Hi Everyone -

Just wanted to share a brief update that we moved to a new editor for our forums with the Rich Editor experience (previously WYSIWYG). We believe this will provide a better experience for all forum visitors in the long run. If you are interested in learning more about the new editor, please visit the URL below.

And please let us know if you find any bugs/issues with the new editor by emailing us at [email protected] and we will pass along this feedback to the team.

Thank you!

https://blog.vanillaforums.com/rich-editor-enhancing-your-forum-posting-experience

PSA about 4* Thor

24

Comments

  • DauthiDauthi Age Unconfirmed Posts: 995 Critical Contributor
    There is nothing wrong with using a feminine to define females or masculine to define males, as that is the way their gender identity tends to sway. The original Thor would have no problems being called masculines like "lord", why would it be an insult to use the feminine "lady" to define the new Thor in a way that she can be easily differentiated from 2 other Thors in the game?

    We shouldn't see everyone as the same, we should celebrate and be proud of our differences.
  • she wields the power of Thor... and is a lady....

    unless the author knows something that we dont about what she is hiding down there, I will be calling her lady thor or she thor
  • lokiagentofhotnesslokiagentofhotness Age Unconfirmed Posts: 192 Tile Toppler
    Can I call her Publicity Stunt?

    If they genuinely wanted to, they could have made a female character that could whoop Sentry's butt while wearing a costume that was badass while not accentuating sexuality. If they wanted to.

    Instead they go for shock value by taking a male hero of legend and making Thor a female.

    So I will call her what I wish, while at the same time not insulting the female gender. Lady Thor works, but I like some of the other ideas here as well.

    Not to mention the fact that Thor, as in Thor Odinson, the god, still exists. Honestly I'm more offended by the entire "Let's make Thor a woman for a short time only NOT REALLY" than anyone on the forum calling the character 4Thor.

    I would be all for it if they'd turned the actual Thor into a woman, but nope. Instead we get unworthy Thor and some random.
  • SquareSquare Posts: 380 Mover and Shaker
    _RiO_ wrote:
    rvs623 wrote:
    Please be respectful to the character and those who created her and don't call her female derivative names of Thor as if she's meant to be a sidekick or something.

    Here's the thing: no matter what you do or say, she is a derivative of the original Thor.

    Thor turned female is nothing more than a cheap tactic by Marvel to both bait female readers and placate feminist outcry over cape comics being male-centric. Rather than coming up with a character that could stand on her own, they cannibalize Thor's character and then have their female derivative ride on the coattails of the popularity established by the original. Frankly, having the new character be such a derivative is kind of insulting to those same demographics Marvel is trying to appeal to. (Really; what kind of signal is this sending? She needs a male base to get any kind of popularity going?)

    Furthermore, at the same time the fall from grace and taking of his name is disrespectful to the original Thor character and those who created him as well. So asking to be respectful to the new Thor, while the new Thor was created in a manner that is totally disrespectful to the old Thor; that's ... well, that's kind of hypocritic, really.

    Personally I think a light mocking of the name is just the right amount of respect to show this character and its creator. Marvel is stepping on a lot of toes with it, and they know they are. They already have their contingency scenario prepared and ready to go now that New Avengers has shown Odinson tap into his multiverse alternate's Mjolnir, which has the enchantment mirrored: "Whoever holds this hammer, if he prove unworthy, shall possess the power of Thorr".
    This attitude is some of what's wrong in the comics world. To claim it was a tactic is to give a lot of disrespect to Aaron as a writer and someone with his own story to tell. To say it is meant to placate feminists is about as true as Thor becoming a frog was meant to placate PETA. It's a story.

    Not a single comic reader is under the illusion that this is permanent change. So to say there is a contingency scenario is baffling. Spider-Man was never going to be Doc Ock forever. Professor X will not be dead forever. That is part of the medium of American super-hero comics. Nothing ever really changes. It's not a contingency plan if the intent is to unltimately return.

