Your Unpopular/Controversial Opinions on the X-Universe

[Hizashi]

I honestly don't understand why people are making a big deal of the whole poly thing as if its something that's heavily featured on every issue as opposed to a background thing. I'd much rather a silly and inoffensive poly/open relationship between Jean/scott/Emma/Logan than dragging out the same tired love triangle that's been plaguing the comics for over 25 years...

As for the alleged "ooc", Krakoa is supposed to be a new start, about letting the past go and starting anew. So it makes sense that's they let go of their grudges and try to start something new. It's not like any of those characters have previously stated that they're vehemently against any sort of open/poly relationship.

It's because people are culturally indoctrinated to believe that women that sleep with more than one men are whores due to millennia of sexist ideas. Many let go of that prejudice, but not everyone.

And of course no one in the world had the experiences and powers those four had and still many find no problem in having open or poly relationships. It's also not like Logan didn't have a ton of casual relationships, Emma too probably did in her Hellfire days, and Scott would naturally want to be with both Jean and Emma if they wanted to.

That slutshaming most likely plays a part but I think it's always because Scott and Login being in an open/poly relationship and playing house together doesn't fit the stoic alpha male type they view them as.

Nice Strawmen. Background details are important; a character not stating a dislike for something doesn't mean that they approve of its opposite or an alternative; the answer to the triangle is to stop using it, not necessarily a poly triangle/quadrangle; there's nothing silly about character relationships, or else no one would care about representation; no one is making this only about Jean or Emma; I'm not convinced that Scott would want a poly-relationship with Jean and Emma, despite jokes made by the fandom.

Don't assign motivations to others, you can ask for clarification if you need it.

[Anchorsify]

Plenty of jewish people, like with muslims and christians, get tattoos despite being forbidden. Kitty isn't orthodox and seems to reform jew (judging by the woman rabbi at her wedding) and reform tend to be more lax about tattoos than in orthodoxy. The cremation was disappointing along with the lack of jewishness at her funeral, they could at least have Magneto or Bobby or even Lorna recite the Kaddish.

I agree with the last bit, but any real reference to her religion prior to her ressurection to speak on any of those issues should have really been done. Or even after as she gets the second set of (rather awful) knuckle tattoos. I will agree with you that this is poor writing—but poor writing can (and imo does) lead to character assassination here for kitty, because of all these issues.

I mean one Kitty isn't 14 anymore, she's a grown adult woman and is allowed to do more ~naughty~ stuff. Given how she just came back from the dead and how Krakoa is just one big endless springbreak island, it's not out of character for Kitty to be partying and enjoying herself and for the people around her to not be concerned much. Mutants on Krakoa are celebrating a victory at last, along their future finally being certain for the first time, as well as the previously lost mutants now resurrected. Family and Friends are now reunited after years apart and mutants have managed to triumph over death, so it fits with the general theme of Krakoa that Kitty is celebrating. Ororo was a mother figure to Kitty, she's not her mother and I don't think it's Ororo place to tell an adult Kitty wether she can drink or who she can kiss.

She can, she just never has before in any other book. Ever. In her fourty+ years of history. And she's been over 14 for the vast majority of that time. At what point do you agree it is just out of character? Or do you believe anything written and thusly canon is impirically in character?

And no offence but I have to laugh at your outrage over Kitty kissing people. It's just so silly. As long as it's same and consentual I don't see the issue with her kissing a woman while celebrating her coming back to life. It's not like she just had a public orgy right there.

Seems a little rude but whatever, see above for why it is completely out of character. (Not the woman specifically part, but that she is doing that at all—it was cringy the first time too)

Kitty isn't the only character who's recent history aren't being brought up, neither are Monet's and Roxy recently dealing with emplate, or Betsy-Kwannon body swap and the trauma for Kwannon, or Jean recently being brought back from the dead, or Hope feeling about kid Cable killing her dad, Vulcan being allowed to just stroll around despite his megalomanic history and killing the second class of X-men and etc. There's a reason for that and I think its going to be addressed in Xos and the aftermath.

