"He's a Fairy, I Do Suppose": A Queer Analytical Perspective on Superman (Part 1/3)
Future Links: Part 2, Part 3
Note: This is commentary on the evolved perception of Clark Kent as it relates to the U.S. American standards of masculinity, effeminacy, and queerness. This is a textual analysis, which also presumes that readers are familiar enough with Superman that not everything need be directly cited. Further, though I am familiar with queer (and feminist) academic theory and history, I do not claim this work as an academic pursuit and do not (as of yet) make direct references to any particular theorist, philosopher, historian, and so on. Feel free to add any insight or thoughts; we're all friends here.
Introduction
The importance of the Clark Kent identity to the Superman mythos has been long debated in Superman media, fan circles, and academia. Depending on the exact content and framing of the analysis, Clark can be a metaphor for a particular type of immigrant experience, a covert display of misanthropy from the powerful, or the everyman. He can be one aspect of a disordered whole, a precise half, or the entire neater whole, with Superman’s relevance being complementary to the interpretation of Clark. Though the appeal of the rearmost interpretation has faded somewhat, Clark Kent is often regarded as the “real identity,” with Superman being either the most potent manifestation of Clark’s good nature or “just something he does.” However, one of Clark Kent’s many manifestations, and arguably the most important, was the Fairy — the effeminate antithesis to Superman which served as the premiere cover for the aforementioned alter ego, as well as the iteration upon which all others are constructed through their adoption, alteration, or rejection of his aesthetics and implications. The concept of the disordered whole and thus of Superman as “real” hinged on the Fairy identity. As such, the image of Clark constructed in the modern era reveals potent mechanisms underlying the fundamental relation of Superman to queerness and nontraditional masculinity: namely, that in spite of the stark contrast between Clark Kent and Superman, the man behind both personas (Kal-El) occupies a blurred third position, where cisheteronormativity is both transparently incoherent and vital to his continued success maintaining a secret identity.
Some Context: Superman and Clark Kent as Opposite Personas
Superman is often described as incontrovertibly masculine, an ideal representation of traditional images of men and the expectations heaped upon them by patriarchal norms. His towering physique and awesome capabilities underpin the resolute and authoritative personality he projects to enact change. To the extent that the aforementioned norms are intertwined with familial nuclearization, Superman’s status as the “greatest (and strongest) hero” works in tandem with stereotypical male roles of “protector,” “provider,” “leader,” and so on, buttressed by the general perception of him as the true embodiment of physical power. For these reasons, of the two primary personas with which this essay is concerned, Superman is typically the preeminent masculine figure even if he’s not the predominant identity; his presence, compassion, and heroics are consistently framed as paternalistically benevolent or righteously domineering, such that he’s often considered as the superior moral and behavioral guide in most situations even by other heroes his age.
In the larger Superman mythos, Clark Kent is typically constructed to be the opposite — effeminate, or at least enough unlike Superman that few people suspect a connection without ample evidence, despite any physical or attitudinal similarities. More specifically, Clark is “mild-mannered,” which has been construed to entail pervasive shyness, timidity, submission, and cowardice, in addition to a relative feebleness and delicate sensibility not expected of a man his size and age. He dresses poorly and hunches over to shrink himself, sometimes speaking with a stutter or nervous air. What attention he does attract for his sharp writing ability and communication skill as a reporter is often trumped by his reputation for being unabashedly scared, frail, and accident-prone. Clark’s friends and neighbors are more likely to regard him as gentle and sweet, but they find themselves exasperated at times depending on the current context. Clark also literally and figuratively lacks paternalism in most cases: in the Earth-1 and New 52 universes specifically, Clark is notably a bachelor, while Earth-2 and New Earth are not bachelors but have no children. He is also not considered a role model or a guide, at least to the same extent or type as Superman, such that a traditionally paternal image is usually attributed.
