Personality-wise, how do you distinguish Wonder Woman and Superman?

[Agent Z]

Well ok, I guess eveybody has different ideas of what a strong woman looks like, I think wide shoulders and meaty arms and legs is a good measure. But what is your ideal shape of a strong woman?

If its all the same with you, I'll decline from answering this question.

And are you seriously comparing menial labor to a woman literally trainning for combat (and specially wrestling like I prefer Diana's specialty to be). Her trainning would be specifically guided to practicing feats of strength in combat useful ways. Superman would only partially and accidentally also get a little pump from working on the farm, and it's not even like most of the stuff he did would be designed to test his limits so that he could build muscle.

Clark's menial labor would not be the same as a normal person's due to his strength not to mention how often he tests his physical skill against opponents like Mongul, Doomsday and Brainiac. Diana by contrast grew up with people who weren't as strong as her. She'd be more muscular than the average woman but that doesn't mean she'd be more muscular than Clark.

[Robanker]

If we are being realistic, a pair of glasses wouldn't be enough to fool people no matter what Clark's body looks like.

Yeah, but in a story where a man can fly and lift a train with a pinky, why are we talking realism with the glasses? There are a billion explanations regarding how nobody sees through his secret identity and none of them will ever hold to any degree of scrutiny so let's just not. It's like how no detective in the DCU can figure out who Batman is despite there being a lot of easy paths to the same answer: he leaves DNA samples on every crime scene (because every villain messes him up now), he's the only one with the resources to do it, etc. You can always come up with an explanation for any of them but at the end of the day, realistically, Superman and Batman wouldn't keep secret identities long. Let's not go down that road.

[manwhohaseverything]

I'm not just talking about definition, I mean even size. The common Superman is absolutely huge. Look at Henry Cavill in a shirt, it's impossible not to notice his unusual size.

As said,not much of an issue.the glasses disguise was meant to be absurd and ridiculous.It doesn't need much explanation.You don't explain a joke,do you?But,if people hell bent on clinging on it then this is the only way.Go all might route.

Really? In older comics superheroes like Superman weren't drawn with all this definition that we have now and I think Superman looked just fine.
Attachment 104909

In All Star Superman he was also smoother
Attachment 104910

that was a standard physique for a strongman of that era.Muscle definition and being shredded wasn't much of thing back then as it is now a days.Also,these guys being drenched in steroids wasn't a thing either.

[Hcmarvel]

I actually think Wonder Woman should absolutely be willing to kill. Maybe this is stemming from the fact that Kingdom Come was one of the first major DC events I read (at least one that had ALL the characters in it) and that version of Diana imprinted on me.

I'm well aware of the fact that A) her part in Kingdom Come is not the most well regarded aspect of that story and B) she's kind of shown to be "wrong" in the story

But still, my impression of Diana versus Clark (and Bruce) is that she is the one much more willing to get violent and if necessary kill.

I also don't know why she wouldn't be? She's literally an Amazon. I think its harder to argue she should not be killing her foes to be honest. She can't because it's comics and we want Cheetah to come back sometime but why would an Amazon not decapitate or shoot an arrow through her enemy? It doesn't actually make sense.


As someone who is more Marvel than DC, I appreciated the thoughtful posts in this thread. Still, I do think that Clark and Diana are often presented as overly similar. They somehow are both about "Truth" in a fundamental way that doesn't really make sense for either of them? But if it makes sense for one of them it's Diana cause of the Lasso. As Bendis rightfully pointed out, Superman's Truth, Justice, and the American Way thing never rang true when he was actively lying to the most important people in his life for decades and decades.

Batman, Wonder Woman, and Superman are the "trinity" but that has MUCH more to do with publishing history than the three of them actually forming an interesting triangle. There is not actually that much there. I mean Batman and Superman can be a great pair but I agree with some here who pointed out that its not entirely accurate to portray Clark as the optimistic/naïve one and Bruce as pessimistic/cynical. Bruce isn't pessimistic and Clark isn't naïve. But at least there is a lot you can do comparing these two characters (night and day, powers and no powers, Gotham vs Metropolis, Joker vs. Lex, etc.)

