Marvel Giving Thor's Hammer New Female Friendly Inscription

Ferisar

New member
Oct 2, 2010
814
0
0
JimB said:
Warning: I am about to engage in a completely unforgivable amount of wankery. You may want to skip this post. Even I'm a little embarrassed of it.

Jake Martinez said:
Most people, and I dare venture this includes "magical hammers," don't obsess over pronouns.
In the Egyptian language, the word for magic is "hekau." It's a bit of a tricky word to translate into English, but you could say it means "powerful speech" or "powerful words" and be basically right. See, the Egyptians believed that words were a form of power, and that speech could make magical things happen. They weren't alone, either. Hell, there is (or was; I doubt it still has any particular following) even an old heresy that Adam had power over the beasts of Eden because of the act of naming them, which was a kind of sorcery that defined their natures according to his will. The idea that precise phrasing can make magic happen is all throughout our current understanding of magic, from D&D's verbal spell components to Harry Potter's chanted spells to stories of evil genies and devils granting horribly ironic wishes by obeying the letter of the law while ignoring the spirit.

So would a magical hammer care about phrasing? It wouldn't surprise me a bit.
Less wankery and more noting trends, I'd say :p It's true, though. Granted, by the extension, words have power through, you know, talking. Given most educational fields employ funny words to describe phenomena, it's not that odd that wizards are pictured to use funny words to light something on lightning purple fire of frost of the bear +5 to burning pigeons. It kind of comes with being imagined as being supernatural's version of academia (that applies to more than just wizardry, obviously, it's just blatant there).
 

Imp_Emissary

Mages Rule, and Dragons Fly!
Legacy
Aug 9, 2020
2,315
1
43
Country
United States
bat32391 said:
Where have I been? When and how did Thor become a woman?
Actually, Thor isn't becoming a woman. He going to lose the hammer (Mjolnir) and then it's going to be used by a woman.

She's apparently taken the name Thor, or people are calling her Thor. Not sure which. It was hinted that we've seen the woman under the mask before, but they didn't say who she is.

Thor will still be around, just won't have his Mjolnir anymore. Don't worry, he's apparently getting a cool axe later.

Edit: Ah Jim. Ya beat me to it.

JimB said:
bat32391 said:
Where have I been? When and how did Thor become a woman?
I don't think it's happened yet, but as far as I know, the current story arc in Thor has been building up to him becoming less and less worthy of Mjolnir. It will culminate in him losing Mjolnir, and an original, new character taking the hammer and the mantle.
 

Alorxico

New member
Jan 5, 2011
193
0
0
Why didn't they change it to "they"? This way anyone one, male or female, could potentially be Thor.
 

Artemicion

Need superslick, Kupo.
Dec 7, 2009
527
0
0
I'm surprised it wasn't gender neutral, but hey - Thor IS a female, now, so it's only appropriate that Mjolnir should call for her specifically.

ggwp, Marvel.
 

RealRT

New member
Feb 28, 2014
1,058
0
0
anthony87 said:
"Whosoever holds this hammer, if they be worthy, shall possess the power of Thor."

There. Nice and non-specific ^_^
Yeah, why not change it to that permanently.
 

DrOswald

New member
Apr 22, 2011
1,443
0
0
anthony87 said:
"Whosoever holds this hammer, if they be worthy, shall possess the power of Thor."

There. Nice and non-specific ^_^
I like the idea of it changing to suit the current user. It makes it feel less like a "we need to be inclusive!" thing to me and more like something a magical hammer might actually do - change it's nature to fit the new master.
 

DeimosMasque

I'm just a Smeg Head
Jun 30, 2010
585
0
0
JimB said:
bat32391 said:
Where have I been? When and how did Thor become a woman?
I don't think it's happened yet, but as far as I know, the current story arc in Thor has been building up to him becoming less and less worthy of Mjolnir. It will culminate in him losing Mjolnir, and an original, new character taking the hammer and the mantle.
Him losing Mjolnir has just happened actually in the most recent issues of Original Sin. One of the closing images of the last issue is him on the Moon trying desperately to pull the hammer of the surface of the moon and it not budging.
 

