State Your Opinion on A Character

[CConn]

I knew I should've bought Cry for Justice.

 

[The Question]

Yes, it's politically significant in a world of bigots and homophobes.

But comics shouldn't be that. Straight and gay are fundamentally equal to the enlightened person, and should be treated as such in fiction.

I don't fully understand what you're getting at here.

Do you mean that they should be treated as such in story? Well, I agree to an extent, so long as the social issues they have to deal with because of their sexual orientation aren't ignored.

Do you mean the way in which the writer approaches their characters? Well I agree with that.

But in either case, I don't understand how that is an argument in favor of your point.

The reason making batwoman straight would be worse is because of the bigoted world we live in. It would be bad for homosexuals in the real world, because it would diminish the presence of positive homosexual characters in the media and would send the message that the media is not willing to support minority groups. Wonder Woman becoming a homosexual would cause no such problems, hence it is not hypocritical to be against the former and in favor of the later, as one would objectively be a bad thing and the other is more of a gray area and would have far less of a negative impact regardless.

 

[Mystirious]

The fact that she has had relationships with men does not rule out the possibility of bisexuality, something that has been hinted in the past and is very likely due to her upbringing in a society that A) Has no men and B) Has many cultural elements of ancient Greece, where everybody pretty much ****ed everybody else.

Also, the two things really aren't the same at all. Homosexuals are a minority group that are woefully underrepresented in fiction as strong likeable main characters in stories that aren't completely focused on gay rights. A gay character's sexual orientation changing is a setback for social acceptance. A straight character's orientation changing is not.

I love everything about this post

And i agree it would be absolutely wonderful for Wonder Woman to come out as bisexual. Almost all her writers already think she is so why not make it canon. It would be fantastic and i would love it

 

[Anubis]

It's all grey....except for when it's not.

 

[CConn]

I don't fully understand what you're getting at here.

Do you mean that they should be treated as such in story? Well, I agree to an extent, so long as the social issues they have to deal with because of their sexual orientation aren't ignored.

Do you mean the way in which the writer approaches their characters? Well I agree with that.

But in either case, I don't understand how that is an argument in favor of your point.

The reason making batwoman straight would be worse is because of the bigoted world we live in. It would be bad for homosexuals in the real world, because it would diminish the presence of positive homosexual characters in the media and would send the message that the media is not willing to support minority groups. Wonder Woman becoming a homosexual would cause no such problems, hence it is not hypocritical to be against the former and in favor of the later, as one would objectively be a bad thing and the other is more of a gray area and would have far less of a negative impact regardless.

What I mean is, that whole bolded part shouldn't be considered.

People shouldn't be writing comics to further real-world sociological agendas or needs.

 

[Anubis]

All forms of art do that. Whether intended or not.

 

[Kitsune]

You said if DC ever changed Batwoman's sexuality, you would become incredibly offended and never read a DC book again.

Isn't wanting Wonder Woman to turn gay kind of a really hypocritical based on that above statement?

Batwoman's sexuality was more integral to her character, Wonder Woman has shown and interest in guys, but her upbringing in and all female society would make bisexuality or lesbianism quite understandable. It wouldn't really be a huge stretch for the character to make her bi. I'm not sure if that's what Mystirious was thinking, and the question really wasn't aimed at me, but when have I ever let that stop me

 

[The Question]

What I mean is, that whole bolded part shouldn't be considered.

People shouldn't be writing comics to further real-world sociological agendas or needs.

1: Why not?

2: I'm not talking about doing something simply for sake of being for gay rights. I'm talking about why actively changing one thing would be bad and actively changing another thing wouldn't, so being against the former and for the later is not hypocricy even though the nature of the change is similar.

 

[Mystirious]

I'm fine with them doing that

I only like writers who are pro lgbt

I don't fully understand what you're getting at here.

Do you mean that they should be treated as such in story? Well, I agree to an extent, so long as the social issues they have to deal with because of their sexual orientation aren't ignored.

