The Protectors Die Naturally/Biologically Reproduce?

[Rahkshi Lalonde]

So they can reproduce, let's just say I expect an increase in shall I say disturbing images. Beyond that it seems like an interesting new world.

 

gonna stay vague for the kids, but i don't think that ever stopped them before, to be honest.

[The Meta Knight]

 

So they can reproduce, let's just say I expect an increase in shall I say disturbing images. Beyond that it seems like an interesting new world.

 

gonna stay vague for the kids, but i don't think that ever stopped them before, to be honest.

 

 

Oh come on people. Name ONE toy line like this that has EVER been mildly implicit about such things.       :e:

[fishers64]

 

Male-dominated systems are realistic.

And isn't that just frightening?

 

Oh, yes, all the evil domineering guys hanging around are just the scariest thing ever. I'm trembling in my slippers. Right.

 

Reality is a scary thing until you own up to it. And in this case, the scariest thing about male humanity is that they are actually nice people sometimes (despite all of society trying to tell us that they're evil villains - oooh scary). Get over it.

 

also I think this is one case where the line that shirks realisticity at every turn (robotic characters, wonky physics, ridiculously skewed gender ratios) could have done to shirk it once again.

*cough* Isn't the number one argument for evener gender ratios in fiction realism? Fiction should match reality?

 

Now you're arguing that Bionicle should shirk reality to include more girls in leadership positions? Isn't this position contradicting itself logically?

 

At this point, I cannot help but see your desire, or preference as another might put it, to include more girls in fiction and advance their cause no matter what. This appears to be coloring your judgement up to the point that realistic representation of the male Protectors in this case should be shirked. This preference is not wrong, but it is not one that I share. That is why I have made my previous posts on this subject the way they are. 

[The Meta Knight]

Personally, I don't think they should shirk anything in gen 2. It should be a priority to add more content. So far, that's what Lego seems to be doing.

[Arzaki]

so i'm assuming that if there's biological reproduction, that means that either the Protectors' gender ratio is 1:1 or that there's some serious gayness (and transness) abound

 

....or possibly both

Two gay people can't make biological children....

[believe victims]

 

 

Male-dominated systems are realistic.

And isn't that just frightening?

 

Oh, yes, all the evil domineering guys hanging around are just the scariest thing ever. I'm trembling in my slippers. Right.

 

Reality is a scary thing until you own up to it. And in this case, the scariest thing about male humanity is that they are actually nice people sometimes (despite all of society trying to tell us that they're evil villains - oooh scary). Get over it.

No, I meant the fact that a majority of people in power are men, despite women actually holding a slight majority in population. That's just plain strange if you don't account to society holding men's worth over women's.

 

 

 

 

also I think this is one case where the line that shirks realisticity at every turn (robotic characters, wonky physics, ridiculously skewed gender ratios) could have done to shirk it once again.

*cough* Isn't the number one argument for evener gender ratios in fiction realism? Fiction should match reality?

 

No, actually, the number one argument is that girls should be able to see themselves represented by more than a few token characters in a story.

 

I could argue that the inverse logic counters claims that even gender ratios shouldn't be in there. If a male-dominated Protector society is fine because it's realistic, why does fiction suddenly not have to be realistic with gender ratios?

 

 

Now you're arguing that Bionicle should shirk reality to include more girls in leadership positions? Isn't this position contradicting itself logically?

No, because the argument isn't about realisticity, but about not throwing women under the bus. In both even gender ratios and desiring more girls in leadership positions, this is logically consistent. You're just misunderstanding the argument in a way that allows you to "refute" it.

 

At this point, I cannot help but see your desire, or preference as another might put it, to include more girls in fiction and advance their cause no matter what.

and this is a bad thing how?

 

 

so i'm assuming that if there's biological reproduction, that means that either the Protectors' gender ratio is 1:1 or that there's some serious gayness (and transness) abound

 

....or possibly both

Two gay people can't make biological children....

 

Not technically correct; if one is trans and the other is cis, biological reproduction could still happen.

Edited November 29, 2014 by Wally

[The Meta Knight]

 

so i'm assuming that if there's biological reproduction, that means that either the Protectors' gender ratio is 1:1 or that there's some serious gayness (and transness) abound

 

....or possibly both

Two gay people can't make biological children....

 

I have difficulty explaining this to some people at times.... not to be rude, but...

