Bisexual Superman

Post Reply New Topic

Oh, I see now. Thanks for the clarification.

I don't think I fully qualify as "woke." Just working on it. I admit I get irritated by things that are just "jumping on the bandwagon" with no clear substance. I've noticed that my LGBT daughter, however, gets annoyed that I get annoyed ... to her, its a sign that I'm not all on-board with acceptance, or I would appreciate much needed representation with less questioning. I get the sense that as long as representation is still desperately needed, the LGBT community appreciates any and all effort, even when its mostly symbolic. I doubt it will stay that way, given how we've seen other minority group attitudes evolve. Or she's just still too young to see empty pandering as empty pandering. Not sure. And she'd be frustrated that I'm talking about this at all ...

Long before anyone professed to be "woke" there were folks joking, or even not joking about how they were convinced Batman and Robin were gay, And a certain Televangelist was even convinced that Tinky Winky (one of the Teletubbies) was gay, and a bad influence on the toddlers of America.

But I agree that nowadays were getting out of hand with the wokeness. Some years ago, when Kevin Costner directed a remake of Robin Hood with Morgan Freeman in the cast a Black standup comic on Comedy central at the time said "Robin Hood's band of Merry Men doesnt HAVE to include a brother." Likewise you dont need any of the band of thieves to be LBGT either.

But on the other hand...maybe it okay for some fictional characters to come out of the closet IF they really are "in the closet" (ie their creators actually see them as non binary, but keep it from being obvious).

Bert and Ernie may not be gay, but... it turns out that "Mr. Toad, and Mr. Frog" ( a popular pair in children's books) really were conceived of as being a male couple by their gay male creator. And the lady author of Harry Potter "outed" one of her own characters ( one of the male teachers at Hogwarts) as being gay (Hollywood put dialogue into his mouth that she didnt approve of for that character).

So its complicated.

Uh... it's not Superman who's bi, but his and Louis' super powered son, Jon (they have another kid who's boringly a normal, straight human without any super powers).
As for Robin - - he came out as bi a few years ago. But which Robin, Dick or Jason, I don't know.
Before anyone gets bent out of shape over this, just remember... neither Jon Kent or Robin are real people.

I never could figure out why male superheroes needed to wear underpants over their leggings?

Okay. I got this!

Superman is really a transgender lesbian. And now that she has gotten the sex change operation -looks and acts just like a straight guy.

So ...he can just go one acting like he always acted.

Howz THAT...for pleasing both the woke, and the antiwoke!

SNL’s Ambiguously Gay Duo comes to mind on that one. They were parodies of what you are mentioning about.

As a vintage comic book collector, I could care less about this particular storyline. Will I buy a copy of this? Probably not. It is just not interesting to me overall. The publishers are trying to cast their nets wide to pick up new readers. It is a gimmick at best. I do collect Superman and Batman comics, but only older ones before mid 1960s. Do I care if they were gay or bi? No, I do not.

FYI: A majority of my comic collection is centered around horror characters over the ages. Some of the early 1950s ones were the best at showing gore (before they got banned by Congress in 1955). Unfortunately prices have skyrocketed on all of them so much that I had to stop buying certain titles. I miss the days of finding comics for my collection in the cheap box before they were very popular. That bites literally.

talking of vintage comics, looks like this stuff has been going on for years...

That is not the real comic cover for Batman 122. Someone has replaced Bat-woman with Spider-Man. The 10 cent cover gives it away as a fake. Spider-Man did not arrive in comics until 1962, when comics were usually 12 cents each. Nice try though to whomever did it.

After plenty of thinking on this subject. I have no problem with this at all. I would have had a problem if it had actually been Superman that came out bisexual though. That role is clearly suppose to be a masculine role. To change that would literally change the very nature of the character itself. And that I would never be able to follow.

Ok good eye. Yeah the comic looks 50's and spiderman is marvel property not invented till 60's and were there any crossovers before the 70's? now that i think about it, **smacks head** so stupid. for thinking it was real. Funny cover though as soon as i saw it i just had to post it.

No problem, as I have an unfair advantage. I collect comics in that era, so I saw that it was not a real issue right away. There were many crossover of superheros within Marvel starting in the early 1960s. For example, Namur the Submariner (started 1939 in Marvel) ended up in issue #6 of X-Men as the bad guy. DC started crossovers between Superman and Batman in the early 1940s under a title of World’s Greatest Comics (15 cent issues even). I do not know if or when specifically Marvel and DC ever started having any crossovers between brands though. They used to keep them separate for monetary reasons.

I dont collect. But When i was kid i read alot of comics, as much as i could find, lot of 70s uncanny x-men (my favorite run), spiderman reprints, hulk, wolverine, iron man, daredevil, even 60s x men reprints, etc i do remember seeing some 70s dc marvel crossovers.