LGBT+ Marvel Characters Discussion

[nandes]

Can Mr Sinister finally be outed as the bisexual legend he truly is?

Following Gillen's version of him, I think the only person Mr. Sinister is attracted to is himself

[Beetle]

No, it's exactly why it's right. Not every LGBT character has to be an unproblematic cinnamon roll.

No, but it's kind of annoying when the majority of bisexual characters are unrepentant villains and murderers.

[Drops Of Venus]

Also from SDCC, a preview of the cover for Shatterstar #2.

I was totally confused about what was going on on that cover, but knowing now it's just a preview, it makes a lot more sense that it looks like that. Looking stunning so far.

[Kieran_Frost]

[ref. I mean, a lot of people are still not on the same page on whether using the word ''queer'' is acceptable or not, so...] It's not. But you keep at it.

Queer is an umbrella term that can encompass the entire spectrum better than most other terms. If you shorten it down to just LGBT then you're excluding a heck of a lot of people, LGBTQIA+ is a mouthful of an alphabet soup, and QUILTBAG hasn't really caught on.

No, it really doesn't. The Q word actively excludes from the community all those who don't like or want to be identified or "umbrella'd" under a homophobic slur. Using LGBT+ is more encompassing. The + covers everyone else. And if that seems unacceptable, I ask you this: why is it okay to bemoan anyone being excluded who don't fall under LGBT, but it's entirely acceptable to exclude those who don't want a slur as their community calling card? Why are you so willing to tolerate excluding others?

But more than that Queer was its own identity before a lot of newer terms or definitions were widely used. People still hang onto Queer as an identity even if they might fit into another label like pan or demisexual or nonbinary or genderfluid because they have history associated with it (like how some people prefer bisexual over pan).
A lot of the "Queer is a slur" stuff is coming from terfs and cis gays and lesbians who want to exclude trans, nonbinary, intersex, bi/pan and ace people from safe spaces and conversations about feminism and non-heterosexual experiences. I'm sure that's not what anyone in this thread is trying to do, but it's worth thinking about. Who really benefits from this kind of gatekeeping? If you tell people who aren't cisgender conforming that the identity they've been using for years has now been reclassified as a slur, who are you really helping?

I'm... hmmmm... I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt, and assume you phrased this very poorly. Because the message you're sending (unintentionally, I assume) with this is REALLY not okay. It's actually pretty uncomfortable that you did that (or worse, think that). It's a rather insidious way of trying to silence justifable objections, by labelling anyone who doesn't like the Q word as, on some level, a bigot or prejudice. While some (i.e. a minority of people who don't like the Q word) dislike it for the reasons you stated, the vast, vast, VAST majority who object to its use do so because they have experienced it as hate speech, a slur and been attacked with it repeatedly in their life. The more I think about it, the more I feel it's kind of appauling that you so casually tried to imply the majority of objecters should be lumped in with the like of Terfs. It has NOTHING to do with non-binary, gender fluid, homoflexible anything. It has to do with the Q word is used by bigots against us (esp. against men, esp. in the UK).

There are people who are asexual that have queerplatonic relationships or homoromantic relationships, but aren't comfortable calling themselves gay or bi or pan because they don't have sex.

This makes no sense, if people like your example exist, it should be explained to them, in no uncertain terms, sexuality goes far beyond sex. And to devalue it as nothing greater than "where you stick it" is to share the same traits and depthless understanding as the bigots who say "it's aimed at kids, why are you trying to make it about sex?" when you suggestion MENTIONED gay people exist. Sexuality and sex are not the same thing. If you are attracted to the same sex, you fall under the LGBT+ banner.

Does a demisexual woman not belong in the community unless she's specifically attracted to a woman?

If a demisexual woman is only attracted to men, then no, I would assume she doesn't fall into the LGBT+ community. She's str8. At best she's an ally (and I don't count allies as part of the community).

[Drops Of Venus]

ICEMAN #2 (OF 5)
SINA GRACE (W) • NATHAN STOCKMAN (A)
Cover by W. SCOTT FORBES
• Guest-starring Emma Frost, the White Queen!
• When it comes to Bobby Drake and Emma, the White Queen has always held the upper hand.
• So what trouble is Emma in that has her pleading for his help?

If I wasn't here for this before, I totally am now. This cover is just beautiful. I love this... hm, what's the equivalent of ''bromance'' for a gay guy and a straight girl? Not sure, but I'm loving it. And it's really unexpected that Bobby seems to be the one on top of the situation here, as I totally expected the opposite to be the case. But I like it. Very interested in the direction Sina will take their relationship.

Also, X-Men Black: Mystique's solicitation mentions ''seductive thrills'', so I'm assuming her sexuality will be addressed. Just not sure if it is the part of her sexuality that's relevant to this thread. Is anyone familiar with Seanan McGuire's work? Should I have any hope we're not getting heteronormative Mystique for the millionth time?

[Wiccan]

If I wasn't here for this before, I totally am now. This cover is just beautiful. I love this... hm, what's the equivalent of ''bromance'' for a gay guy and a straight girl? Not sure, but I'm loving it. And it's really unexpected that Bobby seems to be the one on top of the situation here, as I totally expected the opposite to be the case. But I like it. Very interested in the direction Sina will take their relationship.

Also, X-Men Black: Mystique's solicitation mentions ''seductive thrills'', so I'm assuming her sexuality will be addressed. Just not sure if it is the part of her sexuality that's relevant to this thread. Is anyone familiar with Seanan McGuire's work? Should I have any hope we're not getting heteronormative Mystique for the millionth time?

From a quick googling:
https://twitter.com/seananmcguire/st...178944?lang=en
https://seanan-mcguire.livejournal.com/516392.html

So, she's bi herself, belives representation is important, and I've seen some articles about her books usually feature LGBT characters. I guess we're allowed to be hopeful.

Also, CBR's server is a mess today or is it just me?

[Fokken]

DROPS OF VENUS!!! ME TOO ME TOO ME TOOOOO!

Also?? Following Sina's gram, and he made a rather curious comment about "Emma Frost. You have no clue where I'm taking this. Unless you're my editor or artist Nate Stockman or my friend Mikael"

THIS has me perplexed. I'm basically lost in a sea of emotion on a leaky boat of confusion.
What do I WANT?? I WANT Emma to have known all along. What will we GET? Who the FUX knows??? gah.

[Anduinel]

I was totally confused about what was going on on that cover, but knowing now it's just a preview, it makes a lot more sense that it looks like that. Looking stunning so far.

I'm not sure it's a WIP; JDW said something his having printed it out for his wall, so I think that's the finished cover. And I'm with you on being slightly confused at to what's going on there. Playing with expectations in that the sheathed sword is actually stabbing him? Not the clearest depiction of a bloody sword being sheathed? Several layers of metaphor? IDK. But at least it's pretty.

If I wasn't here for this before, I totally am now. This cover is just beautiful. I love this... hm, what's the equivalent of ''bromance'' for a gay guy and a straight girl? Not sure, but I'm loving it. And it's really unexpected that Bobby seems to be the one on top of the situation here, as I totally expected the opposite to be the case. But I like it. Very interested in the direction Sina will take their relationship.

Like I said over in the X-Men forum, I'm hoping this means we get an update on Christian Frost. He's one of the only people left in Emma's life I can see getting that strong a reaction out of her.

[Triniking1234]

If I wasn't here for this before, I totally am now. This cover is just beautiful. I love this... hm, what's the equivalent of ''bromance'' for a gay guy and a straight girl? Not sure, but I'm loving it. And it's really unexpected that Bobby seems to be the one on top of the situation here, as I totally expected the opposite to be the case. But I like it. Very interested in the direction Sina will take their relationship.

Friends.

10 char

[Beetle]

No, it really doesn't. The Q word actively excludes from the community all those who don't like or want to be identified or "umbrella'd" under a homophobic slur. Using LGBT+ is more encompassing. The + covers everyone else. And if that seems unacceptable, I ask you this: why is it okay to bemoan anyone being excluded who don't fall under LGBT, but it's entirely acceptable to exclude those who don't want a slur as their community calling card? Why are you so willing to tolerate excluding others?

I am not excluding anyone. If you don't want to use the label Queer, you don't have to. But it is self-centered to begrudge and shout down anyone else who does use it, or has used it for longer than the majority of posters in this thread have been alive. People have different experiences than you, they have different values and associations with the word Queer. And taking away their choice to use the identity they prefer because it's not something you wish to be called is selfish.

Not everyone fits into a specific category like L or G or B or T, a neat little definable box that's easily understood and digestible for the heterosexual masses. That's why a lot of people who don't like to use labels will use Queer. Why should they be relegated to a + sign?

