I am so close to done with all this bullshit.

[kingrockwell]

No icon ragey enough. This one feels cold and bitter, which is appropriate enough.

A little under two pages from Birds of Prey #2.





With all the fail going 'round at DC lately, the last thing I needed this week was Gail Simone killing gays (even if he pulled the trigger himself). I don't even know anymore.

This shit better be a fake-out because I'm out of patience for Brightest Day and DC in general. I'm gonna go drown my sorrows in Pet Avengers. :(

Comments

[skalja]

Okay, now that I've gotten that out of my system ... it's like there's more heterosexism the more you think about it.

1) That one of DC's very few gay characters was killed;
2) That he killed himself in mourning for his straight love interest;
3) That his death is immediately used as angst-fuel for Barbara, canonically a straight character;
4) That this happens in the middle of DC's latest wave of regressive storytelling. So, women in refrigerators, minorities in matchboxes ... anyone want to take a shot at a snappy label for queer characters?

In fairness to DC editorial and Gail on that last, given the lead time for publishing I don't think they would have had time to revise this storyline even if all the backlash against DC's whitewashing had made them rethink it. However, since it shouldn't have been written in the first place...

Now, maybe the next issue will be fantastic, but even if it is? That doesn't solve or cancel out anything I'm saying here.

[suzene]

Motto to all of the above.

[gailsimone]

Well, it might.

First, it wouldn't make a bit of difference about the white-washing, honestly. I hated the Choi
thing for a lot of reasons, but I also believe that characters should not be purely immune
to bad things happening based SOLELY on gender, orientation, or race. I feel that would
be a betrayal of the ideals expressed in the Women in Refrigerators site, at the very least.

But second, one of the big issues with the WiR thing was that the stories were pure shock value,
with female characters used purely as gore-bait props, and never really referred to again. They
lacked humanity in these stories, as a rule.

That is not the case here. Like I say, fallout next issue, and I think it will be meaningful.

[cygna_hime]

I mean, yes, I get that, but there are so few female/nonstraight/nonwhite characters that each one killed represents a significant reduction in the population -- how many gay men does DC have right now? Yeah, that's what I thought. So, no matter how sensitively or with regard to the character's humanity you make it, killing one means that thereafter it's significantly harder to find any gay male characters to tell nondeath stories about. Whether the death story is a good one or not, it takes away the possibility of future stories.

[nezchan]

Hmm, that brings up something interesting. How many gay/lesbian heroes (or even villains) are really depicted as being connected to any larger queer community? Most of the time it seems like they pop up more or less in isolation, sometimes with a partner but that's about it, like some sort of random mutants (not that sort!).

Like when gay characters die, it's a reduction in population, but is there a community that feels that loss?

[katzedecimal]

Complete agreement. It's one of the major pitfalls to DC's promised "dead is dead" mandate: They'd better get their writers to quit killing people off, or they won't have a DCU left to write about :-\

[big_daddy_d]

Amen. As many have seen me state here before, the "No Resurrection" Policy is bullshit. In fact a lot of new policies is bullshit solely because with the dead is dead thing as an example, DC is going on a slaughterfest. Gail, I'm gonna trust and see how next issue is pulled off, but others..yea they seem to have no real reason as to why this person or that person died. When confronted we get the usual "We wanted you to feel something" or "Good because it still got your attention right?" When we can get a different and reasonable answer, I'll tolerate it more, otherwise, DC needs to rethink these bullshit policies.

[tavella]

Well, they'll have plenty of straight white guys left to write about. Which is I suspect all that most of the current DC writers care about.

[gailsimone]

" mean, yes, I get that, but there are so few female/nonstraight/nonwhite characters that each one killed represents a significant reduction in the population -- how many gay men does DC have right now? Yeah, that's what I thought. So, no matter how sensitively or with regard to the character's humanity you make it, killing one means that thereafter it's significantly harder to find any gay male characters to tell nondeath stories about. Whether the death story is a good one or not, it takes away the possibility of future stories."

Well, again, it might, or it might not.

But I do believe you don't chop a tree in a shared forest unless you're planting a better one.

[skalja]

In a perfect world - either our world or DC's - of course I would never want a character to be spared the axe just because they're a minority. In reality, there's a self-perpetuating system in which there are far more straight/white/abled/male/etc characters who get far more focus than their minority counterparts, because those minority characters get written out because they're newer, have fewer fans, and are therefore easier to mess with. Then more minority characters get created, but because they're newer and have fewer fans ... and so on and so forth. In the real world, there are very few deaths of minority characters that don't bother me because (most character deaths are a pointless waste) + (not enough minority characters) = (minority character taken off the table for no good reason).

The field needs to be level before the play can be equal.

No matter how good your follow-up issue is - and I'm generally a fan of yours, so I'm not predisposed to think it'll be bad - it's not going to change the fact that one of the few gay characters in comics just suicided over his tragic love for his straight friend. I'm really not interested in a story, no matter how meaningful, that only exists because of offensive, stereotypical, heterosexist tropes.

