Join 3,512 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


"Avengers Assimilate"
March 30, 2013 1:21 PM   Subscribe

"All of which is admirable, but that's not actually the speech Havok gave. Havok's speech makes a huge leap from, "my minority identity doesn't define me" to a rejection of minority identity. Havok is a mutant, but he says the word is divisive and that it represents everything he hates. He asks people not to use it. He is, definitively and explicitly, self-loathing about his identity." -- Comics Alliance's Andrew Wheeler talks about the identity politics in the new Marvel comic Uncanny Avengers.

The writer of the issue in question, Rick Remender, wasn't too happy with this criticism at first and took to Twitter to say so, but has since apologised.

Mutant rights in the Marvel Universe have been long used as a metaphor for various civil right struggles, not always done with the kind of subtlety or dignity you'd want.

Uncanny Avengers is a new title that sprung from Marvel's latest event, Avengers vs X-Men, which has put the whole "mutant civil rights" subplot in the various X-Men titles back on the agenda.
posted by MartinWisse (52 comments total) 8 users marked this as a favorite

 
"Say, what does 'uncanny' mean anyway?"

"Strange, unnatural, unsettling, disturbing."

"Huh, do we really want to associate our big-ticket superhero team with that word?"

"Well it worked for X-Men!"
posted by JHarris at 1:27 PM on March 30, 2013 [2 favorites]


Mutant rights would be a better metaphor for civil rights in the real world if more comic book writers came from populations that have historically had to assert their civil rights.

As things stand, mutant rights are more often a metaphor for how young white men think of what civil rights and minority identities are actually about. And that sometimes comes packaged with blind spots, unexamined assumptions, and genteel prejudice.

So, on one hand, comic books are an interesting and useful barometer. But on the other hand, these aren't living members of oppressed minorities: they're simulacra mostly made up by members of the normative majority.
posted by Nomyte at 1:29 PM on March 30, 2013 [35 favorites]


That's not really an excuse for making Havok into a dick though. I dunno, maybe that's going somewhere, maybe that isn't. Hobopissgate muddies the water a little though, still, good on Remender for apologizing on that, and it's not like an urge to rage at the peanut gallery isn't something that any modern writer of sequrntial works with access to an Internet connection has to deal with.
posted by Artw at 1:41 PM on March 30, 2013


I will preface this by saying all I have read of this series is the page that started all of this. I have, however, read a hell of a lot of fallout from this page.

What Remender said about it was boneheaded. His apology for what he said could've been better, but at least he realized it was needed. To be fair to him, never before in human history have people with an apparently enormous amount of free time been so able to immediately voice their displeasure with things. Used to be the makers of comics had at least a week before the mail started coming in, and sometimes there was a buffer between themselves and that mail in the form of editorial. Now everybody gets both barrels of rage, uncut and instant upon arrival. And consequently the targets of ire react faster than they might have once upon a time: tweet in haste, repent at leisure. I think that people will gradually get better at fielding insta-rage (stepping away from the computer usually works pretty good) but that day isn't today.

As to what Remender wrote, I think people are missing the big picture, which is that comics like this are built on the illusion of change. Few people enough have clued into this that there is still somehow fan freakout when a beloved character bites it. If you can't wrap your head around the idea that Captain America/Batman/Superman/Spider-Man isn't really dead -- and I mean, isn't really dead and will be back in the comics and alive again in time for a movie that will be out that summer -- then certainly you won't be able to grasp this, but the whole "a world that hates and fears them" is so central to the X-Men mythos that you really, just really, never ever, ever have to worry about prejudice against mutants not being a thing in the MU. Without it, the X-Men are basically just the Legion in modern day. Uncanny Avengers is a neat idea, but it's a comic that will probably be called something else in a few years, because all it can really do is show the attempt to make the X-Men a mainstream part of their world. And to really make it sting when that effort fails, you have to have the true believer who's sure everything's gonna be different this time. But it will never be any different any time because mainstream superhero comics series cannot really change without ending.

