Jump to content

Talk:LGBT characters in comics/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Different things

I think Cutter and Skywise from Elfquest would fit. Allegedly, they're supposed to have a sexual relationship. 惑乱 分からん 18:31, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Do comic strips count on this page (e.g., Lawrence Poirier, Michael's gay friend in the comic strip "For Better or For Worse"? [[Briguy52748 14:14, 31 January 2006 (UTC)]]

I can't see why not. Go ahead. I think this list could possibly get crammed, but it's OK, so far. 惑乱 分からん 00:50, 2 February 2006 (UTC)--Larrybob 20:49, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
It seems to me that comic strips, such as Dinosaur Comics and Dykes to Watch Out For, should be on a separate page. As long as comic strips are being included, where is Ethan Green from The (Mostly Unfabulous) Social Life of Ethan Green? Or the guys from Two Guys? Lumping comic books and comic strips together, just because they share the name "comics", seems like a mistake to me. --Hypatia
I beg to differ. It's the same medium, and I don't see the point in splitting up the page because of that. You are free to add Ethan Green etc, yourself. 惑乱 分からん 00:20, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
I agree that this list ought to be separated into strips and books. They are not the same medium, similar to how a movie and TV series are different. The style of presentation, the rhythm, and the audience are very different between the two. This should be two separate entries. Chris Griswold 06:54, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
Some points for the discussion

惑乱 分からん 13:51, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

  • I am against having a different article for comic strips and comic books. There's already enough confusion with different categories for comic artists and cartoonists and so on.--Larrybob 20:49, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

These are characters, not people.

The name of this artcle should be changed to List of gay and bisexual characters in comics. "Comic fiction" seems somewhat confusing and could mean humorous fiction. The only thing it makes clear if we change to using characters is that we're not including autobiographical comics.--Larrybob 21:06, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

I support this. I think we should move it. However, I do not think that autobio comics are excluded from this; anyone appearing in a literary work is a character, especially in a comicbook, wherein the appearance of things is fictionalized as well. --Chris Griswold 21:26, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
Oh, and how about "comics fiction?" "Sequential art?" --Chris Griswold 23:07, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Article Rename

Since we have two agreed-upon problems with the article title, lets try to figure somthing better out.

I suggest somthing like "List of gay and bisexual characters in comics". Jack Cain 23:35, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

It should be "List of gay and bisexual characters in comics". Or (comics fiction). There has to be a decent collective term for comicbooks and comic strips. --Chris Griswold 15:20, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
Erm, yes, I meant "List of gay and bisexual characters in comics". I misstyped it before. Jack Cain 15:25, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
I'm alright with the changes, both people->characters and comic fiction->comics, myself. 惑乱 分からん 01:14, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
Cool, glad there is support for this... one other thing, though -- currently the list includes lesbian characters, for example, several characters from Dykes To Watch Out For. At a glance, didn't see if there were any Trans characters listed (but certainly could include Anarcoma, the subject of a graphic novel published by Catalan Communications. So how about "List of LGBT characters in comics" (LGBT seems to be the most common order of the acronym used in Wikipedia.) --Larrybob 03:44, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
Agree, if only to bring it inline with the rest of Wikipedia`s style. Jack Cain 06:06, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
I don't know many trans comic characters, myself. Possibly Ranma 1/2 is a borderline case (in more senses than one, it appears sometimes @_@;). 惑乱 分からん 10:30, 16 April 2006 (UTC)


Wonder Woman

Because this will of course be contested repeatedly, someone has to cite this one. The Amazons are obviously lesbians, but we need something that says Diana is or embraces the entirety of the Amazon culture. Or just some very clever subtle hint. --Chris Griswold 14:37, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Okay, we have to keep the subjective entries off this list. There is a place for that kind of thing.

However.

Knowing a little bit about William Moulton Marston, I decided to leave Wonder Woman on the list. Jack Cain 16:25, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

"Sufferin' Sappho!" (to quote WW) (gee, I just discovered SufferingSappho.com, a Wonder Woman fansite.) --Larrybob 17:03, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
Just because the Amazons of Greek mythology might have been lesbian, doesn't mean we can conclude that the Amazons of DC mythology are. Although I like the idea of WW being bi, I doubt there could be found canonical DC sources confirming it. 惑乱 分からん 22:36, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
There have been a bunch of references to it, sometimes by people who are teasing Wonder Woman or disparaging her behind her back. The implication is there, and heavily reinforced. --Chris Griswold 22:48, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
I totally agree. All the references are there for anyone to see. —Lesfer (talk/@) 18:51, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
Stongly disagree. Regardless of Marston's personal life, this is a page about LGBT characters, not comics creators. At least since the Silver Age, there's been nothing in Wonder Woman's stories to indicate romantic or sexual attraction to women. If someone can cite an example of lesbianism or bisexuality from the Golden Age or any other period, then cite it; otherwise, this entry should be removed.
George Pérez established in his run on Wonder Woman that some but not all of the Amazons are in lesbian relationships. Since Diana came to Patriarch's world, she has shown romantic interest in Superman, Aquaman, Rama, and Trevor Barnes - but no women. During Phil Jimenez' run, a lesbian Amazon couple, Anaya and Iphthime, were important to the Civil War plotline. During Greg Rucka's run, when Wonder Woman was promoting her book outlining her social philosophy, she responded to a question about having a boyfriend by saying she didn't have a girlfriend either, but in the politicized context of the story, that might have been nothing more than a politicized response to promote gay rights and to remind her audience not to assume heterosexuality about anyone. Rucka did introduce a new Amazon, a blacksmith named Io, who showed signs of being attracted to Diana (stuttering in her presence, etc.) who is a far more appropriate entry for this list than Wonder Woman.
The only evidence I'm aware of concerning Wonder Woman's sexuality is that she's straight. If you want to make a list of comics characters who are supportive of the LGBT community, or of comics characters who have a strong LGBT fan following, feel free to put her right at the top. But Wonder Woman doesn't belong on this list, any more than Batman (who has also famously been snickered about and referred to as gay, both by real people and by other fictional characters) does. There are also two other Amazon characters, Hippolyta and Artemis, who have held the title of Wonder Woman, and both of them have shown exclusively heterosexual interests as well (Hippolyta, for Herakles; Artemis, for Mike Schorr). Unless someone can actually provide a citation, this entry should be stricken. There are plenty of legitimate LGBT characters - including some of her fellow Amazons - around who do belong on the list. --Peirigill 00:45, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
At this time, though consensus says she stays on the list. She is a representative of Amazon culture, which has been hinted at stronly as being a lesbian culture.--Chris Griswold 07:53, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
No, it's beyond "strongly hinted." Themyscira is an all-female culture, and as I noted, Perez and Jimenez explicitly identified lesbian couples on Themyscira - but also made it clear that not all Amazons are lesbian. Rucka reinforced that Wonder Woman considered gay rights to be part of the culture whose values she wanted to bring to Patriarch's world. If you want to cite Anaya and Iphthime, who are explicitly a lesbian couple, and Io, who is presumably lesbian, on this page, that's fine. If you want to list "the Amazons of Themyscira" as a "lesbian culture" on this page, even, that's fine. But there is a difference between being a "representative" of a culture and embodying that culture. Consider a real-world example: simply because someone is the Mayor of West Hollywood doesn't mean he or she is gay, even though they're representing a city with a significant gay population and a strong political emphasis on gay rights. Unless someone can cite evidence for me, I have yet to see any reason to believe Wonder Woman is herself lesbian or bisexual.
Does it carry any weight that gayleague.com doesn't list Wonder Woman on any of their lists, including the "uncertain orientation" and "could have been, should have been" lists? Wonder Woman, as one of the single best known superheroes in comics, seems like a rather glaring omission if there were any evidence to support this claim. --Peirigill 08:54, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
Let us not forget the interaction between Diana and Bruce Wayne. I personally have never seen or even heard of anything that hints at Diana being lesbian. At worst Diana has shown no interest in pursuing her love life, but this in no way puts her on either side. An interesting article on the matter can be found here: http://www.fanzing.com/mag/fanzing27/feature3.shtml As for William Moulton Marston, his lifestyle doesn't make the character follow suit. He used each of the women in his life as inspirations but there is no evidence or mention anywhere that Diana was to be considered lesbian or Bi. --CoyoteJack 01:15, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Wonder Woman vote

