Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
So if their sexual orientation isn't even relevant part to the comic then why make her a lesbian in the first place? Why couldn't they just leave her the way she was? This is what I criticize about DC. Using homosexuality as controversy to attrack readers. Eventually the storytelling and writting of the series will dictate if this is worth following. That's the way it works and will always work that way. They can alter the character anyway they want. In the end what matters is quality of the stories.
Kathy Kane didn't even exist in Post-Crisis. In Pre-Crisis, she was a rather boring little desperate housewife who got off on jumping rooftop to rooftop and making Robin jealous of Batman's fascination of her.
By adding a few tidbits into her character (she's completely different thankfully except in the name) she's hopefully more interesting.
And homosexuality rarely attracts readers as so much they actually REPEL readers. Insensitive, immature 15 year old boys don't like gays as it creeps them out. Their minds can't handle it. So if they wanted to attract readers sustainably they should have made Batwoman straight and a sexbomb.
As you say the story will tell the tale. And hopefully they won't token her. If they do, you would be completely right. If they don't, than her homosexuality won't simply matter. It'll just a be a facet of her character as so much her hair color.