I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that's why Havok is saying things that sound wrong. The idea is that, eventually, you see that he was wrong.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 1:51 PM on March 30, 2013 [3 favorites]


One thing that Wild Cards got right and Marvel mostly hasn't is the fact that the huge majority of mutations are not benign. The whole mutant rights theme is kind of disconnected from reality because in the Marvel universe, mutations allow you to fly, initiate nuclear fusion by sneezing, and grow really good weed just by thinking about it or whatever. So it's kind of hard to connect that to substantive issues. Maybe if they showed that there are really awful mutations in the Marvel universe and the persecution that THOSE people see, so we aren't in the weird position of being told to feel sorry for people who are awesomely powerful and have immense, perfectly shaped breasts.
posted by George_Spiggott at 1:52 PM on March 30, 2013 [11 favorites]


initiate nuclear fusion by sneezing, and grow really good weed just by thinking about it or whatever.

Both those things would get you pretty feared and hated in this world, or at least earn visits from uniformed goons.
posted by Artw at 1:56 PM on March 30, 2013


Nomyte,

The X-Men were created by Satn (Lieber) Lee and Jack (Jacob Kurtzburg) Kirby, both American Jews with personal experience of anti-semitism. Kirby fought in WW II and saw the Holocaust in person, discovering a concentration camp while a Scout for the US Army.

But I agree with your identity theory. Let's go one step further and restrict practicing certain arts and technologies to those groups who invented them. Penicillin, movies, computers, the internet- hell, electricity in general- please don't try to develop or use them unless you are a white man.

Thank you!
posted by TSOL at 1:57 PM on March 30, 2013 [6 favorites]


Wow, that's a churlish and oblivious response. Quick, how many issues does Kirby still work on?
posted by klangklangston at 2:04 PM on March 30, 2013 [9 favorites]


Let's also note that the X-Men just went through a several-year period in which Scott Summers (Alex's brother) staked out a particular position on the role of mutants in society, and was arguably completely wrong about it. Whether Cyclops was right or not, it ended tragically.

So let's not make the mistake of thinking just because Alex as a character says or does something that the author approves of it and attack him as if Alex was expressing the author's own political/social opinion.
posted by straight at 2:15 PM on March 30, 2013


Few people enough have clued into this that there is still somehow fan freakout when a beloved character bites it.

People freak out because comics companies hold an unjustifiable monopoly on their characters. Long, long after the original creators have died pop culture icons like Batman are still under copyright, likely to remain so forever (unlike public domain hero Sherlock Holmes, who occasionally appears in DC Batman stories without permission from Doyle's descendants). It's bad enough that media conglomerates give very few creators licence to tell new stories using characters our parents and grandparents grew up with. Killing off a character like Superman meant that absolutely nobody was permitted to write a Clark Kent story for a year or two. Killing off a character is a story embargo, and it's an abuse of an already abusive monopoly.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 2:15 PM on March 30, 2013 [6 favorites]


And maybe some of the other Marvel zombies around here has the time/energy to document my vague recollection that Alex Summers has often been portrayed as being on the wrong side of "political" disagreements between mutants.
posted by straight at 2:18 PM on March 30, 2013 [1 favorite]


X-Factor were the corporate sellout the X-Men with goverment ties, so there's that.
posted by Artw at 2:21 PM on March 30, 2013 [1 favorite]


Few people enough have clued into this that there is still somehow fan freakout when a beloved character bites it.

Damien isn't coming back, I'm pretty sure of that.
posted by Artw at 2:22 PM on March 30, 2013 [2 favorites]


Which completely sucks because we're never getting a 200-issue Nightwing And Robin series, which would basically be the platonic ideal of comics.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 2:36 PM on March 30, 2013 [6 favorites]


Talking of Morrisin arcs that cease being a part of things once they're done, his New X-Men run was a pretty great post-feared and hated X-Men.
posted by Artw at 2:40 PM on March 30, 2013 [1 favorite]


"[...] Alex Summers has often been portrayed as being on the wrong side of "political" disagreements between mutants."

