Purity Destroyed:

An Exploration of Season 5's Clark/Lana Sex

It was revealed in late August 2005 that Clark and Lana would "consummate their relationship"-- or, as tactlessly worded by "Smallville" producer Al Gough as "do the deed"-- in Season 5. They did so in "Mortal," the second episode of Season 5. This essay examines the utter wrongness of this act.

Clark Kent/Superman as Bastion of Morality

Siegel and Schuster, both Jewish, developed the character of Clark Kent/Kal-El/Superman as a messianic figure. When home planet Krypton was about to explode, Jor-El sent his only son, Kal-El, to Earth to live among its inhabitants and save them from evil and chaos. He was found in a cornfield by Jonathan and Martha Kent. They named the young Kal-El Clark, Martha's maiden name, and raised him to have a good, old-fashioned morality. As Clark grew older, his powers, fueled by Earth's yellow sun, strengthened until he became truly a god among men. Unable to simply ignore these gifts, but unwilling to use them openly as Clark and give up any chance of a "normal" life, Clark donned a costume and fought for truth, justice, and the American way as Superman.

In order to be an effective standard of justice and goodness, Superman must be without reproach in all aspects of morality. This is why Superman, as a public persona, is never "involved" with anyone, never cheats, never lies, never steals, and acts carefully as if the whole world is watching his every move-- because it is. Though Clark is not in the public eye as Superman is, it is inescapably true that he and Superman are one and the same person; anything Clark Kent does should be a reflection of Superman's unimpeachable morality.

Because Siegel and Schuster created Clark and placed him in a rural, Midwestern setting with who most likely are (due to probability) Protestant Christian adoptive parents, Clark would embrace the morality prevalent in 1940s America-- that of the Judeo-Christian ethical system. It is this system that condemns theft, dishonesty, murder, covetousness, dishonoring one's parents, violence, and other vices and commands honesty, love for one's neighbors, integrity, hard work, compassion, and all forms of honorable conduct. This system of morality also emphasizes that sex is only to take place within the bounds of marriage... And a true Superman would abide by this code.

Many argue that the notion of waiting until marriage to have sex is naive and old-fashioned-- something that has to change because times themselves have changed. Those who make this claim argue it's utterly unrealistic and laughable to have a leading man stay a virgin until his honeymoon night. But ABC's Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman (1993-1997) portrayed a Clark Kent who was sexually pure until he married Lois Lane, and the results were absolutely beautiful. A newly-wedded Clark and Lois embraced in their marital bed, Clark on top of Lois. Gazing into Lois' eyes, he said something along the lines of, "We have gone through so much to get to this place." The two kissed passionately, and the pair began floating into the air as the camera panned away. It was a truly inspiring union, and one that is increasingly rare in our sex-obsessed society. Has our society truly changed this much-- even since the mid-90s-- that such a scenario is too far-fetched too be believable and entertaining?

Previously, Lois had wistfully spoken of the fact that she was not a virgin and wished she had waited for Clark. Clark's response was not one of condemnation, nor did he feel the need to go out and have sex with someone simply because his bride had already done so. This seems to be a common argument for people who think Clark should have sex before his inevitable marriage to Lois-- "Well, she's already had sex with someone, so why shouldn't Clark? It's only fair!" Clark/Superman doesn't need to sink to the level of others, and his L&C incarnation showed he is capable and willing to maintain his own purity regardless of his wife's past sex life.

Clark and Lana

What is most upsetting about Clark's uncharacteristic decision to engage in premarital sex is that did so with Lana Lang. Some might justify premarital sex as "acceptable" as long as it is with the person one will someday marry-- a sort of premature honeymoon or "test drive" of the car you will be buying (a horrible metaphor, in my humble opinion). But Lana Lang is not and will never be Clark's spouse. While she is, throughout the Superman lore, Clark's first love, she remains the girl he leaves behind in Smallville when he heads to Metropolis to fulfill his true destiny.

The character of Lana Lang throughout the comics varies greatly. She seems sweet and wonderful in some storylines, and in others, she seems to be an evil harpy bent on destroying the relationship between Clark and Lois. On Smallville, she is easily the worst-written and least interesting character of all. Lana Lang, as portrayed on Smallville, is supposed to be the character everyone loves, adores, and essentially worships for her goodness, unselfishness, and general loveliness. Needless to say, the majority of viewers see right through this ridiculous Mary Sue portrayal and vehemently dislike her. Lana's character magically acquires skills when they serve the plot (she went from failed waitress to owner of the Talon in a few episodes, developed lethal martial arts skills in just one episode, was apparently talented enough to go to art school in Paris even though we never saw her do anything remotely artistic, etc.), and all other characters seem to enjoy telling her how beautiful and great she is. The only characters to call her on her crap (a perfect example of this is Season 3's Adam) are killed. The fact that Clark bedded this abomination is a final stake through the heart for any of us who are utterly tired of Pwintheth Lana and her pink perfection.

