Rumor: Bionicle's return in 2015

[Burnmad]

 

 

What even makes a female bionicle female? MU inhabitants have no reproducing organs. 

 

the pronouns used to refer to them; ownership or absence of specific organs does not define who is what gender.

 

So, their gender is defined by which pronoun is used to refer to them, and which pronoun is used to refer to them is, presumably, determined by which gender they are.

 

 

-

 

 

gender is what the character expresses themself as (in extension human beings, though i am keeping this Bionicle related) -- what pronouns they prefer to use, how they prefer others to see them. (Bionicle characters don't have reproductive organs either way so i seriously fail to see what point you're trying to make, if one at all)

 

What, in the BIONICLE universe, is the difference between being identified as male or female, if they have no reproductive organs?

 

-

[shadow pridak money gang]

because there's more to identity than reproductive organs.

 

-Tyler

[Constructelf]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What even makes a female bionicle female? MU inhabitants have no reproducing organs.

the pronouns used to refer to them; ownership or absence of specific organs does not define who is what gender.

So, their gender is defined by which pronoun is used to refer to them, and which pronoun is used to refer to them is, presumably, determined by which gender they are.

 

 

-

gender is what the character expresses themself as (in extension human beings, though i am keeping this Bionicle related) -- what pronouns they prefer to use, how they prefer others to see them. (Bionicle characters don't have reproductive organs either way so i seriously fail to see what point you're trying to make, if one at all)

What, in the BIONICLE universe, is the difference between being identified as male or female, if they have no reproductive organs?

 

-

From what I've seen, the only difference is psychological programming (do they identify as male or female?).

[Lielac]

 

 

 

What even makes a female bionicle female? MU inhabitants have no reproducing organs. 

 

the pronouns used to refer to them; ownership or absence of specific organs does not define who is what gender.

 

So, their gender is defined by which pronoun is used to refer to them, and which pronoun is used to refer to them is, presumably, determined by which gender they are.

 

 

-

 

 

gender is what the character expresses themself as (in extension human beings, though i am keeping this Bionicle related) -- what pronouns they prefer to use, how they prefer others to see them. (Bionicle characters don't have reproductive organs either way so i seriously fail to see what point you're trying to make, if one at all)

 

What, in the BIONICLE universe, is the difference between being identified as male or female, if they have no reproductive organs?

 

-

 

Pronoun preference, for Matoran. Status in society, for Vortixx. And Skakdi women are apparently more vicious and destructive.

[believe victims]

The argument of whether or not gender exists in Bionicle is useless; the whole Orde ordeal settled that once and for all. There would be nothing strange about a male Toa of Psionics if there was no such thing as male and female to Matoran/Toa/Turaga. Gender, without a doubt, is a thing in their society.

[Burnmad]

because there's more to identity than reproductive organs.

 

-Tyler

 

Don't leave a job half-finished. Do tell me what, please. Skipping anything that shouldn't change with one's gender, obviously.

 

-

[Noxryn]

 

because there's more to identity than reproductive organs.

 

-Tyler

 

Don't leave a job half-finished. Do tell me what, please. Skipping anything that shouldn't change with one's gender, obviously.

 

-

 

 

You're sort of derailing the topic at this point, it's a really easy answer to find by simply doing some research and your argument holds no water here since gender objectively exists in the Bionicle universe. 

 

(And plenty of people have already answered this for you, anyway)

Edited July 18, 2014 by Kitania

[Burnmad]

I know not what to Google. If it's so easily found, humor one unenlightened with a link, a keyword, something.

 

As for the existence of gender, I was never arguing that, in the first place. I'm not really arguing anything, I'm just getting to these questions to see if here, I will finally find a person to answer them.

 

-

[Lielac]

The argument of whether or not gender exists in Bionicle is useless; the whole Orde ordeal settled that once and for all. There would be nothing strange about a male Toa of Psionics if there was no such thing as male and female to Matoran/Toa/Turaga. Gender, without a doubt, is a thing in their society.

Perhaps unfortunately. When I'm not complaining about out-of-universe factors, I like to speculate that the Great Beings were just so concerned with gender that they just couldn't set it aside even when creating beings that weren't even supposed to be fully sentient. And were robots. And whose job didn't require anything involving gender at all. Like, if the elements didn't have attached genders set in stone, I'd be totally for all Matoran of Psionics all being naturally calm and level-headed because their Toa powers meant that anger would be dangerous and could easily screw up a species like the Zyglak were. But when they're one of only a few female elements, and like those other elements they play into stereotypes about feminine behavior... ... aaaaand I'm preaching to the choir here, aren't I.

[believe victims]

I know not what to Google. If it's so easily found, humor one unenlightened with a link, a keyword, something.

 

As for the existence of gender, I was never arguing that, in the first place. I'm not really arguing anything, I'm just getting to these questions to see if here, I will finally find a person to answer them.

 

-

 

This topic isn't the "gender definition topic" though. It's the "possible bonkles 2015" topic. Surely you can take this to a PM or something?

[Noxryn]

I know not what to Google. If it's so easily found, humor one unenlightened with a link, a keyword, something.

 

As for the existence of gender, I was never arguing that, in the first place. I'm not really arguing anything, I'm just getting to these questions to see if here, I will finally find a person to answer them.

 

-

 

I googled "Gender identity and expression" first ten or so results was one from the APA here. 