Havok got a letter from Val Cooper the other day. He opened it and loved it. It's because he's a sucker.

Yeah, this whole fiasco - while raising important issues and inspiring worthwhile discussions - is based on a scene wherein Havok acts in a manner I find largely consistent with how the character has been written throughout its publication history. He's spent years of his life working for the US government and just recently got run out of Madrox's X-Factor for being too square.
posted by Morvran Avagddu at 3:02 PM on March 30, 2013 [3 favorites]


One thing that Wild Cards got right and Marvel mostly hasn't is the fact that the huge majority of mutations are not benign.

Wasn't that the entire point of Alan Moore's Watchmen and the end of Silver Age comicdom?

It has been 26 years already, and neither DC or Marvel has fully caught up to the idea that super-powers would fuck people up and make civilization unmanageable.
posted by vhsiv at 3:03 PM on March 30, 2013 [3 favorites]


Havok is a mutant, but he says the word is divisive

Yeah, and that's another thing! I resent you people using that word. That's our word for making fun of you! We need it! Well, I'm taking back our word, and I'm taking back my son!
posted by obiwanwasabi at 3:08 PM on March 30, 2013 [2 favorites]


Both those things would get you pretty feared and hated in this world, or at least earn visits from uniformed goons.

The tabletop RPG Mutant City Blues, a superpowered Police Procedural game, looks at thermal impact of powers, including the ones that a) get you sanction, b) get you pressured to work for intelligence agencies, or both. It's a pretty clever game, overall.
posted by GenjiandProust at 3:31 PM on March 30, 2013 [3 favorites]


Something that makes this speech even more tone-deaf is that X-Men: First Class did a pretty good job of showing how Xavier's various privileges made him blind to the way that other mutants couldn't pass and might feel differently. It also made him a bit of an ass and a jerk, which Uncanny Avengers seems to be trying, although apparently unwittingly, to replicate....
posted by GenjiandProust at 3:35 PM on March 30, 2013 [4 favorites]


George_Spiggott: One thing that Wild Cards got right and Marvel mostly hasn't is the fact that the huge majority of mutations are not benign.

vhsiv: Wasn't that the entire point of Alan Moore's Watchmen and the end of Silver Age comicdom?

Watchmen contains exactly one character with any physical abnormalities, and he's essentially a god.
posted by baf at 3:38 PM on March 30, 2013 [2 favorites]


Damien isn't coming back, I'm pretty sure of that.

Jason Todd came back, and fandom at large literally voted to have him killed. Damian's coming back.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 3:43 PM on March 30, 2013 [4 favorites]


Wasn't that the entire point of Alan Moore's Watchmen and the end of Silver Age comicdom?

Superheroes pretty much make no sense if you think about them in terms of the "real" world, so if you're going to tell a superhero story its going to happen in a universe where the rules of reality allow for them. sure, a story in which you pull that rug out from under them can be fun, but after a while everything pulling a Watchmen just becomes trite.
posted by Artw at 3:59 PM on March 30, 2013 [2 favorites]


which Uncanny Avengers seems to be trying, although apparently unwittingly, to replicate....

See that's the thing, it doesn't look at all unwitting to me, as it's totally in-character for Havok to be a jerk. (And X-Men: First Class is hardly the first to make Professor X out to be a jerk.)
posted by straight at 4:09 PM on March 30, 2013 [1 favorite]


Watchmen contains exactly one character with any physical abnormalities, and he's essentially a god.

True, but Jon Ostrander 'proves' that mortal homo sapiens aren't psychologically equipped to have such powers.

The rest of them merely put on costumes and became reckless sociopaths.

(Of course, Zak Snyder missed this, and allowed everyone to act like a Golden Age hero.)