I think we should vote on whether to keep Wonder Woman on this list. Please read the above arguments, or add your own, along with your vote - either Keep or Remove. Sign your vote. Votes will only be counted for those who have registered prior to this message. --Chris Griswold 19:50, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I realize I need to set a limit, so this vote will last one week.--Chris Griswold 23:55, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
Remove --CoyoteJack This user registered after the vote was initiated.
Keep. —Lesfer (talk/@) 22:45, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
I don't understand why my vote wouldn't count. I was made aware of this discussion (and the ability to discuss articles) today. My opinion is no more or less valid than anyone elses. --CoyoteJack 01:03, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
As far as I know, that is generally the way Wikipedia votes work. Wikipedia does not want people getting their friends to register just to vote on a topic; nor do they want them registering multiple usernames for the same purpose. --Chris Griswold 04:03, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I vote that Wonder Woman is not a lesbian.

I'm not sure I can cite a time that Wonder Woman was ever portrayed as being a lesbian, other than one off handed gag in an issue of Justice League Task Force. Indeed, my approach to Wonder Woman -- worked out with the president and publisher of DC Comics at the time -- was that Wonder Woman represented the potential for unity between men and women, socially and sexually. Raised as she was to become a great symbol of bonding and hope for equality and unity between the sexes, I never once interpreted Wonder Woman to be anything other than a straight woman.

The idea that she was raised on an island where some of the women were lesbians, Diana must therefore too be gay, is ludicrous -- born out of the same idea that kids raised with gay parents will grow up to be gay.

Diana's long time love interest was Steve Trevor; this changed with the Perez reboot. But then she was seen having romantic feelings towards Superman.

Wonder Woman's mother, too, as not a lesbian -- she was in love with Heracles and had a sexual relationship with Wildcat of the JSA. It was implied during my run on Wonder Woman that Phillipus, Captain of Hippolyta's Guard, as in love with the Queen, but little of that relationship was explored.

During the Perez run, it was established that there were many coupled-off Amazons -- most notably Penelope and Menalippe (as early as Wonder Woman (2nd. series) #21. Later, in a story featuring the first cultural exchange between the Amazons and "Man's World", a priest asked on Amazon about "missing the sharing" God intended for the sexes.

One responded, "Some do. They have sworn themselves to Artemis, the Virgin Hunter, and Athena, the Chaste Warrior. Others choose the ways of Narcissus. But most of us find satsifaction in each other."

I think most creators think of Diana as some melding of Artemis and Athena, but many do miss the Steve Trevor relationship (or, at least, some sort of romantic relationship for the Amazon Princess).

Beyond creative objections, my believe that Wonder Woman is not a lesbian comes down to one specific aspect of the character's history. I seriously doubt ANY Amazon would have made advances with Diana. They were all her elders, teachers, aunts, etc. and she was the daughter of the Queen. Practically, I doubt she would have ever been allowed to date a fellow Amazon, because of rank, age, and Hippolyta's overprotective relationship with her daughter.

Phil Jimenez —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.175.127.12 (talk • contribs)

Thank you for your thoughts, but please don't erase discussion from a talk page as you did. CovenantD 02:25, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Who erased discussion, the person who posted the giant quote from Phil Jimenez? --Chris Griswold 03:30, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
	:::That would be the person, IP 68.175.127.12. They took out everything everybody else had written for the section. I restored it. CovenantD 03:36, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, but you need to have been a registered Wikipedian. --Chris Griswold 04:03, 16 May 2006 (UTC)


Remove - I haven't seen any evidence that Wonder Woman is herself bisexual or lesbian, just that she's open to and accepting of those who are. --Brian Olsen 04:38, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Remove, as per above. Diana has been romantically linked exclusively with men: Steve Trevor in the Golden Age; Merboy and Birdboy in the tales from her childhood as Wonder Girl; with Superman, Aquaman, Rama, Batman, and Trevor Barnes in current continuity. Phil Jimenez is a professional who wrote and drew the Wonder Woman title, including several gay characters, and as a gay writer, has a decidedly pro-gay stance; his understanding is that DC's editorial position is that Diana is gay-positive but straight. Even if he is not a registered Wikipedian, he is an expert and his remarks should carry weight.
I recommend removing Wonder Woman but adding an entry for "numerous Amazons of Themyscira" under "A", with Penelope and Menalippe, Philippus, Anaya and Iphthime, and Io listed in a sublevel to that entry.
It should be relevant to this vote that the current page marks Wonder Woman as "citation needed," and yet during this whole discussion the only specific example given of Diana even possibly showing any interest in women was the scene I referenced in Rucka's run, which appears to be a political comment on Diana's part and not an expression of her personal preference. If there are any published scenes where it's clear, either explicitly or from context, that Diana is sexually or romantically attracted to a woman, someone really needs to cite it. I'm more that willing to reconsider my vote if that happens. Otherwise, the content is not verifiable and should be removed. --Peirigill 20:43, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
I vote to keep her on the list. Please see the discussion here: http://www.comicbloc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=27039 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.70.95.203 (talk • contribs)
Sorry, but you need to have been a registered Wikipedian. --Chris Griswold 22:53, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
Remove - Peirigill convinced me even before I inititated the vote, but I thought we'd see what the new consensus was. It looks like we've decided that hints and accusations aren't enough; there need to be stronger evidence to keep her on this list. I do agree that the Amazons need to be on the list, though. --<b>Chris Griswold</b> 23:07, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Batman

