Yeah but that’s not a lot. I can’t find a number for it, but it doesn’t seem to be more than a few hundred in Charlottesville. They’re not going to take over shit.
What a fool.
Between neo-nazis, the alt-right, white supremacists, and the Klan, there’s enough of them. We also just had a racist national campaign ad aired nationally - https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2018/11/05/controversial-trump-immigration-ad/1889608002/
Of all the characters in comics, do LGBT fans really want to claim the Joker?
The Joker being in a relationship with Harley wouldn’t eliminate the possibility of the character being queer, but, yeah, I think it’s more a more harmful form of representation for LGBT readers if he is, given the trope of the Depraved Bixexual.
Well there are three of them so one may be gay. And given how crazy he is I think it’s probably more complex than simply gay or straight. But honestly, does it really matter?
Does it matter in terms of the Joker or with fictional characters, in general?
I was specifically speaking about the Joker.
Damn that’s so dumb… also, kinda funny how in trying to claim his queerness they default to trite stereotypes about gay men… “oh so he wears lipstick? he sometimes dresses in drag? he must be a homo”…
Plus I agree with the question, is that really the character they should be trying to claim? Also, what would that mean about Batman? Is Batman the biggest, most violent homophobe then?
Ugh… let’s not open that can of worms… u_u
I’m sure DC doesn’t want to be dragged into the current culture war. They’ve been happy watching Marvel making asses of themselves for the past few years.
It’s all nonsense really, built on something Neal Adams once said and as much as I love his artwork he talks a lot of shit. The Joker is a character where sexuality is really not important. Maybe I haven’t read enough but the theme I always got from the Harley relationship is she’s besotted with him and he doesn’t care despite her being young and beautiful.
He’s an irrational character, that’s the point of him, and going into his sexuality either way makes him less interesting because that’s working on rational motivation.
It is a little off to discuss these characters as if they have their own psychological profiles when they are pretty much Dick Tracy villains. They express psychological archetypes on the page - they aren’t like real people.
This is true as well and a glaring error in what the woman quoted in the article said… The introduction of Harley didn’t really establish Joker’s heterosexuality, because I don’t think I’ve ever seen the Joker display any love for her (or even affection)… the whole thing with Harley is that she’s also crazy and is infatuated with the Joker while he just uses her, 'cause he’s a psychopath and that’s what psycopaths do.
Joker and Harley is not (and has never been) a love story, it’s a really sick terrible story of mental health and abuse… and precisely, one of Harley’s growth arcs over the years has been getting rid of her obsession with the Joker… so yeah, that article, as per usual, is just BS clickbait… =/
It can be effective when the Joker uses sex and sexuality in a sinister way, as part of his arsenal - quite a few writers have experimented with it, Grant Morrison comes to mind and also Azzarello in the Joker graphic novel.
But as with anything the Joker says or does, can you ever really trust anything he says or does as being the truth about him?
It’s even more ambiguous if you take the interpretation that he re-invents himself with a completely new personality every so often, as there’s potentially a whole new approach to sexuality that goes with each one.
That’s one crap article, written probably out of boredom.
I am viewing Harley’s contribution to the rogue gallery as creators saying - even Joker has right to screw. Considering with how many women Batman sleeps, placing Harley in just to give some contrast between Batman and Joker.
And Joker to me is rather asexual character. There have been discussion whether he raped Barbara or not, but to me, he’d only use sex to prove a point. Because this guy is interested in creating madness and mayhem, along the way, pissing off the Bats.
I enjoy her more as a character in her own right, rather than as an extension of the Joker (which I agree is how she’s used at times).
Some of the most fun stories with her have been completely divorced from the Joker. (I read quite a lot of the DC Superhero Girls comics with my daughter and she’s presented as completely her own character there, separate to the Joker altogether. She’s a lot of fun and it works very well for those books.)
That’s not to say there’s no value in exploring the relationship with the Joker, though - Sean Murphy’s White Knight gets stuck into it extensively and has a very interesting take on it.
This is more or less how the Joker OGN handles it. He uses it as a method of punishment. It’s very unpleasant.
The Joker is the poster boy for unpleasant. At least when he’s taken seriously. Which he isn’t always, he can be played for laughs.
I’m interested in the new movie because I’m interested in what aspect of him they want to look at?