Grant Morrison thinks Batman is gay!

[Trekker4747]

Set Harth wrote:

---

It's not just the appearance of the word...

1) Batman is pulling his boner in public.
2) The Joker is trying to force Batman into a boner.

Yes, and considering the context of the time and use of the word "boner" is being used as an "error" or "mistake" it's not very funny, is it? All people who find that funny are doing is seeing "boner" thinking "erection" and then giggling like a middle-school kid.

I see the word, know the context and don't find it humorous because, well, I know what it's talking about.

[sidious618]

Trekker4747 wrote:

---

Yes, and considering the context of the time and use of the word "boner" is being used as an "error" or "mistake" it's not very funny, is it? All people who find that funny are doing is seeing "boner" thinking "erection" and then giggling like a middle-school kid.

I see the word, know the context and don't find it humorous because, well, I know what it's talking about.

It's funny.

[Kegg]

Trekker4747 wrote:

---

Yes, and considering the context of the time and use of the word "boner" is being used as an "error" or "mistake" it's not very funny, is it?

So. Double entendres. For or against?

[Trekker4747]

Different strokes. (Ha! Ha! Ha! He said "strokes" in the same conversation about boners!)

As I said I see the word, I know what it means and the time it was being used and don't find the use funny. Again, it's just giggling at a word or even it's use in a sentence.

But, I don't find the idea of boners or their use being funny in pretty much any situation, so...

Funnier to me when a panel is taken out of context not because of the words in it and their current meaning but just that its an odd panel out of context.

(Seriously, what IS the story behind Batman's teeth marks inside a thong?! And why does Robin sleep in the same bed as Batman given that they live in a mansion! Was a pre-teen boy sleeping in the same bed as an adult man ever considered okay?!)

So. Double entendres. For or against?

Double entendres can be funny but, again, that's something a bit different than what's any these panels. They weren't made to be double entendres they were made because "boner" means a mistake and didn't mean erection when the comics were made. It was an acceptable use of the word (otherwise I'm guessing the CCA would've had a shit-fit.) Double entendres are intentionally mis-using words to be suggestive. You're meant to read more into in order to "see the funny." Just like "That's what she said!" jokes.

This? This is Batman, Gordon, Joker, whoever using a word that means/meant "mistake." People are giggling over the word boner. It's been a while since I giggled over the use of a single word taken out of context.

[Set Harth]

Trekker4747 wrote:

---

Yes, and considering the context of the time and use of the word "boner" is being used as an "error" or "mistake" it's not very funny, is it?

Yes, it is. In the context of the present.

That's kind of the whole idea.

Obviously it doesn't mean the same thing in the context of the time they were published, or else they never would have been published. It would have been quite scandalous.

Trekker4747 wrote:

---

All people who find that funny are doing is seeing "boner" thinking "erection" and then giggling like a middle-school kid.

No, there's an entire narrative going on that ties into the thread topic. ( Some boner panels that only make sense with the original definition were skipped. ) Oh, and the Joker has an inadequate penis.

[Aeolusdallas]

Trekker4747 wrote:

---

Yes, and considering the context of the time and use of the word "boner" is being used as an "error" or "mistake" it's not very funny, is it? All people who find that funny are doing is seeing "boner" thinking "erection" and then giggling like a middle-school kid.

I see the word, know the context and don't find it humorous because, well, I know what it's talking about.

You are being pedantic. It's funny

[Aeolusdallas]

Kegg wrote:

---

So. Double entendres. For or against?

What's funny is despite Trekkers argument it would have been a double entendre even then.

[Kestrel]

Trekker4747 wrote:

---

(Seriously, what IS the story behind Batman's teeth marks inside a thong?! And why does Robin sleep in the same bed as Batman given that they live in a mansion! Was a pre-teen boy sleeping in the same bed as an adult man ever considered okay?!)

Fun fact: "thong" can also mean "sandal." Not sure from the image what Robin's holding though.

It was probably considered okay iif it's the boy and his father (if adoptive in this case).

