Spoilers "Superman & Lois" Season 2

[Anwar]

Shifting the argument. Lane works for the D.O.D. which has a program to develop anti-Superman weapons and has Kryptonite at its disposal. The average person does not, and has no other realistic means of protecting themselves.

The average person can go to the DoD and ask them for protection, now that they know they're in danger.

Again, critical condition and brain trauma. Not a welcome bargain.

Better than dead.

Superhero life is not some high school club. Real people have real lives and responsibilities, which do not include tossing their real life aside to do what, exactly? Forced to live on alert because their friend / spouse / relative is an irresponsible "hero" who consciously placed them in danger?

That happens whether they know or not, because their friend chose to associate with them in both identities. So yes, they are going to have to live on alert because of what their friend did.

Seriously, you need to accept that there are just things about "Classic" Superheroes that are outdated and need to be reconstructed. Like "Keeping it a secret protects people" and "I should play sick mind games with my loved ones".

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

The average person can go to the DoD and ask them for protection, now that they know they're in danger.

No. Government agencies do not work that way. If you walked up to any agency asking for personal protection, you will--at the very least--be 1) questioned while your ID is being checked and 2) redirected to a branch of your local law enforcement. Just making shit up does not make it true.

Better than dead.

Translation: anything to try (and fail) to justify regular humans engaging in situations far beyond their physical pay grade (and jettisoning any sort of common sense out of the window), when they are better off with no connection to the hero's job and risks.

That happens whether they know or not, because their friend chose to associate with them in both identities. So yes, they are going to have to live on alert because of what their friend did.

Which no regular person signed up for and would not like such a dangerous imposition on their lives. If one is to accept characters as behaving somewhat like real people, then said characters would not willingly send their lives into danger and chaos for some irrational reason that can never be justified with reason.

Seriously, you need to accept that there are just things about "Classic" Superheroes that are outdated and need to be reconstructed. Like "Keeping it a secret protects people" and "I should play sick mind games with my loved ones".

Individuals have private parts of their lives. That is the nature of most people around the world. Only those with a very serious level of insecurities feel they must know everything about / be involved in another person's life. I've used this example before, and it will apply here forevermore: people in potentially high-risk jobs (e.g. working for the C.I.A., N.S.A., etc.) do not open / expose all of their professional lives and risks to their families for the most sensible, time-honored reason.

 

[Anwar]

No. Government agencies do not work that way. If you walked up to any agency asking for personal protection, you will--at the very least--be 1) questioned while your ID is being checked and 2) redirected to a branch of your local law enforcement. Just making shit up does not make it true.

In a superhero world adjusted to the fact there are superbeings and normal people are attacked by then, yes Government agencies would adapt to that and be able to try and provide protection.

Translation: anything to try (and fail) to justify regular humans engaging in situations far beyond their physical pay grade (and jettisoning any sort of common sense out of the window), when they are better off with no connection to the hero's job and risks.

Yes. However, the hero was thoughtless and associated with them in both identities and thus is responsible for putting them in danger. So now they need to know about the danger to take precautions.

Which no regular person signed up for and would not like such a dangerous imposition on their lives.

Again, it's on the hero for thoughtlessly putting the target on them to begin with.

people in potentially high-risk jobs (e.g. working for the C.I.A., N.S.A., etc.) do not open / expose all of their professional lives and risks to their families for the most sensible, time-honored reason.

They tell them that they ARE CIA, NSA and other similar positions, even if they don't tell them exactly what their position is. They do not lie to their spouses over everything. And if they choose to associate with people while "undercover", then they are similarly responsible for the danger that they've brought into their lives.

We need more stories where once the hero's ID comes out to people they associated with in both identities, they get chewed out for how they endangered them.

 

[dupersuper]

these days, secret identities are kind of a dying trope (and deservedly so)

Deservedly? Hard disagree.

Really, this whole "My secret identity protects my loved ones from harm!" thing hasn't held water in decades.

How so?

Secret Identities in general are an outdated idea.

I refer such comments to Adventures of Superman #525.

That happens whether they know or not, because their friend chose to associate with them in both identities.

Except it's not an issue if they're associating with him in both identities. People like Lois and Jimmy know the dangers of publicly being associated with Superman and have chosen to take those risks. People who Clark doesn't associate with as Superman are...not associated with Superman.

 

[Guy Gardener]

I remember Lois making a joke about how she hoped one of Superman's enemies should kidnap Steve Lombard and never give him back.

 

[Christopher]

Except it's not an issue if they're associating with him in both identities. People like Lois and Jimmy know the dangers of publicly being associated with Superman and have chosen to take those risks.

Of course it's an issue. If the excuse for lying to your friends about your identity is that it keeps them safe from danger, that excuse goes out the window if they knowingly face the danger. Then you're just gaslighting them for no reason, which is horrible.

