View Poll Results: Who is your favourite 616 Marvel LGBT character?

Voters
764. You may not vote on this poll
  • ANOLE [Victor Borkowski]

    27 3.53%
  • BLING! [Roxanne ‘Roxy’ Washington]

    12 1.57%
  • CULLEN BLOODSTONE

    20 2.62%
  • DAKEN AKIHIRO

    44 5.76%
  • HULKLING [Theodore ‘Teddy’ Altman]

    41 5.37%
  • KARMA [Xi’an Coy Mahn]

    41 5.37%
  • KAROLINA DEAN

    43 5.63%
  • LOKI LAUFEYSON, God of Mischief

    66 8.64%
  • MOONDRAGON [Heather Douglas]

    39 5.10%
  • MYSTIQUE [Raven Darkholme]

    112 14.66%
  • NORTHSTAR [Jean-Paul Beaubier]

    60 7.85%
  • PRODIGY [David Alleyne]

    21 2.75%
  • RICTOR [Julio Esteban Ricter]

    38 4.97%
  • SHATTERSTAR [Gaveedra-7]

    47 6.15%
  • WICCAN [William ‘Billy’ Kaplan], the Demiurge

    153 20.03%
Page 1007 of 1014 FirstFirst ... 7507907957997100310041005100610071008100910101011 ... LastLast
Results 15,091 to 15,105 of 15205
  1. #15091
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,598

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dermie View Post
    Honestly, I had thought the gay character(s) in SECRET WARRIORS would have turned out to be Carlos Ayala and Mikel Fury. They were best friends, but I had a vibe it might be more than that. Alas, if they were we're unlikely to ever know since both are now dead.
    They did have a playful, almost flirty, vibe, but it could have just been a 'good friends' vibe, too. Gosh, I like that whole team, Carlos, Mikel, 'Red Webo', the Mace of Aesha chick, the power nullifier, etc. way, way better than the group led by Pierce with 'parasitic brain' guy... I kind of wonder if there's some way they could be brought back.

    Stonewall's name implied gay, but he seemed as into YoYo, in the book, so I wouldn't have considered him gay. Again, the tyranny of het-expectations, I suppose, in that a dude and a chick hanging out together 'obviously must be a potential couple,' since it is so rare to see interactions between men and women as *just friends* with no intended 'chemistry' in media.

  2. #15092
    Mighty Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,942

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sutekh View Post
    Stonewall's name implied gay, but he seemed as into YoYo, in the book, so I wouldn't have considered him gay. Again, the tyranny of het-expectations, I suppose, in that a dude and a chick hanging out together 'obviously must be a potential couple,' since it is so rare to see interactions between men and women as *just friends* with no intended 'chemistry' in media.
    Exactly. Stonewall and Yo-Yo were together so much, it was just assumed that there was something going on there since Hickman didn't really give us anything on-panel to suggest otherwise. Given the sprawling size of the cast, its understandable that some of the character stuff got left out...but I think he could have done something to imply it on-panel.

    The funny thing is that the codename thing was just a coincidence. When someone pointed out to Hickman the gay significance of "Stonewall", he remarked that he was totally unaware of the real life Stonewall and that it was unintentional.

  3. #15093
    Astonishing Member Drops Of Venus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    2,816

    Default

    I'm so pissed at Disney+ right now and their decision to move the Love, Simon spin-off series to Hulu because it's not ''family friendly''. Literally everything they described as inappropriate on the show can be seen at The Simspons, which is streaming, uncensored, on Disney+ RIGHT NOW. The double standard is so fucking transparent. It looks even worse when they had another queer-themed show which got cancelled before it even aired.

    Not exactly Marvel related, but I wanted to share this frustration here because I know so many people had high hopes for the Marvel shows there and its potential LGBTQ representation. What Disney did is such a slap in our face, like telling us they're ok with productions with gay people, but they draw the line when it gets too gay.

  4. #15094
    Astonishing Member Silvermoth's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,792

    Default

    Yeah I heard about that. What a disgrace. Even here in Australia if a tv show has any gay references at all, even if the characters don’t even hold hands, it still gets a “sexual references” rating

  5. #15095
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,072

    Default

    For the Love Simon thing, it had brtter be super dirty or something to actually justify this.

