You have to make the original six gender-equal.

[The 1st Shadow]

In-story reason, then.

 

In a Great Beings lab, somewhere on Spherus Magna...

 

GB #1: The Matoran design is complete! Now we just have to implement the programming.

 

GB #2: Hey, you know what? We've done robots before, but what if we tried to take it a step further and implement genders? We can totally turn this into an experiment on making a fully artificial race, instead of just modifying existing ones. We've never done that before!

 

GB #3: Cool idea! Let's go for it!

 

GB #4: Hey, I have an idea! Let's waste time figuring out how to replicate 397 different forms of gender expression so we can please a small fraction of the population of some planet that doesn't even exist in our universe! Huh? Whaddaya guys think?

 

GB #1, 3, and 4: *glares*

 

GB #1: Okay, seeing as we have limited time before the planet, you know, explodes, let's just keep it simple. It's not like they'll be physically different, just mentally. Besides, who cares? They're just gonna keep the giant robot alive and functioning until it finishes its mission, and then we'll take them apart again. #4, we'll tackle that idea at a time when our entire world isn't being threatened by total destruction.

 

In short, there is no in-story reason to acknowledge human gender expression in an artificial race of mainly robotic beings from another universe that were only intended to be used as nanotech tools to keep a larger machine working.

 

Okay, so there's lots of other options in our world, but in a story where one alien race created a race of robots in the middle of a crisis, I doubt they had time to waste even caring about gender beyond the basics. Yes, they could have just gone with genderless machines, but who knows what their intentions were? If experimenting with gender while creating a new race was on hand, it doesn't surprise me that they'd take the extra effort to make them unique in some way. But, what if they'd never done it before? If you're working with something for the first time, you're going to try to go for the basics. Tell me, do you go to an art class expecting to be an expert on the first try? No, you learn the simple stuff, and get into all the more detailed nuances later on.

 

I actually found a good example of this earlier today while helping my sister set up her new iPhone. You know how those have a voice that can talk back to you? Well, I looked at the options for this, and saw three options: Female, Male, and Voice Off. It got me wondering "Exactly how do you program an agenderfluid voice? Or any of those other examples, for that matter. What would it sound like? Would you even be able to tell the difference?" How do you program a voice that sounds neither male or female, but still human? If I talk to someone who is biologically female (but identifies as something else) over the phone, despite what I know, the voice will likely still sound female. Just something to think about. 

 

You and I know about multiple versions of gender, but think about the in-story reasons. Remember that? The BIONICLE story? Half of the reason this site even exists? If I were building a contingency plan to save a world from destruction, I'd be more worried about SAVING everyone than I would be about creating an accurate representation of everyone, just to please them. See what I mean? The Matoran are tools--who cares what they are so long as they get the job done? If you were on a boat and that boat started sinking, would you turn away a rescue boat just because none of the crew represented your form of gender expression? 

Edited January 11, 2015 by ~T1S~

[Noxryn]

I'm admittedly not in tune with the psychology of gender, buy these are robots. They don't have any physical reason to be male or female. Judging by canon, they're all monogendered asexual. Cisgender fails to have meaning, as does trans. LGB all fail when sexual attraction is taken out of the mix, because platonic friendships form regardless of gender.

 

I'm genuinely interested though. Taking the variables of physical gender, sexual attraction and romance out of the human perception of gender, how many possibilities can there realistically be, or can be realistically differentiated?

Gender doesn't rely on physical or sexual attraction, so I'm sorry to say but that entire argument you wanted to start holds no value in any discussion at all. Even so, the characters obviously have gender and gender expression -- the books refer to them all as he/she and brother/sister in various contexts throughout. And, whether canon or not, the movies AND books gave various characters romantic undertones towards each other (like Matau's nice little nest-making comment towards Nokama, or his flirtatious behavior towards her in the second movie).

 

And there is and always have been various gender expressions ... ? They've existed long before the internet, they've existed in various societies ancient and modern, so of course creatures with sentience, sapience and a paradigm for gender will develop various other identities individuals and groups feel more closely aligned to and feel more accurately represent who they are.

 

So, um, what's your point other than trying to poorly refute that nonbinary identities don't belong here?

 

(I'm not even going to start with T1S -- first off, Great Beings aren't real).

[The 1st Shadow]

 

(I'm not even going to start with T1S -- first off, Great Beings aren't real).

 

Ah, so you agree that this whole discussion is flawed from the get-go. We're talking about something that only exists in-story (you'll notice that it's hard to give a small pile of plastic a gender, so we'll focus on the storyline implications), which happens to include the Great Beings. That's the point I was trying to make.

