Since we're on the topic of author/ity and representation and inclusion of various peoples in literature...

Why is it necessary for authors to make characters homosexual or ethnic?
Do they really have a social responsibility to make it representative of actual society?

I found it a bit disturbing that Austin Grossman was considering rewriting the characters to please a few opinionated readers. Granted that I assume authors do revise and revise based off of feedback from peers, I don't think an author should have to rewrite his novel because someone said it doesn't represent society well enough. I feel as if the author has complete rights (ignoring publishers and editors rights) to do what s/he wants with his work.

In the case of Invincible and the online blogger. I feel like you can't really say that the novel isnt representative because after all it is a fiction world. A world where there are aliens, human animals mixes, robots, etc. Since it is a world outside of the world we live in, can you really try to mix in our idea of reality into a different world?

Would the blogger be pleased if Austin made Dr. Impossible African American? That is what she asked for isnt it? more ethnic diversity. Yet I don't think the blogger would be happy about that because if the villain was African American, then Austin would just be contributing to the stigma that african americans are more likely to commit a crime. The only way for the blogger to be pleased is if Austin diversified the characters in such a way that agreed with the blogger's views on breaking stigmas.

So in the end....authors should retain full authority in making characters how they choose based on their own beliefs.