Leaderboard

The "stack of illogic" here is the idea that in a society with a near 1:1 ratio of men to women, nearly all roles of power, be it political, economic, religious, etc, are dominated by men, and that this unequal representation is reinforced through media outlets, and that people are actively arguing against fixing that. Also, this entry just reinforces something that has driven me crazy for years now: BZPower members do not use the word "logic" correctly. The other thing here, is that you have supremely missed the point. Congratulations, you are a special snowflake who isn't like the other girls. You are smarter and better and cooler and less likely to fall for media manipulation! Except, that none of that matters when it comes to the conversation being had in that topic. The conversation is about the role of women and their representation in media. Considering all the scholarly sources actually posted in there, it would be a "stack of illogic" to say that there is not a problem with the stereotypying of women in modern media, and to say that the representation of women in media is problematic. There is so much more to say, but I'm so angry about this nonsense in here that I can't even put these things into words right now. Suffice to say you've missed the point entirely.

But we do believe so many lies fed to us. It doesn't make us helpless. Countless women, men, and other people believe the drivel that the media and other sources lay before us and ingrain in us. A lot of sources don't even realize the harm they're doing. Men come to expect things from women. Other women expect things from women. People shame women for not being some sort of norm. You know this; I can tell from this blog entry because you fight to be who you are. The struggle you have is real. Women damage their bodies and their lives trying to lose weight. Girls of color in our culture believe they are not beautiful because they are not white. They try to straighten their naturally curly hair. Women try to wear clothes that make them unhappy. They are shamed into speaking quieter and not laughing as loudly. They are told to "be like this so guys will like you". And it's good that you fight that. It's good that you decided to be yourself. But this doesn't mean all other women are going to do this. Too many of them don't even realize what is happening, and that's why we're having this problem. I've known so many girls and women who try to be what we are told to be, verbally and by implication. Shave your legs because you have to. Cover that face with makeup. Be cute. Be dainty. Be submissive. Be feminine. No man will want you if you don't. No one will respect you if you don't. I starved myself. I picked at my face until it bled trying to get rid of acne. I'm in therapy because I have anxiety and depression resulting from expectations that I should be a certain way "because I'm a woman". I'm not alone. I'm nowhere near being alone. Countless women have hurt themselves, hurt each other, been killed, settled for less, been denied privileges given to others, and ended their own lives over this stuff. But at the same time, there's an overwhelming voice that tells us something else. You shouldn't shave. You shouldn't wear makeup. Don't be cutesy. Be outgoing. Be a STRONG WOMAN who likes fighting and guns and "manly" stuff. Don't be what we told you to be, and you'll be praised as "not like other girls". This compliments some women by shaming the lifestyles and preferences of others. This is also very, very wrong. I copied this from something I can't share as a whole: The point isn't that we shouldn't do certain things because they're a stereotype. The point is that you need to be who you are and don't shame other people for being who they are. People in our culture seem very concerned with telling women what they can and can't be. That's the problem here. And like Pat said, we're gonna come across this stuff in our lives no matter what. We can be all they tell us, and they say we're trying to hard and we're mindless conformist bimbos. We can completely ignore it, and we get ignored or told to "freshen up", "smile", "reinvent our wardrobe", "don't speak up for ourselves". We can do our own thing, and we still get fussed at for "being or not being a certain way". Now, I'll get to why I'm saying all this on this entry. I don't like speaking up on things like this because I get nervous and have trouble expressing myself, especially on BZPower. Guys on BZPower have tried to shame and argue with me too many times, and also done the same to many other girls. But unless they're trans and lived through these struggles, they don't have that firsthand experience. They may accept what we tell them happens. Some of them see all this garbage at work in the world. They want to help. That's why DV and Makaru speak up. I always appreciate what they have to say. They've learned from women around them, such as myself, Nukaya, and Tufi Piyufi. You say you're speaking to an audience of guys, but to be honest, several women are reading this blog entry. They read the topic about more female characters in the next Lego movie. They love the idea of more women being represented. I know this because they're my friends. But why don't they speak up? I wonder if it's because of the backlash we've received, both here and in other faucets of our lives? In the end, yeah, the only one you can control is you. You have to go into this stuff being willing to let go and know that you're not going to change the entire world by yourself and in one go. But I'm not going to give up or fall into "all or nothing" thinking. I haven't changed the minds of plenty of people. But I have friends now who have watched me and what I say and support, and they understood and now stand beside me. Some of them are content creators who are writing excellent balances of men, women, and non-binaries in their works. Would that have happened if I hadn't been fighting and speaking out on my blog and other internet spaces where they could see? I'm not sure. Other, greater content creators have seen this huge outcry for equal representation. That's part of why we have the Lego Movie creators so ready to include more women in the first place. We shouldn't get angry over every single lie told to us, no. But I think getting fired up over feminism is a really excellent cause. Why? Hey, I've got another quote. We don't have to explode or lose our minds. I mean, in this entire post I'm not upset or angry. But as a woman, I want to speak up. My voice is important here because it's about the representation of women, the lack of which has discouraged and hurt me inside. I am passionate about my cause and ready to educate anyone willing to listen to me. And if people don't, okay. But I'll still speak out. I'll still speak up for equal rights and representation and a proper treatment of all women. We need to see more varied women in our media because it reinforces that we all exist outside the stereotypes and we're more than what people say we should be. There are just as many women in this world as men (I hear that it's more women than men actually but I'm not sure atm.) So why are there way more men in so many movies and comics and games? And why is this so when women and girls are close to half of the consumers of said media? If we can have something as "nonsensical" as a giant floating cloud city or mecha cyborg pirate with a live shark on his arm in a movie, then we can have something as "nonsensical" as more female characters, too.

