Feminizing BIONICLE

[boston100]

Personally i never though of bionics as male and female. they do not reproduce so there is no point. Lego just needed to do it so kids could relate to them. I guys He and She sell better then It. 

[Noxryn]

One possible reason is that many picture Toa as having the "Heroic" or "Ideal" proportions. The men are tall, broad shouldered, and well muscled, while women have longer legs, smaller shoulders, and an hourglass figure. It wouldn't make as much sense for robotic warriors to have stocky or even fat figures. I have seen MOCs and art that are a bit stouter though.

On the first point, a counter example is:

 

Pohatu was not tall or broad shouldered. In fact, Pohatu was slightly hunched due to the orientation of his body piece (which also brought his shoulders more tightly in than his hips, which were wider to accommodate the kicking function). So, not all toa need to have this "ideal" build of what a hero looks like, because from the first cast of them we can see that heroes come in multiple shapes and sizes and body structures (namely Onua's build, Pohatu's and then the rest who had their own differences, be it in limbs or be it in chest pieces and pins).

 

Honestly, I would hope the designers don't listen to feedback that's in this thread. There really isn't a necessity for more petite, slender, small shouldered, hourglass women with large hips in media -- the fact everyone here chose those traits to engender what femininity is speaks to the prevalence of it in media already.

 

If anything, a line like Bionicle should really present heroes with multiple builds and body types, various personalities that are written uniquely, with different and relatable struggles and faults. The line should be telling kids that what they look like doesn't matter: they can be who they want to be, they can strive for what they want, they can become who they want to become regardless. Plus, making the characters more relatable on more fronts would be a bonus to a lot of kids who lack a character to relate to -- there are a lot of real life, breathing and living, girls and women who have things like broad shoulders, small hips, who are tall and not particularly elegant or "sleek" and they should be able to see themselves in female characters created for Bionicle, rather than more of this "ideal" feminine form that only serves to undermine confidence.

 

I guess my point is: A woman doesn't have a set of defined looks, there is no specific formula and to say there is one undermines those who don't fit into that formula. So, Bionicle should continue creating characters with that in mind, without trying to force out a standard female that looks the same every single wave because "that's how all women look right."

Edited October 22, 2014 by Kitania

[Click]

The problem is there is no way currently to give new proportions to current sets because HF torsos come in wide shoulders and really wide shoulders. The new gear functions, as great as they are, only make the problem worse. I've heard multiple people suggest split torsos, with lengths from 5-7 (I'm hoping 6 is included in there, it would be perfect for slightly wider shoulders), so new designs could easily be created to give new proportions. 2015 wouldn't be the year to introduce them (seeing all the new pieces with the rerelease of Bionicle), but maybe next year would be a good opportunity to add even further customization to CCBS.

 

I agree that this would be great for relating to characters and customization, but I will admit it makes much more sense for an race of bioengineered beings designed to protect and battle large creatures to have ideal proportions. They don't have traits passed on from generation to generation as they don't reproduce, they don't gain body fat, and they need to be lean and well built to effectively combat their day to day enemies. I suppose we have no evidence thus far that Lego is keeping that part, if any parts, of the old backstory, so it would be a good chance to introduce the new torsos with new renditions of the characters. Our beloved Mata can become not just some amazing heroes, but characters we can all relate to.

[Kevin Owens]

You know there's a lot of over simplification of sexual and gender characteristics going on in this thread, and it's actually kind of sad.

 

Also I'm pretty sure that we don't want Lego trying to introduce seconday sex characteristics into sets.  Remember Roodaka?

[Regitnui]

It's not secondary sexual characteristics that are the question, but proportions: how do we differentiate masculine biomech build from female biomech build? The answer so far seems to be take what makes a body look feminine: wider hips, narrower shoulders and waist, and thinner limbs. This is not to say all women have these traits and all men don't (waves skinny arms) but it is to say that these traits are considered feminine and masculine, or female-like and male-like.

