Why Are Mutants The Prime Enemy?

And it's worth nothing discrimination goes both ways; many mutants are horrible racists and bigots as well. Starting with Apocalypse, who centuries before anyone ever knew what a mutant was decided 'You know, humans are stupid, puny, weak and inferior and they should be erradicated'.

Nevermind

edited 15th Jun '16 7:10:35 PM by Nikkolas

Bigots aren't really known for making nuanced distinctions, though. See, for example, the various Sikhs who have been assaulted or harassed by Islamophobes who can't tell the difference between Sikhs and Muslims.

The thing is many people in the Marvel Universe do hate other super-powered beings just as much as they hate Mutants. It's not a consensus. All of the bigots that exist in America don't all have a hive-mind on what they agree or disagree that they can't stand. The same goes for the Marvel Universe.

Every Superhero in the Marvel Universe has their moments of unbelievable dickishness. Iron Man one of the most well received Superheroes in the Marvel Universe do you know the litany of shit he's done? Even a fraction of which should cement him as a villain? Also the X-men are not representative of every mutant, no matter how much Cyclops wants them to be.

You know who else have those, every other fucking hero in the marvel universe. That doesn't really stand to scrutiny considering.

It's kind of a shitty metaphor. Coz real people who get discriminated against are not actual threats to you. They are just people. 99% of mutants have insane kill powers or abilities to be threatening to you or your stuff. I like to look at the first X Men movie, when the Senator is describing the as-of-then unnamed Kitty Pryde and goes "what's to stop her from walking into people's home? Or into a bank? Or the white house?"

He's right. And don't say "Well that's no concern or anything to be worried about" coz then my retort is "Why do you buy locks for your doors if you're not concerned someone might try and enter it".

I really thing the metaphor actually does more harm than good because Gays, people of other ethnicities & people of other religions aren't actually more threatening. But someone who can shoot a death beam from his eyes? Yes, there is valid reasons to be scared of him. It's not racism, it's self preservation.

edited 16th Jun '16 5:50:08 AM by Ghilz

There's also another thing to consider. As has been pointed out, even Marvel superheroes aren't exactly universally popular. You know who's even less popular, however - supervillains. With all the coverage superhero battles get, and with the fact that there's like three dozen villains per hero on average, it's a fairly reasonable conclusion that your mutant neighbor is inevitably gonna end up in a blockbuster tussle, with thirty to one chance of being the bad guy.

Strange as it may seem, and likely too offensive to really try and build stories on it, the people most similar to mutants may turn out to be Western Muslims, especially from immigrant origins. More liberal families notwithstanding, it's something you're born with, not exactly easy to stop being, frequently there are obvious signs of your status, and there are a whole lot of morons sharing the same trappings, who like nothing more than blowing themselves and innocents up on national television. And not only is the general public suspicious and hateful of people looking like you, but even you don't know whether a relative might have been dragged into something unpleasant to further said morons' agenda.

This delicious food for thought aside, I generally raise an eyebrow more at how the various power-nullifying or containment devices have yet to become mass-produced, so that mutants like Rogue can have a normal life. Or in general, how one of the most bountiful science fiction ideas, a veritable biological singularity, is so rarely taken at face value instead of being played for social drama. It's not as bad as Star Trek, but man, there's definitely more nuanced and inventive ways to view the situation.

Piggy backing on everybody's comment on Marvel Heroes being hated, the reason mutants are picked on the most is due to said universe attitude towards super beings in general (including heroes).

• Spider-Man is a crime fighter who uses his powers to help people. Most of the time he is outed as vigilante who is a menace to the public. And though the character have periods where he is respected and admire as a hero just remember what Deadpool say about life; it is a never ending television show of disappointments and tragedy with the occasional commercial breaks of happiness. In Spidey's case, that's his life as both Peter and Spider-Man
• Fantastic Four has always been seen as Marvel's first family of super heroes, mostly because they are the first deconstuction of said genre. Seriously, as loved as they are the fickle public tend to turn on them immediately when any of them screw up or link to something terrible. A good example would be the time Reed have to file bankruptcy. Seriously, even though the team save the world so many times those asshole civilians disowned the team because their leader merely sucks at finance. Also in the Galactus Trilogy, a lynch mob was formed against the Human Torch because they think he was the one responsible for the fire in the sky.
• Hulk. Nuff said.
• While often sited as having it better than the X-Men, people often forget that the Avengers weren't immune from the Marvel Universe's hatred. The team have often been criticized for working outside of the government as a private operation, responsible for so many collateral damage, and questionable choice in membership. The latter happens a lot in both the Cap's Kooky Quartet and Kurt Busiek run. In fact, both Civil Wars plot revolve around the public blaming super heroes for events that killed so many people, not caring about the number of times they saved the world.

