Supergirl is effectively invulnerable (her cousin is known to have to use his heat vision to shave; presumably she does too for legs etc). But her ears are pierced in the TV show.

This image

This image shows that they were not pierced before she left Krypton, and since Kryptonite isn't well known on Earth (it's a surprise to Kara and various others), it's unlikely it was used to weaken her to the point she could pierce her ears.

Was it explained anywhere in the show exactly how this was done?

  • 2
    Kryptonite Ear Piercing Instrument May 16, 2016 at 12:36
  • the short answer: they were pierced on Krypton, she just wasn't wearing any in those scenes, per the writers
    – KutuluMike
    May 16, 2016 at 12:38
  • 2
    Does seem like a bit of a "a wizard did it" type answer from the producer/writers, but fair enough :)
    – Dave
    May 16, 2016 at 12:41
  • 1
    And, regardless of the TV show, any Kryptonic ex-pat could always use something like a piece of fingernail clipping to poke a hole in him/herself. (Before you scream "but Recursion," they bite their fingernails) May 16, 2016 at 15:54
  • 1
    I might be missing something, but based on that image I wouldn't say anything about if her ears are pierced or not at the time
    – eis
    May 17, 2016 at 7:49

3 Answers 3


Per my answer on SFF:SE to the same question;

According to the show's producer Ali Adler (via twitter), Kara got her ears pierced on Krypton. This clearly fails to explain why she doesn't appear to have pierced ears in the escape pod (!!!) but I guess that's as good an explanation as any.

#supergirl #eastcoastfeed @supergirlcbs for all of you wondering, Kara got her ears pierced on Krypton

— Ali Adler (@AliAdler) November 10, 2015

My initial thought was that whilst Kryptonians are generally unable to be pierced by normal means, they can pierce themselves (at least as seen in the various comic series).

Using Super-Heat-Vision
enter image description here

By simply tearing their own skin.
enter image description here

It follows that assuming Kara isn't wearing clip-ons(!), she could have pierced her own ears (perhaps with a fingernail) or simply by using a directed beam of her heat-vision.

  • 8
    For one thing, if she weren't actually wearing earrings you might not see the piercings when she's in the escape pod. For another, maybe the show's producer is just plain wrong, and Supergirl's using magnetic-back earrings rather than piercing her lobes :-) May 16, 2016 at 15:52
  • 2
    @CarlWitthoft - Actually, there are a couple of occasions (flashbacks and the like) where you can quite clearly see her ears aren't pierced. That said, who are we to disagree with the show's producer if he says that they were pierced and that it just wasn't very visible.
    – user7812
    May 16, 2016 at 16:27
  • 2
    does that means that her fingernails are tougher than any known material? in which case she has to bite it, I guess? but also she (they, really) are naturally producing an extremely tough material, and on-one has though of harvesting it a studying it before?
    – njzk2
    May 16, 2016 at 17:23
  • @njzk2 - If memory serves, Superman's nails don't grow on Earth, but nor do they break.
    – user7812
    May 16, 2016 at 19:32
  • 1
    @jason - Ah, no. There are two actresses portraying the character at different times of her life. The younger actor had no visible piercings. The producer says that she did have piercings and (presumably) that we just couldn't see properly.
    – user7812
    May 17, 2016 at 14:28

Supergirl comes to Earth already grown. She's not a baby like Superman is. So she could have had her ears pierced on Krypton before long before she came to Earth.

  • 1
    The question states that they are not pierced in the show before she leaves Krypton May 16, 2016 at 12:58
  • 3
    @CearonO'Flynn And KutuluMike's comment proves that the assertion made in the question (that her ears weren't pierced before she left Krypton) is incorrect. This still isn't a great answer since it's essentially guessing rather than providing actual evidence, but it does seem to be correct. May 16, 2016 at 13:43
  • 4
    Yes, sorry I missed that. I'm not sure that picture proves they were not pierced but only that she didn't attempt space flight with earrings in. Kryptonian Health and Safety Regulations? No earrings allowed on interstellar flights. Should a Kryptonian be able to laser their own hair away? Isn't their hair as indestructible as the rest of their anaotomy? Always irked me that. I think it was introduced by John Byrne in the 80's comics. No one really cared before then. May 16, 2016 at 13:51
  • 3
    Now I am wondering since Superman can fly into the sun without his hair being burned off, exactly how hot is his heat vision must be when 'shaving' with it..
    – infixed
    May 16, 2016 at 16:56

Just to cite another solution: In an issue that involved surgery on Superman, they used lasers passed through a rare variety of Kryptonite crstals, which somehow made them able to cut him -- then retconned that in a hurry before criminals could try it. Maybe Supergirl had her ears pierced during the brief period when that worked.

Or perhaps she or otherwise deliberately weakened herself with some form of kryptonite long enough to do this. People do unhealthier things to themselves in pursuit of their idealized body image.

Or maybe she found someone who could do it with high-powered magic, which I believe they are at least partly vulnerable to.

Given that nobody has ever explained how you build a Superman out of the same things the rest of us are eating, or how his own cells manage leanup and replacement, or a million other inconsistencies, this one is relatively easy to explain away.

Unstoppable force meets immovable object, writer goes into hiding.

  • 1
    What does "reconned that in a hurry before criminals could try it" mean?
    – Michael
    May 16, 2016 at 21:58
  • 1
    Retcon: Retroactive Continuity change. Fannish slang for the bad habit some series publishers, especially comics publishers,, have of declaring that something published previously is no longer considered part of the canonical history and may not be used in future episodes/issues. More often used to describe cases where a character's backstory is substantially rewritten, but can apply to smaller alterations of the history. Of course at the time this was published there wasn't a lot of long-term storyline carryover anyway, but...
    – keshlam
    May 16, 2016 at 23:13
  • At ok, I was wondering if it was a typo for "retcon", but then the next part of the sentence doesn't make as much sense. What criminals were likely to try it? Those in the story (who the writers have control over, so that doesn't make sense) or some real world criminals (who i have trouble imaging who they would be, maybe some fanfic which could ignore the retcon anyway?)
    – Michael
    May 16, 2016 at 23:27

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .