I don't blame the current writers for "not letting go" as much as I blame the original decision 25+ years ago to make Hank Pym a wife-beater.

Let's face it - domestic violence is a serious issue and I can understand why the other heroes wouldn't be able to trust Hank ever again. The problem was in making Hank an abuser in the first place. Subsequent writers, including JB, did an admirable job in trying to rehab the character, but the seeds were already planted.

Here's a thought: Why didn't Hank just threaten to hit Jan in that story, then stop himself when he realizes "Oh my God! What am I doing?" You still get across the plot point that Hank is having a mental breakdown without having him actually cross the line of doing something that will forever tarnish his character.

Let's face it - domestic violence is a serious issue and I can understand why the other heroes wouldn't be able to trust Hank ever again. The problem was in making Hank an abuser in the first place. Subsequent writers, including JB, did an admirable job in trying to rehab the character, but the seeds were already planted.

******

1. That was the least of the bad things Hank did in the story. He also shot a surrendering villian in the back and intentionally built a killer robot only he could disarm. All just to boost his self esteem.

2. The story was successfully ignored for years and Hank functioned fine. It was not til recent times writers kept digging up this skeleton. Its not like where Iron Man was a drunk off and on for a decade.

1.  If a man, in a moment of extreme emotional distress, hits his loved one one time...does that make him irredeemably evil?  I seem to recall Peter Parker smacking MJ during the Clone Saga.

2.  Everyone focuses on Hank, but it seems to me that another element to the story was the way Janet responded to Hank's implosion, making her into a stronger character.

3.  I wonder if anything anyone is doing at Marvel today, no matter how "kewl" and cutting edge, will have as much impact on the readers as Shooter's story did?  Frankly, no matter what guys like Bendis and Millar do...they never seem to make much of an emotional impression on their audience, even their fans.

Mike

1.  If a man, in a moment of extreme emotional distress, hits his loved one one time...does that make him irredeemably evil?  I seem to recall Peter Parker smacking MJ during the Clone Saga.

*****

Peter was in the middle of fighting Ben Reilley and MJ tried to seperate him. Out of reflex he knocked her across the room. Not exactly the same as what Hank did.

See, I see the Hank Pym/domestic violence and the Tony Stark/alcoholism storylines as being completely different.

Alcoholism is a weakness and a problem, sure. But it's not evil and being an alcoholic didn't make Tony Stark a bad guy. No, I don't think Tony Stark's alcoholism should constantly be harped upon, but I had no problem with the "Demon in a Bottle" storyline, particularly since Tony was shown to battle and overcome his problem, like a hero should.

Beating your wife, on the other hand, is an inexcusable act of violence. It's something that a hero should never do under any circumstances.

Beating your wife, on the other hand, is an inexcusable act of violence. It's something that a hero should never do under any circumstances."

They are two sides of the same coin. And therein lies the problem. Hank's abuse is explicitly linked to a mental breakdown but for some reason Tony Stark (and Carol Danvers) get a free pass from writers, editors and fandom and Hank is portrayed as a simpering, unstable coward. Most abuse is not like this.

In everyone of these types of social problems, volition pays a part. Ask any person in recovery. If that is the case then so is redemption. In Marvel's inconsistent handling of Hank Pym, they've ruined a great character and hero.

I think a much more interesting take on Pym would have been if Marvel had never introduced mental instability and later domestic abuse. Instead, have Ultron commit an unspeakable act of murder and have Hank, as Ultron's creator, have to deal with that. The moral, stable hero who in his attempt to help humanity creates something that will plague his conscience forever.

Hubris is a wonderful, tragic flaw. Hey, it worked for Shakespeare enough.

QUOTE: Haven't read the current NEW AVENGERS in quite some time, so someone please help me here;  sounds like Bendis! has brought Hank Pym, the wife beater, back to the fore.  How and why?

I'm not sure but it may have been Chuck Austen.  It was a point that was brought up during the "Lionheart" arc.