Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Indigo Rush

Red hot walrus lovin'

Recommended Posts

Tails usurped nothing. Archie / DIC were the ones that decided to expand the universe far more than they should and major inconsistencies are the result. Also, Tails is shown as piloting an aircraft, getting it to work again after being shot out of the air and attaching a booster on it quite quickly in Sonic 2. It's obvious he should have some techy knowledge back then. But every tv show besides the OVA and X completely forgot this part of characterization.

I'm not saying that the comics were right to have forgotten Tails' role in the games to begin with. But Rote WAS there first in the comics as far as being the tech guy, and I've always respected that.

I still think including only one gay character (and his partner), along with him being the tech member, the purple one (as it weird as it is, this IS a sterotype), the fifth wheel of the Freedom Figthers, the one that is ugly, uninteresting to the majority of the fanbase, has no role in the overall story besides some unimportant snippets here and there, and finally using the age card for his partner is a cheap way to include gays. They should've included far more than just a couple, otherwise it reinforces the idea that it's not normal at all, and not treat it as a big deal either. Oh it's a kid's comic. Then they shouldn't go down that road to begin with.

That's a little harsh. I love Rotor and know several other people who also love him. He's not ugly; I actually find him being a walrus living in a forest pretty AWESOME XD

And by the way, being gay isn't 'normal' in that there are loads of them all around (i.e. 'the norm'). They are a minority, so only showing one couple is fine. Beside, we're only now becoming that progressive. And why should we treat it as a big deal? Two gay people happen to exist, big whoop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could you explain "values based around heterosexuality" then, Kitty? I don't know what homosexual 'values' are any different from hetero 'values' to be honest.

Basically Boy + Girl = alright! XD I'm sorry, I'm not in the mood to get into some heavy, philosophical narm, but I will say that from a historical point, Archie still holds those "values" as something they haven't really changed. They might have adapted a bit to include things like divorce, but still mostly presenting boy + girl = good. Or at least a point of interest. Or what should be accepted. Not saying it's entirely a right viewpoint though.

Also, I wasn't bashing homosexual values being any different from heterosexual ones. I said in my first post that I was just merely illustrating a stereotype and that I know homosexuals as a whole don't act that way. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Kitty's saying it'd be surprising to see Archie include a gay character. They've always been very "safe" with their comedy and situations. I wouldn't expect them to put themselves out there by including a gay character.

Well, not surprising, but definitely out of their safety/comfort zone. I'm not saying they couldn't ever do it, but I'd think they'd do it in one of their original titles first before tackling the concept in the work of a licensed character. Secondly, it's still a comic geared towards children, where a lot of the stuff intended for them is also playing it safe as well. While you see a lot more of their age specific media talking about issues like single-family homes/divorces, homosexuality is still a very hushed subject. An example would be an episode of this PBS show called 'Postcards from Buster' (a documentary type show that follows kids around for a day or two) where the main character happened to feature a kid who was being raised by two lesbian parents. People were in an uproar because of the fact that it featured two lesbian parents even though it wasn't played up as being a big thing, with the most commented about it in the episode was something to the effect of "Wow, that's a lot of moms!".

This happened back in 2006-2007 when that particular episode aired, and in limited rotation because some stations actually refused to air it. That's with it being downplayed despite the fact that the parents weren't acting any different than other parents on that show aside from being of the same gender. Even with Rotor's sexuality being mentioned in one of those little side notes in an issue or even with a few stories subtly addressing it, I'm still sure parents/folks would be crying foul. If this comic were being made by an imprint of Marvel or DC that dealt with mature themes (or even their regular mainstream division)I'm pretty sure that folks wouldn't make such a hoopla about it. But fact of the matter is that it's children comic being made by a children comic producer about a video game character traditionally geared towards children.

Edited by KittyNakajima

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd see it as a very progressive move. It IS starting to happen. There are children's books out there now in mainstream libraries that feature same sex parents (as a librarian, I was there when we got a shipment of one particular book that briefly featured two moms). The frontier is gradually being breeched, and it's really not as uncommon to see now as it used to be.

I'd actually be MORE surprised if the 'regular' Archie comics showed a gay couple though, since they're so old-fashioned XD;; Sonic's comic has always been more modern in its ideas and storylines, so it seems less out of the ordinary to see it there, for me, anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hueg post

Sonic Unleashed introduced Louie Montaine, an openly homosexual character to the series. Sonic Unleashed was geared towards children. As far as I know, nobody was particularly offended or disgusted by his character, and I find him to be totally awesome. I honestly don't what problems could arise if Archie were to introduce a homosexual character now. Times are changing. Homosexuals are more socially accepted than before. Blacks weren't featured in that much fictional media when they weren't considered to be part of the general populace, so it's a fairly similar argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sonic Unleashed introduced Louie Montaine, an openly homosexual character to the series.

