Escapist News Now: Thor Is Now A Girl!

[El Comandante]

(vikings are a germanic "tribe")

Ok I have to nitpick this one, but the term is "norse"(which were north germanics). Viking was a profession(basically anyone that travelled abroad on boats be they merchants, explorers or raiders).

Yep you are right, to be even more nitpicky viking is a verb ^^! I simply wrote that, because I thought it would be easyer to get that across.

Also didn't know these forums still had asatru(in any of its modern incarnations) members left here. So I'll say hiya.

Reads like there once where more, in ancient internet times . Greetings friend!

 

[BathorysGraveland2]

I have no interest in comics, so this doesn't bother me in the slightest, but there is something I have to bring up here that a feminist could answer: shouldn't this really be more a slap to the face than anything? To me, it seems like they're saying "Oh, we can't be bothered putting in time and effort to come up with an original female character, so let's just switch the gender of an existing male one and call it a day". See what I mean? This doesn't seem like a feminist victory in the slightest. More a lazy insult.

 

[Overhead]

In Marvel Comics it has long been the case that only those who are worthy can pick up Thor's hammer but that if they are worthy then they gain his power as well as a rad Thor-based costume (unless you're Captain America in which case you are just a super strong Captain America in whatever you were wearing already).

In the past this has lead to Throg:

And Beta Ray Bill (An Alien Cyborg Horse-man):

A woman becoming Thor is not some brand new feminist re-imagining of Thor but rather a consistent continuation on a classic part of how Marvel's version of Thor works. It's not even especially strange one compared to what we've seen before.

Hell, in Earth/Planet/universe X (a possible future timeline) Thor himself does actually turn into a woman and they've done at least one What If? issue I know of based around Thor being female:

I imagine anyone who's upset about this doesn't actually know much about Marvel's Thor.

Edit:

I have no interest in comics, so this doesn't bother me in the slightest, but there is something I have to bring up here that a feminist could answer: shouldn't this really be more a slap to the face than anything? To me, it seems like they're saying "Oh, we can't be bothered putting in time and effort to come up with an original female character, so let's just switch the gender of an existing male one and call it a day". See what I mean? This doesn't seem like a feminist victory in the slightest. More a lazy insult.

No, there are new original female characters (Ms. Marvel for instance is getting a lot of praise at the moment) so it's not a case of choosing either new characters or derivations of old ones. Other people getting Thor's hammer and kicking butt is built into the Marvel mythos, so why not have it be a woman this time?

 

[UsefulPlayer 1]

I move to appease women? More like a move to appease ME!

I think the art looks great and love the idea of a female Thor. I'm reminded of the pictures of the female versions of the MCU Avengers. I hope they bring this idea to the movies eventually.

 

[immortalfrieza]

I dunno it kinda cheapens the whole "Broader representation, yeah!" message when you KNOW it's only a temporary shock change. Oh wait they said it was "not a temporary change" and was "permanent" uhuh. Just like when Superman died, or when Captain America "died", or when Doctor Strange was replaced by Brother Voodoo. All really permanent stuff.

Exactly my reaction. I don't think there's anybody on the planet that buys that this is permanent any more than any of those changes you mentioned were permanent. This is obviously nothing more than a cheap publicity stunt designed to sell comics off the ensuing controversy that the writers will backpedal on in a couple years tops, just like what they're doing with Captain America. They're doing this not for equality's sake or to make a good story but because these days comic book writers are completely incapable of selling comics on the virtue of simply having good stories and making new characters anymore, but by using blatant pandering and manufactured controversy betraying everything the fans ever liked about the comic to temporarily boost sales for a short while before they put everything back to normal and do it all over again with a different comic.

 

[Product Placement]

Doesn't Loki change back and forth from being a woman all the time...? Not that this is Thor literally changing, but y'know. It really doesn't matter.

Loki is a shapeshifter. He can be whatever he wishes to be. Man, woman, fern, snake, fish, bird, female horse that's capable of giving birth, whatever.

Thor's strong. Really strong. He has no magical abilities apart from his items that help enhance his strength + the hammer.

I don't understand why it doesn't matter that they change the gender of one person, just because there happens to be another that can. But like you said, it's another person popping up to take the original role so it's not like they actually changed the gender of the person. I just feel like your point had no point.

 

[Overhead]

Doesn't Loki change back and forth from being a woman all the time...? Not that this is Thor literally changing, but y'know. It really doesn't matter.

