Best response ever to a villain goes to Lois Lane
Lois speaks to my soul.
Best response ever to a villain goes to Lois Lane
Lois speaks to my soul.
Can anyone tell me if this is an actual promo shot or a manip? Because if it is a promo shot I WANT TO WEEP WITH ITS RIGHTNESS, HOLY GOD. Lois in STANDING IN FRONT OF CLARK. She’s in the foreground! SHE IS STANDING IN A PHYSICALLY STRONG POSE. She is staring STRAIGHT AHEAD (i.e. she is NOT averting her gaze). Her shoulders are back, her legs are planted firmly on the ground, shoulder width apart, STEADY. SHE IS TAKING UP SPACE, AND NOT OVERTLY SEXUALIZED. CLARK IS STANDING BEHIND HER MIRRORING HER POSE. This is the most beautiful photo I have ever seen, holy fucking god. GETTING IT RIGHT.
(to answer the question, yes it’s official, it’s from Empire magazine)
Too often, female characters are posed for these promotional shots in distinctly sexual (and just plain uncomfortable) positions and told that it is somehow supposed to empower them; here, Lois Lane demonstrates both the strength and the femininity of her character through a confident, assertive stance. Because the two go hand-in-hand.
(Not to mention that, as previously stated, Clark is not only behind her, but also mirroring her pose.)
ten points to DC
don’t make me revoke them later I will Dumbledore your ass.
holy things done right batman
i may just have to get my ass out of the house and see a movie
you have to laugh when it has somehow gotten to the point where “woman from comic book stands up straight” is cause for celebration and praise
We have really low standards when it comes to this sort of shit. Yet we are still so very often disappointed.
this post makes me so happy I get chills.
Couple of bosses up there.
Your sentimental attachment is grotesque. Even you must realize how worthless they are. Such a savage world. Its scientific achievements paltry. Its weapons unimpressive.
Why Lois Lane is the best, period.
Lois Lane speaks to my soul.
I didn’t really anticipate that I was going to write about this today but enough people are talking about it that it’s time to break it down.
There are some pretty serious and disturbing gender connotations to the way DC Comics is approaching the 75th anniversary of Superman. These gender connotations take on an even more insulting and personal complex when one understands that DC recently was granted the copyright from the Siegel family and understands the personal history that Jerry and his wife, Joanne Siegel (who was part of the inspiration for Lois) had with DC Comics.
There are only two characters known to the Superman mythos that appeared in Action #1 75 years ago: They are Lois Lane and Clark Kent/Superman himself. That’s it. She pre-dates Lex Luthor, Jonathan and Martha Kent, Supergirl, Superboy, the Daily Planet, Jimmy Olsen, Lana Lang and every other supporting player in the mythos. She pre-dates Jor-El and Lara and the S shield as we know it. She pre-dates the concept of “the kindly couple” finding Clark Kent. She pre-dates FLIGHT. Clark Kent had asked her out on a date before BATMAN AND WONDER WOMAN even existed. Lois Lane was introduced as a career woman in 1938 when the idea of that would have been unheard of. Even moreso, she was introduced as a career woman who was, in fact, an object of desire despite her brash personalty and many character traits that, in their time (and even today) would have been associated with a male figure. And if you don’t understand why that’s a big deal…..then really need to consider the way we treat powerful career women in this country through mass media—-the way we deem them “un-sexy” and “cold” and un-feminine. So yes—-it’s a big deal that Lois Lane was allowed to be both hard-ass career woman AND the object of Superman’s (Super—as in “better” than your average sexist man’s) desire.
Lois was the first woman of comics. She was one of the first and only female love interests to be introduced with a JOB and her own ambitious career path. She was introduced as aggressive and ambitious in a landscape when the female love interest would have almost ALWAYS have been introduced as being a passive figure. If Lois was in danger it was because she ran INTO the fire. To understand WHY this was important you need to understand the history of feminism. Lois was not a passive damsel. She was not Sleeping Beauty waiting to be kissed. She had a job. She sometimes had a freaking MACHINE GUN. She was often in the middle of the action before Superman even got on the scene. As the AVclub.com first noted, “She was the first response and Superman was the cavalry.”
Let me be clear here: Every time you cheer a relationship in comics where the female in question is presented as strong and smart and ambitious——you are benefitting from Lois Lane existing.
