Homosexuality in Comics

compound said:
I'm referring to a love interest who is completely human (i.e. no superpowers), and who needs to make concessions and sacrifices in his personal life, on account of the fact that his boyfriend maintains an active career as a superhero. He doens't need to have a football player physique, or even be particularly tough. I just mean an ordinary Joe with a job like yours or mine, who just so happens to be in a committed relationship with the alter-ego of a superhero (on top of the usual temptations, complications, problems, everyday drama, ups and downs that happen in ordinary, "real life" relationships).

Do you feel that comic audiences are ready to accept -- or even embrace -- something like that?
Click to expand...

* points at Robinson's Starman again *
 
Joe Kalicki said:
Robinson's Starman = better than anything Ennis, Ellis, Morrison or Vaughan has ever done.
Click to expand...

Baxter said:
* points at Robinson's Starman again *
Click to expand...

*remembers that Vol. 1 of this was on sale, half off, from Huge Local Chain Bookstore this past weekend*

*whimpers about first paycheck for new job being 18 days away*

*bashes own head against keyboard*
 
compound said:
*remembers that Vol. 1 of this was on sale, half off, from Huge Local Chain Bookstore this past weekend*

*whimpers about first paycheck for new job being 18 days away*

*bashes own head against keyboard*
Click to expand...

I hear that outside of the US you can actually find it in trade. I had to get singles since DC won't go back to print on them.
 
I had the first two trades and teh rest in singles, but I sold the trades and now I need to find the singles of those issues at some point.
 
Baxter said:
I hear that outside of the US you can actually find it in trade. I had to get singles since DC won't go back to print on them.
Click to expand...
Yeah, the first two volumes were in the discount bin here. Obviously, they're very under-promoted as comics in general -- never mind as "gay-themed" titles.

But if they're still marked down by the time my next pay comes in, I'll defintitely pick those up, once and for all.

Just the same, would you mind elaborating (in a non-spoiler-y way) how exactly Robinson approaches Jack's sexuality?
 
compound said:
Actually, no, the Sopranos example *supports* Joe Q.'s original point -- because it was shown (at least in America) on HBO, a paid-access cable channel, and branded as "adult" entertainment. Which is exactly how the MAX line posits itself.

By that token, a "sinful" topic like homosexuality would most likely be treated similarly.
Click to expand...

Good point.

So let's use Invader Zim. That show's main character is continually lamenting about how he hasn't committed genocide yet.

And it's a comedy. :D
 
Ooo. What a great thread.

The way I see it is the same as most people. Gay characters should be presented as regular people who's sexuality is incidental to their other character traits. Their relationships should be treated like any heterosexual relationship.

There is an issue though with trying not to make it feel like forced diversity. If their sexuality is going to be treated as such a non-issue, then how do you decide to put a gay character in a story without feeling like you're just trying to have a token gay guy?

And there's such a thing as too much. Prime example: Sandman. I'm fairly convinced that atleast half of the regular people in Sandman were gay, bi, or transexual. It's fine to have gay characters in a story and I know Neil Gaiman is very supportive of gay and lesbian causes, but it just seemed very misrepresentative of the real world, especially since the characters were very much random people.

I think that most comic fans would be supportive of a mainstream gay character, but the real problem is everyone else. I don't think there was that much of a commotion when they announced that Bat-Woman would be a lesbian, except in the mainstream media. Since comic books are obviously for children, there's no way that comics could or should be allowed to handle sexual topics. It's that kind of ridiculous attitude that would cause more controversy outside of the comics world than within it.

I don't know, it's a very complicated issue(s).

And on a side note, Apollo and Midnighter are totally badass.
Hibiki said:
I think Rene Montoya could pull it off.
Click to expand...
I'm not a huge fan of Rene Montoya, but if they gave her her own solo book, I'd definitely check it out. She can be a really awesome character.
Hibiki said:
8) Seriously though, I don't what it is about DC and all these great unused 2nd and 3rd tier characters. Rene, by far, is the most interesting and combined with Kate, would just make for a great mini or ongoing.
Click to expand...
They've been trying to use those second and third tier characters. One of the main objectives of 52 was boosting the status of great, unrecognized characters. The problem is that I wish they'd follow up on it a bit more.
Bass said:
Haven't you heard? Bisexual characters are where it is izzat! That way, you can whack the taboo "gay" button like a whack-a-mole game, claim you're pushing 'boundaries', and yet, just go, "WHOOSH! I'MINVISIBIBLE!" whenever you want to! All the sensationalism! None of the insight! Gratuitous lesbo scenes whenever you want 'em!