But some of those people have had their histories brought up.
Excalibur 1 addressed in general Betsy's aversion to ever speaking to Kwannon and fallen angels heavily went into kwannon's identity relating to betsy and her prior life with the hand. I hope you are right, but I am not so sure it will be for those that aren't, given how it seems to be up to the writers to do so, and they.. aren't, largely. Fallen angels did many things wrong but at least it addressed that.

It's not character assassination, it's just Duggan poor writing and he hasn't done anything compelling in marauders so I'm glad to see another writer is tackling marauders for x of swords.

I've given him time enough imo to fix the flaws of his writing. Character assassination is a form of bad writing, most would agree. I happen to think both are taking place, because he is completely changing her character without lead up or proper explanation. Never before have Emma and Kitty been anything close to best friends (much less close friends) since before this book, and that is as much because of their history and Emma's original intent to kidnap her as it was their personalities. Until now.

People have talked about Emma's history as a villain and while I personally have no problems with her being on the council, I do have an issue with people saying she has grown or evolved past her history. Ressurecting Shaw and beginning the hellfire club and bringing back that aspect of her past directly shows how she hasnt evolved past it, seeing as how Shaw has now killed Kitty and her little games have harmed others—none of that points to her growing or evolving. It actually looks a lot like Emma up to things she should be past but isn't for whatever reason. And the fact that Kitty of all people isn't calling her out on it is mind boggling. Especially if you want to say that Emma and Kitty are friends–"you want to work with and elevate your abuser to a council position? The guy who had you convinced kidnapping me was the right thing to do?" Is an obvious conversation that never happened. And won't.

No one wants Kitty and Emma together as a couple, and just because Kitty's attraction to women was finally confirmed after it being implied for years (even Claremont himself said that she experienced same gender attraction but was never allowed to confirm it in comics) doesn't mean she's going to commit debauchery with every woman she's shown on panel with. Again I don't know if you're super young or just have victorian sensibilities, but having an adult character getting drunk and kissing other people isn't character assassination or implying the character has lost all their previously established morals and become a "loose woman", as you seem to heavily imply.

I implied nothing of the sort, but since you are taking away such assumptions, let me be clear: there is nothing inherently wrong with that sort of behavior (though some on this very forum decried piotr kissing kitty at random in Age of X-man when they didn't have their full memories of one another and were gleefully happy about kitty kissing a random woman in marauders) as long as there are no issues with consent (which hasn't been implied thus far). The issue is that it isnt something *Kitty* (or Kate, though Kitty has been headmistress without a need for a name change and been to the white house as Kitty, so the name change itself is just another nonsense choice by Duggan to differentiate his version from others and make his mark.. poorly, on the character) would ever do. Because she has never done it.

And of all the characters to be taking part in the revelry, kitty is one of the ones it makes the least sense to do any such thing because of, seeing as how she is on a ship away from party island and both kissing incidents were with non mutants, away from the island. The party atmosphere doesn't exactly travel worldwide.

There definitely are people who have expressed a shipping interest in the two, but hey, one thing to agree on if you also feel that is a crazy ship.

Just maybe try less to insult whatever morals you assume I have because we disagree about characterization in the future, because it's completely unnecessary.

[TheCape]

Coming from the perspective of a Wolverine fan, no i don't find belivable the whole poly thing, for another side is so minor for Logan new status quo that i can ignore it pretty easily.

The whole discourse on Krakoa is like seeing the pro-Edelgard and the Anti-Edelgard camp in the 3H fandom, but unlike that (i'm pro Edel) i'm not sure on what side i'm on in this one.

Hickman run is interesting but a part of me is scared that he will fumble the conclusion like he did with Secret Wars.

[Frontier]

Coming from the perspective of a Wolverine fan, no i don't find belivable the whole poly thing, for another side is so minor for Logan new status quo that i can ignore it pretty easily.

The whole discourse on Krakoa is like seeing the pro-Edelgard and the Anti-Edelgard camp in the 3H fandom, but unlike that (i'm pro Edel) i'm not sure on what side i'm on in this one.

Hickman run is interesting but a part of me is scared that he will fumble the conclusion like he did with Secret Wars.

I'm always pro-Claude (but I have a soft spot for Dimitri) .

[TheCape]

I'm always pro-Claude (but I have a soft spot for Dimitri) .

