Would you object to a "Manly" Peter Parker?

[Hypestyle]

The original Stan Lee strips didn't push the geek envelope to the utmost, despite fan "memory" of such. He was clearly maturing in the original college era. It wasn't until Mr. Lee had left when subsequent writers went full blown Woody Allen with Peter.

[Zeitgeist]

WHo says he has to be a manly depiction like Tony.

fully assertive and confident

headstrong, risk taking and brash with pride, he never second guesses his actions and has no problems with women when whining.

Yeah, I have no idea why Tony Stark came to mind.

[RedQueen]

Peter is confident but not really...he's not like a symbol of malehood (is this a thing?) but he fufills the "everyman" as Marvel likes to put it. While the Bruce Wayne, Tony Stark and Wolverine types fufill this archetype, Peter is supposed to be this symbol of relatability to everyone.

Personally I don't relate to him cause I think being a girl I don't relate to the "everyman" ideal, but that could be just me. I prefer reading characters like Tony and Logan because they can get a little meatier with their roles while Peter does the *guilt, rinse, repeat* thing over and over.

It just wouldn't suit Peter being more like Bruce Wayne or Tony Stark because Marvel have established that Peter being anything else would be "anti-Marvel", whatever that means.

Not saying that Spider-Man isn't popular, I like reading about Peter, but he's got more of an adventurer feel to his title than say like what Iron Man or Batman would have to offer.

I'd love Peter to maybe get a little grittier. Because now I feel like he just goes from changing status quos every couple of relaunches as a way to revamp his title every now and then and it's a bit ehh for me. Peter doesn't fit into that role naturally.

I would honestly just say it's personal taste for me.

[Pav]

He was kind of presented this way in the post-Clone Saga / pre-reboot comics: he was manly and brave and adult.

Especially in the Mackie/JRjr comics.

-Pav, who enjoyed that period so much...

[SuperiorIronman]

I thought we got the manly spider-man in Kaine or at least Miguel.

[CrimsonEchidna]

I thought we got the manly spider-man in Kaine or at least Miguel.

Technically we did with SpOck as well.

[Some Guy]

I already feel like Peter is presented to be fairly masculine when the proper artist is involved. That's one of the reasons I far prefer Cammy's art. Peter looks and feels the !@#%ing man, but the writing still gives us the goofy, snarky dialogue. I like Ramos a lot, but not on Spider-Man because he makes him seem like such a dweeb. When you look at more classic adult era Peter he is not a dweeb. He is manly. Or masculine or whatever. And that's the Peter that I enjoy the most.

And I try not to discuss the whole "Peter is relatable" thing because it's so subjective, but for me personally, this is the interpretation of Peter that's most relatable. A fun, goofy, caring guy who might not be much like Rogers or Logan or Stark, but is masculine in his own right. A guy who can attract women, but isn't on Tony's level. A tough guy when push comes to shove, but is no Wolverine. And a serious guy, but doesn't always feel he need to present himself overly serious like Steve.

[Vegeta]

Instead of the mile mannered snarky worry wort typical depiction, how would you feel about a Spider-Man that is fully assertive and confident to the point of being like Wolverine but less bloodthirsty. Also headstrong, risk taking and brash with pride

Actually, he kind of was that way back in the 60's and 70's, at least when he was dressed up in his Spider costume. Had a bit of a short temper and no problem with telling off others.