But you throw Wonder Woman in there and none of it works totally. There just isn't much to connect Bruce and Diana or to distinguish Clark and Diana. What on Earth is there to connect Batman and Wonder Woman other than they're both heroes? Batman would be much closer to Barry Allen, Martian Manhunter, or Green Arrow than Wonder Woman in my opinion. Superman and Wonder Woman are an iconic duo when paired but unless you are playing up their differences (which to me really just boil down to their willingness to commit to violence as a solution to problems) than they are not that dynamic together either.

My favorite Wonder Woman/Superman dynamic is from that one scene in The New Frontier where Wonder Woman has freed the women who were in captivity and led them in a slaughter of their male captors. I love that Diana is drinking with the women, is taller than Superman, and has no interest in listening to American foreign policy (or letting male slavers live for that matter).

[Agent Z]

Yeah, but in a story where a man can fly and lift a train with a pinky, why are we talking realism with the glasses? There are a billion explanations regarding how nobody sees through his secret identity and none of them will ever hold to any degree of scrutiny so let's just not. It's like how no detective in the DCU can figure out who Batman is despite there being a lot of easy paths to the same answer: he leaves DNA samples on every crime scene (because every villain messes him up now), he's the only one with the resources to do it, etc. You can always come up with an explanation for any of them but at the end of the day, realistically, Superman and Batman wouldn't keep secret identities long. Let's not go down that road.

Alpha's the one who went down that road first not me.

[Agent Z]

I actually think Wonder Woman should absolutely be willing to kill. Maybe this is stemming from the fact that Kingdom Come was one of the first major DC events I read (at least one that had ALL the characters in it) and that version of Diana imprinted on me.

I'm well aware of the fact that A) her part in Kingdom Come is not the most well regarded aspect of that story and B) she's kind of shown to be "wrong" in the story

But still, my impression of Diana versus Clark (and Bruce) is that she is the one much more willing to get violent and if necessary kill.

I also don't know why she wouldn't be? She's literally an Amazon. I think its harder to argue she should not be killing her foes to be honest. She can't because it's comics and we want Cheetah to come back sometime but why would an Amazon not decapitate or shoot an arrow through her enemy? It doesn't actually make sense.


As someone who is more Marvel than DC, I appreciated the thoughtful posts in this thread. Still, I do think that Clark and Diana are often presented as overly similar. They somehow are both about "Truth" in a fundamental way that doesn't really make sense for either of them? But if it makes sense for one of them it's Diana cause of the Lasso. As Bendis rightfully pointed out, Superman's Truth, Justice, and the American Way thing never rang true when he was actively lying to the most important people in his life for decades and decades.

Batman, Wonder Woman, and Superman are the "trinity" but that has MUCH more to do with publishing history than the three of them actually forming an interesting triangle. There is not actually that much there. I mean Batman and Superman can be a great pair but I agree with some here who pointed out that its not entirely accurate to portray Clark as the optimistic/naïve one and Bruce as pessimistic/cynical. Bruce isn't pessimistic and Clark isn't naïve. But at least there is a lot you can do comparing these two characters (night and day, powers and no powers, Gotham vs Metropolis, Joker vs. Lex, etc.)

But you throw Wonder Woman in there and none of it works totally. There just isn't much to connect Bruce and Diana or to distinguish Clark and Diana.

It's not a matter of whether or not she should kill, it's when she should. Diana isn't a sadist or a murderer. She will kill when it is necessary and avoid it when it isn't.

As for Diana vs Bruce and Clark, read Rucka's the Hiketeia or Sacrifice to see how they compare and contrast. And Dian doesn't have a secret identity so truth works for her just fine.

The issue with Wonder Woman in Kingdom Come is she's a strawman. Her main position in that story is to show why superheroes killing under any circumstances is wrong rather than any nuanced examination of when lethal force is and isn't applicable.

And as I've stated before, Diana and Clark having some similarities is not an issue when there are antiheroes and villains of similar stripes running around.

[Alpha]

If its all the same with you, I'll decline from answering this question.



Clark's menial labor would not be the same as a normal person's due to his strength not to mention how often he tests his physical skill against opponents like Mongul, Doomsday and Brainiac. Diana by contrast grew up with people who weren't as strong as her. She'd be more muscular than the average woman but that doesn't mean she'd be more muscular than Clark.

