Green Lantern reinvented as gay superhero

Green Lantern by Alex Ross

DC Comics has announced recently that they will ‘out’ one of their iconic superheroes as being gay. There has been lots of speculation and a kind of knee-jerk reaction/guess that it would be Batman, along with a litany of other guesses all the way down to Vibe, who was so surprised he jumped out of comic book limbo and then fell back asleep just as quickly.

Alan Scott was a train engineer who nearly died when a strange meteorite crashed into his train. Thinking quickly, he carved a ring and power battery from the rock, donned one of the weirdest superhero costumes ever and fought crime with a magic ring that created giant green boxing gloves. His associate was the bumbling and obese Doiby Dickles.

Comics back in those days embraced the inventive lunacy that is mostly absent from modern comics.

Green Lantern disappeared in the 1950’s when funny animals took over the stands after Fredric Wertham’s assault on superhero comics reduced them to subversive perverted trash… oh if only he were alive today he would laugh himself giddy. When DC Comics introduced a new spin on an old idea by creating a new Flash, it was only a matter of time before the other classic heroes followed suit, including Green Lantern.

Borrowing heavily from EE ‘Doc’ Smith’s Lensman novels, the new Green Lantern was a space policeman that guarded the galaxy from evil using a sci-fi spin on the magic ring. In time, a parallel world was located where the original superheroes still lived on, aged and even had children. There were a number of team-ups between the two world until it all got a bit silly and DC decided to smash all of their continuity into one world.

In the new DC Universe, Alan Scott was one of the very first superheroes and his ring slowed his aging process, allowing him to fight alongside the kids of today. The Alan Scott Green Lantern gained a massive support base during this time and went on to star in not just the JSA, but also as leader of Checkmate.

Totally bizarre drawing of Green Lantern and the Pillsbury Dough Boy by Martin Nodell

But that even that version of Alan Scott is gone forever, wiped clean away from the comic book annals of history by that great equalizer known as the editorial process. In a new ongoing series called Earth-2, the Golden Age versions of the Flash, Hawkman, Green Lantern, Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman are being introduced. Rather than serving as elder statesmen of the DCU, as they had in the past, they are entirely different characters.

Most notably, Alan Scott is now DC’s high profile gay superhero.

Alan Scott makes his debut as the Green Lantern in Earth 2 #3

BleedingCool has outed the hero first by revealing that it is none other than Alan Scott, the first Green Lantern. There are a few things to keep in mind here, of course. This version of Alan Scott has no relation to the original Green Lantern created back in 1940. This version of the character is from a parallel Earth in a post-52 DC Universe. So DC hasn’t exactly taken a character who has been straight for decades and had them come out of the closet, they have in fact warped reality, rewritten time and launched an alternate universe comic book in order to create a gay character.

So… is this really a win for equality in comics?

There’s a lot of press and opinion out there on this as you’d imagine, but here’s one of my favorites from ComicBookResources

Green Lantern drawn by artist Irwin Hasen

DC and Marvel are shouting about going gay with a — well, with a straight face, and they’re doing so in 2012. Read between the lines of the public relations, and essentially the two biggest North American superhero comics publishers (and Hollywood IP farms) are proudly, cluelessly boasting about the fact that they’re not as out of touch with the rest of American pop culture and society as they were last month, and they’re accepting congratulations for it.

It’s a bit embarrassing, really, and not just for DC and Marvel — I mean, all of us readers-of and writers-about these publishers get to share in guilt by association.

I’m not sure which of the Big Two comes off worse in this week’s campaigning.

Marvel’s big, gay news is, of course, that mutant superhero Northstar proposed to and is set to marry his civilian boyfriend, Kyle. This plot point has been hinted at by Marvel since at least March, when the publisher started its “Save The Date!” advertising campaign for Astonishing X-Men, and the February-released solicitation for the May-shipping Issue 50 included a line about Northstar having to choose between his boyfriend and the team, and another read “Don’t miss the end of this issue – it’ll be the most talked about moment of the year!”

Pretty obvious that Northstar was going to get married, right?

