Green Lantern is Gay

[ReiverCorrupter]

At least people realize that maybe their entirely heterosexual fictional world may be a little unrealistic.

Who said any of the heroes was hetero? Unless they've actually said they are straight, there's no reason to assume they aren't bi, gay or otherwise queer.

I am so sick of people caring about sexuality, I could puke. /rant

So if people don't ask, they won't tell

To be honest i have trouble seeing your point. Sexuality is still a massive dividing issue in the US and so its hard NOT to care about sexuality one way or another. Personally i think the wholesale attack on gay rights by some states is pretty disgusting and warps the legal rights of all non married couples.

It's all just so draining and idiotic. One side thinks what two or more adults feel or share together is any of their fucking business and the other side won't shut up about what they do in private. I'm just so over the whole thing. I don't give a flying shit who you love or who you wanna do the dirty with or how (so long as they are an adult and consent, blah, blah, blah) and no one else should either. That this little stunt is "necessary" is just salt on my aching wound of not giving a shit.

Why can't people just not care? What in sanity's name is stopping people from waking up tomorrow and going "oh hey, who gives a fuck what sexuality someone describes themselves as?" Are you gay? I don't care. Are you straight? I don't give a crap. Something else? Zero shits are given. In the most non-narcissistic way possible... why can't people just be like me in this regard?

Sorry for ranting in your direction. Nothing against you. You seem quite nice. I am just so, so, so, so over sexuality being an issue. Could you tell?

You're not alone, buddy.

It was bad enough when the right wingers (Imbecilicus Religiosus) were constantly going on about "protecting marriage" (whatever the FUCK that's supposed to mean). But now there's a growing amount of radical progressives (Sui-Istus Douchebagicus) who no longer abide by the principle of tolerance or minding your own business and have instead taken it upon themselves to actively proselytize and browbeat people into accepting other people's lifestyles. If you disagree with them then you must be a bigot. If you even say that homosexuality grosses you out but that you're fine with gay people getting married, you're STILL a bigot. Upon close zoological investigation it turns out that they're really just two species belonging to the genus: Assholus Ignoramus.

 

[Tony2077]

why green lantern did they pick straws or something?

 

[Unesh52]

I notice a lot of people saying "who cares?" And indeed, that should be a attitude when a prominent fictional character is gay. But the fact of the matter is that until recently, writing a gay character in this context would have been unthinkable; it would have caused a major backlash. The fact that this can happen, and furthermore that he can just be gay, rather than making his sexuality the whole point, represents a significant turn in public attitudes towards sexuality. I mean, it's not that significant, but my point is that it's not significant because it's great that it happened, it's significant because it's great that it could happen.

And btw, his boyfriend is cute. Just saying.

 

[him over there]

I notice a lot of people saying "who cares?" And indeed, that should be a attitude when a prominent fictional character is gay. But the fact of the matter is that until recently, writing a gay character in this context would have been unthinkable; it would have caused a major backlash. The fact that this can happen, and furthermore that he can just be gay, rather than making his sexuality the whole point, represents a significant turn in public attitudes towards sexuality. I mean, it's not that significant, but my point is that it's not significant because it's great that it happened, it's significant because it's great that it could happen.

And btw, his boyfriend is cute. Just saying.

The thing is even though it's great that a fictional character context can just be gay DC made him gay for the sake of Publicity. It's the reason they were all like "OMG guys who's it going to be?"

 

[Unesh52]

The thing is even though it's great that a fictional character context can just be gay DC made him gay for the sake of Publicity. It's the reason they were all like "OMG guys who's it going to be?"

I think DC can be rightly criticized for that approach. But the responses I was talking about are dismissing the character re-write in general, not just for DC's handling of the situation or their motivations, and I still think they were missing the point that makes this story interesting.

 

[him over there]

The thing is even though it's great that a fictional character context can just be gay DC made him gay for the sake of Publicity. It's the reason they were all like "OMG guys who's it going to be?"

I think DC can be rightly criticized for that approach. But the responses I was talking about are dismissing the character re-write in general, not just for DC's handling of the situation or their motivations, and I still think they were missing the point that makes this story interesting.

Oh that I understand. It especially seems like a cop out on DC's part because they're like "OMG we're shaking things up look how progressive we are guys!" but not only are they being progressive for the sake of being progressive which is arguably a perversion of the entire gay rights movement but they don't even really follow through and do something entirely inconsequential by making "a" green lantern but not "the" green lantern gay. It defeats the purpose of alerting the public because it doesn't really change anything which means it doesn't even work as a publicity stunt.