    If Walt Simonsons run on Thor came out today, the Internet would be full of fanboy rage that he was disrespectful to the old Thor and its creators. He started off by giving the hammer to a horse alien! He had Asgardians fight with machine guns! He killed Odin!

    It's a story, in the future it will go back to Man Thor, and people can find another reason to complain about feminists.

    Lady Thor isn't disrespectful, but it's not the greatest name. She-Hulk wasn't a great name either, but it was the 70's...
  • homeinvasionhomeinvasion Age Unconfirmed Posts: 415 Mover and Shaker
    Actually there are millions of Thors, we exist on Earth 616 in the multiverse and there are an almost unlimited iterations of Thor. Which is why we should be allowed to have Xforce/ Patch on a team or Thor3/ Thor4 on a team.
  • evil pandaevil panda Age Unconfirmed Posts: 419 Mover and Shaker
    i was calling her "girly thor" in my alliance chat. was that wrong? icon_eek.gificon_razz.gif
  • SpoitSpoit Posts: 3,441 Chairperson of the Boards
    Actually there are millions of Thors, we exist on Earth 616 in the multiverse and there are an almost unlimited iterations of Thor. Which is why we should be allowed to have Xforce/ Patch on a team or Thor3/ Thor4 on a team.
    I'm pretty sure we aren't in 616, or there'd be a lot more stories about heroes in the papers (and papers would still be a thing)
  • EddiemonEddiemon Posts: 1,470 Chairperson of the Boards
    rvs623 wrote:
    I've been seeing something on the forum for weeks that has been bugging me more and more every time I see it.
    When they announced the new (female) Thor, they specifically said “This is not She-Thor. This is not Lady Thor. This is not Thorita. This is THOR. This is the THOR of the Marvel Universe. But it’s unlike any Thor we’ve ever seen before.”

    Source: (Series writer Jason Aaron): http://marvel.com/news/comics/22875/mar ... z3L94STJCd

    PLEASE stop calling her Lady Thor/Thora/Thorina/etc. I've seen some people using 4hor or 4thor; GoT (Goddess of Thunder) would be good too. Please be respectful to the character and those who created her and don't call her female derivative names of Thor as if she's meant to be a sidekick or something. I get that it's confusing and we can't just call her "Thor," but surely we can agree on a better nickname for her?

    Edit for clarification: I'm not trying to turn this into a controversy or say that the nicknames are offensive. I just think that since the author of the comic specifically said not to call her those things that we should come up with a different nickname. That's all.

    For clarification, that is exactly what you are doing.

    We had a Thor. They added another Thor and we started calling it Lazy Thor or Fat Thor to distinguish it from the original. Now we have a new Thor but we can't give it a new name because it is *female*.

    Take your misandry somewhere else thanks. This wasn't an issue for bagman. Or Lazy Cap. Or for Laken. But now there is a gender involved it is big high drama and we must listen to the comic artist because you have a cause.
  • modmousestsmodmousests Age Unconfirmed Posts: 63
    Seriously?

    Mod edit: Rude portion of response edited out. Keep it civil, please. -DayvBang
  • Omega RedOmega Red Posts: 366 Mover and Shaker
    _RiO_ wrote:
    Here's the thing: no matter what you do or say, she is a derivative of the original Thor.

    Thor turned female is nothing more than a cheap tactic by Marvel to both bait female readers and placate feminist outcry over cape comics being male-centric. Rather than coming up with a character that could stand on her own, they cannibalize Thor's character and then have their female derivative ride on the coattails of the popularity established by the original. Frankly, having the new character be such a derivative is kind of insulting to those same demographics Marvel is trying to appeal to. (Really; what kind of signal is this sending? She needs a male base to get any kind of popularity going?)

    This is my sentiment as well. The Marvel universe has so many great female characters already, they should be creating new stories to position them to more relevant roles.

