Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

What do you feel is the criteria for bestowing the title of SUPERHERO upon a person?

Personally, I feel that a person must posess a SUPERHUMAN, or an ability beyond that of the common human, that is natural. It is not that of a something that is manmade.

IE, Batman is not a superhero, Ironman is not a superhero, and Green Latern as well.

there regular hero's but are at such a high calibur they are easily in the same leauge

They have that extra edge of being regular people, so they are easier to relate to, but are not unique in the same sense as Cyclops, Wolverine, Spider-Man, Spawn, etc. are.

They are regular people who decided to take the law into their own hands. People like Punisher.

As said in other threads...would you be a superhero if you would have power to change colours of flowers? Batman is a superhero. Green Latern is a superhero. And Iron Man is a superhero. Get it already.

So is the Martian Manhunter a superhero? After all, he doesn't possess any special powers--just the boring old powers that every Martian possess (although I understand that he is unusually formidable, even for a Martian).

Suppose that, by and act of God, Mars and the Martian race were restored, and the Martian Manhunter went back home. Would he still be a superhero then?

I don't like the idea that you can become a superhero, or somehow lose your superhero status, just by moving around the universe; it seems to me that this cheapens the whole idea of "superheroes."

Okay, first of all this is all my personal opinion, so if you want to be a jackass then do it in another thread. Thanks!

Anyways, I doubt that a person would want to fight crime if their hidden special power was changing a rose from red to green. I really don't think somebody like Dr. Octavius would cowar in fear at the sight of a persons ability to grow their fingernails at will.

I understand your point, but I personally feel that a person needs what is dubbed "powers" in order to classify themselves a 'Superhero.' Otherwise, I simply class them as 'crime fighter,' or 'vigilante.'

In regard to the alien status, I feel that being from another planet kind of cheapens the status of 'superHUMAN' abilities. They can be crime fighters all they like, all the more power to them if they feel so. But they are not 'Superheros'

The only thing needed to be a superhero is a cool pair of tights.

damn strait!

but Eddie Brock is considerd a vigilante,yet he posse's super strength even without the symbiote((it boosted his strength signifacantly)) would you consider him a superhero? he realy dosent have power's unless he's Venom

i really think there's more to it, i mean just having power's dosent make the anyworse. they may not be "superhero's" by name

but they are clearly just as formidable

So basically you're also saying that you don't consider Superman a Superhero. God. That sounds so retarded, just because he's an alien?

I agree wuth Rasta.That doesnt make sense.And you've basically at this point said that you don't regard batman and superman as superheros, even though they were the first superheros. No-one at any time has said superheros had to have super-HUMAN abilities. The term super-power is more accurate. and if you're limiting this to humans with powers, what about mutants then? they aren't technically humans. You've restrcited us to humans who've had accidents like:spiderman, daredevil, hulk, fantastic four. Thor?he's not human, he's a god.So what about him?

A Superhero is not confined to just having super powers, it's idiotic to suggest that Batman, Ironman etc are not superheroes, because they all in their own way have far better heroic qualities than Spiderman, the X-Men and Superheroes who actually have super powers.

Read your statement one more time and think about it hard.

The reason I think the way I do is because you are all hailing people like Batman, Ironman, Punisher, etc. in the fashion you are, but what about the police officers that do the same thing on a daily basis? The only difference between the Cops and your 'Crime Fighters;'

By the way, Lobo, I am not mocking you. I actually got a chuckle out of that.

That is the impression I am getting from all of those who are posting. However, if you all feel that I am being narrowminded, lets forget about what I say and get back on topic.

WHAT MAKES A SUPERHERO WORTHY OF THAT TITLE?

Risking his\her life to save innocents by facing a threat that seems impossible to beat? (even if s\he is a normal human)

Okay, then. As we all know, Batman can see in the dark. It's not a superpower; he has some sort of infrared lens built into his suit. Suppose that, instead of using technology, he had some sort of mutant ability to see in the dark. That's definitely a super-power, it's definitely very relevant to the type of crime-fighting Batman does--but it's nothing he can't already do. So know he's a superhero, yes? Even though he doesn't have any powers he doesn't already have? Surely you see how arbitrary that distinction is?

There are a few reasons the Batman and his ilk are super-heroes and cops and soldiers don't qualify.

A "hero" is one who acts with heroic intent, whether conscious of his heroic intent or not. To be "super" is to be able to perform acts that most people in one's community cannot.
While many cops and many soldiers are heroes, you cannot assign the label "hero" to all of them. You can't prove they do what they do for love, money, power, or whatever else it gives them. Not only is there potentially personal gain to be had from such a job, but these people work for the government and ideally follow orders that do not necessarily come from their own beliefs and passions.
They are sanctioned to do what they do by the government that is charged with protecting the taxpayers. They aren't giving aid to the community, they are simply an official part of the machine.
Because of the tremendous number of police and military operatives in the world, and because the abilities they have are shared with so many of their peers, I have a hard time considering them "super." If they stand out in their group, that may be different, but the difference between an officer and a civilian does not constitute "super."

