Spectacular Spidey 25 should be Peter Parker: Pedophile

[Illiterati-migration]

But that still doesn't prevent me from being offended further by the concept of Peter Parker, a married man, making out with the child of his lost love who happens to look like an adult but is in reality ~8 years old. Yes, I think we all understand that this is a "fictional" reality, but the concept is still an offensive one because we, like Peter in the story, know that she is Gwen's "child" and advanced aging or not, she is still a "child".

 

That's the point Kevin, she is not a child at all. She is a fully functional adult. Most of you are hung up on the amount of time she has spent in the Marvel U., which is only 8 years. She doesn't just look like an adult, she is an adult, in all respects.

 

Tell it to the judge, Pervlok. Don't drop the soap.

[delekkerste]

Right...I had expunged that ridiculous High Evolutionary ret-con from my brain. But my point was that in 1975, the Gwen clone would have been thought of as being created a couple of years prior and would you have been outraged had Peter got it on with her on the basis of her "age" alone?

 

I think we can all agree that PP, a married man, making it with a lookalike of his dead girlfriend is offensive, but the issue under debate is only whether 8 years old is 8 years old. I agree with 'Lok in that this is not a fair comparison - this is no normal 8 year-old and, in fact, I think she is much closer to the Gwen clone example (and we do know that clones these days aren't made in a test tube, but are actually birthed, like Dolly the sheep).

 

If I were a character in the Marvel Universe, I would have no problem making it with Gwen's "daughter", who is really nothing more than a Gwen clone whose age has been artificially accelerated to maturity (as was the clone in ASM #144, pre-ret con) but who carries some Osborn genes instead of purely Gwen's. She is, for all intents and purposes, 20 years old. To argue otherwise, you'd have to count pre-ret con Gwen clone as being only 2 years old which is prime facie ridiculous.

[deathlok]

But that still doesn't prevent me from being offended further by the concept of Peter Parker, a married man, making out with the child of his lost love who happens to look like an adult but is in reality ~8 years old. Yes, I think we all understand that this is a "fictional" reality, but the concept is still an offensive one because we, like Peter in the story, know that she is Gwen's "child" and advanced aging or not, she is still a "child".

 

That's the point Kevin, she is not a child at all. She is a fully functional adult. Most of you are hung up on the amount of time she has spent in the Marvel U., which is only 8 years. She doesn't just look like an adult, she is an adult, in all respects.

 

Tell it to the judge, Pervlok. Don't drop the soap.

 

Don't you have some small animals to torment?

[Kevin Boyd]

That's the point Kevin, she is not a child at all. She is a fully functional adult. Most of you are hung up on the amount of time she has spent in the Marvel U., which is only 8 years. She doesn't just look like an adult, she is an adult, in all respects.

 

... except that she is ~8 years old. Which is our point.

 

We are just going in circles. I'm content to disagree.

[Tango 'n Cash]

She is, for all intents and purposes, 20 years old. To argue otherwise, you'd have to count pre-ret con Gwen clone as being only 2 years old which is prime facie ridiculous.

 

Not at all, as Gwen's daughter was delivered the normal way, and simply has accelerated decrepitude, while the Clone Gwen was (pre retcon) designed as an adult.

 

The first is an 8-year old kid with a horrible disease that prematurely ages her, while the other is an exact duplicate of another adult human. You cannot really compare the two.

[Darthdiesel]

I'm just hoping for a 1:65 sketch variant where MJ is tongue locked with the Gwen look alike

[the_Greatest]

Kind of sneakin' back into following SpiderMan are you ?

And really....emotionally....she's at least eleven.

[the_Greatest]

I don't think the number you're thinking of is 65.

[BradleyX2]

As for the Gwen clone in ASM 144, she was later revealed not to be a clone at all in Spectacular Spider-Man Annual #8. In that issue the High Evolutionary captures and studies the Gwen clone after she discovers that Peter is Spider-Man. The High Evolutionary concludes that she is not a clone but rather a genetic construct. Daydreamer of the Young Gods later clears her mind of the "illusion" of being a clone of Gwen Stacy. Turns out she was another one of Professor Warren's students that Warren had kidnapped. So she was a college-aged girl after all and there isn't any legal question other than, if they had "done it" - who really gave consent? The Gwen template or the person who the template was grafted on to.

 

 

This might make your head hurt, Kevin, but here goes:

 

Yes, Spectaular Annual # 8

from 1988 did everything you said above. And it did so because the Spider-writers at the time thought that "clones" were a silly concept, like Spidey fighting aliens, or driving a "spider-mobile", so they wrote a story revealing that there had never really been any "clones" at all.

