Chanigng characters race or sexuality for DC characters

[Alpha]

Privileged or not, the Trinity are the least likely to be altered among DC characters. Unless it's an Elseworld-like story, I don't see their race or sexuality changing.

Wonder Woman is definitely gonna have a clear cut romantic relationship with a woman one of these days, DC is just taking a long ass time to get to it.

[Alpha]

A POC Clark Kent definitely works because he is adopted by a white family with a strong support system in Smallville and thus his experience isn't even culturally distinct. A brown skinned kid adopted by a white family has a very different experience of the world than one raised by parents that look like him. Everyone in Smallville would know who he is and be friendly with his parents, so he would get the uniaue privilegie of not being treated differently. Clark wouldn't even think of himself as "black" or "asian" or "native american" (In my head canon Clark looks like a south american native). It's another way that you could explore ethnicity with Superman that is unique and reinforces his existing characteristics.

[The Darknight Detective]

Wonder Woman is definitely gonna have a clear cut romantic relationship with a woman one of these days, DC is just taking a long ass time to get to it.

I think the best you will get regarding that is maybe a hint every now and then. I wouldn't hold my breath, at any rate.

[Rac7d*]

Wonder Woman is definitely gonna have a clear cut romantic relationship with a woman one of these days, DC is just taking a long ass time to get to it.

To long the lgbt dont see her as a true rep since she has never had a major gf.

[Alpha]

I think the best you will get regarding that is maybe a hint every now and then. I wouldn't hold my breath, at any rate.

Diana has always been a transgressive character that DC tried to supress but from time to time aspects of it come out a little. The thing is that Diana never performs when she tries to appeal to everyone and they know it. That's why they keep trying to make her into a Wolverine or Captain America type, either edgy or historical, and neither of those strategies work with her. In the 70s Diana became the icon of the second wave feminists and DC didn't do anything with it but they still enjoyed the idea of calling her a feminist icon later on and I think this means something to them. They like to promote their heroes as pillars of culture.

Right now there are 2 main characters that DC can use to promote their lgbt friendliness. There's Batwoman, who despite being a solid vigilante isn't catching on, and then there's Harley Quinn, who completely exploded with Generation Z /Zoomers. She's a good grab, but she only works if she is a counter to the regular heroes.

So DC needs someone to be an "establishment hero" that appeals to the lgbt brand, and Wonder Woman is the only one that can do it without turning heads. Conservatives don't care about Wonder Woman so DC doesn't lose anything, and her ideals are already perfect for the LGBT message. Plus you know that gay women are more "acceptable" for horny boys, so it's a way for them to get the "traditional demographic" to buy into a "gay" book.

[Alpha]

To long the lgbt dont see her as a true rep since she has never had a major gf.

Oh definitely, so when DC goes for it they better do it earnestly. It can't turn into a book about how Diana "always felt pressured not to be bisexual", because that's the opposite of how Wonder Woman works. She is totally proud of herself and has no reason to be insecure. Honestly, I think WW84 actually helps because it sealed the lid on the Steve-Diana romance, so nobody is gonna keep asking about it.

And whoever they pick to be her new romance interest better be a really interesting and unique woman. Diana needs a relationship with someone creative and magical, not another soldier or edgy anti hero.

[Will Evans]

Making Alan Scott gay made a lot more sense than when Marvel did it with Iceman. Homosexuality was illegal in the US until the 1970s, so it makes sense that someone who was born 100 years ago would stay in the closet and even get married and have kids. I think he probably waited for his wife Molly to die before coming out to his kids. Compare that to Iceman, who would've been born about 30 years ago and had a number of girlfriends before being outed by his telepathic teammate Marvel Girl. Had the X-Men been time displaced from the 1960s it might have made sense, but the teenage version of him was only from around 2000 (bear in mind the story was published in 2014), so there would've been no reason to pretend to be straight.

Is Molly dead now?

[John Venus]

As a rule, I give adaptations a lot of license. Any movie or T.V. show is not required to stick to the original work. Even in comic books, I know that the modern versions of characters are not the originals and they are really just adaptations.

But everything is exploitation in some way. Diversity is exploiting our desire to see representation. But comics also try to exploit our interest in seeing the originals. If a story is presented as showing the original Green Lantern--it had better be. They can't get away with changing the details and still exploit my interest in reading stories about the original characters. They have to pick a lane.

The problem is with the "Golden Age" characters they are clearly hoping to exploit that interest in the originals. So they can't at the same time revamp the character beyond all recognition.

Besides, I think it's better to use those originals as contrast. The Justice Society is the establishment characters--they represent the approved super-heroes. There's plenty of room to tell stories about other characters who never saw the light of day because they didn't fit with the establishment. The Society espoused out-moded views in their stories--let that reality exist, because it was how people thought at the time. But then show these other super-hero groups who were not accepted and tell their stories.

If they do revisionism and make it seem like the J.S.A. was all for inclusion and diversity back in the 1940s that's altering the real history just to make people today feel comfortable about an uncomfortable past.

OTOH, having an established JSA member making some kind of bigoted remark could potentially damage the character and render them radioactive for long term but the prejudice shouldn't just be brushed under the rug either.