Do you mean the way in which the writer approaches their characters? Well I agree with that.

But in either case, I don't understand how that is an argument in favor of your point.

The reason making batwoman straight would be worse is because of the bigoted world we live in. It would be bad for homosexuals in the real world, because it would diminish the presence of positive homosexual characters in the media and would send the message that the media is not willing to support minority groups. Wonder Woman becoming a homosexual would cause no such problems, hence it is not hypocritical to be against the former and in favor of the later, as one would objectively be a bad thing and the other is more of a gray area and would have far less of a negative impact regardless.

Yep

If DC EVER made Batwoman heterosexual I would feel physicslly sick. The thought of Batwoman being 'made' straight makes me want to vomit and i would immediately boycott DC forever if they ever did anything as disgusting and bigoted as that

 

[CConn]

All forms of art do that. Whether intended or not.

Not always.

I much more prefer writing based on how things should be rather than what they actually are.

For instance, rather than writing a story that features racism to highlight what a negative thing it is, have a story that features positive multi-racial interactions.

The ends are the same; it still stresses equality. But the means and intent are different.

 

[CConn]

1: Why not?

2: I'm not talking about doing something simply for sake of being for gay rights. I'm talking about why actively changing one thing would be bad and actively changing another thing wouldn't, so being against the former and for the later is not hypocricy even though the nature of the change is similar.

But, if you view straights and gays as equal opposites...one isn't worse than the other. It's like changing a positive to a negative. They cancel each other out.

That said, I fully agree that Wonder Woman being bisexual fits with the character's origin. But her going fully gay would invalidate her entire history of relationships with several male characters. From old Steve Trevor to even Batman.

And in that sense, it should be just as "offensive" as changing Batwoman's sexuality.

 

[SuperFerret]

And Canary is already canonically bisexual so thats one half of the pairing already out of the closet

Uhhh... what?

 

[The Question]

If DC EVER made Batwoman heterosexual I would feel physicslly sick. The thought of Batwoman being 'made' straight makes me want to vomit and i would immediately boycott DC forever if they ever did anything as disgusting and bigoted as that

Although, an in depth discussion of sexual plasticity and the way in which society and cultural institutions influences our views on what exactly sexual orientation is, citing such things as the Kinsey scale and the wildly different ideas of sexuality present in ancient Greece and Rome and feudal Japan would be interesting.

But that's kind of another thing.

But, if you view straights and gays as equal opposites...one isn't worse than the other. It's like changing a positive to a negative. They cancel each other out.

1: I wasn't assuming we were talking about both things happening at the same time.

2: If we were living in a perfect world that would be the case, but we're not.

That said, I fully agree that Wonder Woman being bisexual fits with the character's origin. But her going fully gay would invalidate her entire history of relationships with several male characters. From old Steve Trevor to even Batman.

And in that sense, it should be just as "offensive" as changing Batwoman's sexuality.

But it isn't as offensive, because the positive depictions of an opressed minority aren't being compromised. Changing Batwoman's orientation would have a negative impact on the real world. Changing Wonder Woman's would not. The former is objectively a worse thing. Writers can't act like this isn't the case, that would be completely irrisponsible.

 

[Mystirious]

1: Why not?

Agreed

I only support writers who are pro lgbt like Simone and Rucka

Batwoman's sexuality was more integral to her character, Wonder Woman has shown and interest in guys, but her upbringing in and all female society would make bisexuality or lesbianism quite understandable. It wouldn't really be a huge stretch for the character to make her bi. I'm not sure if that's what Mystirious was thinking, and the question really wasn't aimed at me, but when have I ever let that stop me

Batwoman has stated that she's gay so thats the end of story. She's gay. And only bigoted morons and self loathing fools want to change someone's sexuality

Wonder Woman has as far as I know never stated herself to be heterosexual and there are stories that suggest she does have an interest in women especially in Rucka's stories

That's why I'm okay with Wonder Woman being made bisexual but why Batwoman being made hetetosexual would make me boycott dc forever

 

[CConn]

1: I wasn't assuming we were talking about both things happening at the same time.

