Marvel Giving Thor's Hammer New Female Friendly Inscription

Lightknight

Mugwamp Supreme
Nov 26, 2008
4,860
0
0
Anja Bech said:
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.
Thor is both a modern comic book character and a 2,000 year old human lore character. It's not one or the other. Comic Thor is literally a retcon of human lore in which he is purported to be the same Thor that humans referenced 2,000 years ago freshly returned to Earth.

Yes, he isn't exactly the same, but it is still a direct representation of the Norse God. So all I really mean is that of all superhero Marvel characters, this is the one that has been around for thousands of years. Do you really think the Thor of Norse Mythology is all that different from a superhero story?

Maybe someone will get mad at a Ms. Jesus hero with matter manipulation powers in a comic 100 years from now? Same thing. Just Thor may be even older.

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.
Exactly! And they have legitimate existing characters which makes this even worse. They literally have excellent Asguardians to take up the hammer too.

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.
Right, they've gone from sexism to sexism in the name of not-sexism. The pendulum often swings too far in the name of equality before swinging back to equality's rightful place.
 

Fappy

\[T]/
May 1, 2020
12,010
0
0
Country
United States
Lightknight said:
Now that I think about it, I hope this lady Thor doesn't just become a Valkyrie clone when she gives up the hammer. Actually, this whole thing would be a lot more interesting if it was Valkyrie herself that picks up Mjolnir in the first place. She's a pretty unique character in her own right, and taking up Thor's mantle temporarily may get people to pay attention to her for the first time in.... 30 years.
 

happyninja42

Elite Member
Legacy
May 7, 2020
7,916
2,195
118
Lightknight said:
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!
I think JimB posted previously that the female Thor is someone we know from a previous comic series, but it just hasn't been revealed yet? Which might support my previous hope that a Valkyrie, (not necessarily the Valkyrie comic hero, but just a Valkyrie of Norse mythology), becomes the new Thor. It would make sense in a way, assuming Thor is fighting with other Asgardians at his side when he loses his hammer, and it's a "heat of battle" decision on the part of the female character to take up the hammer to try and save the day, and it works.

It's purely speculation on my part I know, but it makes sense to me thematically, and in my head makes for a pretty cool scene. Male Thor falls to the field of battle, the enemies swarm, and then there is a massive bolt of lightning, and a clap of thunder. Then, as the smoke of battle clears, a woman is standing over him in a defensive posture, armor shining with power and the hammer held aloft, classic badass pose. And everyone's just sort of dumbstruck for a minute as the golden warrior surveys the field of battle, then proceeds to kick arse.

Bah, I'm getting myself overly hyped about this reveal scene in my head. xD It's probably not going to be anything like that in the comic, but I can dream!
 

Sight Unseen

The North Remembers
Nov 18, 2009
1,064
0
0
I still think it's a bit silly that Thor of all heroes can be replaced. Thor is supposed to be an actual god. How the hell does one simply replace him, taking his name and all?

I'm all for seeing more women in comics (not that I read comics) but if you must replace existing heroes, why would you pick Thor as your go to one?
 

Lightknight

Mugwamp Supreme
Nov 26, 2008
4,860
0
0
Fappy said:
Lightknight said:
Now that I think about it, I hope this lady Thor doesn't just become a Valkyrie clone when she gives up the hammer. Actually, this whole thing would be a lot more interesting if it was Valkyrie herself that picks up Mjolnir in the first place. She's a pretty unique character in her own right, and taking up Thor's mantle temporarily may get people to pay attention to her for the first time in.... 30 years.
Kudos for considering my point. From your first post in the thread it seemed like you were already against anyone that would have a problem with this. Hopefully I've made it apparent that my complaints are on wasted potential here rather than just getting mad at girls in a boy's club or something. But you may have just had an issue with the hammer change itself causing controversy. I think it should have been changed to something gender neutral if they were going to do that. Going from one sex to another is still sexist. Or, maybe it will just always switch in the future? Maybe magic just isn't politically correct?

Valkryie would be interesting too. She's obviously close in character and would be a decent choice. The author seemed to indicate that this is an existing character that hasn't been revealed yet. Not sure what that will do though.