[bonesiii]

Folks, please keep it civil... your latest post, fishers, is getting a bit sarcastic, and given past history, that never ends well on this subject.

[The Meta Knight]

Not technically correct; if one is trans and the other is cis, biological reproduction could still happen.

 I'm confused. Does tran even count as gay? (honest question)

 

EDIT: forgive me, Bonesiii, I posted this before I saw your intervention.

Edited November 29, 2014 by The Meta Knight

[believe victims]

 

Not technically correct; if one is trans and the other is cis, biological reproduction could still happen.

 I'm confused. Does tran even count as gay? (honest question)

 

 

if a trans person loves someone of the same gender (i.e. a trans woman loving women), then yes. Gender and sexuality are separate things. You can be trans but not gay, and gay but not trans, or even both.

 

If you have any more questions about this, PM me; this topic isn't quite the place.

[The Meta Knight]

Back on topic

 

Does anybody think this means the no romance rule is out? How many of you think this is a good thing? Who do you think should end up with who? Do you think it would be awkward if Tahu ended up with Gali given the fact that she's his "sister"? What do you think of the possibility of the Toa being actual biological siblings? (which would rule out the afore mentioned question (most likely)) If they are biological siblings, then who are their parents? 

 

Please don't attempt to answer all these questions at once.

[man774]

Here's an idea:

 

 

None of them have genders. Like bacteria, they reproduce via binary fission

[fishers64]

@bones: Warning heeded and taken. Sorry if I got caustic - I guess I have a lot to say on yonder subject and still sorting out a few things here, but that's no excuse for starting a war. 
 
As such, I have misunderstood my opponent's post, but if I didn't post, I would not now know. Such is the nature of forums. 

No, I meant the fact that a majority of people in power are men, despite women actually holding a slight majority in population. That's just plain strange if you don't account to society holding men's worth over women's.

I don't particularly consider it strange. It has been that way for my entire lifetime and probably many years before that. I don't necessarily consider it a good thing or a bad thing necessarily. I don't think it is something to be scared of, as you seem to have implied. It is merely reality, the way things are - something that I can try to change if I have a plan that works, or not.
 
As for society holding men's worth over women's, I'm not sure that I agree with that statement. I see arguments for and against that in my mind. 
 

No, actually, the number one argument is that girls should be able to see themselves represented by more than a few token characters in a story.

Very well then. I misunderstood what you were trying to say.
 

 

At this point, I cannot help but see your desire, or preference as another might put it, to include more girls in fiction and advance their cause no matter what.

and this is a bad thing how?

 

Actually, not a bad thing necessarily.

* * *

 

Here's an idea:

 

None of them have genders. Like bacteria, they reproduce via binary fission

Um, but father-to-son implies male genders. 

 

For the record, there's no evidence that the Toa follow the same reproductive schema as the Protectors. Personally I hope they don't and they are the same biomechanical beings from 2001. Otherwise more awkwardness may ensue. 

 

FTR, the platonic-ism of 2001-2010 Bionicle was something I enjoyed about the original franchise. I'm very sorry to see it go. For the Protectors, it's probably OK as long as it isn't emphasized, but I'd hate to see it work its way into sets or become a thing among the Toa. Children deserve a few years of innocence, you know? 

[Arzaki]

Here's an idea:

 

None of them have genders. Like bacteria, they reproduce via binary fission

Um, but father-to-son implies male genders. 

 

For the record, there's no evidence that the Toa follow the same reproductive schema as the Protectors. Personally I hope they don't and they are the same biomechanical beings from 2001. Otherwise more awkwardness may ensue. 

 

FTR, the platonic-ism of 2001-2010 Bionicle was something I enjoyed about the original franchise. I'm very sorry to see it go. For the Protectors, it's probably OK as long as it isn't emphasized, but I'd hate to see it work its way into sets or become a thing among the Toa. Children deserve a few years of innocence, you know? 

Well, things like "sister chromatids" and such imply genders, but they're not even living. Also daughter cells. Cells don't have gender.

[fishers64]

 

Here's an idea:

 

None of them have genders. Like bacteria, they reproduce via binary fission

Um, but father-to-son implies male genders. 

 

For the record, there's no evidence that the Toa follow the same reproductive schema as the Protectors. Personally I hope they don't and they are the same biomechanical beings from 2001. Otherwise more awkwardness may ensue. 

