dr who banner slice

Contrarian Fanboy: Think Being P.C. Is Bad? You Might Be a Bigot.


dr who banner slice 590x196 Contrarian Fanboy: Think Being P.C. Is Bad? You Might Be a Bigot.

Recently, Matt Smith has announced that he’ll be leaving Dr. Who, instigating an avalanche of predictions and wish-lists about who will be the next to drive the TARDIS. For a lot of Whovians, Smith’s retirement is an opportunity to try out a new Doctor, one that might be more representative of some of the Doctor’s more under-represented fans. Some fans have even suggested a number of black, female, and (GASP!) ginger actors to play the part.

Tilda 535x700 Contrarian Fanboy: Think Being P.C. Is Bad? You Might Be a Bigot.

An excellent choice to be Dr. Who, right?

I can think of a dozen interesting choices. Tilda Swinton is by far the best idea I’ve heard for the new Doctor. Between ourselves, can we admit that she’s more fashion forward, alien, and powerful as herself than any of the Drs. Who have ever been? Helen Mirren would bring humor and depth to the part. Chiwetel Ejiofor’s name has been passed around too. He’s certainly had experience playing in sci-fi, and he’s got the whole “good guy that’s also kind of a dick” thing down.

Predictably, even the hint of casting against type has lead to the repetition of a depressingly familiar conversation, the conversation that happens any time there is a chance of changing a character’s race or gender or sexual orientation or whatever. Invariably, somebody claims that this kind of character rejiggerifying is an example of political correctness run amok, a dangerous trend in thought policing that must be stopped before it ruins the characters we love, unravels the fabric of society destroys the space-time continuum.

The more I hear people make this criticism, the more difficult it becomes for me to pretend as if there is anything to it besides an open sewer of raw bigotry.

Let me get to my point by way of a question: Which Batman is real, Bob Kane’s pipe-smoking, gun-toting character, Adam West’s campy police deputy, Frank Miller’s fascist thug, or one of the others? Which Superman is real, Siegel and Shuster’s new-deal-era working-class hero, George Reeve’s grandfatherly do-gooder, or Grant Morrison’s god among men?

 Contrarian Fanboy: Think Being P.C. Is Bad? You Might Be a Bigot.

Another good Who.

The answer is that none of these are the definitive version. Each of these iterations highlights aspects of the characters we love, often adding new aspects to them as well. These become a part of the DNA of that character. For kids growing up in the 1960s and 1970s, Adam West was Batman. Adams and O’Neil’s New Look Batman didn’t “get rid” of West’s Batman (even though they tried). Instead, they added another layer to the idea of Batman. The characters we love have come to be in the telling, and in the telling the characters we love have changed.

The characters we love are not solid objects: they are constellations of ideas.

Mirren helen mirren 25857661 1378 2067 466x700 Contrarian Fanboy: Think Being P.C. Is Bad? You Might Be a Bigot.

Helen Mirren won’t destroy Who either.

These changes have never destroyed the characters, even when they were, seemingly, fundamental. So why is that these changes are okay, and yet changing a character’s race or gender is an unforgivable assault by the forces of political correctness?

When I hear people use the term “political correctness”, I hear them describing a transparent, politically motivated attempt to normalize difference by changing nomenclature (like saying African-American instead of black), to rehabilitate the image of certain groups of people by playing them against stereotype (like having a Muslim hero when Muslims are too-often seen as terrorists) or to create artificial diversity by introducing “token” characters representing socially maligned groups (like having a black super-hero).

What strikes me is that anyone would think that these are bad things. We shouldn’t use alienating language to describe people. We shouldn’t allow stereotypes to go unchallenged. We should make art that respects that the world we live in is amazing and interesting because it is diverse.

When people say that some kinds of characters or some kinds of casting are wrong-headed because they are P.C. means that there is, on the one hand, a kind of character that one could introduce without being politically correct (i.e, “normal” characters) and on the other hand there are characters that are evidence of encroaching political correctness. That the P.C. charge is drug out when creators introduce characters of color, or women, or LGBTQ characters means that, for some, the baseline of normalcy is white, heterosexual, masculinity. This way of seeing the world is, simply put, bigotry.

