Uncanny X-Men #501 Discussion Thread ~ Spoilers

[Daithi]

And it took place mostly out of District X. (The Madrox mini I mean)

Yes but the agency was based in Mutant Town. The fact that Madrox stepped outside it doesn't mean anything,

[Pach!]

Yes but the agency was based in Mutant Town. The fact that Madrox stepped outside it doesn't mean anything,

It's not really stealing X-factor's thing tho which is the point.

[jarrod]

I remember when Chris got the boot and David's book was the only legible one to me. Scott and especially Fabian kept blatantly stealing scenes from Peter, sometimes whole from him. Poor Peter.
I was too young to really remember, all I recall from after the Claremont exodus was how awesome X-Factor, Excalibur and Wolverine were and how not awesome the rest were.

[Daithi]

It's not really stealing X-factor's thing tho which is the point.

No. It's stealing a plot point back from Claremont's last Uncanny run where Wolverine and Storm assist the authorities in Mutant Town with a crime!

Er I mean solving a crime and this isn't the AXM thread!

[Scavenger]

Also, the real base is still pretty well hidden and well defended. Would not surprise me if the lower parts could handle even a nuclear strike. The same cannot be said for the old mansion.

The real base has a "great view" overlooking the bay. That makes it pretty visible.
Even if there's an underground complex, which the mansion had as well.

Then beating the holy Hell out of it, I think that's the problem folks have with it.

So the problem is that the bad guys are shown to be...y'know...bad guys? :confused:

No. It's stealing a plot point back from Claremont's last Uncanny run where Wolverine and Storm assist the authorities in Mutant Town with a crime!

Well, that was durring the 5 minutes when the X-Men had formed the XSE and was a world wide mutant affairs law group thingee.

[jarrod]

No. It's stealing a plot point back from Claremont's last Uncanny run where Wolverine and Storm assist the authorities in Mutant Town with a crime!
UGH! I am still pissed the X.S.E. plot never went anywhere... sooo much potential just wasted.

I really wish Davis hadn't signed on and Claremont had just stuck to X-Treme (and kept them off mansion).

[MartinRedmond]

I was too young to really remember, all I recall from after the Claremont exodus was how awesome X-Factor, Excalibur and Wolverine were and how not awesome the rest were.

From what I remember, no one in X-Factor could open a mayo jar except Val Cooper. So when Fabian wrote the annual, well that's what happened too.

Peter had some monster explode because Jamie created a clone in it. I think like 2 writers re did the same scene.

Lorna's jaw got broken, so 2 issues later BoomBoom's jaw gets broken. It was really bad. I don't mind stealing from other media, but comics stealing from comics is just dull. :/

[Swashbuckler]

I really really loved this issue. I felt like the move was important finally, which I lacked in 500. I loved that Warren is doing his business stuff and utilizing the X-Men's fame. I also LOVED the Emma and Scott interaction where Scott basically is saying to her "Look skank, I want a wife and family still, not some hooker". I also loved how he was uninterested in her purchase of new bedroom attire. The scene showed her shallow selfishness perfectly and made me think differently about all the sex scenes. He wants her pregnant. And so do I.

The Pixie scene was very cool too. I loved it. There was nothing wrong with it and even if one of the Hellfire goons had called the kid a queer it still would have meant nothing. That word is thrown around for nothing. And the weak arguments that Karma was getting the same treatment at the end are lame. She is just there to set the trap for the Hellfire goons. I did notice her caption box said "Like's girls", which may have been unnecessary, but ultimately it draws the metaphor of persecution of minorities in tighter, which was fine by me.

The Red queen seems pretty generic so far, but I like the use of Empath. He needs to be stepped up as a heavy hitter. I mean, if Psycho man can be one of the FF's villains surely Empath has a stronger place in X-Lore waiting for him. Red Queen though, lame outfit. And her beating him just hellped me see that this is a part of the Hellfire Club and not some random off shoot.

Questions I had....What was up with Beasts chatting about his fingers. Hasn't he been seen using a keyboard or using his fingers? It seemed odd and unnecessary. I'd have rather had more of Wolverine/Nightcrawler chatting. Also, there is a woman in that scene too that looks like Karma, but then when Pixie collapses she suddenly has Rogue's hair. I think this was coloring mistake. The teleporting fast ball special is also REALLY cool and I love that they are teaming up and doing new things.

Again, Great issue. Loved Karma's new look (she's the SEX), loved Emma being put down for being shallow, loved Nightcrawler/Wolverine. Loved it all. Even the art (suprisingly).

[tetragene]

First, reader's assume, that Pixie's friend was gay. It never says he's gay. Not every man in SF is gay, not even every man who goes to the concert of a Diva is gay. Maybe he was trying to get in Pixies' pants and suffered through the show to get in her good graces... Apparently she is a porn star now.

Yeah, the straight guys under 40 made up huge numbers at the 12,000 packed full arena at the Kylie Minogue show I went to. Oh wait, those were girls and queens and guys wearing shirts saying "Kylie, I can be your next gay husband"--but I'm sure there was a handful of young straight guys in there since I saw about 5 young guys rubbing and holding on some girls. I imagine its the same for Britney, Madonna, Cher, etc. The fact that Pixie's friend is being all "Ali Blaire is finally back! Oh...My...God! I was like...pop & freak, pop, pop & freak!" is strong evidence to the contrary. He was obviously a fan of Dazz prior to the show and obviously couldn't give two craps about getting inside Pixie's pants. The only fish he's interested in is a McFish sandwich from McDonalds...

Secondly, people assume that mutants are some kind of metaphor for gays. Seriously now? Mutants have been a metaphor for minorities in general for as long as the book has been running. Yes, homosexuals fit in that category, but it's not an exclusive club folks.

of course not--but the whole "hiding" and "living secret 'normal' lives" aspect that has looooong been a part of the X-books is much more a parallel for in-the-closet-homosexuals than racial or physical-minorities. "Mutants" are a race, but in regards to the hiding/secretive/denial/Legacy Virus--it's clearly meant to strongly mirror homosexuality.

I'm sure people that have made up their minds that Pixie's anonymous friend is gay will continue to hold to their opinions despite my arguments. It's a plausible interpretation. But it's not like BruFrac is glorifying the act, the bashers are the bad guys here.


agreed it wasn't glorified--and there is no definitive answer on the "is he or isn't he" debate since it isn't stated in the comic. But come on...the reasonings that he's possibly gay so overpower the reasonings that he's possibly straight that it's not even funny.

[Slung]

I could see it. Jean's clones always turn out cooler for some reason.


JARROD. SHUT UP! :eek:

[Novaya Havoc]

The only fish he's interested in is a McFish sandwich from McDonalds...


LMAO! I love it.

[Anna]

Has everyone forgotten that when Margali was Red Queen that she had red hair?

[drwho]

I was actually going to try this book out again, but then i saw the red queen and felt like who wants to spend money to read about a dominatrix when I could pay for a real life one.

[AcesX1X]

Again, Great issue. Loved Karma's new look (she's the SEX).

The only thing with Karma I had a problem with was her psychic hair. That fire stuff isn't her signature look!

[Novaya Havoc]

I was actually going to try this book out again, but then i saw the red queen and felt like who wants to spend money to read about a dominatrix when I could pay for a real life one.

Or just buy a Claremont comic. But even he, bless his heart, is not that overt.

[darknessatnoon]

The only person's response I am eagerly awaiting is DDM's. I really want to know if Fraction is still skating on thin ice.

[Swashbuckler]

The only thing with Karma I had a problem with was her psychic hair. That fire stuff isn't her signature look!

Yeah, her power signature was a little odd, but hey, she's changed her look she can change her energy bursts shape and color I suppose.

[LawGiver]

Who do you guys think the Red Queen is?

[jarrod]

JARROD. SHUT UP! :eek:
I meant cooler than other's clones! Yeah, that's it!


xoxoxoxooxooooocox

[AcesX1X]

Re: Karma

They should definitely keep her in this book tho. She's a breath of fresh air.

[jarrod]

Who do you guys think the Red Queen is?
It's Maddie. Obvs.


I do sort of wonder if we might not have dueling clubs though? Or maybe we'll have 3 sets of Kings & Queens?

[LawGiver]

It's Maddie. Obvs.


I do sort of wonder if we might not have dueling clubs though? Or maybe we'll have 3 sets of Kings & Queens?

How is it obvious?

[worstblogever]

The only person's response I am eagerly awaiting is DDM's. I really want to know if Fraction is still skating on thin ice.

I'm waiting for somebody to superimpose Matt Fraction's head on a picture of Peggy Fleming now.

[lockerogue]

I am to busy fapping over Karma. I love her new look.

[jarrod]

How is it obvious?
Well, who else could it be? Jean?

Also, Margali has horns now, though she *is* a redheaded Red Queen.

[AcesX1X]

Margali doesn't have time to strap Empath down and whip him silly. She's got better things to do.

[LawGiver]

Well, who else could it be? Jean?

Also, Margali has horns now, though she *is* a redheaded Red Queen.

Are those the only two characters who have red hair?

[pryde15]

I am to busy fapping over Karma. I love her new look.

Post scans! PLEASE POST SCANS.

[jarrod]

Are those the only two characters who have red hair?
Well, how about some suggestions?

[LawGiver]

Well, how about some suggestions?

The Messiah Baby? We've been told that the kid will be playing a huge role coming up in the next months or so, what if this is it? We had the image of Scott working on the crib, that could be some foreshadowing to who the Red Queen really is.

[jarrod]

The Messiah Baby? We've been told that the kid will be playing a huge role coming up in the next months or so, what if this is it? We had the image of Scott working on the crib, that could be some foreshadowing to who the Red Queen really is.
The Messiah Baby? Come on.

[Slung]

It's Maddie. Obvs.


I do sort of wonder if we might not have dueling clubs though? Or maybe we'll have 3 sets of Kings & Queens?

I love Maddie, but her story really should have been done after Inferno.

[Henry T.]

The Red Queen is probably Madelyne Pryor because of the red hair, pinkish psi-energy, the alternate reality Jean Grey in X-Man went by Red Queen, and the connection to the Hellfire Club (Jean was Black Queen and Maddie was Black Rook).

I think they would use Maddie over bringing back Queen Jean from another reality.

[drwho]

Is this the same Empath that died during m day? Didn't he accidentally fall in lava, or something. I could have sworn Empath died. Magma was crying about it in the 198 mini i think.

[darknessatnoon]

Is this the same Empath that died during m day? Didn't he accidentally fall in lava, or something. I could have sworn Empath died. Magma was crying about it in the 198 mini i think.

That wasn't Empath. It was some other guy. Since when would Empath be sitting in a volcano using his powers of empathy?

Afterwards, Empath tranquilized Magma.

[Pach!]

Is this the same Empath that died during m day? Didn't he accidentally fall in lava, or something. I could have sworn Empath died. Magma was crying about it in the 198 mini i think.

No, the Empath that rescued Magma from costa rica or w/e after she saw some random mutant die in lava.

[LawGiver]

The Messiah Baby? Come on.

How is Maddie Pryor anymore of a sane choice? She's a dead clone. We've already established that the kid has red hair and green eyes, the baby is said to be playing an important role in the X-Men mainstream, I don't see this as a stretch at all. Bringing back a character that we have seen NO foreshadowing for is a huge stretch and leap in logic.

Growing up in these futures Cable keeps jumping to could really mess her up, maybe this is why she likes to strap on bondage gear and whip folks.

[Beast]

Who do you guys think the Red Queen is?
I'm guessing the evil Maddy from X-Man.

Especially if you take into account the fact that Mastermind was teleported away by her.

Which is a power that that version of Maddy employed.

[Pach!]

That wasn't Empath. It was some other guy. Since when would Empath be sitting in a volcano using his powers of empathy?

Afterwards, Empath tranquilized Magma.

LOL.

I have nothing more to add.

[Daithi]

How is Maddie Pryor anymore of a sane choice? She's a dead clone.

Not that Maddie Pryor! The Maddie Pryor that was brought back to life by X-Man but who was actually an evil version of Jean Grey from an alternate universe!