 

There's some terminology I'm not too fond of there, but after reading the relevant sections I felt it decent enough (And since it's from the American Psychological Association, since if I pulled something from GLAAD or the like I'm sure you would've claimed it an unfit source). 

 

It is also a few years old, so there might be something that uses better terminology that's a bit more recent (though I didn't see anything). 

 

But that's my last post on this particular tangent, as it really isn't related to the topic at hand (and I kind of regret not taking this to PM [sorry Mak/Wind and other forum staff!]).

Edited July 18, 2014 by Kitania

[Lielac]

I know not what to Google. If it's so easily found, humor one unenlightened with a link, a keyword, something.

 

As for the existence of gender, I was never arguing that, in the first place. I'm not really arguing anything, I'm just getting to these questions to see if here, I will finally find a person to answer them.

 

-

I googled "what is gender" and the first result (besides the dictionary definition which is ehhh) seems pretty awesome. It's a site called "Gender Spectrum".

 

But now we're getting really off the rails, so... Story! Story is what kept me in Bionicle, and story is what I'd want from a reboot. S T O R Y. How were the Bohrok Animations animated? That seems like a really cool way to make a TV show. With voiceacting it would be euphoric okay maybe I'm exaggerating but imagine it

Edited July 18, 2014 by Lielac

[Reznas]

 

I know not what to Google. If it's so easily found, humor one unenlightened with a link, a keyword, something.

 

As for the existence of gender, I was never arguing that, in the first place. I'm not really arguing anything, I'm just getting to these questions to see if here, I will finally find a person to answer them.

 

-

 

This topic isn't the "gender definition topic" though. It's the "possible bonkles 2015" topic. Surely you can take this to a PM or something?

 

 

I love how sexism is completely relevant to Bionicle (which it was, because it has to do with how Bionicle can do better in the future), yet gender discussion, which is related to Bionicle, isn't relevant at all.

 

-Rez

[Makaru]

I would actually agree that "how gender should be defined" is just as valid a discussion. I would like it more, however, if it would loop more back into Bionicle itself than just as a standalone discussion.

 

Thank you.

[JrMasterModelBuilder]

Whether he knows it or now, I think Burnmad is hitting on a topic those in media production have been struggling with for a long time:

 

How do you define a character without the foundation of some stereotype, big or small?

 

Gender protrayal in anthropomorphic is closely tied into this. Defining a character's gender in a form which is not anatomically different leaves only their character to define them. This is where stereotypes, and often the subversion of some of them, are an easy choice. I know it was suggested that the pronoun used to refer to them was another way gender could be defined, but this seems a rather flat definition. If a pronoun is all that defines the difference between a gender, the characters would seem to have transcended gendered. I guess that would be one way of removing gender stereotyes...

 

It should be noted that the issue of stereotypes to define characters does extend beyond gender. I cannot think of a single character in any media to which some stereotype does not apply.

Edited July 18, 2014 by JrMasterModelBuilder

[Snelly]

So I hear we talking about bionicle possibly/maybe returning and apparently gender in bonkles. (deju vu)

 

WELL, as a gender fluid I would like to say this, boys and girls should stick together and be friends and bonkles should be the same way. :3

[fishers64]

While I see what you're trying to say, fishers, I think you're missing the forest for the trees here.

Okay, so you're saying that I'm missing the general attitude for the specific instance, right? Let me clarify: the specific instance brought up was the Orde incident that prompted the gender debate. That was what I was responding to, and that was what I was talking about in response to Artahka's Nephew, who brought it up.

 

Second, I believe that the forest is comprised of trees, and that the general must follow from specific instances. I come from a background where you must have examples to back up your points.

 

But now I will address the forest.

 

It's true that if you look directly at what was shown in Bionicle, you don't explicitly get "human women are worse than human men"; you get "the Great Beings judged female Toa to be gentler than male Toa."

Actually, they made female Toa to be gentler than male Toa. The Great Beings were in control of how much gentleness the female Toa had, whether to increase or decrease it.

 

Frankly, I think they designed a female "gentleness" amount, then when they thought Psionics Toa needed more, they swittched to the female average because it was easier to jack it up from there.

 

Varian's appearance in story indicates that their jacking wasn't complete - after all, Varian's a fierce fighter in herown right. Still, she's a lot more gentle than Helryx, meaning that their design changes had a legacy.  

 

But that reading's shallow, for lack of a better term.

I think that's actually pretty deep, and considers things that aren't being discussed in this topic. They didn't think of Toa as people like we do. They thought of them as nanotech that needed adjusted. Difference.

 

Ok. Forest.

 

It ignores other portrayals of females in Bionicle (often gentle healers, "tough-girl" attempts to subvert that, or in one or two cases "temptresses") that inform gender dynamics as a whole, and more importantly it ignores real-world context.

 

All righty. The problem I see with this line of thinking is that the gentle healer and tough girl are both in the same character. Gali is the gentle healer who destroyed Karzanhi. Nokama is the gentle healer who locked Gali in a cave.

 

Now, some of the female characters in Bionicle lived up to established stereotypes. Roodaka and Chiara are examples. But I think there are enough unique female characters (the ones I mentioned above, plus Gorast, Helryx, and Krahka off the top of my head) to claim that the whole series is composed of stereotypes. 

 

It's true there are no humans in Bionicle, but just as LEGO expects boys who enjoyed the line to identify with male Toa/Matoran/whatever, it's safe to say they also expected girls who enjoyed the line to identify with the female characters.