It should be noted most of these distinctions are not entirely cogent or consistent in universes such as New Earth, where the motion to make Clark Kent the “real identity” — here distinct from persona, in that the character’s embodiment of and positive relation to ascribed traits and descriptions is sincere — led to the excision of many previously prominent “effeminate” traits within the Clark Kent persona. Nevertheless, the belief that the distinctions between personas should and do exist, at least nominally, remains the most important aspect of Superman's secret identity quagmire.
The Pantywaist and the Strongman: Earth-2, the Golden Age, 1938–1952
[Superman (1939) #67, "The City Under the Sea"]
Men regarded as effeminate or otherwise deficient in masculinity are implicitly presumed to not be (traditionally) heterosexual, as the initial construction of the heterosexual identity is reliant on a stable masculinity. That is, gender expectations for men under patriarchy include assertiveness and dominance — especially over women, who are expected to be submissive and passive. On an individual level, the effects of these displays are most prominent in men’s personal and sexual relationships, creating an environment in which the establishment of a heterosexual relationship acts as an easy indication of masculine prowess. In turn, this creates the cyclical reinforcement between perceived masculinity and heterosexual performance, as traditional heterosexual dynamics tacitly mandate the submission necessary for a man to sufficiently prove his masculinity.
The Superman of Earth-2, also known as the Golden Age Superman and Kal-L, was the first to establish the Clark Kent persona and thus the first to employ the masculine/effeminate dichotomy that would come to define the character in the wider mythos. Though Earth-2’s Clark Kent is considerably more outspoken than many later depictions, bearing the weight of 1940s expectations, he is mild-mannered and diffident depending on the context. He avoids overt grand displays of chivalry to avoid detection, to the point of seemingly abandoning others from time to time, engendering a reputation for pronounced cowardice [e.g., Superman (1939) #1]. He also generally refuses to engage in degrading or disrespectful behavior, making him seem conformist at best and submissive at worst. Decades of embodying these traits, and a tendency to regress to form when he does defend himself or others, create the general perception that he is effeminate (or painfully dull, which often overlaps with the former, as it is seen as an expression of unmasculine passivity). It should be clarified here that effeminacy and femininity are not synonymous; Clark is treated as a particularly weak man for having traits perceived as feminine, namely submissiveness, but is not necessarily feminine himself.
[Superman (1939) #5, "The Slot Machine Racket" and #15, "The Evolution King", respectively]
It follows that Clark’s interactions with Lois Lane, his coworker and love interest, illuminate perceptions of and responses to his effeminacy. In fact, Lois’ attraction to Clark is likely the most reliable barometer of the perception of Clark’s masculinity in-narrative; not only is she the character with whom he most interacts, but the predominant narratives of women’s desires in the 1940s were largely filtered through heteronormative and patriarchal lenses, such that a greater attraction to Clark than, say, Superman would be considered aberrant. Concordantly, Lois’ negative descriptions of and dismissal of Clark in this era — both extant from the beginning and compounded in severity by her own assertive nature, which is juxtaposed against Clark’s — aptly reflect the interplay between traditional gender roles and heterosexuality and related social mores: “pantywaist” referring to both a coward and an effeminate man [Superman (1939) #7, “The Three Kingpins of Crime,” & #8, “The Carnival Crooks”] and “a miserable specimen of humanity” [Superman (1939) #17, “Muscles for Sale”] being amongst them. When asked why she avoids him, Lois tells Clark not to ask her for another sob story, only to reaffirm his status as a “spineless, unbearable coward” after an altercation with an aggressive man attempting to force her to dance [Superman (1939) #1]. Expectedly, Lois continues to lack an actualized romance with Clark through this era because she views him as unmasculine, which lessens her attraction to him (with the irony being that Clark is Superman and is thus the worthiest of her attraction in a traditional sense). Thus, the aforementioned avenue of using heterosexual norms to assert his masculinity is barred to Clark, making it so he must rely on alternate methods of asserting his masculinity or otherwise cope with the consequences of his failure.
Given that the Clark Kent persona in the Golden Age largely exists in service of Superman’s endeavors, most especially the protection of his secret identity, Clark cannot truly escape his conundrum without increasing the risk of exposure. Establishing an honest romance with Lois or another woman would entail both becoming appealing in a traditionally masculine sense and informing her of his alter ego, neither of which Superman is inclined to do lest he and his associates be subjected to blatant violations of safety and privacy. This status quo results in Clark’s feigned shortcomings situating him in an ever-nebulous space of “effeminate heterosexuality,” wherein he ostensibly experiences opposite-sex attraction but is so pitiful at upholding a traditionally masculine role that he cannot establish, maintain, or defend a heterosexual relationship. Such a failure arguably constitutes a form of queerness in that it defies traditional expectations of men under patriarchy, which makes Clark "strange" — and thus, a target of persistent harassment and doubt.
[Superman (1939) #17, "Man or Superman?", #17, "Muscles for Sale", and #22, "A Modern Robin Hood!", respectively]
As aforementioned, Superman is the masculine alter ego and leading persona. The Clark Kent persona serves to shield him from the various unsavory consequences and annoyances of heroism. However, because Clark Kent primarily interacts with humanity, there’s a profound sense in which Superman’s masculinity is divorced from human expectations and standards. Significantly, Superman embodies traditionally masculine norms with ease, due in large part to his great powers and physique, such that he need not entertain many other engagements with gender expectations; yet he struggles with a sense of alienation precisely because he cannot sincerely participate in the relationship rituals that those around him find valuable. A neat example is when Superman, though technically guised as Clark, fears that he’ll crush a woman’s ribs if he forgets himself in a fit of passion [Superman (1939) #7, “The Black Gang”] but there’s also the more pervasive, aforementioned sense in which he cannot pursue a romance for fear the woman would be harmed or disappointed when he cannot perform normally. The alienation worsens the panic Superman develops when confronted with the potential reveal of his secret identity. Generally, the reveal — even just to love interests such as Lois or good friends — is too ruinous to entertain, much less tolerate, such that he lies or engages in blatantly manipulative behaviors to maintain the secret [e.g., Superman (1939) #19,” Superman: Matinee Idol”]. Superman stuffs his suits into secret panels, closets, or drawers, of which he is so protective that he’d rather hope (guiltily) the discoverer die than blackmail him, even in dreams [e.g., Superman (1939) #6, “Mission to San Caluma” & 19, “Superman’s Amazing Adventure”; Adventures of Superman, “The Mystery of the Stolen Costume,” chapters 1–2]. His terror at being discovered is so great that it clouds and confuses many of his personal interactions and concerns, which is compounded by any belief that someone is actively investigating him.
[Superman (1939) #7, “The Black Gang”]
Thus, despite ostensibly being the superior and stronger persona, Superman functions as more vulnerable in emotional and social situations where his physicality is not useful. Concurrently, he is first and foremost concerned with his own protection, given that his social circle in the Golden Age is almost strictly delimited to coworkers and hypothetical wives, all for whom Superman is meant to be a secret. This interacts curiously with what is known of Clark Kent’s reality. It is for Superman that any consequences exist — as Clark Kent’s effeminacy and bachelordom in this era is contingent on Superman’s needs — which raises the question of what Superman is or represents such that perpetual social distance is preferable to anyone being in-the-know regarding his identity. After all, Earth-2 Superman’s alien status was not revealed to him until 1948 [Superman (1939) #53], and Clark's lack of favor with Lois and dearth of masculine flair persisted until the end of the era [as pictured in the beginning of this section, in Superman (1939) #67, "The City Under the Sea"]. Fortunately, the Silver and Bronze Ages seem to offer more concrete illumination than the Golden Age.
There's a weird but not insignificant overlap between those who claim that "Superman's experiences are not specific/close enough to represent immigrants' experiences with xenophobia" and those who claim that "well, you can't change his or the Kents'/his guardians' appearances or backstory; it'll be a completely different person (whom I won't care about)" that I find absolutely fascinating. Both groups, I would argue, completely miss the mark, but the combination is just... something.
