Once I would have been both amused and saddened by the woman who repeatedly told Stan Lee on CNN that the Rawhide can’t, simply can’t be gay because kids might get their hands on the comic and comics, as we all know, are for kids. Except a DA actually got a store owner convicted for that very notion.
Which leads one to wonder whether in some homophobic communities whether stores will be targeted for having those evil queer comic books available to warp young minds.
And besides…c’mon…the Rawhide Kid? What about the Lone Ranger? The kinky mask. “Hi ho, Silver,” indeed (although I’ve also heard “Hi yo, Silver,” but that’s not much better.) That snappy powder blue ensemble. “On, Big Fella?” “Mount up?” And what’s *really* going on with Tonto?
Actually, if you want to see gay deconstruction of the wild west, check out the comedy “Rustler’s Rhapsody.”
PAD
• 
You think thats bad? read what Peter LaBarbera from the Culture & Family Institute says: “We’ll be holding our breath for the issue in which Rawhide Kid discovers that he’s got rectal warts, AIDS, HPV or some other byproduct of homosexual practices”
You can read it for yourself http://www.cultureandfamily.org/articledisplay.asp?id=2924&department=CFI&categoryid=cfreport
(You’ll have to cut & paste – I don’t know enough HTML to make the link. Sorry)
Never mind the parenthesis part above. I didn’t know the link would be automatically generated
Heh.
Let’s not forget Lenny Bruce’s take on the Lone Ranger, ‘Thank you, Masked Man’ in which LR would like Tonto for an ‘unnatural act.’
T
I suppose Mr LaBarbera hasn’t read how common syphillis and gonorrhea were among our stalwart heterosexual heroes of the real Wild West. He must also have missed the understanding of exactly what “Gunsmoke”s Miss Kitty did for a living. A woman in the old West running a bar would have been selling “female companionship” in addition to the rotgut whiskey, but let’s not spoil someone’s rants with anything approaching facts.
Actually, I found it extremely amusing that the man who is currently suing Marvel for breach of contract ended up on CNN defending said company’s product. Ironic, don’t you think?
JSM
Well, listen to the radio on December 23rd. WBAI which can be heard on the internet as well, has invited KEN GALE, comic book writer/editor/scholar, to visit OUT FM’s Monday December 23rd 11 AM EST show. Ken writes “I’m doing a segment on gay comic book and comic strip characters with Pedro
Serrano covering what’s going on in current mainstream comics, but also
talking about gay characters over the years. I might have someone fromcomics with me. Unconfirmed as I write this.”
WBAI often has call in segments during their one-hour shows, and you can probably call from out of town if you are listening to the radio. Watch Ken’s website at:
http://www.comicbookradioshow.com for more info, or write him a letter for his website. He posts most letters, and if there are enough on this subject he might make a section for it.
There’s also a link to Ken’s website from my “friends” link page at:
http://www.bestfriendsproductions.com/friends.htm
-Rachel
I’m assuming historical accuracy is out the window here, so there are two possibilities: The ‘Blazing Saddles’-type bit where they drop an ‘odd’ character into a standard western format; or the ‘Pink Angels’-type bit where they go, “Hey, there’s this cowboy and he’s GAY! Ain’t that just HEE-LARIOUS!!!” We’ll see.
And you missed the recent decision by The Catholic Church to screen out Gays from the priesthood in an effort to eliminate pedophiles (Because, of course, as we all know, Gays are all child molesters…)
Ah, well. At least Zsa-Zsa’s out of the coma.
I took this as Marvel’s attempt to sell comics based on conterversy. I do wish that they had picked a better name than Rawhide Kid. Sounds like a pørņ movie.
I could actually get you a copy of that pørņ if you want
Of course, these idiots (the woman yelling at Stan “The Man” Lee and that LaBarbara dûmbášš) are completely unaware of the facts that most comics readers are adults, the industry is closing in on the brink of collapse due to a lack of new readers, or that comic books used to have a lot more damaging material to children than a character who is heavily implied to be gay (EC made some great stuff, and I remain unconvinced that anybody read a crime or horror book and became immediately addicted to criminal or violent behavior, but dámņ).
I’m glad that LaBarbara has such a good understanding of what he’s talking about, since as we all know, all gay people have rectal warts, HIV and syphillis.
By the way, what’s the deal with the mailing address for the Concerned Women something-or-other at the bottom of that article?
Nevermind. I get it. The CWA sponsors the organization that LaBarbara guy works for.
