Comics Star Wars: Age of Republic

Would make a lot of sense with regard to him cloning a son too

 

The way I took Jango's wish to have a clone of himself was due to his ego, and not necesarrily something that reflects his sexuality. Even if what I said is true, that still doesn't tell anything about his sexual preferences.

 

In the movies, that describes everyone except, like, five people. Star Wars is already a fairly asexual universe (being a PG-rated faerie tale after all), which I like because it lets the audience project their own inner love and desire onto the characters to a greater or lesser degree. Like Mark Hamill says about Luke, "it is meant to be interpreted by the viewer... If you think Luke is gay, of course he is."

Explicitly naming a character as "asexual"... I dunno, that's a tricky minefield in real life as it is, what that label assumes about people who do not adopt it, but that's well beyond the scope of this thread.

 

In Deep Space Nine, Odo was depicted as asexual for the first few seasons. You can do so without using Earth 2018 terminology quite easily.

 

Which is what made it so weird whenever Legends tried to push it. But, you know, we've got people OTP-ing Reylo, so.

As far as representation goes, it's always better to have it be explicit.

 

I think that's a matter of opinion. A lot of asexual people don't like to talk about being asexual. A lot of them aren't even sure they're asexual until they're in their 20s or 30s and start to think "hey I like having friends but don't really like dating people and don't really want to be that close to anyone... hmmm...." Granted this is the way it is in most modern societies today where there's still a massive stigma against it, so most people don't feel comfortable talking about it out loud.

I guess my point is if it's going to be quasi-realistic to today, it's probably not going to be explicit.

 

I see what you're saying, but the way real people behave notwithstanding, it means more representationally for a character to be asexual than "possibly asexual" or "not ever seen in a relationship" or "too busy for a relationship."

But of course this seems more like a question for the diversity thread.

 

Can't the PT Jedi be defined as asexual (with a few exceptions like Anakin, Obi-Wan, Quinlan...)?

 

I think Lucas himself made that distinction. They weren't allowed to form attachments, but they also weren't expected to be celibate.

EDIT: "Jedi Knights aren't celibate - the thing that is forbidden is attachments - and possessive relationships."

 

There's also a difference between assexual/aromantic, and having those desires for romance or sex and choosing not to give in to them.

 

Or he's a professional and doesn't allow his personal feelings interfere with his work.

So the Jedi are allowed to have one night stands and sex with prostitutes as long as they do not get attached to the person they have sex with?

But on a more serious note, I see this as Jedi having sex with other Jedi in the Temple, but simply for pleasure or biological needs, not because of romantic interest.

 

In one of the Jango Fett comics, doesn't she even flirt with him while wearing the slave bikini, and he shrugs her off?

Well, when you look as good as Boba, you can't let that Maker-given physique go to waste.

 

Remember, the Jedi's code of morality is different than the one on Earth. There's actually logical reasoning to think the Jedi might conclude that dealing with their hormones through legal escorts is more moral than actual marriage, which is incompatible with Jedi lifestyle. Here on Earth, much of perceived morality is possibly influenced by religion, society, etc. that tells us that marriage is the moral way to deal with hormones.

But if you look at it from a point of view outside the typical Earth upbringing, is it? These religions codified these rules long before modern knowledge about biology, mental health, hormones, etc. were widespread. In the real world, people try to do things the way religion/society says is moral by getting into marriage to deal with their hormones. Abstinence before marriage means both parties are possibly not thinking clearly when agreeing to marriage.

I know from experience--having met my first and only girlfriend at 32, on the other side of the world no less, after over a decade of not being able to meet literally anyone--the very real fear that if you say no to marriage you face the very real possibility of not ever having anyone emotionally and no outlet for hormones, i.e. the incel problem. Years go by without ever meeting anyone once you spend the majority of time in the working world, and if escorts are illegal in your country there is no outlet for hormones.

Too many people in the real world go into marriage to deal with hormones, then find they just messed up both their lives because they aren't compatible with each other, don't have anything in common, etc. but married to deal with hormones because society and religion told them this was the moral thing to do.

A lot of the situation now is geared towards an "ideal" where everyone will magically find their soulmate and have a wonderful love story. This isn't reality, but Earth laws (especially American laws) are geared around that. People dealing with hormones do a lot of work in trying to be someone else (work out, be cooler etc.) to get married just to satisfy those hormones. Society and religion has told us this is the moral way of doing things, but is it really? If someone's wife finds out he doesn't really like outdoor stuff but just did it to attract her, she will be unhappy and he will be too.

When people are basically told to marry to deal with hormones, it ignores the brutal reality that this could very well be messing up not just the man's life, but the woman's as well if they have little in common. But with no other outlet for hormones in society, this is what people are sadly driven to.

The Jedi may well have concluded that paying a legal escort is far less "sinful" and more moral than potentially messing up someone else's life along with their own. The Jedi may have tried pure celibacy in the past and stopped that because it led to criminal assaults etc. like we see in real world celibate religious institutions.

 

I just said that it would make sense. Not that it's the definitive answer to why he cloned a son lol

 

Just in case there was any doubt, Tom Taylor confirmed he is working on an issue of Age of Resistance about Kylo Ren


And a Poe issue

 

These would make great hardback covers. Looks like we’ll be getting some more news soon regarding the anthology series!

 

Love the arr, looks like both boba and Jango are getting some love.

 

So it looks like Snoke is going to get his own issue.

 

Great Art.

Wonder why there's no Palpatine, or Yoda.

 

I would bet that it is a Kylo/Snoke issue. Hell, if it was just one of Snoke's weekly pep talks where he shocks Kylo across the floor that would be an entertaining 22 pages.

 

The image seems to include only the characters actually starring in an issue.

 

That may be his question.

 

Probably dictated by the mix of characters; I think the sets of four heroes are all the obvious, classic choices for their eras, so there's not much room for Yoda, and Palpatine is too background in terms of his role in his respective eras; at least Tarkin and Hux are in charge of their superweapons, for instance, so they could easily be part of an action/adventure story more than Palpatine.