I'm also concerned that transforming them (an existing character) entirely into a female Thor would dilute their own character so that when they change back it's as if they were just gone for awhile. Rather than bringing their character real attention and legitimate spotlight.

Maybe it could be a thing where the initial transformation into Thor's mantel makes them entirely a Thor clone (albeit still female) and slowly their original character takes their uniqueness back, altering the costume over time to be an amalgamation of costumes. Who knows, but as it stands I'm none too happy. It's just literally a female Thor by all accounts.

Happyninja42 said:
I think JimB posted previously that the female Thor is someone we know from a previous comic series, but it just hasn't been revealed yet? Which might support my previous hope that a Valkyrie, (not necessarily the Valkyrie comic hero, but just a Valkyrie of Norse mythology), becomes the new Thor. It would make sense in a way, assuming Thor is fighting with other Asgardians at his side when he loses his hammer, and it's a "heat of battle" decision on the part of the female character to take up the hammer to try and save the day, and it works.

It's purely speculation on my part I know, but it makes sense to me thematically, and in my head makes for a pretty cool scene. Male Thor falls to the field of battle, the enemies swarm, and then there is a massive bolt of lightning, and a clap of thunder. Then, as the smoke of battle clears, a woman is standing over him in a defensive posture, armor shining with power and the hammer held aloft, classic badass pose. And everyone's just sort of dumbstruck for a minute as the golden warrior surveys the field of battle, then proceeds to kick arse.

Bah, I'm getting myself overly hyped about this reveal scene in my head. xD It's probably not going to be anything like that in the comic, but I can dream!
Yeah, there are some possible redeeming things they could be doing here. We'll have to wait and see. As of right now it's almost entirely a negative that could lead to the dilution of an existing heroine who is just wearing a mask right now. I'd far rather see their costume change slightly if this is the case rather than entirely changing into a female Thor.

Could also be interesting to see if this is a lasting effect of the time he was transformed into a female Thor. Like it actually created a female body or something that has now returned and is quite literally Thor too. Thor Odindaughter or something :p

I'll have to wait and see though.
 

rosac

New member
Sep 13, 2008
1,206
0
0
The only issue I have with this is the actual name thing. Captain America, captain marvel, spider man are example of titles that can be chopped and changed, some even between genders (obviously not spider-man).

Thor is a name not a title, although I hope that as they're definitely going down this route they keep the book titles as Thor, but give her a new, unique name OR have her originally calling herself Thor due to the shock of sudden new manifested powers caused by Mjolnir or something, but then regains her individuality and takes up a new name, leaving Male Thor his own name.

However- I have the feeling that Thor Girl may be the recipient of the hammer, turning her from Thor light to full blown Thor level superheroine, which would make sense for the name change.


My final question is though... If she is called Thor and treated as Thor in all respects, what'll happen to her when Mjolnir (Inevitably) returns to Donald Blake? I think she'll be shunted out of the limelight and relegated to Thor girl mark 2.
 

happyninja42

Elite Member
Legacy
May 7, 2020
7,916
2,195
118
rosac said:
The only issue I have with this is the actual name thing. Captain America, captain marvel, spider man are example of titles that can be chopped and changed, some even between genders (obviously not spider-man).

Thor is a name not a title, although I hope that as they're definitely going down this route they keep the book titles as Thor, but give her a new, unique name OR have her originally calling herself Thor due to the shock of sudden new manifested powers caused by Mjolnir or something, but then regains her individuality and takes up a new name, leaving Male Thor his own name.

However- I have the feeling that Thor Girl may be the recipient of the hammer, turning her from Thor light to full blown Thor level superheroine, which would make sense for the name change.


My final question is though... If she is called Thor and treated as Thor in all respects, what'll happen to her when Mjolnir (Inevitably) returns to Donald Blake? I think she'll be shunted out of the limelight and relegated to Thor girl mark 2.

The issue though, is that in the Marvel-verse, Thor is a title, and not just a name. They've established it from the very beginning, with the engraving on Mjolnir. "Whosoever wields this hammer, shall have the power of Thor" And they've used this loophole many times to let other people be Thor, and headline the comic series. So while yes, I agree that in actual mythology, Thor is very much a single person, in the Marvel-verse, that is not the case at all.

