Jump to content
Tahu3800

To Everyone Who Says Bionicle Is Seixst...

Recommended Posts

The Bionicle storyline is not sexist in my opinion and I'll tell you why.

Before I continue, let's take note of some definitions:

--------------

Maleof or denoting the sex that produces small, typically motile gametes, especially spermatozoa, with which a female may be fertilized or inseminated to produce offspring.

 

Femaleof or denoting the sex that can bear offspring or produce eggs, distinguished biologically by the production of gametes (ova) that can be fertilized by male gametes.

---------------

Notice the issue?

 

In the Bionicle universe, the ability to create new Bionicle is limited to very few characters:

- Mata-Nui who possesses (and is) the Mask of Life     [Male]

- Makuta when he creates Kraata, giving them part of his life "energy"     [Male]

- The Bahrag (Bohrok "Queens") who create the Krana     [Females]

 

Take note that none of these involves sexual reproduction, and those who reproduce are referred to as both male and female. In these instances, creating life is simply imbuing bio-mechanical creations with "will" or the ability to perform functions independently. No Bionicle is known to have any reproductive organs (the instance of creating life seems to be a "energy" transfer). As they do not have reproductive organs, referring to them as different sexes is an absurd proposition. 

 

There are only a few differences between the "male" & "female" characters:

- Color (Blue)

- Voice

- Culture (Water cultures such as Ga-Koro)

 

As the male "factions" (Fire, Earth, Stone, Ice, Air) all have color and cultural differences, this leads to the conclusion that what defines a "female Bionicle" is the voice being "feminine". It could be assumed that living in water and having specialization with holding breath has an effect on the "voice box" (or whatever creates a Bionicle's voice). Of course this could be disputed as the early Bionicle only communicated via machines noises. Meaning that this distinction has literally no meaning.

 

So why does it exist? Primarily due to Lego's marketing campaign identifying young males as their target audience (an idea which was correct as this is the overwhelming group that bought Bionicle sets).

 

So if you are going to claim Bionicle is "sexist" because of it's tailoring to a target audience, then you must apply this title to anything that does this (namely every business). In fact, going beyond tailoring to target audiences on the sex/gender, companies do this based on age, ethnicity, income level and nearly every other noticeable difference. This is by definition discrimination (in the original sense)

 

Discriminationrecognition and understanding of the difference between one thing and another.

 

Of course in the modern era, this word has taken on a new meaning:

 

Discrimination (Common Cultural Usage)the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex.

 

This is not Lego's intent. Lego is not trying alienate certain people, they are trying to maximize sales. Lego is a business, and as such is forced to compete with others for customers. This means doing what is both ethical and available to be done to capture target audiences for purchases. While I can sympathize with people wanting characters that better represent them, I think it is extreme to accuse a company that has brought you such a great series of such an action. 

 

It is also worth pointing out that referring to the Bionicle characters as "it" instead of pronouns kids are familiar with, makes their speech awkward. It may have been the case the Lego noticed this and decided to use common pronouns. They however would've quickly noticed that there were no females characters, so they made the Ga-Bionicle females specifically so that there are females present in the plot.

 

Lego has taken note of their popularity of their products with female customers, and have changed their marketing practices to suit (they're not just making sets for males and females, but starting to make sets to appeal to both). The Bionicle series already has as part of its lore that the Ga-Matorans (Toa, Turaga, etc.) are female. Changing that now could cause some serious inconsistency in the established plot. Whether Lego does that, I cannot predict. It is important though to know that whether or not they keep this distinction, they use the terms incorrectly, as no physical male/female divide exist in the Bionicle lore.

 

So is Bionicle sexist? In my opinion, No.

 

Thank You For Reading

 

P.S. Yes, I noticed I accidentally wrote "Seixst" instead of "Sexist"

Edited by Tahu3800
  • Upvote 12

What's Up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah son, There's never a legitimate reason to exclude female characters from a story. :t

 

(and we all know it's not intentionally sexist, it just ended up kinda so because of some small misplacements of judgement, is all.)

  • Upvote 11

bnnrimg1.pngbnnrimg2.pngbnnrimg3.pngbnnrimg4.pngbnnrimg5.pngbnnrimg6.pngbnnrimg7.pngbnnrimg8.png


Corpus Rahkshi characters: Snap, Teeth ,Rose,Kaita

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the marketing thing. You gotta give what the kids want, and I can't name many kids who'd wanna play with a female character. I'm not saying it's because female characters are bad or anything (personally, I loved the many Toa of Water we've seen on the shelves of the toy aisle), but the majority of the target audience, young boys, wants to see and play with male characters.

