Will Jon Kent suffer the same destiny as Chris Kent?

[Fergus]

Just saying; but DC does have a history of doing some pretty messed up things in their stories. Brutally beating and then blowing up Jason Todd, using Barbara Gordon as little more than a plot device for Joker and Batman while paralyzing her after shooting her, making Hal Jordan a child predator, Kyle Rayner's girlfriend being the original and literal fridged female character, Identity Crisis as a whole, etc.

I'm not saying to undo Jon being bi if/when he gets aged back to where he's supposed to be. In fact, I support him being bi at a younger age, which will help reach kids going through that. Just that DC has done some pretty horrific/messed up things before. Some not so long ago in Heroes in Crisis, and hell, Jon in Bendis' writing right from the get go (and people look the other way with Lois and Clark having 2 more young kids after the crap parenting they did with Jon?).

Those aren't messed up. They are just regular things that happen all the time in comics, novels and all entertainment. They are not comparable to getting rid of a popular character that's representation for an under represented group in comics.

Batgirl/Killing Joke I guess counts as messed up. The messed up part being having Oracle become batgirl again.

[ZuLuLu]

Those aren't messed up. They are just regular things that happen all the time in comics, novels and all entertainment. They are not comparable to getting rid of a popular character that's representation for an under represented group in comics.

Batgirl/Killing Joke I guess counts as messed up. The messed up part being having Oracle become batgirl again.

Plus, DC can have it both ways they don't need to de-age Jon to have kid Jon or Super Sons because they can set stories in the past when Jon was younger. Right now there are no financial benefits for them to de-age or get rid of Jon.

[M@Bowers2014]

Where is Batwoman currently?

i don't think Dc has an issue with benching characters. marginalized or not.

Jon's not going anywhere. Not because of his sexuality [that shouldn't be a pass that guarantee's publication] Jon is selling. He has okay sales and he's showing up in outside media. there's so much more they are yet to do with him so I don't see DC getting rid of him either.

Batwoman showed up pretty recently in a couple of issues of Harley Quinn.

[DABellWrites]

When Jon came out as bisexual and his same-sex kiss cover dropped that whole event was pretty damn big in the mainstream media as I recall. The headline "DC does away with Bisexual Superman" would go over poorly I think. So, Jon has an extra layer of protection against removal Chris didn't.

I'm going throw out something controversial. Jon being bi hasn't been successful enough to warrant DC actually being scared of that backlash. He's not going to get that level of mainstream attention again, unless someone does controversial panel of Jon going down on Jay or he's getting married to Jay. I have nothing against Jon being bisexual. I'm on record stating it's one of the most original things DC could've done for the character.

[Knightsilver]

I'm going throw out something controversial. Jon being bi hasn't been successful enough to warrant DC actually being scared of that backlash. He's not going to get that level of mainstream attention again, unless someone does controversial panel of Jon going down on Jay or he's getting married to Jay. I have nothing against Jon being bisexual. I'm on record stating it's one of the most original things DC could've done for the character.

Agreed. Put bluntly...Teen Jon simply isn't popular enough to cause major backlash for DC if they get rid of him. Most people have no idea who he is. More people would know about Jordan and Jon in Superman and Lois than him. Teen Jon had one issue that garnered attention...and then his sales dropped back down to where they were before...and his book was cancelled.

[Jackalope89]

Those aren't messed up. They are just regular things that happen all the time in comics, novels and all entertainment. They are not comparable to getting rid of a popular character that's representation for an under represented group in comics.

Batgirl/Killing Joke I guess counts as messed up. The messed up part being having Oracle become batgirl again.

When Jason was brutally killed off at the ripe old age of 15, kid/teen heroes being killed was still extremely rare. That only became "regular" after. Killing Joke? Wasn't even originally meant to be canonical, but DC heads apparently loved it so much, when Babs was next seen in main DC comics, she was in a wheel chair.
And the other things I mentioned? Those were not regular things in comics or other media (why you try and throw in other media, when we're talking about comics is odd in itself as well), but they kicked off those becoming regular parts of comics ever since. With the "shock value" mentality only growing since then.

[D.Z]

Maybe erase his history on Earth but only few people remember him. So back to Clark has no son and isn't a dad but Jon exists as anomly. Have your cake and eat it too.

[Ascended]

I'm going throw out something controversial. Jon being bi hasn't been successful enough to warrant DC actually being scared of that backlash. He's not going to get that level of mainstream attention again, unless someone does controversial panel of Jon going down on Jay or he's getting married to Jay. I have nothing against Jon being bisexual. I'm on record stating it's one of the most original things DC could've done for the character.

This.

Jon is not a big enough character to generate much negative press. And if DC were worried about it, they could easily launch a Batwoman, Aqualad, or some other LBGT book at the same time to help cushion the blowback. Or have Conner or Kara come out.

Jon's simply not popular or important enough for his erasure to matter much. A Super coming out of the closet was a big enough deal to get attention for five seconds, and rightly so, but not many folks are gonna care if he disappears.

