JimB said:
Thor was born female, though. Her human identity was always female. She just received the transferable power of a being whose powers have always been transferable and have been transferred to others several times in the course of his career. Thor is simply the first woman to do so...at least in canon (Rogue did it in a what-if) and in the Marvel universe (Wonder Woman did it in the Marvel vs. DC crossover).
If we're counting What If, there's been a few. One of them was Jane Foster, who clearly fits the bill of a woman wielding Thor's powers.
If you think so, then I do not believe you know much about the characters. They are significantly different from their male counterparts.
They're all clearly distaff counterparts. They also have similar reasoning behind them. They may be totes different, but that doesn't change the argument here.
I heard them screaming that Joss Whedon is a misogynist for saying women who can't have babies are monsters (which isn't what he said, but that's what a lot of loud people seem to have heard).
Wheedon's at best an idiot who praises women in the most tone deaf way possible. Like when he used enduring rape as an example of why women are so strong and awesome.
WinterWyvern said:
Don't nitpick: you know exactly what I mean.
She-Hulk, Spider-Woman and Batgirl are all born female too. And all of them are simply reverse-gendered versions of a MALE hero.
Right, none of them got their powers as part of a transfer of powers from a character whose powers were transferable, though, and that's kind of a big deal. It's been previously established that other people can be Thor, even in mainstream canon, where Beta Ray Bill fought for it, Erik Masterson got it, and we even have a frog worthy of wielding Mjolnir. [REDACTED] is simply the first woman to get the powers (following Jim's same caveats of mainstream canon and the Marvel universe). At least, that I know of. She's not Fem-thor, Thorette, Thorina, Thor-Girl, or Thor-Woman. She's another person in a line of people who can use Thor's powers and/or be called Thor.
Spider-Woman, She-Hulk and Batgirl can't say that. This is more like a woman getting Hal Jordan/Kyle Raynor's ring and becoming Green Lantern than someone making a Spider-Girl or Spider-Woman. The closest from that list would be She-Hulk, only because she got her powers from the source. But then, that would also apply to Miles Morales.
And while I'm on this, the fact that the complaints only sprung up because a woman picked up the hammer are, in themselves, kind of bigoted. Sort of like how they've been changing who Captain America is since the 60s (earlier, if you count the communist bashing retcon), but it only became a problem when the black guy picked up the shield (which is ironic, since Sam Wilson was one of the first to do so back in the day). I have a feeling there would be a fit if James Rhodes picked up the Iron Man armour like he did in the 1980s if he did it for the first time today, because things have become so reactionary.
Bombiz said:
I take umbrage with that. specifically the "it's just a story/game/move/whatever" part. Since we have a thread of at least 11 pages it's clearly not "just a story".
No, it could equally indicate people take something like the presence of a female character way too seriously. The fact that something's discussed does not make it important or significant. Especially since this is the internet, and we are all very likely nerds. Nerd/geek culture frequently obsesses over otherwise trivial issues; that's actually one of the common defining traits. And that's not a bad thing, but that doesn't make it significant.
Whether Han or Greedo shoots first is ultimately very trivial, and I will argue it anyway. People spend pages and pages fawning over imagined couples (shipping) for kids shows. And that's fine, but it's still trivial.
Zacharious-khan said:
Star wars at least it's because the female lead is basically jesus, has no flaws, has every skill imaginable, and ruined the movie for me along with "Kylo Ren".
As opposed to the already existing space wizards who were supposed to be expert pilots, master diplomats, capable of survival on alien worlds, master combatants with a special form of arcane weapon that only they can properly use, have magic powers that include mind control and telekinesis, almost always possess computer skills....
And the fact that Luke and Anakin already were Jesus?
People scream Feminist agenda because it seems like this is what they want.
What, that people don't think only men should be Canon Sues? Because while that's not the argument you're trying to make, it's the one you're making with Rei. Luke and Anakin read like fanfic Mary Sue characters already. I find it incredibly hard to believe Rei is any different in this regard.
But that aside, it's weird how it's always what they "seem" to want. Like there's no actual understanding, and people only know what a "feminist" is by third parties.
Like when that whole stink happened with Black widow in the latest Avengers film, it seems as though women can't have silly things like flaws or emotions in films.
Like this, for example: I mean, it could be that people don't appreciate the notion that a woman having her uterus removed makes her a monster, that the entire scene built up not to the sacrifices she made to get there but focused specifically no no can haz babby. No, it must be the idea that she can't have flaws. That in no way sounds like a strawman argument to me.
But okay, from your point of view, how do you explain the bit where the feminists are praising Jessica Jones and it's non-feminists who are up in arms over the character? Because JJ is part of the feminist conspiracy, too, it seems. Your hypothesis does not fit the model.