Should Batman really be a part of this list? I'm aware that there's been plenty of discussion / homoerotic subtext and interpretation of his relationship with Robin, but there's been nothing concrete suggested in the comic books that I'm aware of. In any case, given the amount of females he's also demonstrated a clear interest in (Catwoman and Talia al Ghul to name but two), describing Batman as homosexual doesn't seem entirely accurate to me. --Joseph Q Publique 13:17, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

if this article is titled "List of gay, lesbian or bisexual comics characters," then batman = included. (robin also). --Ghetteaux 18:21, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
On what grounds, Ghetteaux? Batman and Robin have never been shown having a sexual or romantic relationship in any DC continuity. They've often been parodied as a couple, but I don't think that should count. Wertham's accusations aren't generally considered accurate, let alone encyclopedic. If you can cite a published story to support your claim, please do.
Why is this question even being raised? Unless I'm completely missing something, Batman isn't on this list, but the way Joseph Q Publique phrased his question, it sounds like he's challenging a reference to Batman that's currently on the list. --Peirigill 20:54, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
Ghetteaux added it; I removed it. Ghetteaux seems unhealthily interested in this subject, repeatedly altering the Batman entry as well to reflect his feelings on the subject rather than the facts. --Chris Griswold 00:20, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
Yes, when I made this entry, it hadn't yet been removed. --Joseph Q Publique 06:34, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
I hope that Chriswold can tell me more about myself; he has a deep insight not often encounted on the internets. --Ghetteaux 12:23, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps you can tell us why you continually insist that Batman is gay. --Chris Griswold 20:34, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
"continually insist?" that is some strong, strong language homie. but either way, hear is the evidense: 1) the comic boox; 2) the TV show; 3) the movies; 4) the george cloonee interview; 4) the form-fitting spandex and "manties" + BDSM / leather outfit; 5) dont EVEN get me started on the fan fiction. but if the caped crusader needs 2 stay in tha closet, that'z cool w/ Ghetteaux.
yes, yes i noe it has been discussed extensively. the thing that makez it interesting is that there are so so many of you heterobats defending his het status so aggressively. eaze up, homie! even if he's queer he can still fight crime and look gothic.
if you all would give the "dark knite" a littel room to express himself, maybe he wouldn't b so tortured. let the man be himself, Chriswold. --Ghetteaux 12:36, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
In a spirit of respect and fairness, Ghetteaux:
  • 1. What specifically in the comic book? What exact point in the comic book or definite, no-holes-barred conclusive evidence persuades you that Batman is gay? Because, with respect, the amount of heterosexual interest he seems to have demonstrated with women in various media, including mainstream comics, the animated series (Catwoman, Wonder Woman, Talia al Ghul) would seem to demonstrate the opposite;
  • 2. The T.V. show is fairly camp, true enough, but camp doesn't necessarily equal homosexual, and it wasn't (to my knowledge) in any way directly stated or even implied; and besides, the T.V show isn't generally considered to be part of the comic book continuity anyway;
  • 3. What in the movies gives you this impression - especially as, again, in all of them Batman demonstrates a clear heterosexual interest in the opposite gender (bearing in mind I haven't seen Batman and Robin);
  • 4. Not knowing the 'George Clooney' interview well enough, I can only speculate, but it seems like he would only be describing his interpretation of the character he was playing, not the character entirely, which whilst a point of interest is not really sufficient evidence to base the interpretation of the entire character on (as Clooney is, after all, one man);
  • 5. If we were to classify superheroes as gay based on their penchant for form-fitting spandex, then nearly all of them would be gay; and in any case, a preference for bondage / BSDM (which, again, it's not conclusively proven Batman has a taste for) does not equal homosexual tendencies, as heterosexual people can be interested in BSDM;
  • 6. the fanfiction is not considered canonical, and in any case is certainly not conclusive evidence; I could write slash fanfiction surmising that Joker and Two-Face had a homosexual relationship, but it wouldn't make it so.
It's not about being a 'heterobat' (whatever that is) or 'defending' Batman's heterosexuality or 'torturing' him (which would be odd, if not impossible, given that the man's a fictional character, and thus isn't likely to care about what we think anyway) - hell, give me a conclusive piece of evidence that Batman's gay (like, the character actually coming out and saying it, because everything else is just subtext and individual interpretation, which isn't conclusive), I'll change the page myself. It's about being accurate - we're comprising an encyclopedia here, and to make a claim like 'Batman is gay' that goes against most of the available evidence we have about him is going to take some pretty compelling evidence.--Joseph Q Publique 13:33, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Roy Harper

Roy Harper has admitted to 'hustling' in order to score drugs, I believe it was in one of the Titans 80 Page Giants

That doesn't make him gay. It makes him a drug addict. --Chris Griswold 15:38, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
The phrase often used is "gay-for-pay." CovenantD 16:41, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
That hyphenated phrase is a slang term that indicates someone is straight but just doing it for the money. Preference/persuasion is different from monetary gain. The debate is usually genes vs. environment; I haven't seen anyone argue that money makes you gay. --Chris Griswold 17:34, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Hence, why I included the caveat "Possibly" and not "Definitely" Blisterfists 4:39 PM June 6, 2006

This isn't a list of possibly gay characters. That's called speculation. --Chris Griswold 21:51, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

unfortunately, there is a precedent, and therefore 'possibly' stays......if it weren't for the following characters, you might have a leg to stand on, but as it is, if these characters are in question, then why can't Roy be?: Amy Grinderbinder, Freddie Harper-Seaton, Harold Hedd, Omaha, Sparrow Pidgeon, Riot, Ruckus, two of which are directly above and below Roy's entry (Which I will continue to include, unless the rest are omitted)User:Blisterfists

Good point. --Chris Griswold 16:11, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Let's remove speculation

Recently, we moved to removed Wonder Woman fromt his list when we decided we were relying too much on speculation and not enough on fact. Blisterfists (talk · contribs), in listing drug addict Roy Harper as possibly gay, has brought to my attention the fact that there are others on this list marked "possibly" or with a question mark. While Roy should not be on the list because he is clearly a heterosexual man who did some things for drug money, we need to address these other characters and either give details of strong implications that they are lesbian or gay or remove them from the list. --Chris Griswold 16:11, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

  • Esperanza Leticia "Hopey" Glass - Locas, Has had a long relationship with the woman Maggie, as well as with men. (bisexual?)
The issue isn't whether she's bi or straight, it's whether she's bi or lez. 惑乱 分からん 19:06, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
OK, so what's the issue? Can you give tha deets? --Chris Griswold 19:56, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
I haven't read the complete run of Locas yet, I usually read the subsequent book when they're in at my local library, so I am a little lost in the continuity, but basically Hopey seems to be primarily attracted to women, both emotionally and sexually, but could enjoy a man as a sexual partner (she once got pregnant with one of her male friends). This contrasts to her on-and-off girlfriend Maggie, who seems mainly to be together with either Hopey or different males. Maybe there's other fans of the comics that are willing to elaborate more. 惑乱 分からん 21:28, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
Hopey should definitely be on the list, she is currently in a lesbian relationship, and has been in predominately lesbian relationships throughout the strip's run. Jaime plays fast and loose with sexuality, but there's no question that the one thing Hopey and Maggie are not is straight. Hiding Talk 22:20, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Amy Grinderbinder - Preacher; in lust with Jesse Custer, possibly sexually interested in Tulip O'Hare, her best friend. (bisexual?)
  • Freddie "Tom O' Bedlam" Harper-Seaton - The Invisibles; homeless tramp and one of the greatest magicians in the history of the human species (possibly gay or bisexual)
  • Harold Hedd - Harold Hedd; underground Hippie comic book character into marijuana and free love (gay or bisexual?)
He's at least "gay", in the sense that he enjoys sucking dick.Proof - (Explicit picture) Granted, he's not as famous as Superman or Spider-Man, but he's possibly the most famous "underground" character from Canada. Not sure if he might be bi, though. The author lived his last time of life together with a wife and kid/s. 惑乱 分からん 19:06, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
OK, so is he every shown doing a chick? --Chris Griswold 19:56, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure, but he seems to "enjoy their presence"
1 + 2
(including both pages of the story, relatively mild for an underground comic). I guess Bi seems fine... (UTC)惑乱 分からん 21:28, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
Why is this character notable? He doesn't have an entry. --Chris Griswold 21:45, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
Well, Wikipedians clearly lack in the underground comix' historical department, I think... 惑乱 分からん 21:53, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
From what I remember, Omaha is bisexual: She is shown having sexual relationships with both men and women. --Chris Griswold 16:13, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
Allegedly self-identifies as a "bisexual lesbian", formerly involved with women, currently with a man. 惑乱 分からん 19:06, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
OK, so that's clear now. --Chris Griswold 19:56, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

