Files.emailmeform.com



Queer Representation in Superhero Comics, 1980-1994A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of theRequirements of the Renée Crown University Honors Program atSyracuse UniversitySophia BrittainCandidate for Bachelor of Artsand Renée Crown University HonorsSpring 2020Honors Thesis in HistoryThesis Advisor: _______________________ Elisabeth Lasch-Quinn, Professor of HistoryThesis Reader: _______________________ Junko Takeda, Professor of HistoryHonors Director: _______________________ Dr. Danielle Smith, Director AbstractDespite the consistent presence of comic books in American popular culture for almost a century, the validity of the comic as an influential cultural agent has been consistently questioned by society at large due to the perception that it is a “lower” form of media than literature and film. However, research into the history of comics regulation reveals an awareness of the effect that comics have on imparting social values to their readers, and substantial efforts made by the establishment to control the values that were being conveyed. This paper explores the relationship between the changing social views on homosexuality and the increase in queer representation in superhero comics through the study of how queer characters were introduced and received, in comparison to the ways in which queer activism was changing the public perception of the LGBT community. Noticeable parallels exist between the developments made in LGBT rights during the late 1980s and the process of bringing queer characters into the world of mainstream comics during the same time period. These parallels indicate that the integration of queer identities into comics was heavily influenced by the social changes taking place, while the manner in which the integration happened demonstrates an effort on behalf of the comic creators to facilitate open-minded and accepting discussions of homosexuality among readers.Executive SummaryThe Comicsgate movement of 2017 brought about an industry-wide discussion on the growing diversity within comic books. A select group of people claimed that the comic industry, which is often seen as the realm of straight white males, was being ruined by an unacceptable amount of diversity - women, people of color, and LGBT people were all being represented both within the industry and within the pages of the comics themselves. The movement was met with derision from the majority of comic readers and industry professionals, who suggested that increased diversity was perhaps a good and normal thing, rather than a serious detriment. As an avid comic reader myself, the discussion of representation in comic books was of interest to me, and I began to ask myself how the industry had reached its current condition, and if there had been movements similar to Comicsgate in the past. Looking into it further revealed that diversifying comics had always been controversial, whether it be the choice to give female characters more non-traditional roles or to put characters of color into comics that had previously only featured white characters. The most recent of these conflicts was over the inclusion of LGBT characters and issues. After discovering that queer characters had only been appearing in mainstream comics for a few decades, I decided to research the driving force behind this change and find out how the early integration of LGBT characters into comics took place during the 1980s and 1990s. This paper examines the relationship between effects of queer activism in the late 1980s and the growth of queer representation in comics.?The first chapter provides an analysis of the role of comics within society and gives a short review of the current research surrounding comics and queer representation in comics. While the field of comics study is wide, it is still relatively new, and most comic analysis focuses on other social issues such as feminism, capitalism, and militarism. The amount of scholarly work that highlights mainstream LGBT representation is limited, but the other analyses serve as a base for understanding the relationship between comics and ideologies. These studies demonstrate the effect that comics can have on the population despite being commonly seen as a lowbrow and unintellectual form of media.The next chapter gives an overview of the state of LGBT acceptance within society and the work of queer activists, starting with the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980 and the beginning of the AIDS crisis in 1981, and following the developments of legal protections for LGBT people into the mid-1990s. The efforts of the queer community and activist groups such as ACT UP during this time period are examined as examples of the ways in which queer people were making a concerted effort to change the public’s perception of them, especially highlighting the dialogue surrounding the depictions and perception of LGBT people and issues in popular media.The subsequent two chapters delve into the representation of LGBT people within mainstream superhero comics, specifically those published by DC Comics and Marvel Comics, two of the major comics publishers. Chapter Three takes a broader approach to the development of this representation, focusing on defining moments within a wide range of comic series, such as the controversial first appearance of gay characters in a Marvel comic in 1980 and the introduction of an openly lesbian police captain in a 1988 issue of Superman. It also investigates the public’s reaction to these moments through published reader letters and news articles. Chapter Four provides a more focused look at the changing depiction of one specific LGBT character in the Alpha Flight comic series over the course of 10 years, and studies how the development of this character corresponds with changes in public perception of the LGBT community during that time frame.The side-by-side comparison of the changing social perception of queer Americans and the depictions of queer people in mainstream superhero comics highlights the somewhat symbiotic relationship between the dominant social ideologies and the content of popular comics. An analysis of this relationship reveals that while the amount and type of LGBT representation in comics was heavily influenced by social beliefs, seeing queer people in comics also influenced the ideologies of comic book readers, thereby effecting the way in which the queer community was perceived by the general public. Table of ContentsAbstract …………………………………….……………….…………….? iExecutive Summary………………………….……………….…………..? ii??????Chapter 1: Comics Within Society ……………………………………… 1????????Literature Review? ……………………………… 2????????Social Relevance of Comics? …………………… 5Chapter 2: Social Perception in the 80s & 90s? ? ? ……………………… 7????????1980-1986? ……………………………………… 7????????1987-1993? ……………………………………… 10????????Late 80’s Activism ……………………………… 11????????Developing Legal Protections ……………………14Chapter 3: Representation in Comics ? ………………………………… 18????????1980-1986? ……………………………………… 18????????1987-1993? ……………………………………… 21????????Queer Comic Creators ………………………… ? 26Chapter 4: Alpha Flight ? ? ……………………………………………… 28????????The Early Years ………………………………… 28????????Illness and Departure …………………………… 30????????Revelation? ……………………………………… 33Conclusion: Moving Forward? ………………………………………… 38Works Cited? ……………………………………………………………? 411. Comics Within SocietyIn late 2017, as they did every year, the New York Comic Con hosted a retailer-only breakfast panel in which comic book sellers would be able to ask questions of Marvel writers and editors. While the panel started off uneventfully, with inquiries about expected lengths of current series and the patterns of issue numbers, things took an unpleasant turn near the end of the session when one retailer began to speak about his irritation with some of the storylines that had been published recently, specifically ones that had featured a gay kiss and a gender-swapped superhero. Other attendees joined in, and soon the room was filled with complaints attributing a decline in sales to the presence of “blacks,” “homos,” and “freaking females” in comic books.This signaled the start of an extensive movement that would come to be known as “Comicsgate,” in which a certain subset of comic creators and fans took an active stance against the inclusion of comic book characters that were not straight, cisgender white men and against the presence of people in the industry who were also not straight, cisgender white men. This sort of anti-diversity movement came as a surprise to many newer comic fans, who were accustomed to seeing a wide range of identities reflected in their readings. However, a study into the history of comic books and the comic industry within the United States reveals that just like in real life, the path to diversification has always been turbulent.This struggle can be demonstrated through the slow integration of LGBT characters into superhero comics that began during the 1980s. Over the course of the last 40 years, queer representation in mainstream comics has evolved from being entirely nonexistent to being present in almost all of the most popular comic franchises, but the journey to get to the current point was not an easy one. Comic writers faced substantial pushback from editors and conservative groups, while also facing strict industry regulations meant to govern the morals that comic books were projecting into popular culture. At the same time, LGBT activists were fighting on multiple fronts for civil rights and social acceptance, increasing their visibility in other forms of media. This made it nearly impossible for comic books to continue to ignore the existence of queer people, and many writers took it upon themselves to create representation that not only appealed to queer readers but would aid in their cause. The manner in which mainstream comics dealt with the introduction of queer characters, as well as the positive and negative reader reactions to this increase in representation, demonstrates how the developing depictions of LGBT characters and issues in superhero comics both