Fans are burning Tom Taylor in effigy.

[Laser_Man]

Would these be the same type of "fans" who use the word "Woke" as a pejorative but can't tell you what it means?

I don't know how to break this to fans but 90% of story decisions are actually editorial decisions. Not the decision of the writer unless it's a creator owned or stand alone project. Don't like Babs out of a wheelchair? That was editorial. Don't like Jon being bisexual? Same thing. This is like blaming the actors for the writing of a movie. Which, if the Star Wars sequels are any indicator, they also do that. I'm very iffy about fanservice in general since a lot of "fans" are bigoted assholes who are basically just asking for people who aren't like them not to be represented. I didn't read most of Taylor's Jon run. I read the Injustice arc which was fine but given the fact that with Injustice he was working backwards from a premise someone else came up with (sensing a theme here?), he worked with what he was given. I haven't really read anything else he's done.

But if your complaint is "the story isn't going in the direction I want" or "I don't like this particular group being represented", that's either an issue with management, or you're a bad person.

Actually, this time the fans doing this are the kind of people who would be considered "woke" themselves.

Strangely, a lot of people think that Tom Taylor is somehow a right wing propagandist or something the way they talk about him. He is a fairly progressive guy but I guess even that is not enough for some people.

[Confuzzled]

Tom King started hiring bodyguards because of death threats years before Musk took over Twitter.

They weren't emboldened enough to post videos of burning his photos and effigies though. This is a new low for Twitter and scarily I think the worst is yet to come.

The claim that Disney wasn't allowing new Mutant characters to be created was an easily disproved lie. There were a number of new characters created for Wolverine and the X-Men alone and Claremont debuted a new character in the Nightcrawler book he was writing. The X-Men also had a lot of books for an intellectual property Disney was trying to suffocate.

The specific claim of being unable to create new mutant characters is untrue, but there was an effort to suffocate the X-Men; it’s just that it mostly happened outside of comics. This was the period where they were not allowed to appear in cartoons or video games, most famously the huge controversy around Marvel vs Capcom Infinite.

Dunno about the "no new mutants" claim, but I wouldn't be surprised of the reason why Marvel didn't stop publishing X-Men (like they did with F4) was just because they couldn't do it without it very negatively affecting their sales targets. X-Men just represents a portion too big of Marvel's publishing line.

Even then, we know the X-Men were banned from appearing in merchandising, videogames, cartoons, etc. We know from Hickman that they weren't allowed to introduce new ideas to the X-Men prior to the Fox buyout and that affected Bendis' run. And it's also suspicious that at the peak of this Wolverine, Cyclops, Xavier and Jean Grey were all dead in the comics at the same time (granted, there were alternate versions of them running around but still).

Claremont was the one to bring up the "no new mutants" claim. Bendis was one of the very few influential writers who pushed back successfully to a degree. As the others said, the X-Men were also pretty much banned in merchandising and other adaptations. The Inhumans vs. X-Men event was particularly horrible and I have no idea how Marvel thought anyone would become a fan of the Inhumans after that storyline.

[Johnny]

Sorry, edited my og post to correct my mistake.

Nothing to apologize, just thought I should clarify since I often see that.

[CaptCleghorn]

Some folks were calling him racist due to Nightwing being Romani and having his ass sexualised... which I find kinda silly since comics tend to emphasis the ass especially.
But that was like 1 or 2 People on reddit about a year ago.

Honestly, People are the worst. Instead of replacing People with AI for art, I think we should replace fans with AI.
Humanity was a mistake, and these People prove it.

Hasn't Dick Grayson had a nice ass for a while now, as well as being Romani? That's shouldn't have been considered a Taylor idea, should it?

[Bruce Wayne]

Claremont was the one to bring up the "no new mutants" claim. Bendis was one of the very few influential writers who pushed back successfully to a degree. As the others said, the X-Men were also pretty much banned in merchandising and other adaptations. The Inhumans vs. X-Men event was particularly horrible and I have no idea how Marvel thought anyone would become a fan of the Inhumans after that storyline.