Nobody here is every going to argue that women are helpless little creatures that believe everything they are told about themselves. But one doesn't have to look past, well, themselves, to see how media representation of women (and men) has set up stereotypes and perceptions of both of these genders that are part of the cultural zeitgeist. Again, a ton of actual scholarly sources were posted in that topic, but you must have ignored them to be making the point you are making now. No matter how smart an individual is, society and culture are made of conglomerates and social movements made up of a social, shared consciousness. The conversation at hand has never been "are these stereotypes legitimate," because of course they're not. We all know that, because we are on here having this conversation. I know that the idea that all women are passive or submissive is garbage, because I only have to look two feet to my left and ask Maddison something and she will definitely refute that. Stereotypes are obviously not applicable to indviduals very frequently, and even when someone falls into a stereotypical interest group in one way, they fall out of it in another, as evidenced by Becca's post above. As Bryan said even further up, the problem here is that you are consistently seen to argue against the idea of greater inclusion in media, and it seems you reach deeper and deeper into the depths to come up with reasons why. You make decent points, but then you take those points to false conclusions. You're right, we can't force writers to stop producing these works that perpetuate false perceptions, roles, and representations of women, but we can and we should change the world around them so these works are the outliers and the ones viewed as weird and uncomfortable. And we do that by spreading education and by demanding the status quo change, and we do so by applauding, visibly, publicly, purposefully, the moments when big companies, big media moments, big characters, challenge that status quo themselves. Because if they can see that, yes, there is a market for this, that having a movie full of strong, smart, independent women who don't define themselves based on their relationship with a man, that this won't tank their profits, that this gives them a positive public perception, they will continue to move that direction. Yet here you are saying that striving for that is "a stack of illogic" which is both disgustingly dismissive and is, itself, a "stack of illogic". The world is set at an almost exact 1:1 ratio of men to women (with women globally having a slightly stronger lead currently), yet, again, men make up the majority of all power roles in the world. This is your world. Your entire post internalizes so much of that stuff it is ridiculous. All your "I'm not like the girl stereotypes" things are an attempt to prove yourself not a part of the "stereotyped girls" set-up by showing how much better you fit into traditionally male-dominated aspects of society. There's nothing wrong with those ideas or interests at all, whether male or female or intersexed or trans or whichever, but it reads like "I don't have these problems because I don't subscribe to femininity at all, and women who do are the problem" and there's some straight-up misogyny in there. This is your world. You are a woman who, at some point in time, is going to run into these problems in your life. People are going to assume you are weaker, dumber, more passive, etc, at some point in time. It will happen. And what we are trying to say is that not only should it not, but that part of making sure that this changes, that we can say to future generations that this is a thing of the past, is to increase visible recognition of women in power roles on media, because media is propaganda, because it does define the shared cultural consciousness, and by influencing that, we can change this. I debated going through and adding some more caps and exclamation marks, but I felt the point was made without them, just as it was the first time.

