend dying violently and making Escapade think she was repsonsible. And then sent her on an incredibly dangerous mission. To make her more "loyal" since she was one of the only mutant characters with any major role who had questions about Krakoa. And that was far more recent than the Santo stuff.

Seriously though, Emma's abuse isn't some distant past factoid, there are examples just a few months old. Arguably a few days old with Sins of Sinister turning her more back to her classic self

Don't you think you're just moving the goal post? I don't think it matters what's more recent or not, you said she only cared for children when it benefitted her, there are recent examples that show otherwise. And isn't Escapade in the New Mutants now? She seems to be in good terms with Emma at the end of the day anyway. What's ironic for me is you accusing people of ignoring the text to consider her a hero (even though no one in this thread called her that to begin with), when you're doing the same by ignoring any good on panel evidence.

In my opinion, people that consider Emma either 100% a hero or a 100% a villain are both equally wrong.