Um, y’know, as far as I know, there were no cases of human HIV/AIDS in the 19th century. Which is when Rawhide Kid lived.
Me, I keep waiting for Clarence Thomas’ reaction. If I’m recalling Dwayne McDuffie’s comments when Thomas let Milestone know he was a big fan, he also said he’d been a big fan of the Rawhide Kid when growing up.
Well, I’m assuming Clarence Thomas was a fan of the 1950s-60s Rawhide Kid. From the stories where it was never inferred in the least that the character was gay. The one where he had girlfriends. That Rawhide Kid would not have stood by while the sheriff was shot by a gang of outlaws and simply smiled. (I’m going by the art pages printed in Diamond Previews.) Maybe the finished script will give a different perspective to the pictures. But gay or straight, the old character was a hero. Can you be gay and a hero? I thought so, but maybe Zimmerman and friends have a different take on it.
I agree with the comments that Marvel is trying to sell the book on the controversy. The promotional material I’ve seen so far highlights the sexual orientation of the character but hardly anything else about the series.
Is there anything more to the series? Who are the supporting characters? What’s the main storyline? Why, as a consumer who is minding every penny right now, should I be compelled to buy this book?
Marvel seems to be answering with “Oh, well he’s a gay cowboy … buy it!”
I guess that’s fine — and gets them on CNN for sure — but I don’t know enough about the product to purchase it based on the material I’ve seen so far.
Plus, after being turned off by most of their mature readers line (Alias is good, but Cage … umm. Oh wow. How did that ever get published?), I doubt I’d buy it based on just the premise that he’s a gay cowboy.
k9
(and didn’t we go through this same controversy a few years back with Northstar?)
I agree with James Knine’s comments, above. Is Rawhide’s being gay a logical part of the character, or is that the *total* character? One of the great things about the comic THE AUTHORITY is that the Midnighter and Apollo were around for a few issues before we learned they were gay. That way, people made up their minds about the characters — as both superheroes and individuals — without their sexuality entering into it.
How come everytime there is a gay character in comics there has to be an endless discussion about it? Big news, gay cowboy. Hmmm let’s chat about that for the next millenium or until Bush is harmed by snackfoods again.
Gay people- we do exist. Get over it.
I also dig Quesadas’s comments on the whole thing. Saying he’s shy around women and stuff.
Pardon me, but why would a gay man be shy around women? I mean, unless he were also shy around men, which I got the feeling he wasn’t (having not read any classic Rawhide Kid issues, I couldn’t say that he was or wasn’t). Regardless, I am occasionally stricken shy around women, and it usually has to do with my attraction to them, not my disinterest in them.
Marvel is run by idiots. U-Decide, calling the DCMB members stupid (as if some of us didn’t buy Marvel comics, too), and now trying to sell a comic by telling us it’s about a gay cowboy.
I’m a fan of westerns. I have no problem with the appearance of a gay cowboy, just as I have no problem with the appearance of a gay superhero in my superhero books. Sure, there weren’t all that many gay people in the Old West (at least not that had outed themselves — frankly, you could tell me you had proof that Beau or Bart Maverick were gay and I might believe you), but why are they so convinced that this is such a novel idea? Especially since the idea of the gay cowboy is nothing but a joke to him. Bad enough he’s attatching sexual stigma to the expression “Slap Leather” with the title of this ridiculous piece, but the entire point of this seems to be the novelty of a gay cowboy, which just isn’t there.
Also, the idea’s kind of offensive. What “words and actions” of the Kid’s are going to suggest that he’s gay? How blatant is this going to be? One of the things I’ve noticed about the gay people I know is that there are a number of them who aren’t obviously gay. No lisp, no sashay, no flamboyant wardrobe, and they don’t critique the ášš of every man who walks past them. Admittedly, I also know gay men with very pronounced lisps and sashays, violently flamboyant wardrobes, and a tendency to critique even my ášš (which is apparently not up to snuff) to my face (which apparently is), so that isn’t as strong a statement.