I'm not like the female stereotypes, either. I'm actually a dog. Actually, I was amused by your stereotype breakdown and wanted to fill it out for myself. Stereotype: "Girls don't like Lego."Me: *was really into Bionicle but kind of appreciates LEGO from the side nowadays* *mostly buys Friends and Mixels sets because I'm poor and they're cute* *also wanted more girls in the Lego Movie* Stereotype: "Girls like fashion."Me: *loves clothes* *is becoming a lolita so as to wear frilly poofy dresses with bows* Stereotype: "Girls like animals, especially horses."Me: *desires kittens you have no idea* Stereotype: "Girls are less likely to enjoy courses in science and math, and rarely do they program."Me: *hated math in school, enjoyed science, did some programming in college but eh* *wasn't for me* *loves programming games tho* *but is an amateur* Stereotype: "Girls are soft."Me: *doesn't have to wear lotion* *ever* *also I just shaved* *feel my legs* *so smooth* *blue belt in taekwondo tho* Stereotype: "Girls like jewelry and painting their nails, etc."Me: *me too omg* Stereotype: "Girls can't use logic."Me: *spills your fruit* *excellent comeback* *10/10*

IS THIS YOU BUTTLOP. King Buttlop. Tiny crown. Probs friends with Burnie Buns.

Hey! Bowties are cool!

@DeeVee: I am sorry to have offended you. Arguing against fixing that is very bad, yes. I agree with you. How did I use the word "logic" incorrectly? In this case, I think I was using definition #3, and applying it to this branch of study or thought, but I could be wrong. Also illogic is not a word - I use the term to mean "reasoning glitches" or "not thinking things though" (i.e. something that makes no sense). I agree with you here. Look, the stereotyping of women in media is an out-and-out lie. It's an illusion riddled with misconceptionitis. But women aren't helpless people that believe every lie that's shoved in their faces. If I were addressing an audience of women right now, I could make a nice moral speech telling women to "rise above" all the media stereotypes and embrace what they really want...but I'm addressing an audience of guys, and such language strikes me as silly anyway. People can learn to resist these sorts of things. That doesn't mean that the problem shouldn't be solved. It's legitimate. But this world is full of illusions and misconceptions and problems and things that aren't right (like this, which is a lie told to women and a legitimate problem because people believe the lie). If I got mad at every lie I encountered and at all the people who believed it, I would have a highly shortened lifespan. The other thing I believe is that you can't force people to do anything. You can't force writers to stop producing this lie, and you can't stop people from believing it for a little while. You can enlighten people with the truth all day, and they will still ignore you. At the end of the day, the only person you can really change is yourself (and what you write). I don't know about you, but I learned this the hard way many times. So no need to get worked up about it. This is where the my thoughts about not freaking out come from. I'm sorry if this offends you. Right now I'm not exactly sure why you're offended, sadly - if you could make that more clear with capital letters and more exclamation points, that would be good. * * * Lastly, this is a blog. I'm trying to talk about something that is skewing my opinion and influencing my views on the topic, okay? And you may be right; the fact that it does influence my judgement may be fallacious. But it does influence my judgement, regardless of whether or not it should. It makes me think that there are less people out there who believe this media lie than is made out to be. And that was the real point of this entry; to explain why I might not be the most reliable being in analyzing this debate, since some people were saying that I was in that topic. And also to clarify my position and suchnot. It was not to be condescending or offend people. I hope you can understand that. * * * @HH: Lol @ dog. Confused with the response to "girls can't use logic." but whatever. Also, lol @ how people are posting in the middle of the night to this entry.

For a second I thought your new name was "Name Change #0579" and that you had gone completely meta

I guess the part that confuses us the most is you seem to be frequently advocating against stories and movies and media writing interesting and original women when you are one. That implication comes from a strong opinion (from what I have gleaned, anyway) that it's not really that big of a deal. And what we are trying to convey to you is that it really is. For example, my opinions are just piggybacked from the experiences of people I know and discuss these topics with routinely. Another example; the women in the linked topic who were arguing their case. You state that the integrity of the story should matter. Well clearly to a lot of people representation is an inseparable part of story integrity.

