LGBT+ Marvel Characters Discussion

[Johnrevenge]

spoilers:

Same appartement as in Sorcerers Supreme?

end of spoilers
Which reminds me, in Doctor Strange and the Sorcerers Supreme #2, why the hell is Teddy (once again) in his second Hulkling form while being all domestic? Could people please stop forgetting that Heinberg established early on that "pink Kree" was Teddy's default state? I know, I know, that's expecting Marvel editorial to actually do their job; how dare I? I guess one could somewhat rationalize it by claiming that he wants to make their son feel more comfortable by having another green guy around. (Do I get a No-Prize?) But then again, why does that kid look exactly like a Skrull (wrinkled chin and all) but with a blond mop of hair? The hair could be simply because he felt like it (in which case I'd guess adoption), but at face value it looks like Teddy had to mate with a Skrull pure-blood instead of getting creative with Billy.

Now that I think about it...yeah that place looks a lot like the appartment of future Billy and Teddy.

And about the Hulkling form? Well this is the marvel universe, where barely no writers cares too much about continuity or the work of others writers except few cases.

And seeing how things went with creating babies via magic, probably future Teddy and Billy adopted the baby skrull.

[twincast]

And seeing how things went with creating babies via magic, probably future Teddy and Billy adopted the baby skrull.

No magic required, only shapeshifter anatomy.

[NexusTenebrare]

That Generation X line up is horrible.
Once again they focus on the 'loser' class. So boring. That has been done to death at this point.
Benjamin Deeds. Eh. I've never been that huge a fan of his. I'd much rather have seen Anole or Graymalkin in a teen book.
But worst of all. Quentin. Freakin'. Quire. Why does Marvel keep putting that obnoxious irritant in teen books? Do that many people actually like him? Because I can't stand him at all. His presence in this book is enough to ensure I won't be getting it.

That's some BS right there. Just looking at the trouble the book had, homophobic reactions, the removal of its female artists and its original, bi female writer, and that there really wasn't any T&A luring to speak of, I don't think you can pin it like that.

It had a very in-comics famous writer and in-comics famous artist riding a wave of goodwill and good press.

(And, just like any other bi or female character at DC, how many guys wrote it off as "T&A spankbank material" without actually cracking an issue? I've seen enough of those posts in LGBT threads on the net, from Batwoman to Catwoman.)

There are those kind of books, yes. I don't think you can chalk up Batwoman as one of them. (Now, was DC more likely to publish a superhero book with a lesbian lead? Since it's the only one, but we'd already had Midnighter, I'm going to say, actually, no, even there. And, I wanted to say Yes to that, until I stopped and tried to count up their Lesbian solo superhero comics.)

I think you might be misinterpreting my post. I can't be sure, because I don't really know what point you're making.
You seem to be implying that I think Batwoman had no homophobic backlash, that I think the only reason for it's success was because it had a lesbian lead, that I think the book was just "T&A spankbank material",...
I can assure you none of those things are true.

First off, of course Batwoman had homophobic backlash. I'm sure most LGBT lead books at the big two will have homophobic backlash. I never said it didn't.
I also never said that Kate being lesbian was the books only draw. It had a great creative team that probably drew in a lot of people. Midnighter also had a great creative team though. And that failed to mimic the success in sales that Batwoman did.

My point isn't about Batwoman's success. It's about the diference between its success and that of Midnighter. And the reason being straight people (men especially) generally are more accepting of female LGBT characters than male ones. Sure, there will be those that were turned off by Batwoman's lesbian lead, but a lot of straight men might have found it to be an additional reason to follow the book. The book not actually having been "T&A spankbank material" doesn't change the fact that for a lot of straight men two women together is still something of a fantasy, while men who are into other men might be something they'd rather avoid. And it's not even a question of it being some kind of lesbian fetish thing. They might just be more accepting of one and less of the other.

[dragonmp93]

That Generation X line up is horrible.
Once again they focus on the 'loser' class. So boring. That has been done to death at this point.
Benjamin Deeds. Eh. I've never been that huge a fan of his. I'd much rather have seen Anole or Graymalkin in a teen book.
But worst of all. Quentin. Freakin'. Quire. Why does Marvel keep putting that obnoxious irritant in teen books? Do that many people actually like him? Because I can't stand him at all. His presence in this book is enough to ensure I won't be getting it.



I think you might be misinterpreting my post. I can't be sure, because I don't really know what point you're making.
You seem to be implying that I think Batwoman had no homophobic backlash, that I think the only reason for it's success was because it had a lesbian lead, that I think the book was just "T&A spankbank material",...
I can assure you none of those things are true.

First off, of course Batwoman had homophobic backlash. I'm sure most LGBT lead books at the big two will have homophobic backlash. I never said it didn't.
I also never said that Kate being lesbian was the books only draw. It had a great creative team that probably drew in a lot of people. Midnighter also had a great creative team though. And that failed to mimic the success in sales that Batwoman did.

