RSS Feed
Sep 9

Marauders #12 annotations

Posted on Wednesday, September 9, 2020 by Paul in Annotations

As always, this post contains spoilers, and page numbers go by the digital edition.

MARAUDERS #12
“The New Phase”
by Gerry Duggan & Matteo Lolli

COVER / PAGE 1: The resurrected Kate Pryde shows off her new knuckle tattoos, which read “Kill Shaw”. The tattoo she got in issue #2 read “Hold Fast”.

This cover art wasn’t used in the solicitations, which instead had an image of Lockheed saying “shhhh” – presumably as a placeholder to avoid spoiling Kate’s return in the previous issue. Ironically, this concern to avoid spoilers doesn’t extend to issue #12 itself, since the unveiling of Kate’s new tattoos is the final beat of the issue.

PAGES 2-4. Kate is welcomed back to Krakoa following her resurrection.

Note that resurrected Kate has her traditional hairstyle, not the straightened hair that she’s had throughout the series to date. In keeping with Krakoan culture, she’s referred to by a “mutant name”, though the codename used is Red Queen (more of an office than a name) rather than any of her previous names.

We’ve seen this basic ceremony several times before, including in issue #2 with Shinobi Shaw. The basic format is that the resurrected character is expected to say something suitably characteristic, in order to demonstrate that it’s really them. Everyone then acclaims them as a mutant (shifting the emphasis from what makes them individual to what makes them the same as everyone else on Krakoa).

Most of the characters in the background are generics, but the fish guy to the left of Emma is Fish, who was rescued in Marauders #4.

“I have no flesh of my flesh, but I have a daughter.” Storm was indeed basically a mother figure to Kitty Pryde in the early years.

“Because once when I was just a dumb kid I threatened to abandon you over your haircut?” Kate is referring to Uncanny X-Men #173, where Storm showed up with her mohawk for the first time, and Kitty had a tantrum and ran away.

PAGE 5. Recap page (the credits are moved right to the end of the issue). The small print has changed to “A new lease on life”.

PAGE 6. Data page. Bishop emails the Beast about evidence that might suggest Kate was murdered by someone on Krakoa. Presumably it’s Sebastian Shaw, but we don’t know – maybe he’s on the wrong track.

“The type of situation you were hoping I could illuminate for you, given my Hellfire access.” In issue #4, Hank encouraged Bishop to join the Hellfire Club in order to provide him with intelligence on it. Note that over in X-Force Hank is now perilously close to being an outright villain, so bringing in Hank is probably not going to work out very well.

PAGES 7-10. Emma and Kate discuss their plans.

Horses. We’ve seen Emma riding before, in Cable #4 (also by Gerry Duggan).

PAGES 11-17. Kate’s welcome back party.

The recognisable attendees, aside from Kate herself and Emma Frost

  • Teammates Bishop and Pyro, in the final panel of page 10.
  • Iceman, on the far left of the main panel on page 12.
  • Callisto, to the right of the horse, in her Hellfire White gear.
  • Shinobi Shaw – we still don’t know how much he knows about the circumstances of Kate’s death.
  • Christian Frost, with his hand on Shinobi’s shoulder – note that Christian and Iceman aren’t together.
  • Domino
  • Mystique
  • Cable, who looks bored (and in fairness, barely knows Kate).
  • Cyclops
  • In the next panel, Wolverine
  • On page 12, former Excalibur teammate Prestige (Rachel Summers)
  • And the other former Excalibur teammate Nightcrawler.
  • In the background of the next panel, a guy with a techno-organic arm and a high collar who’s presumably Cypher.
  • In the background of page 13 panel 2, in the bottom left, is Pixie, talking to someone not easy to identify.
  • Former soulmate and roommate Magik, who shows up with a mariachi band in tow.
  • The Angel, in the background of page 14 panel 4.
  • Sebastian Shaw, obviously.
  • Havok, recognisable by his headdress in the background of page 16 panel 1 (and apparently being allowed back into polite society for the day).
  • Marvel Girl, speaking to her partners Wolverine and Cyclops in the background of page 16 panel 2.
  • No idea who the person next to Nightcrawler in the same panel is.

