Major change for original X-Man

[COI]

More needless PC shoehorning.

 

No not needless, necessary. Gay characters are completely underrepresented in comics compared to the actual percentage of people who are gay in society. It's important for gay comic fans that they can at least read a comic that has a character who's personal experiences they can relate too. Even if that comic has to be the convoluted mess that's Xmen..

 

If gay characters are necessary, then they need to create them, not retcon long established characters.

 

As Revol stated, in the real world gay people are closeted for years living dual lives and carrying on with "accepted" societal standards. Why should the Marvel Universe as it has been more closely tied to the real world regarding their characters and how they behave, interact etc. be any different?

 

You've got the right stuff.

[F For Fake]

Superheroes and "retconning" are staples of the medium. How many characters have been retconned to be alive, dead, aliens, ghosts, or god knows what all? So retconning a character to be gay is no more offensive to me than retconning them to be a clone. It wasn't how the character was originally created, but superhero comics are a constantly evolving mythology, a long-form story being told, in the case of many Marvel and DC heroes, over the course of several decades, by countless creators. These characters were made to be changed.

 

So a time-displaced version of Iceman is gay now. Who cares? As a straight male comic reader who is used to the constant shifting of character storylines, it doesn't matter a bit to me. To a gay reader who sees very few characters in mainstream superhero comics that they can relate to, it may matter a whole lot. So go for it. I don't doubt a bit that Marvel's intentions are financially motivated, because, you know, they're a business. And what their research must tell them is that comics readership is getting more diverse, and women, people of color, LGBTQ, folks are reading more comics, and want to see themselves represented. So Marvel makes more money, and meanwhile makes more of their readers happy.

 

Seems like a win-win.

 

If straight, white male readers only want to read about straight, white male superheroes, they still have about 95% of the world of superhero comics to choose from.

 

 

[Rip]

First Colossus now Ice Man

[Azkaban]

So Polaris, Jean, Opal, Kitty and others... all beards then? Sure, Marvel. Sure.

 

Hey! I just had a stroke of genius! (or maybe just a stroke)

 

Coming to Marvel this summer, the crossover event to end all crossover events, Gender Jumble, girl is boy, boy is girl, which side are you on? (The answer of course, is both) ....presented over 12 weeks with 1,439 variant covers.

 

Shhhh... keep it down or they'll hear you! I don't need another 1439 comics to go on my wishlist to make my Complete X-Everything collection even bigger!

 

yes you do. Look for the uber rare gold foil and lenticular covers.

 

Why cant we have any female characters coming out accompanied by graphic depictions of their curious findings

 

 

I'm sitting at work reading thru this and that just made me laugh out loud

[dyelan]

Lets flip it around. Why do people who have been following and identifying with an established characters experiences for 50 years now have to be alienated?

 

Make a new character.

[Comicopolis]

Where's conditionfreak when he's needed

[Park]

More needless PC shoehorning.

 

No not needless, necessary. Gay characters are completely underrepresented in comics compared to the actual percentage of people who are gay in society. It's important for gay comic fans that they can at least read a comic that has a character who's personal experiences they can relate too. Even if that comic has to be the convoluted mess that's Xmen..

 

If gay characters are necessary, then they need to create them, not retcon long established characters.

 

As Revol stated, in the real world gay people are closeted for years living dual lives and carrying on with "accepted" societal standards. Why should the Marvel Universe as it has been more closely tied to the real world regarding their characters and how they behave, interact etc. be any different?

 

You've got the right stuff.

 

Baby.

[Comicopolis]

Lets flip it around. Why do people who have been following and identifying with an established characters experiences for 50 years now have to be alienated?

 

Make a new character.

 

Why would they be alienated?

[Park]

Where's conditionfreak when he's needed

 

Oh, he has company.

[COI]

Lets flip it around. Why do people who have been following and identifying with an established characters experiences for 50 years now have to be alienated?

 

Make a new character.

 

Why alienate gays or lesbians from identifying with a long-established character?

[Park]

Lets flip it around. Why do people who have been following and identifying with an established characters experiences for 50 years now have to be alienated?

 

Make a new character.

 

Alienated how?

[Comicopolis]

Where's conditionfreak when he's needed

 

Oh, he has company.

 

I know. I love it when they come out of the closet.

[Park]

Superheroes and "retconning" are staples of the medium. How many characters have been retconned to be alive, dead, aliens, ghosts, or god knows what all? So retconning a character to be gay is no more offensive to me than retconning them to be a clone. It wasn't how the character was originally created, but superhero comics are a constantly evolving mythology, a long-form story being told, in the case of many Marvel and DC heroes, over the course of several decades, by countless creators. These characters were made to be changed.

 

So a time-displaced version of Iceman is gay now. Who cares? As a straight male comic reader who is used to the constant shifting of character storylines, it doesn't matter a bit to me. To a gay reader who sees very few characters in mainstream superhero comics that they can relate to, it may matter a whole lot. So go for it. I don't doubt a bit that Marvel's intentions are financially motivated, because, you know, they're a business. And what their research must tell them is that comics readership is getting more diverse, and women, people of color, LGBTQ, folks are reading more comics, and want to see themselves represented. So Marvel makes more money, and meanwhile makes more of their readers happy.

 

Seems like a win-win.

 

If straight, white male readers only want to read about straight, white male superheroes, they still have about 95% of the world of superhero comics to choose from.

