@redwingx: I get it. But it just sucks that a character can't naturally come into his own instead of writers sitting around a table going "we need a gay character. gay is so hot right now."

EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE. Nothing against gay characters in comic books, I love the Young Avengers and Batwoman and Apollo/Midnighter are some of favorite characters ever. But considering the quality of Teen Titans so far with two issues, with the typical teen crap, I really doubt this will be any good. It just...probably going to be stereotypical...also, making him latino...what? kill two birds with one stones and we call ourselves diverse. Aye, aye, aye...

Just read the preview....cool dude he gets the dumbs up, his dialouge can be a little off but still seems like a good charecter

Lame! Not Teen Titans #4 ... though I consider the whole Gen13izing of the Teen Titans as pretty lame (the original, if done great in the first place, is always better ... always ... than any copy ... and Gen13 has been an amazing book with amazing characters and an amazing (core) story) ... to the point:

All I've read above about the new character is pretty lame ... just to invent an character around the core characterization that he's gay is just so "corporate business thinking" ... aiming every possible target group, maybe bring in a controversial issue... the idea is as lame as the new Ultimate Spider-Man. The main characterization gay or black or latino (the new black in terms of target groups) ... that's so, yeah, I guess I mentioned before: lame!

Just look at Midnighter and Apollo ... great characters, great powers (of course a satire of Batman and Superman) ... and by the way, I almost forgot: they're gay! Or Luke Cage (mainly the new one, the old one was a typically stereotype) ... great history, great characterization ... oh, yeah ... and besides he's black.

And it's not enlightened or courageous ... courageous would be Red Robin's coming-out ... why not? Because he's the main character? Because he's Robin?

This is just target group oriented ...

I've always thought there should be a gay Robin. Whether you believe there's innuendo or not, Batman prompted one of the biggest controversies regarding homosexuality in pop culture and one of the first as well at a time where nobody talked about it. Since then, they've tried to distance themselves so much from that concept that there's something of an aversion to Robin altogether for being too "effeminate" with his exposed legs and campy style (a laugh considering the things most women wear). It wasn't helped at all by Joel Schumacher's kamikaze attempt at incorporating Robin into the movies which has become the totality of most people's impression of him - Christian Bale even said he would refuse to do another Batman movie if Robin was at all involved. Meanwhile, prominent characters with lesbian undertones have free reign (Harley and Ivy anyone?), I really think it's time that the fear and paranoia associated with that period in Batman's history be finally alleviated and dealt with effectively. It's just shameful that someone saying it was a method of subliminal coercion was considered valid enough to inflict a whole code around it.

Having just another nobody gay character could be good but they fall by the wayside. Northstar is with Alpha Flight (snore) and you only see Wiccan every now and then. Gay Robin is better - and no I'm not saying that would make Batman gay by osmosis so don't get your panties in a bunch.

why is he spanish? and not white? dc! why not bat-girl, but starfire a hoe because she not white. the new 52 SUCK'S.

OH, and it's just for money$$$ LAME way to do it!

Wow, he's both latino and gay? Talk about broad strokes. Are they trying to hit all demographics at once? Also, his name is Bunker? Lol.

I think its cool that they are making more diverse characters, but it seems overblown. There are several gay characters in comics already. How this this new character a big deal?

ONE STEP FORWARDS, TWO STEPS BACK

September 19, 2011

Tonight at midnight “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is finally repealed and we can all celebrate how far we’ve come as a tolerant, open-minded society. Then Wednesday, the new gay character, “Bunker,” is introduced in Teen Titans #1 and all that progress gets thrown out the window. A faux-hawk, REALLY, GUYS? That’s your gay signifier? And he’s wearing a pink shirt? And a sweater vest? AND WINGTIPS? Oh, oh, and this makes him totally gay – he has a WELL-DEFINED FACIAL HAIR! Series co-creator Brett Booth tweeted yesterday: “We’re trying to make being gay a part of who he is, your gaydar should be pinged right off the bat:)” Copy dat.

And while I appreciate the effort to be inclusive (and it makes sense that the teen superhero set would be more tolerant than the older generation), you really should keep in mind that not all gay guys are flaming queens who dress as stereotypes. That’s important to know in case you ever want to coax Tim Drake out of the closet, because THAT will require a straight-acting butch queen (he’s got Batman issues, you know) and I don’t think this BUNKER character is up to the challenge.

