Does Wonder Woman play second fiddle to Superman?

[ssupes]

The question here is... with whom?

I mean, Supergirl has her own show right now, and in it she knocked Superman flat on his backside. Comics may be a male dominated market right now, but go outside that and the pattern begins to change.

Attachment 75468

This is the response to Supergirl's TV show. There is a very clear trend that the show is generally better received better by female views than males. Especially interesting is the voting by males and females who are under 18 years of age. The number of votes from males and females is comparable, and yet the reaction is markedly different.

By the way, [and you can verify this yourself using this link - because facts - https://www.imdb.com/title/tt4532368...?ref_=tt_ov_rt ] this pattern continues to a lesser extent with Legends of Tomorrow, where Caity Lotz leads the team as White Canary. Female views rate the show more highly in general than the guys, though not with as big a difference.

Also interestingly, if you jump over to The Flash it is rated about equal by male and female viewers.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3107288...?ref_=tt_ov_rt

So those are the FACTS. What do they mean? It seems both genders are often in sync when it comes to a male lead, but put a female in the spotlight and difference becomes bigger and tends to skew towards the males being less impressed on average. One could extrapolate that this trend would continue in printed mediums as well.

So one could therefore hypothesize about the reason behind the OP's question. First - facts - the current readership of comics seems to be abuot 67% male. This is based on the latest marken research [2017] though three years earlier the poll said they were closer to the same.

https://www.bleedingcool.com/2017/10...n-37-by-women/

That being the case, if the trend from TV shows holds true, female readers will read about characters of either gender, but males will tend to be less impressed by books with a female lead.

In short, Wonder Woman is outshone in the books by Superman because most of the readership are guys, and they don't seem to rate a female lead as highly.

0.7 difference isn't really markedly different, also those stats aren't 100% accurate given that there are 29200 that aren't factored into either gender and finally there are significantly more male viewers to female viewers (almost half are the males countered) which says that more men enjoy female lead superheroes then women due to viewership and the lesser ratings may be down to a number of factors such as story lines, actors etc.

[starlight25]

Batman and Superman's fans won't suffer either because there's nothing that says her gaining popularity will lessen theirs. The DKR example you used isn't comparable imo, that made Batman look superior to Superman and had him beat him in a fight. Wonder Woman is more popular because of her movie which has nothing to do with either of those 2. It's not like the movie had her beating them up or anything, her popularity increase hasn't come by making them look inferior to her.

We don't need to see her beating batman to know she could totally kick his ass. In a fight between the 2, what could he do? Unless pre time can allow him to find a way, there is no way he stands a chance in a random fight.

[starlight25]

Yet. But I an tell you from personally living through it that the bitter complaining, and vast amount of rationalisation, from many fans that happend when Wonder Woman took down Superman in the Max Lord storyline was a thing to behold. The only thing that exceeded it was the rift in fans about whether WW would kill Max.

And no,the movie did not have her beating up Superman. Quite the opposite in fact, despite their equal showing agains Doomsday.

Popularity is like politicl power - it resides completely in the mind. If Wonder Woman beats Superman in a fight [as in the Max Lord example] or beats the hell out of Batman [as in her book Hiketeia] then some people seem to see that as an attack on the sovereignty of those characters, and by extension their popularity.

There is also the Elvis and Beatles argument from Pulp Fiction. One cannot like them equally, there must be a favourite.

jl was being made even before the first Wonder Woman film came. Are you suggesting that if her big hit would have happened before jl started filming, they would have made her beat sm? I don't know about that. But it is not about who is stronger to me. WW should never be presented as fodder to sm, same with the jl. The way they made all the jl seem fodder compared to him is just stupid.

[brettc1]

0.7 difference isn't really markedly different, also those stats aren't 100% accurate given that there are 29200 that aren't factored into either gender and finally there are significantly more male viewers to female viewers (almost half are the males countered) which says that more men enjoy female lead superheroes then women due to viewership and the lesser ratings may be down to a number of factors such as story lines, actors etc.

I disagree on a number points.

First, if you look the breakdowns for the a number of shows, superhero action attracts many more male votes than women as a genre. This being consistent with the survey I cited earlier that showed 67% of comic readers were male, it only gives added plausibility to comparing the two statistics - superhero readers and superhero viewers.

Second, I am not comparing their gender identified scores to the average, only each other.

