Green Lantern is Gay

[DeimosMasque]

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

Nope, one thing to learn about comic characters... cartoons... each cartoon series or special DVD release are alternate universes that has nothing to do with the comics. Heck this doesn't even effect

Even better the DC reboot makes everything that happened for the previous twenty years to never have never happened. Not Batman RIP, no Identity Crisis (thank god) , no 52 (which Alan Scott was a huge part of the conclusion of), no Countdown (thank god), no Teen Titans, no New Teen Titans, no Infinite Crisis, no Death of Superman... etc. etc.

Instead we got a merge "continuity" that included two characters from Wild CATS that stopped being relevant in 1995, Gen13 characters that were never relevant, overdesigned costumes on nearly every character and Animal Man, Swamp Thing and Aquaman being the best written characters out of the whole thing.

OT: I did call Alan Scott being the one they'd use but I did it based on every single hint they lead. Alan Scott is Iconic, he's one of the first Super-Heroes ever in the DCU. He's also now just part of their 'Earth-2' comic which will probably get cancelled after seven issues.

It's a publicity stunt that actually damages the possibility of a Green Lantern 2 movie (which I didn't think was going to happen anyways) as most non-comic readers will go "Green Lantern's gay? Screw that yo!"

DC pulled a great publicity stunt with this... especially when you consider that they already made a new gay character with the New 52. (Nice job BTW naming you're reboot after a much more successful series, with better writing. Oh wait, you're calling the next set of comics Second Wave? Gee.. I wounder if the series of pulp comics called First Wave was popular.)

This new character, he's Bunker in the Teen Titans comic and the writer pointed out in the interviews published in the first couple of issues how it was important to have the Teen Titans be diverse (Yeah never had a minority in that book... oh wait Cyborg... Oh wait Bumblebee, oh wait Black Adam Jr, oh wait Jericho, oh wait ad nausea.) The writer made a big deal about how this new character was both Latino (the new Latino Blue Beetle was a member of the Titans before the reboot and how he was gay, Slade's son: Jericho was implied to be gay and was a member of the Titans)

I don't mean to sound bitter. I'm bisexual myself and love the idea of seeing more gay, bisexual and transgendered characters in comic books. My problem is forcing the issue.

Batwoman and Rene Montoya was a perfect "Northstar" example. DC writers showed that they were both gay and no issue was made of it. On the other side, making a character gay just to "be gay" is insulting and doesn't help anything. Especially when Alan Scott was the father of a Kyle Ratner (one of the Green Lanterns) love interest and his son was an out of the closet homosexual that Scott had issue with.

Both characters who were interesting and still had many stories to be told about them are now gone. Replaced with mid-90s over-designed nonsense and publicity stunts that will amount to nothing.

 

[DeimosMasque]

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 everyoe should too.

You know the sad thing? Most people are only going to take "DC Comics announces that Green Lantern is Gay," from this? They will think they mean the character from the current cartoon and the movie and never realize the difference.

 

[Winnosh]

*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.

 

[Diana Kingston-Gabai]

If you even say that homosexuality grosses you out but that you're fine with gay people getting married, you're STILL a bigot.

Well... yes. Because if you said black people gross you out but you're fine with them living in your neighborhood, you'd still be a racist.

There comes a point where people need to stop and think before blurting out whatever pops into their head. If you, personally, have a problem with homosexuality, it is by definition your problem and not necessarily something you need to put out into the world.

 

[Diana Kingston-Gabai]

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.

Except, as so many people have already pointed out, that character no longer exists. This is Alan Scott of the New 52, and while you can certainly argue that DC's reboot has been poorly and inconsistently executed, it's not like they've been implying that the Alan Scott you're talking about is still out there somewhere. In this, at least, they've been clear: the Alan Scott who fathered Obsidian is gone, deleted, kaput. You don't have to like that decision - I certainly don't - but it's done.

 

[Winnosh]

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.

Except, as so many people have already pointed out, that character no longer exists. This is Alan Scott of the New 52, and while you can certainly argue that DC's reboot has been poorly and inconsistently executed, it's not like they've been implying that the Alan Scott you're talking about is still out there somewhere. In this, at least, they've been clear: the Alan Scott who fathered Obsidian is gone, deleted, kaput. You don't have to like that decision - I certainly don't - but it's done.

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.

 

[Treefingers]

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

 

[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.