influenced and were influenced by the ongoing negotiation of what it meant to be queer in America during the 1980s and 1990s.Literature ReviewOne of the most crucial texts involved in understanding the growth and development of the post-WWII comics industry is American psychiatrist Fredric Wertham’s book Seduction of the Innocent, published in 1954. Wertham, who was avidly anti-comics, argued that the introduction into comics of adult themes such as graphic violence, sex, and drug use was contributing to juvenile delinquency. It has since been proven that Wertham’s claims were based on exaggerated evidence and a skewed data set - the primary set of children that he used in his study had previous evidence of behavior disorders and was a very small sample size, that by modern standards would not serve to support his findings. However, when Seduction of the Innocent was first published, it created a substantial amount of fear among parents and was brought to the attention of the US Senate, resulting in Wertham being brought to speak before the Senate Subcommittee on Juvenile Delinquency. This hearing created a lot of negative publicity for the comics industry, and so they created a self-censoring board known as the Comics Code Authority (CCA). The CCA created a strict set of regulations known as the Comics Code, which set standards for how crime, violence, sexuality, and other adult themes should or should not be portrayed. Comics that wished to be published under the Comics Code seal had to be submitted for approval and meet all of the standards. The Comics Code and its lasting effect on the industry has been the subject of intense academic study and is the subject of one very well-known book within the field of comics studies.Seal of Approval, a 1998 study into the history of the Comics Code, examines the way that the code was created and implemented, as well as the way that it affected comic book publishing. Nyberg notes that from the earliest days of comics’ popularity, they were viewed unfavorably among the adult population due to the fear that comics were distracting children from better literature and making them only semi-literate, despite studies that proved there was no merit to those claims. The fact that what was seen as “children’s culture” had gone outside the realm of traditional control was undesirable, and so adults took advantage of the publicity brought by Wertham’s work to bring the comic industry back under the control of the dominant social/moral values. Nyberg also argues that despite the common perception that the Comics Code alone nearly destroyed the industry, it was merely a factor in a slew of misfortunes, which also included the effect of federal antitrust actions on the publishing industry and the introduction of television as a competition for people’s attention. In fact, she claims, the Comics Code is what led companies such as DC and Marvel to reintroduce the superhero genre, which reinvigorated the industry and brought a new era of popularity to comic books.The study of gay characters within comic books began in the late 1980s, as the characters themselves became more prevalent. One of the most thorough studies from this time period is “Out of the Closet and into the Comics - Gays in Comics: The Creations and the Creators,” a two-part series written by Andy Mangels in 1988. Mangels is a renowned sci-fi and comic writer, as well as a founding member of PRISM Comics, which promotes LGBT creators, characters, and stories within the comic industry. In this series, written for publication in Amazing Heroes issues 143 and 144, Mangels highlights the incidences of queer characters within both mainstream and underground comics, and interviews a variety of comic artists and writers to gauge their reactions to the characters and storylines. Mangels’ position within the world of comics allowed him access to a number of sources who could give unique insights into the dynamics of queer existence within the industry, as well as the politics of trying to incorporate queer representation into a storyline that is aimed towards a public that may not be so accepting.Further studies of comics as a means of perpetuating ideologies are abundant, with many focusing on the power dynamics, nationalism, and pro-American rhetoric present in mainstream comics, and superhero comics in particular. Substantive works on these subjects include: Comics & Ideology, a collection of essays analyzing themes of power and identity in comic books, Enter the Superheroes, an analysis of the social and historical relevance of superhero comics, and The American Comic, another essay collection dealing with comic development and censorship. Social Relevance of ComicsWhile modern comics are geared towards a much wider range of consumers, the comic books of the 20th century were considered to fall within the domain of children or young adults. Because of this, they were (and to some extent still are) considered to be a more lowbrow form of culture and were not always read with the same scrutiny that other forms of literature and art were subjected to. Until Wertham’s contributions to the anti-comics movement brought the issue to the national stage, the comics industry was allowed to develop without much oversight, allowing it to convey a variety of messages and points of view, usually subject to the views of the writer. Once the Comics Code was implemented, however, the comics industry was split into two main parts: the mainstream comics, which primarily served to reinforce the dominant ideologies, and underground comix, which propagated more subversive ideologies and dealt with topics that were not considered to be morally correct.It was considered important that superhero comics in particular adhered to traditional values because of their popularity among young boys, who were viewed as being impressionable and likely to attempt to emulate the heroes that they saw in print. The base nature of the classic superhero comic is that the heroes are noble and representative of what society sees as good, while the villains are irredeemably evil and representative of the values that society does not encourage. Because homosexuality was overwhelmingly seen as a negative trait until just a few decades ago, the inclusion of homosexual characters was a highly contentious issue. The lack of understanding as to what caused people to be queer, combined with conservative anti-gay beliefs, created a fear that if a hero - or really any character other than a villain - was even implied to be gay, that the children might be turned gay as well in an attempt to act like the hero. A secondary important aspect of the superhero comic is the relatability of the main character to the readers. Spider-man, for example, is the alter ego of a teenage boy who, despite his superhuman abilities, is shown to struggle with everyday issues such as completing his homework and getting a girlfriend. Teenage male readers were able to see themselves on the pages of a comic, just as women were able to see themselves in characters such as Wonder Woman and Lois Lane. The effect that seeing an openly queer superhero could have had on a closeted teen would have been very important to making them feel not only comfortable with their identity, but proud that someone like them could be a hero. When queer characters finally started being introduced in the 1980s, it was important for writers to keep in mind that just as their writings were being influenced by the actions of the gay community, a whole generation of LGBT readers were looking to the media for reassurance in their sexuality and humanity.2. Social Perception in the 80s & 90sTracking the reasons behind the growth of queer representation in comics requires an understanding of how society’s perception of the queer community was changing during the time period in question. Despite a tumultuous start to the decade, with a conservative president in office and the AIDS pandemic generating a widespread fear of gay people, a substantial shift in public perception of queer Americans began to occur in 1987. This change was marked by a rise in gay activism, which increased the visibility of the community and helped to push for an increase in civil rights and protections. These developments made it possible for comic creators to feel justified and safe in working LGBT characters into their stories.1980-1986The early-to-mid 1980s were a period of intense hardship for queer Americans. At the very beginning of the decade, the 1980 presidential election resulted in the victory of Ronald Reagan, kicking off a rise in conservative beliefs throughout the country. During his campaign, Reagan commented on the issue of the gay rights movement, saying that the movement “isn’t just asking for civil rights, it’s asking for recognition and acceptance of an alternative lifestyle which I do not believe society can condone, nor can I,” and claiming that homosexuality is an abomination in the eyes of the Lord. This statement set the tone for Reagan’s attitude towards the queer community, but an oppositional administration was not the only challenge that they would be forced to face. On June 5, 1981, the Center for Disease Control’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report published an article pertaining to a case of Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia that had emerged in five young gay men in Los Angeles, who were found to also have other uncommon infections. On the same day, a New York dermatologist reported to the CDC a number of cases of gay men who had contracted Kaposi’s Sarcoma, a rare cancer associated with a weak immune system. At the end of the year, the United States would have 337 reported cases of severe immune deficiency, 130 of which had already resulted in death. This signified the beginning of the AIDS epidemic in America, which would continue to worsen over the next several decades and have severe effects on the LGBT community.Early publications about the virus focused on the fact that the infection was being spread primarily by/among the gay male population, leading to it being