Whoops, two blog posts in a row where I’m basically ranting. Sorry!
Anyhow, let’s get two items out of the way real quick:
- The vast majority of people within the political space complaining about this, as in pundits, have likely never read a comic book in their life nor have an interest in reading a comic book;
- Therefore, the vast majority of the people complaining about comics becoming “woke” or too political are showing their ignorance of the fact that comics have virtually always been political, including the focus of this post, Superman.
So, the idea is that Jon, Clark Kent/Superman’s son, went into the future with the Legion of Superheroes and came back aged up, which is why he’s essentially a second Superman. Clark is going off-world for a different storyline, thus making Jon the primary Superman for Earth. Meaning, Superman in canon exists as a bisexual. Which is freakin’ cool.
According to NPR, Jon/Superman is slated to come out as bisexual in the pages of Superman: Son of Kal-El #5, written by Tom Taylor with art by John Timms, which will published on Nov. 9.
Of course, some will say, as the author of the NPR article did, that it’s not really Superman, so does it even count? As in, it’s not the classic Clark Kent Superman and Clark Kent is still with Lois Lane. But I think that’s letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, as they say. Even though it’s not Clark Kent Superman and even though a cynical mind could frame this as a publicity stunt to drum up interest, representation, even of this sort, matters. So, yeah, it’s a good thing. Not perfect, but good.
Now, I don’t tend to keep up with monthly comic books and their various off-shoots. I don’t have the money for that, but I do read the compilations, or graphic novels, when they appear, so one day when they make a graphic novel of this story arc featuring Jon, I will gladly read it.
I have a hard time understanding people who get upset by things like this, and I have an even harder time understanding people who still, in the year 2021, equate bisexual, queer, gay, whatever you want to say, with being less than manly, like it’s an affront to masculinity.
Those people are telling on themselves and projecting their own insecurities about their manhood. It’s actually apropos that this news comes out at the same time that certain pundits were knocking Pete Buttigieg, the secretary of the Department of Transportation, for taking paternity leave to care for his and husband, Chasten’s, newborn. Again, they were telling on themselves by seeing it not only as an affront to manliness to take paternity leave, but that, “What’s there for a man to do in the house with a newborn?” showed how awful partners they are to their spouses and nascent fathers to their newborns.
Do better, men. Seek better, healthier and more enriching models of masculinity. Tucker Carlson ain’t it. Matt Walsh ain’t it. That’s faux-masculinity to make a buck. Only other insecure men trying to find their place in the world are buying it.