I have a question; kryptonite makes him weaker and robs him of his powers, but does it make him stupider? One of his powers is his superior intelligence, if I recall.
Yet another question…
Has it ever been established, in comics or elsewhere, just how biologically similar Humans are to Kryptonians? I mean , in the new movie…
… we find out that the two species can inter-breed.
Is that comic-canon?
And what about other bio-related things? What does Superman eat? Does his invulnerability extend to starvation? Dehydration? Does his super-stomach-acid reduce mere human foods to their component molecules, rendering them incapable of providing nutrition?
I always wonder this stuff about super-heroes. I feel I’m trying to prepare myself for the inevitable day when my latent mutant powers manifest.
thwartme
He eats and everything if he wants to…you know, to be polite or whatever.
As for the Kid of Steel…it depends. Some would say it just can’t happen, others that it might be like a horse and donkey. Personally…yeah, I wonder how happy their marriage in the comics is with no nookie, but I’m a shallow guy.
The movie argument is, I suppose, that when Superman lost his powers, he was transformed to a human and so could sleep with Lois.
Well, if we consider that kryptonians are actually from a different planet, it’s far worse than horse/donkey; for a start, we don’t know whether Superman is even a carbon-based lifeform and, if he is, whether his DNA is even slightly like ours. Then there’s the question of internal (or external) anatomy: Superman might have a womb and be designed to carry the child! Superman’s penis might be tiny and recessed when not in use (like a gorilla’s- there is some evidence that the larger and more powerful a primate, the smaller its genitalia need to be); Superman might only be attracted to women who release Kryptonian pheromones; he might kill his mate halfway through the act, a la praying mantis (or that might happen anyway; as tanstaafal’s link points out, Superman’s money shoot might be like letting off an AK-47 into Lois’s body).
However, since Jor-El apparently selected Earth fairly carefully when shooting off his rocket (man, how long did this guy plan the “shoot-my-son into space” thing, anyway? “I’ll be into dinner in a minute honey, just designing a spaceship to carry our infant sun to a distant sun in the event of our world exploding”) I think we can assume that Lois and Superman are sexually compatible at some level; mind you, this does not address the moral issues involved. Superman and Lois having sex is most definitely bestiality, at the very least (it would be more “natural” for Lois to get it on with a frog or beetle, even). Plus, consider that Supes has died at least once, and very publicly, at that: half the DC universe attended his funeral! Thus we are faced with perhaps the most important question of our generation: is Lois Lane a secret necrophilia buff?
:eek:
From Superman II:
Lois: I assume the rest of your bodily functions are… normal?
Superman: Excuse me?
L: Putting it delicately… Do you … Eat?
S: (leaning back in chair) Yes, I eat. When I’m hungry. (meaningful looks exchanged)
L: (nervous giggle) Of course you do!
Based on Superman Returns, one could make a case for Lois being a complete, um, slut, putting it delicately. The superkid was supposedly conceived just before SM left. And now she has a “fiance” that apparently believes it is his own child. So – was Lois getting it on with White, whose first name I forget – while also lusting after SM? Or did she just take up with him immediately? After her “You’re a tough act to follow, you know” speech? How promiscuous is she, exactly?
Let’s be fair on Lois- she can’t have had any easy relationship, what with Superman being lusted after by everyone woman between here and Krypton, not to mention being placed in mortal peril all the time. She was simply flying into the arms of another for solace after a tricky relationship.
Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex is entirely Niven’s thoughts, not DCs.
Clark and Lois have been married since not long after his death and ressurrection, and have, by all accounts, a completely normal and satisfying sex life.
Superman concieving a child is, of course, the domain of imaginary stories, Elseworlds, and potential futures, but:
-
In the vast majority of the above, he has children with human women - occasionally superpowered human women (typically, Wonder Woman), or when his powers have been removed (as in Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow) which only establishes biological compatability, but more often with Lois while his powers are fully intact, which means Niven’s suppositions about its lethality are demonstrably wrong.
