The Four Color Media Monitor: DC Comics is going to change a character's sexual orientation soon

And predictably, this has gotten the mainstream press' attention (via Hot Air):

So which one is it? The folks at DC Comics aren’t saying, but they do say it’s the latest effort to make sure their comics keep up with the times.

Last September, DC Comics relaunched its entire line of comic books to feature an updated look and a new lineup of LGBT superheroes: including Voodoo, an African American bisexual woman and Batwoman, an open lesbian…

“DC and (archrival) Marvel are recognizing that there is an LGBT audience that has been reading their comics for years,” said Matt Kane, associate director of entertainment and media for GLAAD. “When creating these fictional worlds it’s important to show the full diversity.”

Aside from making good business sense, Kane said younger readers are perfectly comfortable with gay characters and expect to see their peers represented.

Are they? Sales today hardly reflect that. And it's not realistic if they won't even allow any questions of whether it's a healthy practice and role model, and are only willing to say it's positive.

For now, it's assumed that the Superman of the new Earth 2 is going to be "outed" because according to Bleeding Cool:

As Senior VP Sales Bob Wayne explained, just like the President of the United States, the co-publisher's policy on this "has evolved."

And despite his best efforts to stem Dan's wandering mouth, we also got the very strong impression that the death of Superman of Earth Two many not have been as final as portrayed...

Frankly, it makes no difference whether it's Superman or Batman, a major or a minor character, or even a protagonist in the regular or the alternate dimensions that they're going to out, their publicity stunt tactics in themselves are offensive already, just like the scene James Robinson wrote where the Earth 2 Wonder Woman was stabbed in the back. And it's not likely to find long-term sucess.

And according to this FOX News report (via Big Hollywood):

Didio said DC's position had shifted on the subject since he said in an interview last year that any homosexual characters would be new introductions, and that none of their existing characters' sexual orientations would shift.

DC vice president Bob Wayne likened DC's change in tune to President Obama's shift on gay marriage, explaining that DC's policy “has evolved,” the report says.

Well how about that, they're politicizing it already. And that's also pretty laughable how they're telling they've "evolved", since Renee Montoya was one basically straight character whom they turned into a lesbian a decade ago, instead of conceiving a new one who could take that role. They already "evolved", and it was pretty bankrupt, as the publisher is soon bound to be themselves.

Update: while we're on the subject, the AP Wire's written about Marvel's plan for Northstar to get married to another husband in the pages of Astonishing X-Men #51, and they say:

Northstar revealed he was gay in the pages of "Alpha Flight" No. 106 in 1992, one of Marvel Entertainment's first characters to do so.

Naturally, they won't mention how embarrassing that was from an artistic perspective - Scott Lobdell's story was heavy handed (it involved Northstar absurdly beating up on Major Maple Leaf while telling him he was gay), and Lobdell was taken off the book almost immediately around that time, and it was canceled a year and half later. This same alarming hammer job repeated itself in 2001 when Lobdell was writing the Eve of Destruction story in X-Men. "Outing" a character is one thing, but doing so forcibly and banging the readers over the head with it is another. That's hardly any way to get anyone to accept their ideas if they present them so cavalierly.

Labels: dc comics, marvel comics, msm propaganda, politics, X-Men

More forced diversity... how stupid. It's a complete joke if you ask me. Plus have they ever considered that the reason why no one reads them anymore is because of these blatant and politically correct publicity stunts?

Posted by Carl | 3:49 PM

Remember what they say, Carl, "if you don't like it, then you're the homophobe and you're the problem." To say nothing about how they'll drill it in your head, whether you want it or not.

Pity Wertham isn't around anymore, as he might have been amused by all this. Or, hated even more so by the comic fandom. Whichever.

Posted by Killer Moth | 4:27 PM

Yeah, every time you criticize something like Islam or homosexuality or something the left favors,they call you a fill-in-the-blank "phobic" simply because you disagree with them. I think Wertham would be disgusted by this if he were still alive, and justifiably so. I believe this is the kind of thing he was worried about back in the 1950s.

Posted by Carl | 8:15 PM

I got the impression that the forcibly converted character was going to be someone we hadn't seen up until this point. Which made me think it was probably Plastic Man or someone like that. I can't imagine they'd be allowed to make Superman (even Earth-2 Superman) gay.

Isn't it strange how the people who believe no one can change their sexual "orientation" in real life are the very same ones who are always ready to modify those of fictional characters?

Posted by The Drizzt | 1:37 PM

Dennis Miller on O'Reilly, tonight, quipped it would either be Aquaman or Wonder Woman. The latter makes the most sense, though, it would kill me as a Steve Trevor/Princess Diana shipper. Heh.

Indeed, as Wertham was rather disturbed with the homoerotic content at the time, and having read some of which, I can't say he is completely wrong. But, hey, that's what it was, back when. Now, these days, it's "make everyone gay." Okay, fine.

