Legion World Forums LEGION COMPANION Dr. Gym'll's Cultural Rarities E2 Alan Scott is the ex-straight "iconic male" DC character to be rebooted gay

It is one thing that there is more support for gay rights in the western world and another to have the embodiment of America be gay. I mean some people still have a problem seeing anyone who isn't white as an American.

And I would see the embodiment of the American spirit as not having any particular sexual orientation but emcompassing all sexual orientations.

What about the Hawkman, or even Hawkgirl of Earth 2. That would certainly create a new wrinkle in the whole Hawkman / Hawkgirl thing.

Just a thought, as she is being reintroduced soon.

I don't know if they are planning a Hawkman for Earth 2. I think that the popularity of a Hawkman-less Hawkgirl on the Justice League cartoon may mean no Earth 2 Hawkman. We do know the gay character is male, so that rules out Hawkgirl.

Maybe they'll merge two Golden Age characters: The Spectre and the Gay Ghost.

CMK, Quis beat me to it. My comment was indeed responding to your exact statement, not what was perhaps your more generalized meaning.

I don't recall any such symbol portrayed as gay, with the possible exception of Rawhide Kid, who as a cowboy could reasonably fit as representational of the American spirit.

But certain insane elements of society have claimed several characters as secretly gay, if not all American, such as Tinky-Winky the Teletubbie just for being purple and carrying a magic bag that looks like a purse.

And of course it happened decades ago too, with Dr. Wertham accusing Batman of pederasty.

Dr. Wrentham was right!

http://superdickery.com/index.php?o...mp;id=32&Itemid=50&limitstart=67

http://superdickery.com/index.php?o...mp;id=32&Itemid=50&limitstart=70

http://superdickery.com/index.php?o...mp;id=32&Itemid=50&limitstart=72

Yeah, forgot about the male thing.

If he was really Doc "Wrentham," it would help explain his fascination with flying creatures.

Also, on the left of that last link there's an ad for "Quilting Queens" or something. You've gotta' love the internet...

<span style="font-size: 36px;">d a r k s i d e LIVES!!!!!! </span>

More and more, it's looking like Alan Scott. And from the get-go, a lot of people (like Quis) were guessing he'd be the one. Make me wonder:

- why was he the first to come to mind? I ask that because A LOT of people guessed Alan Scott. Is it because Obsidion no longer exists, therefore DC lost a well known gay character, and therefore having his father assume that role fits?

- when can we start joking about his weakness to wood?

Oh, it's never too soon!

Because, as the E2 GL rather than one of the main guys, he's not in the main [real] DCU, and so is "safe" just like how Marvel feel able to have a black Spider-Man in the zombie-like Ultimate U?

Yes, and how are those elements of society regarded these days?

And especially amongst comics creators, who have hitched themselves to the gay-rights bandwagon en masse for years already?

I think that these creators would see civil rights as an American value, and a gay man, gays being the currently trendy civil-rights cause, as the ultimate expression of that value.

I do hope there is no S&M storyline involving Roy Scheider.

As way too normal by a certain voter base and specific radio assholes, from what I see.

It sounds as if you're intimating that they've viewed as loons, but I see way too many voices in agreement with the loons. And not enough voices pointing out the lunacy. The Birthers are still going at it, and even Senators are still outspoken among them, so if you're trying to imply America is in any way more rational than before, we'll just have to agree to disagree and leave the politics out of this thread. (Oops, too late.) Things may be hopeful statistically, but there's still way too many squeaky wheels for DC to do these things casually and without great deliberation over expected benefit vs fallout.

There's a big difference between how the creators see values and how much backlash the publisher is willing to deal with. Making a seriously popular hero (aka a valuable property) gay is a financial risk and this is a business, first and foremost, so I don't think their values have the last word.

(There's also some pretty rabidly antigay creators out there, who fortunately also don't get to toss their values into stories willy nilly.)

I just don't see DC making, say, Superman gay unless they simultaneously HAMMER HOME WITH GREAT EMPHASIS that this is but ONE Superman on MANY MANY EARTHS, and even then they'd be dealing with the Million Moms.