(Did Snyder read comics as a child? Did he even understand the distinction of Moore's GN before he took the directorial job?)
posted by vhsiv at 4:15 PM on March 30, 2013


Superheroes pretty much make no sense if you think about them in terms of the "real" world, so if you're going to tell a superhero story its going to happen in a universe where the rules of reality allow for them. sure, a story in which you pull that rug out from under them can be fun, but after a while everything pulling a Watchmen just becomes trite.

Yeah, one of the things that's funny and kind of telling about some people's take on Watchmen relative to superheroes (and their take on the grimdark rapey parts of The Walking Dead relative to post-apocalyptic science fiction, and their take on Game of Thrones relative to epic fantasy) is that they're convinced that Watchmen is more "realistic" not because the characters are better-defined than those of almost all superhero comics to that point (which they are), and not because the book is deliberately metaphoric in a way virtually no superhero comics were to that point (which is true), or even because Gibbons created an incredibly detailed, fully-realized environment in the NYC neighborhood where most of the book takes place (which he did, and no one ever talks about that, but goddamn dude Dave Gibbons!), but because "man, that shit's fucked UP."

Why is it somehow more realistic for Rorschach to leave a guy to saw his own hand off Mad Max-style than it is for Batman and Green Arrow to exist? What makes Doctor Manhattan more plausible than the Green Lantern Corps and Wolverine? Nothing at all. The idea that superheroes who are more disturbed and violent are more realistic is an idea embraced by someone who thinks reality is inherently, predominantly disturbing and violent. I mean, to be sure, shit is fucked up. But is shit mostly fucked up? I mean, the economy is wrecked and there is a constant specter of fascism and corporate greed and basic evil, but if you look outside your window, do you see a scene from The Road? Is a person in our world more likely to barbecue a baby than to rock it? Come on. No. Grimdark isn't reality. Reality is reality. Reality is less grimdark than not, because grimdark is not sustainable. Grimdark, in reality, can only ever be a blip, no matter how grim and dark it is...because unless we all just fucking die it's so grim and dark, eventually things return to a tolerable state. Not a great state, maybe not even all that good a state, but one where people are happier than not. That's reality, and if it weren't, none of us would be here wasting our time talking about silly bullshit like whether an X-Men comic is properly sympathetic to questions of racial identification.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 4:24 PM on March 30, 2013 [10 favorites]


The best thing to come out of this.
posted by Artw at 4:25 PM on March 30, 2013 [3 favorites]


The article seems to be complaining that Havok's speech is not a perfect summation of the article authors current idealised position on minority identity, rather than one of several possible perspectives by a particular character.
posted by biffa at 4:27 PM on March 30, 2013 [4 favorites]


Being a mutant isn't like being gay or Jewish or whatever. Mutants have different genes than humans do. That's a real, intrinsic difference, not a superficial one. Humans and mutants are divided by their genetic heritage, just as different species of animals are. I don't want to be offensive, but would we go around saying oh, monkeys or bugs, we're all in this together? No.
posted by Joe in Australia at 4:52 PM on March 30, 2013


Marvel's mutant/non-mutant prejudicial distinction has never sat well with me. The origin of someone's superpowers is nowhere near as important as the fact that the individual concerned has superpowers, and DC's general approach (and pretty much every other superhero world) seems to reflect that.

The JLA have a broad diversity of origins and nobody really cares - they're all superheroes, in the eyes of the public and each other. Some individuals get some prejudice due to particular quirks of their origin, for example Zatanna (magician) and Zauriel (angel), but broadly speaking it's irrelevant whether you got your powers from drinking a serum, an alien giving you a magic item, years of training, or were born with them. The fact is that you are now a separate class of being from the common run of humanity.

