Since when was Supergirl always stuck in Superman's shadow?

The Conversation wrote a sugarcoated item about Supergirl and the upcoming movie, that rather predictably takes no objective view of the Maid of Might's history:

Since her official debut in 1959, Supergirl has struggled to emerge from the shadow of her cousin, Superman. So it’s a bold move that the second cinematic release in the newly rebooted DC Universe will be Supergirl.

Milly Alcock first appeared as Supergirl in the epilogue to Superman (2025). Her Supergirl is a brash “party girl” – an immediate contrast to David Corenswet’s squeaky clean rendition of Superman. Based on the comic book Supergirl: Woman of Tomorrow (2021) by Tom King and Bilquis Evely, she is a traumatised character, dealing with the destruction of her home planet of Krypton. “I have no people,” Supergirl laments in the trailer.

Well that's the problem: it's based more on the overrated King's story than a screenplay that could stand on its own. Might I also add I don't find the posters showing Supergirl wearing a trenchcoat appealing? The sunglasses may be cool, but the coat ruins everything. And I don't think Supergirl was always in Superman's shadow as they say, if only because there were times in the past where she did have solo adventures printed. The problem is the publishers didn't always see her as the storytelling vehicle she could be if they wanted to invest in serious merit-based writing. And the article has a pretty big goof in the following:

However, Supergirl was not always so introspective. The character and her alter ego, Kara Zor-El, first appeared in 1938, to cash in on the popularity of Superman. She was a preppy teenager who played a supporting helpmate role, allowing Superman to display his paternal side.

Publishers DC Comics also flirted with the concept of Superwoman. A 1943 story had Superman’s girlfriend, reporter Lois Lane, dream that she was Superman’s female counterpart. In her book Supergirl: Contemporary Feminist Reboot of a Hapless DC Comic Helpmate (2022), Batya Weinbaum suggests this moment reflected the “changing position of women in wartime”. In a 1947 story, Lois Lane, Superwoman! from Superman issue #45, Lane is convinced she has superpowers, only to discover she is the victim of a ruse where Superman is using his influence to simulate the experience. This prompts her frustrated exclamation: “You men who try to keep women weak and defenceless – I hate you!”

Lane may well have been addressing the DC editors who published her adventures. In his cultural history of comic book heroines, comic book historian Mike Madrid outlines an excerpt from 1950s-era DC Comics’ editorial policy which reluctantly accepts stories featuring women, but only if the female characters are “secondary in importance”.

Somehow, it's hard to believe a company that readily published Wonder Woman all these years would have a problem publishing anything with a lady in the lead. Either way, they did have some impressive lady co-stars created at the time, and who went on to see better writing as time went by. Also notice the hilarious goof in the year of debut, which is actually Superman's, not Supergirl's, which was originally early 1959.

As for what Lois Lane was written telling in 1947, well, that could easily describe the situation decades later, when men and women alike who had lenient views on discrimination led to the publication of Identity Crisis. Yet that sees no mention in this puff piece, and that's the considerable weakness here. As is the following "explanation" why Kara Zor-El was originally terminated in Crisis on Infinite Earths:

Whereas Superman (played by Christopher Reeve) was introduced in 1978 by the same producers with a daring rescue of a plummeting helicopter, Helen Slater’s Supergirl performs an aerial ballet and frolics with woodland creatures. In comics, Supergirl fared even worse. The character was killed off in 1985’s Crisis on Infinite Earths storyline, partly because of her threat to Superman’s unique status as “the last son of Krypton”, and partly because of the film’s disappointing box office takings.

Excuse me? What kind of monumentally stupid explanation is that? The staff may have wanted to establish Kal-El as the last Kryptonian at the time. But that doesn't make Kara a "threat" to said status. What the writer says is disgusting, and undermines any valid lamentation he's making, though he's right the editors used the film's failure as a justification, which is also sick. And then he adds insult to injury when he says:

In comic books, however, death is never permanent. Kara Zor-El and Supergirl were resurrected in 2004 in The Supergirl from Krypton. There was an attempt to add nuance to the character, with a greater emphasis on the trauma she suffered from witnessing the loss of her home planet. But this was rather undermined by various revealing costumes clearly designed to satisfy the male gaze.