Diddy_Mao

New member
Jan 14, 2009
1,189
0
0
Machine Man 1992 said:
Daystar Clarion said:
Fappy said:
Mjolnir is magical. I don't think it's all that unbelievable that it can change the pronoun etched on it when it comes into contact with another sex. If this kicks up any kind of controversy at all I will be extremely disappointed in whoever stokes the flames.
Fappy, we're on the internet.

Of course people are going to get angry. People are stupid.
Because god forbid fans of an established character that's been around longer than many of us have been alive, get angry at Marvel for messing with said beloved character in the name of publicity and scoring points with the SJW crowd.

And one more thing; I don't get this whole "Thor is the title" thing. Thor isn't a title, it's his name. The guy's name is Thor, his title is "God of Thunder."
There's an established history of exactly this kind of thing happening with Thor.
Dargo Ktor, Eric Masterson, Red Norvell...hell Simon Walterson pulls double duty as Thor and a Frog.
If you want to get picky there's also Beta Ray Bill and Thrr the Dog of Thunder.

I fail to see how suddenly assigning the mantle to a woman is somehow more disrespectful to the character or fans.
 

Scorpid

New member
Jul 24, 2011
814
0
0
anthony87 said:
"Whosoever holds this hammer, if they be worthy, shall possess the power of Thor."

There. Nice and non-specific ^_^
Bingo bango. Maybe the hammer fixes the gender reference of its inscription with magic. You know because you don't want to possess the power of the god but have your feelings be hurt because you don't feel included by the inscription.
 

Strazdas

Robots will replace your job
May 28, 2011
8,407
0
0
Frozengale said:
Shouldn't the hammer just be gender neutral?

I guess it changing to fit its wielder's gender is fine. But why not just make it "Whosoever holds this hammer, if THEY be worthy, shall possess the power of Thor."
Thats because this was never about being gender neutral. they just wanted to slap more female superheroes, but since innovation wasnt an option they genderswapped the existing ones because "Thor" sells. Its the new gimmick - make everything female.
 

happyninja42

Elite Member
Legacy
May 7, 2020
7,928
2,218
118
anthony87 said:
"Whosoever holds this hammer, if they be worthy, shall possess the power of Thor."

There. Nice and non-specific ^_^
Thank you, you said it for me. Very easy way to resolve that issue, also it sounds more classicy and theatrical to use they. Which, given the operatic and classic myth feel of Thor and the Asgard, would be very fitting.
 

happyninja42

Elite Member
Legacy
May 7, 2020
7,928
2,218
118
JimB said:
bat32391 said:
Where have I been? When and how did Thor become a woman?
I don't think it's happened yet, but as far as I know, the current story arc in Thor has been building up to him becoming less and less worthy of Mjolnir. It will culminate in him losing Mjolnir, and an original, new character taking the hammer and the mantle.
Do we know if the original Thor is going to still play a role in the Thor comic series? Or is he going to get some spinoff with him as a depowered god on the road to redemption? That would actually be pretty cool really. Having him have to re-earn his rightful place as Thor, and take up the hammer again down the line, but give the female Thor her own magic hammer like they did with Beta Ray Bill. Assuming she does well as a cash source, and the stories are good, I could easily see them giving her a spinoff Thor comic, like they've done with the various versions of the Spider-Man comics, which are all basically alternate universe takes on the same hero.

I gotta admit, I'm almost compelled to start reading comics again, to see what they do with the female Thor, and the de-powered Thor on the side.
 

JimB

New member
Apr 1, 2012
2,180
0
0
Happyninja42 said:
Do we know if the original Thor is going to still play a role in the Thor comic series? Or is he going to get some spinoff with him as a depowered god on the road to redemption?
I do not personally know, but I have seen pictures of him running around in a new costume (looks like he's shirtless and and wearing brown leather pants) and swinging a big ol' axe, so he will be around. I just don't know in which book. I assume it will be Thor, since it would kind of screw up the attempt to save money if they made a new book.
 

