Major DC Character To Be Outed As Gay

[huedell]

This is all just too weird. The way I see it... yes, its a cheap ploy to use
the idea that a DCU character is going to be revealed as gay in order to
stir up publicity.

But besides being cheap, I don't see why people should be offended.... at
least until they see how its handled.

This attitude is identical for a political, religious, racial etc etc version
of this same scenario... across the board.

Other than that, I feel no need to hold DC responsible for a moral failing
just because they are making an "event comic" out of all this because
its their job to sell comics... its OUR job to say to buy 'em if we like 'em...
or to not if we don't.

[Earth 2 Chris]

^How times have changed:

DC handled Pied Piper's outing very delicately and quietly in the pages of Flash in a roof-top scene where he and Wally were discussing villains. Wally asked Piper if he thought the Joker was gay, and Piper revealed he should know, because he was himself.

Meanwhile, Northstar, after years of fan speculation, in the midst of battle in a Rob Liefeld-ripoff splash page shouted out in huge letters "I'M GAY!!!"

Of course most of those 90s Marvel guys are running DC now, so...

Chris

[Random Axe]

Well, here's the mystery nobody has mentioned. How are they actually going to introduce/reveal this character? Is it going to be casually mentioned in passing, is he/she going to be caught in a compromising position like Lance Bass or is the character going to make a long, drawn-out monologue? Maybe it'll be a combination of the three.

If anyone thinks DC is being tasteless for this obvious exploitation and cash-grab, just wait till we see how the message is delivered. I have a feeling we are about to see a new level of disappointment, even for DC. I have ZERO confidence it's handled in the respectful manner it requires.

[PNGwynne]

It's kinda surprising to me that with all the characters in the DC universe they don't already have a gay character.

Oh, they do--but it's something "new" thats going to generate Death in the Family-like PR.

Putting Batwoman, Obsidian, Cavalier, or Pied Piper in good stories is just to much work.

[PNGwynne]

Re: Batman--I think, as some others have suggested here, that would be a terrible decision on DC's part:it is not only untrue to the character's conception, it would feed into decades of dirty "youthful ward" jokes & innuendo.

It would trash the cool Bats-Catwoman relationship as well. Honestly, Batman is already a pretty complex & conflicted character--making him gay seems like a Brat Pack rehash.

I can't imagine that DC will touch the Trinity (& Robin, by association), although WW could legitimately explore lesbian or bisexual themes. Maybe WW has & I'm unaware of it.

But, I also can't imagine much of what has motivated DC in the last several years.

[Brazoo]

I really don't get the shock. Since when is DC above sensationalization to create publicity?

It's kinda surprising to me that with all the characters in the DC universe they don't already have a gay character.

[Earth 2 Chris]

In the Golden Age, Bruce Wayne had a succession of girlfriends; Julie Madison, Linda Page, etc. And of course there was Catwoman and Vicki Vale. By the early Silver Age he had Batwoman, and like every DC hero mostly rebuffed her advances because of either his dedication to duty or fear of reprisal by his enemies. By the 70s he had quite a few love interests, most famously Talia and Silver St. Cloud. It was strongly hinted that they had a sexual relationship (gasp!). In the 80s Vicki Vale returned, and you also had Alfred's daughter Julia Remarque and Catwoman, who actually became his crimefighting partner for a while. Of course "Son of the Demon" showed us that Bruce and Talia had consummated their relationship. Sometime after, the idea of Batman as a psychologically damaged man-child obsessed with vengance emerged, and the theory was he had no time for women due to his "holy war" on crime. There were still overtures to him and Talia, and Vicki Vale and Vesper Farichild and others tried to break through, but by that point writers seemed to have forgotten to write much for Bruce Wayne to do.

In the last decade, Jeph Loeb and Jim Lee reignited the Batman/Catwoman romance in HUSH. I lost track of Batman's continuity during Morrison's run. But Batman has actually had a healthier romantic life than most people give him credit for over his 70 plus year career.

Chris

[torgospizza]

I DO NOT advocate for Aquaman to "come out," & I like Mera, too. But you would be amazed at the gay fan base Arthur has. I like the character for a lot of reasons, not the least of which is, er...character design.

How would you feel if it was Bruce Wayne? I know people have been joking about him and Robin for ages, but when you think about the years of bailing on women wanting to share nightcaps with him, it's possible that if one person's been closeted for decades he would be the guy. The whole deal about the war on crime coming first and all just seems like an excuse. Thing is, if Bruce is gay, I'm not sure he even knows it, he's so lacking in introspection. I know he had a kid and has been with a couple gals, but even Oscar Wilde had children. When it comes to Batman, I really don't know what to think.

[PNGwynne]

Everyones first thought seems to be Aquaman but I don't think DC would do that. He's considered a lame superhero by many already and I think if they do it right, they need to find someone who will be welcomed as a gay superhero, not someone who will be further ridiculed for coming out.