Earlier in the week Marvel started hyping an announcement that would be made on The View, of all places. (Do you know what a Venn diagram of “People Who Watch The View” and “People Who Will Ever Buy An Issue of Astonishing X-Men” looks like? It’s two circles on separate sheets of paper, and about a mile and a half between each of those sheets of paper). And it turned out to be that, yes, as you’ve surely already guessed, Northstar would be the first Marvel superhero to be married to a member of the same sex. (An aside: I wonder if, in the Marvel Universe, if mutant/human marriages are considered a greater threat to “traditional marriage” then gay marriages …? Do Republican politicians in the Marvel Universe introduce Defense of Marriage Acts forbidding a homo superior from marrying a homo sapien?)

So Marvel’s big news of the week is that the publisher whose foundational, traditional identity has been that it was the edgier, more realistic and with-it alternative to DC’s staid comics line, is just now catching up to Archie Comics, traditionally the most conservative and slow-to-change of the extant publishers. (They still publish comics for kids! And sell them in grocery stores!) Archie’s Life With Archie #17, published in January, featured a wedding between Kevin Keller and his boyfriend Clay Walker (six months, by the way, is about how long it would take to plan, create and publish an issue of an ongoing comic book series, at least in the olden days of the 1990s).

The appearance on The View, corporate synergy or no (Disney owns both Marvel and the show’s network ABC), was at least pretty well timed. President Barack Obama publicly stated his support for gay marriage on May 9. That too would have (and perhaps should have) been a non-story, as Obama had publicly supported gay marriage in 1996, but changed his mind as he campaigned for the presidency the first time, were it not for the fact that he was a sitting president. Like the Marvel story, the Obama one was basically along the lines of a declaration that someone was not as backward as previously thought. It’s just too bad so many news cycles have occurred between the Obama’s announcement and Marvel’s; that guy has been great for helping Marvel sell comic books in the past.

DC’s big, gay news of the week wasn’t made in such a splashy fashion, so company gets some points for not jumping as high or shouting as loud about how totally not-homophobic it is, but it also seemed calculated to insert the publisher into the Marvel news, in the hopes of getting DC’s name mentioned in the mainstream media at least as often.

DC Comics Co-Publisher Dan DiDio didn’t call a press conference to make his company’s gay announcement, but it nevertheless seemed more cynical and calculated, given the timing.

DC’s announcement seems somewhat smaller on the face of it — DC will apparently “out” one of its “major iconic” (and male) characters as gay in a New 52 storyline that begins in June — and whether it’s actually a big deal will likely depend on the identity of the character.

My Word dictionary function is telling me the definition of “iconic” is “relating to or characteristic of somebody or something admired as an icon,” with “icon” being either “somebody … widely and uncritically admired, especially somebody or something symbolizing a movement or field of activity” or, more simply, “a picture or symbol that is universally recognized to be representative of something.”

DC no doubt has a pretty loose definition of the word “iconic,” which it often uses to mean “all of our superheroes, even Vibe.” If I were to list all of DC’s truly iconic characters, the ones most likely to be recognized in the streets of foreign countries and the ones that many other characters have been derived from, my list would end up being pretty small: Superman and all his derivatives (-girl, -boy, maybe Steel), Batman (and –girl) and Robin, Wonder Woman, The Flash, Green Lantern, Aquaman, Captain Marvel (I suppose I’ll get used to calling him “Shazam” some day …) and Plastic Man.

There’s also an excellent article about gay superhero characters in comics here and the author has done plenty of research on the subject.

I’m kind of frustrated by this news as while as I have said on previous occasions I fully support diversity in comics, this changes the original character almost to the point where one has to wonder how much of Martin Nodell and Bill Finger’s character is left?

Why not just create a new Green Lantern who happens to be gay instead of warping reality in order to ‘catch up with times’? Is that level of modification really what is needed in order to inject something other than a white straight Anglo-Saxon into comic books?

