So, Jane Foster has been Thor for a while now, and though I'm fine with the idea of someone else wielding the hammer and being the god of thunder, but I've always found it very strange when someone else starts going by the name Thor. God of Thunder being a mantle makes sense, but Thor is a name, I never understood how if someone starts using the hammer for an extended time they can start calling themselves Thor. The original Thor started calling himself just Odinson when Foster got he hammer, but that never made any sense to me. What do you think?

Already done multiple times here in Thor topics and the Answer is No, because he born and will die as Thor the God of Thunder, Mjolnir is just a weapon like Gungnir... Why keep debating this? Is there anyone who thinks character Mjolnir is good writing?

It was a pr stunt where the execution was just pathetic...

^^^

@asgaard: Sorry, I'm new to the site so I don't know what has or hasn't been discussed.

No need to apologize, but perhaps a search in this forum would be cool ... :)

No it is just wrong he was Thor God of Thunder before the hammer and after removing the hammer doesn't change that, and giving it to someone else should in no way give them his birth name it just doesn't make sense. There is no logical explanation for it, the hammer gives you the power of Thor not the identity of Thor.

No. Neither should Hulk. These are people, not just masks. It's different if, let's say, Peter Parker is allowed to get old and physically not be able to perform his duties in the role and it's passed on to a younger guy. Thor was born the god of thunder and Hulk was a product of a failed experiment by Bruce Banner, and it's a persona he has to live with and deal with. They personify their names and roles.

Actually even with guys like Cap and Spider-Man, it's hard to envision someone taking up the mantle because, unfortunately, they'll always have to try and live up to their predecessors because they defined their vigilante personas. Captain America was a persona and character born out of one man's sense of duty and self-sacrifice (as well as a scientific experiment) which outweighed his physical frailty. Steve Rogers defines the mask. Same way Peter Parker does. Carol Danvers, for instance, had the Ms. Marvel persona for many years and naturally moved into the role of Captain Marvel since Mar-Vell died many years ago.

While I'm seeing a lot of logic and common sense here about this topic you all forget that marvel thinks "diversity", that's controversy I should say, means more than continuity, logic and respect for characters and their fans. I see this garbage continuing for a while because if Thor comes back and reclaims what is rightfully his then the feminists will riot over how a man took something from a woman.

That's my concern, that Marvel keeps Jane going as Thordis so long there will be just as much outrage from her fans if Mjolnir reverts to Thor, though considering the comments made Marvel likely relishes the potential of another controversy. Seriously though, at that point Jane would have to be dead for this whole thing NOT to be the cynical, pandering PR stunt so many have been calling it.

No simply because Thor is not a mantle or title that can be passed on like Spider-Man and Captain America to a worthy successor. Thor is the identity and persona of the Thunder God himself, it's not a legacy Thor can pass on since he was born an Asgardian god. Thor personifies his characteristics and role. I wouldn't be opposed to a future where someone else wields Mjolnir, but they shouldn't call themselves Thor.

Thordis appeal is just the gender, unfortunately for the character (Jane) she is just the host, the accessory of the Pr female version of Thor, the new readers are temporary and don't care about the Asgardians, their world and their stories...

Either way, guess Marvel (as business company) in 2017 will have to choose between the comic book Pr pandering and the $1B Thor franchise in the Mcu...

This ^ Marvel definitely botched (to put it lightly) this whole idea from the beginning. Thor becomes unworthy? fine... The next person who comes along and lifts Mjolnir now IS Thor? guys, you just just jumped the shark with that idiocy. Everything could have gone 99% the same had Thor kept his name and Jane been given a new one, though I'd guess calling her "Thordis" would've pretty much let the cat out of the bag well before they were planning.

It's their comics so they can do anything they want. However I can completely understand why people would be mad and refuse to accept it simply because it's his actual name an not a persona/alter ego It was ok with Masterson and Blake because they were attached to the real deal but Jane is her own person who just so happens to wield Thor Odinson's hammer.

Spidey, Cap,Hawkeye are even good hell even Hulk is perfectly fine with me as long as you add some adjective or something to differentiate them (Incredible Hulk, Red Hulk, sensational she-hulk etc)

@antithetical: well they COULD have done a story, an epic one at that, about Thor becoming unworthy but we have to settle for the whisper of doom. Has the story even hinted at what that may have been?

@kiba: Nope, not in the slightest. I too speculated they had no real idea exactly what is the cause of his unworthiness, just that Fury whispered in his ear and that was that.

Most of these feminists that are so for this movement and raved about it don't even read comics and know nothing about the Marvel Universe.

hell no it should not be.