Clifford, you are right. I hadn't considered that before, but that is pretty funny.

Trevor, I was violently opposed to the issue wherein JB has Superman kill three de-powered mass murderers simply because he took it upon himself to do so. It definitely struck me then as it does now of salting the earth behind him on his way out. Still, that scene is not inherently unviewable by a child. Children understand big themes like life and death as well as crime and punishment. It is when the material is lingered over for shock value or fetishistic intent that the kids ought not be invited in to play with the "adult" readers. I can see an actual discussion taking place between a parent and child over whether Superman did the right thing or not.*

Truth be told, kids are far more resilient and savvy than any generation of adults is ever willing to credit them with. They survived the excesses of EC comics just fine and do fairly well with the nonsense being published today. The real problem comes in not giving them any sense of story for their money or publishing anything a responsible parent would allow their child to read. Parents then become roadblocks to increased literacy and the comics themselves are seen as the complete waste of four dollars almost each and every one truly is these days. How can you justify spending another four bucks next month or whenever the book is seen on the stands again when all the last four bucks bought you were pictures of a child clawing its way out of a womb, a heroine violently vomitting up a mass of snakes and a six page conversation in a Denny's men's room? Come back next month, kids!

Kids don't buy that. Not many anyway. Certainly few parents would buy it for them. Adults will 'cause it's cool. And the heroine vomitting snakes is own they've been reading since they were twelve. But adult readers have trained themselves to make bad financial choices. Kids are usually smarter than that.

* I would however not allow a kid to read the Big Barda/Sleez story wherein the villain has Superman and her baking blueberry muffins together... Or were they gardening? I'm pretty sure they weren't windsurfing. I know that. If only there were some clue given in the art or the reactions of the characters to suggest what was REALLY happening in those issues...! But, alas, as we all know, there is not...

Without a doubt, Trevor, comics have long been the playground of creators who wanted to "elevate" the material or simply "fix" whatever previous writers did to make comics seem "childish" or "illogical." This is all done on some level or another to make comics more palatable to themselves personally and the presumably increasingly cognizant comics audience, a.k.a. older readers.

However, in the case of the Byrne stories you cite (all of which I loathed at the time and still have no fondness for today) this sort of thing was done alongside the more conventional storytelling of the day. A reader could, in fact, was invited to, "miss" the adult content and enjoy the story at a more basic level. Consideration for a mass market, all-ages audience was given even when the most questionable storylines were in play. (Teen Lois' strip search.) "Exclusively" for kids? No. But still all-ages enough to get by.

No such consideration exists today. This is the crux of all the whining you object to. There is no basic underlying story which younger readers can enjoy while the author winks at his older readers with salacious "suggested" material or apparent hardcore political assertations about the efficacy and justice of the death penalty.

Comics today, Trevor, are written not just with their sights set firmly on adults (Hank and Jan taking turns with each other, for instance, or slapping one another around) but with a constant knowing attempt to turn the volume forever "up" on the violence and sex. DC has told us that they do not write Batman for children. You should not give Batman comics to your child. Marvels are published by men who assert that comics have never been written for children and that children never read them. All those spinner racks that read "Hey, Kids! Comics!" Myths. Never happened. Keep our product out of the hands of children.

This is not entirely new, I'll grant you, but the turnaround is within the past 10-12 years, not 30. By and large, comics 30 years ago could still be read by youngsters and were meant to be. Those today certainly are not.

Avengers Disassembled took place in 2004. Before that, comics for adults such as Watchmen, Swamp Thing, Vigilante, and such existed, yes, but the Avengers, Fantastic Four, Spider-Man, and Superman were still all ages. Kids could read these titles openly. Now they can not. This represents a change in the market which gives rise to these complaints.

There were mis-steps and adult content way back when, it's true, and creators who tried to "push" the boundaries, but that is all there is out there today. There is nothing else. There are no boundaries. Every loathsome, horrific, extreme, or overt act is permissible now. Encouraged, in fact. By all means, teleport heroin into the body of Spider-Man's girlfriend and then cut her costume off with a knife while she is helpless to fight off the multiple assailants moving in on her. It's comics! It's supposed to be fun. Have fun, guys...!

What's even more a shame is that they did it all for you, the adult reader who now feels he's outgrown this hobby. Come back! Come back! the comic companies cry! We're adult now! You don't have to go! We're edgy! We're violent! We promise! You like edgy and violent, don't you? Come back, please...!

Is what we have here today anything new? Maybe not. But we have nothing else anymore, and that wasn't the case in the past.