 

FTR, the platonic-ism of 2001-2010 Bionicle was something I enjoyed about the original franchise. I'm very sorry to see it go. For the Protectors, it's probably OK as long as it isn't emphasized, but I'd hate to see it work its way into sets or become a thing among the Toa. Children deserve a few years of innocence, you know? 

Well, things like "sister chromatids" and such imply genders, but they're not even living. Also daughter cells. Cells don't have gender.

 

Er, there's little to suggest that the Protectors are single-celled organisms.

 

Sister chromatids and daughter cells are arbitrary names assigned to gender-free items to make them identifiable to a gendered and gender-knowledgeable populace. We're talking about characters - people - here. Characters have genders unless otherwise stated to be relate-able to an audience with genders (that is, all of us). 

 

Now it is possible for the Protectors to reproduce via binary fission and have their genders assigned at random, but I tend to doubt it. The Agori reproduce as we do, and so the precedent would be for the protectors to do so as well. I would prefer binary fission myself - that might be a way to salvage it back into platonic-ism, but it seems like a patch to appeal to preference. Possible, but not likely. 

 

Interestingly, binary fission would likely place the Protectors as an entire race of males, which would be worse in the ratio department than even Bionicle 2001-2010. For that reason, I don't see it happening. 

[ZOMBI3S]

I like these changes. It makes the story more relatable, more human. Having generations allows for greater mystery and legends, instead of just everyone not being able to remember what happened a long time ago. It gives the land more culture, I think.

 

As for gender, I think it's super cool that they have both genders in all tribes. That's how I originally imagined the matoran as a kid. I don't see the whole 'passing down from father to son' as being a problem though. It's Lego. Most of the protectors will probably be male, but there's bound to be some female characters who are the exception to the rule. As long as the characters are strong, I don't think it should matter exactly what the ratio is.

[dotcom]

 

so i'm assuming that if there's biological reproduction, that means that either the Protectors' gender ratio is 1:1 or that there's some serious gayness (and transness) abound

 

....or possibly both

Two gay people can't make biological children....

 

Still somewhat off-topic but i mean.

They're not human or anything. They're an entirely alien and different life form from anything we know.

So there's no real indicator at this point that reproduction is impossible between same-sex individuals on Okoto.

Now, would I expect Lego to ever do that? Definitely not, because, well, Lego.

Still, when we're talking about some species we know nothing about in some mystical universe, assuming they function exactly like the organisms of our world is kind of silly. After all, aren't other theorizing that they're not born but built, or that they operate like single-cell organisms? Anything is, on some level, a fair assumption at this point.

 

Anyway.

 

I certainly hope that "From father to son" is just a stock phrase and not an indicator of the Protector system being inherently patriarchal. I really hope at least 2 Protectors are female--at the very least. Let's please not repeat 2009 ratios again...

[Regitnui]

Aiya. All I said was I'm now regarding the Protectors of Jungle, Ice and Water as female, the same way I'm dividing the Toa.

 

I'm a feminist, so I believe that fiction should be trying to put women in leadership roles outside of the 'Token Female'. That way, when the generation of boys playing with these guys grow up, they're not likely to fee threatened by the 'old boys club' disappearing for a more egalitarian system.

 

Honestly, budding or asexual reproduction seems unlikely simply because TLG doesn't need an alien mythology, but a successful toy line. Gender dynamics is a familiar plot device, if nothing else. Picture one of the Protectors (maybe the young, just-inherited-my-position Protector) complaining about an ambitious sibling.

[Akavakaku]

I'm inclined to interpret "father to son" as being figurative, much like how "mankind" includes women. But it's also possible that, like some real life species, these villagers are protogynous, meaning they all begin their life female and then become male at a later stage. Perhaps the transition to male is a requirement for becoming the next Protector, simply because it is a mark of age and experience. (Disclaimer: No I don't think it's likely.)

[masterchirox580]

 

So they can reproduce, let's just say I expect an increase in shall I say disturbing images. Beyond that it seems like an interesting new world.

 

gonna stay vague for the kids, but i don't think that ever stopped them before, to be honest.

 

I wasn't talking about what lego might do I was talking about what people who probably live in their mothers basement might draw.

[Aanchir]

FTR, the platonic-ism of 2001-2010 Bionicle was something I enjoyed about the original franchise. I'm very sorry to see it go. For the Protectors, it's probably OK as long as it isn't emphasized, but I'd hate to see it work its way into sets or become a thing among the Toa. Children deserve a few years of innocence, you know?

