Quote:
Originally Posted by Hack&Lube
Dean Cain is throwing a fit in the media about the new sexuality of Superman's son. He also appears in a bunch of conservative religious films if I remember correctly.
That said, I don't care about this development and I don't care what someone's agenda is. The point is if it suits the story, if it creates good narratives, does it empower the character or is it simply being put there as a token gesture or to stir up controversy?
|
I don't think it is a token gesture to stir up controversy, nor to boost sales. I think a "Diversity" mandate has been given and the two recent comings out of Red Robin & Jon Kent (new Superboy) are the token A-list heroes on the list.
Interesting that DC wouldn't go all the way, calling them bisexual instead of gay. DC does have gay characters, but they are all c-list level (Batwoman, Bunker), or their sexuality has been ambiguous (Connor Hawke, Artimis).
The colorist on that series (Superman: Son of Kal-El) has announced that he is finishing his contract and then will not work with DC again. One of his beefs is that DC has changed the iconic superman tag line, It is now "Truth, Justice, and a Better World!". He sees it as a slight to American values and to all those Americans who died in various wars (specifically WW II), and to new Americans as well.
No big loss as a new colorist has been announced for this particular issue and the series going forward.