Green Lantern Relaunched as Gay

[quote]four60 wrote:

[quote]kevinm1 wrote:

[quote]kevinm1 wrote:

[quote]four60 wrote:

[quote]WolBarret wrote:
Green Lantern > Batman. Just saying.

Hal Jordan FTW![/quote]

The Lanterns have more Power but the Bat is a cooler character.

Batarang > Giant Green Fist[/quote]

A pedo in a s and m outfit vs the most powerful weapon in the universe the GL wins[/quote]

Pic didn’t come out[/quote]

The ring is powerful, but lets be honest hahahah they will give that ring to anybody hahahah

[/quote]

LMAO LMAO!!!

So the Green Lantern was not already gay?

[quote]Derek542 wrote:
So the Green Lantern was not already gay?[/quote]

HA!!

Waits for WOL…

[quote]four60 wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:
So the Green Lantern was not already gay?[/quote]

HA!!

Waits for WOL…
[/quote]

Wait seriously I thought this was a known thing?

I mean his power was given as a piece of jewelry, he wears tights, and he flashes lights like glow sticks.

The more progressive move would have Shaft comin out of the closet. A black, openly ghey superhero… You kidding me??? Perfect!!!

[quote]Edevus wrote:

[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:
2. There isn’t any scientific, with out a shout of a doubt, conclusive evidence that proves that homosexuals are indeed born that way.
[/quote]

  1. Let’s imagine that homosexuality is a choice. At some point, mostly at teenager ages, a boy or a girl decides that he/she likes people of their same gender.

So this decision means :
-That the amount of potential mates he (from now on, I’ll skip the ‘she’, but it’s included) has gets reduced to 5-10%.

-That his chances to have children get limited to alternative methods (surrogacy, in vitro, adoption).

-That he’s going to be facing heavy prejudices even in the most ‘progressive’ societies. This will include not being able to marry and thus get the social benefits that heterosexual couples can have, even displaying any affection in public without being the center of attention or at worst, being killed or jailed for it like in many muslim countries. Not to mention log on your favourite forum to see that someone is comparing your love to your partner with necrophilia or beastiality. That must sting.

Seriously, who in his right mind would choose this? Why would someone in Iran or whatever choose to be homosexual? Total non-sense.

  1. Now let’s imagine that homosexuality come from abuse on childhood.

-Why are there so many homosexuals that were never abused in their youth?

-There are people who were abused on their youth and they engage in self-destructive behaviours that are of heterosexual nature.

It’s not consistant.

There may not be any scientific study that shows that homosexuals are born this way, but homosexuality is also present in animals and they are unable to make such choices. Like a person with some common sense. It’s just increasing the difficulty of your life by large margins.[/quote]

Thank you for responding with a non agitating reasonable post.
First of all…I see where you’re coming from, believe me I do, but for me it’s always going to come back to an issue of morality. If conclusive evidence on Homosexuality is revealed to be a “born with” sexual preference, how would you explain people who switch back and forth? Bisexual? Once was gay, now is straight, once was straight now is gay? OR my roomates girlfriend, a Pansexual? In my opinion, there are too many variations of sexual preference for it not to be a choice. I will wait for science to prove me wrong…but science is going to have to explain EVERY variation of sexual preference in order for consistency to be achieved in understanding why people stray from the majority.

[quote]Edevus wrote:

[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:
2. There isn’t any scientific, with out a shout of a doubt, conclusive evidence that proves that homosexuals are indeed born that way.
[/quote]

  1. Let’s imagine that homosexuality is a choice. At some point, mostly at teenager ages, a boy or a girl decides that he/she likes people of their same gender.

So this decision means :
-That the amount of potential mates he (from now on, I’ll skip the ‘she’, but it’s included) has gets reduced to 5-10%.

-That his chances to have children get limited to alternative methods (surrogacy, in vitro, adoption).

-That he’s going to be facing heavy prejudices even in the most ‘progressive’ societies. This will include not being able to marry and thus get the social benefits that heterosexual couples can have, even displaying any affection in public without being the center of attention or at worst, being killed or jailed for it like in many muslim countries. Not to mention log on your favourite forum to see that someone is comparing your love to your partner with necrophilia or beastiality. That must sting.

Seriously, who in his right mind would choose this? Why would someone in Iran or whatever choose to be homosexual? Total non-sense.

