If there was a new marvel now series which character reboot would be best for an lgbt character?

[dragonmp93]

I would say that a bisexual Iron Man.

[Imraith Nimphais]

I'm with Aja_C. on this one.

Either use one of the already existing LGBT characters who remain woefully underutilised. Or simply create a new character.

[aja_christopher]

I couldn't see Tony becoming gay. He's way to much of a womanizer and history is to long to all of sudden like guys...
But I could see someone else take up the mantel. Ironman is also a pretty flexible role being that the suit gives the person the powers. All it would really need is a capable pilot with a "never say die" attitude.

I was thinking more along the lines of "bi" but I'd still have to agree with you on that, given the fact that I felt the same way when someone mentioned Roberto (Sunspot) in an earlier thread.

This just gets back to my original point: namely, that changing the sexuality almost seems like creating an entirely different character, in which case it's probably better to just use someone who is already established as LGBT or create a new character entirely and maybe let them take on the "mantle" of a major character for a while and see how it works out.

I really think you're going to create a lot of unnecessary backlash if you try to change the sexuality of a popular character, which in the long run will probably do more harm than good (unless you've got one helluva a talented creative team behind the change).

Having an alternate version step into the 616 would probably be a better option -- I don't think you'd hear nearly as many complaints if "black" Cyclops or gay Wolverine made the jump over from the "X-Treme" universe.

[Imraith Nimphais]

Hmmm...now that you mention it (him)...

Gayverine in the 616 (now that Logan is dead/dying) would be interesting...but only if they also include is bf Hercules.

[aja_christopher]

Hmmm...now that you mention it (him)...

Gayverine in the 616 (now that Logan is dead/dying) would be interesting...but only if they also include is bf Hercules.

And there's your new "reboot" series right there.

Assuming it's true that Claremont originally intended for Wolverine to be bisexual, it would actually be only giving the character his due.

-------

"Chris Claremont originally intended to write Wolverine as bisexual, and although he may or may not be technically immortal, his Healing Factor definitely grants extended longevity and makes him hard to kill. Of course, at the time, fans of comic books were probably less likely to be able to grasp the idea of "a manly dude that swings both ways" and so that angle was dropped...

His son Daken seems to be less choosy about whom he seduces though.

This was semi-canonized in the Alternate Universe series X-Treme X-Men, where Wolverine, here known by his birth name of James Howlett, is bisexual and in a relationship with Hercules, which some fans interpreted as a subtle nod to Claremont's original intention.

As Claremont eventually revealed, Mystique is over a hundred years old; she has had relationships with several men, but her most enduring one was that with Irene Adler aka Destiny. Mystique is also bisexual in another way, having spent years in male shape(s). This was even how the character Nightcrawler was originally supposed to be born (with Mystique impregnating Destiny while in her male form). Marvel ultimately named the idea too controversial, so Kurt is Azreael and Mystique's son instead."

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.ph...ityBisexuality

[Ironbyte]

i think that for a character the only important thin is made him/her interesting and well written...

for example spider-woman and bat-woman are both two great characters with great stories well written (by blackman & bendis)..

aside for this i think it's a stupid thing to reboot a character only for change his/her sexuality/religion/skin color, etc.. the only thing i hope for a rebboted character is made him/her interesting , and if you want a lgbt version (or a black version or a catholic version, etc) of a character , you can invent a new one, like dc made with batwoman (they not change batgirl sexuality, but invent a new interesting character (interesting and well written aside of her sexuality) of batwoman...

you can made all happy, experiment with new character and respect fans of old charater (not changing they favourite charatcer), for example i'm italian and proud of it, but if marvel reboot iron man and made he an italian character calling him bruno (for example) i'm became not very happy with marvel....

[KOSLOX]

Hmmm...now that you mention it (him)...

Gayverine in the 616 (now that Logan is dead/dying) would be interesting...but only if they also include is bf Hercules.

I've always figured Logan is the "any port in a storm" type.

[Marvell2100]

Silver Surfer
Scott Summers

[skyvolt2000]

We've had a female Thor and a black captain America announced already. Iron man is an obvious next choice but a bit too obvious.

Someone suggested a gay hulk once which would be fascinating because of the themes of repression and finally letting all of that out as well as the anger over bigotry and the need to feel powerful once.

A transgender ms marvel would be interesting too because the - marvel stories are good metaphors for feminism including transgender rights. There may be more _ marvel books than would be sustainable though if there's more than two.

What do you think?

Lets leave well enough alone. We have enough LGBT characters now and it's about dang time some use them instead of trying to sex change an established character.

Or you can go the new character route with a TWIST-how many Marvel guys have siblings or long MIA cast members?

Didn't the late Thunderstrike have a son?
Didn't Eli Bradley have siblings? Whose to say one of them didn't get granddad's blood?
Rocket Racer has siblings.
Where is Storm's nephew Spike?
Or Cannonball's siblings?
Whose to say Tony doesn't have a gay son out there?
What if Falcon's dead nephew Sam was alive somewhere?

In other words help fire up the back issue market by using a long gone guy as your new gay hero if using the current ones are not available.

[Dayle88]

Why is this so important? Marvel comics are essentially action stories. Do we watch Bond films to see him sleep with that particular films girl or for the mystery, suspense and action? Relationships are a part of any genre because these characters have to seem human for us to relate. But it seems to me that a push for diverse sexual orientation should occur in a medium of entertainment where the relationships are the focus.

Don't get me wrong, there should be diversity in the Marvel universe. Just use new characters or characters that were originally created that way. Changing existing "straight" characters for the sake of diversity and no other reason doesn't sit well and rarely works.