When I hear the term political correctness, I hear a term that means acknowledging that we live in a world filled with all kinds of people and that they all deserve respect. It means acknowledging that people who look like me aren’t the center of the universe, and that maybe, just maybe, there are other versions of normal that might be worth knowing about. And when I hear people saying that having a woman or African-American Dr. Who is bad because it is P.C., then I hear people saying that Dr. Who is only for some kinds of fans and not for others. I hear people saying that white male fans deserve to see people like them, while women fans, LGBTQ fans, and fans of color simply don’t. Honestly, I’m tired of even pretending as if this is even a valid point and that the people making it are anything but bigots.

S#!T Talking Central

  • John

    I’m not very familiar with Dr. Who, and I’m absolutely not invested in the character, and I agree with you 100%… I’d love to see a female/ethnic/or lgbt Doc represented on tv. BUT, dismissing the complaints of dedicated fans who want to have a white, skinny, British Doctor as bigotry is too much. Way too much.

    What’s the first thing we notice about our favorite characters? Their clothes? Hair? Skin color? All these different visual elements that allow us to realize that, yes! this is in fact Doctor Who or Superman or Batman. Wander too far from the core visual cues of these characters, and you start to lose your audience.

    How come Iron Man never stayed in his Heroes Reborn suit? Or why isn’t Hulk in his Joe Fixit form all the time? Black suit spidey?

    We tend to fall in love with the classic iterations of these characters, and we sure as hell don’t want to let go. Change is a geek’s worst nightmare.

    I think it’d be fun to change the race or gender of some of fandom’s most championed characters, but even I have certain characters who are off limits.

    1) WOLVERINE- I want him to be a gross, white, spittoon using redneck from the heart of Canada

    Well… actually, I was going to start a list of characters I want to remain unadapted, but I can’t think of anymore I’m particularly obsessed with.

    But on another note, before we few champions of change pounce upon our geeky brethren, declaring them “racists/sexists/homophobic/douche kings”… let’s remember that the powers that be won’t make any substantial changes to these characters based on our lofty goals to diversify fandom. They’re only interested in money. So if they do change to a queer, female, ginger Doc, they’ve done so because their focus groups show that they can target a younger, wider audience segment. And it’s to that type of corporate meddling that I think a lot of fans are outraged.

    TO SUM IT UP…

    Just because someone doesn’t want their favorite character to be changed in any way, doesn’t mean you can immediately ascribe them to being a racist/bigot/sexist. Those terms should be saved for only the most awful people, not pimple faced fanboys who want to preserve the look of their favorite characters.

    And yeah, this even partially applies to the whole “PC” argument. Since it’s sure as hell not a warm hearted mission to bring diversity to the screen that drives these changes in character, but instead a need for profits

    • reverendswann

      There is a lot in your comment to respond to, but I want to respond to one thing because it is really at the core of what I was saying. You said “Just because someone doesn’t want their favorite character to be changed in any way, doesn’t mean you can immediately ascribe them to being a racist/bigot/sexist. Those terms should be saved for only the most awful people”

      There are two major problems here.

      1) I wasn’t talking about changing characters in ANY way, I was talking about specifically changing their race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, etc.

      2) No, the term bigot should not be saved for the most awful people because even good, kind people who try to be open-minded can be, and are, bigoted. Bigotry is everyday, commonplace, and widespread. Even the kind of people who spend all of their time being basically good people are capable of the most shocking kinds of unthinking, automatic bigotry.

      The problem is this: I get from your comment that you think that there are bigots on the one hand and good people on the other. The reality is not a stark as that. And here was my point. I’m tired of pretending as if people aren’t bigoted just because they’re not going around committing hate crimes. People have assumptions about other people, about races, and sexual orientations, and religions. They make decisions, sometimes small, sometimes large, based on those assumptions. The first step in interrogating those attitudes is to call them what they are: bigotry.

      As for Wolverine, I’d welcome a remade Wolverine. I don’t see anything about his race that is essential to his character. I’ve known mountain men of color who were every bit as tough and awesome and redneck as Wolverine.

      • john

        Thank you for responding.

        I don’t think there are racists/sexists on one hand and nice folks on the other. Everyone is a bit of these in their own fashion. Whether it’s through supporting sexist media (especially in music) or through microaggression. BUT… there are ways to quantify these sorts of examples. (the difference between being a patron of sexist music and being damn misogynist)

        And that’s just a side note. More important to my point is that you make a great logical leap that people who don’t support a change in race, gender, sexual orientation, of their favorite characters are bigots.

        Bullshit.

