Controversial Superman Opinions

[PCN24454]

I had an issue that was like the 'lost years' between Superboy and Superman when he was in college or something. He gave a buddy a signal watch to call him in emergencies. Well, one time he was dealing with some massive crisis, i don't remember what... Volcano maybe? Well his friend saw a building on fire and hit the watch then ran in to help some people... Superboy/man heard it, saw what was happening, but couldn't get to him till it was too late.


As for Lois, my biggest problem is the whole... attitude about how capable she is. Smallville used to have me tearing my hair out whenever Lois or Lana would start bragging about capable they are and they don't need a hero or a man to 'protect' them... Meanwhile he's LITERALLY saved their lives 50 times each. Not just inconvienced... but they would be DEAD if he hadn't been there. All their special army training and all their positive attitude and iron will means exactly jack to a sniper or a bomb.

You really can't have a strong feminist attitude AND need to get rescued a hundred times by the hero... you can't have both.

Can you have a strong masculinist attitude and need to be rescued by a hero a million times? /s

I hate the idea of ANYONE being too proud to need help, so I kind of understand what you're feeling, but I'd still keep it.

[manwhohaseverything]

I had an issue that was like the 'lost years' between Superboy and Superman when he was in college or something. He gave a buddy a signal watch to call him in emergencies. Well, one time he was dealing with some massive crisis, i don't remember what... Volcano maybe? Well his friend saw a building on fire and hit the watch then ran in to help some people... Superboy/man heard it, saw what was happening, but couldn't get to him till it was too late.


As for Lois, my biggest problem is the whole... attitude about how capable she is. Smallville used to have me tearing my hair out whenever Lois or Lana would start bragging about capable they are and they don't need a hero or a man to 'protect' them... Meanwhile he's LITERALLY saved their lives 50 times each. Not just inconvienced... but they would be DEAD if he hadn't been there. All their special army training and all their positive attitude and iron will means exactly jack to a sniper or a bomb.

You really can't have a strong feminist attitude AND need to get rescued a hundred times by the hero... you can't have both.

Why not? Would it work if supergirl was the one rescuing? And as for being dead, well she knows it and still did it.Did it before superman was ever a thing in Metropolis. It ain't about having a man protect her all the time. But, it's about her keeping her independence. I don't think she minds being rescued. especially by clark. It's her job to be in the middle of action. That doesn't mean things can't go over her head now and then.It's not as if lois is ungrateful to clark in those situations.

[phantom1592]

Why not? Would it work if supergirl was the one rescuing? And as for being dead, well she knows it and still did it.Did it before superman was ever a thing in Metropolis. It ain't about having a man protect her all the time. But, it's about her keeping her independence. I don't think she minds being rescued. especially by clark. It's her job to be in the middle of action. That doesn't mean things can't go over her head now and then.It's not as if lois is ungrateful to clark in those situations.

Oh yeah... I had the same issue with Supergirl rescuing Jimmy all the time and Jimmy mouthing off about how wasn't really in danger and he totally had things under control. CW plays that trope to DEATH... In a world like these guys live in... Independence is vastly overrated. When the hero tells you to back off and let them handle the supervillain... just shut up and back off and let them handle the supervillain. In a battle between gods, the mildly above average human doesn't get an equal say in the partnership. I think Iris in the Flash was the WORST when it came to that. No... actually I think it's still Lana from Smallville, but Iris is right up there.

[Nelliebly]

Expanding upon this, I would like to add that I don't think Superman should be in love with Lois at all or have a kid for that matter.

Superman should be the embodiment of selflessness, and no person can deny that they aren't bias towards their loved ones. Nobody should ever question if Superman would choose between his wife and kids or a random child and woman.

Superman love for Lois is the very reason we have nonsensical AU where he turns evil because of her dying or whatever. The only person that should have that kind of effect on Clark's psyche should be Ma & Pa Kent. Yes, it's just as selfish for him to love them that much, but they made him into the man he is, it's understandable why they are his everything (it's why I don't mind One More Day like most people).

I'm not saying Superman shouldn't be happy and I'm not saying he shouldn't have faults, but we know that Superman hears almost everything on Earth and in the DC Earth there is virtually always someone that needs saving (there are times when he in facts let's some die to save others). So all those times we have seen "Superman always being there to save Lois" there must have been multiple instances in which he let someone else die to save her. Could have been a child even.