I'd be in favor of Excluding Roy, if there weren't already characters who set the precedent.....either prove they are/aren't, or we're opening the floodgates for more (Roy's just the first)User:Blisterfists

OK, I want to ask you, then: Please cite an issue in which Roy's homosexuality is implied. And the whole "I did dudes for drugs" thing doesn't cut it; that doesn't make him gay, it makes him an addict. If you have an instance where he talks about that and gives some indication that he was into it, that's another thing. By your standard, we'll have to add Cassidy from Preacher because he gave an alleyway BJ for heroin. --Chris Griswold 17:48, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
I can't cite an example, because I don't think anything exists, but that doesn't change the fact that there are other characters where that can't be done either....
what I'm saying is this: If I can't provide enough evidence for Roy, cool, exclude him, but exclude every other character that doesn't have enough evidence too, don't just go knocking out Roy, because he's a High Profile Superhero, and the others are from indy comics, or strips that people don't really care much about......User:Blisterfists
It's not because he is a "High Profile Superhero". It's because your reasoning for his inclusion is faulty. He's not gay. --Chris Griswold 19:54, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Blisterfists (talk · contribs), please don't remove these characters whhile they're still being discussed. You additionally removed Riot, and she is pretty clearly a lesbian, although Morrison and Millar can only strongly imply that in the series. --Chris Griswold 01:28, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Webcomics

While I am in no way against the inclusion of comic strip characters on this list as some others were, I do feel that the recent edits adding webcomics characters to the mix has diluted the entry. Webcomics have a smaller audience and no quality requirements for publication, and therefore are simply not as notable. I move that we explicitly limit the article to print characters. --Chris Griswold 06:23, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I disagree. There might be a point in removing lesser known characters, unless they have a notable cult following, but I don't see the point in disqualifying a form of publishing, as a whole. 惑乱 分からん 13:10, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
What about titles like Girl Genius or Supernatural Law, which (IMO) are notable comics, but which have adopted a policy of publishing primarily online and only later anthologizing in print? I agree with Wakuran that such online comics shouldn't be disqualified simply because of their medium, although I also agree that some sort of notability should be required of characters regardless of medium. Perhaps a multi-part requirement that the character either
  1. has made a series of appearances in a comic that has been in publication for over a year, or
  2. has been the subject of significant social commentary outside of the comics industry itself (to cover newsworthy one-shots), or
  3. was historically significant as the first or a prominent example of a GLBT character in some way, whose historical significance is independently verifiable (to cover important historical appearances for characters who were not ongoing).
That's just off the top of my head... maybe there's an existing policy on notability that could apply (and be enforced) here, which would allow genuinely important webcomics while screening minor and trivial characters. Peirigill 17:52, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
I knew someone smart like Peirigill might come along with a better idea. I'm actually good with that. But I think we should also apply those guidelines to comic strip and underground or independent comic books. --Chris Griswold 19:16, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, something like that. I'd like the article to cover the medium broadly, not only american superheroes. Many furry and other sub-genre webcomics seem to have a relatively large, and very devoted following, and the most popular of those would certainly qualify. (Btw, I wonder whether Cherry Poptart should be sorted under P...) 惑乱 分からん 22:28, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
Fair enough, though like all things significance is open to a certain amount of interpretation. I've recently added several characters, some of whom are relatively minor, before I was aware of this policy recommendation. As far as I can tell, all of the ones I've added fit the first criterion, though in some cases (e.g., Brahma) just barely; nonetheless, I would not object if it were ruled that some or all of them were not of significant importance (though some I would argue that at least a few of my additions, such as Zoe Carter and Chelsea Chattan, are notable enough for inclusion). I would not consider myself an adequate judge of my own entries, but if the community at large holds that they should be removed, I will not dispute their redaction. Schol-R-LEA 7:29, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
I noticed that Izzy Sinclair was identified as coming from a "comic strip." Seems like a useful distinction, especially in light of the concerns about the relative "weight" of strips, comic books, and webcomics. I've added a few comic strip characters, and added "comic strip" after the title of the strip, following the Izzy model. I'd like to suggest that for any format other than a serial comic book, like graphic novels (not counting compilations), webcomics, and comic strips, that we identify the medium following the name of the work in this manner. Peirigill 20:07, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Possibly, but I doubt both whether the distinguishing lines between different forms of publications are clear-cut, and if the distinction really is useful. 惑乱 分からん 20:37, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Ultimately, no genre nor medium is "clear-cut." There will always be works that blur the lines. But publication through newspaper, magazine, and web formats are clear enough for most works. In any case, it's a recommendation for formatting, not a requirement, and one that would only be requested of works that were obviously different formats from serial magazines.
As for the usefulness of the distinction, there's one reason I'd like to see it... Why would anyone use this list for anything, anyway? Presumably, to locate gay characters to read about. Identifying the format makes it easier to track down the original material, especially for those characters whose entries have no blue links. This way, no one will walk away frustrated because they tried to track down a webcomic at their local comic book shop. Beyond that, no, it's not terribly useful, but then again, neither is this list. ;) Peirigill 17:23, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
Fair point, but which descriptions should we give? Country of origin? Publishing form? (Franco-Belgian comics are often published in large A4-sized "albums", for instance.) Genre/drawing style? 惑乱 分からん 08:51, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
(restting indent)I'd say whatever descriptions are useful or interesting. To me, it's not so important to know that a title is published in A4, for example. It might be interesting to know that a certain character is yaoi, or nonfictional. One thought that strikes me is that it might be interesting to observe trends, such as a greater willingness in webcomics to write gay characters than you'd find in newspaper strips, for example... or conversely, it's interesting to see how many gay characters get into the newspaper strips precisely because newspapers are likely to be the most conservative format, least likely to present something that might be controversial to the wider newspaper readership. Might you find similar interesting trends geographically, such as a greater presence of gay characters in Belgian comics than in Italian ones? I don't know. Is it useful? Probably, but maybe not enough to outweigh the increased page clutter. Peirigill 17:59, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Xavin