I don't consider the Punisher to be a super-hero. What he does, many real-life ex-military NRA-backing nut-cases who stay in shape can do. He may have the innocent in mind when killing his prey, but he's primarily driven by the hatred of criminals. He's an exterminator.

The Batman risks his life to save others. His "war on crime" is not a real war, unlike the Punisher's. The Batman takes prisoners and leaves no casualties. He lives by compassionate methods. He risks his life and his freedom, for he is not officially sanctioned to do what he does. Now that Commissioner Gordon is retired, he has no friendly arrangement with the police. He works by his own rules, under no authority, performing acts most athletes and law enforcement can't, and always acts as a hero. That's the definition, in my opinion.

How many police officers do you know that when they were choosing their profession thought to themselves, "I think I will put myself in probable danger with drug lords, murderers and various other criminals because there is good money in it." I doubt that was their train of thought in such a decision.

They, more likely then not, did it for the reasons of 'protecting those who are in need.' The innocent, if you will. Much like your Batman.

All I am saying is that if you are going to classify Ironman, etc., the ranking of Superhero, what about the police? They have just the same in terms of motives, but they are lacking the finance to give themselves the edge that Batman, Ironman, etc. have.

Like I said, you cannot confirm any policeman's motives. They are real people, with no thought balloons to show you the truth that only they know. I'm not ragging on cops, I'm being realistic. I know that cops aren't paid well, but there are benefits that come with rank and retirement, and I was mainly thinking of dirty cops. Also, don't bother arguing with me when I tell you that the job attracts personalities within the full range that include "serial killer," "serial bully," and "hero." I study cops and criminals for a hobby and for school.
I considered being a cop myself, for "heroic reasons" I suppose, but I don't think I have what it takes cognitively and physically. I believe in having competent men and women doing the job.
Don't romanticize the job of police officer when analyzing its appeal or effects. It's many things to many people. It's just a job to some people, it's a way to be a bully or a protected criminal for others, and it's a calling for true heroes to some. The intent is nothing you can put a blanket statement on because we're talking about individuals.

Because of the "super" part of superhero. As Herr Logan says, there's nothing extroidinary about them. No matter what their motives (and I'm a little less optimistic than you are about that; I suspect many people go into the police force because they want to be in a position of power), they're simply not good enough to be labled "super."

The way I see it,

Heroic motives and actions = hero
Exceptional abilities = super

Heroic motives and actions + exceptional abilities = superhero.

Funniest thing I have read in a while




What I am saying is how can you say that any cop, be it man or woman, is not entitled to be deemed a superhero if they are just the same as Batman, minus the cape and cool car? I cannot see the logic in that thinking.

Batman, even without the technology is still the worlds greatest detective and a master of the martial arts. That has to count for something.

It does, but that is part of the reason that I started this thread.

What is the criteria of classifying somebody a crime fighter?

Is it sheer wanton to solve crime and protect the innocent? The tights, as Lobo said earlier? What is it? The above average intelligence? Martial Arts?

Why is it that we hold these people on high? How do we say that one person is a "superhero," and that those who try really hard to ensure that our streets are safe (even though in most cases they are not anyways) fall short of being revered is such a fashion? Where is the cut off?

I feel they need to posess a supernatural ability, personally. It is not that I have no respect for Batman, Ironman, or any of the others who were not part of an unfortunate accident that mutated them in one way or another.

Batman decided one day to become Batman. It was a conscious decision he made. Did Reid Richards make the decision to become Mr. Fantastic? No. He was on a space shuttle that was showered by radiation transforming him into the elastic man he is now. He decided to take this Fantastic power (no pun intended, but now that I think of it, N'yuk) he now has to fight crime (Dr. Doom for the most part).

And I ask you . . . why do you think that having superpowers is a good criteria? I don't know if you saw my question, so I'll repost it. If Batman could see in the dark because of some sort of mutant ability, instead of infrared lenses would he be a superhero? He'd have the exact same abilities that he has now. Two people with the exact same abilities--one a superhero, the other not. That seems perfectly absurd to me.

You keep asking what the criteria for being a superhero are. I don't think there is a hard-and-fast definition, but here's what I came up with. To be a superhero, you must--

Have good motives. Stopping criminals doesn't make you a superhero unless you do it for the right reasons.

Have exceptional abilities. I don't have a hard-and-fast definition for exceptional, but I know it when I see it.

Be effective. This is probably pretty self-explanatory.

There are probably other qualifications, but those are the ones I see as important.

