sign in sign up
<<
Home , Allan Heinberg, Bamf, Blood Brothers (comics), Chaste (Marvel Comics), Edwin Jarvis, Flashback (comics)

Table of Content

Introduction......

Chapter I: The Misrepresentation...... 1

1. vs. ...... 3 2. ...... 7 3. Freedom Ring...... 9 4. ...... 11 5. vs. YMCA...... 13 6. Superior ...... 18

Chapter II: Coming Out As a : Queerness in X-men Comics...... 22

1. Legacy Virus – the Image of AIDS in Comics...... 24 2. How (Not) To Be A Mutant – Acceptance And Self-acceptance...... 29

Chapter III: and Gender Transgression in the ...... 33

1. The Case of vs. ...... 34 2. The Case of Sam Wilson and the Love Interest...... 38 3. The Case of Peggy Carter and ...... 42 4. The Slut-shaming of Iron Man...... 45

Chapter IV: New teams, new representation...... 49

1. Rainbow Lesbians And Genderfluid Aliens – ...... 50 2. Am I the Only One Straight Here - Young And ...... 54

Conclusion...... 64

Works Cited...... 73

Primary Sources...... 73 Secondary Sources...... 80

English Resume...... 85

České Resumé...... 87 INTRODUCTION

In this work, I want to examine the way – across its different incarnations – approaches the issue of representation. The intent is not to catalog every queer character that have ever existed in Marvel Comics, but to examine the key or significant instances of both direct queer representation or a metaphorical depiction of these issues. These examples are both positive and those that can be seen as stereotypical, misinterpreting or simply unfortunate.

The first chapter records the instances where Marvel either introduced character as queer or hinted on this possibility, but the final execution was far from ideal. The first character that is analyzed is Jean-Paul Baubier, alias Northstar, from the comics Alpha

Flight, whose history highlights several issues of queer representation. Baubier was originally meant to be an openly gay character, but an intervention from Marvel executives prevented this from being revealed until much later. The way in which he is

“outed” then highlights another issue of queer representation – the tendency to turn the character's sexuality into the central point of their narrative and their sole motivation. Finally, he is killed by a considerably more popular, heterosexual character.

The second character examined in this chapter is Johnny Bart, the main character of the comics Rawhide Kid. He was originally created in 1955 and published by the predecessor of the modern Marvel Comics, the .

Important for this thesis, however, are the miniseries Rawhide Kid vol.3: Slap Leather and Rawhide Kid vol.4: The Sensational Seven, published in 2003. Here, the originally heterosexual Bart is reimagined as gay. The character was surrounded by controversy, both due to this change, but also due to the Marvel's decision to keep Rawhide Kid in a mature-only inprint and to annul their decision about Bart's sexuality. On his character, I want to explore the issues of reimagining an already existing character as queer, as well as the stereotype of queerness as something inherently sexualized and “unsuitable for minors”.

In contrast with Rawhide Kid, where a preexisting character was reimagined,

Freedom Ring, created in 2006 by Robert Kirkman, was created as a queer character from his beginning. This is often presented as a better alternative to “revealing” the sexuality of characters previously presumed to be straight, as such a change is perceived as “disrespectful towards the character” by some. The issues of depicting heterosexuality as a default state notwithstanding, there are other problems surrounding the creation of such a character. Like Northstar, Freedom Ring was killed off by a well established heterosexual character. Unlike him, however, Freedom Ring had been planned to be killed from the very start of his miniseries.

The next category of a failed queer representation I want to address shortly are jokes. Sexuality of such a character is only meant to be a punch line and is even presented as something degrading. This is examined on the case of Castle, aka

Punisher, in Wolverine Vol 2 #186 (2003). In this story, Punisher is beaten by Wolverine and, as a final act of humiliation, “outed” as gay. To make this situation worse, the story itself was written as a revenge to author Garth Ennis, who let Punisher to brutally defeat

Wolverine in Punisher Vol. 5 #17. The possibility of being gay is thus presented as humiliating not only by the characters, but also by the author.

The last two sub-chapters are concerned with characters in which queerness is depicted as a sign of their villainy. First of them are the gay rapists who attacked the main hero in the short story “...A Very Personal Hell”, published in 1980 in the Hulk! magazine. While these villains never reappears in any other comics, they highlight the issues connected with casting explicitly queer character as villains in a space with little to no queer representation.

The next sub-chapter then examines Tony Stark alias Iron Man, as depicted in the 2014 – 2015 series Superior Iron Man, written by Tom Taylor. This series rewrites Iron Man, one of the oldest heroes of Marvel, as a villain after a universe-wide event reversed moral alignments of some of the characters. As mentioned in the chapter

3.4., there are hints in his previous characterization that would support this reading.

However, Stark has never been canonically confirmed as queer. It is thus problematic that his queer-coding has become more prominent after he was recasted as a villain.

In the second chapter, I want to look into the way the X-Men franchise use mutation as a metaphor for queerness and the issues of the queer community. X-Men have been used throughout the years to talk about different social issues – there is an often quoted and discussed parallel between the African-American civil rights movement leaders, Martin Luther King an Malcolm X, and the mutant leaders Charles

Xavier and Eric Lensherr. I want to focus on the storylines in which the parallels with the issues of the queer community are especially noticeable.

In the first sub-chapter, I focus on the storyline dealing with the Legacy virus story arc. This arc, which spans from the late 90s to the early 2000s, mirrors the narrative surrounding the HIV virus. While the story of a fictional virus helped

Marvel to comment on the real life issue, their approach was not unproblematic.

I examine how this arc repeats certain harmful discourse from the mainstream

HIV/AIDS narrative, and the specific issues arising from the way Legacy virus is framed in the narrative. The second sub-chapter focuses on the issues of acceptance and self-acceptance that surround the storyline focused on the “mutant cure” - a fictional chemical able to suppress any manifestation of the mutant gene. Mutations manifest differently in each individual and the reaction of both the public and oneself to the mutation differs accordingly. This allow the writers to metaphorically depict the experience of a queer person of a many different social, racial and national backgrounds, as well as the experience of different subgroups of the LGBT+ minority. Above all, this storyline mirrors the issue of the so-called conversion therapy and the potential ramifications of the search for the biological nature of queerness.

The third chapter explores the images of bisexuality and gender transgression in the Marvel universe, especially in its cinematic version. Both bisexuality and gender transgression step outside of the boundaries of the binary which is normally ascribed to sexuality and gender, and have the power to disrupt the heteronormativity of the narrative. They are, however, often perceived as negative or invalid – not only by the public, but also by the queer community.

The first sub-chapter examines, on characters from the television series Marvel's

Agent Carter and their relationship to , how our reading of the situation can be warped due to the heteronormative assumptions. This, in connection with the marginalization of non-monosexual orientations, leads to an erasure of a potentially queer characters from the narrative.

The topic of the second sub-chapter is the disruption of the heteronormative assumptions and the stereotypical image of feminine and masculine in Captain

America: The Winter Soldier. This is examined on characters of Natasha Romanoff and Sam Wilson, their relationship with Steve Rogers and their role in the narrative of the movie. The chapter also briefly explores the way this disruption supports the reading of Steve Rogers as bisexual.

The third sub-chapter deals with a similar issue with Peggy Carter and Edwin

Jarvis, characters from the TV series Marvel's . It examines how their characterization deviates from what is traditionally seen as masculine and feminine, but also how these characteristics are depicted as not mutually exclusive. It also looks into the way their relationship disrupts the heteronormative image of a man/woman relationship.

The last, fourth sub-chapter is focused on the character of Tony Stark and the way his sexuality transgresses the traditional depiction of masculine sexuality in popular culture. Stark is perceived as an example of modern masculinity. However, his sexuality is often framed as something shameful and weak, which is more usual for the depiction of female or queer sexuality.

The last chapter is mapping Marvel's more successful attempts at queer representation in the series Runaways and . Both of these series feature mostly newly created characters, focus on the lives of super-powered children and teenagers, and both of them manage to include more that one queer character. Both of them are also financially successful, disproving the argument that the exclusion of queer character is justifiable by the economic needs of the publisher. I examine how queer minority is represented in those comics and how it compares to the general state of this issue in Marvel Comics books.

In this work I use the concept of the so-called Marvel Comics Multiverse.

In the context of Marvel Comics, a Universe is a sum of stories with a common continuity and characters. Characters are shared across the universes, but in different interpretations, and the size of a universe can extend from a single issue to the set of multiple movies. In this work, I mostly reference two of them: the 616-universe, which contains the main Marvel canon, and the 199999-universe, which consist of theatrical movies, short movies and TV series created by the . CHAPTER I: THE MISREPRESENTATION

When it comes to the topic of queer (or any minority) representation in the media, there are often tendencies to derail the discussion by pointing out the already existing character that represent this minority. The existence of this character is then seen as a proof that there is already a sufficient representation, that any further demands would be unreasonable and unrealistic and that if the creators of the media would fullfil them, they would only be “pandering to the politically correct”. One of the counter arguments is that the current distribution of identities (sexual, racial, gender or otherwise) among the characters does not correspond with the reality. This can be showcased on the example of representation of women in comic books. As in the year 2014, the average percentage of female population in the world is 49,6 (“Population, female (% of total)”). However, in the Marvel 616-universe, female characters make up only about 31% of the population

(Hickey). The situation is similar for all underrepresented groups.

It is also important to examine how exactly queer characters are depicted.

There is an unfortunate tendency for the queer characters to fall into a certain patterns.

The first possibility is to become a walking stereotype. Here, queerness is often the only defining characteristic of the character and their storyline. The second - which often occurs when the writer or producer is changed after the character is revealed as queer – is that the queer identity of the character is either never mentioned again, or even completely retconned1. The third common possibility for the queer character is to be a “queer villain” - a type of villain whose queerness serve to emphasize their badness, instead of being a separate characteristics. The fourth is to reveal the character as queer (or to hint strongly on this possibility), but to use this information only as a of humor. The fifth common fate of the queer character is a sudden . This tendency is called the “bury

1 Retcon – to revise an aspect of a fictional work retroactively 1 your gays” trope. This trope stems from the tradition of the lesbian pulp novels, where the tragic ending – framed as a punishment for “amoral behavior” - was necessary to prevent the book from being seized as obscene (“Why so many queer female characters die on TV”). Nowadays, this tendency is more often explained as a depiction of homophobia or as a simple coincidence. Nevertheless, this trope is strongly problematic, as a single dead queer character comprise a much bigger portion of all queer characters in a given media than it is with straight characters. It is also interesting that when there are more queer characters, those who are straight-passing are more probable to survive that the more openly or “typically” queer ones.

The lack of queer representation was further aggravated by the existence of the . This code, formed in 1954 by the comics book publishers as an alternative to the government censorship, banned anything that was seen as potentially harmful for the readers, being it gore, the depiction of a crime in an uncondemning way, or “sex perversion or any inference to same” (“Code of the Comic

Magazine Association of America, Inc.”), which included any mentions of or any other non-heterosexual orientation. While it was not mandatory for a to be approved by the CCA to be published, these books often had problems finding a distributor.

This changed as late as in the 1989 version of the code, where it is given that any

“recognizable national, social, political, cultural, ethnic and racial groups, religious institutions, law enforcement authorities will be portrayed in a positive light, (including) social groups identifiable by lifestyle, such as homosexuals...” and that derogatory reference to “physical handicaps, illnesses, ethnic backgrounds, sexual preferences, religious beliefs, and race” should be used only for dramatic purposes and depicted as unacceptable (“Comics Magazine Association of America Comics Code 1989”). Finally,

2 the influence of the code started to wane during the 2000s and was completely abandoned by Marvel in 2001. The existence of the code, however, is not the only thing that influences queer representation. The personal decisions of the creators and editors are both able to push against the official limitation and to undermine any efforts for the representation even at the times when there is no “legal”, CCA sanctified reasons to do so.

In the following part, I observe some of the failed attempts at queer representation, both in the characterization and the treatment of these characters, and the general attitude of Marvel towards the possibility of queer characters in their series.

1. WOLVERINE VS. NORTHSTAR

Northstar – civil name Jean-Paul Baubier – was created by and

John Byrne and appeared for the first time in X-Men #120 in the April of 1979 as a member of a Canadian mutant team, . This was a decade before the changes in the Comics Code allowed for an open depiction of homosexuality in comics books. Despite of this, there were hints towards Baubier's sexuality from the very beginning of his existence. In the first issue of the of Alpha Flight comics, Baubier is introduced as a rich and famous professional skier, constantly surrounded by female fans but showing little to no interest in them (Alpha Flight Vol 1 #1, 3). When abducted by his fan, he argues that he could never be with her thanks to her behavior, even if “it were conceivable that (he) might return (her) affections...” (Alpha Flight Vol 1 #41, 21), making clear that there are other reasons he would never do it. When he is sure he is going to die soon, he also reminisces to his life, mentioning that that he had “Fun. Fortune. Special friends.” (Alpha Flight Vol 1

#48, 15) – a quote which is illustrated with Baubier sitting somewhere with another man.

3 These allusions were so clear and persistent that in the comment section of Alpha Flight

#39, reader Brian Nelson casually lists “admit Northstar is gay” as a way of improving the comics, among such things as changing the and bringing back popular character

(Alpha Flight Vol 1 #39, 23).

Baubier's sexuality remained in a grey zone of public secret until the late 80s, when the series is taken over by . He attempted to “out” Baubier by having him contract HIV, which at that time was still almost synonymous with homosexuality.

In Alpha Flight #42, there is a first hint that there is something wrong with Baubier's health. He develops a persistent cough, which is, over the course of the next few issues, followed by unhealing wounds (Alpha Flight Vol 1 #44, 9) and failing immune system

(Alpha Flight Vol 1 #45, 4, Alpha Flight Vol 1 #50, 2). Marvel, however, decided to back away from a diagnosis that would almost inevitably mark Baubier as gay. In Alpha Flight

#50 it is revealed by Loki – villainous step-brother of the Avenger's hero - that

Baubier is a half-elf and that his sickness is caused by living outside the elvish realm of Alfheim2 (26). Baubier's twin sister Jeanne-Marie then decides to share her “inner light” with him to cure him. She is then pulled into the demon realm of Svartalfheim, while he ascends back into the Alfheim (Alpha Flight #50, 29 and 34). There is no official information whose decision it was to change the reason behind Baubier's illness, only that this decision was made by someone high in Marvel's chain of command (David) – which, at that time, would probably be editor-in-chief Shooter. Writer Peter David later sarcastically commented on the issue: “Yes, that’s right… (Baubier) wasn’t gay. He was just a fairy3. That’s muuuuch better. And the protectors of superheroic masculinity breathed a sigh of relief. That was a close one.“ (David).

2 One of the nine realms of the Marvel universe, based loosely on the Nordic mytholog

3 Fairy – derogative term for a gay man 4 Marvel had returned to this issue later in the 90s, under a different editor-in-chief and updated version of the Comics Code. This time, Baubier actually manages to come out.

The story itself is, once again, centered around HIV – during a fight, Baubier finds an abandoned baby girl, who is later diagnosed with AIDS. While staying with her in the hospital, Baubier is attacked by a World War 2-era hero, Major Mapleleaf, who is angry that the girl has the attention and sympathy of the public – attention and sympathy his son didn't have.

Major Mapleleaf: “She's too young to have done anything to bring

the disease upon herself,” people think. My son wasn't guilty of anything.

But because he was gay, he didn't rate!” (Alpha Flight Vol 1 #106, 17)

Baubier then reveals he is gay to prove that Mapleleaf has no right to “lecture (him) on the hardships homosexual's must bear.” (Alpha Flight Vol 1 #106, 20).

This story still relies heavily on the idea that for a homosexual main hero, their sexual identity and the problems connected with it must be in the center of the narrative – in this case, the question if a queer celebrity is morally obliged to use their status to help

(Alpha Flight Vol 1 #106, 22) – instead of being just another part of their character.

Nevertheless, it was certainly a progress in representation. In the following years, Baubier's homosexuality has been alternately promoted and ignored, depending on the writer.

Critical year for the character was, however, the year 2005. In a span of one month,

Baubier is killed off in three different continuities: the main 616 universe (where he was eventually brought back), X-Men: Age of limited series and X-Men: –

Heroes and Martyrs. On top of that, in the first two of those cases, he is killed by one of

Marvel's most popular characters, Wolverine (Wolverine Vol 3 #25, 13, X-Men: Age of

Apocalypse Vol 1 #2, 9). This repeated death – downright suspicious even for a “standard”

5 character – was not very well received. American writer Perry Moore, in the light of this incident and inspired by 's Women in Refrigerators4, had created a web site

Who Cares About the Death of a Gay Superhero?, which lists “over 60 gay and lesbian comic book characters who have been ignored, maimed or murdered“ (Gustines): “Yes, bad things do happen to all people. But are there positive representations of gay characters to counterbalance these negative ones?” (Moore).

The author of the Wolverine #25, , was not thrilled with this kind of negative publicity. In reaction to Moore's list, he had written on the Newsarama website:

“Oh, tell (Moore) to f**k off. (Baubier) didn't die because he was gay. He died because

Wolverine was brainwashed by .” (Millar). He also argued that many other characters had died in the same issue and that he never considered Baubier's sexuality when deciding to kill him. “This was an equal opportunities kill, as you might say. His sexuality didn't enter my head. (…) It's just completely inconsequential to the story, no more relevant than the death of or Barry Allen being an attack on heterosexuality.” (“Interview – Mark Millar - The Death of Northstar”).

While there is no proof or reason to believe that Millar's intentions are in any way different from what he mentions in this interview, his decision to kill Baubier still remains problematic. When a heterosexual, cis – and white, male, able-bodied, as this can be applied to any minority in the comics books – hero is killed or otherwise removed from the story, the number of such characters remains virtually unchanged. For queer characters, however, it could mean a considerable percentage. Moreover, there is an issue with the choice of Baubier's killer. It sets Baubier, sidelined for many years before the event, against one of the most popular and prominent characters of the Marvel universe. Also, it contrasts Baubier's effeminacy with Wolverine's macho-masculinity, which appeals to

4 Situation where a female character is killed, maimed or depowered, usually to progress a male heroe's story 6 exactly the group of fans that would most probably had problems with Baubier's sexuality.

All in all, it seems almost as an instruction on which side the audience's sympathies are supposed to be.