And I guess that brings into why the public hate mutants: because of all the bullshit that follows with somebody being a super being. Seriously, have you ever wonder how it is like to be a resident of the Baxter Building and somehow getting involve in the Fantastic Four's crazy adventures that could kill you. Or the many super battles that occur in New York. Let's not forget the destruction followed when the Hulk comes by. It seems like being a super powered character is a warrant for bad things to happen very often. And guess what, there is a group of people with such super powers that could be anybody that you know. What if they turn into villains and plot to kill you? And if not, what if some villain, monster or anything comes and attack because being a super being means you are a weirdness magnet? And this isn't some theoretical question that are what ifs, there are times in the Marvel Universe did happen with all the number of infamous mutant villains and the number of times the X-Mansion was attack. Honestly the mutant bigotry sometimes boils down to a cross between rationale fear and the deconstructive nature of the Marvel Universe.

Though for the times when the bigotry stems from hate for the sake of hate: bad writting.

edited 16th Jun '16 10:34:18 AM by BigK1337

Unfortunately that's how it is handled more often than not.

Regarding the "but mutants really ARE dangerous" thing:

Sharing living space with people much stronger than you, with abilities you can never possess, who could assault or abuse you, without you being able to defend yourself . . . isn't that what a lot of people with disabilities experience in Real Life? Yet I've never heard anyone cite that as a reason to hate and fear able-bodied people.

Also it's a BS statistic in the first place. Most mutants do not have super awesome powers, they just look different. Optic blasts are cool and all but most mutants just have extra limbs or fur or something.

"Though for the times when the bigotry stems from hate for the sake of hate: bad writting."

Uh, doesn't most bigotry have its roots in hate for the sake of hate? By saying it doesn't, you are saying it is a rational belief.

Also I had no idea Claremont invented the idea o fMagneto being a holocaust survivor. He really did single-handedly transform a third-rate title into one of Marvel's most premier properties.

Anyway, I always liked that backstory and idea because Mags has witnessed how humans treat other humans based on absolutely nothing "science." Nazi race science was a load of hooey. But mutants are actually genetically different from normal people. If humans could genocide other humans based on nothing, they could certainly try to genocide mutants based on an actual fact.

It's the different in scale of damage. Magneto once set off an EMP that affected the entire globe.

Problem is that the writers keep focusing on the Mutants with highly destructive powers. And the fans don't seem to care for Mutants whose abilities aren't useful in combat, so that doesn't help either.

That's just it. With the way Mutants have been presented in Marvel fearing them is very much rational

edited 16th Jun '16 1:21:12 PM by windleopard

Yeah, that's the thing that bug me with the series. They tend to focus on the prejudice and bigotry the super power mutants go through while the hidious and otherwise Morlocks just stay in the sewers hanging out with a bunch of reptiles and rat who uses ninjutsu. The X-Men can defend themselves easily with their omega level powers, but Morlocks? Most of them can't do shit. They only have a few powerful members to protect them, and considering the events of the Mutant Massacre . . . yeah.

On a side note, I sometimes feel that the Morlocks are better suited for a Fantastic Four story line. Especially one for the Thing, who out of all the Marvel characters he is one who can relate with the mutants the most. It would not only eliminate that Superman Stays Out of Gotham that plaque X-Men stories but also give impactful development in human and mutant relationship.

Yeah you're right. Probably should just said "The times humans hate mutants on bigotry alone and none of the rationale fears of their powers is due to this: bad writing". I'm not really good at wording my points.

@Raven Wilder

If the disabled were the majority of society and able-bodied people a minority you might see that kind of thinking. However, since disabled are a minority living in "our" world you don't. Mutants are a minority in a world of people less powerful than them.

Yeah, it's not like real-world homophobes don't make arguments all the time about the dangers posed by gay people. You never see racist pricks trying to use statistics to prove how dangerous black people are, or how dangerous Muslims are. Sure.

See, that's the thing: There are dangerous members among pretty much any group. And prejudiced people will point to those dangerous members to justify their hatred. Right now, around the world, major political parties in countless countries are arguing that Muslim refugees from war-torn countries have to kept out because terrorists might sneak through with them. To these people, that is completely reasonable. Because Muslim terrorists are dangerous! We have to be vigilant in protecting ourselves against them! If that means innocent Muslims suffer, well, that's a shame, but it's the price we pay for protecting ourselves!

Right now, most countries have bans on gay men donating blood. Sometimes it's an indefinite ban, sometimes for a specific period. (In the US, it's a ban on donating within one year of gay sex. In Canada, it's 5 years. Fuck off, Canada, we're supposed to be better than that.) The reasoning behind it is that gay people are more likely to be HIV+. They're dangerous. So it's necessary for us to protect ourselves by forbidding them from donating blood. Or we have to protect children by not allowing same-sex couples to adopt them, to justify those bans.

Or how about the US needing a wall to protect itself from Mexican immigrants bringing crime. Police shooting unarmed black kids are justified because they need to protect themselves, and everyone knows black people are dangerous thugs. Or, hell, goth kids took a lot of shit after Columbine because people decided goths were dangerous.

All these groups are dangerous. That's the thinking of the people who are prejudiced against those groups, and who use their prejudice to justify laws and programs that oppress those groups.

