>>513254747
It's a negative caricature of masculinity that backfired. Ironically the writers missed the moral of the legend of the golem. If you look at Superman's very first depiction, he is meant to be terrifying. He's a menace. People are running in fear at his feat of strength, not cheering him on. Superman is a golem that got out of control. Now he's a role model moreso than a cautionary tale. It's the same thing that happened with Rorschach, where the writer tried to subvert expectations by intending a negative depiction of someone with uncompromising morals but he ended up being the most popular and beloved character in the franchise, so much so that they had to write an entire arc besmirching his legacy as damage control. The Golem always turns on its Creator. Superman was a golem meant to turn people away from masculinity, he became a popular symbol of masculinity. If the writers were Jewish I'd be surprised because their mother never told them the story of The Golem of Prague.