Nightcrawler. We’ve seen a few letters from Nightcrawler but this is the first time we’ve seen him and Kitty together. Generally, there’s a sense in this scene that we’re integrating the Marauders Kate with a more traditional Kitty in a way that hasn’t been done so far in this series – this is probably one reason why Kate thanks Sebastian Shaw for his “gift”. (Magik also behaves in a much more retro, childlike fashion here, rather than the brooding goth we’ve seen in recent years.)

Nightcrawler is really keen to talk to Kitty later, though not right here – he says “we have much to discuss” twice in a page. As the most religious character in the X-books, he’s retrieved her Star of David necklace, which she’s worn ever since her earliest appearances. (Go and check, it’s there in her debut.) Krakoa has placed great weight on mutant identity as the be all and end all – Nightcrawler seems to be unusual in attaching any great weight to other aspects of a person’s identity and background, no doubt in part because of the demands of nation-building. Kate was not wearing the necklace in earlier issues of this series, and its reappearance here (along with her hair) is clearly symbolic of a reconnection with her roots.

The whisky aged by Tempo was previously seen in issue #10.

An “Irish exit” is an Americanism for leaving a party without saying goodbye.

PAGES 18-22. Kate ges her new “Kill Shaw” tattoo.

This is, I think, the most direct scene in terms of the widely-accepted subtext that Kate is interested in girls. More broadly, it parallels the scene in issue #2 where she got her previous tattoo (and also paid a ridiculous amount of money and kissed the tattooist afterwards).

Meanwhile, note that Kate has gone back to fetch her Marauders pirate costume – but she hasn’t tried to change her hair back. As already noted, she’s now wearing the necklace along with her costume.

PAGE 23. Credits.

PAGE 24. Data page. A letter from mutant fashion designer Jumbo Carnation to Emma Frost, updating her on how he’s been getting on back on the regular fashion circuit with the other designers. “Jean Paul” is presumably Jean Paul Gaultier. The “Gala” is the Hellfire Gala which has been mentioned on and off since issue #7; we still don’t know what it actually is.

Jumbo suggests that he was in some sort of depressed state when he left Krakoa, something that hasn’t been particularly visible on page. It seems that, like Kitty, he’s been cheered up by reconnecting with aspects of his old identity in the regular world.

PAGES 25-26. Trailers. The reading order is actually out of date, because Hellions #4 has been delayed by a week. As with all books this month, the Krakoan trailer text just reads NEXT: X OF SWORDS.

Bring on the comments

  1. Moose says:

    @ Dimitri & @ Chris V

    Yikes, I didn’t mean to kick things off like that! I think things got a bit out of hand, following the thread, I think you’re both thinking logically, but assuming bad faith where they may have been none. I see what you’re both reacting to, don’t get me wrong, but I also see that you’re both (I assume, correct me if I’m wrong) not intending things to be read that way. My read is that you may disagree (though not as much as it appears), but you’ve got your backs up now, justifiably or not.

    Regarding the issues, Chris V, you asked how are Forge and Shaman representative…it’s possible I’m missing something, but here’s my off-the-cuff look at major Native characters:

    Shaman – actual shaman
    Talisman – mystic
    Forge – technology, but also mystic
    Thunderbird – no magic (in 616), but dresses like a movie character
    Warpath – ditto
    Mirage – mystical nature connection, also has dressed like a movie character
    American Eagle – same costuming choices

    I have no doubt I’m forgetting people, but that’s my first pass at characters from that group in Marvel.

    Actually, the most balanced Native character I can think of is the (one-off?) villain from early New Warriors, Sea Urchin. Jeremy Swimming Bear, I believe, the character who beat Namorita and cut her hair. Although a loathsome villain, he was both identifiable as native, and even mentioned that scalping was a practice introduced to his people by Europeans. Kind of sad that he’s the only one I can think of to be that nuanced in his portrayal (from a cultural point of view).

    And I definitely didn’t mean to imply that assimilation was the right way to present any character who is non white, European descent, male and Christian!