And this inherently wrong because? Even years before, there were times when Kara Zor-El was drawn as quite a fashion plate, and the bare midriff costume was actually introduced around the turn of the century, at the middle of Peter David's run on the new take on Supergirl (I think Leonard Kirk was the artist), which was developed out of a character who first appeared in 1988. The real reasons to complain are that no concrete story accompanied the reintroduction in the Superman/Batman title published at the time, or even the solo title that followed, and that a very bad man accused of sexual misconduct was in charge of editing, that being Eddie Berganza, who was only fired from DC in 2017. If there's a valid complaint to make about fetishizing in what he oversaw, it can be blamed on Berganza, and also writer Jeph Loeb. Oddly, when Kara was reintroduced at the time, the figure as drawn by Michael Turner wasn't so busty, if at all. As for the costume, if there's anything wrong with it, and possibly has been for a long time, it's how it was long-sleeved, which makes it look silly. The article, interestingly enough, notes that the TV show starring Melissa Benoist appears to have followed up on the PC view of Supergirl's outfits:

In the pilot episode she finally strikes out on her own with the dramatic rescue of an airliner, assuming the mantle of Supergirl. In a show that employed several female writers and became known for its positive representation of LGBTQ+ issues, problematic topics such as Supergirl’s infantilising name and costume were directly addressed.

Kara refuses to wear revealing versions of the costume from the character’s comic book past. In discussions with her employer, CatCo Worldwide Media CEO Cat Grant, she is told: “I’m a girl. And your boss. And powerful. And rich, and hot, and smart. So, if you perceive Supergirl as anything less than excellent, isn’t the real problem you?” Significantly, Grant is portrayed by actor Calista Flockhart, known for the Ally McBeal series – a show that sparked debates about feminism and women in the workplace in the late 1990s.

Well if all they care about is putting down even creators with more common sense, along with pushing an agenda that did more harm than good, those are just some of the reasons why it's regrettable the Maid of Might's potential has suffered ruin for years. The TV show became increasingly political, and that's why it's more an embarrassment than a classic today. At the end:

The 2021 comic book Supergirl: Woman of Tomorrow follows the young alien Ruthye Marye Knoll, who recruits Supergirl to seek revenge after her father is murdered. The story is told from Ruthye’s point of view, the fractured narrative lending the story a fatalistic quality. The narration also emphasises the mythic quality of Supergirl, “who lost everything and kept walking”.

It remains to be seen how closely the film will follow the philosophical source material. Meanwhile, in the pages of the latest DC comic book, writer and artist Sophie Campbell has returned to the brighter tone of the 1960s version of the character, merged with the sensibilities of the 2015 television series. The many interpretations of Supergirl continue to reveal the character’s durability and versatility.

If memory serves, the writer of the latest series is really a man with the name Ross, and it sure is ironic somebody who claimed earlier the outfits in post-2004 Supergirl were a problem suddenly makes no such arguments when somebody of "Sophie Campbell"'s standing is helming the new series. Predictably, no objective view is taken of King's overrated story either, and that takes away any impact this puff piece might've had.

Since the new movie's also a subject, Polygon says the director, as much as the screenwriter, did draw "inspiration" from both King's story and what the assigned screenwriter turned out:

"I very deliberately started with the script that Ana wrote," Gillespie says, "and I put together a lot of visuals around that coming from the script, trying to make something that I would be excited about and that had this grit and flavor of the Supergirl character, Kara." [...]

"After that, I went back and visited Tom King's Woman of Tomorrow and took some images from that," he says, "but I didn't want to start there because I didn't want to just do the comic book."

Unfortunately, that's just what he did nevertheless, and borrowing even remotely from something that pretentious doesn't help a bit. Nor did injecting feminism into the narratives of the TV show or even the comics themselves avail, but that's certainly a moot point by now. It remains to be seen what the box office results will be for this new Supergirl movie, and based on how it's crafted, I'd rather stay home and read the comics I own instead. These articles are just more examples of stuff that ultimately doesn't help the Maid of Might's reputation at all.

DC no longer celebrates USA anniversaries, with Superman or any other superheroes

A writer at the New York Post talks about DC's refusal, in all their far-leftism, to celebrate America's 250th anniversary, in contrast to a time in 1976 when they were willing to publish a Superman special where they celebrated the Bicentennial:

He may be faster than a speeding bullet, but even Superman can’t outrun globalization.

Back in the summer of 1976, one of my treasures was an oversize special edition comic book, “Superman Salutes the Bicentennial.” Reprinting a famous cover of the 1940s, with a bald eagle perched on Superman’s arm and a stars-and-stripes shield behind him, the publication contained six historical tales of the Revolution and the Spirit of ’76.

Today, a search of DC Comics’ website shows nothing celebrating America’s Semiquincentennial, by Superman or any other superhero.

Yet they're perfectly fine with celebrating LGBT pride month, which is a lot more than the one or two days Holocaust Memorial Day and 911 Memorial Day takes place on. Even USA Independence Day (4th of July) is only about that long, and when a politically motivated "celebration" goes on for as long as a month, that's also troubling. Let's also consider that the same people who don't celebrate USA Independence Day and Centennials also don't show any appreciation for foreign independence days like in Ukraine and Bulgaria to celebrate their independence from the Soviet Union, nor do they celebrate holidays like the near dozen France has, nor far eastern holidays like Japan's and Thailand's. Or even Israel's, in complete disregard of Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster's ancestry.

One might have thought that 1976 would be a terrible time for comics to commemorate America. Hundreds of thousands of boys who had read Superman in the 1950s and ‘60s had been sent to Vietnam, where 58,000 of them died. Watergate and Richard Nixon’s resignation had shattered faith in the political system, while assassinations of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and Robert F. Kennedy, followed by devastating riots, made a mockery of the “American Way.”

Yet DC Comics, along with tens of millions of Americans, did celebrate the country. Though its values had been severely tested, Bicentennial America also had seen the greatest growth of the middle class and national wealth in human history, as well as the final push to ensure civil rights for all citizens, fulfilling the “promissory note,” as Dr. King put it, of the Declaration of Independence and Constitution.

That America’s most famous fictional hero — a symbol of the country around the world — would celebrate, too, seemed only natural, and it inspired young readers like me.

This patriotic portrayal continued. Thirteen years later, in September 1987, DC put out a special comic with the New York Daily News to commemorate the bicentennial of the Constitution. Traveling back in time, Superman, along with three young Americans, foils Lex Luthor’s plot to hijack the Constitutional Convention and install himself as dictator of the United States.

Amid the action, Superman delivers a mini civics lesson, explaining that while the Constitution did not outlaw slavery or give women the vote, the Framers had the foresight to allow it to be amended to fit the times.

Next to “Schoolhouse Rock,” Superman probably provided more civics education to young readers than most elementary classrooms could have hoped to do.

Times indeed have changed. In 2011, DC used Action Comics’ 900th issue as a platform to have Superman renounce his American citizenship, perhaps believing he felt more comfortable in Davos than Dubuque.

A decade later, DC officially changed Superman’s motto to “truth, justice and a better tomorrow,” a mash-up of adventure series and soap opera.

Given such changes, it’s no surprise that DC seems intent on ignoring America’s 250th.

That says more about DC than it does its most famous character. It seems the editors at DC no longer understand there is a reason that Superman was created in America, and not France or China. (DC Comics did not reply to a request for comment.)

Oh, that's not shocking either if they wouldn't respond to news writers about this. No doubt, they have a policy to shut out questions from anybody deemed patriotic and even sensible nowadays, and this is bound to be the case at Marvel too, where current EIC C.B. Cebulski rarely gives press statements like his predecessors at this point. On which note, if they're not celebrating the 250th with Captain America as a host icon, even that shouldn't be shocking. And back to DC, their story where Supes was depicted shedding his citizenship wasn't the only troubling tale they turned out back then. There was also one that downplayed the horrors of Iran's dictatorship very badly, and that definitely hasn't aged well in over 15 years, after the dictatorship slaughtered thousands of people opposed to their tyranny. When a USA publisher won't celebrate their own country, it should come as no surprise they can't even make a solid case for innocent and defenseless people overseas. Those Superman stories from 15 years ago are a stain on their resume as much as their reputation. I hesitate to think what they'd do with Golden Age-created characters like Liberty Belle too these days.

Anyway, if Paramount Skydance, as new owner of properties like DC that came with the WB purchase, has no intention of cleaning up such a mess, then that only further makes the case for why DC and Marvel can't remain under a conglomerate ownership.

Masters of the Universe movie goes into box office freefall

So the latest live action adaptation of what began as a toy line that later morphed into comics and cartoons appears to be another financial dud, as Variety states:

“Scary Movie” easily secured the No. 1 spot over this weekend’s other major new release, Amazon MGM’s sword-and-planet adventure “Masters of the Universe,” which debuted at No. 2 with a soft $29.3 million in North America. The film also earned just $25 million from 86 overseas markets for a global start of $54 million. It’s an underwhelming start for a movie that cost nearly $200 million to produce, not including the marketing budget. It’ll require substantial staying power to justify its price tag, considering that theater owners get to keep roughly 50% of ticket sales.