 

I don't think Bionicle's sexist either. They're just trying to make toys for young boys, so they have to appeal to that target audience. Of course, an older, smarter audience has become attracted to the toy line and they just had some ideas and opinions of their own.

  • Upvote 6

mindeth the cobwebs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You... DO REALIZE that bonkles is a work of fiction, constructed by actual people in the real world we live in where sexism definitely does exist, right

 

Whether all the characters are technically sexless/genderless in-universe or not (why do people only claim this when they're trying to deflect accusations of sexism in the series??) doesn't really matter much to this kind of discussion, because they are still treated as if they do have genders by all official material, and CURIOUSLY ENOUGH most of them happen to be designated as male

 

Another thing that REALLY DOESN'T MATTER here is Lego's intent. Like of course they're trying to sell products and not actively hurt people, they're a business,  no one is disputing that - but that doesn't mean what they do won't have consequences. Stuff like this isn't usually INTENTIONALLY MALICIOUS but that doesn't mean it should be ignored, especially when it's as painfully obvious and prevalent as sexism in bonkles

  • Upvote 16

RksnKgM.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm failing to see why this is an issue. The female characters are not shown in any derogatory manner what-so-ever. In fact, being that they are consistently shown as capable warriors, persevering and wise, I might even say that on a per-capita basis they are shown as somewhat superior to the "male" characters. They are always shown as equal in all ways to their "male" counter-parts (except in terms of population). It in no way promotes unjust treatment towards females. 

Edited by Tahu3800
  • Upvote 6

What's Up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As we all know, always depicting females a certain way is totally not sexist at all.

 

Not to mention that the ratio started as one in six and then got to about one in twenty. I don't care how "strong" the female characters are, there's no excuse for relegating the representation of about half the human race to mere token status, even if you think that it's a good marketing decision.

  • Upvote 13

avatar by Lady Kopaka


tumblr_ng1pw4xLEM1tryxewo1_1280.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As we all know, always depicting females a certain way is totally not sexist at all.

 

Not to mention that the ratio started as one in six and then got to about one in twenty. I don't care how "strong" the female characters are, there's no excuse for relegating the representation of about half the human race to mere token status, even if you think that it's a good marketing decision.

They are portrayed exactly like the "male" characters. They're physically the same as the "male" characters. Why people care about a distinction without a difference is something I still don't understand.

 

The plot literally says they are bio-mechanical creations of a technologically advanced race. For all we know the sex titles may have been ignorantly adopted by the Bionicle simply because they were seeking pronouns to ease communication. 

Edited by Tahu3800
  • Upvote 3

What's Up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't find your argument that the characters do not have a sex convincing, as I reject your premise defining the terms male and female. There're more cultural ideas about the two sexes than reproductive ability.

That said, you have a point about marketing. I'd make a comparison to 'My Little Pony', as that's a toyline that has a skewed gender ratio to the opposite extreme. Yet no one declares it to be sexist, and indeed the latest iteration of the show was created by a feminist. This double standard is something those claiming Bionicle to be 'sexist' should consider.

Edited by Airoski
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

As we all know, always depicting females a certain way is totally not sexist at all.

 

Not to mention that the ratio started as one in six and then got to about one in twenty. I don't care how "strong" the female characters are, there's no excuse for relegating the representation of about half the human race to mere token status, even if you think that it's a good marketing decision.

They are portrayed exactly like the "male" characters. They're physically the same as the "male" characters. Why people care about a distinction without a difference is something I still don't understand.

 

i'm pretty sure you just missed the entire point of what he said. allow me to repeat it.

 

I don't care how "strong" the female characters are, there's no excuse for relegating the representation of about half the human race to mere token status, even if you think that it's a good marketing decision.

"physically the same" doesn't matter at all. he even set aside the depictions of female characters in-story, although those were also sub-par. the fact of the matter is, there are less than one-fifth as many female characters as male ones. that's what he meant by "token status".

Edited by Arc
  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

As we all know, always depicting females a certain way is totally not sexist at all.

 

Not to mention that the ratio started as one in six and then got to about one in twenty. I don't care how "strong" the female characters are, there's no excuse for relegating the representation of about half the human race to mere token status, even if you think that it's a good marketing decision.

They are portrayed exactly like the "male" characters. They're physically the same as the "male" characters. Why people care about a distinction without a difference is something I still don't understand.