commonly referred to as the “gay plague.” Conservative politicians and activists pounced on this fact, and used people’s fear to advocate for the banning of queer people from certain properties or jobs. This perception of the disease certainly did not do anything to increase the urgency with which the Reagan administration began to deal with the epidemic - in fact, it was treated as a joke for years. One excerpt from a 1982 press briefing conversation between press secretary Larry Speakes and journalist Lester Kinsolving highlights the irreverent and uncaring manner that the administration took in response to LGBT activist concerns:Kinsolving: “Does the president have any reaction to the announcement from the Centers for Disease Control that AIDS is now an epidemic and there have been over six hundred cases?Speakes: “AIDS? I haven’t got anything on it”Kinsolving: “Over a third of them have died. It’s known as ‘gay plague.’”Press pool laughter“No, it is. One in every three people that get this have died. And I wonder if the president was aware.”Speakes: “I don’t have it. Do you?”Press pool laughterKinsolving: “In other words, the White House looks on this as a great joke?”Ronald Reagan himself would not publicly mention AIDS until September of 1985 while defending himself from accusations that his administration had not made it a priority to find a cure. He would not give a speech about AIDS for another two years. Despite the Reagan administration’s relative inaction on the issue, public perception of AIDS did start to change in the mid-80s due to scientific advancements and proof of the disease spreading outside of the gay community. When society began to realize that AIDS could be spread through various means such as blood transfusions, or from mothers to their babies, the concept of the disease as a “gay plague” decreased somewhat, though it was still prevalent among more conservative sectors.Legal protections for homosexuals, however, were still almost entirely nonexistent, and in 1986 the gay male community was dealt a crushing blow via the Bowers v. Hardwick Supreme Court decision. This case was a challenge to the Georgia state statute that criminalized sodomy, and concerned Michael Hardwick, who was caught having consensual sex with another man in the privacy of his own home. Hardwick’s lawyers argued that based on the precedent set in Griswold v. Connecticut, he should have the right to private sexual conduct outside the regulation of the state. The Court disagreed, and in a 5-4 ruling decided that the Georgia statue was constitutional, claiming that they were unwilling to say that people had a fundamental right to engage in sodomy and noting that laws against sodomy went back to Roman times. This meant that it remained legal for states to criminalize homosexual activity and punish people that chose to engage in it with up to ten years in prison for a single offense.1987-1993At the end of 1987, upwards of forty thousand people had died of AIDS, and many people believed that the government was not taking any substantial steps to find a cure. Despite the epidemic being in its sixth year, President Reagan had only given his first public speech about AIDS that May, at the American Foundation for AIDS Research Awards Dinner. During this speech, which he opened with a joke that seemingly praised a rich man for not giving money to support his struggling family, he claimed that there would not be “a vaccine on the market until the mid-to late 1990's,” stated that he had asked the Department of Health & Human Services to make AIDS one of the diseases “for which immigrants and aliens seeking permanent residence in the United States can be denied entry,” and called for increased AIDS testing. These statements were met with booing and shouting from parts of the audience, as they demonstrated that the government was not prioritizing finding a cure, taking actions that would increase the stigmatization of AIDS and, in the event that the testing registry was accessible to the public, potentially causing harm to the welfare and livelihoods of the infected. In June of the same year, Reagan signed Executive Order 12601 to establish the President’s Commission on the HIV Epidemic, which was intended to determine the best way to protect the public and help the infected. However, many of the president’s initial appointments to the commission had limited to no prior knowledge about AIDS, and some were also considered to have a strong anti-homosexual bias. By October, after a few months of in-fighting and lack of progress, multiple members resigned, and the head of the commission was replaced with James D. Watkins. Gay rights organizations saw this shake-up as a major setback that cost the commission valuable time while people continued to die en masse.Late ’80s ActivismAlso in October of 1987, while the Presidential Commission was in turmoil, six hundred thousand queer people descended on the capital for the Second National March on Washington for Gay and Lesbian Rights, spurred into action by their collective anger and loss. One of the most meaningful events that occurred during the March was the first unfurling of the AIDS quilt. Created by Cleve Jones, a San Francisco based gay rights activist, the Quilt is composed of thousands of 3’ by 6’ panels (the average size of a grave), each representing a person who had died from AIDS. Panels were sewn and decorated by people who had lost loved ones to the disease, and sometimes by people who were in the process of dying. Many of the patches included inscriptions that highlight the sorrow and anger that the community was feeling, such as “You still owe me two years, but I forgive you and will always love you. I never located your parents. Maybe someone will see this and tell them” and “I have done nothing wrong. I am not worthless. I do mean something.” At the time of the March, the Quilt contained 1,920 panels and was larger than the size of a football field. Volunteers read the names of the deceased out loud as the almost half a million visitors to the exhibition walked around its borders. The response to the Quilt at the March resulted in a four-month tour of the United States the following year, during which panels were added in every city, effectively tripling the size of the quilt. By its next display, only one year after the first showing, the Quilt had grown to 8,288 panels.The other major development that took place during the Second March was the growth of the AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power (ACT UP) as a national movement. ACT UP, which had been started by Larry Kramer earlier that year, promoted civil disobedience and direct political action to improve the lives of people with AIDS. The presence of ACT UP activists in the main march and rally inspired people to return home and start their own local chapters - after the March, groups appeared in 50 new cities across the United States.In early 1988, queer activists observed that the repressive legislation being passed, such as mandatory testing and quarantines, seemed designed to not only limit the spread of the disease, but to eliminate queer people’s civil rights. Vic Basile, executive director of the Human Rights Campaign Fund, observed that activists needed “some type of strategy [to] get the community organized nationally… ways to pass proactive types of legislation and get money released to do the job… what are the appropriate ways to get affirmative, progressive kinds of public health measures passed?” In order to determine the best course of action to deal with the issue, over 200 activists gathered in Warrenton, Virginia, for what would come to be known as the Warrenton War Conference. At the end of the three-day event, the group had reached a conclusion on four high-priority steps that needed to be completed in order to build the gay rights movement and counteract the actions that were being taken against them: a national media campaign to promote positive images of queer people, the creation of a national response system that would link all organizations and provide the communication resources needed to pressure elected officials, a yearly public conference of LGBT activists, and a national coming-out day or week to be held every fall. Given the structure of these goals, queer people were faced with two opposing viewpoints on how to apply those ideas and fight for rights and acceptance - assimilation versus anger. The more peaceful of these two options is exemplified by the work of Marshall Kirk and Erastes Pill, initially published as “The Overhauling of Straight America.” In this essay, Kirk and Pill argued for the use of positive propaganda to desensitize the general public to homosexual behavior by portraying queer people as polite victims and slowly integrating into mainstream media. If queer people present as a strong group that is proud of their “nonconformist and deviant lifestyle,” they claim, straight people are more likely to see them as a public menace that needs to be oppressed. For that reason, LGBT people must avoid celebrating their pride publicly or in a manner that would contradict Kirk and Pill’s desired depiction of queers as victims of both fate and of society. The ideal person to be depicted in the media campaign would be “decent and upright, appealing and admirable by straight standards, completely unexceptionable in appearance--in a word, they should be indistinguishable from the straights we would like to reach.” By their logic, in order to change the way homosexuality was viewed, queer people needed to portray themselves as weak and in need of protection.This point of view was looked on with contempt by many other activist groups, who believed that the only way to make a change was not by being polite, but by acting out and causing problems for society until society itself changed. As author Lars Eighner pointed out, the problem with the gay movement was that too many of them were being nice, giving mainstream America no reason to change the way that they were treating the gay community: “When the oppressor must negotiate, he chooses to