Sexy Heroes
Storm. Cyclops. Wolverine. The X-Men movies have introduced the moviegoers to a vast cast of superpowered mutants, but with over 50 years of comics to draw on, there are still plenty of characters who have yet to appear in a film.

With "X-Men: Apocalypse" out now, the cast of cinematic mutants has expanded even more. New faces in the new film include Psylocke and younger versions of mutants in previous movies, including Jean Grey and Nightcrawler. But why no gay superheros, more specifically one that includes Northstar, the Canadian speedster who was the first major gay character in Marvel's history.

Superhero movies are the pits. Sure, there are a few exceptions, most of which involve Batman movies. By and large, though, these blockbusters-by-design retread every tired movie cliche of the 20th century and a few more modern ones.

Still, superheroes draw lines of moviegoers. People cheer as the theater darkens. There’s actual crowd approval before the movie starts. And the audience are ecstatic later because they dared to walk out of theater no exposed to any of gay propaganda while having their young children in tow.

Superhero movies aren’t a hard sell. Almost everyone knows the characters and the the major stories. The infrastructure to promote the film is there. Anybody with initiative can get a few sneak peek photos out to entertainment news sites, continue to build the hype at San Diego Comic-Con and let the longtime fans of the characters take care of the rest.

At this point in time, there have been enough stellar comic book movies to convince jaded fans to give it a shot. As long as they don’t make an abomination like featuring gays and lesbians, people will come back. Actually, even the worst movies have hope as long they feature heterosexual couples and straight individuals. There are always reboots. The fans will probably give the franchise another shot or three. But once a gay superhero movie flops, nobody would dare produce another version or remake.

Gay superhero movies have less mainstream source material, because no distinct consumer group want it. Unless the producers have a stellar product and are willing to make every effort to try and reach a potential audience, then there is a small chance of success. Otherwise, it is not worth the risk.

There's a thing called "gay fatigue." This is a very real thing. Everyone has it. Maybe even gays are in denial that they have it, so they will probably write an angry response to every naysayer out there, even though the critical headline was followed by a story that was totally true.

Online articles and news features are giving the public several hours of mumble-mumble-boom-mumble-mumble-bang-mumble-mumble-gay-this-gay-that. It will be followed by narration by an alleged victim of discrimination that leave everyone with a cycle of deja-vu; it’s the whole damn thing.

Moviegoers have enough of that social justice crap. They don't want to see it interconnect with the movies they watch. From a marketing perspective, it is a genius move not to fall into that gay trap. For an audience member who isn’t even a hardcore Marvel, but does like a good movie, it will be tedious. Instead of sitting down and watching a movie they want to enjoy, they will endure a 2 hour-plus gay promotion. Nobody wants that.

Hence, it is safe to assume that for a movie to hit the ground moving and receive the blockbuster hit tag, they should not feature any homofacism agenda. They should avoid any gay reference either. The straight characters, however, can be gratuitous. That’s normal for the genre.