[LawGiver]

Not that Maddie Pryor! The Maddie Pryor that was brought back to life by X-Man but who was actually an evil version of Jean Grey from an alternate universe!

Your right, that choice is much better.

[Anodyne]

I'm guessing the evil Maddy from X-Man.
...who was revealed to actually be an evil Jean Grey who'd replaced X-Man's friend Madelyne.

[jarrod]

I love Maddie, but her story really should have been done after Inferno.
Yeah. Was NOT a fan of X-Man mommy revival.


How is Maddie Pryor anymore of a sane choice? She's a dead clone. We've already established that the kid has red hair and green eyes, the baby is said to be playing an important role in the X-Men mainstream, I don't see this as a stretch at all. Bringing back a character that we have seen NO foreshadowing for is a huge stretch and leap in logic.

Growing up in these futures Cable keeps jumping to could really mess her up, maybe this is why she likes to strap on bondage gear and whip folks.
Seriously? You're really pushing this argument?

L.O.L.

[drwho]

The Maddie in X-Man was a figment of his imagination that he brought to life. Perhaps some other character chose to dye their head red.

[DeniseXfrost]

It's Rahcel duh!

[jarrod]

It's Rahcel duh!
Rachel can't do heels since the Phoenix left her.

[LawGiver]

Yeah. Was NOT a fan of X-Man mommy revival.



Seriously? You're really pushing this argument?

L.O.L.

Why do you think it is Maddy? You could try posting without coming off as an ignorant ass too, it might help this discussion, there is enough tension in this thread with out idiotic statements like the big bolded font "LOL", it just makes you come across as an 8yr old retard.

[drwho]

I really didnt think much about the whole gay issue that was brought up but Pixie is kind of like a fairy which is used by some as a name for gay people. So I see the gay connection now.

[jarrod]

The Maddie in X-Man was a figment of his imagination that he brought to life.
Actually, I thought he also unconsciously pulled her psyche from the Astral Plane/afterlife/WHR/whatever too? He reached out for "Jean" but got Maddie instead?


Why do you think it is Maddy? You could try posting without coming off as an ignorant ass too, it might help this discussion, there is enough tension in this thread with out idiotic statements like the big bolded font "LOL", it just makes you come across as an 8yr old retard.
She's being set up as a logical counter to Emma in press materials, she looks the part, it'd explain her motivation, and it continues the X-Offices favorite passtime of teasing (but not delivering) Jean. Come on, Maddie's the most obvious option.

I could do without the personal insults though. You seem to be making something of a habit of this?

[Beast]

The Maddie in X-Man was a figment of his imagination that he brought to life. Perhaps some other character chose to dye their head red.
No, as was noted earlier the Evil Maddy was actually an alternate reality Jean Grey.

After X-Man #52 (June 1999), Madelyne did not appear again until much later in X-Man #67 (September 2000). It was then revealed that this Madelyne was an impostor, a parallel universe Jean Grey. The impostor implied that Madelyne was fake all along, but at another time she claimed she "replaced your Maddie several months ago." The in-story evidence remains ambiguous, and X-Man ended at #75 without any more about her.

[LawGiver]

Actually, I thought he also unconsciously pulled her psyche from the Astral Plane/afterlife/WHR/whatever too? He reached out for "Jean" but got Maddie instead?



She's being set up as a logical counter to Emma in press materials, she looks the part, it'd explain her motivation, and it continues the X-Offices favorite passtime of teasing (but not delivering) Jean. Come on, Maddie's the most obvious option.

I could do without the personal insults though. You seem to be making something of a habit of this?

Where is she being setup as this? All I have seen is the #503 cover with the playing card and Emma and some Redhead opposite each other. How is she a more obvious choice than the redheaded Messiah Baby?

As for "insulting" you, I've never called you a name or anything, indicating you are acting like something or might come across as something your not is not an insult. Your snide remarks were unwarranted.

[MartinRedmond]

If you keep hiting refresh, this thread is almost like a chatroom.

[jarrod]

Where is she being setup as this? All I have seen is the #503 cover with the playing card and Emma and some Redhead opposite each other. How is she a more obvious choice than the redheaded Messiah Baby?
It's subtle hints... "Red Queen" title, the card cover. And frankly, that's more than your Messiah Baby "theory" has going for it.


As for "insulting" you, I've never called you a name or anything, indicating you are acting like something or might come across as something your not is not an insult. Your snide remarks were unwarranted.
Spoken like a true _ year old ______. Not that you are an _ year old ______, just that you come off like an _ year old ______. <3 <3

[LawGiver]

It's subtle hints... "Red Queen" title, the card cover. And frankly, that's more than your Messiah Baby "theory" has going for it.

How is that any better than the Messiah Baby one?


Spoken like a true _ year old ______. Not that you are an _ year old ______, just that you come off like an _ year old ______. <3 <3

Pathetic.

[jarrod]

How is that any better than the Messiah Baby one?
Uh, would you mean besides the actual hints? Where's the canonical support to your MB fanfic again?


Would rather come off as an 8yr old retard than a cum ninja, whatever that is.
I'm done with you, inaugural ingore list asshole. I guess even _ year old ______s can "win" sometimes.

[Toboe]

I- Cyclops' behavior through the X-books seems so inconsistent. He's at most, duplicitous. In X-Force, he creates a secret X-team dedicate to outright assassinating threats to the X-Men. Then, in Uncanny, he announces to all mutants, friend and foe, that he has set up shop in San Fran. Which, means it'll be a secret from S.H.I.E.L.D. and SHRA how long, exactly? And more importantly, what's the strategy in telling your enemies where you are, just to gather some possible friends? This is the same guy who founded X-Force, saying the X-Men gave too many people second chances. Is he trying to sucker enemies out into the open, in the process, leaving mutants like Pixie out as bait as they're a part of the new school?

Editorial keeps telling us he's always right. Scott has been known to deceive the public before, in the early days of X-Factor, as a noted example. I'm just wondering what his plan is here. He's got one, I just can't nail it down because of how inconsistent he's acted.

Yeah, that's been bothering me as well. I don't know if it's all part of Cyclops' master plan to deceive the public, or some terrible misunderstanding between the writers and editors.

They move out of the mansion so they won't remain a target enymore, yet they announce the whole world where their new location is.
He said he's not willing to give their enemies any more second chances, and assembles X-Force to hunt them down and kill them all. But now he invites his foes to join them in SF.
He states he didn't really disband the X-Men after Messiah Complex, and that it was just to keep Iron Man out of their business. But it seems like he didn't bother to tell that to the students and even some teammates, which caused some deep resentment towards him. Yet they're there in SF all together again. It's all so contradictory...

[worstblogever]

Yeah, that's been bothering me as well. I don't know if it's all part of Cyclops' master plan to deceive the public, or some terrible misunderstanding between the writers and editors.

They move out of the mansion so they won't remain a target enymore, yet they announce the whole world where their new location is.
He said he's not willing to give their enemies any more second chances, and assembles X-Force to hunt them down and kill them all. But now he invites his foes to join them in SF.
He states he didn't really disband the X-Men after Messiah Complex, and that it was just to keep Iron Man out of their business. But it seems like he didn't bother to tell that to the students and even some teammates, which caused some deep resentment towards him. Yet they're there in SF all together again. It's all so contradictory...

The funny part to me, is that he tells Tony Stark the X-Men are disbanded.

Then, he does his "shout out" to all those with the X-gene.

Skids is an agent of S.H.I.E.L.D. She works for Tony Stark. So's Andreas von Strucker, one of the Thunderbolts, who works for the Initiative.

Well, Scott, I'm sure Tony won't ever find out you lied to his face. :rolleyes:

[jarrod]

The funny part to me, is that he tells Tony Stark the X-Men are disbanded.

Then, he does his "shout out" to all those with the X-gene.

Skids is an agent of S.H.I.E.L.D. She works for Tony Stark. So's Andreas von Strucker, one of the Thunderbolts, who works for the Initiative.

Well, Scott, I'm sure Tony won't ever find out you lied to his face. :rolleyes:
SF seems to be anti-SHRA though. In this case, I do think the X-men have at least political leverage and public support backing them up, so it really doesn't matter what Tony knows (at least in the short term). The city itself is being defiant, which could lead to some interesting stories and conflicts down the line...

[worstblogever]

SF seems to be anti-SHRA though. In this case, I do think the X-men have at least political leverage and public support backing them up, so it really doesn't matter what Tony knows (at least in the short term). The city itself is being defiant, which could lead to some interesting stories and conflicts down the line...

If SHRA is fought in the courts as a backstory (Vange Whedon lawyer cameos?), then, yeah. But Iron Man might come off that high horse after Secret Invasion. Still, he's already visited Emma, and Scott regarding it a handful of times. Sooner or later, he's going to make his point.

With the X-Men headed to space for the next big crossover, though, it likely will never come up.

[jarrod]

If SHRA is fought in the courts as a backstory (Vange Whedon lawyer cameos?), then, yeah. But Iron Man might come off that high horse after Secret Invasion. Still, he's already visited Emma, and Scott regarding it a handful of times. Sooner or later, he's going to make his point.
I'd enthusiastically endorse all that. Especially Vange. More Vange plz.


With the X-Men headed to space for the next big crossover, though, it likely will never come up.
What What What???????

[worstblogever]

I'd enthusiastically endorse all that. Especially Vange. More Vange plz.



What What What???????

"War of Kings"?

[LawGiver]

Uh, would you mean besides the actual hints? Where's the canonical support to your MB fanfic again?

The baby's features.
The crib.
The interviews that say the kid will be part of a huge storyline soon.

I'm done with you, inaugural ingore list asshole. I guess even _ year old ______s can "win" sometimes.

My heart weeps for all those discussions we will never have.

[jarrod]

"War of Kings"?
I thought WOK was just going to involve the "already in space" X-Men and the Inhumans/Kree? Scott's crew is heading outer too?

[Daithi]

"War of Kings"?

It's not really an X crossover though.

[Bronze Badger]

I, for one, hope the Red Queen is neither Maddie or the Messiah Baby.

[worstblogever]

I thought WOK was just going to involve the "already in space" X-Men and the Inhumans/Kree? Scott's crew is heading outer too?

Eh. Not necessarily. It just wouldn't surprise me.

It's not really an X crossover though.

Yeah, it probably will fall more under the galactic Marvel stories like GotG and Nova and the like.

[Beast]

"War of Kings"?
That's more involving the Inhumans, The Shi'ar, and the Starjammers.

[jarrod]

OT: I want Warlock in the Starjammers. And Kitty.

[worstblogever]

OT: I want Warlock in the Starjammers. And Kitty.

You may not be far off, there.

But back on subject? Yeah. I'm wondering when the hell SHRA is going to come down to California, via the Order, or whoever, and start asking Cyke and crew what gives. Because that broadcast to all mutants should've tipped off S.H.I.E.L.D., their pyschics, and any mutants in the Initiative (including Mutant Zero, Swordsman, Skids, etc.) real fast.

[Pixie_Solanas]

I think the only way they could have been more overt and obtuse about it is if the Karma description box said "Karma... takes it hardcore with a giant strap-on and don't you boys just love it, right?"

[jarrod]

You may not be far off, there.

But back on subject? Yeah. I'm wondering when the hell SHRA is going to come down to California, via the Order, or whoever, and start asking Cyke and crew what gives. Because that broadcast to all mutants should've tipped off S.H.I.E.L.D., their pyschics, and any mutants in the Initiative (including Mutant Zero, Swordsman, Skids, etc.) real fast.
I'd like to see it happen... it really needs to happen honestly. The only way out I can see is if SI destroys the whole post-CW SHRA/SHIELD setup.

Also, moar Skids too! Brubaker's take on her was one of the few things I really liked in his run.

[worstblogever]

I think the only way they could have been more overt and obtuse about it is if the Karma description box said "Karma... takes it hardcore with a giant strap-on and don't you boys just love it, right?"

They could've just included this image under her name:

http://b4.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/01631/45/64/1631374654_thumb1.jpg

[CmX]

I liked this issue a lot. My only gripes were the constant reference to Warren's money, (okay we get it, he's loaded) and the lack of Dazzler. :(

But I'm liking the Hellfire Cult and the Red Queen being behind it.