And you're making fun of my post?
First of all Reed Richards doesn't fight crime for a living. He's a scientist and explorer, and it's his personal history with Dr. Doom that brings them into conflict.
Second of all, Richards doesn't have to fight crime or super-villains or whatever because of cosmic radiation. It's his conscience, not his elastic body. How is this not obvious to you?
You seem to think that being a super-hero has to fall into your lap. Why would you value the qualities of a super-hero who didn't work at being one-- someone who was born a mutant or befell a radioactive accident-- more than those of someone who dedicated their life to rising above their human limitations to accomplish deeds equal to those who could do it more easily with super powers?
If you haven't gotten it by now, you probably won't. Gregory already said enough to make the point clear before I found this thread.

this is the best point so far

No, I am not making fun of anything. I thought we were all having a nice debate. I was actually enjoying discussing this with everyone, and everyone has made valid points.

My standpoint is still just that, mine. If you all think I am dismissing your points then please stop posting here. If you think I am just some punk kid trying to piss you off, then stop posting here. Eventually, this thread will disappear and we will move on with our lives. (by the way, I am not some punk kid)

With that said, I will continue to my rebuttle. (I said butt, n'yuk ) I do not feel that superheroism (if that is even a word) has to fall into your lap. Look at Batman. He had his parents killed infront of his eyes as a child, fell into the batcave and used that symbol to strike fear into the hearts of those preying on the innocent. If that is not falling into ones lap then I will eat my hat.

I am simply saying what about those who, more or less, hadn't a say in leading the life of a vigilate? Granted, there are those who chose the life of a supervillian, but that still encompasses the title of SUPER.

The supernatural aspect, in my eyes, still dictates the superhero status.

And P.S., can Batman see in the dark with infared vision with his mask off? No, thus that point has no validity.

What is so extraordinary about Punisher? Or Ironman? His intelligence? Does that classify Albert Einstine to be a superhero? His technilogical advances help protect people, so is his indirectly a Superhero?

Wait ... you're using Batman as an example of how superheroism (not a word) doesn't have to fall into your lap? But you've been spending the entire thread arguing that Batman isn't a superhero.

Punisher is a genius with weapon's and hand to hand skill's and easily take's out hero's. Wolverine is a "Superhero" in regaRD'S TO HEALING BUT IN THERE LATEST ENCOUNTER sorry bout that damn cap's lock...anywho

Punisher got scrathed a few time's but really gave wolvie a run for his money, and wolvie has cleared room's full of ninja's and could probably take out a swat team in second's a feat i would expect punisher to also perform.

police and soldier's may have the same motive's but are CLEARLY outclassed.

Remember what I said about the word super(it means more/better than normal, not extraordinary). The word that means extra more than usual is hyper.Thats why bats is a superhero coz he's more athletic,strong, fast,organised, talented than normal. Thats just a technicality but I think relevant.This is a good post though mate.

A rebuttle for Gregory:


Your point being?

I used Batman as an example of how superheroism (thank you for pointing out it is not a word, but I will continue to use it because we all know what I am trying to say) DOES NOT HAVE TO FALL INTO YOU LAP, and by doing so proving that the criterian does not include a near-fatal accident. Look at the X-Men. They were not victim to a horrific accident (for the most part, I know Wolverine) but they are still classed as superheros in my eyes.

I'm trying to understand you, so bear with me.

Batman is an example of how superheroism does not have to fall into your lap, even though he is not a superhero?

Yes. Somebody asked me if "superheroism" has to fall into your lap. I said no. And I used Batman as an example because the life he is leading has everything to do with the death of his parents.

This might kind of ruin everything I was debating for, but that is okay.

First, let me make one thing a little more clear. I like Batman. I have nothing against him. The Batman series, comics, etc, had THE BEST villians. And the story of Batman is very relatable, which is another plus.

One major reason I feel Batman is not a superhero is the short-lived series on WB Batman Beyond. Where would Terry be without the Batsuit? Nowhere. Where would Batman be without his toys? Nowhere.

Take away his technology and Batman is nothing. Take away Spider-Mans technology and where is he? He is without webbing. He still has everything else!

Take away Ironmans technology, he is nothing. Take away Storms technology, she is the same!

Batman could take half of the marvel and DC universe in a hand to hand fight without toy's tho

Maybe. People like Flash, I can see that.

Who the hell is Flash anyways? Run really fast... BOOOO!!!!

well he make's quicksilver look like a senor citizan speed wise

Even so, I hate them both and wish they would die. But they are still Superheroes in my eyes because that have that INBORN extra edge on your average human.

It's funny, because that's exactly the reason I don't like that show. I watched several episodes of it, and I constantly found myself thinking, "This is totally wrong. The people who make this show seem to think that Batman is nothing more than some guy in a fancy suit, and that's not true."