        If you want to break it down in its pseudo-psychological aspect, everyone forms a social relationship with fictional characters, and the more you invest in them… the more you love them. It’s a logical fallacy to claim geeks who don’t want a large, superficial change to their favorite characters as sexist/racists. And that’s exactly what you’re proposing: a very large and noticeable, but superficial change to characters.

        No, they just don’t want their characters changed in a superficial way. What’s another reason for this besides blindly calling people bigots? Could it be that these characters have been around for DECADES and they don’t want to see the manipulated to pander to a broader audience. Hmmm… that kinda makes sense.

        Also, if I can preach for a little bit. Besides Doctor Who (who’s a great candidate for casting a minority/female/queer doc since he takes different forms all the time) I don’t believe that you can change classic characters in the superficial ways you’ve mentioned. The brand is important, and the brand consists of an image that’s been around for 70 years. Superman? white dude from Kansas. Sherlock Holmes? Old British white dude? Goku? Young, spiky haired Asian dude! The minute you change of any of these to much in one direction, you’re bound to lose the context of them. Race is important to everyone of these characters (as well as gender) because it’s one of the visual cues that tells us “oh yeah, that’s Batman/Superman/Goku”. You might want geeks to get over it and enjoy the story, but we all know when building a brand, that’s not how it works.

        It is a shame that more minoriities aren’t represented in comics. Just look at the inability of Quesada, a hispanic dude, to incorporate more diverse figures into Marvel. They’ve already established their brands, and any change to them is a big one.

        Now, the real way to add much needed diversity to fandom is not through manipulating existing characters, but by supporting under represented/minority creators and under represented/minority characters. There are really a few out there (unless your supporting foreign art.. there’s a wider pool of work to pull from). I remember picking up a book on black comic writers (an anthology), nothing mainstream about it, and all three writers who collected the anthology were white. That’s the problem.

        And Wolverine… case in point. Wolverine is a disgusting white trash, pointy fingered asshole. Sure, it’d be fun to see a different take on him, but that’s all it’d be. A spin on the classic version. Why would I want to see that?

        • reverendswann

          I’m glad this post has gotten at least your attention, so thanks for this great conversation. I really do mean that.

          One of the nice things about being a fan and not an executive is that I don’t have to look at these characters as things that should be stable so they can be sold. That kind of view looks at Batman and says “okay, he’s a white guy, he’s got this costume, and he’s dark and brooding. THAT’S what he IS.”

          But, really, Batman has been a lot of things, like most genre characters, he is defined by constant change. He’s both used and been against guns, he’s been both for and against killing. His costume has changed from grey to black to blue to armored. There are countless ways in which Batman has changed as a character and as a design.

          What I hear you saying is that, despite the huge changes that genre characters have always undergone, race is essential to them that to change it would destroy their context. I disagree. I disagree because, first, I don’ think many creators said, “this kind of story can only be told if the character is a WASP.” In fact, I know that that WASPness was required of characters because, in the early days, editors would not allow creators to produce characters that weren’t WASPs (if that isn’t, to use your word, pandering, then I don’t know what is). There are dozens of anecdotes about editors forcing colorists to change characters so as not to “offend” readers with race.

          Sometimes, writers internalize these editorial pressures before they even produce anything. Superman is a great example of this. You see a white guy from Kansas, but Siegel and Shuster saw a symbol of the Jewish experience that they had to make into a WASP in order to sell to publishers. The context wasn’t midwestern whiteness, it was Jewish immigration. Now he’s sold as a messianic Christian figure and his WASP characteristics are seen as being a part of his moral goodness. (for the record, I think, to make him overtly Jewish now would be a fabulous idea. It would double down on the themes that have made him interesting.)

          As a fan, I enjoy looking at characters as ideas, histories, and, ultimately, as reflections of times. I can look at and appreciate that they change to communicate with readers. That’s why I am a fan of against type casting. These types of choices have never “destroyed” anything. They have illuminated new things about characters and their contexts. And, honestly, I still don’t see how the defensive reaction to these kinds of changes isn’t bigotry when more drastic changes happen all the time and are, usually, tolerated.

          • John

            I still can’t see the purpose.

            To me, it’s like recasting a character in a popular television show. Like Jim from The Office… I would much rather watch him continue on with Krasinski as the actor, than have him recast.

            Now, if comic book characters actually aged, or there was an organic method to bringing in a new, deiverse superhero, then I can understand it.

