Would Batman be worthy of Mjolnir?

Would Batman be worthy of Mjolnir?

Attached: aba75d3faae38a127c3e3d83451aeec6.jpg (2049x2937, 772.06K)

No he's a pedophile

No way fag.

Post-Whore? Absolutely. Pre-Aaron re-writing the requirements? Probably not. Odin used to have a very old world view of "worthiness" and Batman refusing to kill might disqualify him as a warrior.

I thought to be worthy in the hammer's eyes you had to have a willingness to kill?

He doesn't kill so no.

For being worthy you need to kill when the enemy is un-redeemable, and he can barely kill 3 clowns.

if capn fag can be then i dont see why not

No, it's bullshit. To be worthy you must correspond to an image of nobility, heroism, leadership and a good balance between self-esteem without leading to arrogance. All this according to some Nordic standards .

killing is irrelevant. And Batman is too marked by vengeance and various paranoia to be worthy.

Probably not

No

if batwank is strong enough, then yes

Obviously.

Those "nordic standards" require you be able to kill because killing others also kills a part of your innocence which is a sacrifice to Odin and The World Tree, allowing that innocence to bear fruit in others who would then in turn sacrifice it themselves (this cyclical nature of sacrifice is one of the ways Christianity eventually won over the Danes as it was a concept they were already familiar with and could conceptualize.) All of which doesn't matter because nu-mjolnir has very purposefully been divorced from it's original roots.

>guy who literally makes plans to kill his allies
>guy who lets a psychopath clown run loose
I bet he and harley would be worthy of mjolnir just because of their names

Meh, in no comic is it ever said that killing is really so crucial. The hammer simply reacts to the ideal image of "noble Nordic knight" Someone that is a nobel warrior that protect the innocent, his own land and behave with honor. "noble knight by nordic standard"

Killing or not is a "non factor". If you have to kill an enemy, so be it, if Thor doesn't want to kill a defeated enemy, so be it. But you must act with honor.

it is more a question of conduct and heroism.
Killing as many enemies as possible was old Thor being punished by Odin.

I have to say I find it quite disturbing how people don't understand such a thing thinking that killing is the main point of the Hammer.

Is batman willing to pulp an ice giants head with Mjolnir? If not, probably not worthy.

He can lift this one.

Attached: 43434.jpg (339x806, 230.22K)

So any jackass can use this hammer?

Nobody's saying "killing is the main reason" only that being unable to kill disqualifies you. You have to meet all the standards and a "noble nordic knight" wouldn't be able to parse justice if he couldn't (not wouldn't) kill. The cycle of life and death is integral to the "nordic" mythos and Batman has taken an un-nordic stance.

it's a hammer bruce. world's greatest detective my ass.

Attached: 1412017718955.jpg (360x478, 139.82K)

no, specifically unworthy.

so if you were once worthy but not anymore.

being worthy is entirely dependent on how good of a warrior you are
Batman is his universe's most skilled warrior

He'd be worthy

The Batman Who Laughs would

That's not what unworthy means. It simply means not worthy.

Absolutely not.

Why did they even give Batman that title? It should belong to Sherlock Holmes.

No shot. His heart and intentions and underhanded methods and violence and everything else disqualify him. Yeah he thinks he's doing righteous work, and maybe he is, but it's not pure, it's not moral, he is unworthy.

Simonson once wrote about Beta Ray Bill that when they were making a character that was supposed to be able to lift Mjolnir back in the 80's they figured someone like Batman would be disqualified due to his not-killing absolutism, while Captain America's ideals of individual liberty would clash with the Old Norse ideals of sacrifice. And that's why Bill was conceived as a warrior who's sacrificed everything for his people to survive even as ice cubes.

He shouldn't be, but Jane was so now anyone's worthy. That guy who got your order wrong at the local fast-food joint? He's worthy now.

Sherlock is dead and Detective Chimp didn't want the title

>being worthy is entirely dependent on how good of a warrior you are

Yes

>He'd be worthy
Nope. For Bruce it's not a skill issue.
He has too many mental issues that need to be solved before he can be truly worthy.

Muh parents, muh vengence, muh i can't trust anyone, muh control, also he can undeniably become an asshole in great times of stress.

Batman is great warrior but as Odin teaches, just being a good warrior is not enough.

In fact anyone can raise that hammer.

No, I love batman, but no,the only one who is worthy is Batchad, The batman who cums in bitches as ususal

No, but the writers would bat wank him so that he is.

So could Dick or Damian lift Mjolnir?
Or some other skilled warrior like Shiva?

Wouldn't a worthy person be unable to?

Dick, likely. Damian, no.

Damian is a dick so logically that means he would be able to lift it too.

Can't say for Dick but I don't think he has the right mindset. Damian is way too immature.


it's clearly stated that the state of mind is crucial to being able to lift the hammer and Thor becomes unworthy when he begins to think that gods are unworthy.

Spider-man is a slave to a sense of guilt and to some extent even Batman is obsessed that what he does is never enough.

Shiva is not brave. She is a killer with no honor

Bat-Chad:

>is worthy of Mjolnir
>can wear the Mask without being corrupted
>can no-sell Saitama's punches
>can no-sell Zeno's Erase
>could buy out Scrooge's entire business empire with 1% of his wealth
>can get into the Salty Spittoon without having to show how tough he is, because it's already a given
>knows exactly where Carmen Sandiego is at any given moment
>has had sex with every woman in Gotham
>and makes Superman cry because he knows he'll never be good as Batman