    Lastly, from before this got heated…I never thought about how missionaries would have been received in 616…they must have been pretty convincing, arguing against gods that were standing right there!

  2. Chris V says:

    As I have argued though, having some Native characters recognized as shamans isn’t truly stereotypical, unless one thinks that Native cultures no longer exist.
    Having too many can certainly be a problem.

    Out of those, Forge is a much more nuanced character. He can be written in many different ways.
    So, that really leaves Shaman and Talisman. Talisman is the daughter of Michael Twoyoungmen, and the idea of lineage can play a part in authentic Native religious tradition also.

    Mirage’s mystical nature connection is through Norse mythology though. So, I’d have to consider that differently.
    I don’t think Dani has usually been written in a manner anything like Shaman (or Forge for that matter) in most of her appearances either.

    I am in agreement about costumes, but that’s really a different matter. I think that Marvel has fixed that problem with James Proudstar and Dani, at the very least.
    Same could be said about some of the naming choices. A name like “Swimming Bear” or “Moonstar” is an ok name for some characters, but having a distinct lack of names like Silko or Erdrich mixed in too is problematic.

    I do think that Dani, Forge, and James Proudstar (Greycrow has had some moments on the villain side too, once he got rid of the poor codename) have all been presented as nuanced characters.

    Marvel could probably do better, and the fact that they are bringing in some fiction writers with Native backgrounds to write some of their Indigenous characters in an one-shot later this year should help.
    However, I don’t think that having three characters who are shamans (or one has a shamanic lineage) is a problem.

  3. Dimitri says:

    @Moose

    I appreciate that you’re trying to de-escalate things, and I will try to follow your lead on this. Because I do think it’s a very nice gesture worthy of respect and reciprocity.

    But I do want to make something clear here: I believe Chris V when he says he didn’t mean anything racist. I want people to believe him when he says he didn’t mean anything racist. That’s why I invited him to clarify, so he could have the last word on what he actually meant while at the same time being cognizant of how it came off to me. That way, he could make it 100% clear what he actually meant in light of this potential misunderstanding.

    That’s why I find his insistence on repeating over and over that I meant to frame him for racism so frustrating.

    If I wanted to call him racist, I wouldn’t have bothered to offer him an out by saying that I should assume I misunderstood, taking all of the responsibility on me.

    To close this remotely gracefully, all Chris V had to do is say, “No, this is not what I meant. I can’t even fathom how you thought that because it never crossed my mind. Here’s what I actually meant.”

    I designed my comment so he could do that, again taking all of the potential humiliation on me. I would have been the guy who misunderstood stuff.

    But instead I get snide attacks with every new reply about my being a closet racist or whatever the insinuation, and I can’t for the life of me understand how I ended up the bad guy here. Because I showed respect in the wrong paragraph order? Like, come on!

    So, for me, this has nothing to do with Native American portrayals (I did not get around to offer an opinion on the matter). It’s about me not tolerating those kinds of snide insults when I went out of my way to show you respect.

    Beyond that, we’re good, and I’m ready to move on.

  4. Chris V says:

    Ok, I said I wasn’t going to respond to this conversation, but I’ll reply once more.
    My first response to you was my clarification, where I explicitly said that I did not mean it in the way you read it.
    That didn’t seem to adequately fix the situation for you.

    I never implied that you were a racist in this matter. I did not ever think that.
    I just wondered why you were making certain points that you were making, while there was more content to my post than this one line.
    I got the intimation you were one of these people online who like to poke people with random claims to their being racist or sexist or whatever their hang-up, by taking one throwaway line and reading it out of context, just to start an argument.
    I really didn’t get where you were coming from reading what I wrote.

    Perhaps I misjudged you.

  5. Luis Dantas says:

    Native American characters being Shamans may be a cliche, but is it a bad one?

    We have plenty of characters with a military background of some sort, or who are “miracle scientists”, after all.

  6. Dimitri says:

    @ Luis Dantas

    Any cliché can be a bad one if it’s overused, I think. Even a positive stereotype can become stifling if it prevents you from being recognized as person.