It reminds me of the holiday specials of old where all of the characters are excited about Christmas, even Superman (well, his parents lived in the midwest, they probably took their space orphan to church). Are there no superheroes of different religious/cultural backgrounds? They ALL celebrate Christmas… SERIOUSLY?? And nearly every alternate future story has a Ken and Barbie match-up between superheroes who have gotten married and all have children. Not one of them remained single? None of them are gay? ALL OF THEM HAD CHILDREN?

It strikes me that comics have a very very long road to maturity and maybe all things considered they should remain places where thugs wear bandannas and caps and are knocked out by giant green boxing gloves. Save the social commentary for the pundits.

Unless you’re a socially conscious publisher like DC… way way back in the day.



50 thoughts on “Green Lantern reinvented as gay superhero

  1. It seems like DC said “Now which of our “iconic” characters can we turn gay? Firestorm (he *is* “flaming”…sorry!)? Red Tornado? Ragman? The Creeper?” “No, No, No, No… Wait, I’ve got it! You know that ALL gay men dress flamboyantly, y’know like Liberace, it’s a proven FACT, so it *has* to be Alan Scott!” “Yes. Perfect. A man who wears a costume so garishly camp that even Elton John in the ’70s would have thought twice. Yep. Gay people are going to be positively *thrilled*!”. Genius.
    DC crowing about this seems ludicrous. It’s not as if it’s Batman or the primary Green Lantern, is it?
    The whole new DC relaunch of the “Justice Society” seems lame, divorcing them from what made them different. I fear that DC’s idea of characterisation for Scott will be er that he is gay, which is pathetic and insulting to gay people and well everyone.
    Think about it this way : the two major relaunches/revamps of DC in the mid- to late-Fifties and the mid- to late-eighties really shook up the characters, we got new versions of the Flash (Barry Allen/Wally West), Green Lantern (Hal Jordan), Hawkman et al, revisions for Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman (all post-Crisis), and new takes on the superteam (Justice League of America/Justice League International) but in the New DCU we’ve mostly had the return of the ’50s pre-Crisis versions of characters or watered down incarnations of ’80s/90s concepts. If DC were *really* concerned about being inventive and adventurous, wouldn’t they have created updated versions of say the Green Lantern (or Flash) ideas and created a new modern take who was the main version and *happened* to be gay? Instead they come up with this pathetic lip service idea and create an Alan Scott who may as well be someone else. Weak. They have all the courage of the Cowardly Lion.


  2. “Opinions?”

    Oooohhhh! oooooh! I have an opinion! My opinion is FUCK YOU DC.

    First, what a stupid corporate move this is. The “who will it be” release already got media attention. And when it is finally announced, how do you think it will be carried? “DC Announces Green Lantern is Gay”. Too bad for anyone hoping that there might be a “Green Lantern 2” movie, where they finally get it right. Believe me the average reader viewer is not going to get the distinction between the various Green Lanterns.

    Second, it doesn;t matter how you rationalize it It the character is an older man, named Alan Scott who wears a red, green and purple suit with a magic ring – it IS the Golden Age Green Lantern. Can DC just not piss on the grave of Bill Finger enough?


  3. This is on ongoing idiocy at DC. Whatever the flavor of the month is — gay, spanish, black, whatever — they feel the need to take an EXISTING character and make them that. Then, when the character fails, they kill them and do it all over again. And again. And again. See Spanish Atom, Lesbian Batwoman, Black GL, etc. etc.
    It’s called creative bankruptcy. They have no clue what to do to save their failing line, so they do things like this.

    The fact that it is a proven non-starter never seems to enter their minds. They like the media praise so much they’re willing to ignore the dismal sales. This disease has even spread to Marvel, with their gay/black/Spanish ultimate Spider-Man. An all-in-one “demographicly correct” hero! They left out transgendered and cross-dressers, but who knows one day we may yet see Mrs. Spidey or Superman in a dress. Of course it goes without saying that all white males are stupid, heartless, evil Nazi racists. Embarrassing.