If DC wants to take that stand, bless them. But I'll believe it when I see it.

Shining Son:

I disagree. If sponsors or parent groups would object to Kevin Keller, then they'd be boycotting Archie, no less than if Jughead were suddenly revealed to be gay. If such sponsors would object to Batwoman, they'd be boycotting DC, no less than if an "icon" (though from the hints they've dropped, it's certainly not one of the really big names) were suddenly revealed to be gay. Clearly, the publishers in the comics companies are not seeing any serious loss of revenue from the high-enough profile pro-gay-rights matter they've put out there.

The creators and the publishers are quite comfortable with a pro-gay-rights position nowadays.

Certainly with Batwoman and plenty of supporting characters over the years, the waters have been tested.

I personally feel that Alan Scott or any of the Earth-Two characters would be pretty underwhelming choices. If they're making such a big deal of it, then it should be a prominent character in the primary reality. This choice may have some reverb through the comics-reading community, but the effect on the general public would be a huh? (if even that).

I feel that Alfred Pennyworth or Jimmy Olsen would both be much better choices because everyone knows those characters from their respective mythos. But if the "reintroduce" part is correct, I guess we won't get that.

Aside: If somehow it does end up being Alfred, I wonder if that could be a multi-media thing with something in Dark Knight Rises being done on-screen with Michael Caine's portrayal? The timing would be phenomenal! Now THAT would be something seismic!

Well, I might have missed a page here, but, if it's not Alan Scott, just saying because it's fun to guess, maybe it's one of the Marvels.
Ya think?

Perhaps Marvel Jr.?

And have we seen Lex Luthor, yet?

He, and/or Shazam would make interesting copy for characters who have been around for a very long time.

Captain Marvel is about to appear in the backup in Justice League. We have seen Billy and Mary, but not as their heroic alter egos. But I think they would not use Captain Marvel because of the whole boy/man paradigm of the character. There are still too many people who freak out when it comes to kids and being gay.

Luthor we have seen in Action Comics. But I doubt it will be a villain.

Apparently the One Million Moms group has heard about this and Northstar's upcoming wedding and are none too pleased.

One of the Marvels would really be cool though!!!!

Yeah...1 million if you count each of them a couple hundred times.

I think they definitely want a hero not a supporting character.

Between Alfred & Jimmy, I'd prefer it to be Jimmy. In a way Alfred has been the female character in the Batman household*, so it would make him being gay seem just too stereotypical. Plus with the whole Batman/Robin being gay thing since the 50s makes me think DC will stay away from the Batman family for this. Although a tie-in with Dark Knight Rises is intriguing.


*In this I am talking about supporting characters that when you hear the supporting character, you can name the hero. Lois & Jimmy are tied to Superman. Iris Allen is tied to the Flash. Carol Ferris is tied to Green Lantern. Mera is tied to Aquaman. With Batman, you think of Robin, Commissioner Gordon, and Alfred. No female counterweight as it were. And of the three, Alfred performs those household tasks that have been historically female tasks.

Quis, according to Bleeding Cool , "sources" say it is indeed Alan Scott as you've suggested. They're not calling it confirmation, but history tells me BC's sources are much more reliable than they are not.

If this is the case, I'm not really upset. However, it does likely mean no Jade or Obsidian as we've known them. Both have a faithful cult following.

Again, I don't think doing this with Alan Scott is all that seismic in terms of DC making a statement. Given the alternate Earth setting and his obscurity to non-comic fans and to even some actual comic fans, the choice seems pretty "ho-hum".

The more I think of it, the more I like your logic behind the character actually being Jimmy Olsen over Alfred. It would have been much braver of DC, IMO, than Alan Scott. If sources are correct...oh well.

It's not like Northstar is all that non-obscure to non-comic book fans.

Still, no one (but the rabidly anti-gay) thought it would be any of the top tier characters.

And don't count Jade or Obsidian out. Gay men have been known to father children. Although storywise, even if Alan Scott was heterosexual, he needs to have contact with the ring/lantern/starheart before any kids he fathers get powers. So, you would still be looking at 10-15 years before you could have Jade or Obsidian. Although, comic years don't match real life years as we all know.