Homosexuality in Comics: Shameless Gimmick or Artistic Choice?
By Smart_Dork_Dude 29 Comments
I will say this to begin with. I don't mind homosexuality. I can't understand it for the life of me, but I don't mind it.
This is a topic I feel must be addressed. You see I am a fan of Alan Scott. The ORIGINAL Green Lantern from the Golden Age. I always found him to be a very interesting character with an interesting origin and look. I don't even MIND the fact his costume doesn't have much green. If he's flying or when he's using his ring he's got the green glow so that's enough really. Now in DC's reboot they changed plenty of things. However these changes are the most jarring with their reboot of the Earth 2 universe. Some of the biggest changes is that Alan Scott's ring isn't powered by an extremely magical lantern anymore, his costume is the most unimaginative redesign I have EVER seen and looks a random member of the Green Lantern Corps. Not to mention he's gay. I have no problem with gay people and feel there should be gay superheroes, just as there should be African/African-American, Hispanic, or Asian superheroes
And there ARE gay superheroes: Batwoman, Obsidian(Alan Scott's SON who apparently will never exist again as with Alan Scott's daughter whom I was a fan of), Mikaal Tomas AKA Starman, Northstar, Wiccan, Hulking, and Apollo and Midnighter(Personally hate these two since they're basically one big "Superman and Batman are gay" joke. At least that's the feeling I've gotten every time I read a comic with them in it).
However they should NOT have an established straight superhero for that. Why? Not only does it show a SEVERE lack of imagination on the writers part as it makes them seem incapable of creating a new character, it also makes the entire character into a sales gimmick and nothing more.
Now some of you may say
"But what about Batwoman? She was an established straight character and she's now gay!"
And you would be right. The difference? Originally the entire reason Katherine Kane AKA Batwoman existed in the first place was to show people that Batman and Robin were not gay. That's the entire reason. She also fell into extreme obscurity very quickly. This means she had no time to form real fans before she fell into obscurity. Unlike a character like Alan Scott who actually has fans and appeared in quite a number of comics. The current Batwoman is so different a character with so different a back story that she only thing she has in common with the original Batwoman is the name.
And if any of you still can't see where I'm coming from, think of it like this. Is not making an established heterosexual character a homosexual the same as making an established gay character straight? Would not there be a backlash from the LGBT community? It's the same thing here. When dealing with established characters you need to make sure of but one thing. Make sure the character you plan on making gay is either completely original or so completely obscure with so little previous appearances that no one will even care.
29 Comments