Incidentally, I felt compelled after having read that article Michael Brunner posted that I sent a rather nasty e-mail to that LaBarbera guy. Here’s an excerpt I’m rather proud of from what he should be recieving Monday morning (or perhaps later):
A) “rectal warts, AIDS, HPV or some other byproduct of homosexual practices”: This is absurd. For starters, Quesada made it fairly clear that it’s a humourous story. Just as there aren’t all that many comedies about college fraternities that offer frank portrayals of alcohol poisoning, date-rape, and hazing casualties, no comedy about a gay person is obligated to offer frank portrayals of these “byproducts of homosexual practices.” Nevermind that not all gay people have rectal warts, AIDS, or even bow-leggedness. Even if the comic actually “outed” the Rawhide Kid (as opposed to obviously suggesting it), or portrayed it in a serious light, there’s no reason that they would be under any obligation to show the negative aspects of it. The Kid probably won’t be tied to the back of a covered wagon and dragged for thirty miles, severely beaten by drunken rednecks, or verbally assaulted by self-righteous bigots who think it’s their business who warms his bed, and those are all very real risks of being gay, too.
Before you ask: Yes, I am trying to pick a fight.
I’ve been reading various posts about this book on various websites, and the one thing that most people agree on is: even if the Zimmerman story is no good, the John Severin art should be great.
–The most interesting comment I’ve seen is that, if Marvel really wanted to shake things up, they would make Johnny Storm gay.
Let’s recap what’s going on for those who came in late.
Marvel has decided to publish a (mini?) series about a gay cowboy.
Okay, Marvel does have first admendment rights, as well as the means to produce said comic.
Will this attract media attention (and possibly problems) to Marvel specifically and the comic book industry in general? More than likely.
Will the above be able to weather the storm? We’ll have to wait and see.
But the one aspect of this situation that no one has touched upon yet is Marvel using an already established character.
If they wanted to do this story and created a new character specifically for it, fine. But the Rawhide Kid I’ve read over the years can’t be the same one they’re planning to do now.
Granted, they do own it/him. But to take a character and do such a drastic 360 degree retcon…
What’s next? Captain America is secretly a Nazi sympathizer? Ben Parker faked his death to go live with his mistress?
Retconning does not always work. Look at the whole mess the return of the Spider-clone created.
In my opinion, Marvel should at least rethink the application of this idea.
Randall Kirby reported “The most interesting comment I’ve seen is that, if Marvel really wanted to shake things up, they would make Johnny Storm gay.”
Well, since Johnny Storm is so well established being interested in women, wouldn’t it be more angsty and even more “poltical” to make him truly BI (that is equally — or nearly equally — interested in both or not particular to gender, just to the person’s self inside and out combined)?
>>How come everytime there is a gay character in comics there has to be an endless discussion about it?<<
Not every time. Just when it’s a slow news day.
PAD
>>Granted, they do own it/him. But to take a character and do such a drastic 360 degree retcon…<<
It’s not 360! This is the second time I’ve read this about this very topic. 360 degrees is a complete circle. It means you wind up right back where you started. If someone is winding up the opposite of where they began, it’s called “doing a 180.”
PAD
PAD, you should check out the Other DCU Topics and Green Lantern boards on the DCMB. It’s every time.
Of course, Rob usually deletes them within a week and a half.
Nekouken writes “Yes, I am trying to pick a fight.”.
It seems that wherever I go, I can cause trouble 🙂
Well, in the words of Wellington J. Wimpy, “Let’s you and him fight”.
Re: Peter LaBarbera.
Well, I can certainly understand his wanting to see rectal warts in comics. Everyone needs characters they can identify with.
As for the ‘360’ ‘180’, whatever turn… While I know next to nothing about the Rawhide Kid, the impression I get is that they’re taking a character who’s never had a clearly presented sexual orientation (Beyond the simple assumption he’s straight) and establishing him as Gay.
Again, not expecting much, but we’ll see what happens.
Viva Nekouken!!!
Great letter — that completely articulates the way I feel about people who say the story should have this thing or that.
Other people have been complainingthat Zimmerman won’t be giving us a sensitive portayal of what it may have been like to be gay in the west.
I say, screw sensitive. If it’s a comedy, I want it to be FUNNY. That’s what counts.
Rob
(Just to clarify, I don’t find bigotry and intolerance funny. But sensitivity isn’t that funny, either.)
You know, one can only wonder if this interview was rigged. It seems just like CNN to air some lunacy like this, because while there is still some perception in the public that comics are just kid stuff, most adults DO know that they can be written/aimed at adults too, not to mention that the store owners can bar the kids from buying the adult stuff, and so that’s not what concerns them. What does concern them is if those who’re spending their time with comics about gays and lesbians are trying to glorify it and even justify it, and sadly, there are many cases where this is true. Worse still, there are many cases in which the writers spare no expense in going even so far as to villify parents who oppose the ideology/practice, and to smear them as nothing other than hypocrites. (For a notable example, see Judd Winick’s recent work on Green Lantern)
Let’s put it this way. It is possible to feature gays in comics, but if all you’re going to do is tilt the focus in some one-sided way for the purpose of trying to justify and glorify homosexuality, then that’s simply bad writing, not to mention that it’s biased as well.
