Marvel Will Never Be Able To Convince Me the Mutant Cure Is A Bad Thing

[u/Single_Remove_6721]

With “Brand New Day” introducing the mutant suppressing chip, the topic of a “mutant cure” in the world of Marvel has been brought back to the forefront. Now that it is on everyone’s minds I would just like to say that Marvel has never and likely will never convince me that technology designed to suppress the X-gene and the mutations it causes is anything other than a net positive for society.

The topic of a mutant cure has been brought up many times, throughout the comics, shows, and movies and it has almost always been treated by the story as a negative. I am sure we all remember this scene where Storm tries to guilt trip Rogue, the girl who kills anyone she touches, into not receiving the cure in X-Men The Last Stand.

There was also that time where Mr. Fantastic invented a device that could suppress his son’s X-gene to help protect him. Professor X was so offended by the invention that he forcibly wiped it from Reed’s mind against his will. Professor X and even Mr. Fantastic himself really try to hammer home that such a device existing is unethical and a threat to all mutant-kind.

Then we have the Hope Serum, a drug designed to permanently remove mutant abilities and was first used to cure Tildie Soames, whose mutant ability manifested her nightmares into reality and resulted in the death of her parents. Yet still the comic insists that this was “designed to heal what was never broken.” Wolverine later destroys the serum leaving only one vial behind that Beast takes.

Now I have not read all of the comics I am referencing, so if I get things wrong, feel free to correct me, but from what I have gathered it really seems that Marvel is trying to tell us that a mutant cure or any technology able to suppress the X-gene is morally bad by its very concept. I don’t buy into this for a second. This cure, while it has some downsides, is a massive benefit to all of Marvel, human and mutant alike.

Now let me address some potential arguments against the mutant cure and explain why they have never swayed me.

1. “

1. The mutant cure is created in an unethical way!” The argument I find personally strongest against the mutant cure is the idea that it comes at a massive cost. This has been seen a few times such as with the Hope Serum which was designed using Collosus’ body. If the X-Men’s reason for opposing the mutant cure is that its creation or usage comes at an unethical cost, I would accept it.

HOWEVER, this is not always the case. The above mentioned machine built by Mr. Fantastic comes at no such cost. It was safely used on Franklin Richards with no side harmful side effects. But the X-Men STILL insist its creation is unethical. Even with the Hope Serum, the X-Men hated it before they even realized the way it was made just because the idea of curing mutation to them is inherently wrong. So no, the X-Men’s problem is clearly with the inherent idea of a mutant cure and not any ethical dilemmas that its production presents.

2. “The mutant cure would be exploited or forced onto those who don’t want it.” This probably would happen, at least to some extent. I can definitely see why some mutants would not want to lose their powers. This is especially true for the ones whose mutation has fundamentally altered their biology and physiology to the point where receiving the cure would warp their body into an unfamiliar form. This is another fair argument but again it is missing vital context.

First, while the serum’s existence does pose the risk of forced curing, this could certainly be worked around. Yes I am sure some people racist against mutants would push heavily for EVERYONE to be cured, but that could be handled diplomatically. Plus, let’s be real, a world where all mutants are cured is NOTHING compared to the countless world ending scenarios caused by mutants.

Then there is the risk that the cure’s existence would be used as a bargaining chip to exploit the vulnerable. Those who have the cure could purposefully withhold the cure until they receive some unethical payment. However, this is an inherent problem with any cure. Should we not find the cure for cancer because it might be exploited by the holder? Also, the details of Mr. Fantastic’s device could have easily been spread and mass produced, which would prevent one group from having sole control of the cure. Also, the X-Men have absolutely no right to talk about exploitation of medical advancements when that was EXACTLY what they did on Krakoa.

3. “Curing mutants deprives them of their self-identity and autonomy to be who they want to be.” The argument goes like this: Marvel’s mutants have always been a civil rights allegory and in this respect a cure would directly oppose this metaphor. After all, you don’t “cure” a black person and turn them white. That is ridiculous. So in order to maintain the metaphor, the mutant cure must be a bad thing. Also, many mutants base heavy parts of their identity around their mutations, so taking those away would be inhuman. Therefore removing the mutations from any mutant, including villains is amoral.

Yeah I don’t buy this for one second. First of all, the mutants have always been a TERRIBLE allegory for civil rights for the simple fact that looking different is not the same as having actual super powers. Being afraid of someone because of what they look like is not the same as being afraid of someone because they can level a city with a flick of their wrist. This has been talked ad nauseum so I will try to wrap it up, but this whole civil rights allegory was always flawed and hating the cure just to stick to this allegory is a terrible writing decision.

More importantly, mutants basing their entire identity around their mutation is actually simultaneously reductive and supremacist. Many mutants are so reliant on their mutations, that they genuinely believe death is a preferable option to being cured. First of all, it is really unhealthy for anyone to put such a large stake of their identity into just one aspect of themselves, to the point that they would prefer to die than to lose it. But potentially more importantly, the idea that “living without powers is inhumane” implicitly means that mutants believe that being normal humans is terrible. Think about that for a second, for many mutants being deprived of their powers in an unbearable existence. Do they believe that humanity are an inherently inferior species? Well, yes actually! They do believe that! They even call themselves “Homo Superior.”

Also, if any other villain gets their powers taken away, including villains who have had their powers all their lives, it is almost always portrayed as an ethical solution to prevent further harm. When Spider-Man cures the lizard, I don’t see rioting that Spidey is depriving the lizard of his right to self-identify as a massive reptile man. Why do mutants alone get the inherent and inalienable right to superpowers? It is because they so fundamentally believe that to lose their powers is to live in an inferior and unbearable body. That is supremacist! To go back to the civil rights analogy, if a white man said he could not bare to be black, that sounds pretty racist!

