PKJ Action Comics Discussion and Spoilers

[Blue22]

Yeah I've never been a fan of Superman being straight up immortal. Abnormally long lifespan, sure. I wouldn't mind him living through like three or four generations of Justice Leagues. But straight up immortality? Nah.

That said, I also don't really mind him having another family after Lois and Jon are dead (or even while Jon is still alive, depending on how long his lifespan is). It happens. Sometimes spouses die. Sometimes people move on, whether they planned to or not. Doesn't make his and Lois' relationship any less special. it's just a part of life. And I'm sure Lois and Jon wouldn't want him to be alone, for possibly hundreds of years, after they're gone.

[Yoda]

Yeah I've never been a fan of Superman being straight up immortal. Abnormally long lifespan, sure. I wouldn't mind him living through like three or four generations of Justice Leagues. But straight up immortality? Nah.

That said, I also don't really mind him having another family after Lois and Jon are dead (or even while Jon is still alive, depending on how long his lifespan is). It happens. Sometimes spouses die. Sometimes people move on, whether they planned to or not. Doesn't make his and Lois' relationship any less special. it's just a part of life. And I'm sure Lois and Jon wouldn't want him to be alone, for possibly hundreds of years, after they're gone.

Yeah, I'm not wholly opposed to that either. It gets gross where they are like here are his 20 future wives and 40 children or positioning Wonder Woman as his immortal true soulmate that just had to wait for Lois to die. Barring those scenarios, there's ways to make it work.

[Nelliebly]

Yeah I've never been a fan of Superman being straight up immortal. Abnormally long lifespan, sure. I wouldn't mind him living through like three or four generations of Justice Leagues. But straight up immortality? Nah.

That said, I also don't really mind him having another family after Lois and Jon are dead (or even while Jon is still alive, depending on how long his lifespan is). It happens. Sometimes spouses die. Sometimes people move on, whether they planned to or not. Doesn't make his and Lois' relationship any less special. it's just a part of life. And I'm sure Lois and Jon wouldn't want him to be alone, for possibly hundreds of years, after they're gone.

I think Yoda has done a great job touching on this but I’ll second his comments.

Theoretically, I agree with you that the idea of Clark living forever and being alone is extremely sad and you know that Lois, of all people, would worry terribly about him. She would hate the tonight that he was deeply alone and sad forever. No question. From a character POV, there is no question that Lois would not want that for him.

The problem is what Yoda brought up and the underlying gender issues with all of this because that’s where it becomes super gross.

There is, without question, a segment of fandom that literally can’t wait for Lois to be in the ground because then Superman can go off and “finally play the field” and bang all these super hot chicks etc. And, unfortunately, there are AU’s where the writer clearly couldn’t wait to get rid of her to try and push that sexist nonsense. And there is a creepy eugenics vibe that definitely plays a role too. There is just no question that treating Lois like that is just phenomenally gross. She’s barely in the ground and people are chomping at the bit for him to “move on” and it absolutely is linked to a lot of really ugly misogyny and also it’s an attempt to lessen her overall importance to a narrative where a lot of men are enraged that this woman is as important as she is.

Which is why this immortal Superman thing just leads to all kinds of problematic tropes. Because, theoretically, yes, Lois would never want never want him to be alone for thousands of years but the potential for just straight up misogyny and playing to the absolute WORST segments of the fandom who would like nothing better than for Lois to die tomorrow so Superman can go bang hot chicks and “not be tied down to that****” is just really, really risky. Like that’s the problem. DC Comics track record is bad. They have a bad history of feeding the lowest common denominator of the fandom which is why some of us cringe and get angry when we see the potential for it.

Yoda put it well too but that’s it in a nutshell. “Don’t feed the trolls” is a saying for a reason and feeding the idea that Lois is disposable and not that important and belongs dead in the ground so he can “move on” is 100%, absolutely the definition of feeding the trolls.

Mark Waid is completely married to Silver Age ideals and will never prefer a married Superman (a lot of us obviously don’t agree with him even if we respect him) but even he has gone on record that if Superman ever gets married it’s only to Lois and he will never marry again. He might have relationships but he’s the kind of man who can only take “forever” vows once no matter how old he is. I don’t think he’s wrong per se. This is all really tricky stuff.

[Nelliebly]

Yeah, which is a whole other can of worms. But at least in story, that's implied to basically be the result of her having deceived Clark. So the implication is it wasn't consensual. Being based off some of the Arthurian myths doesn't Mordred's mother come to Arthur disguised as someone else? So for all we know she could have appeared as Lois at some point. His comments were more directed at the actual members of the House of El. He didn't mention the Red King or whatever that guys name is.

I can only speak for myself but given the way the general public still treats male victims of sexual assault as “lesser” I would prefer for DC to tread extremely carefully with a story like this.

