Archie comics to introduce openly gay character

[dark-weezing.livejournal.com]

I have no real opinion about the matter, but I'm sure some of you might with the injection of the LBGT agenda. Special thanks to The Four Color Media Monitor blog. (For those unfamiliar, it's a good conservative opining site about today's modern comics.)

Link: http://www.archiecomics.com/blog/news/2010/04/archie-comics-introduces-first-openly-gay-character.html

Update: Our mod, sopdetly, via the Comments, poses a few essential questions:

No, but seriously. I'll ask it here because I trust y'all: What is this gay agenda I hear so much about, from your perspective? What exactly do you think all the gays are getting together and plotting?

And to be specific to the topic in the post, what about a long-running comic series suggests "GAY AGENDA" to you? Is it simply that they've put an openly gay character into the series? Is it that they're making a point to make sure everyone knows?

Fair questions all, so feel free to address them in your own comments, as well. As I type this, Mark Steyn is referencing this on Rush, now. How about that?

Comments

[sopdetly.livejournal.com]

You know, I've identified as GLBT for 4 years now, and I still have not received my complimentary agenda I've heard so much about. I have to-do and shopping lists I need to be putting in there! Who do I contact about this oversight?


No, but seriously. I'll ask it here because I trust y'all: What is this gay agenda I hear so much about, from your perspective? What exactly do you think all the gays are getting together and plotting?

And to be specific to the topic in the post, what about a long-running comic series suggests "GAY AGENDA" to you? Is it simply that they've put an openly gay character into the series? Is it that they're making a point to make sure everyone knows?

[dark-weezing.livejournal.com]

I'll meet you half way and edit in your comment into the entry, as it's a fair question to ask. How does that sound?

(Can't type, today. Bah.)

[dark-weezing.livejournal.com]

Done, as I wanted to do it, anyway. Hopefully, it will answer at least some of your questions.

[shezan.livejournal.com]

They did not send you your agenda? WOE!

... can I contribute?

[scarletwalk.livejournal.com]

I think that people may label it as a "gay agenda" if the readers are reminded constantly about the character's sexual orientation. If that's going to be the case, then I think it's political correctness fail.

I'll roll my eyes if this kind of thing happens: "Hey look guys, it's gay Kevin! Hi, gay Kevin!" Hopefully Archie comics won't take this kind of approach, because I think that it would just reinforce labeling. The last thing the gay community needs to to only have token gay characters appear in the media.

Personally, I'm not opposed to an openly gay comic book character. I'll only be annoyed if that's the only characteristic the character has, though. Someone shouldn't be defined only by their sexual orientation.

[spikedpunch.livejournal.com]

You are not the only one, I have yet to get even one memo.

from conservapedia

[afa-mom.livejournal.com]

it is a set of beliefs and objectives designed to promote and even mandate acceptance and approval of homosexuality, and the strategies used to implement such. This article notes that the goals and means of this movement include indoctrinating students in public school, restricting the free speech of opposition, obtaining special treatment for homosexuals, distorting Biblical teaching and science, and interfering with freedom of association.

[machiko.livejournal.com]

Personally, I could care less and I'm just amazed that all those Archie comics are ongoing. Who reads those, anyway? I've never met someone who was a big fan.

[clearlypellucid.livejournal.com]

I like how stereotypically metro the character looks. I feel like the GLBT community should be more offended than anyone.

[dark-weezing.livejournal.com]

I thought EW declared "metro" to be an now unpopular look, according to their best of 2009 issue? Man, I'm out of the loop.

[telemann.livejournal.com]

Who reads Archie anymore?

[dark-weezing.livejournal.com]

That was the first question that popped in my head when I first read that.

[mosinging1986.livejournal.com]

I'm with those who were surprised these comics are still around! (Who knows, maybe there's a huge fandom that I'm just not aware of.)

Since I don't read these, I don't have a personal interest one way or the other. But I'll throw this question out for thought: If homosexuality is no big deal, why does it always have to be announced? After all, when's the first, last or any time someone "came out" as being heterosexual? When has there ever been a Straight Pride parade?

[arkadelos.livejournal.com]

I know. I hope having a homosexual character is not an attempt to pull up ratings and gain readership. If so, that seems to be about pandering or about being used.

[sopdetly.livejournal.com]

When has there ever been a Straight Pride parade?

I can answer to this, if you would like an answer, and do so from the perspective of someone who did once wonder the same thing. It's sort of long and rambling and not quite on the topic of the post, but I wanted to offer. :)

[arkadelos.livejournal.com]

Okay, I just found an AP article about the openly gay character, and I found the inclusion of this character to be offensive because he will...

"win the affection of Veronica and wrestle over how to gently rebuff her flirtations."

If you have a homosexual man, do NOT give him a heterosexual female love interest and do NOT give him a heterosexual woman with a big crush on him! From the article, it sounds like he serves no purpose for the comics except to split apart Archie and Veronica, a plot device best suited for a new heterosexual character anyway.

