PDA

View Full Version : Groundless Assumptions of Superheroes?



Tiberian
2006-06-22, 03:04 AM
Personally, I can't wait until Superman Returns comes to my local theatre. But watching the news, I have become agitated at some of its hype. Unfortunately, Superman's hype isn't that their may be a second good DC movie to come out in two years, but instead queries on Superman's meaning.

First off, there is the Christ-like figure. (Don't mention it)

Secondly, I just saw an interview posing the question is Superman Gay?

I have no actual problems with either question, what I have problems with are the people doing the interview. Michael Musto and Bex Schwartz, two people who I doubt (IMHO) have even ever read a comic book. My biggest problem, why aren't news shows interviewing people who are in the real know (like I don't know, comic book writers and illustrators.) instead of media gadflies.

Another things was that during the entire five minute segment, not one image from comics were captured, only movie promos. Like when gay Batman was referenced they showed the horrible Schumacker promo with Batman and Robin in glossy, rubbery spandex-like pleathe

KayJay
2006-06-22, 04:47 AM
How can Superman be gay when he's with Lois Lane?

Dhavaer
2006-06-22, 07:21 AM
How can Superman be gay when he's with Lois Lane?


Camouflage.
Which apparently means to blow smoke up someone's nose. Are there any Franks in the audience who can confirm this? Camouflet?

Ing
2006-06-22, 08:01 AM
ah yes, the glory of American/international news.

argue over the very important clearly false insane notions such as Superman is gay, while meanwhile there are meaningless thinigs like war, corperate crimes, goverment misconduct, that rightfuly is ignored.

hey its not the job of the media to do investigative reporting, its their job to do the esiest stories even if they are concerned about fiction and are incredibly insane.

....wait

Dawnstrider_Moogle
2006-06-22, 09:04 AM
ah yes, the glory of American/international news.

argue over the very important clearly false insane notions such as Superman is gay, while meanwhile there are meaningless thinigs like war, corperate crimes, goverment misconduct, that rightfuly is ignored.

hey its not the job of the media to do investigative reporting, its their job to do the esiest stories even if they are concerned about fiction and are incredibly insane.

....wait

But being against gayness is a Real Christian Value! Forget helping the poor, or fighting injustice...the media needs to be focusing on Real American Values like protecting the Sanctity of Marriage from people who want to-

Augh. Must not let poisonous political climate get to me.... >.>

OldFart
2006-06-22, 10:43 AM
The media prints what sells. It's not really their fault that their readers don't want to think too hard.

Someone pointed out to me last weekend that at the turn of the 20th century, newspapers were written at the high-school graduate level. Now, they are at the 5th grade level.

So my beef with this story is really the fact that its readers will dwell on studid questions like "is Superman gay?" instead of more important questions like "would it really matter if he were?"

Ing
2006-06-22, 12:51 PM
yes but the media also tells us what we want

what about us who do want a more intelligent and less batshizinsane news service? *since its only provided for 5th grader levels (which is also why America's public schools are failing) where can we get what we want? *papers should be writen at just above HS level...it encourages even the offically uneducated who wish to be informed to better themselves, and it'll happen just by osmosis. *just be reading the sports section the vocabulary and comprehension skills of joe average can increase.

remember back in the old days when even the non landed gentry who had no officaleducation could carry on an intelligent conversation often because they self taught? *Fredrik Douglas, Thomas Edison, Ab Lincoln. *all fairly smart chaps but their only education was private reading and the news paper. *by dumbing down the news we drag everyone else down.


honestly if superman was gay it would mater because it is a big diffrence form what his character is...kinda like if a batman movie made him campy and with ruber nipples...too far diffrent from the concept to honestly share the same name. not that there's anything wrong with it, but it's NOT superman



Booster Gold now....

