I must speak to you about the edit war that is going on between us on the "Lust" page, which is starting to really get on my nerves. First things first, please be sure that I am not removing the categories you add to spite you, and I sincerely amplogize if you felt offensed. But Lust really does not fit the description of the categories you keep adding.
Lust is poised and polite true, but is not acting in a particularly refined fashion, and lacks the attitude and social ground of the high society. It is true that many examples in the category do not really correspond, as the categories are often abused, but still.
She did commit many crimes, but no war crimes who were more committed by the liles of Wrath and Kimbley. In the same fashion, warmongering was more Wrath's doing and she does not spread fear or hatred on a large scale.
In the same way, "Elitists" is about social standing. She openly scorns mankind and regards homunculi as superiors, so "Supremacist" could be argued further, I grant you that. Yet, supremacists go out of their way to deny rights and privileges to those they consider inferiors, while Lust is more of a scornful, indifferent Misanthrope, content with watching humanity burn.
"Sadists" is also a point of debate. But while she does revel in violence and bloodshed, she does not revel in people suffering like Envy does, being more "merely" cruel, for lack of a better word. In the same way, she does not torture people. On the contrary, she kills swiftly and efficiently and leaves people to die when she is certain that they won't make it. That's no torture.
She is no failure intolerant. She killed Cornello more because he had outlived his usefulness than because he failed. And when Envy confess a failure in tracking down Barry, she merely scolds him and gives him mean of better completing his mission next time, in complete contradiction to "Failure Intolerant Villains".
Finally, she does not corrupt anyone, Cornello for instance was already a morally bankrupt filth before meeting her and she gave him mean to satisfy his ambition.
If you disagree with what I said, please tell me so in order for us to discuss it on our respective message walls.
Good Evening! I aggre with you about this meaningless "war".I had no purpose on offending you or whatsoever.I came to terms with the fact that some of my suggesting categories were no fit such as elitist or warmongers.But i strongly believe that she is supremacist(cause she belives that humans are lesser creatures and that homoculi are so much superior.She is also a conspirator and patern in crime sicne she was in charge for many actions consider the day that was promised.Last but not least i also beleive that she fit the categories Sophisticated villains and Inarnator (remember how she trick Roy's soldier ).
Please take those under consideration and feel free to tell me your opinions.
I grant you "Supremacists" and "Conspirators", but "Partners in Crime" is meant for teams of two or three villains that cannot be dissociated like Jasper and Horace in Disney. I grant you "Sophisticated" as well, but she did not corrupt Jean Havoc, nor did she impersonate another character, she manipulated him and is already listed as "Master Manipulator".