Loki Appreciation 2019

[Pallux]

LOL @ that Endgame art Raye!

There's new art posted by Patrick Gleason, who's just signed a new exclusive with Marvel, featuring all the heroes and Loki is right in the midst of them but you can't see his hands so mjolnir may be purposefully kept out of view.

Attachment 81998

This... actually helped to convince me a bit more that Loki might get Mjolnir somewhere in this. Because even though we saw him with it on that cover, and even though I've had my share of fannish thoughts on such a scenario for years, I'm also very mistrustful of cover art in general but especially when it's something like... an ex-villain trickster character getting that one thing he's always been after. Not that I think it couldn't happen, I'm hopeful that it does, but I know covers often like to show us something that's sort of true but with a twist that changes everything, you know? But here we see him in a sort of odd position, walking with a swagger/lean he's not normally shown to have, and yeah that looks like someone possibly carrying something heavy. HMMMMMMM!!!

Oh and yeah, those fannish Mjolnir thoughts did involve Loki becoming worthy but then willingly giving Mjolnir back to Thor bc 1) it'd be a lovely poetic moment where he acts in contrast to all those millenia of his Mjolnir-jealousy related bullshit, 2) frankly I'm not as interested in seeing Loki be a big blunt weapon wielding sort of character as I am in the idea of him just being able to lift Mjolnir, and, since Thor became unworthy: 3) I feel bad for Thor lol. Let him have his hammie back.
Really, Loki doesn't even really need a big magic weapon to be his most powerful. I mean, it would help, but his true strengths lie somewhere else. It'd make him stronger in a way that isn't like, magnifying what his strengths as a person already were. If that makes sense? On the one hand it'd give him perfectly balanced brain-brawn stats, but it's also his relative lack of brawn that made him develop his Loki-skillset so well, and I guess it feels less... poetic... to me to give him smth that takes away some of the motivation to pull some super Loki **** and let him hammer his way through, rather than show that the Loki method can work perfectly fine for the good side. Anyway this isn't a prediction, just a scenario I've had in my head for a long time.


Oh, since you've been talking about the taking responsibility thing! One thing I liked so much about AotG is that retrieving the Naglfar horn thing was essentially Loki cleaning up his mess. Yes, it was bc Nebula was an active threat with it, and there was the plan to use it in the WotR (possibly just a bonus, since they'd have it then anyway), but it did still have some old Loki nonsense coming around to ruin things, and Loki dealing with it. And then he tried to do the same thing when he saw he was the one who more or less created Malekith, before realising he couldn't. It's just nice. (as well as a convenient concept for Loki stories, if Marvel ever runs out of things for Loki to do lol. There's probably PLENTY of old Loki plans that could come back to bite him/everyone else in the ass at some point ) Actually Squirrel Girl did this too with the Ratatoskr thing, come to think of it haha

[Raye]

edit - whoops responses as I was responding..

Yeah I really hope Thor doesn't actually become unworthy (except for the period of time that the bad thing is happening) and it's just that he lets Loki keep it for a while, and then Loki gives it back. That would be my ideal scenario for both characters. Means Thor doesn't become a worse person overall after the event, it shows Thor is not letting himself be solely defined by his connection to his hammer, he's doing something nice for Loki, and if Loki gives it back, that also shows development on his part. And yeah, as you said, Loki doesn't need Mjolnir for the power it grants, he needs it as a symbol of how much he's changed, and it can just last a few months and it would accomplish that goal.

That's true about the Naglfar beacon, I hadn't even thought of that. and with the Malekith epiphany, it's so nice how that dramatic change i his character, where he's taking responsibility for the things he's done, was handled there, I thought. It was just a matter of my vs you and then him trying to stop Malektih, subtle but to the point.

and yes, old Loki plots will probably be coming back to bite him and the rest of Asgard in the ass for years to come.

ahhh everyone talking about the symbiote and its possible importance in the plot ... I'm still thinking about how to recover the mijolnir ahahah
I would like to mention that it is in the heart of the sun, and that Thor has already tried to recover it, but in return Loki is able to enter the sun and go out at leisure, but I do not believe that during the whole war Loki entered the sun to look for a hammer not knowing if he can lift it ... THEN perhaps thor will not have the hammer in his hands in the whole event, in eppisode 5 of WoR in my opinion is when the Mijolnir makes his epic entry (the description of the chapter speaks of something that comes from the sky and on the cover there are lightning bolts) maybe Loki calls the hammer as a joke and then it appears in his hands ahhaha or maybe the Minjolnir arrives alone on earth, the problem is to know how the hell comes out of the sun ...
Is Verity Willis in the new Loki comic? I think it was one of the best characters created for the story of Loki, she stood out the best side of Loki without betraying the essence of the character.