2. RAWHIDE KID

Western series Rawhide Kid was originally published by the predecessor of the Marvel Comics, the Atlas Comics, between the years 1955 and 1957 and was one of

Marvel's most prolific Western comic books. Its main character was Johnny Bart, a Wild- west gunslinger. Originally, he is depicted as straight. In the 2003 miniseries Rawhide Kid vol.3: Slap Leather and the subsequent Rawhide Kid vol.4: The Sensational Seven (both by

Ron Zimmerman) is Bart however reimagined as a homosexual. This decision raised a controversy, both from those who supported the idea of a queer hero, and from the conservative organizations. The president of the AFA (American Family Association, a non-profit organization promoting fundamentalist Christian values), Tim Wildmon, accused Marvel of using the comics as a “part of an ongoing attempt by those in the entertainment industries to promote homosexuality as normal“, stating that “if that’s not what is motivating Marvel, then why purposefully take a heterosexual character and change him into a homosexual?” (“Marvel gives kids first ‘gay’ main character”).

The reaction to the new miniseries were mixed even from those who were not opposed to the idea of a queer hero in general. Some of the reviews stated that the depiction of Johnny Bart “played too much into the stereotypes” (Renna) and while

Zimmerman managed to avoid the depiction of homosexuality as something to be hated or feared, some felt that the main character is more of a comical figure than a three- dimensional protagonist (Bramlett). However, in his article “The Confluence of Heroism,

7 Sissyhood and Camp in Rawhide Kid: Slap Leather”, Frank Bramlett claims that with its almost over the top depiction of its main hero, Rawhide Kid: Slap Leather questions the heteronormative idea of masculinity and celebrates the queerness (Bramlett). Johnny

Bart blends the hypermasculinity of being a cowboy and a gunslinger, and the hyperfemininity of being a sissy – usually a pejorative term for a man who do not meet the heteronormative standards of male gender role, which is however reclaimed by some and which is used by Bramlett without its condemning implications. By connecting these two seemingly opposing terms, Johnny Bart is a proof that a gay character does not need to perform in a heteronormative masculine way in order to be a hero (Bramlett). Moreover,

Johnny Bart's sissyhood is not depicted as a “side effect” of his queerness that he cannot control, but as something that he deliberately chooses not to hide. This is further supported by a scene in the fourth issue, where Bart's father, witnessing his son being bullied, joins the attackers instead of helping his own son:

Mr. Bart: Shut the hell up, you damn sissyboy! You make me sick! Bad enough I

gotta be the laughin' stock 'a town, but now I got you prancin' 'round not even able

to fight yer own fights. (The Rawhide Kid: Slap Leather Vol 3 #4, 5)

This scene is shown as being crucial for Bart's decision to become a hero. This could mean that his heroism is an effort to become more traditionally masculine. However, he is shown to be openly queer and content with it, enforcing the idea that heroism and sissyhood are equal parts of his character, not mutually exclusive.

How appropriate is the characterization of Johnny Bart in the miniseries is, to an extent, a matter of personal taste. The way Marvel treated the miniseries and the character during the publishing and after, however, is a different issue. First of all, there is a matter of the rating that was connected to the miniseries. The Rawhide Kid: Slap Leather was published in the imprint, which focuses on the more mature stories. Unlike other 8 MAX books, however, Slap Leather lacks any explicit sexuality, profanity or graphic violence that would justified the rating – unless the justification is the existence of the gay character. This explanation was confirmed in 2006, when Johnny Bart was excluded from the Marvel Western event, which featured a number of characters from Marvel's western titles. When asked if Bart is going to appear in the event, Editor-in-Chief argued that it would Marvel to label the whole event as MAX, “unless they use the traditional version of Rawhide” (Cronin). Moreover, Marvel later tried to retcon Bart's homosexuality. The All-New Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe #9 mentions in Bart's profile that “for the time, (Bart) adopted an eccentric persona apparently intended to confuse others,” (12).

3. FREEDOM RING

The attitude towards queer representation in the Marvel Comics changed noticeably following the 2003 Rawhide Kid miniseries, with such a series like Young Avengers, which received GLAAD Best Comic Book Award5. However, there was still a controversial unwritten policy assigning a higher content rating to the series with a queer main character.

In an online interview on the website Newsarama.com from August 2006, the current

Marvel's editor-in-chief Joe Quesada was asked about this policy. As a proof that there is no longer any policy surrounding queer characters, Quesada mentioned Freedom Ring, the new miniseries in the Marvel Team Up comics that had been planned to start in the issue #20 (Quesada).

The main hero of this miniseries, Curtis Doyle, finds a ring forged from a piece of – an artifact able to control matter and energy – which allows its wearer to

5 An accolade bestowed by the Gay And Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation to honor an outstanding representation of LGBT community in media 9 alter reality in a limited around themselves. He decides to take on a superhero identity, but he ends up in a coma with a broken spine after his first fight (Marvel Team Up

Vol 3 21#, 28). He manages to heal himself using the powers of the ring (Marvel Team Up

Vol 3 22#, 5), trains, and tries to take on the villain, Iron Maniac – only to be promptly killed (Marvel Team Up Vol 3 24#, 13).

From the perspective of queer representation, the interesting fact is that, in comparison to other stories with a queer protagonist, the focus of Freedom Ring is not solely on Doyle's sexuality. Doyle's homosexuality is an integral part of his character and is acknowledged throughout the whole miniseries, but the story would work even with a heterosexual character. However, the treatment of the character is far from ideal.

In a space of just five issues, Doyle is put into a coma, have his spine broken and is finally killed – permanently, which, in the realm of comic books, is not always a rule. Moreover, he was killed by a popular heterosexual character – the Iron Maniac turns out to be an evil version of Iron Man from an alternate dimension (Marvel Team Up Vol 3, 22#, 15). Like with previously mentioned death of Baubier in the hands of Wolverine (see chapter 1.1.

Wolverine vs. Northstar), this decision can cause the readers to sympathize more with Doyle's killer than with Doyle.

In is understandable that Doyle's death stirred up a controversy. First of all, as the whole miniseries is only five issues long and started in July 2006, it is probable that during his interview with Newsarama, Quesada was well aware of Doyle's fate. The author of the comics, Robert Kirkman, had tried to justify his decision to kill Doyle, but his explanation only highlighted the issue:

“Freedom Ring was always planned as an inexperienced hero who would get

beaten up constantly and probably die. I wanted to comment on the fact that most

10 superheroes get their powers and are okay at it... and that's not how life works.“

(Kirkman).

While this idea is not that controversial or unusual – similar character is the main hero of Mark Millar's Kick-Ass - the issue is that this “inexperienced hero who would get beaten up” is also one of the few queer characters in the franchise. Kirkman stated that he wanted to write a gay character that is not “all about being gay” (Kirkman) and that he just happened to combine those two ideas. He also realized, however, the implication of his decision:

“Frankly, with the SMALL amount of gay characters in comics in general, and how

unfortunate the portrayals have been thus far, whether intentional or not—I

completely understand the backlash on the death of Freedom Ring, regardless of

my intentions. If I had it to do all over again... I wouldn't kill him. I regret it more

and more as time goes on. I got rid of what? [sic] 20% of the gay characters at

Marvel by killing off this ONE character. I just never took that stuff into

consideration while I was writing.” (Kirkman)

4. PUNISHER

Punisher (civil name Frank Castle), was created by and John

Romita Sr. in 1974 and appeared for the first time in The Amazing Spiderman #129. Castle is an ex-marine who became a vigilante after his family is killed by the mafia. At the time of his creation, this character was unique for his willingness to use such extreme methods as torture, coercion and kidnapping to achieve his goals, which set him apart from the more traditional heroes. He was a precursor of the 1980s wave of antiheroes. During the 90s, all ongoing Punisher titles were canceled due to the poor sales. There were immediate

11 attempts to relaunch the character in more adult-oriented imprints such as and later Marvel MAX, but these attempts were mostly short lived and unsuccessful. Punisher remained without a solo series until the 2000s, when two series – The Punisher (2000) under imprint and Punisher: Frank Castle (2004) under MAX imprint, both written by Garth Ennis - managed to rekindle the character's popularity.

The tone of those series is strongly influenced by Ennis's dislike for superheroes and the popular superhero tropes of the 2000s. Punisher: Frank Castle is a mostly serious take on the character and the Marvel universe – avoiding such traditions like the sliding time scale of the stories. The Marvel Knights version of The Punisher, however, utilizes an almost cartoonish style to humiliate the most popular and well known Marvel characters

– especially Wolverine. In Punisher Vol. 5 #17, he have Castle to shoot off Wolverine's face with a shotgun, then shoot him in the groin before finally pinning him down with a steamroller.

While this series was intended by Ennis as a humorous take on the comic book tropes and clichés, Frank Tieri, who was writing The Wolverine at the time, failed to see the humor in Ennis's treatment of the character. He decided to “take revenge” on Ennis and

Castle in Wolverine Vol 2 #186. In his version of fight between Castle and Wolverine,

Wolverine managed to beat up Castle almost to unconsciousness, while ridiculing the futility of Castle efforts: “World ain't black an' white, Castle – there are no easy answers. (…) No matter what ya do... no matter how many of them you “punish”. In some way, shape or form – there's always gonna be a mob.” (Wolverine Vol 2 #186, 24).

To ridicule Castle even further, however, Tieri decided to let Wolverine find bodybuilding magazines in Castle's backpack. While those magazines are not explicitly targeted towards gay men, they have a history of serving as a mild form of gay pornography (Kranz, 71), and Wolverine is depicted as being aware of this fact:

12 Wolverine (holding up the magazine): An' ya were makin' fun a' me fer wearin'

yellow tights?6 Makes sense, though, now that I think about it. You're single, neat,

very organized...

Castle: ...suspect... they're all suspects... always looking for suspects...

Wolverine: ...you keep tellin' yourself that, sport. See ya around, Frankie.

(Wolverine Vol 2 #186, 25)

While reimagining such a stereotypically masculine character as Castle as not heterosexual could be groundbreaking, the way it is depicted in Tieri's comics combines several problematic aspects of queer representation in the media. First, there is a notion of homosexuality being connected with a certain personality traits, which are usually those perceived as feminine. Also, when Wolverine uses the fact Castle is single as a proof of his homosexuality (while deliberately ignoring his past relationship), it promotes the toxic notion of masculinity being defined by sexual activity. The most problematic aspect, however, is that Castle is “outed” by Wolverine as a final act of humiliation, comparable, in Tieri's eyes, with the mutilation Wolverine was subjected to in The Punisher #17.

Moreover, the fact that Castle's orientation had not been mentioned in any of the subsequent issues indicates that this was never meant to be a serious representation.

Tieri, through Wolverine's mouth, calls Castle gay in the same way a schoolyard bully uses this term – as an ultimate mockery.

5. HULK VS. YMCA

Robert Bruce Banner, alias Hulk, appeared for the first time in The Incredible Hulk

#1 in May 1962. Originally a normal scientist, Banner is hit with a blast of gamma radiation from an experimental detonation of a gamma bomb, which caused him to 6 Allusion to Wolverine's iconic yellow spandex costume 13 transform into a giant, green skinned monster with low intelligence and destructive tendencies. This transformation was originally connected with the sunset - a nod towards

Stevenson's Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, which Hulk's creator, , cites as one of his sources of inspiration (Lee, 75). Between The Incredible Hulk #4 and The Avengers #3,

Banner begin to change voluntarily and while regaining his intelligence by using a gamma- ray machine. His current characterization is established in #59. Here, it was also stated that Banner's transformation is triggered by stress. In the team-up stories, such as The Avengers, Hulk is usually used as a of the group. In his solo run, however, the emphasis is more on Banner's efforts to escape the military and find the cure for his condition.

The stories in The Rampaging Hulk! magazine (later shortened to The Hulk!), published between the years 1977 and 1981 by Marvel's inprint, Curtis Magazine, focused more on these “civil” storylines. This was motivated, at least partially, by the popularity of

The Incredible Hulk TV series, which abstained from the more fantastic plots for technical and financial reasons, but also due to the producer’s effort to further the series from its comics inspiration as much as possible. It is also important that the Curtis Magazine was published outside the purview of the Comics Code Authority. This allowed for a content that would otherwise been unsuitable for comics - partial nudity, profanity, more graphic violence, but also homosexuality.

The story I focus on is “...A Very Personal Hell”, written by , Marvel's

Editor-in-Chief at that time, and published in the Hulk! magazine #23, 1980. The plot revolves around Bruce Banner trying to gain access to medical books that would help him to find the cure for his condition, while avoiding being captured by the authorities.

The emphasis is on the “realism” and bleakness of the world Banner finds himself in and as it contrasts with the more stylized world of the Marvel's main universe. Shooter depicts

14 drug addiction, abusive relationships, prostitution, there is even a suicide as a crucial part of the plot. What was controversial, even at the standards of the 1980s, was the scene where Banner was cornered in the YMCA showers by two gay men and threaten with rape.

The issues of queer representation in this comics start with the character design.

Both of Banner's attackers are drawn in a manner that emphasize the stereotypical image of a gay man. They are soft featured, muscled in a way that suggest more of an obsession with one's own physique that “natural” masculinity. Gay stereotypes are also present in their body language – exaggerated gestures – and speech – use of diminutives and lisp.

This is further highlighted by the costume designs. Their classic jeans and sleeveless tops are typical for the so-called Castro clone – fashion style popular among gay men in 1970s and 80s, resembling an idealized version of a working class man. Jewelry and the color pink is also used to make the characters seem more feminine (The Hulk! #23, 5).

However, much more dangerous than simply depicting homosexuality as unmasculine and therefore undesirable is how the narrative creates connection between homosexuality and crime. For Banner's attackers, rape is clearly something they do not participate in for the first time – one of them mentions that he “went first with that chubby cutie from Akron last week.” (The Hulk! #23, 6) – and that they have no moral problems with it, despite being fully aware of the suffering they are causing their victims – even taking pleasure in this fact: “I like it when they whine” or “You won't like it this time... but

I will!” (The Hulk! #23, 6). To enforce the notion of homosexuality as something inherently amoral, there are hints on the pedophile tendencies of the villains. They repeatedly voice their fascination with Banner's apparent youth and innocence, calling him

“baby-face” and other diminutive nicknames (The Hulk! #23, 5).

In a space where queer minority is already well represented, Shooter's story would may be perceived as tasteless, but it would be more for its use of rape as a source of drama 15 than for casting gay men as villains. However, as Banner’s attackers are the first queer characters in the Curtis Magazine inprint and one of the first in the Marvel as a whole, they are setting a precedent for a gay man in the Marvel universe. There is a tendency to perceive the sole member of a group as its representative example – the group attribution error – which is much stronger when a member of an outgroup is judged. “A Very Special

Hell” thus reads as a confirmation that “gay men are rapist”, while in an otherwise identical story with heterosexual attackers, it would be only seen as a confirmation of their status as a villains without attributing the same characteristics to every heterosexual man.

The whole story become even more problematic when read in the context of other

Hulk stories. As it is mentioned before, Banner’s transformation into Hulk is triggered by stress – often simplified as anger, but basically by any emotion that causes a release of adrenaline. In The Avengers, Hulk is described as a Banner’s personified survival instinct that appears when Banner feels threatened by anything, including himself: “I put a bullet in my mouth and (Hulk) spit it out.” (Avengers). It is clear, even in “...A Very

Personal Hell”, that this transformation is caused by the biological processes connected to stress, not by the emotion itself (10). In other dangerous situations, Banner is able to transform almost instantly. Why it is only the danger of a homosexual rape that delays

Banner’s transformation? Shooter argues that this is a case of a “post rape syndrome”, which causes rape victims to be “in during the actual attack, almost numb and disbelieving” (Shooter) and only reacting afterwards. However, while the Rape

Trauma Syndrome (which is a psychological condition Shooter probably had in mind) can present as an apparent calmness of the victim, it is after the assault, not during it

(Tewksbury, 22). And even in the case when the shock would lead to the inability to act and thus a semblance of calmness, there is still a biological reaction leading to a release of the stress hormones – which would trigger Banner’s transformation.

16 There are even theories that Banner’s inability to transform was caused by a subconscious desire to be raped as a way to experience a homosexual act without having to openly admit his sexuality (Fernandes). Banner’s transformation after his escape then would not been a delayed reaction to the assault, but caused by Banner being angry at himself for acting up on his desires. Fernandes’ reading is further supported by the fact that

Hulk is only able to calm down and transform back into Banner after he is reassured in his masculinity and heterosexuality by earning a sign of affection from a woman (The Hulk!

#23, 15 - 16). However, this reading is problematic as well as it employs a common victim- blaming rhetoric – that a lack of fight means that the victim, at least subconsciously, desired to be raped.

The easiest explanation for Banner’s reaction is Jim Shooter’s willingness to sacrifice internal logic of the story to serve his idea. He was trying to keep the story very bleak and “realistic” and as close in a style and tone to The Incredible Hulk TV series, which also limited the use of Hulk to a minimum. This, however, does not excuse neither

Shooter’s choice to cast one of the first openly queer characters in the Marvel Universe as villains, nor his reaction when he was notified of this issue. He argued that it never occurred to him that “a couple of bad guys could be interpreted as a sweeping indictment of gay people.” (Shooter). This could be a genuine overlook on Shooter’s side. There are, however, accounts from Shooter's coworkers stating that there was an unwritten “no gay allowed policy” in place during Shooter's time as the Editor-in-Chief of the Marvel Comics

(Mangels). While there is no concrete evidence of existence of such a policy, other occurrences during Shooter's time in this position7 indicates that such a claim is rooted in reality.

7 See Chapter 1.1. 17 6. SUPERIOR IRON MAN

Iron Man, created as a collaboration between editor Stan Lee, scripter , story-artist and cover-artist , appeared for the first time in Tales of

Suspense #39 (1963). According to Lee, he was created as a dare – being a weapon manufacturer and industrialist inspired to a great degree by Howard Hughes (“Mask of Iron Man”, 81), he went against every sensibility of an average Marvel reader in the 1960s. Nevertheless, he gained popularity – he became a founding member of the Avengers in 1963, earned a solo comics The Invincible Iron Man in 1968, starred in several animated series and in the 2008 live-action movie Iron Man that helped to launch the Marvel Cinematic Universe as a whole – and quickly established as one of the central heroes of the Marvel Comics.

