foundlingmother:

While I find the notion that Loki’s an innocent and pure angel annoying and ridiculous, I find the notion that Thor’s innocent and pure equally so. He doesn’t have to have been a morally righteous, wonderful, unproblematic sunshine boy since birth to be a hero. He can have made serious mistakes, held gross, racist views, perpetuated Odin’s imperialism through both rhetoric and action, etc. and still be good because he’s grown as a person. Because he continues to grow and learn from his mistakes. Excusing his bad behavior, calling it justified (even the stuff he did/said to/about the Frost Giants at the beginning of Thor), only encourages the dumb idea that heroes can’t be flawed, that people are always one way. I’ll always maintain that Thor had good intentions, but, for fucks sake, Loki has good intentions in Thor (selfish good intentions, but he’s trying to be the hero to prove himself). Good intentions =/= morally right. Condemn the heroes for their wrong actions, just as we condemn the villains.

Gosh, I’ll never understand why people want Thor to be so boring, stagnant, and artificial! XP

We (people who are Loki fans in the first instance) don’t even have a problem saying that Loki has worse moral problems than Thor does. Guess what? You’re allowed to like characters who have done bad things! You’re even allowed to prefer a morally worse character over a morally better character on aesthetic grounds! I do it all the time.

There’s a consistent problem with people on this site, or maybe in fandom generally, denying the existence of moral complexity and ambiguity. They claim their favorite character is always good and pure all the time, and if that character comes into conflict with another, they feel the need to claim that the other character is totally evil and wrong. I really wish people would stop doing that. It makes the characters and the movies (or books or TV shows) more boring than they actually are.