Dean Cain Slams Superman Coming Out as Bisexual: “It Isn’t Bold or Brave”
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/general-news/dean-cain-superman-bisexual-1235030248/
shareIt's a pr stunt
share
MovieChat Forums > Dean Cain Discussion > Dean Cain Slams Superman Coming Out as B...
In my opinion too, I absolutely agree.
shareI agree with Cain. It's just bandwagoning, as he calls it. It might have been a brave creative choice a couple of decades ago, but today, when an enormous number of formerly straight, white characters in comics and other media have been substituted with "diversity" replacements, it's just the latest in a long line, and there's nothing new or bold about it.
I read now that George Takei has just slammed Dean Cain for his remarks on Twitter, writing "“So Dean Cain apparently is upset that the new Superboy in the comics is bisexual. I used to be upset that Dean Cain was straight but he has definitely cured me of that.”
I'm sure that heterosexual Dean Cain is going to lose tons of sleep knowing that a washed up octagenarian leftist actor, known today chiefly for his ongoing, bitter hatred of a more talented and more famous former costar, might no longer be sexually attracted to him. I don't know how Cain will cope with such a devastating blow.
Lol, I have no idea how Takei thought that was some kind of diss.😆
shareI'm 100% for representation with Superheroes, but why? As a bi individual myself, I would love to see a new hero. I hate, hate it when to create something diverse, they can't be bothered to write something new, just change up something we already know (and possibly love). It's really getting annoying.
shareMaybe the doing away with the traditional depiction is as much of the motivation as creating something diverse --i.e., revising the old is as important as representation. I doubt it's about lazy writing since new comic characters have been churned out all the time.
shareMaybe I'm just a little irritated because there has been such a lack of originality for sometime, and so many just keep getting reinvented. I guess there wouldn't be as much visibility if it were just a new character, but it's still frustrating.
shareI agree with you, but I don't think representation is the only goal. It's as if a sacrifice has to be offered now.
shareThe thing is, those new characters are all about what skin color they have, who they have sex with, and what's in between their legs. Nothing substantial about them. Then when they fail, writers fall back to changing popular characters to fit their agenda.
Anime and Manga are able to churn out new characters all the time. Sure, they might share alot of the same tropes we've seen before, but they're still new characters. On the subject of superheros, look at My Hero Academia and One Punch Man. All original characters, many of them popular, each with their own fanbase. Japan has also featured strong women and LGBTs, many of them likable without the pandering you'd see in America and Europe. Even when Anime and manga have gotten political, it's almost never about real-world politics, there's no push for inclusion or diversity, nothing about women's rights or LGBT rights. The best part is that Japan makes its content for its own people, and it's still able to draw in many foreign fans. If that isn't inclusion, then I don't know what is.
Western writers don't know how to be fun anymore. They think escapism is bad and people MUST be aware of everything going on in real life as if just being aware will make a difference. These writers also confuse "relatable" with "self-insert" and think that unless a character looks and/or acts EXACTLY like a particular person, that person won't like the character. As with Moviechat user sslssg, I'm also bisexual, and I think it's stupid that Tim Drake and Jon Kent are bi. I'm fine with more representation when it's done right, but it hasn't been done right, not for a while now. I'm not constantly looking out for characters that are like me, I'm looking for characters that are likable. I don't wanna read about me, I wanna read about someone else. I want to root for that person, watch him or her grow and be better than who they were at the start of the story. Depending on the type of story, such as a power-fantasy or something, I may even want to vicariously live through that character.
The last bi character I liked was Jack Harkness from Doctor Who. I thought they handled his sexuality perfectly and fluidly, but it came AFTER he was established as a supporting character and as a flirtatious time-travelling agent. I also like John Constantine. But today? it's all about left-wing agendas, and it's ruining comics, sci-fi, fantasy, movies, games, comics, books, everything.
It's not the writers as much as the forces that now compel the writers.
shareOh, it’s the writers too. There are people that LOVE writing crap like this.
But yes, they were hired by these forces in the first place since they no longer seek talent but activists, so it’s a partnership made in hell.