negotiate with the nice people… but nice people win only when there are less-nice people on the scene… a movement needs both carrots and sticks. We have plenty of carrots. We need more sticks.”The proverbial stick in this situation would be provided by groups such as ACT UP, who performed acts of civil disobedience across the nation. One of their earliest protests occurred on the first National Coming Out Day, which took place almost exactly one year after the 1987 March on Washington. Activists assembled at the headquarters of the FDA in Rockville, Maryland, where they staged a die-in on the lawn, covered the building in posters and banners, blocked the building doors, and chanted various slogans protesting the FDA trial protocols that were keeping AIDS drugs from people that desperately needed them. This event was highly publicized due to the efforts of ACT UP’s media team, enabling them to spread their message to an international audience. Other acts of disobedience took place in the years to follow, stretching well into the 1990s and located in highly visible locations such as churches, the houses of prominent anti-gay politicians, and even the CBS Evening News.Developing Legal ProtectionsDuring the late 1980s, mainstream politics in America begin to shift towards civil rights protections for the queer community. The 1988 presidential election placed George H.W. Bush in power, who though still a conservative Republican, signed several bills that expanded gay rights. These bills included the Hate Crime Statistics Act, which required the Attorney General to collect data on crimes committed because of the victim’s sexuality (among other reasons), and the Immigration Act of 1990, which eliminated homosexuality as a possible cause for barring immigration into the United States. In addition to these laws, the New York Court of Appeals made a groundbreaking decision in the 1989 Braschi v. Stahl Associates Co. case that represented a substantial step forward in the acceptance of queer partnerships as legally legitimate. When Miguel Braschi’s partner of 10 years passed away from AIDS in 1986, Stahl Associates informed him that he had one month to vacate the deceased’s rent controlled apartment, or they would begin eviction procedures. Given that the New York state rent control regulations prohibited the eviction of surviving family members, Braschi argued that he should be allowed to retain his residency in the apartment. While the lower division courts ruled that the law did not apply to homosexual relationships since they were not legally recognized and could not marry, the Court of Appeals decided that since Braschi and his life partner adhered to many of the legal standards of a what would be considered a family, Braschi should be allowed to remain in the apartment. In their decision, the Court stated that “in the context of eviction, a more realistic, and certainly equally valid, view of a family includes two adult lifetime partners whose relationship is long term and characterized by an emotional and financial commitment and interdependence.” Even though the ruling only set a precedent within the boundaries of Rent Control law, this was the first time that a US court stated that LGBT relationships could be legally recognized as families.The early 1990s saw further advancements in civil protections for LGBT Americans. In 1992, the Health Benefits Expansion Act was signed into law in Washington, DC. The act was intended to establish domestic partnerships in DC and extend the health benefits of government employees to cover occasions such as taking sick leave in order to care for a partner or make family arrangements if the domestic partner is adopting a child. While the funds needed to actually implement the act were blocked on a yearly basis by Republicans in Congress until 2000, the intention behind the act displays further acknowledgement of queer relationships as legitimate and deserving of the same rights as straight couples.Despite the progress, there were also some substantial setbacks, particularly in terms of LGBT Americans who wished to serve in the military. Up until 1993, the US military had enforced a blanket ban on allowing queer people to serve. One Department of Defense directive stated that “Homosexuality is incompatible with military service. The presence in the military environment of persons who engage in homosexual conduct or… demonstrate a propensity to engage in homosexual conduct, seriously impairs the accomplishment of the military mission.”During his presidential campaign, Bill Clinton had promised to remove the ban on homosexual service members, which would have allowed them to serve openly. After his election however, Clinton did not fully remove the ban, but rather signed the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy that was in effect until 2011. The DADT policy maintained the previous rule that prevented openly queer people from serving in the military, claiming that their presence was a risk to morale, discipline, and unit cohesion. The only development that policy created was the claim that “a Service member’s sexual orientation is considered a personal and private matter, and is not a bar to continued service… unless manifested by homosexual conduct.” These developments meant that gay people could continue to serve in the military as long as they remained in the closet and did not engage in or intend to engage in homosexual behavior - basically, as long as they pretended that they weren’t gay at all. The small positive aspect of the policy was that separation and investigation procedures were not allowed to be initiated unless a superior officer either witnessed the behavior or had credible evidence of homosexual activity. 3. Representation in ComicsThe issue of homosexuality in comics became prevalent in 1954, when Fredric Wertham published his book Seduction of the Innocent. Wertham’s interpretation of Batman and Robin as a gay couple, though unanimously decried by the creators, caused concerns about exposing children to homosexual behavior. The creation of the Comics Code introduced a strict set of rules, one subset of which dealt with marriage and sex. Among other things, this ruleset banned any reference or allusion to homosexuality in comics that were to be marketed towards the youth population. While adherence to the Code was optional, many major comic publishers, such as DC and Marvel, followed it because comic book wholesalers would often refuse to sell books that did not have the Code approval seal. Because of these rules, homosexuality was entirely ignored in superhero comics for decades, and queer representation in these books only began to develop in the 1980s.1980-1986The 23rd issue of Hulk Magazine, published in 1980, contains the first implied gay characters in mainstream comic books - but rather than being a triumphant step forward in representation, the comic was openly homophobic, portraying gay men as sexual predators. The story in question takes place in a YMCA locker room, a key fact because the YMCA residential facilities were, at the time, considered to be important centers for gay male social life and sexual encounters. Bruce Banner, entering the community showers after a long day, is followed into the room and cornered by two men. After shoving him up against the wall, they comment on the softness of his skin and the roundness of his cheeks, and one proceeds to ask the other if he thinks Banner will whine. It is implied through their conversation that this is not the first time that the two of them have raped or attempted to rape unsuspecting men in the showers. While Banner manages to escape before any harm comes to him, once in the safety of the alley that he flees to, the waves of “horror and revulsion sweeping through” him causes him to transform into the Hulk, and he goes on a destructive rampage through the streets.The HULK #23 was met with intense criticism from multiple sides. In the letters section of The HULK #25, one reader wrote in to comment that though he had accepted that comics were remaining neutral on the subject of homosexuality, “I refuse to idly sit with the virulent anti-gay stance Marvel has chosen to adopt… You owe everyone concerned an apology. Not just we gays, but the straight people who had to endure one more misrepresentation of the gay community with which they coexist.” Author and Marvel Editor-in-Chief Jim Shooter responded to these complaints with a defensive hostility, arguing that he reserved the right to make anyone a villain, baselessly claiming that there were numerous other upstanding gay background characters that readers just did not know were gay, and accusing a gay reader of holding prejudices about queer people because the reader interpreted another queer-coded character as being gay. Fellow comic writer Mike Grell also commented in an interview that the story was blatantly homophobic and that he was “embarrassed to be working in an industry that would allow something like that to see print.” The issue was such a fiasco for Marvel that mainstream superhero comics would completely avoid the issue of sexuality for several years to come.It is also worth noting that during Shooter’s time as Editor-in-Chief, many Marvel writers commented on a supposed anti-gay policy that he put in place which stated that there would be no gay characters in Marvel comics. While Shooter’s successor Tom DeFalco stated that to the best of his knowledge no such policy had ever existed, and that the lack of gay characters could be attributed to the fact that he did not think it was appropriate to discuss anyone’s sexual preferences in comics, the multitude of statements from freelance writers that counter his claims makes it unclear as to whether DeFalco was telling the truth or simply attempting damage control for Marvel’s public image. There is certainly no physical evidence that supports DeFalco’s claims, as no Marvel writer would confirm an attempt to include a gay character in their works until Bill Mantlo took over Alpha Flight in 1985, and even then the attempt was overruled by Marvel editors, as will