Naw, this isn't about the Dark Knight except in reference to a long line of Joker-centric storylines.

I've heard a few references to it being an unspoken fact in the DC offices that the Clown's a bit more bent than straight in this department too. I've also heard it that each writer was more or less given free reign to interpret The Joker's sexuality however they saw fit, which would explain why in some arcs he's considerably more flirty with ol' Batsy than in others. However, in The Killing Joke, we saw he had a wife.

So what's the deal? I've heard everything from straight to gay to bi to asexuality with a murder lust. Or is there really no established canon fact about the man?
[Edited 6/30/08 3:04am]

Interestingly enough, the vast majority of fanfic I've found involving the Joker writes him as gay or bi, even if the fic isn't slash and/or he's just a peripheral character.

I have always thought that he is asexual, or even a sexual torturer ...

The Joker has a relationship with Batman. You can interpret it to be somewhat sexual.

He's had actual sexual relationships with women like Harley Quinn.

However, his murder lust is his primary characterization. He shares that openly with men, women, etc. Some writers seem to relate this murder lust with a sexual lust. That's more reflective of the writer. Some relate the murder lust to his psychological or even philosophical lusts. Again, reflective of the writer.

interesting. I've never actually thought about it before...

In "The dark knight returns", it is hinted that The joker is in love whit batman( i beleive he called him "honey" at a time in the story) but thats a else-world story, so i guess you cant take that for granted.

Funkaren said:

The dude's got all kinds of cute nicknames reserved for Batman, and uses them all over the place, in various storylines. Batman never reacts very well to it. Can't imagine why.

JoeTyler said:

I think he definitely does get a power, even a sexual, kick out of torture and murder. But I'm not sure that really qualifies as asexual, because unless I'm mistaken that term as applied to humans refers to a lack of sexual interest in anything or anyone.
[Edited 6/30/08 12:25pm]

Sadist, a pansexual sadist?

matthewgrant said:

I actually hadn't given it much thought either. The Joker's just not a character I look at and ask myself "Hey, I wonder what he likes to knock boots with." But the other day I was having a conversation about comic book movies with a friend who's only familiar with Jack Nicholson's Joker. Curious what to expect in The Dark Knight, he asked to borrow a few of my old comics. When he was done with them, he came back and said "Um, is this gonna be like a psychotic Brokeback? And that's why they cast Heath Ledger? I ask because maybe it's because I'm new, but I think the Joker's got a thing for Batman."



Of course I thought it was funny, but that got me to thinking. As far as I know, it never had been established in canon that Mistah J's any one thing over another. And knwoing that fan fiction is often reflective of how a character is perceived, I did a search. And like I said, damn near everything I found wrote The Joker as gay or bisexual, even if the fic wasn't slash, and even if he wasn't important to the story. Harley, if she's mentioned at all, is either his hag, or something to fuck when he's bored.

Huh.

baroque said:

meow85 said:

some use this term(asexual). morrissey and andy warhol were known to use this term alot.

meow85 said:

pansexual=s a sexual orientation characterized by the potential for aesthetic attraction, romantic love and/or sexual desire for people, regardless of their gender identity or biological sex. Thus, pansexuality includes potential attraction to people (such as transgender individuals) who do not fit into the gender binary of male/female. Some pansexuals suggest that they are gender-blind; that gender and sex are insignificant or irrelevant in determining whether they will be sexually attracted to others.[2]

http://superdickery.com/i...mitstart=2

God, I love this one. It just never gets old.

TMPletz said:

baroque said:

TMPletz said:

Where'd you get that?

TMPletz said:

My God! I've got a copy of that one. I can read it over and over and it never stops being funny.

I don't care if it was 1961, that has to have been on purpose. They just. keep. saying. it!

meow85 said:

That one is also posted at superdickery.com.

The Joker definitely at least like Bats in some way, hes not often planing to kill Bats, he just wants a playmate, theres been at least one occasion where he had the chance to kill Bats, but didnt do it because he still wanted to play whit him.

TMPletz said:

I figured it be there somewhere, but before that? Is this pic a product of DC?

Funkaren said:

I can think of a few examples.

i would think of the joker as being omnisexual, or as being equally revolted enough by both sexes that he is able to be equally sadistic to either gender.

meow85 said:

Looking back at it, I had to do some digging in my closet to get to the box of comics, I see how someone would come to that. I'm actually kindof surprised I didn't see it that way growing up. Makes for a much more interesting reread of what I have left in my stash, including the Catwoman comics I have of Joker hunting her down for maybe what could be likend to jealousy over Batman . I'm totally going to be reading some fanfiction after this.

matthewgrant said:

Innocent minds and all that.

I clued in to the potential possibilities of Joker's inclinations in the 10th grade when Queer as Folk first started airing in Canada. Even so, I never thought about it a whole lot, until my friend innocently asked if Heath had been cast because of the homoerotic aspects of The Joker's character. And who knows? Maybe that was part of the decision.

meow85 said:

That's from the graphic novel "Arkham Asylum". Great book.

Mars23 said:

I'm gonna have to get ahold of a copy, methinks.

meow85 said:

http://www.amazon.com/Bat...ef=ed_oe_p

Writer: Grant Morrison
Artist: Dave McKean

Publisher: DC/Titan Books

Batman: "You're free. You're all free."
The Joker: "Oh, we know that already. But what about you?"

Given that this book has been out for fifteen years now, it amazes me that SBC has yet to cover it. So, here's the excuse for doing so now - a brand spanking new edition, about twice the length of the original. So you're not just getting your 128 page graphic novel here - one of Morrison's most accessible, yet still thought-provoking, works - but a shed load of extras too. More on these later.

This could possibly be the definitive Arkham Asylum story - the Joker plus his bonkers inmate friends take over the asylum and do a deal ... they will release all the staff/hostages if Bats just walks in through the front-door of his own volition, and plays a game with them. Crazily some staff members opt to stay behind; the opportunity to examine madness face-to-face is too great for them to pass up. This of course makes one question whether such intimate proximity to madness has a leeching effect, of drawing the observer and the observee closer together over time? Morrison certainly appears to be making the case for this here, and it lends an added air of menace to the book - not only does Batman have to contend with the lunatics, he has the supposed norms to look out for too.

The Joker makes Bats run through hoops once he's finally in Arkham; driven to the edge of madness (and Bats has a nasty solution to prevent himself going over the edge) Bats fights his way back and turns the tables at last...or does he?

The extras provide added depth to the storyline - Morrison's full script not only shows his original intentions and where McKean deviated from same, but it's also extensively annotated by a modern-day Morrison, looking back over the changes and what happened to his original work, discussing his intentions and providing insight into the influences and meaning behind particular panels or snatches of dialogue. Of somewhat less interest are a few pages of Morrison's breakdowns which accompanied his script - these only take up a few scant pages, fortunately, it's the script that's the meat of the extras, and the value this adds to the book is incalculable.

It's worth every penny of the asking price, if you don't own this book go and order it now - if you only have the paperback, sell it on EBAY and pick yourself up a copy of this lush hardcover edition.

Mars23 said:

Sounds pretty sweet. I'll give it a looksee next chance I get.