Recovering Mjolnir is tricky, I am not sure how they'll do that. They can go practical, Thor going to the sun, maybe with Loki to provide forcefields, and just getting it directly. Or they can go dramatic, with Mjolnir hurtling from the sky when it's most needed. In both scenarios you have to potentially deal with Mangog as well, which complicates things. Mangog could also be another scenario for the bad thing, come to think of it. I still kinda like the symbiote angle though. While admittedly I don't see how a symbiote under normal circumstances could power up Thor significantly since Thor is at such a high baseline power level to start with, but maybe Malekith did something to it. but yeah, I think Thor is needed to wield it first in both scenarios. As you say, there is no reason Loki would go get it while having no idea that he could lift it or not, it wouldn't make sense. He has no reason to believe he'd be worthy, so why waste time trying? Mjolnir is likely the reason he thought Thor was needed to win the war. so yeah, i do think Thor is needed to get the hammer on the board initially. The cover with the lightning bolts is issue 5, so it may be that Thor (and Loki) arrive with that then, then the bad thing happens in 6, which does not have a cover revealed yet. So it's seeming like Loki is back from the dead in 4, Thor gets Mjolnir in 5, bad thing leading to victory in 6. And a lot of other things fleshing things out, as well, like the Bifrost, and Jane getting Valkyried up and all, but I think the Thor and Loki stuff is the meat of the story for the last half.

Verity... her fate was unclear. She may be dead, she hasn't appeared since the end of Agent of Asgard. a shame, since I liked her.

[Pallux]

Oh I forgot to say like half of what I was planning to say earlier so here goes:

1:

maybe Loki calls the hammer as a joke and then it appears in his hands ahhaha

That's fucking hilarious, I love it lmao

(I also miss Verity dearly, she was great. As a Loki companion and by herself. Also everytime I watch Would I Lie To You I imagine Verity and Loki playing and being obviously unbeatable)

2: back when I read (skimmed) that post where Raye talked about that podcast interview abt the new solo, I read the thing where Kibbles said he was creating an Ice Man-like character for Loki as like... creating a Loki characterisation that was somehow Ice Man-ish. I was like ok......idk anything about ice man so I'll just shut my mouth and see what happens lmao. Only now am I seeing it as actually creating a character that is like Ice Man. Duh. I'm amused and embarrassed. Anyway, if that means a frost giant, especially a friendly/non-fully hostile one, that'd be great bc even since before TMT I was secretly thinking it'd be fun to have some sort of frost giant ally at some point. Like that one guy who'll go "guys I kinda wanna know what he has to say" before everyone else tells him to shut up/threaten to murder him lol. Or maybe even associates with Loki in secret.

3:

and this: https://66.media.tumblr.com/6b7314bd...o2_r4_1280.jpg

This makes me so happy just because Loki is listed with all these women. I know there's probably someone who will make the argument that it's *just* bc of Loki's shapeshifting powers, but listen! Loki's gender stuff is extremely important to me and I love it when characters make references to her being a her sometimes in-universe! Then the art choice to draw male form Loki was made and it maaaybe makes it less cool for me a tiny little bit, but that won't stop me from cherishing what I can. That's all.


[EDIT:

edit - whoops responses as I was responding..

Yeah I really hope Thor doesn't actually become unworthy (except for the period of time that the bad thing is happening) and it's just that he lets Loki keep it for a while, and then Loki gives it back. That would be my ideal scenario for both characters. Means Thor doesn't become a worse person overall after the event, it shows Thor is not letting himself be solely defined by his connection to his hammer,(...)

Oh snap, you're right. It WOULD be a meaningful Thor moment in his current arc to have him also choose to let Loki/anyone have it even though he can lift it. Guess my brain was a little too full of Loki at that moment to consider that for Thor too.]

[Raye]

Yeah, I think Thor needs to let go of the hammer somewhat before he gets it back. Realize he can be awesome without it. He's an immortal good able to call lightning down from the skies just by willing it to be, that's awesome, he doesn't NEED Mjolnir to be awesome. Though I will concede a weapon of some form would be handy. He's been a bit slow to learn this lesson.

and yeah, I am pretty sure he meant a new character based on the Mega Man character. By which i presume he meant mostly in terms of powers, so hurling ice blades through the air, since that makes the most sense to me in this context, but I mean, he didn't clarify. A Frost giant would make sense, though. An yeah, a Korg-like frost giant or something would be awesome. If Loki is so atypical of Frost giants, surely there is at least one other that's not a monstrous brute right?

I'd also like to see Iceman the mutant be brought up at some point. Since it was Loki who supercharged his powers back in the day, causing him to lose control for a while there, in some frost giant related plot. It's not a super high priority for me, but... I think it could be interesting to have them meet up again after Loki's turned face.

