Originally Posted by
Silvanus
I think that the question/threat you mention sounds like something the Ares of #0 (with his tendency to rationalize) might have said. But Wonder Woman rejected his philosophy. When she spares the minotaur, sides with "the girl in the middle of nowhere" against both king and queen, responds to Hades' cruelty with a gift, hugs the sister who is hurling a storm of blades at her, encourages Milan and Orion to find their inner heroes, shows concern for Demeter even though that goddess was on the wrong side, spares the First Born's life hen she could have sent him to Hades with Ares, gives up information to Cassandra rather than continuing to fight when Milan's life is in jeopardy, intentionally loses to Artemis in order to secure her assistance, etc., she shows that she cares not just about brining wars but about stopping peace. If her goal was just to "stop war," she would, for example, have killed the minotaur and the First Born, and thus prevented future killings. But because her goal was to bring peace by being peaceful ("be the change you seek in the world," as Ghandi said), she leaves them alive, even knowing that they may fight another day. in Azz's book, as summed up in the final issue, I think her actual question is "instead of making war, shouldn't we love each other and submit ot each other? Shouldn't we trust in each other's strengths?" (Unfortunately, the First Born's answer to that question is "no"--or yes, but defining "love" as possession--so she can't save him.)
I know you've said you consider the Azz run to be an exception, but it's where we get the most sustained development of the character in the New 52, so I don't think it can be pushed off to one side in any discussion of the New 52 Wonder Woman.
I do see plenty of places in other books where she takes the "threatening" stance you mention. But in JL, we've seen examples more recently of her showing a preference for peace--doing charitable work in (I think) Africa alongside Lex Luthor, giving Luthor a chance to show that he can be trusted, some of the comments she has made int he Darkseid arc. Even in the Finch arc, after Hippolyta's words about "managing conflict," she starts to show less impulsiveness and more of a tendency towards peace (i.e, trying to reform Donna. I don't think Finch is portraying this well, but she does seem to be trying.) Whether this development is or is not because "writers are saying 'this is not Wonder Woman,'" it is (as you seem to acknowledge, to some degree) happening, so it has to be part of how we assess New 52 Wonder Woman overall.
Jiminez could have made the same comments if he had heard the title "god of war" and seen a smattering of panels in which Wonder Woman does or says something violent, but never read any whole issues of Wonder Woman since the New 52 started. So while his comments about her new Olympian title, for example, reflect some reasonable assumptions about what being the god of war might mean, I just don't think they address what (if anything) being god of war has meant in the books.