I don't think they wrote this series with girls in mind as an audience at all. Greg mentioned that the ratio was to please the target audience that think girls have cooties.

 

With that in mind, the representations of female characters suddenly do matter that much more, and they begin to echo real-world stereotypes.  The Great Beings might not explicitly be stereotyping real-world girls, but they are stereotyping their reference point in Bionicle.

No, they are simply identifying a higher gentleness quotient in one of their programmed devices. If they said it about female Agori, that would be way different.

 

And remember - the Great Beings aren't some immobile, observed truth (or fact, or whatever).  They were written by Greg and the story team.  Greg and co. had a choice in how they wrote the work, and they chose to write "the GBs thought females were gentler."  And that is a pretty common trope and stereotype in real life, as applied to real girls.

Greg alone wrote that serial. And "the GBs thought females were gentler" is not what the serial said. It said:

 

“After that, someone decided that maybe a gentler touch was needed for Psionics … so all the subsequent Psionics types were made female.”

In fact, it's not even clear that the GBs thought that, just that Orde did, as evidenced by the word maybe.

 

Maybe you can argue the intended reading was "the GBs thought females were gentler, and that was wrong", and Chiara's protests to the contrary about being 'gentle' might support that.  But when taken in context with the rest of how Bionicle depicted females - flat, tropey, and underrepresented - that's kind of difficult to believe.  In my opinion, it reads much more like Chiara's line was a quick attempt to write another "tough-girl" character that could be pointed to and said "see? Our women are strong!" without actually addressing the myriad other stereotypical female tropes that were on display again and again throughout Bionicle as a whole.

The only thing I have to say to this is that 1) tropes are tools, and 2) tropes are not stereotypes. Yes, the girls of Bionicle fall into some tropes. So do the guys. The TVTropes page for Bionicle is long.

 

Right now, I see the "dragon lady/spitfire/temptress" stereotype, on two side characters. And that's inevitable with such a broad range of female characters.  

 

And now I'm going to post this, and figure out what all the ninjas are spouting.

[believe victims]

If a pronoun is all that defines the difference between a gender, the characters would seem to be trans-gendered.

 

 

...........what?

 

A character's gender is just a trait, like skin color on human characters, that defines WHAT they are. Ideally, in human characters, there would also be little difference in the character traits allowed for male and female characters. If you're worried about being unable to tell what gender a character is without pronouns, you've been reading some shallow characters. Personality and gender should be disconnected, especially in a fictional society in which there are no social pressures for a gender to act a certain way.

[Sumiki]

Varian's appearance in story indicates that their jacking wasn't complete - after all, Varian's a fierce fighter in herown right. Still, she's a lot more gentle than Helryx, meaning that their design changes had a legacy.

Wasn't Varian's personality/backstory a fan contest, though? If your argument has to hinge on what is essentially glorified fanfiction, then I think that says a lot about the nature of gender portrayal.

[fishers64]

What even makes a female bionicle female? MU inhabitants have no reproducing organs. 

What the GBs programmed in, as based on Agori/Glatorian genders and mental characteristics thereof.

[Lielac]

Whether he knows it or now, I think Burnmad is hitting on a topic those in media production have been struggling with for a long time. How do you define a character without the foundation of some stereotype, big or small? Gender protrayal in anthropomorphic is closely tied into this. Defining a character's gender in a form which is not anatomically different leaves only their character to define them. This is where stereotypes, and often the subversion of some of them, are an easy choice. I know it was suggested that the pronoun used to refer to them was another way gender could be defined, but this seems a rather flat definition. If a pronoun is all that defines the difference between a gender, the characters would seem to be trans-gendered. I guess that would be one way of removing gender stereotyes...

We-e-e-e-ell, being transgender is the state of having been assigned a gender by a state of your body and then disagreeing with that assignment. So if, say, a Ta-Matoran, this element being one that's "always" male, identified as female, then she'd be a trans woman. If gender isn't assigned by an outer trait, though, and was only a mental designation of "I am female, I answer to she/her", "I am male, I answer to he/him", "I am neither, I answer to they/them", "I don't care, I answer to my name or if I can tell through context that you're talking to about me", "my gender changes depending on my mood, I'll tell you what pronouns I prefer but in general they/them is OK", then there's no transness, because trans is, by definition, "opposite" something. If there's nothing to disagree with, then it's just... gender. Existing for its own sake. Which there's nothing wrong with.

Edited July 18, 2014 by Lielac

[JrMasterModelBuilder]

 

If a pronoun is all that defines the difference between a gender, the characters would seem to be trans-gendered.

 

 

...........what?

 

A character's gender is just a trait, like skin color on human characters, that defines WHAT they are. Ideally, in human characters, there would also be little difference in the character traits allowed for male and female characters. If you're worried about being unable to tell what gender a character is without pronouns, you've been reading some shallow characters. Personality and gender should be disconnected, especially in a fictional society in which there are no social pressures for a gender to act a certain way.

 

I think you're kind-of agreeing with me. There does need to be more to a gender than just a pronoun. It's just a mater of how you manifest it with or without stereotypes.

