I'm been a big fan of the new Batwoman since her introduction. I've been delighted that she was going to headline Detective Comics and that Renee "The Question" Montoya would be her back-up. I've been thrilled with the actual product; I keep re-reading this month's issue of Tec, simply because it's darned beautiful.
The story worked for me, too. I was no fan of the whole "Church of Crime" routine that was part of the 52 muddle, but it makes a good and logical focus for Batwoman. Plus, the creative team has immediately given it exactly what it needed: a costumed wacko. I mean, this is Gotham, after all.
I appreciated greatly the Question seems to focus on "small" crimes and mysteries (if a person being kidnapped and sold into bondage can be considered "small"). The Question shouldn't be fighting Dr. Polaris or even the Penguin; helping one person at a time is perfect. And if she happens to break up a slavery ring that's been funding drug smuggling from Santa Prisca that's part of the Penguin's deal with Kobra, well, that works, too. Because cracking down on "small" crimes can have an impact on the larger level in the real world, too. You don't lead to shoot laser beams out of your eyes to make a difference.
As a gay man, I am disappointed. Lesbians are everywhere in comics nowadays. Lesbians are falling from the trees. At Big Monkey, we have a "Fortnightly Fave" display, where every two weeks we feature some literature based on a common character or theme ("the Flash", or "vampires", or "space"). We could pretty easily to do a "Fortnightly Fave" display on "Lesbians" (Grace from the Outsiders, Scandal Savage from Secret Six, Maggie Sawyer who used to be in Superman and used to be in Batman, Detective with two starring lesbians, Strangers in Paradise, I Was Kidnapped By Lesbian Pirates from Outer Space)
But... as Kathy Griffin would say, "Where are my gays at?"
Lesbians and gay men aren't interchangeable and (outside of political necessities for unified action) don't consider themselves a group. Lesbian characters don't satisfy a gay male reader's need to see characters easy to identify with any more than male characters satisfy a female reader's desire for female role models in comics.
I realize that a gay reader complaining that there are no gay characters isn't exactly original. Heck, reader of Type Z complaining that there are no characters of Type Z is a basic bitch-blogging formula. But the increasing prevalence of lesbians is making the absence of male gay characters even more glaring.
DC has, what, Obsidian? Obsidian, who is often portrayed as mentally unstable, when anyone (other than Marc Andreyko) bothers to portray him at all? The deranged Pied Piper? The *snort* Tasmanian Devil, who was intended as (and remains) basically a joke character and gets a cameo every three years or so?
Jeez, DC... Marvel is outdoing you. Wiccan, Hulkling, and Northstar do stink of overwrought romance comics, but, hey, that's just Marvel being Marvel. Unless I'm wrong... have they all been killed off already?
Is DC worried about readers disliking gays in comic books? Are lesbians okay, because, you know, "at least they're hot for the fanboys"? Is DC worried to offend gays with a poor portrayal and so is just steering clear of doing so altogether?
Here it is, DC: I no longer care what the reason is. It's reached a point whether I'd rather have Estrano back (yeah, you heard me; I went there!), than to have Obsidian as the one small gay male oasis in a desert of lesbians.
It's probably too late, but here's your chance:
if Inferno is not gay, I'm calling you out as homophobes, DC Comics.