 

Correct. The Great Beings do not exist. The Toa do not exist. The Matoran do not exist. So what are we even talking about here? We're talking about a story. It's a story about robots who were created by a fictional alien race to save a planet. 

[Doctor Makuta]

I'd make Lewa and Onua female.

[Noxryn]

 

(I'm not even going to start with T1S -- first off, Great Beings aren't real).

Ah, so you agree that this whole discussion is flawed from the get-go. We're talking about something that only exists in-story (you'll notice that it's hard to give a small pile of plastic a gender, so we'll focus on the storyline implications), which happens to include the Great Beings. That's the point I was trying to make.

 

Correct. The Great Beings do not exist. The Toa do not exist. The Matoran do not exist. So what are we even talking about here? We're talking about a story. It's a story about robots who were created by a fictional alien race to save a planet.

 

I feel like you missed the entire point that Bionicle is a series written by humans, for humans. The toys have gender. The characters have gender. The people reading and relating to the characters have gender. The entire point of this topic is just talking about making equitable ratios between genders, which people were posting just fine until some posters made mockeries and stinks over nonbinary identities being included, which is flat out rude.

 

But if you think the story has no relevance, no point, no purpose, no affect or rhyme or reason to exist then why even post on a website, or in a forum, dedicated to it in the first place?

[Toa Levacius Zehvor]

- SNIP -

 

Heh, I know all of that. I've been taking classes in media productions and film studies since sophomore year of High School, and done independent studying for longer than that. The difficulties you're describing with the industry are exactly why I plan on getting a minor in screenwriting, rather than a major.

 

But the fact of the matter is, the gender ratio of Bionicle has already been determined. Could it have been better? Yes. Can we change it now? No. Unless you plan on going through every copy of a Bionicle book every published, and swap around the pronouns in place there, we're just beating a dead horse. Harping on about it will not accomplish anything. Topics like this, where we discuss alternatives, provide an interesting insight into peoples thoughts. But the gender ratio of Bionicle is a null point; what should be the focus is on new material, and how it will be shaped.

 

Commenting on the above, the system, for both better and worse, is the way that it is, for exactly the reasons we have both described. But asking the system to change is not the answer. Being the change to the system is the answer.

 

There's plenty of identities outside of those three choices you deemed the only acceptable options, most of the discussion came from people mocking, or outright denying the existence of those identities which falls in line with the purview of the topic as it's about equitable gender representation in Bionicle.

 

Some people used romance or popular shipping options as reasons why they'd change this or that, but any other argument was because some people can't get past the concept of non-binary identities and felt the need to shout them down for no apparent reason.

 

Have you considered the possibility people might be more willing to listen to what you say, if you didn't have a blatant superiority complex?

 

Nobody on this topic has been shouting people down, and has attempted, with a remarkable amount of civility which has, in fact, stunned me. But in each post you've made, you've shoe-horned in passive-aggressive commentary, and selectively hand-picked certain points to discuss. And then, for your last great act, you've went with a post meant solely to call out other members, but under the pleasant guise of not targeting anyone by name; a tactic commonly used for the purposes of dehumanizing the opposition in a debate, I might add. Retired staff or not, this is completely uncalled for.

 

That being said:

 

But if you think the story has no relevance, no point, no purpose, no affect or rhyme or reason to exist then why even post on a website, or in a forum, dedicated to it in the first place?

 

You are fully correct here. Stories, no matter how small, have meaning. One well-crafted story can change the course of human history, if told by the right person, to the right audience, at the right time. Fiction is a very powerful tool, and never something we should discount.

 

I'm admittedly not in tune with the psychology of gender, buy these are robots. They don't have any physical reason to be male or female. Judging by canon, they're all monogendered asexual. Cisgender fails to have meaning, as does trans. LGB all fail when sexual attraction is taken out of the mix, because platonic friendships form regardless of gender.

 

I'm genuinely interested though. Taking the variables of physical gender, sexual attraction and romance out of the human perception of gender, how many possibilities can there realistically be, or can be realistically differentiated?

 

None. Gender is a byproduct of your biological brain pattern, with some degree of environmental contributions; however, these do not so much define a gender, as round off the edges for what is considered the "norm" for yours. But in the absence of any physical gender or romantic attraction, the whole concept would cease to exist. Do we consider bacteria to be male or female? Of course not; there is no such concept for them. In higher forms of life, this lack of definition disappears.

