IDW... What the actual FUCK are you doing? (TMNT #5 reaction)

Let's travel back to the past... All the way back to June 2024 when the "Alpha" issue for Aaron's run was released.

Here's what I said:

But one bright spot in this story: it didn't feel like there was a racial/bigotry allegory to the whole thing despite the facility being located in the deep south, so that was nice and refreshing. Obviously, the guys who run the facility don't look at the mutants as people, and ignorantly only see them as animals, but it didn't beat you over the head with over-the-top moralism. In other words, it seemed like Jason Aaron was more interested in telling an actual story than just preaching the same shallow message that we've heard a million times before.

I spoke WAY TOO FUCKING SOON.

I thought the Mutant Town shit was behind us.

Nope.

I thought the tired racial allegories were done. I mean, that's what Nightwatcher is for, right?

Nope, guess again.

Aaron introduced a new villain, District Attorney Hale.

The TL;DR on Hale is that he's a big meanie racist against Mutants because a mutant killed his parents (but it was only in self-defense tho!!). So cringe. So bad.

I don't know why I expected more from Jason Aaron given his track record on other properties, but I did. All of my hype for the writing on this comic is gone.

At the very least, I'm hoping Juan Ferreyra's art will be as good as I expect it to be. It's just a shame there won't be a good story to accompany his art.

Gort

Honestly, my initial reaction is pretty extreme. But maybe Aaron will find a way to pull this off in a way that's not cringe. It's a disappointing direction, but I'll see how it plays out.

ryu289

Why is it insidious when a trans writer uses it compared to one a non-trans writer does?

Sophie Campbell used it in tandem with an allegorically trans child.

As I said in the video, Sophie Campbell uses the concept of mutation as an allegory for being trans.

Which is why Leo had this reaction to Lita's de-mutation:

So Lita's story is supposed to represent that of a trans child who "found a family" of adult strangers who accept and affirm Lita's new identity.

The real-world equivalent would be a transgender orphan child being picked up by a group of adults who affirm the trans child's identity.

But here's the thing. To me, and to a lot of other people, that's called grooming. To "affirm" the "gender identity" of a "trans" child is to sexualize a child.

But considering you're okay with teaching children about "kinks" I can see why you wouldn't find a problem with adults taking in kids to "affirm their gender identity" or whatever.

Frankly, you're a disgusting creep. And I'm not going to take your opinion on trans issues seriously, especially with regards to children and allegorical stories about transgender children.

You said in your video:

half of Campbell's run was an allegory for black lives matter and the turtles even had their own makeshift autonomy Zone akin to the Capitol Hill autonomous Zone that communist secessionists set up during the BLM riots

So yeah, you made it sound allegorical. How come you won't own it.

Yes, it was an allegory for CHAZ. Allegories are not explicit.

So when you said this:

same with Mutant Town, with nothing there to say it is explicitly invoking CHAZ

That's exactly right. It wasn't explicitly invoking CHAZ because allegories aren't explicit. Allegories are an implicit literary device.

The references to CHAZ in Campbell's work are implicit, not explicit, and it's precisely that reason why it's allegorical.

Allegories aren't explicit.

Again, you need to brush up on your media literacy.

Also from your video:

this is the bigger point; Raphael punching Hitler can only be considered political if you believe everyone you disagree with is a Nazi

Yeah, the vast majority of Americans aren't Nazis and don't support Nazis.

Being opposed to Nazis isn't controversial or political at all.

It's only really political if you falsely accuse people who aren't Nazis of being Nazis (like falsely claiming Trump is a Nazi).

I don't see how politics conflicts with the core of the TMNT, especially how applicable it is to outsiders as you yourself pointed out.

So you clearly didn't watch the video then.

Here are a few things I said in that video:

• "When Kevin Eastman and Peter Laird created the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, they never intended for the turtles or mutation to be an allegory for… well, anything. It wasn’t about bigotry, it wasn’t about being trans or gay (sorry Sophie Campbell), and it wasn’t even about being outsiders."

and

• "I want to bring this up again, because I think it’s important to reiterate. TMNT artists are now using mutation not to create a good message about being an outsider, but instead they’re using it to make allegories about being trans or some other oppressed minority. And what’s worse, they’re using it to demonize the families of trans people. The most prominent example was how IDW TMNT writer Sophie Campbell handled the issue of Mona Lisa’s family. Sophie Campbell, who is trans, was attempting to make a point about being transgender by using mutation as an allegory. Campbell wrote Mona Lisa’s parents as bigoted and fearful of Mona Lisa’s mutation in an attempt to justify Mona Lisa leaving her human life behind and fully embracing the parallel mutant community. In the mind of Sophie Campbell, parents of trans kids are like Mona Lisa’s parents: not accepting and fearful, so those trans kids should go find a new family that blindly embraces their trans identity.
  So in other words, instead of preaching about outsiders and the importance of family, modern TMNT writers are encouraging kids to leave their families if they don’t feel fully accepted. I just hate to see it."

theshellprotect9 Agreed!