The word "mutant" implies otherness. It's not hard to label a person a mutant and disassociate him from humanity (think: Ned Ralston). Barring Morrison's somewhat ignored work on mutant culture, there's little flattering about the word.

Andrew Wheeler of ComicsAlliance points out how part of rejecting an unwanted label means means offering an alternative. Black people, for example, rejecting "negro" for "Afro-American". Now let's look at DC Comics: their empowered humans don't suffer the same stigma as mutants. Humans don't think metahumans are out to get them or vice versa. It's understandable; a "metahuman" is still considered human. Instead of mutant, why not metahuman?

If Havok had ended his speech with that question, we might be singing a different tune.

bump

Metahuman isn't specific to mutants. Closer than "human", but not mutant specific.

@fodigg: "Metahuman" encompasses mutants and mutates. Human Torch and Beast both have mutated genes. But who gets the bigotry? Beast. If the X-gene is the future of humanity, is it wise to disassociate born-metahumans as "mutants"? Again, "mutant" implies otherness. Not different, but other. The Inhumans have origins on Earth, right? Would you consider an Inhuman a human? No, the name speaks for itself. "Metahuman" presses a X-carrier's humanity on a person. As far as alternatives go, I don't have answer yet. It is easy how an non-powered human could regard and fear a powered "mutant" as other, though. Pride or not, it's a matter of perception.

If mutant culture was better represented in comics, it might be a different story.

I don't think Havok is ashamed of being a mutant but us tired of the word mutant being used a pejorative. Its to the point where in the
Marvel Universe most peoples first reaction to hearing the word mutant is negative and that I believe is what Alex does not like.

My thoughts on the matter are the same as kitty prydes.

A-FREAKING-MEN!!

Just read the issue and I LOVE her response...

@cameron83: it was a great response