 

We aren't debating human physiology or body types, but how the expectations of human physiology can 'gender' essentially sexless beings by physical proportions. Then how best these proportions can be represented in our chosen medium: technic and CCBS. Some people may focus on the secondary (or, god forbid, primary) sexual characteristics, but there are other ways the genders differ. One of those is proportions.

[Kevin Owens]

Yeah but you see it's kind of problematic to asign physical characteristics to gender you know?

[Regitnui]

Unfortunately, physical characteristics and gender are inextricably interlinked. Women look different to to men even if they're both broad shouldered. Broad shouldered actually has different standards depending on gender.

[dee.3x3]

Honestly I try to pay more attention to hips and shoulders, they seem to be much more definitive.

 

But honestly, nobody should be annoyed that a line of sets built off one base skeleton design don't have diverse body proportions. I hate it especially when people criticize both Hahlis and Gali mistika for it too. The inika build was disproportionate for male body types, let alone female ones.

[Makaru]

Unfortunately, physical characteristics and gender are inextricably interlinked.

 

Women have always existed in different shapes and sizes.

[Noxryn]

Unfortunately, physical characteristics and gender are inextricably interlinked. Women look different to to men even if they're both broad shouldered. Broad shouldered actually has different standards depending on gender.

Not really, there are a lot of women who do have the same proportions as men. So forcing proportional differences on a toy, when those proportional differences don't actually account for 100% of cases in the real world anyway, isn't doing anyone any good and such a practice is going to exclude a wide array of people who wouldn't get to see themselves presented in a story they may otherwise enjoy.

 

And "broad shouldered" might have different standards on a societal level, but like I said, there are women who have broad shoulders on par with men and to exclude them and constantly trying to remove them by basically stating they aren't feminine enough is really kind of mean.

[Zeddy]

But what is the alternative? Would a male-proportioned female character really be better than a female-proportioned one (that represents the average woman)? Wouldn't by definition more women identify and be more comfortable with the latter?

Edited October 22, 2014 by Zeddy

[Makaru]

The clear alternative, to me anyway, is to have more female characters with differing body types.

 

You know, the exact same thing they already do with the guys.

[Regitnui]

The average woman has different proportions to that of the average man. I am by no means saying that all women have the same proportions. Men don't all have the same proportions, but there is an average feminine shape and an average masculine shape. Is it irreconcilably wrong to think that the feminine should be used over the masculine shape to represent female characters?

[Zeddy]

Lol sorry still hadn't quite gotten used to the fact that they've stopped the clone sets/one-body-fits-all. That's what I was basing my objection on- it could still apply to smaller sets like the protectors though that look the same but are male and female. BTW do we know if any of the protectors are female?

 

But yeah, that makes sense in the context of the more specialized/larger sets. If we get a more even ratio of female sets/titans then obviously they don't have to follow the same build (if you can design Onua like that, you can do anything ). Larger sets offer more freedom, and certainly that freedom should be used to showcase different body types.

Edited October 22, 2014 by Zeddy

[Aanchir]

But what is the alternative? Would a male-proportioned female character really be better than a female-proportioned one (that represents the average woman)? Wouldn't by definition more women identify and be more comfortable with the latter?

I think the issue is that some people are conflating "average woman" with "ideal woman". The former could arguably have some justification, but the latter raises the question of "ideal by whose standards"? Standards of female beauty have varied greatly over the years, but throughout history there has been an unfortunate tendency to hold all women to standards chosen primarily by men. This means more ofen than not, they are "ideal" in terms of sex appeal, not so much in terms of empowering women.

 

Representing all female body types is pretty much a hopeless task unless the BIONICLE theme increases its number of female characters considerably. And I don't honestly know how much sense it would make. Just look at how few male body types are on display within any particular wave. Even with five males to every female, Pohatu in 2001 and 2002 is the only Toa to ever have a more heavyset design. Sure, you have characters like Onua with extremely exaggerated body types, but there are a wide range of more realistic body types that are completely absent from Toa sets.