  1. Now let’s imagine that homosexuality come from abuse on childhood.

-Why are there so many homosexuals that were never abused in their youth?

-There are people who were abused on their youth and they engage in self-destructive behaviours that are of heterosexual nature.

It’s not consistant.

There may not be any scientific study that shows that homosexuals are born this way, but homosexuality is also present in animals and they are unable to make such choices. Like a person with some common sense. It’s just increasing the difficulty of your life by large margins.[/quote]

Thank you for responding with a non agitating reasonable post.
First of all…I see where you’re coming from, believe me I do, but for me it’s always going to come back to an issue of morality. If conclusive evidence on Homosexuality is revealed to be a “born with” sexual preference, how would you explain people who switch back and forth? Bisexual? Once was gay, now is straight, once was straight now is gay? OR my roomates girlfriend, a Pansexual? In my opinion, there are too many variations of sexual preference for it not to be a choice. I will wait for science to prove me wrong…but science is going to have to explain EVERY variation of sexual preference in order for consistency to be achieved in understanding why people stray from the majority.

[quote]flipcollar wrote:
It has not been tolerated by many societies in history? That’s just plain false. Crack open a book or two and read about Ancient Greece, the Renaissance period in Europe, the entire history of Asia, ancient Egypt, and ancient Rome, just to name some off the top of my head.
Just because you don’t know about homosexuality in world history doesn’t mean it’s not there.
[/quote]

NOT TO JUMP in the middle of this, but the bit about Rome, Greece, Renaisance Europe, and Egypt tolerating homosexuality is a modern myth.

Typicaly ancient societies tolerated being the active (pitching) person, but the passice (catcher) was ostracized, would lose citizenship, and could even be put to death. The “catchers” were universally slaves or like class.

Breaking this down a bit by country (I’ve cut-and-pasted for speed – sorry):

++++++++++++
Rome (pagan Rome – pre 100CE)

Roman men were free to enjoy sex with other males without a perceived loss of masculinity or social status, as long as they took the dominant or penetrative role. Acceptable male partners were slaves, prostitutes, and “entertainers” — whose lifestyle placed them in the nebulous social realm of “infamia,” excluded from the normal protections accorded a citizen even if they were technically free.

Male sodomy of another male was seen as an act of dominance/submission, not so much “sex” – think prisoners and dogs.

With this idea of dominence in mind, sex among Roman soldiers or other free men (pitching or catching), violated the Roman decorum against intercourse with another freeborn male — becaue it was improper to be dominant over another freeman (or to allow yourself to be dominated).

(Sara Elise Phang, Roman Military Service" Ideologies of Discipline in the Late Republic and Early Principate (Cambridge University Press, 2008 p. 93).

A soldier who allowed himself to be sodomized or gave oral sex to another soldier was put to death.

(Thomas A.J. McGinn, Prostitution, Sexuality and the Law in Ancient Rome (Oxford University Press, 1998 p. 40.)

+++++++++++
Greece

Greeks were effectively the same as Rome, with certain caveats — again penetrative sex was seen as demeaning for the passive partner, and outside the socially accepted norm.

(Martha C. Nussbaum, Sex and Social Justice (Oxford University Press, 1999 pp. 268, 307-308, 335)

The caveat is that Greeks preferred to commit what we would now call pedophilia, raping young boys — the cut off being when they first grew facial hair.

(Gloria Ferrari, Figures of Speech: Men and Maidens in Ancient Greece (University of Chicago Press, 2002 p. 144-5).

I can’t say any responsible person would want to follow the Greek example of molesting boys, and the romatization of the same is disgusting.

++++++++++++++++++

Egypt

Of course, today, homosexuality is punishable by death in Eqypt, as it is in most moslim countries.

Evidence of acceptance of homosexuality in ancient Eqypt is scarce, if it exists.

There are several stories/myths involving homosexual acts by Eqyptian “gods,” but they involve dominance/trickery/enslavement.

Not exactly evidence of acceptance.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++
Renaissance period in Europe

There certainly was homosexual sodomy in Europe, chiefly of the model where young apprentices “paid” for their apprenticeship by submiting to sodomy by thier masters, but it was not accepted in this heavily Roman Catholic period, and it was consistently illegal.

In fact, some of the first “labor regulation” was to protect appretences from sexual predation by their masters.

Florence was the San Fransico of the day, but sodomy was certainly illegal and not socially acceptable. For example, in Renaisance France, first-offending sodomites lost their testicles, second offenders lost their member, and third offenders were burned.

