The Illuminati and the Malaysian Jet »« Palumbo: Not In My Backyard

Apparently, a Female Thor Will Ruin Everything

I’m not a comic book guy and couldn’t care less about superhero movies, but apparently Thor is now going to be a female character. Naturally, that has the MRAs losing their minds. Apparently, a female Thor is proof of misandry and is going to turn men into slaves for women. Or something. David Futrelle has the screenshots. This is my favorite:

bluepillprof

Yes, of course. A female Thor will obviously lead to mandatory lesbianism and the banning of heterosexual sex. It’s totally obvious, right?

Comments

  1. AndrewD says

    Janiceintoronto, For the same reason Fundementalist christians are againdt atheism, same sex marrage etc -Lack of (self)confidence in their beliefs and body image.

  2. Alverant says

    Thor was a frog for a while and there wasn’t as much outrage.

    Besides, technically Thor isn’t undergoing a gender change. The male Thor will do something arrogant/stupid and be taught humility by having his powers removed (again). Those powers are going to be transferred to a woman for a while. Basically it’s no different than Tony Stark building a suit of powered armor for a woman and letting her be the Iron Avenger while he takes a few months off to go to detox.

    Same powers, same name, two different beings. This guy is way off base and didn’t bother doing any research beyond reading a headline.

  3. wscott says

    When your whole sense of self-worth is invested in stupid machismo, which society (and most women) no longer value, it’s only natural to feel threatened. I don’t have a lot of sympathy, but I sorta understand where it comes from.
    .
    By the way, AFAIK this change is only in the comics not in the movies. (Comic nerds remember when the Mantle of Thor was passed to a frog and no one freaked out.)

  4. hexidecima says

    MRAs are afraid of anything that says that they aren’t the rightful rulers of the universe. It’s even worse when a woman demonstrates them to be liars.

    I think it’s interesting that they’re giving Thor’s powers to a woman. Maybe she and Capt. Marvel can thrash some MRAs.

  5. Pierce R. Butler says

    Thor, a woman?!?

    Sacrilege! (Ask any Odinist.)

    Of course, the Marvel Comics Thor has violated the canonical Aesir from Day One – most obviously, the True Thor™ was/is a redhead!

  6. busterggi says

    “The only penetration women will get is from their magic hammer.”

    Now available at Amazon.com!

  7. says

    In most Marvel continuities, Mjolnir is an intelligent alien artifact that imbues what is effectively divinity on whomever it decides is worthy of wielding that power. As Alervant said, all that is happening is that the current wielder will be losing that trust, and the hammer decides that a woman is worthy. Thor, by Marvel definition, is the person chosen by Mjolnir, which will make this woman Thor. Not She-Thor or Ms. Thor or Thorette: Thor.

    @janiceintoronto #1 – For the same reason creationists are terrified of evolutionary biologists. MRAs believe, as a matter of blind faith, that women are not capable of wielding any kind of power, and get tetchy when confronted with evidence that contradicts their fanatical beliefs. Why they are fanatics would make for a much more interesting conversation.

  8. scienceavenger says

    @5 From my admittedly socioeconomically biased view of the world, whiny effeminate little boys are over represented among comic book readers. Perhaps that’s why strong women frighten them so. They also seem to be driven entirely by their libidos, making the possessors of the vaginas all-powerful, able to make the little boys do anything to get some. And then the b*tches go and give it to assholes, or so goes their pitiful worldview.

    The bottom line problem for MRAs is they think THEY get to dictate to women what women should prefer in men, which is [shocker] the traits the MRAs (supposedly) possess. The rest follows…

  9. gmacs says

    From OP

    I guess it’s better than having a gay relationship between Thor and Tony Stark but still…..

    What? Are you kidding me? I wasn’t even thinking of that before, but now I want it. I WANT IT!

    I’m a heterosexual male who isn’t typically entertained by Yaoi type stuff, but for some reason that is a combo I want to see. Maybe just because it would make the REAL MENZ squirm. I can’t be the only one. Marvel! Please make that happen!

    I don’t think anyone would be more happy or relieved than Pepper Potts.

  10. says

    @wscott #5 – Consistency has never been a concern for most comic book companies.

    The cinematic Thor draws from a continuity where Thor is himself an alien and Mjolnir is merely a tool. The continuity in question is one where Mjolnir selects a mortal to bear its power. Both continuities have existed for decades, with the latter one having more stories: it got around religious objections better, allowed for much more varied stories, and made it much easier to transition the property to new artists. Actual comic fans know what and why, and the response has largely been applauded: the screeching is coming mainly from people who know the character only from a couple of movies and not from the comics.

