Superman: son of Kal-El

[Kara Danvers]

Clark doesn't view Superman the way you're looking at it at all.

I don't know the context of that comic page but different people and writers will see it differently.

[Nelliebly]

Superman didn't mean anything before Clark. It means something now.

And it might mean something ::different:: in the future because ideas and ideals evolve.

But, I mean, by your own logic, Kara Danvers as played by the lovely Melissa Benoist as seen in your profile pic shouldn’t have been allowed to be named “Supergirl” by Cat Grant.

She’s Superman’s cousin, she performed one heroic public act (saving the plane) and she is blood related to Kal.

The “Super” mantle meant something already because Superman was an active hero when she debuted.

By your own (deeply flawed) logic then, Kara Danvers didn’t “earn” the right to be called Supergirl. The Super moniker “meant something” when she debuted and it shouldn’t have been bestowed upon her just because she was from the House of El and performed one heroic act. She should be stripped of the title. She can wear her family crest but shouldn’t be allowed to be called Supergirl. That’s nepotism. They should rename the show.

Seems pretty unfair to me but, hey, I didn’t make the rules. You did.

[Yoda]

I don't know the context of that comic page but different people and writers will see it differently.

Do you have a single example of Clark looking at his title of Superman as something special just for him? Because that whole idea seems to go pretty directly against any conception of the character. His humility and seeing himself as not being "special" or above anyone are pretty central concepts to the characterization across the board. Entitled is not a character trait of any Superman.

[Kara Danvers]

And it might mean something ::different:: in the future because ideas and ideals evolve.

But, I mean, by your own logic, Kara Danvers as seen in your profile pic shouldn’t have been allowed to be named “Supergirl” by Cat Grant.

She’s Superman’s cousin, she performed one heroic public act (saving the plane) and she is blood related to Kal.

The “Super” mantle meant something already because Superman was an active hero when she debuted.

By your own (deeply flawed) logic then, Kara Danvers didn’t “earn” the right to be called Supergirl. The Super moniker “meant something” when she debuted and it shouldn’t have been bestowed upon her just because she was from the House of El and performed one heroic act. She should be stripped of the title. She can wear her family crest but shouldn’t be allowed to be called Supergirl. They should rename the show.

Seems pretty unfair to me but, hey, I didn’t make the rules. You did.

I said Jon shouldn't be called Superman. I don't think it's wrong for him to have Super in his name. It is taking Superman specifically that I disagree with.

[Kara Danvers]

Do you have a single example of Clark looking at his title of Superman as something special just for him? Because that whole idea seems to go pretty directly against any conception of the character. His humility and seeing himself as not being "special" or above anyone are pretty central concepts to the characterization across the board. Entitled is not a character trait of any Superman.

Superman is humble. He doesn't see himself as the greatest hero in the Universe but he is.

Superman as the greatest hero in the DCU is something we know as readers and we know he is special. It is not something Clark believes about himself.

[manwhohaseverything]

Superman didn't mean anything before Clark. It means something now.

it still means nothing.you just attribute value into it.for an outsider like it means nothing. the s=hope thing is hilarious and the sygil of house of el is also eyerolling concept.It's just an s.Superman is dude with supernatural powers as of now. that's it.let's look at what siegel,the creator defined "superman" as. siegel defined as "the champion of the oppressed".Guess what clark has been doing since siegel.He's been a stooge,a dictator,a messiah,a savior..etc.No champion in sight.Therefore,clark hasn't been superman.title became meaningless.Anyone can give it any meaning.I can have it mean "monkey's uncle"(wink!wink! hope).

[Nelliebly]

I said Jon shouldn't be called Superman. I don't think it's wrong for him to have Super in his name. It is taking Superman specifically that I disagree with.

So you are fine with him wearing his family’s shield, having “Super” in his name but he isn’t allowed to be called Superman even though, Jon Kent, identifies (that we know of) as a man. K.

But I mean, you can’t back track. You laid out the criteria for why Jon wasn’t allowed to be called Superman and your own criteria applies to Kara Danvers on Supergirl. It is what it is. Your own profile pic conflicts with the criteria you yourself set.

[Kara Danvers]

So you are fine with him wearing his family’s shield, having “Super” in his name but he isn’t allowed to be called Superman even though, Jon Kent, identifies (that we know of) as a man. K.