Bisexuality. It's like being gay. But only when it's fashionable.
Click to expand...
:lol:
Mavericker said:
Homosexuality in comics is a horrific idea-what message is this sending to kids?
Click to expand...
Oh god...
Baxter said:
Zatanna? Really? And I never like Constantine as a bisexual character. Probably because the only place I've ever seen it mentioned was in Azzerello's run and it was just out of left field. It felt like he was just trying to make the one guy uncomfortable instead of having an interest, which seems like a Constantine thing to do, Bi or not.
Click to expand...
I could imagine (I haven't read the actual stories in question) that Constantine's bisexual side may have to do with occultism and whatnot. Those of you who read Promethea certainly know that Aleister Crowley had some sexual relationships with men, supposedly for reasons having to do with occult rituals.
Bass said:
I don't. :?
Click to expand...
VILE HEATHEN!!!
Bass said:
Good point.

So let's use Invader Zim. That show's main character is continually lamenting about how he hasn't committed genocide yet.

And it's a comedy. :D
Click to expand...
A comedy that's technically aimed at kids.

I've been watching a lot of Zim lately, since I noticed that we have Nickelodeon cartoon channel. :D
 
E is always my hero

(though had I been the one to catch him, in my immediate fury, I probably would have kicked his *** straight off the boards for good)

I'm just really happy with this thread. I wish there were more threads where we could talk about more serious things involving the comic book industry, or even things like movies and television...maybe when a certain someone "decides to leave," that'll be a little more possible... but its refreshing to see what people think about this subject...

The Example of a homosexual response to the Peter-MJ relationship is a great one... Many gay characters, being slanted into stereotypes, are apparently eternal bachelors, who can throw away one boyfriend for another as quick as they might get through a gallon of milk... I haven't read Starman past the first two volumes, but im intending to soon, so maybe that has a decent example of that...

The trouble is, and this is sadly true for a large number of the homosexual population, that when they realize that their religion doesn't exactly condone their behavior they tend to throw all morality that they consider to be church-based out the window... I've seen it a hundred times... And so you get a lot of homosexuals (less today than about ten, fifteen years ago, but its still there) who eschew the idea of a monogamous relationship... So you get the barhopping sex-crazy stereotypes that you could see in Queer as Folk...

And I hate that stereotype, and I hate the fact that many people give that stereotype credibility...

I'd like a more laid back gay character, someone who didn't leave every morning dressed perfectly matched with their hair done up... Someone who might sleep in, toss on their costume before kissing their partner and going off on a late-morning patrol in whatever city they might live in.

But the thing is, I have a feeling people would just say that his having a boyfriend is a gimmick... If a character acts like a relatively normal guy, someone who if they walked down the street you'd never be able to tell that they're gay, it would make people uncomfortable... I think a lot of people like to think that they can pick out the gay people out of a crowd, I think that's a comforting thought... Its the same thing with lesbians, people are more thrown off by someone perky in a dress with long pretty hair and makeup with a basket of muffins turning out to be a gay woman... They'd rather have it be short-haired cops who only ever wear pants and engineers, and mechanics, and military women. The stereotype is more comfortable than the reality. It throws people off in the same sort of way that an Articulate Well-Educated African-American in the Southern US would have been thrown off even just fifty years ago. I think Straight people are mostly the ones painting gays with rainbow flags, and I think thats what makes them satisfied. To look at it in Will and Grace, Jack was always a more popular character than Will because to the general populous (to tune in to see a show about gay people) he fit what they wanted to see in a Gay Character.

Honestly I think that's one of the things that's holding back gay people in this day and age...

I am rambling, but nonetheless, that's what's been on my mind.
 
moonmaster said:
There is an issue though with trying not to make it feel like forced diversity. If their sexuality is going to be treated as such a non-issue, then how do you decide to put a gay character in a story without feeling like you're just trying to have a token gay guy?
Click to expand...

By doing this:

moonmaster said:
The way I see it is the same as most people. Gay characters should be presented as regular people who's sexuality is incidental to their other character traits. Their relationships should be treated like any heterosexual relationship.
Click to expand...