be discussed in the following chapter.The lack of mainstream gay characters in subsequent years can also be attributed to the continuing restrictions of the Comics Code, which both Marvel and DC still adhered to for their superhero comics. While the most recent revision in 1971 had eliminated some of the stricter language from the Code, it still retained the guidelines that “Illicit sex relations are not to be portrayed and sexual abnormalities are unacceptable” and “Sex perversion or any inference to same is strictly forbidden.” This meant that in any comic that was to receive the approval of the CCA, there could be no mention of homosexuality. While the Hulk comic had not been published under a CCA approved imprint, many of its readers expressed the idea that if Marvel was going to adhere to those standards for some comics, they should hold true to it for all comics, especially the mainstream ones that were popular among teens. For the rest of the early 80s, both Marvel and DC kept away from any indication of homosexuality, positive or negative.1987-1993As the later 1980s saw substantial progression in rights and protections for LGBT Americans, making it safer for people to come out and increasing the visibility of the queer community, the number of implied and eventually confirmed queer characters began to multiply. Industry professionals such as writers and publishers were very aware of the effect that public opinion could have on their careers, and for many years it was believed that including a gay character would decrease the comic’s marketability in certain parts of the country. However, as it became more acceptable to be queer, mainstream creators began to feel more comfortable alluding to characters being something other than straight. As one anonymous writer stated, “I feel that the situations with gays in comics will eventually reflect the real world. As more and more people come out of the closet… more and more comic characters will come out.”That isn’t, however, to say that all writers made their choices based on whether or not the books would sell. Many outspoken authors were motivated by other causes to create queer characters in their works, such as the desire to create topical storylines, to accurately portray either their sexuality or the sexuality of their close friends, or to facilitate further social change. Just as the opinion of the readers affected the comics, the comics were a form of media that could affect the opinions of the reader, and by including queer characters that were just normal people - not heroes, not villains, but everyday people who had typical problems - authors knew that they could influence their demographics. This mode of operation aligns with the first tenet of the Warrenton War Conference, which highlighted the need for a media campaign that would promote positive images of queer people. A great example of the non-threatening and sympathetic queer is the character of Maggie Sawyer, the Metropolis Police Captain in Superman, who was “outed” by issue #15 in 1988. The story painted of Maggie’s life shows her struggling with self-acceptance, caring deeply about her child, and seeking comfort and support from her implied partner. In her younger years, while she was still denying her sexuality, Maggie had married a male police officer and had a child with him. It is insinuated that as she and her husband fought and grew distant, she came to terms with her sexuality, and the marriage fell apart. The courts decreed that she was an unfit mother, presumably due to her being a lesbian, and her husband was given full custody of the child. In the current time frame, her child has run away and come to the city, and despite having been separated for years, she is still frantically trying to find her, which causes her to turn to Superman for help.Maggie is also shown in conversation with a female character named Toby, who refers to her as “Babe” and hugs her while attempting to comfort her about the missing child. There are no explicitly lesbian scenes, as the two are not seen kissing or lying in bed together, but the writing and art work together to indicate that the two share a caring and romantic relationship. The words “gay” or “lesbian” are also conspicuously absent. In one scene, a concerned Superman can be seen saying that “it certainly seems ridiculous in this day and age that someone as upright as Maggie Sawyer should have to give up her child just because she’s… Hold it!” Distracted by the sight of a potential villain, his line of thought is cut off just before he would have confirmed her sexuality.By making a minor character an implied homosexual, the writer was able to create a sympathetic storyline that dealt with a modern-day issue without making it a focal point of the storyline. As one editor put it, “Issue #15 was not a story about a gay person. It was a story about a gay person’s child being turned into a bat.” Queer readers were able to see a subtle and only mildly stereotyped depiction of a member of their community on the pages of a major comic, while straight readers could see a queer person that was, for all intents and purposes, just like them. Maggie Sawyer was not participating in any sort of “deviant” behavior - she was an upstanding and law-abiding (as well as law-enforcing) member of society, she was a caring mother whose child had been taken from her, and she needed to be comforted by the people that she loved.As Kirk and Pill stated in “The Overhauling of Straight America,” it was important to show gay people as victims of society in order to maximize sympathy and highlight their suffering by showing “graphic pictures of brutalized gays; dramatizations of job and housing insecurity, loss of child custody, and public humiliation.” The aforementioned issue of Superman had dealt with the child custody point, and various other DC Comics would take the time to highlight the other struggles that queer people faced. In one issue of Green Arrow, for example, the titular hero encounters a gay couple celebrating their seventh anniversary. Later in the story, the two men are the next victims of a string of anti-gay hate crimes, and the Green Arrow must hunt down the perpetrators to stop the attacks. Stories like these engender sympathy within the population of straight readers, as shown in one reader’s letter that claims, “I am not a homosexual, but… I enjoyed your portrayal of homosexuality in Green Arrow 5. The two men who entered the flower shop were not perverts, weirdos, or anything resembling one… that’s why it was all the more shocking when they were brutally beaten.”However, not all of DC’s gay characters in 1988 were so passive and sympathetic. In the second-string crossover series Millennium, author Steve Englehart created a Latin American male character known as Extra?o, who embodied a number of gay male stereotypes. He wore loose and colorful clothing, referred to himself as “Auntie,” and had a limp wrist in almost every panel that he was depicted in. This character was not particularly popular among any subset of the readership due to his stereotypical appearance and behavior, which artist Keith Giffen stated was an “absolute atrocity and set the cause of doing gay characters in comics back at least ten years.” He was also one of the indented victims of an HIV/AIDS story planned by the author, although the storyline was never fully realized due to concerns among the editors.It was clear to the comics world at this point that gay characters were inevitably going to become a normalized part of stories, and writers were beginning to push the boundaries of what had been considered acceptable. The power of the Comics Code Authority was rapidly weakening as more and more publishers abandoned its strict regulations, and in 1989 the CCA published what would be the last revisions to the Comics Code before it was fully abandoned. The new rules completely removed the previous allusions to sexual deviancy, instead regulating that “social groups identifiable by lifestyle, such as homosexuals” be portrayed in a positive light and that “scenes and dialogue involving adult relationships will be presented with good taste, sensitivity, and in a manner which will be considered acceptable by a mass audience.” As long as writers and artists were not depicting graphic sexual behavior or nudity, they were now free to include openly queer characters without fear of reprisal.With legal obstacles removed and the industry on their side, comic book writers in the early 1990s took a new approach to outing gay characters. Rather than relying on subtle indications of homosexuality, both DC and Marvel comics featured a major character directly using the long-forbidden “g-word” and proudly proclaiming their gayness. In The Flash, supervillain-turned-hero Pied Piper claims that “he [The Joker] is not gay Wally. In fact I can’t think of any supervillain who is… Well, except me, of course. But you knew that, right?” in conversation with the Flash. In Alpha Flight, super mutant Northstar triumphantly proclaims “I am gay!” mid-battle. However, outside of these important moments, their queerness is never part of the storyline once they come out, and in fact is almost completely ignored. In a manner somewhat similar to the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy that would be put into place in the following years (albeit a bit more forgiving), queer superheroes were able to serve their country and fight the bad guys, as long as they never talked about or acted on their sexuality. The readers knew that the characters were gay, but the outings may as well have never happened for all the effect that they had on subsequent storylines.Despite the lack of continuation of the queer superhero stories (most were limited to one-issue events), as time progressed, DC and Marvel editors became much more open to discussion on the issue of queer representation and acceptance. In 1988 the “letter-to-the-editor” pages contained carefully selected positive statements about the characters that were implied to be gay, often letters from queer people writing about how nice it