    As for the people who created the characters to begin with, well, they can just go somewhere and die for all DC/Marvel cares. And far too often that’s exactly what they do. Which is why no one will create NEW characters for them the companies to exploit and steal. A sad situation!


    • I think that you’re operating on some false information on Miles Morales as he is not gay. He’s also not the first reinvention of Spider-Man as a minority (that mantle goes to Miguel O’Hara, the Spider-Man of 2099). Additionally, Miles Morales replaced the Ultimate version of Spider-Man after Peter Parker died. The media were in a tizzy over political agendas gone mad while simultaneously admitting they had no idea what they were talking about as they did not read comics (what comics WOULD Glen Beck read? The Spider?).

      The creation of a gay Batwoman put DC on the spot and not in a good way, causing the delay of her outstanding opening story by Greg Rucka and JH Williams. In the case of both Batwoman and the Miles Morales Spider-Man, the reaction has been positive as the stories are great.

      In my opinion, making Alan Scott gay is disrespectful to the character in much the same way that reinventing the Jay Garrick Golden Age Flash as a doofus is. It’s a lousy story. It’s also an act of desperation to attract readers to Earth-2, possibly resulting in record sales of the first and second issue. And unless the quality of that comic has taken a turn for the better, they will be in for a surprise… not that they’ll read it, I suppose.


  4. I met Martin Nodell years ago at a Heroes Con. I can only imagine his reaction to this news.

    I was thinking the other day how I really hate this trend. I’m not homophobic, and I have no agenda… but we aren’t talking about the real world where real people are born gay and have to find their way in a decidedly anti-gay world… we’re talking about media (be it TV or books or comics or whatever) trying to ride a wave and say “look we like gay people because we made a character gay” and without any substance to back it up…

    IF I were gay, I imagine I would be frustrated that there were no role models or super-heroes that looked like me… but I wouldn’t be appeased or celebrate one of these media-frenzy “look who is gay now” comic events that is more about bandwagon-jumping than actual diversity.

    I give Marvel a slight pass on Northstar, and I’ll tell you why… IF you go back and read John Byrne’s original Alpha Flight series… he laid all the groundwork for Northstar to be gay back then. I give Byrne credit for doing that when nobody wanted to do it… and he didn’t do it for fame and fortune. In fact, he kind of knew nobody would go for it and that’s why he was subtle about it… and frankly, it made for a more realistic character in the Marvel universe… because here we had a mutant, already a looked-down-upon group in the greater Marvel universe… characters that have to hide who they really are from most people… and then buried under that you have a gay character who has to hide that too… even around his mutant friends he feels like he has to hide.

    So… Northstar had the groundwork laid long ago and well before there was any money in having a gay comic character. I still don’t like the way Marvel outed Northstar nor the marriage thing here that smack of publicity more than it seems to be about genuinely supporting the gay community.

    So… back to DC then… and turning an existing character gay that had never been before. I think that should actually be offensive to gay people. In my mind it marginalizes what being gay is most likely about in today’s world. I know it seems better now than say 30+ years ago… but I don’t know. I wish that the powers that be… if they really wanted to support something… would actually support it, even when the money isn’t in it. In other words, and again I’ll give Marvel some credit here… Northstar pops up in various X-books when he isn’t popular… and he hasn’t stopped being gay all these years (at least I don’t think so).

    I would respect DC more if they just created a new character… revealed he (or she) was gay… and stuck with that character. IF the character can’t sell a solo book, bring them back in JLA or something every now and then.

    It’s like what they do with Black characters. Black Lightning pops up now and again to say “see we don’t hate Black people, we have a Black super hero” and then he goes back into the drawer again… I wish DC, for example, had kept more of the “Black Universe” characters like Icon and Static Shock and such around more even when that universe of titles folded… I applauded the effort as a genuine effort to promote diversity… and I wish those characters had stayed around more often than I’ve seen them since.

    And no, I’m not equating black to gay or any variation you might think… I’m just noting a similarity in the way the big companies have treated minority interests and capitalizing on a wave of something to sell books, only to get back off the equality soapbox when it isn’t fashionable any more.