And was that Rogue that made a tiny cameo? I thought she was supposed to be down under?

[worstblogever]

I liked this issue a lot. My only gripes were the constant reference to Warren's money, (okay we get it, he's loaded) and the lack of Dazzler. :(

But I'm liking the Hellfire Cult and the Red Queen being behind it.

And was that Rogue that made a tiny cameo? I thought she was supposed to be down under?

Colorist's error, apparently.

[CmX]

Colorist's error, apparently.

Who was that supposed to be? For a sec I thought it was Laura, and then I saw the white bangs haha

[worstblogever]

Who was that supposed to be? For a sec I thought it was Laura, and then I saw the white bangs haha

When Pixie comes in beat up? I think it was supposed to be Karma.

[xmanfan527]

LOL at Dominatrix Madelyne Pryor

[cgar]

i liked this issue a lot more then the last one. Lands art had no emotion but the story was good not great. Its going to be interesting to see how the cult and the club are related. If at all. Hopefully its Maddy

[Anna]

I am to busy fapping over Karma. I love her new look.

A little too slutty for my taste.

Well, who else could it be? Jean?

Also, Margali has horns now, though she *is* a redheaded Red Queen. She used an illusion last time; she could again.

It's Rahcel duh! Rachel's still "Lost In Space" with Alex and Lorna.

When Pixie comes in beat up? I think it was supposed to be Karma.
It was. Land just slutted her up like he did to Pixie.

[worstblogever]

I just read it again, and the possibility Emma bought a strap-on in Paris did cross my mind. :redface:

Well, that, and I wanted to note that the Red Queen does seem to telekinetically fasten Empath's restraints, and the same glow of power for the TK seems to manifest around her whip.

Think of that what you will.

[fitditz]

I just read it again, and the possibility Emma bought a strap-on in Paris did cross my mind. :redface:

Well, that, and I wanted to note that the Red Queen does seem to telekinetically fasten Empath's restraints, and the same glow of power for the TK seems to manifest around her whip.

Think of that what you will.
That's exactly what I noticed too...it could only mean 1 of 2 things.

[Anodyne]

I, for one, hope the Red Queen is neither Maddie or the Messiah Baby.
Did you mean "either...or" or "neither...nor"?

I want Maddie back, but not as a one-note villain. But at least "Red Queen" is not as silly as "Goblin Queen." IMHO.

[Henry T.]

Yeah the Red Queen was definitely telekinetically restraining Empath. She fastened him with her tk. She has green eyes too.:wink:

[Bingo!]

Did you mean "either...or" or "neither...nor"?

I want Maddie back, but not as a one-note villain. But at least "Red Queen" is not as silly as "Goblin Queen." IMHO.

What?

Red Queen is the most ridiculous looking female character I've seen in... ever. She looks gawd awful in that Stormy Leather discount rack lucha libre mess. Do we need to see her in that travesty to understand she likes to inflict pain?

[darknessatnoon]

What?

Red Queen is the most ridiculous looking female character I've seen in... ever. She looks gawd awful in that Stormy Leather discount rack lucha libre mess. Do we need to see her in that travesty to understand she likes to inflict pain?

It gave me a hot-flash to read her.

[jester1436]

Red Queen dominating Empath and Emma showing off for Scott in the bedroom are obviously why Land belongs on Uncanny.

[worstblogever]

What?

Red Queen is the most ridiculous looking female character I've seen in... ever. She looks gawd awful in that Stormy Leather discount rack lucha libre mess. Do we need to see her in that travesty to understand she likes to inflict pain?

Well, almost...

http://i197.photobucket.com/albums/aa262/surrealmonkey_wedding/worstblogever/LOLrouge-1.jpg

[Beast]

Who doesn't love the daughter of Princess Leia and C-3PO! :biggrin:

[Beast]

Who doesn't love the daughter of Princess Leia and C-3PO! :biggrin:

[worstblogever]

The Red Queen at least has better hair than Rouge Mort. :wink:

[tetragene]

The Red Queen at least has better hair than Rouge Mort. :wink:

Impossible. Rouge Mort's hair is miraculously rooted from her gimp suit in a way which defines logic. Red Queen's hair is lame in comparison.

[worstblogever]

Impossible. Rouge Mort's hair is miraculously rooted from her gimp suit in a way which defines logic. Red Queen's hair is lame in comparison.

Yet, the Red Queen's does not have the shape of breasts with nipples and all. At least on the Red Queen, I know which pair I'd rather stare at. :wink:

[greenshoes713]

I liked Karma's jacket

but isn't it always hot?

[sneggz]

That is also mentioned in this issue.

Scott mentions how when Nathan came back him and Jean were on the run and never had time, he wants to prepared. It's actually a pretty interesting scene. Emma doesn't even make a sarcastic remark to him, she seems oddly supportive.

That is because she knows that her little tyke will be in there soon.

[tetragene]

Yet, the Red Queen's does not have the shape of breasts with nipples and all. At least on the Red Queen, I know which pair I'd rather stare at. :wink:

I don't understand--with Rouge Mort you get two sets of boobs instead of one. I figured that would be win-win? :confused:

[MartinRedmond]

Impossible. Rouge Mort's hair is miraculously rooted from her gimp suit in a way which defines logic. Red Queen's hair is lame in comparison.

Perhaps it's a wig woven into her ugly costume.

[worstblogever]

Perhaps it's a wig woven into her ugly costume.

You're going to have to be more specific. Which one?

I don't understand--with Rouge Mort you get two sets of boobs instead of one. I figured that would be win-win? :confused:

I don't want to run my fingers through a woman's hair and end up with my hands covered in breast-milk.

Red Queen wins.

[Optic Rage!]

I'd like to see it happen... it really needs to happen honestly. The only way out I can see is if SI destroys the whole post-CW SHRA/SHIELD setup.

Also, moar Skids too! Brubaker's take on her was one of the few things I really liked in his run.

San Fran rejected the S.H.I. remember??

[Dazzler]

I liked Karma's jacket

but isn't it always hot?

In San Francisco, the weather can change from 90 to freezing in minutes. This time of year at night, without a jacket, she'd be a Lezbi-cicle.

This is, of course, operating on the assumption that you're asking that question in sincerity.


As an aside, I'm sorry, but I love Rouge Mort's design if not her character.

--Dazz

[darknessatnoon]

In San Francisco, the weather can change from 90 to freezing in minutes. This time of year at night, without a jacket, she'd be a Lezbi-cicle.

This is, of course, operating on the assumption that you're asking that question in sincerity.


As an aside, I'm sorry, but I love Rouge Mort's design if not her character.

--Dazz

I love her too. She's a 1,000% improvement on Meggan.

[Dazzler]

I love her too. She's a 1,000% improvement on Meggan.

I totally agree. I kinda dig her whacked sense of style.

Is she supposed to be Meggan? I never got the full story on who she was.

--Dazz

[Beast]

I totally agree. I kinda dig her whacked sense of style.

Is she supposed to be Meggan? I never got the full story on who she was.

--Dazz
Nope. Wasn't meant to be Meggan.

[darknessatnoon]

I totally agree. I kinda dig her whacked sense of style.

Is she supposed to be Meggan? I never got the full story on who she was.

--Dazz

Yeah, wrapped up in that big tube of rubber is Meggan. It makes sense if you think about it ... in a sick Claremontian sort of way.

EDIT: BEAST! Dazz wasn't asking you! David R said it was, and that dude has the CC hook up. So, it's incontrovertible.

[Beast]

Well, David R is full of it. The writer himself posted that it wasn't Meggan.

[Dagger]

I loved the issue. I'm hoping more than ever that the Red Queen is Maddie. I wanna see who else is all involved with the Hellfire Cult. And Empath looked sexy as hell. It almost makes me not hate him for being a ass to my beloved Jetstream. Almost.

[Dagger]

Well, David R is full of it. The writer himself posted that it wasn't Meggan.
Where did he post this? David R doesn't seem to be the kind of guy who would lie about CC's writing and plans he had for characters and books that weren't true. He's a huge fan.

[metalgorgomon]

Guys, Cronin wrote a moderator note in the first post of this thread:


MODERATOR'S NOTE:

Besides the context of the scene, which does appear to indicate that the friend of Pixie is gay, an alleged original script of the issue has been making the rounds on the internet, and in it, the goons yell "Queer Freaks" as they begin bashing Pixie and her friend. So let that inform your discussions.

[Dazzler]

Yeah, wrapped up in that big tube of rubber is Meggan. It makes sense if you think about it ... in a sick Claremontian sort of way.

EDIT: BEAST! Dazz wasn't asking you! David R said it was, and that dude has the CC hook up. So, it's incontrovertible.

LOL!
I'm taking your side of the story because I happen to like it better.

Sorry, Beast.

--Dazz

[Beast]

Where did he post this? David R doesn't seem to be the kind of guy who would lie about CC's writing and plans he had for characters and books that weren't true. He's a huge fan.
Over where he posts all his stuff. He posted outright that it wasn't Meggan.

Maybe David R was assuming it was before the writer clarified.

[Beast]

LOL!
I'm taking your side of the story because I happen to like it better.

Sorry, Beast.

--Dazz
There's no side to the story. There's facts and bull. If you prefer bull, that's your choice.

[darknessatnoon]

There's no side to the story. There's facts and bull. If you prefer bull, that's your choice.

When it comes to Rougemort, you are dealing in bull from start to finish. Spare us the fine distinctions.

[Dazzler]

There's no side to the story. There's facts and bull. If you prefer bull, that's your choice.

I prefer bull if it's more fun than facts, yeah. :tongue:

--Dazz

[Dagger]

lol. Rouge Mort was a waste of paper, ink and color. I would wipe my ass with pages featuring Rouge Mort.

[Mitsaso]

This was SUCH a kinky issue.

Loved it!

BUT! I want my Dazzler comeback ANYTIME now...!

I'm back home baybee! Bring this new era on!!! :cool:

[darknessatnoon]

lol. Rouge Mort was a waste of paper, ink and color. I would wipe my ass with pages featuring Rouge Mort.

Your ass would be dyed red afterwards. I thought she was great. If only bitch fans hadn't screamed so much, she could have unmasked and given Brian back his wife. Was a little self-control on your and Novaya's part too much to ask, Dagger?!

[Pach!]

This was SUCH a kinky issue.

Loved it!

BUT! I want my Dazzler comeback ANYTIME now...!

I'm back home baybee! Bring this new era on!!! :cool:

How was the army? /random

[Dazzler]

lol. Rouge Mort was a waste of paper, ink and color. I would wipe my ass with pages featuring Rouge Mort.

Now that would be a sight to behold.

--Dazz

[Beast]

Your ass would be dyed red afterwards. I thought she was great. If only bitch fans hadn't screamed so much, she could have unmasked and given Brian back his wife. Was a little self-control on your and Novaya's part too much to ask, Dagger?!
Why is Rouge-Mort covered up? My guess she is really Meggan!! Under someone's control.
Dear David --

Certainly a fair guess, given the history of the series, and the writer's proclivity for seeding even more loose ends than he allegedly resolves -- but in this particular instance ... I wouldn't bet the farm.

Cordially,

Chris Claremont
Yada, Yada, Yada.

[darknessatnoon]

Yada, Yada, Yada.

That's a definitive no, then. Thx Beast. I'll just ask Paul Cornell to do it if CC won't.

[Mitsaso]

How was the army? /random

They kicked me out due to my partial deafness!:biggrin:
YAY! Feels like I just gained a year in my life!

[worstblogever]

That's a definitive no, then. Thx Beast. I'll just ask Paul Cornell to do it if CC won't.

Paul Cornell is pretty keen.

[darknessatnoon]

They kicked me out due to my partial deafness!:biggrin:
YAY! Feels like I just gained a year in my life!

WOW

Congratulations!

[Dagger]

Your ass would be dyed red afterwards. I thought she was great. If only bitch fans hadn't screamed so much, she could have unmasked and given Brian back his wife. Was a little self-control on your and Novaya's part too much to ask, Dagger?!
Just for a second. Then I'd wash it off, lest it forms into a gimp suit.
Now that would be a sight to behold.

--Dazz
And how!