When you look at the things said about marginalized groups, you realize, yeah, it's really not all that different from the treatment of mutants. Is it a perfect metaphor? No, of course not, because metaphors aren't meant to be perfect. But the fact remains that, when written well, the mutants work as a metaphor for marginalized groups. A lot of writers fail to write that metaphor well, but a lot of that has to do with perceived limitations of the superhero genre.

I do think it would be valuable for Marvel to put out an X-Men title that's focused on a bunch of mutants that don't have world-saving powers. Mutants who just look weird. That comic is something I'll never stop asking for.

Morlocks. I've always thought they'd make for the actual best group of mutants to focus on. They're the ones who don't get awesome looks, Charles Xavier's bank account, and most often not even the kickass top of the food chain powers. They're the actual marginals and outcasts, the ones who get all the actual hindrances of being a mutant and none of the perks.

I don't know if this is ever stated in any Marvel work, but it could be explained that while other superbeings are largely unique, mutants are an entire group of people.

edited 16th Jun '16 7:49:47 PM by Novis

IMO, while the concept of discrimination and hatred against naturally super-powered beings sounds fine in theory, the rest of the Marvel universe doesn't really seem to work within the same themes.

Public disapproval against the Avengers seems to come more from them being authorities responsible for the city's security, rather than them being super-powered per se. Jameson's tirades against Spider-Man usually accuse him of vigilantism or hidden agendas, but he never seems to accuse him of being a mutant (and it would be quite easy to do so). Guys like Thor were born with their superhuman powers, and the public knows it.

So, it often feels like mutant racism exists only in X-Men/mutant books. Sometimes it even takes the form of a distinction between who's technically called a mutant and who isn't, which is bizarre. Discrimination isn't rational to begin with, so it makes little sense for racists to be so nuanced on who they discriminate against.

For the discrimination issue to work in a believable manner, the rest of the Marvel universe would have to be on the same page on how the issue exists, and how much it affects their society.

Which is why the X-Men are better off in their own universe. They might as well be with the way they're written.

Jameson's tirades against Spider-Man usually accuse him of vigilantism or hidden agendas, but he never seems to accuse him of being a mutant (and it would be quite easy to do so).

That'd be because Jameson seems to have nothing against mutants as long as they abide the law and don't cause any ruckus.

If I remember right, the incident where Kitty Pride called up the n-word was where she was confronting a group that was planning some kind of action against mutants on her campus. The ringleader of this group, who was black, not understanding why she should come to the defense of mutants, asked her if she was a "mutie." She replied "I dunno. Are you a "n —?" He told her to watch her mouth, and she told him back to watch his. She went on to make the point that the word "mutie" was meant to be hurtful, just as the n-word was, and was forcefully calling to this fellow's attention just what kind of thinking he was engaging in. This was during Claremont's era, and less comparison was being drawn to racism than to intolerance in general (I thought so, anyhow). I always felt that, at least during the Claremont era, the language used against Mutants, and governmental steps proposed to be taken against them, was meant to be much more reminiscent of anti-Jewish rehetoric and policies.

One thing I always liked about George RR Martin's Wild Cards series is that, in true Martin fashion, it presented both sides of the argument as having points to make (he tends to like showing the bad side of good things, and the good side of bad things). You had the super-human individuals, particularly the Jokers, who were frequently discriminated against and shunned by society, which is of course presented as bad. At the same time, they are as well presented as being genuinely dangerous, and often killing people and causing significant amounts of damage by accident. There, though, the problem is much more often presented as its own thing rather than a stand in for racism. Taken purely on their own, Mutants do represent a significant danger to the public in the Marvel universe.

edited 20th Jun '16 12:11:04 PM by Robbery

Kitty's first use of the 'N'-word was in the God Loves, Man Kills graphic novel. She got in a fight with a local kid in her dance class, who used the word mutie. He called Kitty a "mutie-lover." Stevie Hunter told her not to get so upset, and that it's just words. Kitty asked if Stevie would be so calm if the kid had called Kitty a "n*-lover."

She also used the word in an issue of New Mutants where a mutant committed suicide because he was worried about people finding out he was a mutant. Kitty gave a eulogy that started off with a whole lot of slurs.

Some people still hold this stuff against her, but one thing I would point out is that she was still a kid when she did this. She was 13-14 years old for these stories. She's probably 20 or so now. How many people - especially intelligent people - are the same in their 20s that they were at 13?

Problem is no one's called her out on it to my knowledge.

The problem is you really shouldn't be drawing direct comparisons between a fictionalised group and real ones like that. Especially ones that position members of an actual oppressed group as the ones oppressing the fictional group.

The fictional world has to be able to take itself seriously, though. On Marvel Earth, Mutants, regardless of how they look, are an oppressed minority. It makes sense that within that reality, they might draw parallels between themselves and other oppressed minorities. It makes sense that within her own reality, Kitty should equate "mutie" with any other diminishing epithet.

Sure, but that's a problem with the writer, not the character. It made sense for the character to say those things at that time and at that age and under those circumstances. Claremont's the one who should've known better.