    I have no issue with the idea of a woman taking on the Thor mantle, actually, I think it is pretty cool and worth exploring. My issue is with the crass use of a property to push for a political agenda. I read the first issue. The art is gorgeous and the plot is promising, but there is an exchange between Odin and Freyja that reads like straight pamphlet material. Seeing Odin portrayed as a caricature of a macho just so the writter could make a point about his political posture was quite a turn-off. Back in the sixties Stan Lee used his comics to present social and political issues. I think he was very smart in the way he did it because even when you could see the author's posture on the issues, the content always read like commentary and not like soap-box propaganda.

    DC has done a great job with Wonder Woman for decades. Anyone who wants to see how to do the feminist agenda in US comic-books should study that character's history, it is very interesting.

    I call the character "Thora" and sometimes refer to her as "Thorita" in the same vein as I use "spidey" for Spider-man. It is naive for a writter to expect he can excercise any control over how his creations can be called by readers. The public has the right to call any given creation whatever the hell they want to.
  • TaganovTaganov Posts: 240 Tile Toppler
    Square wrote:
    This attitude is some of what's wrong in the comics world. To claim it was a tactic is to give a lot of disrespect to Aaron as a writer and someone with his own story to tell. To say it is meant to placate feminists is about as true as Thor becoming a frog was meant to placate PETA. It's a story.

    Not a single comic reader is under the illusion that this is permanent change. So to say there is a contingency scenario is baffling. Spider-Man was never going to be Doc Ock forever. Professor X will not be dead forever. That is part of the medium of American super-hero comics. Nothing ever really changes. It's not a contingency plan if the intent is to unltimately return.

    If Walt Simonsons run on Thor came out today, the Internet would be full of fanboy rage that he was disrespectful to the old Thor and its creators. He started off by giving the hammer to a horse alien! He had Asgardians fight with machine guns! He killed Odin!

    It's a story, in the future it will go back to Man Thor, and people can find another reason to complain about feminists.

    Lady Thor isn't disrespectful, but it's not the greatest name. She-Hulk wasn't a great name either, but it was the 70's...

    I guess I'm too cynical to agree with you, though I do get what you're saying and actually hope I'm wrong and dude just has an amazing story to tell about Lady Thor. I'm as much for reinterpretation of literature as the next guy with a liberal arts degree, but this all stinks of a placatory tactic. All of a sudden, in the midst of the comic book industry taking a beating for catering to one demographic, Captain America is black, Thor is a woman and a slew of super heroes come flying out the closet. And as you observed, these changes are temporary, so really, what's changed? I mean, why bother organically cultivating diversity in American super hero comics when you can just drop non-canonical, "look how inclusive we are now" bombs at your convenience? Seriously, I'm waiting for Storm to be revealed as a transgendered lesbian whose mom was Jewish, dad was Muslim and was brought up in a Catholic enclave so they can hit all their diversity targets at once. It's a bloody spectacle.
  • I call her Thorina and I'll always do... unless they give us "Odin mother of all things" (a 5* with all the covers and fully leveled) !!

    If you really want me to call her Thor, I need to add something to not confusing with 2* or 3* Thor ... I'll call her LGB-Thor then icon_lol.gif
  • SquareSquare Posts: 380 Mover and Shaker
    Taganov wrote:
    I guess I'm too cynical to agree with you, though I do get what you're saying and actually hope I'm wrong and dude just has an amazing story to tell about Lady Thor. I'm as much for reinterpretation of literature as the next guy with a liberal arts degree, but this all stinks of a placatory tactic. All of a sudden, in the midst of the comic book industry taking a beating for catering to one demographic, Captain America is black, Thor is a woman and a slew of super heroes come flying out the closet. And as you observed, these changes are temporary, so really, what's changed? I mean, why bother organically cultivating diversity in American super hero comics when you can just drop non-canonical, "look how inclusive we are now" bombs at your convenience? Seriously, I'm waiting for Storm to be revealed as a transgendered lesbian whose mom was Jewish, dad was Muslim and was brought up in a Catholic enclave so they can hit all their diversity targets at once. It's a bloody spectacle.
    I don't think editors are telling the writers at Marvel what to do in general. For crossover involvement, yes, but in general stories, no. Like, right now, there is the Axis crossover, and there are set crossover issues, but not every book coming out reflects that storyline, just the labeled ones.