Have you read the Knightfall/Knightsend story? In that, Bruce beats a number of very skilled martial artists without using any of his technology. Heck, he defeats the Azbat without using any technology but his nightvision lens.

Ok first of all a Super Hero is different from a Super Human Therefore No The Xmen are not Super human they are Super Heros They are the next step in Human Evelotion which makes them no longer Human Super man is a Super hero not Super human and Eddie Brock is not Super Human he is an ordinary guy with an Alien Suit The Suit is what possess the strength not Eddie brock Eddies strength is not SUPER he just works out a lot. Bat man is not a Super hero he is another guy that has lots and lots of money and entirely too much time on his hands to do all the martial arts training. If I had 30 years with nothing to do but travel the world and learn martial arts would that make me a Super hero not to mention the money which is immessurable and with that kind of money Tiny Tim could be a SUPER HERO if you class Batman as such (thank you for putting Tiny Tim in my head Darth Revan)

If you also became the world's greatest detective, had a genius level intelligence, and fought crime with even a fraction of the Batman's success, then yes. You would be a superhero.

Who the hell is Tiny Tim? Whoever he is, you're wrong. Being a superhero also requires a huge deal of dedication and a very specific mind-set. Especially Batman; we all know how well the Azbat did, and even Nightwing was relieved when he didn't have to be Batman any more.

VENOMfan...

Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the symbiote a part of Eddie now? I thought it was a part of him... and can only be removed by Loud noises (and I think fire, or fire hurts him a lot)

Thus... isn't it the suit that gave Eddie the power? So... isn't it the suit?

the suit bonded with Eddie, but could be removed threw sufficent effort and they have been seperated a few time's, Venom primary weakness was sonic attack's but was also weak to fire((it's the other way for carnage)) yes the suit was what boosted his Strength but he was powerfull for a regular human to begin with, but after they first bonded even if you seperated Eddie from the Symbiote he possesed a spider strength, just the suit provided the other abilitie's, Wall crawling,Webbing,Agility,Reflex's((tho not spider-man calibur)) and his own type of spider-sense. tho this is the original Venom, not the Monster Venom that obsorbed Eddie and thus they truley became one entity.


more can be learned
http://www.marveldirectory.com/individuals/v/venom.htm
and
http://www.spiderfan.org/characters/venom.html

A superhero is someone who risks their own life to protect others against impossible odds, powers mean nothing they're just an aid. Batman and Ironman are superheroes because they prothect people they don't know for no other reason than they want to, sure Bats hates criminals because one killed his parents but it's his compassion that makes him don the batsuit and fight. He gets no pay and and usually takes critical injury. But he keeps fighting, that is the mark of a superhero the determination to fight when all hope is gone, and buddy Batman and Ironman are true superheroes

First of all police officers are very different from Batman, Ironman and the Punisher. They work for the goverment , get paid and go home.
Batman , Ironman and all the other superheroes you don't acknowledge as superheroes have their own heroic motivation and commit their own free time into saving the public from warped psychos.
They also train hard into making themselves above normal human standards, instead of just having a superpower bestowed onto them by some freak-unrealistic accidents.
Also I thought that to be acknowledged as a hero, never mind a super one - the general public have to consider them heroic. Now last time I checked everyone in the Spiderman universe generally hates him for one thing or another, mutants are considered vile scum in X-men.
But apart from the Punisher, Batman and Ironman are well respected and are considered to be heroic people because of their determination in bringing criminals to justice. Stan Lee just thought if he gave the majority of Marvel characters superpowers they would be superheroes, well he's soooooooo wrong.

Damn right!!

Amen to that.

Cyclops: Batman may not be able to literally see in the dark without night vision, but he can fight someone blind. Obviously, he's not as good as Daredevil with his eyes closed, but because of his training and intuition, he can take down most non-superhuman opponents in pitch dark.

I see... so the fact that getting paid makes Policemen horrible people? As I am sure I have mentioned before, I am almost POSITIVE that a vast majority of police officers DO NOT get into that field for the money. I am sure they have the good motives that you speak so highly of... so where is the differentiation?

Spider-Man is so disliked in the Marvel Universe mainly because of J. J. (J. Jonah Jamison, if you did not know what I meant.) J. J. hates Spider-Man because of personal reasons. Apparently, wearing a mask makes you a bad person in his eyes. So, I am sure that if Batman was in the position that Spider-Man was, then he would be revered as a horrible person as well. (Lets do your homework before posting here)



Good point, but what about Police Officers? Do they not go back day after day?

But how many police officers, upon being crippled, would then risk their lives trying to rescue a kidnapping victim while still confined to a wheel-chair?

Batman has been crippled, brainwashed, and heavily addicted to a drug (Venom). He's seen one of his partners blown to pieces, another (Azrael) fatally shot, and another confined to a wheelchair for life. He's seen one of his friend go insane and murder thousands of people; he's actually died in the line of duty (Obsideon Age). But he's never stopped fighting, and he's never lossed hope in his cause. The level of dedication he shows is almost inconceivable--I doubt that any police officer can match it.