 

 

Whether he knows it or now, I think Burnmad is hitting on a topic those in media production have been struggling with for a long time. How do you define a character without the foundation of some stereotype, big or small? Gender protrayal in anthropomorphic is closely tied into this. Defining a character's gender in a form which is not anatomically different leaves only their character to define them. This is where stereotypes, and often the subversion of some of them, are an easy choice. I know it was suggested that the pronoun used to refer to them was another way gender could be defined, but this seems a rather flat definition. If a pronoun is all that defines the difference between a gender, the characters would seem to be trans-gendered. I guess that would be one way of removing gender stereotyes...

We-e-e-e-ell, being transgender is the state of having been assigned a gender by a state of your body and then disagreeing with that assignment. So if, say, a Ta-Matoran, this element being one that's "always" male, identified as female, then she'd be a trans woman. If gender isn't assigned by an outer trait, though, and was only a mental designation of "I am female, I answer to she/her", "I am male, I answer to he/him", "I am neither, I answer to they/them", "I don't care, I answer to my name or if I can tell through context that you're talking to about me", "my gender changes depending on my mood, I'll tell you what pronouns I prefer but in general they/them is OK", then there's no transness, because trans is, by definition, "opposite" something. If there's nothing to disagree with, then it's just... gender. Existing for its own sake. Which there's nothing wrong with.

 

True, I appologize for my poor choice of word. "Transended gender" would be more appropriate for what I was trying to say.

Edited July 18, 2014 by JrMasterModelBuilder

[believe victims]

Actually, they made female Toa to be gentler than male Toa. The Great Beings were in control of how much gentleness the female Toa had, whether to increase or decrease it.

 

Frankly, I think they designed a female "gentleness" amount, then when they thought Psionics Toa needed more, they swittched to the female average because it was easier to jack it up from there.

 

 

This is all theory, though. Nowhere in canon, to my knowledge, has someone explicitly stated "The Great Beings programmed female Toa and Matoran to be gentler than males", and regardless, it still implies sexist viewpoints on the part of the GBs.

 

 

 

If a pronoun is all that defines the difference between a gender, the characters would seem to be trans-gendered.

 

 

...........what?

 

A character's gender is just a trait, like skin color on human characters, that defines WHAT they are. Ideally, in human characters, there would also be little difference in the character traits allowed for male and female characters. If you're worried about being unable to tell what gender a character is without pronouns, you've been reading some shallow characters. Personality and gender should be disconnected, especially in a fictional society in which there are no social pressures for a gender to act a certain way.

 

I think you're kind-of agreeing with me. There does need to be more to a gender than just a pronoun. It's just a mater of how you manifest it with or without stereotypes.

 

No, I said the exact opposite. Gender does not need to be defined by personality traits. In the end, in the Bionicle universe, all you should need to determine gender is either for the character to state it or to judge from pronouns. Otherwise, you are implying traits to be intrinsically linked to certain genders, which is wrong.

Edited July 18, 2014 by Octodad

[fishers64]

 

Varian's appearance in story indicates that their jacking wasn't complete - after all, Varian's a fierce fighter in herown right. Still, she's a lot more gentle than Helryx, meaning that their design changes had a legacy.

Wasn't Varian's personality/backstory a fan contest, though? If your argument has to hinge on what is essentially glorified fanfiction, then I think that says a lot about the nature of gender portrayal.

 

Yes, it was a fan contest, but no, my argument doesn't hinge on it. The Great Beings still made and modified the Psionics Toa, as written. The fact that Varian is a gentle and playful character is a coincidence, seeing as that story was written before TYQ. 

 

 

Actually, they made female Toa to be gentler than male Toa. The Great Beings were in control of how much gentleness the female Toa had, whether to increase or decrease it.

 

Frankly, I think they designed a female "gentleness" amount, then when they thought Psionics Toa needed more, they swittched to the female average because it was easier to jack it up from there.

 

 

This is all theory, though. Nowhere in canon, to my knowledge, has someone explicitly stated "The Great Beings programmed female Toa and Matoran to be gentler than males", and regardless, it still implies sexist viewpoints on the part of the GBs.

 

Yes, but they programmed ALL of the Toa and Matoran's mental characteristics as I understand it. I also think (this is a theory) that they did so based on characteristics of female Agori/Glatorian, without any sexism in mind.

 

As for "needing a gentler touch" that's Orde's speculation/theory. When he comes out as a set in 2015, you can smash him for being a sexist pig.

 

Speaking of which, I hope that none of the TYQ characters end up as sets. Given this whole thing, I think that would be an extremely bad idea.

[JrMasterModelBuilder]

 

No, I said the exact opposite. Gender does not need to be defined by personality traits. In the end, in the Bionicle universe, all you should need to determine gender is either for the character to state it or to judge from pronouns. Otherwise, you are implying traits to be intrinsically linked to certain genders, which is wrong.

 

 

You're reading too much into my post. I did not say that gender needs to be defined by personality traits. I said that it commonly defined this way in media. I am also, in no way, trying to imply that traits are intrinsically linked to certain genders, in reality. Again, I was only stating that this is how it has been traditionally done in media for many years. It's up to you to decide if you think this is wrong.

 

However, if you do decide that it is wrong, I encourage you to offer alternatives or recommendations on how to handle this, especially considering the tight time constraints media producers have to define a character in a story. As a media producer, I would be very interested to read them.

Edited July 18, 2014 by JrMasterModelBuilder

[believe victims]

 

 

Actually, they made female Toa to be gentler than male Toa. The Great Beings were in control of how much gentleness the female Toa had, whether to increase or decrease it.

