DC’s New Superman, Jon Kent, Comes Out as Bisexual in Upcoming Comic

[Superlad93]

From Bendis on Twitter https://twitter.com/BRIANMBENDIS/sta...27655945990144

"just a reminder to tom, @johntimmsart and the entire creative team, ten years ago, almost to the day, dummies like glenn beck opened their dummy holes about Miles Morales' debut. so congrats on your upcoming Oscar "

Lets hope this is true!

[oneveryfineday]

Real life caught up to me and I am so late to the party. I’ll read through the threads later but I’ll quickly drop my reaction to this news now.

And I have to say as a bi comic reader I’m pretty damn happy! It’s unbelievably liberating to not to have to say anymore that being Superman disqualifies Jon from being bi, or that Jon could only be bi if he was only a sidekick. Superman and queerness are not mutually exclusive! Now I want Jon to have ALL the love interests and romance all the cute guys, gals, and others.

Also I saw that Taylor liked a tweet about Jon’s bisexuality being influenced during his time in the 31st century—so calling it now, Jon and Brainy totally made out at least once for fun lol

[SJNeal]

Also I saw that Taylor liked a tweet about Jon’s bisexuality being influenced during his time in the 31st century—so calling it now, Jon and Brainy totally made out at least once for fun lol

If anyone turned Jon it was Timber Wolf!

[garazza]

Also I saw that Taylor liked a tweet about Jon’s bisexuality being influenced during his time in the 31st century—so calling it now, Jon and Brainy totally made out at least once for fun lol

Wow, way to undercut the importance of Jon coming out by saying he did it because Future People don't have 21st century biases and prejudices and not that the time period Jon is actually from is starting to abandon those things and becoming more progressive and accepting that Jon would feel comfortable coming out.

[BBally]

CGers and online grifters using the "Jon Kent Superman Becoming Bi" reveal to push their "Wokeness Has Killed Comic Book Sales" narrative.

Except there are other bigger reasons why American comics sales are dropping:

1. Increased comic prices.

2. Overuse of gimmicks like events, retcons and reboots.

3. Reboots and retcons make it hard to serve as introduction for new readers.

4. A huge number of comic fans are more into superheroes when it comes to floppies than other genres

Wokeness is the least of the US comic industry's problems.

Also while floppies are having sales issues, graphic novels and trades are still seeing really healthy sales. And some of those graphic novels have been accused of being "woke" as well.

Is "wokeness" a part of it? Maybe. But, it's not even close to being the main reason behind comic sales devline and not every book is affected by "wokeness" either.

As usual, certain people use the fact Manga is outselling Comics in order to push the narrative that Manga is "never political nor tackle themes".


That narrative isn't accurate as there are manga that do tackle themes and there are other bigger reasons Manga outsell US Comics.

1. Cheaper (an entire Manga volume is cheaper and yet has more content than 2 comic trades)

2. Its fanbase are more accepting of variety than many US comic fans

3. It's a lot easier for readers to get into Manga as most manga doesn't suffer through retcons or reboots.

Plus the fact unlike most US comics, most manga tend to be written with an ending in mind.

A manga series having more than one installment or reboot is rare.

Hell, Japan in general has been unsubtle when tackling topics like bigotry and "identity politics" in their young audience targeted media including superhero media. Just recently a superhero series in Japan called High School Heroes acknowledged one of the show's heroes as a trans woman.

[Nelliebly]

Tom Taylor is bisexual though.

I have literally never heard that. If he is, fine. It doesn’t excuse the racism or misogyny though bc white queer men are not immune to racial insensitivity or misogyny. But thanks for the info.

[Celgress]

CGers and online grifters using the "Jon Kent Superman Becoming Bi" reveal to push their "Wokeness Has Killed Comic Book Sales" narrative.

Except there are other bigger reasons why American comics sales are dropping:

1. Increased comic prices.

2. Overuse of gimmicks like events, retcons and reboots.

3. Reboots and retcons make it hard to serve as introduction for new readers.

4. A huge number of comic fans are more into superheroes when it comes to floppies than other genres

Wokeness is the least of the US comic industry's problems.

Also while floppies are having sales issues, graphic novels and trades are still seeing really healthy sales. And some of those graphic novels have been accused of being "woke" as well.

Is "wokeness" a part of it? Maybe. But, it's not even close to being the main reason behind comic sales devline and not every book is affected by "wokeness" either.

As usual, certain people use the fact Manga is outselling Comics in order to push the narrative that Manga is "never political nor tackle themes".


That narrative isn't accurate as there are manga that do tackle themes and there are other bigger reasons Manga outsell US Comics.

1. Cheaper (an entire Manga volume is cheaper and yet has more content than 2 comic trades)

2. Its fanbase are more accepting of variety than many US comic fans

3. It's a lot easier for readers to get into Manga as most manga doesn't suffer through retcons or reboots.

Plus the fact unlike most US comics, most manga tend to be written with an ending in mind.