    Brubaker killed off Cap, and had Bucky step in. Remender has aged Cap, and the Falcon steps in. It all seems pretty organic to me. And neither that Thor or Cap plot seems to reflect what Marvel is actually doing positively about representation (i.e. Ms. Marvel is a pretty good book, from the issues I've read), it's just a storyline involving non-white men. The Cap and Thor thing just got attention because they're movie stars.

    I have to say, I don't feel that way about DC. Maybe they're getting better, but they were haemorrhaging writers for a while there because of editorial interference, with so many publicly complaining about the company, to the point that DC made a work stipulation that you can't discuss working there. I don't get that vibe with Marvel or their books these days. I do think the crossovers are way out of hand there. Original Sin finishes, and Axis starts the next week, and they're leading to a massive one in May. It's like D3 is taking their PVE ideas from Marvel! icon_e_biggrin.gif

    By the way, if you didn't know, Storm was a lesbian for most of the 80's. She was doing Yukio in Japan, and probably Callisto too. If they made the Invisible Woman a lesbian, yeah, that would be lame, but with Storm, a lot of that's already in there. If you ever read 80's X-Men, keep that in mind as you read icon_e_wink.gif
  • EddiemonEddiemon Posts: 1,470 Chairperson of the Boards
    Square wrote:
    Brubaker killed off Cap, and had Bucky step in. Remender has aged Cap, and the Falcon steps in. It all seems pretty organic to me. And neither that Thor or Cap plot seems to reflect what Marvel is actually doing positively about representation (i.e. Ms. Marvel is a pretty good book, from the issues I've read), it's just a storyline involving non-white men. The Cap and Thor thing just got attention because they're movie stars.

    Ultimate Peter Parker -> Miles Moriales
    Cap -> Falcon (Even though there was Patriot as a natural successor)
    Thor -> Lady Thor (Even though Thor is his freaking name, not a role. Every time Thor has died there hasn't been a stand in Thor. And even though Thor is actually someone else with their own identity that just hasn't been revealed yet).
    Nick Fury -> Black Nick Fury. (Totally Organic, there wouldn't have been thousands of people of rank waiting to take over shiled that a newcomer could bypass...)
    Cap Narvel -> Muslim Cap Marvel...

    The Big 3 (Cap, Iron Man, Thor) We'll turn one black, one female and we'll turn the remaining white guy evil.

    At what point does it become an agenda and not just organic?
  • lokiagentofhotnesslokiagentofhotness Age Unconfirmed Posts: 192 Tile Toppler
    Eddiemon wrote:
    Square wrote:
    Brubaker killed off Cap, and had Bucky step in. Remender has aged Cap, and the Falcon steps in. It all seems pretty organic to me. And neither that Thor or Cap plot seems to reflect what Marvel is actually doing positively about representation (i.e. Ms. Marvel is a pretty good book, from the issues I've read), it's just a storyline involving non-white men. The Cap and Thor thing just got attention because they're movie stars.

    Ultimate Peter Parker -> Miles Moriales
    Cap -> Falcon (Even though there was Patriot as a natural successor)
    Thor -> Lady Thor (Even though Thor is his freaking name, not a role. Every time Thor has died there hasn't been a stand in Thor. And even though Thor is actually someone else with their own identity that just hasn't been revealed yet).
    Nick Fury -> Black Nick Fury. (Totally Organic, there wouldn't have been thousands of people of rank waiting to take over shiled that a newcomer could bypass...)
    Cap Narvel -> Muslim Cap Marvel...

    The Big 3 (Cap, Iron Man, Thor) We'll turn one black, one female and we'll turn the remaining white guy evil.

    At what point does it become an agenda and not just organic?