And that shouldn't be. He should always choose who needs saving most. Giving her recklessness (and that's mainly cause she knows Superman will save her), I would say Lois deserves saving less than most.

Not to mention, I hate hearing people say stuff like "Lois helps make him who he is" or anything to that effect. No she really doesn't. Lois has absolutely no baring on his personality and if anything she's toxic. And I know that probably sounds like me just disliking Lois, but it isn't. She's a favorite character if minds, but I just feel like there are dilemmas that her very existence poses for Superman's character that I would actually like addressed.

Overall, I would like to see a comic that actually addresses something like this. Clark had to choose between saving Lois and another person, he chooses the other person. Lois can either manage to survive or die, but overall I would just like to see him in such a dilemma rather than just ignoring it like most writers do.

You can say you prefer Superman and Lois to not have kids (I don’t agree but that’s fine) but you will have to go back 80 years and take it up with Siegel and Shuster about him “not loving” her because the romance with Lois was easily the most personal part of the story for them. This is documented in full in the biography “superboys” written by Brad Ricca who knew the family well. Lois was the piece of the story that meant the most to them.

What you are suggesting here isn’t a character at all but a childish, emotionless cipher. You’ve taken the drama and nuance of Clark Kent and Superman and turned him into a robot. He’s not. He’s a man with feelings and desires and passions and fears just like us. He just also happens to be the most powerful man in the world. The idea that he shouldn’t love....that he shouldn’t be in love and that he shouldn’t be allowed to express that love through word and deed is ridiculous. There is zero chance Superman would be the icon he is if what you are suggesting came to pass. If Clark Kent has nothing at stake he has nothing to lose. Stories where he fights for the public have weight specifically because we see it embodied in the people he loves. It’s what makes him a dynamic character and not a robot. And the idea that he should be fully fulfilled just from his parents but never love Lois is equally as silly. Those relationships aren’t in competition with each other as anyone who is married but maintains a loving relationship with their parents can tell you.

Finally, there is nothing heroic or noble about proving heroism by sacrificing loved ones. First and foremost because it robs Lois Lane of agency. She’s not just a person to be sacrificed to prove some point—she’s a character with her own fan base and, from a narrative pov, her life as value. It’s insulting to suggest that Clark should ever have to prove anything by not saving her. She is with of being saved and he’s worthy of the nuance of both loving someone with all his heart and being a servant to the world. The fact that stories like Injustice that explore grief and trauma so poorly don’t respect this nuance doesn’t mean it’s not there.

[Nelliebly]

That's great. Thanks a million dude.


As I said, I love Lois, so I hated using the word toxic, cause it is a bit... harsh. But I think it's just one of those traits of characters that you don't really notice unless you look deeper.

Nevertheless, I don't mind Superman choosing his wife, but I would just like to see at least one instance where he faces a dilemma where he has to choose someone over her.

You “love” Lois but you think Superman should let her die to prove some kind of point because this is good drama to you or something? Doesn’t sound like you love her or respect her for that matter.

If you love Lois so much than you should advocate for more diverse writers so that she’s not always written by 50 year old white men all the time. If you love her than you should believe that, as a character with her own agency, she deserves better than constantly being reduced in this way by male writers who don’t respect her.
The words

[manwhohaseverything]

Oh yeah... I had the same issue with Supergirl rescuing Jimmy all the time and Jimmy mouthing off about how wasn't really in danger and he totally had things under control. CW plays that trope to DEATH... In a world like these guys live in... Independence is vastly overrated. When the hero tells you to back off and let them handle the supervillain... just shut up and back off and let them handle the supervillain. In a battle between gods, the mildly above average human doesn't get an equal say in the partnership. I think Iris in the Flash was the WORST when it came to that. No... actually I think it's still Lana from Smallville, but Iris is right up there.

No. I meant supergirl rescuing lois. The only problem with that is lois doesn't actually fight. She covers the story. I haven't seen one time where clark asked her to stop doing something, that it's getting in his way and she hasn't backed off. Lois backing off.

They will jump in to trouble and run away from it. Sometimes, they would need to fight a bad guy, use a tommy gun, fly a fighter plane... Etc. So they do. Moreover, these are characters that have been using the troupe for 80 years. Ofcourse, there would be nuancesless portrayals that can be irritating.For me, it's just a ritual they do as a couple, now. They seem to get a kick out of it. So who am i to judge. Moreover, them being that reckless and hell bent on doing what's right and telling the truth inspires clark to act. By your logic, batman shouldn't be in justice league. They made him into an annoying batgod for not getting him rescued at all.



