shannonl5
2 years ago1,000+ Views

"What are we so scared of?"

It's not an easy question to answer. Last June Gawker wrote about the leaked emails between Sony and Marvel which outlined the character traits Spider-Man would have. One thing was very clear: neither company would approve of a nonwhite Peter Parker, nor would they green light a homosexual version of the character. Taking that into consideration, it's unlikely that they'd agree to a pansexual version either.

"We're scared of things that aren't us,"

Garfield told Mic. "Love is love. Skin is skin. Flesh is flesh. We're all wrapped in the same thing. I have no preference." This sentiment sounds incredibly similar to the definition of the word pansexual (Via Google):
"Not limited in sexual choice with regard to biological sex, gender, or gender identity."
It's amazing to hear this kind of positive news from one of the actors, but the leaked emails indicate that this kind of discussion just isn't happening among the people who are actually empowered to make these kinds of decisions.

So, just what ARE we so scared of?

At this point, it seems like people will see a Spider-Man movie no matter what. That's not a bad thing! The character is incredible, and the story about redemption and responsibility is one that so many people can relate to. Does it really matter if the person behind the mask doesn't look like the Peter Parker we're used to?
31 comments
View more comments
@jibarito @VeronicaArtino @ xxchicharitoxx @InPlainSight @rodiziketan what do you think about this? Would you be interested in seeing a version of Spider-Man that's pansexual?
2 years ago·Reply
@shannonl5 I think it's really important that people growning up should be able to see superheros as accessible to them, and what we have today is kinda Caucasian hetrosexual and usually male dominated group....I know it shouldn't be that way....all for diversity, either in new characters or the reinvention of existing ones.
2 years ago·Reply
I feel like they've already changed his character to fit in, and have barely done anything with it. Changing it over and over again would turn fans away from the character, in my personal opinion.
2 years ago·Reply
@jibarito what you're saying makes sense. I personally would like to either see a new character with this identity, or more emphasis placed on characters who have already been written that way. Mystique for example is canonically bisexual (as was Wolverine in a comic au...) but that aspect of their lives was pretty much ignored in the films. I think what Garfield was trying to say (and I could be mistaken, obviously I don't know him lol) was that there's not any good reason why a character as big as Spider-Man hasn't been depicted this way. Since there's so much nostalgia attached to the character maybe it does make more sense to start fresh instead
2 years ago·Reply
@shannonl5 true, I can see and understand that aspect of it as well
2 years ago·Reply
30
31
6