I look forward to the day when the sexuality of any person (real or fictional) is not newsworthy in any way.
Exactly. And if people thought it really shouldn't be an issue for a character to be straight or gay, they wouldn't need to discuss it on a comic con panel as some sort of big idea. They'd just write the stories. Stan Lee and Jack Kirby didn't have to go around and talk about anti-Semitism.... they wove the topic into their story lines seamlessly.
Righto. And those stories still ring true, and have real weight and substance, while the schlock they are producing now is only serving to gain a short 15 minutes of fame, and then be forgotten forever.
Trust me, 90% of everything DC has produced in the last 5 years will be stuffing the back issue bins a few years from now, in exactly the same way you find 90's comics stuffing them today. Pure crap with no intrinsic or redeeming value.
I'm wondering why my post (quoted above) got "flagged"... on my Notifications page, it is listed as "troll". Disagree with me, sure. I am as boneheaded as anyone else... but flag me as a troll? Come on.
Bandwagon or not, it has the opportunity to broaden the universe & add more depth to a male character in a similar fashion to Batwoman if handle properly. Like I said before, I will be interested to see who it is.
Matthew
Sure, good things can come from companies "jumping on the bandwagon" and joining the latest trendy cause.
But I don't think they should be lauded or rewarded for using those causes to further their own goals. Hollow gestures rarely change the world.
There is a bank that asks you to choose it over others because of it's "GO GREEN" checking program. Is "going green" by using my checking card instead of my checkbook really going to change the environment? No... it's just a company using hollow sentiment to make you think they care, when they really favor you using a check card over paper checks, anyway, due to kickbacks and fees.
Don't be fooled. For the past few years, DC has been playing hard at being relevant, hoping to increase public awareness and therefore sales, and this announcement smacks of this.
Bandwagon or not, it has the opportunity to broaden the universe & add more depth to a male character in a similar fashion to Batwoman if handle properly. Like I said before, I will be interested to see who it is.
Matthew
Sure, good things can come from companies "jumping on the bandwagon" and joining the latest trendy cause.
But I don't think they should be lauded or rewarded for using those causes to further their own goals. Hollow gestures rarely change the world.
There is a bank that asks you to choose it over others because of it's "GO GREEN" checking program. Is "going green" by using my checking card instead of my checkbook really going to change the environment? No... it's just a company using hollow sentiment to make you think they care, when they really favor you using a check card over paper checks, anyway, due to kickbacks and fees.
Don't be fooled. For the past few years, DC has been playing hard at being relevant, hoping to increase public awareness and therefore sales, and this announcement smacks of this.
So... you're accusing them of trying to sell comic books?
Bandwagon or not, it has the opportunity to broaden the universe & add more depth to a male character in a similar fashion to Batwoman if handle properly. Like I said before, I will be interested to see who it is.
Matthew
Sure, good things can come from companies "jumping on the bandwagon" and joining the latest trendy cause.
But I don't think they should be lauded or rewarded for using those causes to further their own goals. Hollow gestures rarely change the world.
There is a bank that asks you to choose it over others because of it's "GO GREEN" checking program. Is "going green" by using my checking card instead of my checkbook really going to change the environment? No... it's just a company using hollow sentiment to make you think they care, when they really favor you using a check card over paper checks, anyway, due to kickbacks and fees.
Don't be fooled. For the past few years, DC has been playing hard at being relevant, hoping to increase public awareness and therefore sales, and this announcement smacks of this.
Okay, now the serious answer--
I get what you are saying, and I understand your suspicion. But I think there is an angle that isn't being considered: What if DC actually thinks there is a readership that wants this?
What if- instead of just thinking that what they are doing this is merely ideological, or for a publicity gain- what if it is actually simpler than that? What if it is actually them just trying to sell a book to readers that want this? I mean, that is the business they are in, no?
To put it this way, DC published dozens of books about violent conflict resolution in brightly colored super suits every month because they have good reason to believe that is what their readers (myself included, lest you think I am judging) want.
And we have told them so by buying that product. To give readers what they want is not ideology. It can simply the the business they are in. Five monthly Batman books, or whatever it is these days, is not The Change That DC Wants To See In The World. That is them meeting demand with supply.
Could it not be possible that, in this case, too, they simply think they are meeting a demand? They are in the business of selling comics. Which means they have to sell them. And like all for-profits they need to grow their business. Could this not simply be another way to grow their business?