But I mean, you can’t back track. You laid out the criteria for why Jon wasn’t allowed to be called Superman and your own criteria applies to Kara Danvers on Supergirl. It is what it is. Your own profile pic conflicts with the criteria you yourself set.

My criteria is that someone that isn't the greatest hero in the DCU shouldn't use the name of the greatest hero of the DCU. Characters can use names that associate themselves with him. They can combine Super with whatever they want as long as they don't take his specific name.

Supergirl is not Superman. Superman is Superman.

[Nelliebly]

Superman is humble. He doesn't see himself as the greatest hero in the Universe but he is.

Superman as the greatest hero in the DCU is something we know as readers and we know he is special. It is not something Clark believes about himself.

Kal-El as Superman is the greatest hero in the world.

We don’t know who Jon will be yet because, again, for the 100th time, you have not read the book yet.

He’s ::different:: from Kal-El because he’s literally (not just spiritually) the children of two different worlds in a way Clark was not. They have ::different:: heritages. Neither is right or wrong.

Clark didn’t name himself Superman and, likely, Jon won’t either. Just as Kara didn’t name herself Supergirl. How it will play out remains to be seen. You don’t know any of that yet so it’s rather silly to be this adamant pretending that you do.

[Nelliebly]

My criteria is that someone that isn't the greatest hero in the DCU shouldn't use the name of the greatest hero of the DCU. Characters can use names that associate themselves with him. They can combine Super with whatever they want as long as they don't take his specific name.

Supergirl is not Superman. Superman is Superman.

Oh so now you are saying that Supergirl isn’t actually equal to Superman? She’s lesser than him. Inferior.

Well this convo really took a turn, huh? Yikes.

[Kara Danvers]

Kal-El as Superman is the greatest hero in the world.

We don’t know who Jon will be yet because, again, for the 100th time, you have not read the book yet.

He’s ::different:: from Kal-El because he’s literally (not just spiritually) the children of two different worlds in a way Clark was not. They have ::different:: heritages. Neither is right or wrong.

Clark didn’t name himself Superman and, likely, Jon won’t either. Just as Kara didn’t name herself Supergirl. How it will play out remains to be seen. You don’t know any of that yet so it’s rather silly to be this adamant pretending that you do.

Have you read the book?

And sorry if I don't trust the guy that wrote Superman killing Lois and becoming a villain in one comic and turned him into a zombie in an other.

[Kara Danvers]

Oh so now you are saying that Supergirl isn’t actually equal to Superman? She’s lesser than him. Inferior.

Well this convo really took a turn, huh? Yikes.

She's not the greatest hero in the DCU. Superman is.

Do you think Supergirl is the greatest hero in the DCU?

[Morgoth]

And sorry if I don't trust the guy that wrote Superman killing Lois and becoming a villain in one comic.

Is it really so hard for some people to understand that this is not Taylor's idea?

[Nelliebly]

Have you read the book?

And sorry if I don't trust the guy that wrote Superman killing Lois and becoming a villain in one comic and turned him into a zombie another.

None of us have read the book yet!!! That’s the entire point. It feels like you are being purposefully obtuse at this point.

No one has been more critical of the way Lois Lane was treated in Injustice Gods Among Us than me. I’m the queen of yelling about the way she’s mistreated. I do think Tom Taylor at least tries to be kind about Lois to fans which is more than I can say about most of these guys including Philip Kennedy Johnson who has been off-putting, cold and defensive.

But any issues or fear you have with Tom Taylor are ::separate: concerns and not actually part and parcel to the point here which is that your logic for why Jon should not be allowed to be called Superman is inconsistent and deeply flawed.

If you just believe, as many do, that Superman shouldn’t have a legacy hero that’s fine and just say that. It’s a controversial topic for sure and people will agree or not agree and that’s ok. But making up rules —that you can’t even apply consistently—for why Jon specifically just shouldn’t be allowed to use this name —when again you aren’t applying your own rules fairly—is where you completely lose me.

[Kara Danvers]

Is it really so hard for some people to understand that this is not Taylor's idea?

No one forced him to write Injustice and DCeased.

He knew what kind of story he was asked to write and he went along with it.