And third, in a mark out of 10, 0.7 is a significant difference when calculated across tens of thousands of votes. It’s especially noticeable when you look at The Flash and Arrow, where the male/female score averages are almost identical (differences of only 0.1 - 0.2)

[ssupes]

That appreciation thread is devoted to their romance, which not everyone on here supports.

Just a little nit pick but it isn't just about their romance but more their relationship which also includes a platonic one. I won't deny it is frequented more by people who enjoy the romance but you can post images about their friendship even with a stance that you don't agree in a relationship between them so long you start arguing with people who do *cough* like some obsessive fans *cough* and people will respect your opinion. All appreciation threads are to appreciate the characters and the ties that bind them, whatever they may be i believe.

[ssupes]

I disagree on a number points.

First, if you look the breakdowns for the a number of shows, superhero action attracts many more male votes than women as a genre. This being consistent with the survey I cited earlier that showed 67% of comic readers were male, it only gives added plausibility to comparing the two statistics - superhero readers and superhero viewers.

Second, I am not comparing their gender identified scores to the average, only each other.

And third, in a mark out of 10, 0.7 is a significant difference when calculated across tens of thousands of votes. It’s especially noticeable when you look at The Flash and Arrow, where the male/female score averages are almost identical (differences of only 0.1 - 0.2)

But as I mentioned earlier, you haven't considered other factors such as plot. Take a look at the jessica jones IMDB numbers where the difference is 0.3 with numbers higher then super girls and if you asked fans I imagine a lot would say they prefer jessica jones story to supergirls.
Here is my link for proof: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2357547...?ref_=tt_ov_rt

[brettc1]

But as I mentioned earlier, you haven't considered other factors such as plot. Take a look at the jessica jones IMDB numbers where the difference is 0.3 with numbers higher then super girls and if you asked fans I imagine a lot would say they prefer jessica jones story to supergirls.
Here is my link for proof: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2357547...?ref_=tt_ov_rt

I had already checked out JJ, but thanks. Yes. Plot clearly has an impact, and JJ is exceptionally well written. It is also quite different to Supergirl in that the antagonist in series one is a male and played superbly by David Tennant, whereas Supergirl's main antagonists also tend to be female.

But if you keep looking at Buffy and Xena's scores on IMDB, especially the latter, you will see the same trend emerging that I was talking about. It is also true of the female led shows ALIAS and LE FEMME NIKITA.

I'm out writing at the moment but when I get home I will begin compiling a data table. Feel free to suggest female led action shows and movies. I prefer to have all the facts, and it might be a comprehensive list disproves my theory ��

[Doctor Bifrost]

Mainstream movie viewers who are not into comics, no, they would have no clue either way. Comics readers? They know of his negative reputation. Its a known quantity outside of his relative absence for such a long time.. Because comic fans tend to research, comic fans tend to check out back issues. Its just a natural stepping stone of the fandom. I mean, he was never around outside of being the older, rather unimportant husband of Etta when I grew up reading comics. But it didn't take much searching to figure out who he was classically and what his reputation was. Same as how my generation as children never saw Barry Allen in a then-current book. He was dead and had been dead a while. But we figured it out. So Steve doesn't have any sort of clean slate within the comic fandom Its too much to just be completely erased since the New 52 brought him back in a sometimes-meaningful role. Especially since in that time he's only gone over rather lukewarm as it is. He still needs a lot of work. One good movie is not going to suddenly make him Lois Lane level. I hope he gets there, but its going to take time and investment on DC's part. Good films will help, but its still not going to happen overnight with comic fandom.

Lois had a reputation too, of course: shamelessly chasing Superman while he repeatedly said he couldn't marry her; trying to trick him in a hundred different ways; ignoring Clark Kent or treating him with contempt; getting into catfights with Lana Lang over who deserved Superman more; and being absurdly impulsive, from jumping out of a window (IIRC) because she knew that Superman (wherever he was) would save her, and she wanted to see him, to subjecting herself to potions and rays and whatever, then hiding the results from Superman because she was embarrassed - again. Also, crazed jealousy when Superman was seen with another women, and also attaching herself to other male superheroes when they appeared. (I'm talking one-shots, not crossovers from the JLA or anything.) Meanwhile Superman and Batman would fool her into thinking Superman and Clark were two different people, and laugh at her behind her back.