[Hi-Fi]

They kicked me out due to my partial deafness!:biggrin:
YAY! Feels like I just gained a year in my life!
Mah cuz! I'm so happy for you, dude!

[MuhollandDriver]

Coming in to this late.....

i liked this issue a lot. The Hellfire Cult/Red Queen concept is great. The bondage scenes were unexpected, quirky, a little unexpected! i like :)

As for the bashing scenes......

i am gay and yes, the scene made me squirm. That being said....i really think the writers had the best of intentions. It is a sore area for many of us, perhaps they were not careful enough. Nonetheless...i do believe their hearts were in the right place.

The description for Karma i found a bit more tasteless..to be honest.

Yet...the Pixie "fairy concept" with the possibly gay friend was disturbing. i have to admit. i know the intentions were likely good...but it did end up leaving a bad taste in my mouth. i cannot even fully explain why.

Now.....on the flip side!

You want to use real-life horrifying experiences of gays and cloak it in "mutant" terms to push the concept? Fine. Then please give a gay character with a storyline and a concept. Even tho some of the characterization might have been uneven to some...Skottie Young did write a story where two gay characters had very interesting, complex, real life moments. Much gratitude, Skottie.

We are not present just so You can use our oppression for Your writing. Quit seeing us as a concept. Write us as human beings...just like other characters. For every gay tragedy allegory thrown in....i want to see Anole, Northstar, and Karma with a full cooked life and personality.

i am not necessarily accusing brubaker and fraction of this. But way too many writers do this. i know that they mean no harm....and it may be hard for straight people to understand this...but i think many of You will relate to what i am talking about.

[MartinRedmond]

Yeah, the Red Queen is Meggan.

Originally Posted by Chris Claremont
Dear David --

Certainly a fair guess, I would bet the farm.

Cordially,

Chris Claremont


Chris Claremont confirmed Meggan is the Red Queen! Cool!

[Hi-Fi]

I think Karma rocked on those last pages. Just by being there all trendy and awesome. It's so nice to have her around again. I hope she shines next issue.

[Cytokinesis]

That bondage scene was seriously... just off. Thank god it wasn't Madelyne, because that 'costume' was...

I mean, one could almost accept it as a completely different deranged character.



Still hoping that Madelyne is the leader of the sisterhood though.

[Dagger]

That bondage scene was seriously... just off. Thank god it wasn't Madelyne, because that 'costume' was...

I mean, one could almost accept it as a completely different deranged character.



Still hoping that Madelyne is the leader of the sisterhood though.
I wonder when we'll see more of the sisterhood too. I thought we'd have something by now. It's been 2 issues, and we haven't even seen any kind of recruitment drive or anything.

[Hi-Fi]

How do we know the Red Queen wasn't Madelyne? The scene was ridiculous, though.

LOL-worthy material.

[darknessatnoon]

I wonder when we'll see more of the sisterhood too. I thought we'd have something by now. It's been 2 issues, and we haven't even seen any kind of recruitment drive or anything.

Their stance towards male mutants has been made clear, though.

[Dagger]

Their stance towards male mutants has been made clear, though.
Of course. Unless they are drag queens, or extremely effeminate, then they are not welcome!

[MuhollandDriver]

i liked the bondage scene.

It was unexpected...over the top.....why the heck not!

Brubaker and Fraction are developing a fun sensibility with this comic. i like :).

[greenshoes713]

I think Karma rocked on those last pages. Just by being there all trendy and awesome. It's so nice to have her around again. I hope she shines next issue.

Yeah she was being trendy!XD

[Bamf25]

Damn, I want my books. Due to a Diamond/UPS shipping error many Mid Altlantic US stores did not get their books today (about 250 according to my store).

[darknessatnoon]

Of course. Unless they are drag queens, or extremely effeminate, then they are not welcome!

I think they should be more welcome, but not completely so. Just like in the S.C.U.M. Manifesto (Society for Cutting Up Men), Valerie Solanas allowed for a SCUM Auxiliary made of effete guys and drag queens. In the end, though, they don't make the final cut either.

[Dagger]

I think they should be more welcome, but not completely so. Just like in the S.C.U.M. Manifesto (Society for Cutting Up Men), Valerie Solanas allowed for a SCUM Auxiliary made of effete guys and drag queens. In the end, though, they don't make the final cut either.
Lol. That sounds like a fun society to read about.

[darknessatnoon]

Lol. That sounds like a fun society to read about.

Follow the Yellow Brick Road. (http://www.womynkind.org/scum.htm)

[Anodyne]

What?

Red Queen is the most ridiculous looking female character I've seen in... ever. She looks gawd awful in that Stormy Leather discount rack lucha libre mess. Do we need to see her in that travesty to understand she likes to inflict pain?

I was referring only to her codename; that's why I put "Red Queen" in quotes. I haven't yet seen the character because my comics aren't shipped until the end of the month.

I've always felt that the codename "Goblin Queen" was intended to mock Madelyne.

[darknessatnoon]

I was referring only to her codename; that's why I put "Red Queen" in quotes. I haven't yet seen the character because my comics aren't shipped until the end of the month.

I've always felt that the codename "Goblin Queen" was intended to mock Madelyne.

LOL,

Red Queen only implies that she's a hormonal basket-case.

[Dagger]

Follow the Yellow Brick Road. (http://www.womynkind.org/scum.htm)
omg! I must ebay that issue STAT! I love vintage stuff from the 60's and 70's!!!

[darknessatnoon]

omg! I must ebay that issue STAT! I love vintage stuff from the 60's and 70's!!!

I have sooooooo many more recommendations. I'll look around tomorrow. But that one is my hands down favorite example of someone who uses "the insult form."

[Dagger]

I have sooooooo many more recommendations. I'll look around tomorrow. But that one is my hands down favorite example of someone who uses "the insult form."
LOL. Where do you come across this kind of stuff? It's amazing!!

[darknessatnoon]

LOL. Where do you come across this kind of stuff? It's amazing!!

I researched that stuff for a thesis I wrote once a long long time ago.

[Pixie_Solanas]

I liked Karma's jacket

but isn't it always hot?

Hot? SF? We get two weeks of hot weather a YEAR. That's it.

[Dazzler]

Hot? SF? We get two weeks of hot weather a YEAR. That's it.

And even then, it's colder than a witch's titty.

"The coldest winter I ever spent was the summer in San Francisco"

--Apologies to Oscar Wilde.

--Dazz

[pariah-1972]

Ok i finally got done reading this and Goddamn this was freaking horrible. .
0 the girl on the cover i thought was jean grey for a minute
1.Why didn't they kill Pixie ? would make sense if they did.
2. what was with all the homophobia talk earlier? or should i just ignore it as the rantings of a crazy person?
3. did we really need the overly descriptive break down of Warrens new car? i felt like i was reading an ad for a new car... is this product placement?
4. there was no tension no feeling that something was happening or even going to happen.
5. art was too airbrushed for my tastes.
6. how would kurt know where to teleport at? he can't do blind teleports everyone knows that.
7. nothing really happenend.
8. if the pixie girl and her guy friend just came out of the concert shouldn't there be more people around?
9. top of page four her left foot looks like its backwards or it got severly twisted tho i could be looking at it wrong.
10. is Emma modelling lingerie from page seven? if so why aren't we allowed to see it?
11. should i complain about Warrens wings not being seen when he was driving?
12. Do we really need captions for who these people are?

13. red queens costume was hilarious it look like something from gene simmons comics.

14. are we really suppose to believe this is our little jeanie? especially with Madelyne around somewhere.

!5. how did they know Karma was a mutant? sixth sense? they certainly don't seem to have any tech on them if they are using chains and bats.
which leads me to another point would anyone be stupid enough to mess with a mutie before even knowing what they can or can't do to you?
then again Empath has them on mind control (even technically he can't do that sort of thing) or maybe hes just making them hate and then gives them a push in the right direction?
16.is there a significant reason for the song in the title and then karma singing it at the end?


i will say i'm glad to see some of the original new mutants back , hopefully we will get to see Magma again.

[Pixie_Solanas]

And even then, it's colder than a witch's titty.

"The coldest winter I ever spent was the summer in San Francisco"

--Apologies to Oscar Wilde.

--Dazz

Another fair San Franciscan? DRINKS IN THE MISSION!

[Dazzler]

Another fair San Franciscan? DRINKS IN THE MISSION!

You are so ON!

Do you go to Zeitgeist or the Phone Booth?

Aside from the Lone Star, they're my bars of choice.

--Dazz

[Dagger]

Ok i finally got done reading this and Goddamn this was freaking horrible. .
0 the girl on the cover i thought was jean grey for a minute
Ummm...okay. I don't see it, but okay.
1.Why didn't they kill Pixie ? would make sense if they did.
Why would it have made sense?
2. what was with all the homophobia talk earlier? or should i just ignore it as the rantings of a crazy person?
The X-Men has used the allegory between the persecution of gays and mutants since the 90's. The bashing of pixie, and her assumed gay friend has led to many posters to think that the writers were showing a gay bashing. 'Fairy.'
3. did we really need the overly descriptive break down of Warrens new car? i felt like i was reading an ad for a new car... is this product placement?
Marvel's been doing ad placement for years.
4. there was no tension no feeling that something was happening or even going to happen.
Going to have to disagree with you on this.
6. how would kurt know where to teleport at? he can't do blind teleports everyone knows that.
I'm assuming that this was all a set up after what happened to Pixie after the concert.
7. nothing really happenend.
We saw that Empath and the Red Queen were behind the Hellfire Cult. Both of which appears to be mutants. We saw Worthington Towers, and Graymalkin Industries. We saw a subplot for Cyke wanting to have a baby and repopulating the mutant species by having some babies of his own.
8. if the pixie girl and her guy friend just came out of the concert shouldn't there be more people around?
You would think so.
9. top of page four her left foot looks like its backwards or it got severly twisted tho i could be looking at it wrong.
It's Greg Land. What do you expect?
10. is Emma modelling lingerie from page seven? if so why aren't we allowed to see it?
It's see through. From the Emperor's new clothing line.
11. should i complain about Warrens wings not being seen when he was driving?
Only if you want to complain about it every other time it's been done.
12. Do we really need captions for who these people are?
Ask pretty much every Chris Claremont comic, and you will find an answer.
13. red queens costume was hilarious it look like something from gene simmons comics.
Agreed.

14. are we really suppose to believe this is our little jeanie? especially with Madelyne around somewhere.
Popular consensus is that it is Madelyne.
15. how did they know Karma was a mutant? sixth sense? they certainly don't seem to have any tech on them if they are using chains and bats.
which leads me to another point would anyone be stupid enough to mess with a mutie before even knowing what they can or can't do to you?
then again Empath has them on mind control (even technically he can't do that sort of thing) or maybe hes just making them hate and then gives them a push in the right direction?
That's what it seems like. And he's been shown to have some degree of mind control when manipulating the emotions of his victims.
16.is there a significant reason for the song in the title and then karma singing it at the end?
Wait and see.

i will say i'm glad to see some of the original new mutants back , hopefully we will get to see Magma again.
Agreed.

[The Black Guardian]

!

I think you have uncovered the pedophilia undercurrent in American music. :(
Apparently something they learned from Kylie.
"Get up boy, cuz I wanna chance to make you move."

Anyway... this debate about "gay bashing" is one of the most absurd things I've read for a while.

As for the issue, it was good in parts, but in other parts (mostly, any scenes with Scott and/or Emma)... ew.
16.is there a significant reason for the song in the title and then karma singing it at the end?
Maybe something to do with William Gibson's novel of the same name, which is set in SF/Oakland?

[Anodyne]

I
Is she supposed to be Meggan? I never got the full story on who she was.

--Dazz
Nope. Wasn't meant to be Meggan.
Yeah, wrapped up in that big tube of rubber is Meggan. It makes sense if you think about it ... in a sick Claremontian sort of way.
EDIT: BEAST! Dazz wasn't asking you! David R said it was, and that dude has the CC hook up. So, it's incontrovertible.

Well, David R is full of it. The writer himself posted that it wasn't Meggan.
Where did he post this? David R doesn't seem to be the kind of guy who would lie about CC's writing and plans he had for characters and books that weren't true. He's a huge fan.