 

With that said, I do agree with what some people have been saying that it makes no sense to insist on female characters having narrower shoulders than male characters in ALL circumstances. Frankly, I'm baffled that some people are even complaining about the 7x9 Hero Factory torso beam having shoulders too wide for women, when the shoulders are as narrow as the shoulders on any of the Toa Mata, and narrower than the original Gali's. Some people have been talking about how "idealized" proportions are better for action heroes like the Toa, but why how is "petite", narrow-shouldered build better for an action hero than a more athletic build? For that matter, how is it fair to exaggerate the shoulder width of male characters with 9M, 11M, or even 15M shoulders, but then insist that all female characters' shoulders remain a "realistic" 7M or narrower?

Edited October 22, 2014 by Aanchir

[Makaru]

Is it irreconcilably wrong to think that the feminine should be used over the masculine shape to represent female characters?

 

It's not "irreconcilable", but it is a bit ignorant to say that someone who does not fall within the "perceived" average [which I think may be different than what you are picturing] does not get to have a hero.

 

Which is why I point back to Gali 2015 and go "this is good can we build on this idea?"

[Zeddy]

 

But what is the alternative? Would a male-proportioned female character really be better than a female-proportioned one (that represents the average woman)? Wouldn't by definition more women identify and be more comfortable with the latter?

I think the issue is that some people are conflating "average woman" with "ideal woman". The former could arguably have some justification, but the latter raises the question of "ideal by whose standards"? Standards of female beauty have varied greatly over the years, but throughout history there has been an unfortunate tendency to hold all women to standards chosen primarily by men. This means more ofen than not, they are "ideal" in terms of sex appeal, not so much in terms of empowering women.

 

Representing all female body types is pretty much a hopeless task unless the BIONICLE theme increases its number of female characters considerably. And I don't honestly know how much sense it would make. Just look at how few male body types are on display within any particular wave. Even with five males to every female, Pohatu in 2001 and 2002 is the only Toa to ever have a more heavyset design. Sure, you have characters like Onua with extremely exaggerated body types, but there are a wide range of more realistic body types that are completely absent from Toa sets.

 

With that said, I do agree with what some people have been saying that it makes no sense to insist on female characters having narrower shoulders than male characters in ALL circumstances. Frankly, I'm baffled that some people are even complaining about the 7x9 Hero Factory torso beam having shoulders too wide for women, when the shoulders are as narrow as the shoulders on any of the Toa Mata, and narrower than the original Gali's. Some people have been talking about how "idealized" proportions are better for action heroes like the Toa, but why how is "petite", narrow-shouldered build better for an action hero than a more athletic build? For that matter, how is it fair to exaggerate the shoulder width of male characters with 9M, 11M, or even 15M shoulders, but then insist that all female characters' shoulders remain a "realistic" 7M or narrower?

 

 

I agree that average and ideal are two separate things, but I don't know if saying "they should have narrow shoulders or wider hips" is talking about the ideal woman- it is biology that women have different proportions, right? Making some small changes to sets to reflect that (as long as we're applying human standards to figures) isn't a bad thing. It's a start, at least, where you start with a more representative body shape and then branch out to different ones. Given LEGO's history and their target audience etc., I don't think anything is going to happen immediately and they (designers) need a starting point and IMHO that is it.

 

Like I said, the above applies to the simpler sets; obviously more variability is possible the larger the set is and then I agree that making all female titan sets look alike is unreasonable.

 

Also when I talk about proportions I'm basically assuming that the torso/leg/hip whatever pieces act like the sets bone structure. Male characters would have wider shoulders (but not super exaggerated, like Onua ) and female ones would have narrower ones. With athletic builds I think the key is "muscle mass"- the base/bone structure doesn't change, but things can always be added on (like those leg and shoulder armour pieces on the Inika/Piraka, I forget what they're called ) to bulk up; this is true for real human beings, and it can be true for Bionicle sets. Assuming, once again, that we're using human proportions as the standard.