James St. James on World of Wonder talking about the new Bunker character in Teen Titans.

He pretty much hit the nail on the head.

(Source: http://worldofwonder.net/posts/2011/09/19/one-step-forward-two-steps-back/)

My issue is not that the chracter's gay, but that we can't seem to have a gay character that ISN'T overtly camp. I mean; pink shirt, pink and purple uniform, faux-hawk, etc. etc., its like they're going out of their way to make him stereotypically gay. Having an individual's sexuality, or race, or religion, as the starting point of their characterisation won't make a strong character, in fact, it's likely to do the opposite. I'd rather they introduced a good, strong character, and then have 'oh, and by the way, he's gay', as just another aspect of his personality, rather than its foundation.

@Lonestar88: sadly, it's accepted nowadays

I loved Freedom Ring from Marvel team up. If they hadn't killed him off in like 3 issues I'd definitely pay for a title starring him. Freedom was openly gay and dating a guy but not necessarily a flamboyant character. I don't normally focus on the sexual orientation of fictional characters but I think it would be cool if they handled Bunker the same way (minus killing him). And as for the purple costume, there's nothing wrong with a dude wearing purple gay or not.

Great interview, love where Scott's going here.

I like his costume colors. Purple and dark pink is a good color combination. His casual clothes aren't too bad either; looks like the typical prep style. His personality seems like it'll be fun too. I think it'll be good to have a positive and generally happy character as part of a group that will likely be prone to teen angst. And I'm all for him being a flamboyant gay because, well, there are flamboyantly gay people in the world. As long as he's not being introduced to have people poke fun at like some flamboyant characters it shouldn't be an issue.  
 
Also, I love how as soon as a minority character is introduced a bunch of people start complaining that it's 'just to get sales' but then go on to complain that they don't have enough minorities in comics. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

I'm glad he didn't just change the orientation of an existing character. It's annoying when a character like Renee Montoya or Northstar is written as straight for years, and then suddenly "reveals" that they're gay.

So instead of homosexuality just being a character aspect it completely defines him... are there no gay comicbook writers?

His costume and energy powers look awesome but he looks like the exact illustrated portrayal of a camp gay guy who's friends with 40 year old women and talks about how much he loves dicks and the x factor. I hope that isn't the case though, here's wishing for purple beastboy who happens to be gay.

Everyone always jumps the gun to call others homophobic when they express hesitance toward this sort of thing, but the fact is the character is introduced as "the gay Teen Titan".  
 
I'm sorry, what?  
 
His description is "Gay Teen Titan"  
 
Not "New Teen Titan with the ability to generate walls who also happens to be gay" 
 
It's "Gay Teen Titan".  
 
When a character's defining characteristic from the get-go is their sexual orientation, chances are the writer hasn't put a lot of thought into them as a whole, and would rather just "shock" the easily shocked. 
 
Batwoman, Shatterstar; these were organic characters who happened to be gay. Shatterstar's sexuality was hidden, but Batwoman's wasn't. They were just normal people (for superheroes) who were also homsexual. Neither DC or Marvel came out an obnoxiously said at the time of their creation; 
THESE TWO WILL BE GAY. 
 
Frankly, it's more a sign of DC and Comicvine's obnoxiousness that they're focusing on one factor of the character than other's "bigotry". 
 
 

@G-Man

Hate for the character already? The issue isn't even out yet...

I thought Bombshell was the Teen Titans gay character
 
I do like "Miggs" though, I likes him a lot.

As a gay man and an avid comics fan I have mixed feelings about both the introduction of this character and some of the reactions I've been seeing in the comments. While I do agree that it would be much better to create a multi-faceted character with a complex and human personality independent of the fact that they're attracted to the same sex, characters need to start somewhere. In reality there are many types of gay people, I'm probably more on the average side of things, I like comic books and fast cars and guns, but I also have more stereotypically "gay" attributes too. But in the gay community there definitely are flamboyant people, and to see them represented within comic books is okay. I mean DC also publishes Midnighter and Apollo, who are both gay but neither are flamboyant. The gay community has many different facets, as do the people in it, and while I may not be a flamer (I use the term lovingly) I think it's perfectly okay for there to be a flamboyant character in continuity. And while he may right now be defined as the gay character, like I said characters need time to develop, let him grow and evolve as a character before you write him off as some cheap ploy by the writers for attention.