 

But then, in the mid-90's, the new guard of Spider-writers conceived of this idea you might have heard of called "The Clone Saga", but to do it, they needed to reveal that, those really *were* clones that Spidey had met/fought years before. The High Evolutionary had lied. So in Web Of Spider-Man # 125,

Spidey finds the Gwen Clone again (who's back to looking like Gwen despite the alterations that were done to her by Daydreamer) and now married to a clone of Miles Warren (the Jackal) who's renamed himself Warren Miles. Anyways, Warren dies in the issue, and the Gwen Clone goes on to appear throughout the "Maxium Clonage" arc, and she simple wanders off at the end of the story (the "Omega" issue). So the Gwen Clone is still out there somewhere.

[rob_react]

Kind of sneakin' back into following SpiderMan are you ?

 

If I were it'd be a first, I've never followed Spidey very closely. This Sin's Past arc (and the fallout from it) is just such a big deal these days I can't help but want to know the gruesome details

[FlyingDonut]

The whole story arc is repugnant.

 

1. Peter Parker is cheating on his wife.

2. He's cheating on his wife with the daughter of his ex-girlfriend.

3. The fact that the daughter of his ex-girlfriend is physically 20 is completely irrelevant. She was "born" eight years ago.

 

I'm wondering what the [#@$%!!!] Marvel is doing here? I'm not sure where they're going with this. It is just stupid.

[chrisco37]

That chick is hot!

[Ares]

According to Marvel Previews Sarah is the ones putting the Moves on Spidey!

Since she and Mommy look alike what is she is imagining what life for her mom and Peter was like!

 

If thats a fantasy sequence he may be kissing Gwen!

Untill we read the issue we have nothing to go on just a picture of him kissing a Gwen lookalike!

[UnrulyAppendage]

According to Marvel Previews Sarah is the ones putting the Moves on Spidey!

Since she and Mommy look alike what is she is imagining what life for her mom and Peter was like!

 

If thats a fantasy sequence he may be kissing Gwen!

Untill we read the issue we have nothing to go on just a picture of him kissing a Gwen lookalike!

 

That makes the cover even worse. Why did they, being editors, choose the theme for the cover?

 

It could be a number of things, but what we do know is Peter and Sarah are in Europe, and the previews say Sarah makes the move. That is part is understandable. The cover is not. Covers are suppposed to be sensational, but not tacky. The cover shows Pete is going after it and taking her to a "special" place. Show Pete being shocked or figthing her off, not sweeping her off her feet.

[OldGuy]

According to Marvel Previews Sarah is the ones putting the Moves on Spidey!

 

Oh, well that makes it ok. I'm sure the judge will take that into account.

[delekkerste]

Oh, well that makes it ok. I'm sure the judge will take that into account.

 

There's not a judge in the Marvel Universe that would convict Petey. "Your honor - just look at her!"

 

"Hmm, yes, I see your point. Case dismissed."

[UnrulyAppendage]

According to Marvel Previews Sarah is the ones putting the Moves on Spidey!

 

Oh, well that makes it ok. I'm sure the judge will take that into account.

 

I am giving Marvel the benefit of the doubt that Pete rejects her. If he does not, then Pete needs to get his b$%# cut off.

[Hobgoblin]

Here's the image with one of my posts on it...

 

 

Wish I had the ability to pull the plug like that - I will probably still collect DD after Bendis leaves - well every time he has Mack had been there so its been good, but I guess I'm a sheep in that sense - I will wait for the title to get better for a long time. ASM though I'm done 4 good - see the Beyonders comments RE: How bad can they up now.

 

I'm waiting to see who follows BMB

 

RE: ASM... Has no one read the solicitation for Spectacular 25 or seen the cover? Maybe this is a case of "haha nothing like this happens in the book" but c'mon...

 

 

I myself have viewed this upcoming cover several times. And I don't care if she's technically only 8 years old. As long as her body says she's in her 20's, I'd hit it too

 

You gotta admit, for a drawing, that is a fine beast.

[Aman619]

yeah... but all thats makes her is JAILBAIT....

and you facing 5 to 10 years...

[UnrulyAppendage]

I myself have viewed this upcoming cover several times. And I don't care if she's technically only 8 years old. As long as her body says she's in her 20's, I'd hit it too

 

For MOST posters, that would be the only way they would ever get a girl like that. She would have to have the mind of an 8 year old. "Hey little girl, want some candy?"