I'm not so sure Xavin is either transgendered or bisexual. What Xavin does, he does out of concern for his people. The change in gender is not his own desire, but a way to achieve his goal, that of marrying Karolina.--Chris Griswold 22:50, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Two questions: is this list supposed to include transgendered characters, in general? It's labeled as a GLB list, not a GLBT list. Either way is fine; I'd just like to know.
Re: Xavin: assuming that transgendered characters are in fact fair game for this list, what difference does motivation or willingness make? Gender transgression is gender transgression. (Of course, by this logic, you have to open the floodgates to straight drag queens and kings, gay-for-pay straight characters, etc., but that's the price you pay for being inclusive of transgender, which is a broad and very ill-defined category.)
Assuming, conversely, that this list is really about characters with same-sex attraction, then Xavin counts. S/he is attracted to the same gender as his/her biological gender. I wouldn't identify the character as "(lesbian)" but as "(straight male in a female body)" or some such. The sex would be gay sex, even if the gender identification was at odds with the body, and that seems like sufficient grounds for inclusion on this list. Peirigill 17:23, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
I just think the transgendered tag seems strange for Xavin because I've always understood GLBT issues to be about identity and personal choice. Cassidy the vampire isn't gay because he gave an alleyway blowjob for heroin; he wanted the heroin, not the blowjob. Xavin doesn't want to be female, but he appears as a female because he feels he has to for his people. The Skrulls are a race that do have gender, so it's not like he is androgenous. If you feel strongly about Xavin on the list, I will be alright with his inclusion because you're right: It is a GLBT-related situation. I think we should mention, however, why he does what he does. I wonder, though: By this logic, isn't Karolina Dean bisexual? --Chris Griswold 20:13, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
"I've always understood GLBT issues to be about identity and personal choice." Yowza! I know what you're getting at, but "choice" is a hot-button word in gay politics.  ;) Personally, I agree with your example, and wouldn't include Cassidy or Arsenal on this list. I just wanted to point out that once you start accepting "transgender," you can easily be pushed to including all sorts of problematic and counterintuitive cases, since "transgressive" is almost by definition in defiance of clear-cut gender categorizations.
That's why I phrased a very specific question: does the female Xavin feel same-sex attraction? If so, then homosexuality is occurring, but it's transgendered homosexuality, and should be acknowledged as such rather than being labeled as simply "lesbian," which, as you rightly point out, implies a certain gender identity that doesn't obtain here. Karolina, however, seems to me to be a straightforward lesbian, since her attraction is to Xavin qua female, not to Xavin qua man in a woman's body. Peirigill 20:46, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
People choose whether to accept their identity and how much to embrace it.
I'm not getting anywhere near that argument! (Not that I don't agree, just that it's contentious - especially for transgendered folk who don't feel they have an innate gender identity, and resent the presumption of us males and females that they're just declining to embrace one. Oops, I guess I did get near it!)  ;) Peirigill 01:17, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
Xavin is never female; he just appears female. Karolina is still involved with a male character, whatever his appearance.
If that's the case, then I'd say he doesn't belong on this page (although he's still technically transgender). I thought he was a Skrull, and that Skrulls were shapeshifters, not illusion-casters... are you sure he's never physically, biologically female? Poor Karolina, then... sounds like she's being deceived. Peirigill 01:17, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
Gender seems prettty definite in the Annihilation: Super-Skrull miniseries.
I don't know what "qua" means. --Chris Griswold 00:34, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
It means "in its role as" or "in its capacity as." It's used a lot in Scholastic/Catholic philosophy to distinguish between two aspects of a single entity, such as the communion wafer qua bread and qua flesh. See [[1]]. Peirigill 01:17, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
I have learned something.--Chris Griswold 06:01, 6 July 2006 (UTC)


Transgendered Section

The trangendered section seems out of place, with no actual examples of the traditional definition found at transgender: 

"People who were assigned a gender, usually at birth and based on their genitals, 
but who feel that this is a false or incomplete description of themselves." 
Another one is: 
"Non-identification with, or non-presentation as, the gender one was assigned at birth."

Most of the examples given are either sex/gender-shifting (as a form of shapeshifting) or crossdressing, which, at least in my mindset, are two completely different aspects. 惑乱 分からん 14:58, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Merge

I'm not sure why this article wasn't just a series of positive changes to the "List" article. The two are both lists that cover essentially the same info, but the one is just more detailed. I don't think we need both. --Chris Griswold 13:04, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

The scope of the articles are different, though. This is a descriptive article, the other a list. 惑乱 分からん 09:20, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Survey

Merge - There is little difference in the scope of these; one id just more descriptive than the other but is still a list.--Chris Griswold 19:47, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
Speedy Merge - They're both 'lists', but List of gay, lesbian or bisexual comics characters is more complete. I'm pulling over anything from this page that's missing on that one, and I vote for going with List of gay, lesbian or bisexual comics characters as the format. done, there were only 2 -- Ipstenu (talk|contribs) 15:00, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Closed with CONSENSUS TO MERGE CovenantD 16:15, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Maybe merge

This is a more detailed and descriptive article than the other one; if anything, the other (or parts of it) should be merged with this article. Maybe merging is not the answer, though. Maybe each article should continue to stand alone. It seems there's too much merging going on in Wikipedia.

Citations?

Are there any sources for these? (Especially the ones whose names appear unlinked.) 65.115.38.32 15:12, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Discussion

Unreferenced characters

We need to add citations to the characters on the list. Do not add a new character to the list without citing the mention of LGBT. --Chris Griswold 23:13, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Amazon image

The sample image of "An Amazon of Themyscira" is a cover of Artemis from the Requiem mini. This seems inappropriate. The main problem is that Artemis is straight, not gay. To my knowledge, she's never been portrayed as attracted to women. Also, Artemis is part of the Bana-Mighdall tribe. Although the Bana-Mighdall have reluctantly emigrated to Themiscyra, they are usually contrasted with the "Themysciran Amazons." Most importantly, Artemis is only twenty years old, not 2,500 years old, like the immortal Themyscirans. The Bana-Mighdall line continued because of reproduction; theirs is a heterosexual culture, unlike the Themyscirans' predominantly lesbian culture. Sorry to be a nitpicky fanboy, but this is like having an article that mentions that many figure skaters are gay, and then illustrates that statement with a picture of Wayne Gretzky. Peirigill 19:09, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Good point. Wait: Wayne Gretzky's gay? --Chris Griswold 19:23, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Wait...since when have the Amazons been gay? I thought it was just there society.--Mullon 04:08, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Perez established that many but not all Themysciran Amazons were lesbian. Jimenez and Rucka reinforced this. Several Amazons have been explicitly identified as coupled, including Anaya and Iphthime. Others, like Io, definitely appear to be attracted to women, but this hasn't been stated outright. Back when the list of LGBT characters was a separate page, someone wanted to list Diana (Wonder Woman) as bisexual based on her portrayal by Rucka, and the consensus was not to list Diana but to list "various Amazons of Themyscira" based on Perez, Jimenez, and Rucka's runs. Peirigill 02:53, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup

Explaining the tag: This article needs some general copy editing, and the references need to be formatted to fit Wikipedia style. In just glance, I found several quotation mark errors and un-capitalized words at the beginning of sentences. --Chris Griswold 05:16, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

