Is "V" Gay?

It has been hinted that Valerie is V. Valerie was a lesbian. The hint I'm referring to was a quote by Moore saying that it was hard to make a comic about a "transexual terrorist".
 
^Not a bad guess, I guess. If Valerie was V(even though I doubt it) that would explain her liking Evey, too.
 
Everybody makes convincing arguments, but it just doesn't make sense that everybody would know V as "the man in room 5", even the people who were there, if V were really the woman in room 4. They all agree that it was V who blew up the camp and it was him they saw walking away. There's never any mention to V ever being a woman, even by Dr. Surridge, in fact she says explicitly that V went through no physical changes after the drugs were administered.

The thing about the roses isn't very well explained, there's a bit where we know that V grows the same kind of Roses as Valerie and we can assume he grows them because of her, but what they don't tell you is that he grew them at the camp, and that's why Dr. Surridge realizes that V is coming to kill her. He's the last person to have cultivated them before his escape from Larkhill.
 
StorminNorman said:
I have not yet read the Graphic Novel (planning on doing it really really soon after seeing that fantastic movie), but the impression I got was that there was some attraction to Evey romantically. Now could it of been my heterosexual brain skewing my opinion, possibly - but thats what I saw.

yes they made it into a hollywood romance. quelle surprise.

i never considered he might be gay...interesting.
 
v was gay.
v was a lesbian.
v was straight.
v was muslim.
v was christian.
v was a man.
v was a women.
v was a political activist.
v was a terrorist.
v was a torturer.
v was a liberator.
v was a captor.
v was everyone who had been taken out behind the chemical sheds and shot.
v was the destroyer.

at least in the original moore there are no easy answers. the movie is a bit more simplified but v was always meant to be a grey character. he wears a mask. if we knew exactly who he was the story would lose some of its impact.
 
Flamboyant? Yes. Gay? No. And if it was Valerie, who builds a shrine to themself, especially someone as selfless as V. Don't see it...
 
Just because you can feel empathy for those people of the world who are oppressed doesn't mean you are one of the oppressed. I am a (relatively) rich-white-heterosexual-male living in America but I can still cry out against injustice in the world. I don't think it matters one way or another if he is gay or straight or Christian or Muslim or white or Black. What matters is that he stands for justice in a world sorely lacking everything justice stands for.
 
It's also important to note that Valerie was V's lifeline in the camp. She's so important to him because she saved his life. He might have given up and died if she hadn't reached out to him. It's got nothing to do with her orientation, it's her story that changed him.
 
Abbey_Normal said:
It's also important to note that Valerie was V's lifeline in the camp. She's so important to him because she saved his life. He might have given up and died if she hadn't reached out to him. It's got nothing to do with her orientation, it's her story that changed him.

Exactly. This is a story about human beings. Not constructions of race, sex, gender and religion.
 
How could you think for a second that V was Valerie? That doesn't make any sense. V's whole vendetta is for himself and Valerie who went through the same torture at Larkhill. I can't even fathom how them being the same person is even a possibility.

At first, I stereotypically thought of V as gay just because he has a strong taste for theatrics and he is flamboyant at times, but because of his vast knowledge of explosives, I think he was a protestor. He may have been a gay protestor, but we'll never really know. I don't really think it's important either way.
 
Furthermore said:
Just because you can feel empathy for those people of the world who are oppressed doesn't mean you are one of the oppressed. I am a (relatively) rich-white-heterosexual-male living in America but I can still cry out against injustice in the world. I don't think it matters one way or another if he is gay or straight or Christian or Muslim or white or Black. What matters is that he stands for justice in a world sorely lacking everything justice stands for.

So you're basically Bruce Wayne.

Rich, white, womanizer, in the day time

Batman at night :up:
 
We'll continue this here, under a more appropriate topic heading...

Manic said:
Perhaps my assumption was a bit illogical, but I still don't see how you read any hate toward gay people in it.

Now, where did I ever say you hated gays? No, I just said you have issues. Issues along the lines that topics dealing with Homosexuals make you uncomfortable and make you say stupid things. I dont know how they are rooted, nor do I care. I just know that those comments really pi$$ed me off because it comes from someone a bit too closed minded for their own good, and it just showed you were not paying attention to the right things. Bringing up that you "knew" Gay people didn't help the situation either, IMO

Manic said:
I just thought that people were being held in the same prison for the same reason. Don't take this the wrong way (as it wouldn't be the first time), but why else would Sutler (or at least his anti-gay party) hire a priest to wander the facility?

Maybe to give last rights? Maybe he was a friend of the party that was allowed certain privilages? They never fully explained why he was the highest paid person.
 
Nivek said:
Now, where did I ever say you hated gays? No, I just said you have issues. Issues along the lines that topics dealing with Homosexuals make you uncomfortable and make you say stupid things. I dont know how they are rooted, nor do I care. I just know that those comments really pi$$ed me off because it comes from someone a bit too closed minded for their own good, and it just showed you were not paying attention to the right things. Bringing up that you "knew" Gay people didn't help the situation either, IMO
Sorry, I misinterpretted your earlier statement. You said I'm afraid of gay people. And I didn't bring up that I just know gay people, but that I get along with them with no problem. I don't understand how I can be homophobic if I get along with gay people everyday. I used it as a counter-example, because I was offended when you called me a name.