 

Frankly, I think they designed a female "gentleness" amount, then when they thought Psionics Toa needed more, they swittched to the female average because it was easier to jack it up from there.

 

 

This is all theory, though. Nowhere in canon, to my knowledge, has someone explicitly stated "The Great Beings programmed female Toa and Matoran to be gentler than males", and regardless, it still implies sexist viewpoints on the part of the GBs.

 

Yes, but they programmed ALL of the Toa and Matoran's mental characteristics as I understand it. I also think (this is a theory) that they did so based on characteristics of female Agori/Glatorian, without any sexism in mind.

 

 

Then the sexism would be on the writers' parts for implying with Agori that personality traits are linked to gender.

 

However, if you do decide that it is wrong, I encourage you to offer alternatives or recommendations on how to handle this, especially considering the tight time constraints media producers have to define a character in a story. As a media producer, I would be very interested to read them.

 

 

My alternative/recommendation is so simple I've already stated it multiple times without breaking a sweat: just write characters. Tahu could be female. Lewa could be female. Gali could be male. All preserving the same personality traits. And I guarantee no kid is going to double-take at the idea besides the fact they had different genders before, because again, personality traits aren't tied to gender. If you want to write an interesting female character, first ask yourself why you haven't written any already. Chances are it's because you prioritize the "female" over the "interesting".

Edited July 18, 2014 by Octodad

[Lielac]

 

 

No, I said the exact opposite. Gender does not need to be defined by personality traits. In the end, in the Bionicle universe, all you should need to determine gender is either for the character to state it or to judge from pronouns. Otherwise, you are implying traits to be intrinsically linked to certain genders, which is wrong.

 

 

You're reading too much into my post. I did not say that gender needs to be defined by personality traits. I said that it commonly defined this way in media. I am also, in no way, trying to imply that traits are intrinsically linked to certain genders, in reality. Again, I was only stating that this is how it has been traditionally done in media for many years. It's up to you to decide if you think this is wrong.

 

However, if you do decide that it is wrong, I encourage you to offer alternatives or recommendations on how to handle this, especially considering the tight time constraints media producers have to define a character in a story. As a media producer, I would be very interested to read them.

 

Writing a character and then deciding what gender they identify as seems like a good plan to me. There are lots of tropes and shorthands that can be used that aren't linked to gender! And it looks a lot less stereotypical if there's more than one girl in a group and they have different personalities. And everybody gets approximately equal screen time and plot importance.

[JrMasterModelBuilder]

However, if you do decide that it is wrong, I encourage you to offer alternatives or recommendations on how to handle this, especially considering the tight time constraints media producers have to define a character in a story. As a media producer, I would be very interested to read them.

 

 

 

My alternative/recommendation is so simple I've already stated it multiple times without breaking a sweat: just write characters. Tahu could be female. Lewa could be female. Gali could be male. All preserving the same personality traits. And I guarantee no kid is going to double-take at the idea besides the fact they had different genders before, because again, personality traits aren't tied to gender. If you want to write an interesting female character, first ask yourself why you haven't written any already. Chances are it's because you prioritize the "female" over the "interesting".

 

 

Which brings us back to the previous question: In the context of this fantasy world, what is a "male" and what is a "female"? How does a character decide to identify with the masculin pronoun or the feminine pronoun? Or is there no difference between genders and they are effectivly irrelevant? At which point, why bother having them?

 

Writing a character and then deciding what gender they identify as seems like a good plan to me. There are lots of tropes and shorthands that can be used that aren't linked to gender! And it looks a lot less stereotypical if there's more than one girl in a group and they have different personalities. And everybody gets approximately equal screen time and plot importance.

 

The same question above applies here as well, but I am interested in this. What do you consider to be acceptable "tropes and shorthands" and on what criteria do you differentiate?

Edited July 18, 2014 by JrMasterModelBuilder

[believe victims]

Which brings us back to the previous question: In the context of this fantasy world, what is a "male" and what is a "female"? How does a character decide to identify with the masculin pronoun or the feminine pronoun? Or is there no difference between genders and they are effectivly irrelevant? At which point, why bother having them?

 

 

If you're implying gender in our world is decided purely by what's in your pants, you're mistaken. People have been figuring out gender without genitalia for centuries now, at minimum.

 

You bother having genders for relatability to a human audience. Why do the Transformers have genders? Why is GLaDOS female or Wheatley male? Why is WALL-E male and EVE female? Gendering otherwise ungendered characters has less to do with an internal logic and more to do with appealling to a human audience. That's why you bother having them, and also why it matters if one is drastically underrepresented.

[Lielac]

Writing a character and then deciding what gender they identify as seems like a good plan to me. There are lots of tropes and shorthands that can be used that aren't linked to gender! And it looks a lot less stereotypical if there's more than one girl in a group and they have different personalities. And everybody gets approximately equal screen time and plot importance.

The same question above applies here as well, but I am interested in this. What do you consider to be acceptable "tropes and shorthands" shorthands and on what criteria do you differentiate?

 

Well, let's see. The "femme fatale" trope, for instance, is very much gender-linked. Being a flirt, on the other hand, is not, although male and female flirts are seen differently in western (English, specifically North American and European) society/culture because of stereotypes about things like acceptable expressions of sexuality. (Which is as far as I'll go on the topic unless a mod says otherwise.) If you have two flirts and one's a guy and one's a girl, and they act identically, then they'd ideally be treated identically by the narrative. The girl, say, wouldn't be treated worse, not if her flirting is objectively identical to the guy's. Or if they're both hot-headed, then they'd be reacted to the same, allowing for other factors like personal grudges or disagreement on the severity of an issue.