Pepper Potts (who I love btw) being the CEO of Stark Industries? You wouldn’t HAVE that if Lois hadn’t already been there first. The very idea of Pepper Potts even showing up as Tony’s equal in the first Iron Man movie as a brilliant business woman hinged on the history of Lois and Clark already EXISTING for years on end in various forms of mass media—the very idea that a human woman without the privilege of physical power could be the the “one thing that I can’t live without” and the backbone for a MAN of great power whether that “power” came in the form of alien superpowers or a suit made of iron and wealth. This concept did not evolve overnight. It was 75 years in the making, people. And there was another comics’ couple that debuted in 1938 who did the legwork through years of sexism in our culture to get you here. Understand that. Understand the circle of feminism.
Mary Jane Watson (who I freaking love btw and has a legacy of her own) being written as a strong-willed love interest for Peter next to Gwen’s more “pleasing” personality at the time? You wouldn’t HAVE that if Lois hadn’t been there first. There was a template there to create a female partner for Spider-Man with fire in her personality who wouldn’t just nod and smile but would fight back. Again, this concept did not evolve overnight.
Every freaking sci-fi romance that you read now (and I’m not talking about Twilight who took the wrong lessons from Superman, I’m talking about the GOOD ones that took the RIGHT lessons about female power) you owe in some form to Lois Lane. The very idea that a heroine with the ambition and sharp tongue who was going to do things her way and only accept the best in love on the side like Elizabeth Bennett or Jo March could be juxtaposed into a SUPERHERO narrative—-you owe to Lois Lane.
There is serious, bad gender commentary that hinges and infects DC Comics’ choices right now with regards to this character. And if you don’t understand this or if you are one who tries to make excuses for it bc it doesn’t suit your interest to do so, then you are not understanding feminism or gender in the genre and you are an active contributor to the problem.
Lois Lane is a female character who is very hard to objectify. She is very hard to make male gaze. She is usually identified more by her job and her brain than by some physical factor which is why yes, she can be ANY race or have any color hair. She doesn’t exist to be a sex object or to be a male escape fantasy. The CW tried their damnest to objectify her with Erica Durance in the role and yet Durance was so conscious of Lois’s agency and power that she just refused to allow it to happen. The character is so strong-willed that it’s virtually impossible to strip her of agency. She’s always in control. She is very, very hard to objectify and that makes her poison for an industry and a company who really only cares about their female icons when they can exploit them for the male gaze in some capacity. (See the current treatment of Wonder Woman for an example on the way DC has taken a character who was designed to empower women and put her through the lens of the male gaze to instead make her a male power fantasy. DC can’t handle Wonder Woman as she is supposed to be written anymore than they can handle Lois Lane as she is. They just fake it better with Diana because Diana punches shit every once and a while for the cheap seats in the back which allows the company to pretend that they are empowering her even as they continue to devalue her.)
Lois Lane deserves a variant cover for the 75th anniversary of Superman celebration. Lex Luthor, a character who btw is not 75 years old, has not only not been featured in as many comics of media properties as Lois as…but it’s not even close. But he’s an important figure in Superman history. So if they want to feature him on a cover….fine. That’s great. But not at the expense of the feminist icon of the narrative. This comes on the heels of the new 52 where Lois has been continually downplayed, marginalized and shoved out of roles she has held in this mythos for 75 years.
Jim Lee apparently told a fan at Wonder Con today that they might consider putting Lois on a cover “with Perry White and Jimmy Olsen.” So they want to shove the only other character from Action #1 and the DEBUT FEMALE CHARACTER OF THE DCU on a cover with two supporting MALEcharacters who debuted years after she did. They want to do what many, many employers and companies across media do daily to women: they want to downplay the contributions of the female player by forcing her to share space with two men who are nowhere near as important to downplay her power.
There was a WOMAN who debuted in Action Comics #1. And she was wearing a business suit. She had a JOB in the Great Depression. She had her own comic book for years on end that outsold Batman at one point. She endured years of sexism as women were shoved back into their traditional gender roles after World War 2. She endured terrible sexism at the hands of male creators only to rise from the ashes again in the Bronze Age through the Modern Age as the powerful career woman she was intended to be. She has been in more media properties than any other female character in the DCU roster. She headlined a TV show watched by 20 million people—-many of whom were women.
Oh yeah…and in the ultimate recognition that career women were allowed to CHOOSE their own paths she was married to f***ing Superman on and off in various continuities (including the MAIN DCU CANON) for 30+ years. She was the mother of his child in-canon both biologically and in an adopted capacity depending on what era you were in. So with all due respect, this stunt with Wonder Woman should go burn in the insulting hell fire from which it was spawned. Let’s just hope that the two feminist icons that DC offered up as sacrifices survive the burns from those assanine flames.