  11. says

    @gmacs #11 – I’m a hopelessly monosexual gay man, and I would be much more intrigued by a Pepper Potts and Sif romance. (In the Asgardian continuity that the movies use, Sif is Thor’s lover.) Imagine if Pepper were to realize that she can be a strong leader and warrior in her own right, without having to be the mess-cleaner of a self-centered and fabulously privileged man-child.

    Oh, my, wouldn’t THAT put the MRAs’ panties into a royal bunch.

  12. Dexeron says

    Marvel has already proven that they can combine inclusivity with great story-telling with their Pakistani-American Ms. Marvel. I can’t wait to see what they do with a woman wielding Mjolnir. Will get an interesting humility-redemption story for Donald Blake, and also a great new kickass role-model that young girls can get behind. Between all of that, and Sam Wilson becoming the first African-American Captain America, Marvel continues to prove that they’re entertaining and relevant, (and this is, to an extent, reflected in their films) while DC continues to live up to the worst stereotypes of the industry.

    And the fact that this also makes all of the bigots’ heads explode? That’s just icing on the awesomeness cake.

  13. D. C. Sessions says

    And just to add insult to injury, Thor’s clothing are not standard-issue comic-book boudoir design. No magic anti-gravity boobs (they’re in a steel breastplate that’s not wildly different from the male sleeveless torso outfit) and she’s wearing — gasp! — trousers. With real boots.

    The facial armor is sorta pointless, he breastplate is reminiscent of the 50s, and the armguards are stupid (with bare upper arms? WTF?) but all in all totally uninteresting for wanking.

  14. Doug Little says

    The latest 300 movie had the main protagonist being female as well as the leader of the Spartan’s, where’s the outrage?

  15. says

    The male Thor will do something arrogant/stupid and be taught humility by having his powers removed (again). Those powers are going to be transferred to a woman for a while.

    Because being a woman is an inferior state, a punishment?

    Got it.

  16. says

    the main protagonist being female as well as the leader of the Spartan’s

    Gorgo was hardly the main protagonist. She was an important and interesting character, yes, but you’re not being honest if you want to pretend that Leonidas wasn’t the main protagonist.

  17. konrad_arflane says

    @Marcus #19:

    I think you’ve got it backwards. The guy who is currently Thor does something stupid and is taught humility by having his powers taken away and being turned into whatever regular Joe he was before he became Thor. He doesn’t become a woman.

    Meanwhile, another person gets to be Thor – and this time, *that* person is a woman. So it’s not a question of “punishing Thor by turning him into a woman”.

  18. says

    By the time they are all done, men will be whining, effeminate little boys…

    So whines the so-called man whose masculinity is under threat by a fictional character.

  19. typecaster says

    There’s further implications to this development. Consider the following facts:
    .
    1. Marvel is owned by Disney
    2. Thor is now female.
    3. Therefore, Thor is now a Disney princess.
    .
    I can’t wait for the animated musical version.

  20. dingojack says

    A female incarnation of Thor turning men into whiney little boys?
    Nope — the MRAs have already got the ‘whiney-little-boy’ vibe well and truly covered.

    Dingo

  21. Alverant says

    #19 No Marcus, I said the male Thor and female Thor are two distinct beings and that male Thor’s powers are being transferred is the punishment. The fact they are being transferred to a woman is irrelevant. Well perhaps it matters to male Thor, but that’s his problem and another thing he’ll have to get over.

  22. Abby Normal says

    Can’t wait to hear the rants when the bigot brigade finds out the new Captain America is black.

  23. pocketnerd says

    DC has effectively declared they don’t want to make comics for women or minorities. Marvel’s response seems to be “Fine, if you don’t want to appeal to people who could double or triple your base, we’re more than happy to.”

  24. Dweller in Darkness says

    @30, did you see the interview where the guys who’s more or less* spearheading the DC movies said that they won’t me making a Martian Manhunter movie because only virgin males like the character? That was special.

    * I say “more or less” because the other thing that distinguishes Marvel from DC, other than Marvel actually, y’know, trying to attract a broader audience, is that Marvel has a centralized plan for doing so while still allowing for creativity within their brands.