During the Marvel history, there are several instances where Iron Man has been set against the rest of the heroes, e.g., the Crossing storyline, where Iron Man is manipulated by the time-traveling villain Immortus (Avengers 395#), or the storyline, where he is pitted against Captain America in a political conflict. The example I want to focus on follows after the 2014 Avengers & X-Men: AXIS event, where part of the heroes and villains got “inverted” - meaning their morality was changed to the polar opposite.

Most of the characters were returned to their previous state. However, some retained their reversed characterization, and Iron Man was among them (Superior Iron Men #1, 5). While this villain version was never confirmed to be queer, there is certain context that supports reading of this version of the character as queer-coded.

One of the reasons why readers were so willing to perceive this version of Iron

Men as queer were other changes that occurred in the same year in the Marvel Universe.

First, one of the major characters of the Marvel comics, Thor Odinson, have lost his ability

18 to wield his hammer as he was deemed unworthy of the name Thor8 (Original

Sin#7, 25). In Thor Vol 4 #1, the hammer is found by an unidentified women (2) - later revealed to be , a recurring character from the Thor comics. Since this moment,

Thor of the Marvel Universe is female - “This is not She-Thor. This is not Lady Thor. This is not Thorita. This is THOR." (Penagos). Around the same time, similar recasting had occurred in Captain America. Steve Rogers, the original Captain America, was stripped of his enhanced physique and the mantle of Captain America waspassed to Sam Wilson, an African-American superhero fomerly known as (Captain America vol. 7 #25, 2).

As Thor and Captain America are one of the most prominent characters of the Marvel Universe, and as both of them were recasted by characters that are in some way

(racial or gender) a minority in comics, many of the readers took it as a hint that another of the major characters will be changed in a similar way. When it was announced that Tony

Stark is moving from to San Francisco and that there are changes planed in his future (McMillan), many assumed – due to the active LGBT+ scene in SF, as well as from the sleeker, more “fashionable” design of Iron Man's suit - that Marvel is planning to out

Iron Man as gay.

The reactions to this presumed change in Iron Man's sexual identity were mixed.

Some have praised Marvel for their progressiveness:

“Wait wait. Black Captain America. Female Thor. Iron Man set in San .

If @Marvel's SUPERIOR IRON MAN is gay, I'll never doubt them again.”

(SantoriGriffith)

Others, on the other hand, have seen this change as disrespectful to the characters and their creators, as pandering to minorities and misguided effort to cash in on more progressive readers:

8 Any person worthy of Mjolnir, and only this person, can pick up the hammer and be bestowed the power of Thor ( #83) 19 “Marvel’s re-imagining of its characters will have a very negative effect on

the money-side of their company. Who wants to see a “chick flick” version of Thor,

a Spike Lee interpreted Captain America, or Queer Eye For The Iron Man Guy?

I’ guessing we will see these reboots fail and we’ll be right back to the traditional

versions of the characters because that’s how the comic universe works.”

(Anderson). or even an outright attempt to indoctrinate the readers into perceiving homosexuality as normal.

While this change was later revealed to be Iron Man's “inversion”, there are still scenes in the Superior Iron Men (comics series centered on Iron Man after the AXIS event) that could support the reading of the post AXIS Stark as queer. The most distinct one is a panel in the issue number #8, where Stark is depicted among several sleeping people on what can be described as an aftermath of an orgy (Superior Iron Men #8, 10). The presence of both men and women does not necessary indicate that Stark have been participating in any kind of same-sex activity on this orgy – there could have been several pairs engaging in a strictly heterosexual intercourse. However, the author of Superior Iron Man described this version of Tony Stark as “Arrogant. Cunning. Witty. Superficial. Completely self- obsessed. Superior.” (Haupt). The events of Superior Iron Man turns Stark into an unrestricted ruler of the city (Superior Iron Man #, 7) and thus not limited in his choice of sexual partners. It would be more in line with this self-obsessed personality to surround himself only with people to which he is sexually attracted.

If this scene is an actual confirmation of Tony Stark's bisexuality – as reading his sexuality as strictly homosexual on the basis of this panel would be inaccurate - it would be deeply problematic. First of all, it would once again resorted to the queer villain trope, framing his bisexuality as a sign of moral decay. He is even described as “depraved” in 20 the story (Superior Iron Man #2, 25). Moreover, it is hinted on in a different comics of the AXIS event that the “inversion” affects all aspects of personality, including sexuality – see Loki, Agent of #8, where Loki - who in this series is depicted as queer - is shown after his inversion in a very traditional heterosexual relationship with an inverted villainess Amora – who is even jokingly called “Heteronormativity” by other character

(Loki, Agent of Asgard #8, 5). Stark's apparent bisexuality in Superior Iron Man would then paradoxically serve as a confirmation of heterosexuality.

The other reason why the depiction of Stark's sexuality in Superior Iron Man is problematic is due to the choice to portrait bisexuality in a highly sexualized situation.

There is a stigma surrounding bisexuality, both in the mainstream society and in the queer community that stereotypes bisexuals as promiscuous and incapable of a stable relationship. Moreover, bisexual relationships are often erased with the argument that the relationship is always either hetero- or homosexual, depending on the gender of the partner, and thus, barring the cases of polyamory, a bisexual relationship cannot exist.

While some argue that such a behavior is in character for Stark even before the events of

AXIS – which varies in different time periods and different versions of the Marvel canon – the fact is that a similar behavior is much less stigmatized in heterosexual men.

Even with these problems, the depiction of Tony Stark as a bisexual man could still be accounted for as proper queer representation if it would continue after he is returned to his normal morality. However, after the Secret War event that restarted the whole Marvel

Comics universe, there are no signs of Tony Stark showing attraction to any other gender then women. Stark's brief exploration of a different sexuality thus stays only another example of the queer-coded villain trope and confirmation of the stereotype that there is something inherently depraved and amoral in non-heterosexual – and especially non- monosexual – identities.

21 CHAPTER II: COMING OUT AS A MUTANT: QUEERNESS IN X-MEN

COMICS

The 1960s was a time of rebirth for the Marvel Comics. After almost two decades of romantic, western and monster comics, Stan Lee – Marvel's editor-in-chief and head writer at that time – created, with artists Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko - many of the characters and series that serves as the backbone of the Marvel Universe – e.g., , Spider-man, Iron Man or Thor. In 1963, Lee decided to start another team of super-powered individuals. This meant to find the origin of the abilities for each of them. There already were a team that got their super-powers in a single accident – the members of the Fantastic Four were all irradiated by cosmic rays – but Lee envisioned the new heroes as being previously unconnected. In an interview in 2004, Lee recalled:

“I couldn't have everybody bitten by a radioactive spider or exposed to a gamma

ray explosion. And I took the cowardly way out. I said to myself, 'Why don't I just

say they're mutants. They were born that way.'” (“Stan Lee”)

From the beginning, these Mutants (later renamed X-men as Marvel publisher

Martin Goodman was unsure that the readers would understand what mutant means (Lee,

Kirby, 35)) fought not only the conventional , but also the prejudice and hatred of the mainstream population. This struck a chord with many readers. While there previously were heroes born with their superpowers – like Thor, who is an alien/god – or heroes that are hated by the public – like Spider-man, who had been branded as a criminal for most of his career – there were none who connect both of these characteristics and for which the hatred is such a central theme. Spider-man can – and on several occasions, did (The Amazing Spider-man Vol. 1 #50, 12) – abandon his superhero identity. For mutants, their powers are integral part of their biology, and they are hated not 22 for what they do, but for what they are and what they could do. It is thus very easy to find parallels between the mutants and many marginalized real-world groups, and this parallels are acknowledged in the comics. There are depictions of mutant concentration camps

( Vol. 3 #9, 5), and one of the main villains of the X-men franchise, Erik Lensherr aka Magneto, justifies his hatred towards non-mutant population with the fear that mutants will be subjected to the same treatment he had already lived through in the Nazi concentration camp (X-Men: First Class). There are also allusions to the African-American civil rights movement and the pan-African movement, with such motives as creating new, exclusively mutant names that mirrors a similar custom in an African-American community. Both of these readings can be problematic as it assumes that all prejudice is the same (Lyubansky) and because unlike the real life minorities they parallel, mutants can be seen as objectively dangerous due to their powers. In this chapter, however, I want to focus on the parallels between mutants and the issues of the LGBT+ community and its depiction.

However, the parallel that can be found between mutants and the LGBT+ community, but not any other minorities, is that mutants – like LGBT+ people – can be born outside of their communities. While other minorities can share their culture with the previous generations, mutant/LGBT+ children are often born strangers in their own families. The mutant powers also tends to manifest during the puberty – as addressed at the very beginning of the movie X-Men (2000). This is also the time when, according to

Owens in Queer Kids: The Challenges and Promises of Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Youth, most of the queer individuals became positively self-identifying (15).

The image of the X-men team as a surrogate family connects X-men to another problems faced by queer youth – the danger of being either abandoned by their families or being forced to run away in fear of their reaction. LGBT+ people constitute between 20 23 and 40% of the homeless youth in the US, despite being around 10% of the general population (“America's Shame: 40% of Homeless Youth Are LGBT Kids”). In the X-men franchise, the motive of a teen-aged runaway appears repeatedly. In the first movie, for example, the audience-surrogate character is a young girl nicknamed who run away after she put her boyfriend in a coma with her suddenly manifested powers (X-Men).

In the following chapter, I focus on some of the most important events in the X- men franchise that supports reading of this comics as a metaphorical representation of the LGBT+ community. It is the storyline concerning the mutant-only disease, the Legacy virus, and how it mirrors the AIDS narrative, and the search for the cure for the mutation in the context of the so-called conversion therapy.

1. LEGACY VIRUS – THE IMAGE OF AIDS IN COMICS

In the X-Force #18, a mutant terrorist from the future opens a capsule containing a man-made virus called Legacy (4). This virus is tailored to only affect those with an X- gene9. The illness originally attacked genetic transcription and replication, killing its victims as a fast growing cancer. The second version, however, allowed the infected to survive for a couple of years. The victims developed skin lesions, fever, breathing troubles and general weakness, until they lost the control over their superpowers and died.

The storyline had run continuously until 1994, when the last notable mutant character to be infected, , dies in X-Factor #100 (12). Later in the same year, Moira

MacTaggert has been infected in #80 (18) as the first non-mutant to contract the disease. Afterwards, the storyline has been effectively inactive until 2001. At that time, writer Grant Morrison took over the writing of the X-men series and was asked by the editor Mark Powers to finish the storylines from the previous era – including 9 fictitious gene responsible for the mutant superpowers 24 the Legacy Virus storyline. In Uncanny X-Men Vol 1 #390 (21), the cure is finally discovered and spread simultaneously to all mutants. While the virus and the consequence of the mass cure is used in stories later in the 2000s, it has never been of a greater importance for the Marvel Universe.

From the depiction of the disease, it is clear that the Legacy virus was set up as a fictitious counterpart of the HIV/AIDS. The symptoms – especially at the second version of the virus – the most prevalent and well known symptoms of HIV/AIDS, the pneumocystic pneumonia and Kaposi's sarcoma. It is also mentioned in the epilog of “Legacies” (Uncanny X-Men Vol 1 #390, 23) that the Legacy virus manifests differently in every mutant due to its connection to the X-gene. This is similar to the HIV virus, where the symptoms differ in every patient due to the multitude of opportunistic infections.

The Legacy virus also only targets a certain marginalized group of people and it is even dubbed “Mutant Plague” in the stories – mirroring the use of “Gay Plague” as a nickname for AIDS, and the belief that it can only infect gay men. Finally, the fact that Legacy virus is artificially created as a weapon against mutants can be seen as an allusion to the conspiracy theory claiming that AIDS was created by the US government as a biological weapon. Moreover, the notion of Legacy virus as an allegory to AIDS was later confirmed by one of the writers, Fabian Nicieza:

We [the writers] specifically discussed ways to alienate mutants even further

from mainstream superheroes, (…) HIV/AIDS was a very prevalent topic at

the time and absolutely as creators, having gone through our 20’s in the 80’s, we

were well informed by the thematic underpinnings of prejudice against gays as

a result of the virus outbreak. (Darowski, 116)

25 The Legacy virus storyline was not the first time Marvel used their stories to comment on the AIDS problematic. In the Alpha Flight Vol 1 #42 (4), a member of the mutant team Alpha Flight, Jean-Paul Baubier, started to show symptoms similar to

AIDS. Baubier is also central to another earlier AIDS storyline in Alpha Flight #106. Both of these stories are discussed in the chapter 1.1. - Wolverine vs. Northstar. There were also

AIDS related stories in series outside the X-men franchise. The Legacy virus storyline was, however, the first that situated the heroes – even the whole mutant community – not into a position of a savior, but of a potential victim.

Despite the intentions behind it, the whole Legacy storyline is not without its controversies. For example, the first person that contracted the virus and died from it in

“Going Through The Motions” (Uncanny X-Men Vol 1 #303, 8) is Illyana Rasputin, a white, teen girl with no expressed mutant powers. She is an ideal “innocent victim” - both from point of view of the Marvel Universe and as an allegorical AIDS victim.

At the time of her death, she was not yet a fully confirmed mutant, and would she be an AIDS victim, her age and gender would indicate she had to be infected by an accident, not “sinfully” through sexual intercourse. As such, she is much more acceptable as a poster child for the tragedy of the Legacy virus/AIDS than somebody openly mutant/openly queer. It is interesting that the same narrative was criticized in the Alpha Flight #106 (see the chapter 1.1.). Moreover, not only that this reinforces the idea that some AIDS victims deserved their disease, it also steers public awareness away from the population most at risk towards the more “esthetic” victims. It is what Loe Bersani calls in his essay

“Is The Rectum A Grave?” displacement: the focus of the discourse on those who are the least likely affected (but who are usually privileged or are perceived with more warmth) that marginalize the more vulnerable, but less socially accepted groups (203).

26 It is also important to look into how the Legacy virus is strictly framed as a “mutant problem”. In similar disastrous situations before and after the Legacy virus storyline, characters from different series who either are scientists themselves or have access to scientific resources – like or Tony Stark – are shown to work on the solution for the given situation. This did not happened in the case of the Legacy virus.

On one hand, this could be read as mirroring the lack of reaction from the government and public at the beginning of the AIDS crisis, when the disease had been still seen as infecting only gay men. The lack of help from the non-mutant allies – safe from Moira MacTaggert, who does not appear outside the X-men titles – is however not commented upon by the characters. This supports the possibility that Marvel simply did not want to deal with the Legacy virus outside the X-men franchise – creating the notion that the Legacy virus/AIDS is something that should not concern the “normal” people and should be dealt with only by those directly involved. It is also telling that the cure for Legacy is found shortly after MacTaggert – an infected non-mutant – dies. While her death is not directly caused by the infection - she is mortally wounded by before she can succumb to the virus (Uncanny X-Men #388, 18) - the message is clear. There is no hurry to find the cure unless the “normals” are in danger.

The fact that the virus can only infect mutants is also problematic. While it is done to enforce the allegorical connection with AIDS as a disease that hurts predominantly an already marginalized group, it is necessary to look at the way mutants are defined in the Marvel Universe. While the exact source of their mutation changes through time and different versions of the Marvel Universe, mutants are always categorized, even by themselves, as a separate species or sub-species of human – Homo superior or Homo sapiens superior (X-Men Vol. 1, #1, 11). The reason why the Legacy virus is able to target only mutants is that they are genetically different – they are not completely human. In

27 the context of the AIDS narrative, this reasoning dehumanize people with AIDS and queer people in general.

Finally, there is an issue with the finale of the whole storyline. In the Uncanny X-

Men #390 (8), the cure for the Legacy virus is finally devised, with the ability to cure all infected mutants in the world at the same time. There is a catch, however – in order to deploy this cure, someone has to be injected with it and activate their mutant powers, killing themselves in the process. While this creates a narrative symmetry, as the disease was released by a mutant, it also sets a dangerous precedence. The health crisis, already believed to be brought to existence by those affected the most (enforced by the fact that it was a mutant terrorist who brought the disease into the present), should be also solved by the same people. Moreover, the existence of this cure is framed as dangerous, as it provides Magneto with hundreds of soldiers that are quarantined on the island he is overseeing (X-Men Vol 2, #110, 16).

But despite of these mishaps, the Legacy virus storyline is still important in the context of the AIDS narrative and the queer representation in the Marvel Comics.

While no queer character is introduced during the story, it helps to reinforce the idea of mutants as a fictional counterpart of the queer minority. Also, as the AIDS narrative goes, it was first Marvel Comics story concerning it (or its fictitious counterpart) that rose above the occasional “very special issue” and at least tried to depict the influence of the health crisis on the whole community.

28 2. HOW (NOT) TO BE A MUTANT – ACCEPTANCE AND SELF-ACCEPTANCE

“Have you tried... not being a mutant?” asks the mother of Bobby Drake in X2

(2003) after discovering his mutant powers. The whole scene plays out as loving but horrified family finding out that their son is gay: the adamant decision to not say the g- word (or the m-word, in this case), the self-blaming, the reassurance of love despite this whole “problem”. Even the director of the movie, Brian Singer, referred to the scene as “coming out” (Applebaum). In this particular scene, mutation is treated by the characters as something that can be controlled at will – mirroring the “homosexuality is a lifestyle choice” discourse. The fact, however, is that the mutant superpowers are caused by hereditary changes on a genetic level. This is commented by another mutant character,

John Allerdyce, when Drake's mother blames herself for her son's condition: “(scientists) discovered that the males are those who carry the mutant gene and pass it on, so... it's (the father's) fault.” (X2). The theme of coming out and dealing with either one's own sexual identity or the identity of someone close repeats in many installments of the X-Men franchise. The following chapter is analyzing two problems of the mutant community that can be related to the queer minority – the question of coming out and the question of the possible cure for mutation.

One fact that is important for the theme of coming out is that there are generally two different groups of mutants, based on how their powers manifest. The first are those whose powers does not influence their appearance. Such a mutant can exist in the “normal” society without being outed unless their powers are used. The powers of the second group usually manifest prenatally and influence the bodily structure. To survive, these mutants have to either disguise themselves or to leave the mainstream society. While there is no physical marking that would give away someone's queerness in such a way, this division of mutants illustrates the concept called “straight-passing privilege” - a way person 29 benefits from not being perceived as queer – and its problematic nature. This concept is often used to invalidate the experience of non-monosexual10 people in heterosexual relationship. However, to capitalize from this privilege, one is forced to hide their identity.