Remember, whatever praise they might get for doing something that could be seen as ideological (as well as whatever criticism), a few news cycles later that will have faded, and there will still be next month's books to sell. Publicity and even scandal fades fast. At the end of the day, they've got to make the books they think they can sell.
So what if they believe there is an audience that has a demand for a book like this? Is meeting that demand really any different than meeting my demand for a monthly dose of Swamp Thing, Animal Man, and All Star Western?
I look forward to the day when the sexuality of any person (real or fictional) is not newsworthy in any way.
Exactly. And if people thought it really shouldn't be an issue for a character to be straight or gay, they wouldn't need to discuss it on a comic con panel as some sort of big idea. They'd just write the stories. Stan Lee and Jack Kirby didn't have to go around and talk about anti-Semitism.... they wove the topic into their story lines seamlessly.
Righto. And those stories still ring true, and have real weight and substance, while the schlock they are producing now is only serving to gain a short 15 minutes of fame, and then be forgotten forever.
Trust me, 90% of everything DC has produced in the last 5 years will be stuffing the back issue bins a few years from now, in exactly the same way you find 90's comics stuffing them today. Pure crap with no intrinsic or redeeming value.
I'm wondering why my post (quoted above) got "flagged"... on my Notifications page, it is listed as "troll". Disagree with me, sure. I am as boneheaded as anyone else... but flag me as a troll? Come on.
Agreed. Bunch of crybabies not happy with just giving an unhappy face so have to try to censor those they disagree with by flagging them.
Dont believe me? Watch... GRANT MORRISON IS AN IDIOT!! ...wait for it.
Bandwagon or not, it has the opportunity to broaden the universe & add more depth to a male character in a similar fashion to Batwoman if handle properly. Like I said before, I will be interested to see who it is.
Matthew
Sure, good things can come from companies "jumping on the bandwagon" and joining the latest trendy cause.
But I don't think they should be lauded or rewarded for using those causes to further their own goals. Hollow gestures rarely change the world.
There is a bank that asks you to choose it over others because of it's "GO GREEN" checking program. Is "going green" by using my checking card instead of my checkbook really going to change the environment? No... it's just a company using hollow sentiment to make you think they care, when they really favor you using a check card over paper checks, anyway, due to kickbacks and fees.
Don't be fooled. For the past few years, DC has been playing hard at being relevant, hoping to increase public awareness and therefore sales, and this announcement smacks of this.
Okay, now the serious answer--
I get what you are saying, and I understand your suspicion. But I think there is an angle that isn't being considered: What if DC actually thinks there is a readership that wants this?
What if- instead of just thinking that what they are doing this is merely ideological, or for a publicity gain- what if it is actually simpler than that? What if it is actually them just trying to bank on thinking they will be giving some readers what they want?
To put it this way, DC published dozens of books about violent conflict resolution in brightly colored super suits every month because they have good reason to believe that is what their readers (myself included, lest you think I am judging) want. And we have told them so by buying that product. To give readers what they want is not ideology. It can simply be the business they are in. Five monthly Batman books, or whatever it is these days, is not the change that DC wants to see in the world. That is them meeting demand with supply.
Could it not be possible that, in this case, too, they simply think they are meeting a demand? They are in the business of selling comics. Which means they have to sell them. And like all for-profits they need to grow their business. Could this not simply be another way to grow their business?
Remember, whatever praise they might get for doing something that could be seen as ideological (as well as whatever criticism), a few news cycles later that will have faded, and there will still be next month's books to sell. Publicity and even scandal fades fast. At the end of the day, they've got to make the books they think they can sell.
So what if they believe there is an audience that has a demand for a book like this? Is meeting that demand really any different than meeting my demand for a monthly dose of Swamp Thing, Animal Man, and All Star Western?
Or what if they simply have good stories they want to tell with this version of the character?
OK. Probably not.
But still, if Rob Liefeld can sell books, why not The Fabulous Flash or the Gaudy Green Lantern or The Awesome! Atom or whoever?
I look forward to the day when the sexuality of any person (real or fictional) is not newsworthy in any way.
Exactly. And if people thought it really shouldn't be an issue for a character to be straight or gay, they wouldn't need to discuss it on a comic con panel as some sort of big idea. They'd just write the stories. Stan Lee and Jack Kirby didn't have to go around and talk about anti-Semitism.... they wove the topic into their story lines seamlessly.