[JD]

I find all three of the comic panels/series of panels pretty funny when taken out of context. Does anyone here know the story behind the teeth marks in the thong? Because no matter how that word was used, that seems a little odd. And the two guys/one bed thing, because no matter how you look at it that one is a little odd too.

[Trekker4747]

JD wrote:

---

I find all three of the comic panels/series of panels pretty funny when taken out of context. Does anyone here know the story behind the teeth marks in the thong? Because no matter how that word was used, that seems a little odd. And the two guys/one bed thing, because no matter how you look at it that one is a little odd too.

Don't know the story behind either panel, I could probably research it and find scans or summaries of the comics but I can't see the "thong" one making much sense. (It seems like a one-off line and not part of the story.)

Even if the "thing" in the comic was supposed to be a (leather?!) shoe it still doesn't make sense. It's less gay/sexual perhaps but still sort of odd.

Them sleeping in the bed together? I don't think there's any explanation to that that could make sense. Unless it stormed last night and the teenaged Dick Grayson is afraid of lightning and wanted to sleep in "safe bed" I don't think it'd ever make sense Dick Grayson didn't have his own bedroom or, hell, his own wing of the mansion.

But, nope, the mostly-grown Dick Grayson sleeps in the same bed as a 30-year-old man. In what universe does that even make sense? Or is legal? Or wouldn't result in backlash of Micheal Jackson-ian proportions.

[beamMe]

Trekker4747 wrote:

---

Don't know the story behind either panel, I could probably research it and find scans or summaries of the comics but I can't see the "thong" one making much sense. (It seems like a one-off line and not part of the story.)

Even if the "thing" in the comic was supposed to be a (leather?!) shoe it still doesn't make sense. It's less gay/sexual perhaps but still sort of odd.

Them sleeping in the bed together? I don't think there's any explanation to that that could make sense. Unless it stormed last night and the teenaged Dick Grayson is afraid of lightning and wanted to sleep in "safe bed" I don't think it'd ever make sense Dick Grayson didn't have his own bedroom or, hell, his own wing of the mansion.

But, nope, the mostly-grown Dick Grayson sleeps in the same bed as a 30-year-old man. In what universe does that even make sense? Or is legal? Or wouldn't result in backlash of Micheal Jackson-ian proportions.

Read The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay and you might better understand and appreciate the intend behind these images.

[Avalon]

Kestrel wrote:

---

Fun fact: "thong" can also mean "sandal." Not sure from the image what Robin's holding though.

It can also mean a leather tie, or binding. It would make sense if Bats had used his teeth to get them out of a situation where they were tied up by a villain.

[Lonemagpie]

A leather thong is a sort of leather lace or rope used for tying stuff...

Also, I don't think Bruce and Dick are actually meant to be in the same bed in that pic - it's just bad colouring that makes it look that way. The fact that there are two headboards, and a straight line in the middle that's meant to be the edge of a mattress shows that it's meant to be twin beds next to each other. But because the colourist has put both mattresses as one block of white...

[Aeolusdallas]

Lonemagpie wrote:

---

A leather thong is a sort of leather lace or rope used for tying stuff...

Also, I don't think Bruce and Dick are actually meant to be in the same bed in that pic - it's just bad colouring that makes it look that way. The fact that there are two headboards, and a straight line in the middle that's meant to be the edge of a mattress shows that it's meant to be twin beds next to each other. But because the colourist has put both mattresses as one block of white...

Two twin beds pushed together isn't any better.

[Trekker4747]

Aeolusdallas wrote:

---

Two twin beds pushed together isn't any better.

Just what I was getting ready to say. It's shoddy art as the headboard and such of Dick's bed doesn't quite line-up with his mattress (but I guess it could be like one of those hotel headboards that aren't part of the bed but part of the wall) but either way Dick's bed is clearly butt-up against Bruce's bed so they're effectively "one bed." And even if they were two separate beds not right next to one another it still doesn't make sense because that's how married couples in old sitcoms sleep together.

It's a mansion why doesn't Dick have his own room?!