    • The whole idea of a character switching sexual preferences should be ANATHEMA to gays. Again, no normal person is going to care that this is the Alan Scott version of Green Lantern, much less the Earth Q47 (or whatever) version. They are taking a 70-year old character and TURNING him gay.

      Do you think Marvel will ever – EVER – under any rationalization, be allowed to retcon Northstar straight?


      • Two assertions that are wrong and really don’t need much refuting, though sad that such a comment was posted in the first place.


  5. @odkin, while I find it silly that DC are making the new version of Alan Scott gay, to ask whether Marvel would ever retcon Northstar into being hetero is a false equivalency. Firstly they are two different companies, secondly there are vanishingly few gay characters in either Marvel *or* DC while there are hundreds of hetero ones, and finally the “Alan Scott is Gay” concept isn’t strictly speaking a retcon as the New DCU thing has thrown the old interesting versions of the JSA and its characters in the bin so this Alan Scott is basically a *new* version of the character (even though he’s kinda the same confusingly) in a different situation with a new sort-of JSA upcoming which begs the question why they didn’t just create new characters and a new team (the answer is of course money and wanting to get rid of the old JSA whilst still having an alternative “modern” take still around.
    As for your complaints about non-comics readers not understanding that there are different Green Lanterns, well, as they don’t read comics, *that doesn’t matter* and I’m not sure how Alan Scott becoming gay affects the – not very likely – chances of there being a Green Lantern 2. You seem to be implying that a Green Lantern being gay would jeapordize any sequel. How? You are very angry that they’ve made the current Alan Scott gay, fine but some of your other arguments seem a little volcanic.
    I’ll be clear, I think making this pseudo-Alan Scott is pointless but I have no objection to there being a gay Green Lantern, a black Flash or whatever, why should I? Surely any kind of person of whatever sexuality or creed could be a superhero. John Stewart is a good G. L. and there’s no reason for Batwoman not to be a lesbian – no one complains about the legions of hetero heroes no matter how dull, while I’m not in favour of the sexuality changes of extant characters when it makes no sense I’m in favour of diverse characters because it is positive and it reflects the world outside of hellholes where women, gays and others are persecuted or killed


  6. In a couple of years time it will be all change again. At the very least we’ll probably get the original Alan Scott brought back along side this new, younger version. I don’t think the problem lies in making a character gay (you could argue they haven’t, they’ve created a new version who is gay) but changing the whole universe in the first place.

    P.S. to Mr. Odkin, perhaps Bill Finger wouldn’t be as bothered about the sexuality of one of his characters as you seem to be.


    • I keep hearing this “But Bill’s son Fred was gay!” argument. So what? Sorry this seems cruel, but no father with one son would PREFER that his son be gay. So to the extent that homosexuality “took” his one heir, DC is now taking the other one.


      • To clarify my own statement about wondering how Martin Nodell would fell about this… I was not saying that because of homophobia OR even implying that Mr Nodell might share in that view. I was merely saying it from a standpoint that I don’t believe there was a hint of the character being gay as originally created. So the “offense” I allude to is not because gay people are offensive… but rather because arbitrarily retroactively declaring someone gay in an attempt to capitalized on “gay is cool now” media frenzies is a bad thing for everyone. It doesn’t help the gay community at all.


  7. I’m also reminded a bit of the reaction about a month ago to Grant Morrison’s “Batman is gay” conversation… I wonder… if he had said “Alan Scott is gay” would DC have still made this move?


  8. That pesky homosexuality taking people’s “heirs”, even fictional ones now! It’s a plot I tells ya, probably the commies… Oh right, yes, I forgot, it’s 2012 not 1952 a bit late in the day for such nonsense. It makes it appear that being gay is a disease rather than something that just is. There’s more to life than propagating the human species and anyway there’s billions of hetero people to do that (though not all “straight” people want children, quite sensibly in my opinion) while many gay male couples can adopt and gay female couples may use IVF. Like I’ve said a gay Alan Scott is out of nowhere and isn’t really the character any more than it’d be Batman but jeez he’s only being made gay, it’s arguably a stunt on DC’s part, faux liberalism, but it’s no less so than the transformation of Jay Garrick into an ass. Some of the dubious reaction to this news seems to have less to do with Alan Scott going gay (!) and more with their being gay superheroes or comics characters *at all* which is just Sad.