Anja Bech

New member
Mar 20, 2013
58
0
0
Lightknight said:
It's also particularly bad with Thor. This isn't just a comic character, this is a 2,000 year old character of human lore.

Why not just bring Sif or some unique and badass female to the forefront? Why do this? They aren't even giving the legitimate female characters a shot. It's like the only way they know how to add characters is to clone existing ones and slap breasts on them. People should honestly be even madder at this, because they don't get it.
2000 year old? No, this Thor has absolutely nothing to do with the Norse god. He's a superhero, borrowing the Norse god's lore. They are absolutely nothing alike.

I do however agree with you that they shouldn't just make 'female Thor' but either make an original character with an original name or take an already existing woman from the canon and use her. This is just lazy.

Also, what Sigmund Av Volsung said - why not just change the inscription to 'they'? Changing is to she seems silly when Thor, obviously a he, has been carrying this thing around for ages.
 

happyninja42

Elite Member
Legacy
May 7, 2020
7,928
2,218
118
JimB said:
Happyninja42 said:
Do we know if the original Thor is going to still play a role in the Thor comic series? Or is he going to get some spinoff with him as a depowered god on the road to redemption?
I do not personally know, but I have seen pictures of him running around in a new costume (looks like he's shirtless and and wearing brown leather pants) and swinging a big ol' axe, so he will be around. I just don't know in which book. I assume it will be Thor, since it would kind of screw up the attempt to save money if they made a new book.
True, I just personally see Thor's road to redemption story as being potentially awesome enough in it's own right to warrant a comic series of it's own. xD

But that's just me and my love of stories like that, someone fighting against odds and threats to reclaim their glory and grace, after being a deuche at some point in the past.

You're very likely right that it wouldn't be a good idea from a marketing standpoint, but I'm looking at it from the fan/reader angle. xD
 

JimB

New member
Apr 1, 2012
2,180
0
0
Anja Bech said:
I do however agree with you that they shouldn't just make 'female Thor' but either make an original character with an original name or take an already existing woman from the canon and use her. This is just lazy.
It's not lazy; it's a business decision. The comic book industry is remarkably stagnant and resistant to change. New characters have the best opportunity to survive if they are attached to an established hero and allowed to branch out after their popularity has been proven with the safety net of a big hero's name.

Anja Bech said:
Also, what Sigmund Av Volsung said - why not just change the inscription to 'they?' Changing it to 'she' seems silly when Thor, obviously a he, has been carrying this thing around for ages.
Wait, why is changing it to "she" silly but changing it to "they" isn't? Yeah, Thor was carrying Mjolnir for ages, but he ain't doing it now, is he?
 

Lightknight

Mugwamp Supreme
Nov 26, 2008
4,860
0
0
Trishbot said:
Sif actually has been the main leading heroine for some time in the "Journey into Mystery" series.


It's been a pretty entertaining read.
Yeah, that's a really good one. But I'm referring to making her a legitimate mainstay in the Avengers or something mainstream. Hell, have her wielding Thor's hammer instead of this nameless being. Though, I'd hate for her not to have her sword. I'd prefer she just take his place amongst the avengers.

But don't just take an unknown, undeveloped female and stamp "Thor" on her like that's something new. That's even worse than "Super Girl" or "Batwoman". At least they're distinct albeit unoriginal. But indistinct and unoriginal? That's a step backwards and it also pisses off fans of Thor unnecessarily. Not that I'm a fan of Thor, he's very nearly in an Aquaman category for me. But Sif? Dayum gurl!

Fappy said:
Lightknight said:
Thor Odinson to be precise.

What's more is Thor still exists in this paradigm. It's just some girl wielding his power and borrowing his name.

Like I said, we already complain about female heroes just having a male name slapped on and yet somehow we're OK with writers not even bothering doing that? Weird.

It's also particularly bad with Thor. This isn't just a comic character, this is a 2,000 year old character of human lore.