[Rahkshi Lalonde]

It seems a better word than "feminizing" for this topic would be "slenderizing" :b

[Toa Green Ninja]

Nah, the name makes enough sense.

[Reznas]

Nah, the name makes enough sense.

 

Not to everyone. I can see what you mean by "feminizing," but it's the not the word choice I would personally use.

 

-Rez

[Rahkshi Lalonde]

I was just joking about how many people connect "female" with "slimmer".

...

also i like to look for chances to say "slenderize". :u

[The Undertaken]

Hmm, well if we want an ideal athletic build(specifically a well-muscled, sleek, streamlined, vaguely hydrodynamic build), then take into account 24-hour body armour, Gali actually seems not bad as far as builds go. But that's just me, quite frankly I have no idea how to improve the design without it reinforcing some stereotype or other, I blame the media and not enough of me questioning the things I take for granted. Still though, the only consistent difference I see between males and females is that generally women are shorter than men, exceptions do occur of course, but that is the only thing that seems consistent.

[Regitnui]

Ja nee, I know and accept that people of both genders have varying body types, but the original question was how bet to feminize MoCs, and I certainly think the proportions argument is better than the 'Slap on boobs' argument. Yet, let me emphasize that I'm fine with how female characters already look in Bionicle simply because they're not human. It doesn't matter if they have a feminine figure. But if you do want to make a bionicle with a female figure, don't build boobs onto it when you could just as easily change proportions.

[Click]

This is why I always wince whenever I see a topic about gender. It always quickly divides the contributors into two uncompromising sides, namely "Bionicle is a toy line, and many of their decisions make sense for the audience and story," and "Lego is a bunch of sexist old men who can't portray a woman and anyone who says anything about "ideal form" or "stereotypes" is also a sexist old man."

 

If there is no compromise, and all it leads to is fighting between members, I don't see why we make these topics and allow them to continue. Is there any way to settle this?

[Pohatu: Uniter of Stone]

Ja nee, I know and accept that people of both genders have varying body types, but the original question was how bet to feminize MoCs, and I certainly think the proportions argument is better than the 'Slap on boobs' argument. 

I tried that once. I'd rather not remember that. The Moc looked horrendous, weird and also non-feminine. 

[The Undertaken]

This is why I always wince whenever I see a topic about gender. It always quickly divides the contributors into two uncompromising sides, namely "Bionicle is a toy line, and many of their decisions make sense for the audience and story," and "Lego is a bunch of sexist old men who can't portray a woman and anyone who says anything about "ideal form" or "stereotypes" is also a sexist old man."

 

If there is no compromise, and all it leads to is fighting between members, I don't see why we make these topics and allow them to continue. Is there any way to settle this?

Because, most respected Click, there are some of us who legitimately are looking for compromise.

We look for ideas, ideas to improve upon what's already there, to sift through the confusion to find something that works, and to be honest so long as this doesn't get too uncivilized it can actually be a stimulating discussion. Remember: the purpose of a debate is not to sway your opponent, it is to sway everyone else.

[Makaru]

If there is no compromise, and all it leads to is fighting between members, I don't see why we make these topics and allow them to continue. Is there any way to settle this?

 

I think we're reading different topics.

 

Particularly, I have not seen any [serious] responses descrying Lego as being a sexist overlord. I think they are widely perceived as a more equal-affairs company.

 

And it is because of that mindset, I think, we ask more of them. Because they have the potential, the power and the desire to improve things past the status quo.

Edited October 22, 2014 by Makaru

[Click]

"Sexist old men" is a direct quote from earlier. The debate has been very civil this time around (although other topics have gotten out of hand). I just don't see any swaying here. One member says "Here's my opinion," another says "here's my opinion, you're wrong," and back again. I was just hoping we could get past that and acknowledge both sides.

[Lyichir]

"Sexist old men" is a direct quote from earlier. The debate has been very civil this time around (although other topics have gotten out of hand). I just don't see any swaying here. One member says "Here's my opinion," another says "here's my opinion, you're wrong," and back again. I was just hoping we could get past that and acknowledge both sides.