    That’s why a lot of Asians push back against the “good at math” stereotype, for example. Not because being good at math is bad, but because it’s reached a point where some people will actively throw it in your face to rob you of your achievements.

    More relevant to the point, I volunteered at a reservation. Most of my First Nations friends would actively groan and curse whenever a Native character would turn out to be a shaman in movies (which happens really, really often, I quickly learned watching movies with them and seeing movies through their eyes).

    It really does seem to hit a nerve, for what it’s worth.

  7. Chris V says:

    Well, it’s funny how many Native writers feature “shamans” in their fiction.
    Apparently, these Native writers don’t feel the same.
    Perhaps it could be a sense of resentment when seen through the prism of a white person’s imagination (in said movies) versus how they feel at a personal level about their own cultural identity.
    Therefore, it strikes a nerve to see a white person write another Native “shaman” character, but they feel differently when they are writing about Native characters, themselves.
    Many may want to explore parts of their traditional culture which sets their art apart from all the white American writers on the shelf.

    I actually have Shawnee ancestry. My great-grandmother was a Shawnee woman. She died long before I was born, and no one ever let me know about this part of my heritage. Mainly because my grandfather was taught that it was best to hide this fact.
    I found out by looking through a picture album.
    I have always been drawn to wanting to find out more about this part of my culture and heritage.
    When I see a “shamanic” character, I am more likely to be drawn to them, because it’s different than the Christian background in which I was raised.

    Overuse is certainly a negative though.

    On the other hand, the Asian people being good at math cliche is somewhat different, in that any one person can then be racially stereotyped as being good at math. Since anyone can, hypothetically, be good at math.
    The distinction with “shamanism“ is that not everyone can fulfill such a role.
    It’s like the profession of a medical doctor. Not everyone can be a doctor. It takes skill and ability.
    So, people might say that if a person is Asian, they must be good at math, regardless of if they are good at math.
    It would be incredibly idiotic to say, “That person is a Native American, they must have the skills of a shaman!”.

  8. Bloodredcookie says:

    So, now that Kitty is officially (textually) bi the question becomes: Is she going to hook up with Magik or Rachel? We know it’s going to happen eventually.

  9. Moose says:

    I hadn’t even thought about the “asians are good at math” thing, but now it’s going to make me look at Amadeus Cho a bit differently. And that is a character, if I’m correct, that was specifically designed by a Korean-American writer! I should note, though, that I like the character, and really miss the Cho/van Lente Hercules run!

    @ Chris V – I agree that Forge is a nuanced character (as are Shaman and Talisman, when well written), but I think a character can be both good AND cliched. Random info, when I first started reading X-Men in the early 90’s, at the tail end of the Claremont run, Forge and Banshee were my favourites…I was a weird kid, I liked the middle-aged un-kewl characters best.

    As far as Mirage, I’m not an expert on early New Mutants, but I don’t believe you’re right when you say Dani’s mystical connection is solely through Asgard. I am totally willing to be corrected, but the whole Ghost Bear plot line was integral to her character, and her bond with Rahne stemmed from a “mystical Native” nature connection.

    I think the broader problem is pretty obvious: a general shortage of examples from minorities in comics. The difficulties in getting a new character to catch on are another topic, but the bottom line is that comics have a huge catalogue of white characters male straight characters, so none of them really carry any particular weight as a standard-bearer for us. When you don’t get to look in comics and see that most of the faces look like yours, the few that do are going to pack more punch!

  10. Moose says:

    Very off topic here, but I’ve just been reading a book about the history of Christianity…after an earlier comment on here, I can’t get out of my head thinking about how different it would be in 616!

    I want Marvel to commission a “History of the Marvel Universe” book like Mark Waid just did, solely dedicated to the improbable rise of Christianity in a world full of tangible gods! Of course, the target market would basically be just me.