 

[JD]

Yes, because knowing the nuclear missile is about to strike 5 feet away from you in less than a minute is better than not knowing..

Yeah, I'd sure as hell want to know if I was going to die, even if it's just for 5 minutes, I'd still rather be able to prepare myself.

No. Government agencies do not work that way. If you walked up to any agency asking for personal protection, you will--at the very least--be 1) questioned while your ID is being checked and 2) redirected to a branch of your local law enforcement. Just making shit up does not make it true.

I have a feeling if you could prove with absolute certainty that you were in danger, and it was something beyond the police's jurisdiction, the fed's would provide you with protection.

Translation: anything to try (and fail) to justify regular humans engaging in situations far beyond their physical pay grade (and jettisoning any sort of common sense out of the window), when they are better off with no connection to the hero's job and risks.

To be clear, I never once talked about regular people trying fight the villains, I was just talking about them going about their daily lives. Even if you can't fight the villains, it's still better to know that they have a reason to target you, and that you can avoid putting yourself in a situation where they might get you.

Which no regular person signed up for and would not like such a dangerous imposition on their lives. If one is to accept characters as behaving somewhat like real people, then said characters would not willingly send their lives into danger and chaos for some irrational reason that can never be justified with reason.

To be fair in most of these situations they weren't knowingly putting themselves in this situation, since they didn't know that their friend/significant other was a superhero when they first got involved with them.
My biggest issue with secret identities is one that you have not addressed yet, and that is the fact that spending years or decades lying to people you care is really, really fucking shitty thing to do on a purely personal level. Even undercover cops, spies, and special forces soldiers at least tell their family members that they are those things, even if they can't tell them exactly what they're doing.

 

[Ovation]

undercover cops, spies, and special forces soldiers at least tell their family members that they are those things, even if they can't tell them exactly what they're doing

It’s not unheard of but it’s hardly universal for them to do so, particularly the first two categories.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

In a superhero world adjusted to the fact there are superbeings and normal people are attacked by then, yes Government agencies would adapt to that and be able to try and provide protection.

No, they would not. Providing personal protection for individuals is not their job or within their legal authority. Again, making shit up does not make it true or sensible.

Yes. However, the hero was thoughtless and associated with them in both identities and thus is responsible for putting them in danger. So now they need to know about the danger to take precautions.

Once again: consciously involving civilians in superhero business is placing them in danger for no justifiable reason. Two, there are no precautions against the endless numbers of super-villains who all have distinct powers, methods of operation, etc., that the superhero cannot stop outright even when he's the only one facing them. He or she cannot possibly protect them, nor are they ever going to be "prepared" to deal with super-villains, unless this miracle is the product of especially poor storytelling.

Again, it's on the hero for thoughtlessly putting the target on them to begin with.

Nope. You're trying to shift the argument again. I said:

Which no regular person signed up for and would not like such a dangerous imposition on their lives. If one is to accept characters as behaving somewhat like real people, then said characters would not willingly send their lives into danger and chaos for some irrational reason that can never be justified with reason.

The only thing on the hero is being so irresponsible that he or she actually believed involving his very fragile, John & Jane Q. Average relatives / friends in his life of dangers they will ever be "prepared" to face, handle, much less understand. Real people would not appreciate the hero deciding--of his or her free will--to involve--essentially draft their loved ones into a fight they never needed to know about/or face, and would not under every other circumstance of life.

They tell them that they ARE CIA, NSA and other similar positions, even if they don't tell them exactly what their position is. They do not lie to their spouses over everything.

You really do not know what you're talking about. No one in the CIA or NSA is opening up the "book" of his or her job, what they see/know/do to relatives, not only due to the rules of the agencies, but on a personal level, for the safety of their relatives.

We need more stories where once the hero's ID comes out to people they associated with in both identities, they get chewed out for how they endangered them.

Unrealistic and lacking any creative value whatsoever.

 

[Anwar]

No, they would not. Providing personal protection for individuals is not their job or within their legal authority.

Actually it is. Especially if they can be bothered to create "Superman Corps" and all.

Once again: consciously involving civilians in superhero business is placing them in danger for no justifiable reason.

The hero associating with them in both identities is placing them in danger for no justifiable reason.

Two, there are no precautions against the endless numbers of super-villains who all have distinct powers

There are plenty, actually. But they only work if the hero doesn't lie to them 24/7.

The only thing on the hero is being so irresponsible that he or she actually believed involving his very fragile, John & Jane Q. Average relatives / friends in his life of dangers they will ever be "prepared" to face, handle, much less understand. Real people would not appreciate the hero deciding--of his or her free will--to involve--essentially draft their loved ones into a fight they never needed to know about/or face, and would not under every other circumstance of life.

The hero doesn't that anyways, by associating with them in both identities and therefore letting their enemies know these people are important to them.