  25. gog says

    @29 Abby Normal

    I’ve already had a facebook contact make a more-or-less complaint, saying that to include other identifiable groups we should create new superheroes instead of remaking existing ones. The person in question isn’t necessarily being a bigot, but I see it as an expression of privilege; an objection to changing the cultural markers of a character in order to appeal to a less privileged group.

  26. pocketnerd says

    Thus Spake ZaraAbby Normal, #29:

    Can’t wait to hear the rants when the bigot brigade finds out the new Captain America is black.

    Cap’s fan base has always been strongly divided. On one hand, you have right-wing diehards who long for the days when Captain America was as a walking nationalist revenge-fantasy, punching out Hitler, commies, hippies, and other Enemies of the State. On the other hand, you have people like me, who like him because he represents the very best of what our nation could be — just, courageous, and welcoming to diversity. Admittedly the last bit is somewhat subverted by Steve Rogers the blonde, blue-eyed Aryan poster-boy (give Cap a little slack — he hit the newsstands in 1941 for cryin’ out loud) but putting the costume on Sam Wilson will go a long way toward fixing that. I hope.

  27. pocketnerd says

    Thus Spake ZaraDweller in Darkness, #31:

    @30, did you see the interview where the guys who’s more or less* spearheading the DC movies said that they won’t me making a Martian Manhunter movie because only virgin males like the character? That was special.

    Nope, I missed that one. Classy. And nothing grows an IP faster than showing naked contempt for its fans — just ask George Lucas…

    (And for what it’s worth, the Martian Manhunter is one of my favorites… and my love life is quite satisfactory, thank you.)

  28. borax says

    #29 Abby Normal and #33 pocket nerd. I’ve noticed that the ass hats that are complaining about Sam Wilson becoming the new Cap seem to completely forget all the other people who have been Cap over the years.Now what makes this change different?

  29. wscott says

    From my admittedly socioeconomically biased view of the world, whiny effeminate little boys are over represented among comic book readers.

    [sigh] Yeah. I’d like to believe the whiners aren’t actually that many, but are just overly loud compared to their actual numbers because complaining is all they’ve got.

    Consistency has never been a concern for most comic book companies.

    To be fair, that’s nearly impossible when you have literally hundreds of authors telling stories with the same characters for 50+ years. And it’s not always bad: some of the best comic stories of the last few decades have been the ones that violated continuity in one way or another.

    Actual comic fans know what and why, and the response has largely been applauded

    Someone on another thread summed it up pretty well for me: “My inner continuity nerd is a little put out, but most of my brain wants to see what kind of cool stories they’ll get out of this.”

    Therefore, Thor is now a Disney princess.

    [spit take] LOL! I guess the hair is already up to Disney quality…

    @30, did you see the interview where the guys who’s more or less* spearheading the DC movies said that they won’t me making a Martian Manhunter movie because only virgin males like the character? That was special.

    Was that the same interview where he said the only reason She-Hulk was created was so Hulk would have someone to bang? Yeah, what a guy. (Never mind that Hulk & She-Hulk are cousins – ick!)

    to include other identifiable groups we should create new superheroes instead of remaking existing ones.

    I can sorta see his point in theory. But in practice in comics, all the Big Iconic Heroes are already taken. With a handful of notable exceptions, new superheroes seldom gain a tenth of the readers of the old favorites.

  30. pocketnerd says

    Thus Spake ZaraDweller in Darkness, #31:

    @30, did you see the interview where the guys who’s more or less* spearheading the DC movies said that they won’t me making a Martian Manhunter movie because only virgin males like the character? That was special.

    Welp, I did a quick Google and all I can say is THE STUPID, IT BURNS. It turns out it was also the notorious interview in which he calls She-Hulk “chunky” and “a giant green porn star.” He then went on to say his take on a Martian Manhunter movie would be “Then [Martian Manhunter] gets out and he’s really angry and he fucks She-Hulk.”

    Wotta guy. With charm like that, I can’t imagine why DC is failing to appeal to women, minorities, and moviegoers.

  31. JustaTech says

    Given how much gender/sex swapping happens in Norse mythology, I’m surprised that they haven’t done this before now. I mean, there is at least one story where Loki changes himself into a mare and mates with … something … and gives birth to Odin’s 8-legged horse. (How do 8 legs work on a horse?) Thor even dresses up as a woman to hide from a giant too big to fight.