I like where they're going with Miggs :) I had a friend who would tell me that she didn't have a problem with gay people (like me) but didn't understand the more flamboyant ones that I hung out with. They made her uncomfortable.

Ever since then I've had a bit of a sore spot for those people who prefer their gays "normal" or more masculine. Some of these comments in here just bug me. I'm glad they're making a more flamboyant character who isn't ashamed or fearful because he's gay. It sends a positive message.

@crj25 said:

As a gay man and an avid comics fan I have mixed feelings about both the introduction of this character and some of the reactions I've been seeing in the comments. While I do agree that it would be much better to create a multi-faceted character with a complex and human personality independent of the fact that they're attracted to the same sex, characters need to start somewhere. In reality there are many types of gay people, I'm probably more on the average side of things, I like comic books and fast cars and guns, but I also have more stereotypically "gay" attributes too. But in the gay community there definitely are flamboyant people, and to see them represented within comic books is okay. I mean DC also publishes Midnighter and Apollo, who are both gay but neither are flamboyant. The gay community has many different facets, as do the people in it, and while I may not be a flamer (I use the term lovingly) I think it's perfectly okay for there to be a flamboyant character in continuity. And while he may right now be defined as the gay character, like I said characters need time to develop, let him grow and evolve as a character before you write him off as some cheap ploy by the writers for attention.

Interesting points. Do you think this character would have received any of this attention if he had not been noted as gay right off the bat?

I'm fine with him being gay, I just don't know why every time Marvel or DC makes a minority character there has to be a big announcement. Maybe if they didn't neglect so many characters with those characteristics this wouldn't matter so much.

I'm fine with him being gay, I just don't know why every time Marvel or DC makes a minority character there has to be a big announcement. Maybe if they didn't neglect so many characters with those characteristics this wouldn't matter so much.

Of all the new 52 I gave up on this one it was like reading a MTV comic.

This is the reason I have decided to keep getting the titans. I have been collecting the Teen Titans from the beginning, and I was hating the DCnU version, until they added Bunker. So I am giving this a chance once again and hope it turns out well.

As long as they don't over do it, let alone draw too much attention, I won't mind.

Hate for the character already? The issue isn't even out yet...

I just wish we could have a gay charaacter who is out, without being 'flamboyant'. In my mind that means overly camp which, looking at the pic. and the wAy the character is described, is exactly what Miguel's going to be. While I have nothing against people being camp and/or effiminate, its stereotypical and cliched. Not just in comics but in film and tv as well. Is it too much to ask for a character who's gay without being either extremely camp or overtly butch?

Wot.

Seriously, wot?

Why is it that all these new gay characters have to be flamboyantly so? The most popular gay characters, they aren't 'gay characters', they're characters who happen to be gay, like Billy Kaplan and Teddy Altman.

I don't really care that he is gay. As long as the book and the character are interesting, I am ok. But I have to agree with those saying that since this is not a big thing, why announce it like this? If it's not that important, things like "Gay Teen Titan" are not needed.

There are so many diverging opinions on this topic.

The declaration of the new character being gay - how it was declared - why it was declared - all the way through to how he is being presented I find disappointing. It's more disheartening there is a dialogue at all. The reasons for this character's existence can be explained in so many ways. Cash grab - sensationalism - catering to the gay community - even catering to groups that are anti-gay for that matter, but at the same time, wouldn't it be best if we could see this as just another character? Without pointing out his sexual preference? And how he goes about displaying it?

Even with the potential of this character of displaying "sterotypical" behaviour, it would be more fair to just be aware of his existence and focus on his impact in the story. I like that he's flamboyant - but purely from a personality aspect. He sounds like fun. Discussion is great - don't get me wrong, but accusations of the writer creating this character to generate sales is a bit funny. I mean, isn't that his job? And this is a contentious issue obviously - the controversy (or implied one based on the activity in this thread) is a money maker. Lobdell has plenty of experience in that respect and if its a formula that works, then he's going to utilize it, over and over again. In fact, he has.

So, this is just another character where we need to wait and see were it goes. I can only hope Lobdell's ears are open and that he is willing to listen to the fans. But I doubt it.

a mexican teen with the power to put up border walls?