You really do not know what you're talking about. No one in the CIA or NSA is opening up the "book" of his or her job, what they see/know/do to relatives, not only due to the rules of the agencies, but on a personal level, for the safety of their relatives.

They still tell them that they ARE CIA and NSA and don't lie 24/7.

Unrealistic and lacking any creative value whatsoever.

Nah, it led to great stories. Heck, even "Whatever happened to the Man of Tomorrow" had Clark realize that his double-life just put people in danger.

 

[JD]

It’s not unheard of but it’s hardly universal for them to do so, particularly the first two categories.

Obviously they're not going to tell people who they're targeting on assigments, but I have a feeling most of the people they meet and get romantically involved with outside of work are probably going to be told at some point what they do for a living.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Actually it is. Especially if they can be bothered to create "Superman Corps" and all.

Again, no. The DoD does not offer personal protection for individuals, nor will they ever do that.

There are plenty, actually. But they only work if the hero doesn't lie to them 24/7.

Since average civilians cannot protect themselves from super-powered threats, and cannot possibly have a counter for the various powers and abilities from numerous villains, your statement is simply ridiculous.

They still tell them that they ARE CIA and NSA and don't lie 24/7.

Knowing where one works is as contrasted in magnitude from telling / involving civilians in the details their professional lives as the heat of sun is from a wet firecracker. It is completely different than a superhero deliberately involving his loved ones in his business.

Nah, it led to great stories. Heck, even "Whatever happened to the Man of Tomorrow" had Clark realize that his double-life just put people in danger.

Superior stories had civilians die as a result of their life becoming entangled with the hero's.

 

[JD]

Knowing where one works is as contrasted in magnitude from telling / involving civilians in the details their professional lives as the heat of sun is from a wet firecracker. It is completely different than a superhero deliberately involving his loved ones in his business.

I know this was directed at @Anwar, but I've been saying similar stuff to what he's saying here, and in my case, what you're saying here is all I'm talking doing. I'm not saying they should be involving them in their superheroing, all I'm talking about is the heroes just telling the people they are closest too "hey, I'm [enter superhero name]". That's it, and just doing that is not going to suddenly put them in any more danger than they already were in by being involved with the person.
Now, if the person decides that they want to find a way to get involved in the superheroing after they learn the truth, that's entirely on them, and is not the fault of the hero.

 

[Anwar]

Again, no. The DoD does not offer personal protection for individuals, nor will they ever do that.

They would in this case, this is a Superhero world.

Since average civilians cannot protect themselves from super-powered threats, and cannot possibly have a counter for the various powers and abilities from numerous villains

Average civilians would have a better chance to prevent their capture and endangerment if they knew they were targets now. And again, it's the heroes' fault for endangering them to begin with via associating with them and not warning them of the danger.

Knowing where one works is as contrasted in magnitude from telling / involving civilians in the details their professional lives as the heat of sun is from a wet firecracker. It is completely different than a superhero deliberately involving his loved ones in his business.

This is all because the hero deliberately involving friends and loved ones in his business. The issue we're discussing is how irresponsible it is to do so and not warn them of what they've become a part of.

Superior stories had civilians die as a result of their life becoming entangled with the hero's.

Because the hero didn't tell them what they were entangled with. If they'd known, there would've been potential chances they'd live.

 

[YLu]

You really do not know what you're talking about. No one in the CIA or NSA is opening up the "book" of his or her job, what they see/know/do to relatives, not only due to the rules of the agencies, but on a personal level, for the safety of their relatives.

Are we really supposed to believe those rules are primarily about keeping relatives safe? Those rules are about keeping classified information from leaking, nothing else.

 

[Commander Troi]

I don't think this discussion will change anyone's minds, but thank you all for staying civil.

FWIW, I half-expected Lana to have already known. They've said many times that she's his best friend. She should've known ages ago. I'm glad he finally told her.

I am super frustrated with these breaks between episodes!

 

[dupersuper]

The hero associating with them in both identities is placing them in danger for no justifiable reason.

Again, if they're publicly associating with Superman, how does also associating with them as Clark place them in more danger?

 

[Anwar]

Again, if they're publicly associating with Superman, how does also associating with them as Clark place them in more danger?

It's usually the other way around, it's Clark choosing to associate with them as Superman which is what puts them in danger.

 

[dupersuper]

It's usually the other way around, it's Clark choosing to associate with them as Superman which is what puts them in danger.

Either way, "both" have nothing to do with it. Regardless of secret identity, any one publicly befriending Superman is at risk.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Are we really supposed to believe those rules are primarily about keeping relatives safe? Those rules are about keeping classified information from leaking, nothing else.

The rules serve both purposes.

I don't think this discussion will change anyone's minds, but thank you all for staying civil.

Probably not, as ridiculous, unnecessary and creatively weak concepts like that seen in the most recently aired episode of S&L are never going to sell as anything other than poor writing and in-universe, it makes Clark seem enormously irresponsible.