Loki is a shapeshifter. He can be whatever he wishes to be. Man, woman, fern, snake, fish, bird, female horse that's capable of giving birth, whatever.

Thor's strong. Really strong. He has no magical abilities apart from his items that help enhance his strength + the hammer

It wasn't that he turned into a woman on occasion it's that Loki had a female form as his permanent one for a few years, up until just before he died in Siege and was reborn as a child.

Also Thor does have magical powers, there was an example a few issues ago where he summoned a portal or something and someone was suprised, to which he replied "Really, you think I can have Loki as my brother and not pick up some tricks".

But it's a moot point because Thor is still male and doesn't change into a female, it's a new character who has been called 'Thor' in the promotional material who will exist in ADDITION to main Thor.

Usually I'd be fine with this kind of change. Unless it was superman or something (since that'd just be feminist pandering) but Thor!? THOR!? He's based off fucking Norse Mythology!? Yah cant change his fucking gender. That's just...not allowed or something!

For several it was basically accepted that he was not a god, just part of an advanced shapeshifting alien race that had assumed the form of gods and forgotten their origins due to being susceptible to human belief. Thor the comic has never striven for accuracy.

Just as an example in the last few months a far-future Thor has fought a space alien from the former universe who survived the Cosmic Crunch/Big Bang and became a force of cosmic destruction, battle a minotaur in charge of an evil super-company, fought a time-travelling Egyptian world-conquerer and generally beat up on super villains. He's also blond instead of ginger.

Exactly my reaction. I don't think there's anybody on the planet that buys that this is permanent any more than any of those changes you mentioned were permanent. This is obviously nothing more than a cheap publicity stunt designed to sell comics off the ensuing controversy that the writers will backpedal on in a couple years tops, just like what they're doing with Captain America. They're doing this not for equality's sake or to make a good story but because these days comic book writers are completely incapable of selling comics on the virtue of simply having good stories and making new characters anymore, but by using blatant pandering and manufactured controversy betraying everything the fans ever liked about the comic to temporarily boost sales for a short while before they put everything back to normal and do it all over again with a different comic.

Eh, it's not going to be permanent but few stories in comics (including great ones) have any long lasting effects on the overall mythos. Frankly I've found Jason Aaron's God of Thunder comics to be really high quality and it cannot be argued that they introduced several new characters (Gorr, that Roxonn CEO who's a minotaur, Thor's new love interest, etc). You seem to be assuming that they're forsaking good comics and new stories for gender equality when there's no reason that's the case. They're not mutually exclusive.

Also as I stated in my previous post Thor has a long history of other people getting his power. It ties into the mythos perfectly and is by no means a betrayal simply because this person with the power of Thor is a woman instead of a human man, a male frog or a male cyborg horse alien.

Cap is now black, Thor is now female.
In other news:

"We're Marvel, and we feel black people and women aren't important enough for us to give them their own costume, their own superpowers and their own identity. We can however use them as the gimmick of an existing superhero, for few months."

Not really. Ms Marvel had to have four separate printings of it's first issue, which was released a few months back. It's about a Muslim Pakistani teen who gains super-powers and chooses her name based on her favourite hero, the female super-hero Captain Marvel. It's got other comics focused on women/minorities like Ghost Rider (Hispanic) or She-Hulk as well as fairly risky concepts in the past that it tried but didn't sell well (Like an all-women super team with the Defenders). minorities and women also regularly receive prominent placement in team books, with Luke Cage having lead Avengers teams for several years now and Storm being a former X-men team leader (Maybe current too? I don't read the X-book she's in at the moment).

It doesn't do everything right, like there is a lot of cheesecake and some awful plotlines, but it's not a case of either/or.

Hell, having someone else take over a mantle isn't a specific gimmick to do with equality. Pretty much every major hero has been replaced at one point or another.

Captain America was Bucky Barnes rather than Steve Rogers for a long while (and US Agent before that). Thor's power has been imbued on a lot of people. Superman died and was replaced by FOUR different versions of himself. The Fantastic Four frequently break up and are replaced by a different team, this last happening just a few years ago. Iron Man was replaced by an alternate universe teen-version for a good while. Batman 'died' a while ago and was replaced by Nightwing. Spider-man was just recently replaced with an evil version with Dr octopus's brain for several years. The entire concept of the Flash revolved around being a legacy hero up until a year or two ago (Jay > Barry > Wally > Bart) and in Green Lantern Earth typically has more corps members than any other planet simply so they can have a lot of different 'main' green lanterns.