This article needs a lot of work to become comprehensive. The prominent emphasis on Marvel characters (Northstar and the Rawhide Kid) borders on POV. Where's the commentary on early, controversial, or prominent LGBT characters from DC like Extraño, Wanda Mann, Terry Berg, Renee Montoya, and Kate Kane? Much of the article focuses on temporary, one-shot transformations of characters from one gender to another. This isn't comprehensive (for example, there's no mention of Superman encountering a gender-reversed Justice League), and while technically these are cases of transgendering, they are not truly examples of transgendered characters — no more so than the fact that many superheroes have been turned into apes at one time or another means they belong on a list of animal or animal-themed superheroes. The history is seriously lacking; not one mention of Wertham's accusations that Batman, Robin, and Wonder Woman were homosexual? Can we get some better citations for public response and perceptions? What about how gay characters fit into the larger context of comics increasing the overall diversity of their publications? What about comic book stories that address gay themes indirectly, using non-gay characters? I know, I know... if I don't like the article, I should fix it. I'll see what I can do. In the meantime, I wanted to add my concerns to Chris' cleanup tag, in the hope that anyone who is actively working on this article might take them into account. Peirigill 07:19, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Thank you. --Chris Griswold 08:25, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Not to mention Pied Piper, who came out, if I recall the timing right, BEFORE Northstar. And not that I have anything against Transgered people, or think they don't deserve a share of this article, but it seems unbalanced to A) have so little text talking about gay characters and so much devoted to transgendered and B) to have most of the transgender bits focus on transformations that weren't permanent. Maybe some more focus on gay characters, especially now that they're really making an apperance (including in books marketed towards children (Young Avengers & Runaways))..like Freedom Ring, Scandal, Knockout (or is she bi?), Hulkling, Wiccan, Xavin (if being a Skrull counts..now there's something for transgender/no gender), Karolina, etc. 71.197.161.86 15:22, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Since when has Black Cat been bisexual?--Mullon 04:09, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Alternate reality, openly bi. Earth-616 allegedly bi, quote: "It's been so long since I've had a boyfriend... or a girlfriend". Not sure about the particular issue. 惑乱 分からん 22:54, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Transgendered section (further ponderings)

I think the transgendered section seems out of place, here. I wonder if I'm alone in my opinion, but in my worldview, TG refers to real-life examples of (primarily) being born one gender, feeling you should be born as another, not to completely switch between each other genders as will. I'm aware that gender-shifting is an old mythological concept found in many cultures worldwide, and I think it is an interesting phenomena to warrant its own article, though, but should not be mixed up, merged or confused with transgender issues. It is rather some form of shapeshifting or transformation fetish. Also, as it stands now, I wonder how the authors could have missed the manga series Ranma 1/2 and Futaba-Kun Change!. The Jimmy Olsen section seems even further misplaced, it doesn't seem like Jimmy Olsen is crossdressing of some sort of sexual curiosity (or perhaps that could be argued...) 惑乱 分からん 11:09, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

See my comments just above, in the "Cleanup" section. I'm loath to start mandating what counts as "transgender" and what doesn't, so I wouldn't eliminate the information about temporary gender switches, but I'd treat it as a less important aspect of transgendering in comics and significantly reduce the section, maybe use summary style to link to an article dedicated to gender swtiches in comics. The primary discussion of transgendered characters should be those characters who identify as transgender or who undergo a significant, lasting, or repeated alteration of gender. Peirigill 18:54, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Hmmm, transgender seems to be a vague definition, with the Wikipedia article even mentioning cross-dressing. Repeated alteration (male-female and back again) fits Ranma 1/2 and Futaba-Kun Change! anyway. There seems to be few examples of what I'd consider true transsexuality in comics (such as the movie Transamerica), even outside the American mainstream. I think the gender-shifting section is interesting, but it might possibly fit better in another article. 惑乱 分からん 21:35, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
I agree with this. There is a difference between depicting a character as being transgendered in the sense that real people are transgendered and depicting them as being suddenly reversed in sex.--Chris Griswold(☏) 01:05, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
I agree also; that section dismayed the hell out of me, as it occupies a majority of the article now and seems mostly to refer to established heroes who were briefly switched or appeared as the other gender in an alternate universe or something like that. I'm going to get flamed for this, but I'd actually call it transcruft. As per the OP, none of this is actually what TG is generally accepted to be. I'd agree with Peirigill that permanency is required at the *least*. Suntiger 10:16, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Agreed. The bits about regular characters growing breats for an issue should be shrunken and moved lower in the article.--Chris Griswold (☎☓) 10:40, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Proposed restructuring of article

Just some preliminary thoughts... what you you all think of this outline as a template for revising this article?

  1. Lede and TOC
  2. Scope of article
    1. Who:"Transgender themes, in the broadest sense, have been present in modern comics since their earliest days in the late 19th century, every time comedy or drama ensued from breaking established gender roles. Characters whose sexual or gender identities break heterosexual or gender norms have been less common. These include characters identifiable as LGBT, whether gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transsexual, or even simply expressing same-sex attractions or defying simple gender assignment."
    2. When:"Although the history of comics arguably goes back to Rodolphe Toepffer's "picture-stories" in the 1830s and even further to medieval European tapestries, illustrated pre-Columbian Mexican chronicles, and beyond, modern comics began in the 1890's with [quick summary goes here]. This article deals with LGBT characters in modern comics."
  3. History
    1. 1930s and 1940s: Early gay-themed comics
      1. WWII (pre-war Berlin Schwuler comics, Tom of Finland, etc.)
    2. 1950s and 1960s: Underground comix (Harold Hedd, etc.)
    3. 1970s: Development of an artistic community (Gay Comix/Gay Comics, Dykes to Watch Out For, etc.)
    4. 1980-1995: Emergence into mainstream comics (Extraño, Northstar, Gaiman's Sandman series, etc.)
    5. 1995-2005
      1. AIDS and the Gay Rights movement (HIV in Global Guardians, Alpha Flight, Hulk, etc.; Judd Winick and Pedro and Me; also, anti-gay comics like Chick)
      2. Proactive diversity from major publishers
      3. Manga and yaoi
      4. Notable works and events (Stuck Rubber Baby, Rawhide Kid mini, Pedro and Me, Josiah Power as gay "title character" of Power Company, etc.)
    6. 2006-present (recent developments: Holly Robison as Catwoman, Renee Montoya as lead character in Gotham Central and 52, etc.)
      1. Webcomics
  4. Public response
    1. Wertham and the Comics Code Authority (Batman and Robin, Wonder Woman, etc.)
    2. Backlash (concerns about morality (especially in a medium perceived as geared towards children), de-gaying characters (Gen-13), reader complaints of writers pushing their social agendas (Winick), oversized "Mature readers" label (Rawhide Kid))
    3. Awards (GLAAD awards, etc.)
    4. Panels of gay writers/artists at comicons
  5. Literary and artistic techniques
    1. Genres (Coming-out stories, biography, serial drama, homoerotica, etc.)
    2. "Closeting" techniques (Northstar as "fairy," kisses shown only in silhouette (Catwoman, Starman), gay characters never touching other characters (Pulp Annual of Flash), gay characters whose partners are kept off-panel (Maggie Sawyer, Piper), omission of the "g"-word (Power Company), etc.)
    3. Breaking out of the closet (cinematic kissing scenes, activist characters (Piper and Terry Berg), etc.)
  6. Related same-sex and transgressive themes in comics
    1. Gender-switching as a plot device/tool for exploring characterization
    2. False homoeroticism (Arsenal and Nightwing jokingly called "boyfriends" in Outsiders, attractions misinterpreted as same-sex in Ranma 1/2, etc.)
    3. LGBT themes addressed allegorically through non-LGBT characters
    4. Fanzine and fanfic (slash)
  7. List of LGBT characters in comics