  11. Chris V says:

    Do the white characters really look like “us”?
    Aren’t most white superheroes an idealized vision of white people? They embrace the myth that the US is a “classless” society.
    -First of all, don’t they usually “look” like Americans, not other white Europeans?
    I’ve heard many of my British friends complain about the representation of English characters in American comics too.
    Most of them consider Hellblazer their favourite comic. I mean, not that I can blame them. It was once probably the best comic on the stands.
    John Constantine looks like a lot of white British people though.
    -Secondly, don’t they usually “look” like east coast Americans? The majority being from New York.
    -Finally, do they look like the majority of Americans, outside of the fact that they are white?
    The majority of them are rich and famous and scientists.
    That was my whole point of the lack of factory workers who are superheroes.
    There isn’t a lot of representation of white Americans.
    That’s sort of the problem, that it’s become acceptable to lump all white Americans together on the basis of race.

    Peter Parker may be the closest to an “everyman”, but even with him, he’s a genius and he’s going to go to university and end up with some white collar job eventually. Plus, they even had him married to a supermodel.
    It was easy for a lot of comic fans to relate to Parker as a child, because he was a nerd who got picked on, but he was still a super-genius.
    Isn’t that a cliche too? That the unpopular bookworm will eventually get the last laugh? When, in reality, no, a lot of times you just grow up and have a boring life too.

    Isn’t it really Flash Thompson that a lot of Americans can best relate to? He was the one with real-life issues.
    He’s from a working class background. His home life is pretty shitty. You know he’s going to grow up and get some crappy job. Marry some woman from his home town. Get a house in the suburbs. Work a lot, worry about bills. Probably get a divorce at some point.
    He even gets drafted and has to go fight in Vietnam, something a lot of people related to at that time.

    What about the fact that this character was a stereotypical working class dude at one point? He’s a bully, because Parker is so obviously better than him.
    Yes, he’s the cool kid in school, but you know he’s not going to college….so the joke must be on him.
    Yes, he does eventually get humanized when he becomes friends with Peter later.

    Where are the southern characters? There are a few, but even one of them is a “Cajun” stereotype.
    Where are the people who regularly attend church? A lot of Americans consider themselves Christians.

    I think that’s why X-Men started to become so popular. They seemed like they had actual problems. They were easier to relate to, even for straight white males who didn’t understand the persecution of being a racial minority or gay.
    Even then, they usually lived in a mansion with rich guy Xavier. They didn’t even have to hold down jobs, even though some of them like Bobby Drake (just for one) was from a middle class background.

    Isn’t that sort of what Forge was too? An idealized character. He could be and do everything. He was rich, he was a genius, he could also be a “shaman”, and he got to date a hot woman like Storm too.

  12. Chris V says:

    Thinking about it more, compare that with the portrayal of African-American characters.
    Until very recently, Marvel’s African-American superheroes were much more “everyman” characters, who also had to deal with racism.
    The opposite of the idealized white characters, in that suddenly realism was more important.
    Their African-American characters tended to be poor or working class people who were always worried about holding down a job and making money.

    Obviously, this was another stereotype.
    Unlike the progressive Black Panther (if we ignore how Wakandan people were originally portrayed on the page).

    Sadly, I think minor villain Thunderball was the character with the most nuance until recently.
    Not that Luke Cage wasn’t a great character.
    They even called him the “black Bruce Banner” at one point. I mean, that’s so subversive, unless the writer actually didn’t consider the implications. Yet, as satire, that reads pretty strongly. I don’t know the writer’s intent.

  13. Dimitri says:

    Well, shit, I was had.

    I gave the benefit of the doubt to someone who meant exactly what I thought he meant.

    I know I’m inviting a panoply of insults for posting this, and this time I don’t have the excuse of not knowing what’s going to happen.

    But fuck me. I’m not crazy. The following quote doesn’t leave room for imagination, does it?

    “There isn’t a lot of representation of white Americans.
    That’s sort of the problem, that it’s become acceptable to lump all white Americans together on the basis of race.”

    And the rest of the post doesn’t contextualize things differently. This is what was meant. You can agree with it or disagree with it, but I wasn’t crazy for understanding it exactly the way I did.

    And I sure as shit did not deserve all the snide insults for reading the comment exactly as it was meant.