By the 1500s, sodomy was consitently a capital offence, punishable by death.

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]Edevus wrote:
I’d say that Gregron picking up my “bigotry” but ignoring the fact that the OP said that gay sex is unhealthy and seems to happen only in rest stops makes him homophobic by association, no? And homophobes are…bigots.
[/quote]

Before this morning I had only made two posts in this thread and they were both jokes. I didn’t ignore the fact that thirdruffian (NOT the OP by the way) made his comments, I just chose not to dignify them with a responses.

I don’t believe what he believes but I don’t try to force my views on him. He can believe whatever he wants, just like I can and just like you can.[/quote]

It’s true, it was thethirdruffian, I wrongly said OP.

You can believe whatever you want, but spitting lies is harmful and picking on me for a joke when that guy was saying some nasty stuff feels somehow awkward. Butt-hurt? Maybe, but I won’t deny I’m sensitive to this topic. I can’t imagine how it would be if I was gay myself.

[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:

Thank you for responding with a non agitating reasonable post.
First of all…I see where you’re coming from, believe me I do, but for me it’s always going to come back to an issue of morality. If conclusive evidence on Homosexuality is revealed to be a “born with” sexual preference, how would you explain people who switch back and forth? Bisexual? Once was gay, now is straight, once was straight now is gay? OR my roomates girlfriend, a Pansexual? In my opinion, there are too many variations of sexual preference for it not to be a choice. I will wait for science to prove me wrong…but science is going to have to explain EVERY variation of sexual preference in order for consistency to be achieved in understanding why people stray from the majority.[/quote]

I think that there are many confused people for many different reasons. I wish I had the answers, but I don’t. I know of 40, 50, 60 years old people who suddenly switch their sexual orientation. Did they really switch it? When they were young, they were educated to be in a certain way and it’s possible that you can go all your life without knowing that it’s totally possible to be in love with the same gender. And that’s how they feel, but if you are taught and educated in a certain way, it can be very hard to move away from it.

There are also confused teenagers who will do this experimenting, but I’ve got the feeling that it’s mostly young girls who do this. Why? Maybe we should look at their parents and see what is their role in the life of this girl.

But for the core of homosexuals, I really believe that they are born this way. I really don’t see teenagers deciding to go this way, especially when they know that they could be killed for it.

Our mind is malleable, but even in the absence of any sort of “manipulation”, homosexuality can happen. But also totally different views on it, like, you’re talking about your kids and they will grow up to see homosexuality as a something taboo because that’s what you are showing. Now, what will happen if any of them is homosexual? Will you try to heal them or maybe you’ll accept that it can happen?

Jewbacca, you could add about the Cathars as well. For them, homosexual sex was prefered over heterosexual sex due to being non-procreative. They had a very interesting society, including man/woman equality, lots of freedom, etc.
That was 1000 years ago and they were quite advanced when it comes to certain ideas.

They were murdered by the Pope’s troops.

EDIT Ah, you said it was a myth? It’s not. People were split into dominant/submissive type and not so much into man/woman.

[quote]Edevus wrote:
But for the core of homosexuals, I really believe that they are born this way. I really don’t see teenagers deciding to go this way, especially when they know that they could be killed for it. [/quote]

I certainly do not posit to know. There have been studies showing that at least a plurality of self-described homosexuals were molested as children and that they did not identify as homosexual until after the molestation.

http://wthrockmorton.com/2009/06/05/a-major-study-of-child-abuse-and-homosexuality-revisited/

[quote]test driven wrote:
The more progressive move would have Shaft comin out of the closet. A black, openly ghey superhero… You kidding me??? Perfect!!![/quote]

Shaft was a superhero?

Maybe Static Shock would be a better choice.

Just a few thoughts…

  1. FrozenNinja has an opinion and expresses it without being an asshole; so, I think he deserves the same in return.

  2. Marvel has handled thier gay characters the same way as any hetero couple (i.e. nothing graphic) , at least from what i’ve seen. I think kissing is as much as they’ve shown in mainstream comics.

3.It’s a fucking COMIC BOOK.