This is totally off the top of my head. Any suggestions for reorganizing or expanding this? Peirigill 06:51, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Yaoi is much older than the 90's, I think, only that it was barely known outside East Asia by the time. Possibly the list and article is too US-centric, btw. Japan, Europe, Australia (Latin America? Africa?) is largely forgotten. 惑乱 分からん 09:36, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
I didn't know enough about yaoi to do more than include it somewhere. How should these non-Americentric topics be covered? I was thinking chronologically made the most sense, but it seems likely that you'd need to talk about the main three areas of comics (the US and Canada, Western Europe, and Japan) separately because of the different styles and/or public responses. (The pro-censorship forces that led to the American Comics Code Authority, are, IIRC, a uniquely American phenomenon. Peirigill 00:29, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
You're probably right. In Europe there were old moral codes, but AFAIK no officially sanctioned standard. 惑乱 分からん 06:51, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
My knowledge is Americentric, so please help me fill this in! In Japan, I know about yaoi and bishonen, and I seem to recall that there's a lesbian counterpart to yaoi. I read Ranma 1/2, but I'm not familiar with Futaba-Kun Change!. What else is there to cover? I know that some Japanese comics are distributed as parts of large anthologies, which allow readers and writers to experiment with a greater diversity of genres. Is that relevant here? Does that create a context where comics with gay-related themes are more readily available, or does the fact that children might be reading limit what writers will include? Or does Japan just not get upset about gays the way the US does? Peirigill 00:29, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Hmmm, most anthologies tend to be aimed at a particular demographic target audience, that is pre-school kids, girls between 8-13, males between 18-30 etc. thus there appears to be little concern that children might be reading material which is not suitable for them. Also, generally mainstream comics do allow much more of graphic sexuality and graphic violence etc. than in USA. Japan, and particularly the Japanese pop culture, does seem to have different conceptions of homosexuality than USA. 惑乱 分からん 06:51, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
As for Europe, I did include the pre-WWII Berliner comics and Tom of Finland. I can add Vellekoop to the erotica section. What else is there for Europe?
Ralf König is a popular German cartoonist. Also, Europe has had more alternative comics inspired by the american underground. I'll see what else I could find of remarkable material. 惑乱 分からん 06:51, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
The anthology Dyke Strippers includes lesbian (and female bisexual) cartoonists from around the world, including New Zealand and Australia. I had intended to talk about that in the "Development of an artistic community" section. Any suggestions for male cartoonists?~
The american anthology Gay Comix is not only for male cartoonists, but they have been produced semi-regularly since the 80's. 惑乱 分からん 06:51, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm thinking we could mention how other areas, like Africa and the Middle East, have few or no LGBT characters because of the cultural backdrop (assuming that they don't, in fact, have many gay characters). Peirigill 00:29, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Possibly. The comic cultures here also seem quite underdeveloped. 惑乱 分からん 06:51, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Hmmm, maybe the transgendered section should be restructured, too, with more direct, realistic examples of transsexualism on top (Actually, I have trouble finding more characters than Lord Fanny) and perhaps further down, renaming the rest of the section to "Other ambiguate depictions of gender" which would include the current gender-shifting and cross-dressing section. This way, we could include the classic Krazy Kat, whose main character seemingly was in a perpetual state of gender flux, depending on which story George Herriman wanted to tell (I remember an interesting Sunday page in which Ignatz got jealous because he erroneously believed Krazy had a date with a girlfriend. Ignatz is afaik always described as male) 惑乱 分からん 11:31, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
I've already done that, by creating a separate "Gender-switching as a plot device/tool for exploring characterization" subsection in a separate "Related same-sex and transgressive themes in comics" section that goes at the end of the article. I'd prefer rewriting the article so that there is no longer a separate "transsexual" section, as in my proposed outline above. I'd rather mention transgendered (and specifically, transsexual) characters alongside the LGB characters as they come up in the history and public response sections. Trying to compartmentalize transgender will mean separate sections for gay characters, lesbian characters, and bisexual characters, and that approach seems problematic. It's not necessary, it will be hard to neatly categorize people (as we've seen from the List of LGBT characters), and it doesn't seem to add much compared to the approach of just bringing characters up as they come up.
Just to be clear: I want to overhaul this article top to bottom, to address the concerns that ChrisGriswold and I were discussing above. That's why I could really use everyone's help in agreeing on the outline, and making sure that the outline is comprehensive, NPOV, global, perspicuous, etc., before making any significant changes. Peirigill 18:07, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
"Transgender" seems a vague concept, but I'd say it is different enough from LGB (mainly sexual and romantic attraction), instead being about personal gender identity, to warrant its own section and having LGB bulked together, partly because the distinction between homo and bi isn't always that clear-cut... Ah, created, you're talking about the outline you drafted. Maybe your proposals are too specific, if it's vaguer, it could be more diversified in the inclusion of examples. Anyway, if it's a draft, of course it could still be worked on, and I could have read it through more carefully first. 惑乱 分からん 19:44, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
(decreasing indent for legibility) Maybe I should clarify: in my outline above, typical examples are given in parentheses, just to give you an idea of what kinds of characters and works would be covered in each section. It's not exhaustive by any means.
Although the concepts of sexual orientation and gender identity are different, this is an article about characters, not concepts. There's no significant difference between Neil Gaiman's decisions to introduce gay male characters (Alex Burgess), bisexual male characters (Paul McGuire), lesbian characters (Foxglove), bisexual female characters (Hazel), transsexual characters (Wanda Mann), and polygendered characters (Desire). Separating Shvaughn Erin's transsexualism and Element Lad's presumed homosexuality is especially unhelpful, because the two topics are intimately connected in the same storyline.
If transgendered characters really deserve a separate treatment from same-sex characters, we should seriously consider making this page Gay characters in comics and give Transgendered characters in comics its own page. That doesn't feel right to me, and I don't recommend it. I'm not absolutely opposed to a separate section for transsexual characters, but I don't think it's needed or helpful. Could you draft an alternate outline, either based on mine or totally new, that shows how you would organize the topic? Peirigill 21:11, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Webcomics

Should there be a seperate list for webcomics? The internet is a lot more free of censorship than mainstream comic books, and the inclusion of such characters seems to be going against the general tone of the article as set in Public Reaction, which specifies publishers. --OGoncho 19:32, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Webcomics should be separate. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 01:54, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
I disagree. Censorship depends on what country and comics culture you are talking about. The comics should be somewhat "notable" though, having gained a significant following. However, it should be marked in the list whether the comic is a webcomic or not. (By the way, I really should start discussing that restructural with Peirigill again soon.) 惑乱 分からん 20:21, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Both The Gaming Guardians and Guardians are notable for having prominant gay superhero characters, especially Radical's brother (who'se name eludes me) and Brahma. If we're going to include Webcomics in superhero comics articles, these should definitely be included. And let me also state that I'm definitely for including notable webcomics in other comic articles, where appropriate. Just because a comic is primarily available on the web doesn't make it invalid.--Pyritefoolsgold 12:00, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

It's not any less valid, but it is a different medium. A separate article should be created, since the name of this one is comic book characters. CovenantD 12:05, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

What makes a webcomic invalid is lack of readership. Just like a blog or poet's chapbook. Anyone can make one; doesn't mean it's affecting anyone's life. Notability must be proven for these things to eb taken seriously and not be regarded simply as plugs. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 15:09, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
CovenantD hits the nail on the head - this is "LGBT comic book characters". I don't think anyone would have any problems with LGBT webcomic characters and adding a link in via See also. (Emperor 15:35, 25 November 2006 (UTC))