 

Me? I'm not so fond of traditional "gender roles" and the like, at least in the modern age. Obviously, men and women have certain biological predispositions, both physical and mental (though, as the presence of transgendered persons demonstrates, those physical predispositions may be flip-flopped in rare cases). However, what a lot of people fail to realize is that "gender roles" apply both ways; where there are female soldiers, one must also expect male house(husband?)s to come into place.

 

You want the truth about the gender binary? It's an almost strawman like concept meant to cast discussions into two opposing viewpoints. Male and female are not opposites standing at the end of fields; they are two overlapping concepts, with which traits are considered attached to whom changing dependent upon the culture in question. People are either male or female. So why, then, do "non-binary" people come up? Because of the false binary concept which is shoved in their face; the idea shown to them that "this defines you."

 

But what of the girl child who begins playing with toy soldiers, wears a t-shirt and jeans, and dreams of marrying a stay-at-home-dad? Or the young boy in the same boat, who enjoys playing with dolls, wearing hot pink, and wants to work at a day care until he can be married to the woman described prior? In both cases, more often than not (particularly for the boy), they will be laughed at and ridiculed for what they do. Their sexuality may be frequently called into question, and commentary may be just as vitriolic from parents as from other kids. So it's very easy for these kids, if told about the concept of a "gender binary", to immediately presume they fall somewhere in between. But this is not the case; they are simply a man and a woman, whose expressions of such traits simply differ from many of their peers.

 

If people were simply willing to be more accepting of this sort of thing, life would be a lot easier. But, then again, we'd also lose out on this enlightening discussion.

 

I'd make Lewa and Onua female.

 

Truly, the newer members are a small voice of sanity and reason in the midst of all of this. Thank you for that.

 

-Toa Levacius Zehvor

 

No more posting right before I go to sleep; these things never end well.

[The 1st Shadow]

I feel like you missed the entire point that Bionicle is a series written by humans, for humans. The toys have gender. The characters have gender. The people reading and relating to the characters have gender. The entire point of this topic is just talking about making equitable ratios between genders, which people were posting just fine until some posters made mockeries and stinks over nonbinary identities being included, which is flat out rude.

But if you think the story has no relevance, no point, no purpose, no affect or rhyme or reason to exist then why even post on a website, or in a forum, dedicated to it in the first place?

 

No I get that. I also understand how fiction works. I understand how THIS fiction works. I understand that humans wrote a story about robot nanotech designed to keep a larger robot functioning while it went on a mission to save a planet. The story does have relevance.

 

I'm going to bring up my rescue boat point once again. In story, the planet was on the verge of collapse. A group of characters created a "rescue boat" to save the "sinking ship." Tell me, if you were about to die, would you care if the person or group of persons saving your life represented all genders? Would you really care about that?

 

Well, in-story, the Great Beings. apparently didn't. They wanted a way to save their world, so they built one. The point I'm trying to make is that, from a story-based perspective (a story, without which, the characters would just be bits of plastic), representation of all human genders makes absolutely no sense. Sure, they could if they wanted to, but why? In terms of saving the world, what difference does it make?

[Noxryn]

Have you considered the possibility people might be more willing to listen to what you say, if you didn't have a blatant superiority complex?

 

Nobody on this topic has been shouting people down, and has attempted, with a remarkable amount of civility which has, in fact, stunned me. But in each post you've made, you've shoe-horned in passive-aggressive commentary, and selectively hand-picked certain points to discuss. And then, for your last great act, you've went with a post meant solely to call out other members, but under the pleasant guise of not targeting anyone by name; a tactic commonly used for the purposes of dehumanizing the opposition in a debate, I might add. Retired staff or not, this is completely uncalled for.

 

That being said:

 

 

I'm sorry if I'm more than a little tired of hearing people erase and try to debate the mere existence of nonbinary genders (Absolutely constantly on this website). I'm very sorry if my passive aggressive undertones offended you as you, among others, talk about how this is a valid debate and that the true and real existence of such people don't matter in the scheme of this story and how they don't belong. Forgive me, truly.

 

Let me put it this way: This is not a debate. There is no debate to be had over the existence, validity or inclusion of nonbinary gender identities inside the Bionicle universe for such people, real human people who are not you, to relate with and enjoy. It's absolutely rude, demeaning and dehumanizing, inherently, to even act like this is up for debate at all.

 

So, sorry if I don't treat every point as legitimate in a discussion designed to insult and degrade other people.

