CBR: Homosexuality in Comics Parts 2 & 3
Jul. 19th, 2007 02:41 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
mondoshawan555Here we go, now I even have something to say...
Homosexuality in Comics Part II
I'll just skip Alan Heinberg because every time I see his name all I can think is "you bastard destroyed Wonder Woman!!!". So on to the next one. Don't really know Scott Lobdell but I've heard of Northstar. That's about it then though. Maybe I should find me some Alpha Flight. Then there's Alan Moore. I like Alan Moore. And I like The Mirror of Love. When I saw an article about that book with José Villarrubia's photos I just had to buy it. It's a beautiful book. And Alan's poem is amazing, especially the last bit. It made me realise some things about myself and the world and therefore it holds a special place in my heart, and on my wall:
I'll just skip Alan Heinberg because every time I see his name all I can think is "you bastard destroyed Wonder Woman!!!". So on to the next one. Don't really know Scott Lobdell but I've heard of Northstar. That's about it then though. Maybe I should find me some Alpha Flight. Then there's Alan Moore. I like Alan Moore. And I like The Mirror of Love. When I saw an article about that book with José Villarrubia's photos I just had to buy it. It's a beautiful book. And Alan's poem is amazing, especially the last bit. It made me realise some things about myself and the world and therefore it holds a special place in my heart, and on my wall:
While love endures we'll love,
and afterwards,
if what they say is true,
I'll be refused a Heaven
crammed with popes,
policemen, fundamentalists,
and burn instead,
quite happily,
with Sappho, Michelangelo
and you, my love.
I'd burn throughout eternity
with you.
and afterwards,
if what they say is true,
I'll be refused a Heaven
crammed with popes,
policemen, fundamentalists,
and burn instead,
quite happily,
with Sappho, Michelangelo
and you, my love.
I'd burn throughout eternity
with you.
And last is Greg Rucka. Well you know that I adore Greg. Yeah yeah, maybe the biggest reason for that is Renee Montoya but it's not really a bad reason.
“It wasn't a decision to make her gay-- that was the character to me,” Greg Rucka told CBR News. “It was clear the first time I read her. Other people out there wrote her as straight, and every time I read it, I read it that it was ‘bearding.' She read to me as gay and in the closet. And I don't know why I saw that in the character, but literally from the moment I laid eyes on that character, I thought, ‘Oh, she's in the closet.'
How cool is that? Ha.
Then about Batwoman:
"She was in development before ‘52' started,” Rucka continued. “One of the things we were asked to do was to incorporate her. In ‘52,' she's revealed little by little, because she's not a primary character in ‘52,' she's a secondary character. So we're not focusing a lot on her. She will be in the spotlight soon enough, and then people hopefully will decide if they like the character.
This makes sense but I never trust anything that is said about these things 100%. I do want to believe him though. They just made a mistake in my opinion by putting Batwoman in 52. It made her unavailable for other titles for a year and even after that she's been completely absent. It's about time she gets an appearance again. I read something about her being in some new Batman book, and then (if I didn't dream it) there was something about her own book, maybe it'll be a miniseries. I was a bit disappointed with the character because her role in 52 was odd but now I'm looking forward to learning more about her.
To Rucka, the question of homosexuality is strictly a civil rights issue. “There was a line that I had in ‘Wonder Woman,' it was in the book that she published, in quotes, ‘Love is the flower that wants to grow.' So let it grow already, don't legislate it. People should know what's out there.”
One thing I love about Rucka's Wonder Woman is that it didn't go far from WW saying "It's ok to be gay!" And let's not forget about Io... *sigh*
Homosexuality in Comics Part III
In this segment, the participants discuss the Comics Code, the stigma of comics as a children's medium, whether homosexuality is a lifestyle choice or a genetic predisposition, and the tendency for gay, lesbian and bisexual characters to be defined by their sexuality.
This was a fascinating read, especially when they started talking about whether homosexuality is genetic or something else. I don't really have a clear opinion about that because there are so many aspects to it and I don't fully understand what makes us the way we are. They did make some points that are good though:
As such, Andreyko doesn't lend much credence to the idea that a child's sexuality is shaped by their childhood experiences. “I was exposed to heterosexuality by my parents' marriage and I'm pretty darnn gay,' the writer said.
So true, why don't they ever think that? If being exposed to heterosexuality made people straight not many people would be gay. I'm so sick of the arguments that finding out about homosexuality makes children gay. Please.
While Andreyko strongly believes in the genetic component of sexual orientation, there is no doubt in his mind that homophobia is a learned behavior. “Most people probably wouldn't care what a person's orientation was, but from childhood we're inundated with the word ‘fag' or hearing that something is ‘so gay' that negative connotations are attached almost immediately.”
I can say from personal experience that this is true. When I was a kid I thought being gay is gross and I'm still trying to get over that.
Heterosexual Alan Moore, on the other hand, is quick to discount the genetic component. “The thing about the gay gene always sounds profoundly Nazi to me,” Moore said. “I think that this search for the gay gene, it hearkens back to when KM Benkert first coined the term ‘homosexuality' as a pathological term, the name of an illness. And I think that all talk of a gay gene is probably based upon the fact that, ‘Oh yeah, there's a gene for a predisposition for cancer, or a gene that will probably give you hemophilia or stuff like that. ‘Homosexuality is an illness, so there's probably a gene for that as well whereby we could cure it.'
This pretty much makes me think that if there's a gene for homosexuality then there has to be a gene for heterosexuality also. Has anyone ever looked for that?