 

i'm pretty sure you just missed the entire point of what he said. allow me to repeat it.

 

I don't care how "strong" the female characters are, there's no excuse for relegating the representation of about half the human race to mere token status, even if you think that it's a good marketing decision.

"physically the same" doesn't matter at all. he even set aside the depictions of female characters in-story, although those were also sub-par. the fact of the matter is, there are less than one-fifth as many female characters as male ones. that's what he meant by "token status".

 

 

The point is that they are machines without differing sexes which have adopted the titles for a currently unknown reason. The fact is that the "male" and "female" Bionicle are exactly the same. They have no discernible difference between the two.

Edited by Tahu3800
  • Upvote 2

What's Up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't wanna get in a big argument here, but there's something relevant to this I've never seen anyone bring up: Lego Friends has no EDIT: few male characters. Doesn't that make it sexist, by the reasoning that genders should be represented equally? If it does, then since Lego has been sexist in both directions, does that cancel it out or make it worse? If it doesn't, why?

 

(For the record, I agree with Tahu3800 at least as far as the realities of marketing are concerned. I simply seek understanding. :) )

Edited by John Smith
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The point is that they are machines without differing sexes which have adopted the titles for a currently unknown reason. The fact is that the "male" and "female" Bionicle are exactly the same. They have no discernible difference between the two.

yes, but if we're going to distinguish between "identical" beings by using humanlike genders, why not make the amounts of each gender equal to humans as well? if it "doesn't matter" because the genders are "the same", why do you care so much about not changing the skewed percentages?

 

I don't wanna get in a big argument here, but there's something relevant to this I've never seen anyone bring up: Lego Friends has no male characters. Doesn't that make it sexist, by the reasoning that genders should be represented equally? If it does, then since Lego has been sexist in both directions, does that cancel it out or make it worse? If it doesn't, why?

it is literally not possible to be sexist against men. women are a marginalized and oppressed group, and proper representation is important and rare. while Friends is nowhere near perfect (read: stereotypes), it's an important step for Lego towards equal representation, at least as long as we're talking quantity rather than quality.

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, in case that's still unclear: there's more to gender than biology. If a character (or, more importantly, a person) identifies as female, then it really is not for you to say they're not. Gender is completely dependent on how a person percieves themselves. This should not be a surprise. So saying that X cannot be female because they don't exhibit certain physiological properties really comes off as kind of awful, especially since there are actual people who get this treatment on a daily basis. So, in short, yes, Bionicle's female characters are in fact female, and yes, they are marginalized. And, as Sumiki pointed out, the representation of the established female characters really isn't anything to brag about. There are literally just like, three different character types that sum up all female characters in Bionicle.

  • Upvote 6

26203.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The point is that they are machines without differing sexes which have adopted the titles for a currently unknown reason. The fact is that the "male" and "female" Bionicle are exactly the same. They have no discernible difference between the two.

yes, but if we're going to distinguish between "identical" beings by using humanlike genders, why not make the amounts of each gender equal to humans as well? if it "doesn't matter" because the genders are "the same", why do you care so much about not changing the skewed percentages?

If it could be recreated I would suggest are roughly equal split, but it is established lore already. Changing it now only creates inconsistencies.  

 

Also, in case that's still unclear: there's more to gender than biology. If a character (or, more importantly, a person) identifies as female, then it really is not for you to say they're not. Gender is completely dependent on how a person percieves themselves. This should not be a surprise. So saying that X cannot be female because they don't exhibit certain physiological properties really comes off as kind of awful, especially since there are actual people who get this treatment on a daily basis. So, in short, yes, Bionicle's female characters are in fact female, and yes, they are marginalized. And, as Sumiki pointed out, the representation of the established female characters really isn't anything to brag about. There are literally just like, three different character types that sum up all female characters in Bionicle.

 

As far as I'm concerned the reality (that they are non-sexual machines) is all that is relevant. What they wish to call themselves ultimately means nothing other than a referent in language. I say this because they have no sexes because they are machines that do not sexually reproduce, and there are no noticeable gender stereotypes that applies, as they act in the same manner as the "males".

Edited by Tahu3800

What's Up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it is literally not possible to be sexist against men. women are a marginalized and oppressed group, and proper representation is important and rare. while Friends is nowhere near perfect (read: stereotypes), it's an important step for Lego towards equal representation, at least as long as we're talking quantity rather than quality.

