we did ("we" because I'm not the only one in this case).

Adult comics characters show the way for children and teen to become adults themselves.

They're useful and interesting

(And before anyone leaps in to "remind" me that it was Stan himself who had Peter graduate from High School, let me play the other part of that equation -- the part that gets o-so-conveniently forgotten whenever the "Stan did it!" card is tossed into the hat: Stan did, indeed, age Parker from his first appearance. He did the same with Johnny Storm. He was operating with a Marvel Comics that had, traditionally, flared and sputtered, with cycles of boom and bust, and he had no way of knowing that these new characters he'd co-created would be around five years hence. When he did see that Marvel was going to be around for the long haul -- at least compared to its previous runs -- he slammed on the brakes. Parker aged almost in real time in his first several years. He aged not a day after he started college.

Your point is, in a word, stupid. This "lesson" can be taught only if the reader has followed the character thru his changes. To a new reader -- if there is such a creature -- Peter Parker is not a kid who grew up, he's an old married guy.

For me, I could follow his development. At the same time i was at 9 or 10 reading about newly married Peter, I was reading about teenaged or college aged Peter in Marvel Tales.

It felt good that, as a shy, not so popular kid myself, that one day I too could find a pretty wife! (and i did!).  It brought a lot of comfort to me.

And I could always relate to Peter Parker, no matter my age or his.

To JB:

To a kid it's not just about to see "how a character became an adult", it is more about "how it is to be an adult".

Spider-man Too Use Poor Insane Drawings?

And I'll add to that tha fact that reprints are here for new readers to read this about the evolution. most of all this days with the essentials.

Like I already said, as a child it was never a problem for me to have adult characters. And I don't remember that it was a problem for my friends.

We were reading the new Spiderman Stuff by Marv Wolfman (amazing) Chris and You (Team up) or Roger and JRjr (spectacular) all along with reprints of Lee/Dikto.

And to see the evolution, the difference between the new and the ancient stuff was part of the fun.

It's really not a question of who did what.  Does it matter that Stan and Ditko aged Peter Parker beyond high school?  No, it's a matter of when.

The whole arguement of Peter Parker should have remained 16 in order to keep bringing in new readers is bogus, since he's only been 16 for a few issues.  By issue 30-something he was already in college, and has still managed to bring in plenty of young, new readers throughout the 70's and 80's.

Sometime in the late 80's to early 90's, however, too many people seemed to concern themselves less with making comics and more with selling comics.  From there, the end was quite swift.

My "rude" anagram was a  try to answer to JB saying that my "point was in a word stupid" in a funny way without being rude: Did I fail?

And yes my anagram is stupid, but thats the best I could find. With more time I could find something dumber.

Rob: That's my anagram that is stupid, not you.

Brian: That's not because I don't agree with JB or You that I'm wrong. I gave my opinion and I think I'm not the only one to think this way.