 

[Unesh52]

Oh that I understand. It especially seems like a cop out on DC's part because they're like "OMG we're shaking things up look how progressive we are guys!" but not only are they being progressive for the sake of being progressive which is arguably a perversion of the entire gay rights movement but they don't even really follow through and do something entirely inconsequential by making "a" green lantern but not "the" green lantern gay. It defeats the purpose of alerting the public because it doesn't really change anything which means it doesn't even work as a publicity stunt.

What do you mean they changed "a" Green Lanturn? I thought this was the reboot one, so he's the only current official GL in existence. Certainly they wouldn't retcon the older stories so that he is gay in those. I don't really read comics, so I might be misunderstanding something basic here.

 

[him over there]

Oh that I understand. It especially seems like a cop out on DC's part because they're like "OMG we're shaking things up look how progressive we are guys!" but not only are they being progressive for the sake of being progressive which is arguably a perversion of the entire gay rights movement but they don't even really follow through and do something entirely inconsequential by making "a" green lantern but not "the" green lantern gay. It defeats the purpose of alerting the public because it doesn't really change anything which means it doesn't even work as a publicity stunt.

What do you mean they changed "a" Green Lanturn? I thought this was the reboot one, so he's the only current official GL in existence. Certainly they wouldn't retcon the older stories so that he is gay in those. I don't really read comics, so I might be misunderstanding something basic here.

What I mean is that Hal Jordan is the most iconic green lantern and the one that even people not versed in the series would know about so changing a different one defeats the purpose of the publicity stunt. Other than that it makes sense since I believe Alan Scott is the Gl featured in the new continuity.

 

[Winnosh]

Oh that I understand. It especially seems like a cop out on DC's part because they're like "OMG we're shaking things up look how progressive we are guys!" but not only are they being progressive for the sake of being progressive which is arguably a perversion of the entire gay rights movement but they don't even really follow through and do something entirely inconsequential by making "a" green lantern but not "the" green lantern gay. It defeats the purpose of alerting the public because it doesn't really change anything which means it doesn't even work as a publicity stunt.

What do you mean they changed "a" Green Lanturn? I thought this was the reboot one, so he's the only current official GL in existence. Certainly they wouldn't retcon the older stories so that he is gay in those. I don't really read comics, so I might be misunderstanding something basic here.

What I mean is that Hal Jordan is the most iconic green lantern and the one that even people not versed in the series would know about so changing a different one defeats the purpose of the publicity stunt. Other than that it makes sense since I believe Alan Scott is the Gl featured in the new continuity.

Ok this is gonna be sorta confusing for people. Yeah DC Rebooted their continuities... Sorta. You see All of the Green Lantern and Batman and a few other characters and comics got to keep their continuities. IE while Superman and wonderwoman's comics got reset to issue one Green Lantern and Batman comics didn't and are pretty much just rolling on like nothing happened... Except when they cross over with other characters.

 

[GloatingSwine]

What do you mean they changed "a" Green Lanturn? I thought this was the reboot one, so he's the only current official GL in existence. Certainly they wouldn't retcon the older stories so that he is gay in those. I don't really read comics, so I might be misunderstanding something basic here.

If you think they've suddenly written Hal, John, Guy, and Kyle out of continuity then you're madder than you look.

They'll be back, especially Hal, he's the one who most comic readers think of when you mention Green Lantern. Alan Scott, even though he was the original, isn't.

Also, Alan Scott was involved in an interesting story not unrelated to this subject in the previous continuity, as his son was gay and he, as someone from an earlier and less accepting generation (the JSA characters in old continuity were just that, older), had to cope with that.

Since the "new 52" is a massive retcon they can certainly wipe out all of that storytelling, but it's a poor way to have a gay "iconic" character for the sake of tokenism.

Hell, they integrated the Wildstorm universe, just publish a headline title for Midnighter and Apollo, hell, that was back in 1998 and Warren Ellis managed to throw in copies of Batman and Superman as a gay couple without it being parody or tokenism, they were just two solid characters who happened to be in a relationship.

 

[Cecilthedarkknight_234]

hmm does the affect the justice league cartoon from the 90's green lantern as well??

 

[LadyRhian]

hmm does the affect the justice league cartoon from the 90's green lantern as well??

No. The original Green Lantern, Alan Scott, the one they are talking about here, is different from the Green Lanterns run by the big-headed Blue Guys on Oa. This GL found a magical lantern in the ground (more like a Genie Lantern than the Bullseye Lantern the Oan GL's use, and it was powered by magic). Instead of being weak against the color yellow, it was weak against wood. Different thing entirely. The original GL was part of the JSA, the Justice Society of America, in the 1940's, not the JLA or Justice League of America of more modern times.

 

[reachforthesky]

Scott's sexuality will be just one aspect of the character, and it won't define him.

I'm confused. Is this change only acceptable if being gay does not define him?