In response to ChrisGrisWold, I see what you mean, at least as far as major articles like this one are concerned, but the Gaming Guardians is one of the most notable webcomics out there. Another quetion: what happens if Gaming Guardians publishes a book featuring the timeline in which Brahma has been featured (Not unlikely, and it may have already happened) Should that then be included in this article, or is it still a "webcomic?"--Pyritefoolsgold 04:04, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I'd say you could include it in both. (Emperor 05:08, 26 November 2006 (UTC))
Still think it's an unnecessary distinction. If the webcomic has a notable readership, or is very popular among a sub-culture (such as furry fandom) they should still belong. Some small info about the character/comic could be given here, though. I'd rather have the article moved to a new title than start a new article. 惑乱 分からん 14:29, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
But it isn't about notability or popularity the objection is that it is a different medium (as the distinction between comic books and comic strips is a well-defined despite them both using sequential art to tell a story, e.g.: List of films based on American comic books and List of films based on comic strips then I can't see the problem with webcomics being seen as another medium which probably has more in common with the latter. See the section Forms within comics). This article as it stands seems well-defined and a good size and I'd not support moving it to a more general entry and really don't see the problem with LGBT webcomic characters. (Emperor 15:53, 6 December 2006 (UTC))
I don't think that the medium is distinct enough to warrant another list. In that case, there surely would be a vote on a merge soon, anyway... 惑乱 分からん 22:41, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
Well start the list and see if anyone proposes a merge. I know I'd vote against a merge as I suspect would a number of other people here. If comic strips and comic books are distinct enough to get two lists in the examples I give then I can't see there being a big issue with them being separate here. As I say this isn't about notability and it isn't being webcomicist (I have one of my own) its just a distinct form of sequential art. (Emperor 23:42, 6 December 2006 (UTC))
I'd still warrant it isn't distinct enough, all considered. Why should webcomics be listed separately, but not manga, underground or European comics? And for comics/film/tv, I think having four different articles for basically the same scope is unnecessary overkill. List of films and television series based on comics should probably suffice for starters. 惑乱 分からん 00:30, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Webcomics are not on paper and can be published for much less money and with much less editorial input than other forms of comics, all of which free webcomics from limitations the other forms have. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 01:27, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
I wouldn't say that it's enough reason to write a separate article. Robert Crumb published a lot of his own comics, himself, without editorial input. The same goes for several other comics fanzines. Usually they had a very small number of readers, but some became very popular. I don't think having separate articles is a good choice, in the film/Tv articles, Asterix is considered a comic strip rather than a comic book, and V for Vendetta is considered as both. 惑乱 分からん 01:38, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Not a great example as they shouldn't be there. I have removed V for Vendetta and once the mess over the other entry is sorted (it should never have been moved to "American comic books" at which point it lost its international examples) is fixed I'll move Asterix over there too. The bottom line is that comic books are printed on paper in multi-page stories while webcomics have each "page" released peridiocally over an electronic medium. I would also oppose the merging of comic books and comic strips as they are also distinct formats. However, all this comes down to is my opinion versus yours. If you disagree so thoroughly create the entry and if someone suggests a merge then a group of peers can offer their opinions on the matter and that is the way it is going to be decided. (Emperor 02:07, 7 December 2006 (UTC))
Opinions, yeah, apparently so. I don't think the different formats of the medium needs to be sorted at this stage. I'm for one article, though it should have marked the type of comic, and in the case it has been filmed, wheteher the film is live-action, animation or both, or whether it was filmed as a feature film, tv series or both.惑乱 分からん 14:31, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
All of those are constrained by the paper format. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 03:23, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
But the DIY attitude in comic creating has existed long before the Internet became popular, see minicomic. 惑乱 分からん 14:31, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure what minicomics have to do with webcomics. One is constrained by paper, and the other is not. The only thing they maybe have in common is that you will be hard-pressed to find too many Wikipedia articles on minicomics. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 23:47, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
The point is that paper in itself isn't necessarily a constraint. 惑乱 分からん 13:02, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Paper comics can't use animation, links, or metatext. They can't easily be distributed unless in a certain size range, whereas webcomics can be as long and wide as the author intends and still use the same delivery system. Webcomics can easily use branching narratives through page links, but print comics cannot. To say that paper is not more constraining than the web is incorrect. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 01:04, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
Actually, I think most of these statements are irrelevant to the discussion, (animation, links, metatext) unless it strays so far away from the original medium that it could be argued it no longer is a comic, anymore. It's true that it's a form that's easier to distribute, and that it might be easier for an artist to reach out with a longer narrative, but I don't think it warrants a separate article. Just a sub-section of explanation, and a note next to the character listed. 惑乱 分からん 15:11, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Outsiders characters

Whilst reading the list I noticed that two characters from DC's Outsiders; Grace and Thunder, appear to be missing. In Outsiders December 2006 (issue #41), the two are shown to be involved in a romantic/ sexual relationship.

Well, add them. 惑乱 分からん 16:21, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

What about Harley Quin and Poison Ivy? Also are all the LGBT characters from Sandman present? I didn't see Wanda, but the list is a jumble so I may have overlooked. Is Desire LGBT? Technically in some way It is something.

I don't think Harley and Ivy have ever been explicitly stated as bi or lesbian(?) Desire is interesting, I guess sie is a bisexual ambisexual, or something. The list is, naturally, incomplete. 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * 16:54, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikify characters

THere should be links to each characters wikipedia page. For instance, there's no link for the Rawhide Kid. - Peregrine Fisher 15:16, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Rawhide Kid gay b.jpg

Image:Rawhide Kid gay b.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:32, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Miscategorizations

I’m holding off on simply making the changes because I’m not completely up to date on the characters and my comics are currently unaccessible to check the references I have in mind.

Timothy Ravenwind notes he’s bisexual in one of the Mark Millar issues of Swamp Thing (which I specifically remember because the reference was so clunky), but is listed as gay. Is there any event to justify listing him as gay rather than bisexual when he self-described as the latter?

Freddie "Tom O' Bedlam" Harper-Seaton from The Invisibles is listed as undetermined, but he’s clearly gay though with a thing for Edie. King Mob (from the present) asks him about it, and he responds with a “I suppose I am” to the sexual invert question. I could see the attraction to Edie bringing up the question of whether he’s gay or bi, but the “possibly gay or bisexual” suggests that straight is also a possibility.

Danny the Street is definitely gay as I recall, not just a transvestite. He makes reference to using Palaré so the straights wouldn’t know what they were talking about. Certainly there’s the question of how a street could be gay, but as he’s been assigned a gender and the question only exists once accepting a sentient transvestite street, I would think it a moot one. Skyhawk0 11:22, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Magik

Can someone inform me why Magik keeps phasing on and off the list? Is a rogue user adding her and then someone removes her?

Seriously, she and shadowcat are on the list and I don't think either of them are gay or bi? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.206.190.114 (talk) 18:27, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Wishful thinking. I have friends who loudly proclaim this or that character to be gay basically because they (the friend) want them to be, and so find the most ridiculously extreme examples of same-gender friendship and blow it up into a love affair. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.84.19.246 (talk) 14:18, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Doop-bisexual.png

Image:Doop-bisexual.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 07:09, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

The image Image:InnocentBirdManga6.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --02:55, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Archiving discussion?

Hmmm, this page is more than 80 k, with my inclusion of the discussions from the merged article. Maybe someone should archive this discussion? 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 15:14, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Archive 1
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:LGBT_characters_in_comics/Archive_1&oldid=1053226843"