            They were successful with Miles Morales and Rhodey as Iron Man in that way.

      • Pronk

        But gender/race/religion can affect the persona of a character. And if you change the character’s persona, said character is no longer said character

        • Dalinkwent

          So how does Dr Who being black change anything about his overall character?

          • Pronk

            I don’t watch dr. Who, so honestly, I couldn’t tell you. However, if its been a British guy for 40 plus year, he should probably stay British. Perhaps make him like don cheadle from ocean’s 11? I would not change it just for the sake of putting a black man in the role. If you have a valid creative reason for doing so, great, but otherwise, leave well, well alone.

          • Dalinkwent

            You do know there are black British actors? Like for example Chiwetel Ejoifor and Edris Elba. So the characters still British, just black.

          • Pronk

            Did you see the part where I mentioned don cheadle from ocean s’s 11? Do you have a reason for making the doctor black other than just for the sake of making him black? You know racism goes both ways. If you want to get rid of it completely, you need to not affirmative action your creative decisions.

  • Erik Wise

    I am gay and I approve this article. Anybody who freaks out about casting against type in the comics world ends up sounding like Scalia in his dissent to SCOTUS’ ruling today that overturned DOMA: Old-fashioned, nonsensical, and whiny.

    • frank

      that’s because you’re a mainstream derp-tard who doesnt grasp the concept of source material. Why dont we re make the Milk movie and we’ll cast him with will smith and make it a Rom com. You’re not a nerd so dont comment on shit you dont comprehend. Re casting a character who has been a specific race/gender shows no respect for the story itself. thats like casting kunta kente with Tom Cruise. If you’re making a new iteration of a character in an alternate universe then thats different. The way they made the punisher a women instead a man etc. but stop thinking you sound intelligent because you spouted off some acronyms you saw on buzzfeeds main page last week

      • Erik Wise

        Here’s another acronym for you: STFU.

        Cheers! :D

      • Blackbelt_Jones

        Harvey Milk isn’t a fictional character you fuckin’ idiot.

        • reverendswann

          Seriously, let me marry you.

    • reverendswann

      You are a gorgeous animal.

  • Mia Rainier

    I am a fan of Doctor Who – for many years. I have gone “back in time” and visited the Doctors I was not alive for, and have seen several new Doctors

    come and go as well. I am completely ‘for’ mixing up the Whovian universe… I’m

    totally supportive of creating a new Doctor of a different ethnicity, or sexuality. However – there are very few things that have stayed true throughout the evolution of Doctor Who as a character. Number one, he has always been British. I think a Doctor of a different race could be accepted if and only if he was still British. Number two, the Doctor has always been fond of women. I believe he could be portrayed as bisexual, but certainly not gay (not that I have anything against the LGBTQ community). Finally, notice that concerning the Doctor, I will only use the pronoun “he” – though he is of an alien race, he has only ever occupied a male body (at least, we haven’t seen him female, bringing me to the observation that perhaps the Doctor IS male…) I don’t know about you, but I don’t think people would like Batman undergoing a sex change and becomng Batwoman. So it’s the same for the Doctor. I suppose everyone has a different observation, a different opinion, but this is mine. I guess the Doctor could just as easily be American instead of British; or gay; or a woman…But, he does drive the TARDIS (a blue BRITISH phone booth). And, I could list all the many FEMALE companions the Doctor has had… And there’s River, too. ;) Meaning the Doctor “couldn’t possibly” be gay (he can be bi – no problem with that). And I guess I just don’t see the Doctor choosing to inhabit the body of a woman after all these years of being a man.
    But I digress.
    Don’t chew me out for disagreeing with me, I merely have an opinion and choose to share it with human beings who really don’t give a flying rat’s rear end.

    • reverendswann

      He has only ever occupied a male body so far. If you’re willing to accept a Who of a different ethnicity or sexuality (which he’s also not been thus far), then, honestly, there’s no reason to worry about a female or gay Doctor.

  • Tom Baker

    Sorry, but if the next Doctor is not a white British man the ratings will plummet and the show will be cancelled. That’s just the way it is.

  • Pronk

    Sometimes the gender and race is part of the character’s backstory, and that is what makes the character work. Would James Bond be as cool if it was a Hispanic guy working for the Brazilian government? Would Marty Mcfly be as endearing if he was actually a girl who’s dad fell for her? Sometimes these things don’t matter, but when it comes to well established characters, they do because otherwise you change the essence of the character.