I think this is a kind of ridiculous mindset, to be honest. How is there any threat to kids' innocence in making the characters more like real people in their ability to have real families? There are plenty of kids' franchises that never needed any rule against characters having families. Dora and Diego are both humans, and humans can have families — Dora visits her abuela fairly often, as I understand. But that doesn't mean Dora the Explorer and Go, Diego, Go! are destroying kids' innocence.

 

Even stories that explore concepts like romance are often no threat to kids' innocence. Most kids learn what love is well before they're within the target age range for BIONICLE. They've already seen the Disney fairy-tale movies where a princess falls in love with a prince or vice-versa. They already know that their own mommies and daddies fell in love a long time ago. That concept is nothing alien to them. So nobody's innocence is being threatened by the use of this concept.

 

It's also a bit ridiculous to assume that the Toa being capable of romantic love would somehow mean they could no longer have platonic relationships. Hero Factory characters were capable of romance, but the main story was never derailed by any kind of romantic subplot. Why? Because that wasn't the kind of story the writers wanted to tell.

 

I wasn't talking about what lego might do I was talking about what people who probably live in their mothers basement might draw.

I think everyone knows what you were talking about. And as Rahkshi Lalonde said, that's never stopped them before. If you think inappropriate BIONICLE art doesn't already exist you're sadly mistaken. The kinds of people who draw that kind of thing aren't under any pressure to abide by what the official storyline says in the first place, so why would a rule that "Matoran don't reproduce" have ever held them back?

[masterchirox580]

 

FTR, the platonic-ism of 2001-2010 Bionicle was something I enjoyed about the original franchise. I'm very sorry to see it go. For the Protectors, it's probably OK as long as it isn't emphasized, but I'd hate to see it work its way into sets or become a thing among the Toa. Children deserve a few years of innocence, you know?

I think this is a kind of ridiculous mindset, to be honest. How is there any threat to kids' innocence in making the characters more like real people in their ability to have real families? There are plenty of kids' franchises that never needed any rule against characters having families. Dora and Diego are both humans, and humans can have families — Dora visits her abuela fairly often, as I understand. But that doesn't mean Dora the Explorer and Go, Diego, Go! are destroying kids' innocence.

 

Even stories that explore concepts like romance are often no threat to kids' innocence. Most kids learn what love is well before they're within the target age range for BIONICLE. They've already seen the Disney fairy-tale movies where a princess falls in love with a prince or vice-versa. They already know that their own mommies and daddies fell in love a long time ago. That concept is nothing alien to them. So nobody's innocence is being threatened by the use of this concept.

 

It's also a bit ridiculous to assume that the Toa being capable of romantic love would somehow mean they could no longer have platonic relationships. Hero Factory characters were capable of romance, but the main story was never derailed by any kind of romantic subplot. Why? Because that wasn't the kind of story the writers wanted to tell.

 

I wasn't talking about what lego might do I was talking about what people who probably live in their mothers basement might draw.

I think everyone knows what you were talking about. And as Rahkshi Lalonde said, that's never stopped them before. If you think inappropriate BIONICLE art doesn't already exist you're sadly mistaken. The kinds of people who draw that kind of thing aren't under any pressure to abide by what the official storyline says in the first place, so why would a rule that "Matoran don't reproduce" have ever held them back?

 

I'm aware it exists (I wish I could repress those memories), I'm just saying they're probably gonna get more "inspiration" as a result of this plot point (is there a way to blacklist the word "protector"?). 

[Kokera]

If it turns out Makuta has a son, it would be a great nod if his name is Rahkshi. I might have to fanfic that.

[fishers64]

I think this is a kind of ridiculous mindset, to be honest. How is there any threat to kids' innocence in making the characters more like real people in their ability to have real families? There are plenty of kids' franchises that never needed any rule against characters having families. Dora and Diego are both humans, and humans can have families — Dora visits her abuela fairly often, as I understand. But that doesn't mean Dora the Explorer and Go, Diego, Go! are destroying kids' innocence.

 

Even stories that explore concepts like romance are often no threat to kids' innocence. Most kids learn what love is well before they're within the target age range for BIONICLE. They've already seen the Disney fairy-tale movies where a princess falls in love with a prince or vice-versa. They already know that their own mommies and daddies fell in love a long time ago. That concept is nothing alien to them. So nobody's innocence is being threatened by the use of this concept.