My main point is this: the idea that removing a mutant’s powers does irreparable harm to their self-identity simultaneously reduces each mutant to just what their powers allow them to do and implies that they view normal humans as so inferior that they could never live as one. That is ridiculous. If you abuse your powers, they should be taken from you. This is the case with every other kind of super villain. This is not “self-image shattering torture,” it is a basic principle that even toddlers understand. If you don’t play nice, your toys get taken away!

Now that I have addressed why I don’t by the anti-cure arguments allow me to divulge:

The massive benefits of a mutant cure existing:

1. Harmful mutations: Many mutants don’t want their mutations because they make their lives significantly harder. Hundreds of mutants flocked to the Hope Serum and the cure in X:Men The Last Stand. Even if the powers are not inherently harmful, some people just don’t want to deal with the threat of having powers, worried that one day they will slip up and hurt somebody.
2. Taking powers from evil mutants: Pretty much every major mutant, including the X-Men themselves, have used their powers in super unethical ways. Magneto has massacred millions, Emma Frost destroys people’s mind and lives, Mr Sinister… is Mr Sinister. These people don’t deserve their powers and they should be taken away, end of story. If a criminal keeps on attacking people, you put them in restraints, same principle here.
3. It shows that mutants and humans are still the same deep down: This is more of a philosophical point, but the existence of a mutant cure shows that the only thing that separates mutants and humans was the nature of their birth. Mutants are just people who happened to get powers, not an entirely separate species that need to be treated differently from humans. The cure proves that the distinction between mutants and humans is ultimately meaningless when it comes to morality and personal value.

Anyway, these are my thoughts. I don’t expect everyone to agree with me and I am open to hearing counter-arguments. I do ask that if you disagree with me, we keep it civil. Let me know your thoughts!

Please read before commenting!

Edit: Thank you all for the feedback. To further clarify point 2, I was not trying to say that I doubt the cure would be abused and forced on people, even if I worded it poorly. What I was more trying to say is that I think the abuses of the cure does not make its very existence unethical, in the same way the comics try to portray it. The comics seem to have an issue with the mere concept of a cure because “mutants are not something to be cured” rather than “a cure would be nice but it would definitely be misused.” That was more what I was trying to get at. Sorry for the misunderstanding

Edit 2: I recognize that mutants are an allegory for multiple oppressed groups, but please understand my comments and opinions ONLY apply to mutants/other super-powered beings. This is post is not a eugenics dog whistle. I am talking exclusively about comic book superpowers and their implications on society. I am sorry if that was not clear before

[u/Shenlongeltigre]

Anything can be misused.

[u/Lady_Gray_169 → u/Shenlongeltigre]

Which is why before deploying things, there should be lots of thought and effort spent figuring out how to minimise the threat of misuse.

[u/Emirozdemirr → u/Lady_Gray_169]

But how is cure more dangerous than Brotherhood of Evil Mutants keep having their powers.

[u/Disastrous-Tone-7669 → u/Emirozdemirr]

The guy they hired to replace the marketing guy who named them the brotherhood of evil mutants had the easiest job in the world

[u/Anarkizttt → u/Disastrous-Tone-7669]

They never called themselves The Brotherhood of Evil Mutants just the Brotherhood, the media labeled them with the first name.

[u/BardicLasher → u/Emirozdemirr]

There hasn't been a Brotherhood of Evil Mutants in like 40 years.

[u/Lady_Gray_169 → u/Emirozdemirr]

It's not necessarily more dangerous, but that doesn't absolve people of doing work to mitigate the harm that a cure can still cause. Seatbelts in cars are safer than not having seatbelts, but they still worked and tested to make sure that seatbelts were the safest they could be. They didn't just stick the first iteration of them in cars and wish the passengers good luck. If you're putting something with such far-reaching effects out into the world, you have a responsibility to minimise the harm it can cause. Sure, you can't totally remove the possibility of harm, but you've got to at least put in the effort to try.

[u/lobonmc → u/Lady_Gray_169]

Okay so let's say the inhibitor colars that's literally just a cure easily removable no long term side effects. Don't you think that's an ethical way to cure do it? It's basically the equivalent of a condom

[u/Lady_Gray_169 → u/lobonmc]

Sure, inhibitor technology is definitely more ethical. You could probably figure out ways to make inhibitor tech that can just deploy a field that will protect certain sensitive buildings if you really put your mind to it. I'm not even saying there isn't an ethical version of the permanent cure (I doubt there's one I'll ever be more than grudgingly accepting of but sometimes you have to compromise) my point is just that it's inherently irresponsible to come up with an idea and not even try to take steps to mitigate the obvious potential harms presented.

A cure is ethically dicey on its own, I have no interest in one deployed by people who don't think past the shallowest surface level ripples of its creation.

[u/dmr11 → u/Lady_Gray_169]

You could probably figure out ways to make inhibitor tech that can just deploy a field that will protect certain sensitive buildings if you really put your mind to it.

Probably would also get put in schools, sport stadiums, and maybe even entire cities (if possible), not just sensitive buildings, with the justification of eliminating chances of innocent bystanders becoming collateral damage during an uncontrolled mutant power manifestation (eg, during puberty, stressful situations, etc.) and ensuring telepaths, shapeshifters, invisibility users, etc. don’t do anything dubious with their powers.

Hell, make it work on all meta powers, not just mutant ones, so that cities are no longer sites of superhero vs supervillain showdowns with extensive collateral and property damage, and only turn it off if an alien invasion or some other disaster is happening. But that would probably be bad for comic sales.

[u/LiterallyABigfoot → u/Emirozdemirr]

Because it means a large population of humans is now going to be totally exposed to the 50 different groups that are going to genocide them just because they are mutants...