    • reverendswann

      Frankly, a Brazilian James Bond sounds amazing, just like a female Marty McFly sounds pretty rad.

      • Brian Sleider

        If it was Bond in Brazil it would not be Bond, James Bond is a Brit.

      • Pronk

        So a female Mcfly who’s dad pursues her is “rad” and not creepy at all. Okay buddy!

  • Brian Sleider

    So if I think the Doctor should remain a white male because he always has been. Because he is you know a WHITE MALE time lord. I am automatically bigoted? No, I just care that the character is a white male and thats what he should remain.

    • reverendswann

      If I can quote myself “The more I hear people make this criticism, the more difficult it becomes for me to pretend as if there is anything to it besides an open sewer of raw bigotry.”

      • Brian Sleider

        You do not get to define words. Sorry, thinking a character should remain faithful to its roots is not bigoted. People like you who toss around words like bigot, racist and sexist dilute the terms and remove the meaning from them. Grow up get off the high horse.

    • Belinda Contague

      Actually, I think he was a woman once, wasn’t he?

  • Keltari

    This topic has come up a few times in different media. I was reading one about comics, specifically the latino peter parker. I think the core of the problem is people dont like change. People have grown up with a particular view of a character and thats the image they hold. Spiderman will always be Peter Parker to me. I cant picture Superman being black, nor can I picture Luke Cage being white.

    As for the hate, well thats the internet for you. People say things they dont often mean… or sometimes do… behind the anonymity of the internet. Trolls be trollin and all.

  • WoWed

    I’m fine with them changing the race of Dr. Who, as long as he is still British. What I’m not fine with is changing the gender and sexual orientation. Does that make me sexist or homophobic? No, because i believe there are certain aspects of the character that need to remain constant in order for it to be Dr. Who.

  • Lucia Malpense

    I don’t fucking care about race or sex. I care about a part of the character is being changed. The Doctor has always been a white, British guy. I’d just be pissed if say, Tony Stark was blond in an Iron Man reboot or if Captain America was Canadian. Stop accusing people of being bigots because they don’t want characters they love to be that different.

    • Liebchen

      “Don’t you dare change my beloved white male character into a black one! I wouldn’t like him anymore!”

      “I’d be so pissed if my favorite white male character turned into a female! KEEP HIM A WHITE MALE!”

      How is that not a bigoted line of thinking?

      And I find it funny how you start off by saying that you don’t care about race or sex, but then go on a rant over how you’d be pissed if they changed the race or sex of a character. . Seems like you *do* care.

      • pokethebear

        I think there should be a new Malcolm X film with a white guy playing Malcolm because changing things like the race of the main character isn’t a big deal at all. Don’t agree with me? You must be a racist bigot……

        • spence5

          Right, because Malcolm X is a fictional character and everything…

          • pokethebear

            I’m simply pointing out that a film about Malcolm X would be based on a true story, which means details could be changed. “Based on a true story” doesn’t mean “every single detail is historically correct” there is always some creative license and that is the issue here, how much creative license you can exercise. Sure it would enrage a lot of people to make such a pointless, stupid change because Malcolm means so much to so many people but consider this, a lot of people have grown up with Doctor Who and identify him as a white british male and to them that is fine, it works and they don’t see any need to change that and to make such a visible but superficial change for the sake of pulling in viewers who currently couldn’t care less is obviously going to upset many long standing fans of the show.

            This is not bigotry, this is a form of ownership. “How dare you suggest changing the doctor? My doctor! The doctor that has been the same colour, sex and nationality since the beginning.”
            As obvious as it is that a white Malcolm X is a stupid idea, so are any of the suggested changes to Doctor Who to most long standing fans.

            Not me tho, I think that show is cheesey as sh★t and could do with a bigger effects budget.

            I was just trying to point out that messing with things people are so emotionally invested in is going to create backlash.I was asked if I was stupid for the Malcolm X thing, I’m sure that was the same reaction many Doctor Who fans had reading this article because to them the doctor simply is what they have always known him to be. That doesn’t make anyone automatically bigoted at all, it just means they like things the way they are and probably think your drive to make pointless changes to suit political correctness is an insulting joke. I don’t even like the show but I think that if you are gonna change something as fundemental as the race or gender of such a long standing character you better have a damn good reason and you better make it pay off or you could drive away long standing, loyal fans for nothing. Sure you may pick up some new fans who had no interest before but will they stick around once the novelty wears off? If they weren’t a fan before then more than likely not.