Haggis_McCrablice
2006-06-22, 12:56 PM
Someone pointed out to me last weekend that at the turn of the 20th century, newspapers were written at the high-school graduate level. Now, they are at the 5th grade level.
You give them too much credit. I am a former journalist; I know. When I was writing for my campus paper I was told to strive to write at a third-grade level. :-/ I guess it's for the benefit of the hung-over fratboys and the vomit-stained debutantes who first thing in the morning aren't up to reading anything much more complex than the instructions on the side of a coffee can. This is why as a writer I deliberately write the most long and Byzantine sentences I can, just to rebel.... ;D

Ing
2006-06-22, 12:59 PM
and thus you should...you better all of us as we must evolve to read such complicated eldrich archaic fillibusters, or fall behind and become unable to have proper intercourse or intellectual congress

Kish
2006-06-22, 01:13 PM
honestly if superman was gay it would mater because it is a big diffrence form what his character is...kinda like if a batman movie made him campy and with ruber nipples...too far diffrent from the concept to honestly share the same name.
You mean, like the first Batman movie, with Adam West?

Ing
2006-06-22, 01:19 PM
i was refering to the one with George Cloony


and ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRNOLD



AYAHAUAYAAYAHYHA I AM MR. FREEEEEEEEEEEZE AHUHAUHGUGUGUGYGYGUG

Faticus
2006-06-22, 01:51 PM
If Superman has a child with Lois the first time the baby kicks her cheast will explode. Thats why Superman needs to get with Wonder Woman.

nagora
2006-06-22, 02:47 PM
Unfortunately, Superman's hype isn't that there may be a second good DC

What was the first?

Ing
2006-06-22, 02:48 PM
Batman BEgins

Tokeloshe
2006-06-22, 04:26 PM
Batman 2 was good. 3 onwards, not so much.

Tarlonniel
2006-06-22, 04:42 PM
If Superman has a child with Lois the first time the baby kicks her cheast will explode.

Only if sunlight somehow reaches the inside of her uterus. *:o

Also - in some incarnations - don't his powers remain latent for part of his childhood, and develop slowly during the rest of it?

Faticus
2006-06-22, 04:53 PM
I never thought of that. :-/

CelestialStick
2006-06-22, 07:25 PM
Only if sunlight somehow reaches the inside of her uterus. :o

Also - in some incarnations - don't his powers remain latent for part of his childhood, and develop slowly during the rest of it?
These are actually two good, and independent points.

In Lois and Clark there's an episode in which Clark (or Superman) collides with a meteor headed for Earth. He comes back with amnesia (and buck naked) and later in the episode his parents are trying to teach him how to fly again. At one point Martha just pushes him off his terrace and he falls into the garbage bin in the alley below. Priceless stuff. Anyway, the point is that during the episode Martha or Jonathan mentions to Clark that he didn't start flying until he turned 18.

In Smallville, Clark has slowly been developing the powers of the adult Superman, and there was even a scene in which Martha said, "Clark didn't get really strong until he turned [some age I forget, like 10]." In the first Superman movie, the toddler Kal-El picks up the rear of Johanthan's pickup truck in one hand shortly after his ship crashed into Earth, which suggests a bit of an earlier start to a pretty phenomenal strength. ON the other hand, just moments before, when Martha suggested keeping to toddler, he and Martha give each other a big hug, and the toddler doesn't crush Martha, suggesting that even at that age he has some ability to scale his strength to level appropriate to the situation. That ability might work unconsciously and thus perhaps in vitro as well.

Remember also that if Clark and Lois had a child, he would be only half-Kryptonian, so presumbly his strength would like somewhere between that of a human and a full Kryptonian.

In Superman II, the image of Lara, Kal-El's mother, seems to establish that Superman can't have sex with a human woman without first losing his powers.

