I absolutely love the bromance between Bobby and Sam. Is there more to it then just friendship that I don't know but either side of the argument would be believable and fit their history. I don't have a preference either way but I will say I think it would be absolutely hilarious to have a issue where Izzy walks in on them.
@jpmst17, you waste your time -- keep this in mind before you get roped into another topic such as this...
"Headcanon generally refers to ideas held by fans of series that are not explicitly supported by sanctioned text or other media. Fans maintain the ideas in their heads, outside of the accepted canon."
Last edited by Micabe; 08-07-2022 at 07:18 PM. Reason: Thought ammendment(s).
Not that I care all that much, but upon a few more moments of further thought, I SUPPOSE... this could be seen as a rather juvenile, balls & boobs joke. As in, somedays I feel like sum testicles, somedays I feel like sum breasts. It's hard to tell with you lot, sometimes, given the proneness to absurd irrationalism.
Oh, child, please. Don't bother, save it for yourself. You can say it 'til the cows come home, and hopefully then, you'll get a li'l somethin-somethin. 'Cause forget touching the grass, what some of y'all need, by the desperate sounds of it... is a good, old-fashioned:
And though I'll probably regret this, I'll bite anyway... what am I not getting? From the link I provided, [periodical] comics aren't only doin' good, they're doing better than ever! Or is it that this just doesn't line up with your preconceived notions?
Um, no offense, BUT... not necessarily. I'd argue behavior = instinctual, wherein cognitive = intellectual. I mean, have you ever been in the closet... for most your life? Does someone with amnesia forget to put clothes on, to cover themselves, and just walk around naked? See, there's this thing called... conditioning. Though I'll admit, this is just conjecture on my part, I'm no eXpert. But I could look into it more, if ya want, just say the word.
Please, you can post the same thing 50 times, it won't officially make Cyclops bisexual in the marvel universe. And above all, accept that some people want something more concrete to be convinced that a character who has always been clearly heterosexual, would suddenly be attracted to men. Damn, in the Krakoa era, this may be the only discussion or interaction a minimum subject to interpretations in 3 years, written by Hickman who is not even in place anymore. In what world is that enough to change a character's orientation ?
Interpretation and headcanon are fine, but only if we agree that it's just that. As long as it is not shown or written on page anyway.
Eh, I think there is an argument for both sides. My guess is that there is at least something more to the dynamic than simply Jean seeing both guys, but anything specific is beyond me.
On the believers side: The room opening between the three rooms is being spoken by the naysayers as if it were a completely normal thing when it isn’t. As far as we can tell, Jean isn’t serious with Logan. (Or at least casual enough for Logan to actually contemplate going for a random surfer girl without even given a single thought about how Jean would think) Having connected rooms straight into both mens is super weird. Who knows, maybe there are doors, but I am not certain how comfortable anyone would feel being within distance of the other persons room where private matters could be going on within ear distance, unless the Summers house boasts sound-proof walls.
Not only that, but Scott isn’t joking when he said “Scott in a Speedo”. He is literally wearing one the next time we see him with the family on Chandilar and it would be very put-of-character to put one on in an attempt to take the joke further. If it were Bobby, Hank, Kurt, Warren, Gambit, or hell, even Colossus, maybe I could wave that off as them being wacky. But Scott is not the type to do that kind of humor and the most he does with humor is dry wit and humor, usually in an awkward way.
And like it or not, the sub-plot in the Pride issue where Pride stories are happening would be very strange to do if they weren’t implying something. It wasn’t just a “oh, there’s Jean and Scott and Logan”. Scott and Logan literally were having an argument in the background as the main characters were having a conversation, with them resolving that conflict on panel in the background. Quite a friendship to display in the background of a Pride issue where it goes over subjects of being gay where two characters in a throuple are having an argument to be a message of “bromance” and “tolerance of each other’s company for their heterosexual relationship with the same girl”.
On the naysayers side: I still do get it. Nothing is confirmed outright. Scott did not disclose he was bisexual or anything else. He never said he was heterosexual either, but he has only expressed interest in women. Logan even moreso. And jumping from rivals to possibly even a casual relationship is a big jump in character development to make for any character similar to Scott and Logan’s dynamic.
On top of how it wouldn’t make sense in the grand scheme of things, Scott and Logan have not said any meaningful words to each other about anything outside of missions. They are barely in proximity of each other most of the time, especially nowadays when Scott and Jean are now on the X-Men. Yet, Jean has made efforts to see Logan for different reasons, both professionally and romantically. Scott has not as far as we know.
****************
Either one of these can be taken as a possibility. It’s why I can’t say nay to either argument, but frankly, I find it unreasonable to absolutely shoot down either side. You (as in other people in this thread) can have your own view of the matter either way, but we should not be acting like neither side respectively has no absolute reason to think the way they do as if there is no merit to either side.
Marvel absolutely dropped the ball on explaining how this dynamic works beyond “Jean is seeing both men. Everything is fine now”. I am placated by the fact that there is no love triangle. I will not lie though and say that I wish someone would have the hutzpah to do what the writer for Guardians of the Galaxy did and approach this throuple in actual closer detail like they did with Starlord, whether it’s to deny that Logan and Scott have any relationship of their own going or if they just avoid each other altogether. Something.
Im in the camp of “there is something there and someone needs to actually do something interesting and approach what is going on”.
Some are simple like that, and easily amused.
1st sentence: Never said it did.
2nd sentence: Have clearly stated that I do, several times over.
Last sentences: I have never asserted what Hickman intended, other than being provocative, with what is CLEARLY...
to anybody with even a modicum of reading comprehension:
innuendo
an allusive or oblique remark or hint, typically suggestive.
"she's always making sly innuendoes"
Similar: insinuation, implication, hint, suggestion, intimation, overtone, undertone, allusion, nuance, reference
mid 16th century (as an adverb in the sense ‘that is to say, to wit’, used in legal documents to introduce an explanation): Latin, ‘by nodding at, by pointing to’, ablative gerund of innuere, from in- ‘towards’ + nuere ‘to nod’. The noun dates from the late 17th century.
Which is all I ever said it was, from the beginning, and have... understood since grade school.
I can't help that almost childlike others, crap their diapers and/or get their panties in a twist, over such things. I've been merely... reflecting the facetiousness of it all. And of course... playing devil's advocate, as I so often do, 'cause I like to. Sorry/not sorry for causing you or others any undue stress, but that's on you, not me... as it's self-created.
Arguing aside, we're all in agreement on who is the top out of Scott and Logan right?
This, 'cause...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queerbaiting
is a thing, needs to be avoided... and called out. Which I think is what some were/are trying to say, in a roundabout way.Queerbaiting is a marketing technique for fiction and entertainment in which creators hint at, but then do not actually depict, same-sex romance or other LGBT representation. They do so to attract ("bait") a queer or straight ally audience with the suggestion of relationships or characters that appeal to them, while at the same time attempting to avoid alienating other consumers. ...
Just storing these here for easy access, as I want to address them at a later point, in Bobby's own app thread.
And with that, I think I've said all I wanted to say on the matter. Or at least I thought I did, UNTIL...
this opportunity arose, lol. IDK...
I'm kinda leaning towards them being verse.
Last edited by PolarIceFire; 08-08-2022 at 05:27 AM.