 

It's also a bit ridiculous to assume that the Toa being capable of romantic love would somehow mean they could no longer have platonic relationships. Hero Factory characters were capable of romance, but the main story was never derailed by any kind of romantic subplot. Why? Because that wasn't the kind of story the writers wanted to tell.

Er, HF characters are robots, and as such aren't capable of romance.

 

FTR, the platonic-ism of 2001-2010 Bionicle was something I enjoyed about the original franchise. I'm very sorry to see it go.

This is preference statement. This is something I would like to see. It is not a mindset.

For the Protectors, it's probably OK as long as it isn't emphasized, but I'd hate to see it work its way into sets or become a thing among the Toa. Children deserve a few years of innocence, you know?

By "it", I mean biological reproduction and related subtext, flirting, double meanings, and so on. Some of my recent studies on this subject have indicated that sex is being marketed to younger and younger children. I'd like to see that stop. (again, preference.)

 

Plus it's part of what made Bionicle "out there" and different from other stories, which seem to fall into romance subtext/plot over and over again. It's a reaction to a worst-case-scenario, one in today's culture is more and more likely. 

 

There's nothing wrong with a biological family in the context of a kids story, especially with human characters.

 

The other thing is that people on BZPower are making a big deal out of it, far greater than Lego probably intended. They already did it in 2009 and no one seemed to think that was too big of a deal. Now it's back in 2015 and everyone's cheering for possible gender equality and rolling their eyes at what might come of it in someone's deranged mindset.

Edited November 29, 2014 by fishers64

[FallenCor]

':I

 

I'll just... go re-read my Legends collection and reminisce about the old days...

[Aanchir]

Er, HF characters are robots, and as such aren't capable of romance.

They're robots in a make-believe science-fantasy universe, and as such romance is every bit as possible for them as for the robots in Wall-E. Is it really so hard to use your imagination? In our world, robots aren't capable of romance. In our universe, robots aren't capable of human-like thoughts or feelings, either. In the Hero Factory universe, they are capable of all of those things! It would be a very boring story if they weren't, and could only perform mind-numbingly repetitive tasks.

 

This is preference statement. This is something I would like to see. It is not a mindset.

I was talking about the "children deserve a few years of innocence" mindset, not about the preference for platonic relationships. Platonic relationships in a fictional universe would not be the least bit threatened by the mere existence or possibility of romantic relationships — we live in a universe where romance exists, but that doesn't mean that every single boy-girl interpersonal relationship in this universe is a romantic one. Nor is every FICTIONAL boy-girl relationship in our universe a romantic one.

 

By "it", I mean biological reproduction and related subtext, flirting, double meanings, and so on. Some of my recent studies on this subject have indicated that sex is being marketed to younger and younger children. I'd like to see that stop. (again, preference.)

Since when has LEGO been guilty of marketing sex to kids? Most LEGO themes have even less sexual/romantic content in them than Disney movies released two decades ago. Why would BIONICLE somehow turn out different?

 

Plus, it's not like flirting and double-meanings somehow didn't exist in the classic BIONICLE movies, even among Matoran characters that allegedly were incapable of romance. Maku sneaking away to Po-Koro to spy on Huki, Toa Metru Matau coming up with pick-up line after pick-up line in his conversations with Nokama, etcetera.

 

Most kids' stories are told in a universe where biological reproduction exists (our own), and that's never caused any systemic problems before, so I don't see why you seem to think the mere existence of parenthood in a universe puts it on a slippery slope towards inappropriate/risqué material.

 

Plus it's part of what made Bionicle "out there" and different from other stories, which seem to fall into romance subtext/plot over and over again. It's a reaction to a worst-case-scenario, one in today's culture is more and more likely.

Why jump to the worst-case scenario? It's like saying that a real-life robot takeover is "more and more likely" in today's culture. Yes, technology keeps improving, but the idea that our machines could ever completely overthrow humanity is just as implausible as it's ever been.

 

There's nothing wrong with a biological family in the context of a kids story, especially with human characters.

Why the "especially"? What makes human characters' family relationships inherently more wholesome from a storytelling standpoint than those of anthropomorphized robots or animals? The long-running kids' cartoon Arthur has anthropomorphized animal characters. Sesame Street has fantasy Muppet characters. Both shows have had no trouble with the inclusion of biological families putting them on a slippery slope towards moral depravity.