Unless Philip Kennedy Johnson is prepared to explore the trauma of Clark being raped by Circe, it’s irresponsible to set up a narrative where it happened and not go into the fallout. There is no question that Circe disguising herself (as Lois I guess?) to rape him is trauma.

I just am very wary of any story that uses sexual assault as a plot beat and then brushes it off. That’s very irresponsible given the way alpha males in particular are considered “unable to be raped” in the public dialogue on sexual assault.

Smallville had an extremely bad habit of just openly sexually assaulting Clark. It happened like 3x and one of those times he was in a relationship with Lois, was assaulted and then beat himself up for cheating on her. He didn’t ::cheat:: on her—he was assaulted. The show not understanding the difference was horrific. I don’t want to see any of this anymore. A hot woman violating Clark without his consent is RAPE. I don’t care how “hot” people think she is or how “you totally would” (things you read and see when this happens” bc it doesn’t change the consent piece.

[Nelliebly]

I understand that the fans do not like that clark has children with another woman, but I understand it only if Lois are alive, but thousands of years pass and that clark has to be alone, crying for lois seems ridiculous, it seems that clark has to be with wool, then with lois, and have lived millions of years as asexual

Asexuality is an orientation and it is part of the LGBTA spectrum. You do not become asexual anymore than you decide to be gay. I know you likely just misspoke here but be careful to not misuse an actual sexual orientation when what you actually mean is ::abstain:: from sex. Abstaining from sex for personal reasons and someone identifying as asexual as their orientation ::can:: overlap but maybe times don’t and our ACE friends deserve better than casual dialogue like this. Being Asexual is not a bad thing. Abstaining from sex —for whatever reason one chooses—can also be perfectly healthy and fine. Again, watch how this language can potentially hurt ACE people by painting abstinence as weird or negative or inherently bad. It’s not. That’s dated and damaging language about sex especially when we are discussing men.

As for Clark, I think a lot of good stuff has been said on this thread already about the potential pitfalls, sexism etc that’s often a problematic element in this kind of storyline which is why a lot of us would prefer they don’t do it to start with. I don’t think more needs to be said on that front.

[garazza]

I can only speak for myself but given the way the general public still treats male victims of sexual assault as “lesser” I would prefer for DC to tread extremely carefully with a story like this.

Unless Philip Kennedy Johnson is prepared to explore the trauma of Clark being raped by Circe, it’s irresponsible to set up a narrative where it happened and not go into the fallout. There is no question that Circe disguising herself (as Lois I guess?) to rape him is trauma.

I just am very wary of any story that uses sexual assault as a plot beat and then brushes it off. That’s very irresponsible given the way alpha males in particular are considered “unable to be raped” in the public dialogue on sexual assault.

Smallville had an extremely bad habit of just openly sexually assaulting Clark. It happened like 3x and one of those times he was in a relationship with Lois, was assaulted and then beat himself up for cheating on her. He didn’t ::cheat:: on her—he was assaulted. The show not understanding the difference was horrific. I don’t want to see any of this anymore. A hot woman violating Clark without his consent is RAPE. I don’t care how “hot” people think she is or how “you totally would” (things you read and see when this happens” bc it doesn’t change the consent piece.

Given that Dick Grayson's sexual assault is never mentioned, combined with his dismissal of Lois having a substantive role in his run and his dismissal of Jon's own trauma, I sincerely doubt he will ever acknowledge just how problematic and tricky using sexual assault as a part of story is. PKJ doesn't strike me as the kind of guy that actually thinks about the real world implications of aspects of his run.

[Yoda]

I can only speak for myself but given the way the general public still treats male victims of sexual assault as “lesser” I would prefer for DC to tread extremely carefully with a story like this.

Unless Philip Kennedy Johnson is prepared to explore the trauma of Clark being raped by Circe, it’s irresponsible to set up a narrative where it happened and not go into the fallout. There is no question that Circe disguising herself (as Lois I guess?) to rape him is trauma.

I just am very wary of any story that uses sexual assault as a plot beat and then brushes it off. That’s very irresponsible given the way alpha males in particular are considered “unable to be raped” in the public dialogue on sexual assault.

Smallville had an extremely bad habit of just openly sexually assaulting Clark. It happened like 3x and one of those times he was in a relationship with Lois, was assaulted and then beat himself up for cheating on her. He didn’t ::cheat:: on her—he was assaulted. The show not understanding the difference was horrific. I don’t want to see any of this anymore. A hot woman violating Clark without his consent is RAPE. I don’t care how “hot” people think she is or how “you totally would” (things you read and see when this happens” bc it doesn’t change the consent piece.