You do realize this doesn't make sense right? Because Diana also faces opponents who test her physical skills regularly PLUS she was trained by amazons to teste her limits. Yes, they were wekaer than her, but if they were training her they probably adapted their training to her power level, like making her lift super heavy items and have multiple people throwing super heavy stuff at her, and fighting her at the same time, things Clark would have no reason to do in the farm becausr he wasn't training to be a superhero, he just had the power implicitly.

[Alpha]

Alpha's the one who went down that rod first not me.

Yeah true. But my main argument for Superman's and Wonder Woman's physique isn't body realism, it's what they convey. A Wonder Woman like I described would convey someone who works out a lot and trains physically, which she does. Superman's would convey someone who is naturally strong but doesn't have much expertise.

[Robanker]

As said,not much of an issue.the glasses disguise was meant to be absurd and ridiculous.It doesn't need much explanation.You don't explain a joke,do you?But,if people hell bent on clinging on it then this is the only way.Go all might route.



that was a standard physique for a strongman of that era.Muscle definition and being shredded wasn't much of thing back then as it is now a days.Also,these guys being drenched in steroids wasn't a thing either.

Clark being able to inflate his muscles is a terrible idea. Just stick with the glasses. Turning him into All Might because adults have trouble suspending disbelief in a story about a living alien solar battery who can bench press a galaxy because of the secret identity is goddamn stupid.

It's the conceit. Like how the Batmobile doesn't get stuck in traffic like it actually goddamn would. Because that's not fun or cool.

People dunk on the glasses because they want to dunk on Superman and it's an easy target. If you fix that they're just going to make fun of Kryptonite or something. Don't apologize for the character just because people can be petty.

[Agent Z]

You do realize this doesn't make sense right? Because Diana also faces opponents who test her physical skills regularly PLUS she was trained by amazons to teste her limits.

Superman has way more enemies in his rogues gallery that test his physical might than Diana does. Most of her enemies either don't have super powers or their powers aren't super strength (Circe's magic, Zara's pyrokinesis, Dr Psycho's telepathy just for example). Furthermore, Clark has been shown as using his powers to do menial labor that would require more than one person to do.

Yes, they were wekaer than her, but if they were training her they probably adapted their training to her power level, like making her lift super heavy items and have multiple people throwing super heavy stuff at her, and fighting her at the same time, things Clark would have no reason to do in the farm becausr he wasn't training to be a superhero, he just had the power implicitly.

Clark has been depicted as training to be a superhero since he was Superboy or practicing with his powers since he discovered them. He may not be formally trained in martial arts like Diana was but he still has his own experience.

[Agent Z]

Yeah true. But my main argument for Superman's and Wonder Woman's physique isn't body realism, it's what they convey. A Wonder Woman like I described would convey someone who works out a lot and trains physically, which she does. Superman's would convey someone who is naturally strong but doesn't have much expertise.

Again, Superman is stronger than Diana.

[John Venus]

I actually think Wonder Woman should absolutely be willing to kill. Maybe this is stemming from the fact that Kingdom Come was one of the first major DC events I read (at least one that had ALL the characters in it) and that version of Diana imprinted on me.

I'm well aware of the fact that A) her part in Kingdom Come is not the most well regarded aspect of that story and B) she's kind of shown to be "wrong" in the story

But still, my impression of Diana versus Clark (and Bruce) is that she is the one much more willing to get violent and if necessary kill.

I also don't know why she wouldn't be? She's literally an Amazon. I think its harder to argue she should not be killing her foes to be honest. She can't because it's comics and we want Cheetah to come back sometime but why would an Amazon not decapitate or shoot an arrow through her enemy? It doesn't actually make sense.


As someone who is more Marvel than DC, I appreciated the thoughtful posts in this thread. Still, I do think that Clark and Diana are often presented as overly similar. They somehow are both about "Truth" in a fundamental way that doesn't really make sense for either of them? But if it makes sense for one of them it's Diana cause of the Lasso. As Bendis rightfully pointed out, Superman's Truth, Justice, and the American Way thing never rang true when he was actively lying to the most important people in his life for decades and decades.