Back in the 1970s, sci fi writer Larry Niven wrote a funny story about how it would even be possible for Superman to procreate. I'm not sure if I can repeat it here because of the presence of children, but suffice it to say that the problem of Superman's biology being too strong for Lois's body starts long before fertilization. ;)

Ing
2006-06-22, 08:14 PM
i think we can just sum everything in that work up with its title

Man of Steal Women of Clenex

Valda, Adlav and Samiam: the Jacked-Up Trinity
2006-06-22, 08:26 PM
If Superman has a child with Lois the first time the baby kicks her cheast will explode. Thats why Superman needs to get with Wonder Woman.

Has anyone noticed that Wonderwoman's gotten alot more powerful over the years? She used to be a chick in tights with rope nigh-indestructible wristguards. Now she's Superman with boobs and rope.

Tarlonniel
2006-06-22, 08:39 PM
Has anyone noticed that Wonderwoman's gotten alot more powerful over the years?

I think CelestialStick has mentioned it one or five times over the course of these threads ;) Didn't notice it myself until I started watching JLU. I wonder if it was a gradual change, or if there was some specific point at which she gained new powers... ???

Arian
2006-06-22, 08:55 PM
That ability might work unconsciously and thus perhaps in vitro as well.

"In vitro"?! Not quite the term you were after, I think :P

Unless we assume that Lois' womb is literally made of glass.

Haggis_McCrablice
2006-06-23, 03:58 AM
I believe ye mean "en utero", laddie. ;)

So if a pregnant Lois were to sunbathe with her belly exposed, would that be enough to juice up Clark Jr., d'ye think?

I saw a preview of the new Superflick tonight, and the thing that struck me was when the hood shoots Superman, and the bullet strikes him in the eyeball and flattens into a lead pancake. I alsways though Big Blue's eyes and groin would be his most vulnerable places. In an episode of S:TAS he is temporarily blinded by a laser beam to both eyes, which of course would have taken a normal man's head clean off. But on another occassion he does manage to keep his 'do impeccably neat when Metallo dunks his head in boiling lava. Not a hair out of place. So did Jor-El think to provide his son with some miraculous Kryptonian mousse when loading up his rocket to Earth, or something?

Millikin_Erreene
2006-06-23, 05:43 AM
"ah yes, the glory of American/international news.

argue over the very important clearly false insane notions such as Superman is gay, while meanwhile there are meaningless thinigs like war, corperate crimes, goverment misconduct, that rightfuly is ignored.

hey its not the job of the media to do investigative reporting, its their job to do the esiest stories even if they are concerned about fiction and are incredibly insane.

....wait"


At least our news media is free to print and discuss what they want without the government telling them what they can and cannot discuss, unlike the news media in places like China, Iran, or North Korea. *And every country has their share of garbage news.

Take this recent article for instance. *

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticleNew.asp?xfile=data/theworld/2006/May/theworld_May731.xml&section=theworld

The results of a pointless British poll (Exactly how much time and money was wasted to gather and translate this information?) managed to make headlines in the United Arab Emirates and Thailand.

"what about us who do want a more intelligent and less batshizinsane news service? *since its only provided for 5th grader levels (which is also why America's public schools are failing) where can we get what we want?"

Our newspapers are 'dumbed down' for all the immigrants, legal and otherwise, who come to this country and do not want to bother with learning more than the most basic English.

Apparently American public education must be doing something right since we walk away with most of the Nobel Prizes year after year. *

remember back in the old days when even the non landed gentry who had no officaleducation could carry on an intelligent conversation often because they self taught? *Fredrik Douglas, Thomas Edison, Ab Lincoln.

I seem to recall being taught (in an American public school) that Fredrick Douglass attended a public school in Baltimore Maryland. *And for a slave in the 1800s, his owners were very liberal about allowing him to travel with them around the United States and Europe.
Thomas Edison was also home schooled by his mother, who was a school teacher, because he was believed to have a learning disability.
And Abraham Lincoln's family came into wealth while he was growing up.

Ing
2006-06-23, 09:09 AM
no its not the imigrints, stop trying to blame them as they often have their own papers in their own languages if they don't know English. its because americans are notoriously lazy. and for a free press and media we seem to have an aweful lot of FCC fines and censorship.