[Rosebunse]

So who is Ice Man from Mega Man? I'm looking up about him and I guess all I'm seeing is a cute little robot that does ice attacks and who is a bit of a brat. He also has a crush on Roll, the girl robot. So does this mean that this character just has those powers or are we going to be seeing some of that characterization? It would be sort of cute if they had a crush on Loki LOL

It would be nice to know why Loki is the way he is or, yeah, at least meet other Frost Giants who are a bit abnormal. Now, it does make some sense that we wouldn't see them, because it seems that the weaker ones are normally killed, with Loki being an exception because of Laufey being in charge, but given how many of the larger Frost Giants are being killed here, it makes sense that we might see some of the smaller ones come out of hiding.

I'm totally for Loki meeting up with Bobby, that would just be fun, especially given all the crap both of them have been through recently. I know we all love Verity, but I am still holding out for a male love interest, though with certain gay characters, that would also make it difficult to get more of Lady Loki, who I do really want to see. Really, I think we can all agree that we just want Loki to be more LGBTQ and really push those norms. It shouldn't be all he's about, but it would be fun to see more of. Also, I think Lady Loki is very pretty and I would love to see them in more casual clothes. Like a nice sun dress or black jeans and a cute t-shirt. When Loki was using Sif's body as Lady Loki, they were very, very sexualized and then when Loki turned good, when we did see their female form, they weren't. Of course, I still think that it's clear that the narrative reason was that Loki was using his newfound sex appeal to make himself look less dangerous, but it still comes across as sexiness=evil and modesty=good.

So for the moon, you have the mangog, the hammer, and potentially some sort of symbiote thing.

That sounds fun. I can't blame Aaron if he decides to just not use the mangog and just focus on the hammer. It honestly seems mean to sick that monster on them after all this.

I still contend that there's a chance that Loki might end up simply praying for the damn thing and it will reconstitute itself. Prayer has been a very large part of Aaron's run. There's an underlying bitterness to the whole story when it comes to that; we understand why the gods can't answer every single prayer, but it still sucks when they can't.

So maybe it isn't Loki's prayer, but someone's prayer has to do something.

[Pallux]

*adds "Korg-like" (and I am ab-so-lutely talking Taika Waititi Korg) and "has crush on Loki" to my hypothetical Friendly Frost Giant character sheet* lmaooo it's getting better and better

The prayer angle wouldn't have occurred to me. Could potentially be all cool and dramatic, with Aaron's mythical speak text scrolls or whatever they're called.

I should clarify that when I say I love Verity as a Loki companion I mean as like, a character who accompanies Loki, not a romantic interest. I already would've thought of it as a kind of annoying cliche if they'd been portrayed like that (though I did love their dynamic enough that in the end I would've accepted it), but especially after Verity told her mom she wasn't interested in romance, I'd find it extra silly.


Ok so, the thing I really loved about how Lee Garbett did she-Loki is that she doesn't look hugely feminized~~. Sure, there's the makeup looking stuff (and different hair I guess), but that's SO minor compared to what it could've been (even like, fanartists who draw "genderbends" of whomever tend to exaggerate more). I was actually so relieved that Loki's *normal* female form was just Loki in the same outfit, pretty much the same look, but girl looking. It's true that the body snatching era vs the AoA era could send the message that dressing sexily=bad, but I don't think the solution to that is to give new Loki the same sexualization treatment, instead of not sexualizing lady villains by default anymore. We have MORE than enough super sexy and scantily dressed hero ladies anyway. I'd have nothing to complain about her occasionally wearing muggle fashion, but then male Loki would have to do that as well imo. And since male Loki isn't as stereotypically masculine as most comics men, I like female Loki also not as stereotypically feminine as most comics women. Not that I'm opposed to Loki dressing however the **** she wants, but I think the art should be careful not to default to "oh there's boobs now; it has to be sexy/very feminine"

I know you didn't say Loki should totally be sexualized to hell as soon as she's a lady, I'm not trying to make you sound like that! But I just want to share my thoughts on this, it's on my mind a lot.


BTW, idk what the general consensus is, but I'm not really sure if Sif-body Loki was a woman? I actually don't even like to call modern female Loki "Lady Loki" because that term is so associated with that Sif body thing, and I don't like to conflate the 2 situations. Like, it could very well be woman Loki but as far as I know this was before a writer had decided that being either a man or a woman as the mood strikes was just a part of Loki as a person, and "stealing someone's body and using it to manipulate people" or "disguising as someone who happens to be female" is absolutely not any indication at all of actual gender identity. I never know whether to call JMS-Lady Loki she or he, bc iirc correctly everyone else did, but wasn't there a thing where Loki used like male words like "prince" or w/e for him slash herself? (as opposed to AoA Loki saying "goddess" and "queen"). I usually just say **** it and go with "she", bc everyone else did and that was apparently fine by Loki (even if it might just have been bc it was part of the act), and now that Loki's genderfluidity is canon we can look back and assume that even if it was just part of some evil shenanigans, Loki was probably at least like, comfortable enough with the whole female thing.