”This is a soft opening for an action adventure with franchise and series potential,” Gross says, adding that “right now, the only fantasy heroes doing strong business are the biggest and most established superheroes, like Spider-Man, Deadpool, Wolverine, and Superman.”

“Masters of the Universe” is based on the Mattel action figure known as He-Man and marks the toy company’s second theatrical film after “Barbie.” Inaugural crowds were 66% male and nearly 40% were above the age of 45 — meaning that mostly fans of the ’80s toy and cartoon showed up. So “Masters of the Universe” will need to cater to broader audiences in the coming weeks in order to become profitable in its theatrical run.

Not so simple if it didn't make a big splash in its first week. The results so far are certainly telling.

Anyway, there are questionable elements in this new film, which is not bound to be a surprise for anybody who's paid attention to the woke trajectory Hollywood sadly took in the past decade. Let's begin with the following review - or what I can glean from something where the majority of the text is largely restricted by pay options - from the Wall Street Journal, which says:

As imagined by director Travis Knight—best known for another toys-to-screen saga, 2018’s “Transformers” sequel “Bumblebee”—and a battalion of screenwriters, the new He-Man, lost prince from the planet Eternia, is a meek cubicle dweller named Adam. He lives in Oklahoma City. He works in H.R., wears a pink shirt, and drives a yellow Subaru. The last gets better mileage than the running gag about his ordinariness, which is still being used in the closing minutes of the film. Adam, played by England’s Nicholas Galitzine (“The Sheep Detectives”) with Schwarzeneggerian bulk, never stops babbling about conflict resolution and creating space for meaningful dialogue. His office-dweeb jabber would be the most overdone gag in the movie were it not for the many references to the kinds of actions a fellow called “Fisto” might undertake.

No kidding. Well, it gets worse, as this review from Peter Travers points out:

Galitzine, a self-described “hetero” who won raves for playing a gay prince in “Red, White & Royal Blue” and a queer Duke in “Mary & George” with Julianne Moore, plays it straight here as hapless Adam, a clueless charm boy with an office nameplate that lists his preference for he/him pronouns. That one quickly went viral and not in a good way.

Gee, and it doesn't get any better with what's told in the following review from Region Free, about crude sex-related jokes involving genitals turning up, which I'm not going to highlight directly since what's described is so alarmingly vulgar. For something turned out in part by a toy company, how odd they want to inject crude lines into the mess, just because they want a PG-13 rating and believe that's the only way it'll sell. What that shows is just how lacking confidence many entertainment producers are, and it's doubtless been that way for a long time. And what makes it additionally insulting to the intellect is how, according to Screen Daily, the relationship between Adam and Teela is "chaste". How odd indeed. Yet that's been pretty much the norm for years now, to eschew romantic chemistry between the leads almost entirely, and points to either/both a lack of creative freedom for the writers/directors, or goes to show how creatively bankrupt they are at this point.

And then, from Vanyaland, we learn this film can't escape certain stereotypes that're apparently still acceptable among Hollywood leftists:

...Meanwhile, there are the scenes set on Earth, full of a simmering rage at the “feminizing” ways of corporate culture — “I have the power” reinterpreted as a seminar chant, conducted by Adam’s boss, a black woman with a shaved head and overly-cautious-yet-peppy HR demeanor — which is intended to provide a polar counter-balance to the hyper-masculine expectations of those on Eternia.

And I thought it was already bad enough the Golden Age of comics had some unfortunate stereotypes of black women with short hair, making them look far less attractive than their white counterparts. Obviously, the stereotype still exists, and, if the above description is any sign, has gotten considerably worse. What's so "feminine" about what they cite? It's nothing more than a slight to black women, and no doubt, a result of the woke notion that guys aren't allowed to admire even them. PC certainly leads to victimization.

Since we're on the subject of race-related issues, I also noticed the film's simultaneously got a case of race-swapping, with the mentor-like figure Man-At-Arms - who was white in original incarnations in toys and cartoons - changed to black with the actor Idris Elba in the role. It's rather ironic since Elba also claims to believe James Bond shouldn't be turned woke or its star have his race changed. But then, why didn't he make the same argument regarding the co-star he plays in MOTU? Is it because this is a minor character by contrast? Does that suddenly make it justified? Or was Elba too eager to receive a paycheck for a screenplay so laughable? They had a chance to introduce an original character who could fill the specific role here played by Elba, and instead, yet again, political correctness triumphed over organic writing. What a joke.