      • Do people (even in the comics world) know that Martin Nodell was an artist at the ad agency that created “Poppin’ Fresh”?

        If they don’t, then that picture probably is really strange… but knowing that… it makes the picture kind of clever… though I guess with the Alan Scott = gay storyline, there is probably someone somewhere with a “coming out” joke about Poppin’ Fresh there.


  9. “James Robinson: We were developing the book for about eight months before the first issue came out, and there’s a part of me that loves the old continuity and everything else. Obviously, I’m a huge fan of DC. But one of the things I felt was that if you’re going to reinvent a universe, you should really go for it. You should go for it the way Grant Morrison has done with Superman or how Geoff Johns has come up with a new origin for the Justice League. With that in mind, the only thing I was sad about in terms of a younger Justice League was that there wasn’t going to be Jade and Obsidian – Obsidian of course being Alan Scott’s gay son. And just as one idea can foster the next, from there I went, “Why don’t I just make Alan Scott gay?” And to Dan Didio’s credit, there wasn’t a moments hesitation on that. He just said, “That’s a great idea,” and we went with it.”

    wow.. lotta thought went into that.


  10. Being gay/lesbian should NOT be encouraged. In any way, shape, or form. A gay couple adopting a child causes the child to be raised in a homosexuallized environment, thus indirectly encouraging it. Some children even envision themselves as wanting to be like the heroes that they read about in their comic books. Subconsciously it encodes the “Desire to be Gay” dream into the minds of those children. Which is an abomination. Children should NOT look up to anyone who’s gay. To be gay is NOT okay. If gays think their needs to be a gay superhero then…so what? Do they have some kind of inferiority complex like those that have play the “racist” card every chance they get? They are NOT “heroes” and they are NOT “super” and they definitly should NOT be given a reason to be proud of it.


    • So many bad ideas in this reply…

      You do realize that in all of history virtually all homosexuals were raised in a heterosexual home, right? I mean, since gay people can’t reproduce themselves without help… most of the babies are in fact coming from heterosexual couples AND most of them are raised in heterosexual homes. So… IF your fear is that homosexuals will raise homosexual kids… how are you going to explain the existence of them in the first place? FYI, that’s a rhetorical question.

      Stupid people adopting kids raises them in a stupid environment, thus indirectly encouraging it… Some children even envision themselves as wanting to be like the stupid people they read about. Subconsciously it encodes the “desire to be stupid” dream in their minds. Children should NOT look up to anyone who is stupid. To be stupid is NOT ok. And so forth…

      You do realize that on top of everything and the backwards notions here… that comics and specifically super-heroes in those comics are ENTIRELY FICTIONAL? Your views on homosexuality in general aside, kids shouldn’t be trying to be like ANY comic character… Comics aren’t real.


      • Look I KNOW that these are fictional characters. Fictional chartacters. Okay? I’m just saying should NOT be something that’s glamorized. Alright?…and so forth.


    • Wow Majin, I am really hoping you do not have children. Small, closed minds like yours should not be allowed to reproduce. Children should be encouraged to be what they want and their friends and family should not love them any less for it. Close minded people like you are what causes the teenage suicides for those who are struggling with trying to come out as being gay. YOU are NOT OK!!! And you know what, I am gay and damn proud of it.


      • I would say that I’m sorry, if you lost a boyfriend due to something similar as this, but I would be lying. Just like I would be lying to say that it would be perfectly fine to be gay. Just because people of like to make it sound like it’s alright…It’s NOT and I’m saying people (NOT just children) should NOT be given the impression to believe otherwise. Just so you know I am very openminded. I just like to be brutally honest. 🙂 You’re gay and proud of it, huh? Guess you don’t have much to be proud of then. I would further explain why it IS wrong, but I seriously doubt that you would understand, anyway.