I think my preference would be that they not address it at all given I have zero confidence that they could handle it with any sort of appropriate narrative. While I think that there has been some progress made in this area since depictions like you describe from Smallville, it would still not be anywhere near the level necessary. And regardless of how it was actually presented, lets assume they handle it perfectly, it would still engender the responses you describe from certain segments of the fandom.

Given that Dick Grayson's sexual assault is never mentioned, combined with his dismissal of Lois having a substantive role in his run and his dismissal of Jon's own trauma, I sincerely doubt he will ever acknowledge just how problematic and tricky using sexual assault as a part of story is. PKJ doesn't strike me as the kind of guy that actually thinks about the real world implications of aspects of his run.

I remember that storyline from back in the day and yes, I don't think it was handled very well. I haven't reread it in ages, but I think Jack Knight had a storyline in Robinson's Starman run that was along these lines as well. I want to say it was handled decently, but I can't be sure of that. Really, sexual assault is just is one of those things that cape books should stay away from, because theres a very short list of writers who can address it with any sort of competence and regardless the fanbase doesn't deal well with it as Nelliebly notes.

And I haven't checked, but I do feel that this was a plot pulled directly from some adaptation of Arthurian legend to generally fit the vibe of Camelot Falls he was going for with House of El. I suspect his analysis of the plotline didn't extend further than that. They seem to be looking backward into the timeline somewhat in the upcoming Annual so I expect it likely won't directly feature any of these events.

I think Yoda has done a great job touching on this but I’ll second his comments.

Theoretically, I agree with you that the idea of Clark living forever and being alone is extremely sad and you know that Lois, of all people, would worry terribly about him. She would hate the tonight that he was deeply alone and sad forever. No question. From a character POV, there is no question that Lois would not want that for him.

The problem is what Yoda brought up and the underlying gender issues with all of this because that’s where it becomes super gross.

There is, without question, a segment of fandom that literally can’t wait for Lois to be in the ground because then Superman can go off and “finally play the field” and bang all these super hot chicks etc. And, unfortunately, there are AU’s where the writer clearly couldn’t wait to get rid of her to try and push that sexist nonsense. And there is a creepy eugenics vibe that definitely plays a role too. There is just no question that treating Lois like that is just phenomenally gross. She’s barely in the ground and people are chomping at the bit for him to “move on” and it absolutely is linked to a lot of really ugly misogyny and also it’s an attempt to lessen her overall importance to a narrative where a lot of men are enraged that this woman is as important as she is.

Which is why this immortal Superman thing just leads to all kinds of problematic tropes. Because, theoretically, yes, Lois would never want never want him to be alone for thousands of years but the potential for just straight up misogyny and playing to the absolute WORST segments of the fandom who would like nothing better than for Lois to die tomorrow so Superman can go bang hot chicks and “not be tied down to that****” is just really, really risky. Like that’s the problem. DC Comics track record is bad. They have a bad history of feeding the lowest common denominator of the fandom which is why some of us cringe and get angry when we see the potential for it.

Yoda put it well too but that’s it in a nutshell. “Don’t feed the trolls” is a saying for a reason and feeding the idea that Lois is disposable and not that important and belongs dead in the ground so he can “move on” is 100%, absolutely the definition of feeding the trolls.

Mark Waid is completely married to Silver Age ideals and will never prefer a married Superman (a lot of us obviously don’t agree with him even if we respect him) but even he has gone on record that if Superman ever gets married it’s only to Lois and he will never marry again. He might have relationships but he’s the kind of man who can only take “forever” vows once no matter how old he is. I don’t think he’s wrong per se. This is all really tricky stuff.

You put it much better than I did, but I agree. In a vacuum there are a ton of storylines that I would not have an issue with exploring these kinds of things. But in the context of portions of this fandom and how things get interpreted or spun or used to feed misinterpretations I have very little tolerance for these type of things.

[Nelliebly]

Given that Dick Grayson's sexual assault is never mentioned, combined with his dismissal of Lois having a substantive role in his run and his dismissal of Jon's own trauma, I sincerely doubt he will ever acknowledge just how problematic and tricky using sexual assault as a part of story is. PKJ doesn't strike me as the kind of guy that actually thinks about the real world implications of aspects of his run.

I agree with you completely which is why I’m wholly uncomfortable with him even introducing this plot —especially as a throwaway.

“Oh yeah he had sex with Circe because she tricked him.” Oh really???? That’s called rape. That’s not a throwaway subject and I’m disgusted they are making it one.

[Sacred Knight]

Yeah I've never been a fan of Superman being straight up immortal. Abnormally long lifespan, sure. I wouldn't mind him living through like three or four generations of Justice Leagues. But straight up immortality? Nah.

