Only if I can be Superman's nemesis!
DUN DUN DUN!!!
Actually, to be more serious, the real question we should be asking ourselves is, "what is evil and who gets to define it?" This might sound cynical, but based on my observations of the world, it seems we live in a reality where might actually
does equal being right. Whether you're talking about a particular political party, government, or religious organization that's in charge over a particular country or continent, it seems the majority always gets to define what is moral and what isn't, but the minority is forced to either accept it, or be labeled as "evil".
If gods exist, then who gave them the right to be in charge? Themselves? If gods are real, then they arbitrarily decided that they had the right to be in charge because of how powerful they are, but that doesn't mean we should care what they think is moral or immoral if it makes no sense. In some religions where theism is the core of the members' belief system, merely not sharing their belief or refusing to worship their god(s) is considered evil. Is it though?
Depending on what majority you live under, being "evil" in their eyes could be quite harmful to you, or it could be beneficial if you're good enough at it. What I would do in reality is a lot harder to answer honestly, because in some circles, I could literally be a tree-hugging hippy and only ever eat vegan, and be considered an amoral monster by the majority, if I get in the way of what they think is moral, good, or just. If the scenario is reversed, I could be considered evil because I like eating bacon or steak.
I guess if I'm going to be "evil", then I want to have a good justification for being that way, regardless of whether or not it solves my problems. If it
did solve all my problems, instead of just adding to them, then I probably would if I felt like the moral majority was wrong.