Over where he posts all his stuff. He posted outright that it wasn't Meggan.

Maybe David R was assuming it was before the writer clarified.
Chris Claremont confirmed Meggan is the Red Queen! Cool!
On the contrary. Over at Comixfan, on October 27, 2007, David R speculated that Rouge-Mort might be Meggan. What Chris Claremont replied on October 28, 2007 was, "I wouldn't bet the farm." When you quoted Claremont, Martin, the n't somehow got deleted. Here's a link to CC's original post:
http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/forums/showpost.php?p=1387746&postcount=160
LOL,

Red Queen only implies that she's a hormonal basket-case.

Not to a fan of Lewis Carroll. :smile:

[Personal]

I'm not sure what issue to what book this is...

but does anyone recall when Wolverine and Emma went to a wedding ceremony together? It was kind of like an Emma/Logan special that was just a fun read.

Anyways, Emma, despite her social status and familiarity amongst the crowd, is a complete victim to mutant bashing - both outright, and through mind reading. Wolverine was invited outside by some guys only to be beat on for being a mutant. It was weird to see such strong characters in positions like these you don't normally see them in.

It was in this issue it dawned on me the parallelism between homosexuality and mutant..y...


and honestly I think this is being overanalyzed. In all my years of living not only in SF, but in the Castro, I've only known one incident of gay bashing - and that was someone walking through the Mission on Pride night with his face painted. It probably would have happened either way...you don't walk through Mission at night. Period.

[Omega Alpha]

This was good, better than #500. Interesting subplots, even more hints (yeah, I do think that Emma is pregnant already or will be soon), and for people complaining about the X-angst or "the A-listers dominating all the books", you had a lighter issue, with the X-men just having fun (until the end) and characters like Karma, Empath and Maddie (?) making appereances.

[Slung]

Gays choose to be gay... It's a decision that they make in their youth, not a genetic quirk or defect.. Mutants don't choose to be anything. They don't have a choice in being a mutant. Most of them cannot hide. The X-men can be equated more with children with birth defects than gays.

What the hell? Even most right wing Christian fundamentalists have pretty much jumped onboard that people don't CHOOSE to be gay. Why would anyone choose to be ridiculed, beaten up, looked down upon, ostracized in their youth? Pretty much everyone wants to fit in during their youth. UGH.

It was very interesting to see that the rumors of Cyclops uncaring towards the depowered mutants is actually not true, he did invite them to San Fran.
The writers heard about the complaints! Cyclops has changed his mind.

Scott didn't seem to mind though... he's just as bad for not standing up to it imo.

If only Storm had been there. The real Storm, not this Wakandan robot they FedExed to San Fran...

I'd like to see the real Storm too.

As for the issue. Scott and Emma are nauseating. What the heck was Emma wearing in/on her crotch that cost so much money? Since when does Scott call his woman "baby."

[Dagger]

I was given the ok to say this.

This right here is exactly why the friend was beaten. They are using this as the catalyst to develop Pixie, give her purpose. Make her a true, real hero. It is a horrible scene, I agree on that. But this is the reason, from Marvel themselves, as to why it happened.

Will it be handled well? I can't answer that. But this is why it happened.

Steven
I'm so happy this will help bring Pixie to the forefront and help developing her character. I'm all for this!

[Dr. Ghost]

when pixie got hit in the back of the head, it looked like she enjoyed it.

[LungerTony]

What the hell? Even most right wing Christian fundamentalists have pretty much jumped onboard that people don't CHOOSE to be gay. Why would anyone choose to be ridiculed, beaten up, looked down upon, ostracized in their youth? Pretty much everyone wants to fit in during their youth. UGH.


Please Slung, dont take this as an attack, but don't act like you know everything, or that your opinion or feelings represent a universal truth.
I live in the deep south, in the evangelical fortress of America, and I would totally disagree that Christian funds believe that homosexuality is NOT choice.
They mostly totally believe homosexuality is a lifestyl choice from everyone I have ever befriended, talked to, heard, etc.

Why would any youth want to be ostracized? I don't know.
There was a kid in my highschool that dressed like a girl. Went full blown transvestite at age 15. People didn't like him at all. The kid wanted to use the girl's bathroom. True story. Made a big stink about it. The kid even got on the Dr. Phil show. No lie.
Despite all the negative attention, the kid kept up with his antics. If it wasn't for hsi crap noone would have even bothered with this kid and he wouldn't have been on tv and wouldn't have been a popular conversation topic.
That kid's sexual preference may or may not be a choice depending on everyone's opinion, but I don't think anyone will try to say he dressed like a girl because it was in his DNA.

Point is, some people just want attention. Regardless whether it is negative or positive attention. They just want attention.


AND, I don't consider the X-Men to be an allegory to the gay movement and their prejudices like some people say. Never did I ever remotely think that.
I always thought of the X-Men as an allegory to American racial/white/black tensions that predominated in the first half or so of the 20th century.

[Henry T.]

If he was very effeminate and dressed like a girl, most likely he was a transexual, which again would be due to the development of the brain (refer back to one of my earlier posts on prenatal brain development).

I think what Slung meant was that even big time conservative Christian organizations (like Focus on the Family) concede that gay people don't chose to be gay (why else would they have to create ex-gay ministries to brain wash them into being "straight"?). However, they think it is a solely social/psychological developmental issue and ignore biological (genetic, hormonal, brain development) and evolutionary factors.

EDIT, my earlier post...

No, gays do not chose to be gay. And not all gays can blend in as some gay men are extremely effeminate and some lesbians are extremely masculine and some people are transexual or intersexual.

While there is no single gay gene, a polygenic set of genes most likely are involved. Afterall genes affect the release and regulation of hormones and other aspects of brain development in interaction with environmental factors.

Most likely the biological basis of homosexuality has to do with the way the brain develops in the womb. For example we all begin life as a fetus in a proto-female state. If we are male the Y chromosome activates the release of androgens like testosterone to masculinize the fetus. These chemicals will masculinize the brain and the genitals to make the fetus a male. However, brain tissue naturally resists this process and therefore creates a continuum of low masculinized brained males to high masculinized brained males.

Studies have shown differences in respsect to size and dendritic connections of the anterior hypothalamus, anterior commissure, and amygdala in heterosexuals and homosexuals.

These areas of the brain are similar in heterosexual females and homosexual males and in heterosexual males and homosexual females.

Similar studies (although with a relatively small sample) have been conducted on rams as well.

Homosexuality occurs in the animal kingdom just as it does in humans in respect to clandestine behavior, situational homosexuality (such as in prisons when one sex is isolated from the other) and in lifelong orientations.

In Iran gay teens can be executed just for being gay. You can google it and see pictures of teen boys hanging dead from a noose. Would teenage boys chose to be gay in a country where they could get the death penalty?

Sexuality develops from a complex interaction of biological, environmental, social, and psychological factors. Its definitely not a choice.

[Dagger]

They are actually equating The X-men/Mutants with the gay movement... (Thus, the silly move to San Francisco---that will be un-done in about 3-4 years).

The reason that they have a school is that the mutants won't encounter human gangs and anti-mutant factions in the cities..

The X-Men aren't The Champions/Defenders/etc.. in which they need to be Avengers-lite, and become the champion of any city.

I just don't get the closet-comparison.

Gays choose to be gay... It's a decision that they make in their youth, not a genetic quirk or defect.. Mutants don't choose to be anything. They don't have a choice in being a mutant. Most of them cannot hide. The X-men can be equated more with children with birth defects than gays.

Gays can blend in society, and not be called-out on site unless their actions and words "out them".
Bloody hell. The gay theme has been seen as far back as Chris Claremont's run. Sure, it wasn't the predominant comparison, but it was there. Just look at the New Mutant issue where Larry Bodine killed himself. It's quite obviously a parallel to a gay teen being outed and killing himself because he couldn't handle the ostricising from the 'regular' people. Before you 'drop some knowledge' on how it feels to be gay, and whether we choose to be gay or not, learn some fricking facts.

[nikbackm]

Since when does Scott call his woman "baby."

Since Matt Fraction started writing Uncanny?

[Slung]

Please Slung, dont take this as an attack, but don't act like you know everything, or that your opinion or feelings represent a universal truth.
I live in the deep south, in the evangelical fortress of America, and I would totally disagree that Christian funds believe that homosexuality is NOT choice.
They mostly totally believe homosexuality is a lifestyl choice from everyone I have ever befriended, talked to, heard, etc.

Why would any youth want to be ostracized? I don't know.
There was a kid in my highschool that dressed like a girl. Went full blown transvestite at age 15. People didn't like him at all. The kid wanted to use the girl's bathroom. True story. Made a big stink about it. The kid even got on the Dr. Phil show. No lie.
Despite all the negative attention, the kid kept up with his antics. If it wasn't for hsi crap noone would have even bothered with this kid and he wouldn't have been on tv and wouldn't have been a popular conversation topic.
That kid's sexual preference may or may not be a choice depending on everyone's opinion, but I don't think anyone will try to say he dressed like a girl because it was in his DNA.

Point is, some people just want attention. Regardless whether it is negative or positive attention. They just want attention.


AND, I don't consider the X-Men to be an allegory to the gay movement and their prejudices like some people say. Never did I ever remotely think that.
I always thought of the X-Men as an allegory to American racial/white/black tensions that predominated in the first half or so of the 20th century.

None of the conservative Christians I know believe gays choose to be gay. They believe gay people choose to have sex, but not that they choose to be attracted to people of the same sex. They may believe gays social upbringing causes them to be gay, but not that they consciously choose it. Why would anyone want to feel ostracized and different from everyone else, risking alienation from friends, family and church. If you're straight (which I'm assuming you are) do you think you could magically choose to be gay? Please. Anyone who believes that gay people choose to be gay seriously needs to have contact with someone who is gay. And try reading the Bible for real. Jesus would have choice words for them.


I think what Slung meant was that even big time conservative Christian organizations (like Focus on the Family) concede that gay people don't chose to be gay (why else would they have to create ex-gay ministries to brain wash them into being "straight"?). However, they think it is a solely social/psychological developmental issue and ignore biological (genetic, hormonal, brain development) and evolutionary factors.
Thanks Henry.

[LungerTony]

None of the conservative Christians I know believe gays choose to be gay. They believe gay people choose to have sex, but not that they choose to be attracted to people of the same sex. They may believe gays social upbringing causes them to be gay, but not that they consciously choose it.

Lol. I would agree with that then.
A misunderstanding of words then. I equate "being gay" as "being active in a gay relationship of some kind." I don't consider a person "gay" for deep down remote feelings the person may have had but never acted upon.

From my pespective, homosexuality is a choice in the sense that the person choose to act upon their feelings. Not that the feelings may have existed to begin with.
And for whatever its worth, I do have a few gay/bi friends.

[Henry T.]

Anyone who believes that gay people choose to be gay seriously needs to have contact with someone who is gay. And try reading the Bible for real. Jesus would have choice words for them.

I agree with this completely.

Theres a nice little book called "The Lost Message of Jesus" by Steve Chalke and Alan Mann that I would definitely recommend to any Christian. It shows how Christianity has gotten away from Jesus' inclusive and peaceful message and how many Christians don't even know what Jesus taught and probably don't even agree with it. Many would denounce Jesus as a liberal.

For example: Until the 4th Century, Christians were against war and the church fathers didn't allow Christians to join the military. And now a lot of conservative Christians are pro-war. :confused:

[ThreeDays]

From my pespective, homosexuality is a choice in the sense that the person choose to act upon their feelings. Not that the feelings may have existed to begin with.

So, just to be sure everyone understands everyone else, you think that all forms of sexuality (hetero, homo, what-have-you) are a choice in that one chooses to act on sexual inclinations?

I suppose that's okay — and true according to the definition you're going by — but that isn't really the widely understood meaning of "sexuality"/"sexual orientation." I imagine you're the only one in the thread so far to use that definition, as it really then leaves no term that means "the direction of one's sexual interest."

Christianity has gotten away from Jesus' inclusive and peaceful message

Agreed.