I DO NOT advocate for Aquaman to "come out," & I like Mera, too. But you would be amazed at the gay fan base Arthur has. I like the character for a lot of reasons, not the least of which is, er...character design.

[megoscott]

Moderator's Note: 2 posts have been removed due to political content. Please avoid making partisan political statements on the Mego Museum Forums. Take it up with a mod if you have any questions.

We are pleased to have a thoughtful and respectful discussions on this topic. Thanks.

[hedrap]

I don't advocate DC messing about, any more than they already do, with classic established characters: Not Robin, not Aquaman, not Jimmy Olsen. It's disrespectful to fans & creators.

I'm not suddenly going to embrace a character because of their orientation--it wil depend on the writing & context. If DC wants to take an established supporting character & "make them gay," it will only be successful--as it has been with Obsidian & Piper--if written well.

This media statement by DC is sensationalistic marketing IMO: At worst, it is cashing in; at best, it is too little, too late, and a disservice to classic creations.

The "alter-ego" of superheroes can be seen as a type of closet--super-hero comics could explore this duality one step further by having a gay hero who is closeted & acts out as a hero, or even vice-verse. This was explored satirically in Veitch's Brat Pack.

But to do it glibly, to pander, to distort the core of an iconic character, is not only a disservice to gay fans, but to all fans.

You deserve 100% credit for probably the most objective comment I've read about this anywhere, online.

Most comic sites are contorting themselves to congratulate DC, and if anyone refers to it as sensationalism, the straights are the ones who go nuts.

But, it is pure exploitation. Dido and Johns stink at running a company. All they know is how to create hype, and fail on the follow through.

If this was an honest creative direction, it would just happen. No major emphasis, no neon signs. Simply, one of the characters is gay and we learn of it through backstory.

The odds of that happening now, are slim to none.

It's the same thing with Marvel and Northstar.

[PNGwynne]

Oops! Duplicate post.

[kingdom warrior]

All the gimmicks in the world cant beat good writing.

Thats the number 1 issue with comics now. They have ran off MOST of the talented folks who knew what good comics were.

All the gimmicks in the world can't get me to buy overpriced slick magazines that pretend to be comic books......

[kingdom warrior]

DC has done some good things within their former "Universe" regarding gay themes, inclusiveness, & visibility.

We've seen gay heroes (Obsidian, Estrano, Starman Mikaal, Batwoman), gay supporting cast (Superman, GL, Flash, WW), even gay villains (Pied Piper, Cavalier & Capt. Stingaree).

Aside from Denny O'Neil's rather heavy-handed & stereotypical depiction of the Joker as fey in a few '70s stories, these depictions were story-driven. If elements were added to lesser, established or supporting characters, it was done in an unsensational way.

I don't advocate DC messing about, any more than they already do, with classic established characters: Not Robin, not Aquaman, not Jimmy Olsen. It's disrespectful to fans & creators.

I'm not suddenly going to embrace a character because of their orientation--it wil depend on the writing & context. If DC wants to take an established supporting character & "make them gay," it will only be successful--as it has been with Obsidian & Piper--if written well.

This media statement by DC is sensationalistic marketing IMO: At worst, it is cashing in; at best, it is too little, too late, and a disservice to classic creations.

The "alter-ego" of superheroes can be seen as a type of closet--super-hero comics could explore this duality one step further by having a gay hero who is closeted & acts out as a hero, or even vice-verse. This was explored satirically in Veitch's Brat Pack.

But to do it glibly, to pander, to distort the core of an iconic character, is not only a disservice to gay fans, but to all fans.

Well said Scott!!

Steve.

[kingdom warrior]

Why can't the bigwigs at DC just leave well enough alone?

First, they retcon everything in the 80's, which was bad enough. Then, they do it AGAIN this year!

NOW, they want to change the orientation of an established character just because they want to be seen as progressive?

Pardon my French but WTH???

That doesn't make ANY kind of sense.

This is all a gimmick to sell more comics and increase the fan base.

Which is all a bunch of hooey.

If they really, REALLY want tin increase sales and the fan base, all they have to do is WRITE BETTER STORIES!!!!!

Or...does that make too much sense?

That is why I prefer to read more independent comics, which don't have a large fan base, but their plotlines do make sense, the art is pretty cool, and the characters aren't tired retreads of the usual stuff.

Because they can't leave well enough alone anymore, once upon a time they were a regular comic book company and then they went public, and now they have to answer and make money for shareholders at all cost.....

You see they can take chances that small comic book companies can't because of their back catalog....want the old Superman and Batman take your pic from any era on the last 70 years they have it....

That's why they can change things up and not give a flying flip what us olds farts want.....they want those who have that extra cash to buy their new ideas and gimmicks.