We may never know what they really love. If that's the ticket to breaking in or blowing up, you might just be wearing a costume that resembles this latest fashion.
shareI HONESTLY WAS NOT SURE WHERE I STOOD ON THIS TOPIC...BUT AFTER READING YOUR RESPONSES...I FIND MYSELF BEING BOTHERED BY THIS ONE...AWESOME,WELL THOUGHT OUT RESPONSES AS USUAL.👍🏾😘
shareI don't want to be bothered by it, because I love having more representation for Bi individuals. I'm just torn on how I feel.
shareIt was alright until he descended into Islamaphobia.
shareHow is it Islamophobia when he notes that in some Islamic countries, they'll throw you off a building for being gay. That's true. It's not slander or libel, when the bad things they are saying about you are not false.
shareIt also happens in plenty of non-Islamic countries too, it sounds like he’s just singling out Muslims for something that happens everywhere.
shareNo, it's not happening everywhere. There are 69 countries in the world today where homosexuality is still criminalized. Nearly half of them are in Africa, and most of them are either Muslim, or have large, if not majority Muslim populations. And of all these countries, laws against homosexuality are not evenly penalized. If you are homosexual Barbados, you may be sentenced to prison (though that law is under review and likely to be repealed). In Sri Lanka, you don't have much to worry about; it's still illegal, but rarely if ever enforced. Ditto Samoa, prison up to seven years, but the law is not enforced these days. In Taliban Afghanistan, or theocratic Iran, they will kill you, for being gay. And the more literal any Muslim country's interpretation of the Quran is, the more strictly it follows Sharia law, the more dangerous -- and possibly lethal -- it is there for anyone that happens to be gay.
It really does look to me like Evan Sayet was right when he said "...in order to hold onto his ideology the Neo-Liberal needs to intentionally ignore -- pretend he doesn't know -- things that he really does know."
I think you need to do more research and find out how many Islamic governments have actually given someone the death penalty for being gay. And you would find that in the last 20-30+ years there have only been a handful of cases, and they were in Saudi Arabia.
Half of the countries where homosexuality is outlawed are Muslim, the other half are Hindu/Buddhist/Christian.
So I reiterate: gay people are also killed and imprisoned in non-Islamic countries.
in order to hold onto his ideology the Neo-Liberal needs to intentionally ignore -- pretend he doesn't know -- things that he really does know
Well for one, I don’t think that guy knows what neo-liberal means. What does the free market have to do with this?
Secondly, there is nothing in the Quran that actually endorsed throwing gays off rooftops or killing gay people, it just says it’s a sin. It’s like saying all Christians want to kill gays. share
I think you need to do more research... you would find that in the last 20-30+ years there have only been a handful of cases, and they were in Saudi Arabia.
Factually incorrect. Hassan Afshar, 19, was hanged for it in Arak Prison in Iran's Markazi Province on 07/18/15. 3 men, known only by their initials, were hanged on 09/04/11 in the south-western city of Ahvaz. In the Islamic State that grew up in the power vacuum in Iraq, gays were throws from rooftops -- not that it was a recognized state, but they didn't care about that. The theocrats running it would execute you just for being gay.
Half of the countries where homosexuality is outlawed are Muslim, the other half are Hindu/Buddhist/Christian.
And which of the Hindu/Buddhist/Christian ones have, and enforce, the death penalty for it?
So I reiterate: gay people are also killed and imprisoned in non-Islamic countries.
Which countries? Be specific.
Secondly, there is nothing in the Quran that actually endorsed throwing gays off rooftops or killing gay people, it just says it’s a sin. It’s like saying all Christians want to kill gays.
No it isn't. It's not just what's in a religion's scriptures, it's also how it's interpreted. And we all know -- you know -- that in most Christian countries, certainly in the developed world, nothing is going to happen to you if you're gay, despite what's in the book of Leviticus. Not true in Iran, Saudia Arabia, Nigeria, Afghanistan, et al.
Same thing with criticism of the religion. You can draw cartoons of Christ all the live long day. No one will do more than write angry letters. Draw cartoons of Muhammad, and you will literally need bodyguards. Only one religion is stifling criticism today with credible threats of violence, and we all know which one it is. share
Well I can tell you’re a raging Islamaphobe, and facts obviously don’t speak to you.
Factually incorrect. Hassan Afshar, 19, was hanged for it in Arak Prison in Iran's Markazi Province on 07/18/15.
He was hanged for having rape charges filed against him. Not for “homosexuality.” The fact you can’t even be bothered to research your own evidence speaks volumes. I’m just going to ignore you other examples because they’re most likely just as dubious.
And which of the Hindu/Buddhist/Christian ones have, and enforce, the death penalty for it?