My point isn't about Batwoman's success. It's about the diference between its success and that of Midnighter. And the reason being straight people (men especially) generally are more accepting of female LGBT characters than male ones. Sure, there will be those that were turned off by Batwoman's lesbian lead, but a lot of straight men might have found it to be an additional reason to follow the book. The book not actually having been "T&A spankbank material" doesn't change the fact that for a lot of straight men two women together is still something of a fantasy, while men who are into other men might be something they'd rather avoid. And it's not even a question of it being some kind of lesbian fetish thing. They might just be more accepting of one and less of the other.

Well, and then there is that the editorial was against marrying them during the New52 and DC YOU, and that caused to the creative team to quit.
Also that's how we learned about the Grim-dark policy that DC had at the time.

[Johnrevenge]

Well, and then there is that the editorial was against marrying them during the New52 and DC YOU, and that caused to the creative team to quit.
Also that's how we learned about the Grim-dark policy that DC had at the time.

Well, during New52, DC was practically against all marriages in general (they practically destroyed all existing marriages pre new52, except Animal Man's, although that marriage ended nearly in divorce) as they used the stupid reason of "super-heroes live in a dark world, so they can't afford happiness in their personal lives". Luckily it seems that politic is gone with Rebirth, as Aquaman and Mera are going to marry again, and there can be more weddings in the future.

[NexusTenebrare]

Well, and then there is that the editorial was against marrying them during the New52 and DC YOU, and that caused to the creative team to quit.
Also that's how we learned about the Grim-dark policy that DC had at the time.

The Grim-dark policy has been in place at DC since a long time before the New52. People who blame it all on the New52 reboot have clearly not read a DC book in the last 30 years.
The reason they annulled the marriages was because the heroes were supposed to be younger to appeal to a younger audiance.

[dragonmp93]

The Grim-dark policy has been in place at DC since a long time before the New52. People who blame it all on the New52 reboot have clearly not read a DC book in the last 30 years.
The reason they annulled the marriages was because the heroes were supposed to be younger to appeal to a younger audiance.

So are they part of Joe Quesada's school of thinking ?.

And no, one thing is that the Batman franchise being dark like the Killing Joke, and other very different is that the entire universe, with a couple of "exceptions" like Harley Quinn, being grim-dark like the Blue Lantern, i.e. the hope-powered ones, being totally exterminated and Future's end, a dystopian future that time travel couldnt stop, being the canonical future of the DC Universe.

And people who dont blame the New52 have clearly not read a DC book that is more than 5 years old.

[Johnrevenge]

And people who dont blame the New52 have clearly not read a DC book that is more than 5 years old.

Exactly. Before New52, DC offices promoted relationships and marriages (one of the most popular was the marriage of Hourman and Jesse Quick). Now with Rebirth, they are promoting relationships again (like the marriage of Aquaman and Mera, or that Extraño is now married, or the relationship of Apollo and Midnighter).

[NexusTenebrare]

That's funny, because what I remember from before the New52 is stuff like teen heroes being abducted and forced to fight to the death while none of the adult heroes could be bothered to look for them.
Or the newly returned emo fascist Superman being totally fine with America bombing an entire planet out of the sky and then putting the survivors in a extra-dimensional gulag.
You know, light-hearted stuff like that.
But sure, focus on your marriages.

[Johnrevenge]

That's funny, because what I remember from before the New52 is stuff like teen heroes being abducted and forced to fight to the death while none of the adult heroes could be bothered to look for them.
Or the newly returned emo fascist Superman being totally fine with America bombing an entire planet out of the sky and then putting the survivors in a extra-dimensional gulag.
You know, light-hearted stuff like that.
But sure, focus on your marriages.

Dude, when we started to talk about the Batwoman series, we started to mention the policy that DC started to use regarding the relationship since new52, you are the one who is mentioning the grim-dark policy, which has been something that have existed in comic books in general since the 90s. And they used the cheap excuse of "dark gritty world and heroes can't have happy life" in an attempt to justify what they did with the Batwoman's marriage when they canceled it.

[t hedge coke]

DC... so grim dark they publish two Scooby-Doo titles and just had a year of Starfire making lighthearted masturbation jokes and rescuing pet birds from hurricanes.

My point isn't about Batwoman's success. It's about the diference between its success and that of Midnighter. And the reason being straight people (men especially) generally are more accepting of female LGBT characters than male ones. Sure, there will be those that were turned off by Batwoman's lesbian lead, but a lot of straight men might have found it to be an additional reason to follow the book. The book not actually having been "T&A spankbank material" doesn't change the fact that for a lot of straight men two women together is still something of a fantasy, while men who are into other men might be something they'd rather avoid. And it's not even a question of it being some kind of lesbian fetish thing. They might just be more accepting of one and less of the other.

Midnighter, a gay man, got an ongoing before any lesbian superhero got an ongoing at DC.

If it was about which was more acceptable to straight men, if that really was a major deciding factor, even so, we have to acknowledge that DC published gay male superhero ongoing titles before lesbian superhero ongoing titles.

DC also had gay male superheroes before it had even close to explicitly lesbian superheroes. Extrano may have been annoying af, but he was there. It was a thing.

Marvel, same thing. We had explicit and coded gay men first. And, first in solo titles.