The studio's presumably planning a sequel spotlighting She-Ra, but I think it'd be better if it all stopped here, since PC is bound to influence such a project even worse than what this MOTU movie's already turning out to be. And if box office results say anything, it probably will grind to a halt anyway. Just another ridiculous merchandise-based movie starring actors and actresses I've never heard of, and the result of Hollywood's barrel scrapings in their desperation for what they can adapt to live action. Stuff like this is why it's better to stick with comics and other books instead, so long as they aren't woke.

A clue how AI doesn't make the best source for recommendations

A writer at Tom's Guide says he asked ChatGPT to list some comics recommendations based on an analysis of his personality. The results are about what you could expect:

After ChatGPT dove into my biggest personality traits, it also pointed out that I value consistency, enjoy larger-than-life characters, am a truth-seeking individual, love character archetypes like “The Enlightened Warrior” and more. With a full read of who I am and what I’m into, the chatbot finally listed out an array of perfect comic book reading material split out across the roadmap I presented it with:

5 'start here' comics: Kingdom Come, Batman: Year One, Invincible, Watchmen and The Dark Knight Returns.
5 Comics that challenge my worldview: Transmetropolitan, V for Vendetta, The Invisibles, Maus and DMC.
5 Comics that perfectly match your interests: Planetary, Batman: The Court of Owls, East of West, Saga and Black Science.
5 underrated gems: The Manhattan Projects, Tokyo Ghost, The Human Target, The Strange Talent of Luther Strode and Global Frequency.
5 comics that could become lifelong favorites: Planetary, Kingdom Come, Watchmen, Invincible and Batman: The Long Halloween.

And no Superman in sight. Come to think of it, no Robin or Huntress in sight either. Indeed, why don't the spinoffs from Batman's world count? And if larger than life matters, why not Colossal Boy from Legion of Superheroes and Nuklon from Infinity Inc, based on their enlarging powers? I also don't find the citation of Warren Ellis-penned GNs appealing either, nor the citation of V for Vendetta and Saga. Also note that Marvel seems to be out of these results, and that too is decidedly troubling.

So what's the use of AI if it's going to offer such predictable results? What's so wonderful about all this darkness in selection either? This is just miserable, and while DC/Marvel, lest we forget, collapsed years ago, that an AI program would be so obvious should make clear AI's not the best at everything when it can only recommend a majority of dark titles.

Has a writer for neo-Valiant been un-cancelled?

About a year ago, an Argentinian writer working on Valiant's Bloodshot appeared to be blacklisted over alleged negativity to LGBT ideology. Now, according to Comic Book Club Live, he's been reinstated:

Nearly a year after Valiant — and publisher Alien Books — were hit with serious blowback online thanks to what was seen as anti-trans text in Bloodshot #1, writer Mauro Mantella is back on the book with the June release of Bloodshot #4 – Man Made Hell #1, a “new” three issue series with art by Kristian Rossi.

To briefly review what went down in August of 2025, the rebooted Bloodshot featured a storyline about vampires fighting the nano-tech powered warrior using his own nanites. While a lot of it skirted cultural commentary/satire, one bit in particular stuck in reader’s craws. Specifically, this line of text: “There are kids who want to be bitten to become vampires because their favorite influencer says they are one. And parents who force their children into that irreversible change… just to feel modern… and believing that they’ll be thankful for it when they grow up.”

As many readers pointed out, this bit seemed to be specifically mapping onto anti-trans messaging, and Argentinian writer Mantella came under fire for including it. For their part, Alien Books immediately offered a statement on the dialogue, and laid out several steps for addressing the issue including updating dialogue for the trade and undergoing “a more intense review by our proof readers as part of our editorial process.”

Unfortunately, immediately following that in came to light that Mantella had repeatedly retweeted anti-trans and anti-vaccine memes, multiple times in the past. And in response, Mantella deleted his Twitter account and posted a lengthy response/explanation about his reposts, as well as the offending line of dialogue in Bloodshot. [...]

Well, after that absence, Bloodshot is back — and so is Mantella, with the new issue hitting stores on June 24, 2026. While this is pure speculation, it seems likely this fourth issue is the first completely crafted since the fallout from everything detailed above. Whether it will be addressed in the issue, or referenced in any way? TBD.

Does this mean they came to realize how bad it looks when they cancel a writer over petty issues and politics, so they reversed their previous approach and reinstated Mantella at the helm? We can only hope so. But if Mantella and company actually address anything related to this, that's something they decidedly shouldn't do, unless they're willing to prove they can defend the dialogue as originally written last time. Something they probably won't do, unfortunately.

