Andrew Garfield Wants Spider-Man To Be Gay Now

July 11th, 2013 // 36 Comments
That Would Explain This
Shailene Woodely Mary Jane Amazing Spider-Man 2 Andrew Garfield
Shailene Woodley Isn't Mary Jane Anymore Read More »

“You rang?” – These photos

Presumably because fighting Jamie Foxx has given him a taste for the dark chocolate, Andrew Garfield is now openly giving interviews where he says he wants Peter Parker to fall in love with a male MJ played by Michael B. Jordan who you may remember from such roles as Wallace from The Wire and Token Black Friend Who Naturally Gets Killed in Chronicle. So for those of you keeping score on your Hateboards, that makes this Spider-Man not only British, but a homosexual miscegenist. Somewhere the South just went, “Well, that sounds nice- BWAAAAAAA?” Entertainment Weekly reports:

Recently, he says, he had a philosophical discussion with producer Matt Tolmach about Mary Jane or “MJ” to fans. “I was kind of joking, but kind of not joking about MJ,” he tells EW. “And I was like, ‘What if MJ is a dude?’ Why can’t we discover that Peter is exploring his sexuality? It’s hardly even groundbreaking! … So why can’t he be gay? Why can’t he be into boys?”
Garfield even has an actor in mind: “I’ve been obsessed with Michael B. Jordan since The Wire. He’s so charismatic and talented. It’d be even better—we’d have interracial bisexuality!”

Of course, none of this will ever happen because Sony doesn’t make movies to watch them lose $80 billion in the Bible Belt and/or get shot by a Confederate cannon. Although, it is amazing that someone didn’t take Andrew Garfield aside and tell him never to speak a word of this to anyone again considering it’s gone over exactly as expected if you scroll through the butthurt in the EW comments. Because I ain’t sure if British Boy is aware, but this here’s ‘Merica and young, handsomely sculpted dudes in tights fuck pussy the way God intended. You can’t just can’t go making up imaginary nonsense where they’s homosexual, alright? Now get that there Spider-Boy to use his magic spider-powers to fight that Rhino sonofabitch. And no more making out with Electrical Man!

Jamie Foxx Electro Entertainment Weekly Cover

“You know how they say people never talk this close unless they’re going to fuck or fight?”
“I can see your erection. You’re wearing tights.”
“Welp, there goes that surprise…”

Photos: Splash News, WENN


  1. JK

    If this actually happened that would be the end of Spiderman among any of the longer standing fans and purists. Look at the hell that broke loose screwing with other iconic comic characters. I read the character in comics as a kid, liked a good many of the movies, and I know if they messed with a standing character like that I’d never watch it. It has nothing to do with religion, bible belt, rebel cannons or the rest. It’s about screwing with an icon to be edgy, trendy or cool as it’s just fucking stupid.

    • Even if they could confiscate and burn any old copies nothing will end. Do you mean longer standing fans that ‘used’ to read like you?

      As for the purists, the only constant has been the Spider part, cause we remember the Clone Saga. That didn’t end Spider-man, this wouldn’t.

      Then there are the “what ifs” alternate realities and numerous rollbacks, fan fics and reboots. Loose money? Yes, then make it back after the news cycle and pick up of new fans. As long as whatever lines and words the author and writer decide to call Spider-Man, spends majority of the time Super-heroing and the rest of the time doing other things including no gratuitous sex scenes with lines and words they decide to call MJ, then they’re pretty much sticking to the core material. You can correct me if there are other things that have remained constant.

      • …um, yeah, there’s been one big constant …peter parker.
        …whether peter has been a photojournalist or a science teacher, whether he’s been married or single, he was still peter parker …just because his CIRCUMSTANCES changed, that does’nt mean HE changed (i think you might need to research what “core of the character” means) …and, yeah, JK is right; if hollywood took an iconic character like spiderman and changed his sexual orientation on a whim, there would be massive backlash (just look at how internet uproar has affected changes in several major movies in recent years) …“what-if’s, alternate realities and numerous rollbacks, fan fics and reboots” have nothing to do with it, plus, none of them have gone as far as changing core elements of peter’s character …neither did the clone saga, besides, the fact that this much maligned comic book arc did’nt “end” spiderman, WTF does that have to do with feature films??? …are you wrong that spiderman would go on, and find new fans, and still make money? I dunno…all i know is; a major change like making peter gay would be a disaster on many fronts.

  2. rican

    Now EVERYTHING has to be gay, and if you’re not into it you’re homophobic, WTF?

    • JC

      Totally. If only there was some way for us poor, oppressed straight people to escape the military-industrial-gay complex. They wouldn’t let me apply for my current job unless I banged a dude in HR.

      Granted, I was trying to get a job in gay porn, but still. Discrimination!

      • TheJoaker

        Said in a douchey way but I agree with the first guy. Part of the reason people followed Peter Parker so long is because they identified with him. They were both jealous and happy for him when he got MJ. And now that gorgeous redhead is the douchey running back from the season of Friday night lights that everyone wants to pretend wasn’t rushed out because everyone thought it would be cancelled. It’s a leap, is what I’m saying.

        A comic movie is going to stray from the original story. That happens. But changing an iconic red headed female to a black male mostly because his initials are the same sounds like its trying to make a statement rather than tell the story we all go in the theater to see

      • Good point, My translation of the issue in the article was that switching the sexuality of the lead superhero of a title would be the end of a book that still continues strong, if not formulaic story telling with the same familiar characters.