Then the comic blogs (not counting this one, naturally) will do the "tut-tut" against those who may not be immediately on-board with such a decision, as they always do. "Because we hate progress," and the rest. I'm fine with the subject and with LGBT characters, but to shoehorn this in, and mainly because Obama decided it was so 'courageous' to do so.... this is progress? It's cheap political opportunism at worst or best. (To say nothing about implications of pandering.)

Too bad Lobdell is at DC, now, as he could have written Nortstar's wedding. Heh.

Posted by Killer Moth | 6:23 PM

Yeah, Killer Moth, to me the whole thing reeks of "publicity stunt." And the usual pinheads at websites like Comics Alliance and Newsarama and CBR will probably publish articles like "Bigots Totally Freak Out over Changing of Character's Orientation" or some such nonsense like that. I know Comics Alliance published a biased article with a similar headline back when the Muslim Batman was introduced and even mentioned Avi by name. In fact, it's the first result you get on Google if you type in "Muslim Batman."

The problem I have with LGBT characters is that they're often introduced in a heavy-handed way, just to add "diversity" or something like that. It's just so the writers can impose their political beliefs on you and if you disagree with that, they're quick to call you "homophobic" and a "bigot" and if you're a public figure, they'll demonize you in whatever way they can... it's a joke.

Posted by Carl | 6:49 PM

Something that hit me- do they ever have a gay villain?

And where's my polygamous and bestiality superheroes? I want one that drinks Robitussin by the gallon too. There is a popular subculture surrounding the practice after all. We need some affirmative action NOW, Didddio.

Wertham had a solid common-sense point, but is blown off by everyone. Things you read, hear, watch, do or pretty much anything you experience can influence how you act or think about an issue. Positive media portrayals of gays have absolutely helped turn the percentages in their favor. It's common sense, but that isn't allowed anymore. Ok, W. was wrong on such and such details, The overall principle is valid.

Otherwise, why would Millar and Fraction and Co write their self-indulgent preachy tales of homophobia and racism and bigotry and Bushdevil? Because a few goofballs enjoy it? Yeah, well, more people like plain old superhero tales.

Probably get some lame fanboi meme-spounting troll come in here and toss around some totally cool -phobe names. Whatever. Up theirs in advance.

Posted by thunderbird | 4:05 AM

NRO revealed that the character will be Alan Scott, the original Green Lantern.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/300982/breaking-gay-dc-superhero-revealed-noah-glyn

Oh, sure, why not? We'll ignore the fact he had a kid (Jade). Lame.

I'll respond to Carl's comment, later.

Posted by Killer Moth | 2:00 PM

Two kids actually, Jade and Obsidian. Married twice (first to Rose/Thorn, then to Harlequin).

Of course, that was before the Flashpoint debacle. They're probably all retconned away at this point.

How absurd.

Posted by The Drizzt | 6:00 PM

I forgot about Obsidian, actually. Mark Steyn was right: it is a full-time job keeping up on comic canon. Thanks for the reminder, though.

Allahpundit has a nice snarky take, and, I admit, if I didn't know who Alan Scott was, I would have went, "who?"

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/05/24/report-new-gay-d-c-comics-superhero-is/

Thing is, I like Alan, but now, as AP said, "His main power now, I guess, is drumming up cheap publicity for D.C. Comics by magically transforming into a minor footnote in the culture war over gay rights."

Yep.

Posted by Killer Moth | 6:51 PM

You see, GL was in denial when he got married. The super-bigots, super-homophobes and super-religious-nuts made him deny his true self. That or they'll just retcon that part of his life out.

Posted by thunderbird | 11:00 PM

This comment has been removed by the author.

Posted by t | 11:05 PM

I guess when Superman aka Superdhimmi is off hanging out with The 99 Alan will have to stay at home.

Posted by Unknown | 5:02 PM

Diversity is good, they have Gay characters like Kate Kane and WonderWoman obiously is a better character to come out as gay.

Claming this on "liberal" views is BS cause they are against It as well, however the ones making the most noise are the conservative people, thus DC gains publicity.

But as Cons have such bad reputation thanks to Fox and some homophobic and fanatic christian institutions DC knows that their complaints arent a threat.

So conservative people are doing a favor, as always, to this media circus.

Doesnt even compares to Marvel, cause there is a legitimate creative task in their gay and minority characters for the last 10 or more years.

DC most interesting gay character was Batwoman, whose social writing was perhaps the only thing published that dealt with homosexuality in a serious way.

Even Roy Thomas, the man who created Obsidian and was quite pleased and in peace with Obsidian beign Gay said this:
" I've nothing against gays, but I think the notion of making Alan Scott retroactively gay (even if this is a new Earth-2 version, an abomination of an idea in and of itself) is ludicrous and offensive."

Posted by Anonymous | 4:21 PM