Another year, another opening for a set design position at Lego. You'd think that'd be good news for someone like me whose life goal is to have such a career. It's not. Let's start at the beginning. In High School when I had to finally decide what I'd do with my life (and after failing an architectural drawing class hard, and giving up on studying to be an architect), I realized that my childhood dream of working for Lego wasn't actually all that unrealistic. Through BZPower and other Lego fansites, I met actual people who worked for the company, and they loved it. And I read all sorts of news on the internet about what a great company Lego is to work for. Of course, my interests had changed since I was a kid. Back then, when I was asked what job I wanted, it was to be a Master Model Builder at Legoland. But my building preferences have never favored large-scale models or sculptures—I liked the sets. I liked minifigures. I liked the idea of actually being able to walk into a toy store, and look at a product on a shelf, and be able to say "I made that". So I decided I'd like to be a set designer, and to my guidance counselor, that meant getting a degree in industrial design. So I looked at some design schools, but as I approached the end of my time in high school it became apparent to me how much my Aspergers Syndrome and Non-verbal Learning Disorder affected my ability to learn and function in school. So I ended up going to Landmark College, a school specifically for students with learning disabilities. And I loved it. They didn't have a design program, but since it was a two-year school I figured that I could get my associate's degree there and then transfer to a design school. When it came time to find a school to transfer to, I looked at a number of options, but so many of the schools seemed so competitive and their programs seemed to ask the world of students. My transfer services associate at Landmark recommended Wentworth Institute of Technology, a school that had an impressive program for getting design students internships in the field. It turns out, Wentworth was a hellhole. I spent a year there and it was the worst year of my life. I went from being a bright student who was constantly encouraged by my professors to being a talentless hack who couldn't manage to complete even the simplest assignment. And it wasn't for lack of trying—but Wentworth turned out to have zero tolerance for anything short of perfection, and no useful options for a student who needed clear instructions and step-by-step assistance. I withdrew from Wentworth, and went home to see if I could earn a position at Lego through job experience, rather than through education. It's been a year since then, and I've been stymied at every level. Trying to get a design job? Good luck, if you don't have education or a portfolio. Trying to get a retail job with Lego, and work my way up through the company. Good luck, for someone who can't drive (and maybe never will, since I have a crippling fear of being behind the wheel) and has no retail experience. Trying to get retail experience? Good luck in this market, where there are always more experienced people out of work and looking for the same job. My only work experience was interning at the newspaper (a business my family runs), as a copy-editor, and copy-editing doesn't offer a lot of transferrable skills (and is a dying trade to boot). I've since diversified that to interning for the radio (also part of the newspaper), handing out freebies to listeners. For the past month I was working an unpaid internship with a local toymaker, hoping that could be seen as an advantage if I apply for a design position at Lego again. But I scarcely got to do any design work, and while he was impressed with my skills and knowledge (the first person to recognize such things in me for some time), I don't think I was furthering my future at all by working there. So I quit, at least temporarily, to try to work on a portfolio to submit to Lego next time there's an opening. And now there is. But just like last year (when I lost my chance at a job with Lego after the first email back from them), I have no portfolio and don't know the first thing about making one. My counselor instructed me to look at ones online, but all I've found there are amazing portfolios that I have neither the skill nor the content to make. If not for the total lack of other options, I'd be just about ready to give up my dream of working for Lego entirely. After all, no matter how many people say I'm talented or knowledgable about Lego, my experience in the fan community constantly reminds me that there are hundreds of people who are both more talented and more knowledgable than me, most of whom don't work for the company either. I'm an intensely uncompetitive person who wants to apply for one of the most competitive jobs in the world. And I'm just about at my breaking point. I can't tolerate much more disappointment, or one more "no" from a prospective employer. Not with the family paper going bankrupt and my annoying little brother almost done with high school (he'll have a job before I do, at this rate, and then any hope of ever getting respect from him goes out the window). I don't know where I can go from here.

...Next name change acquired!

Alternatively: "My mood today" Alternate Alternative: "He's Always Watching"

Hey! Bowties are cool!NOPE.

The argument isn't about the movie, it's like, about storytelling in general. It seems everyone has their own take on what is and isn't necessary in terms of male to female character ratios, but generally everyone agrees that the addition of new strong female characters in the next LEGO Movie is a good thing. I looove how orderly and polite the discussion was despite some radically different views, it's one of the big reasons I love BZP ^^

I think a lot of it may have resulted in some poorly worded (myself included) arguments. Almost everyone in that topic wants strong female characters. There seems to be some confusion that it may come at the expense of a well written story-line, which appears to be where most of the dissension lies.

Is it...wrong or unnecessary to have a 1:1 ratio? What would be wrong with that? I mean, maybe the ratio won't always be exactly 1:1. What if you have an odd number of characters, right? Still, a ratio of, oh I don't know...5:1 or worse *cough* is something we can agree is a problem, isn't it?