  6. #15096

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sutekh View Post
    They did have a playful, almost flirty, vibe, but it could have just been a 'good friends' vibe, too. Gosh, I like that whole team, Carlos, Mikel, 'Red Webo', the Mace of Aesha chick, the power nullifier, etc. way, way better than the group led by Pierce with 'parasitic brain' guy... I kind of wonder if there's some way they could be brought back.

    Stonewall's name implied gay, but he seemed as into YoYo, in the book, so I wouldn't have considered him gay. Again, the tyranny of het-expectations, I suppose, in that a dude and a chick hanging out together 'obviously must be a potential couple,' since it is so rare to see interactions between men and women as *just friends* with no intended 'chemistry' in media.
    Can I please advise that you be mindful of your language called something "tyranny" is just looking for someone to be triggered and get angry, if you want equality please provide it as well i'm sure you would be one of the first people that would have a go and call someone homophobic if they mentioned the words tyranny in relation to LGBT.

    Quote Originally Posted by Drops Of Venus View Post
    I'm so pissed at Disney+ right now and their decision to move the Love, Simon spin-off series to Hulu because it's not ''family friendly''. Literally everything they described as inappropriate on the show can be seen at The Simspons, which is streaming, uncensored, on Disney+ RIGHT NOW. The double standard is so fucking transparent. It looks even worse when they had another queer-themed show which got cancelled before it even aired.

    Not exactly Marvel related, but I wanted to share this frustration here because I know so many people had high hopes for the Marvel shows there and its potential LGBTQ representation. What Disney did is such a slap in our face, like telling us they're ok with productions with gay people, but they draw the line when it gets too gay.
    If this is true then for me its a bad business move especially if its so transparent, especially since it seems people are more open to the LGBT content these days or less people whine and bitch about it and if they arent interested they just dont watch.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rosebunse View Post
    For the Love Simon thing, it had brtter be super dirty or something to actually justify this.
    From what Drops of Venus is saying the answer is nope but lets hope they change things to justify it, i think Disney need to try and keep a balance between the two crowds - which is difficult but not impossible.
    Truth is the best policy

  7. #15097
    Astonishing Member Drops Of Venus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    2,816

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rosebunse View Post
    For the Love Simon thing, it had brtter be super dirty or something to actually justify this.
    The only thing that would even remotely justify this would be R Rated content, but I find it extremely unlikely the show is R in nature for two reasons:

    1. It's based on a PG-13 movie. Making an R show as a spin-off makes no damn sense. Let's be real: odds are the show is very similar to the movie, which I definitely don't think is soooo inappropriate for Disney+ standards.

    2. The show had already been greenlit to Disney+ and had wrapped up filming already, so there's no way they didn't know the kind of content the production had. If it was R Rated, it's unlikely it would've ever been considered for Disney+ in the first place. The fact that it took this long for this to happen clearly indicates they changed their minds.

    And again, I just keep going back to The Simpsons comparison. Like, that show is NOT family friendly and everyone knows it. Alcohol use, sexual exploration, marital issues (those are the things that Deadline listed as the mature themes featured on the Love, Victor show)... how is that so different from what we get on that damn cartoon, that Disney allowed to stream uncensored on their platform? It just... boggles my mind.

    The craziest thing is that the Runaways show (which featured a lesbian character almost getting raped on the first freaking episode) is on Disney+, so like... what's the deal here? I can't help but feel like this is so clearly one of those situations where gay is ok until it becomes too much, then they chicken out.

  8. #15098
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,072

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Drops Of Venus View Post
    The only thing that would even remotely justify this would be R Rated content, but I find it extremely unlikely the show is R in nature for two reasons:

    1. It's based on a PG-13 movie. Making an R show as a spin-off makes no damn sense. Let's be real: odds are the show is very similar to the movie, which I definitely don't think is soooo inappropriate for Disney+ standards.

    2. The show had already been greenlit to Disney+ and had wrapped up filming already, so there's no way they didn't know the kind of content the production had. If it was R Rated, it's unlikely it would've ever been considered for Disney+ in the first place. The fact that it took this long for this to happen clearly indicates they changed their minds.

    And again, I just keep going back to The Simpsons comparison. Like, that show is NOT family friendly and everyone knows it. Alcohol use, sexual exploration, marital issues (those are the things that Deadline listed as the mature themes featured on the Love, Victor show)... how is that so different from what we get on that damn cartoon, that Disney allowed to stream uncensored on their platform? It just... boggles my mind.