In the moment when one's queer identity is revealed, any privilege stemming from the perceived heterosexuality disappears. This could be illustrated on the situation of Mystique in the X-men: First Class (2011) and X-men: Days of Future Past (2014).

Mystique is a special case among X-men characters as her shapeshifting abilities allows her to look “normal”. It is however shown that she had to consciously keep this form and that it is exhausting for her to do so for a long time (X-men: First Class). She – at least unconsciously – wants to be able to reveal herself, but she is kept from it by her adoptive brother, Charles Xavier. Her personal story arc in the movie is finished by her breaking free from his influence and accepting her identity. She gradually stops using her human form, her original name and even wearing clothes that she does not need and that are only making shapeshifting more complicated. All these changes can be read as a metaphorical departure from the heteronormativity. It is problematic, however, that this acceptance of herself is connected with her joining the series antagonist, Magneto.

He is depicted in a very sympathetic light and his willingness to accept Mystique in her true form even when Xavier is not willing to do it helps to make him a more multidimensional character. However, he is still portrayed as an extremist. The simple act of accepting one's true identity is thus depicted as something dangerous and undesirable.

Moreover, there is an issue with the erasure of Mystiques queerness in the movies.

There are parallels between her experience and the experience of a queer person – in his essay “X-Men, Mystique, and Identity Politics: A Transgender Metaphor” Murphy Leight draw a comparison between Mystiques story in the new X-Men movie trilogy and

10 Romantic or sexual attraction to one sex or gender only (Hamilton) 30 the experience of trans people. However, in her 616 version, she is shown in relationship with a woman – a relationship which is missing from all of her movie versions.

Another topic connecting the acceptance of one's mutant nature and one's queerness is the possibility of a cure. This appears in the X-men franchise as the Mutant Cure or

Hope Serum, which is central in the Gifted story arc (The Astonishing X-men v3, #1-6) and the X-men: The Last Stand (2006), and is one of the sub-plots of the X-men: First Class

(2011). Even within the mutant population, the reaction to the possibility of being “cured” of their abilities is extremely polarizing. On one hand, there are those who see this cure as a tool of genocide and are afraid that the cure will either become mandatory or the pressure of the “normal” society will work in a same way. Similarly, there are real life concerns that if a genetic cause of homosexuality was found, the LGBT+ community would be targeted in vitro via genetic treatment or selective abortion (Burr). On the other hand, there are mutants that perceive the cure as their only hope for a normal life. It is worth noting that those usually falls into two categories. One are mutants whose abilities are uncontrollable and dangerous – in X-men: The Last Stand, it was Rogue whose powers can harm or kill anyone she touches; in the Gifted story arc, the first publicly announced user of the cure was Tildie Soames, a pre-teen girl with the ability to project her nightmares into reality

(Astonishing X-Men Vol 3 #2, 10). The second were those whose powers manifest physically – e.g., Hank McCoy with prehensile, ape-like feet (“X-Men: First Class”).

The division between pro-cure mutants and those who oppose it can be read as a metaphor for the way privileges and personal background a can influence the attitude one holds toward oneself. The more is the life of the mutant negatively influenced by their powers, the higher is the probability that they will want to use the cure themselves.

In the same way, those living in a less safe conditions or whose orientation is less accepted

31 by the mainstream (e.g., bisexuals or asexuals) are more likely to stay closeted or to have a negative attitude towards themselves.

32 CHAPTER III: BISEXUALITY AND GENDER TRANSGRESSION IN

THE MARVEL UNIVERSE

Bisexuality – attraction towards both men and women (Bowie, 7), sometimes also defined as an attraction towards both one's own gender and genders different from one's own.

Gender transgression - behavior or self-presentation that steps outside the traditional gender roles.

What these two terms have in common is a concept of existing outside the binary.

Bisexuality disturbs the notion that one can be either heterosexual or homosexual. By transgressing the gender roles, they become less clear-cut and “natural”. Due to this disruptive nature, however, these concept are often perceived as negative. The bisexual erasure and biphobia is a problem prevalent not only in the general society, but also, which is more problematic, in the LGBT+ community. The outlook of the mainstream and queer society mirrors and complement each other. Bisexuality is seen by both as a “phase”, after which the person either returns to the “normal”, or move forward towards the “real queerness” – i.e. homosexuality, and the validity of bisexuality as a sexual identity on its own is undermined. This hinter the bisexual representation in the media even more – creators are scared to make the character bisexual in fear they would drive away more conservative viewers, and viewers who want queer representation often see this as a cop out. There are also troubles with stereotypes surrounding bisexuality. In his book Bisexual

Characters in Film: From Ana¿s to Zee, Wayne Bryant describes one off those stereotypes as a “bisexual psychotic killer” (83), whose sexuality is a sign of depravity and/or mental illness. Bisexuality in the pop-culture is also often connected with hypersexuality – the “anything that moves” stereotype. Female bisexuality is seemingly better received - 33 however, sexuality of bisexual women is mostly used as a “fanservice” for male viewers.

Many bisexual characters also remains unconfirmed by the canon and their sexuality is only shown in hints or, worse, used for queer baiting11.

This chapter focuses on the characters of the Marvel Universe – predominantly in its movie variation, but also in the comics universe - that can be read as bisexual, how these characters transgress the heteronormative and gender-normative narratives, and the approach of both fans and creators towards those characters and situations.

1. THE CASE OF PEGGY CARTER VS. HOWARD STARK

In the year 2015, during the mid-season hiatus of the TV series Marvel's Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., American television network ABC started an action/drama/superhero miniseries Marvel's Agent Carter, based on the character from the films Captain America:

The First Avenger (2011) and Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014), Agent Peggy

Carter, and inspired by the Marvel One-shot12 of the same name. From its beginning, the series was acknowledged for its contribution towards representation – in both positive and negative way. It is praised for being Marvel's first woman-lead movie/television franchise and for its depiction of female friendship (as much as this seems as a marginality, it is important to realize that women in the pop-culture are often pitted against each other in the fight for the love interest, and true female friendship is depicted as uncommon or non-existent). On the other hand, its representation of other marginalized groups is much weaker. “There are little glimmers of commentary on class and disability, but both as they specifically relate to the post-war era. Where the show really fails is race, with its all-white

11 Situation when an alusion to queerness of the character is inserted into a piece of media to attract a queer or more liberal viewers while confirming the oposite to not alienate the homofobic/transphobic audience (Panigrahi, 1)

12Series of direct-to-video short films set within the Marvel cinematic universe 34 cast and absurd under/misuse of its only person of color with a speaking role in these two episodes, Andre Royo’s Harlem night club owner who is a) in cahoots with the bad guys and b) ends up dead.“ ("The Superficial Yet Satisfying Feminism of ‘Agent Carter’.").

Regarding the topic of this chapter, however, there is an interesting moment in the fourth episode of the first season, The Blitzkrieg Button. Peggy Carter is arguing with another character who tricked her into stealing an object from SSR13 by claiming it is a dangerous weapon. In reality, however, the object contains the last vial of Steve Rogers'

(Captain America) blood. Both characters want to keep the vial for themselves.

The following argument occurs:

Carter: You used me. You lied to me.

Character: You hit me!

Carter: You don't get to use my reaction to your lies as a reason to your lies.

Character: Yeah, I do. I know how much Steve meant to you because I know how

much he means to me. (“The Blitzkrieg Button”)

For context, it is important to know that during the Captain America: The First Avenger,

Peggy Carter served as a romantic interest of Steve Rogers, and the effort to find closure after his death is part of her motivation for keeping the vial. Without any additional knowledge about the second character, it could thus be easy to assume that this character have a similar romantic feelings towards Rogers. After all, it is directly stated that this character can sympathize with Carter because their feelings towards Rogers are the same or similar. If this character was a woman, she would be, without any doubt, Carter's rival in her relationship with Rogers.

However, the character arguing with Peggy Carter is a man – Howard Stark, the creator of the technology that created Captain America. In that moment, our 13 Scientific Strategic Reserve, a fictitious government agency and the precursor of the S.H.I.E.L.D. 35 assumptions about the relationship presented begins to warp to fit the heteronormative narrative. There is a tendency to interpret Stark's feelings towards Rogers as either purely platonic, or even possessive – that he only sees Rogers as his creation that he wants to get back. This can be supported by the following dialog:

Stark: You know, I believe that sample SR-53, that blood, Captain America's blood,

holds the key to vaccines, medications, possibly even a cure for the common cold.

Steve Rogers may not still be with us, but he can still save millions of people.

Carter: And how many millions of dollars are you set to make? (“The Blitzkrieg

Button”)

The depiction of Howard Stark in the comic books and movies also confirms that he prefers scientific progress (or monetary gain) over the well-being of the people.

This can be seen in , where Tony Stark watches the movie reel left to him by his father. On this reel, Howard Stark is talking to his son into the future, hoping that he will uncover the clues he left for him and will be able to create something (a new element, as it is shown later in the movie) that Howard Stark can't due to technological limitations.

At the same time, he is ignoring his son in his present, because he is too young to understand the technology. He ends his speech with: “What is, and always will be, my greatest creation... is you.” (Iron Man 2), putting his son on the same level as the machines he had created.

This is, however, the way Howard Stark act towards people other than Steve

Rogers. It is confirmed that he had held Rogers as an ideal against which he had measured everyone else. He also never stopped searching for Rogers after he crashed his plane and

(presumably) died (Captain America: The First Avenger). We never got to see much interaction between Howard Stark and Steve Rogers during the movie, and the most we

36 can presume about the nature of their relationship can be taken from the way it parallels

Carter's relationship. And when he compares how he feels and how Carter feels, he puts them on the same level – meaning that if Carter loved Rogers, than Stark felt the same way.

There is another scene is the series that confirms this reading. The main villain of the series, doctor Fennhoff, is able to hypnotize people to the extend he creates a complete new reality for them and forces them to act against their character. In the final episode of the series, Valediction, he hypnotizes Howard Stark to force him to bomb the New York City with a gas that induces murderous in people. The he creates for Stark is one when he is able to locate Steve Rogers and bring him back home. This still does not exclude a different reading of their relationship – Stark himself justifies his obsession with finding Rogers as the only way to redeem himself. “You don't have to fix anything. Peg, all I've done my whole life is create destruction. Project rebirth was...

He was the one thing I've done... that brought good into this world.” (“Valediction”).

But the very next thing said brings us back to the original reading:

“Howard... I know you loved him. I loved him, too. But this won't bring him back.

(...) Steve is gone. We have to move on--all of us. As impossible as that may sound,

we have to let him go.” (“Valediction”)

Once again, there is no cop out, no confirmation of heteronormativity – allusion to “brotherly love” or any suggestion that Stark's and Carter's love towards Rogers were of a different kind. Thanks to that, this scene doesn't come across as . It is more what Tumblr user shipperhipster calls in her “A Retrospective on Planet Hulk” “gay blue- balling”: when there is nothing in conflict with a queer reading of the text, but the authorities behind the text never confirms it (“A Retrospective on Planet Hulk”).

37 2. THE CASE OF SAM WILSON AND THE SUPERHERO LOVE INTEREST

Sam Wilson joined the Marvel Comics universe in 1969, in Captain America #117.

Originally an ordinary man, a social worker, he was inspired by Captain America to become a superhero and is his long-term partner. His original powers were an emphatic and telepathic control over birds, but later he acquired a harness that allowed him to

(Captain America Vol 1, #170, 17). From the point of view of the general representation of the minorities, he is important as the first African-American superhero in the mainstream comics. Not the first black superhero, as this title belongs to Black

Panther – prince of the self-sufficient, technologically advanced African country – who made his debut in 1966 in Fantastic Four #52 (Brothers). Sam Wilson is constantly depicted as one of Steve Rogers' closest friends and even took up the mantle of Captain

America after Rogers had been stripped of his powers (Captain America Vol 7 #25, 21).

For the movie Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014), Wilson is updated as a former pararescue, currently working as a counselor for the Department of Veteran Affairs.

His flying harness is explained as an experimental military winged jet Wilson was testing

(Captain America: The Winter Soldier). His ability to communicate with birds is omitted in the movie version.

In connection to the topic of gender transgression, it is interesting how Sam

Wilson's role in the movie is, in his relationship to Steve Rogers, structured in the way that is more characteristic for female characters. To be more precise, his role is very similar to that of the superhero love interest. His first meeting with Steve Rogers can be described as a meet cute. This term was coined by the director Ernst Lubitsch and describes “situation in a film, television series, etc. in which a potential or future romantic couple meet for the first time in a way that is considered adorable, entertaining, or amusing.” (“Meet cute.”). Wilson and Rogers meet while running at the Memorial park, where Rogers annoys 38 Wilson by his ability to run multiple laps in the time it takes Wilson to finish one14. After finishing the run, they immediately start to joke with each another and sharing personal information, despite never seeing each other before. It is indicated that Wilson is the first person Rogers met in the 21st century who can empathize with Rogers through shared experience:

Wilson: It's your bed, right?

Rogers: What's that?

Wilson: Your bed, it's too soft. When I was over there I sleep on the ground and

used rock for pillows, like a caveman. Now I'm home, lying in my bed, and it's

like...

Rogers: ...lying on a marshmallow. I feel like I'm gonna sink right to the floor.

(Captain America: The Winter Soldier)

After this scene, Wilson invites Rogers – still basically a - to visit him in the Veteran's Center. Apart from being another example of the meet cute trope, this scene also provides additional characterization for Sam Wilson. He is depicted as a nurturing person – as is has been already mentioned, he works as a counselor for the veterans suffering from PTSD – which is traditionally seen as a feminine quality. His caring nature is also emphasized in the second act of the Captain America: The Winter

Soldier, when he provides a hiding place for the heroes on the run – despite, once again, them being almost complete strangers. He also focuses on emotions, both in this job and in his personal relationship with Rogers. It’s him who manages to make Rogers to open up about his emotions and issues of getting settled in the twenty-first century.

Sam Wilson: ...But seriously, you could do whatever you want to do. What makes

you happy? 14 Due to the supersoldier serum, Rogers is able to perform on the peak of human abilities or slightly over them. 39 Steve Rogers: I don't know. (Captain America: The Winter Soldier)

Wilson is also shown as a much more stable person in comparison to Rogers. They both share a similar trauma from a loss of a close friend. In Rogers' case, it is James

Barnes, who died during the Captain America: The First Avenger movie; for Wilson, it is his wingman Riley (Captain America: The Winter Soldier.). However, while Rogers' survival guilt are one of the main themes of the movie, Wilson was able to move on.

Lastly, it is important to look into the reasons why Wilson joins Rogers.

For context, the main storyline of the movie is concerned with uprooting the infiltration of

HYDRA15 inside the S.H.I.E.L.D and, for Rogers personally, with saving James Barnes, who had been brainwashed and used as an assassin by since the World War 2.

Unlike other characters, Wilson has no loyalty to S.H.I.E.L.D and no motivation to join the final battle, except for, as Caroline Siede puts it in her article, “simply to be around Steve.”

("Unfortunately, The Winter Soldier Was the Best Female-driven Superhero Film of

2014."). Similar character traits and narrative structures can be found in almost every female character that serves as the love interest in the MCU movies. They function as a stable point in the dangerous lives of their boyfriends. They are a nurturing element – this is very obvious with from the Iron Man franchise, who starts as Stark's assistant and is as such directly responsible for his well-being. Most of the main characters also struggles with expectations that are laid on them, which is a problem their love interests lack.

It is interesting that while most of the Marvel superhero movies introduce a female love interest for their hero, Captain America: The Winter Soldier lacks such a character.

There are three female characters that could serve this role, but they are all kept from becoming the love interest. First of them is Peggy Carter, who occupies the position of

15 Fictional terorist organization 40 Rogers' love interest in Captain America: The First Avenger. However, given the fact she lived through more than seventy years Rogers spend in a suspended animation, her age – and her mental state, as she is depicted to be suffering from a late stage of the Alzheimer’s disease - puts her clearly outside the traditional love interest range.

The second one is , which is introduced as Rogers' neighbor.

Her stylization invokes the girl next door trope – an archetype of an all-American girl or women, safe and known (Winchell, 73). This is further supported by the fact that she is a nurse like Rogers' mother (Captain America: The First Avenger). Moreover, in the 616 comics canon, she is Rogers' lover. However, this potential relationship is sunk when it becomes clear that Sharon Carter is an S.H.I.E.L.D agent posing as a civilian to keep an eye on Rogers. From Rogers' behavior in the scene when they meet for the first time after this fact is revealed, it is clear that the evolution of their relationship towards a romantic one is, at best, delayed (Captain America: The Winter Soldier).

The last potential female love interest in the movie is Natasha Romanoff, a member of the Avengers and an S.H.I.E.L.D agent who is working with Rogers during the whole movie. Her role in Captain America: The Winter Soldier is, however, closer to that of a platonic partner that in action movies is usually reserved for men (“Captain America:

The Winter Soldier Review, Part 3 - Black Widow & Falcon.”). She even “sabotages” her potential romantic relationship with Rogers by acting as a “matchmaker” - in the scene where Rogers and his team are rescuing the hostages from the ship Lemurian Star, she is constantly suggesting different woman as a potential partners from Rogers (Captain

America: The Winter Soldier). The only time when she engages in something that can be read as a romantic/sexual behavior with Rogers is when she kisses him on the escalator:

41 Natasha Romanoff: Kiss me.

Steve Rogers: What?

Natasha Romanoff: Public displays of affection make people very uncomfortable.

(Captain America: The Winter Soldier)

She employs the heteronormative narrative of the displays of affection oinpublic: too intimate to be comfortable to watch (which helps her to divert the attention of their pursuers) but normal enough not to draw attention.

Both Romanoff’s and Wilson’s behavior and relation to Rogers are transgressive against heteronormative gender-normative assumptions. Wilson is depicted as caring and nurturing (traditionally seen as a feminine quality) and his connection with Rogers is based on emotions. That stands against the traditional image of masculinity and masculine relationship. Romanoff's relationship with Rogers, on the other hand, is more similar to a traditional movie depiction of a masculine friendship. While her use of sexuality and emotional manipulation as weapon is something that is stereotypical for a female fighter character, she at the same time dismisses the heteronormative narrative by positioning herself deliberately outside the position of a potential romantic interest.