I don't see how the typical normal citizen of the Marvel world can tell that Havok is a mutant and Spider-Man is not, and even if they somehow can, I don't see why it is a matter of such importance to them.
posted by aeschenkarnos at 4:55 PM on March 30, 2013 [2 favorites]


One thing that Wild Cards got right and Marvel mostly hasn't is the fact that the huge majority of mutations are not benign. The whole mutant rights theme is kind of disconnected from reality because in the Marvel universe, mutations allow you to fly, initiate nuclear fusion by sneezing, and grow really good weed just by thinking about it or whatever. So it's kind of hard to connect that to substantive issues.

At times, they've taken a stab at it. The Morlocks, for example, were a Claremont-era community of mutants living in NYC's underground tunnels, too ugly or deformed to fit into society (and many made uglier by one of their own). Morrison's run and beyond featured many mutants who weren't, say, Nightcrawler (visibly non-baseline human, but charming and with useful powers) but more like No-Girl (floating brain in a jar) or Glob Herman (body made of translucent wax) who were more interested in learning to live normally than saving the world.

And there was one famous story where Wolverine hunts down a young mutant whose power just kicked in for the first time, which is to constantly and uncontrollably melt organic matter all around him. It's not his fault or his intent, but he's suddenly the most lethal mutant on the planet, and if word got around that a mutant was the one who just dissolved his hometown...
posted by delfin at 5:25 PM on March 30, 2013 [2 favorites]


I don't want to be offensive, but would we go around saying oh, monkeys or bugs, we're all in this together? No.

Attitudes like this may be fine it Latvaria, but other places have more progressive views, thank you.
posted by GenjiandProust at 5:37 PM on March 30, 2013 [5 favorites]


I don't see how the typical normal citizen of the Marvel world can tell that Havok is a mutant and Spider-Man is not, and even if they somehow can, I don't see why it is a matter of such importance to them.

Typically, it's an issue of what happens to these adolescents whose powers manifest all of a sudden and mark them publicly as both other and dangerous in a way that is out of their control and understanding.

So, to take your example, it's one thing when Peter Parker secretly becomes powerful and no one knows it. It's entirely another when Havok first manifests his ability, raises his voice and accidentally destroys an entire building and every witness can see Alex Summers doing it and freaks out.

At these moments, parents can freak out about their children, communities can freak out about their perceived safety, authorities can freak out about crisis management and the mutant him/herself can freak out about a million things. And ultimately you end up with a conversation about dealing with the mutation, as opposed to the person. Part of the purpose of the most well written X-Men stories was to say "In all the talk about safety and policy, let's not forget that we're talking about people whose rights should be protected."

which, when it comes down to it, is a pretty good point in this day and age for a lot of our national conversations.
posted by shmegegge at 5:44 PM on March 30, 2013 [1 favorite]


By the way, the digital comics revolution has gotten me back into super hero books for the first time in almost 15 years, and can I just mention something?

fuck you marvel. Please stop ruining Spider-Man. that is all.
posted by shmegegge at 5:46 PM on March 30, 2013 [5 favorites]


The X-Men were created by Satn (Lieber) Lee and Jack (Jacob Kurtzburg) Kirby, both American Jews with personal experience of anti-semitism. Kirby fought in WW II and saw the Holocaust in person, discovering a concentration camp while a Scout for the US Army.

I thought Silver Age comics (notably Green Arrow / Green Lantern) also were a product of the massive social change that had been occurring since the start of the Civil Rights movement, and X-Men was part of this phenomenon.
posted by KokuRyu at 6:15 PM on March 30, 2013


Meanwhile Black Bolt, King of the Inhumans, rolls his eyes and thinks, "How about a ruler of a super-race so powerful HE CANNOT OPEN HIS MOUTH. His VOICE is DESTRUCTION ITSELF. That's some heavy shit! But do WE get pored over and our every action analyzed? Nooooo........"