[Slung]

Lol. I would agree with that then.
A misunderstanding of words then. I equate "being gay" as "being active in a gay relationship of some kind." I don't consider a person "gay" for deep down remote feelings the person may have had but never acted upon.

From my pespective, homosexuality is a choice in the sense that the person choose to act upon their feelings. Not that the feelings may have existed to begin with.
And for whatever its worth, I do have a few gay/bi friends.

What do you call a guy who falls in love with another guy but doesn't act on it? Straight? And remember that this person isn't attracted to someone of the opposite sex. If he gets married to a woman, he is living a lie. If he doesn't get married he is living a life of lust (which the Apostle Paul says that if someone is going to live in lust - or 'burn in passion' they should get married). What is the most Christian thing to do? And do you consider your attraction or feelings for girls a "deep down remote feeling" you may have but will choose to never act on?

Do you see the problem?

[LungerTony]

For example: Until the 4th Century, Christians were against war and the church fathers didn't allow Christians to join the military. And now a lot of conservative Christians are pro-war. :confused:

Well, for what its worth, before the 4th century Christianity was a mess. There was not much universal agreement on doctrine beyond their very flat basics of Christianity. And their isn't a hole lot of existing historical data available compared to later periods.
Church fathers may not have allowed Christians to join the military, I am not sure. But really, you had sporadic episodes of imperial persecution on Christians, so I am sure the state (Rome) made that decision easy for Christians anyway. So it is a bit of a moot point.
Christianity didn't spread over continental Europe in the three centuries after Christ because ALL Christians were passivists and were not in the military.

[Slung]

Well, for what its worth, before the 4th century Christianity was a mess. There was not much universal agreement on doctrine beyond their very flat basics of Christianity. And their isn't a hole lot of existing historical data available compared to later periods.
Church fathers may not have allowed Christians to join the military, I am not sure. But really, you had sporadic episodes of imperial persecution on Christians, so I am sure the state (Rome) made that decision easy for Christians anyway. So it is a bit of a moot point.
Christianity didn't spread over continental Europe in the three centuries after Christ because ALL Christians were passivists and were not in the military.

Well, I would say the first two centuries of Christianity was more in keeping with Christ and Paul's ideas of Christianity then the Dark Ages. Which was what happened next. I think I'd take Jesus (and some of Paul's) Christianity over the Dark Ages any day.

And if we look at Jesus, He had a big problem with the religious of the day and hung out with the outcasts. If He were to come back now I'm guessing He wouldn't be seen too often in churches (and we'd probably crucify Him all over again).

[claimtosubclaim]

Another fair San Franciscan? DRINKS IN THE MISSION!

I prefer the pubs. 'Mad Dog in the Fog' on Haight is a good one. They have trivia nights hosted by an Irishman. Prizes include pitchers of choice beer.

None of the conservative Christians I know believe gays choose to be gay. They believe gay people choose to have sex, but not that they choose to be attracted to people of the same sex. They may believe gays social upbringing causes them to be gay, but not that they consciously choose it. Why would anyone want to feel ostracized and different from everyone else, risking alienation from friends, family and church. If you're straight (which I'm assuming you are) do you think you could magically choose to be gay? Please. Anyone who believes that gay people choose to be gay seriously needs to have contact with someone who is gay. And try reading the Bible for real. Jesus would have choice words for them.


I agree with Slung completely.

*You can add that to your sig if you want*

[LungerTony]

What do you call a guy who falls in love with another guy but doesn't act on it? Straight? And remember that this person isn't attracted to someone of the opposite sex. If he gets married to a woman, he is living a lie. If he doesn't get married he is living a life of lust (which the Apostle Paul says that if someone is going to live in lust - or 'burn in passion' they should get married). What is the most Christian thing to do? And do you consider your attraction or feelings for girls a "deep down remote feeling" you may have but will choose to never act on?

Do you see the problem?

You can spin the Bible a lot of different ways on many different subjects, but you are taking a lot of liberty if your suggesting that the Bible supports gay marriage. There a lot of passages that makes its opposition to sodomy and homosexual relationship clear.
And I would call that guy straight, assuming he is or has been in a sexual relationship with a girl. I don't know what else you'd call it.
I don't understand your last question.

[Henry T.]

Well, for what its worth, before the 4th century Christianity was a mess. There was not much universal agreement on doctrine beyond their very flat basics of Christianity. And their isn't a hole lot of existing historical data available compared to later periods.
Church fathers may not have allowed Christians to join the military, I am not sure. But really, you had sporadic episodes of imperial persecution on Christians, so I am sure the state (Rome) made that decision easy for Christians anyway. So it is a bit of a moot point.
Christianity didn't spread over continental Europe in the three centuries after Christ because ALL Christians were passivists and were not in the military.

Jesus taught peaceful resistance.

You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.' But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.
—Matthew 5:38-42, NIV

But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic. Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. Do to others as you would have them do to you.
—Luke 6:27-31. NIV


From Wikipedia (this is also the position taken in the book I referenced)

A figurative interpretation relies on historical and other factors.[1] At the time of Jesus, striking someone deemed to be of a lower class with the back of the hand was used to assert authority and dominance.[2] If the persecuted person "turned the other cheek," the discipliner was faced with a dilemma. The left hand was used for unclean purposes, so a back-hand strike on the opposite cheek would not be performed.[3] The other alternative would be a slap with the open hand as a challenge or to punch the person, but this was seen as a statement of equality. Thus, by turning the other cheek the persecuted was in effect demanding equality. By handing over one's cloak in addition to one's tunic, the debtor has essentially given the shirt off their back, a situation directly forbidden by Jewish Law as stated in Deuteronomy 24: 10-13:

When you make your neighbor a loan of any sort, you shall not enter his house to take his pledge. You shall remain outside, and the man to whom you make the loan shall bring the pledge out to you. If he is a poor man, you shall not sleep with his pledge. When the sun goes down you shall surely return the pledge to him, that he may sleep in his cloak and bless you; and it will be righteousness for you before the LORD your God.

By giving the lender the cloak as well the debtor was reduced to nakedness. Public nudity was viewed as bringing shame on the viewer, not the naked, as evidenced in Genesis 9: 20-27:

Noah was the first tiller of the soil. He planted a vineyard; and he drank of the wine, and became drunk, and lay uncovered in his tent. And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brothers outside. Then Shem and Japheth took a garment, laid it upon both their shoulders, and walked backward and covered the nakedness of their father; their faces were turned away, and they did not see their father's nakedness.

The succeeding verse from the Sermon on the Mount can similarly be seen as a method for making the oppressor break the law. The commonly invoked Roman law of Angaria allowed the Roman authorities to demand that inhabitants of occupied territories carry messages and equipment the distance of one mile post, but prohibited forcing an individual to go further than a single mile, at the risk of suffering disciplinary actions.[4] In this example, the nonviolent interpretation sees Jesus as placing criticism on an unjust and hated Roman law as well as clarifying the teaching to extend beyond Jewish law.[5] As a side effect this may also have afforded the early followers a longer time to missionary to the soldier and or cause the soldier not to seek followers of Jesus to carry his equipment in the future so as not to be bothered with their proselitizing.

Peaceful resistance worked for Martin Luther King Jr. and Ghandi.

[Slung]

You can spin the Bible a lot of different ways on many different subjects, but you are taking a lot of liberty if your suggesting that the Bible supports gay marriage. There a lot of passages that makes its opposition to sodomy and homosexual relationship clear.
And I would call that guy straight, assuming he is or has been in a sexual relationship with a girl. I don't know what else you'd call it.
I don't understand your last question.

I wasn't spinning the Bible any which way. I was merely commenting on the irony that Paul says people should get married instead of burn with lust, but then the gay person can't get married so they are expected burn with lust.

I never said that our guy who doesn't have sex with dudes but is attracted to them has sex with girls. Why would he? Would you feel good about having sex with guys? And if this hypothetical guy is in a sexual relationship with a girl outside of marriage that would be just as sinful as homosexuality, wouldn't it? (For that matter, biblically, so would gossiping and calling people names).

And as I said if a gay man gets married to a woman there is a whole lot more baggage and ills for that marriage including lies and a lack of emotional intimacy which isn't fair to either of them. And I'm sure God would not appreciate that union.

You said that this hypothetical guy with attractions to other dudes, who you won't call gay, had "deep down remote feelings" that he doesn't act on. I was wondering if you could call your own feelings for women "deep down remote feelings" that you could choose never to act on.

[LungerTony]

I never said that our guy who doesn't have sex with dudes but is attracted to them has sex with girls. Why would he? Would you feel good about having sex with guys? And if this hypothetical guy is in a sexual relationship with a girl outside of marriage that would be just as sinful as homosexuality, wouldn't it? (For that matter, biblically, so would gossiping and calling people names).

If he wasn't involved with girls or guys, I would call him straight, unless the person identified his ownself as gay.

And as I said if a gay man gets married to a woman there is a whole lot more baggage and ills for that marriage including lies and a lack of emotional intimacy which isn't fair to either of them. And I'm sure God would not appreciate that union.
Lol. Every relationship I have ever had lacked emotional intimacy.

You said that this hypothetical guy with attractions to other dudes, who you won't call gay, had "deep down remote feelings" that he doesn't act on. I was wondering if you could call your own feelings for women "deep down remote feelings" that you could choose never to act on.

No heterosexual man would publicly announce they could never have sex with a lady.
But I will be honest. If having sex with women invoked upon me some major "not good" consequence, I could survive by mastur---ing 5 times a day.

[Henry T.]

11Jesus replied, "Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. 12For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage[c]because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it."

Now I know theres controversy as to whether "eunuchs who were born that way" could apply to homosexual men or not but it at least acknowledges other types of people (perhaps intersexuals or others).

Surely some eunuchs were homosexual as Alexander the Great is believed to have had some love affairs with some of his eunuchs, right?

[Quinnhop]

The only relevant tie that Jesus has with this thread is the fact that he was the world's second mutant (and an omega one, at that).

[nikbackm]

The only relevant tie that Jesus has with this thread is the fact that he was the world's second mutant (and an omega one, at that).

So who was the first one then?

[Slung]

If he wasn't involved with girls or guys, I would call him straight, unless the person identified his ownself as gay.


Lol. Every relationship I have ever had lacked emotional intimacy.



No heterosexual man would publicly announce they could never have sex with a lady.
But I will be honest. If having sex with women invoked upon me some major "not good" consequence, I could survive by mastur---ing 5 times a day.

Wait. You're against homosexuality because of the Bible, but you're okay with sex outside of marriage? You do realize that one is discussed five times or so in the entire Bible but the other many many times? I'm confused. You also realize that Jesus said that people who divorce and get remarried are committing adultery, right? That means fifty percent of Christian marriages are actually adultery. You think thats better than gay marriage (which the Bible never even makes remote mention of). There could be a whole discussion on the cultural context of the passages against homosexuality in the Bible.

[LungerTony]

Now I know theres controversy as to whether "eunuchs who were born that way" could apply to homosexual men or not but it at least acknowledges other types of people (perhaps intersexuals or others).

Surely some eunuchs were homosexual as Alexander the Great is believed to have had some love affairs with some of his eunuchs, right?

A eunuch is someone who's sexual genitals were removed. It is impossible for them to have sex.
I don't see how it could apply to homosexuals.
If Alexander the Great was having gay sex with "his" eunuchs, I think it would be foolish to think this is some great consentual gay relationship between two equals.
More likely it is Alexander butt-raping his slaves.

[Personal]

Lol. Every relationship I have ever had lacked emotional intimacy.

Maybe because your views are so ****ed up :\

[Peter F.]

So who was the first one then?

Apocalypse? Selene? Dazzler? The latter two look good for their age.

[Henry T.]

A eunuch is someone who's sexual genitals were removed. It is impossible for them to have sex.
I don't see how it could apply to homosexuals.
If Alexander the Great was having gay sex with "his" eunuchs, I think it would be foolish to think this is some great consentual gay relationship between two equals.
More likely it is Alexander butt-raping his slaves.

I thought they were just castrated therefore they would still have their penises.

What do you think was meant by eunuchs who were born that way then? I think its very rare for men to be born without testicles. I know some intersexuals (hermaphrodites) have clitoris' the size of a small penis and a vagina where the testicles would be.