3. THE CASE OF PEGGY CARTER AND EDWIN JARVIS

In the original 616 universe, Edwin Jarvis appeared for the first time in the #59 as a butler of Anthony Stark and the Avengers. In the movie and television universe, he was initially portrayed as an artificial intelligence created by Stark and based on his memories of the original Edwin Jarvis (Iron Man 2: Public Identity Vol. 1 #1, 15).

This was done to avoid the similarities with Alfred Pennyworth16.

16 Bruce Wayne's butler in the franchise 42 When discussing this character from the perspective of the gender transgression, the most important is the version of Edwin Jarvis as played by James D'Arcy in the TV series Marvel's Agent Carter, where he acts as Carter's sidekick while she is trying to clean

Howard Stark's name after he was accused of high treason. This is already a departure from the traditional image of the hero/sidekick relationship, where the pair is usually of the same gender or with woman on the position of the sidekick. But their relationship and their personality traits in general are subverting the stereotypical idea of masculine and feminine.

The transgression of the gendered assumptions starts with the deliberate lack of any romantic relationship between Carter and Jarvis or even a potential for such a relationship. It is common for shows with mixed-gender central pair to have a romantic tension between them, leading to a romantic/sexual relationship in later seasons – e.g.,

Seeley Booth and Temprance Brennan in Bones or Fox Mulder and Dana Scully in The X-

Files. Marvel's Agent Carter, on the other hand, undermines this possibility by mentioning

Edwin Jarvis's wife in the first episode (“”) and building their relationship throughout the series, even though Ana Jarvis is not physically present until the second season. This is further emphasized in the second season, when Carter and Ana

Jarvis meet for the first time. In this scene, Ana Jarvis arrives to find her husband lying on

Carter (“A View In The Dark”). Stereotypically, this would lead to Ana Jarvis presuming that her husband is having an affair with Carter, which would be further supported by the fact that Mr. Jarvis is spending most of his time with Carter, and is keeping this fact from his wife. She instead correctly recognize that they are merely fighting, and the whole scene plays out as a subversion of this stereotype rather than enforcing it.

The characteristics that are assigned to Mr. Jarvis and Carter does not correspond to masculine/feminine norm. Jarvis is assigned with many traits that are traditionally seen

43 as feminine – he is nurturing and caring, more emotional, and also, for the most of the time, submissive. While most of this behavior can be explained by him being butler, it is shown that he behaves the same even in private - he is shown to prepare soufflé for his wife (“Now Is Not The End”). In the comic book version, he is shown serving as a parental figure for the newcomers in the . The tie-in materials to the Iron Man movies also indicate that he had served as primary caretaker for Tony Stark during his childhood. In his relationship to Carter, his role is to support Carter and serve as a normalizing element.

Peggy Carter, on the other hand, shows many qualities that are more usual in male characters. This is apparent at the first sight from her fighting style. Many female characters in the Marvel universe use a fighting style that puts a lot of emphasis on the esthetic aspect of the fight to the point of sexualization. Typical user of this style is

Agent Carter's character Dorothy Underwood, a Soviet spy trained by the Red Room17.

Carter's own style, on the other hand, is much more simple, straightforward and traditionally masculine. Gavia Baker-Whitelaw described it in her review as Carter

“slamming heavy objects into men until they fall over,” ("Marvel's 'Agent Carter' Packs a

Punch."). There is also her willingness to sacrifice others, even people close to her and herself, if the situation requires it (“”), which is connected to a certain emotional reservedness more common in male characters.

This presence of masculine elements in her personality, however, does not mean that Carter rejects her femininity. From the first shot of the series, where Carter walks through a grey crowd of men, contrasting in her fashionable blue coat and red fedora

(“Now Is Not The End'), it is emphasized that she is still a very feminine character.

However, this is not depicted as being in any contradiction with her masculine side and her

17 A fictitious K.G.B. espionage training program focused solely on women 44 feminine and masculine traits are even mixed in the same scene – e.g., when she is defusing a bomb (masculine) using the contends of her kitchen and a perfume bottle

(feminine) (“Bridge And Tunnel”).

From the perspective of gender and gender transgression, the most important aspect is the way the transgressive traits are treated in the narrative. It is common that masculine traits in female are seen as positive and feminine traits in male are seen as negative, and that adopting masculine characteristic is necessary for a female character to be a hero.

In Marvel's Agent Carter, however, the masculine traits of Agent Carter or feminine traits of Edwin Jarvis are never commented as something out of place. While Carter is sometimes mocked by other characters, it is always for her efforts to success as a woman in a masculine occupation, not for her failure to perform her femininity. Similarly, Jarvis' femininity is never ridiculed or even mentioned, both by the characters and the narrative.

4. THE SLUT-SHAMING OF IRON MAN

Tony Stark, AKA Iron Man, is often seen by the public as an epitome of masculinity manifested through his wealth, inventions and his promiscuity – in The Avengers, Stark even self-identifies as “genius, billionaire, playboy, philanthropist” .

His masculinity is maybe much more refined than Thor's, but still very traditional. In his article "'With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility:' Cold War Culture and the Birth of

Marvel Comics", Robert Genter even describes Stark's sexuality as a part of his effort to reclaim his masculinity which was damaged by the loss of autonomy Stark suffers during his captivity (961). However, Stark's sexuality is often depicted and framed in a way which is stereotypically for the depiction of female sexuality. He takes the passive position in his relationships, being the pursued rather than the pursuer. In several of his

45 relationships, he was even explicitly abused by his partner, which is stereotypically seen as a strictly women's issue. Moreover, his sexuality is framed as a weakness – to the point that it can be described as a slut-shaming.

Slut-shaming is an act of criticizing and stigmatizing someone for their real or presumed sexual activities or for behavior that is seen as connected with sexuality, such as the manner of dressing or personal grooming, as a way of assuming control over their body and behavior. This is a bigger problem for women due to the double standard where sexual promiscuity in men is seen as a sign of masculinity, while the same behavior in women is deemed amoral. It can thus be seen as a transgression of gendered expectations when this criticism is turned towards a man – especially one who is at least presumed to be heterosexual, as slut-shaming of men is more common in the gay community.

In the case of Tony Stark, this tactics is used by Stark's antagonists and enemies, who perceive his presumed promiscuity as sign of a weak will. This is depicted in the 1998

The Invincible Iron Man And Captain America Annual. In this issue, Tony Stark is pulled into a virtual reality by the villain Metallo, who, after finding out that Stark is not controlled by him, remarks: “Since when does a playboy like you have the will to resist me?” (14). By emphasizing Stark's playboy status, Metallo makes explicit that sexual promiscuity, even in men, is a sigh of weakness.

Similarly, in Avengers #12, a villain called is threatening Stark as a last resort before losing the battle: “Well, I still have the reality gem18. What about a reality where a guy like you doesn't even have a...?” (12). From the context, it can be safely assumed that the threat was of emasculation. While this is a commonly used thread towards men in general due to the perceived connection between penis and masculinity, the difference here is in the exact wording. The phrase guy like you is setting Stark apart from the others and

18 Magic artefact that grants its user control over the reality 46 positions his sexuality as the defining and only part of his identity. His promiscuity is not a sign of masculinity, but, once again, something that can be used against him.

This use of Stark's sexuality against him repeat also when a villain is trying to establish their superiority over him. In Invincible Iron Man #503, Stark is forced by the villain into an extremely submissive, sexually charged position – kneeling, begging, and de facto kissing the feet of the villain (14). While the scene could be read as an example of a queer-coded villain, there are several differences that set it apart. First, in the traditional scene where hero is interrogated/tortured/blackmailed by the queer-coded villain, the villain is actively performing his queerness, while hero is passive and visibly disgusted. Here, it is Stark who begins the scene. Moreover, it is shown later that there was no sexual gratification for the villain in Stark's behavior. He is explicitly depicted as perceiving Stark's sexualized behavior as something shameful (Invincible Iron Man #503,

28).

The depiction of Stark's sexuality as something weak and inappropriate is an unusual tactic in the context of how male sexuality is perceived. However, it is much more common in depiction of male queer sexuality. And while Stark is explicitly shown as only being in relationship with women, there are hints that allow to read him as bisexual.

The first is in The Invincible Iron Man Vol 3 #58, where Stark is captured in a virtual reality by his former friend, Tiberius Stone. Tiberius Stone is shown surrounded by the group of people, from which women can be all identified as Stark's sexual partners, while men remain unknown. As it is shown in the previous issues that Stone has a habit of seducing Stark's lovers as a way to humiliate him (Iron Man Vol 3 #56), it can be deduced that all people depicted here had a sexual relationship with Stark – not excepting men.

47 The second example is from The Invincible Iron Man Vol 3 #30, where Stark is abducted by a suit of armor that gained consciousness. The armor acts as a jealous stalker/ex-lover and explicitly expresses its love towards Stark (Iron Man Vol 3 #30, 9).

This is, once again, a example of a queer-coded villain. Much more interesting, however, is Stark's behavior after the armor destroys itself to save Stark's life. He is clearly distraught, begging the armor to stay alive (Iron Man Vol 3 #30, 28).

Both of these examples are evidently problematic. In both of them is queerness depicted much more prominently in the villains, and Stark's relationship with characters that are presented as potencial sexual partners can be disregarded or, in the second example, seen as fueled by a Stockholm syndrome. In context of the general way Stark's sexuality is treated, there is a certain queer subtext that is not acknowledged by the authors, but is definitely noticed by the readers. The issue of Stark's queerness is later revisited during the Axis storyline, as is analyzed in the chapter 1.6. – The Superior Iron Man.

48 CHAPTER IV: NEW TEAMS, NEW REPRESENTATION

There are several arguments that appear repeatedly when queer representation in the media – especially media targeted at children and teens – is discussed. The first, that due to the relative low percentage of queer people in the society, it would be unrealistic to have a queer character in every single piece of media. The second, that queer stories have to be focused only on the fact that the character is queer. The third, that queer stories are inherently sexual and thus have to be only about adults and targeted on adults. And the last one, that queer characters are always only a publicity stunt aimed on “politically correct activists” and that stories with them could never be economically successful and popular with the audience.

These arguments are often taken by the editors as a reason – or justification - not to publish stories with queer characters. That makes the rare occasions when such a story goes into print even more important. It does not ensure that these stories will not be problematic in some aspect or that there will be no controversy surrounding them. But even a limited or imperfect representation is still preferable to representation limited to villains and jokes (as described in the previous chapter) or no representation at all.

The two comics I am examining in this chapter – Brian K. Vaughan's Runaways and Young Avengers by and Kieron Gillen – both feature a team of young superheroes and are primarily aimed at teenaged and young adult readers. I examine how successful these comic books are in the depiction of queer characters and what problems their representation have, as well as the reaction of the readers to these comics.

49 1. RAINBOW LESBIANS AND GENDERFLUID ALIENS – RUNAWAYS

Runaways were created in 2003 by Brian K. Vaughan as a part of Marvel's imprint. Tsunami turned out unsuccessful, but thanks to its sales, Runaways were relaunched in February 2005. It continued for three volumes until the November 2009, when it was put on hiatus for an undefined time. A fourth volume was produced in 2015 as a part of the Secret Wars crossover event. However, this volume featured a different cast than the previous series and will not be taken into account.

The story is centered around a team of children who run away from their homes after finding out their parents are members of a crime organization called The

(Runaways vol1 #1, 24). The series often parodies tropes common in superhero stories, like code names – which are used by the team at the beginning, but most of the heroes return to their civil name by the end of the first volume – team names – despite the series name, the title Runaways is only used once (Runaways vol2 #26, 4) – and costumes – the only one that is worn by a team member is made by the youngest member of the team out of a bed sheet (Runaways vol1 #11, 24).

In their representation of minorities and underrepresented groups are Runaways well above the average of the Marvel Comics. From the nine characters that are part of the team during the first three volumes, four of them are a person of color or at least has an outward appearance of one19 (although only three of them were members of the team at the same time). Six members are female or presenting as such for the most of the time, and one of the heroines is overweight. For this thesis, however, the most important characters are and her partner, .

19 Xavin is an shapeshifting alien using a form of an African-American person, Victor Mancha is an android with an appearance of a Latino teenager. 50 Unlike the X-men franchise, Karolina's queerness is not depicted metaphorically through a fictional "weirdness". However, her sexual identity is not revealed immediately.

Although there are hints on her sexuality from the issue #1, where she abandons a flirtatious chat with a boy to comment on the attractiveness of her female friend, it is not explicitly confirmed until the issue #7 of the second volume. In some moments, the comics almost seems to be trying to convince the readers that Karolina's behavior is, in fact, result of her being an alien and not a sign of her queerness - a strategy that had already been used before (see chapter 1.1. Wolverine vs. Northstar). This reading is further supported in the issue #9, where Karolina shows interest in a boy and kisses him. Albeit it does not guarantee that she is heterosexual, it would certainly made the argument easier would the authors be forced to change Karolina's sexuality. It is, however, also possible that this was done on purpose to invoke this trope. Moreover, it is hinted by the context that

Karolina's behavior was caused by her desire to feel "normal" (Runaways #9, 14).

The important fact about Karolina Dean from the perspective of queer representation is that her sexuality is not her only characteristic and motivation behind her storyline. Her story arc is focused more generally on coming to terms with her identity – not only as a lesbian, but also as an alien, a superhero and a daughter of villains. This, however, does not mean that her depiction is completely unproblematic. While she is not killed off, as often happens to queer characters, she still disappears from the story for several issues (from #8 to #14 of the second volume). On a much lighter note,

The Rainbow Hub also mentioned in their commentary on Karolina Dean that "Maybe, next time, we can get all that visibility and transparency without the really horrible pun of our gay character being a literal giant, sparkly rainbow?" ("BAMF Women Superheroes:

The Visibility of Karolina Dean"), alluding to her ability to emit multicolored light.

51 The other queer (or at least queer-coded) character is Karolina's partner, Xavin.

Karolina's is, unbeknown to her, betrothed to Xavin as a part of the deal that would stop a war between Karolina's and Xavin's homeworlds, as well as prevent a possible attack on

Earth. While she is willing to marry Xavin to ensure peace, Karolina still refuses, as Xavin is a man and their marriage would thus be loveless. Xavin is, however, a , an alien with the ability to change their appearance at will. To quote: “For us, changing a gender... is no different from changing hair color.” (Runaways vol2 #8, 18).

There are two different queer interpretation of Xavin. The first possibility is to read

Xavin as genderfluid - that is, their gender identity fluctuates over time between male, female and other. This version is supported by The Official Handbook of the Marvel

Universe, but also by Vaughan himself. Throughout the comics, Xavin appearance changes according to the situation - female when interacting with Karolina, male-Skrull when fighting and male on the occasions they need to appear more powerful – e.g., in front of a sexist mob boss (Runaways vol2 #25, 4) or while playing board games. In this scene,

Xavin themselves comments on their gender identity.

Molly: It's just, I think everybody would be more comfortable if you could maybe

just look like a girl forever.

Xavin: And I'm sure some people would be more comfortable if Karolina liked

males. Or if you were not a genetic mutation. But I am not like everybody else, and

that means you will have to learn to accept something new and different.

(Runaways vol2 #22, 16)

After the series is overtaken by a different writer, Joss Whedon, the interpretation of Xavin changes. While Xavin still uses both male and female form, there is a much stronger implication that only one of those forms is default for them. This is confirmed in

52 Runaways vol2 #29, when during a fight with Karoline, Xavin unconsciously shifts from their currently used shape to a female form they are using for most of the series:

Xavin: I simply wasn't concentrating... maintaining a false shape does take a

measure of effort. What has happened that is good?

Molly: Dumbo, you girled out! That makes this the real you?

Xavin: I didn't realize that was in doubt. (18)

This scene thus confirms Whedon's interpretation of Xavin as woman instead of genderfluid. She can be read as transgender – as her former default form and her Skrull form are masculine – which is a group as underrepresented in comics as genderfluid. Also, it is possible that this change was made in reaction to the previous Civil War: Young

Avengers/Runaways crossover. In this story, Xavin is maintaining a male form even in situations when in the regular series, a female form would had been used. Karolina is also shown to be unsure with Xavin's actual gender: “He's not my boyfriend! She's my girlfriend... sometimes. Kind of.” (Civil War: Young Avengers/Runaways #1, 3). This led some of the readers to believe that Xavin is using a female form only for Karolina's sake and is actually a male, and Karolina is delusional when identifying Xavin as a women at all. However, Whedon's reading is still inconsistent with the previous series and it robs the character of some of their complexity.

However well executed is Xavin's depiction in the most of the Runaways, in the end, they did not escape the usual fate of the queer characters. While they were not killed – at least not on-screen – they disappeared from the story when Xavin, pretending to be

Karolina, is captured by the last survivors of Karolina's race to be tried for a treason. They have not appeared in a comics since. Karolina, on the other hand, still appears in

53 the comics sporadically and she was shown dating Julia Powers in #28

(16).

2. AM I THE ONLY ONE STRAIGHT HERE - YOUNG AVENGERS AND LOKI

Young Avengers were created in 2005 by Allan Heinberg and . After the first volume (2005 – 2006), the team appeared in several tie-ins to the universe-wide events – such as Civil War, or Dark Reign – and in the Avengers:

The Children's Crusade miniseries. In 2013, the series was relaunched as a part of the

Marvel NOW! campaign20, with Kieron Gillen as a new writer.

As in the Runaways before, queer representation in the Young Avengers surpasses what is common in a more prominent comics titles – the comics have even won the GLAAD Media Award in 2005 and 2014 for both of its volumes. From the sixth issue of the first volume, there is an openly gay pair in the team's roster, William Kaplan and

Theodore Altman - although there is no explicit kiss until the Avengers: The Children's

Crusade #9 in March 2012 (20). In the second volume, they are joined by lesbian America

Chavez, bisexual David Alleyne and also bisexual, genderfluid Loki. The sexual identity of two other characters, Noh-Varr and Thomas Shepherd, is not discussed into a greater detail, but there is room left for speculations. In a comical reversion to the “normal” state of the queer representation and the “token queer” trope, this prompted the last member of the team, Kate , to ask if she is “the only person on this team who's straight” (Young

Avengers Vol. 2 #15, 18).