      • “Just so you know I am very openminded.”- you may want to stop saying that given your statements here. Since you seem to think of yourself as an authority on the lives of others, you are certainly not open-minded at all. You’ve made a decision and closed yourself off to the possibility that you are wrong or even the possibility that you have the right to tell anyone how to live their life (and you don’t).

        Everyone has the right to happiness… unless you get their rocks off by hurting others, that is.


      • Oh please Majin, please enlighten me as to why it is wrong. I am so interested in hearing your extraordinarily open minded point of view. Andf F.Y.I, I did not lose a boyfriend to suicide due to close-minded idiots like you, but many people have. And unlike those with your frame of mind, i have compassion and understanding for people. I have plenty to be proud of and jackasses like you are not going to effect how I think or what I feel. You may be able to intimidate others with your stupid rants, but there’s many others that know the truth. The truth is, you’re just talking out of your @$$ because of how insecure you are about yourself. Your miniscule little life sucks, so to make yourself feel better, you try to make others feel like theirs is nothing. Well, on the positive, at least you have some form of goal in life, congrats!!


      • In the event that you did not see his reply… you really don’t want to see it. Predictably hateful and ignorant with bad grammar to boot.

        I never like to say that a person is a waste of space, but this guy could easily be replaced with 200 pounds of phone books. If his words on this blog are anything to go by, he serves no valid purpose in life.


  11. It didn’t even look like SweetD even tried to talk to him in a decent manner that last time. I don’t think he even tried get any point he was trying to make.


    • They got on each other’s nerved. It was a positive/negative situation, but that’s giving Majin Broly a lot of rope. Majin Broly told SweetD he had nothing to be proud of and that he was not sad about the possible death of a loved one, after all. I don’t think I could personally respond to a comment like that without seeing a haze of red. The man was saying that SweetD’s lifestyle was flat out wrong which is just insanely close-minded and juvenile.

      Majin Broly was clearly baiting SweetD and having a laugh at the same time. His deleted reply included the phrase ‘fudge-packers,’ so if there was any uncertainty about his character or intelligence, you can make an informed decision with that info. I really don’t need that kind of person visiting my blog. He didn’t even have anything to say about the comics or the role that they play in society other than a possible brainwashing threat to children. There are far worse offenders of influencing children aside from the Earth-2 series which I wager is read by very few.

      Homophobia is so rampant that I actually heard a young man say that upon news of the openly gay Batwoman taking over Detective the last thing he wanted to read was a lesbian adventure series… I mean he’s a young male… and Batwoman is a very attractive woman. How could he say such a thing? My only conclusion was that he worried that he’d view her as a three dimensional character rather than a sex object. As it happens, the series was also superbly drawn and well written. His loss (and she’s hotter than Georgia asphalt).


    • @SweetD. I hope you don’t mind my asking, but would you have really listened to him? I mean, if he didn’t speak to you in such a way?


      • If he spoke with any shred of decency, i certainly would have listened to his opinion. I believe people are free to have their opinion, but there is a point where things would get too offensive and someone has to speak out.


  12. Interesting what comes crawling out of the woodwork when certain subjects are mentioned. One couldn’t blame SweetD for his response to Broly’s lead-headed vileness, if his venomous references to “abomination” (as if he were Matthew Hopkins:Witchfinder General or Reverend Stryker from God Loves, Man Kills), his mush-minded nonsense about “encoding”, and twitchy obsession with homosexuality not being portrayed in a positive light anywhere, were not clue enough to his psyche the puerility, ignorance, and gleeful unpleasantness of his responses to SweetD fully revealed his cankered worldview. I admired SJV’s earlier reply and am glad to see he won’t be back (fingers crossed). Frankly, it’s difficult to see how anyone could defend that paranoid medieval outlook or fail to understand why some responses to him (and those like him) become less measured. After all what’s “measured” about someone jetting forth bile insisting that gay people should be made to feel inhuman and worthless, and that comics (and any media) shouldn’t portray being gay as “normal” (whatever *that* is). I mean, firstly the idea that reading a comic with a gay character in it could make you *choose* to be gay or just somehow “gay you up” is boneheadedly hilarious, and secondly the monomaniacal and ignorant focus on gayness as something “wrong” rather than something that just *exists* (and is like heterosexuality nothing to do with morality) is so childishly warped as to beggar belief. I am *faaarrr* from being perfect but I cannot understand that bullying void-minded attitude. I don’t know what it says that some people are so exercised about the “threat” of homosexuality and humaneness, hey they wouldn’t want to look at the real wrongs in the world would they but why would they when they are obviously so *perfect* and “open-minded”. Depressing.