P.S. Can Marvel PLEASE give us Loki being a woman just because again, and not *only* showing that ability exists when it could come in handy for tricking/manipulation purposes? That's like saying a character is bi but then only ever showing them flirt with someone of the same gender to get information or something, and never for personal reasons. Put your money where your mouth is, you know? As far as I know we've only had a bit of the good stuff in AoA, and after that it was just stuff like "would looking like a woman help in this election?". In the Tenth Realm comic too, but at least there we also had

"my child who is both" :')

[Raye]

I think that aspect, or at lest how prominent it was, has kind of been dialed back. Or more accurately, was dialed up during Ewing's run. I think it was mostly an Ewing thing, and even in his run, it was usually done for a purpose (infiltrating the angels, or Lorelei's gang etc. only at the end when Loki was acting very erratically was it just because) It never really came up before his run, (I agree i don't really think of Lady Loki during JMS' run as a true woman during that time, it's just the body they ended up in. Loki was ecstatic to get his old body back afterwards) and only barely since. I know some people are really into it, because it's such a rare thing to see in comics... and though it's not an aspect I'm terribly attached to, it's not something I'd object to seeing again, it is canon and fits with the myths... but I mean, I'm just saying, I wouldn't expect a ton there, given recent trends with the character. Keeping Ewing's stuff as part of things, seems to me that Loki kinda falls into the male category like 90% of the time, and generally considers himself male most of the time, but occasionally feels the urge to go the other way, but it's really not something they do all that often, or like Loki is going to abandon gendered pronouns or anything. Still technically non-binary but... not something that comes into play a lot. but yeah, I did like how Lee Garbett handled it, not like huge boobs popping out of suddenly more revealing costume and stuff, just more feminized features.

I am not sure if the prayer thing will work with Mjolnir. It might, but Mjolnir seems to only 'come' to the last person who held it, who would be Jane. But i guess it may be possible if it sensed the situation was dire enough. I think Thor and Loki going to the sun may work best because it could serve a dual purpose of getting the hammer and allowing them time to talk.

so Loki wasn't in Squirrel Girl, dead and all, but he was mentioned a couple times. Turns out Ratatoskr was the one who teleported Squirrel Girl, but knowing Doreen would not accept what she said, she figured Loki was someone Doreen would trust more (you know you done fucked up when Loki is considered significantly more trustworthy) and would also be smart enough to think ot send Doreen to go after the Frost Giant base. also, from the recap page:



awww...

also, after this is over I really want Loki to join the twitter conversation recap pages in Squirrel Girl.

also, not Loki related, but LOL:

[Pallux]

Haahahah omg the Malekith thing

Oh don't worry, I'm definitely not expecting much on the female Loki front. Even under Ewing we got like, 4 and a half seconds of it, so I'd be extremely surprised if we got a substantial amount. And I don't need it to reach a certain percentage or anything. (And I don't worry bout nongendered pronouns at all since you don't need those to be non-binary, especially when Loki seems to just do the traditional "he"+male form and "she"+female form thing) I just want it to be done right when it happens, you know? I'd even rather have it just being mentioned in a way that makes it sound legit, than to have an actual appearance but have it framed as a manipulation thing. I also don't think the fact that it's been dialed back means that that's like, right. Or should be kept the same by other writers. Unless I missed something, I wouldn't say Ewing dialed it up as much as he created/established it. And when a writer decides to make it canon that a character is, say, bi, to come back to my other example, subsequent writers can dial it down as much as they want to but I'm still gonna say that if it's now part of a character, you should actually acknowledge it at the very least enough that it's not something people just straight up don't know unless they read a specific older title. I don't even really think it was dialed back as much as it is straight up ignored. By Aaron at least. Maybe I've missed something but I can't recall anyone even just referencing Loki sometimes being a woman (and not just being able to look like one for Reasons) in recent years, outside of Squirrel Girl.

[EDIT: I'm forgetting that list of potential new Thors I was so happy about earlier! And that one, then, but still not in a completely solid, inarguable way.]

Oh that reminds me. Remember this part?



