Comic Cartoon Toy rants - expect spoilers and very personal opinions

[griffin]

This is for rants and personal opinions about Transformers comics, cartoons, toys, etc, that may not be appropriate for news or review topics (if it will derail them with off-topic posts or debates)... so that this site isn't accused of pre-emptive censorship just because us staff know where a debate is heading.
Posts from news and reviews topics might end up being moved here under that reason.

If you don't want to see spoilers or more extreme or outdated personal opinions, don't interact in this topic or respond to those people.

If you don't like the opinions of someone else, don't complain about it or respond to them - you have the ability to filter their posts in your Control Panel if you don't want to see outdated or unpopular opinions.

As long as people are only targeting opinions, and are not directly targeting or insulting other members, posts will be left untouched.

And it is recommended not to keep arguing the same point or opinion just because others don't agree with you. Once you've made your point, leave it and walk away if someone doesn't agree with you. Chances are, you won't be able to change their opinion, especially if done in a hostile manner.
.

[bowspearer]

Looks like a hard reboot. Lost Light is going biweekly and wrapping up the current "season" at the same time the Unicron series ends (according to James Roberts on Twitter). Wreckers will wrap up. All th loose ends being tied up.

A hard reboot if done right would get me back on board with them. My issue has never been the relationships per se, but the fact that the universe building required to push certain storylines and issues, simply hasn't been there.

If they do want to push certain concepts and issues next time round, then it needs to start right at the universe building stage - right down to the xenobiology at play. If they want gender and romantic relationships in there from the getgo, fine - just make sure the xenobiology and xenopsychology is compatible with those agendas.

What really needs to happen is for people to sit down, take a good hard look at what all the possibilities they want to take place in their universe and write a detailed bible which encompasses the various biologies, sociologies and histories that requires - then lock it in and lock it down. Anything which can work within that framework goes ahead - anything incompatible with it either gets rejected or they go down the "multiverse" route - where again, each universe introduced has its own bible.

That's just good storytelling.

[bowspearer]

I wonder what they'll reboot with? Does everyone still want G1? I'm finding constant throw backs and references to the Geewun universe is getting kind of tiresome these days.

Whatever they reboot with, I just want a properly constructed universe (history, xenobiology, xenopsychology and xenosociology) and a story which works within that framework. The beginning of the end for IDW was when they started pushing agendas which simply didn't work within the framework they had and the ret-conning they used was at best, really weak, and left plot-holes which weren't properly plugged up.

The days of continuity nightmares being acceptable are long gone. The G1 cartoon creative license with continuity died in the 1990s. These days it's completely reasonable to expect science fiction - even in comics - to have a well constructed bible and stick to it.

The reason the IDW comic worked so well to begin with was because it had a lore that it didn't deviate from and it was able to put that lore ahead of egos and agendas - something which Mairghread Scott proved she was utterly incapable of after that appalling and baseless attack on Simon Furman.

If you are that compelled to anthropomorphise an entirely alien race (so alien that it's xenobiology is actually gaiasexual), then you have no business writing stories about that alien race and should stick to writing about human beings - period!

And yes, the state of play with IDW comics does deeply annoy me; it started out as a unique take on Transformers (Furman even originally said in an interview that there probably wouldn't even be a Unicron), which was well crafted and took a hard-scifi approach in its universe building.

Heck, in the past I've even made the argument that the live-action movies would have been 100 times better than they'd have been if they simply adapted the Dead-Furmanverse. Heck, if you wanted to explore the idea of gender and transgenderism in the IDW universe, the whole functionalist phenomenon in Cybertronian society already made for a great allegory for it. After all, IDW Cybertronian xenobiology and xenopsychology doesn't allow for gender to naturally occur as sex does not naturally occur, however function and function identity clearly does exist.

Then because people whose agendas clearly outstrip their universe building abilities decide that political agendas are far more important than quality storytelling craft, the wheels have gradually fallen off the wagon.

And for booting up cold, if they did want to literally push the gender and sexual relationships agenda, would it have been so hard for them to have simply taken the blasted multiverse approach and had all the characters who were female and in sexual relationships (heterosexual or homosexual) from an alt universe where the Cybertronians actually had a xenobiology, xenopsychology and or xenosociology which was actually compatible with those concepts and had the wall between realities break down.