See, in BABYLON 5, only one character is not white, there is one black guy, the late Richard Biggs who plays Dr Stephen Franklin. He never feels like a token black guy - because it's never, ever brought up. I swear, a white guy (hell, a asian woman, why not) could play the character and all you'd not need to change anything. No one comments on his race, his race is never brought into the plot to give him a distinctive viewpoint - and it's the same for the spin-off, CRUSADE, which had one asian and one black person and again; never brought up. Apparently, the actors loved their roles precisely for this reason - they weren't tokenised. The same is true for RED DWARF. Two black characters, two white characters, no discussion of race ever. That's how you stop it being token gay. Because we can see if a character is black, asian, or what-have-you, no one needs to say it. Do the same for gays. Have them casually possessing the habits a homosexual would have (in the same way heterosexual actors casually posses their habits) without drawing attention and that's when we get progress, honesty, and something worth experiencing.

I'd rather have no homosexuals in stories than the bland, "I'm gay and that makes me a person, Grace" bull**** we get. It's just the modern version of Minstrels and jazz hands. :sick:
 
compound said:
When I described the possibilty of a gay character in the "Mary Jane role", I didn't mean a perrennial damsel-in-distress.

I'm referring to a love interest who is completely human (i.e. no superpowers), and who needs to make concessions and sacrifices in his personal life, on account of the fact that his boyfriend maintains an active career as a superhero. He doens't need to have a football player physique, or even be particularly tough. I just mean an ordinary Joe with a job like yours or mine, who just so happens to be in a committed relationship with the alter-ego of a superhero (on top of the usual temptations, complications, problems, everyday drama, ups and downs that happen in ordinary, "real life" relationships).
Click to expand...
The problem with that is that the clearest divide between the superhero/normal person character is the ability to protect themselves from villains. While the damsel-in-distress (and to a lesser extent, girlfriend-in-the-freezer syndrome) has become something of a trope in the genre, its become a trope for a reason. A lot of the quintessential stories focus on the protection of the weak by the strong and there seems to be a lot of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" associated with the idea. Whether its actually broken or not, is debatable.

The question arises; if you don't have the weak protecting the strong, what kind of story will make or define a gay character, without turning them into a stereotype?

Dr.Strangefate said:
The trouble is, and this is sadly true for a large number of the homosexual population, that when they realize that their religion doesn't exactly condone their behavior they tend to throw all morality that they consider to be church-based out the window... I've seen it a hundred times... And so you get a lot of homosexuals (less today than about ten, fifteen years ago, but its still there) who eschew the idea of a monogamous relationship... So you get the barhopping sex-crazy stereotypes that you could see in Queer as Folk...

And I hate that stereotype, and I hate the fact that many people give that stereotype credibility...
Click to expand...
Its hardly an homo exclusive stereotype though. The playboy is an archetype across a huge number of stories, its just that women are the default partners. The issue isn't the stereotype or the existence of the stereotype, its that the population is seen as exclusively exemplifying the stereotype. That stereotype prevents people from being taken seriously; if all you do is drink and screw, thats great for you but its not a real endorsement of your brainpower.
 
Caduceus said:
The problem with that is that the clearest divide between the superhero/normal person character is the ability to protect themselves from villains. While the damsel-in-distress (and to a lesser extent, girlfriend-in-the-freezer syndrome) has become something of a trope in the genre, its become a trope for a reason. A lot of the quintessential stories focus on the protection of the weak by the strong and there seems to be a lot of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" associated with the idea. Whether its actually broken or not, is debatable.

The question arises; if you don't have the weak protecting the strong, what kind of story will make or define a gay character, without turning them into a stereotype?
Click to expand...

I'm reminded of alternate universe lesbian Constantine. It's been a while since I read the series she appeared in, but I think the first seflessly heroic act we saw her do was rescue a stranger, who became her girlfriend.
 
Looking back on it, I think that's one of the reasons why I've gone back to reading more manga (shojo-ai more specifically). I want to see more of the social interaction as entertainment, as opposed to the mindless macho posturing running rampant in DC and Marvel.

Granted, what I'm reading is more aimed at lesbian readers, but I can honestly say, I can get more emotionally attached to and identify more with characters like; Lucia (Venus Versus Virus), Shizuma (Strawberry Panic!) and Hazumu (Kasimasi), than I do characters like Storm, Catwoman, or Ms Marvel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top