| Author |
|
Robert White
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4560
|
| Posted: 06 September 2013 at 10:32am | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
Doesn't marriage pretty much end the adventurous, interesting phase of most peoples lives unless they're a member of the Fantastic Four?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Steve De Young
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 01 April 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 3507
|
| Posted: 06 September 2013 at 10:46am | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
Doesn't marriage pretty much end the adventurous, interesting phase of most peoples lives unless they're a member of the Fantastic Four?
---------------
Yes, being married and over 30 is just a long, slow, boring march to the grave.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
John Bodin
Byrne Robotics Member
Purveyor of Rare Items
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 3911
|
| Posted: 06 September 2013 at 11:24am | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
Back when I still bought comic books, I bought superhero comics specifically for the superheroes.
I can't see the attraction when it comes to making sexual preference a key element of a superhero comic. If I want to read about superheroes, I want to read about superheroes. If I want to read stories that are specifically about the sexual orientation of the characters, well, there are plenty of other sources for that sort of material.
Can't even begin to imagine why issues pertaining to sexual orientation would be something that would attract someone to actually prefer to see as part of their superhero comics. What does that thought process even sound like?
I can't wait to pick up this issue of Nightwing -- this is when they reveal that Dick Grayson is hetero and he prefers doing it missionary-style, and I feel this is something that has been sorely lacking in comics for way too long. They've dodged the issue for years, but now it's refreshing to find that there are heroes out there who are willing to take a stand regarding their sexual orientation, particularly their fondness for the missionary position.
Next month is going to be even cooler -- that's when DC plans to reveal that Hal Jordan's favorite ring-construct is a sex swing that features bondage straps, and S&M is yet another sexual preference that comics have been dodging the issue on for far too long.
NOW I'm seeing what I've longed to see for so long in my superhero comics -- make mine DC!
Seriously, people -- isn't this why we have fan fiction?
</SARCASM>
:-/
[EDITED FOR TYPO]
Edited by John Bodin on 06 September 2013 at 11:26am
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Matt Reed
Byrne Robotics Security
Robotmod
Joined: 16 April 2004
Posts: 35945
|
| Posted: 06 September 2013 at 11:45am | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
If done right, I think it has all the validity in the world. We've had thousands of comics that focus on the heterosexual love lives of superheroes while also focusing on the adventures of said heroes. Reed and Sue. Lois and Clark. Peter Parker and Gwen Stacey. Ben and Alicia. Hawkeye and Mockingbird. The Vision and the Scarlett Witch. Some even eventually got married. I don't read new comics from Marvel or DC anymore so I can't speak to BATWOMAN specifically, but I can see this working as long as it's not issues and issues devoted only to a relationship (any relationship of any kind). FYI this isn't a revelation, John. The new Batwoman has been out for awhile. When I did read comics that featured her several years ago, her sexual orientation wasn't the focus but just an aspect of her character like Peter Parker dating Betty Brant or MJ. I didn't have a problem with it at all.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Jason Czeskleba
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 30 April 2004
Posts: 4620
|
| Posted: 06 September 2013 at 11:54am | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
John, there's quite a leap between a story featuring characters that happen to be gay, and a story that is "specifically about the sexual orientation of the characters." Mentioning that a character is gay is hardly the same as going into specific detail about the exact sexual practices that a character enjoys.
I remember when Shooter wrote his notorious story about Bruce Banner being threatened by rapists at a YMCA and there was a big public outcry, with people objecting to the fact that the first openly gay characters ever depicted in a Marvel Comic were rapists. Shooter's response was "Marvel has probably featured many gay characters in the past, you just didn't know they were gay because it wasn't important to the story." I found that to be completely disingenuous. If Marvel had never depicted any relationships or love scenes between any characters, he would have a valid point, but of course that was not the case. To feature numerous love scenes and plotlines about straight relationships, but to never do the same for gay relationships was obviously deliberately discriminatory.
And that still remains the point now. If a comic is going to show love scenes between straight characters, why should it not show love scenes between gay characters, John? Why shouldn't they be treated equally? Or are you arguing that comics should show no love scenes at all, and never suggest or depict any romantic relationships between anyone?