Police officers have determination, and I'm sure that many of them are good people. I certainly don't want to downplay them--but they're not superheroes.

wait i have it, MECHANDISEING!!! that's what make's superhero's a substantial profit!!..................no that's not it

That is the funniest thing I have ever heard in my life!

Anyways, back on topic. (thanks for the breather though, VENOMfan)

I am sure there is a plethera of handicapped police officers. And I am sure that they are more then willing to do so. Perhaps because they do get known for doing such because they not wear a costume.

Alright, first off Batman is definetly a Superhero, not just anyone can be on the Justice League, also Iron Man is a Superhero, it does not matter that he had to use his ingenuity to become one. Green Latern is a Superhero too!(But I do understand your argument, it is pretty gay that there is a whole society of "Green Lanterns" Anyway a Superhero has to fit four criteria...

1. Has to have a personal conflict such as dealing with his/her powers and or past. Example; Spiderman, it eats him alive that he ultimately was the reason for his Uncle Ben's death, He is often hated by the public and all of his worst enemies know who he is and/or were people that played roles in his life.
2. Any true Super hero has to have a nemesis that he cant beat without damn near dying or being helped. Example; Spiderman and Carnage, Superman and Darkseid, Batman and Clayface, Wolverine and Sabretooth.
3.They have to be battle tested.
4.They have to be willing to die for whats right

I'm pretty sure you have to pass a physical to become a police officer.

Anyway, this is different. This isn't a case of going into the force with a handicap, or of being handicapped and continuing in the force in some capacity. This is a matter of a man being worn down for days, being crippled in the most bruttle fashion, and then immediately throwing his personal concerns aside the instant somebody required his help.

Besides, that's not his only accomplishment. Reread my list of things Batman has survived again, and tell me that the average police officer could keep going after suffering all the horrors Batman has suffered. I think you'll find, if you're completely honest with yourself, that you won't be able to.

Your average cop does not have the money to afford the health coverage a rich person does. But police officers that have been hurt on the job still go back and perform their job as best as possible. Perhaps if they had the financial backgroud of our beloved Bruce Wayne, they could go full out, but it is unfortunate they cannot.

When Batman's back was broken by Bane, he got absolutely no medical care except that which was available in the cave, which were very second rate. Because if they'd taken him to a hospital, it would have given away his identity, don't you know.

Good point...

But let me pose a question to you. How different is Batman from... Robin? What does he have over Robin/Nightwing? Nothing.What does he have over Batgirl (aside from the gender defining organs)

Anybody can throw on a costume and pose at Batman. Use his toys and you are Batman.

Batman is a far better fighter than Nightwing or Robin. Remember in Fugitive, when Batman and Nightwing faught? Nightwing couldn't even touch Batman, and Batman won without even landing a punch. And of course, the difference in skill between Batman and Robin is even more pronounced. Batgirl is about as skilled as Batman, but she is far less experienced.

You say that anybody can pose as/be Batman. But remember what happened when Azrael tried that? Remember what happened when Huntress posed as Batman in No-Man's Land? People died.

And remember, Nightwing, Robin, and Batgirl are not just "anybody." The first two were personally trained by Batman; Batgirl was trained by one of Batman's teachers from a very early age. Nightwing leads the Teen Titans. Heck, he was leader of the JLA durring the Obsideon Age. Robin is the leader of Young Justice.

These are not "anybody." They are a very, very select group.

This is clearly not true. The man is distinct, and although Nightwing has filled in for him, he is not the same person.

You seem to take people's comparison of superheroes to police officers as debasing the station of police officer. From what has been posted here, it can't be rationally inferred that people are calling policeman "horrible" because they get paid for what they do. You seem to think in extremes quite often. If this is supposed to be an intelligent argument, you can't use such hyperbole and expect to gain an edge. It was already stated in this thread that the police force is a community of thousands and thousands of people with diverse backgrounds, personalities, and motives. This automatically squashes any attempt for anyone to judge whether a random, anonymous, imaginary cop is a hero or not. It simply isn't logical. For many, the term "superhero" is describing one's specific actions, not a job that you can apply for.
If you were going to try to attack the argument that police officers are employed, paid, and restricted by the government, you might have tried drawing a parallel to the Avengers and the JLA, since they are U.N. sanctioned. You would have been wrong, but it's a direction in which to go, anyway. I'm not fully informed as to whether the U.N. grants any money to either of these organizations, but I know that Tony Stark used to bankroll the Avengers.

That was one of the most intelligent statements I have ever read, and for that I applaude you.

However, I am not trying to say that anyone in here is demeaning the police as a whole... not even in the least. I am trying to get an understanding how how people judge those who either uphold the law or take the law into their own hands.

There is one thing I have to say before I post a rebuttle. Has anyone else read the comic where the X-men and the Teen Titans team up to fight Dark Phoenix? It was pretty bad ass. (I know, weird. DC and Marvel)

Anyways, I am trying to say that there is, in my eyes, nothing "super" about Batman or Ironman (these are examples, I am not attacking them in particular). They have trained (very hard), but that is all I can see. For that, I DO NOT consider them anything more then cops in fancy get-ups. If you can convince me otherwise, I welcome you to do so. I am not short sighted, but if I have a rebuttle I will post it.

Moving away from Batman and Iron Man for the moment...

You've said that aliens can't be superheroes because they're not human, and therefore cannot be "superhuman."

In Marvel, mutants aren't technically "human" either. So you don't believe that the X-Men are superheroes?

(Kal-el gets credit for this point; I'm just dragging it back into the light)

cheers Greg, I was gonna use my old argument anyway.You saved me sounding repetative.

WHATEVER!!!!!
BATMAN IS THE ULTIMATE SUPERHERO!AND NO ONE ELSE!

BATMAN!BATMAN!BATMAN!

It really depends upon where you get your information, whether a mutant is technically a human or not. Most known mutants have the same basic biological needs and operations as humans. There have been several instances of mutants and humans interbreeding and producing non-sterile offspring. In instances where two diverse species interbreed, the offspring cannot reproduce. This seems to indicate that mutants are close enough genetically to count as human, biologically. Obviously, when it comes to Apocalypse in his golden years and any other ultra-powerful, god-like, sometimes immaterial mutants, there is cause to call the genetic closeness moot.

The point is that some mutants choose to become career criminals (like the Vanisher, Pyro, Blob, Black Tom, etc.), some choose to become heroes (like the X-Men), and some just choose to live normal lives, not involving themselves in the bigger fight between good and evil (like Iceman and Havoc when it suited them). Those who became heroes were superheroes, because regardless of how or why they could perform superhuman feats, they could, and they used those abilities to heroic ends.

Clearly, with aliens such as Kal-El and J'onn J'onzz, the term "super" is relative. Because they are on a world where their power is greater than that of most people's, that makes them super, and obviously they are heroes.
In Alan Moore's "Top Ten," everyone in a particular town is a superhero, so it is difficult to say what is "super" in such a place. This is where the point of contest in this issue comes from-- what is "super" in any particular context.

I say if the Batman can have an arsenal of non-lethal, specialized gadgets moved to his Bat-cave without the law finding out and secretly carries this arsenal into the city each night in conjunction with his massively developed physical prowess, tactical skill, and analytical knowledge for the purposes of saving lives and protecting the innocent-- something that most citizens, including the police, cannot accomplish-- then that makes him a superhero. The fact that he has help from his intelligence network (Robin, Oracle, Nightwing, etc.) makes him no less a superhero, insures he will stay a superhero and not go over the edge and become a violent, vengeful vigilante.

Superman has the same basic needs as humans, and he is capable of mating with non-Kryptonians to produce fertile offspring (how do I know? Read DC 1,000,000). I don't think that definion is going to fly in comic book realities.

Superman cannot reproduce! (Watch Mallrats by the great Kevin Smith)

Yes, he can. Read DC 1,000,000 (sort of hard to find, I admit, since there are a great many issues and it's never been collected into TPB format) if you don't believe me. 1,000,000 months in the future, there's an entire Superman dynasty, started by Kent and Lane.

I'm not just talking about getting horny and feeling lonely for human companionship. Superman has different biological needs as a Kryptonian than humans. For one, I don't think he needs to eat much at all. I don't know how much oxygen he requires either, and I don't remember if Post-Crisis Superman even needs it at all. The point is, Kryptonians in an Earth environment, were there enough of them to constitute a species, would be a different kind of animal biologically than humans in their own environment. They would all be more or less the same in their distinction from humans. The Marvel comics mutants, however, are not all the same. They are all different variations on regular human organisms.
In the novel "The Death and Life of Superman," it was Jonathan Kent's estimate that a Kryptonian male could not breed with a human female. Whether or not this is true, I can't say. My point about breeding was mainly to close the genetic distinction between normal humans and mutants.

Fair enough, Batman, but then...

Is Plastic Man human? He certainly was human before he was turned into Plastic Man, and he's had a son by a human woman (granted, we don't know whether the son is non-sterile), but he doesn't need any of the things humans need to survive--in the Obsideon Age story-line, he survived for thousands of years as a few particles floating around near the bottom of the ocean.

I think you'll have a very, very difficult time defining "human" in such a way that it applies to all the right DC heroes, and nobody else. We already have an alien who can have a non-sterile child (whatever Kent might think) and a human(?) who can live thousands of years without any of the basic human needs. And you can't say that all it takes to be human is to be born to human parents, because by that definition Dream of the Endless (the current one) would be human, as would his raven, Mattew. Not to mention characters like the Man-Bat.