 

[Regitnui]

 

 

I'm admittedly not in tune with the psychology of gender, buy these are robots. They don't have any physical reason to be male or female. Judging by canon, they're all monogendered asexual. Cisgender fails to have meaning, as does trans. LGB all fail when sexual attraction is taken out of the mix, because platonic friendships form regardless of gender.

 

I'm genuinely interested though. Taking the variables of physical gender, sexual attraction and romance out of the human perception of gender, how many possibilities can there realistically be, or can be realistically differentiated?

None. Gender is a byproduct of your biological brain pattern, with some degree of environmental contributions; however, these do not so much define a gender, as round off the edges for what is considered the "norm" for yours. But in the absence of any physical gender or romantic attraction, the whole concept would cease to exist. Do we consider bacteria to be male or female? Of course not; there is no such concept for them. In higher forms of life, this lack of definition disappears.

 

Me? I'm not so fond of traditional "gender roles" and the like, at least in the modern age. Obviously, men and women have certain biological predispositions, both physical and mental (though, as the presence of transgendered persons demonstrates, those physical predispositions may be flip-flopped in rare cases). However, what a lot of people fail to realize is that "gender roles" apply both ways; where there are female soldiers, one must also expect male house(husband?)s to come into place.

 

You want the truth about the gender binary? It's an almost strawman like concept meant to cast discussions into two opposing viewpoints. Male and female are not opposites standing at the end of fields; they are two overlapping concepts, with which traits are considered attached to whom changing dependent upon the culture in question. People are either male or female. So why, then, do "non-binary" people come up? Because of the false binary concept which is shoved in their face; the idea shown to them that "this defines you."

 

But what of the girl child who begins playing with toy soldiers, wears a t-shirt and jeans, and dreams of marrying a stay-at-home-dad? Or the young boy in the same boat, who enjoys playing with dolls, wearing hot pink, and wants to work at a day care until he can be married to the woman described prior? In both cases, more often than not (particularly for the boy), they will be laughed at and ridiculed for what they do. Their sexuality may be frequently called into question, and commentary may be just as vitriolic from parents as from other kids. So it's very easy for these kids, if told about the concept of a "gender binary", to immediately presume they fall somewhere in between. But this is not the case; they are simply a man and a woman, whose expressions of such traits simply differ from many of their peers.

 

If people were simply willing to be more accepting of this sort of thing, life would be a lot easier. But, then again, we'd also lose out on this enlightening discussion.

 

 

-Toa Levacius Zehvor

Thanks. That's the answer I was looking for. I don't personally like gender roles either, but the point I was trying to make was that there's no reason for the Matoran to be gendered at all, so why fuss about it?

 

Kitania, you have fire and a viewpoint that's worth spreading, but you don't persuade people with the verbal equivalent of a custard pie to the face. I stay out of gender dynamic discussions for a good reason, and when I'm asking a question, it could be because I don't know everything you do, and would like to try and get onto the same page.

 

Back on Topic:

I like that people choose Lewa to be female, and not just because it's reinforcing my view. I enjoy the , flippant woman characters.

[-Windrider-]

Have you considered the possibility people might be more willing to listen to what you say, if you didn't have a blatant superiority complex?

 

Nobody on this topic has been shouting people down, and has attempted, with a remarkable amount of civility which has, in fact, stunned me. But in each post you've made, you've shoe-horned in passive-aggressive commentary, and selectively hand-picked certain points to discuss. And then, for your last great act, you've went with a post meant solely to call out other members, but under the pleasant guise of not targeting anyone by name; a tactic commonly used for the purposes of dehumanizing the opposition in a debate, I might add. Retired staff or not, this is completely uncalled for.

 

Okay. I admit that I have not been following this topic too closely, so my apologies for that. But this caught my eye - I truly do not think any part of Kit's post merited this reaction. And yes, I might be biased, due to my own identity. Still, I need to enforce BZPower's guidelines on respect. Retired Staff or not makes no difference.

 

You can come to me if you have an issue with what gets posted here. If you're not comfortable coming to me, there are others who are willing to listen. It becomes an issue, however, when someone gets attacked for defending certain identities.

[Archon~]

 

 

(I'm not even going to start with T1S -- first off, Great Beings aren't real).

Ah, so you agree that this whole discussion is flawed from the get-go. We're talking about something that only exists in-story (you'll notice that it's hard to give a small pile of plastic a gender, so we'll focus on the storyline implications), which happens to include the Great Beings. That's the point I was trying to make.