God, I hope this isn't gonna be like The Rawhide Kid, where they just introduce ever gay stereotype from the book

@TypingKira said:

Wot.

Seriously, wot?

Why is it that all these new gay characters have to be flamboyantly so? The most popular gay characters, they aren't 'gay characters', they're characters who happen to be gay, like Billy Kaplan and Teddy Altman.

...mmh.. Easier to write? :/

Interesting all i gotta say for now

The character is racist for the fact they think, oh he is mexican, since most of mexican are very macho and homophobic, lets make him gay.

The guy cant be mexican, he just have one last name, mexican have 2 or more last names.

The guy cames from a small fake village, wtf?

The character haves no past, no real reason for being a hero, he is just there to be gay and "mexican".

He haves no real background that make him feel mexican, mexican gay people like all mexicans, act in a mexican way and talk like the mexicans.

Also the Glee image makes no sense, Glee failed in mexican tv so hard, that show that mexican are by far smarter that the people livin on the USA, is a fact that Glee makes people stupid.

I just hope they notice all the mistakes they made with this character and try to give him a background, is ahrd to belive a happy person would became a hero, just becuase he think the costumes are cool.

*FACEPALMS*.... Dude Dude...Dude.. Someones been watchin WAY too much Ugly Betty -__-

I will not judge the character because he is a Mexican gay hero (As a Mexican I know it feels weird since my representative plays for the other team but i can accept that). What I will judge is the fact that writers sometimes just make this characters for the sake of controversy and their sole personality is based on them being gay or from a different race besides being white, even after so many people complaining I do like Miles Morales (who is a nice character but didn't exactly needed to hype him up as a black/hispanic spider-man) and I hope this guy doesn't end up getting all flamboyant while speaking in spanish as his only personality

@The Dark Huntress said:

@G-Man said:

Hate for the character already? The issue isn't even out yet...

Seriously...

I'm one of the biggest critics on the site of his work with Starfire and not even I'm going on about this.

I love how people automatically make the assumption that just because he's a "controversial" character, it's not going to be a good one. A bit presumptuous, no?

People need to wait until at least..y'know actually reading the issue before they start complaining about how it's not a good character, seeing as he hasn't even appeared in anything yet.

Look how everyone reacted to Miles Morales aka the new Ultimate Spider-Man. People need to grow up. Straight middle class Anglo-Saxon males are not the only ones who read comics or should be represented in mainstream comics. Lets see what the writer does with his creation before judgement is passed.

Well I didnt want any gay characters, but I can see how this may be an okay thing. Im not currently following the this book so there is a level of I-dont-care. While I dont support Gay Marriage or anything like that, I do support diversity in comics and think that this is a great thing to do for the sake of the comics industry. But not every gay person out there is flamboyant and girly. So as long as he isnt annoyingly gay he will not be opposed by me.

I feel like they could have pitched this a lot better. If I was pitching this book I would have said:

"We want to portray a flamboyantly homosexual man as normal. Meaning he's campy but his camp isn't used for cheap laughs. He's an 'obvious' gay man, but he's not a punchline. We feel this isn't seen enough."

If he'd come out and stated his intentions like that, I'd be fine with it. One of the main characters of Six Feet Under was "camp gay" even when he was in the closet and that show was fantastic! Because he was a complex, interesting character and was far from another Will & Grace-style comedy relief character. But with this interview I'm not entirely convinced they won't stoop to that. I'll have to read it to be sure.

One thing I'm definitely concerned with is that his powers--how they've been described in interviews anyway--make him seem like a "Purple Lantern." That sounds lame. And the worst part is, it's been done.

@Planewalker said:

I'm not a fan of gay characters, I love Authority but hated the in your face relationship between Midnighter and Apollo hope the retcon that hopefully...

Blasphemy! That they retconned the Apollo/Midnighter relationship was just as irksome to me as Lois/Clark. That was one of the best marriages in comics.

@DeathpooltheT1000:

Yeah your right dude nice way to write it down.

I don't mind at all that he's gay.

As if he didn't fuck with existing characters enough, Lobdell continues the trend of creating gay characters not to be good characters but to be gay. It's what Glee does: create a character as a stereotype just to win GLAAD awards simply for the character's existence, no matter how awful of offensive or artistically dire the character may be.