Righto. And those stories still ring true, and have real weight and substance, while the schlock they are producing now is only serving to gain a short 15 minutes of fame, and then be forgotten forever.
Trust me, 90% of everything DC has produced in the last 5 years will be stuffing the back issue bins a few years from now, in exactly the same way you find 90's comics stuffing them today. Pure crap with no intrinsic or redeeming value.
I'm wondering why my post (quoted above) got "flagged"... on my Notifications page, it is listed as "troll". Disagree with me, sure. I am as boneheaded as anyone else... but flag me as a troll? Come on.
Agreed. Bunch of crybabies not happy with just giving an unhappy face so have to try to censor those they disagree with by flagging them.
Dont believe me? Watch... GRANT MORRISON IS AN IDIOT!! ...wait for it.
Funny... weren't you the one worried about whether or not DC would handle something with maturity?
Yeah I got flagged for abuse because I posted a link to an article stating that said gay character would be an iconic one. Well I guess I learned my lesson not to post links.
Yeah I got flagged for abuse because I posted a link to an article stating that said gay character would be an iconic one. Well I guess I learned my lesson not to post links.
I wouldn't let flagging get you down, or influence your behavior too much one way or the other. It is an anonymous keystroke. And I believe the worst thing that can happen is that five unique flags on a post can sink a single post (and all that does is make it become something you have to give an extra click to make legible). Not worth thinking too much about, I think.
I look forward to the day when the sexuality of any person (real or fictional) is not newsworthy in any way.
Exactly. And if people thought it really shouldn't be an issue for a character to be straight or gay, they wouldn't need to discuss it on a comic con panel as some sort of big idea. They'd just write the stories. Stan Lee and Jack Kirby didn't have to go around and talk about anti-Semitism.... they wove the topic into their story lines seamlessly.
Righto. And those stories still ring true, and have real weight and substance, while the schlock they are producing now is only serving to gain a short 15 minutes of fame, and then be forgotten forever.
Trust me, 90% of everything DC has produced in the last 5 years will be stuffing the back issue bins a few years from now, in exactly the same way you find 90's comics stuffing them today. Pure crap with no intrinsic or redeeming value.
I'm wondering why my post (quoted above) got "flagged"... on my Notifications page, it is listed as "troll". Disagree with me, sure. I am as boneheaded as anyone else... but flag me as a troll? Come on.
Agreed. Bunch of crybabies not happy with just giving an unhappy face so have to try to censor those they disagree with by flagging them.
Dont believe me? Watch... GRANT MORRISON IS AN IDIOT!! ...wait for it.
Funny... weren't you the one worried about whether or not DC would handle something with maturity?
I'm sorry I didnt realize people had been paying $2.99 to read my posts all this time? I have an apple and an orange, shall I explain the difference between them too?
I look forward to the day when the sexuality of any person (real or fictional) is not newsworthy in any way.
Exactly. And if people thought it really shouldn't be an issue for a character to be straight or gay, they wouldn't need to discuss it on a comic con panel as some sort of big idea. They'd just write the stories. Stan Lee and Jack Kirby didn't have to go around and talk about anti-Semitism.... they wove the topic into their story lines seamlessly.
Righto. And those stories still ring true, and have real weight and substance, while the schlock they are producing now is only serving to gain a short 15 minutes of fame, and then be forgotten forever.
Trust me, 90% of everything DC has produced in the last 5 years will be stuffing the back issue bins a few years from now, in exactly the same way you find 90's comics stuffing them today. Pure crap with no intrinsic or redeeming value.
I'm wondering why my post (quoted above) got "flagged"... on my Notifications page, it is listed as "troll". Disagree with me, sure. I am as boneheaded as anyone else... but flag me as a troll? Come on.
Agreed. Bunch of crybabies not happy with just giving an unhappy face so have to try to censor those they disagree with by flagging them.
Dont believe me? Watch... GRANT MORRISON IS AN IDIOT!! ...wait for it.
Funny... weren't you the one worried about whether or not DC would handle something with maturity?
I'm sorry I didnt realize people had been paying $2.99 to read my posts all this time? I have an apple and an orange, shall I explain the difference between them too?
No. I get you. Posts here are free. And therefore you see them, and any time someone might spend reading them, as having no value.
I think it is an illuminating statement on your approach.