That annoyed me hhaha a....... Yes, of course, definitely have the Loki who just happens to be in some woman's stolen body be all *I'm* a *woman* and you guys are not", while more recent Lokis who can literally identify as a woman for real, no matter how rarely, are standing right there. And then don't address that part. I can come up with justifications for why this dialogue could totes work in-character or w/e as much as I like but at the end of the day, what we have on page is someone wearing Sif's **** being unquestionably called a woman and modern Loki's gender-potential being fully ignored here and in the rest of the series. The ignoring wouldn't even be such a big deal for me if it weren't for the comparison with the probably-not-actual-woman "Lady Loki" being made. lmao I'm not trying to sound like I'm about to fistfight a writer, and maybe it shouldn't be as big a deal to me as it is, but that bothered me omg


So about Ewing's take on it. I actually wouldn't have thought to count the Trixie thing (if that's what you were talking about). Though you're probably right. Even though Trixie does have the key Loki features, I kind of assumed that disguise was based on the "Trixie" aspect of it bc of the focus on the pun here
I do like a stupid pun.
Like, Loki can only change into things she metaphorically is. So I thought instead of going with "my own self, female" she went with "a hypothetical woman named Trixie."
Ofc Loki can come up with punny names regardless but it's just what I assumed and then later on Garbett's girl Loki looked sort of different so I didn't question it. Well it doesn't matter anyway.

Maybe ironically the first moment (of a grand total of 2 moments) I thought counts as actual indisputable "evidence" of it not just being a mission thing, is the moment Loki only shows it for half a second and doesn't stick with it, and then also weakens the point by following it up with a fox. (He also doesn't stick with the fox obviously)


Which isn't a real literal identity thing in the same way. But you can't be "exactly myself but a woman" in the metaphorical way you can be like an animal with certain traits associated with it. So bc of that and the focus on "turn into myself" thing it still felt like a purposeful confirmation. The other moment is the "my child who is both" thing.


[EDIT 2: it is definitely a crime that Loki hasn't joined the recap pages. Let him shine! Be proud of probably your only Asgardian who can navigate social media!]

[EDIT fuckin three -_- sorry lol: I don't think the fact that Loki was acting erratically should discredit any of it. I actually forgot abt this earlier but I would count it as one of the "indisputably legit" moments. I mean, for one thing it's an interpretation to see it as "well that only happened bc he was being erratic". All the other stuff isn't being dismissed just bc he was being a bit hyper. And Loki just going through both his forms to try out/settle into this new body/existence could just as well serve to confirm that the female form is, in fact, a part of that existence. I mean it's not like he was turning into animals or throwing random magic around or whatever.]

[Raye]

I think some of the more... intense fans in that regard (not you) may have made them a little skittish about it. Made me a little skittish about it anyway. Back when Agent of Asgard was still going, towards the end, Lee Garbett made a post on his Tumblr (of course it was tumblr.) where he made a perfectly innocent comment about a 'sexiest male comic characters' list that was floating around, and he said something about how Loki should be on it, now that he was all hot. Innocent. Loki's hot now, so should be on a sexy characters list. Not something you'd think would cause a stir. And a group of fans just went ballistic about it, because it was a list of male characters. Saying you shouldn't call Loki a 'male' and that he'd be insulted to be on such a list for that reason, and on and on. (which is why I brought up the pronouns thing) And I jumped into things, and got dogpiled, called a transphobe bigot blah blah, because I was trying to point out that Loki obviously didn't have a problem with being called a man prior to this in the appropriate context, given years of continuity showing otherwise, and he was thousands of years old so likely had different ideas about such things than modern people, and so on. And anyway, yeah, it was messy. And the creatives were involved, Garbett started it, so he would have gotten a message every time this thread was responded to, and it was huge. And that was just one incident that I saw, I'm sure there was more that I didn't see. so, i could see that making them a little skittish. Because this group of people were screaming at them that they were doing it wrong, that Loki wasn't genderfluid enough. They clearly had the idea that there was only one correct way to be genderfluid, their way, but that would go against what was already established for the character. Like, on the one hand, I get it, suddenly there was this high profile character that represented them, and they latched on to Loki for that reason, i can understand that. When there's very little representation, some people who are searching for that kind of thing latch on to what they can find, and can get very protective of that aspect. I can also get being a little frustrated to almost have a character represent you, but not quite, because everyone is different, and no one character can represent an entire group. I've been there. But to this group of fans, it was the ONLY aspect about Loki that mattered, his history prior to this reveal, personality, relationships, abilities, nothing mattered except this one thing, they wanted it to be the focus above all else, and they projected themselves onto Loki HARD, even when it didn't apply. They wanted Loki to exactly reflect back at them their particular experiences, which were much more of the '50/50, no gender applies' variety, as opposed to Loki's '90/10 whatever pronoun seems right for the situation' deal. Obviously I don't have a window into what Marvel thought, or if they thought of it at all, but I could definitely see kinda stepping back a bit rather than focus on it and do it 'wrong' and raise their ire, since they made it very clear that for some of them (and yes, i realize it was likely a tiny but vocal fringe) would accept nothing less than their particular version of what it meant to be genderfluid, which clearly wasn't what Marvel was going for. Whenever there is a call for showing more of that, i get recollections of that incident, it was eye opening... Basically, these people may have done their cause more harm than good.