Lightknight said:
Yeah, there are some possible redeeming things they could be doing here. We'll have to wait and see. As of right now it's almost entirely a negative that could lead to the dilution of an existing heroine who is just wearing a mask right now. I'd far rather see their costume change slightly if this is the case rather than entirely changing into a female Thor.

Could also be interesting to see if this is a lasting effect of the time he was transformed into a female Thor. Like it actually created a female body or something that has now returned and is quite literally Thor too. Thor Odindaughter or something :p

I'll have to wait and see though.
Well, personally I don't want it to be Valkyrie, the already established character. When I've used the term Valkyrie in my posts, I'm simply referring to the Choosers of the Slain, and stating that having a valykrie be the female warrior who takes up the mantle of Thor would be thematically fitting in my mind. Granted my premise is assuming the moment of Thor's fall and her rise is taking place in the thick of a major battle, and thus the Choosers would be there as that's their job. But, I have no idea how much of the actual Norse mythology is in the Marvel-verse when it comes to that stuff. For all I know, the only valkyrie is Valkyrie herself, which would make my theory moot.

Are the Valkyrie's as a group that take the souls of dead warriors to Valhalla actually established as a group in the Marvel-verse?
 
Apr 5, 2008
3,736
0
0
Aren't this article and the announcement of the God-change itself major spoilers?? Why announce these things so far in advance? Wouldn't fans enjoy it more if it were unexpected?

As for the wording change, it's a sad issue with the English language that in the singular, we *only* have gender specific third person pronouns (he, she, him, her, his, hers) while in the plural, we *only* have gender neutral ones (they, their, their's). Spanish for example has "ellos" and "ellas" for "they" masculine and feminine respectively.

Saying that, for years now using "they" as an indefinite pronoun in the singular has been common in speech and writing. Many authors and famous publications use it and have done so not just for years, but centuries. Grammar "purists" might scoff and say it's incorrect, but I use it and think it's a perfectly acceptable use of the language.

Writing "he or she" or "(s)he" or "s/he" gets tiring after a while. Marvel have set a precedent whereby now the inscription may need changing every time Thor changes. Using "they" in place of he or she would mean the inscription could remain unchanged no matter who is Thor at the time.

Tho I expect Odin the Skyfather probably has Microsoft Word 365 with Skydrive, so he can just open a document, make any changes to wording, font, spacing, etc then sync it to Mjolnir via the cloud. He probably has an Asgardian Weapons Inscriptions template and hopefully Asgard has an off-realm backup for users' documents and data.

Out of interest, are there any other Asgardian weapons/Gods that are conditional upon meeting a certain criteria? Like is Loki only Loki as long as s/he wears a stupid hat?
 

happyninja42

Elite Member
Legacy
May 7, 2020
7,916
2,195
118
KingsGambit said:
Aren't this article and the announcement of the God-change itself major spoilers?? Why announce these things so far in advance? Wouldn't fans enjoy it more if it were unexpected?
I think they're goal was to try and drum up new readers with the marketing and advertisement. Readers such as myself actually. I don't read comics anymore, and haven't for almost 15 years. If they hadn't put this information out there as a pre-release hype machine, I wouldn't have heard about it. And I am honestly intrigued by this enough to seriously consider picking up the comic series for a bit and see what they do with it. So there, they've got 1 additional potential customer from this marketing, and likely more such as myself. I suspect this was their goal. To revitalize the reader base.


KingsGambit said:
Out of interest, are there any other Asgardian weapons/Gods that are conditional upon meeting a certain criteria? Like is Loki only Loki as long as s/he wears a stupid hat?
Not that I can think of, because Thor didn't have that condition in the actual mythology at all. It's something done with the comic books only. The only other one I can think of that has a signature trait, that if you got wrong would be a very obvious error is Sif, and her (literally) golden hair. Which, they got wrong in the comics. xD Also, they got Thor's hair wrong too, as I seem to recall historically he is red-headed, not blonde. But no, many of the Norse heroes have signature weapons that are part of their image, but I can't think of a single one that has some restriction on how they can use/wield it like the Mjolnir "Whosever be worthy" thing.
 