[GSR]

(Disclaimer up front: even as I write this I realize this conversation is getting further and further away from "what do we want to see in Bionicle if it returns."  If you'd like to discuss this more after this post, we should probably take it to PM.)
 

Okay, so you're saying that I'm missing the general attitude for the specific instance, right? Let me clarify: the specific instance brought up was the Orde incident that prompted the gender debate. That was what I was responding to, and that was what I was talking about in response to Artahka's Nephew, who brought it up.

Second, I believe that the forest is comprised of trees, and that the general must follow from specific instances. I come from a background where you must have examples to back up your points.

But now I will address the forest.

 

So, to clarify, what I meant by "missing the forest for the trees" is that the issue here is not the precise in-universe sort of typing the Great Beings did and why. What I mean to say is that we need to take this particular case in context, and consider from a real-world perspective why it was written that way, and what effects it might have.

Also, re: the bolded sentence - I'm not really sure what you're getting at here? If you're suggesting I didn't provide enough solid examples - that might be fair, I was writing mostly from memory there, and as I've already admitted above (and will do again below) I may be misremembering the serial and overgeneralizing. But if you think so, please say so directly - maybe I'm just reading this wrong, but at the moment it sort of comes off that you're putting yourself up on a pedestal here.
 

Actually, they made female Toa to be gentler than male Toa. The Great Beings were in control of how much gentleness the female Toa had, whether to increase or decrease it.

Frankly, I think they designed a female "gentleness" amount, then when they thought Psionics Toa needed more, they swittched to the female average because it was easier to jack it up from there.

Varian's appearance in story indicates that their jacking wasn't complete - after all, Varian's a fierce fighter in herown right. Still, she's a lot more gentle than Helryx, meaning that their design changes had a legacy.

 

 
This is part of what I meant above by the forest/tree thing.  Alright, the Great Beings explicitly made female Toa to be 'gentler' than male ones, it wasn't just them working off past experience.  But where does that idea come from in the first place? The existing real-world trope of the gentle female.  Honestly, the in-universe reasons for them doing it aren't very relevant to the discussion.
 
The case of Varian was brought up above by Sumiki; as for Helryx, I'll admit I overgeneralized in my original post.  I didn't mean to imply Bionicle had absolutely no female characters outside of the roles below.  Helryx stepped outside those molds.  But, to tie this into the original topic, remember that Helryx was a serial- and book-exclusive character.  She was in none of the major media (movies, comics - you can make a case that books were more important than comics, maybe, but I'd argue back that comics being included with Lego magazine meant they were more outward-facing than the books) for the franchise, and certainly never had a set, which was the primary focus.  In terms of gender representation, if Bionicle returned I'd love to see characters like Helryx present within the main storyline and sets, not just shunted off to side media.
 

I think that's actually pretty deep, and considers things that aren't being discussed in this topic. They didn't think of Toa as people like we do. They thought of them as nanotech that needed adjusted. Difference.

 

 

From an in-universe perspective? Sure, that's an important difference. From an out-of-universe one? I strongly disagree.  The female Toa/etc. were the female characters of the franchise, and as I mentioned below, they were what girls (and some boys as well) would likely identify with.  The GBs can call them nanotech - to the reader, they're characters, and ideally ones fleshed-out enough we see them as relatable people.  So how they're presented and defined reflects back on real-world gender ideas of male and female.
 

 

All righty. The problem I see with this line of thinking is that the gentle healer and tough girl are both in the same character. Gali is the gentle healer who destroyed Karzanhi. Nokama is the gentle healer who locked Gali in a cave.

Now, some of the female characters in Bionicle lived up to established stereotypes. Roodaka and Chiara are examples. But I think there are enough unique female characters (the ones I mentioned above, plus Gorast, Helryx, and Krahka off the top of my head) to claim that the whole series is composed of stereotypes.

 

 

As I said above, I was maybe too hasty in writing those categories.  That said, even if Gali and Nokama had moments of fierceness, they were still often portrayed as the primary peacekeepers and healers, as most Ga-characters were to some extent.  Repeats of common female tropes, which - perhaps not always bad, like you said below. But certainly tiring, and when presented as the primary defining factor, questionable.

 

I don't think they wrote this series with girls in mind as an audience at all. Greg mentioned that the ratio was to please the target audience that think girls have cooties.

 

 

 I'll be honest, I'm not sure how that weakens my point - if anything, it strengthens it.  If the focus is entirely boys who "think girls have cooties", then I'd argue having these gender depictions line up with real-world ones is even worse.  Wouldn't we want to challenge that?

 

No, they are simply identifying a higher gentleness quotient in one of their programmed devices. If they said it about female Agori, that would be way different.

 

 

 Again, I disagree.  In-universe, the GBs turned up the gentleness stat on their female robots, sure.  Out-of-universe, Greg sat down and wrote "all the characters of this element were made this gender because that's gentler."  This could be an uncharitable way of looking at it, as I've acknowledged above.  But the GBs having the idea of "women = gentler" didn't come from the ether - it came from existing, real-world ideas, and reinforces them.