2: If we were living in a perfect world that would be the case, but we're not.



But it isn't as offensive, because the positive depictions of an opressed minority aren't being compromised. Changing Batwoman's orientation would have a negative impact on the real world. Changing Wonder Woman's would not. The former is objectively a worse thing. Writers can't act like this isn't the case, that would be completely irrisponsible.

You're still missing my main point; they shouldn't write characters to be positive depictions of anything.

They should write characters to be characters; diverse, multifaceted, and their own entities. And not be influenced by our own, flawed, society.

And you can disagree with that, that's fine. But at least grasp what I'm getting at.

 

[Mystirious]

But, if you view straights and gays as equal opposites...one isn't worse than the other. It's like changing a positive to a negative. They cancel each other out.

That said, I fully agree that Wonder Woman being bisexual fits with the character's origin. But her going fully gay would invalidate her entire history of relationships with several male characters. From old Steve Trevor to even Batman.

And in that sense, it should be just as "offensive" as changing Batwoman's sexuality.

I will certainly agree that it would make more sense if Wonder Woman was bisexual rather than gay

 

[CConn]

I will certainly agree that it would make more sense if Wonder Woman was bisexual rather than gay

There we go!

I can live with that.

Now let's shake.

...but try not to get too dizzy.

 

[The Question]

You're still missing my main point; they shouldn't write characters to be positive depictions of anything.

They should write characters to be characters; diverse, multifaceted, and their own entities. And not be influenced by our own, flawed, society.

And you can disagree with that, that's fine. But at least grasp what I'm getting at.

I got that from the beginning and never disagreed with that.

But that has nothing to do with the fact that changing Batwoman's orientation would hurt real people in the real world, wheras changing Wonder Woman's would not. Thus, the former would be a worse thing to do because it would have negative outcomes for actual human beings, and to not recognize that would be irrisponsible.


... although, now that I think about it, I do disagree with your main thesis in one small part. The "And not be influenced by our own, flawed, society" part.

Of course characters should be influenced by society. People are influenced by society. If you're going to make characters who are, as you put it, "diverse, multifaceted, and their own entities," then society cannot be realistically taken out of the equasion. Everyone lives in a society and everyone has been shaped by it in some way, either directly or by their attempts to live in defiance of it.

 

[Cain]

All forms of art do that. Whether intended or not.

It's called: "catering to demographics"

 

[Anubis]

Sweet.

For those of you just tuning in, we're on the Martian Manhunter but the previous character (Wonder Woman) has sparked an entertaining debate on sexuality in comics.

I think they shoulda taken the opportunity to have made J'onn more ambiguous. He comes from a race of shape shifters. I don't know. I think he shouldn't really identify with a typical sexual identity.

 

[CConn]

I got that from the beginning and never disagreed with that.

But that has nothing to do with the fact that changing Batwoman's orientation would hurt real people in the real world, wheras changing Wonder Woman's would not. Thus, the former would be a worse thing to do because it would have negative outcomes for actual human beings, and to not recognize that would be irrisponsible.


... although, now that I think about it, I do disagree with your main thesis in one small part. The "And not be influenced by our own, flawed, society" part.

Of course characters should be influenced by society. People are influenced by society. If you're going to make characters who are, as you put it, "diverse, multifaceted, and their own entities," then society cannot be realistically taken out of the equasion. Everyone lives in a society and everyone has been shaped by it in some way, either directly or by their attempts to live in defiance of it.

If you want to get really philosophical about it, you could argue that Batwoman's popularity is so miniscule in comparison to the overall populace of our country - let alone the world - that while technically it would hurt the gay community, it would be by an almost unnoticeable margin.

