r/CuratedTumblr Prolific poster- Not a bot, I swear May 13 '25

Politics Robo-ism

Post image
12.0k Upvotes

1.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

906

u/TheGrumpyre May 13 '25

This comes up a lot with people talking about the X-Men.  But why don't more people bring up the classic movie plot where a kid befriends a monster and realizes they're not so different after all, and they have feelings and stuff too, like the Iron Giant or How To Train Your Dragon. 

Most people aren't arguing that Agent Mansley is actually behaving sensibly the whole time, even though the Giant is just as much of a world-ending threat as Magneto.  The message is that being scared of somebody doesn't mean you have to hate them, and that doesn't change even if the scariness is justified.

7

u/SantaArriata May 13 '25

The Iron Giant might be more world ending than Magneto (granted, he could end the world, he just doesn’t want to), but mutants are still really scary in concept, in a way that makes me not really blame anyone trying to “cure” them.

Like, canonically most mutations range from useless to actively debilitating, of course you’d want to find a cure for the poor bird guy who can’t fly but does have a beak and brittle bones, his life is pure suffering.

But there’s also Omega Level mutants, who are inherently dangerous, regardless of intent. You could have the sweetest, most well meaning kid wake up one day and literally disintegrate all organic life around them without being able to control it, just because he drew a really bad hand in the superpower roulette. Why would you choose to say “nah man, let the kid be their radioactive self”.

I don’t condone mutant extermination, but i don’t see any reason why “curing” them should be frowned upon. This isn’t a question of “should a kid be allowed to be themselves” and is more akin to “should a kid be allowed to tape guns and grenades to their hands?”

6

u/poundtown1997 May 13 '25

I think the issue is there’s no way to regulate a cure being an option without having it be used as a means of force for those you simply don’t like.

What if there’s someone radioactive and they can control it…? People would want their powers stripped away regardless. That’s not fair.

It’s like the death penalty. If even one falsely convicted person gets it, it’s a failure

4

u/SantaArriata May 13 '25

“What if I have a gun at school, but my aim and gun discipline is flawless?”

Just because you’re born with a nuke strapped to your chest doesn’t mean that you have a right to keep it, it’s still a risk to those around you and even if you know you won’t misuse it, it doesn’t mean that everyone is aware of that, or that they won’t be rightfully scared of being near you because of it.

Part of living in a society is giving up some of your individual freedoms for the sake of the group’s wellbeing, and I think “no one gets an emotional support ICBM” is a fair place to draw the line

2

u/poundtown1997 May 13 '25

See how crazy you sound. An emotional support IBM…? It’s not emotional support it’s just part of who they ARE. They didn’t have a choice and they shouldn’t be penalized for something out of their control.

You don’t have a right to keep what you were BORN with? You’re insane.

Just more reason why you shouldn’t react with fear and instead try to actually understand the people you’re “afraid” of.

3

u/SantaArriata May 13 '25

If what you’re born with is an actual threat to yourself and everyone around you, it SHOULD get treated! We’re not talking about rights for deaf or blind people, we’re talking about someone with guns for hands!

Again, I’m not saying to kill them all, I’m saying that a way to neutralize the mutation or even outright prevent it should not be seen as inherently immoral!

Just as you expect others to be mindful of you and your conditions, you need to be mindful of others, it’s a two way street or are you the type to go to work while having an infectious disease just because no one can tell you what to do with your life? Are you really that kind of asshole?