-
Starting in 1976, and lasting until 1988, Superman and Lois had an in continuity decendant in the 30th century. Laurel Kent was later removed from Superman’s family try by making her a Manhunter android during the Millenium crossover, but she was originally intended as an actual decendant of Superman, and stayed that way until Millenium.
Er…to remove the confusing aspects of this line:
‘In the vast majority of the Imaginary Stories, Elseworlds, and potential futures where he concieves a child, it’s with human (or metahuman) women - as opposed to aliens, demons or gods.’
No, I’ve definitely seen a “possible future” story where Lois is kicked to death by SuperFetus. I think it was the same story where Superman becomes President. One of the same series, at least.
Note ‘vast majority’ in that quote.
For every story published by DC where the writer’s read MoSWoK, and decided Niven had a point, there’s at least a dozen where Lois and Clark have one or more children - often twins - without him being robbed of his powers. And a double handful more where he is robbed of his powers first, so it doesn’t speak one way or another.
There’s one Elseworld (Created Equal) where Superman impregnated hundreds of women (artificially), since he was the only male on Earth who wasn’t dead* (and was biologically compatable with human women).
- A plague wiped all the others out. Except for Lex Luthor
… Dammit, I need to start previewing when I use spoiler boxes. >_<
This is actually from the first Superman. Although in Superman II, Superman did have sex with Lois, after he decided to give up his superpowers and spend the rest of his life with her (a decision he later changed). This, I presume, could be how Jason was concieved.
You are absolutely correct, and I am horribly embarrassed.
But if Jason was concieved when Superman was just Ordinaryman (that is, devoid of superpowers), how come Jason has superpowers?
And another one (for those of you who still haven’t seen it, unboxed spoiler for Superman II ahead!):
In the original Superman, Superman states in his interview with Lois that he always tells the truth. However, in Superman II, he lies to Lex Luthor in order to trick Zod and Friends into losing their powers. Is Superman supposed to be unable to lie (that is, he can’t lie even if he wanted to), or does he just lie in the company of other villainous liars (as he pointed out, Lex is known to lie as well, and Superman knew that Lex would think he was telling the truth)?
Superman’s just really honest (except for the whole “Secret ID” thing, that’s a nasty web of lies). But he’s not an idiot. If saving the world means fooling the bad guys, then he’ll lie.
Lois: You lied!
Superman: I exaggerated.
Oops, wrong sequel.
Nah, the Big Blue Boyscout’s perfectly able to lie, he’s just a big blue boy scout. The Kents raised him to be an honest boy, and he lives up to their example better than they could ever have hoped. But he can, and will, lie if it’s neccessary.
Actually, in that scene where he tricks the bad guys into being de-superized, he does not lie. He tells Lex to coax them into the chamber. LEX tells them that the chamber will de-superize, and the baddies make SM go in it. So SM allows them to believe the lie, but has not told it himself.
Is he lying when he claims to be Clark Kent? No, IMHO; that is the name he grew up with. When asked, he never specifically denies being SM, but then he is almost never asked. When Lois asks in SMII, he says something like, “Lois, you can’t be serious.” When asked his age in the first movie, he says “Over 21,” which is true.
Ah, so he CAN eat. But does he HAVE to eat? Can he survive simply on the yummy goodness of our yellow sun, or does he require other nourishment?
To bring a completely innapropriate practicality into my guessing-game, I’d say he doesn’t need to eat. From the first movie, we can see that the journey from Krypton-that-was to Earth-that-is took a couple of years at least (assuming Kryptonian kids age at the same rate as humans). Unless Jor-El included a Trek-style food replicator on his little nursery ship, there’s no way that little escape pod could have held enough nosh for a growing boy to live all that time.
I figure Superman doesn’t need to eat. Probably drink either. I know I’ve seen him wear a breathing mask in something… probably not a comic, maybe a cartoon?
thwartme