There was a woman in Action Comics #1 and she was an icon for millions of women who grew up seeing her on television and in comic books. So ask yourselves why DC Comics is now trying to erase the influence of the first woman of comics and more importantly, ask yourselves if it wouldn’t just be easier for Dan Didio and Jim Lee to just openly spit on Jerry and Joanne Siegels’ graves.
You claim to care about sexism in comics? Got news for you…THIS is sexism in comics at play. This is the attempted erasure of a feminine icon on her 75th anniversary. It’s not right. It’s not fair. And it shouldn’t be something that ANYONE who claims to care about women or gender in comics has tolerance for.
As much as I’d like to say don’t fuck with Lois Lane, I think it’s more apt to say, don’t fuck with Lois Lane’s fans. We’re kind of angry of late.
Fem!slash february Lois/Diana
I didn’t know I shipped this
An example of something I didn’t realize I had wanted my whole life until the moment I saw it and realized I wanted it my whole life and never told myself.
Lois Lane died today.
Her real name was Joanne Siegel (formerly Kovacs) and she was a girl from Cleveland who so wanted to make the big time during the Depression that she put an ad in the paper advertising herself as a model. She got many responses (most of whom just wanted dates), but she only answered one, from a Mr. Joe Shuster.
Taking the bus, she arrived and was amazed to find that Mr. Shuster was, in fact, not a “Mister” at all, but a short, skinny teenager. His parents’ apartment in Glenville was freezing and the blue bathing suit Joanne had borrowed from her sister to pose in was too big in certain places. Important places. Joe saw her pinching and twisting and laughed; I’ll fill all that out, he said. And a bond was born that lasted for decades. Just outside the door, Jerry Siegel was thumbing through magazines, somewhat unaware (but not entirely) that he would later marry the girl inside.
She was modeling for a character they were doing in their ongoing Superman proposal. A character named Lois Lane.
So in 1948, after Joanne and Jerry became reacquainted at a Cartoonist Society masquerade ball in New York City, they were married. She would refer to herself as Jerry’s “model” and “co-writer.” That’s how close they were. They supported each other through a lot, some of it very thin. But some of it was magnificent, like their daughter Laura, who was a much prouder topic of conversation to them than any sort of flying alien.
We all know how Jerry and Joe sold Superman to DC for $130 with that first check for Action Comics #1. We all know. But it bears repeating.
It bears repeating because no matter whose side you may be on in this, the defining battle of comics (legal, moral, economic, or otherwise), you know that after Jerry died in 1996, Joanne carried on the fight, much to the dismay of Time-Warner, some fans, and maybe even herself at times. But she never gave up. She believed in truth, justice, and all that stuff. She made a lot of calls to DC Comics in her day. A lot of dogged, pushy calls. And when they hung up, she called back.
Like I said, Lois Lane died today.
I only met her once. When, with the help of Brad Meltzer and his online army who raised money through an Internet auction, we all helped restore Jerry’s boyhood home in Cleveland. Standing on the same porch where Jerry used to bolt from the door, I presented Joanne with a copy of the original ad she once placed, something that took me years to find. In fact, after I did find it, I kind of wondered why I spent so much time on it. But when I gave it to her, her eyes lit up, making it instantly worth it and I understood, finally, why those crazy Cleveland nerds did it all in the first place: the costume, the powers, the everything-but-the-kitchen sink Superman.
She was over ninety years old then, but with that red hair and warm smile, it was like looking into a time machine. They did it to impress a girl. Not just a pretty one, but an endearing, complicated, and charming one. So it makes a lot of sense, I guess, that Lois died on Valentine’s Day. Within the insanity of what super-heroes are, hers is the one character who always made us want to keep our feet on Earth.
—-“Lois Lane Died on Valentine’s Day”—Comicsbeat Obituary for Joanne Siegel—wife of Superman Co-Creator, Jerry Siegel and model and inspiration for Lois Lane.
Happy Valentine’s Day in Joanne’s memory and in memory of everything that Lois and Clark meant to the Siegel Family. As we approach the 75th anniversary of the creation of Superman and Lois Lane and we approach the release of the new film starring Henry Cavill and Amy Adams….remember what this story is REALLY about. Superman has been the victim of alot of really sad behavior at DC Comics as of late and it’s easy to feel like we are losing him. It’s even easier to feel like we are losing Lois. So read this. And remember what this story is really about.
“They did it all for her.”
“Just wondering if you were some plain Jane, raised in the ‘burbs — even someone like me — could you do what you do?”
The best thing about this scene is that it’s one of the only times you’ll see it acknowledged openly that Superman is able to do what he does for two major reasons:
1. He’s a man
2. He’s a beautiful man
His beauty—as a white man with gorgeous blue eyes—-helps him assimilate. It’s one of the major reasons why Superman is able to show his face and be a creature of the “light” because even though people may initially fear the presence of an alien….they ultimately learn to trust him, in part, because he’s culturally acceptable in his beauty, physically pleasing and male.