Well, what I've seen is a decent discussion of the issue of "how could female sets be made more recognizeably female?" as well as the more complex "what makes a character look recognizeably female in the first place?" I've seen a lot of interesting talk about realistic versus stylized proportions, diversity of body types, and how to get a person to recognize a character's gender without resorting to stereotypes to do so. And most of the members involved (not all, but most) seem to have been less concerned with presenting a firm opinion and hoping to sway the opinions of others and more concerned with actively furthering the discussion by considering others' suggestions and adding their own input.

 

Frankly, when I first saw this topic I was extremely worried that it'd devolve into a nasty argument between people holding extreme positions one way or the other, which would drown out any more moderate discussion. But thanks in part to good policing by Makaru and other staff, the topic has remained civil and as a result has already resulted in quite a few enlightening insights. That's more than I had hoped for and I'd rather see where the discussion goes from here than have it cut off solely based on the fear that it could get worse.

[Flex Lord Splash]

Remember Roodaka though? She was probably the most feminine of the original Bionicle line. She had a sort of hourglass shape. Not saying that every female character needs this, but it would be interesting to see something like that again, when female Toa had totally different shapes since they were pretty much the same as the male Toa.

[believe victims]

"Sexist old men" is a direct quote from earlier.

No it's not. I just did a full search of the topic and you are the only person to use the phrase "sexist old men".

 

Now, I did use the phrase "old white businessmen" shortly after calling the gender ratios sexist, so maybe that's where you're getting it from. Either way, it's most definitely not a direct quote of anyone.

 

I haven't seen a lot of hostility in this topic, which is weird, because I'm involved in it. I've seen some other less-than-stellar behavior, but overall, people seem pretty calm. If your issue is that people have beliefs they're passionate about and believe strongly in, then I'm afraid your issue is with the human condition. Just because a debate is happening, doesn't mean people need sway from their position if they already believe in it with all their hearts. I would be a terrible person if I let every smooth-talking debater decide what I should believe.

 

Remember Roodaka though? She was probably the most feminine of the original Bionicle line. She had a sort of hourglass shape. Not saying that every female character needs this, but it would be interesting to see something like that again, when female Toa had totally different shapes since they were pretty much the same as the male Toa.

 

If it comes along with slinking around and whispering seductively into people's ears again, I'd rather never see a Roodaka again.

[Flex Lord Splash]

 

"Sexist old men" is a direct quote from earlier.

No it's not. I just did a full search of the topic and you are the only person to use the phrase "sexist old men".

 

Now, I did use the phrase "old white businessmen" shortly after calling the gender ratios sexist, so maybe that's where you're getting it from. Either way, it's most definitely not a direct quote of anyone.

 

I haven't seen a lot of hostility in this topic, which is weird, because I'm involved in it. I've seen some other less-than-stellar behavior, but overall, people seem pretty calm. If your issue is that people have beliefs they're passionate about and believe strongly in, then I'm afraid your issue is with the human condition. Just because a debate is happening, doesn't mean people need sway from their position if they already believe in it with all their hearts. I would be a terrible person if I let every smooth-talking debater decide what I should believe.

 

Remember Roodaka though? She was probably the most feminine of the original Bionicle line. She had a sort of hourglass shape. Not saying that every female character needs this, but it would be interesting to see something like that again, when female Toa had totally different shapes since they were pretty much the same as the male Toa.

 

If it comes along with slinking around and whispering seductively into people's ears again, I'd rather never see a Roodaka again.

 

 

Heh yeah she did do that. I used to have an joke about how Vakama only turned evil for a time because he was crushing on Roodaka though. She also seems to be the only female Bionicle with actual 'hair' or a long hair/mane.

[Pomegranate]

"Sexist old men" is a direct quote from earlier. The debate has been very civil this time around (although other topics have gotten out of hand). I just don't see any swaying here. One member says "Here's my opinion," another says "here's my opinion, you're wrong," and back again. I was just hoping we could get past that and acknowledge both sides.