That's one of the reasons that I don't like the idea that nonhumans can't be superheroes--DC and Marvel blur the lines between human and nonhuman to such an extent that the distinction becomes almost meaningless.

Hey. I'm on your side in the debate. Sorry if I was unclear in my points.

You weren't unclear. I just got caught up in the heat of the moment.

I say if the Batman can have an arsenal of non-lethal, specialized gadgets moved to his Bat-cave without the law finding out and secretly carries this arsenal into the city each night in conjunction with his massively developed physical prowess, tactical skill, and analytical knowledge for the purposes of saving lives and protecting the innocent-- something that most citizens, including the police, cannot accomplish-- then that makes him a superhero. The fact that he has help from his intelligence network (Robin, Oracle, Nightwing, etc.) makes him no less a superhero, insures he will stay a superhero and not go over the edge and become a violent, vengeful vigilante.
wow!
you r one of the few who actually appreciates batman!couldn't have put it better myself!

a superhero is a hero with superpowers

be it artificiel (like iron man, batman)
by accident ( hulk, spiderman)
or born (mutants)

they are superheroes

imho tho

for me a superhero is somebody with charisma and
some kewl power (from good tactics like Batman,
till Raising the Dead like Evil Ernie )

I don't prefer a typical superhero,
i like Evil Ernie/Lady Death types
but a Spiderman/Batman is also kewl
and X-statix are also great

dont forget a living costume, those help

What makes a superherO?

being featured in a Marvel/dc/dark horse etc comic book series

hmmmmmmmmmm.......good point but Sam and twice are a staple of Image's serie's and look at them just a couple of goofy cop's

yeah. supppose so. and simpsons, they are a comic series and not superheroes

yeah, realy it's obvious who is a "superhero" and who isnt, just the "super" part realy dosent make one better than the other.
Punisher is the best example he has no enhancement's or extra "abilitie's" but the guy handed the Marvel Universe it's ass...albeit a "what if" it was still a possibility. Hell he dropped Spidey and Venom at the same time((they were fighting, but both set's of spider-sense should have picked up on o' Punisher's intention's)) all he used was his brain and good old fashioned lead

The "super" part is over-rated basically. One who uses their own abilities in an extrodinary way make one a hero or villian.

A Superhero just makes a Superhero. Period.

when was that? when puni took on spidey and venom?

I miss this thread.

Bumping again

Originally posted by Herr Logan

I don't consider the Punisher to be a super-hero. What he does, many real-life ex-military NRA-backing nut-cases who stay in shape can do. He may have the innocent in mind when killing his prey, but he's primarily driven by the hatred of criminals. He's an exterminator.



Say what you want about him hes still the best hero out there

Coughbumpcough

everyone has there own ideas of what makes a superhero, personally, i don't think you need superpowers to make a superhero, grayson was a cop who was a superhero, so does that make him a megahero?....you can ask the question "does that make just normal cops superheros?"....no it don't, the good cops maybe heros, but if they dont have any exceptional abilities or skills(and i'm not just talking about powers when i say that) than whats so super about them?

Originally posted by Smallville
In regard to the alien status, I feel that being from another planet kind of cheapens the status of 'superHUMAN' abilities. They can be crime fighters all they like, all the more power to them if they feel so. But they are not 'Superheros'

So Superman isn't a superhero?..... he's just a vigilante in tights?

Originally posted by Scoobless
So Superman isn't a superhero?..... he's just a vigilante in tights?

What makes a superhero a superhero? Perspective. For example: Black Panther isn't a " superhero ". He does what he does because he's serving Wakanda and its people. He's wearing the uniform because of cultural and ceremonial dictates. ( You know, like how the Queen has to weak a crown, robes etc. during ceremonies. And how the U.S. President has to wear a suit. )

Batman, not a " superhero ". For the most part he works outside the law, breaking it without care. He's more of a vigilante. He doesn't care if people hate him for his actions or love him. He does what he believes he has to do right or wrong and deals with the consequences.



Superman is on the DC Wheaties box. He stands for morality, justice and all that good stuff. Captain America also-- has a strong MORAL compass. Play fair, fight fair, Eat your broccoli, finish your spinach, don't have angry sex, buy war bonds. That sort f things makes a superhero.

Technically, Superman is "superhuman." So is the Batman. The definitions in this link cover both that which is beyond any human's abilities, and that which is extraordinary for humans:
Superhuman definition

I think I might have mentioned-- a damn long time ago-- that it also sort of depends on the context. The prefix "super" automatically requires that there be an implied or stated "normal" basis for comparison. Superman isn't living among his own people. He wouldn't be anything special while living with Kryptonians on Krypton, or even living in a world predominated by Kryptonians under a yellow sun. Because he lives in a world where almost all the inhabitants do not have abilities like his, he is "super," and because his "powers and abilities far beyond those of mortal men" (i.e. humans, with whom he lives), he is "superhuman."