        But i guess very many people are comforted by stories that rely more on the same people doing and looking like pretty much what they always. Die only to come back in some issues, train a new guy and retire only to return years later as the new-old (usually after the old-new guy dies a gruesome but honorable death), decades for a character to get a costume that could realistically be called clothing… Yeah I remember why i stopped reading now.

  3. Nonnie Moose

    So Andrew Garfield went to the Peter Jackson School of Directing?

  4. Greedo shoots first, Jabba walks, Disney buys it out – Blasphemy! Lucas is the devil.

    Spiderman is gay – What a brave choice, too bad the south is ass backwards.

  5. I thought Spiderman already was a pickle sniffer?

  6. anonymous

    Just because the actor wants to bang some dude shouldn’t mean Spider-Man should too.

  7. “… So why can’t he be gay? Why can’t he be into boys?”

    (Andrew then leaned forward in his chair. His shoulders then began to shake up and down…)

    “WHY CAN’T I BE INTO BOYS…..DAD!!!!!!”

    (At this point, our EW editor attempted to console Andrew but he stormed out in a fit of rage after snapping his thumbs back and forth)

  8. Wait til Paula Deen hears of this!

  9. What if they had left Sam Raimi the fuck alone? That’s the question that really needs answered.

  10. Why couldn’t Mary Jane be 6’4″ Transexual?

    It would be a better fit the whole “Dress-Up” theme of Comic Book “Superheroes”.

  11. “…gay now?”

    I didn’t see the last Spider-Man movie because it looked too gay. Is he saying it wasn’t supposed to be gay, but now he wants it more gay? How gay can it get?

    It’s bad enough I see penises everywhere around me all day. Phallic buildings, bananas, the penises in the bath house where I’m writing this from. I swear, if I see one more penis, I’m going to get aroused.

  12. Spider-Man
    Commented on this photo:

    Spiderman went in for the belt. Stayed for the sweaty man-on-man action.

  13. pavement_smear

    It’s not that I would be offended by a gay Spiderman. It’s just that I have a sinking feeling that this idea only got bandied about because the team is void of worthwhile storylines, and desperately seeking something “edgy” to hide their complete lack of writing talent. Essentially, a gay Spiderman is not a rainbow flag for equality – it’s a white flag of surrender to mediocrity.

  14. Why not make him a black lesbian who dresses like a bat? Oh yeah, because he’s NOT!

  15. Not gonna happen and I wouldn’t care if it did.

  16. Joey JoJo

    I think we all know why this is coming up. It just dawned on Emma Stone that sooner or later Spidey is going to end up with MJ and not Gwen Stacy. Suddenly Spidey needs to be gay or maybe he turns into a monk? Why does he need a girlfriend at all? He should just hang out with Gwen Stacy, right?

  17. TheJoaker

    Seriously, fish, you complain about these movies as much as anyone. Expecting Mary Jane and suddenly having Peter Parker make out with a dude to cope with the loss of his girlfriend wouldn’t let make you go “…wait”

    I don’t have problems with gender and sexual roles being reversed, but this reeks of something done more for attention than story purposes.

  18. o0

    ENOUGH with this hidden agenda in this country to make everything Gay. It’s not shame to be straight. It’s not neccesary to change and make everything overly appealing to small part of the population. Not against gays, just sick of the whole thing. Spider Man is not gay. He does not need to explore any secuality issues. These movie are kid friendly and no need to put overtly sexual situations like gay exploration into them.

  19. Why can’t MJ be a dog with psychic powers? Dudes don’t want to watch dudes fuck and it’s because we are homophobic, it’s because it’s disgusting and we like pussy

  20. Dick Hell

    There was always an ejaculatory aspect to the whole web-slinging business so this seems like a natural development. “Uh, did you get some web in your eye? Whoops, sorry ’bout that. Yeah, I know it stings.”

  21. G-Spotted

    Is someone projecting? Has Emma always known he’s bi-curious?

  22. Goes around the city shooting web on dudes faces.

  23. ChaCha

    So are we to think that straight guys (whites, blacks, Latinos and Asians) from OUTSIDE the South/Bible Belt would happily show up in droves to see gay Spiderman?

  24. Ummm, no, but to be honest, Peter Parker always came across as more homosexual than heterosexual.

  25. RichPort's Gay Ghost

    With the long overdue repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”, and the opportunity for our gay brothers and sisters to share equally in the benefits of marriage, you’d think that society would be more accepting of a gay superhero. Or more precisely, a gayer superhero.

    Honestly, Spiderman was already pretty f*cking gay, especially since the most masculine actor to ever play him was Tobey Maguire. Andrew Garfield is not exactly evocative of heterosexuality, and has probably smoked more pole than RichPort at a church retreat.

    • No one is saying they wouldnt be accepting of a gay superhero, just that Spiderman gets with Mary Jane and ppl who’ve followed the comics want to see the original story line. We would be accepting of a new gay super hero to come out and we’d go watch the movie but just write a whole new character to represent homosexuality.

    • Mike Walker

      2013 … RichPort … lol

  26. luis

    Are you asleep? You have noticed millions of boys 5 to 15 worship Spider Man. I assure you, as Sony will, that the parents of these boys, who are not all bible thumpers, or really hostile to gays, just will not take their 8 year old boys to watch Peter Parker persue and kiss other men. Just be honest and real about it. It won’t happen. They will lose most of their audience

Leave A Comment