 

Correct. The Great Beings do not exist. The Toa do not exist. The Matoran do not exist. So what are we even talking about here? We're talking about a story. It's a story about robots who were created by a fictional alien race to save a planet.

I feel like you missed the entire point that Bionicle is a series written by humans, for humans. The toys have gender. The characters have gender. The people reading and relating to the characters have gender. The entire point of this topic is just talking about making equitable ratios between genders, which people were posting just fine until some posters made mockeries and stinks over nonbinary identities being included, which is flat out rude.

 

But if you think the story has no relevance, no point, no purpose, no affect or rhyme or reason to exist then why even post on a website, or in a forum, dedicated to it in the first place?

I think you're failing to acknowledge the fact that most people in the world identify as either male or female, and I don't think there's much arguing in that, it's fact.

Only a minority of people seem to associate themselves with another gender, and this is mostly present in rich "Western" countries, but that's another discussion altogether. Now seeing that the topic starter wanted to make the Toa gender ratios more applicable to human populations. Now, comparing the minority of people that seem to associate with different genders to the amount of people present in the human population (thats around 7 billion now right?). Now let's say there's around 70 million people that don't define themselves as male or female, that is still 1% of the human population. Now how exactly are we supposed to represent that when each Toa carries around 16.667% of the population? Do you see what I'm trying to show you here? Looking at the numbers of the human population, which is what the topic starter wanted to replicate with Toa, it just doesn't make sense to use any "nonbinary" genders. In addition to that, even if the number I gave you is much higher than 1% (I honestly think I made a large overestimate), I doubt that it would climb up to around 17%, so that we need to represent one of the Toa as nonbinary. That was my explanation as to why it doesn't make sense to add a nonbinary member if we wanted to compare the Toa to human populations.

 

~T1S~ pretty much covered the story-wise reasoning, and I think he expressed it rather clearly. I'd just like to add that there is no evidence whatsoever that the Bionicle universe had such a thing as continous gender. Everything, and all things pointed towards simply 2 genders: male & female.

 

Now onto the marketing/business/$$$ reasoning! Oh boy this is a fun one. Let's start with this: Lego is a company that brings joy to children, but also likes to make money, like every company. I mean, that's why they're created am I not correct? Now, I already went over the fact that most people identify as male/female. I covered in another topic why Lego kept their Toa/characters very (too much imo) male dominant: because boys are/were their target audience. Now whos buying these toys for the kids? The parents of course! Parents raised, mostly, in cultures that don't promote much gender-identity variation, and is seen as something taboo. In short, most parents (that are funding Lego) are probably more or less raised with gender-conservative points of view. So, lets say that a toy is identified as "nonbinary". Little Jimmy comes to mom or dad and asks what's a nonbinary gender. The parents are confused, they don't even know (I mean honestly how many parents do you know that are aware of this continuous gender thing), so they are more inclined to stop buying the product.

 

tl:dr making bold "social justice" moves doesn't make a lot of money.

 

I think that's all I had to get off my chest? Yup, bout sums it up.

Edited January 11, 2015 by Archon~

[Sumiki]

I think you're failing to acknowledge the fact that most people in the world identify as either male or female, and I don't think there's much arguing in that, it's fact.

Only a minority of people seem to associate themselves with another gender, and this is mostly present in rich "Western" countries, but that's another discussion altogether.

Non-binary identities have been found in ancient Egyptians, Native Americans, and Indians. I don't know how your assumption that it's something made up by a Western minority either came to be or is relevant to this conversation, except to belittle those who identify as non-binary themselves.

tl:dr making bold "social justice" moves doesn't make a lot of money.

Well, there's no reason to be breaking out the scare quotes.

 

What you described is a reason for the continued exclusion of non-binary identities. It is not a valid justification. That's the big difference in the conversation here—just because there's reasoning behind something doesn't automatically make it valid. In this case, one of the shortcomings of a profit-increasing move is the exclusion of specific minorities.

 

And it's not just BIONICLE that falls prey to this either; it's present in basically every slice of modern media. That's why transgender and non-binary people feel as if they have to resort to headcanons to see themselves in the media they enjoy, which is hardly an offense.

[Archon~]

 

I think you're failing to acknowledge the fact that most people in the world identify as either male or female, and I don't think there's much arguing in that, it's fact.

Only a minority of people seem to associate themselves with another gender, and this is mostly present in rich "Western" countries, but that's another discussion altogether.

Non-binary identities have been found in ancient Egyptians, Native Americans, and Indians. I don't know how your assumption that it's something made up by a Western minority either came to be or is relevant to this conversation, except to belittle those who identify as non-binary themselves.

tl:dr making bold "social justice" moves doesn't make a lot of money.