I like all the sides, i just prefer Edel over all of then (even if Dimi never convinced me regarding his plans).

[Hizashi]

Coming from the perspective of a Wolverine fan, no i don't find belivable the whole poly thing, for another side is so minor for Logan new status quo that i can ignore it pretty easily.

The whole discourse on Krakoa is like seeing the pro-Edelgard and the Anti-Edelgard camp in the 3H fandom, but unlike that (i'm pro Edel) i'm not sure on what side i'm on in this one.

Hickman run is interesting but a part of me is scared that he will fumble the conclusion like he did with Secret Wars.

Hey, Pro-Edel! Same.

Why is it so hard to believe that there are people who don’t like the current relationship stuff?

[loke13]

I agree with the last bit, but any real reference to her religion prior to her ressurection to speak on any of those issues should have really been done. Or even after as she gets the second set of (rather awful) knuckle tattoos. I will agree with you that this is poor writing—but poor writing can (and imo does) lead to character assassination here for kitty, because of all these issues.



She can, she just never has before in any other book. Ever. In her fourty+ years of history. And she's been over 14 for the vast majority of that time. At what point do you agree it is just out of character? Or do you believe anything written and thusly canon is impirically in character?




Seems a little rude but whatever, see above for why it is completely out of character. (Not the woman specifically part, but that she is doing that at all—it was cringy the first time too)




But some of those people have had their histories brought up.
Excalibur 1 addressed in general Betsy's aversion to ever speaking to Kwannon and fallen angels heavily went into kwannon's identity relating to betsy and her prior life with the hand. I hope you are right, but I am not so sure it will be for those that aren't, given how it seems to be up to the writers to do so, and they.. aren't, largely. Fallen angels did many things wrong but at least it addressed that.



I've given him time enough imo to fix the flaws of his writing. Character assassination is a form of bad writing, most would agree. I happen to think both are taking place, because he is completely changing her character without lead up or proper explanation. Never before have Emma and Kitty been anything close to best friends (much less close friends) since before this book, and that is as much because of their history and Emma's original intent to kidnap her as it was their personalities. Until now.

People have talked about Emma's history as a villain and while I personally have no problems with her being on the council, I do have an issue with people saying she has grown or evolved past her history. Ressurecting Shaw and beginning the hellfire club and bringing back that aspect of her past directly shows how she hasnt evolved past it, seeing as how Shaw has now killed Kitty and her little games have harmed others—none of that points to her growing or evolving. It actually looks a lot like Emma up to things she should be past but isn't for whatever reason. And the fact that Kitty of all people isn't calling her out on it is mind boggling. Especially if you want to say that Emma and Kitty are friends–"you want to work with and elevate your abuser to a council position? The guy who had you convinced kidnapping me was the right thing to do?" Is an obvious conversation that never happened. And won't.



I implied nothing of the sort, but since you are taking away such assumptions, let me be clear: there is nothing inherently wrong with that sort of behavior (though some on this very forum decried piotr kissing kitty at random in Age of X-man when they didn't have their full memories of one another and were gleefully happy about kitty kissing a random woman in marauders) as long as there are no issues with consent (which hasn't been implied thus far). The issue is that it isnt something *Kitty* (or Kate, though Kitty has been headmistress without a need for a name change and been to the white house as Kitty, so the name change itself is just another nonsense choice by Duggan to differentiate his version from others and make his mark.. poorly, on the character) would ever do. Because she has never done it.

And of all the characters to be taking part in the revelry, kitty is one of the ones it makes the least sense to do any such thing because of, seeing as how she is on a ship away from party island and both kissing incidents were with non mutants, away from the island. The party atmosphere doesn't exactly travel worldwide.

There definitely are people who have expressed a shipping interest in the two, but hey, one thing to agree on if you also feel that is a crazy ship.

Just maybe try less to insult whatever morals you assume I have because we disagree about characterization in the future, because it's completely unnecessary.

Seems it really boils down to the fact that you have a very rigid definition of who the character of Kitty Pryde is and are unable to reconcile that with the direction that her character has been taken in DoX despite it being laid out pretty well by Frostedemma why the character of Kate is acting the way she's acting. If anything her suddenly adopting a militant Persona and becoming headmistress of the school was a bigger departure from her character than anything we've seen in Dawn of X but I digress.

