Just saw this on the news yesterday, I know, some of you are going to say "why in Politics?" If this isn't playing politics, I don't know what is.

Marvel Comics has decided to trot out the first all gay comic book hero. They decided to flip the Rawhide Kid, an 1880's six-gun desperado. Now while I haven't seen the new comic yet, I am hoping that we aren't going to be treated to a page of the Kid taking a throat culture off of Black Bart. Not to mention you're going to need some kind of writer to fill out more than half a dozen books.

This is not playing politics, this is playing PC.
Just like the idea that we NEED to elect hillary clinton to presidential office just because she is a woman and we have never had a female president, comic book guys feel that we NEED a gay comic book hero simply because it has never been done

Homer

ahh but is there a difference in striving for new things in art, and striving for new things in politics.

On a side note, the day you guys elect hillary, is the day i give up on america all together

Marvel Comics is motivated by nothing more than the desire to sell more comics.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jacross:
ahh but is there a difference in striving for new things in art, and striving for new things in politics.

On a side note, the day you guys elect hillary, is the day i give up on america all together

---

Trust me, I live here, the time to give up on america was a long time ago. Desert the sinking ship Jacross, it is better that way.

Homer

Jacross is an Aussie anyway...

"PC", What does the "P" stand for?

Is he camp?

(P)olitically (C)orrect

Exactly, so why is it not a political issue?

It's not a political issue because it's a commercially motivated decision by a comic book manufacturer.

...of a political nature. Are you honestly saying that commercial decisions don't affect politics?

If it involved a comic book manufacturer being paid by the govt to spread propaganda then possibly. But not a comic book character being resurrected in a different form to appeal to a new audience and gain a hail of publicity; a decision made by a corporation for profit which has a harmful effect on no-one and no political significance whatsoever. What are we going to be discussing next: the socio-political implications of the latest Lord Of The Rings film?

You could do that. But it is fairly easy to see the political implications of a gay superhero in a predominately homophobic society.

I'm a homophone.

I'm an antonym.

It's one thing trying to show homosexuals as "one of us" by writing a gay superhero - but the fact that it hit the news is just proof that they are trying to make a point. And as such they are highlighting the rift that occurs between heterosexuals and homos. Is it that odd to have a gay superhero? Superman was probably gay - if not he was definitely camp.