Testing pic...

[arkadelos.livejournal.com]

(http://pics.livejournal.com/arkadelos/pic/0001y86d/)

[spikedpunch.livejournal.com]

As a gay male, I see this offensive in that this is promoting sexual harrassment against gays. Girls, you had your chance early on and lost it, get over it. Find another victim of your overly aggressive sexual predatory behavior.

[spikedpunch.livejournal.com]

I guess sarcasm is just too much for some people to handle.

[shaolin.livejournal.com]

This just strikes me as being the desperate attempts of an outdated comic struggling to remain relevent in modern times (like when Dagwood and Blondie talk about the internet or cell phones *shudder*). There was also a recent attempt to give the Betty and Veronica comics a shoujo style (http://www.homemademech.com/manga-reviews/betty-and-veronica-double-digest/379/) to attract more readers.

Since we can assume that the Archie Joke-Generating Laugh Unit 3000 (http://joshreads.com/?p=1827)'s web crawlers discovered shoujo manga, it might've also come across shonen-ai or maybe a cache of Good Omens slash fics and generated Kevin Keller.

[tulleskirt.livejournal.com]

In response to all the questions over who even reads this stuff anymore...well, I was pretty obsessed with them when I was little, and now my younger sister (who's 12) really loves them, and my OTHER sister (8), is starting to look at 'em too. I think they just seem to have a sort of invisible fanbase because...well, they're not like superhero comics, you outgrow the pretty swiftly. They're not the deepest things around, but they're fun for a few years.

As for this new character, I don't have a problem with it. I'd agree with what others have said in that I hope he's more than just KEVIN THE GAY GUY, but come on--this is Archie Comics, not exactly the land of deep characterization. :p

[jenny-wildcat.livejournal.com]

As long as the comics don't pull something like "Everyone in the world is really gay and the oppressive Christian/western/right-wing/whatever-supposedly-anti-gay-worldview-is-in-vogue-this-week makes us deny it against our will" (like was proclaimed in more than one of my literature classes in college - bleagh), I'm okay with it.

Mark Steyn was talking about this on Rush's show (as was mentioned) and he said something along the lines that "coming out of the closet" is a way to score political points and in some campaign somewhere a candidate "outed" a self-proclaimed bisexual man as really being heterosexual. That made me roll my eyes because why should you only identify yourself by your sexuality? It's like people who voted for Obama just so they could say they voted for the first black president - yippee-skip, the guy still has to govern. Does a person's skin color or sexual orientation (or even gender) automatically make them a good president, or even a good person?

There are gay people in the world - I get it. And I'm fine with them being my friends and neighbors. I don't hate them and I don't do/say cruel things to them. I don't condone their lifestyle, but I don't condemn them for it either. As long as they let me live my life the way I choose, I will let them do whatever they want.

But something totally unrelated makes me laugh about all this - the character's name is Kevin Keller. And I actually know a Kevin Keller in real life. And no, he's not gay - he's got some interesting ideas about life, but he's definitely not gay.

[sopdetly.livejournal.com]

Re: the outed bisexual candidate, that was in Philly. He apparently brought it up because he was looking to get an endorsement from a GLBT group, one who happened to be already endorsing his opponent (the incumbent, a straight woman). She also leveled other accusations against him (that he's a trust-fund kid who's never worked a day in his life, both of which he's denied). So maybe his sexuality alone isn't enough to qualify him for office, but if he's planning to support GLBT issues and wants the people who might also support those issues to know it by getting an endorsement from this group, outing himself as bi isn't totally out of the blue.

What really gets me, is that I don't think anyone has the right to assume they know someone else's sexuality. Heck, I'm sometimes unsure of my own. Unless he's stated before that he thinks fags are disgusting, then there's no call to attack his chosen identity. And I would think that someone who gets an endorsement from a gay group would understand that.

/wordvomit

[dark-senshi.livejournal.com]

_{There are gay people in the world - I get it. And I'm fine with them being my friends and neighbors. I don't hate them and I don't do/say cruel things to them. I don't condone their lifestyle, but I don't condemn them for it either. As long as they let me live my life the way I choose, I will let them do whatever they want.}

That sums up my feelings exactly.

[fi-harkness.livejournal.com]

I couldn't care less about the character being gay. (And that should tell you a lot about me, seeing as I how I'm very very Catholic.)

What DOES bother me is he's being used as a token. I've always been against characters just being there for the sake of filling some race/gender/sexuality quota. When that happens, they never strike me as real people, ya know? They're just Token (like in South Park!).

Buffy the Vampire Slayer has the best example (in my opinion) of how to bring about a gay character without it being....Lame. I loved how they made Willow a lesbian on Buffy because it was natural, it wasn't some quick change made for falling ratings, and they didn't rub it in your face constantly. She was, and will always be Willow: Buffy and Xander's best friend; not Willow the Gay Witch.

I feel sorry for this poor character already. I really do.