I'm not going to deny that Loki is non-binary or say I don't want it to be part of the character. I don't have a problem with it, and as I said, it fits with the myths, and it's canon now. I just don't want it to overshadow the other aspects by having too much focus spent on it, and i especially don't want his character to be changed in order to fit with some particularly strident 'fans' desires. Same deal with his bisexuality. I'd be totally cool with him having a male love interest, it would actually be my preference the next time they give him a love interest. but all the other stuff, his personality, methods, family, and especially his personal journey of trying to be better etc. just interests me more, and I don't want too much focus taken away from that.

Oh, and I kinda read that scene as Loki messing with Jane at least to an extent, that a lot of it was a big show, so rather than confuse matters he just stuck with the apparent genders of all the versions gathered there.

anyway... that's probably all I am going to say about that for now.

but yes, Loki totally needs to join the Squirrel Girl recap pages, even when he's not appearing in the issue, like Tony does. Not saying replace Tony, cus I love Tony in the recap pages, just add him in sometimes. Maybe have him annoy Tony some. He even has a handle from Young Avengers, @lokiofasgard. I think that one was more for their faux-Instagram, but could still apply here. The one hangup with that may be that Ryan North or the editors actually registered all the twitter handles and updates them on wednesday with the recap page tweets. So it kind of depends on if that account was actually registered by Gillen for YA or not, and if so, if he will give the account to the Squirrel Girl team. Or they can just make him a new one.

[Pallux]

That surprises me, that people would call for a no-gender-applies or no-binary-gender-applies Loki, when being both man and woman simultaneously or at different times is a perfectly legit way to be nb
OBVIOUSLY, the REAL fix would be to add Loki on sexiest female list as well

I'm not saying this is what happened, but it reminds me of one of those situations where some shitty article (or more forgivably, some personal blog post) will report something differently than what it actually is, like "[X] CHARACTER confirmed GAY!" When the source was just like. "Character says she kissed a girl when drunk once". And that bare bones information starts circulating and mutating and people just get disappointed by the source material bc it looks like the source material isn't doing what it set up, when really the article set up things based on clickbaity poorly researched information. "Loki is genderfluid" vs "Loki says **** GENDER 4EVER!!!"

Uhhh anyway. (I was tempted to change that to malekith is so great anyway...resisted the impulse but still feel dweeby.) I will say though that I don't think Loki's pre-reveal history should be much of an indicator for how he should be treated wrt the gender thing now. People can and do change in ways like this, even very late in life. And I don't see the 90/10 thing as something that must be respected as part of Loki's identity. In a real person, yes. But this isn't a real person, it's a bunch of decisions (not) being made by some writers. The decision currently seems to be to do the absolute bare minimum or nothing at all. Looks to me like either playing it safe or just not caring. If someone comes along and writes way more female Loki I def don't see that as disrespecting/changing Loki's character, rather than just continuing from where a previous writer took some tentative first steps. These many years of lack of girl Loki aren't ooc/proof against genderfluidity; one can have long periods of being mostly one gender, a period of mostly another or a period of changing way more frequently or whatever other reasons. But choosing to keep doing so close to nothing to the point that it's not clear to most readers, just isn't enough. Idk how to say this without sounding demanding, but like, they need to address it at some point, and it needs to be absolutely indisputible.

Heh, if I had my fantasy deamland way, it'd be closer to 50/50, but it's not at all necessary, just something I think would be awesome. I said earlier I'd rather have a good proper reference in text only rather than an unsatisfying appearance. I should add that if we get some references but still no appearance for a long time, that'd also not be great imo. That reverse also comes across as being unwilling or afraid to commit to the concept, so that's not ideal.

Either way, I don't really see how having a character who's already established as [x lgbt+ thing] but not acknowledging it except maybe once every couple years in a way that doesn't *have* to mean anything at best and could be interpreted in a pretty hurtful way at worst (transness as manipulation), could possibly be less ire-inducing than drawing female Loki now and then, but I can't read Marvel minds. Or people on the internet minds.

One thing I find so fun and...conventient I guess lol... about modern Loki is that you can just have all this stuff and nothing has to change. It's not like Loki's gonna sit people down to have a coming out scene lmao, or have some internal drama agonizing over gender/sexuality. You can throw in some off-handed remark about some guy being hot, (or reference a thing with some historic figure which I only mention bc I think that kinda thing is hilarious) and especially with the gender thing you can just not write anything differently at all, just draw a girl instead of a guy. You could make it a whole thing and it could work, but you don't have to and I think that feels so fun and free.

Re: the tmt scene. Yeah that's more or less how I see it too. Doesn't change any of my feelings on it though, I shouldn't have to justify a scene that misrepresents a character in a way most of the audience won't even know to question. Luckily Cat Thor Loki's presence lifts my mood before I get to that part, at least.