Why not just bring Sif or some unique and badass female to the forefront? Why do this? They aren't even giving the legitimate female characters a shot. It's like the only way they know how to add characters is to clone existing ones and slap breasts on them. People should honestly be even madder at this, because they don't get it.
First off, as someone already pointed out Sif does have her own book (last time I was reading Journey into Mystery anyhow). Also, Marvel's Thor has become so much its own thing that he hardly even resembles the mythological character he is based on. Sure, they take inspiration for the actual norse mythology, but inspiration is where it ends. Marvel's Thor is very much Marvel's Thor.
Her book is a side series. I want them to have a mainstream Avenger's female that is kickass as a character on her own merits and isn't just a [HeroName]-[Female designation]. Don't get me wrong, many of those female versions of previously established male characters end up evolving into unique characters with interesting situations.

As for your primary grievance, I don't have an issue with a woman taking up his mantle. It could be a fun read, after all. I do, however, believe this to be financially motivated considering the comic industry's history with such stunts before. This is less about "appeasing SJWs" and more about making a quick buck on a novelty issue #1.
I don't particularly care about them being motivated by money. What's frustrating about this is that this will be temporary, almost certainly. Then what happens to the female character? This could have been an opportunity to bring a sidelined female hero into the spotlight and core group. Take the avengers movie, for example, we have exactly one female and she's not even a superhero. Black-widow is just a spy. Some alterations have given her lame internal powers like "slowed aging" "mind-control resistance" and "enhanced immune system" which aren't exactly powers. Hawkeye is at least a tech superhero with his arrows but is certainly borderline not superhero unless you believe he has superaim and not just peak human aim. But these are the support heroes. The ones from a distance or sneaking. Usually the ones on the computer away from the super powered action.

The comics have some female heroines passing through here and there. Some are better than others and quite a few are just rehashes of the deadly assassin that isn't actually superhuman which is ridiculous to have in such numbers. Why do women get cast in the deadly assassin role so often in these comics? Echo's ability, for example, is photographic reflexes. Not superhuman, just she can copy what she sees someone else do. Not lift a car or anything requiring powers. But things like play the piano or martial arts. She's also deaf which puts her at a further disadvantage. Then Sharon Carter who is just a spy type.

Now, Sif just happens to be my #1 choice. There are other options that stand on their own right. But Sif is sexy without being overtly sexualized and completely badass without being dumb and actually has superpowers.

Sersi was made a member of the Avengers for awhile. That was interesting but she's honestly a bit too powerful as an eternal. Heroes that are just too powerful are hard to write for. She can manipulate all matter with her mind. Organic and inorganic. She merely has a bit of trouble on the subatomic bit. I think they dropped the ball a bit by making her a shameless flirt with the Captain but it was kind of nice seeing him get embarrassed. She may be a decent choice to try to bring to the spotlight but they've really gone off the deep-end with sexualizing her character. It's the same reason why I find wonderwoman a terrible character in the DC universe with her bondage origins.

Power Woman is one I'm still unsure about. She just doesn't seem to stick as a character for a lot of people.

Ms. Marvel could become interesting. They may be trying to make this person into a mainstay... maybe. It's kind of weird to associate a hero's main differentiation with being religion. Her name is also literally a Ms. [heroname]

But really? I'm mostly ok with ANYTHING other than what they're doing. It's not even a new hero they're creating. It's literally a temporary Thor stamp with breasts and I'm completely unsure why this is viewed as progressive when it's even less work than the stuff they'd been doing before which was viewed as not good enough.

Is it just because it's making fans of Thor upset so it makes people feel like it's progressive for feminists? That doesn't sound right. I may not be a fan but I understand. On the other hand, since Thor Odinson still exists they could do something really interesting with his storyline. Will have to wait and see if I'm going to spend any time on it.
 

Anja Bech

New member
Mar 20, 2013
58
0
0
JimB said:
Wait, why is changing it to "she" silly but changing it to "they" isn't? Yeah, Thor was carrying Mjolnir for ages, but he ain't doing it now, is he?
It's not the change I think is silly, it's the fact that they changed it to be gender specific. It's a teeny tiny thing, I know, and it doesn't really matter, but I still feel it would have made a bit more sense to make the pronoun gender neutral.