Now, Diana is not knocking Clark for that here. She’s saying outright that he’s the kind of man that does NOT abuse his privilege and that he uses the gifts he’s been given to help others.
And the bottom line is this…
Lois is saying point blank….you couldn’t be Wonder Woman if you came where I came from. If you were born in Man’s World and raised in this culture. I’m doing the best I can. And she’s right. Diana’s heritage and power informs who she is.
And Diana is agreeing with her. She’s basically like, “You’re right. I had alot of help by way of my birth and there is privilege in that.”
But she’s also reminding Lois that her situation is different from Clark’s as she is still navigating man’s world as a woman. And maybe the two of them have alot more in common than they think. And, in a way, she’s basically saying to her, “You know, there are things that I understand about you that even your husband might not understand simply due to the fact that his gender gives him privilege. But I get it. And if you can open up and acknowledge that I get it….we might be true friends.”
Reading this issue (an issue that Phil Jiminez still says is one of the most asked about/popular issues he ever wrote) in the wake of the new 52 is jarring and not just because the new 52 has gone out of their way to dissolve the Clark/Lois bond and pair Clark with Diana. It’s jarring because there is a clear understanding the PRIVILEGE issue here from Wonder Woman both about the privilege that she has and the privilege Superman has. She gets it. She understands it. She’s blunt and honest about it and compassionate. Whereas, now, the privilege that both Clark and Diana have is not only not acknowledged but almost celebrated as a way to put them above the humans. And there is no realization now (as there was here ) that the things that Lois and Steve Trevor do—-not just surviving but thriving and fighting in the world without the benefit of that privilege—-are of inspirational, vital importance to keeping that privilege in check.
I need a gif of Amazons slow clapping in pride.
To me, the core of that attraction is that she is a better reporter than he is. Think about being Superman for a second. The Olympic record for weightlifting is 1,038 lbs., but you could lift more than that as a child. The record for the 100 meter dash is 9.58 seconds, but you can travel over 51 miles in that time. Going to Vegas? You don’t need your X-Ray vision to win at Blackjack, because you can just count the cards while holding down a conversation about nuclear physics. Without really trying, you are better at just about everything than anyone else in the world.
However, (as Mark Waid once pointed out in a podcast with Marv Wolfman) none of that really translates to your chosen profession. Typing really fast does not help your prose. Being able to lift a tank does not help you convince a source to go on record. It is as near to competing straight up with normal people as Superman would ever be capable of. Even then, it comes easily enough to him that you get a pretty lofty perch at a great paper very early in your career. It is just in this one context, there is someone better than you are: Lois Lane.
As mild-mannered reporter Clark Kent, you reach up for the first time in your life and she rejects you.
To me, it is an inversion of the Luthor story. Luthor sees someone above him and feels hate. Superman sees someone above him and feels love.
Dean Hacker, comment on “Giving Lois Lane A Second Look, For The First Time” by Kelly Thompson (CBR: She Has No Head!)
Ooh, I like this. I’ve always had a soft spot for Lois (journalism major here), but this is a really clever way to look at her romance with Clark.
I’m on vacation this week so I’ve lined up a number of other bloggers and readers to give their thoughts on the world I cover. Today I have post from Natasha Townsel who, as you will see, describes her self as a “huge” Superman fan. Today Natasha give her thoughts on a recent issue of Action comics. It is a terrific piece so please give it a read.
I am a huge Superman fan. No, let’s get something clear: I am a HUGE Superman fan. I collect comics, memorabilia, DVDs of now-defunct Superman TV series, and any and all Superman movies, both live action and animated. I love Clark Kent because of who he is, not because of what he can do. The fact that Clark possesses all those powers, yet remains an incredibly humble man from the Midwest who just wants to do the best he can to help moves me deeply. I love that his entire purpose is for us as humans to use the abilities that we were born with to benefit humanity. The ultimate theme of this character is hope, not revenge, fear, or hubris. Clark believes the best in humans because he was raised by two of humanity’s best representatives. He believes in second chances (and third and fourth) and that there is good in everyone. He believes that all life is precious and will do everything he can to preserve it. Superman is the ideal representation of humanity and inspires us to be our best possible selves.
“It’s not invulnerability or flight or heat vision or super speed that makes him the World’s Greatest Hero. It’s that Superman refuses to despair. He is a testament to the opposite, in fact. Superman is hope.” (Adventures of Superman #640)