    The craziest thing is that the Runaways show (which featured a lesbian character almost getting raped on the first freaking episode) is on Disney+, so like... what's the deal here? I can't help but feel like this is so clearly one of those situations where gay is ok until it becomes too much, then they chicken out.
    Well, The Simpsons is a cartoon. Those things easily get a pass even when they shouldn't. It's also a terribly profitable property that would be insane not to add. It's also rather old and a lot of the older episodes are pretty wholesome.

    Now, that being said, there's certainly a double standard at play.

  9. #15099
    Astonishing Member Drops Of Venus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    2,816

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rosebunse View Post
    Well, The Simpsons is a cartoon. Those things easily get a pass even when they shouldn't. It's also a terribly profitable property that would be insane not to add. It's also rather old and a lot of the older episodes are pretty wholesome.

    Now, that being said, there's certainly a double standard at play.
    That still doesn't explain Runaways being there. Or other stuff like 10 Things I Hate About You. If that stuff qualifies as family friendly enough for Disney+, that should absolutely raise the question of why Love, Victor is not.

  10. #15100
    Spectacular Member Storm17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Location
    America
    Posts
    181

    Default

    I'm sorry, this will probably get some attacks and hate, but so what. As a member of the LGBT community, I am not offended by silly jokes on a cartoon. I find them funny most of the time. Let them do what they wanna do. As long as they let us do what we wanna do.

  11. #15101
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,072

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Storm17 View Post
    I'm sorry, this will probably get some attacks and hate, but so what. As a member of the LGBT community, I am not offended by silly jokes on a cartoon. I find them funny most of the time. Let them do what they wanna do. As long as they let us do what we wanna do.
    I agree to an extent, but what bothers a lot of people is that LGBTQ content is seen as "too mature" even when it's no different from other stuff.

    Now, to be fair to Disney, I do think they're trying. In years past, the show wouldn't have been made at all. I also think they still face a ton of pressure from not just foreign markets, but even from conservative groups here in the US. It doesn't mean they shouldn't do more and it definitely doesn't mean we shouldn't encourage them to do more.

  12. #15102
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,598

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by VolcanikTiger86 View Post
    Can I please advise that you be mindful of your language called something "tyranny" is just looking for someone to be triggered and get angry, if you want equality please provide it as well i'm sure you would be one of the first people that would have a go and call someone homophobic if they mentioned the words tyranny in relation to LGBT.
    A) am straight (which is part of why I automatically assume a guy and a girl with any sort of playful banter are a potential couple, 'cause that's the way I've been programmed by decades of media).
    B) have no clue what you are on about.
    C) will avoid the term anyway, since it bugs you.
    Last edited by Sutekh; 02-25-2020 at 12:25 PM.

  13. #15103
    Astonishing Member Drops Of Venus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    2,816

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Storm17 View Post
    I'm sorry, this will probably get some attacks and hate, but so what. As a member of the LGBT community, I am not offended by silly jokes on a cartoon. I find them funny most of the time. Let them do what they wanna do. As long as they let us do what we wanna do.
    What? I'm not sure what you're getting out of this discussion, but my point is not about jokes at all. No one is saying The Simpsons is not allowed to exist. What's being argued is that The Simpsons GET to exist on a platform like Disney+ while depicting adult themes, and yet, a queer-themed TV show can't do the same. It's about the double standard.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rosebunse View Post
    Now, to be fair to Disney, I do think they're trying. In years past, the show wouldn't have been made at all. I also think they still face a ton of pressure from not just foreign markets, but even from conservative groups here in the US. It doesn't mean they shouldn't do more and it definitely doesn't mean we shouldn't encourage them to do more.
    They definitely have to do better. It's like everytime they take a step forward, there's a step back. I think this Twitter thread perfectly encapsulates why people are frustated with Disney and their decisions when it comes to LGBTQ content lately. If it was a one-time thing, maybe it would've been easier to let it go, but it's one let down after the other...

    I really hope Kevin Feige steps up when it comes to LGBTQ representation in upcoming Marvel projects. We know he fought hard to have more POC and women in Marvel productions, and that worked out for him. Hopefully he can to the same for queer rep.

  14. #15104
    Astonishing Member BroHomo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,531

    Default

    Sooooo this was eFFin hot
    GrindrStone(D)

  15. #15105
    Astonishing Member Silvermoth's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,792

    Default

    Good lord I’m going to have to lie down thinking about Scott in a speedo.

    I always knew he was a briefs sort of guy

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •