Select Page

Superman comes out of the closet

Superman comes out of the closet

I must preface my opinion on this subject by saying that I am a libertarian-brand conservative in terms of principles.  I do not work with the Libertarian Party because they have no idea how to get their principles implemented in a real political world.  

I mention this bit of information because I am a VERY tolerant person in terms of what people do in their private lives.  I have supported gay unions and then gay marriage when it was far less popular to do that.  I have worked for gay people – and had gay people working for me.

I have also believed that what a person does in private is their business – as long as they are not directly hurting others.  But most of all, I have long believed that a person’s private life should be kept private. 

But even with all that open-mindedness, I am at a loss to understand why it was important to make the new Superman –the son of the original Superman — bisexual.  In that spirit, why not make him transgender and fly around in a tutu.

As a comic book franchise, Superman had the broadest possible appeal.  He was a man endowed with superpowers used on behalf of a universal vision of good versus evil.  Superman has suddenly become a controversial figure – applauded by some and derided by others.  His newly revealed sexuality now dominates his historic cultural role – fighting for “truth, justice and the American way.”

Of course, it is not about Superman – or even his son, Jon Kent.  They do not exist.  The ability to fly “faster than a speeding bullet” or to “leap tall buildings in a single bound” are fictional.  Clark and Jon are nothing more than two-dimensional drawings on paper or the silver screen.  They are only what the artists, writers and owners of the franchise make them.

So, why did they suddenly decide to make the successor Superman bisexual.  There has been an intimate romantic attraction between Clark Kent and Lois Lane.  In later movies, that was advanced to a more intimate relationship.  I thought that was also needless – and a disappointing move.

One must assume that it must have to do with readership.  Perhaps the sanitized stories of noble superheroes have gotten boring for the consumer.  Or perhaps they are making the characters more interesting to a more adult audience – leaving the little kids with Kermit the Frog, at least until his relationship with Miss Piggy is more graphically revealed.

I do believe that there is value in having cultural icons that represent pure and uncomplicated goodness that appeal to the more innocent young kids.  Is the bisexual Superman a better role model for the youngest generation?  If so, then perhaps Cinderella should have a backstory of being a victim of white slavery.  Should the old woman who lived in a shoe be used to promote abortion.  And is Prince Charming to be chastised for giving Snow White an uninvited kiss as she lay helpless.

Some members of the gay community have applauded the decision to make Superman, Jr. the subject of an alternative lifestyle.  It is something to which they can relate, they say.  I can understand that, but why not just create a new gay superhero – much like Black Panther, who became – if not the first – certainly the most successful new superhero in terms of box office.

Superman – like many other superheroes — is a cultural idealized fantasy.  He appeals to the angels of our better nature.  One of his super qualities is to be better than we mere humans.  More moral.  More pure.  To give him more compromised and controversial “human traits” makes him less of an iconic and idealized superhero.  He becomes nothing more than human frailties on steroids.

The very essence and purpose of a superhero is to not have a dark side. To inspire and draw us to our good side. That appeal is diminished when our hero is traumatized by doubt and anxieties – or has the same human frailties as the rest of us.

Superman, Jr. did not really come out of the closet, as my own headline states.  He is only a drawing on a piece of paper – an icon that is created by artists and writers.  He does not have a sex life – straight or gay – unless those who create him give him a fictional sex life for some socio-political purpose.  

I personally believe that people should keep their sex lives private – and away from public pronouncements.  I have no desire to know what other folks do in the bedroom – or elsewhere.  And that also goes for fictional characters such as Superman, Jr.  

So. There ‘tis.

About The Author

Larry Horist

So,there‘tis… The opinions, perspectives and analyses of Larry Horist Larry Horist is a businessman, conservative writer and political strategist with an extensive background in economics and public policy. Clients of his consulting firm have included such conservative icons as Steve Forbes and Milton Friedman. He has served as a consultant to the Nixon White House and travelled the country as a spokesman for President Reagan’s economic reforms. He has testified as an expert witness before numerous legislative bodies, including the U. S. Congress. Horist has lectured and taught courses at numerous colleges and universities, including Harvard, Northwestern, DePaul universities, Hope College and his alma mater, Knox College. He has been a guest on hundreds of public affairs talk shows, and hosted his own program, “Chicago In Sight,” on WIND radio. Horist was a one-time candidate for mayor of Chicago and served as Executive Director of the City Club of Chicago, where he led a successful two-year campaign to save the historic Chicago Theatre from the wrecking ball. An award-winning debater, his insightful and sometimes controversial commentaries appear frequently on the editorial pages of newspapers across the nation. He is praised by readers for his style, substance and sense of humor. According to one reader, Horist is the “new Charles Krauthammer.” He is actively semi-retired in Boca Raton, Florida where he devotes his time to writing. So, there ‘tis is Horist’s signature sign off.


  1. Dan Tyree

    Superman a queer? Who would have ever thought. My kids won’t read that shit on my watch.

  2. Frank stetson

    Oh of course Dan sees bisexual and thinks queer. Oh well

    On this one Larry, one side of me says I agree wholeheartedly. I am a male, heterosexual, frankly, a bit of a pig, cowboy American. The other side Larry, says who really cares.

    My Superman will always love Lois Lane and that’s all there is to it. What his son does is his business. In either case, we will always question how the man of steel can make love to begin with, but that’s a discussion for another thread.

    As I watch some lame Disney serial, there are girls kissing girls, guys kissing guys, and everyone in between. All of these plot tangents add nothing, absolutely nothing, to the story. I hate that. Don’t like hetero love scenes that don’t add to the plot or narrative either. I have to admit I am probably as open as you, in about the same boat on this one, and I cringe every time there are PDAs without meaning.

    I guess I feel the same way about this as I do about “gratuitous tits an ass,“ or what we called GTA that was prevalent in the 70s and 80s. Hopefully it is just a gratuitous display of the signs of the times and will soon be replaced by depictions of meaningful relationships that actually add to the story rather than just window dressing to gain ratings.

    But if Spiderman comes out, that’s it.I’ll be reading books after that!

    Good post Larry, both silly and insightful!

    • Dan Tyree

      If it walks like a duck——-

  3. TOM

    I think you are missing the point Larry. It is all about being “woke” and gaining legitimacy for abhorrent lifestyles. If a new superhero emerged that was gay, it would only be watched by gays who already accept their lifestyle. This is about poisoning our culture.