This happens ALL THE TIME. It is part of comics. So why does it only seem to matter when the person taking on the role is a woman?

 

[Something Amyss]

xD I don't know if I'd go that far. But I would side more on funny than sad. ;p

Well, people seemed to be less...shall we say, upset with the "change."

Also, this is funny timing given the new announcement of that same guy as Cap again.

I don't think sexism is a big part of the outcry. It's more about the strange wording and impossibility of being Thor if you are not Odin's son.

Even though guys like Eric Masterson have done it before? I mean, I'll ignore the aforementioned Throg and Beta Ray Bill because of the specific complaint, but jeez, even that should be an indicator.

It reeks of retcon and pseudofeminist cashgrab to many.

Except it's not retcon, and people are jumping on ERMAGERD FEMINISM with no real evidence. Yeah, that's part of the problem. Marvel's doing what they've been doing for decades. Crying "feminism," even "psuedo feminism" displays a lack of Marvel history....Wait, I got it. They're all fake geek guys, right?

It's just funny how Marvel has this history of switching up characters, and it's only when the character becomes a minority or a woman, and only recently, that it's an issue. I mean, it'd be one thing if their tendency to do this was something new, like how there was a Human Torch before the Fantastic Four, but...it's not just an old timey thing.

But yes, I very much think sexism is a part of the outcry. I think even more so, since I never said sexism, but you brought it up to deny it. I think, frankly, thou doest protest too much.

I seriously doubt this would have even been an issue if they had pulled this with another blond white dude.

I imagine anyone who's upset about this doesn't actually know much about Marvel's Thor.

I think I'm sticking with my "Fake Geek Guy" hypothesis. They're not really fans of Thor so much as they are guys who thought Chris Hemsworth was awesome in those movies....

But seriously, I'd forgot about Throg. And now I can't get it out my head.

 

[Product Placement]

Doesn't Loki change back and forth from being a woman all the time...? Not that this is Thor literally changing, but y'know. It really doesn't matter.

Loki is a shapeshifter. He can be whatever he wishes to be. Man, woman, fern, snake, fish, bird, female horse that's capable of giving birth, whatever.

Thor's strong. Really strong. He has no magical abilities apart from his items that help enhance his strength + the hammer

It wasn't that he turned into a woman on occasion it's that Loki had a female form as his permanent one for a few years, up until just before he died in Siege and was reborn as a child.

Also Thor does have magical powers, there was an example a few issues ago where he summoned a portal or something and someone was suprised, to which he replied "Really, you think I can have Loki as my brother and not pick up some tricks".

But it's a moot point because Thor is still male and doesn't change into a female, it's a new character who has been called 'Thor' in the promotional material who will exist in ADDITION to main Thor.

...as I said. Loki can be whatever he wishes to be. I don't care that a comic had him opting to be a woman for an extended time period, he can do so because he's a bloody shapeshifter.

And did you stop reading my post at the point where you quote mined me? I explicitly stated that I was fully aware that this is another person taking over Thor's role and so does the person I was talking to and also the article. Educating me about something I expressed being aware of is just insulting.

I mentioned in an earlier post that this is the reason why I dislike Marvel playing around with the Norse mythology. Some guy in the 70's just carbon copies a religious lore and makes a superhero comic and gets away with it, just because it was obscure enough and now they feel like they can do whatever they want with it. It's disrespectful in my opinion.

An no, it's not because they're changing Thor into a woman, I've been on this opinion ever since I first discovered the comic a got passed the very short "cool, they made a comic about one of my favorite god" phase.

 

[Something Amyss]

Captain America was Bucky Barnes rather than Steve Rogers for a long while (and US Agent before that). Thor's power has been imbued on a lot of people. Superman died and was replaced by FOUR different versions of himself. The Fantastic Four frequently break up and are replaced by a different team, this last happening just a few years ago. Iron Man was replaced by an alternate universe teen-version for a good while. Batman 'died' a while ago and was replaced by Nightwing. Spider-man was just recently replaced with an evil version with Dr octopus's brain for several years. The entire concept of the Flash revolved around being a legacy hero up until a year or two ago (Jay > Barry > Wally > Bart) and in Green Lantern Earth typically has more corps members than any other planet simply so they can have a lot of different 'main' green lanterns.

This happens ALL THE TIME. It is part of comics. So why does it only seem to matter when the person taking on the role is a woman?

