Joe, I have to mention that Paul's theory doesn't even begin to touch on the plethora of non-comics persons in various media (Hollywood, etc.) that are milking the comics genre for huge profits AND who, in all likelyhood, never read any comic in the first place.

You know I gotta disagree thats its because these Writeres aren't comic fans. I think they have this attitude precisely BECAUSE they are fans.

One thing I've noticed is that most longtime comics fans, perhaps as a reaction to the "comic book guy" sterotype, or the general view that "comics are for kids" seem to be very ....... uppitity torwards other fans. Especially newer fans. Most times this seems to take the form of what I call "psuedo-intellectual literary snobbery"

These are the idiots who are only too happy to tell you how superheroes are really just adolescent power fantasies bought by permanently adolescent  man-children deperately hoping to hold onto thier pre-pubescent sexual fantasies or some other other pretentious pop-psychology bullshit containing words worth more than the thoughts they are being used to express. The guys who will buy any titel on the rack as long as it doesn't sell more than 300 copies so they prove how "independant minded" and "anticorporate" they are.

They in turn grow up into the "artistic writer whos to good to do capes crap" (unless of course the bills come due) and doesnt hesitate to shit all over the toys hes been handed while doing so.  

At the end of the day I think its prety simple, most comic fans get looked down upon because of our hobby, and unless your strong enough not to care, finding a way to be superior to the average "fanboy" is the only way tot ake the sting out.

I've found that I never have to explain things about Star Trek, Star Wars, War Comics, Westerns, Archie Comics, or even porn comics.

But from time to time I have to "explain" things about superheroes. The costumes, the physiques, the battles, etc. Never the powers strangely.

Which leads me to think that superhero comics are actually non-mainstream relative to the other genres. People somehow find it difficult to relate to the material and I can see why: it's almost pure fantasy. The rules are not clear. Characters die and are reborn. Characters we've known for years can actually turn out to be skrulls. The military/business/government concerns don't come along to grab these superpowered people and dissect them in order to duplicate their abilities. The powers themselves don't behave in a consistent manner (Superman lifting a tank while standing on grass should be driven through to the earth).

That being said, I enjoy most of superhero comics that are written almost purely from a fantasy perspective. And the fact that I am lucid about the apparent internal inconsistencies of the genre in no way dimishes my appreciation.

And, you know, all such things are addressed, in the stories that are done right -- but not at the expense of the genre. A superhero comic is, first and foremost, about superheroes. Stan and Jack and Steve and a whole bunch of others showed that it could be more, but too many writers (and fans!!) these days seem to want it to be less!

So the hurdle, before we can even get to the "good story" part, is getting people to accept that superheroes are capable of presenting "good stories", and must not default to "camp" in order to be entertaining.