[Slung]

A eunuch is someone who's sexual genitals were removed. It is impossible for them to have sex.
I don't see how it could apply to homosexuals.
If Alexander the Great was having gay sex with "his" eunuchs, I think it would be foolish to think this is some great consentual gay relationship between two equals.
More likely it is Alexander butt-raping his slaves.

Jesus talks about eunuchs who had their testicles removed and those who were "born that way." Re-read the passage. Eunuchs culturally at that time did not necessarily mean people who had their testicles removed - Eunuchs referred to men who were put in position of authority in regards to political figure's harems or female political figures. These were men that the authorities felt safe putting in charge of their women. Men who would not molest or grope these women. Even a heterosexual who had his testicles removed still has an attraction to women and could still sexual molest them.

Eunuchs have a history of homosexual activity (whether genital-less or not) because most of them were men that authorities felt were "safe" with their women. Take that as you will.

Further food for thought was that Daniel and Shadrack, Meshack and Abendigo (or however you spell their names) were technically called "Eunuchs" in the old testament. And found to be beautiful and "loved" by their supervisor. Take that as you will also.

[LungerTony]

Wait. You're against homosexuality because of the Bible, but you're okay with sex outside of marriage? You do realize that one is discussed five times or so in the entire Bible but the other many many times? I'm confused. You also realize that Jesus said that people who divorce and get remarried are committing adultery, right? That means fifty percent of Christian marriages are actually adultery. You think thats better than gay marriage (which the Bible never even makes remote mention of). There could be a whole discussion on the cultural context of the passages against homosexuality in the Bible.

Lol. I don't oppose homosexuality because of the Bible. I never said that. But I understand the assumption. The Bible is only marginally important to me as a real guide to life.
I don't even really oppose homosexuality, but I certainly don't celebrate it as "normal". My biggest issues is that it celebrates of culture of feminism (in men) and a desire to challenge and attack gender roles.
And gay people on the internet seem to be the most whiny and sensitive people on the planet.

[Henry T.]

Jesus talks about eunuchs who had their testicles removed and those who were "born that way." Re-read the passage. Eunuchs culturally at that time did not necessarily mean people who had their testicles removed - Eunuchs referred to men who were put in position of authority in regards to political figure's harems or female political figures. These were men that the authorities felt safe putting in charge of their women. Men who would not molest or grope these women. Even a heterosexual who had his testicles removed still has an attraction to women and could still sexual molest them.

Eunuchs have a history of homosexual activity (whether genital-less or not) because most of them were men that authorities felt were "safe" with their women. Take that as you will.

Further food for thought was that Daniel and Shadrack, Meshack and Abendigo (or however you spell their names) were technically called "Eunuchs" in the old testament. And found to be beautiful and "loved" by their supervisor. Take that as you will also.

Right! And there were times in history where Islamic regimes had eunuchs watch over harems because they knew they would watch over the woman without being interested in them.

[ThreeDays]

The only relevant tie that Jesus has with this thread is the fact that he was the world's second mutant (and an omega one, at that).

Au contraire.

While we're discussing the potential logic or lack thereof in following Biblical suggestions here on a comic forum, I'd like to bring up an observation/curiosity I've long found boggling. Continuity errors send many hardcore comic fans to foaming at the mouth at times (including me), but they always get a pass among the Bible fans.

The Bible's rife with them (http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jim_meritt/bible-contradictions.html), yet you don't hear about them very often. Even when they're gigantic. The absolute biggest to come to mind is Judas having two completely different deaths depicted in the Book of Matthew (suicide by hanging) and the Acts of the Apostles (suicide by falling headlong into the ground, with his body subsequently bursting and his innards spewing all about).

If he wasn't involved with girls or guys, I would call him straight, unless the person identified his ownself as gay.

That wouldn't make sense either since a female only interested in females — or a male only interested in males — may have never "been involved" with someone up to a certain point in their life, yet would only be interested in "getting to know" (in the Biblical sense, of course) someone of their own sex.


By the way, in the hopes of putting a lid on taking any kind of cues from the Bible regarding sexuality, the Bible doesn't tell you who you can have "relations" with in the case of having a condition like this one (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5-alpha_reductase_deficiency), this one (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Androgen_insensitivity_syndrome) or this one (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/17-beta-hydroxysteroid_dehydrogenase_deficiency). Whether you went with a male or female, according to someone's definition, you'd be a homosexual.

If the Bible couldn't account for everyone, then why account for it.

[nikbackm]

Apocalypse? Selene? Dazzler? The latter two look good for their age.

For some reason I assumed he meant our universe and not the 616.

[Henry T.]

Lol. I don't oppose homosexuality because of the Bible. I never said that. But I understand the assumption. The Bible is only marginally important to me as a real guide to life.
I don't even really oppose homosexuality, but I certainly don't celebrate it as "normal". My biggest issues is that it celebrates of culture of feminism (in men) and a desire to challenge and attack gender roles.
And gay people on the internet seem to be the most whiny and sensitive people on the planet.

It is normal and natural though. Its a part of natural variation (see again brain development) and appears in the animal kingdom in the same ways that it appears in humans.

1. Clandestine behavior-- Heterosexuals can experiment with homosexual behavior.

2. Situational Homosexuality-- when heterosexuals are isolated from the other sex for a prolonged time, they may engage in homosexual behavior (this happens in prisons, military, catholic and Buddhist monasteries etc ) and this has been observed in animal populations when one sex is isolated from the other.

3. Lifelong Orientation-- There are animals and humans who are lifelong homosexual or are homosexual for extended periods of time during their life. They have sex with and/or pair bond with the same sex. They may even raise other's children (observed in swans, penguins etc) or just have heterosex to reproduce and then go back to their same sex partner.

Homosexuality as orientation in animals may also be due to brain development.

[Slung]

Lol. I don't oppose homosexuality because of the Bible. I never said that. But I understand the assumption. The Bible is only marginally important to me as a real guide to life.
I don't even really oppose homosexuality, but I certainly don't celebrate it as "normal". My biggest issues is that it celebrates of culture of feminism (in men) and a desire to challenge and attack gender roles.
And gay people on the internet seem to be the most whiny and sensitive people on the planet.

I'm confused. Please continue doing whatever it is you do.

[Henry T.]

Au contraire.

While we're discussing the potential logic or lack thereof in following Biblical suggestions here on a comic forum, I'd like to bring up an observation/curiosity I've long found boggling. Continuity errors send many hardcore comic fans to foaming at the mouth at times (including me), but they always get a pass among the Bible fans.

The Bible's rife with them (http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jim_meritt/bible-contradictions.html), yet you don't hear about them very often. Even when they're gigantic. The absolute biggest to come to mind is Judas having two completely different deaths depicted in the Book of Matthew (suicide by hanging) and the Acts of the Apostles (suicide by falling headlong into the ground, with his body subsequently bursting and his innards spewing all about).



That wouldn't make sense either since a female only interested in females — or a male only interested in males — may have never "been involved" with someone up to a certain point in their life, yet would only be interested in "getting to know" (in the Biblical sense, of course) someone of their own sex.


By the way, in the hopes of putting a lid on taking any kind of cues from the Bible regarding sexuality, the Bible doesn't tell you who you can have "relations" with in the case of having a condition like this one (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5-alpha_reductase_deficiency), this one (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Androgen_insensitivity_syndrome) or this one (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/17-beta-hydroxysteroid_dehydrogenase_deficiency). Whether you went with a male or female, according to someone's definition, you'd be a homosexual.

If the Bible couldn't account for everyone, then why account for it.

Not all Christians are literalists or fundamentalists.

Anyways, there are also some people who have Klinefelters Syndrom and have XXY chromosome. The only was Cassandra Nova can be genetically Xavier's identical twin would be if he had Klinefelters, I think.

[ThreeDays]

Not all Christians are literalists or fundamentalists.

True enough, and those that aren't typically have a more considerate, informed knowledge of homosexuality than those to whom the existence of intersexuality must be pointed out.

Anyways, there are also some people who have Klinefelters Syndrom and have XXY chromosome.

Yep, and that's another reason why any position of judging homosexuality negatively becomes so mired in technicalities that no one looking to do it can really work out how it should apply in the case of intersexual individuals. Which an omnipotent being should really work out if he wants to be fair and just; especially when 1 percent of all live births have some degree of ambiguity regarding the sex of the newborn.

Does one determine a person's sex based on chromosomes? On genitalia? On which reproductive organs work (assuming any do)? On overall physical appearance? On the accepted gender of the individual? Should one be going by any physical characteristics in the first place when marriages/relationships are supposed to be about the spirit anyway, thus rendering judging someone's spirit based on their sexuality (a physical rather than spiritual concern) blatant hypocrisy and shallowness?

It's really beyond absurd that with all the knowledge floating about in this day and age such debates remain necessary

[ifitkillsyou]

a a side note...
wasnt there a red haired stripper with a whip in the Morrison Hellfire "club"
i remember it being a realllllllly sexy Bachalo issue.
i say thats the red herring...
i mean queen.
(not like, you know, QUEEN btw)

[timbox]

Karma was looking nice and fit. I'm glad to see her exercising regularly.

[Peter F.]

Karma was looking nice and fit. I'm glad to see her exercising regularly.

I thought you loved Phat Karma.

[timbox]

I thought you loved Phat Karma.

How dare you!? You obviously have me confused with someone else. Ugh!

[Peter F.]

How dare you!? You obviously have me confused with someone else. Ugh!

We should all embrace Phat Karma. She loves you.

[Pro]

From my pespective, homosexuality is a choice in the sense that the person choose to act upon their feelings. Not that the feelings may have existed to begin with.

I don't choose to like blueberry pie, i just like blueberry pie, that's why i choose to eat it. Whether i make the choice to eat blueberry pie or not doesn't change the fact that i like blueberry pie. It just means i don't choose to eat blueberry pie. I'm still a lover of blueberry pie though, whether i choose to eat it or not.

[darknessatnoon]

I don't choose to like blueberry pie, i just like blueberry pie, that's why i choose to eat it. Whether i make the choice to eat blueberry pie or not doesn't change the fact that i like blueberry pie. It just means i don't choose to eat blueberry pie. I'm still a lover of blueberry pie though, whether i choose to eat it or not.

Have you seen Won Kar-Wai's movie, My Blueberry Nights (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86kckraMXtI&feature=related)? It's all about people who like blueberry pie (rarer than you'd think!).

[timbox]

Believing in god is a lifestyle choice. Being gay is not.

[burtle]

Why are we talking about being gay instead of how awful this art is?

[Peter F.]

Why are we talking about being gay instead of how awful this art is?

Because the awful art is a given. Land is the artist after all.

[darknessatnoon]

Believing in god is a lifestyle choice. Being gay is not.

They are both lifestyle choices, except one involves good clothes and a sense of humor and the other does not.

[tetragene]

LOL--I'll definitely say this for the issue...that one scene has led to multiple "interesting" discussions in this thread, lol.

I am still absolutely, positively perplexed that there are people who have read years worth of X-Men stories and STILL don't think there's been any links/parallels with homosexuality. PERPLEXED.

Legacy Virus which at first only seemed to affect mutants but then was affecting humans and slowly killing them left and right...was based off what? You don't think it was similar to the AIDS epidemic that everyone thought was just a "homo disease" until heterosexuals started getting it too?

"mutations" being "realized" during puberty and teenage mutants keeping it secret out of denial, fear of being hated & ostracized? Do people "realize/discover" their race or physical disorders during puberty? No. Is that the typical age homosexuals realize/become aware of their feelings and sexual longings and the denial (in most cases) start? Yes. Do people "hide" their race? No. Do people "hide" their homosexuality? Yes.

This is why I don't like the pussyfoot approach taken with the beating in #501 in relation to "gay bashing". And I don't blame the writers for that since from the leaked script the slur they originally had would have, alone, made that distinction clearer. Make the distinction so clear that readers can't help but know what the comic book beating was modeled after. If you're going to use the metaphor/parallel than at least make it clear enough so that readers can't "see it if they want to, not see it if they don't want to"

[Novaya Havoc]

LOL--I'll definitely say this for the issue...that one scene has led to multiple "interesting" discussions in this thread, lol.