[quote]Edevus wrote:

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]Edevus wrote:
I’d say that Gregron picking up my “bigotry” but ignoring the fact that the OP said that gay sex is unhealthy and seems to happen only in rest stops makes him homophobic by association, no? And homophobes are…bigots.
[/quote]

Before this morning I had only made two posts in this thread and they were both jokes. I didn’t ignore the fact that thirdruffian (NOT the OP by the way) made his comments, I just chose not to dignify them with a responses.

I don’t believe what he believes but I don’t try to force my views on him. He can believe whatever he wants, just like I can and just like you can.[/quote]

It’s true, it was thethirdruffian, I wrongly said OP.

You can believe whatever you want, but spitting lies is harmful and picking on me for a joke when that guy was saying some nasty stuff feels somehow awkward. Butt-hurt? Maybe, but I won’t deny I’m sensitive to this topic. I can’t imagine how it would be if I was gay myself.[/quote]

I wasn’t “picking on you”… It was a joke. Sorry if it felt like I was picking on you because that wasn’t my intention, just some good natured humor. (serious)

“There’s two things I can’t stand, people who are intolerant or other peoples cultures… And the Dutch.” (kinda the joke I was going for originally)

This whole accepted/not accepted by society for thousands of years is nothing but a logical fallacy. Because something has been around a long time or is “time tested” it is therefore correct. If you don’t believe me that it’s a fallacy, google argument from age.

However if we set aside the fact that thirdruffian purported a fallacy, how good a test is society for what should be moral/acceptable? Well slavery was socially acceptable for several thousands of years and only recently was deemed unacceptable by society (relatively speaking). Does that mean slavery is moral?

[quote]Edevus wrote:

[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:

Thank you for responding with a non agitating reasonable post.
First of all…I see where you’re coming from, believe me I do, but for me it’s always going to come back to an issue of morality. If conclusive evidence on Homosexuality is revealed to be a “born with” sexual preference, how would you explain people who switch back and forth? Bisexual? Once was gay, now is straight, once was straight now is gay? OR my roomates girlfriend, a Pansexual? In my opinion, there are too many variations of sexual preference for it not to be a choice. I will wait for science to prove me wrong…but science is going to have to explain EVERY variation of sexual preference in order for consistency to be achieved in understanding why people stray from the majority.[/quote]

I think that there are many confused people for many different reasons. I wish I had the answers, but I don’t. I know of 40, 50, 60 years old people who suddenly switch their sexual orientation. Did they really switch it? When they were young, they were educated to be in a certain way and it’s possible that you can go all your life without knowing that it’s totally possible to be in love with the same gender. And that’s how they feel, but if you are taught and educated in a certain way, it can be very hard to move away from it.

There are also confused teenagers who will do this experimenting, but I’ve got the feeling that it’s mostly young girls who do this. Why? Maybe we should look at their parents and see what is their role in the life of this girl.

But for the core of homosexuals, I really believe that they are born this way. I really don’t see teenagers deciding to go this way, especially when they know that they could be killed for it.

Our mind is malleable, but even in the absence of any sort of “manipulation”, homosexuality can happen. But also totally different views on it, like, you’re talking about your kids and they will grow up to see homosexuality as a something taboo because that’s what you are showing. Now, what will happen if any of them is homosexual? Will you try to heal them or maybe you’ll accept that it can happen?[/quote]

If any of my (future) kids became homo I’d still love them with all my heart. I would still reach out to them and let them know I love em but it wouldn’t change the fact that I’d tell them it is and will always be wrong…and it would break my heart terribly.

That wouldn’t stop me from hanging out with them, or inviting them to thanksgiving or whatever. Love conquers all. If I hate them and push them away, how can I ever have them see my point of view. That’s why I was upset with the other poster calling me a bigot. You love the person and dislike the sin. Pushing people away who are gay is a wrong approach.

[quote]imhungry wrote:
Just a few thoughts…

  1. FrozenNinja has an opinion and expresses it without being an asshole; so, I think he deserves the same in return.

  2. Marvel has handled thier gay characters the same way as any hetero couple (i.e. nothing graphic) , at least from what i’ve seen. I think kissing is as much as they’ve shown in mainstream comics.

3.It’s a fucking COMIC BOOK.[/quote]

Well thank you kind sir

[quote]four60 wrote:

[quote]test driven wrote:
The more progressive move would have Shaft comin out of the closet. A black, openly ghey superhero… You kidding me??? Perfect!!![/quote]

Shaft was a superhero?

Maybe Static Shock would be a better choice.[/quote]

Shaft just sounds better. You are correct