So Shadow Flaredrick is running a Hitman game and we need people. Come and Sign up folks. You won't be disappointed. Bionicle Hitman VI: Final Hour! Guns, Explosions, and hoardes of enemies that no one can count! And for a limited time if you sign up now I will promise not to use the Icepick of Doom! Once in a lifetime offer

So, Emerald City Comicon was AWESOME. I would've posted about it sooner, but I have been stupid busy with personal stuff lately. Also I was hoping to have some detail shots of what I'm about to show you, but meh. Can't wait forever. SO! I decided to go as a steampunk assassin (a la Assassin's Creed). Given the time crunch, I didn't have time to do everything I was hoping to, but I'm at least happy with what I had. You'll notice some Bionicle MOCs implemented, which is why I find this relevant to BZP... :b I was in a hurry to finish those parts of the outfit, and decided Bionicle/Technic was the easiest way to have more gears and wires implemented into the costume. Those hidden blades were VERY hairtrigger, so I only wore them for one of the two days I dressed up. Oh well, that's what I get for making them in a half hour the night before leaving. XD Everything was loads of fun! I enjoyed pretending to be an assassin, hehehe~ Met some awesome people with VERY cool cosplays, including a fairly well-known cosplayer I follow on dA, so that was awesome. I also got LOADS OF STUFF. Including my Lego name bricks signed by Carlos D'Anda, and a signed print from Stuart Sayger. And all this delicious goodness: Heartless shirt, doge shirt, a LoZ shirt (angry chibi Link saying "call me Zelda ONE more time!"), a dice bag, an Edward Kenway figure, a LoL key ring (gift), a card game (gift), a Wacom stylus, a Lego dog and turtle, a Zora's Sapphire necklace, Portal socks, two Romantically Apocalyptic postcards, two signed Chasing Artwork prints, a dragon wool-felting kit, a Hyrule Historia book, a TARDIS card (gift), a signed book from The Oatmeal, and a Lego Hobbit set I already built. (I have a picture of all of these, but I figured I've shared enough photos for one day... XD)

So I got Rapunzel's Creativity Tower in the mail earlier this month (like a week ago), and I finally got around to stop playing with Flynn and Rapunzel long enough to build it. However, Lego's design kinda sucked, so I wanted to make my own version to be closer to the movie set. Front Side Bed Spiral Staircase with cat looming in background So that is what I have done so far. I am glad I had so many spare pink pieces from my trips to the lego store pick a brick. They really came in handy with the color scheme. Will I finish this? Not any time soon as I am running out of pieces and have a limited supply of purple for the roof and fewer grey pieces for the base of the tower. Even so, I think for what I have thus far this looks promising. Whassat, Billy? You agree with Lego's decision to not make a Mother Gothel Figure? ... GET OFF MY LAWN! ~Tekulo <3

I am super super super looking forward to seeing how this turns out (assuming you finish it which you should). I do think there's a little too much pink for the interior, but I'm guessing you were trying to emulate the Friends style while just making the layout more film-set accurate. But despite that it's still a huge improvement- loving it so far! I've been meaning to make my own MOCup of her balcony for a while now. I just have to get off my butt and, you know, do it.

Then he does it again. And again...

Can you imagine? "Hey guys, check this out" *goes on a weeklong rampage of delicately breaking the rules but not toooo bad* *goes on weeklong rampage of throwing money around, submitting news reports, helping folks out, writing essays for every post, and kissing feet* "Taa-daa!" Then they make a movie about the BZPower Member of Legend

Gotta love Lego Flynn. Looks cool so far.

I gotta admire you. To try this hard and persevere this far is an amazing testament to your strength and work ethic. There is a path for you to take. I don't know when you'll end up where you need to be, but you'll get there and you'll love it, I'm sure. Keep your hopes up. I'm praying for you.

If you ever feel down just remember this, it took me five years to figure out the pun in Jason Mraz's first album.

Hey, you're pursuing something you want to do with your life. No matter how that ends, I still find it respectable. People that end up in jobs they hate always wonder "what if I had done something differently when I had the chance?" If you really want this, then I say give it all you got.

Congratulations! The BZPower member of legend. Has yet to be unleashed.

What I would love to see is somebody lose all of their proto points without being banned And then earn everything back plus more to become a POBZPC