There are many people who say that homosexuality is normal, to which one could reply in fairness, but what if it isn’t normal? Well think what you will of it, but the truth is, it’s really just the result of mental disorder, and can be developed even at an adult age. It can be repaired via psychotherapy.
Futhermore, if it’s okay to put gays and lesbians in comics, then why not Bulgarians, Romainians, Swedish, Danish, Corsicans, Armenians, Dutch, Icelanders, and even the Bolivians? Why is it so important to just tell stories about gays and lesbians? What’s wrong with all the other races in the world?
And for the record, I should also like to point out that “homophobia” is a word that was concocted for the purpose of discrediting people who oppose the practice. Let’s be clear, we have nothing against them as human beings, and we don’t have any desire to let them come to any harm, we just don’t agree with the lifestyle they’re leading. And in the case of Rawhide, well, what’s appalling is that this could very well be something designed for glorifying homosexuality and belaboring its would-be points endlessly.
So it’s simply disgraceful that Marvel should be trying their darndest to sell this via controversy, when in truth, not all publicity is good, and as Lincoln once said, “you can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.” And by now, I doubt if everyone’s going to be fooled by this balderdash either.
I’m trying to quote for the first time, so cut me some slack if this comes out like gibberish. There’s plenty in Avi’s message that merits response, but for now, here are two thoughts:
Avi wrote: Let’s put it this way. It is possible to feature gays in comics, but if all you’re going to do is tilt the focus in some one-sided way for the purpose of trying to justify and glorify homosexuality, then that’s simply bad writing, not to mention that it’s biased as well.
There’s no obligation for fiction to present a both sides of any issue. Fiction only needs to tell a good story; some stories benefit from that approach and others don’t. But good writing can be a strong advocate for a worldview or agenda, just as bad writing can. Like doing anything well, the job is just harder.
Avi again: Futhermore, if it’s okay to put gays and lesbians in comics, then why not Bulgarians, Romainians, Swedish, Danish, Corsicans, Armenians, Dutch, Icelanders, and even the Bolivians? Why is it so important to just tell stories about gays and lesbians? What’s wrong with all the other races in the world?
No one’s “just” telling stories about gays and lesbians. They getpress because they’re a hot-button topic in our society. Straight characters are far more prevalent in comics, so no one is limiting themselves writing only about gays.
As for people of other countries, they should be written about, too. Who’s going to do it? Anyone who wants to, probably. I don’t think anyone is stopping them. But I also wouldn’t expect the news coverage that Slap Leather is getting for a comic whose lead character is Bulgarian. It’s not contriversial, so why should the talking heads on CNN jabber about it?
Rob
Avi Green Wrote:
“Let’s put it this way. It is possible to feature gays in comics, but if all you’re going to do is tilt the focus in some one-sided way for the purpose of trying to justify and glorify homosexuality, then that’s simply bad writing, not to mention that it’s biased as well.”
I’d agree, going with some of the comments above, if the premise is a comedy story, but what if it a romance story?
To Whom It May Concern:
When creating my original message, I typed and rewrote my comments several times, being careful to chose just the right words so as not to (intentionally) offend anyone, while still attempting to express my thoughts.
However, somehow I screwed up my math (360 instead of 180 degrees) in the process, and failed to catch the error.
But I still maintain the opinion that you should not take an established character and make such radical change(s). It just does not make any sense from any creative and/or logical thought process that I am aware of.
Lee Houston wrote “I still maintain the opinion that you should not take an established character and make such radical change(s). It just does not make any sense from any creative and/or logical thought process that I am aware of.”
My impression is that this is a Marvel MAX series. Not only are these series generally intended for older readers (lots of profanity, for instance, and more “explicit” content) but several of the series have presented Marvel Universe characters in clearly different ways than in regular continuity.
Does this make any sense? Yes, it does. Apparently many readers enjoy stories that take established characters and re-imagine them in different ways. The success of Marvel’s Ultimate line and DC’s Elseworlds comics show there is indeed a demand for such stories.
If this is a Marvel MAX book, then the regular Marvel Universe Rawhide Kid may still be straight (or of undetermined sexual orientation).
Actually, Apollo and the Midnighter were shown as being a gay couple from their very first appearance.
Just to nitpick.