Green Lantern is Gay

[Diana Kingston-Gabai]

My big thing is that this, just like giving Barbara back the use of her legs does not help diversify the DCU it lessens the diversity. And this Alan Scott is Alan in name only, he shares nothing in common with the original he's pretty much a completely different character with a different origin, different supporting cast, different personality.

In Essence They HAVE made an new character and just slapped his name on it to say he's Iconic. That's another reason I'm upset. Those things from before were what defined him.

There was a time when being an absolute prick to Lois Lane was what defined Superman, and when the scariest thing the Joker ever did was throw giant custard pies at Batman. These aren't static, rigidly-defined characters, especially given DC's tendency to hit the reboot button over and over. So yes, those things from before defined the Alan Scott of before; now they don't.

And, realistically speaking, if this actually was a genuine attempt at diversity (as opposed to spotlight-hogging, which of course is the more likely scenario), then I understand why DC used an established character - new characters very rarely catch on, and if their New Gay Hero was cancelled after six issues, it would look very bad for DC (especially after their relatively recent racefail with Jaime Reyes, Jason Rusch and Ryan Choi).

 

[bafrali]

Green Lantern is Gay.Nobody cares.Lets move on

I care. Lots of people care.

So?What i meant was it is not a big deal as this was just an excuse to compete with Marvel in PC stunt and they used a relatively obscure version of an "iconic" character.I don't hold grudge against game developers who use scantily-clad hot chicks in their ads.I just say it is stupid and move along.I think everyone should too.

How about we discuss whatever we want to discuss? thankuverymuch

When i said let's move on, i trusted that people would take it as a friendly advice rather than a forceful propaganda.But i guess depending on other people to fill the blanks was too much.I will put it into consideration.Thanks

 

[Alar]

I'm pretty sure most people expected they would choose a woman, since lesbians in their mind = what people who read comic books (AKA teens/young men) would want.

Also, I accidentally clicked the Report button on this article. Sorry Andy! Seriously, it was a mistake! >.<

 

[Winnosh]

My big thing is that this, just like giving Barbara back the use of her legs does not help diversify the DCU it lessens the diversity. And this Alan Scott is Alan in name only, he shares nothing in common with the original he's pretty much a completely different character with a different origin, different supporting cast, different personality.

In Essence They HAVE made an new character and just slapped his name on it to say he's Iconic. That's another reason I'm upset. Those things from before were what defined him.

There was a time when being an absolute prick to Lois Lane was what defined Superman, and when the scariest thing the Joker ever did was throw giant custard pies at Batman. These aren't static, rigidly-defined characters, especially given DC's tendency to hit the reboot button over and over. So yes, those things from before defined the Alan Scott of before; now they don't.

And, realistically speaking, if this actually was a genuine attempt at diversity (as opposed to spotlight-hogging, which of course is the more likely scenario), then I understand why DC used an established character - new characters very rarely catch on, and if their New Gay Hero was cancelled after six issues, it would look very bad for DC (especially after their relatively recent racefail with Jaime Reyes, Jason Rusch and Ryan Choi).

There is a difference between subtle personality tweaks and changing everything about the character. This character doesn't have two superhero kids, This character has never been in WW2 This character was never married this character new character wasn't directly responsible for getting a large majority of the DCU both trained as well as giving them the insperation to become superheroes in the first place.

This isn't changing subtle things about the character's behavior like those other things you mentioned. This is creating a new character and slapping an old character's name on it. They have nothing in common other than power set. Even where they got those powers is gonna be different.

 

[Da Orky Man]

Man, and I was sure it would be matter eater lad.

Was that a real comic?

I've stopped wondering that. I've seen such a hilariously huge number of comic strips that bad or worse on the internet, nothing surprises me anymore.

I'm really hoping that's a joke comic. I've seen chatbots that could write better dialogue.

 

[Winnosh]

Man, and I was sure it would be matter eater lad.

Was that a real comic?

I've stopped wondering that. I've seen such a hilariously huge number of comic strips that bad or worse on the internet, nothing surprises me anymore.

I'm really hoping that's a joke comic. I've seen chatbots that could write better dialogue.

Its real Matter Eater Lad is actually pretty cool, eventually retires from being a Superhero and becomes a lawyer.

 

[Cyberjester]

Yes, good on them for redoing one of their characters as homosexual thus pleasing the homosexual movement whilst annoying every comic fan and so inciting conflict.

They could have just introduced a whole new character and made his homosexuality a part of him instead of slapped on in the name of rights, but no. Causing a fight is definitely the best way to go about it. -.- Funnily enough, this way his homosexuality will define him to all the new fans he gets since the only reason he'll be the most popular character on the web is _because_ he got changed to a homosexual.