Build a funeral pyre in your mind for the old Kitty Pryde and embrace the Glorious Dawn of Captain Kate Pryde bisexual icon and Red Queen of the Hellfire Trading Company!!!!

[Wiccan]

I feel conflicted about this. In a way, yeah, it's like Duggan is kind of just saying "Yeah Kitty and Emma like each other now because I want to lol". But in the other hand I really enjoy it. I think the idea of Kitty kinda saying **** it and starting to do all the things she considered bad but kinda has always wanted to do it's cool. It should probably just have been developed more before it reached the point it is now.

[Kitty&Piotr<3]

It's an unpopular but true criticism that characterization and existing canon don't matter in this era. Like at all.

[Zelena]

It's an unpopular but true criticism that characterization and existing canon don't matter in this era. Like at all.

Unpopular? There isn’t and won’t be any accurate poll about it.
People who didn’t like it probably stopped buying and reading the books.

I am a different person from twenty years but not that different.

(Nice avatar, Kitty&Piotr<3, and I’m not a Marvel Girl fan.)

[frostedemma]

Can we stop with this.

Like, it's not as bad as straight guys really pushing for the idea that there's absolutely no contact between Scott and Logan, but it's kind of annoying too, cause they definetely are both with Jean. And it really feels like thinly-veiled "haha scott and logan gay" jokes.

I'm literally gay, and the punchline isn't that "haha scott and logan being gay" but rather them all dating each other. A lot of people have picked up some homoeroticism between Scott and Logan over the years and are having fun with this poly/open relationship.

[Kitty&Piotr<3]

Very odd to see people denying jean and Logan when they sit naked in a hot tub together.

She had a bikini on

[frostedemma]

Nice Strawmen. Background details are important; a character not stating a dislike for something doesn't mean that they approve of its opposite or an alternative; the answer to the triangle is to stop using it, not necessarily a poly triangle/quadrangle; there's nothing silly about character relationships, or else no one would care about representation; no one is making this only about Jean or Emma; I'm not convinced that Scott would want a poly-relationship with Jean and Emma, despite jokes made by the fandom.

Don't assign motivations to others, you can ask for clarification if you need it.

It's not a strawmen when you gave no explanations as to why you're so vehemently opposed to the poly/open relationships and a lot of the vocal criticisms about on the internet has been based in sexism/slutshaming and or alpha male nonsense. Things don't exist in a vacuum so I don't think completely leftside to come to this reasoning but I'm sorry if you got offended my goal was not to thrown stones.

Again what's wrong with a little silly nonsense, especially when its in the background? Does Logan always have to be the brooding, cigar in his mouth lone wolf and Scott always be riddle with self-guilt and not allowing himself to have fun and enjoy himself?

Wanting representation in relationships doesn't mean that every relationship depicted on panel has to be taken with the upmost seriousness with no silly and (inoffensively) mindless pairing. This is definitely a situation where we can have our cake and eat it too.

[cranger]

It's not a strawmen when you gave no explanations as to why you're so vehemently opposed to the poly/open relationships and a lot of the vocal criticisms about on the internet has been based in sexism/slutshaming and or alpha male nonsense. Things don't exist in a vacuum so I don't think completely leftside to come to this reasoning but I'm sorry if you got offended my goal was not to thrown stones.

Again what's wrong with a little silly nonsense, especially when its in the background? Does Logan always have to be the brooding, cigar in his mouth lone wolf and Scott always be riddle with self-guilt and not allowing himself to have fun and enjoy himself?

Wanting representation in relationships doesn't mean that every relationship depicted on panel has to be taken with the upmost seriousness with no silly and (inoffensively) mindless pairing. This is definitely a situation where we can have our cake and eat it too.

I am going to step around a lot of the minefield here, but this grouping is only "shocking" or "giggles" because of the characters selected and the established attitudes. To pretend otherwise is being disingenuous. At best you just don't care that characters people do feel represented by are being badly written.

[Havok83]

She had a bikini on

Which she took off