Why did people complain so much about Superman fathering a child outside of marriage when Jason was conceived in Superman II? People complain about this like it was something Singer did. I just don't get it.
Jason was not conceived in Superman II. Singer ignored that part of the Donner continuity. Here is his quote about it:
"Well, I didn't really stick to that. Y'know, the mylar bed. And the cocktails in the Fortress of Solitude. I wouldn't want to bring that up. All I wanted to reference is they had had a previous, there was some sort of previous relations between them."
link:
http://www.superherohype.com/news/featuresnews.php?id=4972
Secondly, in SUperman II, he intended to give up being Superman and forge a life with Lois as a normal human, remember when he gives up his powers and all that? Contextually, it's a different situation. There's no indication that Superman in SR intended to be in a committed relationship with her. ACtually, SR gives NO CONTEXT for their relationship whatsoever.
Thirdly, you're assuming that these same people liked the idea of them having sex in Superman II and just dislike it in SR. I for one have always cringed at that part of SII, but at least the resolution was complete and more palatable.
And I know people will cite him leaving Earth as some sort of horrible, immoral act. So what, is it OK to fornicate and make no plans of marrying a woman, but it's not OK to fornicate and then leave sometime later (the timetable was never established, some people would have you believe that Clark literally snuck out of the Fortress the next morning and disappeared for a few years) when you find out that you might not be the only one of your race left in existence?
Leaving Earth is not a horrible or immoral act. In fact for the right reasons it may be selfless and heroic. However, if you are in a sexual relationship with someone, you are MORALLY obligated to be honest with that person that you are leaving for an extended period of time. Otherwise, you are emotionally abandonning your partner and any children that may be re****ant of that union. I would say that when you are involved sexually with another person you are required by an absolute morality to be honest with your partner about your actions if they will affect your partner. With sex pregnancy is always a possibility, it is your responsibility to communicate leaving town, so that your partner is not abandonned emotionally. It is wrong, it is always wrong, and there is no way it can be seen as right.
No, it's certainly not OK to fornicate and make no plans to stay with that woman, and that was his intention in SII. SR gives no context to the relationship, but the fact that he left w/o telling Lois anything seems to imply that it was not his intention to be in a committed relationship with her.
As far as sneaking out on her, I don't think the film implies that. I think as an adult he would know the consequences of being in a sexual relationship. He knew he should have told her he was leaving, the fact that he said "It was too difficult" shows he knew it was wrong to leave w/o saying good bye. He had to have condsidered it to have come to the realization that "It was too difficult." If he could not tell her b/c it "was too difficult" it adds a selfish motivation for not telling her. Selfishness is not one of Superman's character traits. It is also irresponsible. It's not simply that he left because "There was a job for Superman," it's that he wasn't responsible or thoughtful in his action towards the woman he supposedly loves and who loves him.
As far as sneaking away the next morning, he couldn't have left too long b/c 1. Lois did not have time to find out she was pregnant and tell him 2. She slept with Richard soon enough that she didn't realize the baby was SUperman's 3. She wouldn't have slept with Richard if Superman as still around and Clark would have know who he was when he returned. So, while there's not a whole lot of specific context given, some things can be infered from what is known.
BTW, as an aside about reproduction in human. Ovulation occurs in the middle of the meunstral cycle. A woman then 'misses her period' when she is pregnant about 2 weeks later, give or take a few days. A woman would at least have an idea that something might be up within a few weeks. Also SPerm only last about 3 days inside a woman's body and then they die, so intercourse has to occur fairly close to ovulation for a woman to get pregnant. In the case of Superman, Lois and Richard, she would have to had sex with Richard in about a 2 week time frame after having sex with Superman, otherwise she would have been able to figure out Richard was the father. Additonally, when you're pregnant you get an ultrasound to establish gestational age so a due date can be fixed. At this point in prenatal care Lois would easily have been able to figure out when Jason was conceived. Now even if Lois had sex with Richard within a 2 week period of having had sex with Superman, there might still be confusion. But Lois would have realized this and hopefully would have been honest with Richard that she had been sexually involved with someone else before she and Richard got involved.
Seriously, no one seems to be judging the man for the actual act, but everyone wants to crucify the man for not having psychic abilities.
Actually, I am judging him on the actual act, the act of emotionally abandonning the woman he loves and any responsibility (children) resultant to their sexual relationship. It's not about 'having psychic abilities' it's about acting maturely and responsibly when you are in a sexual relationship.
The fact that you are accepting Superman II as canon continuity for SR has mislead your understanding of the movie that Singer made. He's not including that. Only he knows what actually happened before the events depicted in SR.
Sidebar #2. If SII and the amnesia kiss was in continuity, then wiping her memory of everything sort of becomes akin to date rape. IMO, an even worse situation than is actually presented in SR.