 

By definition, sexism is a prejudice against one or both of the sexes, not exclusively against women. If that's the case, sexism is not the proper term, because it applies to both sexes. Also, I don't know about your experience but from my experience, I have seen many men both oppressed and marginalized.

 

Also, saying that only men can be sexist doesn't really serve to help the issue of sexism. It actually makes things worse. I think that most of us want a world where men and women are treated equally, given the same opportunities, freedoms, etc. But stating that all men are the root of the problem really only isolates men in the end, which is not what we want for either sex. The solution is not to treat men in the way many women are treated until it balances out. In my opinion, there have to be changes on both sides, not just one.

 

-Rez

 

EDIT: Since this is sort of off-topic, I have something to add:

 

I think that, yes, LEGO probably didn't intentionally try to make Bionicle sexist. But that's really no excuse. Whether you're targeting a specific demographic, or not, a 6:1+ males to females gender ratio is kind of outrageous. This isn't even a slight imbalance in gender, it basically makes females nonexistent, which is far from realistic.

Edited by Reznas
  • Upvote 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it is literally not possible to be sexist against men.

You lost me, and I imagine lost quite a few others. I was under the impression that men belonged to a sex, so sexism against them is easily conceivable. I can't see how one could possibly argue otherwise without completely changing the definitions of the terms being discussed.

 

I cannot possibly imagine how Lego friends can be considered 'an important step' while Bionicle is thought of as sexist. I'd have thought the fact that the business of these females is making friends while the males in Lego's other toylines save the world would enrage those passionate about representation :P

  • Upvote 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is though, the same people who claim Bionicle is sexist are not the target group. So unless a large number of 8 year old boys suddenly care about this gender stuff, then it really doesn't matter to Lego.

  • Upvote 2

In the time before time, the Great Spirit descended from the heavens, carrying with him the ones called the Matoran, to this island paradise. We were separate and without purpose, so the great spirit blessed us with the Three Virtues: Unity, Duty and Destiny. We embraced these gifts and in gratitude named our home Mata Nui, after the great spirit himself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah son, There's never a legitimate reason to exclude female characters from a story. :t

This is not true. What about a story set in a male prison or military unit? Is Orange is the New Black sexist for excluding men from a women's prison? It's possible to have a story with no male characters, or no female characters. It's an artistic choice, and a creator should not be berated for doing it.

 

But in the case of Bionicle, it's a marketing choice. They are currently choosing to market the line to boys, so boys make up the majority of the cast. By the same standards, is Monster High or Barbie sexist for having only a few male characters compared to dozens of females?

 

I'll admit that the lack of girl characters is a bit frustrating so I do agree with you guys there.

And it would be really great to get more females that aren't blue, or even a female villain. But let's be realistic here, it probably won't happen unless we get another "queen of the swarm". Like some I could see as a girl. But they may not even get names.

 

Even though Bionicle having a 50/50 gender ratio will probably never happen, a separate constraction line for girls might. And I'd be really exited for that. Since everything's made of CCBS we'd be able to add pink/purple/glittery parts to our mocs and it would be amazing.

 

 

 

 

 

Edit: Oops, watch out for leaked info -

-Wind-

Edited by -Windrider-
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This brings up an interesting point about equality and representation that really needs to be addressed.
 
Society is terrible to women in more regards than it is terrible to men. It is terrible to those who identify within the gender binary and it is terrible to those who do not.
 
This is the direct result of a system widely known as the patriarchy. It is the reason that men are paid more than women and the reason that women do not hold high political office and the reason that the blame of assault is placed on the victim and not the perpetrator.
 
It is an incontestable fact that the patriarchy exists, and it is why society has traditional gender roles. It affects men in insidious ways as well, in pressures to be masculine and to do traditionally "manly" things, but this is secondary because its effects on women are much, much worse.
 
The result of this is that you have this engrained system of prejudices which leads to the unnecessary gendering of goods and services. The idea that girls can't enjoy things that are "for boys" and that boys can't enjoy things that are "for girls" is awful in many regards, with the worst bit being the reinforcement of gender roles and anything that someone does that doesn't conform to their assigned gender is seen as harmful and worrisome when in reality, it's completely normal.
 
Nearly every company falls prey to this, and you can see it pretty much everywhere you look when you start knowing what to look for. LEGO, for all of their good, did this with BIONICLE. They saw what they were designing, said "this is for boys!" and marketed it in that direction. Thus, the reasoning behind the atrocious gender ratio is simply a marketing decision based on false precepts of unnecessarily gendered marketing.
 