A lot of people are bothered by the differences between Hero Factory and BIONICLE, but today I was thinking about some of the story-related decisions made by the Hero Factory creators that really did do favors for the theme and its fans. Unlimited Heroes: There was something poetic about BIONICLE's "Six Heroes, One Destiny" tagline in 2001, but when you think about it, it was a creative limitation on fans that later BIONICLE story arcs did well to do away with. Back in 2001, there were a lot of constraints on BIONICLE: there were only six Toa, only six Turaga, only six villages, and only six Matoran tribes. These constraints were a limitation for fan-created stories. To create characters like Voriki, Toa of Lightning, you had to actively contradict the official story at every turn, particularly if you wanted your character to interact with the official characters overtly. Hero Factory instead encouraged fans to create their own missions and their own heroes by demonstrating that officially, there were millions of heroes far more than you'd ever get to meet in the official storyline. The online mission log, mission ticker, and testimonials even provided examples of these heroes and the variety of missions they were assigned to. This allowed fans to create their own heroes with whatever powers and personalities they could dream up. . Many Destinies: The "One Destiny" part of the classic BIONICLE tagline can be used as a metaphor for another problem the BIONICLE storyline had. Namely, its characters' quests were part of a singular overarching saga with very few gaps. There were few mechanisms for characters to get new tools, armor, or masks except with a scripted transformation. This limited what fans could do with the official characters in their own storytelling, building, and role-play. There was no way to create new forms for official characters unless they set their stories before or after the official story, because you couldn't cram a new form between two quests. And form changes were often tied closely to the idea of "destiny" most of the time, a character could only transform if they were destined to do so, and it was not a reversible process. The "Adaptive Armor" of 2008 made the characters more adaptible, but the story didn't take great advantage of it. In Hero Factory, "upgrade" mechanisms were in place from the beginning: first by refitting heroes with new gear, like in the Furno Bike or Bulk & Vapour sets, and later with more elaborate upgrades that completely altered the heroes' armor and equipment. Furthermore, missions didn't have strict placement on a linear timeline, allowing the characters to go on new missions of any importance at any point between the ones portrayed in the main story. They could even team up with people's original hero characters or face off against people's original villain characters on those missions: since each mission was more or less self-enclosed, there was very little danger that such missions would end up contradicting future missions in any way. . Powers Tied to Design: I remember that back when the Toa Inika, Toa Mahri, Phantoka, and Mistika were introduced, changes to their design were often explained by fans with the idea that they weren't designed with specific characters in mind: they were created as generic characters, and identities, colors, and powers were assigned to them later. It's not clear how true this was, but it could certainly hold true with many character designs and mask powers. The Piraka's powers and personalities had no irrefutable ties to the individual set designs, nor was there an obvious connection between many most post-2003 mask designs and their powers. Later BIONICLE waves began to improve on this: the Barraki's powers and personalities were expressly tied to the sea creature motifs they were based on, and the powers of the Makuta in 2008 were largely connected with their bat and insect motifs. The Glatorian designs also had clear elemental motifs matching the characters' tribes, though they weren't tied to powers right away since none of the characters had special powers before Mata Nui arrived. Hero Factory likewise assigned most powers and personalities based on the character and weapon designs. But the 2.0 and 3.0 heroes, despite powers that matched their new forms, did not have obvious design ties to the heroes' previous forms and characterization, other than pretty strong consistency in their color schemes. The Breakout series changed that for good. The characters returned to using their original masks or new masks designed to resemble them, and many parts of their design paid tribute to the characters' original powers, personalities, and motifs. Stringer, the sonic-themed hero, got a guitar cannon and speakers in his shoulders, while Evo, the weapons expert, got a hefty Tank Arm. Subsequent forms, equipment, and powers for the heroes remained extremely character-driven. . Powers Not Tied to Gender: BIONICLE definitely deserves praise for the decision to have female characters, which came as a result of pressure from franchise manager Lena Dixen. At the same time, the way it dealt with gender was somewhat lackluster. Gender was tied to the tribe or powers of a character: at first, only blue water-oriented characters were female, though later characters who didn't appear in the sets introduced new "female" elements like Lightning and Psionics. Like the constraints I mentioned at the beginning, this was very limiting. Even worse, this rule was more only ever broken to allow a male character to have a traditionally female element, never the other way around. The only female Glatorian or Agori to appear was a water-themed character. Hero Factory thankfully didn't come up with any rules for what characters had to be like to have certain powers, not even with regard to color scheme. This meant that your custom hero could be male or female regardless of its color scheme or powers. The official story still has downright pitiful gender ratios, but fan-created characters have absolute freedom in terms of gender, powers, colors, and motifs. . Obviously I'm not trying to hold this up as evidence that Hero Factory was better than BIONICLE as a whole. I could be here all day writing up a list of ways that the BIONICLE story was well planned and well executed, or ways that the Hero Factory story has been poorly executed. But at the same time, I appreciate these kinds of differences between the two themes especially, because they are indications that a theme's design is informed by its forerunners' strengths and weaknesses alike. It's a sort of creative evolution, even when a theme is taking lessons from wildly different themes (like how BIONICLE took lessons from themes like Alpha Team and Star Wars rather than just from Roboriders and Slizer, or how Ninjago took lessons from themes like Exo-Force and BIONICLE rather than just from the previous Ninja theme).

