Wally West: The Flash Appreciation 2019

[WallyWestFlash]

RCO007 (1).jpg

Mr. S.

Lol.

[Sam]

If you are raised in an insular and homophobic environment and your response is discomfort followed immediately by understanding then acceptance then that is the right course of things. Reactions are products of their environment and someone bucking their environment for the common good and acceptance of others is a positive thing and shouldn't be treated like blanket, intentional and continuous bigotry.

It's not just a different time, but that does matter (unless you want to start waving your finger at Superman for being racist against Japanese people), but the context of the situation, even to this day, is perfectly acceptable. It is an important moment for both characters and the franchise, as Flash was one of the very first franchises to openly include and support a significant gay character in a positive light.

Okay, people seem to be confusing the issue.

Did Messner-Loeb do anything wrong with that story? No. Was Wally's reaction realistic? Yes. Is reacting with discomfort to someone coming out to you an okay reaction? No. Absolutely not. Time doesn't justify it. Context doesn't justify it. Nothing justifies it. Does that mean you are a horrible person if that is the way you react? No, but that still doesn't make that kind of reaction okay and that has to be acknowledged.

Frankly, I find people trying to justify that reaction as acceptable more troubling than anything else. A person is coming out. They are putting themselves out there, and when people react with discomfort it is affirming all the fears and insecurities they have just because they are attracted to people of the same gender. It tells them they are different or irregular and that is not an okay thing to be telling people. It is not perfectly acceptable to uncomfortable around someone LGBTQ no matter how you were raised. They are human beings and they deserve to be treated with respect.

And yes, Superman being racist toward Japanese people is a huge problem, even in the context of WWII.

[Dred]

All I know is I'd kill to have had a circle of people around me like Wally when I came out. I don't know where your outrage is coming from but that fact that you think someone's environment shouldn't affect their behavior seems insane to me. A person isn't worse or bad for breaking socially ingrained negative habits. His reaction was to accept Hartley regardless of his kneejerk feelings. His discomfort wasn't acted upon in a negative way because, instead of falling into the socially constructed homophobic trap he fought that idea so he could treat Hartley with respect -- the thing you're saying he didn't do.

It would be a problem if he was exposed to it, understood there's nothing wrong with it, and still acted in discomfort and negatively towards Hartley.

What sucks is we live in a world where homophobia is taught and ingrained in the media and general culture. It doesn't suck that characters like Wally and real people who come around realize the problem entirely of their own volition.

[reis9999]

Both Booster and Harley only saw each other killing Wally.

No one knows who killed anybody else.

So, Bruce thinks it was Harley because the deaths were caused by blunt trauma. Barry thinks it was Booster because everyone was killed in about 1.5 seconds, consistent with time travel abilities (but also super-speed).

Turns out it was Wally.

Dan Didio opens a bottle a champagne.

And also, identity crisis writer and the people involved with "armageddon 2001" are advising King to not change the outcome of the history because of leaks and people's opinion.
For me this is one of the biggest indicatives of wally being the murder.

I really think that king is more concerned with creating a mistery around the "why a heroe killed everyone in sanctuary" than aorund "who did it"

[Sam]

All I know is I'd kill to have had a circle of people around me like Wally when I came out. I don't know where your outrage is coming from but that fact that you think someone's environment shouldn't affect their behavior seems insane to me. A person isn't worse or bad for breaking socially ingrained negative habits.

If you'd read what I was saying, you'd understand that I'm not arguing that someone's environment affects behavior. It does. I'm also not arguing that a person is bad for having a reaction of a discomfort. In fact, I literally said that a reaction of discomfort doesn't make them a bad person.

That said, it doesn't mean that a reaction of discomfort is justified, okay, or not hurtful. It doesn't matter what the context is or when it took place. It's systematic of a culture that treats LBGTQ people as an alternative, not normal, and, as such, we need to acknowledge that such behavior isn't justified. It doesn't mean Wally is a bad person or that we can't root for Wally because of it. It just means that reacting with discomfort wasn't okay, even if it was realistic and makes sense with his upbringing.

My frustration is that I don't want Wally's reaction to be seen as the ideal or something we should want, which is the feeling I was getting from people's reactions. What we should want is for people to learn of someone's sexuality and accept it without question. Discomfort is not unusual, unfortunately, but it is certainly not okay, and we shouldn't pretend like it is. That's all.

[Dred]

Yes, I'm happy to condemn the culture. The feelings actually were okay because they weren't acted on. That's where I think you're misunderstanding me. If we lived in the world you're talking about then Hartley coming out would not matter. There would be no societal pressure for him to fight against because society doesn't accept who he is. You're talking about a situation that would invalidate coming out in the first place. The reason Hartley is putting himself out there is reliant on the same structure that developed Wally's discomfort. It is definitely okay for someone to have discomfort and push it aside for the benefit of a real person. It's not ideal, but I'm not pretending anything is ever ideal or will ever be. I get the feeling you want some kind of black and white, perfect and not perfect scenario, and that since Wally did not have the exactly perfect feelings instantly that he is at some fault. But it's not really the case because we shouldn't expect perfection in the first place.