Moore believes that this drive for conformity is so ingrained in the modern psyche that people go out of their way to hide the things that make them different. “Nobody really wants to be an oddball in any area of their lives,” Moore said. “If people are different in terms of their sexuality, then they are suspect. If people are different in terms of their diet, they are suspect. Anything that can single you out form the herd, it is possible that it will make you a victim of the herd's displeasure. It comes from the way in which we see society, and the way in which we see ourselves, and I think that society perhaps feels threatened by any twigs that are the wrong shape or size, and that is probably the root of their unease with the concept of what they would see as an ‘irregular' sexuality.
This I agree with.
Alan Heinberg admits that at times the rhetoric can be laid on a little thick. “We want it both ways, don't we?” Heinberg said. “We want more gay characters in comics, but we don't want them defined by their sexuality.”
Yeah, it's the WW destroyer saying it but he has a point.
Anyway, a very interesting read. Looking forward to the last part tomorrow.
“It wasn't a decision to make her gay-- that was the character to me,” Greg Rucka told CBR News. “It was clear the first time I read her. Other people out there wrote her as straight, and every time I read it, I read it that it was ‘bearding.' She read to me as gay and in the closet. And I don't know why I saw that in the character, but literally from the moment I laid eyes on that character, I thought, ‘Oh, she's in the closet.'
How cool is that? Ha.
Then about Batwoman:
"She was in development before ‘52' started,” Rucka continued. “One of the things we were asked to do was to incorporate her. In ‘52,' she's revealed little by little, because she's not a primary character in ‘52,' she's a secondary character. So we're not focusing a lot on her. She will be in the spotlight soon enough, and then people hopefully will decide if they like the character.
This makes sense but I never trust anything that is said about these things 100%. I do want to believe him though. They just made a mistake in my opinion by putting Batwoman in 52. It made her unavailable for other titles for a year and even after that she's been completely absent. It's about time she gets an appearance again. I read something about her being in some new Batman book, and then (if I didn't dream it) there was something about her own book, maybe it'll be a miniseries. I was a bit disappointed with the character because her role in 52 was odd but now I'm looking forward to learning more about her.
To Rucka, the question of homosexuality is strictly a civil rights issue. “There was a line that I had in ‘Wonder Woman,' it was in the book that she published, in quotes, ‘Love is the flower that wants to grow.' So let it grow already, don't legislate it. People should know what's out there.”
One thing I love about Rucka's Wonder Woman is that it didn't go far from WW saying "It's ok to be gay!" And let's not forget about Io... *sigh*
Homosexuality in Comics Part III
In this segment, the participants discuss the Comics Code, the stigma of comics as a children's medium, whether homosexuality is a lifestyle choice or a genetic predisposition, and the tendency for gay, lesbian and bisexual characters to be defined by their sexuality.
This was a fascinating read, especially when they started talking about whether homosexuality is genetic or something else. I don't really have a clear opinion about that because there are so many aspects to it and I don't fully understand what makes us the way we are. They did make some points that are good though:
As such, Andreyko doesn't lend much credence to the idea that a child's sexuality is shaped by their childhood experiences. “I was exposed to heterosexuality by my parents' marriage and I'm pretty darnn gay,' the writer said.
So true, why don't they ever think that? If being exposed to heterosexuality made people straight not many people would be gay. I'm so sick of the arguments that finding out about homosexuality makes children gay. Please.
While Andreyko strongly believes in the genetic component of sexual orientation, there is no doubt in his mind that homophobia is a learned behavior. “Most people probably wouldn't care what a person's orientation was, but from childhood we're inundated with the word ‘fag' or hearing that something is ‘so gay' that negative connotations are attached almost immediately.”
I can say from personal experience that this is true. When I was a kid I thought being gay is gross and I'm still trying to get over that.
Heterosexual Alan Moore, on the other hand, is quick to discount the genetic component. “The thing about the gay gene always sounds profoundly Nazi to me,” Moore said. “I think that this search for the gay gene, it hearkens back to when KM Benkert first coined the term ‘homosexuality' as a pathological term, the name of an illness. And I think that all talk of a gay gene is probably based upon the fact that, ‘Oh yeah, there's a gene for a predisposition for cancer, or a gene that will probably give you hemophilia or stuff like that. ‘Homosexuality is an illness, so there's probably a gene for that as well whereby we could cure it.'
This pretty much makes me think that if there's a gene for homosexuality then there has to be a gene for heterosexuality also. Has anyone ever looked for that?
Moore believes that this drive for conformity is so ingrained in the modern psyche that people go out of their way to hide the things that make them different. “Nobody really wants to be an oddball in any area of their lives,” Moore said. “If people are different in terms of their sexuality, then they are suspect. If people are different in terms of their diet, they are suspect. Anything that can single you out form the herd, it is possible that it will make you a victim of the herd's displeasure. It comes from the way in which we see society, and the way in which we see ourselves, and I think that society perhaps feels threatened by any twigs that are the wrong shape or size, and that is probably the root of their unease with the concept of what they would see as an ‘irregular' sexuality.
This I agree with.
Alan Heinberg admits that at times the rhetoric can be laid on a little thick. “We want it both ways, don't we?” Heinberg said. “We want more gay characters in comics, but we don't want them defined by their sexuality.”
Yeah, it's the WW destroyer saying it but he has a point.
Anyway, a very interesting read. Looking forward to the last part tomorrow.
