This here is a cliff-hanger. What was the first word?
There's a bunch of people on Twitter really mad about this.
They're still regularly dumping money into Marvel/DC properties on a regular basis after constant social justice snafus on an almost regular basis.
Nothing's going to change.
Many that had no intention on buying the comic no matter what.
I wonder how many of those angry with this decision were going to buy the comic anyway.
Those faces weird me out.
This here is a cliff-hanger. What was the first word?
It was a throwaway comment in one issue.
Doesn't count as major character development.
You can still look at him as bi or omnisexual, just that the current writer is choosing not to cover it.
I'm starting to hate comics, creators, and their fans for things like this.
Having a character be one way, but then changing them into something else.
Like the whole doombots retcon thing. But when you do it with social issues people take personal stock.
It's just alternate universe stuff, so it totally doesn't have any bearing on the character at all. The writers can conveniently drop any trait they want. Herc dipped his toes into the gay end of the pool and decided it wasn't for him. As one does. He's 100% straight now, don't worry about it!What a lame development.
Had the opportunity to build on an aspect of his character that had precedence in two previous iterations and have a cool bisexual leading man, but decided to play it safe instead. :/
Fucking Chuck Austen
There's a bunch of people on Twitter really mad about this.
They're still regularly dumping money into Marvel/DC properties on a regular basis after constant social justice snafus on an almost regular basis.
Nothing's going to change.
but I am guessing tumblr has still thrown a hissy fit.
Fuck those guys for caring about bisexual representation.
When a character in his entire existence is basically known for sleeping with or trying to sleep with every woman possible it comes across as a rather lame attempt to shoehorn onto that character characteristics that never existed in the first place.
Just like it was lame to pull the sudden Iceman is gay thing. His entire existence was chasing after women and suddenly no you are just a closeted gay man
Seriously, dumb PR. Didn't even need to say "wait and see", which would have been purposefully misleading, he could've just said something like "the romantic subplot involves a women, that's not necessarily saying that he's straight, he could be bi but his orientation is never really discussed". And then nobody would be talking about this.
Awful I laughed, but this and the Bobby/Iceman being gay thing was just poorly handled both times.
Doesn't sound like a character that would be all that beneficial to bi representation.When a character in his entire existence is basically known for sleeping with or trying to sleep with every woman possible it comes across as a rather lame attempt to shoehorn onto that character characteristics that never existed in the first place.
Just like it was lame to pull the sudden Iceman is gay thing. His entire existence was chasing after women and suddenly no you are just a closeted gay man
I never knew bi dudes never slept with women.
Yeah, they're not painting him as bi. At all. They're painting him as a homosexual man. Which is fine, except comic-books have given us the internal thoughts of Drake for five decades and it's never been a part of his character, or hinted at beyond theories fans have read into the character and used increasingly nebulous logic to back up said theory, before.
It is absolutely a retcon. And if that's their direction they're going... it's cool. Just pulling the 'it was always there' card is utter bullshit. It wasn't. Which is a shame, because really ONE of the original five being gay in the 1960s would've been some progressive as fuck brilliance. But even Marvel didn't have the balls back then for that.
Sometimes I can totally see why some characters are gay just to show that Marvel takes care of social justice, like in a totally unrelated story they have to keep mentioning it, that makes me a little angry, it takes me out from the story. Of course I'm in for more gay, female, black characters, but with actual good writing, and some writers did a good job in that side.
With this being said, Hercules sucks.
Sometimes I can totally see why some characters are gay just to show that Marvel takes care of social justice, like in a totally unrelated story they have to keep mentioning it, that makes me a little angry, it takes me out from the story. Of course I'm in for more gay, female, black characters, but with actual good writing, and some writers did a good job in that side.
With this being said, Hercules sucks.
Why do minority, female, and LGBT heroes have to be justified? Why can't they just be there without the barrier of "good writing", whatever that means in relation to representation.
What a lame development.