No, but it would be little more than a campaign stunt if he was just going to be "the gay character", not to mention somewhat offensive to gay people. This is suppose to be DC showing that they try to write real characters, not making a hyper-sexualized gay character to be edgy or fill a quota.

 

[nightwolf667]

Oh that I understand. It especially seems like a cop out on DC's part because they're like "OMG we're shaking things up look how progressive we are guys!" but not only are they being progressive for the sake of being progressive which is arguably a perversion of the entire gay rights movement but they don't even really follow through and do something entirely inconsequential by making "a" green lantern but not "the" green lantern gay. It defeats the purpose of alerting the public because it doesn't really change anything which means it doesn't even work as a publicity stunt.

What do you mean they changed "a" Green Lanturn? I thought this was the reboot one, so he's the only current official GL in existence. Certainly they wouldn't retcon the older stories so that he is gay in those. I don't really read comics, so I might be misunderstanding something basic here.

He's the main Green Lantern on Earth 2, which is a separate universe. In the main reboot continuity, I think we actually have most of the other main GLs already in continuity. Hal Jordan, Kyle Rainer, John Stewart, and Guy Gardner. So, it's really not that big a leap and if he doesn't work out they can just can him. Also, since he's only gay on Earth 2, it could mean that he's not on their main Earth, just in case it doesn't work out. It's not that brave a move really given that they picked the one that would offend the fewest of their readers. It's like saying: "Yeah we'll make one Green Lantern gay, but don't worry guys! It's not going to be anyone that you actually care about! And besides! You still have five other human Lanterns to pick from!" Had they actually chosen the Barry Allen Flash, Hal Jordan, Batman, or Superman I'd be more impressed. But this, it's just sort of meh.

Also am I the only one who finds it ironic that they deaged and rebooted Alan Scott on Earth 2, the timestream that was originally designed for the kids of the DC superheroes. The place where time passed normally and everyone got married and had kids? I mean, Helena Wayne and Power Girl are already in the reboot. So trading in Obsidian, Alan Scott's already gay son for the father seems silly. They could have picked Guy or Rainer, but no.

And I get that Alan Scott was iconic within the DC setting being the original Green Lantern, but he hasn't been iconic in the public consciousness for a long time. I don't think he's ever even appeared on any of the cartoon shows. He got a nod in Smallville once, but not in name. In the context of them adding more diversity to their cast it's great, but when you think about how brave they could have been and how badly they chickened out. It's really just kind of sad.

 

[Treefingers]

Green Lantern is Gay.Nobody cares.Lets move on

I care. Lots of people care.

 

[Atmos Duality]

*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.

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

At least people realize that maybe their entirely heterosexual fictional world may be a little unrealistic.

Who said any of the heroes was hetero? Unless they've actually said they are straight, there's no reason to assume they aren't bi, gay or otherwise queer.

I am so sick of people caring about sexuality, I could puke. /rant

So if people don't ask, they won't tell

To be honest i have trouble seeing your point. Sexuality is still a massive dividing issue in the US and so its hard NOT to care about sexuality one way or another. Personally i think the wholesale attack on gay rights by some states is pretty disgusting and warps the legal rights of all non married couples.

It's all just so draining and idiotic. One side thinks what two or more adults feel or share together is any of their fucking business and the other side won't shut up about what they do in private. I'm just so over the whole thing. I don't give a flying shit who you love or who you wanna do the dirty with or how (so long as they are an adult and consent, blah, blah, blah) and no one else should either. That this little stunt is "necessary" is just salt on my aching wound of not giving a shit.

Why can't people just not care? What in sanity's name is stopping people from waking up tomorrow and going "oh hey, who gives a fuck what sexuality someone describes themselves as?" Are you gay? I don't care. Are you straight? I don't give a crap. Something else? Zero shits are given. In the most non-narcissistic way possible... why can't people just be like me in this regard?

Sorry for ranting in your direction. Nothing against you. You seem quite nice. I am just so, so, so, so over sexuality being an issue. Could you tell?

You're not alone, buddy.

It was bad enough when the right wingers (Imbecilicus Religiosus) were constantly going on about "protecting marriage" (whatever the FUCK that's supposed to mean). But now there's a growing amount of radical progressives (Sui-Istus Douchebagicus) who no longer abide by the principle of tolerance or minding your own business and have instead taken it upon themselves to actively proselytize and browbeat people into accepting other people's lifestyles. If you disagree with them then you must be a bigot. If you even say that homosexuality grosses you out but that you're fine with gay people getting married, you're STILL a bigot. Upon close zoological investigation it turns out that they're really just two species belonging to the genus: Assholus Ignoramus.

Your post was both laugh out loud hilarious and spot on intelligent. If there was some kind of internet medal, you'd get it.

 

[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.