Alan Scott, the Original Green Lantern, Comes Out as Gay

That's right, John.

Rhyan, I wasn't arguing with you about the publicity thing. Of course it's to make money. Last time I checked, DC and Marvel weren't charitable organizations. You think it's a bad thing. I think it's a great thing. 100 years ago, gays were non-existent or invisible in most literature, and relegated to being subtly hinted at. 50 years ago, gays were the villains - as Mike above (bless his tiny little soul) calls them "sexual deviants". That a mainstream comic would make a heroic character openly gay is a watershed, no matter what the motivation.

Let me draw an analogy for you. McDonalds was losing customers and wanted to boost their image as being healthy. So they introduced salads. Cynics may say, "They're just doing that to make money. They don't care about your health. The vegetables aren't organic." But the fact of the matter is, society wants healthier food, and they changed to accommodate that, even if it's only to make money. And if you don't like their salads (carrots and lettuce together? That's just deviant!), nobody's forcing you to eat one.

Give the "Gays and LGBT supporters" a little credit - they're not stupid. If you don't like White Anglo-Saxon males (which this gay Green Lantern happens to be), don't read about them. AS I already said, there's a niche for that.

That's funny I thought they were all gay already. Especially Batman and Robin!

I'm proposing gays and LGBT supporters see this for what it is. A money making scheme by DC and not some historic progressive moment in the history of comics. In a year, maybe less, this Green Lantern and the comic series he's involved with (Earth 2) will be gone and forgotten. You won't hear a peep out of either DC or Marvel about gay characters until they need another publicity boost. DC and Marvel both have a long history of using popular movements (Women's Lib, Civil Rights) to put out temporary characters and storylines to boost interest, generate publicity and increase profit margins. But at the end of the day their universe's are still run exclusively by white anglo-saxon male characters (or their alien equivalent in Superman's case). The only true progress being made toward LGBT equality in comics is all from the small Indy press.

I'd like to point out something else.

Who cares what characters DC produces?

DC has no obligation to use characters of any race, gender or sexual orientation. The company exists to make money for its shareholders and is under no moral duty to advocate for anyone's cause.

If anyone wants to advocate for a cause, then, as ted says, start your own comic. Don't try to throw burdens on someone else's back.

Alan Scott is without question one of the most beloved Golden Age characters in comics. He has been married twice and is the father of two children. DC Comics is currently being led by one of the worst leaders it has ever had in Dan Didio. For him to tarnish the legacy of Alan Scott by declaring him to be a sexual deviant is disgusting. This publicity stunt has been met with almost universal hate and I hope it leads to both he and his partner Jim Lee being fired from the company.

Point taken. Now, are you proposing that DC attempt another major reboot despite a history of failure?

Actually Superman was rebooted in the 90s as an electric powered hero instead of the traditional x-ray vision, man of steele. So there is precedent. Just because the Superman reboot failed infamously, doesn't change the fact that DC tried to reinvent the entire character after his resurrection.

How many original “A-List” superheroes have been created in the past 40 years, anyways, Rhyan? Any new Batmen, Supermen, or Spidermen lately?

Exactly. @Rhyan W, has DC ever rebooted a major character on the scale that you are proposing?

@Rhyan W. I don't read comics at all, plus I'm a white male, so the white male barrier is of no consequence to me. Plus, I thnk you mean the straight white male barrier.

I think black characters in the media in general have been moving away from the stereotypes of yesteryear. Hot Cocoa Bang Bang is now Donna Tubbs - still a caricature, but not a stereotype.

How many original "A-List" superheroes have been created in the past 40 years, anyways, Rhyan? Any new Batmen, Supermen, or Spidermen lately? No, comics are in the same doldrums as the movies - there are only variations on a theme now. It's kinda hard to change those classic superheroes into something they've NOT been for the past 50-70 years.

Superman can't "go gay" any more than he can marry Lois Lane or even father her child - it disrupts the status quo. Thus, the "alternate universe" stuff comes out.

Of course, you could write your own comic, if you wanted.

John Stewart is to the Justice League what Garrett Morris was to SNL. The token black guy. He was never taken very seriously, and always considered an usurper. Kyle Rayner and the other white GL's always surpassed him in popularity and face time in the comics. I suggest DC and Marvel both become more ballsy and pick a major iconic character. Both companies have no problem totally rebooting their universe's every decade or so. They've both done complete universe reboots multiple times since the 1990s. So there shouldn't be a problem rebooting an icon instead of a third stringer. All it takes is conviction and balls. Will they lose some readers? A few. But will the vast majority of readers remain and support them? Absolutely. Comic fans are among the most open and accepting in the world.

@Rhyan W -- I rarely read recently published comics, so I'm not that familiar with the current lineup. But John Stewart comes to mind as a major black character.

What solution do you propose? Should a major, established character come out of the closet as black? How would that work?

@Ted and John
Really? Where are the major black characters today? There still are none. Do Storm, Black Panther or Luke Cage have their own comics? No. Black Nick Fury is a World B type guy. He doesn't exist in the "prime" Marvel continuity. So, what you're saying is that if gays don't mind the pandering and sit back and be nice boys and girls, in 40 years they still won't have broken through the white male barrier in superhero comics too? Yay for progress.

Ditto to ted's comment.

Well, of course it's pandering, and of course it's going to be some minor character that nobody's ever heard of before, and of course it's a stunt, and of course they're in it to make money. Isn't that the nature of the business?

Once they had token black superheroes in minor roles; now nobody would bat an eye at one in a larger role - except maybe the diehard bigots. Society progresses in stages, and tokenism is just one part of the jouirney on the road to tolerance.

I'm sure when Marvel or DC thinks they won't lose sales to people who rant and rave about their favorite hero coming out, they won't think twice about it. Until then, I'm not gonna complain about the pandering. Wiccan and Hulkling never felt like that anyway, and Wonder Woman already admitted there was a reason they called it Paradise Island.

What silliness. Pandering... Yuck.

Gays should be insulted that DC (and Marvel) are just using them for quick ratings boosts and don't genuinely give a damn about them. That's why the "gay" hero is always from World B or a 5th stringer and never someone truly important. DC and Marvel are playing the LGBT community so hard to earn a buck from their struggle and gays don't even seem to realize it. Most of them applaud it. Jeez Louise.