MorganL4

Person
May 1, 2008
1,364
0
0
hazabaza1 said:
On one hand, the idea that the hammer changes based on whoever is holding it is a neat idea, and I can certainly see why they did it.
On the other hand, having it stay a 'he' and allow her to wield would be a very Éowyn thing to happen so I think it would at least be a neat approach.

Still, I don't read comics so whatever I say is basically null and void!
But this begs the question: Why would Mjölnir the ancient magic hammer give a damn about genitalia? I mean as far as the hammer is concerned, sex seems kind of superfluous, you know?
 

Lightknight

Mugwamp Supreme
Nov 26, 2008
4,860
0
0
Happyninja42 said:
Lightknight said:
Yeah, there are some possible redeeming things they could be doing here. We'll have to wait and see. As of right now it's almost entirely a negative that could lead to the dilution of an existing heroine who is just wearing a mask right now. I'd far rather see their costume change slightly if this is the case rather than entirely changing into a female Thor.

Could also be interesting to see if this is a lasting effect of the time he was transformed into a female Thor. Like it actually created a female body or something that has now returned and is quite literally Thor too. Thor Odindaughter or something :p

I'll have to wait and see though.
Well, personally I don't want it to be Valkyrie, the already established character. When I've used the term Valkyrie in my posts, I'm simply referring to the Choosers of the Slain, and stating that having a valykrie be the female warrior who takes up the mantle of Thor would be thematically fitting in my mind. Granted my premise is assuming the moment of Thor's fall and her rise is taking place in the thick of a major battle, and thus the Choosers would be there as that's their job. But, I have no idea how much of the actual Norse mythology is in the Marvel-verse when it comes to that stuff. For all I know, the only valkyrie is Valkyrie herself, which would make my theory moot.

Are the Valkyrie's as a group that take the souls of dead warriors to Valhalla actually established as a group in the Marvel-verse?
Yes, and the original Valkyrie (Brunnhilde) is literally one of those. She was selected by Odin to lead the Valkrior (group of Valkyries that do what you said).

Also, she was recently slain (currently serving Hela in some capacity which doesn't mean she's alive since Hela is the goddess of death). So... this has got to be her (Brunnhilde, not Samantha Parrington), actually. It almost can't be anyone else. To be honest, this wouldn't be a bad resurrection story and the once leader of the group that collects dead souls isn't a bad option to resurrect. I just think it's weird to make her literally Thor.

So there you have it. I believe the current female Thor to be the reincarnation of Brunnhilde (Valkyrie) who has already wielded Thor's hammer once before before losing it in a battle. She has also stated that she isn't just an Asgardian but also something much older. That hasn't been revealed yet so this could be a full fleshing out of Valkyrie. Could be.

Look at this cover, it's Valkryie (I think this was in 2006, probably gave them ideas):

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c2/ULTMTSV2006_COV.jpg
 

Dominic Crossman

New member
Apr 15, 2013
399
0
0
anthony87 said:
"Whosoever holds this hammer, if they be worthy, shall possess the power of Thor."

There. Nice and non-specific ^_^
To be fair, that's what I always thought it said, although obviously I'm misinformed. Still, nice to see they didn't make a stupid oversight on this and keep it as he.
The Internet would explode with fury.
 

Lightknight

Mugwamp Supreme
Nov 26, 2008
4,860
0
0
rosac said:
The only issue I have with this is the actual name thing. Captain America, captain marvel, spider man are example of titles that can be chopped and changed, some even between genders (obviously not spider-man).

Thor is a name not a title, although I hope that as they're definitely going down this route they keep the book titles as Thor, but give her a new, unique name OR have her originally calling herself Thor due to the shock of sudden new manifested powers caused by Mjolnir or something, but then regains her individuality and takes up a new name, leaving Male Thor his own name.

However- I have the feeling that Thor Girl may be the recipient of the hammer, turning her from Thor light to full blown Thor level superheroine, which would make sense for the name change.


My final question is though... If she is called Thor and treated as Thor in all respects, what'll happen to her when Mjolnir (Inevitably) returns to Donald Blake? I think she'll be shunted out of the limelight and relegated to Thor girl mark 2.
When it becomes revealed who she actually is her original name may come back into play.