  32. says

    In most Marvel continuities, Mjolnir is an intelligent alien artifact that imbues what is effectively divinity on whomever it decides is worthy of wielding that power. As Alervant said, all that is happening is that the current wielder will be losing that trust, and the hammer decides that a woman is worthy. Thor, by Marvel definition, is the person chosen by Mjolnir, which will make this woman Thor. Not She-Thor or Ms. Thor or Thorette: Thor.

    But Thor is a name, not a title. When Loki got the hammer for a little while, he didn’t become Thor; he stayed Loki, only with a hammer. Right? Or am I mistaken about that?

    I still think it’s dumb, in that the temporary transferral of Thor’s powers to a woman means nothing at all, bad or good. It’s just to stir up sales, and before very long at all he’ll get his hammer back, the woman will be forgotten (regardless of what her name is– presumably she has a name before becoming Thor; why doesn’t she keep that) and nothing will have changed. The next Thor movie will still have Chris Hemsworth. And that’s fine with me– I (still) want original female superheroes, please, though I’m sure not holding my breath until they arrive on the screen.

  33. Akira MacKenzie says

    Is it the concept or archetype of these characters that we love, or their race/gender? If it’s the former, then anyone regardless of color, sex, orientation, etc. should be able to step into their shoes (or tights as it were) and play the part.

    If it’s the latter, you’re liking that character for all the wrong reasons.

  34. Mobius says

    A female Thor completely destroys my faith in the Aesir. Now I am going to have to find a new religion.

  35. dingojack says

    “(regardless of what her name is– presumably she has a name before becoming Thor; why doesn’t she keep that) ”
    Because it’s not like ‘Thor’ had a name when he was ‘played’ by a man or anything, oh no never….
    The whole ‘name’ and ‘title’ thing is just so complicated isn’t it?
    Dingo

  36. Pen says

    … men will be whining, effeminate little boys…

    They can still barely imagine the terrible truth. When Thor is a woman she’ll be eyeing them up and picking the ones she likes the look of for all the privileges she’s willing to dish out. Their lives will be defined by whether she finds them cute or not. They won’t even make worthy opponents, Thor will be saving her hammer for the serious stuff and they’ll just be eye candy for the female audience and love interest so that Thor has, you know, a bit of a stake in winning. Dystopias are terribly popular these days, so why shouldn’t the MRAs have one all of their own?

  37. says

    I wonder if BluepillProfessor has ever ventured into the world of fanfiction. A Tony Stark/Thor story should be fairly easy to find.

  38. lofgren says

    I tend to agree that we should make new characters to be more inclusive rather than RETCON old characters, but neither of these examples are that.

    I don’t believe that rewriting characters’ histories in that particular way is respectful to the character’s writers who have come before you, to the historical context in which the character was created, or to the particular group you are trying to represent.

    Basically saying “Cap has always been Black” (or more often these days, gay) is bad. Cap giving up his suit so a Black guy can take over is good. One is progressive. It moves the story, and history, forward. The other is historical revisionism, which is inherently regressive.

  39. Pierce R. Butler says

    borax @ # 35: Now what makes this change different?

    Sam Wilson has never made public his long-form birth certificate.

  40. eric says

    @41:

    Is it the concept or archetype of these characters that we love, or their race/gender? If it’s the former, then anyone regardless of color, sex, orientation, etc. should be able to step into their shoes (or tights as it were) and play the part.

    If it’s the latter, you’re liking that character for all the wrong reasons.

    Kinda disagree, simply because I see it a bit as a package deal. When some author writes an excellent character (or an actor plays a character excellently in a movie), its inevitable and pretty natural for the audience to distrust or dislike any proposed variation, even if the variation is on some irrelevant trait. That’s just because they love the old version in all it’s detail.

    On the positive side, an excellent new variation (or second actor) can overcome this distrust and expand how we think about the character. But it’s gotta be done right; very few fans are going to like the new version just because the character is a different race or sex. The dialogue, plot, and acting has to be there too. I’ll take Battlestar Galactica’s Starbuck as an example. There was a lot of angst about the new version being a woman. I don’t consider that angst to be sexist necessarily, many people just loved the old character in all his particulars. But Katee Sackhoff nailed the role, and changed minds. My point here is that the people whose minds were changed probably weren’t all misogynists; they just feared that any variation from the original wouldn’t be as good. When Sackhoff did it just as well, albeit differently, they accepted it. They did like the old Starbuck in part because he was male and played the role in a stereotypically male fashion. But they also liked the new Starbuck, after she showed herself to be a talented actress playing a well-scripted character.

Leave a Reply