Then he sighs and destroys the moon.
posted by BitterOldPunk at 6:24 PM on March 30, 2013 [11 favorites]


Character continuities aside, the argument here boils down to: "mutant" is not pejorative, but actually descriptive and therefore Havok is delivering... bassackwards (including all the implications that may have) rhetoric?
posted by P.o.B. at 6:28 PM on March 30, 2013


X-Men Origins: Cyclops Cat
posted by homunculus at 6:33 PM on March 30, 2013 [5 favorites]


Watchmen contains exactly one character with any physical abnormalities, and he's essentially a god.

Except for the completely superhuman feats that characters regularly perform, in the comic. And the psychics.
posted by kafziel at 6:49 PM on March 30, 2013


"Mutant" can be and often is a pejorative in the Marvel universe. Their status has varied widely from place to place and era to era.

"Mutie" has been the racial slur of choice, shown as being on par with your favorite real-world racial slurs. As with some of those, some mutants self-identify with it proudly (somewhere Randall is saying "we're taking it back"). Many outsiders use it with a bit more menace, as well as a handful of sillier-sounding epithets like "genejoke" or the ever-popular "freak."

As far as mutants under the law, a Mutant Control Act was the impetus for one of the most famous X-Men storylines, sparking an alternate future that left mutants dead or in internment camps. That hasn't happened in mainstream Marvel America, but Mutant Registration Acts have passed there and in Canada, along with a more generic Superhuman Registration Act that helped spark the recent Civil War crossover.

One island nation in Marvel, Genosha, hit all the extremes; its government enslaved and mindwiped mutants and used them as a labor force, only to be eventually overthrown by Magneto and set up as a pure mutant nation, only for THAT and 99% of its inhabitants to be annihilated by Sentinel robots.

As far as generic American superhumans, they're obviously all over the place as to where they get their powers from: government serums, toxic substances, spider bites, radiation, otherworldly origins, magic, technology, you name it. The phrase "Children of the Atom" has been applied to mutants at times, hinting that they started appearing en masse thanks to background radiation from the modern nuclear era. Ironically, the baseline-appearing mutants like Havok are often the most feared and lashed out at simply because they DON'T stand out; you can see an angry Hulk coming, but someone like Havok who can melt an aircraft carrier is viewed as 'hiding' his powers. The nature of the beast -- to fear that which is different.

Which is why Havok is saying "we're NOT different, we're people like you." The reason mutants still resonate so loudly in the Marvel universe is that it's hard to say that he's right OR wrong.
posted by delfin at 7:25 PM on March 30, 2013 [1 favorite]


As far as mutants under the law, a Mutant Control Act was the impetus for one of the most famous X-Men storylines, sparking an alternate future that left mutants dead or in internment camps.

Speaking of which: Bryan Singer: I’ll “Repair” Things From The Last Stand in Days of Future Past

X-Men: Days of Future Past Adds Previous X-Men Star, Twilight Actor, Iron Man 3 Actress
posted by homunculus at 7:37 PM on March 30, 2013


Which is why Havok is saying "we're NOT different, we're people like you."

Right, so maybe I'm missing something, but that is exactly what the article has a problem with. I've read enough X-Men since the 80's to understand what "mutant" means, and I guess I just can't understand where the big problem is with Havok's speech.
posted by P.o.B. at 7:49 PM on March 30, 2013


Comparing the oppression of a "minority" group with superpowers to actual historically oppressed minorities has always seemed a bit like when NRA or Romney types compare themselves to minorities because their gun or inheritance rights are being oppressed. I suppose one can imagine a realistic Randian world where the inherently brilliant and powerful are genuinely abused by the unsympathetic masses, but that's so far from the historical reality of oppression that such scenarios are more misleading than helpful. The oppression of superheroes seems about as illuminating a narrative as the oppression of the Galtians, and making those powers genetic only further muddies the metaphor. I'm not sure it's a metaphor worth saving.
posted by chortly at 8:59 PM on March 30, 2013 [3 favorites]


Absolutely, chortly - pretty much any mutant power (that isn't both destructive and uncontrolled), however trivial, is a ticket to a fortune, if you can only use it imaginatively. Fame too, if you want.