            What you end up with is a smaller fan base, less viewers and for what? To make unnecessary changes to appease one group over another.

            I just wanted to post because on this subject throwing around the word “bigot” is not justified in the slightest and is just a way to try to silence anyone who doesn’t agree with you.

            I didn’t mention the gay thing because from what I hear the doctor has been obviously bisexual at times, or have I gotten that wrong?

          • reverendswann

            I said this earlier, but now I really mean it: this is the dumbest thing I have ever read.

            Just to be clear, Dr. Who is a fictional character, Malcolm X is not.

        • Blackbelt_Jones

          ……what?…are…are you stupid?

          • reverendswann

            You, sir, are a genius.

      • Lucia Malpense

        If you stopped to read the rest of my comment properly, you’d see that it isn’t the RACE OR SEX I fucking care about, it’s that a character is being changed IN GENERAL. I gave the Iron Man and Captain America examples because they SPECIFICALLY WEREN’T about race and sex to show that it wasn’t the race and sex that annoyed me. Of course, I forgot about the plethora of stupid idiots who only choose to see what they want to in order to accuse people of being racist or sexist.

        Lemme make this crystal clear to you, okay? If say, the Black Widow was made into a man, I’d be pissed. If Miles Morales became white, I’d be pissed. If the Doctor become black or female, I’d be pissed.

        I have no double standard with this. There’s no specific race or sex that I just don’t want my favourite characters to be. Being a bigot means that you detest a certain race or sex.

        It’s the same concept as ‘I’m not racist, I hate all races equally.’

    • Jason Tadd Jackson

      Doctor who is neither white nor British, in fact he isn’t even human. He is possibly the one character whose race or sexuality can be changed without changing the character or back story. It has already been established that he changes his from everytime he “dies” so it isn’t a stretch for one of those forms to be a different race or sex.

      • reverendswann

        THANK YOU.

  • ÇℜΔÇK_ℵΙℵℑΔΔ

    Dr. Who is the epitome of lame sci-fi. It should go away. But I suppose like the last 2 Bond films which were disgustingly bad, the British audience will lap that shit up like its cocaine.

  • Rincewind54

    Doctor Who needs to be a ginger on the final transformation. I rememberone of the previous Doctor’s checking for red hair after a transformation. As for the rest the doctor seems to be getting consistantly younger with each transformation, so as great as actors and actresses are that people are proposing, this fact should be considered. Also not to sound negative but change to a different gender or race would be getting rid of a constant in the series and feel like the producers are giving into outside pressure. There is a Rowan Atkinson special on Doctor Who on youtube if you want to see what would happen with a female Doctor.

  • Linda

    Your article was amazingly well articulated and logical.

    Except it was a giant load of rubbish. other that, it was fascinating.

    I want a white, male Doctor; preferably slightly older, and Posh. Because I get distracted when I am required to stretch my “willing suspension of disbelief” stretched beyond a realistic parameter. Not because I’m a bigot.

    Your self-righteous tirade has NOTHING to do with good story telling or consistency with backstory; you’re on your own personal social agenda, and you want to intellectually demonize everyone who would prefer maintaining actual BACKSTORY and character integrity.

    By your logic, in order to shove the LGBT agenda down everyone’s throats as efficiently as possible, maybe Bart Simpson should suddenly realize that he is a girl, and needs a gender reassignment.

    Please fall off your bandwagon. And preferrably let it hit you hard on the head on the way down.

    • reverendswann

      I guess I’d forgotten that white heterosexuality and good story telling are basically synonymous.

  • kris

    So sick of people being called bigoted because they want to stick with a tradition of a friggen TV show! Get over it, if they ever make a remake of “the fresh prince” that family better be white or they are bigoted!

  • Diego

    Wow. Big time attention on this article. I say, change a character all you like. They do it all the time in comics and the results are sometimes poor, sometimes great. We’ll never find out if nobody ever tries… Think of it as an alternate universe type thing. Green Lantern is now gay btw.

  • scrambles

    bigot (ˈbɪɡət) — na person who is intolerant of any ideas other than his or her own,esp on religion, politics, or race

    simply stating an opinion does not make one a bigot. by saying that all of these people are wrong for wanting the same archetype, you have become the bigot.

Top Stories