RoadRatt wrote:
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.
Not sure that sexuality equates to masculine/feminine or other types of gender labels. If he was bisexual, or gay, does that mean he couldn't be 'masculine'? I don't think so.
My view is that who people want to sleep with (not talking about extremeness here) or don't, is normally a non-issue in most daily scenarios. I doubt I'd be worrying about who Superman was sleeping with if he was saving me or the planet. Would he not decide to save a mother and baby from being hit by an out of control car, because he preferred guys? Doubt it.
So does it change his character? Where it does become relevant, in films at least, is that love interests and romance are used for motivation and because audiences seem to like them (they sell tickets), they cast attractive people etc. Then is the issue one of relatability? Would I feel less emotion if his boyfriend was in danger, as opposed to the actress I find the most attractive? Maybe? I'd be able to connect to the situation on a human level though hopefully.
I don't know, I just think that sexuality isn't someone's defining trait and we pay far too much attention to it.
_________________
ASD (Lvl2), ADHD Inattentive Moderate