 

Greg alone wrote that serial. And "the GBs thought females were gentler" is not what the serial said. It said:
 

“After that, someone decided that maybe a gentler touch was needed for Psionics … so all the subsequent Psionics types were made female.”

In fact, it's not even clear that the GBs thought that, just that Orde did, as evidenced by the word maybe.

 

 

In this case, there's really nothing to argue but semantics, so let's go for that: personally, when I read "maybe a gentler touch was needed", I don't read that as "maybe the females will be gentler", or "maybe that's why they were made female", I read it as a slight humorous downplay of the situation.  Like someone saying "maybe this isn't such a good idea" - 90% of the time, that means it's not a good idea and the speaker well knows it.

 

The only thing I have to say to this is that 1) tropes are tools, and 2) tropes are not stereotypes. Yes, the girls of Bionicle fall into some tropes. So do the guys. The TVTropes page for Bionicle is long.
 
Right now, I see the "dragon lady/spitfire/temptress" stereotype, on two side characters. And that's inevitable with such a broad range of female characters.  
 
And now I'm going to post this, and figure out what all the ninjas are spouting.

 

 

The girls fall into tropes, yes.  That's not always a bad thing, no.  But when it happens so often, and there's so few female characters to begin with, people start to get frustrated.
 
The whole point I've been trying to make with these posts is that it doesn't matter so much why exactly the GBs in-universe made the logic, "we need gentler Psionics Toa, women are gentler, let's make them all women."  They can be considered nanobots to fix, or whatever.  Nor does it matter if what they do fits the exact dictionary definition of "stereotyping".  

 

At the end of the day, these female characters - who as readers we expect to relate with, and with whom we have a common point of gender to build off of - are labeled with "female = gentle."  The gender mores imposed upon characters in a work don't just vanish because they were actually robots and not human.  Fiction reflects reality, and reality reads itself off fiction.  And that is why we groan when we read:
 

“After that, someone decided that maybe a gentler touch was needed for Psionics … so all the subsequent Psionics types were made female.”

 

And with all that said, if you'd like to continue debating the Orde stuff, we should really take it to PM now, since we're veering quite far from the main point of the topic, which is to discuss what we would want if Bionicle returned.

 

And on that topic, I'll reiterate what was buried in the wall of text above: I'd love to see characters like Helryx, who fall outside the basic "hero/villain of the year" role, to get sets and appear in the main media of the franchise.  It breaks up some of the monotony of the overall story beats, and allows Lego to represent more character types (and genders.)

Edited July 18, 2014 by GSR

[JrMasterModelBuilder]

 

Which brings us back to the previous question: In the context of this fantasy world, what is a "male" and what is a "female"? How does a character decide to identify with the masculin pronoun or the feminine pronoun? Or is there no difference between genders and they are effectivly irrelevant? At which point, why bother having them?

 

 

If you're implying gender in our world is decided purely by what's in your pants, you're mistaken. People have been figuring out gender without genitalia for centuries now, at minimum.

 

You bother having genders for relatability to a human audience. Why do the Transformers have genders? Why is GLaDOS female or Wheatley male? Why is WALL-E male and EVE female? Gendering otherwise ungendered characters has less to do with an internal logic and more to do with appealling to a human audience. That's why you bother having them, and also why it matters if one is drastically underrepresented.

 

I'm not implying the above at all, and fully believe that implying such is wrong.

 

I am also fully aware of the benefits to having genders in anthropomorphic character to fascilitate human relatability. But I think you would agree that your examples also suffer from gender stereotypes, yes? WALL-E was a stereotypical love-struct male who Eve had to depend on to rescue her. Wheatley was a dense male easily consumed by power. Transformers is no better than BIONICLE.

 

ANYWAY:

 

This is probably my last post on this issue, at least for the foreseeable future. I'll come back and read the responses at a later date. My departing advice: "Be constructive." Stating something is wrong without offering an alternative is only addressing a small fraction of the problem.

 

UPDATE:

 

Appologies to GSR. I posted this before seeing your reply.

Edited July 18, 2014 by JrMasterModelBuilder

[GSR]

No worries, JMMB; my comment about taking it to PM was more to fishers and myself, since our convo is focusing on a single incident from Bionicle as it was, and while I think the gender questions raised are a good discussion to have, it's also wandering further and further from "how would you like Bionicle to return/what should be considered" with all the focus on the Orde stuff.  

 

Like Mak said, there's nothing wrong with having the gender discussion as long as we keep it civil, connected to Bionicle, and ideally connected to how we might want Bionicle to return (since that's the point of this topic).

[Click]

Just please be careful with this gender discussion. Last time, it got a little hot (not going to link in case there is some rule against it). Probably should at least take it to PM or another topic.

[BioGio]

Title of topic is "Rumor: Bionicle's Return in 2015."

 

Twenty pages of discussion (= 794 posts), including people arguing about which dictionary defines "sex" and "fact" best, and a skin-deep level of textual criticism I haven't seen since freshman English class.

 

Never change, BZP.  (just kidding, guys, ily, that's why I come back I think)

 

Also to stay kind of on-topic:  Makaru said a while back that Mata-Nui-being-the-universe could be dispensed with in a Bionicle reboot.  While I agree that the "shocking twist" nature of this revelation couldn't work twice, the use of Mata Nui's "illness" as a metaphor should definitely be kept.  The nature of this metaphor changed pretty dramatically throughout Bionicle's run (from Faber's early, rather symbolic/shrouded equivalencies like Toa canisters = pills, to Nokama revealing that Mata Nui is dying, to Mata Nui being a giant robot), but I feel like it ought to be somehow preserved.

