The term is very tainted for me, but I understand why it’s not for many other fans. IIRC Vision #7, the flashback book in King’s series, was released in the same month as Civil War. It’s the only issue that’s solidly dealt with their relationship in modern history, and it’s a bite sized version of their relationship in some aspects. I do understand why a lot of people think of that issue when they think of comics Vision/Wanda.

But… when I think of the term ‘toaster’, I think of John Byrne. In his own words:

He felt very strongly Vision was not a person, and that something was wrong with Wanda for marrying him. John Byrne is the writer responsible for retconning the children as delusions, making Vision purely a robot and getting rid of his emotions, turning Simon a homewrecking chode and Wanda a mad hysterical woman.

The term, to me, is forever tied to those events. Besides that, Vision has been referred to as various household appliances as a way to insult him and the notion of his personhood for decades, including in-universe:

Even within the context of that single issue the last time Wanda uses it in Vision #7 is to hurl it at him as in insult in her darkest moment. King put the term in there so he could ultimately have Wanda use it against him.

So I can’t think of it as cute and I don’t generally reblog stuff that uses it in as a term of affection… but I also don’t have a problem with that stuff existing. The fans who use it aren’t doing it maliciously, they’re just seeing something kind of unique about their OTP to latch onto. It becomes part of the fandom vocabulary. I definitely get it, and those little details are some of my favorite parts in any couple fandom I’m a part of.

Although if I may suggest an alternative… if you’re looking for another term for comics Wanda to call comics Vision, my personal favorite is “dark eyes”.