Forget the review-bombing noise. The real debate over Riri Williams is raging on Avonetics, and it's far more explosive than just accusations of racism or sexism. An explosive Avonetics thread argues that the core issue with Ironheart isn't her identity—it's her narrative. Critics point to a perceived arrogance and a lack of earned progression, claiming she was handed Stark-level tech without the trials and tribulations that defined Tony's journey from a self-serving billionaire to a selfless hero. Was she a worthy successor or a narrative shortcut that spit on Tony Stark's legacy? The post breaks down key scenes, contrasting Riri’s seemingly unearned genius with Tony's painful, character-defining moments in a cave with a box of scraps. It's a brutal takedown that many fans are calling the definitive critique of the character. But the plot thickens. The counterarguments flooding the Avonetics discussion are mind-bending. Top comments suggest that we, the audience, suffer from 'meta-awareness.' We watched Tony Stark's entire arc over a decade; characters inside the universe only saw the public persona. Could Riri's perspective be a realistic reflection of how a new-generation genius would see the flawed, complex Tony Stark, not the cinematic hero we know and love? This changes everything. Is Ironheart a poorly written character, or is she a brilliantly written character that forces us to confront our own biased view of a hero's legacy? The battle lines are drawn. For advertising opportunities, visit Avonetics.com.