[Frontier]

RCO007 (1).jpg

Mr. S.

Lol.

I love that .

[Spider-Ham]

Can’t really confirm right now but it seems Wally was not Sanctuary’s murderer.

I’ll come back in few hours.

[WallyWestFlash]

Do you have some possible good news for your fellow Wally fans???

[Sam]

Yes, I'm happy to condemn the culture. The feelings actually were okay because they weren't acted on.

The feeling were acting on. Wally was visibly uncomfortable and ran away. Hartley could visibly see it bother him. He even comments on it. Running from the situation is acting on it.

That's where I think you're misunderstanding me. If we lived in the world you're talking about then Hartley coming out would not matter. There would be no societal pressure for him to fight against because society doesn't accept who he is. You're talking about a situation that would invalidate coming out in the first place. The reason Hartley is putting himself out there is reliant on the same structure that developed Wally's discomfort.

I'm not misunderstanding you. But you're definitely misunderstanding me. What you describe is an ideal world we should want, but obviously that isn't the world portrayed in the comic. I have never disputed that, yet you seem to think I am. HOWEVER, just because Wally isn't living in an ideal world doesn't change the fact that his behavior in this issue is harmful and potentially damaging. That has to be acknowledged. Just because you aren't in a ideal world, doesn't mean treating people like they have a gay plague is okay.

It is definitely okay for someone to have discomfort

No it isn't. Homosexuality shouldn't make people uncomfortable.

and push it aside for the benefit of a real person.

That's good, but it shouldn't be necessary. We also don't actually see that in this issue. Harley helps out in the end, but we don't really see Wally talk to him again at any point. He really should have apologized for running away.

It's not ideal, but I'm not pretending anything is ever ideal or will ever be.

That's bull. Just because something isn't ideal, doesn't mean you have to accept that. And even if things will never be completely ideal, people have to keep working to for things to be ideal. Otherwise, what's the point?

I get the feeling you want some kind of black and white, perfect and not perfect scenario, and that since Wally did not have the exactly perfect feelings instantly that he is at some fault. But it's not really the case because we shouldn't expect perfection in the first place.

No, I'm definitely seeing in grey. Humans are imperfect and we can't expect people not to make mistakes. But we have to acknowledge and own up to those mistakes. Otherwise, we can't strive to be better people cause we'll keep making the same mistakes. Wally made a mistake. Wally was at fault. That has to be said. But that doesn't mean he can't improve himself and fix things going forward.

Frankly, that was the whole point of Messner-Loebs run. Wally was a HUGE jerk and he was developing into a better person. That's great, but that doesn't mean he didn't act like a jerk. You have to acknowledge the act to move forward. I'm not looking for Wally to be a perfect person. If you understood anything I wrote, that would be very clear to you, but I do think we should be able to acknowledge when he doesn't act perfectly and when he does something that isn't okay.

[Dred]

If that's what you consider acting on socially ingrained homophobia then you live in a different world than I do. But frankly, I'm sick of arguing in circles with you about what amounts to fault and how society gets to offload all its responsibility onto individuals.

[Sam]

If that's what you consider acting on socially ingrained homophobia then you live in a different world than I do. But frankly, I'm sick of arguing in circles with you about what amounts to fault and how society gets to offload all its responsibility onto individuals.

Running away from someone because they are gay is unquestionably homophobia. If you can't see that, I'm not sure what to tell you.

[Badou]

Honestly, I don't care if Wally is the killer or not anymore. The story has failed to win me over in any capacity and I am not invested in the outcome. The character, and others, have been dragged through the mud and written badly and that doesn't really change with whatever twist they put in.

[BohemiaDrinker]

Running away from someone because they are gay is unquestionably homophobia. If you can't see that, I'm not sure what to tell you.

Sam, may I ask how old you are?

I'm really not trying to be patronizing or a dick here, but I have been having this same conversation with a lot of younger people lately.

I don't disagree with your point that Wally's behavior is far from the best option, but that time was a very, very different time. Going bak to the early nineties and 80's is, culturally, like looking at a cave-person, even when we look at ourselves. At the end of the day, sexualities that deviated from the enforced cis-hetero-monogamy model were not even really a talking point (except for the AIDS epidemic) and most regular folk had never thought more than 5 minutes about it, if at all.

At the time, Wally had to "digest it", for lack of a better word. The reason he took five minutes to think about it is because he was forced to, unlike most other people had. And yes, the conclusion he arrived at should be the starting point of the conversation for today standards, but for the time it was progressive AF.

We can look at the past with today-tinted glasses and judge past actions for today standards all we want, but the fact of the matter is that some of the most ardent racial activists of yore could look like racists by today standards, and that's true for everything elkse. All people can hope is to play the best with the cards handed to them, which back then Wally did.