It's not like there wasn't already the potential there from the getgo with the dead universe.

But no, who needs actual craft when all you care about is pushing agendas and to hell with quality storytelling, right? That's clearly how the writing staff at IDW have come to think. You know I'm actually glad that Dwayne MacDuffy is dead and doesn't have to see so many comic publications getting so wrong, what he and the rest of Milestone got so right.

Yet after all this time and how downhill it has all gone, clearly IDW did need it and now they're paying for it.

I just hope that whoever does the reboot - be they in IDW or Marvel - actually does the universe-building that a Transformers comic deserves before even scripting Issue 1 and then locks it in as sacrosanct for that reality.

[bowspearer]

And where?

If you weren't so busy dogmatically virtue signalling and actually read what I wrote, you'd clearly see that the entire post was actually about not only the poor quality universe building, but the complete disregard and contempt for the existing build universe, which was used to justify pushing an agenda. I also suggested ways in which the LGBTIQ agenda could have been explored, which were compatible with that universe. I pointed out that it could have been done literally by taking the multiverse approach (the dead universe sets a precedent for it) or as an allegory with functionalism.

If my beef was with the LGBTIQ agenda and not the universe building, then why would I have stated ways it could have been implemented that I would have been fine with?

But ultimately if you're determined to read what I wrote through the blinkers and lens of Cultural Marxist cognitive dissonance, then that's ultimately your choice. Just don't expect me to respect that irrational choice.

[bowspearer]

Looks like the hard reboot side won.

I *hate* reboots and it's a slap in the face of every consumer that bought the considerable volume of IDW stories. It didn't happen, the characters we've come to know and love didn't have these experiences. I hated the DC reboot, the Marvel, and now IDW. And I am still going to be paying for stories that got rebooted as part of the Hachette Transformer Collection.

Not. Happy. Jan.:mad:

Ordinarily I'd agree with you. The problem here is that the series is a massive continuity mess after a poorly done soft reboot. The current IDW staff really need to learn how to properly engage in universe building and work with existing built universes in a way where when they want things to take a massive left or right turn, it all still seamlessly works. Sadly nothing the current IDW staff have done, is shown they're upto the task with that.

I actually wish DC got the Transformers licence tbh. Say what you will about the likes of New 52, but at least they can write a coherrent multiverse where things can turn on their head completely with two different versions of the same character (eg Batman vs Owlman) and still make sense.

Not as an extreme example, but let's the Rewind and Chromedome originally having just a close friendship and then Rewind and Chromedome suddenly being lovers. Nothing in the IDW continuity - specifically the xenobiology and xenopsychology is compatible with that. For Chromedome and Rewind to be lovers, it can only be explained by the later Chromedome and Rewind having a different xenobiology and/or xenopsychology which is both compatible and conducive to Rewind and Chromedome being lovers.

In short, you're essentially talking about an Earth-1/Earth-2 type situation. The same "character", but different because they're essentially from a different reality to each other - as evidenced by their xenobiology and xenopsychology.

Yet rather than intelligently approach this intelligently and have a crossover and kill the earlier versions of the characters off, the writers simply pretended that "Earth-1" Chromedome and Rewind were really "Earth-2" Chromedome and Rewind, while keeping the xenobiology of Cybertron as that of "Earth-1". That kind of thing simply wouldn't be likely to happen in DC, yet IDW have shown that they're fine going down the path of that continuity nightmare. Honestly, both Transformers and the under-represented groups they were attempting to represent, deserved a much more competent execution of things.

[Paulbot]

Really bad (and telling) example you picked there. Rewind and Chromedome were introduced to the IDW comics by James Roberts. Nobody came in and rewrote them into being a couple. The same writer introduced them, developed them, revealed their relationship, and did world-building by establishing rules around how Cybertronian relationships work (and "lovers" in a sexual sense doesn't come in to that - that's why there's other words used). It wasn't an "agenda", it was story-telling, it was world-building, it was expanding how Transformers can work in fiction.

There is very little in the IDW comics that is a continuity mess. The writers and editors have done pretty good job keeping things lined up, even with harder to reconcile things like Primacy or Megatron Origin. The addition of new information into a fictional universe that becomes established fact is just part of how fictional universes work. Why wasn't there any discussion of Conjunx Endura during Infiltration or Stormbringer - maybe because the Transformers were in a four million year war and personal relationships were less on their minds? It doesn't mean they took a massive turn. It always seemed very natural expansion.

[bowspearer]

Really bad (and telling) example you picked there. Rewind and Chromedome were introduced to the IDW comics by James Roberts. Nobody came in and rewrote them into being a couple. The same writer introduced them, developed them, revealed their relationship, and did world-building by establishing rules around how Cybertronian relationships work (and "lovers" in a sexual sense doesn't come in to that - that's why there's other words used). It wasn't an "agenda", it was story-telling, it was world-building, it was expanding how Transformers can work in fiction.

I went with it because it's arguably the most high profile example, but whichever way you slice it, it still makes a point of things. Either you're talking about them being overtly rewritten, or you're talking about them being introduced into a universe where Cybertronian xenobiology is incompatible with pair bonding and then suddenly it's a thing. Either you're analogously treating Earth 2 characters as Earth 1 character out of nowhere, or you're putting Earth -2 characters into Earth-1, with insufficient universe building to competently explain it.

You can argue that "lovers" in a heterosexually reproducing series isn't used, but the problem there is the way in which I first became aware of their relationship - where Roberts has treated it as being exactly a case of the "human" version of it.

I stopped reading just after Days of Future Past, which was interesting, when I caught wind of the preview for I think it was Issue 42 of MTMTE, where it became clear we weren't going to get a credible explanation for why a species which is reproduced by their planet would have naturally occurring sexes/genders. I was prepared to give them a chance when Windblade came onto the scene for there to be a credible explanation for how genders could naturally exist in a species where their existence made no biological sense, but after close to 10 issues, it became clear we weren't getting one. At that point, it became clear that the quality of universe building that gave us hotspots, forged vs constructed cold, functionalism and Stage-6ers (which I have to say have been a missed opportunity in terms of exploring their place in Cybertronian society), was going to be a thing of the past, and I reluctantly said goodbye to it.

But I digress. I first became aware of it in a magazine article celebrating Chromedome and Rewind as a same-sex couple, where Roberts went along with things and made no attempt to distinguish this from human homosexual relationships and was more than happy to have it portrayed as such. I've since learned that there are a multitude of heterosexual and homosexual pair-bonding relationships (be it Onslaught and Blast-Off or Nautica and I think it was Blurr). Yet the thing is that pair bonding of any kind, really doesn't make sense for a species which doesn't require pair-bonding to reproduce; after all, the biological function of pair bonding is to maximise the survivability of the offspring by having both progenitors/parents hang around to look after their offspring.

It works in the G1 Cartoon - the Autobots were essentially robot maids and butlers whom the Quintessons no doubt also designed to act as companions and quite possibly sex-bots (apologies if this last one is age inappropriate).

Beast Wars and Beast Machines -again, you have both animal programming and animal DNA influencing a Cybertronian, and in Beast Machines you literally have heterosexually reproducing, technorganic life forms. In fact short of wondering what the heck a plant crossed with a rat looks like and hoping it survives longer than the poor rat in Batman and Harley Quinn, I'm perfectly fine with that relationship in every biological sense.

The idea of the planet producing sparks and either naturally producing bodies for them, or where that failed, a pseudo cult being established around producing artificial bodies for bodyless sparks, isn't a natural fit with pair bonding of any kind.

Yes it's world building, but its world building that is incongruent with the established universe and would have been far better handled from a multiverse perspective.

What is a natural fit with that type of Cybertronian xenobiology though, is the idea of a caste system based around functionalism. In fact what would have been a very interesting way of exploring transgenderism and society's reaction to it, would to have been to explore transfunctionalism. In fact Lightspeed, with his identifying as a flyer but being stuck as a having a ground-based alt-mode, would have made for an intelligent exploration of transgender issues.

As for the agenda side of things, I base that on the comments of Mairghread Scott. The way Simon Furman handled Arcee was intelligent and empathetic. He had Jhiaxus make Arcee happening by kidnapping them and altering their RNA to introduce gender into Cybertronian society. He made Arcee female as a point of difference. That automatically made every single other Cybertronian male by extension. The handling of Arcee's origins did nothing but endear sympathy for her and even more hatred for the vile monster which was Jhiaxus. Yet Mairghread Scott ripped into Furman and accused him of being a misogynist.

Then when she's brought not only Windblade, but other female characters into the fold, we get this "they've always been there" explanation, which makes absolutely no sense in terms of IDW's established Cybertronian xenobiology. Never mind the fact that if they were always there, I have yet to read about the massive genocide of female Cybertronians which would have had to have taken place for Jhiaxus to suddenly be reintroducing gender, as opposed to simply introducing it. Even the G1 Cartoon, as continuity flawed as it was, managed to get that part of things right when bringing female Autobots seemingly out of nowhere.

That absolutely screams out viewing universe building as "pesky" and something to be treated as the obstacle to a political agenda, rather than the very foundation of any good storytelling.

Whether Roberts was directly a party to it himself, or whether he was simply working within what Scott had created, you're still talking about a situation where his work was one where exploring issues was done at the expense of solid universe building - to the point where it could be accused of overtly pushing an agenda to the point of blatant flag waving.

As I said, I'm fine with an exploration of issues, I just expect the universe building to be well-crafted.


There is very little in the IDW comics that is a continuity mess.

And yet, in the latest continuity gaffe, we suddenly have Unicron in a universe that was established as having Unicron right from the getgo by Simon Furman.


The writers and editors have done pretty good job keeping things lined up, even with harder to reconcile things like Primacy or Megatron Origin.

Which is precisely why they would have been better taking the multiverse approach.


The addition of new information into a fictional universe that becomes established fact is just part of how fictional universes work.

Not exactly. There's world-building which fits seamlessly with what is already there and there's trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. My problem with IDW is that it's very much become the later.


Why wasn't there any discussion of Conjunx Endura during Infiltration or Stormbringer - maybe because the Transformers were in a four million year war and personal relationships were less on their minds? It doesn't mean they took a massive turn. It always seemed very natural expansion.

I don't buy that for one minute. These are teams which existed working in close proximity for millions of years. They did so in high pressure situations which were often life and death. If we've learned anything from human pair bonding as a sentient pair bonding species, it is that those are the very type of conditions which will bring about pair-bonding where it might otherwise not take place. Yet particularly with Stormbringer, where there would have been a prime example to introduce it, there was absolutely no sign of it.

Like I said, it might well be universe-building, but it's the kind which tries to fit a square peg into a round hole.

[SMHFConvoy]

Jesus Christ, I'm so sick of the, "Female robots? Same sex relationships? It must be some sort of agenda." argument.

It has no place here.

[BigTransformerTrev]

In regards to the actual topic of this thread: :p;)

I'm not surprised that the Wreckers is a one-shot, they haven't left enough characters from the Wreckers alive or still on the team to make a bigger story :rolleyes:

Unicron is looking awesome in the preview - and huger than ever! :eek:


My 2 cents on the other discussions that have cropped up :)


Let’s hope Uniceon eats enough of the IDW verse that we stop getting all the useless ands meaningless cross overs and events. IDW have become as bad as Marvel!




Please let this be the end of all the crossovers and tie ins with other licenses.

The one off Transformers/Mars Attacks was pretty funny! :D

Besides that I agree with you. There should only be one universe that Transformers crosses over with and that's My Little Pony! Now there is a missed opportunity! Rainbow Dash & The Wonderbolts vs Starscream & The Seekers, Rarity flirting her way into making any Autobot do her bidding - it would be a friggin sensation! :D



Ordinarily I'd agree with you. The problem here is that the series is a massive continuity mess after a poorly done soft reboot. The current IDW staff really need to learn how to properly engage in universe building and work with existing built universes in a way where when they want things to take a massive left or right turn, it all still seamlessly works. Sadly nothing the current IDW staff have done, is shown they're upto the task with that.

I actually wish DC got the Transformers licence tbh. Say what you will about the likes of New 52, but at least they can write a coherrent multiverse where things can turn on their head completely with two different versions of the same character (eg Batman vs Owlman) and still make sense.

Not as an extreme example, but let's the Rewind and Chromedome originally having just a close friendship and then Rewind and Chromedome suddenly being lovers. Nothing in the IDW continuity - specifically the xenobiology and xenopsychology is compatible with that. For Chromedome and Rewind to be lovers, it can only be explained by the later Chromedome and Rewind having a different xenobiology and/or xenopsychology which is both compatible and conducive to Rewind and Chromedome being lovers.

