Too bad this can't be magically retconned into existence

[DarkCrisis]

The artist: http://gingashi.deviantart.com/art/j...-dad-106626528


Why must you hate this Joey Q?

[Alan2099]

Peter Parker playing with a kid in a Spider-man dress? Sure it could have happen.

But if you meant him having a kid of his own, that's a mistake MANY comics have made before and is best to be avoided at all costs.

[Jim Thompson]

Peter Parker playing with a kid in a Spider-man dress? Sure it could have happen.

But if you meant him having a kid of his own, that's a mistake MANY comics have made before and is best to be avoided at all costs.

Not so much a mistake as a matter of personal preference and taste, I think.

[Alan2099]

Not so much a mistake as a matter of personal preference and taste, I think.

No. I go with what I said. For the way standard superhero stories are set up it's definitely a mistake.

Now if you're going to argue the way comics are set up without the characters noticeably aging is a mistake, that's a different topic right there.

[Mako]

They should retcon this back in. And then go on to tell the stories of a Spider-Man with a slipped disk, a hernia, and false teeth. That's what readers want. Spider-Man should grow old right along with us. Eventually, he should die of old age and they could run 22 pages a month of his headstone in a cemetery. After all, that's why they created Ultimate Spider-Man, right? So they could tell the adventures of a Spider-Man who wasn't buried in a cemetery.

[RDMacQ]

No. I go with what I said. For the way standard superhero stories are set up it's definitely a mistake.

Now if you're going to argue the way comics are set up without the characters noticeably aging is a mistake, that's a different topic right there.

There are quite a few superheroes who have kids. The Fantastic Four are the obvious one. Then there's Red Arrow. The Flash. Savage Dragon. Luke Cage and Jessica Jones. Wolverine had a kid, albeit it was a retcon.

Parenthood isn't exactly a taboo subject when it comes to superheroes.

[RDMacQ]

They should retcon this back in. And then go on to tell the stories of a Spider-Man with a slipped disk, a hernia, and false teeth. That's what readers want. Spider-Man should grow old right along with us. Eventually, he should die of old age and they could run 22 pages a month of his headstone in a cemetery. After all, that's why they created Ultimate Spider-Man, right? So they could tell the adventures of a Spider-Man who wasn't buried in a cemetery

OK, that is quite a leap. Peter becoming a father is pretty far removed from him having one foot in the grave. You don't instantly age sixty years when you have a kid. A lot of people under the age of thirty have kids. Hell, I know a couple of guys who are under thirty who have kids. And its not like they're going to bed at eight thirty at night and hiking up their pants to go play lawn bowling. Look at the Fantastic Four- they've had a kid as part of their supporting cast from years, and its not like Reed and Sue are about to be shipped off to the old folks home. Peter becoming a father isn't going to lead him to becoming an old man. If anything, its an interesting development that fits the theme of great power and great responsibility. What greater responsibility is there than being a good father?

[Beacon]

But if you meant him having a kid of his own, that's a mistake MANY comics have made before and is best to be avoided at all costs.

How is it a mistake? Spider-Man is a series about growing up. It's a mistake NOT to let him grow up.

[CMBMOOL]

Well once again, it's looks like it's up to up me to try to prove you all wrong and show my point....

[Mako]

OK, that is quite a leap.

How? You seem to care so much about Spider-Man maturing. From your previous arguments you make it seem that if he isn't going forward, he's either standing still or regressing. So where does it stop? Why is your suggested path towards old age any different from that path to old age?

Peter becoming a father is pretty far removed from him having one foot in the grave.

To young readers and viewers it's not that far off. How many times have you heard an elementary school aged child say, "That person's old. He must be 40." The problem with Peter having a child in continuity is that it does age him. And if that child isn't retconned away, it ages him more with each passing year. It's fine for the Fantastic Four to get married and have children. That book was designed to be about famiy. Spider-Man's title was designed to be about a loner.

You don't instantly age sixty years when you have a kid.

No. But you DO instantly age when you have a kid. The moment you have a child your life is one about responsibility. For Peter to be a father who puts is life at risk all the time, that would be irresponsible of him. And that would logically end his adventures right there.

[BlackToe]

No. But you DO instantly age when you have a kid. The moment you have a child your life is one about responsibility. For Peter to be a father who puts is life at risk all the time, that would be irresponsible of him. And that would logically end his adventures right there.

I agree. He should NOT be Spider-man if he has a child. The instant he gets one and is still active as Spider-man, is incredibly irresponsible. Its one thing to do this to his wife, but to his child is another matter entirely.

[GDB]

So should a police officer quit their job when they have a kid? There's being "responsible", in wanting to make sure your kid always has their father, but there's also being "responsible", in wanting to make sure other people don't die because you failed to act out of fear.

[ShadowSonic]

Spider-Man's title was designed to be about a loner.

No it's not, it's about a guy trying to be a superhero and still have a life without having some great moneymaking job, or no family to worry about. That does not prevent him from having lifelong companionship, love or happiness. Those are all parts of life that an everyman also gets meaning Peter should have not be prevented from getting them too.

[Mako]

So should a police officer quit their job when they have a kid? There's being "responsible", in wanting to make sure your kid always has their father, but there's also being "responsible", in wanting to make sure other people don't die because you failed to act out of fear.

A generic police officer in an analogy isn't the character of Peter Parker.

For Peter Parker it would be irresponsible for him to put his life in danger if he was a father.

[BlackToe]

A generic police officer in an analogy isn't the character of Peter Parker.

For Peter Parker it would be irresponsible for him to put his life in danger if he was a father.

AND for free, AND at his own financial expense, which in turn is his child's financial expense.