With the controversy over J.H. Williams III and W. Haden Blackman walking off Batwoman due to editorial interference, a lot of media focused on a single aspect of this interference, the refusal of editorial to allow Kate Kane and Maggie Sawyer to get married. Of course, DC was more than happy to latch onto this, arguing that they have no problem with gay marriage, just marriage in general, because it distracted from the real issue at hand, which is over twenty creators leaving or being chased off DC books due to editorial mismanagement. But it would be, like, hard and stuff to address that issue, so "we're not homophobes" it is.
Well, this got fans talking about DC marriages that have been undone with the Nu52, and one that stood out as being kept intact was the marriage between Aquaman and Mera. After all, he is the king of fish (or something) and Mera is frequently referred to as his queen. The couple were married pre-Nu52, and Geoff Johns, the one writer besides Scott Snyder immune to editorial interference, writes his book.
However, at Baltimore Comic Con today, Dan Didio addressed the Batwoman controversy, again acting as if the marriage were the issue and not last minute editorial changes to storylines that had been in the works for over a year. This led to Bleeding Cool mogul Rich Johnston asking a DC exec directly whether Aquaman and Mera are married, to which he was told directly that they are not married in the Nu52 and never were.
(image also from Bleeding Cool, to whom we owe our lives)
I guess when Mera is referred to as his queen, that's just in the... biblical sense? I dunno, I have no idea what it means, because it's nonsensical and pretty much an obvious retcon for the sake of winning a semantic argument over a non-issue.
All I know is that all of this is a distraction from the real issue, which is, as mentioned several times but never addressed by DC, the constant complaints about editorial interference and mismanagement.
I'll say it again: the constant complaints about editorial interference and mismanagement.
What's that? No, I'm not accusing DC of being homophobes.
I'm talking about the constant complaints about editorial interference and mismanagement.
The constant complaints about editorial interference and mismanagement.
Are we clear here now?
Editorial interference and mismanagement.
I await the responses from apologists pointing out that DC Comics isn't prejudiced against fish people.
And then I will direct them to this wonderful timeline of New 52 creative departures.