I get the "underclass resentment" theme, and fear of that is a reasonable and legitimate thing, especially if your superpower is "types at 900wpm" and you are distinctly inhuman in appearance. However, even the Fungal Secretary could earn enough money to get comfortably out of the middle class, and at that point he is pretty much at the same risk profile as any other rich but not super-rich person of an ethnic or subcultural minority, except that his minority includes someone who can time travel and beat his hate-crime-committing assailants up every day since they finished primary school.

Mutants are so much better off that it is absurd to feel sorry for them. But on the other hand, the US has an entire political party based on the premise of feeling sorry for rich people.
posted by aeschenkarnos at 1:31 AM on March 31, 2013


Mutants are so much better off that it is absurd to feel sorry for them. But on the other hand, the US has an entire political party based on the premise of feeling sorry for rich people.

I think that a key to understanding the "mutants are oppressed" theme is remembering what Stan Lee brought to comics. He intended his characters to have problems, unlike the previous generation of superheroes whose somewhat disconnected stories had become moribund. He wanted characters with problems, at least to some degree.

Therefore, the point is not to compare mutants with normal people, but to compare mutants with other superheroes. Iron Man may have a disability issue, but he's not hated by a large chunk of the populace. The Fantastic Four have issues, but they are wealthy and famous and (usually) supported. Mutants get to live with the fear that they might get kicked out of regular society if they are identified as mutants. If iy's a little silly, it's an idea from a comic book aimed squarely at kids 40 years ago, rather than a sophisticated analysis of diversity. If you can't accept the premise, you ought to avoid the comic in the same way that you can't read Batman if you are constantly picking at the fact that, by now, surely someone must have figured out that Wayne is the Batman and sued him out of existence....
posted by GenjiandProust at 4:27 AM on March 31, 2013 [1 favorite]


Comparing the oppression of a "minority" group with superpowers to actual historically oppressed minorities has always seemed a bit like when NRA or Romney types compare themselves to minorities because their gun or inheritance rights are being oppressed.

I've always assumed that, for a lot of X-Men readers, the plight of mutants represents not the oppression of minorities but nerds thinking, "Everyone picks on me because I'm smarter than they are."
posted by straight at 7:13 PM on March 31, 2013 [3 favorites]


A beginners' guide to the X-Men that ends with "you know what? watch the cartoon".

I watched the cartoon in the 90s and what I remember is everyone turns out to be a mutant. Any random character who shows up on screen for more than 20 seconds, except for maybe a couple of PFLAG-style accepting-and-caring parents, either has mutancy revealed or has mutancy imposed upon them via, like, Apocalypse's machines or something. Which puts a new spin on Havok's line. There is no point in dividing between mutants and non, because we are all Keynesians mutants now.
posted by brainwane at 8:32 AM on April 1, 2013


There's Mutants and there's Muties. You know the worst thing about muties? Muties always want credit for some shit they supposed to do. A mutie will brag about some shit a normal man just does. A mutie will say some shit like, "I ain't never tried to enslave mankind!" What do you want, a cookie?! You're not supposed to enslave mankind, you low-expectation-having motherfucker!
posted by zoo at 8:49 AM on April 1, 2013


... Is what I expected Havoc to say next. In case that bit isn't clear.
posted by zoo at 8:51 AM on April 1, 2013


Chris Havrock?
posted by Artw at 9:24 AM on April 1, 2013


A Moment of Silence for the Kitty Pryde Movie, Destroyed by Wolverine: Origins
posted by homunculus at 9:16 PM on April 3, 2013


Wolverine, Origins - what a piece of shit.
posted by Artw at 9:19 PM on April 3, 2013


« Older Trip Avisaargh - a tumblr collection of links the ...  |  Tyler the Creator's new album ... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments