Andrew Garfield Hopes To Eventually See "A Pansexual Spider-Man"

[PeterParkerSpider-Man]

I support LGBT characters. I support pansexual characters. What I can't support is changing pre-existing characters who were established long ago. Peter Parker isn't pansexual, and hasn't been that way in more than 53 years of publication. Not in movies, not in cartoons, not in video games, not in comics.

Why is the topic of diversity always focused on sexuality, race, or gender? Comics today are more accepting and inclusive than ever before, and that's a great thing. As someone else mentioned, why aren't there more diverse body types? How about more characters who deal with mental illness? Characters with Autism? These are just a handful of topics that could use more inclusion. Why is "diversity" always limited to either sexuality, race, or gender?

People need to stop saying "I want a Peter Parker who is (this race/this sexuality/this kind of person" or "I want a James Bond who is (this race/this sexuality/this kind of person)," and instead accept the characters for who they are. It's impossible to change characters to reflect everyone who is a fan of that character. Peter Parker is as he is. James Bond is as he is. They've been popular for decades the way that they are. Why see them changed? Why? Why not, instead, support the kind of characters you want to see? Or make those characters? Or at least make your voice be known that you want those characters?

I'm against changing established characters. That's it. Bring on the diversity, bring on characters who more reflect our world and the people who read these comics. Bring on characters who face the same issues we face. But you don't need to change characters in order to do that.

[Sardorim]

Eh, I would be fine with it if the writing is good.

[Carabas]

I support LGBT characters. I support pansexual characters. What I can't support is changing pre-existing characters who were established long ago. Peter Parker isn't pansexual, and hasn't been that way in more than 53 years of publication. Not in movies, not in cartoons, not in video games, not in comics.

This becomes a problem when you factor in that in comics, new characters are not really financially viable.
If only new characters get to be LGBT, you won't ever have LGBT character that are actually important in the universe. You'll just have some minor Avengers teens or third stringer X-people who are perpetually in danger of being wiped out in an event or just to show how badass this or that villain is.

[7thangel]

No, most people who've commented on the subject are asking for more African American and LGBT superheroes. There's very little outcry for more Hispanic superheroes.

that's not even close to being true. people are calling for more diversity, period. trying some divide and conquer ish is bs

[Colossus1980]

LOL so you assume that there are many more LGBT people than we think because they're closeted, but you can't prove it? How freaking convenient. "Oh, I know I'm right despite the numbers but I don't have to prove it..."
You should run for office.

Some days I get the feeling the LGBT is more like 50%. More LGBT in America than Hispanics that's for sure.

[RikWriter]

Some days I get the feeling the LGBT is more like 50%. More LGBT in America than Hispanics that's for sure.

If you listened to the news or watch any entertainment media you'd think so.

[neonrideraryeh]

Eh, when most people talk about wanting more people of color in comics and comic book movies here, (and really, a lot of places) they mostly seem to be talking about black character. Like "people of color" is the new "African American". It's funny how super PC people seem to say "people of color" now, seems why too close to "coloreds" and "colored people" to me...but maybe super PC people lack the awareness and irony to see that in trying to be really politically correct they've inadvertently come around to racist. Needless to say, it's, a very very funny thing.

Words seem to fall in and out of this. A word can be not offensive, then offensive, then not offensive again and loop on forever. It really is all very funny. A lot of people struggle to keep track, especially elderly people. And then there are still disagreements within sub-groups of sub-groups about if a word is okay or not.
The meaning of a word is all about what the majority deem them to be. If everybody in the world decided to swap "melon" and "chair" then the words swap cos a word is a subjective statement that people decided to explain something. Yes, they evolve based on the etymology in order to put some kind of logic and reasoning behind definitions, but the people make the decision and neologisms are born all the time. It's like the way currency is a decision of something being given a non-corporeal meaning. The real thing is context and intonation it seems. Can you blame somebody getting the word wrong when their tone isn't offensive?
There are probably linguists who focus on this kind of stuff specifically.

[Mike82]

"Pansexual." There is no such thing as pansexual.

[Master Man]

"Pansexual." There is no such thing as pansexual.

Pansexual - A person who is sexually attracted to pans (cooking pans, not little boys that refuse to grow up).

[ChrisIII]

This almost sounds like it could be a comic book title given the franchise's use of adjectives. "The Pansexual Spider-Man".

[Starter Set]

Pansexual - A person who is sexually attracted to pans

Poor birds.

[Zeitgeist]

This becomes a problem when you factor in that in comics, new characters are not really financially viable.
If only new characters get to be LGBT, you won't ever have LGBT character that are actually important in the universe.

I really don't think this holds true.

[Greg]

Pansexual is someone attracted to all types of people. Similar to bisexuality but Pan focuses more beyond specific genders.

Also, most of these comic book stories happen in cities like NYC where diversity is rampant and everywhere. NYC is pretty much a boiling spot of all types of cultures and races yet stories don't reflect it one bit. That is why people make a big deal asking for more proper representation. And people are asking for more diversity in general, not just African-Americans. I don't even see where that even came about.

Also, it's stupid to really come up with a statistic for LGBT people as it's never really accurate. There are people who have yet to realize their sexuality, people who refuse to accept or acknowledge it (even if it's anonymous), and there's also people who are more so on a spectrum and can be classified as bisexual but will say they're something else due to where their attractions lean. I know quite a few men who have attractions to men and may have some experience with it, but will say they're straight due to a stronger attraction to women or having more experience with them. Also, do we know where these studies are being held?

[Carabas]

I really don't think this holds true.

Feel free to offer a counterargument. And don't just say "Deadpool."

[Calighoula]

My wife's family is Hispanic and so is a good portion of the population of my state, yet they get short shrift when it comes to superhero and action roles.

I agree. A Latino is almost always cast as either a criminal/cop, unless it's a biopic like Selena or Frida, or the odd bit role in a comedy.