Yeah I got flagged for abuse because I posted a link to an article stating that said gay character would be an iconic one. Well I guess I learned my lesson not to post links.
I wouldn't let flagging get you down, or influence your behavior too much one way or the other. It is an anonymous keystroke. And I believe the worst thing that can happen is that five unique flags on a post can sink a single post (and all that does is make it become something you have to give an extra click to make legible). Not worth thinking too much about, I think.
I was being sarcastic but I just thought it was funny that someone would sink to that level. I actually take pride in the fact that I posted content that pushed someone to that level. Anyways just so I don't drive this thread completely off topic has anyone considered it could be Ted Kord? That would definitely change up the Booster Gold/Blue Beetle bromance.
You knew the 50,000 Moms Who Are Bad at Math were going to be on top of this. I think that's who they're looking for publicity from lol. I would be. If I was writing something with a gay character, I'd immediately give them a press release to get them to advertise my book for me.
The funniest part about their quotes is the fact that they think children actually read comic books.
You knew the 50,000 Moms Who Are Bad at Math were going to be on top of this. I think that's who they're looking for publicity from lol. I would be. If I was writing something with a gay character, I'd immediately give them a press release to get them to advertise my book for me.
The funniest part about their quotes is the fact that they think children actually read comic books.
I think this a win/win situation. Free publicity and who listens to there moms anyways? Just saying 90% of everyone out there would be virgins if they did.
I hope they get mad at more comics, since the things they protest do better (JC Penny, Glee, etc...) I am going to send them a letter than my podcast talks about gay people in a positive manner...and watch the ad rates soar!
So looks like it's GL of Earth 2 then, so what does that mean for the kids?
It means that people who follow the news, but don't follow comics, are going to be confused about why Ryan Reynolds isn't making out with Sinestro in Green Lantern 2.
Comments
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
But I don't think they should be lauded or rewarded for using those causes to further their own goals. Hollow gestures rarely change the world.
There is a bank that asks you to choose it over others because of it's "GO GREEN" checking program. Is "going green" by using my checking card instead of my checkbook really going to change the environment? No... it's just a company using hollow sentiment to make you think they care, when they really favor you using a check card over paper checks, anyway, due to kickbacks and fees.
Don't be fooled. For the past few years, DC has been playing hard at being relevant, hoping to increase public awareness and therefore sales, and this announcement smacks of this.
I get what you are saying, and I understand your suspicion. But I think there is an angle that isn't being considered: What if DC actually thinks there is a readership that wants this?
What if- instead of just thinking that what they are doing this is merely ideological, or for a publicity gain- what if it is actually simpler than that? What if it is actually them just trying to sell a book to readers that want this? I mean, that is the business they are in, no?
To put it this way, DC published dozens of books about violent conflict resolution in brightly colored super suits every month because they have good reason to believe that is what their readers (myself included, lest you think I am judging) want.
And we have told them so by buying that product. To give readers what they want is not ideology. It can simply the the business they are in. Five monthly Batman books, or whatever it is these days, is not The Change That DC Wants To See In The World. That is them meeting demand with supply.
Could it not be possible that, in this case, too, they simply think they are meeting a demand? They are in the business of selling comics. Which means they have to sell them. And like all for-profits they need to grow their business. Could this not simply be another way to grow their business?
Remember, whatever praise they might get for doing something that could be seen as ideological (as well as whatever criticism), a few news cycles later that will have faded, and there will still be next month's books to sell. Publicity and even scandal fades fast. At the end of the day, they've got to make the books they think they can sell.
So what if they believe there is an audience that has a demand for a book like this? Is meeting that demand really any different than meeting my demand for a monthly dose of Swamp Thing, Animal Man, and All Star Western?
Dont believe me? Watch... GRANT MORRISON IS AN IDIOT!! ...wait for it.
OK. Probably not.
But still, if Rob Liefeld can sell books, why not The Fabulous Flash or the Gaudy Green Lantern or The Awesome! Atom or whoever?
It's worth a shot.
I think it is an illuminating statement on your approach.
http://sciencefiction.com/2012/05/24/one-million-moms-call-arms-gay-characters-comics/
The funniest part about their quotes is the fact that they think children actually read comic books.
And two new users ( @Rilke and @UGoBoy) joined tonight using @FoneBone's email and IP address.
Nah. Must be a coincidence.
a straight girl who has a best friend who is gay and spends a lot of time together
The Tiki
The Tiki