Sex and Ratings

It is no secret that Smallville's ratings have fallen. In an attempt to reel in more viewers, the WB introduced a ridiculous amount of sexual content and nudity (partial, of course) into Season 4 with laughable results. Smallville has inexplicably been moved to 8PM CST on Thursdays, so it will now be directly competing with The O.C., so one can only imagine how much sex and nudity Season 5 will need to introduce to compete with that show.

Sex does not equal ratings. Every single show on television has characters who are having sex-- Did Smallville really to break new ground by having two of its leads "do the deed," as Al Miles so tactfully described the events of "Mortal?" Originality is what draws in viewers... Originality, great acting, and interesting storylines (especially those not involving magical stones scattered around the earth) are what keep people watching a show. One of the fantastic things about Smallville is that its lead wasn't sexually active in an era in which it is assumed all males must lose their virginity at 16 (and females by at least 18) or something is terribly, terribly wrong with them. If viewers want to see sex, there are plenty of other shows with bed-hopping characters to keep them amused. But throwing sex into Smallville seemed like a cheap ratings ploy designed to suck in new viewers who would tune in to see just that episode (because Tom Welling and Kristin Kreuk are HOTT!) and never watch the show again, and this sort of publicity stunt alienates those of us who don't want to see our show turned into every other show on television.

My Personal Feelings

I am fond of referring to myself as "America's last 23-year-old virgin." I decided years ago that I wasn't going to have sex until I'm married. Though it's been hard, and a lot of people seem to think I'm a complete weirdo for making that choice, I don't regret it at all. I've heard all of the common arguments for premarital sex ("But the guy you marry won't be a virgin! That's not really fair, now is it?"-- As if it's some sort of game and we both have to start at the same place, or as if I should compromise my purity simply because my future husband might have compromised his; "You won't know what you're doing on your honeymoon night!"-- Because it's not like the guy I marry will understand I waited for him and be eager to teach me or, if he's a virgin too, explore sex with me; "This is 2005... Nobody goes by those old-fashioned rules anymore!"-- Well, last time I checked, "Thou shalt not steal" is a 5,000+-year-old rule that works pretty darn well along with "Thou shalt not murder."), but I just don't buy them. A recent episode of Gilmore Girls featured a quote about purity that I find appropriate: "Your virtue, for example, if a gift... It is a gift you can give to only one man. Once you give it, it's gone. You can't regift it. If you give it to the wrong man, when the right one comes along, you'll have no gift to give. You'll have to give him a sweater." Amusing, but true! I'm also not in any big hurry to have to head down to a clinic and get tested for the plethora of STDs it's possible to get from a "partner." What's most depressing is that some 1 in 4 women my age will have had an abortion by age 40. Regardless of the arguments some pro-choicers like to use to preserve our "right" to abortion ("What about rape and incest?"), the most common arguments women who actually have abortions give to providers regarding why they made that decision are either "I don't want any more children" or "I'm not ready to have children." We live in a quick-fix society where our own needs trump the needs of others... Even others we create through our own sexual irresponsibility. But I digress; this essay is about abstinence, a lifestyle that protects its practitioners from ever needing to think about abortion.

I know I'm in a minority, but regardless of my joking title for myself, I am not the only one in America who's decided to wait. This is why I feel people like me need to be represented on TV. We need good characters on TV who are abstinent yet not completely laughable. I can't count any of the characters on 7th Heaven as good abstinence role models as that is probably one of the most unrealistic and silly shows ever, but at least they (with the exception of the recently sex-happy Simon Camden) upheld traditional morality. Clark Kent was a great role model for abstinence, but the WB has thrown that away. It's horrible to turn on the TV and have no one adequately represent you. We hear a lot about how we need to have good representation for African-Americans, Latinos, homosexuals, etc., but no one seems to care about representing abstinence. It's an assumption that everyone past puberty is sexually active, and that assumption is playing out in homes as kids really do try to imitate who they see on TV. Our whole culture is obsessed with sex, and no one can look to Clark Kent as fighting against that current any longer.