I think the best fix for the JSA would be to have most of them exist in the period they were created but only have a handful of them survive in the modern day. Have Alan, Molly, Jay, Joan, Ted Grant, Dinah, Larry, Will Everett, Ted Knight, Sandy Hawkins either thrown forward in time or be trapped in another dimension where time move slowly only to reemerge during a period that's approximately 20 years before Superman debuted. Then have them age naturally (with the exception of Alan Scott) and have children. Once the kids are grown you can juxtapose how Alan being a gay man in the 40's was different from Todd being gay in the present day. You can have Will Everett talk to his grandson, Will Everett III about his experience as a super powered black man in the 40's or have the elder Dinah advising the younger Dinah on what it's like being a female superhero.

Once you have established a proper foundation of the JSA/Infinity Inc, you can do all sorts of anthology style stories about characters who existed between 1939 to the modern era. Explore the 'Hidden Figures' of the DCU.

No it isn't. It's a comic book not a history record. If people want to learn how people in the 1940s thought they can read the old JSA comics or just read a history textbook.

You can't alter history by making the JSA more racially and sexually diverse.

No, he has a point. If you are introducing super-powered non-white and not-straight characters into a 1940's setting, you have to acknowledge the prejudice and discrimination they would have faced. To pretend that everyone got along back then would be a disservice not just the people who lived through that era but the people of the present day who would develop a warped view of the past.

I'm reminded of the content warning WB used to put on for their older cartoons: https://imgur.com/gallery/U8UZyVI

[John Venus]

I think the best you will get regarding that is maybe a hint every now and then. I wouldn't hold my breath, at any rate.

I would say we are only a couple of years away from DC announcing WW having a major female love interest instead of just winks and nods*.

In the comics at least. TV and movies are a different matter as they are meant to reach out to a global audience and most of the rest of the world is still deeply homophobic. The global audience is fine with a major blockbuster that says 'racism is bad', they are not ready for a movie that says 'homophobia is bad' or the leads are in a same sex relationship.

*her girlfriend in Rebirth and kissing Artemis on Earth One.

[The Darknight Detective]

I would say we are only a couple of years away from DC announcing WW having a major female love interest instead of just winks and nods*.

In the comics at least. TV and movies are a different matter as they are meant to reach out to a global audience and most of the rest of the world is still deeply homophobic. The global audience is fine with a major blockbuster that says 'racism is bad', they are not ready for a movie that says 'homophobia is bad' or the leads are in a same sex relationship.

*her girlfriend in Rebirth and kissing Artemis on Earth One.

I think her live-action success is what's going to maintain the status quo for her, IMO. No need for DC to rock the boat until they have to.

[Aahz]

I think her live-action success is what's going to maintain the status quo for her, IMO. No need for DC to rock the boat until they have to.

Question would be anyway if DC could do this, or would need the OK from WB or AT&T.

[mathew101281]

I feel radical makeovers only work if the character doesn’t have much of an established cultural footprint. The problem with most really popular, and somewhat popular characters is that people already have a vision of what that character is. I feel that most characters have a set time period in which drastic changes will be easily accepted. After that, the characters mythos becomes set like concrete, and it becomes very difficult if not impossible to do anything to them that actually sticks. It’s no accident that most of the iconic Batman villains were created pre 1970’s. After that the number of new villains that actually stuck became more of a trickle.

The whole create new characters vs remodel old characters debate is interesting to me. I feel that creating new characters is harder to do, but can be much more rewarding in the long term. While re skinning old characters is easier at the outset but tends to relegate said character to “interesting alternate take” at best, or unwanted character at worse.

[The Darknight Detective]

Question would be anyway if DC could do this, or would need the OK from WB or AT&T.

Very true. The comics division doesn't have the final say.

[The_Lurk]

Changing an established character to such degree is lazy and probably even closet racist. It shows contempt for the character which already makes me loose interest; there no reason to care for a character if they don't even care. Besides that it also shows contempt for both races involved ("You people of X color are not good enough for a new original character/not good enough to invest big in an lesser known established character of YZ ethnicity so be happy you have that white due/gal everyone knows painted X now"). Its problematic that some fools still believe they do it for representation & diversity simply because they say so. They don't. They do it because its cheapest marketing possible. The only color they truly care about is green (...no, not Jennifer-Lynn Hayden).

I'm all for either good new characters or respectful passing of mantle versions (i.e. Mr. Terrific or MCUs Captain America [iirc in the comics too at some point in the past]) or my fave existing side by side versions (give me more Justice League China please ). Although (as with all characters) the mantle bearer does have to prove her/himself to be interesting to spend time, money & emotional investment on completely from the beginning though. But for my money that one already has a much better head-start than the "Pff, just make that on gay and call it a day" one.

[scary harpy]

Variety: ‘Titans’ Season 3 Casts Jay Lycurgo as Tim Drake

And we have Jay Lycurgo rumored as casted for Tim drake
Attachment 105434

"Drake is described as a streetwise kid who’s managed to grow up on the toughest streets without losing his indelible belief in heroism. His easy-going demeanor is backed up by a near-genius mind, a natural detective with a perception of detail far beyond his years."

This description doesn't sound like Jason to me. Just because he grew up in the streets doesn't mean that he is out there stealing tires.

I think this was reported in January about Tim Drake appearing in the live-action Titans. If I recall correctly, Tim would be bi-racial: Asian and black.

If I am understanding most posters, they accept this in the show but not in the comic book...or am I wrong?