@DeeVee: I at least skim-read the articles in question, and I did address those points - in a PM to the person who cited them, because B6 kindly asked that the discussion be removed from the topic. The first was about a theory of hedgemony, the second was about relevant stats that showed there are less girls in stories. I did take them with grains of salt though. The first was talking about a theory that media elites communicate ideas to the masses and thereby control them. It also talked about alternative media that provides a counterpoint. But eventually the alternative media becomes mainstream - unless the public at large has an opposition to it that doesn't erode. Unless it's actually true. The public at large has an opposition to truth. Otherwise we wouldn't be having this conversation either, since if the public welcomed truth, they would rail against all these lies and the writers who produce them would be out on the street already. The second article talked about statistics of women in films in 2008. I don't need stats to tell me that women get misrepresented in film and on TV. This doesn't account for other mediums, such as books and music, which sometimes portray women in a realistic light. Again, that doesn't mean that this isn't a problem. I do acknowledge that it might apply to the discussion in the topic, because it was talking about a film. But one realistically represented film isn't going to change those stats. Hollywood will still produce junk. One outlier doesn't change the status quo. My point in that topic was the ratio of male-female characters is a subordinate point to integrity and needs of the story you're writing. The ratio of the characters is actually an independent point to representation. Consider: Story 1: One girl, who is a genius creative problem-solver, becomes a private detective and hires five guys to assist her. She keeps all five of them at arm's length and solves several important mysteries that have an impact on the world around her. Story 2: Five girls who are "society conforming" vie for one guy's attention at a party. Which story portrays women in a better light? But I move beyond the realm of hypothetical: Consider the Mentalist, for example. The ratio is 3:2 guy/girl ratio for the main cast, but all of the women in the story are portrayed realistically. Don't confuse ratio for representation. Oh please. I don't own the world, and I certainly don't control it. The odds of me obtaining world-altering power...aren't that high. Realistically, though, I'm going to die, and all the control I get, if I do get it, will end. I'm just passing through. You agree that we can't change the writers, but you think we can change the world? The world is harder to change than a few writer's minds. People aren't going to change for certain just because of this post on a blog or a few more girls in a brickfilm. There's a chance (possibility) that a few people might think a little different, but that's it. You're exaggerating your own impact to change things. NO. no no. This was what I was afraid of. I didn't mean that at all. I was trying to explain why I sometimes have trouble understanding these discussions. I even explained near the end that being so different has its disadvantages. There's nothing wrong with any of the "stereotypes" I listed or people who follow them. I'm really no better than anybody else, and my uniqueness is not something to look down on other people because of. It's just how I am. It has its assets and liabilities, like any other aspect of myself. It has already happened. I usually prove them wrong or shrug it off or both. What they think doesn't change what I can do. Micronic influence that doesn't warrant all this fuss, but whatever. @HH: I'm not going to repeat myself again, as you and DV's points overlap a bit, but I'll address a few things. There is lies on both sides of this argument, yes. I just haven't addressed the other side of the argument because it gets into stuff that breaks the rules here. At least, I'd have to lean on that to make a good argument. Also it's way off topic. Indeed. Boingy. I would like a society where everyone is free to embrace their true preferences and make choices based on that. Or just the truth in general. Agreed. Sorry to hear that. Although I can't really relate, sadly. I enjoy arguing and refuse to be intimidated. But me =/= everyone. I get that. This blog isn't visible to guests. And I'm realistic - the majority of BZPower is guys, so I naturally tailor my response to that audience. I barely even think about it anymore. But if the idea that girls are supposed to be passive is myth, girls are a lot more assertive than you make them out to be. It's a lie. Don't believe it. But you can only speak for yourself and I can only speak for myself. The truth is varied and probably somewhere in between. Remember the end to the first film? Finn's sister is being introduced into the story as a storyteller, and she will probably introduce more female characters into the narrative. It's not nonsensical. It makes perfect sense. All of this IMO started with some bad wording in a news article that implied that that director wanted to throw girls in for the heck of it. I don't think that's true - I think the director recognized the above and brought in the female characters accordingly. But that's just me.

I'm so close it's not even funny. One. Flipping. Point. That's it.

Gratuitous picture of Bulltop bulltopping around.

Wait...are people upset that there are going to be more female characters in the next Lego Movie? I read the talkback and I can't really make much sense of it. I think they're saying they're worried that this means the director's just going to toss in some half-sincere female characters for the heck of it? Even though actually clicking the link in the BZP article leads to an article with the headline "'The Lego Movie 2' Director Wants More Strong Women In Sequel"? Which is basically just saying that there are going to be new awesome characters in the next movie? Some of whom will also happen to be female? Did I use whom correctly I never quite got the hang of that grammar thing? I don't see how having awesome characters is a bad thing, so I must be waaaaay off.

It's the middle of the day for me. Haha. -Rez

I am going to take a stab in the dark and say the "Mary Sue" phenomenon; where a female character is written to have disproportionate and unrelatable positive features. My personal experience though is it's the exception and not the rule, so I don't know for sure.

It's truly confusing. If the people behind the movie hadn't proven that they couldn't craft awesome and compelling characters then I could maybe relate to the fear that they might stick in underdeveloped female characters just to satisfy audiences. But that's not the case at all. The Lego Movie had plenty of incredible characters, so I can't see how more female characters (and more interaction between the existing female characters) could possibly be a bad thing. If nothing else, this news reassures me that Chris McKay cares about the movie he's making and isn't just going to try to ride the wave of success the first movie brought. He's putting genuine thought into how to make the sequel even better, and that makes me even more excited to see what he has in store.

Today I want to talk about mass. Sometimes you'll hear it defined loosely as "the amount of stuff in an object." There are, however, two separate definitions of mass in classical physics. The first definition comes from Newton's second law. This mass is known as the inertial mass. The larger an object's inertial mass, the more it resists being accelerated by a given force. The second definition of mass also comes from Newton, but it is instead determined by his law of gravitation. The mass here determines how much two massive objects attract one another; this is known as the gravitational mass. But here's the interesting thing about these two masses: there is no law of physics that says these masses are one and the same. Such a notion is known in physics as the equivalence principle. The weak equivalence principle was discovered by Galileo; he noticed that objects with different masses fall at the same rate. Einstein came up with the strong equivalence principle, which discusses how a uniform force and a gravitational field are indistinguishable when you look at a small enough portion of spacetime. The only reason we believe these two masses are equivalent is because experiments show that they are equal to within the precision of the instruments with which we measure them, and there are ongoing experiments trying to narrow down that precision to determine if there is any difference between the two.

Well, the problem with stereotypes has a lot to do with the way people think about them. There's a big difference between saying "lots of women like horses" or "lots of men like sports" and saying the same thing about ALL men and women. And if a story is big enough in scale, it's easy for the latter to be implied if the story supports the stereotype again and again without offering any sort of counterpoint. Furthermore, stereotypes become problematic if writing tends to defy stereotypes about one group without doing the same for the other. This is where gender ratios in media can be problematic. So many stories (including BIONICLE, Hero Factory, and, until recently, Ninjago) feature a heroic team of boys with just one "team girl". The boys on the team will have diverse personalities, while the girl will tend to fit into one or two archetypes, without much room to explore female diversity. This leaves female fans with fewer female characters to relate to. And while society is progressing to the point that people are comfortable identifying with a character of the opposite gender, it's simply not fair that girls should so often be forced to do so if they want a character who really reflects their personality, while boys have a wide range of male characters to choose between. Obviously I agree with you that certain stories could not be told with female characters in equivalent roles. After all, if you want to write a story about a society or a part of society where one gender is absolutely rejected (for instance, Disney's Mulan), then having equal male and female representation in equivalent roles could completely undercut the story's themes and messages. At the same time, as long as male and female characters are unevenly represented in media, it is important that storytellers not use these justifications as an excuse not to bother with creating diverse female characters. That starts to cut close to old-school gender prejudices in other fields, like business (for which women were long considered unfit due to stereotypes about them being unassertive, fickle, and prone to mood swings). And you shouldn't fabricate a justification where it is not supported by real life. BIONICLE is a good example. Yes, gender ratios in the BIONICLE universe were incredibly skewed, but the official story's reasons for this were perfectly arbitrary from a real-world perspective. There's no storytelling reason that elements like Air and Ice couldn't be female, or why genders had to be tied to elements at all. It was purely a matter of toy sales: it was well-known that action figures of female characters didn't tend to sell as well as action figures of male characters, so fewer female characters were introduced. I would say this was an understandable marketing decision, but a very poor storytelling decision, since there was no need to create flimsy rules to justify imbalanced gender ratios when it could have just represented the genders unevenly (like in the Glatorian, Ninjago, Chima, or Hero Factory sets) without imposing rigid restrictions that would affect future official characters and fan-created characters alike. Just because you can come up with a story where an overwhelmingly male cast is justified doesn't mean you should when there are so many other kinds of stories to choose from.