In the following chapter, I want to focus on how queerness is depicted in the Young

Avengers series and how the comics stands in comparison with the Runaways series

20 Brand used to relaunch several ongoing Marvel series to attract new readers 54 and with the situation in the Marvel Comics in general. I want to also take a closer look into the character of Loki and how he is depicted not only in the Young Avengers comics, but also in the Loki: Agent of Asgard series and the older comics, movies and in the mythology that was inspiration for his character.

While the relationship between Altman and Kaplan is not canonically confirmed until the issue #6, the hints and allusions in the previous issues was enough for the fans to start assuming. In the second issue's readers' reactions, reader Phillip Gasper asked if there was flirting between Altman and Kaplan and praised the authors for bringing in a queer character without making it “an event of the season” (Young Avengers #2, 24). In the next issue, Jordan Crisp mentioned in his letter to the authors one of the reasons why queer representation matters so much: “If something like that existed when I was 15 (only 6 years ago), it would helped me understand my sexuality much sooner...” (Young Avengers

#3, 23). And for the next five issues, this discussion have completely took over the letter column. While the majority of the reactions were positive, there were some that saw the inclusion of a queer couple as inappropriate. Probably the most reacted upon were a letter from James Meeley, who stated that “comics were never meant to be an outlet for changing society views or forcing sensitive issues to be discussed among the readership” and that they should primarily “entertain in an all-ages type of manner” (Young Avengers

#3, 24). This letters highlights the arguments that are often used against the queer representation in media. The first is that the comic books – although this argument is used for other forms of pop-culture, too – are only supposed to entertain without exploring any real-life issues. However, this argument not only frames queerness as a special issue instead of an inseparable part of our reality, but it also undermines the position of comic books as a valid art form.

55 With formulations like “forcing sensitive issues” or “pander to every taste within society” (Young Avengers #3, 23), Meeley uses another argument that is common in discussions about the representation – that anything, except for the false neutral of a white, heterosexual, cis, able-bodied male protagonist is never an artistic choice of the author, but either a political statement that was forced into the story by some kind of pressure group, or a calculated effort to appease those groups, often for financial reasons. This is not just a question of queer representation – the same argument emerges when a female character is given any role outside of a fanservice in a media that is presumed to be an exclusively male space21, or when a person of color is cast for a character that was either written as white or was presumed to be white by the audience22.

Meeley also states his conviction that “a super hero comics is not a platform for exploring “sexual identities”” (Young Avengers #3, 23). Later, he has specified that he never had any problem with the mere existence of a queer couple, but with the “sexual exploration” of any kind concerning the teen-aged characters (Young Avengers #5, 24).

Taking this second letter into context, it is possible that Meeley had simply misunderstood

Heinberg's commentary about his plans to “explore (the heroes') identities – sexual or otherwise – in the oncoming issues of the series (Young Avengers #2, 24) as a confirmation of an explicitly erotic content, but it still exposes the double standard of the perception of heterosexuality and queerness. Heterosexuality is viewed as standard, to the point where a character that displays no explicit sexual behavior is still perceived as such. Queerness, on the other hand, is often perceived as something inherently sexual and only manifesting through sexual acts. From this perspective, queerness is thus painted as something adult,

21 e.g., when Mad Max: Fury Road was described as “feminist propaganda” for having a female character ordering a male titular character

22 e.g., when the fans of Hunger Games were angered that black actors were cast to play characters of Rue and Thresh, despite the fact that both of the characters were described as such in the book 56 controversial and unsuitable for minors. Heinberg is clearly aware of this problem, as he states in his reply to Meeley's letter:

“...just as AVENGERS are about the super-heroic lives and loves of the classic

Avengers – from and Janet Van Dyne (a heterosexual couple) to Scarlet

Witch and the Vision (a mutant witch and a robot who married and had twins) –

YOUNG AVENGERS are about super-heroic lives and loves of the Young

Avengers...” (Young Avengers #3, 23)

However, the depiction of Kaplan's and Altman's relationship is still influenced by this perception. While the heterosexual couples in the comics openly share kisses, Kaplan and Altman remain very . It did not go unnoticed – in Young Avengers #12, reader

Eric Baysinger explicitly prompted the creators to show more intimacy between Kaplan and Altman. The letter itself disproves the notion of queer relationship as something that is shown only through sexual acts and even mocks it, as Baysinger is calling for “blatant hand holding” and “fingers running through a mop of hair” (Young Avengers #12, 26). This is amended in the second volume of the series. Not only that the physical intimacy of these character is made much more prominent - on the level of kissing - but Altman's and

Kaplan's love is crucial for the story. This does not mean that the queerness of this relationship has become a focus of this story, but the relationship itself – the series antagonist is manipulating them into a breakup to reach his goals, and it is Altman's love that allows the team to defeat the main villain (Young Avengers #13, 14). What is also important is that their story arc managed to avoid the “Bury you gays” trope, leaving the characters not only alive, but even happy and together. This is further confirmed by a story Happy Ever After, where Kaplan and Altman are shown in a flash-forward as older men, still living together (New Avengers #6)

57 The rest of the queer characters are not given nearly as much space as Altman and

Kaplan, but there are important in the context of the queer representation. David Alleyne –

Prodigy – outed himself as a bisexual in the Young Avengers #9 (7). He is one of the two characters from the series whose sexual identity was confirmed directly and in character, not from the context or by the author – the second one is Billy Kaplan, who explicitly identifies himself as “gay, Jewish Avengers fanboy” (The Ultimate

Collection - Avengers: Children's Crusade, 94). The revelation of Alleyne's bisexuality caused its share of controversy. He had never been portrayed as a bisexual before, so this was seen by some as an effort to push a queer agenda onto the readers. Even some members of the queer community regarded this decision as unfortunate due to Alleyne's mutant superpowers. He is able to absorb the knowledge, skills and, to a certain degree, characteristics of other people, so his bisexuality can be read as something he acquired through this ability (“Oh the inhumanity of it all!: Male bisexuality in Marvel Comics”).

This possibility is even hinted on by Alleyne's team-mate. However, Alleyne himself explains that this is not a case: “It was like an awakening. It was like realizing something that was always true and I just couldn't see it.” (Young Avengers #9, 7).

The queerness of the next character, America Chavez, is primarily confirmed by the author – on his blog, Gillen was asked if Chavez would ever feel attraction towards a man, to which he answered that he wrote her as identifying as a lesbian (“Another way to breath”). This was also indirectly confirmed by the comic. While she had a short relationship with a male member of her previous team (Young Avengers #10, 19), she later confirms that she was “just experimenting” (Young Avengers #15, 17), which can be not only read as a confirmation of Chavez's queerness, but also an allusion to a common trope of a girl “experimenting” with her sexuality and briefly identifying as a lesbian. Moreover,

58 Chavez was also raised by two women, but this fact is never portrayed as something abnormal.

The last character whose queerness I want to examine is Loki Laufneyson. This character is based on the Norse trickster deity of the same name and appeared for the first time in the comics #6 (1949), published by the Marvel predecessor, .

This version has little in common with both the mythological Loki and the character that has later became famous in the Marvel Comics. He is a member of the Olympians – species based on the Greek – and stylized to resemble the Christian image of the devil. Loki's official premiere in the Marvel Comics came in the year 1962, in Journey into Mystery #85, where he was reintroduced as one of the Asgardians – race of

Gods/aliens inspired by the Nordic mythology – and the arch-enemy of his step-brother,

Thor.

While the second incarnation of the Marvel Loki is closer to its mythological model than the version used in Venus – at least his connection with the Nordic mythology is preserved – there are still parts of his background and characterization that are different from the most recognized versions of Loki in mythology. Most of them – like Loki being

Thor's step-brother (Avengers #1, 5) instead of 's blood-brother (Bellows, 156) can be justified by the ambiguity of the source material or simply as mistakes made by the comic's authors. The most noticeable change in Loki's characterization, however, is his shift from a trickster towards a more traditional villain. This can be traced to Snorri Snorrason's

Prosaic Edda, where under the influence of the Christian worldview Loki turned into an enemy of the Gods.

While Loki from the Marvel Comics is depicted more as a straightforward villain, he still has some characteristics that are typical for a trickster. The most important is what

Lewis Hyde describes, in his book Trickster Makes This World: Mischief, Myth and Art as 59 “boundary-crossing” (7). Tricksters transgress the social and cultural boundaries, one of them being the boundary of gender and sexuality. In the mythology, there are stories where

Loki is depicted as either cross-dressing or even changing his sex. When Thor is forced to pretend he is a woman to retrieve his hammer from giants, Loki acts as his maid and unlike

Thor, he never voices any concern that he will be ridiculed for it (Bellows, 176). There is also a mention that he had lived long-term as a woman, even giving birth (Bellows, 159).

There are also instances of Loki using seidr, magic that was perceived as specifically feminine (Loptson).

In the Marvel comics, however, this fluidity in a gender and sexuality is often used to highlight Loki's villainy, as well as his status of an outsider. Asgardian culture is depicted as highly masculine - preferring a muscular body type, body and facial hair, interest in fight and physical strength. Loki, who in Marvel is adopted/kidnapped from a different culture as a child, is an antithesis of a proper Asgardian man. He is much thinner, cleanly shaved – or maybe even unable to grow a beard – and prefers magic to an actual physical conflict. This lack of traditional masculinity is even emphasized by the costume design of the movie version. Male Asgardian characters are usually dressed in armor, symmetrical, and brightly colored, often using red. Costumes of the Asgardian women, on the other hand, are more muted, using shades of green and grey, and are asymmetrical. Loki's costume balances between those two opposites. While it is masculine at the first glance, underneath, there are asymmetries – different lapels and shoulder pads on the each side, metal decorations on only one side of his torso (Joy). Loki is also able to assume a female identity. While in the most current comics it is usually done by shapeshifting, the most prominent example was in Thor vol. 3, No. 5 (Jan. 2008), when

Loki took over the body of the goddess .

60 This cannot be seen as an example of a queer representation, as while Loki is able to change his sex, it is never presented as changing a gender. However, the stories still use many harmful tropes common in the depiction of LGBT+ individuals in media. Loki is a typical example of a queer villain, as his queerness is presented as something that exaggerate or confirms his status of a villain. Sometimes, it is even portrayed as the cause of Loki's villainess, as it highlights Loki's otherness, which in turn led to his alienation from Asgard (Thor). Moreover, he exemplifies harmful tropes common for trans representation in media, most prominently the notion that transgender people are being inherently deceiving in their presentation. The most common form of this trope – where a transgender woman is portrayed as a man pretending to be female to trick other men into having sex with him – is so prevalent that it even has an impact on the real world.

There is a legal defense used to justify transphobic attacks stating that the failure to disclose one's “real” (i.e. genital) sex accounts for an intentional deception. Loki's behavior conforms to this notion - he does not change his sex to conform his own changing gender identification, but to use female sex appeal to trick other heterosexual characters.

The version of Loki used in Young Avengers was originally created by Matt

Fraction for the comics Thor #617, but his creation stemmed from two events of the year

2011. First, Loki sacrificed himself in #4, only to be reborn in a much younger, amnesiac version, accompanied by his old consciousness in a form of a magpie (Thor

#617). While this version of Loki was later killed and possessed by the consciousness of the original Loki in Journey into Mystery #645, this reimagine still lead to a departure from

Loki's original characterization as a villain towards more of an anti-hero interpretation.

Moreover, in April, the movie Thor was released, starring a British actor Tom Hiddleston as Loki. Hiddleston's performance in the role, as well as the new interpretation of Loki's backstory, lead to a growth in Loki's popularity. This has probably influenced Marvel's

61 decision about Loki's character development, his involvement in Young Avengers series and the creation of Loki's solo series, Loki: Agent of Asgard.

Loki's queerness is already present in Kieron Gillen's second volume of Young

Avengers. In the final issue of the series, he is depicted flirting with his teammate, David

Alleyne (Young Avengers Vol 2 #15, 10). While it is quickly glossed over as a joke by

Loki, it seems that it is probably to hide his emotions after Alleyne's rejection. His behavior is also perceived as sincere by other members of his team (Young Avengers Vol 2

#15, 17). The most important fact is, however, that Loki's queerness is not depicted as a symptom of his moral depravity, as it was in the older series, but just as an aspect of his character.

This trend continues in the Loki: Agent of Asgard series. Al Ewing, the writer of the series, declared on his Tumblr account that: “Loki is bi and I'll be touching on that.

He'll shift between genders occasionally as well. (“Loki is Bi”.). In the comics itself, there are allusions to Loki's changeable gender and sex – often interpreted as genderfluidity by the fans. Loki is repeatedly referred to as a “child who is both (son and daughter)” (Loki:

Agent of Asgard Vol 1 #11, 12; Original Vol 1 #5.5, 17). Moreover, in Loki: Agent of

Asgard Vol 1 #14, Loki uses a female form without it being necessary for the plot – like when Loki is working in a women-only team (Original Sin Vol 1 #5.3, 21). Loki even implies that the gender fluidity is an essential part of their identity. “I'm never going to be just one thing, am I? I'm not “goddess of some stories”...” (Loki: Agent of Asgard #14, 8)

There is also a scene in issue #5 where Loki mentions that it requires a great amount of power for him to shapeshift. When his companion points out that she had saw him changing his appearance, he tells her, while shapeshifting into a female form, that: „I can turn into myself. That's no problem.” (Loki: Agent of Asgard #5, 10). In this form, Loki uses female pronouns (Loki: Agent of Asgard #14, 9) and is described with these pronouns

62 in the narrator's text – implying that Loki's shapeshifting is not just a matter of sex, but of a gender.

63 CONCLUSION

The representation of the minorities in the media, being it based on the race, religion, ability, gender and gender presentation or sexuality, has always been a topic of a heated discussion for both scholars and public, and comics books are no exception. On one side, there are voices that see this issue as inherently politically charged, and as such as inappropriate for such a medium as comics books - especially mainstream super-heroic comics books. The very inclusion of a minority character is often seen as if not a direct promotion of a certain lifestyle or ideology, than at least as an attempt to discuss something that is unsuited for the perceived age and social group of the comic books readers. Any attempt for a greater diversity is seen as either an appeasement to the culture of political correctness, or a cynical cash grab at the expense of the more liberal readers and minorities.

These arguments, however, are undermining the very position of comics as a valid art form. When comics are framed as unable to function as anything more that a source of amusement, they are also marked as insignificant in a longer run and void of any deeper meaning. Also, there is an issue of marking the very existence of the minorities as political. While there are, without any doubt, political issues - being it discrimination, prejudice, or the question of the privileges – that cannot be separated from the narrative concerning the minorities. This, however, does not mean that a minority character have to exist in a work of fiction only to point out this issues. In its essence, such a character should exist because such people exist in reality and that the media should, at least to a degree, reflect this reality. Without a conscious effort for a greater diversity, the protagonist often settles into a mold of the false neutral - white, male, heterosexual, cis- sexual, able-bodied - as anything that falls outside this image is perceived as the other and thus politicized. 64 The representation of the queer minority, both from the perspective of the gender and sexual/romantic orientation, is a special issue even in the context of the representation due the perceived inherent sexual subtext. Any orientation outside heterosexuality is perceived as manifesting only through the physical intimacy (or, in the case of the asexual spectrum, the lack of thereof). The argument is thus that the presence of a queer character automatically renders the piece of fiction unsuitable for children. This, in turn, makes it unacceptable for comics and comics based media, which are primarily targeted at children, to contain such a character. If there have to be a queer character, this reasoning claims, it can be only in an adult-only material with an appropriate rating.

However, there are flaws in this argument. It ignores the demographical changes in the comics books readership, where the average age went, since 1995, from 11-12 years to 18-20 (Bongco, 223). The center of this argument, moreover, once again lies in the false neutral. Heterosexuality is seen as a given norm, something that is presumed until proven otherwise. Any other orientation else must be proven, and as there is an effort to preserve the false neutrality of the protagonist, almost anything short a public intercourse can and will be interpreted as joke, misinformation or baseless fanservice, or simply ignored.

While the first openly gay character in the Marvel Comics, Jean-Paul Baubier alias Northstar, did not appeared until the end of the 1970s, there is a long running comics series that can be read as a metaphor for the issues of the queer community, and that is the

X-Men franchise. The position of the mutants as the outcasts from the society allowed many groups to identify with the problems of the fictitious minority - being it African-

Americans, queer community or even just geeks. What made X-Men so suitable as a stand in for the queer issues is both the genetic basis of their powers - echoing the “born this way” argument that appears in the discussion of the queer rights - and the fact that they can intersect with any other minority.

65 The first chapter, unfortunately, maps the instances of misinterpretation of the queer characters and the issues that often appears in their depiction. There is an issue of the so-called "bury your gays" trope - the tendency to kill off queer characters disproportionally to their percentage in the cast. This is exemplified on the characters of

Jean-Paul Baubier and Curtis Doyle alias Freedom Ring. Both of them were killed by a much more popular, canonically heterosexual characters, which creates a dangerous bias as to on which side the audience's sympathies are supposed to be. Doyle's case is even more problematic as he was heralded as example of the queer representation in Marvel

Comics, even thou the creators have already decided to kill him.

Baubier is also an example of another issue, which is connected to the reluctance of the authors and producers to depict an actual queer character in the comics. He was imagined as gay from his creation and was supposed to be shown as HIV positive, which would connect him to another issue prominent in the media depiction of the queer community. This plot line was, however, abandoned and Baubier was "outed" as being of a fairy descend.

Baubier was later canonically confirmed as gay. The exact opposite happened to

Johnny Bart - Rawhide Kid - who was reimagined as gay in the restart of his series in

2003. His run was surrounded by controversies - Marvel was criticized for their decision to depict character previously perceived as heterosexual as gay, for the exclusion of this series from the multi character western crossover on the basis that his series was labeled as mature just because of the sexuality of the main character. In the end, Marvel decided to side with the more conservative and anti-queer of the conflict and Bart was revealed in the official handbook as only pretending to be gay to confuse others.

Next problem started as almost a juvenile argument between the creators and seems relatively benign in comparison. As a retribution for humiliation Wolverine was

66 subjected in Garth Ennis' comics, writer Frank Tieri decided take revenge on Frank Castle, alias Punisher, by "outing" him as gay in his comics. Reimagining such a popular masculine character as gay would be a bold move for queer representation. However, as the incident was never referenced after, Punisher's potential queerness had never chance to become anything more that a joke. And while there are much more dangerous stereotypes and tropes connected to queerness, there is still issue that queerness is portrayed by Tieri as an ultimate insult.