ETA: I wanted to add that although I strenuously disagree with your perspective here and find the story you wrote very offensive, I have no grudge against you personally and respect that you're here talking about the issue with fans.

[gailsimone]

I totally agree with your first paragraph and the conclusion you gave in the following sentence.

After that, we will have to part ways, respectfully, because I do not agree with that assertion
at all, as stated in panel two.

And really, I never considered Creote's love tragic, I thought it was pretty redemptive in
an otherwise very emotionally cold human. And I never felt that it would be wholly unrequited,
either, as we never saw Savant's opinion on it, in the end. Savant's general cluelessness here
isn't a function of his sexuality, it is a function of a genuine psychological condition.

I don't believe in gay love or straight love, just love, and Creote's love for Savant was
the deepest, most meaningful part of him. I don't think he killed himself out of
homosexual drama or heterosexual cliche, but out of a real love, and a belief that
his place was at Savant's side, no matter where that was.

I guess I can't see that in the terms you describe, above. It seems diminishing of the
character and the most genuine love in the book.

[kingrockwell]

Yes, it is diminishing to his character. That's what stereotypes do, they diminish. However pure his love may have been before, it is now colored by this deeply problematic death scene.

[mad]

The field needs to be level before the play can be equal.

This times one million.

[totable_cobra]

Regarding your second point, this story is contributing to a really problematic trope for gay characters (wherein they just don't get happy endings in mainstream media) much the same way a lot of WiR cases unintentionally exemplified the problems you've mentioned.

"Meaningful fallout" is not enough for this reader. I'm sick of watching gay characters die so we get "meaningful fallout."

This

[angel_negra]

Agreed. Why do all the characters like me have to die just so the straight people can feel bad?

Re: This

[bluejaybirdie]

High school age lesbian chiming in to agree here. I would love to have more characters I could identify with in media, but it seems like a lot of the time the gay characters get killed off to give the straight characters angst. It's hard enough getting messed with almost daily IRL, the last thing I need is my escapist ventures reflecting that.

And, like other posters have said, it's really unfortunate that this happened in Pride Month.

[gailsimone]

I get that, and if you still feel that way in two issues, you can punch me right in the face for free.

[suzene]

I...really don't think that'd make anyone involved feel better.

[totable_cobra]

I am afraid I won't be able to take you up on that. I enjoy your work, generally, but even if this is a clever storytelling device wherein we only think you're playing into a really common and hurtful bit of literary cliché, I'm not engaged enough to find out.

This scene doesn't leave me feeling intrigued or even angry; instead I am cynical and a little hurt, and so I think it would probably be best if I skipped the next few issues, meaningful fallout or no.

I am sure you don't mean to hurt anyone with this. I really believe you only want to tell a good story. But you have to understand how wearing it gets to see this over and over and over again, only to hear the same justification every time. "It's meaningful this time." "Wait and see." I always do, and it never really pays off in a satisfying way. Fool me once, etc. - I keep getting burned, and eventually I have to stop blaming the stove and start retraining my hand.

[kingrockwell]

So many motto. One thing about the snappy labels is they need an example of the trope at its worst. Something that catalyzes the movement against it. Best I can think of for queer characters is maybe Freedom Ring or the time Northstar was killed three times in one month.
If anyone can get a quip out of those, feel free. My snark is dead tonight.

[thanekos]

short of homos in hearses, i don't think anything else's snappy enough... no receptacle starts with a Q or a G (or an L/B/T) that I can think of..

[turtlefu]

1) "very few"? DC has a lot of gay characters. Scandal Savage, The Question, Batwoman, Pied Piper, Knockout, Thunder, Holly Robinson, Obsidian (and Damon), Grace Choi, and I think I missed one or two
2) Which straight characters do all the time. See: Ralph Digby (almost), I couple others I can't remember of the top of my head.
3) Okay, I'll give you that. But, his death made sense in the "hunting down all Birds associates" part.
4) Not really Gail's fault.

[kingrockwell]

1. Knockout is dead, the Question in uncertain territory, and when was the last time you saw Grace and Thunder? There are very few gay characters compared to the legions of straight ones. What's more, putting Creote on the list you provided, there are now 10% fewer gay characters in DC Comics now.
2. I can't remember the last time a straight character died mourning their gay friend they had an unrequited crush on. This is in fact part of a stereotype in the portrayal of gays, it is not a stereotype .
3. And there are any number of straight associates to the Birds that would've served just as well. How about that fucking kid, Josh? I'd have loved to see him die.
4. Are we trying to pin this all on Gail? No. We are saying it is a problem.

[kingrockwell]

Hmm. Thunder's apparently in a coma. Half your list is a pretty good counterpoint to what you're trying to say there.

[kirke_novak]

Gays in the refrigerator?