Ah, the Silver Age! Yeah, she was a good reporter, but not the Pulitzer Prize-winning top of her field, the way she is today. (And her being a good reporter often depended on Superman.)

I think none of that really sticks to her because, back then, "that's what women were like." (That's not what women were like, of course, but in popular culture they were frequently portrayed that way: damsel in distress, distraction from the hero's true purpose, easily fooled, love-obsessed, the brilliant scientists's beautiful daughter instead of being the brilliant scientist herself). So when they finally started trying to build up Lois as a more independent character, it was easier to toss a lot of that aside as just the way things were written back then.

Steve Trevor has always had a harder time, because a man who is less powerful, less successful, less well-known, less interesting than his female love-interest would have been seen back then - and to some extent, even today - as "less of a man," a very tough label to come back from. Whereas none of that would prompt most people to see Lois as "less of a woman."

I think it continues to be a problem even today, as there are still many people who want to see Diana with a man who is "worthy" of her, by which they frequently mean (and I've seen this set out explicitly) someone around her level of power and/or status - Superman, or Hercules, or Batman because he's the G-ddamn Batman.

Of course, not everybody feels that way, and I think the movie helped. Although I don't know what happens now that we jump 65+ years into the future.

[brettc1]

Lois had a reputation too, of course: shamelessly chasing Superman while he repeatedly said he couldn't marry her; trying to trick him in a hundred different ways; ignoring Clark Kent or treating him with contempt; getting into catfights with Lana Lang over who deserved Superman more; and being absurdly impulsive, from jumping out of a window (IIRC) because she knew that Superman (wherever he was) would save her, and she wanted to see him, to subjecting herself to potions and rays and whatever, then hiding the results from Superman because she was embarrassed - again. Also, crazed jealousy when Superman was seen with another women, and also attaching herself to other male superheroes when they appeared. (I'm talking one-shots, not crossovers from the JLA or anything.) Meanwhile Superman and Batman would fool her into thinking Superman and Clark were two different people, and laugh at her behind her back.

Ah, the Silver Age! Yeah, she was a good reporter, but not the Pulitzer Prize-winning top of her field, the way she is today. (And her being a good reporter often depended on Superman.)

THANK you.

[brettc1]

On another note, lets revisit some of Wonder Woman's epic feats of strength from the golden age.

This one [not in the same category as her sun towing feat, but still impressive] shows her moving a glacier big enough to threaten the destruction of New York City.

Being the Golden Age, artists weren't overly concerned with realism in their illustrations - hence the rather puny looking ice mass in the final frame shown. But since we know its supposed to be representative of city levelling sheet of ice. Based on the art of the buildings toppling, and the approximated sizes of the ships int the harbor and being carried by the ice, if the glacier in questions were about 500 feet high and 1000 cubic feet in volume it would have a mass of over 750, 000 US TONS.

Super-herculanean indeed.

wonder woman ice 1.jpg

[Miles To Go]

Lois had a reputation too, of course: shamelessly chasing Superman while he repeatedly said he couldn't marry her; trying to trick him in a hundred different ways; ignoring Clark Kent or treating him with contempt; getting into catfights with Lana Lang over who deserved Superman more; and being absurdly impulsive, from jumping out of a window (IIRC) because she knew that Superman (wherever he was) would save her, and she wanted to see him, to subjecting herself to potions and rays and whatever, then hiding the results from Superman because she was embarrassed - again. Also, crazed jealousy when Superman was seen with another women, and also attaching herself to other male superheroes when they appeared. (I'm talking one-shots, not crossovers from the JLA or anything.) Meanwhile Superman and Batman would fool her into thinking Superman and Clark were two different people, and laugh at her behind her back.

Ah, the Silver Age! Yeah, she was a good reporter, but not the Pulitzer Prize-winning top of her field, the way she is today. (And her being a good reporter often depended on Superman.)

I think none of that really sticks to her because, back then, "that's what women were like.".

No, it doesn't stick with her because it wasn't true to Shuester and Seigal vision of the character, like a lot of the Silver Age was to many other aspects of Superman, as enjoyable as it was. Fortunately by the late 70s things were turning around for that version of Lois.

[brettc1]

Another feat from 1947.

Wonder Woman lassos and throws a planetoid.

According to science, the minimum diameter for a rocky object to assume a spherical formation under gravity is 600 km.