A manga series having more than one installment or reboot is rare.

Hell, Japan in general has been unsubtle when tackling topics like bigotry and "identity politics" in their young audience targeted media including superhero media. Just recently a superhero series in Japan called High School Heroes acknowledged one of the show's heroes as a trans woman.

Being a reader of both, I will say I haven't enjoyed an American comic book run as much as I've enjoyed Manga in many years. To me, overall, American comic books, bluntly put, suck. The only exceptions I can think of are Immortal Hulk or early "new" X-Men. Give me something like MHA all day long over current Superman I'll be very happy.

[Nelliebly]

I tend to put more stock in the work itself than their interviews, because the books are read by more people and the interviews are often these little fluff pieces that get lost and forgotten on the internet that only us terminally online people read to begin with.

That being said, all of Taylor's points are pretty stupid and he's just not a good Superman writer to begin with. We have the Injustice work from him that shows he's terrible at writing Wonder Woman and Superman, and treated Harley with kid gloves after she helped Lois get murdered. I don't value his opinion on Lois and hold it against him more because he has no good or at least non-offensive writing when it comes to her.

I actually like Tom a lot personally and I actually don’t think he hates Lois at all. I actually think he likes her a lot.

I think he got over zealous trying to pump up his new couple and, for some god forsaken reason, decided to use Jon’s mother (a character far more beloved and iconic than most) as the punching bag to do it. It was just completely unnecessary to even make the comparison.

Lois is an 83 year old character and she’s female. The fact that she’s survived the waves of misogyny and progression and regression for women’s roles in this country with the resilience she has is part of what makes her so important. She ::has:: been subjected to a lot of bad writing and misogyny over the decades and, yet, Lois and Clark are still here….headlining their own TV show. It’s an achievement. So to bring her up and then be dismissive is disrespectful of that.

Also it’s extremely toxic to imply that a relationship between any two people including two men is more equal bc of physical powers. We’ve been over this a million times with the Superwonder stuff—that’s gross.

He needs to just build Jon and Jay on their own merits.

[Superlad93]

Wow, way to undercut the importance of Jon coming out by saying he did it because Future People don't have 21st century biases and prejudices and not that the time period Jon is actually from is starting to abandon those things and becoming more progressive and accepting that Jon would feel comfortable coming out.

I'm sorry but this is just ridiculous and grasping at straws-- and to what end, I honestly don't know.

Rather than this ridiculous take, is it not far more on brand to say that "Jon went to a place that nurtured and didn't punish or discriminate his potential feelings but rather treated them as perfectly normal"? And on top of that, it's not some alien world or anything. It's Earth...after we've gotten our **** together. Thus is it not also on brand to say that what the new Man of TOMORROW is fighting for is the bridge from the present to that same tomorrow that will allow others to feel just as good about themselves and who they are as he was made to feel. You live in the real world just like me, and have seen the backlash from some parties over this very news, so it's clear that our era is not quite there yet, but the point isn't to sit and wait. We see the future and its inevitability, and a lot of the time we have to bring tomorrow here today.

The importance is that the future is on its way regardless of what today's assholes thing, and Superman is leading the charge. How any other take can be extrapolated from that is genuinely beyond me as a person.

[Celgress]

...Also it’s extremely toxic to imply that a relationship between any two people including two men is more equal bc of physical powers. We’ve been over this a million times with the Superwonder stuff—that’s gross....

You hit the nail right on its ugly head. It is baffling to me Taylor used this strawman argument to prop his couple. I was like WTF!? when first reading it. By his logic, Lois, Mary Jane, and Tim's never love interest (I forget his name, sorry lol) are all worthless characters because they aren't trained fighters or have powers...

[Nelliebly]

You hit the nail right on its ugly head. It is baffling to me Taylor used this strawman argument to prop his couple. I was like WTF!? when first reading it. By his logic, Lois, Mary Jane, and Tim's never love interest (I forget his name, sorry lol) are all worthless characters because they aren't trained fighters or have powers...

It’s also just particularly problematic rhetoric to use with two men, because the implication then becomes that men relying on each other or being saved by each other is beneath them.

Generally speaking, there has never been anything wrong with Lois being saved by Superman. He has superpowers and she is no different than we would be in her shoes. It’s been weaponized against her over the years because of misogyny or been used poorly but, if she has agency, there is nothing wrong with it. And there is nothing wrong with Jon saving Jay.

[SiegePerilous02]

I actually like Tom a lot personally and I actually don’t think he hates Lois at all. I actually think he likes her a lot.

I think he got over zealous trying to pump up his new couple and, for some god forsaken reason, decided to use Jon’s mother (a character far more beloved and iconic than most) as the punching bag to do it. It was just completely unnecessary to even make the comparison.