An attempted "boycott" of DC for the wrong reasons was called off

Popverse tells, in their most expectedly sugarcoated way, that a group that was calling for a boycott of DC because they lacked Black characters in a stand-alone ongoing stopped their call for one:

Last week, a group called Black Comic Alliance announced a boycott against DC Comics in response to the publisher not having an ongoing series featuring a Black character in its mainline universe. But after significant backlash online, the group has ended the boycott and has released a statement regarding the matter.

According to a press release from Black Comic Alliance and leader James Portis III, "This decision comes after a lot of reflection and conversations with members of the comic book community. While the boycott was launched to draw attention to an issue we believe remains important, it became clear that the conversation surrounding the boycott was often overshadowing the larger goal of the campaign."

The statement responded to a line of criticism that emerged in the wake of the boycott's announcement, mainly that the lack of a Black character-led ongoing series in DC's mainline universe doesn't negate the other books featuring marginalized people both on the page and behind the page.

"However, we also recognize that many fans and creators we care about felt the boycott unintentionally minimized books, characters, and creators whose work provides meaningful representation for women, LGBTQIA+ readers, people of color, and other marginalized communities. That was never our intention, and we apologize for that impact. We heard those concerns, and they played a major role in our decision to reevaluate the boycott," the statement continued.

That such "advocates" could still be active with all this nonsense is almost hilarious, mainly because: they actually care about mainstream comics, let alone DC? No, they do not, or they would've called for a boycott more than 2 decades ago when Identity Crisis marked DC's descent into misogyny. Just why do SJWs like these still want anything to do with DC and Marvel long after they ceased to matter? Mainly because it's unlikely they'd buy the products they demand, if they had their way.

So what comes next? According to the statement, "DCSoWhite will continue as an awareness and advocacy campaign rather than a boycott effort," and that they will encourage fans to preorder comics before FOC (Final Order Cutoff date) at their local comic shops. "Pre-orders are one of the clearest indicators of reader interest and help publishers and retailers determine future investments in characters, titles, and creative teams. We encourage fans to support the books and creators they want to see succeed, particularly those from underrepresented communities."

"The DCSoWhite campaign is not ending. The petition remains active. We will continue to highlight Black creators, promote Black independent comics, document industry trends, and advocate for greater investment in Black characters across mainstream comics."

With that in mind, writer Stephanie Williams (who is nominated for the Eisner Award for Best Writer this year for books like Roots of Madness, Street Sharks, and Temporal) and artist Clayton Henry are working on Wonder Woman #35 and #36 out this July and August, while Absolute Catwoman #1, co-written by Che Grayson, will be hitting stands on June 10. Currently, Green Lantern John Stewart is one of the leads of the Green Lantern Corps ongoing series by writer Morgan Hampton, while Jamal Campbell is nominated for the Eisner Award for Best Writer-Artist with his Zatanna.

This is basically a clone of the #OscarsSoWhite "campaign", which was all about demanding privileges and awards galore without consideration of merit. All the organizers of this comics-based campaign are doing is calling for throwing a lifeline to a company that's long collapsed in terms of merit, and won't improve under the current ownership unless maybe Paramount, as new owner of WB's assets, decides to clean house, make improvements in their properties, DC included, and even do away with much of what the past 2-plus decades have resulted in, which was awful.

It's also no surprise Popverse would devote so much attention to such a trivial issue that's been moot for years, make no effort to call for improved merit and reparations for the DCU, and also fail to acknowledge that DC's attempts at DEI 2 decades ago were a huge failure. Today, most of the characters who were introduced as replacements for 3rd tier white protagonists (the Asian Atom, Black Firestorm and Latino Blue Beetle) have largely disappeared, mainly because they weren't introduced based on merit, which ultimately led to their collapse, yet at this point, the saddest thing is that DC won't restore most of the white protagonists they forced out of their costumes back to their regular statuses, if at all. That's all you need to know they're not emphasizing merit, yet do the organizers of the DCsoWhite campaign care? Not one bit. Nor do they care that even the quality for comics starring white characters has also long collapsed under what Dan DiDio started, and continues with Marie Javins at the helm. That's why this Black Comic Alliance is such a joke. If they were serious, they'd be calling for a boycott of DC/Marvel based on how bad their stories actually are today, and making a case for supporting independents instead. So why do they continue to attach themselves to companies that're no longer run by merit?