The guy that pushed the dumb Inhumans strategy (Perlmutter)is the same guy trying to wreck Disney with Peltz and having him claim that Black Panther and Captain Marvel were unnecessary films because of their black/female cast despite them earning billions for the company (https://www.ft.com/content/0a182c97-...f-ae980562bb45). These are not smart people.

[charliehustle415]

Man, keyboard warriors and dorks of the highest degree do this type of ****.

We need to bring back weggies and purple nurples, sometimes bullying keeps these idiots in place.

[skyvolt2000]

Dunno about the "no new mutants" claim, but I wouldn't be surprised of the reason why Marvel didn't stop publishing X-Men (like they did with F4) was just because they couldn't do it without it very negatively affecting their sales targets. X-Men just represents a portion too big of Marvel's publishing line.

The behavior was inexcusable by that fanbase.

Because at the END of the DAY as with everything at these two companies-when you CHOOSE to buy that comic that is trashing your character.
You have no right to blame anyone else for it continuing. I don't like what went on in Black Panther. Guess what I STOPPED buying the books. That is what you are suppose to do.

That story was the ISSUE but the WRONG set of folks took the brunt for it.

I don't know how to break this to fans but 90% of story decisions are actually editorial decisions.

EXACTLY.

Lets take New 52 Static Shock. EVERYTHING in the first 6 issues of that book except Static's school name was NOT by the WRITER-John Rozum. He left that book before issue 1. He was going to let it go until he was being told by fans they were NOT going to support his work because of how bad that book was. That is when he spoke up.
The editor and artist took over that book.
That editor no longer works in comics. The artist DC did not talk to him for a good 7 years before he did something on Nightwing.

Gail Simone will tell you how miserable Dwayne McDuffie was on Justice League because of the editor.

Priest will GLADLY tell you how much of a battle Black Panther was to do. He went 60 issue fighting with editors.

Look at the state of Black Panther-what editor would HIRE a writer who does not care for T'Challa? TWICE?

While folks go after writers-folks forget there is an EDITOR in the background. Who gets free passes.

Nobody takes them to task.

[Holt]

I agree that too many people choose not to simply ignore stories they don’t like, but Marvel deserves the brunt of the blame for the hate the Inhumans wound up getting. They chose to actively pit the Inhumans against the X-Men to raise their profile and went all meta by having the same event that gave birth to a bunch of new Inhumans also be poisonous to mutants. Fans were primed to not accept them after all of that.

[Robotman]

“Two fictional characters aren’t dating. I’m sending a death threat!”

Seriously, reevaluate your life.

[Zero Hunter]

I suspect that majority of Barbara's "fans" who complain about the wheelchair actually just want her out of the way so that their favourite could be the Batgirl.

No its that she was a much better character as Oracle than she ever was as Batgirl. Stop generalizing.

[Rac7d*]

No its that she was a much better character as Oracle than she ever was as Batgirl. Stop generalizing.

Good thing she operates as Oracle more then she does as batgirl
But that’s not enough for them

[thwhtGuardian]

No its that she was a much better character as Oracle than she ever was as Batgirl. Stop generalizing.

That's more than just a little bit subjective, but also neither here nor there considering the subject at hand. Death threats are not cool.

[D.Z]

There used to be lot more of those kind of crazy fans in the old days.

But at the same time, many editors and writers do go out to "ruin" characters or alienate fanbases. Some characters or versions of characters cannot be fixed, no matter what you do, because some of the fans refuse to go along with the fixing.

[OopsIdiditagain]

I hate how fans think they can bully writers into retconning something just because they don't like a change

[kcekada]

No its that she was a much better character as Oracle than she ever was as Batgirl. Stop generalizing.

I don't think either Oracle or Batgirl is better than the other. Oracle may be perceived as the better character -- because she was written better and with more depth in Birds of Prey (actually debuting in Suicide Squad). But there have been good (and some not as good) stories of Batgirl as well. Personally, I prefer her as Batgirl and prefer her to Batwoman (a character who seems a bit redundant), but enjoyed her as Oracle as well.