Based on a comparison with the size and mass of the moon [which is actually about 3500 km in diameter] the mass of the planetoid here would be upwards of 1 THOUSAND BILLION TONS.

And she's THROWING IT.

But for the skeptics, let's say that object is smaller. Much smaller. Let's say it's only the size of Mount Everest.

In that case, the object would mass a mere 3.5 BILLION TONS.

[SiegePerilous02]

LOL.

Saying Steve still labors under the burden of his 60's reputation is like saying this is how people think of Batman...



But one good comic was all it took to change his persona overnight, going from a guy who did the batusi to the man who has spent the last thirty years making Superman his whipping boy, and the ruling god of the DCU...

The Adam West Batman was very popular when it first came out, even if it gained a negative reputation later on that damaged the brand. It has circled back around to being pretty well regarded again since the Batman franchise in general has so many takes that all very popular. Even so, it's a difficult comparison to make for the obvious reason that Batman is the star of a franchise, while Steve is a tertiary character in another.

Plus the problem Steve has had for the majority of his publication history is that he is flat out boring. That's no a problem Batman has ever faced even when he's being goofy Adam West. Or Silver Age Lois Lane. Because that woman was many things, few of them positive, but boring was not one of them. If we're comparing him to Batman or a supporting character like Lois, he comes up far short. Chris Pine's Steve was literally the best Steve we have EVER gotten, but that's one movie vs. 75 years of comics with him not doing a whole lot of anything and being absent for big chunks of it.

No, he really doesn't. Well, clearly in your mind, but I don't think much anywhere else. You missed the point entirely. People can read the Adam West Batman, but it doesn't change the status of the current batgod. But not many people are going to go further back than Perez to read about Wonder Woman, and if they do they are likely to skip Kannigher entirely and go straight to the source, which are kooky and fun, and don't feature loser Steve.

I like Marston's Steve, but let's be honest: he's not going to be the most noteworthy thing for people who go back and read the Golden Age stories. He is far less interesting than Wonder Woman, the Amazons, Etta and the Holliday Girls or the various villains.

To be fair superman has had two new animated movies coming out, a writer who has new heroes inspired by only him, and superboy to appear in Young justice both comics and animation, Titans show, and animated movie. Death and Return of Superman is going to ne shown in theaters. He's had a show about that lasted 10 seasons and an 11th one in the comics.

Wonder Girl appeared in YJ too, and Donna has shown up in Titans before Kon.
That show that lasted 10 seasons didn't have him actually be Superman. I know it was popular and Superman fans should be grateful for it or whatever, but I've never been inclined to watch it. Same with Gotham. They are taking the origin stories (the most boring parts) and stretching them out. Who cares? I wouldn't want a ten season show of Diana fighting all her villains before becoming Wonder Woman.

They were major players in season one of Young Justice, while Wonder Woman barely communicated with Wonder Girl. When is the last time WW had an animated movie much less an animated show.

Superboy was a major player. Clark was his aloof "dad" who popped in every once and a while and acted uncomfortable. He also had a reputation as being a dick to Superboy. YMMV on whether or not that's a fair assessment of his reaction to a surprise clone, but it's one that persists none the less.

As I tell my students, when somebody tells you the truth [or in this case common knowledge], ask for the facts that can be proven.

I feel like the published history of WW comics is proof enough. At one time, Steve was considered so useless that Perez aged him up as Etta's boring husband and he got shuffled off to limbo. This was a change that did not last an insignificant amount of time, they didn't have an incentive to do undo it from a fan outcry. It's not a change I care for remotely, but it happened. Things circled back to him because in the intervening years none of the bland Steve substitutes managed to stick, so they might as well reinstate the real deal. I wouldn't go so far as saying he's unpopular (Jason is someone who i think of as unpopular, outright rejected by pretty much everyone) but he's not overwhelmingly popular either. Maybe movie Steve, but the comic ones is just kind of there. Post-Crisis fans especially don't have a strong attachment to him.

While some of his uphill climb is due to this perception that a non-powered man is not worthy of Wonder Woman, a lot of it is either due to not a lot of interesting things being done with him or a sizable chunk of the fanbase getting bored with hetero relationships for WW in general and wanting to see her hook up with another woman. The movie showed that a romance with Steve could be done, but it was a finite story. Translating that over the comics remains to be seen. The momentum of her first movie's success has not carried over to the comics in any major way post-Rucka, and his Steve was fine but nothing outstanding.