Ohio Maltz Museum's exhibition for Jewish comics contributions

NPR-WOSU covers an exhibition of Jewish comics contributions at the Maltz Museum in Ohio. It was also organized by a historian who was involved in getting a NYC street named after Jack Kirby:

“Icons in Ink, The Jewish Comics Experience,” on view at the Maltz Museum in Beachwood through Aug. 23, is a revelation and a celebration, albeit with some limitations and questionable aspects.

The show’s core material is conveyed through colorful, large-scale graphic layouts resembling magazine pages that reach from the height of one’s knee to above one’s head. The layouts are filled with text and reproductions of pages from comic books. It’s an eye-grabbing approach that produces visual overload at times. Also, transitions from one section of the show to another occasionally lack continuity and flow.

But when it comes to the core goal of highlighting Jewish contributions to comic book history, the show delivers fascinating and sometimes surprising insights.

Organized by Roy Schwartz, a New York-based pop culture historian, the exhibition opened in 2023 at the Center for Jewish History in New York and is now in the middle of a five-year national tour.

It brims with Schwartz’s zeal to highlight the Jewish roots of what he described in an interview as “a unique American art form,’’ and “the bastard child of literature and art.’’ His expertise includes having written the 2021 book, “Is Superman Circumcised?: The Complete Jewish History of the World's Greatest Hero.’’

For Cleveland, Schwartz and the Maltz expanded the show to highlight the city’s role in the evolution of comic books, in collaboration with Samantha Baskind, the Cleveland State University professor of art history known for her extensive scholarship on Jewish contributions to the visual arts.

Hidden meanings of Superman

Naturally, Superman, the brainchild of Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster, two Jewish high school students in Cleveland’s Glenville neighborhood who invented the “Man of Steel’’ in the 1930s, is a major focus.

Superman’s birth on the doomed planet Krypton and his parents’ effort to save him by launching him to Earth is a familiar tale. It may not be widely appreciated, however, that the story echoes that of the finding of Moses, and that Superman’s name at birth, Kal-El, is a Hebrew phrase often interpreted as “voice of God’’ or “vessel of God.”

Superman’s powers evoke the myth of the Golem, a massive, Samson-like humanoid purportedly molded in clay by a 16th-century rabbi Prague to defend Jews from pogroms.

As the show points out, Jewish fans have certainly understood such signals.

Somehow, I'm not so sure they do, seeing how some of those who stick with leftism are so hostile to Israel, their country of origin, that it's hard to believe at this point they care about any "signals". Speaking of which, this exhibit features at least 2 comic creators who decidedly aren't worth seeing there:

Also featured in the Cleveland section of the show are printed works and original drawings from Harvey Pekar’s ironic and self-deprecating “American Splendor” series, Peter Kuper’s hilarious “Spy vs. Spy” episodes in Mad Magazine and Terri Libenson’s Jewish-centered narratives in series, including “The Pajama Diaries.”

Cleveland Heights native Brian Michael Bendis is represented by outstanding works including a spectacular 2006 ink drawing for an Avengers episode depicting an explosion on a crowded street in what could be Downtown Cleveland.

When somebody as awful as Bendis is included, despite how overrated and atrocious his writings were on - but not limited to - series like the Avengers, something is terribly wrong. What's so "outstanding" about his cheap approach to science fiction? It's also troubling that somebody like the late Pekar was included, despite his negativity to Israel that he practically wove into a GN titled "Not the Israel my Parents promised me". These are the kind of "creators" whose works we need to see? Nope.

Conspiracists and paranoiacs might see the show as piling on more evidence for the hate-filled fantasy that Jews supposedly control everything from Wall Street to Hollywood.

On this, it's bizarre said conspiracists would want anything to do with Jewish creations, if that's how they feel, and have no interest in producing their own entertainment products that hopefully aren't laced with prejudicial visions. And then, in a very sad hint at where this NPR affiliate really stands, they say it needs an "update":

It’s also striking, given its attention to the social and political context of comic books in prior decades that “Icons in Ink’’ doesn't bring its story fully into the present.

The show’s generally triumphal tone feels oddly off-key amid the recent uptick in anti-Semitism on the left and right, and the post Oct. 7 backlash against Israel.

Debate over Israel’s military conduct in Iran, Gaza and Lebanon, or settler violence against Palestinians in the West Bank, has inspired authors and pundits of all political persuasions.