[dragonmp93]

DC... so grim dark they publish two Scooby-Doo titles and just had a year of Starfire making lighthearted masturbation jokes and rescuing pet birds from hurricanes.



Midnighter, a gay man, got an ongoing before any lesbian superhero got an ongoing at DC.

If it was about which was more acceptable to straight men, if that really was a major deciding factor, even so, we have to acknowledge that DC published gay male superhero ongoing titles before lesbian superhero ongoing titles.

DC also had gay male superheroes before it had even close to explicitly lesbian superheroes. Extrano may have been annoying af, but he was there. It was a thing.

Marvel, same thing. We had explicit and coded gay men first. And, first in solo titles.

That's like saying that Star Wars counts as part of the Marvel Universe; and i did said that there was couple of exceptions.

[legion_quest]

DC... so grim dark they publish two Scooby-Doo titles and just had a year of Starfire making lighthearted masturbation jokes and rescuing pet birds from hurricanes.



Midnighter, a gay man, got an ongoing before any lesbian superhero got an ongoing at DC.

If it was about which was more acceptable to straight men, if that really was a major deciding factor, even so, we have to acknowledge that DC published gay male superhero ongoing titles before lesbian superhero ongoing titles.

DC also had gay male superheroes before it had even close to explicitly lesbian superheroes. Extrano may have been annoying af, but he was there. It was a thing.

Marvel, same thing. We had explicit and coded gay men first. And, first in solo titles.

TBF, Midnighter was at Wildstorm, an imprint. No DC on the cover or anything to indicate it was a DC book. Granted, your point does stand, but I think it should be clearly defined that DC's first mainstream LGBT title was a female title.

Similarly, people will happily point to Claremont doing stuff with coded female characters before we saw the coded gay male characters.

It isn't right to put the two in competition and suggest that one is more deserving or whatever than the other, but it is something generally seen in other mediums like TV and film, that hot, promiscuous lesbianism has been used as the 'acceptable' gate way, because it's non-threatening to male readers (whether it is also masturbatory is debatable), so it is easy to see where it comes from in comics and equally, it isnt right to say that it hasnt happened in comics, as there clearly have been times when female characters have been revealed to be bi seemingly for just the one arc just so an artist can draw some hot slashy pictures. You havent tended to get that with gay male characters.

It isn't an 'every situation is this' scenario, but neither is it a 'you like to say that, but it isnt true' scenario either. Different instances, different issues each time.

[spirit2011]

TBF, Midnighter was at Wildstorm, an imprint. No DC on the cover or anything to indicate it was a DC book. Granted, your point does stand, but I think it should be clearly defined that DC's first mainstream LGBT title was a female title.

Similarly, people will happily point to Claremont doing stuff with coded female characters before we saw the coded gay male characters.

It isn't right to put the two in competition and suggest that one is more deserving or whatever than the other, but it is something generally seen in other mediums like TV and film, that hot, promiscuous lesbianism has been used as the 'acceptable' gate way, because it's non-threatening to male readers (whether it is also masturbatory is debatable), so it is easy to see where it comes from in comics and equally, it isnt right to say that it hasnt happened in comics, as there clearly have been times when female characters have been revealed to be bi seemingly for just the one arc just so an artist can draw some hot slashy pictures. You havent tended to get that with gay male characters.

It isn't an 'every situation is this' scenario, but neither is it a 'you like to say that, but it isnt true' scenario either. Different instances, different issues each time.

On westworld you see many women kissing eachother, bu I don't remember dudes kissing at all.

F/F couple can be easilysubverted to male gaze. It is worrying that Catwoman, harley, Ivy get all be bi, while being bad girl and being heavily sexualized. that tells a lot about what audience they want to reach. meanwhile the good girls are all straight (o course batwoman, but she was created to be lesbian)

[dragonmp93]

TBF, Midnighter was at Wildstorm, an imprint. No DC on the cover or anything to indicate it was a DC book. Granted, your point does stand, but I think it should be clearly defined that DC's first mainstream LGBT title was a female title.

Similarly, people will happily point to Claremont doing stuff with coded female characters before we saw the coded gay male characters.

It isn't right to put the two in competition and suggest that one is more deserving or whatever than the other, but it is something generally seen in other mediums like TV and film, that hot, promiscuous lesbianism has been used as the 'acceptable' gate way, because it's non-threatening to male readers (whether it is also masturbatory is debatable), so it is easy to see where it comes from in comics and equally, it isnt right to say that it hasnt happened in comics, as there clearly have been times when female characters have been revealed to be bi seemingly for just the one arc just so an artist can draw some hot slashy pictures. You havent tended to get that with gay male characters.

It isn't an 'every situation is this' scenario, but neither is it a 'you like to say that, but it isnt true' scenario either. Different instances, different issues each time.

Well, gay males gets used like that as well if the fanbase is mostly female.

On westworld you see many women kissing eachother, bu I don't remember dudes kissing at all.

F/F couple can be easilysubverted to male gaze. It is worrying that Catwoman, harley, Ivy get all be bi, while being bad girl and being heavily sexualized. that tells a lot about what audience they want to reach. meanwhile the good girls are all straight (o course batwoman, but she was created to be lesbian)

Except Wonder Woman.