But yes, Thor is a name. It's like there being a new female Steve Rogers rather than there being a female Captain America. That's my primary complaint about the name itself.
 

hazabaza1

Want Skyrim. Want. Do want.
Nov 26, 2008
9,612
0
0
MorganL4 said:
hazabaza1 said:
On one hand, the idea that the hammer changes based on whoever is holding it is a neat idea, and I can certainly see why they did it.
On the other hand, having it stay a 'he' and allow her to wield would be a very Éowyn thing to happen so I think it would at least be a neat approach.

Still, I don't read comics so whatever I say is basically null and void!
But this begs the question: Why would Mjölnir the ancient magic hammer give a damn about genitalia? I mean as far as the hammer is concerned, sex seems kind of superfluous, you know?
'Cos it's fucking maigc and shit, I'unno. Why can a lizard use Mjolnir, and why does Hulk get a sword and decide to murder the world?

Remember we are discussing comic books here, it's a frighteningly deep series with little to no answers for many questions.
 

Evil Smurf

Admin of Catoholics Anonymous
Nov 11, 2011
11,597
0
0
I'd inscribe it with; "Are you ready to party? We're getting so hammered!"
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.
People are also delicious. I eat youtube trolls for breakfast, yum yum!
 

Lightknight

Mugwamp Supreme
Nov 26, 2008
4,860
0
0
Evil Smurf said:
I'd inscribe it with; "Are you ready to party? We're getting so hammered!"
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.
People are also delicious. I eat youtube trolls for breakfast, yum yum!
You eat crap for breakfast, Shooter McGavin?

If I wielded the hammer, I'd just inscribe it with a threat to anyone that touches the hammer using a pronoun that doesn't include me. "If any non-lightknights be worthy to weild this hammer, you'll get hammer-aids, lightknight gets the hammer though"

Hmm, guess that'll be a developing inscription until I think of a better one.
 

happyninja42

Elite Member
Legacy
May 7, 2020
7,916
2,195
118
Lightknight said:
Hmm, guess that'll be a developing inscription until I think of a better one.
"Whosoever be not me, hand's off my fucking tool. Only I get to play with my...hammer" ? xD
 

immortalfrieza

Elite Member
Legacy
May 2, 2020
2,024
54
53
Country
USA
DaWaffledude said:
It's kind of like how certain words like "sorta" "ain't" "gonna" etc. and certain phrases like "I did good" "You're real clear" etc. will have every proper english obsessed person jumping down your throat because they technically aren't real words and proper sentences respectively despite the fact that just about every english speaking person on the planet uses those words in such a manner. It doesn't make any sense but you'll always find somebody somewhere that goes out of their way to point out the "proper" way of saying things according to some very arbitrary rules and definitions. "He" being gender neutral is just another one of those sorts of words.

tzimize said:
The inscription thing is completely beside the point, the reason to resist this is what is (imo) stifling of creativity. Instead of creating a new, worthwhile hero, with her own powers from Asgard (honestly, not only the men were mighty in that lore) they just give Thor boobs. Because boobs.

Its sad and unnecessary, and to me about as retarded as making Wonder Woman into Wonder Man. What is the point?
The "point" is that Marvel's writers these days are either completely drained of good stories or were all replaced by a bunch of talentless hacks or both that are unable to sell comics off having good stories and characters anymore plus a dose of executive meddling so they pull some obvious publicity stunt like this to piss off their loyal fans as much as possible and sell comics riding off the ensuing controversy instead. Of course they then backpedal on everything a some months later, just to do the same thing to another comic. That's all this is, all gimmicks like this have ever been. If they really wanted the comic to sell on it's own merits Marvel wouldn't be shoving it in everybody's faces every chance they get. A severe lack of creativity and an even greater lack of respect for the fans, the material, and it's history is the problem here. Hell, DC does the same thing.

Wait. Correction, there was a time when gimmicks like this actually weren't gimmicks and where actually an attempt to prove something as part of a great story even though they never lasted, probably sometime back in the late 80's early 90's.