I know Jon being bi was/is a big deal among the nerds in the LBGT community, and I'm not trying to diminish what that meant to them. But businesswise? They're not buying the book or supporting the character, and their potential anger would likely be as short-lived and ultimately meaningless as their support was.

[Fergus]

When Jason was brutally killed off at the ripe old age of 15, kid/teen heroes being killed was still extremely rare. That only became "regular" after. Killing Joke? Wasn't even originally meant to be canonical, but DC heads apparently loved it so much, when Babs was next seen in main DC comics, she was in a wheel chair.
And the other things I mentioned? Those were not regular things in comics or other media (why you try and throw in other media, when we're talking about comics is odd in itself as well), but they kicked off those becoming regular parts of comics ever since. With the "shock value" mentality only growing since then.

Killing off Robin wasn't messed especially in the context we are currently discussing. The only real life impact it had was that it was so well received that DC went on to do it in canon 2 years after Miller did it. And it made joker a serious foe.

It wasn't met with backlash.
it didn't lead to an increase in clowns killing sidekicks in real life
it didn't lead to a decrease in robins in the comics
It didn't lead to any groups losing important representation.

Killing Robin wasn't messed up. Robin has been in peril and getting physically brutalised since 1940 when robin was just 8 years old. Young kids have died in comics before Robin. Which was why it wasn't a shocking thing when Miller killed him or when he was killed in canon.

Super telling us to Slap a Jap is messed up.
Lois Lane in Black face is messed up.

Walking back representation especially the most high profile Super franchise representation that the LgBTq community celebrated is messed up and isn't something anyone can compare to a story where Joker killed a Robin. Come on dude.

We are talking a move that has real implications vs a fictional story that literally readers close the comics and move on to the next story. At most thinking that was grim and that's it.

Paralysing Barbara then having her walk again. Introduction and the erasure of disability representation. Is messed up and people to this day still decry it.

Comparing A killing Joke to An LGbtQ character disappearing is insulting and unvalues just how important even representation in media is.

[Fergus]

Plus, DC can have it both ways they don't need to de-age Jon to have kid Jon or Super Sons because they can set stories in the past when Jon was younger. Right now there are no financial benefits for them to de-age or get rid of Jon.

That is the better idea.

I don't know where folks are getting this idea that teen Jon is less successful than kid John?
Teen Jon's title had slightly higher sales than Super sons [Single issues that is. I don't know about the trades though Super sons Omins sell very well]

DC is having their cake and eating it. There is no incentive to change their strategy at this point aside from finding a way to make Teen jon more layered/unique.

Good writing and direction can fix improve Teen Jon and DC can always keep churning out kid Jon stories at the same time. Win Win.

[Fergus]

Batwoman showed up pretty recently in a couple of issues of Harley Quinn.

And she's showing up In Robin next issue but at one time she had a solo and was more prominent.

[Fergus]

This.

Jon is not a big enough character to generate much negative press. And if DC were worried about it, they could easily launch a Batwoman, Aqualad, or some other LBGT book at the same time to help cushion the blowback. Or have Conner or Kara come out.

Jon's simply not popular or important enough for his erasure to matter much. A Super coming out of the closet was a big enough deal to get attention for five seconds, and rightly so, but not many folks are gonna care if he disappears.

I know Jon being bi was/is a big deal among the nerds in the LBGT community, and I'm not trying to diminish what that meant to them. But businesswise? They're not buying the book or supporting the character, and their potential anger would likely be as short-lived and ultimately meaningless as their support was.

It wasn't just the nerds. The Sydney LGBTQ community celebrated the announcement at Mardi Gras with a more than a 1k revellers dressed as Superman.

[Jackalope89]

It wasn't just the nerds. The Sydney LGBTQ community celebrated the announcement at Mardi Gras with a more than a 1k revellers dressed as Superman.

Clearly, they didn't buy much outside of that one issue though.

[marhawkman]

Clearly, they didn't buy much outside of that one issue though.

If that.

honestly i think it'd go down as jon getting sidelined and no longer the star... and maybe get used.

[skyvolt2000]

Clearly, they didn't buy much outside of that one issue though.

How do we know that?

Seriously

Remember most of the data out there is books ordered. Which is all DC (and Marvel) seem to care about.

If I sell 30 copies. I am NOT going to order more than say 33-just in case.

It's not the consumers fault stores don't mind Batman have large piles of unsold issues. While at one point throwing fits if a POC or LGBTQA book left behind 3.

And if DC were worried about it, they could easily launch a Batwoman, Aqualad, or some other LBGT book at the same time to help cushion the blowback.

It wouldn't have worked.

Aqualad had a mini and Aquamen-the LINE started to the left with folks hating the fact he got those shots.

Midnighter nor Batwoman getting a shot would NOT make up for the SON of Clark Kent getting tossed away.

All that would do is OPEN a bigger can of worms about the treatment of LGBTQA characters at DC. Not named Harley, Ivy or Kate.