    Probably at the point where there's genuine diversity? There's always going to an "agenda" when it comes to updating comic characters that were created decades ago when the superhero was generally white, male and heterosexual. Allowing things to organically evolve is not going to increase diversity, because people like the status quo. It's safe, and it's proven successful in the past. So why change, unless you actually make a concentrated effort to do so.

    Now if only they made the same kind of effort for the movies instead of having 2 million movies starring White Guys with Strong Jaws.
  • SquareSquare Posts: 380 Mover and Shaker
    Eddiemon wrote:
    Ultimate Peter Parker -> Miles Moriales
    Cap -> Falcon (Even though there was Patriot as a natural successor)
    Thor -> Lady Thor (Even though Thor is his freaking name, not a role. Every time Thor has died there hasn't been a stand in Thor. And even though Thor is actually someone else with their own identity that just hasn't been revealed yet).
    Nick Fury -> Black Nick Fury. (Totally Organic, there wouldn't have been thousands of people of rank waiting to take over shiled that a newcomer could bypass...)
    Cap Narvel -> Muslim Cap Marvel...

    The Big 3 (Cap, Iron Man, Thor) We'll turn one black, one female and we'll turn the remaining white guy evil.

    At what point does it become an agenda and not just organic?
    Straight white guys see conspiracies everywhere.

    Keep in mind, these changes happened over 10 years, under different editors.

    -Mark Miller wrote Ultimates, and wanted all the characters based on movie stars. He chose Samuel Jackson for Fury. His choice, not a mandate. When it came time to make the Avengers movie, that was the one they went with. In the 616 universe, they adjusted it to match for the sake of the movie being massively more popular than the comic ever could be. White Nick Fury still exists (though they did some confusing stuff to him in Original Sin). Not an agenda.

    Miles Morales, only Ultimate Spider-man, not 616. Brian Michael Bendis has said that he wanted it (he also has adopted children of colour, so maybe he's more sensitive to the lack of role models in pop culture for minorities. He also created a chubby Latino character, Goldballs, for X-Men) Maybe you can call that Bendis' agenda, but it's not Marvel's.

    Cap/Falcon - Cap was Bucky five years ago. If that wasn't an agenda, neither is this. Ultimately irrelevant, since it's going back to status quo before the next Cap movie (which would probably happen anyway as they run out of story ideas).

    New Thor - Also irrelevant, since it's going to go back to status quo. It's a story arc. Not an agenda.

    New Ms. Marvel - Maybe that was an agenda? I can't fathom why anyone could complain that Marvel has a single book with a Muslim lead though. That seems just a matter of time. I would imagine the editors said they wanted something different, and got a bunch of pitches, and went with that one. In the end, if the book is good is the key thing, and it is. The writer is a Muslim woman, so possibly she enjoys seeing a comic at Marvel about a capable young Muslim woman. That seems pretty organic to me. I think there is room in the market for that sort of diversity.

    New Ghost Rider is Latino too. This is at least the third GR, so it doesn't make much difference. He's just a flaming skull. I don't know anything about the writer there.


    In the last 20 years, Marvel and DC have successfully launched two new superhero properties that I can think of: Deadpool (though part of the X-Men world) and Guardians of the Galaxy (which was still an existing title, and existing characters, so it's arguably old). It's very hard to make popular new characters. Really hard. If comic companies want to increase diversity (and they definitely do), existing series/known names are one way to do it. White people will have to be happy with the fact that 80% of comic characters are still straight white people, and more men than women, even though white guys are just 30% of the American population.

    I think it's time to share our toys a little more. Just a little.
  • If I could vote down OP I would.

    It's ridiculous professional offence-taking like that this that gives feminism a bad name.

    Also we're hardly sitting in a high court in front of a Judge here - its comic books! Really who cares?!?!
  • I call her Lame Thor as opposed to Lazy Thor.
  • Omega RedOmega Red Posts: 366 Mover and Shaker
    Square wrote:
    Straight white guys see conspiracies everywhere.

    Keep in mind, these changes happened over 10 years, under different editors.