 

- BioGio

 

EDIT:  Jeez, there's like a standoff going on in this thread what with all those people just watching the thread and not posting.

 

EDIT:  Seriously, is everyone just staring at their screen hitting refresh compulsively and like hoping for someone to post first.  Like, "Maybe a mod'll come in and have a real killer response."  I'm imagining there's also a deeply introspective soul-searching-type process going on for some people, as in like "Should I post?  And could posting serve as a way of imparting meaning on this discussion/my life, or is the concept of contributing to a conversation just a Stirner-esque spook?  And even if I post what if my post contains private language and no one understands me because maybe my internal experience vis-à-vis Bionicle is nonsense as it cannot be verified by the other posters?"  and then they probably go into some real hardcore solipsistic existence-questioning.

Okay but I've been meta enough in this post, I'm done I swear.

(I literally have nothing better to do than to mangle various philosophical concepts on a message board for building toys.)

Edited July 18, 2014 by BioGio

[Gatanui]

EDIT:  Seriously, is everyone just staring at their screen hitting refresh compulsively and like hoping for someone to post first.  Like, "Maybe a mod'll come in and have a real killer response."  I'm imagining there's also a deeply introspective soul-searching-type process going on for some people, as in like "Should I post?  And could posting serve as a way of imparting meaning on this discussion/my life, or is the concept of contributing to a conversation just a Stirner-esque spook?  And even if I post what if my post contains private language and no one understands me because maybe my internal experience vis-à-vis Bionicle is nonsense as it cannot be verified by the other posters?"  and then they probably go into some real hardcore solipsistic existence-questioning.

Okay but I've been meta enough in this post, I'm done I swear.

(I literally have nothing better to do than to mangle various philosophical concepts on a message board for building toys.)

No, I guess most people are just busy reading all those pages of discussion.

 

I long for the day when gender stops being a controversial topic. It's time society got beyond that stage.

 

-Gata

Edited July 18, 2014 by Gatanui

[Lielac]

I think the users-viewing list doesn't refresh instantly, so some of the people who were on it weren't actually reading the thread. Me, I decided to go write fanfic instead of compulsive F5ing, because whether Bionicle returns or not I will always have fun writing yet another AU that starts in the '01 era.

 

... and I hope any Bionicle reboot recaptures the science fantasy mystical aura stuff of '01-'03, because, yeah, I'll be honest, I think that era was the most awesome. Straightforward but not boring, neat concept... no guns... (no I will never like zamor spheres or cordak blasters or anything like 'em, and I'm not sorry.)

Edited July 18, 2014 by Lielac

[Alyska]

My understanding of how gender works for MU inhabitants:

 

The Matoran species was modelled on the Agori. I'm guessing this applies on a cognitive basis as well- that is, the structure of the brains of Matoran were modelled on the structure of an Agori's brain. If Agori are similar to humans, there are going to be some physiological differences in the layout of male and female brains. Perhaps the GBs tried to imitate these differences when designing the Matoran. Because the Matoran language is to some extent based on Spherus Magna languages, the concept of gender is included in it, and Matoran refer to each other as he or she. The Great Beings also added some cosmetic gender attributes, such as giving them male and female-sounding voices.  (The idea of a Matoran who feels that their apparent, "programmed" gender does not match who they really are is certainly a possibility, just not one that's likely to ever be addressed, sadly.) 

 

Now, we don't really know that much about Agori society. What we have seen is that they seem to have some concept of women being weaker or not as fierce in battle, (as seen by Kiina's efforts to prove herself to them). There are no female Agori characters that have important roles in the story- perhaps the women are not given "important" roles in their society. The only female Agori we have "seen" are an imaginary healer and a dead love interest. Now, if the Great Beings were to observe the kinds of roles Agori women tend to fill, they may put it down to inherent physiological differences, and expect that Matoran with "female" brains would display similar attributes. The existence of certain characters (Chiara, Tuyet, Helryx, etc) suggests that the brain structure by itself did not have as much of an influence as the GBs assumed it would.

[Lielac]

@Alyska: Hmm. This is an intriguing piece of theory! I mean, I'm pretty sure I read that there's more variation in the brains of humans in the same or similar gender(s) than there is between genders, but yeah. The GBs are unconsciously sexist, Agori society has a lot of humanity's failings, and things make sense again. For a certain definition of sense that includes sexism existing at all, but whatevs.

 

Now, for a kid's toyline, I don't think we need to get into anything heavy like that (the poor souls can learn the hard truth about the world a liiiittle bit later, if they don't already know; we're here for magic robots kicking bad guy butt and talkin' 'bout teamwork), and the best way to avoid heavy society things is to make 'em a non-issue in a fictional society. My suggestion? Multiple ladies to a team-up and not treating them differently from the guys! Especially the multiple ladies to a team-up thing. I will get on my hands and knees and beg if I need to. Boys can learn early on that girls don't have cooties, and I think the best way to do that is to normalize girls existing in stories, and then casually revealing the oh-so-shocking (not) truth that girls don't actually think all that differently from boys after all.

[Maphrox: Toa of Polygons]

you guys

 

I figured it out

 

the gender difference that is

 

it's the pitch. Of their voices.