I love the Whiskey Media family and the editors of Comic Vine, but their nonchalance about the trends killing their favorite medium is bothersome. Plenty of sites do the same. The ComicsAlliance reaction to Lobdell and Winnick isn't an angsty feminist backlash, it's fans who love the medium who want to use their minds and not eat whatever mush is presented before them. The collective bar for what constitutes good comic writing just keeps being set lower and lower and lower and people (including those who will respond to this, probably) keep trying to justify manipulative garbage instead of relishing in it.

You have to create a great character first and include any kind of sexual orientation (if any clarity is necessary at all) second, you know? I hope no one meets me, shakes my hand, and immediately starts questioning what I look for in a partner.

@pixelized said:

@Vance Astro said:

I'm fine with him being gay, I just don't know why every time Marvel or DC makes a minority character there has to be a big announcement. Maybe if they didn't neglect so many characters with those characteristics this wouldn't matter so much.

"Hey Hey, Come read DC comics, we now have Black People!"

As a black person this made me almost die. Thank you so very much. XD

@DeathpooltheT1000 said:

The character is racist for the fact they think, oh he is mexican, since most of mexican are very macho and homophobic, lets make him gay.

The guy cant be mexican, he just have one last name, mexican have 2 or more last names.

The guy cames from a small fake village, wtf?

The character haves no past, no real reason for being a hero, he is just there to be gay and "mexican".

He haves no real background that make him feel mexican, mexican gay people like all mexicans, act in a mexican way and talk like the mexicans.

Also the Glee image makes no sense, Glee failed in mexican tv so hard, that show that mexican are by far smarter that the people livin on the USA, is a fact that Glee makes people stupid.

I just hope they notice all the mistakes they made with this character and try to give him a background, is ahrd to belive a happy person would became a hero, just becuase he think the costumes are cool.

Thats dumb. your bunching all mexicans together just because they live in mexico? not all mexican gays act the same and not all mexicans have strong obvious personality traits or visual appearance that suggests they are mexican. People are diverse everywhere.

i doubt the creaters made the gay character mexican because mexicans are "macho, and homophobic", thats the most ignorant statement ive seen in awhile -.-

Batman comes from a gigantic fake city and your not like wtf about that?

Just because glee didnt do well in mexico doesnt mean there werent any die hard fans.

Not to mention, the character was just introduced, you can definately expect his backstory to come into play eventually, but if they give it all away up front thats less stories they can make and more limitations the writers place on themselves.

who needs a reason to be a hero? how about to help people? maybe this character is just a generally good person with powers who wants to help.

He isnt a flawed character just because he is still in progression -.-

@TadThuggish said:

As if he didn't fuck with existing characters enough, Lobdell continues the trend of creating gay characters not to be good characters but to be gay. It's what Glee does: create a character as a stereotype just to win GLAAD awards simply for the character's existence, no matter how awful of offensive or artistically dire the character may be.

I love the Whiskey Media family and the editors of Comic Vine, but their nonchalance about the trends killing their favorite medium is bothersome. Plenty of sites do the same. The ComicsAlliance reaction to Lobdell and Winnick isn't an angsty feminist backlash, it's fans who love the medium who want to use their minds and not eat whatever mush is presented before them. The collective bar for what constitutes good comic writing just keeps being set lower and lower and lower and people (including those who will respond to this, probably) keep trying to justify manipulative garbage instead of relishing in it.

You have to create a great character first and include any kind of sexual orientation (if any clarity is necessary at all) second, you know? I hope no one meets me, shakes my hand, and immediately starts questioning what I look for in a partner.

Thanks God wome one understand that.

@TimDrakeRedRobin: I live in mexico and i am mexican, i know how mexicans act and the Glee Fan are people at their 30s that belive they are young.

Young kids hate Glee.

Also i know a gay guy that is from a small village, the guy likes comic and said to me that he found racist the character.

DC:Now with more gays and latinos, dont matter if ouw plots sucks, becuase no one read comic book becuase of the plots

If he's from Mexico-what is he doing in America_ could it be that Latin "machismo" is too much for an "out " gay to bear?

Terry

@TypingKira: Name another flamboyantly gay character.

@Paracelsus:

He's in America because of Red Robin. He's responding to his call to arms (so to speak).