    I promise I’m not going to engage or escalate whatever comes my way next. The man is entitled to his opinion.

    But I really feel like a fucking tool right now.

  14. Chris V says:

    Wow! I guess I was right about you too! Racist boogeymen everywhere for you to fight! Even when that person has Native American and Jewish blood! Crazy times!

    So, your argument is that it’s ok to say that all white people are exactly the same, but that it’s not ok to say that all Native American people are the same?
    Do you even think before you type?

    I am, and always have been, an individualist. I judge people on an individual basis, not on their race or sex or gender or anything else.
    I guess that’s ideologically out of date, and all white folks are the exact same now? Is that your argument?

    Why am I even bothering with this joke, when you are an obvious troll.

  15. Chris V says:

    Which, by the way, deciding that all white people are the same, as if they were an amorphous blob, is very much fascist ideology.
    All white people are alike and have the exact same interests, and if you didn’t conform to this nebulous idea of “whiteness”, you could be excluded, just like all the non-white people.
    It’s a nice way to set up “us versus them” ethno-nationalism. WE are all the same, and everyone not US is the enemy.

    Instead of, you know, the sensible idea that everyone has their own individual thoughts and needs, regardless of any external signifiers.
    Why, imagine this, an African man and a white American might even find themselves enjoying the same things!

    So, you and your little Nazi boy playmates have fun together. Two sides of the same coin.
    Just like different races and sexes and ethnicities may all find things in common (as hard as it may be to believe for all you ideologists), you and the fascists end up finding out you too share so much in common.

  16. Daniel Lourenço says:

    @Dimitri and Chris V: I say this sympathetically, and with respect to your need to express yourselves. But I really would suggest you disengage, because this has become a circular conversation, and it has superseded others being had.

    @Dimitri: I agree with a lot of your comments, and I share many of the same issues with the kinds of statements Chris V is making at this point. I would chalk some of it up to rushed articulation, but there are this point various posts which repeat the same patterns, over and again.

    @Chris V: “I am, and always have been, an individualist. I judge people on an individual basis, not on their race or sex or gender or anything else.”

    That’s fine, in the abstract. But that is now how society is organised, and it is not how people’s lives take shape. To be yet more direct: that is not how individuals take shape as social beings.

    So when you make these comparisons and set-up these supposed equivalences between disparate identities (in terms of race, of class, of ethnicity), regardless of your particular intent, you end up producing very distorted lines of reasoning which are offensive, reductive, and ultimately disrespectful.

    Finally, “Nazi” is an accusation folks really ought to be less creative with.

    Meanwhile, #QueerPryde.

  17. Salomé Honório says:

    Dimitri and Chris V: I say this sympathetically, and with respect to your need to express yourselves. But I really would suggest you disengage, because this has become a circular conversation, and it has superseded others being had.

    @Dimitri: I agree with a lot of your comments, and I share many of the same issues with the kinds of statements Chris V is making at this point. I would chalk some of it up to rushed articulation, but there are this point various posts which repeat the same patterns, over and again.

    @Chris V: “I am, and always have been, an individualist. I judge people on an individual basis, not on their race or sex or gender or anything else.”

    That’s fine, in the abstract. But that is now how society is organised, and it is not how people’s lives take shape. To be yet more direct: that is not how individuals take shape as social beings.

    So when you make these comparisons and set-up these supposed equivalences between disparate identities (in terms of race, of class, of ethnicity), regardless of your particular intent, you end up producing very distorted lines of reasoning which are offensive, reductive, and ultimately disrespectful.

    Finally, “Nazi” is an accusation folks really ought to be less creative with.

    Meanwhile, #QueerPryde.