 

The other thing is that people on BZPower are making a big deal out of it, far greater than Lego probably intended. They already did it in 2009 and no one seemed to think that was too big of a deal. Now it's back in 2015 and everyone's cheering for possible gender equality and rolling their eyes at what might come of it in someone's deranged mindset.

Rolling our eyes at what might come of it in someone's deranged mindset is really the only sensible reaction. Perversity exists in the world, and there is nothing the LEGO Group will ever be able to do to prevent it. They shouldn't have to pussyfoot around every possible thing that people might twist into something unwholesome, because obscene fanart exists of pretty much everything (the Internet has basically codified this as a rule, though chances are this sort of thing existed even before the Internet and it just wasn't something most people were able to find or share).

 

I have seen plenty of disgusting BIONICLE artwork and MOCs for years. Lots of stuff I'd rather not have seen. And from what I've seen, there wasn't any storm surge of it when the 2009 storyline canonized the existence of reproduction in the BIONICLE universe. Furthermore, I don't see why the LEGO Group would be the least bit liable for it if there WAS one. When a franchise appeals to a a diverse audience of people, it's inevitable that some of those people would enjoy it in sick or twisted ways. We don't have to tolerate it. But neither do we have to point fingers at the LEGO Group as if a decision to make BIONICLE more realistic and relatable makes them culpable for the stuff we don't like about the fan community's lunatic fringe.

 

As for BZPower members making a big deal of it, I don't see why they shouldn't. It's a change of story direction, albeit not an unprecedented one. The BIONICLE fan community has already made a big deal of every OTHER way the new sets and story differ from the old ones, so why should this be any different?

Edited November 30, 2014 by Aanchir

[Arzaki]

Hopefully the protectors use protection.

 

I mean, you can't defend yourself without a shield, right?

 

Ha, I got you. You thought I meant something else didn't you? Ha!

Edited November 30, 2014 by Arzaki

[Akavakaku]

Evidently not; the Protector of Ice's saw is the only Protector's weapon that seems like a useful defensive tool, with its wide surface area for deflecting attacks. But I digress. To get back to the topic, if some Protectors were male and some female, which do you think would be which? I'd personally predict that those of Stone, Earth and Ice are female while those of Fire, Jungle and Water are male.

[Munty]

Wow we're back on topic! That took a while... Personally, gender divide issues aside, I think it would be a HUGE mistake for TLG to change the genders of the original 6 toa. Gali is female, all others male. Anything different to that will just feel wrong to existing fans and frankly will mean less than nothing to newcomers either way. I have no problem with a mainly female cast for 2016 but right now they need to stay true to the established lore I think...

[Aanchir]

Wow we're back on topic! That took a while... Personally, gender divide issues aside, I think it would be a HUGE mistake for TLG to change the genders of the original 6 toa. Gali is female, all others male. Anything different to that will just feel wrong to existing fans and frankly will mean less than nothing to newcomers either way. I have no problem with a mainly female cast for 2016 but right now they need to stay true to the established lore I think...

Well, that's not a real concern because the bios for the new Toa are clear about their genders, with Gali still being the only girl among them. What we don't really know about are the genders of the Protectors, since their character pages all have the same copied and pasted bios, and none of the product pages for any of the sets use gendered pronouns.

[Munty]

Odd that we're still getting posts like this then... But I guess it just means I'm not the only person not paying attention to the bios

 

Aiya. All I said was I'm now regarding the Protectors of Jungle, Ice and Water as female, the same way I'm dividing the Toa.

 

I think a gender divide in the protectors would be good in the same way as a future (non gen1) divide in Toas and other characters would be. I agree with Regitnui's principle of division as well actually. Water and jungle seem like they could more easily be feminine while things like earth and stone are somewhat more rugged and manly... Of course that's not to say we couldn't have a female character wielding these elements, they would rely on a strong story to pull it off though as the sets themselves have always been unable to depict specific genders as we know them. Except Roodaka of course with her high heels and boobs...

[Regitnui]

My principle of division, as you put it, is based on the Hecate sisters: Lewa is the innocent and playful Maiden, Gali the wise and nurturing Mother, and Kopaka the distant and harsh Crone. Pohatu, Onua and Tahu don't divide up so neatly; Onua would probably be the Prophet (Crone-equivalent), but neither Pohatu or Tahu neatly fit Hunter (Maiden-equivalent) or Lord (Mother-equivalent). Pohatu might be the Hunter and Tahu the Lord, but it's not as clear as the three (headcanoned) female Toa.