If you mention My Little Pony or LEGO Friends as "sexist" lines, that is wrong on a couple of levels.
 
1. The representation of male characters within My Little Pony is infinitely better than the representation of female characters within BIONICLE. Male ponies have variegated personalities, whereas female characters in BIONICLE are heavily influenced by tropes.
 
2. Modern media is skewed towards creating "masculine" content that the ones that are marketed to girls are either terrible in quality or outright sexist (in the sense of reinforcing gender roles.)
 
3. Sexism in society is, by virtue of its commonly accepted definition, a system of prejudices by a privileged group against a marginalized group. In our society, this means that a man may be prejudiced towards a woman or a woman may be prejudiced towards a man, but only the man's prejudice towards the woman can be considered sexism. They're both wrong, but the man's prejudice is backed up by the overall attitude of society. (This is true for racism as well.) Folks in this topic seem convinced that any prejudice is sexism, which isn't technically the case.
 
In short, there is no excuse for the terrible gender inequality that plagued the 2001-2011 run of BIONICLE. Discussion of how bad it was cannot change the ratios encoded in the canon, but they can help us all to become more mindful of social problems - and, hopefully, change the future of BIONICLE for the better.

  • Upvote 9

avatar by Lady Kopaka


tumblr_ng1pw4xLEM1tryxewo1_1280.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it could be recreated I would suggest are roughly equal split, but it is established lore already. Changing it now only creates inconsistencies.  

which is why i hope that the reboot will change the gender ratios.

 

(and also why i headcanon the gender ratios of the old storyline as 50/50)

 

As far as I'm concerned the reality (that they are non-sexual machines) is all that is relevant. What they wish to call themselves ultimately means nothing other than a referent in language. I say this because they have no sexes because they are machines that do not sexual reproduce, and there are no noticeable gender stereotypes that applies, as they act in the same manner as the "males".

fictional characters don't have agency. they don't think independently. they were created and written about by humans.

 

and i honestly don't know why you keep bringing up sexual reproduction/physical sex characteristics. sex and gender aren't the same thing.

 

Sumiki basically just said all that needs to be said here, though.

Edited by Arc
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

As we all know, always depicting females a certain way is totally not sexist at all.

 

Not to mention that the ratio started as one in six and then got to about one in twenty. I don't care how "strong" the female characters are, there's no excuse for relegating the representation of about half the human race to mere token status, even if you think that it's a good marketing decision.

They are portrayed exactly like the "male" characters. They're physically the same as the "male" characters. Why people care about a distinction without a difference is something I still don't understand.

 

i'm pretty sure you just missed the entire point of what he said. allow me to repeat it.

 

I don't care how "strong" the female characters are, there's no excuse for relegating the representation of about half the human race to mere token status, even if you think that it's a good marketing decision.

"physically the same" doesn't matter at all. he even set aside the depictions of female characters in-story, although those were also sub-par. the fact of the matter is, there are less than one-fifth as many female characters as male ones. that's what he meant by "token status".

 

 

The point is that they are machines without differing sexes which have adopted the titles for a currently unknown reason. The fact is that the "male" and "female" Bionicle are exactly the same. They have no discernible difference between the two.

 

 

What's your excuse for the Glatorian and Agori? They are capable of reproduction and there is a more discernible difference between the two genders within the species, yet the gender ratio was outrageously skewed in that story arc no less than it had been before. It was just a continuation of the same thing we had seen with biomechanical characters.

Edited by XONAR
  • Upvote 3

Bliss.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If it could be recreated I would suggest are roughly equal split, but it is established lore already. Changing it now only creates inconsistencies.  

which is why i hope that the reboot will change the gender ratios.

 

(and also why i headcanon the gender ratios of the old storyline as 50/50)

 

 

 

As far as I'm concerned the reality (that they are non-sexual machines) is all that is relevant. What they wish to call themselves ultimately means nothing other than a referent in language. I say this because they have no sexes because they are machines that do not sexual reproduce, and there are no noticeable gender stereotypes that applies, as they act in the same manner as the "males".

fictional characters don't have agency. they don't think independently. they were created and written about by humans.

 

and i honestly don't know why you keep bringing up sexual reproduction/physical sex characteristics. sex and gender aren't the same thing.

 

Sumiki basically just said all that needs to be said here, though.

 

What I'm saying is that for this purpose, any gender referent is irrelevant. Also, once a character is created, suddenly having a character perform actions which it would not normally do, is bad writing. 

 

This brings up an interesting point about equality and representation that really needs to be addressed.

 

Society is terrible to women in more regards than it is terrible to men. It is terrible to those who identify within the gender binary and it is terrible to those who do not.

 

This is the direct result of a system widely known as the patriarchy. It is the reason that men are paid more than women and the reason that women do not hold high political office and the reason that the blame of assault is placed on the victim and not the perpetrator.

 

It is an incontestable fact that the patriarchy exists, and it is why society has traditional gender roles. It affects men in insidious ways as well, in pressures to be masculine and to do traditionally "manly" things, but this is secondary because its effects on women are much, much worse.

 

The result of this is that you have this engrained system of prejudices which leads to the unnecessary gendering of goods and services. The idea that girls can't enjoy things that are "for boys" and that boys can't enjoy things that are "for girls" is awful in many regards, with the worst bit being the reinforcement of gender roles and anything that someone does that doesn't conform to their assigned gender is seen as harmful and worrisome when in reality, it's completely normal.

 

Nearly every company falls prey to this, and you can see it pretty much everywhere you look when you start knowing what to look for. LEGO, for all of their good, did this with BIONICLE. They saw what they were designing, said "this is for boys!" and marketed it in that direction. Thus, the reasoning behind the atrocious gender ratio is simply a marketing decision based on false precepts of unnecessarily gendered marketing.

 

If you mention My Little Pony or LEGO Friends as "sexist" lines, that is wrong on a couple of levels.

 

1. The representation of male characters within My Little Pony is infinitely better than the representation of female characters within BIONICLE. Male ponies have variegated personalities, whereas female characters in BIONICLE are heavily influenced by tropes.

 

2. Modern media is skewed towards creating "masculine" content that the ones that are marketed to girls are either terrible in quality or outright sexist (in the sense of reinforcing gender roles.)

 

3. Sexism in society is, by virtue of its commonly accepted definition, a system of prejudices by a privileged group against a marginalized group. In our society, this means that a man may be prejudiced towards a woman or a woman may be prejudiced towards a man, but only the man's prejudice towards the woman can be considered sexism. They're both wrong, but the man's prejudice is backed up by the overall attitude of society. (This is true for racism as well.) Folks in this topic seem convinced that any prejudice is sexism, which isn't technically the case.

 

In short, there is no excuse for the terrible gender inequality that plagued the 2001-2011 run of BIONICLE. Discussion of how bad it was cannot change the ratios encoded in the canon, but they can help us all to become more mindful of social problems - and, hopefully, change the future of BIONICLE for the better.

 

How is society more terrible to women than men?

- The unequal pay is a myth. It takes the average salary of a woman vs a man. Not taking into account fields, experience, or credentials. If those variables are accounted for, the pay rates are statistically equal.

- The feminist idea of what "victim blaming" is very different than people's normal concerns.

- The reason men hold political office more frequently is because people vote for them.

- I dispute the existence of the "patriarchy". You're attributing male success to a male conspiracy, I would say it is for various other reason which could be debated.

- Gender marketing is based on statistical analysis of which demographics are most likely to purchase it. Not some evil ploy by the "patriarchy".

 

 

 

 

As we all know, always depicting females a certain way is totally not sexist at all.

 

Not to mention that the ratio started as one in six and then got to about one in twenty. I don't care how "strong" the female characters are, there's no excuse for relegating the representation of about half the human race to mere token status, even if you think that it's a good marketing decision.

They are portrayed exactly like the "male" characters. They're physically the same as the "male" characters. Why people care about a distinction without a difference is something I still don't understand.

 

i'm pretty sure you just missed the entire point of what he said. allow me to repeat it.

 

I don't care how "strong" the female characters are, there's no excuse for relegating the representation of about half the human race to mere token status, even if you think that it's a good marketing decision.

"physically the same" doesn't matter at all. he even set aside the depictions of female characters in-story, although those were also sub-par. the fact of the matter is, there are less than one-fifth as many female characters as male ones. that's what he meant by "token status".

 

 

The point is that they are machines without differing sexes which have adopted the titles for a currently unknown reason. The fact is that the "male" and "female" Bionicle are exactly the same. They have no discernible difference between the two.

 

 

What's your excuse for the Glatorian and Agori? They are capable of reproduction, and the gender ratio was outrageously skewed in that story arc no less than it had been before.

 

The only reason that would exist is because the "females" are less valuable for reproduction than the "males" (meaning that a single female can reproduce at a rate relative to the sex inequality). Any other reason is just poor writing.

Edited by Tahu3800
  • Upvote 8

What's Up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Nah son, There's never a legitimate reason to exclude female characters from a story. :t

This is not true. What about a story set in a male prison or military unit?

 

Ah, forgive me. i forgot male-only spaces (such as prison complexes and stuff) existed. i kinda was only referring to everyday or all-encompassing stuff. (like the universe of bionicle, which has no excuse to lack female characters. :u)

 

i am really not the best at talking, i think others here explained what needed to be said, thumbs up to them. c:

 

 

EDIT: mata nui, i got kapura'd by the most outrageously unbelievable statement in Bionicle history. i cannot believe what i just read. :0

Edited by Rahkshi Lalonde
  • Upvote 3

bnnrimg1.pngbnnrimg2.pngbnnrimg3.pngbnnrimg4.pngbnnrimg5.pngbnnrimg6.pngbnnrimg7.pngbnnrimg8.png


Corpus Rahkshi characters: Snap, Teeth ,Rose,Kaita

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is society more terrible to women than men?

- The unequal pay is a myth. It take the average salary of a woman vs a man. Not taking into account fields, experience, or credentials. If those variables are accounted for, the pay rates are statistically equal.

- The feminist idea of what "victim blaming" is very different than people's normal concerns.

- The reason men hold political office more frequently is because people vote for them.

- I dispute the existence of the "patriarchy". You're attributing male success to a male conspiracy, I would say it is for various other reason which could be debated.

- Gender marketing is based on statistical analysis of which demographics are most likely to purchase it. Not some evil ploy by the "patriarchy".

 

Okay, it seems to me that you're one of those people who thinks feminism is unnecessary and/or some kind of ploy. To answer your points one by one:

 

- By all accounts, the average salary of a woman vs. a man is about 77 cents on the dollar. Many official documents are available to prove this (including items from the US Census Bureau such as this one). Your argument implies that women are, on the whole, less capable of achieving experience or credentials necessary to achieve equality in their field, which is ... I'm not even going to go into how ridiculous that is. I hope that was just a poor choice of words on your part.

 

- Okay, so imagine that you live a block from a grocery store, and so you picked up a few bags and are carrying them home. All of the sudden, someone comes around the corner and mugs you for these groceries. You go to the police and the police, rather than going after the mugger, ask you what you were doing and wearing and they tell you how you should have avoided getting mugged in the first place. That's victim blaming. It's a normal concern for people because that is the reality for many.

 

- So why do people vote for men? More men run for office because people doubt the mental and physical stamina of women, and yes, sexist people have just as much of a say in democratic processed as anyone else. Have you seen the news recently?

 

- The patriarchy is not a male conspiracy. It is something that has evolved and embodies itself in gender roles and gendered products. This is a common anti-feminist argument that I see, and it's patently ridiculous.

 

- Gendered marketing is deeply ingrained to the point that parents, whether or not they realize it, pass it on to their offspring. There is nothing inherently masculine about muscles or explosions or the color blue - heck, blue was considered a girl's color until nearly the middle of the last century. So now, companies are surveying a populace that has been conditioned to perceive certain things without genders as having genders. Boys are likely to desire "boy things" out of social conditioning - not an inherent desire to blow stuff up.

  • Upvote 9

avatar by Lady Kopaka


tumblr_ng1pw4xLEM1tryxewo1_1280.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is an incontestable fact that the patriarchy exists

I'd like to contest that fact :P Explaining social mistreatment of women with the existence of a male-controlled power system is easily argued against. To begin with, in the west at least, sexual equality before the law exists (with the exception of sex offences, where there is heavy prejudice against men). Both females and males can vote in elected officials.

 

 

3. Sexism in society is, by virtue of its commonly accepted definition, a system of prejudices by a privileged group against a mi arginalized group. In our society, this means that a man may be prejudiced towards a woman or a woman may be prejudiced towards a man, but only the man's prejudice towards the woman can be considered sexism. They're both wrong, but the man's prejudice is backed up by the overall attitude of society. (This is true for racism as well.) Folks in this topic seem convinced that any prejudice is sexism, which isn't technically the case.

 

 

I am indeed convinced that any prejudice on the grounds of sex is sexism. The definition you use (that the term can only apply to those who are marginalized in a wider societal picture) is not at all the 'commonly accepted definition', unless you mean commonly accepted in radical feminist circles.

