Could/Should Diana be bisexual/gay?

[Gaelforce]

Who knows, perhaps he has? :)

Show me or it hasn't happened.

But all I am saying is that DC can choose to make any of their existing characters bend in whatever way they desire if the current powers that be think its a good idea and that it can be backed with an appropriate story. And I suppose I need not point out that out of the Trinity, Wonder Woman is the least controversial it could happen to.

I'm not in any way, shape or form saying what DC can and cannot choose to do. I'm just sayin' I don't want them to do it and wouldn't be happy if they did.

I also find it a bit sexist to say that WW would be the 'least controversial.' Of course she would - in general, men don't have any hang ups about two (or more) women having sex. A lot of them get off on it, and since it's men who control the industry and men who are the majority of readers, of course it would be less controversial. Tell them that the Batgod is gay? You better make a lot of popcorn for that display of testosterone ;)

[slvn]

These examples are best considered aberrations stimulated by environmental factors or stresses. I could also cite an example such as cannibalism. There was (or might still be) examples of cultures that engaged in human cannibalism; that factor was more likely than not, socially influenced; however, the norm, under these circumstances (e.g. starvation), is the vast majority of people tend to starve to death before resorting to cannibalism (e.g. these two are equivalent to very small exceptions to the larger population at large that shunned those tendencies at the time or would have considered them strange, as with the example of cannibalism); there is a small Asian culture where they have totally removed the concept of infidelity, but it’s pure culturally influenced; outside of this example, infidelity is clearly a distinction in most peoples’ minds.

If Socrates and his Athenian peers had been cannibals; if the Romans had thought it was perfectly natural to eat people, and only shameful to be eaten; if Michelangelo and Shakespeare wrote sonnets about the attractions of the cannibalistic diet; if cannibals among otherwise non-cannibalistic indigenous peoples in the Americas were honored as shamans; and if Thailand had socially accepted cannibals for centuries (as it has accepted the Kathoey, or third gender); then I might see the point of your analogy. As it is, not so much. There are too many cultures in which homosexual desire and behavior (and other variations of gender and sexual identity) has been seen as natural and common--whetehr or not they are considered desirable or morally permissible--to simply write them off as "aberrations," unless you have decided in advance to dismiss them for dogmatic reasons.

The same with those animal examples; additionally, these may not be examples of homosexual tendencies at all, but the equivalent of say me sharing a room with another college student who is male; when I was in college, and such is probably still the case, a coed dorm setting was rare; usually, males were required to room with males and females room with females, but this behavior is totally divorced from sexual orientation; thus, due to environmental factors, these animal examples are aberrations as compared to the animal examples that I cited; it's just an example of the researcher fudging the data to breed controversy. There’s no need to make such consorted efforts to observe the animal examples that I cited.

Where's your evidence that the researchers are fudging data? As I pointed out, researchers say that they have identified genetic factors in mice and other species,a dn that they have observed "same-sex" behavior in virtually every species they have looked at. I'm not saying that the basis to conclude that this is an "aberration," unless you just mean it is statistically less common than different-sex behavior; and I see no reason to conclude that only the most statistically common behaviors are rooted in biology. You might have to make a "concerted effort" to fin black swans, too--but they're out there, and they're not culturally constructed.

[slvn]

I should have been more specific in my reply :)

The issue I have is simply this - Diana is heterosexual. She has never in her 70+ years been portrayed as otherwise.

I agree; but I don't think "what has been" or "what is" is necessarily "what always should be."

And who knows? Maybe Marston or otehrs would have made her Lesbian or bisexual if they could have. But it wasn't socially acceptable. Is that a reason why no version of the character should ever be Lesbian or bisexual?

for all this time, DC editorial has made it so. They own the character and that character has not been bi/gay.

True, and if by "should she..." we mean "Is DC ethically obligated to make her Lebian or bisexual?" I would say no.

I can absolutely understand LGBT readers wanting someone to relate to, however, my objection is to change an existing character into a potential stereotype

I guess everything is a potential stereotype; Wonder Woman was a heterosexual female stereotype when Kanigher had her standing on a chair because she was afraid of a mouse. But I do want to poitn out again that the idea of a "strong Lesbian" is not, in and of itself, a stereotype. The idea that all strong women are Lesbian is a stereotype, but there's no reason why a Lesbian Wonder Woman should have to play into that stereotype; she could be surrounded by strong heterosexual women. And if a Lesbian WOnde rWOman possesses positive qualities that are commonly considered "feminine," then she cold play AGAINST the stereotype that all Lesbians are "butch."

[/quote]...and, in doing so, take away a character *others* such as myself have related to over the years.[/QUOTE]

I understand how you feel, but there have been 70 years worth of stories of a hetereosexual Wonder Woman, and no one's taking them away. Wonder Woman has been, is and will be (at least in back issues) a role model for heterosexual women. You have great, totally legitimate reasons for your personal preference, and I compeltely respect those reasons. But, to me, the value of yet more stories of a heterosexual Wonder Woman doesn't outweigh the potential symbolic and social value of the first stories of a Lesbian or bisexual Wonder Woman, which would be a strong way of affirming that a woman of any sexuality can be a representative of what is past in women and in humanity.