[The Meta Knight]

My principle of division, as you put it, is based on the Hecate sisters: Lewa is the innocent and playful Maiden, Gali the wise and nurturing Mother, and Kopaka the distant and harsh Crone. Pohatu, Onua and Tahu don't divide up so neatly; Onua would probably be the Prophet (Crone-equivalent), but neither Pohatu or Tahu neatly fit Hunter (Maiden-equivalent) or Lord (Mother-equivalent). Pohatu might be the Hunter and Tahu the Lord, but it's not as clear as the three (headcanoned) female Toa.

I see your point with Lewa, but regardless of your analogies, I could never see Kopaka as a woman. I just can't. Although I've never been one to complain about gender distribution, I do agree we need more strong female characters in media, but I don't really see how or why you would need to portray male characters as female just because you think they should be. Don't take that as having a harsh tone.             :e:  But if you really feel like you have to in order to enjoy the story, then go ahead by all means.

[Regitnui]

None at all. It's just my preference.

 

Oh, BTW, there are already gen2 images of that nature about. I looked, so you didn't have to.

[Munty]

None at all. It's just my preference.

 

Oh, BTW, there are already gen2 images of that nature about. I looked, so you didn't have to.

 

I saw one of these yesterday too... Poor Gali. Or lucky I suppose depending on your point of view 

[The Meta Knight]

 

None at all. It's just my preference.

 

Oh, BTW, there are already gen2 images of that nature about. I looked, so you didn't have to.

 

I saw one of these yesterday too... Poor Gali. Or lucky I suppose depending on your point of view 

 

...I think we need to change the subject.

 

Have the elder Protectors received names yet? I don't think they have. (correct me if I'm wrong.) I think we could all agree that it would be kinda dumb if all the Protectors on the island were simply named 'Protector.' I know it's been said that the only returning characters will be the Toa and the Makuta, but what do you think of the remote possibility of the elder Protectors being named after the 2001 Turaga? (i.e. the elder Protector of Fire's name is Vakama) I personally think that would be a really cool idea. It would give so much nostalgia. (except Nokama might end up a dude...    ) Just a theory though. I don't actually expect this to be the case. 

Edited December 1, 2014 by The Meta Knight

[Aanchir]

 

 

None at all. It's just my preference.

 

Oh, BTW, there are already gen2 images of that nature about. I looked, so you didn't have to.

 

I saw one of these yesterday too... Poor Gali. Or lucky I suppose depending on your point of view 

 

...I think we need to change the subject.

 

Have the elder Protectors received names yet? I don't think they have. (correct me if I'm wrong.) I think we could all agree that it would be kinda dumb if all the Protectors on the island were simply named 'Protector.' I know it's been said that the only returning characters will be the Toa and the Makuta, but what do you think of the remote possibility of the elder Protectors being named after the 2001 Turaga? (i.e. the elder Protector of Fire's name is Vakama) I personally think that would be a really cool idea. It would give so much nostalgia. (except Nokama might end up a dude...    ) Just a theory though. I don't actually expect this to be the case.

 

I'm pretty sure "Protector" is a title. Not sure if they will get individual names or just go by that title. We still know very little about the Protectors as individuals, just about their general role in the story — like the Turaga, they are responsible for maintaining their villages' traditions and legends, except in the case of the Protectors it is a title passed down from generation to generation.

[Munty]

I'm sooo pleased they decided to reuse the same Toa names for the first wave of gen 2 but personally I think it'll be nice to start over with pretty much everything else. That will include things like new protectors/turaga names. Especially since we still don't really have a good idea of what the protectors will be all about. The Turaga were leaders after all, not defenders. I know Vakama and co were all great heroes in their own right once upon a time but I don't think it would be particularly suitable to massively rewrite them as protectors as I anticipate a great deal of action in store for them as the story progresses (provided they aren't neglected that is, but even the matoran got some action in Gen 1 so fingers crossed!)

[Pohatu: Uniter of Stone]

Let's just say yes or no and leave everyone to their ideas without actually having a canon answer that leaves no possibilities open. That's what most kids do anyways. 

[Shadow Destroyer]

Well, the Agori reproduced biologically. I don't see why LEGO wouldn't make a similar move with the new line.

 

Wait, what?

 

I didn't even know that! Was it mentioned in the books somewhere?