This is what men/women of action do. There is something brave, reckless and noble about jimmy using his camera to staredown death. Lois is the reason superman went from an urban myth to the champion of the oppressed. Because he decided to jump in like these guys do.
Hah!lois beat up the entire jl one time in silverage. Shows you what you know. Lois is god. Lol!!!

[Nelliebly]

I had an issue that was like the 'lost years' between Superboy and Superman when he was in college or something. He gave a buddy a signal watch to call him in emergencies. Well, one time he was dealing with some massive crisis, i don't remember what... Volcano maybe? Well his friend saw a building on fire and hit the watch then ran in to help some people... Superboy/man heard it, saw what was happening, but couldn't get to him till it was too late.


As for Lois, my biggest problem is the whole... attitude about how capable she is. Smallville used to have me tearing my hair out whenever Lois or Lana would start bragging about capable they are and they don't need a hero or a man to 'protect' them... Meanwhile he's LITERALLY saved their lives 50 times each. Not just inconvienced... but they would be DEAD if he hadn't been there. All their special army training and all their positive attitude and iron will means exactly jack to a sniper or a bomb.

You really can't have a strong feminist attitude AND need to get rescued a hundred times by the hero... you can't have both.

I’m extremely familiar with Smallville and so I know for certain that Durance’s Lois Lane was always extremely appreciative to Clark when he would save her —-even in the early days when their relationship was more tense flirting. Furthermore, what you’ve left out here is that specifically in Lois’s case, her bravado was often explicitly tied to her need to try and take control of her life after her father had let her down over and over again. She pretended she didn’t need anyone because she was afraid of being hurt. It was only after she let Clark Kent in and accepted that he would truly be there for her that some of those old wounds began to heal. What you’ve blown off here as here as something shallow and then getting “rescued” was years of character development literally culminating in Lois and Clark finally just outright admitting that they were in love.

Furthermore, please do not confuse what “feminism” is. Feminism refers to men and women having equal rights and specifically addresses those equalities under the lens of a patriarchal system. It has nothing to do with women not being able to seek help when they need it and it certainly doesn’t require Lois or Lana or Jimmy or Perry or Ma or Pa Kent or anyone to be able to stand up against alien threats or gunfire to prove they are equal.

Lois Lane could be saved by Superman every day and she would still be a feminist. Her character is rooted specifically in challenging both personality traits that we often praise in men but condemn in women (brashness, ambition etc) and with her ability to succeed in a job at a level that’s beyond her peers many of whom are, yes, men. She absolutely holds her own against threats that are within the normal range of human ability and even beyond but she should not be expected to never need Superman’s help in order to prove she’s a feminist. That’s just not what it means to be one. I’m a feminist and like, point blank, existing in a world where I’m never allowed to ask my husband to “rescue” me in his own way is not a world I’m fighting for. This also discounts all the times both on Smallville and in other Superman stories that Lois saves Clark in some way.

[manwhohaseverything]

I’m extremely familiar with Smallville and so I know for certain that Durance’s Lois Lane was always extremely appreciative to Clark when he would save her —-even in the early days when their relationship was more tense flirting. Furthermore, what you’ve left out here is that specifically in Lois’s case, her bravado was often explicitly tied to her need to try and take control of her life after her father had let her down over and over again. She pretended she didn’t need anyone because she was afraid of being hurt. It was only after she let Clark Kent in and accepted that he would truly be there for her that some of those old wounds began to heal. What you’ve blown off here as here as something shallow and then getting “rescued” was years of character development literally culminating in Lois and Clark finally just outright admitting that they were in love.

Furthermore, please do not confuse what “feminism” is. Feminism refers to men and women having equal rights and specifically addresses those equalities under the lens of a patriarchal system. It has nothing to do with women not being able to seek help when they need it and it certainly doesn’t require Lois or Lana or Jimmy or Perry or Ma or Pa Kent or anyone to be able to stand up against alien threats or gunfire to prove they are equal.