I'm... hmmmm... I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt, and assume you phrased this very poorly. Because the message you're sending (unintentionally, I assume) with this is REALLY not okay. It's actually pretty uncomfortable that you did that (or worse, think that). It's a rather insidious way of trying to silence justifable objections, by labelling anyone who doesn't like the Q word as, on some level, a bigot or prejudice. While some (i.e. a minority of people who don't like the Q word) dislike it for the reasons you stated, the vast, vast, VAST majority who object to its use do so because they have experienced it as hate speech, a slur and been attacked with it repeatedly in their life. The more I think about it, the more I feel it's kind of appauling that you so casually tried to imply the majority of objecters should be lumped in with the like of Terfs. It has NOTHING to do with non-binary, gender fluid, homoflexible anything. It has to do with the Q word is used by bigots against us (esp. against men, esp. in the UK).

I probably could have written it better but I stand by the sentiment, Queer may be used as hate speech. But so is Gay, so is Dyke, so are a lot of terms that we as a community have reclaimed. We've taken the words that they've used as weapons against us and turned it around and worn them as badges of honor. So unless you have a problem with with the etymology of every single word that's been repurposed for our own use, then I just don't see how Queer is specifically worse. People have faced violence hearing all of these words.
And again, you don't have to use it if you don't want to. Labels and identities should be a personal choice.

I specifically said that I didn't think anyone in this thread was a terf, I did not accuse anyone of bigotry. I merely stated that this argument creates a division within the community with people who have used Queer as an identity or an umbrella term, and that that division aligns with the terf agenda.

And let's face it, this kind of in-fighting and snake-eating its own tail nonsense is what the LGBT+ is best at, putting up barriers and excluding different marginalized and vulnerable groups. And that's exactly why I am defending the inclusion of Asexuals in the community.

I mean just for instance, do you know how many Gays and lesbians have distrust for bi and pan people? Even beyond the standard biphobia of "what if they cheat on me or what if they change their minds". In general conversations about LGBT issues, bi/pan voices will get ignored unless they are currently in a relationship with someone of the same-sex, and even then specific issues that bisexual and pansexual people face are glossed over.
Do you know how many arguments I've gotten into in this very thread over whether a bi/pan character should "count"? Hercules, Deadpool, Loki. You claim that sex isn't a requirement for a person's sexuality, and yet people claim characters don't belong in the conversation because they haven't slept with enough men. Same for women like Mystique and Psylocke.
It goes the other way as well, even though they are bi/pan or haven't explicitly chosen a label, Moondragon or Bling! or Lightspeed will often get labeled lesbians, Shatterstar and Rictor will get labeled gay. And it's not like they can have a relationship with someone of the opposite sex. Fans would be furious, they would claim erasure and straightwashing.
Art imitates life because I've heard the same thing from living gay people that unless you've sucked a dick recently you shouldn't have a voice in a conversation. This is why bisexual people sometimes feel like frauds and like they don't belong in the community or at Pride.

This makes no sense, if people like your example exist, it should be explained to them, in no uncertain terms, sexuality goes far beyond sex. And to devalue it as nothing greater than "where you stick it" is to share the same traits and depthless understanding as the bigots who say "it's aimed at kids, why are you trying to make it about sex?" when you suggestion MENTIONED gay people exist. Sexuality and sex are not the same thing. If you are attracted to the same sex, you fall under the LGBT+ banner.

First of all attraction doesn't necessarily apply to someone who is asexual. But that doesn't mean they don't want/can't end up in a same-sex relationship.
People from my example, queerplatonic relationships, do exist. And denying their existence, their experiences, and their right to label themselves however they feel comfortable is wrong and unfair. Just because a relationship looks a certain way from the outside, from your perspective, that doesn't mean that they have to define it in a way that is palatable to you.

In your definition at the end there, what does being attracted to the same sex have to do with being Trans? There are trans men who are only attracted to women. There are trans women who are only attracted to men.
So already same-sex attraction shouldn't be a requirement to be part of the LGBT+ unless you're just adding the T out of habit.

And it's like Drops of Venus said a while back, it's not like there's an army of hetero asexuals demanding to be part of the LGBT+ community, threatening to take us over. So why not include the ones who would want to be included?

I'm not an expert or an authority on these issues, but I've tried to educate myself
http://aromantic.wikia.com/wiki/Queerplatonic
http://wiki.asexuality.org/Demisexual

If a demisexual woman is only attracted to men, then no, I would assume she doesn't fall into the LGBT+ community. She's str8. At best she's an ally (and I don't count allies as part of the community).

But the point of identifying as demisexual is to say you aren't attracted to anyone without an emotional connection. I was trying to say that this hypothetical woman wouldn't be currently attracted to another woman, but she could have the potential to feel that way in the future, or that she has in the past. But even if she never does again, that potential is still there. So why wouldn't she be part of the LGBT+ community?