[Timber Wolf-By-Night]

Yes, I'm happy to condemn the culture. The feelings actually were okay because they weren't acted on. That's where I think you're misunderstanding me. If we lived in the world you're talking about then Hartley coming out would not matter. There would be no societal pressure for him to fight against because society doesn't accept who he is. You're talking about a situation that would invalidate coming out in the first place. The reason Hartley is putting himself out there is reliant on the same structure that developed Wally's discomfort. It is definitely okay for someone to have discomfort and push it aside for the benefit of a real person. It's not ideal, but I'm not pretending anything is ever ideal or will ever be. I get the feeling you want some kind of black and white, perfect and not perfect scenario, and that since Wally did not have the exactly perfect feelings instantly that he is at some fault. But it's not really the case because we shouldn't expect perfection in the first place.

Exactly. I can only assume that Sam is young and idealistic and is looking at the both the world we live in, and the world these comic book characters live in, as how he thinks they should be and is acting out of the belief that any depiction of those worlds that doesn't meet that impossibly high standard of 'how it should be' as unacceptable. The problem is, that's a naive at best, and completely unrealistic at worst, way to look at things. Refusing to accept the reality that mainstream acceptance of LGBTQ people and issues came not all once and without problems but instead happened in fits and starts, with both moves forward and backwards, and with many obstacles to overcome, and that it took time (as in not just years, but decades even, if not in fact centuries), does a disservice to both the LGBTQ community and those in the heterosexual community who consider themselves allies, but particularly to those who lived and died during those times. Because that ideal world? Still doesn't exist.

When Hartley came out to Wally, and Wally reacted initially with discomfort, but by issue's end had gotten over that discomfort and accepted Hartley for who he was, way back in the early 90's? That was probably the earliest that story could have been told. It couldn't have been told in the 60's, 70's, and certainly not the '80's, when not only rampant homophobia but the fear and hysteria created by the emerging AIDS crisis would have made it all but impossible to tell such a story without an overwhelmingly negative backlash from not just comics fandom but the general population. That is, if both the Comics Code Authority and editorial in general allowed such a story to ever see the light of day to start with. Also, Hartley was a supporting cast member. Not a lead character, nor a prominent or favorite member of a big team. Yeah, Extrano of the New Guardians had appeared in the late 80's, but the New Guardians book was considered terrible in general, and Extrano himself such a compendium of terrible cliches and stereotypes about gay men, that even actual living and breathing gay comics readers wanted to forget about him. It took a few years more for an actual mainstream super-hero character being published by one of the Big Two, Northstar of Marvel's Alpha Flight, to be allowed to come out and openly declare what had been thinly veiled subtext anyway, and even then Marvel had what some cynically called the "luxury" of the fact that Northstar was a character the non-comics-reading general public had never really heard of.

I was a teenager during the 80's (86-90 being my high school years). I'm a straight male and would like to consider myself an ally of the LGBTQ community. And I remember pop culture and culture in general back during that decade, as being oppressive to both LBGTQ people and straight people who were considered to be not sufficiently conforming to heteronormative standards of what was considered "traditional" masculinity or femininity. Those standards may have varied across the country, from state to state and town to town, and certainly between urban/metropolitan areas and smaller, even more rural areas. But being a heterosexual who other heterosexuals suspected or even flat out accused of being secretly gay, back then, because somebody thought you weren't ticking off enough boxes to "qualify" as being traditionally masculine or feminine, and therefore were either trying to out you as a socially undesirable person or else try force you to more closely conform to their ideas of what a "real" man or "real" woman was? Probably not remotely bad as what real gay and lesbian people faced, but still not exactly pleasant experience, especially if you were a teenager, either.

(In my case, I was a slightly overweight, nerdy, academic overachieving, non-athlete who didn't follow sports, go hunting, take shop class, learn all about cars, etc., and had reluctantly accepted that 99 percent of the girls I went to school with in my one-school-system small down considered me unfit for dating, let alone boyfriend material. And that was considered fine. When I decided to start growing my hair long, as in down to my shoulders long, at least in part because I was becoming a fan of 80's metal and rock bands? That was the trigger that led members of the largest Baptist church in my town to question both my masculinity and my sexuality, because "Real men have short hair.")

In an ideal world, which we still don't live in and certainly didn't live in during previous decades, coming out wouldn't and shouldn't be a process fraught with emotional and social peril. Nor would being LBGTQ and trying to live a happy, healthy, and safe life, and nor would being a heterosexual who accepts LGBTQ people and supports their efforts to live happily, healthily, safely, and as accepted members of society. Yes, great strides have been made in gaining mainstream acceptance, sometimes more and in a shorter amount of time than many of us thought possible...but it's still not that ideal world, not yet. There are strides that still need to be made. There are still plenty of people trying not only to stop those strides, but to undo those that have been made already. That's why it's important not just to have a vision of how we think things should be and try to move towards that, but to remember when things weren't as good as they are even now...and to remember the efforts that were made to get to this point and accept their importance, not just dismiss them out of hand because somebody who didn't live through them thinks those efforts weren't good enough or did enough.

(Sorry to everybody for hijacking the thread.)