Absurdism corner

Why?


  • Total voters
    203

sad to see that boob - armour just won't die
 Yep :/
Furthermore, why did they change a male character to a female? o_O Why not taking an already existing female characters from Nordic mythology like Freya? (I have to admit, most of my knowledge comes from the board game Yggdrasil, but however...) Or something complete different like Indian mythology?
 
sad to see that boob - armour just won't die
 
Yep :/
Furthermore, why did they change a male character to a female? o_O Why not taking an already existing female characters from Nordic mythology like Freya? (I have to admit, most of my knowledge comes from the board game Yggdrasil, but however...) Or something complete different like Indian mythology?
Maybe current people at Marvel don't even know Freya, etc...

or it has something to do with Disney.

Either way it doesn't make any sense at all.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I remember the same complaints about black Green Lantern, and indian Batman. :p

Mjolnir was wielded by a tentacly alien and a frog before. A FROG! No one complained then. Now a woman takes up the mantel of Thor and everyone's all "hurr durr, girls in my continuity!" Get over it, sheez, you don't even know what they're going to do with this and you're complaining about it already. I mean, it's not like "bam, Thor's a chick now", they've actually got the beginnings of a pretty good growth story going on, if the rumours are to be believed.
 
What's wrong with boob armour?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
LincolnStormtrooper.jpg
 
What's wrong with boob armour?
Practically speaking, it puts a lot of pressure directly on the sternum. Uniboob armor is better, it distributes forces evenly across the entire upper torso instead of directly in one spot down the middle.
To add to that, armor is designed to divert any impact away from you, so your body doesn't have to cope with the full amount of kinectic energy. By creating "obstacles" you contradict the whole idea.
 
Back
Top