Well, there's no reason to be breaking out the scare quotes.

 

What you described is a reason for the continued exclusion of non-binary identities. It is not a valid justification. That's the big difference in the conversation here—just because there's reasoning behind something doesn't automatically make it valid. In this case, one of the shortcomings of a profit-increasing move is the exclusion of specific minorities.

 

And it's not just BIONICLE that falls prey to this either; it's present in basically every slice of modern media. That's why transgender and non-binary people feel as if they have to resort to headcanons to see themselves in the media they enjoy, which is hardly an offense.

It's not a scare-quote mate, it makes sense from an economic perspective. And pardon me if I focus on that too much, but it is very reasonable from a company standpoint that a lot of people completely ignore.

 

And yes I forgot about early human civilizations, I do apologize for that, but it's still a very small percentage of their overall population, I think that fact stays.

 

Also you mentioned that transgender and nonbinary people enjoy the media even though it does not include people of their own gender, right? So here's a thought: if said people can connect to characters that are male and female and still like the media, why does it matter if there are no trans/nonbinary characters in said media if those people seem to be happy with the media? Then again, there's artistic license: I doubt every artist will want to complicate things by including various genders other than the two binary ones, and that's just their own freedom. I mean if someone goes ahead and makes a show with several (aka more than 2 biological ones) genders, do you really think it would draw in a large audience? My guess is probably not.

 

To adress reasoning and justification: there are various justifications for not including other genders depending from what point of view you are observing the story from. Realistically, no mainstream production will play around with gender stuff in order to satisfy a minority of fans/customers, and while it may suck for some people, in the grand scheme of things it doesn't make that much of a difference.

I'd like to add that it's still taboo in media, especially children media, to touch upon any sort of issues that deal with gender and sexuality. I mean LoK pulled it off, but that series was at an end, and was not as mainstream by the time 4th season came around, since it was after all broadcasted online.

[The 1st Shadow]

If I may drop in with one more comment, Kit, I notice that you so strongly advocate that we ignore the other forms of science that have been used to make a point. You say we need to look at the issue from a sociological or psychological perspective. Just those two? Sounds like a very binary view on science, don't you think? It might interest you to know that, like genders, there are hundreds of different kinds of sciences which, while all equally valid, don't always line up with each other on how they approach certain topics.

 

That said, from a sociological perspective, you are right! I will not ignore that. I simply took a different scientific approach (well, two I suppose). Now, there is a science to fiction, as well, even if I I don't recall it's name off the top of my head. So, from a "fictionological" and technical standpoint, I am right. From a statistical standpoint, Archon is right. From a biological perspective, Zehvor is right. We're all correct in the light of the individual sciences we take the perspective of. There is a wide diversity in science, too, not just gender. Everything I said was right from the perspective of my respective science, but social and psychological sciences dictate a different view. It all depends on how you look at it. I don't think that your views are not valid (I'm in my third year of Psych classes now, and I agree with everything that's been said thus far). The problem arises when one member starts acting like theirs is the only right view in the entire topic. Choose your science, but there are dozens of others in existence, some of which are here for a decent discussion. 

 

Can we all agree on that? More than one science, more than one way of being right?

[Noxryn]

Y''know what I like T1S? That you will make up a science to make yourself right. I love how you ignore the fact that not only do sociology and psychology speak against your points, but so does biology and anthropology and findings and discoveries in archaeology. I really adore how you think "being binarist" extends to citing two scientific fields and not every single scientific field -- should I include chemistry, too? What about geology? Surely a geologist's input is just as valuable than a biologist's, or an athropologist's, or a psychologist's. Surely your made up science trumps all of them.

 

But want to know what really gets me here?

 

Is how ridiculously far you three go to basically tell NB people that they are not welcome here. That they are not welcome in this thread. That they are not welcome to headcanon or think of characters as they find relatable. That you're sitting here policing these members, these people, and what you believe should be included under the purview of this topic. You three are acting like intolerant moderators who want nothing more than to make the conversation fit your personal comfort square, pushing others out of it and then citing your made up sciences, then citing fictional characters for their ~valuable~ input, and you're all essentially saying that if you're a statistical minority then you don't get a say in anything, including the fandom and including headcanons and including input in topics like these. Want to know what? That's abhorrent. That behavior is absolutely mind bogglingly disgusting.