[ascended]

I'd like to thank everyone for not allowing this discussion to fall into the usual mess. I know its a delicate subject and Ive seen the topic degrade before. I almost didnt bring it up at all, but given events in the last year or so and the American cultural shift we are seeing, I thought it could be worth bringing up again. So far, Ive really enjoyed the debate.

Anyway, Gael, again you make solid points. And just so Im clear, Im not actually advocating Diana becoming bi or gay. Just sort of posting out loud as it were. Im a straight male, so I basically dont have a horse in this race. Anyway, you mention that when DC has Batman come out of the closet, you will be more open to Diana doing the same.

The difference between the two is that Diana has not really had a strong love life. Batman has a long and detailed history with women, dating or seeing someone almost constantly, even if it is only Selina on rooftops. Superman likewise is very much a straight man. Their orientation is cemented not only among fandom but the wholesale public consciousness. Diana on the other hand, while she has had several boyfriends, lacks a "Lois Lane" or a "Catwoman" and is more often than not, habitually single. Especially in the last twenty or thirty years. And there is nothing wrong with that. Diana doesnt "need" someone in her life. But, historically, I feel there is enough gray area there so that DC could, if they wanted, pull off Diana as being bisexual and not go completely against all precedent. Full out lesbian, I dont think they could get away with. But bi? Maybe. Aside from Steve, no lover, potential or otherwise, has really stuck. In other words, there is wiggle room for it to be brought in, assuming its done intelligently and not just for shock value. It would be seen as such regardless, but honestly.....I dont think fan opinion, especially online, is worth enough to base creative choices on.

Now, Im not even saying DC should do this. Again, I dont have a horse in this race. But of all the truly iconic superheroes, (and really, there's only about four or five) Diana is the only one who could make this sort of switch and still "feel" like Diana. And creating new characters to diversify is great, but it almost never works. Readers rarely gravitate to new characters, (Batwoman being about the only recent example I can think of,) regardless of gender or sexual orientation or race or powerset or whatever. And newer characters are normally the ones on the chopping block first. You mention Renee Montoya, and just a few years after her phenomenal transformation into the Question, where is she? Now, I support new characters and especially more diverse characters. But with the industry as it is.....its a band-aid.

I get where you're coming from though, and I respect your view. Im glad Diana was able to inspire you as a child, and it seems, an adult. And that goes for everyone saying the same thing.

[Outside_85]

Show me or it hasn't happened.

Thing is; it hasn't happened...yet.

I'm not in any way, shape or form saying what DC can and cannot choose to do. I'm just sayin' I don't want them to do it and wouldn't be happy if they did.

Which is fair.

I also find it a bit sexist to say that WW would be the 'least controversial.' Of course she would - in general, men don't have any hang ups about two (or more) women having sex. A lot of them get off on it, and since it's men who control the industry and men who are the majority of readers, of course it would be less controversial. Tell them that the Batgod is gay? You better make a lot of popcorn for that display of testosterone ;)

While that is true, I was actually thinking more of which of the three has a bigger gay fanbase already.
But you are right that there would be more screaming if either Superman or Batman came out.

(Btw, I am not intentionally trying to be offensive with this, but it's sometimes really hard to formulate a sentence without there being a way it can be twisted into something that sounds negative :S )

[ascended]

Also, Slvn puts to post exactly what I mean, a lot better than I.

[psyshot]

Show me or it hasn't happened.

2 words: Pink Kryptonite :-)



ETA: I agree with Gaelforce (too tired to write).

[Gaelforce]

I'd like to thank everyone for not allowing this discussion to fall into the usual mess. I know its a delicate subject and Ive seen the topic degrade before. I almost didnt bring it up at all, but given events in the last year or so and the American cultural shift we are seeing, I thought it could be worth bringing up again. So far, Ive really enjoyed the debate.

Anyway, Gael, again you make solid points. And just so Im clear, Im not actually advocating Diana becoming bi or gay. Just sort of posting out loud as it were. Im a straight male, so I basically dont have a horse in this race. Anyway, you mention that when DC has Batman come out of the closet, you will be more open to Diana doing the same.

The difference between the two is that Diana has not really had a strong love life. Batman has a long and detailed history with women, dating or seeing someone almost constantly, even if it is only Selina on rooftops. Superman likewise is very much a straight man. Their orientation is cemented not only among fandom but the wholesale public consciousness. Diana on the other hand, while she has had several boyfriends, lacks a "Lois Lane" or a "Catwoman" and is more often than not, habitually single. Especially in the last twenty or thirty years. And there is nothing wrong with that. Diana doesnt "need" someone in her life. But, historically, I feel there is enough gray area there so that DC could, if they wanted, pull off Diana as being bisexual and not go completely against all precedent. Full out lesbian, I dont think they could get away with. But bi? Maybe. Aside from Steve, no lover, potential or otherwise, has really stuck. In other words, there is wiggle room for it to be brought in, assuming its done intelligently and not just for shock value. It would be seen as such regardless, but honestly.....I dont think fan opinion, especially online, is worth enough to base creative choices on.