I reblogged this last month, tagged it, and said “might as well see if it works.” I used this video as a reference to find all the forms that i needed (which is A LOT, especially if you’re a dependent) and sent them through the mail, not really allowing myself to hope.
dude.
$2,714 of medical debt from my top surgery - gone. im shaking this was such a weight on me for 2 years and it fucking worked. what the fuck.
Hospitals like to hide these policies under a lot of successive links in obscure places, so if you don't see anything right away, keep looking! Get friends to help! Make it a scavenger hunt. A game where you're assassins sent to slit capitalism's throat
I've decided to move forward on my essay sideblog idea. I won't remove any of them here; I'll just reblog them on that blog, I think. I'm pretty sure Tumblr shows what's been posted by a sideblog and what the main blog it is if you're following one/both so it should be fine.
I've also decided to try and cook up something or other on the Supergirl movie, which I think will be my first post originating on that blog.
I need a name for said blog that's as funny as clarkcvnt.
Another design is using 2 20x25x1 filters, taping them to the sides of the box fan and then to each other so they sort of make a triangle, then cutting cardboard to make a top and bottom to the triangle.
This was discovered as a more effective design during the 2020 US west coast fires.
honestly im very tired of peoples inability to recognize stereotypes that stem from sax rohmer novels i think white people especially owe it to asian people to do a cursory reading of the premise of fu manchu novels and read the characters are associated with them just so they can get their heads out of their asses and stop blindly reading fu manchu and fah lo suee reskins without any critical thought
like an asian daughter trying to get away from her evil dad or trying to usurp her father with the help of white men is a anti asian stereotype i need yall to know that. the daughter who is actually good and is just a helpless victim of her father and she needs help from a white man to either get away or kill her father is a racist stereotype. Id take it a step further and say that even if its not a white man getting help from any outside force to usurp or run from her father is in fact racist. An asian woman falling in love with a white man and that white man basically making her realize that she shouldn't be following her father is racist it comes from Daughter of the Dragon. It comes from Sax Rohmer. We need to recognize that its a thing. We need to be critical of how we talk about characters that fall into that trope
if you reblog anything from me I wish it were this. the anti asian stereotypes from sax rohmer novels are so prevalent in literally everything its difficult to find anything with Asian people that doesnt have at least a few. especially comics
justice league of america (1960) #157 | summer of supergirl special (2026)
kara and clark being so certain of their love for each other that they're willing to bet their lives on the fact that they'd never hurt, let alone kill, one another... yeah.
You can support Hamed Ashour by donating to his gofundme here, which is currently critically low on funds. You can also follow his story via Instagram.
[Image ID] screenshot of a twitter post by @/musIimgojo that reads, "white people when you tell them it's not normal to value an animal's life over a human's" followed by an edited cartoon image of 3 blonde-haired, blue-eyed, white women sneering at the viewer.
screenshot of an instagram post by @/rajaeen1 that reads "In the Genocide I lived in a tent unfit even for a dog so, the world rushed to rescue the dog, not me!
I shared my story a year ago with this very loyal dog friend.
Oh, how lucky this dog is. The story went viral in Arabic and international magazines, and was read by more than 5 million people around the world. The story was translated into seven different languages.
At the time, an organization working in the field of animal rights from the Ireland capital, Dublin, contacted me. They wanted to ensure the dog's health and living conditions in the tent we were living in together. I sent the photos, and afterward, I received a great amount of sympathy and a huge emotional response. They seriously began exploring options to evacuate the dog from the Gaza Strip through licensed institutions.
They wanted a better life, a cleaner place, and a wider sky for the dog
Oh my God! no one even pointed out to me!
I was the one living in a tent unfit for even a dog to live in.
screenshot that reads, "I'm Hamed Ashour - a poet and creative writing trainer from Gaza. Your support will help me survive (food, water, medicine, safe shelter, power, internet) and continue my work: writing, documenting daily life under war, and producing a book of war diaries to be translated so our story cannot be silenced." [End ID]