is to see an LGBT character or complementing how well the writer handled the issue. By the 1990s, the letter pages contained both positive and negative input, and the responses from the editors adhered to a clear agenda that promoted tolerance of queerness and presented the intolerant letters in a negative light. As one editor sarcastically wrote, “How dare we say that all people are the same, that you should treat everyone with respect and that it’s good to like your friends because of who they are, not what they are.”Queer Comic CreatorsThe quality and quantity of queer representation in mainstream comics would also have been affected by the presence of queer writer and artists within the company. Marvel and DC writers were in a tricky position to come out due to the fact that most of the openly queer creators at the time were working in underground or at least smaller-imprint comics and creating works that explicitly dealt with queer issues, which lead to their names being associated with more controversial topics. One such artist was Howard Cruse, the founding editor of Gay Comix. Cruse acknowledged the fact that what he was known for made it hard for him to find work, saying he was aware that many of the things that happened to non-controversial cartoonists, such as getting hired to draw for commercial products, were not happening to him despite his abundance of qualifications. This sort of career blackballing was a well-known possibility among comic creators. One well-known but anonymous artist who had worked for the major publishers said that he chose to remain closeted for just this reason. He was afraid that by coming out, he would lose the chance to do something he loved, as well as the opportunity for financially lucrative jobs, adding that “another reason is that I don’t want to be known as a ‘gay artist.’ I want to be known as a good artist. I don’t want to be stereotyped.” Later in the interview, he told an anecdote about a straight author who had included a gay character in a book that he wrote, and in the following days went on the Today Show and talked about his wife to make sure that people knew that he wasn’t gay himself. The assumption at the time was that if you wrote something gay, it meant that you were gay - another reason that gay characters were absent from comics for so long.Additionally, the people within the industry could be very unfriendly towards the queer community. Numerous closeted creators recalled being at conventions or in office meetings and hearing people make cruel jokes about gay people, thinking that nobody around them would be affected by it. There was one instance of an art director firing an assistant due to his homosexuality, because despite the artistic talent that the assistant had shown, the director was uncomfortable working with him. As another anonymous artist put it, “I think the fact that we are anonymous and choose to remain anonymous at this time - in this article - is in itself, the strongest indication of where society is at right now, and how homophobic comics and the industry is, and can be.” The interviews in question were done in 1988, the same year that the major shift in comic representation occurred, and acceptance in the industry was slowly beginning to increase.4. Alpha FlightPerhaps one of the most cogent examples of the shifts in queer comic representation during this time period is the character development of Jean-Paul Beaubier, a.k.a. Northstar, as featured in Marvel Comics’ Alpha Flight series. Over the course of the initial 130 issue series, Northstar evolves from being a “normal” man whose sexuality is only vaguely hinted at, to being the first mainstream superhero to directly state their homosexuality. The depiction of his sexuality was far from perfect in practice, with authors wavering between relying on physical stereotypes, attempting to kill him off for emotional effect, and simply not addressing his sexuality at all despite it being an established attribute. However, the fact that his sexuality could be directly addressed in print is representative of the larger social shift towards acceptance of the queer community in America.The Early YearsThe “Alpha Flight” team is a group of Canadian superheroes that were initially introduced within an X-Men run as part of Wolverine’s backstory, sent to bring him back to Canada after he escaped the facility he was trapped in and joined the X-Men. They made several appearances in other X-Men and Wolverine storylines, but were merely one-dimensional characters that existed simply to fight the X-Men until 1983, when John Byrne was asked to write the Alpha Flight series. Given the characters’ lack of backstory or motivation, Byrne was forced to come up with characterization for each team member, and decided to make one of them gay. He published a statement on his personal website stating that after reading a Scientific American article suggesting that homosexuality was caused by genetic rather than environmental factors, “it seemed like it was time for a Gay superhero, and since I was being “forced" to make ALPHA FLIGHT a real series, I might as well make one of them Gay.” Byrne’s choice to create a homosexual character was influenced by a new understanding of homosexuality brought about through scientific research, demonstrating that as the way society viewed gay people changed, queer representation in mainstream comics slowly began to emerge.It is worth noting that over the two years that Byrne wrote for Alpha Flight, the only real implication of Northstar’s homosexuality was that he never showed any interest in women. In his origin story issue, Beaubier is told “you had it all… money, fame, women… although the women don’t seem to have interested you overmuch.” However, this is immediately followed by the explanation that it must be due to his athletic nature causing him to be more concerned with winning than with getting women. While this may be attributed to the previously discussed “gay ban” implemented by Jim Shooter, Byrne also had a documented history of homophobic content and statements, ranging from writing a college comic featuring the superhero “Gaylord LeGuy” to complaining that artist Bob Layton’s ink work made him feel sick because it looked “greasy and slimy… And all his men are queer.” These factors, combined with the fact that Byrne only commented on Northstar’s sexuality once the series had been passed to a new writer who was giving not-so-subtle hints on the matter, suggest the possibility that Byrne may not have created Northstar to be a homosexual, and falsely claimed to have created the first gay superhero once he knew the reception to it was more positive than negative. Whether or not Byrne designed Northstar in the manner that he stated, his successor’s intention to portray the character as a gay man was crystal clear.Illness and DepartureIn 1985, Bill Mantlo took over writing duties for the Alpha Flight series beginning with issue #29, and it was at this point that Northstar truly began to develop as a queer character. The shift took place slowly in the beginning of Mantlo’s run, starting with subtle hints such as Beaubier’s sister asking him when he had ever objected to having attractively dressed men around. The hints grew progressively stronger in the following years as Mantlo began to write a story that, despite Marvel’s eventual intervention, was clearly intended to be an AIDS parallel. The storyline in question found its roots early on in Alpha Flight issue #37 with the introduction of a new villain known as “Pestilence.” Having spent 138 years slowly going insane, trapped under a thick layer of ice in an outwardly comatose yet fully aware state, Pestilence sought revenge on humanity for “all the years they had life while I was trapped.”He is revealed to possess numerous powers throughout his appearances, but the one most relevant to Northstar’s development is the ability to draw upon “bodily decay” - the sickness that already exists within people - to feed his own life.After his initial appearance, Pestilence did not appear in the comic for several months, until returning in issue #44. During this time, Northstar had begun to suffer from a mysterious illness, initially assumed to be a cold or the flu, that was signified by a constant cough that appeared in nearly every one of his speech bubbles. At the point in the issue that Northstar encounters the villain, Pestilence is able to sense the decay, pulling Beaubier into an embrace and kissing him on the forehead, drawing on the illness to feed his own power. “You are dying, speedster,” boasts Pestilence, “haven’t you sensed it? And my kiss has accelerated the slow disease spreading like a cancer through your cells!” In the following issue, it is revealed that Northstar’s illness had rapidly worsened to the point that he is coughing so hard that he can barely even stand and his wounds no longer heal, and as he considers how Pestilence hinted that he would soon die from a pre-existing disease, he attempts to distance himself from his team members to hide both his fear and his increasing physical weakness. Even later, it is shown that a superpowered doctor, the one person that could have been able to heal the disease, has been turned into a villainous beast - essentially condemning Northstar to continue to suffer from his mysterious illness until he dies from it.There are numerous plot points throughout the run of this storyline that suggest Mantlo’s intention to have Northstar die as a result of AIDS. In several instances, it is made clear that the condition that Pestilence exacerbated was pre-existing, but that Northstar was unaware of it. A substantial part of the fear surrounding the HIV/AIDS epidemic during this time period was the sudden and rapid decline in health of people who were thought to have been in perfect condition. Given Pestilence’s claim that Northstar had a slow disease that already existed in his system, it is likely that he had been in the clinical latency period of HIV for some time and was now in the early stages of AIDS. One of the most common initial indicators of AIDS was