The last issue discussed in this chapter is the issue of queer villains. Having a villain that is also queer is not inherently problematic in a setting with an adequate queer representation. However, when the villain is the only queer character in the narrative or one of the very few, their characterization then skews the whole image of the queer minority in the fictitious universe and influence the way queerness is perceived in the real life. Moreover, a queer villain as not just a villain who is also queer. It is a villain whose queerness is used to enforce their villainy. This is very much true in the case of Jim

Shooter's "...A Very Personal Hell". While Shooter insisted that there was no intend in casting gay men - very stereotypically and offensive depicted – as the villains of the story, the fact is that in the time of publishing, they made up the entirety of the queer population of the Marvel Universe and was thus fundamental for the formation of the image of the LGBT+ minority in Marvel Comics.

In the case of Tony Stark in the Superior Iron Man storyline is the issue slightly different. As there were a couple of queer characters already in the Marvel Universe at the time of publishing of this comics, the problem is not that he is the sole representative of the whole minority, but that his queerness is depicted as a symptom of his villainy instead of being one of his character traits. Also, the queer-coding of his character become more

67 prevalent after he is turned into a villain, and vanishes again as soon as he reverts to his normal morality.

There were openly queer characters among the mutants - e.g., the already mentioned Baubier - but the chapter dealing with the X-Men franchise is mostly focused on the metaphorical depiction of two issues that impact the queer community – the HIV/AIDS epidemic, depicted through the Legacy virus storyline, and the issue of the acceptance and the theoretical cure for homosexuality.

The Legacy storyline, while without a doubt an interesting take on the issue, suffered from a several problems. First, it repeats several tropes that appear even in the mainstream HIV/AIDS narrative. The focus is often shifted towards characters that could be perceived as “innocent” or more “normal” victims of the disease - most prominently a teen-aged girl without any manifested mutant powers, or a non-mutant characters - framing the others as somehow “deserving” the disease. Also, the storyline was isolated in the Marvel Universe, depicting the Legacy virus as a strictly mutant problem - something a “normal” person does not have to be concerned with. A more serious issue, however, stems from the fact that the Legacy virus is depicted as only infecting people with the X-gene. While it is an extension of the “mutation as homosexuality” metaphor, it also positions queer people as not entirely human.

As the mutation metaphor only works when queerness is perceived as an inborn quality, the X-men franchise also depicts the biggest problem that stems from this approach - the search for either a cure for this “condition”, or a preventive, eugenic measure. Once again, the biggest issue with this metaphor is connected with the very nature of the mutants as depicted in the comics. While most of the self-acceptance issues of the queer people stems from the behavior of the society, there are some mutant powers

68 that are objectively harmful for the person in which they manifested. Moreover, the mutant powers - unlike queerness - can actually make a person dangerous for the society.

The third chapter is concerned with two concepts that exist outside the traditional binary image of the gender and sexuality - bisexuality and gender transgression.

The question of bisexuality is explored in the chapter concerning Peggy Carter and

Howard Stark, as depicted in the TV series Marvel's Agent Carter. The comparison of

Carter's and Stark's relationship with Steve Rogers and the way it is manifested through their behavior and speech shows how Stark can be read as bisexual, but also how our internalized heteronormativity can skew our perception. What is perceived as romantic where the speaker is presumed to be of other gender than the object of the romance is often interpreted as platonic or possessive when there is a possibility of a same-sex relationship.

Stark's bisexuality is never openly confirmed by name. It is also never disproved or even commented on. While it is not perfect for the representation, it is still preferable to an outright denial. It can also be interpreted as a normalization of queerness, as Stark's sexuality is only questionable when heterosexuality is considered to be a default state.

The following sub-chapters, focused on the core cast of the Captain America:

The Winter Soldier and the duo of Peggy Carter and Edwin Jarvis in Agent Carter, examine the instances of gender transgression in these stories. The transgression in CA:TWS are mostly based on the disruption of the gendered expectation of the relationships between the characters. Natasha Romanoff - while still very feminine - is cast in the role that can be describe as a hero's best friend/action support, albeit her close relationship with Steve

Rogers puts her in a position where she could easily became a love interest. Not only is this assumption transgressed by Romanoff's lack of romantic connection with Rogers, but the role is transferred on a male character - Sam Wilson. In this character, we can see the type of gender transgression that is also present in Carter and Jarvis - feminine traits in

69 male characters, masculine in female ones and mixing of both traits. Many characteristics that are present in Wilson - empathy, nurturing tendencies, emotional stability - are common in female characters, more specifically in the character of the love interest.

Similarly, Carter's and Jarvis' behavior shows traits that are stereotypically seen as belonging to the opposite gender. What is important, however, is that those traits are not depicted as something unnatural or shameful, both by the narrative and the characters, which helps to highlight the artificial nature of the gender binary.

The last subchapter, “The Slut-shaming of Iron Man”, shows another case of mixing of feminine and masculine. While in the previous chapters the feminine and masculine traits were mixing in the behavior of the characters, this chapter focus more how gender transgression can be depicted in the behavior towards the character. Tony Stark's sexuality is depicted as something that is often used against him or seen as shameful - which is unusual for a heterosexual male sexuality, but common for queer or female sexuality. This causes the transgressive nature of Stark's sexuality to circle back to bisexuality, showing the interconnection between these two concepts.

The last chapter is concerned with two series in which the queer representation highly surpasses the average of the Marvel Comics – Runaways and Young Avengers.

The subchapter examining the Runaways is focused on the characters of Karolina Dean and Xavin. Despite the initial unclarity, Dean managed to avoid the same cop-out that had happened with Northstar, and her queerness is canonically confirmed. Xavin, thanks to the ability to shapeshift and the tendency to preset herself as a female despite of a masculine neutral form, can be read as a genderfluid or a trans character. This character is also an example of how important is the author for the queer representation – during the Runaways/Young Avengers crossover event, Xavin was presented by the author as

70 a male pretending to be a woman for the sake of his lesbian wife. This was, fortunately, reverted by the next writer of the series.

Young Avengers, especially the second volume written by Kieron Gillen, managed to follow through with their queer representation even further than Runaways, with the majority of their heroes either openly queer or at least possible to be read as such. Like

Runaway, this series also feature an openly gay couple – Willian Kaplan and Theodor

Altman. With this couple, Kieron's Young Avengers managed what much better known works of fiction focusing on a queer couple have not manage – centered the whole story around their love without making their sexuality its only topic, and what it’s more important, avoided the dreaded “Bury your gays” trope and actually gave their heroes a happy ending.

The character I examined to a greater detail is Loki Laufneyson. This character was central for the second volume of Young Avengers, from the point of view of the queer representation, however, he was interesting from the of his modern version in the Marvel Comics.

Loki draws a lot of his characterization from the Snorri Snorrason's Lokasenna, a retelling of the Nordic mythology influenced by the Christian point of view.

The contemporary version is a typical example of a queer-coded villain up until the year

2011, where his characterization begins to change due to Marvel decision to let Loki to be reborn in a younger incarnation, as well as his rising popularity after the movie version of

Thor was released. This led to a gradual shift in Loki's morality from a traditional villain towards an understandable antagonist and finally an anti-hero in Young Avengers and Loki:

Agent of Asgard. What is interesting is that during this shift, his queerness is not erased. On the contrary, he becomes genderfluid and bisexual, which can not only be deduced from the subtext, but is even confirmed by the author.

71 The queer representation in the Marvel Comics is moving from its unsure and problematic beginnings towards a more adequate and just state. This does not, however, mean that this is no longer an issue. The number of the queer characters, while rising, is still very limited and does not mirror the actual demographic reality. This is even more pronounced in the Marvel Cinematic Universe and other cinematic adaptations of the Marvel Comics, where the openly queer characters are often omitted, or is their queerness erased, as can be seen on the example of Mystique. Creators often justify this with concern that a movie with a queer protagonist would be a financial risk due to a limited potential viewership. The question is, however, how much is this argument based on an actual data and how much on dated assumptions, and if it is not just an excuse for

Marvel's own prejudice and the tendency to side with a vocal but less and less relevant group of their readers.

72 WORKS CITED

PRIMARY SOURCES

[Aaron, Jason (w), Dautermann, Russell (p,i).] Thor, Vol 4, #1 “If He Be

Worthy.” (Dec. 2014). [Marvel].

[Aaron, Jason (w), Deodato, Mike (p,i).] Original Sin, #7 “ vs. the

World” (Oct. 2014). [Marvel].

[Aaron, Jason, Al Edwing (w), Bianchi, Simone (p,i).] Original Sin, Vol. 1,

#5.5 “Thor & Loki: The Tenth Realm – Part Five of Five.” (Nov. 2014). [Marvel].

[Aaron, Jason, Al Edwing (w), Bianchi, Simone, Lee Garbett (p,i).] Original

Sin, Vol. 1, #5.3 “Thor & Loki: The Tenth Realm – Part Three of Five.” (Oct.

2014). [Marvel].

[Bendis, Brian Michael (w), Romita Jr., John (p), Janson, Klaus (I).] Avengers,

Vol.4, #12 “Who Will Wield the Gauntlet?” (Jun. 2011). [Marvel].

[Bunn, Cullen (w), Walta, Gabriel Hernandez (p), Walta, Gabriel Hernandez

(i).] Magneto, Vol. 3. #9 (Nov 2014). [Marvel].

[Busiek, Kurt (w), Zircher, Patrick (p), Emberlin, Randy (I).] The Invincible

Iron Man And Captain America Annual, Vol. 1. #1998 “Life & Liberty.” (Jan.

1999). [Marvel].

[Byrne, John (w,p,i).] Alpha Flight, Vol. 1, #1 “Tundra!” (Aug. 1983).

[Marvel].

[Casey, Joe, Justin Theroux (w), Kitson, Barry (p, I).] Iron Man 2: Public

Identity, Vol. 2. #1 “Public Identity Act One: No Reason.” (Jun. 2010). [Marvel].

73 [Claremont, Chris (w), Larroca, Salvador (p), Thibert, Art (I).] Uncanny X-

Men, Vol. 1. #388 “Dream's End (Part 1): The Past is but a Prologue!” (Jan

2001). [Marvel].

[DeMatteis, J.M. (w), Duursema, Jan (p), Milgrom, Al (I).] X-Factor, Vol. 1.

#100 “Mahapralaya!” (Mar 1994). [Marvel].

[Elwing, Al (w), Garbett, Lee (p,i).] Loki: Agent of Asgard, Vol.1, #11 “Turn

Away And Slam The Door.” (Apr. 2015). [Marvel].

[Elwing, Al (w), Garbett, Lee (p,i).] Loki: Agent of Asgard, Vol.1, #14 “Born

One Day and The Sun Didn't Shine.” (Jul. 2015). [Marvel].

[Engelhart, Steve, Mike Friedrich (w), Buscema, Sal (p), Colleta, Vince (I).]

Captain America, Vol. 1. #170 “J'Acusse!” (Feb 1974). [Marvel].

[Ennis, Garth (w), Robertson, Darick (p), Nelson, Mark (I).] Punisher, Vol. 5,

#17 “Aim Low.” (Dec. 2002). [Marvel].

[Fraction, Matt (w), Laroca, Salvatore (p,i).] Invincible Iron Man, Vol. 1, #503

“Fix Me, Part 3 – Fear Itself.” (Jun. 2011). [Marvel].

[Gabe, Christos (w), Moline, Karl (p), Fern, Jim (I).] Avengers Academy, Vol.

1, #28 “Homecoming – Part 2” (Jun . 2012). [Marvel].

[Gillen, Kieron (w), McKelvie, Jamie (p,i).] Young Avengers, Vol. 2, #10

“Mother's Day.” (Nov. 2013). [Marvel].

[Gillen, Kieron (w), McKelvie, Jamie (p,i).] Young Avengers, Vol. 2, #11

“Stage Nervous Breakdown.” (Dec. 2013). [Marvel].

[Gillen, Kieron (w), McKelvie, Jamie (p,i).] Young Avengers, Vol. 2, #13

“Young Avengers – Part Two” (Feb. 2014). [Marvel].

[Gillen, Kieron (w), McKelvie, Jamie (p,i).] Young Avengers, Vol. 2, #9 “The

Kiss and The Make-Up” (Oct. 2013). [Marvel].

74 [Gillen, Kieron (w), Cloonan, Becky, Ming Doyle, Joe Quinones, Jamie

McKelvie (p,i).] Young Avengers, Vol. 2, #15 “Resolution, Part 2” (Mar 2014).

[Marvel].

[Grell, Mike (w), Reis, Ivan (p), Pimental, Joe (I).] Iron Man, Vol. 3, #56

“Sympathy for the Devil – Part One.” (Aug. 2002). [Marvel].

[Heinberg, Allen (w), Cheung, Jim (p), Dell, John (I).] Young Avengers, Vol. 1,

#2 “Sidekicks (Part 2 of 6)” (May 2005). [Marvel].

[Heinberg, Allen (w), Cheung, Jim (p), Dell, John (I).] Young Avengers, Vol. 1,

#3 “Sidekicks (Part 3 of 6)” (Apr 2005). [Marvel].

[Heinberg, Allen (w), Cheung, Jim (p), Dell, John (I).] Young Avengers, Vol. 1,

#5 “Sidekicks (Part 5 of 6)” (Jun. 2005). [Marvel].

[Heinberg, Allen (w), Cheung, Jim (p), Livesay, John (I).] Young Avengers,

Vol. 1, #12 “Family Matters (Part 4 of 4)” (Aug 2006). [Marvel].

[Heinberg, Allen (w), Cheung, Jim (p), Morales, Mark (I).] Avengers: The

Children's Crusade, Vol. 1, #3 “The Children's Crusade – Part III.” (Jan 2011).

[Marvel].

[Heinberg, Allen (w), Cheung, Jim (p), Morales, Mark (I).] Avengers: The

Children's Crusade, Vol. 1, #9 “The Children's Crusade – Finale.” (May 2012).

[Marvel].

[Kirkman, Robert (w), Kuhn, Andy (p,i).] Marvel Team-Up, Vol. 3, #21

“Freedom Ring Part Two.” (Aug. 2006). [Marvel].

[Kirkman, Robert (w), Kuhn, Andy (p,i).] Marvel Team-Up, Vol. 3, #22

“Freedom Ring Part Three.” (Sep. 2006). [Marvel].

[Kirkman, Robert (w), Kuhn, Andy (p,i).] Marvel Team-Up, Vol. 3, #24

“Freedom Ring Conclusion” (Nov. 2006). [Marvel].

75 [Lee, Stan (w), Ayers, Dick (p), Reiman, Paul (I).] Tales to Astonish, Vol. 1,

#59 “Enter the Hulk.” (Sep. 1964(. [Marvel].

[Lee, Stan (w), Kirby, Jack (p), Reiman, Paul (I).] The Avengers, Vol. 1, #3

“The Avengers meet 'Sub-Mariner'” (Jan. 1964). [Marvel].

[Lee, Stan (w), Kirby, Jack (p), Reinman, Paul (I).] X-Men, Vol 1, #1 “X-

Men.” (Sep 1963.) [Marvel].

[Lee, Stan (w), Kirby, Jack (p), Stone, Chic (I).] Tales of Suspense, Vol 1. #59

“Captain America.” (Nov. 1964). [Marvel].

[Lee, Stan (w), Romita, John (p), Demeo, Mickey (i).] The Amazing Spider- man, Vol. 1. #50 “Spider-Man No More!” (Jul 1967). [Marvel].

[Lee, Stan, Larry Lieber (w), Heck, Don (p,i).] Tales of Suspense, Vol. 1. #39

“Iron Man Is Born!” (Mar. 1963). [Marvel].

[Lobdell, Scott (w), Bennett, Richard (p), Green, Dan (I).] Uncanny X-Men,

Vol. 1. #303 “Going Through the Motions.” (Aug 1993). [Marvel].

[Lobdell, Scott (w), Larroca, Salvador (p), Townsend, Tim (I).] Uncanny X-

Men, Vol. 1. #390 “The Cure.” (Mar 2001). [Marvel].

[Lobdell, Scott (w), Pacella, Mark (p), Panosian, Dan (I).] Alpha Flight, Vol. 1,

#106 “The Walking Wounded.” (Mar. 1992). [Marvel].

[Lobdell, Scott (w), Yu, Leinil Francis (p), Morales, Mark (I).] X-Men, Vol. 2.

#110 “One Tin Soldier Rides Away.” (Mar 2001). [Marvel].

[Lobdell, Scott, Chris Cooper (w), Conner, Amanda (p), Candelario, Harry (I).]

Excalibur, Vol. 1. #80 “Out of Time.” (Aug 1994). [Marvel].

[Mantlo, Bill (w), Brignam, June (p), Portacio, Whilce (I).] Alpha Flight, Vol.

1, #45 “Ressurection.” (Apr. 198&). [Marvel].

76 [Mantlo, Bill (w), Brignam, June (p), Portacio, Whilce (I).] Alpha Flight, Vol.

1, #50 “This Mortal Coin!” (Sep. 1987). [Marvel].

[Mantlo, Bill (w), Ross, David (p), Portacio, Whilce (I).] Alpha Flight, Vol. 1,

#39 “The Invasion of Atlantis!” (Oct. 1986). [Marvel].

[Mantlo, Bill (w), Ross, David (p), Portacio, Whilce (I).] Alpha Flight, Vol. 1,

#41 “It's Not Easy Being Purple.” (Dec. 1986). [Marvel].

[Mantlo, Bill (w), Ross, David (p), Portacio, Whilce (I).] Alpha Flight, Vol. 1,

#44 “Plague.” (Mar. 1987). [Marvel].

[Mantlo, Bill (w), Ross, David (p), Portacio, Whilce (I).] Alpha Flight, Vol. 1.

#42 “Auction.” (Jan. 1987). [Marvel].

[Mantlo, Bill (w), Shoemaker, Terry (p), Leialoha, Steve (I).] Alpha Flight, Vol

1 #48 “Madness.” (Jul. 1987). [Marvel].

[Millar, Mark (w), Romita Jr., John (p), Janson, Klaus (I).] Wolverine, Vol. 3,

#25 “Enemy of the State: Part 6” (Apr. 2005). [Marvel].

[Nicieza, Fabian (w), Capullo, Greg (p), Candelario, Harry (i).] X-Force, Vol.