Edited by Jason Czeskleba on 06 September 2013 at 11:54am
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Lance Hill
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 22 April 2005
Posts: 991
|
| Posted: 06 September 2013 at 12:01pm | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
QUOTE:
Back when I still bought comic books, I bought superhero comics specifically for the superheroes.
I can't see the attraction when it comes to making sexual preference a key element of a superhero comic. If I want to read about superheroes, I want to read about superheroes. If I want to read stories that are specifically about the sexual orientation of the characters, well, there are plenty of other sources for that sort of material. |
|
|
You must have hated Spider-Man.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Steve De Young
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 01 April 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 3507
|
| Posted: 06 September 2013 at 12:28pm | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
There's a difference between portraying elements of a character's love life, romantic tension between characters, character relationships, etc. and portraying casual sex. There existed varying degrees of sexual chemistry between Catwoman and Batman for decades, but only with the Nu52 did we get them, on camera, opening up their suits to 'do it' while we watched in a casual encounter.
DC had no problem with showing Kate Kane and Maggie Sawyer in bed together, making out, etc. But they draw their line at showing two women in a committed relationship?
Can people really not see how ass-backward this is? DC freely shows all kinds of sex (and rape, for that matter) in their books, but won't show people in loving, committed relationships. The mind boggles.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Joe Boster
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 29 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 3160
|
| Posted: 06 September 2013 at 12:35pm | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
Or are you arguing that comics should show no love scenes at all,
Yes, orientation makes no difference. I didn't need to see batman & catwoman going at it. or Wiccan and Hulkling
and never suggest or depict any romantic relationships between anyone?
Why does there have to be an 'and'? Romance is fine. Batwoman is a fine read the couple issues I looked at.
The most annoying part of the whole batwoman thing is that they told DC upfront that they intended from the start for the marriage thing. Then they get ready to write it and are told NO. It's not what they signed on to do. I applaud them for leaving the book. DC has said no marriages in nu52 and that's their right, but they should have told the batwoman team from the beginning.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Anthony J Lombardi
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 12 January 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 9410
|
| Posted: 06 September 2013 at 1:15pm | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
If only DC had been as adamantly against marriage when Superman married Lois. ~~~~~~~~ I think that's it in a nutshell. I think DC saw how much of a mistake it was to marry them. They don't want to eliminate the sexual tension.
I don't think you can paint the picture with broad strokes thou. Figures like Lois and Clark shouldn't be married. Bruce Wayne should never get married. I never gave Aquaman any thought so I don't know if it would work.
Reed and Sue being married works. I don't mind that Peter and Mary Jane got married. I wish they would have gotten divorced instead of how marvel ended things.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Stephen Churay
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 25 March 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 8369
|
| Posted: 06 September 2013 at 2:24pm | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
Reading the article, I don't think they left strictly because the marriage
between these characters was forbidden. It also mentions eleventh
hour editorial changes happening in other areas.
If we use George Perez as the starting point, how many creators have
jumped off the DC ship in the last year and a half? The list is starting
to get long.
Also, I'm curious if creators leaving at this pace for pretty much the
same reasons is typical of the way thing have always been and we are
just seeing it due to the information age? Or, does the Distinguished
Competion have a real editorial and upper management problem?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Joe Boster
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 29 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 3160
|
| Posted: 06 September 2013 at 2:45pm | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
If only DC had been as adamantly against marriage when Superman married Lois. ~~~~~~~~ I think that's it in a nutshell. I think DC saw how much of a mistake it was to marry them. They don't want to eliminate the sexual tension. ++++
Agreed! One of the best things to come out Nu52.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Steve De Young
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 01 April 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 3507
|
| Posted: 06 September 2013 at 2:53pm | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
If only DC had been as adamantly against marriage when Superman married Lois.
~~~~~~~~
I think that's it in a nutshell. I think DC saw how much of a mistake it was to marry them. They don't want to eliminate the sexual tension.
-----------------
Yeah, the romance between Lois and Clark is a major part of the boo...wait, then why is Lois dating another dude and why is Superman getting it on with Wonder Woman?
Oh, right, because its all about fanboy wank material, not story or character.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Topic Closed)