You're probably misremembering 'sexist old men' when I was talking about those explicitly in every other post for like eight pages straight in a topic from a few months ago. Sorry, sorta

 

This topic is very, very different from others that have involved the different genders before, seeing as it's just focusing on the question of "how to make Bionice toys that look distinctly feminine" rather than larger questions. The same themes of "women generally look like x and men look like y" are cropping up, that's all.

 

Like Makaru said, the absolute best solution is to make varied body types amongst different characters. A good point being brought up here is that, obviously, not all women fit the "standard model" of narrow shoulders, slim waist, wide hips, long necks, small feet, slender hands, thin physiques, etc. Since we're talking about making individual characters and not making a standardized build to propagate through the years for every figure Lego pumps out, the fact of the matter is there really is no relevance to what is "most common" or "normal". Lego, and all of us at home with our plastic bricks, art, and stories, are under no obligation to make characters that match the highest denominator, and that is because characters by their very nature are meant to be unique or at least serve a purpose. In Bionicle, the Toa-- or anyone at all, really-- do not represent us. They are not audience surrogates and they are not clones. They are meant to set an example, sure, but they have flaws and they have their own personalities and quirks and desires, and while they can teach us valuable lessons and make us feel things, they also represent diversity just by being so diverse. When you have an ensemble of characters who all act, feel, and dream differently, the audience and consumer will definitely feel an attachment or degree or relatability. 

 

In the same way that -- as has been discussed to death and back to life and death again in countless other topics and such -- the skewed gender ratio is harmful to impressionable young girls (obviously all young kids and even many adults and other media in turn are all greatly affected, but it's without question the girls who receive the most negative impact from all of this), the whole "ideal body" phenomenon is also very, very bad and should be avoided at all costs. Not only does it feed all the awful things in the gender ratio issue (not only is there one gal for every five guys, but they're not even mostly well written or unique, and now on top of that being dolled up and representing just flawed, unattainable ideas of physical appearance is not helping anyone) but they're also alienating both girls and boys based not just on their numbers or their personalities, but their physical characteristics too. All male heroes being these athletic, broad shouldered, tall, basically cliche godlike dudes in appearance is cool and all, and yes that is an absolute exaggeration 'cause that just applies to titan sets and canister sets are usually "average dude" proportions, but even those aren't good if that's all you've got. Boys with "feminine" constitutions, and vice versa, for example, are not getting anything out of this but self-esteem issues. Obviously, anyone that's underweight or overweight or shorter or taller than average or not fitting the "average" mold certainly isn't feeling any better either, and would in fact feel worse over time.

 

The big issue therein, referring back again to Makaru's brilliant post, is that the male character sets do represent differen't body types very well. Traditionally we've always had the Stone and Earth sets tending to be shorter or wider or stockier or hunched or just straight up bulky, and we've had sets with insanely varying proportions, with the Toa Mahri coming to mind. The lankier builds, although they are a trait shared between every character in that clone line, like the Inika obviously, round out the numbers to give you, across Bionicle's run, a very diverse collection of bodies. That is, for the male characters. Across all of Bionicle, with the obvious exception of characters like the Bahrag who are not humanoid, the sets representing the female characters have had no such diversity whatsoever, ranging from "scary thin and lanky" (Kiina) to "just exactly average*" (Gali Nuva), and one case of "hamana hamana"(Roodaka, as every other post has brought up ). Where are the bulkier gals? The shorter gals? The non-athletic builds? Anything? The closest we ever got was Hahli Mahri's "mustache", which is a gross, unfunny joke to make and I'm only bringing it up because so many posts in this topic have mentioned it as being something distinct that everyone remembers. *You can say that the Inika builds and the new Gali 2015 don't look "normal" or "average", but that's really just 'cause of the stylistic limitations of those standardized builds, and when you look at each wave of Toa as a group, in those cases you can say, yes, the female sets are completely average and exhibit no secondary physical characteristics exclusive to women. Just wanted to clarify that in case someone pointed out that orangutan arms are not "an average female"