Now, Im not even saying DC should do this. Again, I dont have a horse in this race. But of all the truly iconic superheroes, (and really, there's only about four or five) Diana is the only one who could make this sort of switch and still "feel" like Diana. And creating new characters to diversify is great, but it almost never works. Readers rarely gravitate to new characters, (Batwoman being about the only recent example I can think of,) regardless of gender or sexual orientation or race or powerset or whatever. And newer characters are normally the ones on the chopping block first. You mention Renee Montoya, and just a few years after her phenomenal transformation into the Question, where is she? Now, I support new characters and especially more diverse characters. But with the industry as it is.....its a band-aid.

I get where you're coming from though, and I respect your view. Im glad Diana was able to inspire you as a child, and it seems, an adult. And that goes for everyone saying the same thing.

I disagree regarding Diana not having a 'strong love life.'

Up until Crisis, she was in a 40+ year relationship with a man she had been in love with since she first set eyes on him. She married him in two different universes and had a child with him in one.

Then DC just couldn't figure out which guy to hook her up with, so she went from one relationship with a man to another, dabbled here and there with dating Batman and flirting with Superman, spent 1000 years in another dimension where she was only shown as being interested in Superman (for 1000 years!) She's as 'gender defined' as any character, imo. <shrug>

[UsagiTsukino]

Couldn't Dc just make an alt universe in which she is bi. I mean it would solve it somewhat.

[Legato]

As always stated in similar discussions such as this, it depends on how DC handles it. If DC handles Diana being gay/bisexual with some taste and don't have Diana smooch every female that comes her way just for the sake of cheap fanservice then I'm all for that. Just still let Diana be Diana regardless of orientation

[Totoro Man]

the problem with changing sexual identity is that often the original character gets sacrificed.

I didn't mind when Willow Rosenberg was 'turned' into a lesbian-- what bothered me more is how she lost almost all of those attributes that made her a charming and memorable character-- I don't even remember Willow after season 5-- it's like she got written out of the story. obviously, as Diana has her own title, this -particular- danger isn't likely-- but the fact is that it's a large corporate property-- a flaship character. there's every possibility that only a handful of writers from multiple generations will 'get' the character in this new bi/gay transformation.

I think it's better to leave well enough alone.

there are more effective methods for social engineering acceptance and tolerance than to 'jump the shark' by changing the sexual identity of a comic book character. with Alan Scott and Batwoman it's less of an issue-- because they weren't in active continuity for a very long time.

the odds of DC "doing it right" or "with some taste" are pretty damned low-- sure, maybe ONE person will do it right-- but after that it could devolve into a terrible panoply of writers who have no clue what to do with her.

as sugggested earlier "Elseworlds" or "alternate universe" is the best solution here.

the ultimate goal of any such change is to encourage the acceptance and reinforce the normalization of bisexual and gay behaviour-- all other things would be subordinated to that primary objective.

when I worked in a daycare one of the directors was determined to have a program 'which teaches children to embrace all forms of sexuality: it's okay for boys to like boys, it's okay for girls to like girls". in a moment off frustration I declared "these kids are 5 years old! are we going to start teaching them positions, too? these are OTHER PEOPLE'S kids! shouldn't we get permission before indoctrinating their kids like this? we'll be opening ourselves up to possible lawsuits, people pulling their kids out of the school-- and each child lost is money we won't have anymore. I'll be happy if I can get them to stop biting each other, stealing each other toys, and treating each other with kindness and respect-- if we can get them to act that way towards EVERYBODY around them that other stuff will eventually take care of itself."

Wonder Woman's message of loving everybody should already be self-sufficient enough to leave her the way she is.

[Outside_85]

Couldn't Dc just make an alt universe in which she is bi. I mean it would solve it somewhat.

Ame-Comi perhaps?

[Aquacatlungfish]

I agree with the statements that it would
a. Come off as pandering.
b. Would never be done to the other members of the JL (except for Cyborg but nobody has heard or cared about him).
It makes the most sense than those characters (except for Batman but the pedo Robin jokes would just become creepier) but still, I'd rather we just create LGBT characters than changing old ones at the risk of discarding old love interests (not so much of a problem with WW as I hate Steve).

[Legato]

I agree with the statements that it would
a. Come off as pandering.
b. Would never be done to the other members of the JL (except for Cyborg but nobody has heard or cared about him).
It makes the most sense than those characters (except for Batman but the pedo Robin jokes would just become creepier) but still, I'd rather we just create LGBT characters than changing old ones at the risk of discarding old love interests (not so much of a problem with WW as I hate Steve).

I second this. One could just create a WW supporting character thats gay/bi without risking destroying the actual WW character herself. For instance have the character be a superhero who would help Diana out from time to time.

[UsagiTsukino]

Ame-Comi perhaps?

Maybe or just start a new comic. I mean it would be easier to do if the character is in alt universe. it isn't affecting the actually character. One problem would be who going to write it and draw it.