As much as I loved Louie (Along with nearly every other Unleashed NPC), and would love to see more of him, I think gay characters that don't fall squarely under the exaggerated camp stereotypes might be good too. Louie's sexuality, though portrayed in a positive light, is treated as far more eccentric and over-the-top than "normal." It makes for a funny character, but I definitely think the inclusion of gay characters who avert these cliched stereotypes would help convey the normalcy of homosexuality a bit better.

Still, like I said, I found Louie to be a wonderfully endearing character, and stereotypical though he may be, he's definitely a progressive move for the Sonic franchise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't say I know this character people are mentioning, since I've only played the Wii version of Unleashed. Still, I'm willing to bet that the only reason parents haven't complained about that is the fact he's (I'm assuming) a relatively obscure NPC that they probably haven't even noticed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still, I'm willing to bet that the only reason parents haven't complained about that is the fact he's (I'm assuming) a relatively obscure NPC that they probably haven't even noticed.

Or maybe some parents seriously don't have a problem with it? Not all parents think homosexuality is some horrifying and bad thing. People are a lot more open-minded these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd actually be MORE surprised if the 'regular' Archie comics showed a gay couple though, since they're so old-fashioned XD;; Sonic's comic has always been more modern in its ideas and storylines, so it seems less out of the ordinary to see it there, for me, anyway.

Well another thing they'd consider is the readership of the comic. Archie is pretty big, he's sold in supermarkets and big enough for them to publish things like Sonic. I'm unsure of how large Sonic's following is outside the fandom and gaming circles. Being the longest running video game comic is big in its own way though. But the first thing I thought of when I heard about Rotor was this Christian looking website I found once, talking about how family-friendly the Sonic comics are. I wouldn't put it past people to make a big deal out of it, like they did when Obama wanted to give an address to the children. You can't do something like this without talk of "gay agenda" and so on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't do something like this without talk of "gay agenda" and so on.

Which is why one simply must do it anyway, despite the complaints from extremists who'll accuse the work of an agenda.

Eventually, as this becomes more commonplace, the complaints will become less common. Letting potential for complaints stop this, though, is not the answer. Progressive change is always met with disdain from people who fear it, but simply waiting for attitudes to become more accepting isn't the answer; Contributing to attitudes becoming more accepting, even in a gesture as subtle as adding a positively-portrayed gay character to the cast, is the answer I believe.

Social change doesn't happen by waiting, it happens by speaking out, being open and bold. It is therefore integral not to let homophobia be an obstacle to a message of acceptance and equality. The more homosexuality is seen as healthy and normal, the less powerful homophobia will be, and the sooner it will begin to diminish over time.

This is what I truly believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with everything you're saying, just the cynical side of me didn't expect Archie of all publishers to make that stand. In the end they didn't because we still don't have a gay character, but I guess plans show a willingness.

Edited by Stretchy Werewolf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About whether Archie would allow it... I'm not convinced that it would create a big enough splash to be a problem for them. I'd like to believe that people are more reasonable than that, and I don't think the book is well-known enough for it to get much publicity anyway. I could be wrong, granted, but even if I am, Archie's hardly been shy recently when it comes to publicity stunts. Archie's marriage dream sequence, anyone?

Either way, the subplot would definitely be a positive thing, and I like the low-key way it looks like it would've been handled. The only thing that bothers me is that it was tucked away in 25 Years Later instead of appearing in the main comic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About whether Archie would allow it... I'm not convinced that it would create a big enough splash to be a problem for them. I'd like to believe that people are more reasonable than that, and I don't think the book is well-known enough for it to get much publicity anyway. I could be wrong, granted, but even if I am, Archie's hardly been shy recently when it comes to publicity stunts. Archie's marriage dream sequence, anyone?

Either way, the subplot would definitely be a positive thing, and I like the low-key way it looks like it would've been handled. The only thing that bothers me is that it was tucked away in 25 Years Later instead of appearing in the main comic.

So if you look at it like that in the M25YL context, they could have easily reconned it by saying it was only a possible future, as they have with any story portraying the future of the comic's characters. That or any other writer who came along could have acted like it never happened to begin with aside from that scenario.

Just pointing it out. Not saying I'd support a recon happening but if they had gone through with it I could easily see a few avid readers getting angry that it got brushed underneath a rug.

As for the fact that they planned to include a low key homosexual character in the comic, I'll agree with Stretchy and others that it does indeed show some sort of progress towards acceptance. But the fact that it fell through also says something, and not in the good way either. =/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if you look at it like that in the M25YL context, they could have easily reconned it by saying it was only a possible future, as they have with any story portraying the future of the comic's characters. That or any other writer who came along could have acted like it never happened to begin with aside from that scenario.

Well, it's a possible future, but with the same characters.

If Rotor's gay in a "possible" future, he'd be gay in any future, because logically he was always gay in the present. Sexuality is something you are, not something you become in the future, "possible" future or otherwise. This sort of retcon would not logically work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='KittyNakajima' date='18 November 2009 - 11:17 PM' timestamp='1258586252' post='99976

As for the fact that they planned to include a low key homosexual character in the comic, I'll agree with Stretchy and others that it does indeed show some sort of progress towards acceptance. But the fact that it fell through also says something, and not in the good way either. =/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it's a possible future, but with the same characters.