 

This topic is about "feminizing" Bionicle, as if the figures we've got aren't already feminine enough. What a lot of us are saying, which has been the main source of contention here, is that we do not need to feminize Bionicle at all. The curves and slimming are not an improvement, because they are misrepresentations of what girls and women really look like, and are instead "ideals" that, while nice and pretty and do exist for so many women, are not something they need to see. They have enough of it from every other kind of media, and if they have those bodies, they probably don't mind Bionicle sets not having them because their problems do not revolve around their physical appearance (which is also super untrue because eating disorders and self image problems and harassment and so many things that people ignore, but they aren't strictly relevant to this particular point). Rahkshi Lalonde's joke about the topic's title needing to be "Slenderizing Bionicle" is actually not a joke at all. That is what this topic has been up until that was pointed out. When I first saw the title, I thought it would be more about feminizing Bionicle through, well, making it more feminine, more real, more beneficial to women, etc. I was hoping that maybe it might be about making the male character sets less buly too, or something. I was pretty disappointed with how this topic had been going for the most part, it was kinda painful to read, but I understand why everyone would say what they did and I'm not necessarily surprised. Making sets more feminine is the point of the topic, obviously, sure, but not by slapping Nuva shoulder armor on their chests or anything like that. The solution to really "feminize" Bionicle is to go in the opposite direction of the hourglass figure athletic heroine that we had for 10 years straight. Make 'em strong, and thin, and curvy, and petite, and "recognizably female", sure-- but only if you're also making female figures that are short but stocky, tall but with a heavy base, petite but with more armoring on the tummy than the breasts. Or, you know, just exactly average like Gali Nuva, 'cause at least she didn't need to be singled out. She looks just like the rest of her team, except for her arms, but not only is the "bell-bottom sleeves" look not your standard female trope, Takanuva came along the next year to sport those arms too, so she's still "just like the guys". While Gali Nuva looking perfectly average in terms of build does absolute nothing to help the overall lineup of ladies in Bionicle, she does justice to 2002 by itself. 

 

TL;DR: If you want to "feminize" Bionicle, maybe stop chasing hourglasses and realize that the female sets we have are already feminine enough, and that if you really want your female builds to stand out, go for something less rooted in the past and misrepresentative and infantile than "petite, with curves, narrow everything, wide hips." While those traits are perfectly fine and acceptable, you'd be a lot more creative and helpful if you went outside the box. Make a "macho" female set with no curves and realize she's still a female, and if saying so in the description isn't enough, you're focusing on the wrong things about what being a woman is. In general, subtlety is key. You can have "out of the box" body types that still have many of those "traditional traits" I listed so your MOC/revamp is still "obviously feminine". And, finally, understand why others are saying some builds are bad and why they want to see something else.

 

I hope this clears things up for anyone who didn't quite understand, and I apologize for being lazy in my earlier posts and just giving building tips. This stuff really needs to be explained.

 

 

Edited October 22, 2014 by Pomegranate

[AuRon the champion]

Well, I really hope no one from Lego is reading this thread right now. You all are being really embarrassing.

 

As a "moccist" figuring out how to make male and female characters appear different from each other has always been a slippery slope. Granted, I've been prone to flanderizing feminine qualities in the past for my creations, but as I've grown and started to gain a better understanding to how the body actually looks, I've realized that the best way to create a character of any gender can be boiled down to a few words.

 

"Be smart about it."

 

Stereotypes of the body that have been spoken about in this thread are expectations brought about through wild flights of fancy and certain media-based expectations. For example, I knoe a great deal of men who have very narrow shoulders and small in stature. I know women who make me look as if I belong in hobbittown, and have broad shoulders. The standard female body shape talked about here simply doesn't always count as truth. As such, as you build, you should build to what you want your moc to look like, but keep in mind that proportions are a thing, even if they are exaggerated, they still apply. Be smart about it.