James Rhodes was Iron Man for a while. He was even Iron Man during Secret War (where he asked Mister Fantastic what he thought about Iron Man being black). There was a black, female Captain Marvel in the 80s. She's now Pulsar or something. They changed her name like 30 times. There have now been multiple Venoms, including Mac Gargan (formerly Scorpion) and last I knew Venom was a super agent with Flash Thompson as host. Speaking of, dozens of villains have been replaced.

Just adding to the list.

Though I didn't think Superior Spider-Man had lasted years. Good God, was it that long?

 

[Overhead]

...as I said. Loki can be whatever he wishes to be. I don't care that a comic had him opting to be a woman for an extended time period, he can do so because he's a bloody shapeshifter.

You're confusing mythological Loki with comic Loki.

And did you stop reading my post at the point where you quote mined me? I explicitly stated that I was fully aware that this is another person taking over Thor's role and so does the person I was talking to and also the article. Educating me about something I expressed being aware of is just insulting.

Actually I meant to quote all of it because I feel my criticism is just as valid.

The reason I'm educating you is that you don't actually know the facts. Your logic is that someone with shape shifting powers changing their shape is different from someone without shape shifting their powers suddenly changing form.

Now putting aside the fact that comic Loki is presented as having illusionary powers rather than shapeshifting ones, the situation was Loki was forced into another form with no say in the matter. You presented it as him choosing to change shape, but that wasn't the case.

In fact the actual situation shows the opposite, because if an outside force can be powerful enough that even someone with shapeshifting powers cannot change their form back to normal (which was the case when Loki became a child), of course someone without shapeshifting powers isn't going to be able to.

I mentioned in an earlier post that this is the reason why I dislike Marvel playing around with the Norse mythology. Some guy in the 70's just carbon copies a religious lore and makes a superhero comic and gets away with it, just because it was obscure enough and now they feel like they can do whatever they want with it. It's disrespectful in my opinion.

It was the early 60's, from the very start it was very much not a carbon copy of the mythology as it instantly began with it's own concept separate from anything in mythology owing much to DC's Captain Marvel (aka Shazam).

The very first issue tells how a disabled medical student finds the hammer of Thor, gains his power and defeats aliens from Saturn. Can you refer me to where that happened in Norse myth?

You're also missing the fact that Norse religious lore was people just making up stories about their favourite gods anyway, adapting and changing over time. We know that there are many earlier Norse legends we barely understand and sometimes only know exist because of vague references, but which got overwritten because stories changed and adapted. It was not a solid unchanging text, but rather an ever-evolving dynamic. Modern comics can be viewed as a continuation of this, a point put across in Grant Morrison's Supergods.

An no, it's not because they're changing Thor into a woman, I've been on this opinion ever since I first discovered the comic a got passed the very short "cool, they made a comic about one of my favorite god" phase.

I can't see where this is relevant to my post regarding you.

Because girls don't have their own superheroines they can identify with.
When we get something, what we get is only the gimmick of a replaced hero. But when a male hero is replaced with another male hero, it doesn't matter because well.... there's plenty of male heroes who aren't gimmicky replacements of an existing one. Heck, existing heroes are already male.

You may say, but what about Jean Grey, Storm, Ms Marvel...? They're not female heroines with a female reader in mind, but they're female heroines for the male reader. I'm sure there's exceptions, but me and most women can not easily identify with Storm or Emma Frost and in the way they are represented. Why do you think Ms Marvel never got her own movie, and Storm and Phoenix aren't the main characters of the movies? Because those characters can't hold the role.

It's a little difficult to explain (I'm not English), so I'm not sure I managed to make you understand what I mean. But I've always dreamt of a world where Batman is Batwoman, Spider-Man is Spider-Woman.... and not as a gimmicky reverse-gendered version of an existing hero: THEY are the existing hero, with all their complex lore and many comic issues and movies and cartoons.

It's not a case of a female hero taking on a mantle (usually temporarily) and a new female character being created being mutually exclusive. It's a false dichotomy.

I'd say Ms Marvel very much is a female heroine with female readers in mind and I think that's been very heavily emphasised. I'm guessing maybe you mean Captain Marvel, who changed from Ms Marvel a while ago and was pushed pretty heavily in a solo book as well as being an Avenger.

Also why do you feel you can't identify with heroes like Storm or Emma Frost? There are a lot of different possible rationales and while some I feel would be very relevant (objectification, say) others wouldn't be (perfect body image in general, as that's applicable to all heroes rather than just women). Like I said, there ARE problems with the presentation of women in comics but I just don't see THIS specifically as being one of them. There should be more unique female heroes (and more have been and are coming onto the scene) but that doesn't effect instances like this where the old trope of "someone new takes on the mantle" happens to involve a gender switch.