As I disagree with the premises used to interpret the sexism (or lack thereof) in Bionicle, I cannot say I am convinced by these arguments in support of the conclusion 'Bionicle is sexist'.

  • Upvote 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

How is society more terrible to women than men?

- The unequal pay is a myth. It take the average salary of a woman vs a man. Not taking into account fields, experience, or credentials. If those variables are accounted for, the pay rates are statistically equal.

- The feminist idea of what "victim blaming" is very different than people's normal concerns.

- The reason men hold political office more frequently is because people vote for them.

- I dispute the existence of the "patriarchy". You're attributing male success to a male conspiracy, I would say it is for various other reason which could be debated.

- Gender marketing is based on statistical analysis of which demographics are most likely to purchase it. Not some evil ploy by the "patriarchy".

 

Okay, it seems to me that you're one of those people who thinks feminism is unnecessary and/or some kind of ploy. To answer your points one by one:

 

- By all accounts, the average salary of a woman vs. a man is about 77 cents on the dollar. Many official documents are available to prove this (including items from the US Census Bureau such as this one). Your argument implies that women are, on the whole, less capable of achieving experience or credentials necessary to achieve equality in their field, which is ... I'm not even going to go into how ridiculous that is. I hope that was just a poor choice of words on your part.

 

- Okay, so imagine that you live a block from a grocery store, and so you picked up a few bags and are carrying them home. All of the sudden, someone comes around the corner and mugs you for these groceries. You go to the police and the police, rather than going after the mugger, ask you what you were doing and wearing and they tell you how you should have avoided getting mugged in the first place. That's victim blaming. It's a normal concern for people because that is the reality for many.

 

- So why do people vote for men? More men run for office because people doubt the mental and physical stamina of women, and yes, sexist people have just as much of a say in democratic processed as anyone else. Have you seen the news recently?

 

- The patriarchy is not a male conspiracy. It is something that has evolved and embodies itself in gender roles and gendered products. This is a common anti-feminist argument that I see, and it's patently ridiculous.

 

- Gendered marketing is deeply ingrained to the point that parents, whether or not they realize it, pass it on to their offspring. There is nothing inherently masculine about muscles or explosions or the color blue - heck, blue was considered a girl's color until nearly the middle of the last century. So now, companies are surveying a populace that has been conditioned to perceive certain things without genders as having genders. Boys are likely to desire "boy things" out of social conditioning - not an inherent desire to blow stuff up.

 

 

- The census report you cited is one that specifically doesn't account for the aforementioned variables. Here is a study which does account for such variables: http://www.consad.com/content/reports/Gender%20Wage%20Gap%20Final%20Report.pdf It is a department of Labor report detailing why Women's career choices and not the "patriarchy" is responsible for the pay-gap.

 

- The person being mugged should come with other people if he/she knew the areas was high in crime. People at parties "take advantage" due to intoxication and ability to get away with it. People should plan accordingly. If I walk around a high-crime area with a lot of cash and I get mugged, it is partially my fault. I put myself into that circumstance. If we're going to to ignore the choices a person made leading up to an incident, we could very easily regress to the universe being deterministic (via causality), and it being pre-determined. In every circumstance it is not the victim's fault, but people should take reasonable precautions. You wouldn't say you were at no fault if you walk into the middle of a street without checking for traffic and got hit.

 

- That is democracy. If you don't like it promote some other form of government or work to subvert democracies.

 

- The "Patriarchy" is a myth. Male success could be attributed to cultural factors or biological factors, but acting like it is men holding women back is absurd. If women are indeed "equal" (I'm inclined to say they are in most aspects) then they should be able to compete against it.

 

- Marketing is based on what is profitable. I don't like it, I imagine many people do not, but that is how it is.

Edited by Tahu3800
  • Upvote 7

What's Up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got a bad feeling about this topic. It may be a legitimate question about an actual topic, but it has the potential to evolve into something... bad and flame-y.

  • Upvote 3

I HATE SCORPIOS


 


~Pohatu Master of Stone, 2015

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, this is going beyond the boundaries of Storyline & Theories quickly. I suggest that everyone read the few excellent posts above that explain why sexism as institutional discrimination cannot be turned against men, and why equal and, yes, unequal representation in favor of women of any identity is important no matter what pretense of marketing one may claim.

 

I'm going to close this, then. COT would be a better place for such a discussion, but if a topic is created there, I'll be watching it closely.

Edited by -Windrider-
  • Upvote 14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...