 

Don't even pretend anyone posting here was being absolutely serious and decrying TLG for not having NB characters. Don't even bring up that red herring. All three of you know exactly what this topic is and was about -- "How would YOU make the original six Toa gender-equal." Your input, all three of your input, has absolutely no value to this discussion when all you are doing is decrying people for how they would do this, saying the genders they would include are non-existent, invalid, are not worth having, and by extension making this topic and this website an unwelcome space for those people, who barely have any welcome spaces to begin with -- how selfish and self-centered do you three have to be?

 

I'm absolutely tired of this sentiment on BZPower, I'm tired of this sentiment everywhere else that isn't a transgender safe space, or a LGBT safe space in general, or that isn't around half decent human beings who can at least understand that they should treat other people how they ask to be treated. (I mean, do you all misgender people too and start arguments with them over their NB gender like this?)

 

The fact I was called out for having a superiority complex earlier utterly astounds me in the irony bleeding from those words -- have any of you seen what you have written? Have any of you understood the implications, how it actually makes NB members feel if they were to read this? Or do you trump "economical sense" and statistics over them, over actual human beings?

 

There is no debate to be had, that's why I'm not actually debating with any of you and more calling out your intolerable behavior. Hoping, at least, some of you would have realized what you were doing and then ceased it, but this petulant desire to be right when you are objectively wrong is just telling me that all any of you three care about are yourselves and statistics over actual people, our actual members, our actual community members.

 

And I'm tired of it.

 

If someone posts about NB characters... let them? None of you are experts in your various claimed fields, that is beyond painfully obvious, so your input is absolutely worthless on that front. This topic isn't about whether or not NB genders are valid or deserve to exist and be respected, but you three made it about that because none of you can respect people and all three of you feel uncomfortable with their inclusions and hide behind dated science and made up science (fictionology or whatever that was?) in order to shout them down, insult them, degrade them, dehumanize them and I am not going to stand for that. I will speak up against that because it's abhorrent. And all three of you seriously need to rethink how you interact and treat people, on top of understanding what makes for an actual academic debate (because this is not it).

[Jobber]

I'd probably want Kopaka and maybe Pohatu to be female. They'd make some interesting personalities. 

[Sumiki]

Also you mentioned that transgender and nonbinary people enjoy the media even though it does not include people of their own gender, right? So here's a thought: if said people can connect to characters that are male and female and still like the media, why does it matter if there are no trans/nonbinary characters in said media if those people seem to be happy with the media?

You can like something and still think it can be improved. For example, I like tacos. I will eat practically any taco. But I still think said taco can be improved by the inclusion of blue cheese. Even though I like blue cheese, I wouldn't necessarily want blue cheese in everything.

 

The problem is not that everyone has to be represented in everything. It's a matter of certain identities not being represented anywhere.

 

Can we all agree on that? More than one science, more than one way of being right?

So would you ask a cosmologist for gardening tips?

[The 1st Shadow]

Y''know what I like T1S? That you will make up a science to make yourself right. I love how you ignore the fact that not only do sociology and psychology speak against your points, but so does biology and anthropology and findings and discoveries in archaeology. I really adore how you think "being binarist" extends to citing two scientific fields and not every single scientific field -- should I include chemistry, too? What about geology? Surely a geologist's input is just as valuable than a biologist's, or an athropologist's, or a psychologist's. Surely your made up science trumps all of them.

 

Include all other sciences. Go for it. The point I was trying to make is that you are ALL blowing this simple situation way too far out of the water. So far I've seen no one tell NB people on here to "go away", and yet you constantly suggest that that's all they do. They argue a position, and they've all done it in a very civil and respectable manner. 

 

I use this wonderful thing called "satire" to help make a point, and that's what I've been doing. Pointing out that not just you, but the others are taking a discussion that should have ended long ago way too far for its own good. If you want to headcanon the characters as NB, then please do so. There isn't a problem with that. There is a problem with attacking anyone who doesn't do that just because it underrepresents you. I'm sorry if you misunderstood my words, but my point was to end the discussion and bring us back to the original topic by pointing out that BOTH sides of the argument have taken it on for too long. My points were directed at the others, as well. 

 

 

Can we all agree on that? More than one science, more than one way of being right?

So would you ask a cosmologist for gardening tips?

 

Depends. Are they a gardener? There's so many variables to consider, that you can't use a single approach to come at it. That's the point I was trying to make. That, and the aforementioned "getting out of hand" bit. 

[Toa Levacius Zehvor]

Oh my...

