I am a long term comic book reader and whilst I support your effort to protect children I am afraid I am somewhat confused about the campaign to write to DC and Marvel in objection to their depiction of gay characters. I would like to support any action to protect children but I can’t commit to something I feel I do not fully understand. As I am sure you feel the same way and would not incite such a campaign without becoming fully informed on the subject at hand I would appreciate it if you could clarify a few points for me before I agree to write a letter supporting your cause.

DC comics’ announcement that they will re-introduce a character as gay comes as part of a now nine-month old initiative to relaunch the brand. Many other things have happened in these nine months that, if homosexuality is a worryingly imitable and corrupting influence on children, are surely also of concern.

You speak of the concern that a child might want a boyfriend like Batman. This seems to imply that in other respects you are content that Batman is an acceptable role model. Does this mean that you support his having entirely anonymous, fetishised sex with a complete stranger in (what is effectively) public? In one of the first issues of the relaunched DC line a man had the skin of his face severed to create a grizzly skin-mask, without anaesthetic. This also happened in a Batman book. As did men and women being cut into pieces and then fashioned back together into patchwork corpse puppets.

Nor does it stop there. Wonder Woman, it has been revealed, is the descendant of a people who are serial mass-rapists and serial committers of mass-infanticide. The rape is even depicted, though not graphically. In their defence it’s made clear the Amazon women no longer commit infanticide of all males born of their rape-culture, simply sell them into heretical slavery to the false-god Hephaestus, but as mothers how can you condone either behaviour? And oh yes, that false god is one of many of the greek pantheon of heretical gods that is a regular character in the book, in violation not of a verse of the book of Romans but of the 1st commandment itself!

Catwoman is shown as not simply a villain instead she is presented as an anti-hero. She has a book series of her own in which she is seen fornicating, committing theft after theft and even beating a helpless man to a very violent, bloody and disfiguring death with a baseball bat. Whilst she also stands up for the defenceless in other regards, does that really make up for her other behaviours?

Even Bunker, a new character introduced to the Teen Titans, a book surely aimed at Teenagers by its’ very nature, is both gay and Catholic, conflating the subject of homosexuality and religion.

Now, seeing as all these and other issues exist I can come to only two conclusions. Either you are aware of these things and have concluded that they are all perfectly acceptable for your children whilst the idea of re-introducing a character as gay is not or rather than consider them perfectly acceptable for your children you give you children the credit that they are sufficiently complex individuals to not find these behaviours imitable or laudable but are concerned they will be encouraged to emulate this character’s coming out, despite the already existing characters of Bunker, Batwoman, Renee Montoya and others that they have successfully avoided following into homosexuality up until now.

I look forward to your answer and having my confusion assuaged so that I can confidently write in support of your campaign to protect children from the threatening idea that a man or woman might be gay and still be a good person.

Thank you,

Simon Aplin