 

Yes.

Edited October 22, 2014 by Hatty Hattington

[Dralcax]

Oh, boy, this thread again.

 

Yes, there are more female body types than simply that one used frequently in media, you know the one. But there's still a limit, you know? Women have different proportions than men, and if you get too close to the line, your character looks too masculine to be able to be immediately identified as female, especially if her build is identical to that of her male companions. 

[Toa Green Ninja]

Guys, let me clear up some things for you all. I'll be honest; I wasn't exactly sure what I was going for when naming and creating this topic. It was more of a sudden thing when they booted this discussion out of the 2015 topic, and I sought out to find a home for it.

 

But... now when I think about it, depending on how you view the word "feminizing", you can discuss anything. Whether it's about making female MOCs or, like Aanchir said much earlier, making BIONICLE more appealing to girls and women.

 

In short, what you talk about in this topic is entirely up to you. But please do remember to not go overboard...

Edited October 22, 2014 by Toa Green Ninja

[Aanchir]

Oh, boy, this thread again.

 

Yes, there are more female body types than simply that one used frequently in media, you know the one. But there's still a limit, you know? Women have different proportions than men, and if you get too close to the line, your character looks too masculine to be able to be immediately identified as female, especially if her build is identical to that of her male companions.

I think there are ways to use the same proportions or build for male and female characters while still having the gender identifiable. Certain part choices, particularly the face/mask, can make a difference even if they don't impact the model's overall proportions.

 

I definitely am not in the camp that a character's gender should be defined solely by their official bio, because frankly good character design dictates that kids should be able to know some of the character's most basic traits without having to first read a bio. Giving a character a shield for a weapon can make them seem very protective or well-guarded. Giving a character streamlined armor in various shades of blue can help suggest the element of water.

 

There are various types of visual shorthand for male and female characters that do not generalize a specific body type as masculine or feminine. One that's been around in cartooning for a long time is the use of angular outlines for male characters and curved outlines for female characters. And by "curved" I don't mean "curves" in the sense of "pronounced curves for the breasts, waist, and thighs" so much as "lacking sharp corners". You can have a plump male character with an angular outline just as you can have a fit, broad-shouldered female character with curved outlines. This visual shorthand is thus more of an abstraction (for both genders) than a generalization for either. Characters like Wall-E and Eve showcase how this is not even specific to characters with human bodies.

[Kevin Owens]

Hey I'm just going to throw this out there.

 

Assigning any sort of characteristics to a gender is sexist and you shouldn't do it.

[Lyichir]

Hey I'm just going to throw this out there.

 

Assigning any sort of characteristics to a gender is sexist and you shouldn't do it.

Any sort? Then how, pray tell, would you suggest making a character's gender more evident from their set?

 

I think while saying "all girls are like this" or "all boys are like this" may be sexist, there's nothing sexist about trying to make a character's gender recognizable from a glance, especially in a children's toy. I agree with Aanchir that good character design necessitates that a character's personality, powers, and yes, even gender be discernable from a look at them, and while obviously resorting to harmful stereotypes is about the worst way to do that, using benign design language to distinguish gender (like the curved vs. straight lines he mentioned, or the not-universal-but-still-fairly-typical proportions others advocated for) doesn't hurt anyone and in fact HELPS the theme by ensuring that even young boys recognize that the theme has a female presence, instead of ascribing all the characters to be like themselves as kids are wont to do.

 

Not all characteristics are stereotypes and as not all distinctions between genders are necessarily sexist. An understanding of that is essential if there is to be any headway in this discussion.

Edited October 23, 2014 by Lyichir

[Zidonaro]

 

Hey I'm just going to throw this out there.

 

Assigning any sort of characteristics to a gender is sexist and you shouldn't do it.

Any sort? Then how, pray tell, would you suggest making a character's gender more evident from their set?

 

They're robots. Giving gender traits based on human's is dumb and uncreative if I say so myself.