The Four Color Media Monitor

We first begin with an interview Cosmopolitan ran with Henry Cavill, about the upcoming Batman vs. Superman movie, where he commented on both Wonder Woman and Lois Lane:

POWER WOMEN ​"Strong women are nothing new for the comic book world. I'm glad they are being represented a bit more in film and on TV. Wonder Woman has been around forever, she is an incredibly strong character. She can go toe-to-toe with Superman sometimes.​"

I think he should consider that it all depends on how strong the writing and characterization is. And I sure wish he'd also ponder what poor situations they've wound up in back in DC's comics proper.

SUPERMAN'S LOBSTER: LOIS LANE OR WONDER WOMAN ​"This is a very long discussion because there are a lot of questions to be asked and answered. I mean who is better for a super-powered alien, a human or a goddess? Yes, the goddess can do all the normal things, which we would think are normal in a relationship, and not have any fear of Superman. But you also need to have that baseline of humanity, which Lois provides. And literally keeps his feet on the ground, keeps him down to earth. So that's more of a debate than an answer."

Yes, WW can do a lot of stuff a normal human can do. But pairing her up with Supes is a very obvious idea, and diminishes her personal agency as a stand-alone character in solo stories. One more reason why it's better to pair Clark with a "civilian" co-star, because that's how to bring out the best in a star-and-costar relation in a sci-fi/superhero world. And that's just why DC's modern staff rejects plausible relations along these lines.

I found this through Tech Times, which asked who's better for Superman: WW or Lois. At first, they say:

Wonder Woman or Lois Lane:

We've long seen the ups and downs of Superman being with Lois Lane. Many fans prefer it this way because of nostalgia, or they just enjoy what these two bring to the table in a relationship.

No, that's not it. We enjoy what the writers and artists can bring to the table in how they portray their relationship. But the above is nothing compared to the following "opinion", that must've been taken from a time capsule:

Still, I believe Lois Lane is too much of a damsel in distress. Every time she requires Superman to save her skin, and it becomes annoying after a while. Despite that, though, her being human and in love with a god like figure is always interesting to cover.

What kind of uninformed comment is that? Lois stopped being written as a full-fledged damsel in distress by the Bronze Age. In John Byrne's Man of Steel miniseries from 1986 that updated Superman's backstory, it was established she'd practiced physical combat, and that her father was a military officer. How doesn't that count? Or do they think she should be portrayed as invincible in all instances? That's a puzzling ambiguity some SJWs may have about how women should be depicted in fiction; it sounds like they think they should be presented as perfect at all times sans infallibility and making no mistakes, maybe not even in their personal relationships. You don't get a good story by making characters fully impervious. Otherwise, Superman wouldn't even be vulnerable to Kryptonite and magic.

When it comes down to Wonder Woman, well, she is powerful and doesn't truly require a long-term relationship. She's a wildcard who only enjoys men who are also powerful. They don't have to be strong as Superman, just a manly man type of guy.

Let's see, they're saying because she's a woman she doesn't need long-term relations, whereas a man does? Nonsense. I guess that means her pre-Crisis relations with Steve Trevor, even if not monogamous, were all worthless? Sigh. This just compounds the impression these mainstream writers aren't interested in developing the female casts, and whether she's been seen only finding powerful men appealing is because assigned writers characterized her that way. It's ridiculous to say or think she should only be paired with men who're all powerful.

And if the writer of that piece saw what's become of modern superhero comics, he'd notice there's quite a few stories where superheroes aren't portrayed very manly or mature. At the end, it's said:

In all honesty, Wonder Woman and Batman are a better fit [...]

Why must they be a better fit, and not Steve Trevor for the former, and girlfriends like Silver St. Cloud for the latter? This just is so easy and cheapskate. It doesn't strive for creativity at all. Nor does the following reader comment:

Wonder Woman and Batman aren't a better fit! In all honestly, Bruce is an obsessive paranoid jerk who actually has contingency plans to take down Wonder Woman, which involves turning Superman against her. He doesn't trust her, and she's the one member of the League he fears the most. Tell me how that's a better pairing for her? In all honesty, I am tired of people pushing them together. Wonder Woman belongs with Steve Trevor and that's who she'll end up with in the comic books and the movies. I'm so tired of people who don't know much about Wonder Woman, saying Diana should date Bruce when they're polar opposites and Bruce has like 50 different girlfriends anyways. Why should Diana be another one of his conquests?

Oh, for crying out loud. That was just a specific story seen in the JLA in 2000, where they discover Batman had built weapons with which to take down the League if he thought they'd become dangerous. And Infinite Crisis made things worse, as it drew from an otherwise lame storyline. Sure, I might be tired of everybody suggesting WW and Batman be paired up, because it's just a cheap substitute for relations with civilian co-stars. But I'm also tired of people acting like Batman or any other fictional hero are real people whom they bumped into on the streets. All this nonsense has had the effect of making Batman seem like an infallible pagan deity too, instead of a mortal human being.

Labels: Batman, dc comics, msm propaganda, Superman, women of dc, Wonder Woman