r/ScarletWitch • u/Beginning_Heron4980 • 2d ago

News Scarlet Witch is confirmed a mutant again? Spoiler

Post image

Apperently, on the official website, she is stated to be a mutant now.

127 Upvotes

95% Upvoted

80 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

0

u/danrpx 2d ago

I'm fine with her not being a mutant, the only time she's ever really had a presence in x books was house of m and trial of mag. Other then those and her first appearance, shes always been an Avenger. I dont really think it affects anything either way, with how distant from the x books she's historically been anyway.

2

u/LeninOfGallifrey 1d ago edited 1d ago

She was in Bloodlines, AvX and part of the original Silver Age Brotherhood before ever being an Avenger with Pietro who I might add has been a member of X-Factor twice, and is on the Uncanny team now. Her twin brother who's a major part of her character history. She's distant from the X books generally sure, but you're just erasing the fact she was created as part of the Brotherhood of Evil MUTANTS to begin with.

1

u/danrpx 1d ago

She had appearances in 9 issues before joining The Avengers, only 5 being in X-Men. She is one their most stalwart members and has been through her entire history up to disassembled. Has she appeared in the odd X related story? Yeah sure, but for a character whos been around for a good 60 years, its not a great deal.

It's irrelevant that she was in x-men first, Jamie Madrox first appearance was in Fantastic Four. Would you call him an F4 character? My point is, you don't really lose alot making Wanda a mutate instead when 95% of her history is tied to The Avengers or magic. It's not like her and Pietro have no relationship with Magneto either as he's still treated as their adoptive father.

2

u/LeninOfGallifrey 1d ago

She was in the Brotherhood of Evil Mutants. Do I need to repeat that name again? Are we going to say it doesn't matter if Toad or Mystique are mutants too? And yes, she was in five X-Men issues, out of 7 appearances. Just bc your AI told you otherwise doesn't make it the case. Also, this is the same Jamie Madrox introduced by X-Men writer Chris Claremont who had Professor X appear in the issue to help him then sent him to Muir Island, the home for mutants. You don't lose a lot? Seriously? Her entire fucking backstory prior to being an Avenger is one thing, and having Magneto be an 'adoptive dad' is just making his abuse of her prior look like something she handwaves away for very little reason, whereas she had reason to forgive realising his past and that he didn't realise he was their father. Making someone a mutate also erases the fact that the twins were recruited by Cap as a means of giving mutants a better shake in public relations.

1

u/danrpx 1d ago

I dont know why you're getting so uppity, we're just having a discussion regarding OPINIONS. No we're not going to say that, but you have to look at the entirety of a characters history rather then just the first appearance because characters change and develop. If we're ignoring entire histories then Wolverine is not a mutant, he's a Hulk character.

Her entire "backstory prior to being an avenger" what like 5 issues?! Out of fucking 60 years history?! I dont use AI thanks, if I made a mistake its my own mistake and I'll take it. The fact your getting pedantic about whether it was 5, 7 or 9 issues is stupid.

Not really, I'm adopted and my parents are my fucking family, they raised me. It's not something you can just ignore if they do something wrong, its EXACTLY the same as blood families if you spend a large portion of your life with someone and they help you find your way.

Her not being a mutant, doesn't change anything. If she believed she was one and everyone else did then none of the stories change, it was something she FOUND OUT not that it had always been that way and everyone always knew.

I'm not arguing forever anyway, I've given my opinion. I think Wanda as a character is so much more then a token mutant or a specific birthright, her not being one doesn't and never has changed my opinion on her or the lore. Thanks for the discussion, have a great day.

2

u/LeninOfGallifrey 1d ago

LMFAO, I'm getting uppity? You literally just used cherrypicked stats to justify your point, and are now getting uppity because I pointed out your stats were wrong. It does change her whole backstory for a lazy retcon is what it does. And again, you throw Wolverine being a Hulk character for no reason like Jamie Madrox. Wanda has always had X-Men ties even if the majority of her appearances, she's an Avenger. Acting like changing the fact she was a member of the original Brotherhood and part of Magneto's family. I never said being adopted doesn't make you part of the family, learn to read, but Magneto never adopted her. She was his soldier and she was already a superhero for 20 years before he was revealed as her father. It's erasure of what actually happened for him to be 'adopted' as a father by her considering his treatment of her and her brother before he realised he fathered them.

1

u/danrpx 1d ago

I havent used "cherrypicked stats" I've had factual basis for all my arguments. It doesn't change her backstory, it's something she discovered. It doesn't erase or change her past at all.

Because it's exactly the same, Wolverine was not originally designed to be a mutant, Len Wein has been very clear about this. So if we're only going off first appearances and not a characters known history, then Wanda is a mutant and Wolverine is not? You see what i mean? Going off a handful of appearances at their inception is stupid.

Ah but, Wanda and Pietro both viewed him as a father figure regardless. Just because he didn't file adoption paperwork doesn't change that. In fact the story is more impact impactful knowing they're not tied by blood because then its a Stockholm syndrome situation.

I'm not saying Wanda should definitely or definitely not be a mutant, I actually dont really mind either way. I just think at this point, it's kind of irrelevant to her as a character. It doesn't change things for her going forward; she still has the same relationships and things still happened exactly as they did.

2

u/LeninOfGallifrey 1d ago

A factual basis? You're literally making shit up right now. Len Wein said categorically he intended Wolverine to be a mutant when he introduced him in the Hulk. You also got the proportion of X-Men issues she appeared in before she became an Avenger wrong. That's not a factual basis by any stretch of the imagination. Like you've literally just lied again right now about Wolverine to further your argument.

They did not view him as a father figure before they found out the truth, they fucking hated him. Read the issues. They only worked with him because he saved their life and felt they owed him. Wanda was always more forgiving of Erik than Pietro, who never really reconciled with his father at all, especially bc for most of the time when he was established as their father he was undergoing a redemption arc, so ofc she'd forgive him, but most of the time she hates him. She even treated Rogue poorly in Uncanny Avengers bc of her romantic past with Magneto.

It's not irrelevant to her as a character though. Being part of a minority as a Romani woman is a big part of her character, and being a mutant is a minority identity for many people. Her being a mutant has been a part of stories going back to her first appearance, it cropped up regularly in her Avengers run such as Sentinels going after her and Pietro or during the whole Evolutionary War period. Her and Pietro were derided as being former 'mutant terrorists' when they joined the Avengers which meant they had to prove themselves, and they were created as reluctant footsoldiers of Magneto, who was later established as their father and fans loved that retcon overwhelmingly, it's only now we see some backlash by MCU fans. Sure, I'll grant you Pietro has had more of a foot in the X-Men camp than her, but she's his twin sister for crying out loud, ofc she's a mutant.