Whereas, say, Ellen going straight (a real world, very famous, very positive gay person) would be exponentially more harmful.

But it'd be pretty stupid to get that detailed with it. So I'm done.

 

[SpideyInATree]

Never really was a huge fan of Martian Manhunter but always thought the character was pretty cool. It was good to see the character in Stormwatch # 1 and make a reference that he'd been in the Justice League. Manhunter is definitely bad ass!

 

[Mystirious]

Not always.

I much more prefer writing based on how things should be rather than what they actually are.

For instance, rather than writing a story that features racism to highlight what a negative thing it is, have a story that features positive multi-racial interactions.

Why not do both

I think it's important for stories to highlight the problems with society that have to change as well as offering a hopeful vision of how good things could be

You're still missing my main point; they shouldn't write characters to be positive depictions of anything.

I'm fine with them writing characters as positive lgbt characters if it means we have more positive lgbt characters in comics

That's what i care about and what I want to see

 

[The Question]

Sweet.

For those of you just tuning in, we're on the Martian Manhunter but the previous character (Wonder Woman) has sparked an entertaining debate on sexuality in comics.

I think they shoulda taken the opportunity to have made J'onn more ambiguous. He comes from a race of shape shifters. I don't know. I think he shouldn't really identify with a typical sexual identity.

I definitely agree. His speices having gender never made any sense to me. He doesn't have functioning genetalia a good chunk of the time. I always imagined Martian biology working the way Changelings in Star Trek are described: Their "true form" is a mass of sexless protoplasm held together by something that resembled a nervous system but if much more plastic in it's structure. Two members of the speices need to mate with each other in order to produceoffspring and ensure genetic diversity, but it can be any two.

That makes sense in a techno babble-y way. Martians having organs and set genders does not.

 

[Mystirious]

There we go!

I can live with that.

Now let's shake.

...but try not to get too dizzy.

Glad we can agree about that

Sweet.

For those of you just tuning in, we're on the Martian Manhunter but the previous character (Wonder Woman) has sparked an entertaining debate on sexuality in comics.

I think they shoulda taken the opportunity to have made J'onn more ambiguous. He comes from a race of shape shifters. I don't know. I think he shouldn't really identify with a typical sexual identity.

He does shape shift into both male and female. We dont really see his personal life much I guess he could pursue relationships with both genders

I wouldn't be at all surprised if J'onn was bi or even omnisexual like the dashing Captain Jack Harkness

If you want to get really philosophical about it, you could argue that Batwoman's popularity is so miniscule in comparison to the overall populace of our country - let alone the world - that while technically it would hurt the gay community, it would be by an almost unnoticeable margin

I would try to convince as many people as I could to boycott DC if they ever did something so disgustingly moronically bigoted as make Batwoman straight

There we go!

I can live with that.

Now let's shake.

...but try not to get too dizzy.

Glad we can agree about that

Sweet.

For those of you just tuning in, we're on the Martian Manhunter but the previous character (Wonder Woman) has sparked an entertaining debate on sexuality in comics.

I think they shoulda taken the opportunity to have made J'onn more ambiguous. He comes from a race of shape shifters. I don't know. I think he shouldn't really identify with a typical sexual identity.

He does shape shift into both male and female. We dont really see his personal life much I guess he could pursue relationships with both genders

I wouldn't be at all surprised if J'onn was bi or even omnisexual like the dashing Captain Jack Harkness

If you want to get really philosophical about it, you could argue that Batwoman's popularity is so miniscule in comparison to the overall populace of our country - let alone the world - that while technically it would hurt the gay community, it would be by an almost unnoticeable margin

I would try to convince as many people as I could to boycott DC if they ever did something so disgustingly moronically bigoted as make Batwoman straight

The thought of Batwoman ever being made heterosexual is just repulsive to me. She is a great kick ass positively portrayed gay character. That's why I love her