Beleriphon
2006-06-23, 09:28 AM
I think CelestialStick has mentioned it one or five times over the course of these threads *;) *Didn't notice it myself until I started watching JLU. I wonder if it was a gradual change, or if there was some specific point at which she gained new powers... *???


Sort of gradual starting in the late 60s. They removed the invisible plane (is that dumb or what?) and let her fly. DC focuseed more on the Amazon warrior aspect, and thus more able to fight on par with Superman. By the Crisis on Infinite Earth's it was basically set that none flying, invisible plane Wonderwoman was from a different Earth than Superman-with-boobs Wonderwoman and SwB Wonderwoman became the standard after everything merged.

Millikin_Erreene
2006-06-23, 05:38 PM
"its because americans are notoriously lazy."

Lazy are we? Funny but that's not what the International Labor Organization says. It says the average American works more hours per week than the average citizen of any other country in the world.

http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/workhours.html

Furthermore the United States has consistantly been the most productive country in the world for over one-hundred years.

http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Productivity.html

So if Americans are lazy, then that means the rest of the world is comatose.


"no its not the imigrints, stop trying to blame them as they often have their own papers in their own languages if they don't know English."

In addition to your inability to use proper spelling and capitalization, you admit that immigrants who come to America often fail to possess a basic grasp of English grammar, even after residing in the country for seven plus years (Try to gain citizenship in any other country in the world where you can't speak the language.) and furthermore go out of their way to avoid learning the language and yet you have the audacity to call Americans stupid and lazy.


"and for a free press and media we seem to have an aweful lot of FCC fines and censorship."

Profanity, pornography, slander, and libel are not protected under the American Constitution and never was. You are also incredibly ignorant if you think no other country (especially Australia, Great Britain and Canada) has their own form of media regulation. At least you won't get executed or exiled for breaking an FCC regulation and have the right to appeal.

Ing
2006-06-23, 09:39 PM
dude....no...just no.

see that go by? *that was the point, you must've just missed it. *forum is on Groundless assumptions of SUperheros...not whether imagrints are destroying america. *keep some focus please

let me clarify

it's not the goverment's fault we have bad media, its a lack of pride in proper jurnalism in favor of sensationalism...and that's terrible

and yah americans are physically and mentally lazy. they like media watered down and easy, prefer digital to nature, exercise less, weigh more, and are much more likely to do things quickly then do them right...i generalize not all americans are that way but as a whole that's the view of em.

and don't call me ignorent. *i just don't care enough on a short forum like this on...of all things SUperman's sexuality to do a proper spell check and editing. *if i can get the point across i'm happy. *if i see a mistake i fix it, usually i let it go cause i have stuff to do and consider it a luxary to post here. *

all i said was that the low quality of the new media is the fault of journalists and it is up to them how dumb or impressive they wish to make media, not the imigrints who are hardly a target audience. *generic opinion that was slightly off topic and thus i wish to move on and ignore...stop bringing politics into it...especially nativism.


back to topic
superman is not gay. *never has he been portrayed as anything like that. *always straight and its absurd to even ask that really. *its just blatent titilation and that's terrible

the christ figure: actualy this one KINDA fits...especally after reading kingdom come where they REALLY played that up. *he's always been a kinda stand in for God though, his name Kal El means voice of god i beleive in Hebrew (don't quote me on that i'm not entirely sure) and generally has always had some religious overtones, whether he's a retelling of Golem, or Christ theres always been a judeo-christian deification of his character, so i can see the CHrist annalogy. *SMAS even went as far as to have Darkseid defeat superman and crucify him (not literally but the imagry was pretty clear as his arms were spread open as he was being held beaten and wounded) and parade him as his war banner on earth to break the moral of the humans...pretty much state "WHERE IS YOUR GOD NOW!" was a good epesoid and it played up the christ figure. * in the comics...i mean come on! *he even came back from the dead! *its not like they go to great pains to hide it.