I am still absolutely, positively perplexed that there are people who have read years worth of X-Men stories and STILL don't think there's been any links/parallels with homosexuality. PERPLEXED.

Legacy Virus which at first only seemed to affect mutants but then was affecting humans and slowly killing them left and right...was based off what? You don't think it was similar to the AIDS epidemic that everyone thought was just a "homo disease" until heterosexuals started getting it too?

"mutations" being "realized" during puberty and teenage mutants keeping it secret out of denial, fear of being hated & ostracized? Do people "realize/discover" their race or physical disorders during puberty? No. Is that the typical age homosexuals realize/become aware of their feelings and sexual longings and the denial (in most cases) start? Yes. Do people "hide" their race? No. Do people "hide" their homosexuality? Yes.

This is why I don't like the pussyfoot approach taken with the beating in #501 in relation to "gay bashing". And I don't blame the writers for that since from the leaked script the slur they originally had would have, alone, made that distinction clearer. Make the distinction so clear that readers can't help but know what the comic book beating was modeled after. If you're going to use the metaphor/parallel than at least make it clear enough so that readers can't "see it if they want to, not see it if they don't want to"

Co-signed.

Ugh, I just hope #502 is better.

[dangil_666]

empath looks like rictor when land drew him

[AcesX1X]

psh.

Empath looks the hotness.

Won't someone post a scan??

[yanapryde]

CAN WE PLEASE move on from the topic of Homosexuality.
Lets PLEASE just discuss the book, the story, the art and not continue on with this debate.


please please please.

The art WAS pretty nuts.
Anyone notice the brunette girl in the lounge at X-central and then on the next page, a girl with white bangs?
Color error? Or is that actually Rogue?

[timbox]

Anyone notice the brunette girl in the lounge at X-central and then on the next page, a girl with white bangs?
Color error? Or is that actually Rogue?

That was Karma. She's a homosexual.

[jarrod]

Read through the issue.... it definitely wasn't worth losing flanny and steve. :frown:

[Pro]

The art WAS pretty nuts.

I'm not sure you should be using the word nuts if you want to steer the conversation away from homosexuality.

[timbox]

Read through the issue.... it definitely wasn't worth losing flanny and steve. :frown:

I don't know who Steve is but I agree about Flanny!

[Beast]

This is why I don't like the pussyfoot approach taken with the beating in #501 in relation to "gay bashing". And I don't blame the writers for that since from the leaked script the slur they originally had would have, alone, made that distinction clearer. Make the distinction so clear that readers can't help but know what the comic book beating was modeled after. If you're going to use the metaphor/parallel than at least make it clear enough so that readers can't "see it if they want to, not see it if they don't want to"
You'd still have people not seeing it.

Remember the outrage when Ultimate Colossus came out as gay in Ultimate X-Men.

And so many people argued that there were "Never Any Signs He Was Gay". :tongue:

[ThreeDays]

LOL--I'll definitely say this for the issue...that one scene has led to multiple "interesting" discussions in this thread, lol.

I am still absolutely, positively perplexed that there are people who have read years worth of X-Men stories and STILL don't think there's been any links/parallels with homosexuality. PERPLEXED.

Legacy Virus which at first only seemed to affect mutants but then was affecting humans and slowly killing them left and right...was based off what? You don't think it was similar to the AIDS epidemic that everyone thought was just a "homo disease" until heterosexuals started getting it too?

"mutations" being "realized" during puberty and teenage mutants keeping it secret out of denial, fear of being hated & ostracized? Do people "realize/discover" their race or physical disorders during puberty? No. Is that the typical age homosexuals realize/become aware of their feelings and sexual longings and the denial (in most cases) start? Yes. Do people "hide" their race? No. Do people "hide" their homosexuality? Yes.

This is why I don't like the pussyfoot approach taken with the beating in #501 in relation to "gay bashing". And I don't blame the writers for that since from the leaked script the slur they originally had would have, alone, made that distinction clearer. Make the distinction so clear that readers can't help but know what the comic book beating was modeled after. If you're going to use the metaphor/parallel than at least make it clear enough so that readers can't "see it if they want to, not see it if they don't want to"

Co-signed.

Show me that dotted line, 'cause I'll sign too.

CAN WE PLEASE move on from the topic of Homosexuality.
Lets PLEASE just discuss the book, the story, the art and not continue on with this debate.

The discussion seems to have naturally died down at this point, but any discussion of this book inevitably invites — and promotes — discussion of homosexuality, and, more specifically, its degree of acceptance in society at large. And clearly that was the point.

As tetragene pointed out rather indisputably, X-Men comics have been serving as an allegory for homosexuality for many years now. This issue in particular is quite a vivid example. The subtext practically clubs you over the back of the head, you might say.

[yanapryde]

I'm actually perfectly fine with the debate of whether this issue dealt with the subject of homosexuality.

Its the debate of whether it is a choice that bothers me.
Which it is not.

And if the debate were to continue, why not start a different forum?

[darknessatnoon]

Read through the issue.... it definitely wasn't worth losing flanny and steve. :frown:

My god,

the foot stomping must stop!

"Screw you guys, I'm outta here!"

[darknessatnoon]

I'm actually perfectly fine with the debate of whether this issue dealt with the subject of homosexuality.

Its the debate of whether it is a choice that bothers me.
Which it is not.

And if the debate were to continue, why not start a different forum?

I choose to be gay. But the Red Queen might be changing my mind. She's the hottest piece of ass I've ever seen in a comic.

[yanapryde]

well then, as a gay man myself, I'd like to make a request that you CHOOSE otherwise. You're making us look bad.

Like that red headed dominatriX.

[jarrod]

I choose to be gay. But the Red Queen might be changing my mind. She's the hottest piece of ass I've ever seen in a comic.
Joseph would disagree.


http://yaoi.y-gallery.net/files/preview/3/37/374319-20080111201246.jpg/BlueGrey%20-%20Josh%20Guthrie%20aka%20Icarus.jpg

[timbox]

dn@n is a dark spot on the gay community and should be shunned. Everyone knows homosexuality is a disease, not a choice. Marvel is showing sensitivity by not openly discussing it.

[yanapryde]

I can't believe you just said its a disease.
You shouldn't read the X-Books. Apparently you've learned absolutely nothing.
I'm pity you.

[timbox]

What? I have sympathy for the gays.

[jarrod]

Oh snap! I've been thwarted.

[darknessatnoon]

I can't tell who is trolling whom here. It's confusing.

[Peter F.]

I can't believe you just said its a disease.
You shouldn't read the X-Books. Apparently you've learned absolutely nothing.
I'm pity you.

Timbox was joking. One of the things you need to learn about the X-Boards is to never take anything a lot of us say seriously.

[timbox]

Timbox was joking. One of the things you need to learn about the X-Boards is to never take anything a lot of us say seriously.

Just because you think the diseases are funny, does not mean that everyone else does!

[yanapryde]

we don't NEED or WANT your sympathy.
I wish you didn't have Armor as your avatar. I like her.

[DeniseXfrost]

Timbox should not read X-books.

[yanapryde]

we don't NEED or WANT your sympathy.
Its a shame that I JUST joined CBR's forum's and now I totally regret it, being among company like yourself.
And with ARMOR as your avatar? She's too good for you.

[Peter F.]

Oi. This isn't going to turn into another debacle is it?

Yanapryde, please calm down. No one seriously thinks that being gay is a disease. It's just a very bad joke.

[yanapryde]

sorry Seikun21.
I didn't realize. My bad. I'll be taking the remaining posts with a grain of salt, or whatever.

[DeniseXfrost]

we don't NEED or WANT your sympathy.
Its a shame that I JUST joined CBR's forum's and now I totally regret it, being among company like yourself.
And with ARMOR as your avatar? She's too good for you.
It's a joke.

[timbox]

we don't NEED or WANT your sympathy.
Its a shame that I JUST joined CBR's forum's and now I totally regret it, being among company like yourself.
And with ARMOR as your avatar? She's too good for you.

What were your thoughts on the Red Queen?

[jarrod]

What were your thoughts on the Red Queen?
She needs to get Alex back... that immigrant isn't doing it for me.

[Swashbuckler]

I hope they reveal that the Red Queen is the same person who was Rouge Mort. I mean, they both clearly love bondage gear.

[jarrod]

I hope they reveal that the Red Queen is the same person who was Rouge Mort. I mean, they both clearly love bondage gear.
The Red Queen is NOT Meggan.

Meggan SHOULD be the new White Queen though imo.

[jester1436]

I hope they reveal that the Red Queen is the same person who was Rouge Mort. I mean, they both clearly love bondage gear.

Does that mean Callisto and Storm are also Red Queen and Rouge Mort?

[Swashbuckler]

Does that mean Callisto and Storm are also Red Queen and Rouge Mort?

Not at all, they are just kinky lesbians.

[darknessatnoon]

So, anyway.

I think it's fair to say that the Red Queen probably is the Messiah Baby. I am sure this will all tie into Bishop's plot down the line.

[Swashbuckler]

So, anyway.

I think it's fair to say that the Red Queen probably is the Messiah Baby. I am sure this will all tie into Bishop's plot down the line.

That'll be awesome if it ends up being the Messiah Baby. She's all twisted and perverted form being dragged through the timestream.

Either that or it'll jus tbe some random new chick, that's be great. Marvel needs more random red heads running around.

[LawGiver]

So, anyway.

I think it's fair to say that the Red Queen probably is the Messiah Baby. I am sure this will all tie into Bishop's plot down the road.

The editors have been saying that the baby will play a huge role in the main x-line soon, maybe this is the start of that plot line.

We see how she became twisted in Cable's series all leading up to some kind of crossover maybe around March of next year, that would be pretty cool to see. The one hope for the mutant race turned crazy and preverted by, decision Cyclops made, sending her with Cable into the future.

[darknessatnoon]

The editors have been saying that the baby will play a huge role in the main x-line soon, maybe this is the start of that plot line.

It would also make sense given the parallel of her appearing at the same time as Cyclops building a crib. Cribs are SM starter-gear.

[jarrod]

dark, stop trolling LawGiver. Also stop quoting him, I have the _ year old ______ on ignore for a reason.

[darknessatnoon]

dark, stop trolling LawGiver. Also stop quoting him, I have the _ year old ______ on ignore for a reason.

jarrod, don't be dense. lawgiver is actually probably right about the baby thing. I was thinking about it and it really works.

[jarrod]

jarrod, don't be dense. lawgiver is actually probably right about the baby thing. I was thinking about it and it really works.
Jean is not the Red Queen. She is a Red Queen.

[LawGiver]

jarrod, don't be dense. lawgiver is actually probably right about the baby thing. I was thinking about it and it really works.

I think it at least for now, more send than Maddy Pryor all of a sudden showing up out of nowhere.

Scott in this issue repeated over and over that "they were coming back, the baby is coming back and will need a crib", it was perfect foreshadowing.

[jarrod]

Hey LawGiver, how about a bet on who the RQ is? Willing to stake something on it? I'll temporarily un-ignore-list you to see your response.

Dark, you're free to get in also.

[LawGiver]

Hey LawGiver, how about a bet on who the RQ is? Willing to stake something on it? I'll temporarily un-ignore-list you to see your response.

Dark, you're free to get in also.

If I win you go play with Lions, you win I'll go hump a Rhino.

[darknessatnoon]

Hey LawGiver, how about a bet on who the RQ is? Willing to stake something on it? I'll temporarily un-ignore-list you to see your response.

Dark, you're free to get in also.

jarrod, how do you know that your guesses aren't both correct?

[jarrod]

jarrod, how do you know that your guesses aren't both correct?
Well, my original inclination was that Goo was Maddie. I don't think so anymore, but if that's the case then we're all winners. Yay!

[jarrod]

If I win you go play with Lions, you win I'll go hump a Rhino.
C'mon, something more interesting. Like the loser leaves the forum for a month... I know some around here would love to see me lose that one.

[darknessatnoon]

C'mon, something more interesting. Like the loser leaves the forum for a month... I know some around here would love to see me lose that one.

I think you should go for a week, as a gesture of good faith. Then the bet shall be considered.