Why is being killed any worse than being tortured and locked away for the rest of your life? Also which Islamic countries actually ENFORCE the death penalty for honosexuality (as in have a recorded trial and execution solely for homosexuality). Give examples.
Which countries? Be specific.
Nah. Just trust the fact that I’m right. Or Google it.
that in most Christian countries, certainly in the developed world, nothing is going to happen to you if you're gay
Developed world maybe. Rest of the world it’s very common no matter what religion. South America has some of the highest rates of murders of LGBTQs. So….
Draw cartoons of Muhammad, and you will literally need bodyguards.
Lmao, slight over-generalization. You’re reading too much into sensationalized news stories.
Lemme guess, you’re white and live in the Western world?
share
Well I can tell you’re a raging Islamaphobe...
Ad hominem fallacy. And you can't tell anything.
He was hanged for having rape charges filed against him. Not for “homosexuality.”
And the defendant said the relations were consensual. So of course it's beyond contestation that Iran acted justly, and not possible that the other party in the act, say, claimed rape to escape being charged himself. No that could never happen in a country that criminalizes homosexuality.
Why is being killed any worse than being tortured and locked away for the rest of your life?
In other words you can't name a Christian country that is putting homosexuals to death. That's what I thought.
Nah. Just trust the fact that I’m right. Or Google it.
Nope. Not how it works. The burden of proof is on the one making the claim. You provide your own supporting evidence.
Developed world maybe... South America has some of the highest rates of murders of LGBTQs. So….
Are they judicial? Last time I checked, there is a different between crimes committed by individuals, and legally sanctioned acts carried out by governments. Nice try though.
Lmao, slight over-generalization. You’re reading too much into sensationalized news stories.
Uh, no. In 2005 a Danish paper publied 12 cartoons. The cartoonists immediately started receiving death threats, and there were worldwide protests in which 250 people died. Several Western embassies were attacked. French paper Charlie Hebdo republished the cartoons, and in 2015, two Islamist gunmen, citing the cartoons as their motive attacked the paper's office and murdered 12 people.
Meanwhile, an American artist puts a crucifix in a jar of urine, and... No riots. No bodies.
Lemme guess, you’re white and live in the Western world?
Ad hominem. share
Ad hominem fallacy
Not an ad hominem, considering it’s relevant to the conversation and you’re making a lot of generalizations about Muslims.
No that could never happen in a country that criminalizes homosexuality.
Doesn’t matter. You claimed Iran had him hanged for homosexuality. The charge was rape. He could have just as easily been a straight man
In other words you can't name a Christian country that is putting homosexuals to death
And in other words you can’t articulate why someone being locked away in prison and tortured is any better than being executed?
Are they judicial?
Does it matter? Last I checked, the government sanctioning a death is not any worse than individuals carrying out vigilantism. Btw, ISIS throwing people off rooftops is also vigilantism, considering they don’t hold people to trial. So now you’re a hypocrite. Nice.
burden of proof
Oh you’re going to trot out that old cliche. Let me just do your research for you since you’re so lazy to understand common knowledge. Here: https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=countries+where+homosexuality+is+illegal
Uh, no.
Alright, so you’re cherry picking a couple of sensationalized news stories that were beaten to death by the media. Wow, 250 people died worldwide you say? More people die in car crashes in a given month in your state. You’re basing the actions of an entire religion on .0001% of the population? Nice going pal. Also the Charlie Hebdo magazine editors were mostly sh*tty people. But you’re still silly; terrorist attacks by Muslims in the Western world are a small minority compared to other demographics. The majority of terrorist attacks occur in the Middle East, because that’s where we’ve been bombing it to sh*t for the past 20 years. In reality the US government is the largest global terrorist group.
And you’re seriously arguing that no one has been killed in the US by a deranged “Christian”? share
Of course is a publicity stunt. Has anybody actually read the Recent Jon Kent series? Its boring, its like the series was inspired by a twitter feed. Its sad because the same writer Tom Taylor writes Nightwing and its been awesome so far. Taylor knows his superman is trash and rather go out with some points.
Jon Kent is gonna become Iceman or Alan Scott. 15 seconds of fame and nothing happens
I DON'T NORMALLY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS CRAP.
THIS IS KIND OF STUPID THOUGH...DEFINITE FACEPALM MOMENT FOR SOMEBODY.