the disease Pneumocystis pneumonia, symptoms of which include shortness of breath, fatigue, and coughing - effects that Northstar had already been experiencing, and that were worsened after his confrontation with Pestilence.In addition to the clinical aspects of Northstar’s illness, Mantlo chose to use language that suggests intimacy when Pestilence gloats after attacking Northstar. Pestilence’s presence alone did not worsen the illness - his kiss did. Despite the CDC regularly providing evidence to the contrary, AIDS was still commonly seen as a gay disease, so it would make sense for Mantlo to portray Northstar’s illness being strengthened when another man kisses him. Finally, it is made clear that there is no normal doctor capable of curing Northstar’s ailments, and that the only person who would have been able to cure him is no longer available to him. During the late 1980s, the mortality rate of HIV/AIDS was still rising, and a diagnosis was often seen as a death sentence. By the end of 1987 - the year in which this storyline was written - upwards of 40,000 adults and adolescents had died from AIDS-related causes. By removing any hope of finding a cure for Northstar, Mantlo had set him up to waste away on the pages of Alpha Flight until he became a part of that statistic.However, a cursory glance at modern X-Men comics reveals that Northstar is still alive and well. As it turns out, when Mantlo’s intentions to do an AIDS-related storyline became clear, editors at Marvel were forced to intervene. Carl Potts, who was editing Alpha Flight, claimed that it was a bad idea to take the only popular character in the Marvel universe that was generally recognized to be gay and kill him with AIDS, since equating AIDS with homosexuality was a stereotype that people were fighting hard to break. Mantlo was vocally unhappy with the decision that was made, stating that he was also told having a gay character was not allowed because people in the South might stop buying the book, or that it might cause protests. “Northstar couldn’t live as a gay character in comics,” he told one interviewer, “because it was too controversial, and he couldn’t die as one because it was too controversial… I think it’s hypocritical and pointless.” Northstar was subsequently written out of the comics for the rest of Mantlo’s run through a reveal that his mother was from another realm and his sickness was the result of his being away from his native land, resulting in his leaving Earth to live amongst his own people. This was seen as a cheap cop-out by many readers, with one critic commenting “Yes, that’s right…he wasn’t gay. He was just a fairy. That’s muuuuch better. And the protectors of superheroic masculinity breathed a sigh of relief. That was a close one.” Northstar would not be reintroduced until issue #82, with absolutely no mention of his illness or any issue with his health.RevelationShortly before another new writer took the helm of Alpha Flight in issue #102, a reader wrote a letter to the editor stating that it would be wonderful if they could return to the storyline of Northstar as a gay man and asking if it were possible that comics had “grown up to the point that Marvel could discuss gay characters in their comics.” The published reply made no explicit statement regarding Northstar’s sexuality other than that it had not changed, but hinted that readers should keep their eyes on upcoming issues. The revelation sought by many would be delivered within the next few months by author Scott Lobdell, who had always been fascinated by Northstar and was excited to get the chance to write his character. With the CCA having loosened its standards and with an editor that supported having a gay character, Lobdell was able to write the script for the coming out of the first mainstream gay superhero. The first half Alpha Flight issue #106 sees Northstar rushing to the hospital after finding an abandoned baby girl in a garbage can. After being checked over by a doctor, it is revealed that the baby’s mother was HIV+, and that the child was infected with AIDS in the womb. Due to Northstar’s celebrity, the plight of the child finds its way to national news, and all of Canada becomes concerned with the baby’s well-being. The country-wide fawning over the child awakens the ire of retired superhero Major Mapleleaf, who attempts to kill the baby and is stopped by Northstar. During the battle between the two, Mapleleaf reveals that his own son died from AIDS, but nobody batted an eye about his death - or the thousands of other AIDS-related deaths that had occurred that year - because the boy had been gay. He resents the attention being paid to the baby girl’s innocence, claiming that “‘She’s too young to have done anything to bring the disease upon herself,’ people think. My son wasn’t guilty of anything. But because he was gay he didn’t rate.”The difference between Lobdell’s AIDS storyline and the one that Mantlo had attempted years prior was stark - rather than adhering to the stereotype of AIDS being solely associated with gay men, Lobdell chose to introduce the disease into his story through an infant that was infected in the womb by the mother. This highlights the increased public understanding of AIDS as a disease that could potentially affect anyone through a variety of means. The 1990 death of Ryan White, along with the 1991 Magic Johnson announcement, had helped shift society’s view of the illness from being a “gay plague” to a disease that straight, “innocent” people could get. Lobdell also addresses the issue of portraying non-gay AIDS victims as innocents, and the way in which that label subtly implied that gay men were guilty of something and deserved the disease simply for existing. After Mapleleaf explains the reasons behind his anger, Northstar reveals that he is all too familiar with the hardships faced by the queer community and explicitly states, “I am gay.” Rather than soothing Mapleleaf’s furor, this revelation causes the major to explode in rage and label Northstar’s closeted behavior as selfish, since as a prominent public figure, speaking publicly about his sexuality would bring positive attention to the community and help dispel stereotypes. Northstar responds in anger, pointing out that it is not his responsibility to deal with the way society saw gay people and AIDS, but admitting that the two of them could agree on one thing - “It is past time that people started talking about AIDS. About its victims. Those who die… and those of us left behind.” During the late 1980s, events such as the Warrenton War Conference and the publishing of “The Overhauling of Straight America” demonstrated a concerted effort on behalf of the LGBT community to change the way that American society viewed them. Many points made in these works highlight the importance of highlighting prominent and upstanding queer people, who straight people would respect and be able to relate to. However, as Lobdell effectively points out, this puts undue pressure on queer people who exist in the public eye to not only be publicly out, but also to constantly be ambassadors for the community, in adherence to “model minority” standards. Northstar was well within his rights to maintain privacy about his sexuality, and his claim that it was not his responsibility to be a public queer figure serves as a parallel to the view that the gay community should not bear the entire weight of their public image on their shoulders. Institutions like the media and the government were just as responsible for the social perception of the queer people as the community itself was, and LGBT people would not be able to change society’s views on their own. Lobdell also acknowledged movements such as ACT UP and Silence=Death by having Northstar comment on the importance of speaking out and raising awareness rather than remaining silent as people continued to die.Public reception to Alpha Flight #106 was overwhelming - the book sold out everywhere, and Marvel had to issue a second printing, which also sold out. In one interview, Lobdell stated that they never expected that sort of response and had assumed that the issue would only be of interest to fans of the series. He also commented that the media response was “98%” positive.In addition to this, Alpha Flight editors conducted a tally of the “letter-to-the-editor” responses that they received in response to #106 and found that 76% of the letters were positive, while 21% were negative. This positivity is indicative of a shift towards accepting an increased amount of queer representation in mainstream media. As one New York Times editorial on the comic stated, “Mainstream culture will one day make its peace with gay Americans. When that time comes, Northstar’s revelation will be seen for what it is: a welcome indicator of social change.”Despite the overwhelming success of Northstar’s revelation, his sexuality is almost wholly ignored for the remaining 24 issues of the Alpha Flight series. Before Alpha Flight #106 was even published, Scott Lobdell had left the project due to a disagreement with the new editor over where the series was headed. After nine issues went by without any comment on what had occurred, one reader wrote in to urge the writers not to just let the issue drop, pointing out that what they do with his character now will affect other titles and writers in the future. Although the response to the published letter contained assurances that Northstar’s sexuality would not fall to the wayside, it is never made a major point for the rest of the series, and only comes up in brief instances as a means of generating conflict. Even in Northstar’s own four-issue miniseries, which came out after the Alpha Flight series concluded, his sexuality was never addressed.Marvel made history by introducing the world to the first openly gay mainstream American superhero, but once the introduction was made, Northstar did nothing but run around and brood in his super suit acting as if nothing had even happened. It wasn’t until the early 2000s that Marvel writers purposefully focused on Northstar’s sexuality, giving him real relationships