Oh jesus, okay, I think I'm finally done rambling abt this now. I'm just so full of words! I need to sleep badly and I wrote this on my phone and that means I can't tell whether I wrote a reasonable amount or a stupid large amount lol. I hope for you all it's not too bad.

One last thing: I'm not a huuuge Squirrel Girl fan, just a really appreciative fan, but the loki ones have genuinely been my fav Loki things happening for years. (Loki's recent eating incident may have finally lived up to it) I trust Ryan North with Loki in a way I don't trust nearly anyone else.
Plus I love the image of Tony finding the time during the war to be indignant on twitter. Classic.

[Rosebunse]

Tumblr has some crazy fans.

I was wandering through the Steven Universen fandom for a minute and was attacked because I used male pronouns for what was obviously a male character and things got crazy. Yes, it was Rainbow Quartz 2.0.

And I don't fault these fans exactly. For decades they were ignored and mocked and given nothing, so to some extent, them going ape for character they feel do represent them is understandable. It's just kind of crazy when that excitement turns into anger and cruelty towards fans and creators who don't focus on those things enough. These fans need to calm the **** down or they're going to continue to have a negative impact and make the rest of us look crazy.

Seriously, it ain't easy to be a Loki fan with these people about. We all get clumped with them.

Lady Loki is an interesting character. He is clearly male, that isn't up for debate. Loki wasn't just using Sif's body for its sex appeal, but also for the expectation that women are softer and more sweet and harmless than men. It would be an interesting subversion by JMS if it wasn't for the fact that Lady Loki is still the male Loki and if he wasn't the most prominent "woman" in JMS's run. Well, there was Kelda, but I wouldn't call her plotline too progressive either. It was simply that she met a man, fell in love with him, then fell apart after he died. The resolution to that wasn't even given until years later.

Of course, God bless Aaron for trying, but yeah, him presenting JMS's Lady Loki as a woman was just sort of silly, especially as he completely forgets about Ewing's Lady Loki. Wouldn't it have been so badass for Jane to beat TWO Lokis at once? But no, she just takes on JMS's Lady Loki. It just goes back to how Aaron was trying to be progressive and feminist, but he was falling on classic tropes like women vs women and Girl Power. At least, that's how it often felt, especially early on. Heck, it even sort of feeds back to one of the seeming benefits of Loki's plan in getting a female body, which was seemingly that Thor was less likely to attack him if he looked like a woman. And to my knowledge, JMS's Lady Loki was never attacked or hit by Thor during that time.

I'm not saying that I want loads of books where women are mercilessly beaten by men, but if you're presenting someone as being so freaking strong or dangerous, you shouldn't be afraid to have them go against anyone.

And to Aaron's credit, he did actually get better about all of this as time went on, but it was still pretty glaring when it happened.

And to Raye's point, yeah, Loki was clearly just fucking with Jane in that scene, but still...

[Raye]

That surprises me, that people would call for a no-gender-applies or no-binary-gender-applies Loki, when being both man and woman simultaneously or at different times is a perfectly legit way to be nb
OBVIOUSLY, the REAL fix would be to add Loki on sexiest female list as well

I'm not saying this is what happened, but it reminds me of one of those situations where some shitty article (or more forgivably, some personal blog post) will report something differently than what it actually is, like "[X] CHARACTER confirmed GAY!" When the source was just like. "Character says she kissed a girl when drunk once". And that bare bones information starts circulating and mutating and people just get disappointed by the source material bc it looks like the source material isn't doing what it set up, when really the article set up things based on clickbaity poorly researched information. "Loki is genderfluid" vs "Loki says **** GENDER 4EVER!!!"

Like, that's exactly it. you see that with a lot where a character displays some minor trait that MIGHT be interpreted as them being gay, or whatever else, and I think the same thing happened with Loki. when the whole 'genderfluid' thing came out, it attracted fans via some articles and stuff published about it and it seems like it was taken to be a lot more than it actually ended up being. sometimes these traits can be expanded upon further in the story, and that's fine, that's kind of what happened with Iceman, and you know what, i was fine with that. But at the same time, until the writers do actually make it a lot more explicit, then it's kinda reading too much into things.

One last thing: I'm not a huuuge Squirrel Girl fan, just a really appreciative fan, but the loki ones have genuinely been my fav Loki things happening for years. (Loki's recent eating incident may have finally lived up to it) I trust Ryan North with Loki in a way I don't trust nearly anyone else.
Plus I love the image of Tony finding the time during the war to be indignant on twitter. Classic.

I would have been totally cool with Ryan North doing a Loki solo, he's handled him really well for the mot part. I think i'd want it handled a little more serious than Squirrel Girl, but I know he can do that. But I am sure Kibblesmith will probably be great, too.

Tumblr has some crazy fans.

I was wandering through the Steven Universen fandom for a minute and was attacked because I used male pronouns for what was obviously a male character and things got crazy. Yes, it was Rainbow Quartz 2.0.