[Tiamatty]

Why is this so important? Marvel comics are essentially action stories. Do we watch Bond films to see him sleep with that particular films girl or for the mystery, suspense and action? Relationships are a part of any genre because these characters have to seem human for us to relate. But it seems to me that a push for diverse sexual orientation should occur in a medium of entertainment where the relationships are the focus.

Don't get me wrong, there should be diversity in the Marvel universe. Just use new characters or characters that were originally created that way. Changing existing "straight" characters for the sake of diversity and no other reason doesn't sit well and rarely works.

I'd say comics are different from action movies. I think for a lot of readers, the character is more important than the action. I know it's true for me, and I've seen plenty of other people make similar claims. Peter Parker was the draw, not Spider-Man. Spider-Man beating up Dr. Octopus was always just something to add a little spice to Peter Parker struggling with money. One of the most famous issues of PAD's X-Factor was when the team went to see Dr. Samson - there was no fighting, it was entirely character exploration, and people loved it.

And there are plenty of books where the relationships are the focus. Spider-Man, again. Fantastic Four was always at its best when it was about the relationships (romantic and otherwise) between the characters. Most long-time Avengers fans point to the relationship between Scarlet Witch and Vision as their favourite part of the book for those years. X-Men was always a soap opera, with a ****-ton of relationship crap.

[aja_christopher]

Why is this so important? Marvel comics are essentially action stories. Do we watch Bond films to see him sleep with that particular films girl or for the mystery, suspense and action? Relationships are a part of any genre because these characters have to seem human for us to relate. But it seems to me that a push for diverse sexual orientation should occur in a medium of entertainment where the relationships are the focus.

Don't get me wrong, there should be diversity in the Marvel universe. Just use new characters or characters that were originally created that way. Changing existing "straight" characters for the sake of diversity and no other reason doesn't sit well and rarely works.

I think it adds to the storytelling when you have a diverse group of characters, and "relationships" are a big part of said diversity. It's one of the reasons I enjoyed the X-Men and the New Mutants back in the day (my first exposure to Native American, Russian, lesbian, Brazillian, Jewish, German, etc, heroes) and one of the reasons I enjoyed the more recent series, Runaways as well.

To pretend that the relationships between Kitty and Peter, Scott, Jean and Logan, Karolina, Nico and Alex, didn't matter with regards to the plot is discounting a lot of what made the series in question more than just another "comic book".

In fact, I'd argue that where the New Mutants went wrong was in NOT creating those kinds of relationships -- I would have enjoyed reading about Doug Ramsey a lot more if he'd gotten into a serious relationship with Rahne, and I'd say the same for Amara and Roberto, or X'ian and Dani, who I think would have made a good couple back in the early days of the book (much more so than Dani and Sam or Nate). You had (and still have) people "shipping" Illyana and Kitty just because it just seemed "right" -- despite both characters never really showing that kind of affection for one another on "screen".

I know some people don't read comics to see that kind of thing play out, but I think developing these kinds of relationships within the structure of the story adds not only to the dramatic and entertainment level of said book, but likewise to the believability of the characters in question.

Still, I don't disagree with your main point -- namely that "changing" a popular characters sexuality isn't the best way to promote positive LGBT storytelling at Marvel, especially when there are already so many underutilized LGBT characters out there just waiting to have their stories told.

[The_Greatest_Username]

This is an excellent question and something I may have thought too much about.
I think that Hercules, Starfox, and Storm should be much more openly bisexual, for sure (I think that's something the resonates which just about all of their fans).
To be honest, I've never gotten a gay vibe from Tony Stark. If any classic Avengers was to be "outed", it should probably be Captain America.
The fan theory about Emma Frost being a transwoman is very interesting and fits almost too well with her backstory. That being said, I'm not sure I'd want the first transgendered superhero to be someone as sociopathic as her.

[aja_christopher]

i think that for a character the only important thin is made him/her interesting and well written...

for example spider-woman and bat-woman are both two great characters with great stories well written (by blackman & bendis)

Batwoman is a great example of how to do it right -- hopefully Marvel can learn from that (and allow the character to get married to boot).

Didn't the late Thunderstrike have a son?
Didn't Eli Bradley have siblings? Whose to say one of them didn't get granddad's blood?
Rocket Racer has siblings.
Where is Storm's nephew Spike?
Or Cannonball's siblings?
Whose to say Tony doesn't have a gay son out there?
What if Falcon's dead nephew Sam was alive somewhere?

In other words help fire up the back issue market by using a long gone guy as your new gay hero if using the current ones are not available.

Good point -- you've already got characters like (Storm's daughter) Kymera out there who are pretty much ripe for character development, and it would be interesting to see Tony deal with having a gay son who might one day take over the family business (and armor).

And the Guthrie family, as big as it is, is bound to have at least one kid who is gay -- watching a Southern Christian (and possibly homophobic) family come to terms with that would make for good storytelling.


kymera.jpg

[Dayle88]

I'd say comics are different from action movies. I think for a lot of readers, the character is more important than the action. I know it's true for me, and I've seen plenty of other people make similar claims. Peter Parker was the draw, not Spider-Man. Spider-Man beating up Dr. Octopus was always just something to add a little spice to Peter Parker struggling with money. One of the most famous issues of PAD's X-Factor was when the team went to see Dr. Samson - there was no fighting, it was entirely character exploration, and people loved it.

And there are plenty of books where the relationships are the focus. Spider-Man, again. Fantastic Four was always at its best when it was about the relationships (romantic and otherwise) between the characters. Most long-time Avengers fans point to the relationship between Scarlet Witch and Vision as their favourite part of the book for those years. X-Men was always a soap opera, with a ****-ton of relationship crap.

That's very true, one of my favourite USM issues is #13 where Peter and MJ are talking in Peter's bedroom for the whole issue so my first point is kind of moot.