Batman, Wonder Woman, and Superman are the "trinity" but that has MUCH more to do with publishing history than the three of them actually forming an interesting triangle. There is not actually that much there. I mean Batman and Superman can be a great pair but I agree with some here who pointed out that its not entirely accurate to portray Clark as the optimistic/naïve one and Bruce as pessimistic/cynical. Bruce isn't pessimistic and Clark isn't naïve. But at least there is a lot you can do comparing these two characters (night and day, powers and no powers, Gotham vs Metropolis, Joker vs. Lex, etc.)

But you throw Wonder Woman in there and none of it works totally. There just isn't much to connect Bruce and Diana or to distinguish Clark and Diana. What on Earth is there to connect Batman and Wonder Woman other than they're both heroes? Batman would be much closer to Barry Allen, Martian Manhunter, or Green Arrow than Wonder Woman in my opinion. Superman and Wonder Woman are an iconic duo when paired but unless you are playing up their differences (which to me really just boil down to their willingness to commit to violence as a solution to problems) than they are not that dynamic together either.

My favorite Wonder Woman/Superman dynamic is from that one scene in The New Frontier where Wonder Woman has freed the women who were in captivity and led them in a slaughter of their male captors. I love that Diana is drinking with the women, is taller than Superman, and has no interest in listening to American foreign policy (or letting male slavers live for that matter).

You should check out Rucka's Year One, Hiketia, Perez's Gods & Monsters, League of One OGN, Gail Simone's run or heck, the original stories by Martston to get a feel for what Diana is meant to be by her original creator. Diana is not the punisher. Killing is not her go-to response. She will kill but only after exhausting several steps first. Rucka demonstrates this really well in Year One when Diana gives her enemies three chances to back off and only engages in the third but she doesn't kill them because she was able to subdue Cheetah without killing her. He also made her enemies varying degrees of sympathetic which justifies her not killing them since there is a chance that they could be redeemed.

I'm reminded of Kyoshi in Avatar: The Last Airbender. She killed one guy in the show and that was after he conquered several territories, didn't listen to warnings and partly by accident but fandom acts like she is a bloodthirsty killer akin to the Punisher. Even in the novel she hated the fact that she had to do those things to maintain peace.

Diana was created to be a subversion of Greek Mythos so we can examine them from a different perspective. We don't know what the RL female warriors were like but the ancient greeks were spooked by them because they saw women as little better than baby incubators thus the 'violent baby killing Amazons' were a subversion of that myth. Marston sought to be subvert the myth by making the Amazons a peaceful nation that had advanced beyond war, Hippolyta actually outsmarts Hercules and in response he subjugates her because his ego couldn't take it.

[John Venus]

Again, Superman is stronger than Diana.

superman-vs-wonder-woman-injustice-gods-among-us-6.jpg

10char

[Robanker]

superman-vs-wonder-woman-injustice-gods-among-us-6.jpg

10char

There are more pictures of Clark curbstomping Diana than the reverse, and it's always stupid either direction. Let's not go down this path.

[Alpha]

Superman has way more enemies in his rogues gallery that test his physical might than Diana does. Most of her enemies either don't have super powers or their powers aren't super strength (Circe's magic, Zara's pyrokinesis, Dr Psycho's telepathy just for example). Furthermore, Clark has been shown as using his powers to do menial labor that would require more than one person to do.




Clark has been depicted as training to be a superhero since he was Superboy or practicing with his powers since he discovered them. He may not be formally trained in martial arts like Diana was but he still has his own experience.

I don't think the difference between the amount of strong enemies that Superman and Wonder Woman have is big enough to justify him becoming more muscled after a lifetime of her training as an amazon. And stop comparing Clark lifting trucks and throwing around trees to Diana literally being trained as a warrior to the breaking point of her body. She was raised by the best warriors in the world to be the best among them. She was far more tested than Clark ever was while growing up. And to me that's what her body type should convey. Her being a slim woman doesn't really fit the name "amazonian". It's not about whether we can explain it away with super strength, it's aesthetics of the amazons. Clark for me is always the normie who can do these amazing things. He can be a fellow on the bigger side I guess, but I don't see the appeal in him looking like a bodybuilder or even like Henry Cavill.