And I don't fault these fans exactly. For decades they were ignored and mocked and given nothing, so to some extent, them going ape for character they feel do represent them is understandable. It's just kind of crazy when that excitement turns into anger and cruelty towards fans and creators who don't focus on those things enough. These fans need to calm the **** down or they're going to continue to have a negative impact and make the rest of us look crazy.

Seriously, it ain't easy to be a Loki fan with these people about. We all get clumped with them.

I mean, I don't like to be a gatekeeper and tell people they're doing 'being a fan' wrong (unless it's something like I said in the Enchantress thread a few days ago, where it was just clear Charlie was torturing himself with unreasonable expectations, and he'd be happier if he toned it down by like, a lot.) because at the end of the day if you meet the requirement of 'like a thing' congrats, you're a fan. But... yeah. it can be frustrating at times to get lumped in with the weirdos. As with any fandom there are some extremist fringes who tend to be highly visible and vocal, and sometimes they do more harm than good (see: Rick and Morty for a particularly bad example) and yeah, Loki has a pretty weird fringe. Not the weirdest I've seen, but pretty weird. To be fair, you can say this about Marvel in general, especially MCU, but Loki in particular gets it bad. Some of them have created entire strange fanons and just, canon need no longer apply, they left it behind years ago. And like, whatever makes you happy. But when it becomes a problem is they then sometimes come back around acting like this weird fanon they've been nurturing off in the dark recesses of tumblr should now take priority over the actual canon. That gets frustrating. Especially when the larger Marvel fandom sees some of the weirder ****, and assumes we're all like that, and I'm like... no. I just like the character, and I like where the comics are taking him, I'm just here for the ride.

One thing I do like about the Loki fandom, or at least this thread, (admittedly I have kind of walked away from fandoms in general, this thread and making occasional forays out into the rest of the boards is pretty much all i have left) though is that it is generally fairly positive and more open to new things being tried with him. I think most of us who are invested in his story right now want to see that continue, and would be upset to see them hit the reset button with Loki, but beyond that, generally open to whatever gets thrown out way. Look how we all reacted to him getting eaten alive. Even if sometimes it doesn't exactly live up to expectations, it's not met with a lot of raging. Some fandoms, you kinda wonder why they stick with it at all, because it is non stop complaining, and it seems like their idea of what they want is so narrow, that almost nothing will please them, and it's just kind of exhausting, I don't get it. Sure i may complain when something isn't to my tastes, but I really am much more interested in discussing the character in general and the overall plot. It's just more fun and interesting to me. I like posting here because it helps me crystallize my thoughts on the story or character by writing them down and explaining why I feel a certain way. I feel like i walk away from this thread with a better understanding of the books, or movies when there's something going on with that side of things, even if it was just due to me rambling and that organized my thoughts. And i like speculating. Sure I may be proven wrong, but I like doing it anyway.

[Raye]

another one I liked:




aw...

[Prof. Aegis]

another one I liked:




aw...

I love this one! So wish they would have had a quick look at each other in the movie.

[Rosebunse]

another one I liked:




aw...

They really did have quite a bit of Loki in this film. Like, not a ton, but it was a nice thing to do given that they couldn't find a logical way to bring the Loki from the prime universe back.

OMG I need this preview so bad! We know Loki is coming back, but I want him back now! Mostly because I want to see which theory is right and how this is going to play out. I'm enjoying War of the Realms, but I almost feel like the stakes aren't big enough, if that makes any sense.

Like, we're coming off of Secret Wars and Secret Empire, two of the most stressful and emotional events we have ever seen. By contrast, I just feel like War of the Realms feels much more intimate. It's about Thor's cast, yes, but mostly it feels like a family book and a love letter to the Marvel universe Aaron and the other people working on it love so much. Yes, it's the end of the world, but the consequences seem much more centered on things like Thor's sense of self, Loki's ultimate fate, Odin's relationship to his family, Frigga's finding a place for her power, and Jane taking control after a long fought battle with her own body, as well as her own want to be a superhero. It just doesn't have this absolute sense of doom many other events have. This is both refreshing and a little underwhelming.

Of course, I'm not saying that I didn't want Loki eaten by Laufey. That was awesome! But I was so confused when there were people who acted like Loki was actually dead. Of course, Aaron gave us a scenario that was so much worse than actual death.

Gatekeeping can be a serious issue within fan communities, especially in comics where you have a bunch of older fans who have been in it their entire lives and a bunch of younger fans who are just finding it. None of us here want to run those younger fans off, but it becomes a debate on how exactly you do handle them. My method is to quietly leave a fandom if it becomes too toxic, which can be sort of annoying since I am not really involved in too many either. I get too obsessed with something and it becomes all I can think about. I seriously don't understand how people can watch several shows at once and have a life LOL