CelestialStick
2006-06-24, 01:40 AM
I think CelestialStick has mentioned it one or five times over the course of these threads ;) Didn't notice it myself until I started watching JLU. I wonder if it was a gradual change, or if there was some specific point at which she gained new powers... ???

Yes! At least you've been listening, Tarlonniel!

I read through the lengthy and complex article on Wonder Woman on Wikipedia, and it appears that the flying, almost-as-strong-as-Superman version of Wonder Woman dates from the post Crisis of 1985. In the late 1960s, in fact, she lost her superpowers completely, and basically became an American version of Miss Peal from the Avengers. They later established that the 1940s Wonder Woman came from Earth 2 and the 1970s Wonder Woman from Earth 1.

In the Crisis they killed off Wonder Woman, only it turned out that she had just been thrown back in time, allowing DC to once again reconfigure her.

Currently in the comics Wonder Woman isn't the original Diana, but Donna Troy, who had in one previous version been the adopted younger sister of Diana, and in another version Diana's magical twin sister. A white-clad Diana Prince, reminiscent of the late 1960s Wonder Woman with no powers, has appeared as well. Confused? :D

Ing
2006-06-24, 03:00 AM
*head asplodes*

CelestialStick
2006-06-24, 03:12 AM
*head asplodes*
LOL. At least it didn't explode. ;)

Ing
2006-06-24, 01:19 PM
no other things explode


but hey the more wonder women the better i suppose

Finwe
2006-06-24, 09:09 PM
i mean come on! he even came back from the dead! its not like they go to great pains to hide it.



How many major superheroes can you name who HAVEN'T come back from the dead in one way or another?

Old_el_Paso
2006-10-06, 11:19 PM
If Superman has a child with Lois the first time the baby kicks her cheast will explode. Thats why Superman needs to get with Wonder Woman.Do you know how bad it is to divorce your wife because she can't carry your child?

Steward
2006-10-07, 08:52 AM
How many major superheroes can you name who HAVEN'T come back from the dead in one way or another?

The Tick.

And...

Closet_Skeleton
2006-10-11, 12:14 PM
Do you know how bad it is to divorce your wife because she can't carry your child?


Depends if you're Henry VIII...

Oh, wait...

Is Superman homosexual? I personally have never met a homosexual who wears tights and underwear on the outside.

Maybe they tried to get a comic book fan to talk about Superman's sexuality and they just gave the Reporter a funny look.

Anybody who thinks a superhero might be homosexual should forget idiotic ideas of what "weird people" dress like and actually ask the writer how he interprets his character's sexuality.

Beleriphon
2006-10-30, 01:02 AM
Anybody who thinks a superhero might be homosexual should forget idiotic ideas of what "weird people" dress like and actually ask the writer how he interprets his character's sexuality.

We can probably count the number of gay comic book characters on one hand. I'm sure 4 of the 5 are women.

At any rate, I always found assumptions about superheroes really funny. Nothing is better then trying to explain the X-Men to my mother every time we end up watching the movie, or having to explain the plot of my Christmas DVD after having her watch it from the very beginning. I did find it odd that she didn't do that with Hellboy.

Dhavaer
2006-10-30, 02:10 AM
We can probably count the number of gay comic book characters on one hand. I'm sure 4 of the 5 are women.

Midnighter, Apollo, Ultimate Colossus, Batwoman, Grendel, Renee Montoya, Destiny. I'm sure there's more.

Piedmon_Sama
2006-10-30, 02:29 AM
Don't forget Northstar. He's the very first openly gay superhero.

Dhavaer
2006-10-30, 02:38 AM
What? Dammit, I was thinking about Northstar as I wrote that! I thought I'd already included him.

Grazzt
2006-10-30, 05:22 PM
And let's not forget Obsidian, Pied Piper, Wiccan, Asgardian, and Karolina from Runaways.