The misconceptions about Superman that even some fans believe

The Superman Homepage wrote about 8 misconceptions some people have about the Man of Steel. For example:

#1: “Superman is Boring Because He Always Wins”

Every hero always wins. Batman wins. Spider-Man wins. Wonder Woman wins. That’s how protagonist-driven stories work.

The question isn’t WHETHER Superman wins—it’s HOW. How does he save the day without destroying the city? How does he stop villains without killing? How does he cope when he can’t save everyone?

The best Superman stories make you emotional not because he punched harder, but because he took time to check on a reformed criminal over lunch.

Most importantly, the best Superman stories are usually those with the most talented writing involved. As the byline implies, this is another example of pseudo-fans who criticize fictional characters instead of the assigned writers. And even when heroes don't initially win, they lick their wounds and go back to battle after recovering from the setback. Of course, that's if the writers build the story that way, and Stan Lee and Steve Ditko did it with Spider-Man in his first battle with Dr. Octopus, and even his first clash with the Sandman can be considered.

What kind of lemmings throw around such garbage - first in letter pages and now on message boards - if they don't care/buy/read Superman comics? Undoubtably, many of the modern ones aren't customers of comicdom at all, and were just looking for pathetic excuses to rag on classic creators' hard work. They have no business saying anything about superhero comics at all.

The next example, however, has a problem with modern day propaganda:

#2: “He’s Too Powerful to Be Relatable”

Superman is a working-class immigrant who grew up on a farm and chooses to help others because he’s seen humanity’s potential for greatness.

He can’t play sports without risking injury to others. He constantly makes excuses to his boss. He misleads his closest friends daily to protect his identity. He belongs to two worlds but fits perfectly into neither.

That’s the immigrant experience. That’s deeply relatable.

Oh for crying out loud. With this, the Superman Homepage has once again demonstrated why I became alienated from it, recalling when they sugarcoated the Son of Kal-El spinoff's characterization of its star as gay for the sake of a modern woke agenda. Now in addition, they're distorting how Supes was created as an infant refugee from a destroyed distant planet who was adopted by an earthly couple in the midwestern USA. I guess they believe a mere infant could've gone about looking for rental rooms and real estate, right? Even Supergirl wasn't created as an immigrant, considering that, in the original Silver Age premise, she fled from what was written then as a space colony in danger of deterioration (though her parents and said colony survived, and made their home in the Bottle City of Kandor).

Let's be clear. Superman can be written as relatable simply because he was adopted and raised by a caring couple, working-class or otherwise, and can be written with the very complications alluded to here like secret IDs and what difficulties can arise as a result. That's not just an "immigrant" experience. Even refugee-style protagonists can face problems of all sorts, and not fit perfectly into even their adopted societies.

#3: “Superman Should Always Be Smiling”

Wrong. He was raised human with real emotions. He gets angry when pushed. He carries impossible weight. He struggles with choices no one should have to make.

Being hopeful doesn’t mean being naive. Being kind doesn’t mean being weak or perpetually cheerful. Real Superman has emotional complexity and depth.

Somehow, I doubt whoever insisted on that was serious, because there's troublemakers out there since the Golden Age who've attacked Mr. Fantastic of the Fantastic Four for supposedly lacking personality, and sounded like they believe all heroes should get mad all the time. It basically amounts to a classic "damned if you do and don't" situation, and no decent writer should pander to hypocrites, no matter the tone or content of their messages, though it can be said anybody who's going to be as obnoxious as some anonymous social media users can be is not somebody we should be accommodating at all, period.

#4: “Superman Just Punches Things”

Superman is extremely smart. He’s fluent in every Earth language plus multiple alien ones. He learned Kryptonian independently. He builds and repairs advanced alien technology in his workshop.

He’s trained in martial arts under Batman and Wonder Woman. He’s mastered Kryptonian combat forms. He’s such a skilled actor that he once attended a costume party dressed AS SUPERMAN and lost the contest.

His mind is his greatest weapon.

Depending how a story is written though, Supes could be portrayed viewing martial arts tournaments and video recordings of said practices, and learn from those how to perform the best martial arts techniques. It's not like Batman and Wonder Woman have to be brought in to teach him in all instances, since in past years, Kal-El was portrayed as having an excellent memory system.

#5: “Magic is Like Kryptonite”

Magic affects Superman the same way it affects anyone. If a wizard can turn Batman into a frog, he can turn Superman into a frog.

Magic isn’t a weakness like Kryptonite. It’s something he has no special defense against. His durability applies to magical damage, but not reality manipulation or transformation.

It’s fairness, not vulnerability.

This reminds me that, during the mid-80s, there was a Thor story where the God of Thunder was turned into a frog. And if it's okay for Marvel to conceive a story like that, it was always okay and still is for DC to do the same. Maybe even to turn Superman into an elephant!

#6: “Clark Kent is Fake”

Both identities are authentic. There’s no mask—just code-switching for different contexts.

Clark isn’t bumbling because it’s an act. He’s genuinely adjusting—a farm boy navigating cramped city spaces while constantly restraining superhuman strength. His clumsiness is real adaptation, not deception.

Both Superman and Clark are genuine expressions of who he is.

I think the complainers are fake Super-fans. I don't believe they're Spider-Man fans either, period. Nor are they Lois Lane fans.

The next item is a repeat of the first, and most unfortunately doesn't take an objective view of a certain early 90s storyline:

#7: “Superman Never Loses”

He literally died fighting Doomsday. The Exile arc shows him losing repeatedly. Zod, Darkseid, the Eradicator, Dominus—all defeated him.

Worse are the moral losses. When Toyman murdered a child while Superman was abroad, that haunted him. He can’t be everywhere. He can’t save everyone.

What makes him Superman isn’t never losing—it’s getting back up anyway.

While it's not wrong to write a story where Superman fails to save everyone - and the 1983 story where Lex Luthor destroyed the planet Lexor in all his blind hatred for the Man of Steel is one example - it was still in poor taste to just wipe out Cat Grant's son, which makes it difficult to use the Toyman again if it remains canon, and only makes Toyman into another variation on the Joker, as a result. To be sure, there are other stories depicting Superman failing to save an innocent life that were written in better taste, up to the turn of the century. But the fate of Cat Grant's son was forced and distasteful in hindsight, with the worst part being that writers like Dan Jurgens have never addressed whether it was a good idea to start with.

#8: “Superman is Basically a God”

He’s someone trying to do right who happens to have extraordinary abilities. The power doesn’t make him special—the choice does.

Anyone with his powers could rule nations or take whatever they want. His restraint—choosing to use godlike power for good—that’s what defines him.

He’s not a god pretending to be human. He’s human-raised, choosing kindness over domination.

He's made of flesh and blood, no matter how high his endurance is to pain and injury. Same with Supergirl, if it matters. At the end of the item, the distortion from example 2 is regurgitated:

The Truth About Superman

Superman isn’t boring, overpowered, or unrelatable. He’s a working-class immigrant choosing compassion when he could choose conquest. He’s the friend who shows up when needed.

That’s what makes him super.

Well, the writer sure capped that one with an insult to the intellect. That's what makes him an icon-hijacking propagandist. There are valid points to be found in what's presented, but the political propaganda takes away much of the potential. Such mendacious buffoons are otherwise unsuited to speak in the name of Siegel and Shuster's legacy. And now that I think of it, if there's a glaring shortcoming here, it's that no clear points are made why even Superman stories stand or fall based on the writing and art merit. Without that, one could say we're right back at square one, with little accomplished as a result.