“Icons in Ink’’ hasn’t been updated to reflect the turmoil. It could be said that because the show was organized in 2023, there hasn’t been enough time for a significant response to current events from Jewish creators of comic books or graphic novels to warrant attention.

But it seems to be a missed opportunity that the show doesn't mention the conflicted feelings about Israel that Pekar explored in “Not the Israel My Parents Promised Me,’’ published in 2012 as one of his last books.

There’s also no mention of the three-page spread criticizing Israel’s conduct in Gaza published in The New York Review of Books in February 2025 by Joe Sacco and Art Spiegelman, the Pulitzer Prize-winning creator of the Holocaust-related graphic novel “Maus,’’ whose work is otherwise lauded in the show at Maltz.

Such publications and others like them represent an intriguing opportunity to revise “Icons in Ink’’ as it continues to travel. The exhibition argues successfully that the Jewish experience in comics needs to be understood more deeply.

Given that goal, some freshening could make the show even more relevant and up-to-the-minute. After all, as the exhibition demonstrates, Jewish comic book creators and graphic novelists have been pulling no punches for decades in messages both overt and subtly coded.

When they insist Sacco's a recommendation, and no right-wing creators like the late Joe Simon are mentioned at all, or even Will Eisner, that speaks volumes as to where they really stand on this. It's actually amazing Pekar's screed didn't turn up at the exhibit, but even so, he's hardly somebody I'd consider a perfect choice any more than Spiegelman. Also note how the news site omits issues like Jews being murdered by the Religion of Peace, and all they care about is making Jews look like the sole ones responsible for anything bad happening post-October 7, 2023, while obscuring the more serious issues caused by said religion.

I'll give Schwartz and company this: they may have deliberately avoided some of these issues because they realized Pekar's POV was divisive, and it wouldn't do any good post-10.7.2023 to bring something like that into the mix. Even so, if they didn't bring in something that could provide a more positive viewpoint on Israeli issues like a Japanese mangaka's publication, then it's otherwise a defeat, though not in the way NPR wants to frame it. What they say about the exhibit in that context is shameful, and if that's their position, why'd they even bother to cover the project?

DC desecrates Wonder Woman for "pride month"

Warner Todd Huston at Breitbart informs that for their latest, pointless "pride month" special, DC's included a transsexual pseudo-Wonder Woman, using a previously created character to put in the costume:

DC Comics has announced the introduction of a transgender version of Wonder Woman for Pride Month.

The plot of the upcoming Justice League Dream Girls – A DC Pride Event #1 comic follows the company’s transgender character, Nia Nal, aka Dreamer, as she and several other characters enter into an alternate reality where Nia, not Diana Prince, had become Wonder Woman. [...]

The character first appeared on TV in 2018 — but not in the comics. Transgender actor Nicole Maines first portrayed Dreamer on the CW’s Supergirl TV series that aired from 2015 to 2021. The character finally made the switch to comics in 2021 — also in a DC “Pride” event issue — after Supergirl was canceled. [...]

Along with comics writer Jadzia Axelrod, actor Maines also helped to write the Wonder Woman switch issue, according to reports. [...]

DC has turned several of its top stars into queer characters over the last decade.

In 2023, DC issued a line of comics in which Alan Scott, who is the Green Lantern, turned out to be gay. But the comic flopped hard and sales were dismal.

The year before that, DC’s attempt to make Superman’s son, Jon Kent, into a randy bisexual character also flopped and was cancelled after only 18 issues.

DC has also pushed a list of their long-standing character into the LGBTQ+ theme, including Midnighter and Apollo, Batwoman, Harley Quinn, Poison Ivy, and the Tim Drake version of Robin.

Well this is more than enough reason to practically avoid advertising in their comics, based on how they're desecrating even so much as the costume of an iconic figure, putting a politicized, badly created character in the outfit. And they keep doing it despite how rock bottom sales have been for all these repeated shovings down the throat, which they also refuse to stop keeping canon. Some can reasonably ask if the new Paramount ownership intends to let DC keep receiving funding if all they care about is wasting it on propaganda that's not selling. But chances are just as possible they won't take any steps to make DC quit, so we can only hope. The best to hope for at this point is if Paramount ownership will close down the publisher, which would probably be the best thing to do for now. And even then, they don't belong under a conglomerate ownership.

The whole pride month propaganda's been going on too long, and what's also aggravating is how this is what they consider a big deal, not holidays from foreign countries like Thailand's Yi-Peng lantern festival. All this LGBT propaganda only underscores the stunning lack of creativity now dominating the mainstream.