And I'm glad we agree on one thing at least about Allies.

[Beetle]

I was totally confused about what was going on on that cover, but knowing now it's just a preview, it makes a lot more sense that it looks like that. Looking stunning so far.

I'm not sure it's a WIP; JDW said something his having printed it out for his wall, so I think that's the finished cover. And I'm with you on being slightly confused at to what's going on there. Playing with expectations in that the sheathed sword is actually stabbing him? Not the clearest depiction of a bloody sword being sheathed? Several layers of metaphor? IDK. But at least it's pretty.

It looks completed to me. Kinda minimalist, playing with negative space and the white of his jacket to really accentuate everything else about him, especially his bloody swords.

[maxhilary]

If I wasn't here for this before, I totally am now. This cover is just beautiful. I love this... hm, what's the equivalent of ''bromance'' for a gay guy and a straight girl? Not sure, but I'm loving it. And it's really unexpected that Bobby seems to be the one on top of the situation here, as I totally expected the opposite to be the case. But I like it. Very interested in the direction Sina will take their relationship.

Yes absolutely!! The cover has gotten mixed reviews but I love it, and my excitement has ramped up even more! Really looking forward to the interaction between the two. Especially if it includes Emma knowing about Bobby all along.

[Drops Of Venus]

From a quick googling:
https://twitter.com/seananmcguire/st...178944?lang=en
https://seanan-mcguire.livejournal.com/516392.html

So, she's bi herself, belives representation is important, and I've seen some articles about her books usually feature LGBT characters. I guess we're allowed to be hopeful.

Also, CBR's server is a mess today or is it just me?

Well, that's nice to know. And yeah, I was getting a ''Database error'' over and over before while trying to browse, but it seems to be fixed now.

DROPS OF VENUS!!! ME TOO ME TOO ME TOOOOO!

Also?? Following Sina's gram, and he made a rather curious comment about "Emma Frost. You have no clue where I'm taking this. Unless you're my editor or artist Nate Stockman or my friend Mikael"

THIS has me perplexed. I'm basically lost in a sea of emotion on a leaky boat of confusion.
What do I WANT?? I WANT Emma to have known all along. What will we GET? Who the FUX knows??? gah.

SAME! Emma knowing about his repressed sexuality ever since the body-swapping thing has been one of my biggest headcanons. If she doesn't make a joke about how she was inside him before any man ever was, I will be disappointed.

Like I said over in the X-Men forum, I'm hoping this means we get an update on Christian Frost. He's one of the only people left in Emma's life I can see getting that strong a reaction out of her.

Same. Even if I'm not getting my Christian/Bobby shipping wish, I still think we deserve a follow-up on Christian's story, just to at least know he's okay and not still institutionalized by his homophobic father.

Friends.

10 char

Well, duh. I was just wondering if there was any specific term, like ''fag hag''.

[Tiamatty]

If I wasn't here for this before, I totally am now. This cover is just beautiful. I love this... hm, what's the equivalent of ''bromance'' for a gay guy and a straight girl? Not sure, but I'm loving it. And it's really unexpected that Bobby seems to be the one on top of the situation here, as I totally expected the opposite to be the case. But I like it. Very interested in the direction Sina will take their relationship.

Also, X-Men Black: Mystique's solicitation mentions ''seductive thrills'', so I'm assuming her sexuality will be addressed. Just not sure if it is the part of her sexuality that's relevant to this thread. Is anyone familiar with Seanan McGuire's work? Should I have any hope we're not getting heteronormative Mystique for the millionth time?

I like to think of "bromance" as a gender-neutral term. There's no equivalent for two women who are close friends, either. So I think it can still be called a bromance. But I'm odd.

And it would certainly be nice to see Mystique flirt with a woman, for once.

[VolcanikTiger86]

Oooooooooooooooo speaking of the obviously-sapphic Illyana, she's getting a What If? one-shot by writer Leah Williams.

I hope this shows up in a trade, kinda looks cool with the cover, I’ll maybe even splash out and get her.

Leah is also a stone-cold believer in the truth:

Contrary to popular opinion I’m not here to start a fight but I disagree with someone saying the truth when it comes to fictional characters. Leah Williams can believe to her hearts content that Illyana is a lesbian and there is nothing wrong with that, I’m in agreement to a point I don’t think she is straight as I have said before to me Illyana is bi actually more like pansexual I don’t think that gender is something she would consider and that’s my headcannon, which everyone has Cannon itself is just Marvel’s headcannon which is bits and pieces from the headcannon of their employees that at times fit together.