 

 

Dig it.

 

Good post.

[Comicopolis]

Lets flip it around. Why do people who have been following and identifying with an established characters experiences for 50 years now have to be alienated?

 

Make a new character.

 

Alienated how?

 

[Comicopolis]

Superheroes and "retconning" are staples of the medium. How many characters have been retconned to be alive, dead, aliens, ghosts, or god knows what all? So retconning a character to be gay is no more offensive to me than retconning them to be a clone. It wasn't how the character was originally created, but superhero comics are a constantly evolving mythology, a long-form story being told, in the case of many Marvel and DC heroes, over the course of several decades, by countless creators. These characters were made to be changed.

 

So a time-displaced version of Iceman is gay now. Who cares? As a straight male comic reader who is used to the constant shifting of character storylines, it doesn't matter a bit to me. To a gay reader who sees very few characters in mainstream superhero comics that they can relate to, it may matter a whole lot. So go for it. I don't doubt a bit that Marvel's intentions are financially motivated, because, you know, they're a business. And what their research must tell them is that comics readership is getting more diverse, and women, people of color, LGBTQ, folks are reading more comics, and want to see themselves represented. So Marvel makes more money, and meanwhile makes more of their readers happy.

 

Seems like a win-win.

 

If straight, white male readers only want to read about straight, white male superheroes, they still have about 95% of the world of superhero comics to choose from.

 

 

Dig it.

 

Good post.

 

Absolutely.

[Park]

Lets flip it around. Why do people who have been following and identifying with an established characters experiences for 50 years now have to be alienated?

 

Make a new character.

 

Alienated how?

 

 

Psssshhhhh.

 

Brevity.

[faster friends]

 

What does it mean "completely underrepresented"? This already implies an ideologic stance, as there is nothing to give for granted about the very concept itself of "gay people".

These are not themes you can/should hand lightly, and this is precisely what they are doing. You have at least to admit their controversial nature, and they do not care the least: that is precisely political correctness or an ideologic stance, which is even worse (like Neil Gaiman did with his anti-catholic stances in 1602, for example).

 

I just mean with the thousands of characters in the Marvel universe, it statistically makes sense that a percentage of those characters should be homosexual to reflect real world demographics, and if a character like Iceman turns out to be gay, and from what I have read it seems he was closeted, that is actually a realistic scenario that some people experience in real life. I think that's an important aspect of what has made Marvel so important to it's fans over the decades, that it has made superheroes have human experiences that readers can relate to

 

This makes a huge amount of sense and works perfectly both realistically and in the setting of the Marvel Universe.

 

Granted, I think Marvel did this for other reasons completely but still.

 

Does not make sense at all. Comics do not have to reflect the demographic of the real world. It's a fake universe people...

[Comicopolis]

Lets flip it around. Why do people who have been following and identifying with an established characters experiences for 50 years now have to be alienated?

 

Make a new character.

 

Alienated how?

 

 

Psssshhhhh.

 

Brevity.

 

If he answers you first I will be upset.

[COI]

 

What does it mean "completely underrepresented"? This already implies an ideologic stance, as there is nothing to give for granted about the very concept itself of "gay people".

These are not themes you can/should hand lightly, and this is precisely what they are doing. You have at least to admit their controversial nature, and they do not care the least: that is precisely political correctness or an ideologic stance, which is even worse (like Neil Gaiman did with his anti-catholic stances in 1602, for example).

 

I just mean with the thousands of characters in the Marvel universe, it statistically makes sense that a percentage of those characters should be homosexual to reflect real world demographics, and if a character like Iceman turns out to be gay, and from what I have read it seems he was closeted, that is actually a realistic scenario that some people experience in real life. I think that's an important aspect of what has made Marvel so important to it's fans over the decades, that it has made superheroes have human experiences that readers can relate to

 

This makes a huge amount of sense and works perfectly both realistically and in the setting of the Marvel Universe.

 

Granted, I think Marvel did this for other reasons completely but still.

 

Does not make sense at all. Comics do not have to reflect the demographic of the real world. It's a fake universe people...

 

Except for the fact that it's the "real world" buying the books.

[Comicopolis]

 

What does it mean "completely underrepresented"? This already implies an ideologic stance, as there is nothing to give for granted about the very concept itself of "gay people".

These are not themes you can/should hand lightly, and this is precisely what they are doing. You have at least to admit their controversial nature, and they do not care the least: that is precisely political correctness or an ideologic stance, which is even worse (like Neil Gaiman did with his anti-catholic stances in 1602, for example).

 

I just mean with the thousands of characters in the Marvel universe, it statistically makes sense that a percentage of those characters should be homosexual to reflect real world demographics, and if a character like Iceman turns out to be gay, and from what I have read it seems he was closeted, that is actually a realistic scenario that some people experience in real life. I think that's an important aspect of what has made Marvel so important to it's fans over the decades, that it has made superheroes have human experiences that readers can relate to

 

This makes a huge amount of sense and works perfectly both realistically and in the setting of the Marvel Universe.

 

Granted, I think Marvel did this for other reasons completely but still.

 

Does not make sense at all. Comics do not have to reflect the demographic of the real world. It's a fake universe people...

 

So why do people get so upset about changes to fake characters in a fake universe?

 

If comic publishers don't reflect the demographic I would think that their sales would suffer.