That said, I also don't really mind him having another family after Lois and Jon are dead (or even while Jon is still alive, depending on how long his lifespan is). It happens. Sometimes spouses die. Sometimes people move on, whether they planned to or not. Doesn't make his and Lois' relationship any less special. it's just a part of life. And I'm sure Lois and Jon wouldn't want him to be alone, for possibly hundreds of years, after they're gone.

If it wasn't for House of El I'd be convinced that part of the reason they're changing his powers/physiology (likely leading to a visible aging), was because they wanted it canon that he'd actually age normally with Lois. The House of El stuff pretty easily dispels that though. So it seems like they're just pulling the gray hair deal just to even further show that Clark is the old, and Jon is the new. Aping from Marvel a bit to do a quasi "Old Man Clark" vibe, basically.

Still though, all this I see lasting about two years tops. The gray going away will be a big deal like the rejected COIE ending I had earlier referenced, or to use an example that actually came to fruition, Hal's hair going back to normal after ditching Parallax in GL Rebirth.

The ideas of it being another alternate Superman, almost a reverse-Rebirth, is intriguing, but Superlad has had a good finger on the pulse of this whole thing, he's been right about quite a few things so I think he's right on this one too and its damage to his body that causes an aging spurt.

[Nelliebly]

Just recently I witnessed a convo on Twitter where several guys were talking about Smallville and they went on and on about how “Clark should have ended up with Alicia.” The cute teleportation girl he dated for a few episodes in the early seasons. Which I mean, ok, that’s a dumb takeaway from a 10 year journey even without the assault but I digress.

Ok. Well Alicia tried to rape him. She was a ****** rapist. She drugged Clark in an attempt to have sex with him and marry him. And the show absolutely played it as “sexy” while also, simultaneously, showing Clark’s absolute horror when he removed the necklace and realized what she had done to him. He tells her in clear words that she used him, pushes her physically away and is almost in tears. That’s how Tom Welling played it. There was zero question from Tom’s acting choices that Clark felt violated and betrayed.

And yet, I remember distinctly the fandom preferring her to Lana as if Lana was the villain (Lana and Clark were poorly suited for each other as a couple but Lana was NOT a villain) and not this girl who straight up tried to rape him. But, you know, she was hot and blonde and big, strong men that look like Tom Welling can’t be raped, right???? Right??? Clark totally secretly “wanted” it!

Smallville is old but the convo was recent. And upon being reminded that Alicia tried to rape him, they admitted that they had “forgotten” that part. YIKES. So yeah things have gotten better I guess???? But this is still something I do not trust DC Comics or this particular writer to touch. Because too many people will come away from it just like these guys did and straight up “forget” the assault.

[HsssH]

I actually like the idea of Clark being immortal, but I have to fully agree with stuff mentioned in this thread. It worked for me under Morrison because we never really got the details about how and when, but if PKJ and other writers are going to integrate this idea into main continuity then there indeed is very high risk of them fumbling it really badly.

[Vordan]

I like immortal Superman, but I also thought Waid’s take of “he lives long enough to see the Legion of Superheroes debut in the 30th century but is an old and infirm man by that point” was a cool idea as well. Either way digging into the House of El time period is one of the story bits I’m most excited about, I can’t wait for that Annual.

[Yoda]

I like immortal Superman, but I also thought Waid’s take of “he lives long enough to see the Legion of Superheroes debut in the 30th century but is an old and infirm man by that point” was a cool idea as well. Either way digging into the House of El time period is one of the story bits I’m most excited about, I can’t wait for that Annual.

I think that was Ross in the JSA arc where Kingdom Come Superman ended up on Earth back Pre-Flashpoint. I don't think that's Waid's ending.

[NaVi]

1: apologize for my asexual comment, it was just a way of expressing the idea, not an insult.
2: the possible (it is not known what happened) rape that clark suffers at the hands of circe, it is a very delicate issue, many believe that a woman forcing a man is a kind of honor (to be so handsome, so man, that the woman cannot resist), I hope that DC treats him with the respect that a rape deserves regardless of the gender that suffers it.
3: I like the idea of ​​the immortal superman, that's why I like the idea of ​​superman with other women apart from Lois, not 40 women but 2 or 3 (they are thousands of years), that if it has to be treated as a story of superman, not a hentai manga in which superman saves the girl and she thanks him with a nice night.

[DragonPiece]

He mentioned on Twitter that the entire current arc with Mongul and Warworld takes places on Earth (if the skies above Earth count for you), so it remains to be seen if Action is eventually going to go off-world entirely or if Clark will still be operating on Earth and in Metropolis.

it remains to be seen? Isn't that what this always building up to, Clark going off planet(I guess to warworld?) and people assuming he's dead..leading to Jon becoming the Superman of Earth?