    Joe Quesada has been calling the shots since 2000, first as Editor in chief, now as Chief Creative Officer. He, along executives like Bille Jemas back then and Dan Buckley now have established policies that control the direction of every character within the Marvel Universe. No major change in the status quo of a prominent character can be done without these guys' approval. Your romantic picture of a lone writter with a social conscience and a heck of a story to tell is nice, but it is not the way these comics are being made.

    If such a policy existed in the sixties and seventies we would have no Black Panther, but a black Reed Richards. We would have no Storm but a black Jean Grey. We would have no Luke Cage but a black Daredevil or something. It would be much better if Marvel worked on creating and developing new characters with their own identities but that is difficult and takes years to establish so instead we give you black Spider-man, Thora and muslim Marvel and oh by the way, we are going to call the Huffington post to make sure the world knows we care for diversity. tinykitty.
  • SquareSquare Posts: 380 Mover and Shaker
    Omega Red wrote:
    Square wrote:
    Straight white guys see conspiracies everywhere.

    Keep in mind, these changes happened over 10 years, under different editors.

    Joe Quesada has been calling the shots since 2000, first as Editor in chief, now as Chief Creative Officer. He, along executives like Bille Jemas back then and Dan Buckley now have established policies that control the direction of every character within the Marvel Universe. No major change in the status quo of a prominent character can be done without these guys' approval. Your romantic picture of a lone writter with a social conscience and a heck of a story to tell is nice, but it is not the way these comics are being made.

    If such a policy existed in the sixties and seventies we would have no Black Panther, but a black Reed Richards. We would have no Storm but a black Jean Grey. We would have no Luke Cage but a black Daredevil or something. It would be much better if Marvel worked on creating and developing new characters with their own identities but that is difficult and takes years to establish so instead we give you black Spider-man, Thora and muslim Marvel and oh by the way, we are going to call the Huffington post to make sure the world knows we care for diversity. tinykitty.
    I wrote, it is one way. Not the best way, not the only way. One way. So if you think that's me saying we need a black Reed Richards, well, that's how Internet discussions tend to go, don't they? Exaggeration and misrepresentation.

    Were you someone upset about Bucky as Cap? Was anyone? No. Falcon as Cap? A ton of loud people on the Internet were. Who knows what percentage of readers actually were. Characters change, and it's not evidence of an editorial agenda. It does have to do with changing times. And Marvel still tries to make new characters, of all races and what not. Look at Uncanny X-Men right now, a very diverse cast. And they've been producing lots of books with women, successful or not. The new Thor is not Marvel trying to improve women representation in comics (because it will go back to Man Thor in a relatively short period of time). The Storm book, Spider-Woman, Ms. Marvel, She-Hulk, Captain Marvel, Spider-Gwen books. Those are the company trying to represent women. Not this Thor thing.

    As for Quesada being EIC, yeah he is. But there's a difference between the editor saying, "Make Thor a woman because we need women!" and them saying okay when an idea is thrown at them. One is an agenda, and one is organic. Do you think Quesada said yes, or that he demanded it happen? Because those are very different things.

    As for them proclaiming diversity, well, that goes without saying! There's no corporation that won't proudly trumpet its own progressiveness, even when they changed kicking and screaming. That's what corporations do. They have PR shills who claim that that was what they always thought.

    I know most on this board won't agree, so I should just drop this thread, but it's just so painful to see the outright hostility (not you specifically, but a few in this thread, and a lot on other Internet sites) that comes up on these topics, and the pains that people go to to show they are being truly liberal -> If Cap becomes black, nobody will make the Black Panther. There is no reason both can't exist, unless there is a quota for black characters, which there shouldn't be. I think complaining about it is the biggest problem.

    Like this:
    It's ridiculous professional offence-taking like that this that gives feminism a bad name.
    I think people being upset about comics diversity and temporary storylines is what gives fanboys a bad name. Comics fanboys are kicking and screaming their way into the 21st century.
Sign In or Register to comment.