Note that changing sexual preference is different to changing age (although why change at all?) since no-one cares about age. Boy Wonder won't be Boy any more and he'll need a new name, but if you made him an old man then the amount of people who cared apart from purists will be infinitesimally small. The amount of people who will bother to create an organisation to protest changing who you f*** around on the other hand is so large that I'll need a Hitchhikers moment to explain it.

Good times watching the reaction though.

 

[Cyberjester]

*shrugs*
So his sexuality changed. So what?
Was this really a pivotal part of his character?

Or is it just pandering to appeal to the Homosexual Rights movement?
Such a change is meaningless unless they actually DO SOMETHING with it.

YES Yes his sexuality actually was a pivotal part of his character! It had to do with his relationship with his children. one of whom was gay. It gave the character depth.

People could read comics and not only see a gay superhero if they wanted, they also got his straight dad Who was one of the most importaint superheroes around A living Legend, someone Superman himself grew up hearing stories about, dealing with it and coming to accept him.

Shush, you're ruining the moment.

=P

 

[Winnosh]

Well At least Marvel has a couple of Deaf heroes, We don't have any of those over in DC that I can think of without trying to search the interwebs.

 

[Diana Kingston-Gabai]

This character doesn't have two superhero kids, This character has never been in WW2 This character was never married this character new character wasn't directly responsible for getting a large majority of the DCU both trained as well as giving them the insperation to become superheroes in the first place.

This isn't changing subtle things about the character's behavior like those other things you mentioned. This is creating a new character and slapping an old character's name on it. They have nothing in common other than power set. Even where they got those powers is gonna be different.

What you don't seem to understand is that this is true of every character on Earth-2, and therefore has nothing to do with Alan Scott specifically.

 

[Winnosh]

This character doesn't have two superhero kids, This character has never been in WW2 This character was never married this character new character wasn't directly responsible for getting a large majority of the DCU both trained as well as giving them the insperation to become superheroes in the first place.

This isn't changing subtle things about the character's behavior like those other things you mentioned. This is creating a new character and slapping an old character's name on it. They have nothing in common other than power set. Even where they got those powers is gonna be different.

What you don't seem to understand is that this is true of every character on Earth-2, and therefore has nothing to do with Alan Scott specifically.

Oh I know that, I'm just focusing on him because that's who the thread topic is supposed to be about. Trust me you don't want to get me ranting on the New 52 Reboot as a whole.

 

[Rossmallo]

Well holy crap. This has just made a lot of stuff in The Big Bang Theory a lot funnier in retrospect.

"If you need some extra money, there's about $50 in Green Lantern's ass."

 

[Atmos Duality]

YES Yes his sexuality actually was a pivotal part of his character! It had to do with his relationship with his children. one of whom was gay. It gave the character depth.

People could read comics and not only see a gay superhero if they wanted, they also got his straight dad Who was one of the most importaint superheroes around A living Legend, someone Superman himself grew up hearing stories about, dealing with it and coming to accept him.

As long as they aren't doing it strictly for pandering, then it's fine.
Just color me jaded from the 80s and 90s, where exploitation and PSA comics were at their height.

 

[ThunderCavalier]

He's a man who draws his powers from jewelry, what did you expect?

That's legitimately funny.

Anyway, I've never really followed comic books in particular, so this Green Lantern completely flew over my head. I'm more familiar with Hal Jordan or Ryan Reynolds.

Still, I don't see anyone trying to lynch the people over at the DC offices, so I'm taking it that the reception to this change is fairly positive.

 

[CJ1145]

Anyway, I've never really followed comic books in particular, so this Green Lantern completely flew over my head. I'm more familiar with Hal Jordan or Ryan Reynolds.

I'm just gonna let that one slide...

I was certain it'd be a Green Lantern. I just thought that it would be Kyle Rayner.

 

[BlackWolf100]

I know I shoulden't be part of this topic (as I don't know what gos on in comics thes days) but, from the page cover of the picture, if Alan Scott the blunge chap, then whos that other guy hes kissing to? Robin or a supporting character?

 

[Eamar]

So, purely out of interest, how "iconic" is Green Lantern in the US? I'm not a big DC person, and as far as I can tell he's nigh on unheard of over here in the UK (or was until the movie).

I'm genuinely interested to see how big of a statement they're making with this, basically.

 

[vxicepickxv]

Interesting. DC just outed a character they didn't even create. How... interesting.

 

[BlueKenja]

Why didn't they just develop Obsidian more?

 

[rob_simple]

This was my guess from the start. NAILED IT.