1. #18 “Ghosts in the Machine (X-Cutioner's Song. Pt. 12).” (Jan 1993). [Marvel].

[Quesada, Joe (w), Chen, Sean (p), Hunter, Rob (I).] Iron Man, Vol. 3, #30

“.” (Jul. 2000). [Marvel].

[Remender, Rick (w), Pacheco, Carlos (p), Taibo, Mariani (I).] Captain

America, Vol 7, #25 “The Tomorrow Soldier: Conclusion.” (Dec. 2014). [Marvel].

[Remender, Rick (w), Pacheco, Carlos (p), Taibo, Mariano (I).] Captain

America, Vol. 7. #25 “The Tomorrow Soldier: Conclusion.” (Dec. 2014).

[Marvel].

[Shooter, Jim (w), Buscema, John (p), Alcala, Alfredo (I).] Hulk Magazine #23

“...A Very Personal Hell” (Oct. 1980). [Marvel].

77 [Taylor, Tom (w), Cinar, Yildiray (p,i).] Superior Iron Man, #1 “Be Superior –

Chapter 1: Nightmare Scenario.” (Jan. 2015). [Marvel].[Taylor, Tom (w), Cinar,

Yildiray (p,i).] Superior Iron Man, #2 “Be Superior – Chapter 2: Iron Man vs.

Daredevil.” (Jan. 2015). [Marvel].

[Taylor, Tom (w), Cinar, Yildiray (p,i).] Superior Iron Man, #7 “Be Superior –

Chapter 7: Stark Contrast.” (Jan. 2015). [Marvel].

[Taylor, Tom (w), Cinar, Yildiray (p,i).] Superior Iron Man, #8 “Be Superior –

Chapter 8: Stark Contrast.” (Jan. 2015). [Marvel].

[Tieri, Frank (w), Dodson, Terry (p), Dodson, Rachel (I).] Wolverine, Vol. 2,

#186 “See Ya Around, Frankie.” (Apr. 2003). [Marvel].

[Vaughan, Brian (w), Alphona, Adrian (p), Newbold, Brian (I).] Runaways,

Vol. 1, #1 “Pride and Joy, Chapter One.” (Jul. 2003). [Marvel].

[Vaughan, Brian (w), Alphona, Adrian (p), Yeung, Craig (I).] Runaways, Vol.

1, #9 “Teenage Wasteland, Part Three.” (Feb. 2004). [Marvel].

[Vaughan, Brian (w), Alphona, Adrian (p), Yeung, Craig (I).] Runaways, Vol.

2, #22 “Live Fast, Chapter One.” (Jan. 2007). [Marvel].

[Vaughan, Brian (w), Miyazava, Takeshi (p), Newbold, Brian (I).] Runaways,

Vol. 1, #11 “Lost and Found, Part 1 of 2.” (Apr. 2004). [Marvel].

[Wells, Zeb (w), Caselli, Stefano (p,i).] Civil War: Young Avengers and

Runaways, Vol. 1, (Sep. - Dec. 2006). [Marvel].

[Whedon, Joss (w), Cassaday, John (p,i).] Astonishing X-Men, Vol. 3. #1 - #6

“Gifted.” (Jul. - Dec. 2004). [Marvel].

[Whedon, Joss (w), Cassaday, John (p,i).] Astonishing X-Men, Vol. 3.

#2“Gifted, Part 2” (Aug, 2004). [Marvel].

78 [Whedon, Joss (w), Ryan, Michael (p), Ketcham, Rick (I).] Runaways, Vol. 2,

#25 “Dead-End Kids, Part One.” (Jun. 2007). [Marvel].

[Whedon, Joss (w), Ryan, Michael (p), Ketcham, Rick (I).] Runaways, Vol. 2,

#26 “Dead-End Kids, Part Two.” (Jul. 2007). [Marvel].

[Whedon, Joss (w), Ryan, Michael (p), Ketcham, Rick (I).] Runaways, Vol. 2,

#29 “Dead-End Kids, Part 5.” (Apr. 2008). [Marvel].

[Yoshida, Akira (w), Bachalo, Chris (p), Townsend, Tim (I).] X-Men: Age of

Apocalyps, Vol. 1, #2 “Coming Up for Air.” (May 2005). [Marvel].

[Zimmerman, Ron (w), Severin, John (p, I).] Rawhide Kid, Vol. 3, #4 “Slap

Leather Part #4.” (Jun. 2003). [Marvel].

Captain America: The First Avenger. Dir. Joe Johnston. Marvel Studios, 2011.

Film.

Captain America: The Winter Soldier. Dir. Joe Russo, Anthony Russo. Marvel

Studios, 2014. Film.

Iron Man 2. Dir. Jon Favreau. Marvel Studios, 2010. Film.

The Avengers. Dir. Joss Whedon. Marvel Studios, 2012. Film.

X-Men: Days of Future Past. Dir. Bryan Singer. Twentieth Century Fox Film

Corporation. 201 Film.

X-Men: First Class. Dir. Matthew Vaughn. Twentieth Century Fox Film

Corporation. 2011. Film.

X-Men: The Last Stand. Dir. Ratner, Brat. Twentieth Century Fox Film

Corporation. 2006. Film.

79 X-Men. Dir. Bryan Singer. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation. 2000.

Film.

X2. Dir. Bryan Singer. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation. 2003. Film.

Butters, Tara, Michele Fazekas. "Valediction." Marvel's Agent Carter. ABC. New

York City, New York, 24 Feb. 2015. Television.

Easton, Brandon. “Monsters” Marvel's Agent Carter. ABC. New York City, New

York, 16 Feb. 2016. Television.

Englestein, Brant. "The Blitzkrieg Button." Marvel's Agent Carter. ABC. New York

City, New York, 27 Jan. 2015. Television.

Markus, Christopher, Stephen McFeely. “Now is Not the End.” Marvel's Agent

Carter. ABC. New York City, New York, 6 Jan. 2015. Television.

Pearson, Eric, Lindsey Allen. “A View in the Dark.” Marvel's Agent Carter. ABC.

New York City, New York, 19 Jan. 2016. Television.

Pearson, Eric. “Bridge and Tunnel.” Marvel's Agent Carter. ABC. New York City,

New York, 6 Jan. 2015. Television.

SECONDARY SOURCES

"America's Shame: 40% of Homeless Youth Are LGBT Kids." Williams Institute. 13

July 2012. Web. 5 Jan. 2016.

"BAMF Women Superheroes: The Visibility of Karolina Dean." The Rainbow Hub. 6

Feb. 2015. Web. 25 Feb. 2016.

"Bryan Singer." Interview by Stephen Applebaum. BBC Home. 24 Sep. 2014. Web. 2

Feb. 2016.

80 "Captain America: The Winter Soldier Review, Part 3 -- Black Widow & Falcon."

Review. Web log post. Hello, Tailor. , 7 Apr. 2014. Web. 29 Nov 2015.

"Code of the Comic Magazine Association of America, Inc." 1971 CCA Guidelines.

Web. 3 Jan. 2016.

"Comics Magazine Association of America Comics Code 1989." 1989 CCA

Guidelines. Web. 3 Jan. 2016.

"Oh, the Inhumanity of It All!: Male Bisexuality in Marvel Comics." Geeks OUT! 16

Dec. 2013. Web. 7 Mar. 2016.

"Population, Female (% of Total)." The World Bank. The World Bank Group. Web.

20 Nov. 2015.

"Stan Lee." Interview by Lisa Terrada. Archive of American Television. 22 Mar. 2004.

Web. 2 Jan. 2016.

“Interview – Mark Millar – The Death of Northstar.” AlphaFlight.net. 3 Jan. 2010.

Web. 3 Mar. 2016.

“Marvel gives kids first ‘gay’ main character.” AFA Journal. 1 Feb. 2003. Web. 5

Feb. 2016.

Anderson, Brian. "Captain America Is Black, Thor Is A Woman, Iron Man Gay As

Comics Skew Progressive." Downtrend. 17 July 2014. Web. 9 Mar. 2016.

Another Way to Breath. “I Wanted to Ask.” kierongillen.tumblr.com. Tumblr, 13 Sep

2013. Web. 14 Jan. 2016.

Baker-Whitelaw, Gavia. "Marvel's 'Agent Carter' Packs a Punch." The Daily Dot. 07

Jan. 2015. Web. 18 Jan. 2016.

Bersani, Leo. "Is the Rectum a Grave?" AIDS: Cultural Analysis/Cultural Activism

43 (1987): 197-222. JStor. Web. 10 Feb. 2016.

81 Bramlett, Frank. "The Confluence of Heroism, Sissyhood, and Camp in The Rawhide

Kid: Slap Leather”. ImageTexT: Interdisciplinary Comics Studies. 5.1 (2010). Dept of

English, University of Florida. 24 Apr 2016. Web. 13 Dec. 2015.

Brothers, David. "A Marvel Black History Lesson Pt. 1." Marvel.com Marvel, 18

Feb. 2011. Web. 06 Oct. 2015.

Burr, Chandler. "Homosexuality and Biology." The Atlantic. Atlantic Media

Company, 13 June 1997. Web. 10 Feb. 2016.

Cronin, Brian. “Comic Book Legends Revealed #213” . 25

Jun. 2009. Web. 15 Jan. 2016.

David, Peter. "When You Wish upon Northstar." PeterDavid.net. 14 Feb. 1992. Web.

5 Feb. 2016.

Gustines, George Gene. “A Novelist's Superhero Is Out to Right Wrongs.” The New

York Times. 3 Seb. 2007. Web. 6 Feb. 2016.

Haupt, Ryan. "Say Hello to the Superior Iron Man." Marvel.com. 18 July 2014. Web.

21 Dec. 2015.

Hickey, Walt. “Comic Books Are Still Made By Men, For Men And About Men.”

FiveThirtyEight. 13 Oct. 2014. Web. 12 Mar. 2016.

Hitchcock, Robin. "The Superficial Yet Satisfying Feminism of ‘Agent Carter’."

Bitch Flicks. 2008- 2015 Bitch Flicks, 8 Jan. 2015. Web. 5 Dec. 2015.

I Ship It. “A Retrospective on Planet Hulk.” shipperhipster.tumblr.com. Tumblr, 18

August 2015. Web. 10 Mar. 2016.

Joy, Miriam. "Loki, Gender and Costume Design in Thor: The Dark World ..."

Miriam Joy Writes. 14 Nov. 2013. Web. 11 Dec. 2015.

Kirkman, Robert. “Freedom Ring Controversy.” Image Comics. 25 Mar. 2005. Web.

29 Dec. 2015. 82 Lyubansky, Mikhail. "The Racial Politics of X-Men." Psychology Today. Sussex

Publishers, 5 June 2011. Web. 4 Jan. 2016.

Millar, Mark. “Don't Look at Me, I'm Only a Writer.” Newsarama. 3 Sep. 2007. Web.

5 Dec. 2015.

Moore, Perry. "Who Cares About The Death of a Gay Superhero Anyway?"

5election. Web. 21 Jan. 2016.

Quesada, Joe. "New Joe's Friday: Week 10." Newsarama.com. 15 Nov. 2006. Web.

15 Mar. 2016.

Renna, Cathy. “LGBT Characters in Comics.” GLAAD. 11 Dec. 2002. Web. 11 Dec.

2015.

Shooter, Jim. "Epic Interference." JimShooter.com. 12 July.2011. Web. 14 Feb. 2016.

Siede, Caroline. "Unfortunately, The Winter Soldier Was the Best Female-driven

Superhero Film of 2014." A.V.Club. N.p., 17 Nov. 2014. Web. 10 Mar. 2016.

Bellows, Henry Adams. The Poetic Edda. New York: American-Scandinavian

Foundation, 1923. Print.

Bowie, Angie. Bisexuality: The Pocket Essential Guide. Chichester: Summersdale

Publishers LTD, 2002. Print.

Darowski, J. X-Men and the Mutant Metaphor: Race and Gender in the

Comic Books. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2014. Print.

Decceco, John, Wayne Bryant. Bisexual Characters in Film: From Ana¿s to Zee.

Oxford: Routledge, 2013. Print.

Christiansen, Jeff. All-new Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe #9. New York:

Marvel Publishing, Inc., 2006. Print.

83 Christiansen, Jeff. Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe A-Z Vol 1 #13. New

York: Marvel Publishing, Inc., 2010. Print.

Kranz, Rachel, Tim Cusick. Gay Rights. New York: Infobase Publishing, 2014. Print.

Lee, Stan. Son of Origins of Marvel Comics. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1975.

Print.

Loptson, Dagulf. Playing With Fire: An Exploration of Loki Laufeyson. Raleigh:

Lulu Press, 2015. Epub.

Owens, Robert E. Queer Kids: The Challenges and Promise for Lesbian, Gay, and

Bisexual Youth. New York: Haworth, 1998. Print.

Winchell, Meghan K. Good Girls, Good Food, Good Fun: The Story of USO

Hostesses during World War II. Chapel Hill: U of North Carolina, 2008. Print.

"Mask of the Iron Man." Game Informer 1.177 (2008): 81. Print.

Genter, Robert. ""With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility": Cold War Culture and the Birth of Marvel Comics." J Popular Culture The Journal of Popular Culture 40.6

(2007): 953-78. Print.

Tewksbury, Richard. "Effects of Sexual Assaults on Men: Physical, Mental and

Sexual Consequences." International Journal of Men's Health 6.1 (2007): 22-35. Print.

SantorioGriffith, Matt (FotoCub). “Wait wait. Black Captain America. Female Thor.

Iron Man set in San Fran. If @Marvel's SUPERIOR IRON MAN is gay, I'll never doubt them again.” 17 Jul. 2014, 2:37 p.m. Tweet.

Ryan Penagos (AgentM). “This is not She-Thor. This is not Lady Thor. This is not

Thorita. This is THOR." 15 Jul. 2014, 8:40 p.m. Tweet.

84 ENGLISH RESUME

The concern of this thesis is the representation of the queer minority in the works of the Marvel Comics. The thesis objective is to evaluate the changes in the representation across the Marvel Comics's history and the issues concerning this problematic.

The first chapter is concerned with the problematic depiction of the queer minority during the Marvel's history, such as Queer villain trope, perception of queerness as something inherently sexual, or the disproportional probability of the death of the queer character. This issues are be depicted on the characters of Jean-Paul Baubier, Johnny Bart,

Curtis Doyle, and Frank Castle, the “...A Very Personal Hell” story from the Hulk!

Magazine, and the Superior Iron Man.

The second chapter focuses on the way queer minority is metaphorically depicted in the X-Men franchise and the issues arising from the use of a fictitious minority to represent real-world issues. The first sub-chapter is concerned with the HIV/AIDS discourse in the Legacy virus storyline. The second sub-chapter then analyzes the images of acceptance and self-acceptance in the context of the motive of the mutant cure.

The third chapter examines the instances of gender transgression and bisexuality.

These topics are connected both by their position outside the traditional binary of the gender and sexuality, and by the negative way there are often perceived both by the public and by the queer community itself. The first sub-chapter focuses on the depiction of bisexuality in the Marvel's Agent Carter television series and how its reading can be influenced by the heteronormative assumptions. The second sub-chapter analyzes the gender transgressive reading of the characters' roles and relationships in

Captain America: The Winter Soldier. The third sub-chapter is concerned with the mixing of stereotypically feminine and stereotypically masculine characteristics in Marvel's Agent

85 Carter. In the last sub-chapter, the character of Tony Stark is examined with regard to the depiction of his sexuality.

The last chapter then examines the queer representation in two series which both focus on teen-aged heroes – Runaways and Young Avengers. The achievements and shortcomings of both series are examined. The chapter concerning the Young Avengers also examines in more detail the depiction of bisexuality and gender fluidity in the character of Loki, both in the Young Avengers and his solo series, Loki, Agent Of

Asgard, as well as the evolution of this character during his publishing history.

86 ČESKÉ RESUMÉ

Náplní této práce je reprezentace queer menšiny v dílech společnosti Marvel

Comics. Hlavním cílem je pak zhodnotit změny v této reprezentaci během historie Marvel

Comics a problémy, které se této reprezentace dotýkají.

První kapitola se zabývá problematickým zobrazenováním queer menšiny v historii Marvel Comics, jako je využití trofy Queer padoucha, zobrazení queer orientací jako něčeho z podstaty sexuálního, nebo disproporcionálního pravděpodobnost úmrtí queer postav. Tyto problémy jsou zobrazeny na postavách Jean-Paula Baubiera, Johnnyho Barta,

Curtise Doyla a Franka Castla, na příběhu “...A Very Personal Hell” z magazínu Hulk! a příběhové linie Superior Iron Man.

Druhá kapitola se soustředí na metaforické zobrazení queer minority v příbězích ze série X-Men a na problémy, které vyvěrají z využití fiktivní minority k zobrazení reálné problematiky. První podkapitola se zabývá zobrazením HIV/AIDS v narativě příběhové linie Virus Legacy. Druhá podkapitola pak analyzuje obrazy přijetí a sebepřijetí, projevující se ve spojení s tématem léčby mutace.

Třetí kapitola zkoumá případy genderové transgrese a bisexuality. Tato témata jsou spojena jednak svou existencí mimo tradiční genderovou a sexuální binaritu, jednak svým častým negativním přijetím jak většinovou společností, tak samotnou queer komunitou. První podkapitola se soustředí na zobrazení bisexuality v seriálu Marvel's

Agent Carter, a na způsob, jakým je vnímání bisexuality ovlivněno heteronormativními předpoklady. Druhá subkapitola analizuje gendrově transgresivní čtení rolí jednotlivých postav filmu Captain America: The Winter Soldier. Třetí subkapitola se zabývá míšením stereotypně feminních a maskuliních vlastností v Marvel's Agent Carter. Poslední podkapitola pak zkoumá postavu Tonyho Starka s ohledem na zobrazení jeho sexuality.

87 Poslední kapitola pak zkoumá queer reprezentaci v dvou sériích, které se soustředí na náctileté hrdiny - Runaways a Young Avengers. Zkoumá úspěchy a problémy obou sérií. Podkapitola zabívající se Young Avengers také zkoumá zobrazení bisexuality a gendrové fluidity u charakteru Lokiho, jak v Young Avengers, tak v jeho sólové sérii Loki,

Agent Of Asgard, a změny jeho charakterizace v průběhu jeho historie u společnosti

Marvel.

88 89