If Rotor's gay in a "possible" future, he'd be gay in any future, because logically he was always gay in the present. Sexuality is something you are, not something you become in the future, "possible" future or otherwise. This sort of retcon would not logically work.

I meant in the sense that any future writer aside from Penders could downplay it/ignore this altogether. Am I saying they just make him straight when they wrote him being homosexual? Not at all. More like they just mention it once in the whole run of the comic and ignore it for the most part altogether. On top of that you can't really expect the writers to not fall into that trap - with a comic running as long as Sonic's I'd expect a couple of continuity errors based on how many writers have come and gone.

As for that Louis NPC from Sonic Unleashed, that sounds like such an obscure character that it doesn't necessarily hold too much of a baring towards a comparison like Rotor. I'd imagine someone with conservative views only getting mad about that one if they sat and played the game through near perfect. Rotor might not be as prominent, but he does get his own stories from time to time compared to what might have been a one shot character.

As for my own personal views on homosexuality - I'm liberal/apathetic at best. I've just been playing devil's advocate and arguing my point based on witnessing conservative reaction to homosexuality in mainstream children's media. While homosexuality is becoming more accepted you still have things like boycotting the aforementioned episode in my last post to folks implying homosexuality on mainstream characters such as Spongebob. Am I saying that they're right to do that or think that way? NO. Children do deserve a chance to find out and learn about these things. It just might not happen as quick as you'd like based on conservative beliefs of the powers that be - the folks making the stuff.

@ Blazey - Yes, I'm aware of the fact that Penders was fired before he had a chance to implement this idea. So basically we're just getting into a discussion of "what if", especially given the fact that Ian, the current writer has stated that he has no plans in exploring it altogether.

Edited by KittyNakajima

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as I loved Louie (Along with nearly every other Unleashed NPC), and would love to see more of him, I think gay characters that don't fall squarely under the exaggerated camp stereotypes might be good too. Louie's sexuality, though portrayed in a positive light, is treated as far more eccentric and over-the-top than "normal." It makes for a funny character, but I definitely think the inclusion of gay characters who avert these cliched stereotypes would help convey the normalcy of homosexuality a bit better.

Still, like I said, I found Louie to be a wonderfully endearing character, and stereotypical though he may be, he's definitely a progressive move for the Sonic franchise.

Needless to say, Dr. Mechano, by studying how Japanese culture tends to portray gays in the media, they usually throw in this exaggerated stereotype. Overtly flamboyant, humorous and feminine (see Cho Aniki, Tokyo Godfathers, Hard Gay, ect.) Seeing how this game was made in Japan, it comes as no surprise that they would portray it in this light. It is just like how they sometimes used to portray some blacks in anime with large lips and jet black skin; a reflection of the "Little Sambo" of early American culture. Thankfully to say, now that this stereotypical African representation is not widely used in Japan anymore.

You know, SHOOP DA WHOOP and all of that. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ Blazey - Yes, I'm aware of the fact that Penders was fired before he had a chance to implement this idea. So basically we're just getting into a discussion of "what if", especially given the fact that Ian, the current writer has stated that he has no plans in exploring it altogether.

Ah, I see, that clears things up. My apologies if I was being pedantic, I can be that way at times when I don't think before I speak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, this is pure win right here. But I agree with the people who said that it shouldn't be this OMFG it's a big deal thing, and should be just a fact. Nothing but a fact that may be forgotten.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

STC got away with the whole gay couple thing eleven years ago lol.

Granted it wasn't actually alluded to in the comic itself (of course, neither was the whole deal with Rotor), but Nigel Kitching mentioned it once on ye olde STC Mailing List. The two characters in question were Blockhead Bill (Mighty's dad), and his 'business partner' Society Max. They were only minor characters really (although despite their five issue span, I still found them a heckuva lot more interesting that Rotor, heh), but tis still a neat little tidbit.

I don't really get the point of pointing out characters are gay though.

I mean, I certainly don't mind when there's little hints thrown in the comic here and there (certainly not as the prime focus though, but I say the same about any couples, homosexual or not; the abundance of romance is something that's always niggled at me with Archie), but it always seems a bit odd to me when they come out and say it seemingly out of the blue. And I say this as someone who love love loves finding out these little random facts about the characters lol. I just don't like it when they play things like this up as though it's supposed to suddently make a character more interesting, cos it really doesn't. Not for me, anyway. I guess that's because I couldn't give a hoot about someone's sexuality though, fictional or otherwise.

Actually, I felt the same way when JK 'outed' Dumbledore. I wasn't that into the HP series, so perhaps I missed something, but it just seemed really random to me. Same with Rotor; I always assumed that - being about one of the only characters in Archie not to be paired up with someone - he just wasn't into the whole relationship shebang, but there you go. (Or perhaps not, seeing as it never came to anything... y'know what I mean though.)

Never really was a fan of Penders anyway, but it's nice to see a shot at diversity I guess.

Edited by Lucky Winters

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

You must read and accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy to continue using this website. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.