and showing him interacting with other members of the queer community. However, this delayed development does not mean that the early days of Northstar’s representation were unimportant - in fact, they were quite the opposite. Even hinting at what the Comics Code referred to as “sex perversion” was a critical step in gauging the general public’s reaction to a queer superhero and setting the stage for the development of the LGBT representation present in modern comics.5. Moving ForwardWhile Northstar’s character arc came to a very anticlimactic end in the 1990s, his reintroduction to the Marvel superhero lineup in 2002 saw his sexuality being dealt with in a much more open-minded manner as he took his place within a growing circle of queer heroes. In a late issue of Uncanny X-Men, Northstar was able to openly reveal to the nurse treating him that he had a crush on a fellow member of the team, and rather than reacting with disgust or concern, she simply teases him about his choice in men while promising to keep the crush a secret. By 2009, he was serving as a role model for a second gay mutant and helping him to come to terms with his sexuality. The increasing depictions of Northstar’s sexuality culminated in 2012, when he married his longtime boyfriend Kyle.Marvel was not the only publishing company to make substantial strides in queer representation in their comics since the early 2000s. DC reintroduced the already well-known character of Batwoman as a lesbian in 2006, revealed one iteration of the Green Lantern to be gay in 2012, and announced that Catwoman was bisexual in 2015. They also introduced a number of minor characters and non-mainstream heroes that were representative of a wide variety of sexualities. In addition to the progress made in DC and Marvel comics,independent publishing companies have been building an impressive roster of queer characters and meaningful storylines that resonate with reader experiences. In a modern-day comic book store, a reader of any ethnicity, gender, or sexuality is almost guaranteed to be able to see themselves represented with compassion and accuracy in the pages of a superhero story. This diversity and inclusivity is precisely what led to the onset of the Comicsgate movement, but this time - unlike in the 1980s and 1990s - the comic industry sided wholeheartedly with the queer community that they had previously tried so hard to ignore. Richard Meyer and Ethan Van Sciver, two of the most prominent Comicsgate advocates, have faced significant backlash from comic readers and creators, and have had their works boycotted by many stores. Within the industry, respected professionals took to social media to publicly denounce the movement, with most posting some variation on the statement “I believe comics are for everyone. There is no excuse for harassment. There is no place for homophobia, transphobia, racism or misogyny in comics.” This mass show of acceptance demonstrates a massive growth on behalf of the industry from 30 years ago, when queer comic creators were forced to face homophobia within the workplace on a regular basis and had to remain closeted in order to keep their jobs.?When gay characters first reached the pages of a mainstream superhero comic in 1980, they were nothing more than predators, merely existing to further the plot of the hero. Over the following two decades, as queer activists in real life fought for their right to be treated fairly and accepted by society, queer characters slowly began to emerge outside of the domain of walking stereotypes and convenient plot devices to be real people with a part to play in the story. Letters from readers show the notable role that this representation played in not only self-acceptance, but in an increased understanding of queer people as humans among the non-queer population. This milestone development did not occur on its own, and importance of the comic creators who put their jobs and reputations on the line to push for the inclusion of realistic queer characters, and for the facilitation of open-minded conversations about society’s views on the LGBT community, cannot be overstated. The modern world is still a scary place for many queer people, and as homophobic and transphobic laws continue to be written and implemented, it seems at times that the outlook is quite grim. However, thanks to the combined efforts of queer activists and comic creators from both the past and the present, today’s queer kids are be able to see themselves as the heroes on the pages of their favorite comics and, hopefully, will be inspired to see themselves as heroes in their own world as well.BibliographyPrimary Sources (Non-Comic)Boffey, Philip. “Leaders of AIDS Panel Quit Amid Feuds and Criticism.” The New York Times. October 8, 1997, A18. Accessed at , John. “FAQ: Questions About Comic Book Projects.” 24 August 2004. Accessed at , Lars. “What is Wrong With the Gay Movement.” Advocate, February 18, 1988. Accessed at , Marshall and Erastes Pill. “The Overhauling of Straight America.” Guide Magazine, November 1987. , Andy. “Out of the Closet and into the Comics: Gays in Comics - The Creations and the Creators, Part I.” In Amazing Heroes 143, 39-54. Seattle: Fantagraphics Books, 1988.Mangels, Andy. “Out of the Closet and into the Comics: Gays in Comics - The Creations and the Creators, Part II.” In Amazing Heroes 144, 47-66. Seattle: Fantagraphics Books, 1988.“The Comics Code of 1954.” Comics Magazine Association of America. Accessed at “The Comics Code of 1971.” The Comics Magazine Association of America. Accessed at “Comics Code Revision of 1989.” The Comics Magazine Association of America. Accessed at “Editorial Article 1 - No Title.” New York Times (1923-Current file). Jan 24, 1992. ProQuest Historical Newspapers: The New York Times, page A28.“Final Statement of the War Conference, Airlie House, Warrenton, Virginia.” 28 February 1988. “Gay Rights Leaders Gather in Virginia.” United Press International, February 27, 1988.? Accessed 19 December 2019 at , Chuck. Uncanny X-Men #415. New York: Marvel, 2003.Byrne, John. Alpha Flight #10. New York: Marvel, 1984.Byrne, John. Superman #15. New York: DC Comics, 1988.Byrne, John and Chris Claremont. The Uncanny X-Men #120. New York: Marvel, 1979.Englehart, Steve. Millennium #2. New York: DC Comics, 1988.Furman, Simon. Alpha Flight #115. New York: Marvel, 1992.Gold, Mike. Green Arrow #8. New York: DC Comics, 1988.Grell, Mike. Green Arrow #5. New York: DC Comics, 1988.Hudnall, James. Alpha Flight #82. New York: Marvel, 1990.Liu, Marjorie. Astonishing X-Men #51. New York: Marvel, 2012.Lobdell, Scott. Alpha Flight #106. New York: Marvel, 1992.Mantlo, Bill. Alpha Flight #37. New York: Marvel, 1985.Mantlo, Bill. Alpha Flight #41. New York: Marvel, 1985.Mantlo, Bill. Alpha Flight #44. New York: Marvel, 1987.Mantlo, Bill. Alpha Flight #45. New York: Marvel, 1987.Mantlo, Bill. Alpha Flight #49. New York: Marvel, 1987.Mantlo, Bill. Alpha Flight #50. New York: Marvel, 1987.Messner-Loebs, William. The Flash #53. New York: DC Comics, 1991.Nicieza, Fabian. Alpha Flight #100. New York, Marvel, 1991.Shooter, Jim. The HULK! #23. New York: Marvel, 1980.Shooter, Jim. The HULK! #25. New York: Marvel, 1981.Legal DocumentsReagan, Ronald. Executive Order 12601 - Presidential Commission on the Human Immunodeficiency Virus Epidemic. Washington, D.C.: National Archives and Records Service, June 24, 1987. Accessed at v. Stahl Assocs. Co., 74 N.Y.2d 201, 211 (N.Y. 1989). Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986). Code of the District of Columbia, Title 32 Chapter 7: Health Care Benefits ExpansionDOD Directive 1332.14 (Jan 28, 1982) “Enlisted Administrative Separations.” DOD Directive 1332.14 (Dec 21, 1993) “Enlisted Administrative Separations” H.R. 1048 (101st): Hate Crime Statistics Act. April 23, 1990. S.358 - Immigration Act of 1990. November 29, 1990. White House Press Briefing. October 15, 1982. Web SourcesDavid, Peter. “When You Wish Upon Northstar.” 14 February 1992. Accessed at , Eric. “After a Year, Comic Pros Express Solidarity Against Comicsgate.” . 27 August 2018. Accessed at , Eric. “Controversies Engulf Marvel at New York Comic Con,” . 7 October 2017. Accessed at , Emmet. “Homosexuality in Comics, Part II.” Comic Book Resources News, July 17, 2007. Accessed at , Dennis. “AIDS Cases and Deaths, by Year and Age Group, Through December 2001, United States.” March 2003. Accessed at , Andrew. “Andrew Sullivan on What Sets the AIDS Quilt Apart From All Other Memorials.” Smithsonian Magazine, November 2013. Accessed at “A Timeline of HIV/AIDS” . 2016. Accessed at “About PRISM Comics.” . Accessed at ?“The Aids Memorial Quilt.” The Names Project Foundation. Accessed 17 December 2019, “Pneumocystis pneumonia.” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Accessed November 23, 2019. Accessed at WorksChauncey, George. Gay New York: Gender, Urban Culture, and the Making of the Gay Male World, 1890-1940. New York: Basic Books, 1994.Faderman, Lillian. The Gay Revolution: The Story of the Struggle. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2015.Franklin III, Morris. “Coming Out in Comic Books: Letter Columns, Readers, and Gay and Lesbian Characters.” In Comics & Ideology, edited by Matthew P. McAllister, Edward H. Sewell Jr., and Ian Gordon, 221-50. New York: Peter Lang, 2001.Nyberg, Amy. Seal of Approval: The History of the Comics Code. Jackson: University Press of Mississippi, 1998.Reynolds, Richard. Super Heroes: A Modern Mythology. Jackson: University Press of Mississippi, 1994.Romagnoli, Alex S., and Gian S. Pagnucci. Enter the Superheroes. Maryland: Scarecrow Press, 2013.Shilts, Randy. Conduct Unbecoming: Gays and Lesbians in the US Military. New York: St. Martin’s Griffin, 1994.Sommers, Joseph Michael. The American Comic Book. Ipswich: Salem Press, 2014.Tilley, Carol. "Seducing the Innocent: Fredric Wertham and the Falsifications That Helped Condemn Comics." Information & Culture: A Journal of History 47, no. 4 (2012): 383-413.Wertham, Fredric. The Seduction of the Innocent. New York: Rinehart, 1954. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download