Granted, however, I came off as one of those guys who says "some of my best friends are black" whenever I imply they have issues with race-- I don't believe them, and I seriously doubt you believed me. So for insulting your intelligence, I apologize.

Do I have issues with homosexuals? Perhaps. Is it fear? Doubt it. Whatever my issues are (which I'm unaware of, mind you), they don't affect my relationships with the gay people I know-- at least in any way that I've noticed.

However, I still don't understand how "maybe two people are in prison for the same reason" is a sign that I'm afraid of said reason. So tell me: what did you think I was implying? Because I'm still 90% convinced you're being a jerk to me for the sake of being a jerk.
 
Manic said:
Sorry, I misinterpretted your earlier statement. You said I'm afraid of gay people. And I didn't bring up that I just know gay people, but that I get along with them with no problem. I don't understand how I can be homophobic if I get along with gay people everyday. I used it as a counter-example, because I was offended when you called me a name.

Granted, however, I came off as one of those guys who says "some of my best friends are black" whenever I imply they have issues with race-- I don't believe them, and I seriously doubt you believed me. So for insulting your intelligence, I apologize.

Do I have issues with homosexuals? Perhaps. Is it fear? Doubt it. Whatever my issues are (which I'm unaware of, mind you), they don't affect my relationships with the gay people I know-- at least in any way that I've noticed.

However, I still don't understand how "maybe two people are in prison for the same reason" is a sign that I'm afraid of said reason. So tell me: what did you think I was implying? Because I'm still 90% convinced you're being a jerk to me for the sake of being a jerk.

The main point I was making about your post was you had issues and couldn't follow plot points very well. And here we are, you have admitted you do have issues, and you also admitted your comment about Larkhill being exclusive being "illogical" (in your own words). So, you pretty much confirmed what I said.

Now, I dont really see much of a point continuing this conversation. Im not trying to change your mind and make you a tolorent person, but I was defending my point about your POV being wrong in regards to the story. And I did it without being ignorent or blowing statements out of proprtion, or personal attacks like calling you a Jerk.
 
Nivek said:
The main point I was making about your post was you had issues and couldn't follow plot points very well. And here we are, you have admitted you do have issues, and you also admitted your comment about Larkhill being exclusive being "illogical" (in your own words). So, you pretty much confirmed what I said.

Now, I dont really see much of a point continuing this conversation. Im not trying to change your mind and make you a tolorent person, but I was defending my point about your POV being wrong in regards to the story. And I did it without being ignorent or blowing statements out of proprtion, or personal attacks like calling you a Jerk.
What if I want to be a tolerant person? I notice you still haven't told me what exactly it is you think my statement implied.

By the way, you called me homophobic. I call that a personal attack.

You know what I think your problem is? I don't know if you're simply very close to a gay person or are gay yourself, but you're defensive about it to the point of attacking others. I think you're so ready to assume that I dislike gay people, that you automatically took my statement to offense. You also seem to have tricked yourself into believing that I don't want to be a tolerant person. There's nothing wrong with being mad at homophobes, but you can't just go around assuming every person who makes a broad statement about homosexuals doesn't want to be a tolerant person.

And that's why I think you're acting like a jerk. You want me to be the bad guy. I admitted a mistake to you directly, and not only did you lord it over me, but you went on to further demonize me. I asked you what you thought I did wrong, and you said "Im not trying to ... make you a tolorent person."
 
V's personality was very ambigous (I think for a reason), so I can see how it can be speculated that he might have been. You really don't get enough info on him to make that accusation.
It was made subtely clear that Evey's friend (was he an Unlce?) with the TV show was gay.
 
DareDemon said:
It has been hinted that Valerie is V. Valerie was a lesbian. The hint I'm referring to was a quote by Moore saying that it was hard to make a comic about a "transexual terrorist".

But there was shot with V as man and he escaped from that concentration camp. So I don't think V was Valerie.

And also V had man's voice.
 
Why does V and Evey's gay friend make the same kind of breakfast for her?? That struck me as odd since one of the themes of the movie is that there are no coincidences. Doesn't matter to me, gay or not. I don't see V as a woman, I'll have to watch it again, but as cellmate V, I'm sure they referred to him as a He. I think they also said he was a botanist, and that's his connection to the chenicals used in the explosives. I ramble...Great movie!
 
F91 said:
Why does V and Evey's gay friend make the same kind of breakfast for her?? That struck me as odd since one of the themes of the movie is that there are no coincidences. Doesn't matter to me, gay or not. I don't see V as a woman, I'll have to watch it again, but as cellmate V, I'm sure they referred to him as a He. I think they also said he was a botanist, and that's his connection to the chenicals used in the explosives. I ramble...Great movie!

As for your question, I think it has to do with Evey realizing that everyone, to take a line from Cap'n Morgan, "Got a little V in them." No matter how hard she tried to escape, she saw that the people were starting to follow V's words.
 
I didn't get that vibe from him, but that's just me.

Take care,

From Your Friendly Neighborhood Spidey-Fan
 
DareDemon said:
It has been hinted that Valerie is V. Valerie was a lesbian. The hint I'm referring to was a quote by Moore saying that it was hard to make a comic about a "transexual terrorist".

I believe it's transgender, but I may be wrong. Either way, it's pretty clear that Valerie isn't V in the movie, though it's very possible that she is in the comic book.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"