  18. sagatwarrior says:

    Let me just say that I never intended the conversation to go into the direction that it did. An innocent discussion on the possible change of character’s sexuality has devolved into a heated exchange that I would expect to see on 4chan, Breitbart, or The Young Turks. I thought that this blog would remain untouched by the hyper-partisan, vitriolic American politics that has seemed to cover the globe. But I guess even this blog, which is managed by a British bloke, cannot remain in a vacuum forever. Whenever I come here, I enjoy the lively discussions of past and current comic book characters and storylines. So when the discussion turned to possibly changing another character’s sexuality, I was somewhat intrigued. Let me just say this: Marvel own these characters and can do whatever they want to do with them. If they want to write Shadowcat as being other than a Jewish, techno genius, super agent, possessed by an ancient demon, heterosexual mutant ninja, that knows how to kick butt and owns a purple dragon, then so be it. But trying to (possibly) change her sexuality comes across as bending the knee to the altar of political correctness rather than a natural, organic character growth. There are plenty of ways that they could achieve this. In entering this discussion, I simply wanted to posit the question: What if Marvel decided to have a well-established gay character, such as Northstar, and have him date or have sex with a woman? It was never meant to be a tick-for-tack, but a simply discussion. Although we now know that sexuality is not as as unbreakable as adamantium, it should not be something that can be turned on or off like a light switch. But it seem the discussion would go farther than I thought. Look, most of all the characters in comicdom is a wish fulfillment. A nerdy guy grows up to marry a supermodel. A black guy built like a bodybuilder and has unbreakable, tough skin. And so, And so. Even if these thing are highly unlikely, it is just pure fantasy. I know in recent years, companies have to be very careful of how they portray minorities. Even a character from a cartoon show who own a shop, is married with several children, is now seen as problematic. I am sorry for the question that I had made. It was never meant to break the enjoyment of coming to this blog and having lively debate of what we enjoy the most: comics. I hope all who are involved will consider reading this and move beyond this. Thank you.

  19. Thom H. says:

    @sagatwarrior: I don’t agree with your stance on Kitty’s sexuality / coming out, but I definitely agree that I enjoy this forum because it is typically free of the vitriol I see in other places on the internet. I was actually proud that we, as a group, had managed to have a discussion about some delicate topics in a civil manner. That thought, of course, occurred right before the comments section (mildly) exploded.

    Having said that, the explosion happened after the discussion had ranged pretty far from your original comments. And as far as I recall you weren’t involved in the shouty behavior that ensued. So please don’t feel like you’re at fault in any way. I enjoy coming here to get involved in interesting and geeky discussions with other comic fans, and I think we can probably get back to that sooner rather than later. Or at least I hope that’s the case.

  20. Dimitri says:

    @Salomé Honório
    @Thom H
    @sagatwarrior
    @Moose

    Salomé, thank you for your wise counsel. As I stated in my last comment and for the reasons you mentioned, I don’t intend to engage anymore. And this time, I will keep my word about that.

    Moose, I’m sorry I broke my word about following your lead in de-escalating things. This was never meant as any disrespect towards you.

    Sagatwarrior, I agree with Thom H that you have no need to apologize. This is on me.

    I knew even as I wrote my last comment that it was a selfish indulgence.

    I hope people who had to suffer through this thread can see that, despite multiple allegations to the contrary, this, to me, was never about personal politics: mine or anyone else’s.

    I say this because I let myself be fooled into thinking maybe it was, as if I didn’t know my own heart. But I looked back, and I can confirm that I never called anyone a racist or any other name for that matter, and yet somehow, caving to the sheer amount of rapid-fire allegations, I let myself think that I had.

    Where I come from, one’s relationship to their personal truth is a sacred thing, and when we let it get violated, it’s a matter of great hurt.

    In Western terms, I felt like I had let myself get gaslit, and I was furious at myself. And I wrote what I wrote in my last comment not as an attack on anyone’s politics, but as a way to declare to myself, “I was tricked, but I see clearly now” to help myself draw a line in the sand and move on.

    If anyone is curious, you can look back at that last comment. The focus is on truth, not politics. And despite its undeniable rudeness, most if not all of the anger is directed at myself: “I’m not crazy;” “I feel like a fucking tool.”

    I don’t know that you can understand how badly I needed to do this for myself.

    But none of that changes the fact that I knew when I pressed “send” what shitstorm would come and how unpleasant things would become for both myself and others reading the thread.

    For my part in that, I apologize to you all, and to Paul and Al.

Leave a Reply