 

- SNIP -

 

Nobody is telling non-binary people they are not welcome here. You are the only one who is saying that, and as a result, have been pushing that thought upon others. And I made multiple offers to discuss the scientific side with you, as an aside, because do you know what? You can be proven wrong. But rather than doing so, and assuming the person arguing with you might be open to discussion, you instead took up the belief that obviously, because I disagree with you, I must be a close-minded bigot.

 

That is why I said you have a superiority complex; because you have chosen to assume, as a result of your beliefs, that you are somehow more tolerant than others; that you have endured more than others; that you are more progressive, more open-minded, and more respectful than others. But nothing you have said has demonstrated any of these things. Instead, you have placed yourself upon a pedestal of self-proclaimed enlightenment; one upon which you are granted sole license to cast judgment upon the others members of the same community you claim you are defending.

 

If you wish to talk about which sciences are made-up, don't just say they're made up. Actually show why. Regardless of what you might think, I do consider you to be a person, and I am willing to listen to you. But rather than take of advantage of that, you either choose to ignore my points, or resort to ad hominem.

 

You're right: this thread was, in fact, a thought experiment, not a serious consideration; not once do I believe I've ever said anything to the contrary. What I have done is ask questions, answer them, and tried to understand what other posters were thinking. You are the only one who took offense to this, and felt the need to become defensive.

 

Do I misgender people? Not that I know of. Because usually, their gender is far less important than what they have to say, and never even comes up in conversation. If it becomes relevant, than I'll try to determine if they are male or female; whether or not they are is up their choice, and I will refer to them as the gender their identify with. And regardless of how they classify themselves, I will not discriminate against them as a result. In fact, on the off-chance that they do consider themselves to be some form of third gender, do you know how I will treat them? Exactly the same as anyone else. That same principle means that I will not alter my speech to refer to them by their own custom-made pronouns.

 

To comment on your final point: You're right, I am not an expert on biology, or psych, or, heck, even film. And if you believe you know something I don't - which, considering how much I don't know, there's probably something - then say what that is, instead of simply saying that you know it. One is a dialogue; the other is simply a statement that you, and you alone, are worthy of an opinion.

 

I can't speak for the others, because believe it or not, people not agreeing with you might not agree with each other either. But myself? I have done everything I could to treat you with respect; but somehow, the fact that we are of differing viewpoints automatically means, to your mind, that I am specifically targeting you, as a person, just because of your differing belief.

 

And of course this isn't an actual academic debate, it's an informal discussion. Nobody is trying to offend you. Nobody is targeting you. Nobody is invalidating your opinion.

 

My advice to you: Stop treating people like we're your enemies. Stop treating people like we don't care what you say. Because what you have to say, and the opinions you hold, are infinitely more important than your name, your gender, your physical appearance, or any other other facet which defines who you are. So start giving people the benefit of the doubt. It goes back to what I said before, about making a difference - be that difference. Don't expect other people to just "change" because you consider it the right thing.

 

If you truly are offended, then I apologize. But neither of us should be forced to silence simply for disagreement.

 

-Toa Levacius Zehvor

[Black Six]

I think the discussion here has gotten too heated and too far from the original point to continue as it is.

 

The BZPower Rules & Guidelines state, first and foremost:

Respect your fellow members.

No one should, under any circumstances, be attacking another member for any reason. If someone is breaking the rules or being inconsiderate or making you feel uncomfortable - report them. If you decide to take matters into your own hands and disrespect or attack them back, you are breaking the rule just as much as they are.

 

Toa Levacius Zehvor, ~T1S~, Archon~, Kitania, and Sumiki, I'm looking at you.

 

There are no need for personal attacks here, and I would appreciate if everyone did their best to avoid them in the future.

 

As far as this topic goes, it was a thought experiment with specific constraints using just male and female genders. If you would rather see the Toa represented differently, nothing is stopping you from making your own topic to discuss that different thought experiment. There is no need to correct people who are following the parameters of the experiment or assume they have certain views.

 

In terms of intolerance and the BZPower rules relating to it, disagreeing with who someone is as a person is considered disrespectful and intolerant. You can have whatever views you desire, but if expressing those views has the effect of marginalizing or trivializing someone else, we ask that you not do that on BZPower.

 

For gender, it is the administration's stance that gender is not binary and exists in a wide spectrum. Gender is separate from a person's physical sex. People are free to express whatever gender they feel best represents themselves. If you, for whatever reason, do not think this is the case, you should keep those thoughts off this site.

 

As always, if you have any questions or concerns, you are free to contact me privately to discuss them.

 

Thread closed.