Lightknight said:
Right, they've gone from sexism to sexism in the name of not-sexism. The pendulum often swings too far in the name of equality before swinging back to equality's rightful place.
I think that's what pisses me off about this more than the writers pissing on decades of lore and legions of fans and everything, how hypocritical this whole thing is. It's just as sexist against the male side of the equation in the name of being less sexist even if it was going to be a permanent change as it would be if they took an established female character and turned her male, maybe even more so as nowhere near as many are going to get pissed over the former as with the absolute we'd-never-hear-the-end-of-it=even-long-after-it-was-reversed shitstorm that would occur if they did the latter. This kind of hypocrisy is actually pretty common I've found.

Lupine said:
Let me be that guy, again. Donald Blake having been Thor all along was a retcon. Also even after the retcon it has been retconed again so that Blake was not just some body that Thor was placed into sans memories. As of right now, Blake isn't Thor, they don't even share the same body anymore and Blake is currently a disembodied head in the care of horrific nightmare creatures...
In short, they've never been particularly consistent about it.

As a matter of fact, they've never really explained what it means to be "worthy" of Mjolnir either, likely so they can make storylines like this. From all I've seen it even seemed like once someone were worthy of Mjolnir it didn't matter whether that person stopped being worthy at some point they were still able to wield it. For example I've been reading a bunch of old Thor comics trying to get caught up and I remember one time they decide to have Loki wield Mjolnir by body swapping with Thor, despite that not making any sense. Then as some have mentioned Thor has become "Not worthy" and lost the use of the hammer later on, or the Mjolnir origin story where Thor was able to lift Mjolnir a bit more the more worthy he became while every other time for everybody else it's firmly rooted to the ground. So, in short again they haven't been particular consistent about how "worthiness" affects the hammer either.
 

Nazrel

New member
May 16, 2008
284
0
0
DaWaffledude said:
Nazrel said:
Contrary to common misconception "He" is not a masculine pronoun, it's gender neutral. Where as "She" is a feminine pronoun.

This is why "he" is used for unknown or ambiguous individuals; when referring to a specific individuals the assumption of masculinity is made, though it would also be an appropriate term to be used for an entity without a Male/Female gender.

My point here is that ironically, Mjolnir has now gone from saying it's gender inclusive to that it's gender exclusive.

Given the intent behind the move I find this hilarious.
This is literally the first I have heard of this.

Words mean what the general populace says they mean. It's one of the reasons I'm so fed up about this whole feminism/MRA/SJW mess. No one agrees what the words mean, which means they have no meaning.

No one uses "he" as gender neutral anymore (if they ever did, I haven't bothered to check), just like no one uses "gay" as a synonym for "happy" anymore. No dictionary will change this. A dictionary reflects the speakers of a language, not the other way around. That's why "literally" now officially means both "not figuratively" and "figuratively".

When people say "he", they refer to a male person, or a person they assume is male. Brand me whatever you like, any time I've seen someone called out for using male pronouns in place of gender-neutral ones, I've seen them correct themselves or defend their assumption, not their interpretation of the word "he". Defend your interpretation all you like, it's meaningless if an insignificant amount of people agree with it.

...

Reading back over this post, I may have gotten a bit ranty over what amounts to very little. Seeing people act like their interpretation of a word is the only valid one just gets to me. Sorry.
Feminism/SJW? Labels slapped on broad vaguely defined concepts, thus malleable to narrative.

Gay? A limited use term, but more importantly you know it's historical meaning.

But "He"? "He" is a pronoun; it is one of the foundations of the English language.

While there is some validity to the argument of the flux nature of language, it is the lack of strict definitions that causes these arguments you lament, to allow such a fundamental shift to go uncontested would be a promotion of ignorance.

Regardless of how anachronistic "He" as as a gender neutral pronoun may become; to not at least understand it's historical usage as such, is, on a fundamental level, to misunderstand the majority of anything ever written in Modern English.
 

otakon17

New member
Jun 21, 2010
1,338
0
0
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.
JarinArenos said:
The hammer magically changing its inscription to suit its current wielder sounds perfectly logical to me. It's by far the least fantastic feature of that artifact.
Yeah, simple explanation. Um, I must have missed it but what is the origin story of this new Thor? What happened to the old one? No longer worthy? Killed in glorious battle? Retired? Got lost at WalMart?