I don't think Batwoman's homosexuality in itself was a publicity stunt--I think the PR department took a decent character development innocently put in by the creators and shopped it out to every media outlet, which is their job.

That being said, I think the creators should do whatever the hell they want, and if the PR department decides to run with it, that's their prerogative. There was almost no mention in the mainstream media about gay characters or AIDS in Peter David's run of the Hulk, despite Northstar hooking up at a wedding with a member of the Pantheon or Bruce's sidekick dying of AIDS because he wouldn't give him a gamma-irradiated transfusion.

My opinion is that DC trumps Marvel in this in many ways. In quantity, quality, and visibility. DC queer characters are more likely to have accepted their sexuality, but have also shown, by association, that many major super heroes in their universe are queer friendly. Some of these characters have even had their own titles where their sexuality is not a joke. Their relationships are treated as valid and, dare I jinx it, when someone has a romantic storyline no one appears to be gay bashed for it.

Marvel queer characters are relegated to the no-touching rule (minus one YA hug vs. all the making out their teammates do who are not in acknowledged relationships with one another do), the background, and often seem to be killed off or pushed to the sidelines. This is versus Batwoman and Renee Montoya who had very important roles in 52 and were frequently seen in Batman's Gotham. Or Holly, who was throughout two Catwoman books and her relationship with Karon was a vital part to her storyline when she was training to be Catwoman's replacement. Manhunter also had her own comic (and a fairly successful run) who had a gay couple in her storylines. What's more all of these characters had full lives, often families who loved and accepted them, and respected cohorts amongst the accepted classics of DC. They loved, they kissed, they fought, etc etc.

DC, in my eyes, makes press for being liberal. Marvel makes press stunts. I'm sure they're also more middling because their comic-based movies are goldmines and also seem to be geared at younger audiences than DC. Of course, in a struggling market, you'd think they'd have all figured out how much money the queer population tends to make and how every other corner of the media market is trying to get a slice of that pie.

If the publisher goes toward grabbing as much PR as they think they need at the beginning I'm okay with it. What I am not okay with is the immediate dropping of the character once the arc plays out.

Once a character gets the PR but turns up elsewhere there isn't much more press to get out of it and then it's simply a character living their life.

* * *

I think SIP didn't see major write-ups about it because it was an indie title. The large houses can't help themselves - Where the indie titles fly under the media radar.

* * *

I would agree that DC's entire company seems more inclined to have diversity in the roster but with all the ink on Batwoman they could have followed up with her appearing more often then she did and they certainly could have gotten her own book. She has an interesting backstory as it was laid out but they never explored much of it.

* * *

Another interesting example is Dark Horse and Buffy. They didn't let the moment happen and then answer to the press. They instead got the word out there. Unlike some of the choices by the big two comic publishers Whedon/Dark Horse haven't backed down from the creative decision but boy did they go after the ink about it.