Had the opportunity to build on an aspect of his character that had precedence in two previous iterations and have a cool bisexual leading man, but decided to play it safe instead. :/
It's just alternate universe stuff, so it totally doesn't have any bearing on the character at all. The writers can conveniently drop any trait they want. Herc dipped his toes into the gay end of the pool and decided it wasn't for him. As one does. He's 100% straight now, don't worry about it!
You joke but it's impossible to watch, read, or listen to anything these days without the existence of gay people and their LBGQTLMNOP-whatever friends being thrown in your face. I'm a guy with simple tastes. My dick is for women, my butt is for toilets, and my brain is for nonthreatening entertainment that reinforces my worldview, like pro hockey and wet t-shirt contests and pig wrasslin'.Finally! Us heteros are very underrepresented in media/s
I was talking about Hercules.
I feel they should have gone with Bobby being bi, and the dialogue where he suggests it and Jean shoots him down was cringe inducing awfulness.
Well if they want to talk specifics, he had a wife in the greek mythology story...
Because when Spider-Man becomes mexican or Thor becomes a woman, personally it feels cheapened to me. Like they aren't standing on their own two feet. Minority characters deserve the same quality of writing as any other comic, not kitschy gimmicks because they aren't confident in the concept.
It's the same sort of problem that I have with comicbooks in general really, like when Superman and Batman both "died" to sell comic books. It doesn't feel like a narrative that they care about, it feels like a method for generating sales.
Both of those roles were passed down to other people. The original characters didn't "become" them or whatever.
Besides that, Thor has been a smash success for Marvel and has sold more than the original has in years. Miles Morales retains a die hard fanbase and is going to be appearing the main universe.
There's no point in unnecessarily limiting the definition of what is or isn't the "proper" way to include underrepresented groups, especially since when they do it your way, nobody ever buys them. They've had greater success with Kamala Khan and the new Thor then they ever have any other way.
I know! I probably didn't push my sarcasm as far as I could have.Read the whole article. The alt universe comment is a nice cherry to pick, but it does sound like 616 Herc was bi up until now.
What wrong with base human terminology if it accurately describes a phenomenon or state or whatever? Hercules can bleed, right? Well I guess he's not above our base human term for losing blood. He's also a pretty big dude. My primitive human mind would consider him muscular. Is he above that descriptor?The solution for Hercules would just to be Marvel going 'he's fluid sexually.' In short, he has periods where he'll sleep with men, periods with women, periods with both, periods where he doesn't sleep with anyone etc. I mean he's a God, isn't the point of Gods to be above such base human terminologies.
But that's the thing, it just feels like a cheapened shortcut to me. People aren't interested in new minority characters because they're always handed off to shitty writers. People buy up Female Thor because they want to see the "controversy" unfold.
It's a lot easier to get people to buy your comic when all the news says is: "Spider-man now mexican! Thor now Female!"
Also it just reeks of temporariness. Loki eventually became a man again, I'm sure Miles will become Spider-boy or something soon too. I hate that. Dick Greyson was Batman for a good long while, and now he isn't, and the 'Greyson' comic was good, but not as good as when Bruce was "dead".
Well if they want to talk specifics, he had a wife in the greek mythology story...
I can get being upset/disappointed that they didn't continue that plotline, but outrage?
Comes down to the fact marvel should be creating new characters with all these PC traits instead of these shock "guess which marvel hero likes men this week!" or spinning the PC wheel to see what to shoe horn I next.
I rather see a "Marvel set to introduce..."
Type of headline then
"guess who is now not Caucasian and likes men, and at the same time a Republican....
STAR LORD! "
Seriously, dumb PR. Didn't even need to say "wait and see", which would have been purposefully misleading, he could've just said something like "the romantic subplot involves a women, that's not necessarily saying that he's straight, he could be bi but his orientation is never really discussed". And then nobody would be talking about this.
Sexual orientation is not a character trait. It's not a bullet point on a resume.
Unless you're a total jackass there's no reason to think that way.