Lois Lane could be saved by Superman every day and she would still be a feminist. Her character is rooted specifically in challenging both personality traits that we often praise in men but condemn in women (brashness, ambition etc) and with her ability to succeed in a job at a level that’s beyond her peers many of whom are, yes, men. She absolutely holds her own against threats that are within the normal range of human ability and even beyond but she should not be expected to never need Superman’s help in order to prove she’s a feminist. That’s just not what it means to be one. I’m a feminist and like, point blank, existing in a world where I’m never allowed to ask my husband to “rescue” me in his own way is not a world I’m fighting for. This also discounts all the times both on Smallville and in other Superman stories that Lois saves Clark in some way.

@bold Thanks for that i was struggling to put it in perspective with clarity. I couldn't get words right.

[Kuwagaton]

https://www.cbr.com/superman-lois-la...e-problematic/

Controversial: I actually like this story. I'd put it in something like an 80 Years of Lois. For all the weirdness plainly there and as awkward as it gets with decades of hindsight, I really understand and respect the story for what it does even in a crude way.

Also, Werner Roth was just great.

[Jim Kelly]

https://www.cbr.com/superman-lois-la...e-problematic/

Controversial: I actually like this story. I'd put it in something like an 80 Years of Lois. For all the weirdness plainly there and as awkward as it gets with decades of hindsight, I really understand and respect the story for what it does even in a crude way.

Also, Werner Roth was just great.

You can tell just from the three panels shown, although Vinnie is the inker of record, Murphy Anderson was a strong presence on this story, since his Lois and Superman are there, not Colletta's. Sadly, Werner Roth passed away in 1973. He was great.

[Yoda]

https://www.cbr.com/superman-lois-la...e-problematic/

Controversial: I actually like this story. I'd put it in something like an 80 Years of Lois. For all the weirdness plainly there and as awkward as it gets with decades of hindsight, I really understand and respect the story for what it does even in a crude way.

Also, Werner Roth was just great.

It was actually in the Lois Lane: 75 Year Celebration hard cover. It's pretty ham handed by modern standards but I think most attempts to address racial issues in that time were.

[Jim Kelly]

Yes, nowadays we use pork rinds not ham hands.

[Robanker]

This is in response to what's going on over in the Superman retro movie thread, but...

The fact that everyone is tiptoing over who they'll piss off if Superman just takes a stance akin to the intent of his creators is kind of proof that he needs to. Superman fights for the little guy. If any political party feels that's a problem, well frankly they can eat it. The fact that any issue where Superman sides with the common people is constantly pushing against Republican ideals and we're not really coming up with many where he pisses off Democrats may lend credence to the concept that Clark's crusade leans left. The left is not without fault, but right now it seems like asking Clark to stand up to oppression is political. Trying to force Clark to stand in the middle and have no opinion is exactly why he's stagnated in popularity for 40 years. He will never matter or be relevant if we are constantly trying to make sure he never offends anyone. Batman's most popular book is one where he is actually hunted by the Republican president and he blew up. At some point, the character has to be a character.

This is ridiculous, frankly. Next we're going to debate that the next Wonder Woman movie can't have too feminist a platform or else them wimenz may start asking for equal pay and equal lunacy. Give me a break.

[Cyberstrike]

I think that Brandon Routh and Tyler Hochlin are the best actors to play Superman and that Superman and Lois will be another great show.

[Adekis]

This is in response to what's going on over in the Superman retro movie thread, but...

The fact that everyone is tiptoing over who they'll piss off if Superman just takes a stance akin to the intent of his creators is kind of proof that he needs to. Superman fights for the little guy. If any political party feels that's a problem, well frankly they can eat it. The fact that any issue where Superman sides with the common people is constantly pushing against Republican ideals and we're not really coming up with many where he pisses off Democrats may lend credence to the concept that Clark's crusade leans left. The left is not without fault, but right now it seems like asking Clark to stand up to oppression is political. Trying to force Clark to stand in the middle and have no opinion is exactly why he's stagnated in popularity for 40 years. He will never matter or be relevant if we are constantly trying to make sure he never offends anyone. Batman's most popular book is one where he is actually hunted by the Republican president and he blew up. At some point, the character has to be a character.

This is ridiculous, frankly. Next we're going to debate that the next Wonder Woman movie can't have too feminist a platform or else them wimenz may start asking for equal pay and equal lunacy. Give me a break.

QFT dude, Superman is a frequently if not fundamentally progressive character, and trying to stay neutral or apolitical always benefits entrenched power structures, injustice, and ultimately, evil. And that ain't Superman.