[Sacred Knight]

Lois had a reputation too, of course: shamelessly chasing Superman while he repeatedly said he couldn't marry her; trying to trick him in a hundred different ways; ignoring Clark Kent or treating him with contempt; getting into catfights with Lana Lang over who deserved Superman more; and being absurdly impulsive, from jumping out of a window (IIRC) because she knew that Superman (wherever he was) would save her, and she wanted to see him, to subjecting herself to potions and rays and whatever, then hiding the results from Superman because she was embarrassed - again. Also, crazed jealousy when Superman was seen with another women, and also attaching herself to other male superheroes when they appeared. (I'm talking one-shots, not crossovers from the JLA or anything.) Meanwhile Superman and Batman would fool her into thinking Superman and Clark were two different people, and laugh at her behind her back.

Ah, the Silver Age! Yeah, she was a good reporter, but not the Pulitzer Prize-winning top of her field, the way she is today. (And her being a good reporter often depended on Superman.)

I think none of that really sticks to her because, back then, "that's what women were like." (That's not what women were like, of course, but in popular culture they were frequently portrayed that way: damsel in distress, distraction from the hero's true purpose, easily fooled, love-obsessed, the brilliant scientists's beautiful daughter instead of being the brilliant scientist herself). So when they finally started trying to build up Lois as a more independent character, it was easier to toss a lot of that aside as just the way things were written back then.

Steve Trevor has always had a harder time, because a man who is less powerful, less successful, less well-known, less interesting than his female love-interest would have been seen back then - and to some extent, even today - as "less of a man," a very tough label to come back from. Whereas none of that would prompt most people to see Lois as "less of a woman."

I think it continues to be a problem even today, as there are still many people who want to see Diana with a man who is "worthy" of her, by which they frequently mean (and I've seen this set out explicitly) someone around her level of power and/or status - Superman, or Hercules, or Batman because he's the G-ddamn Batman.

Of course, not everybody feels that way, and I think the movie helped. Although I don't know what happens now that we jump 65+ years into the future.

I agree with all that, today it doesn't reflect that well and its certainly dated. The thing is though, and the main difference compared with the character of Steve Trevor, is that at the time it was very popular. She was very popular. Popular enough that her shenanigans, which again would no go over well today, earned itself its own solo title in its own right that lasted over 15 years (and it should be noted that title did eventually shift away from the schtick of being the love struck reporter looking to trick Superman into marrying her and tried to tackle relevant social issues of the times, so that silly reputation started somewhat ebbing away by the 70s). So her reputation was positive, even if today its seen as not quite...befitting a good characterization of a woman. But she's evolved, and in a sense like the Batman example, her evolution makes her silly past not affect her much. That past reputation, popular at the time even though not viable today, doesn't affect her standing negatively even if it is dated. Its somewhat like the Batman example in that regard. This is why as a supporting character and main interest, she is leaps and bounds ahead of Steve in terms of recognizabilty, popularity, and relevance. He's not in her ballpark. I don't say that to bash the character, I want to see him with relevance and to get over being a joke in the comics. Its never too late. But the effort has gotta be put in if its going to happen.

[kjn]

I think there are two angles to this question. The first, and easy, one is of course the marketing and popularity angle (not only in comics, but in all other media and merchandise). Here of course Batman and Superman trounces petty much everyone but Spiderman. Wonder Woman is probably a solid second tier here, and arguably the only superheroine on that level.

But then we have the narrative angle, which is deeply tied to psychology, especially of the creators. I think a huge part of why the Adam West Batman was allowed to be goofy and silly was partly because it was a children's show, but also partly because the men creating the series were secure in their position as men in society. A man could safely act silly and goofy, or indeed vulnerable, without hurting his standing.

Now, Miller and others created a grimdark Batman in the 80s, probably due to other causes. But that Batman was fed into a patriarchal structure that was starting to feel threatened. And since the men now writing Batman were feeling threatened in their status as men, they could not allow Batman to ever appear vulnerable or not in control. He can be hurt and even put into a wheelchair, but that wheelchair will turn out to be a one-man tank. The difference between how the trauma of Batman and Babs is handled here is rather telling, and in the end I believe Babs comes out as the stronger character, because we were shown her as a whole character throughout, not simply as a projection of negated fears.