      • Gosh! I was just asking. Now I know how SweetD was feeling. What do you mean ‘baiting’? It just sounded like that’s what he was saying and I just wanted to know if it was what he was saying or not.


      • And I was just asking what your intention was and where you were inferring that statement from. Since I don’t see how SweetD or Hal could be saying that it is ‘wrong to not be gay’ there is the possibility that you are just baiting an argument.

        Hal also responded.


      • Boa, I definitely do not feel that is it wrong to “not be gay”. I have straight friends just like I have gay friends and I love them all. Variety is the spice of life, as they say, things would get pretty boring if everyone was the same. Also, it owuld be quite hypocritical of me if I thought it was wrong to be straight, wouldn’t you think?


  13. Funny. Of course not. I am saying that it’s no more “wrong” to be gay than it is “wrong” to be heterosexual. Neither one is a *choice*.


  14. “Off the cliff and back again” — A Blogger’s Tale (with apologies to J R R Tolkien)

    Wow… take a day off the internet to do some chores and all hell breaks loose. What always amazes me (though by now it shouldn’t) is how easily some get all riled up over stuff that doesn’t really affect them, while simultaneously ignoring actual things they could be doing to better themselves and society. People in general seem determined to be in everyone else’s business while at the same time demanding their own privacy. We have voters demanding the “government stay out” of their lives, but also demanding the government outlaw gay marriage. “Government stay out of my religion except to enforce that religion on other people.”

    There’s also the all-or-none and with-me-or-against-me mentality that sends people to extremes. Apparently if you don’t hate all things gay and want to expunge them from all of reality, then you must be “one of them”… Frankly, though, while not ever having been gay or entirely understanding what it might be to actually be gay… I would much rather be mistaken for a gay man than mistaken for one of the anti-gay ranters. Heck, I might even suggest this as a power-of-positive-thinking topic for any gay person depressed and stressed over life… the “it gets better” campaign ought to be supplemented with a “it could be worse, you could be THAT guy” campaign against ignorance.

    People sometimes say and do such things that it kinds of depresses me to think I share a lot of chromosomes with them…


  15. James Robinson had what is probably the “duh” quote of the week regarding this story…

    James Robinson (I’m paraphrasing a bit) stated Alan Scott will not be the only gay character on Earth-2.


    I should hope not… otherwise he would be awfully lonely!


  16. Been reading some of the crazy stuff on other sites. You know what the really crazy part is?

    The overwhelming majority of posts I see by people that hate this, are strongly anti-gay in general and are saying things like “comics are going to turn kids gay”… these are people who as it happens don’t read comics and don’t appear to know anyone who reads comics. Kind of like when Superman “died” and everyone went nuts on the national news… you know all the people who never read comics anyway and thought Superman dying was going to ruin comics?

    Meanwhile… the people who maybe should be mad? Fans of Alan Scott who not only get another retcon to his history BUT also lose his wife and kids (Jade & Obsidian) to this revamp… fans of comics in general… people who actually read comics sometimes… These are the people having reasonable discussions and either not caring because the new “Earth 2 sucks anyway” or “it isn’t really the real Alan Scott” or “it is an alternate universe”… or people who think DC is just bandwagon hopping to stir up news and sales.

    Funny how that works out… the people who get most riled up by stuff like this are people who have no skin in the game. People with an actual interest seem to be way more reasonable.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s