Anyone who’s ever watched a movie about superheroes knows that generally speaking the romanticism in them is generally second or third in importance to the action and villains. That’s not the case for liberals, however, who are pissed that Marvel’s “Superman” hasn’t been bisexual or gay yet.
In a column by Alicia Powe from the DailySurge, she outlines just how ridiculous people on the left are becoming with trying to inject heir backwards ideology into every facet of American culture under the guise of inclusiveness. Well that’s great and all, but as Powe points out girls tend to like boys and boys tend to like girls, which means that a superhero is probably going to fall into that category.
In her column she points to a specific article by a writer from Salon.com, a known liberal rag that espouses some of the most ridiculous arguments on the planet, who expressed her outrage that movie depictions of Spider-Man and other superheroes are always portrayed by “straight, white men.” The article was titled “America deserves better superheroes: Why a straight, white Spider-Man is no longer a real underdog,” and was absolutely ridiculous.
The author is upset that superhorse movies haven’t caught up with the “reasonably progressive and diverse representation of real-life America” in present day comic books. She went further to say that the “mere concept of an openly LGBT character still feels like a pie-in-the-sky dream,” even though comics rarely ever focus on romantic relationship.
“Considering the fact that white male geeks already have Tony Stark, Bruce Banner, Peter Parker, Reed Richards and Charles Xavier to heroize their nerd cred on the big screen, it’s difficult to argue that they still represent some kind of oppressed minority,” she wrote. “It’s probably time to give someone else a chance.”
The whack job then went on to criticize Sony, say they’re “so resistant to change that it hadn’t even considered allowing non-white actors to audition for the role.”
From there she went on to praise the actor who plays Spiderman in the newest Sony film for wondering why the role has never been portrayed by a black actor and also wondering why a superhero can’t b openly gay or bisexual.
Andrew Garfield had said during an interview that he thought it would be groundbreaking for Peter to explore his sexuality. “So why can’t he be gay? Why can’t he be into boys? […] I’ve been obsessed with Michael B. Jordan since The Wire. He’s so charismatic and talented. It’d be even better—we’d have interracial bisexuality!”
The Salon author used his interview to politicize superheroes and said that she believed Sony would benefit from listening to Garfield’s statements.
“There is no logical reason why Mary Jane Watson couldn’t be gender flipped and played by Michael B. Jordan,” she said.
In all honesty, this has got to be the most ridiculous argument ever to come from the progressive side of the fence. Many people don’t want their children, who primarily watch superhero movies, to be exposed to something like that at such a young age and to demand that movie production companies change what has been working ever since the invention of the superhero to fit your progressive agenda is total hogwash.
Then again, what could we ever expect from people who hang their hats on the destruction of traditional American values?