No one may answer this, but from me is a matter of selection. Someone already knows you before committing. Some are gifted, others become like Batman or Ironman.

yeah....batman is so a superhero even without powers i mean he takes on a guy who kills the worlds greatest bounty hunter when he has no weapons no nothing but the guy has like a rifle.

cool look
cool name
has powers
does good

Cape: check
Underwear outside of pants: check
Stupid name: check

That's about all you need.

Here's the deal, Superman came to earth as a powerful alien with human form. After him an entire legion from earth and other parts of the universe...like He-Man and all that mess. Why?

Originally posted by TheKahn
Cape: check
Underwear outside of pants: check
Stupid name: check

That's about all you need. Capes are gay. Whats in is a hot motto, tragities and problems in their life and the lame jokes they ake. Hotness.

I get hard like a superhero...

Originally posted by TheKahn
Cape: check
Underwear outside of pants: check
Stupid name: check

That's about all you need.

also add a side kick to that and ur set to battle crime and super villins

Super heroes are those characters with super powers whose actions are labeled as good in comic books.

A superhero is a person that does the right thing without regard for their own safety and without reimbursement.

no not always look at hulk he is kinda a superhero to some people

Originally posted by supersayin4goku
no not always look at hulk he is kinda a superhero to some people
IMO, Hulk is a misunderstood antihero. He fits some of the criteria though. Savage and Mindless Hulk usually do more damage than good.

I think what makes a super hero super, is the tight undies they wear.

BUT HE DOSE HAVE A MIND TO CONTRULE IT I MEAN WHEN HE SEES THE GIRS HE STOPS

Originally posted by supersayin4goku
BUT HE DOSE HAVE A MIND TO CONTRULE IT I MEAN WHEN HE SEES THE GIRS HE STOPS
A hot girl can always calm the beast.

They were origianlly called Mystery Men... al ittle easier to define.

We all know what a hero is. Perhaps super refers to the level of threats they face... or just a silly costume.

Superman is the epitome for other heroes to look to for guidance

Originally posted by Smallville
What do you feel is the criteria for bestowing the title of SUPERHERO upon a person?

Personally, I feel that a person must posess a SUPERHUMAN, or an ability beyond that of the common human, that is natural. It is not that of a something that is manmade.

IE, Batman is not a superhero, Ironman is not a superhero, and Green Latern as well.

I disagree with you about your criteria. To figure out what makes a person a "Superhero" it should first be determined what makes a person a "Hero". Personally, I think that the level of someone's physical abilities, intelligence or talents is not as important to being a hero as what a person does with what they have.

Examples:

Police officer or Firefighter with considerable physical prowess constantly risking their lives to protect others on a daily basis. = Hero

Olympic athlete with more with more physical skill than an average Police officer who does nothing to protect others. = Not a hero

Old-ass Grandpa with deteriorating health risking his life to save a toddler from an oncoming Subway train. = Hero

Doctor with considerable Mental aptitude using his gifts to help the sick and less fortunate in some third-world country. = Hero

Person with a higher level of intelligence than our Doctor who uses his gifts to figure out a way to make himself rich. = Not a hero

"Hero" defines what level of danger or challenges a person overcomes to help someone else. Being able to compete in a "World's Strongest Man" does not make one a hero.


Now, we turn it up a notch and add the "Super":

An alien with impressive powers and abilities lives on the moon and observes Earth, never helping anybody. Even though he has the ability to help a good damn many people. = Not a hero or a superhero

Another alien with impressive powers constantly risking his life to protect the people of Earth, even saving the entire planet from being destroyed on several occasions. = SUPERHERO

Caped vigilante with considerable wealth but no super-powers who fights crime on a mainly local scale, but has also helped defeat city, state, country and planetary-scale threats. = SUPERHERO

Person with enhanced abilities that lets a robber pass by, and does nothing to stop him. = Not a hero or superhero

Then after said robber kills his uncle, learns a hard lesson about responsibility and devotes his life to stopping crime. Risks his life fighting threats that local Police can't stop. = SUPERHERO

The term "Super" should be applied when someone is willing to face and overcome danger beyond a "Normal" person's ability to deal with. Save a kid from a fire? Hero. Save a city from a fire-breathing Giant? Superhero. It doesn't matter what planet someone is from or what powers (if any) they're born with.

"Gee Superman, thanks for saving the world again and all, but you'll never be a superhero in my book 'cause you're from another planet. You should never be mentioned in the same breath as guys like Flash and Apache Chief."

Did the previous statement make sense to anybody out there?