Lois is an 83 year old character and she’s female. The fact that she’s survived the waves of misogyny and progression and regression for women’s roles in this country with the resilience she has is part of what makes her so important. She ::has:: been subjected to a lot of bad writing and misogyny over the decades and, yet, Lois and Clark are still here….headlining their own TV show. It’s an achievement. So to bring her up and then be dismissive is disrespectful of that.

Also it’s extremely toxic to imply that a relationship between any two people including two men is more equal bc of physical powers. We’ve been over this a million times with the Superwonder stuff—that’s gross.

He needs to just build Jon and Jay on their own merits.

Well said. When I said I held this opinion/wording against him for Lois, I should have clarified it was more as a writer than as a person. I don't know him personally, but like you say I'm sure he's just over zealous when hyping his project and just made some bad points that needlessly drew Lois and (to a lesser extent) Clark into things. Writers are people like the rest of us and miss the mark on things even when they otherwise may have good intentions. Or word their ideas poorly in interviews in ways they may not in their actual work.

Still not wild about him as a Super-verse writer in general though for various reasons.

It’s also just particularly problematic rhetoric to use with two men, because the implication then becomes that men relying on each other or being saved by each other is beneath them.

Generally speaking, there has never been anything wrong with Lois being saved by Superman. He has superpowers and she is no different than we would be in her shoes. It’s been weaponized against her over the years because of misogyny or been used poorly but, if she has agency, there is nothing wrong with it. And there is nothing wrong with Jon saving Jay.

It gets used against Steve Trevor too in reverse. He's viewed as being a "lesser man" for having a super powered girlfriend, which is another reason we get the misguided Superman/Wonder Woman ship.

It's really not fair to him, Lois, Jay, Mary Jane etc.

[garazza]

I'm sorry but this is just ridiculous and grasping at straws-- and to what end, I honestly don't know.

Rather than this ridiculous take, is it not far more on brand to say that "Jon went to a place that nurtured and didn't punish or discriminate his potential feelings but rather treated them as perfectly normal"? And on top of that, it's not some alien world or anything. It's Earth...after we've gotten our **** together. Thus is it not also on brand to say that what the new Man of TOMORROW is fighting for is the bridge from the present to that same tomorrow that will allow others to feel just as good about themselves and who they are as he was made to feel. You live in the real world just like me, and have seen the backlash from some parties over this very news, so it's clear that our era is not quite there yet, but the point isn't to sit and wait. We see the future and its inevitability, and a lot of the time we have to bring tomorrow here today.

The importance is that the future is on its way regardless of what today's assholes thing, and Superman is leading the charge. How any other take can be extrapolated from that is genuinely beyond me as a person.

Exactly, Superman should be the one to bring the present into the future, not bringing the future back into the present. If "Truth, Justice, And A Better World" is to mean anything, then it should be Jon pushing the modern world forward, not because he saw the future and what it contained, but because the modern world has been working hard to make itself better and Jon would be the Superman to oversee that progression.

Implying that Jon only came out because he went to the future is disingenuous because the 21st is already nurturing and welcoming, he didn't need to go to the future to get that. If the world wasn't ready for Jon to be bi, then Jon would've never been bi. The backlash is superfluous. I live in the real world too and all I see is outrage culture. Is DC losing sponsors and advertisers for having a queer character? Is Tom Taylor getting death threats for making a character bi? I see right-wing reactionaries and pundits be their normal, idiotic selves. Remember when Dr. Seuss was cancelled? This means nothing.

The world was ready for Jon Kent being bi before Jon Kent was even created. He didn't need to go to the future to realize that.

[Celgress]

It’s also just particularly problematic rhetoric to use with two men, because the implication then becomes that men relying on each other or being saved by each other is beneath them.

Generally speaking, there has never been anything wrong with Lois being saved by Superman. He has superpowers and she is no different than we would be in her shoes. It’s been weaponized against her over the years because of misogyny or been used poorly but, if she has agency, there is nothing wrong with it. And there is nothing wrong with Jon saving Jay.

Ah, yes, you've done a better job of explaining why this whole thing rubs me the wrong way than I did, congrats. Although, if they had paired Jon with say Yara and made the same argument by denigrating Lois and other non-powered partners, I'd be equally upset. Still, this is indeed an extra problematic layer to Taylor's argument.

[Superlad93]

Is it not possible that Taylor wasn't trying to evoke specifically Lois as damsel but rather calling to attention popular fiction's fairly one note take on queer male characters? By that I mean, you usually get queer male characters who only fit the mold of the limp wristed "sissy", if you'll excuse my language. Taylor's aim seems to be to express that Jay will not fit that stereotype as Jon's partner, and to put clear pin in that for the people in the cheap seats who don't read comics or follow along with this stuff, he explains that Jay has a power set that makes it so he's physically capable in this very physical genre. But even then, Taylor, through his work and interviews, makes it clear that physicality isn't all Jay's about-- it isn't even the first thing he's about given his underground news network being his "sword".

That's not to say this isn't lacking in nuance though, but that's another discussion.