I'd also say the obvious reason Storm and Phoenix didn't hold the X-men movies is because it was an ensemble cast where only Wolverine had enough popularity to support a starring role.

Though I didn't think Superior Spider-Man had lasted years. Good God, was it that long?

Thinking about it, probably not. I just really dislike Slott's writing and it had a much faster release schedule than other comics so it just felt like years.

 

[Overhead]

Well, suggest me a Ms Marvel comic that you feel has been written with female readers in mind. I might read it and then I will finally have an example of a good superheroine comic.

The current Ms Marvel run that started about 4 months ago. TPB isn't out yet but you might be able to get reprints form a LCS. Failing that, you can buy digitally: http://marvel.com/comics/issue/49089/ms_marvel_2014_1

It's got a lot of critical acclaim precisely for handling women well.

Off-hand I'd also recommend the entire New 52 run of Wonder Woman, which I think is probably the consistently best comic DC has put out since the reboot.

Emma Frost, at least in the comics I've read in which she appears, is an all-out male fantasy, and she's a character conceived with male readers in mind. All I think of her is that she's the archetype of the femme fatale, and the archetype of the bad sexy girl who takes the hero (Cyclops) away from the good naive girl (Jean).
She's not a bad character per se, but not exactly a character for female readers, and she certainly would be written very differently if I, a woman, were the writer.

Keep in mind, heroes look good because they look the way a male reader fantasizes he could look. But heroines look good because they look the way a male reader can fantasize about being with them.
We women perceive the difference. When we see a comic with constant ass-shots and boob-shots, or simply when we see a female character always giving the come-hither look or striking oddly elegant poses... we know there's a difference between how she is, and how the stern grimacing male hero is. We know they're not the same, we know the reader is supposed to wish to be the hero and to wish to be in bed with the heroine.

Because of this, we can't identify. And because of this, most of the comic book readers are males, and yet the industry keeps wondering why.

Plus, male heroes are free to look unconventional sometimes. There's the Blob and the Toad, there's the fact that Deadpool is actually ugly under the mask, there's the Penguin and Clayface and MODOK etc. etc.
Unconventional female characters aren't really allowed.

Here's a female character I can appreciate:

Spoiler

Squirrel Girl. She's cute, but she's not sexualized: just what a female reader usually wants. A female character that is a power fantasy and is cute enough that I'd want to be like her, but who doesn't thrust her crotch in the reader's face.. wait, so isn't this just what male readers get with all their all male heroes? I find her one of the best superheroines.

Yes, I completely agree on all counts. Those are all massive examples of objectification that turn me off comics as a man too, because like I said in my previous post I find objectification a massively relevant example of how women are treated badly in comics.

HOWEVER, we then come round again to the original point which is a woman taking on the mantle of Thor. New people temporarily take on superhero's mantles all the time. It does not stop further pushing of women, PoC and LGBT characters but is something that happens in addition to it.

Just recently Marvel have pushed a new muslim female character into a solo book, started a team of entirely non-white Avengers and put together an all female team of X-men. These things are still happening.

Having someone new take over as a superhero might be a gimmick (except in a few well written cases like the Winter Soldier/Captain America), but it's a gimmick regardless of the race and gender of the people involved so why not try and have some extra decent diversity?

 

[Product Placement]

You're confusing mythological Loki with comic Loki.

It's fantastic that you know so much about the comic version but fact of the matter is that I was responding to a person who was asking about Loki changing sexes all the time. I'm assuming he was thinking about the mythological version, which is why I stepped in.

Also, it doesn't matter to me if it was the 60s or 70s, although I appreciate the correction. They still ripped off Northern mythology but that's ok. Vikings aren't around anymore.

An no, it's not because they're changing Thor into a woman, I've been on this opinion ever since I first discovered the comic a got passed the very short "cool, they made a comic about one of my favorite god" phase.

I can't see where this is relevant to my post regarding you.

It wasn't meant to be. That was just a preemptive rebuttal to any claims that I'm just upset because Thor is now a woman, sexist talk. I've noticed more than one person get flagged for that, who's voiced this complaint.

 

[keroko]

I'm still kind of confused how they are going to pull off the "she is not She-Thor or Thorina, she is Thor" bit when the actual Thor is still running around, if a tad hammerless.