In short, you're essentially talking about an Earth-1/Earth-2 type situation. The same "character", but different because they're essentially from a different reality to each other - as evidenced by their xenobiology and xenopsychology.

Yet rather than intelligently approach this intelligently and have a crossover and kill the earlier versions of the characters off, the writers simply pretended that "Earth-1" Chromedome and Rewind were really "Earth-2" Chromedome and Rewind, while keeping the xenobiology of Cybertron as that of "Earth-1". That kind of thing simply wouldn't be likely to happen in DC, yet IDW have shown that they're fine going down the path of that continuity nightmare. Honestly, both Transformers and the under-represented groups they were attempting to represent, deserved a much more competent execution of things.

They are gigantic, shape-changing, mass-changing, sentient alien robots who live for millions of years and fight a civil war across the stars...

...but they have romantic relationships is too far fetched?

Take all the xenobiology and xenopsychology out of it. Transformers is fiction and pretty far-fetched fiction at that. They can do what they like; they can have Merlin show up and cast a spell so that all the Decepticons grow squirrel tails and the Autobots all combine into one gigantic likeness of Mrs Slocombe from Are You Being Served. There are no rules in fiction. Might not make for great story telling though, I'll grant ya that.

I thought the Rewind/Chromedome romance was very sweet. The main problem (as I see it and I may be wrong) was that it proved too popular so then IDW started sticking in romances right left and center. It was when we reached the Onslaught/Blast Off one where I (and, according to the ranting on a lot of online TF boards, many others) went "OK, that doesn't fit at all. Enough with shoehorning in the romances already!".

[bowspearer]

Transformers is fiction and pretty far-fetched fiction at that.

On the contrary, Transformers has always primarily fallen under the genre of Science Fiction and this especially holds true in the case of IDW and the universe Furman originally created. Yes, Sci-fi can explore things which seem pretty far-fetched, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't have a scientific logic and consistency to it.


Take all the xenobiology and xenopsychology out of it.

Except that with well-written science fiction, that's something you don't do.


They are gigantic, shape-changing, mass-changing, sentient alien robots who live for millions of years and fight a civil war across the stars...

Exactly, as you just said, they are an alien race. That means that in some cases, things about their customs, their biology and their interactions are going to be radically different by the nature of the very fact that they are aliens and alien to our customs, our biology and our interactions.


They can do what they like; they can have Merlin show up and cast a spell so that all the Decepticons grow squirrel tails and the Autobots all combine into one gigantic likeness of Mrs Slocombe from Are You Being Served. There are no rules in fiction. Might not make for great story telling though, I'll grant ya that.

And yet even Madman's Paradise didn't contradict the xenobiology of Cybertronians for that continuity - which just goes to show that when Sci-fi does explore the Sci-fi/Fantasy genre, it doesn't abandon its Sci-fi elements. I'll add that when even the G1 Cartoon - the continuity nightmare of the Transformers meta-lore - manages to stay true to genre in a way something else doesn't, then that's really saying something.


...but they have romantic relationships is too far fetched?

For their xenobiology and xenopsychology, they are. What people take for granted is the role sex plays in not only our pair bonding, but even the way civilisation itself formed. Human beings and most - if not all species on the planet heterosexually reproduce. Pair bonding exists as a direct function of child rearing where it is found in birds and mammals and typically involves one parent hunting and gathering and the other directly rearing the young - or one hunts while the other gathers.

But it goes deeper than that. As humans realised they could kill much larger prey (eg mammoths) in teams than they could smaller prey alone, it meant men teaming up together. That meant the alpha sharing not only their share of the spoils of that kill, but also their share of mates. The end result was a move from a poligamous alpha-male dominated breeding society, to a more monogamous communal society - the earliest tribes. From there we of course developed customs and rules, which would ultimately lead to cities, and from there, the dawn of civilisation.

Conversely, IDW's Cybertronians do not heterosexually reproduce, but rather they are gaiasexual - that is the planet naturally reproduces them. The sexual dynamics which drove our race, simply do not apply to them. If anything, Cybertronian civilisation would have formed out of functionalism - where different Cybertronians with different abilities, came together to advance the well-being and lifestyle of each other. As communities grew and merged, this wouold have solidified itself into a caste system where the roles and responsibilities of Cybtertronians would have been rigidly set by their functions. While tribalism as a loose concept does make sense for that xenobiology, the same cannot be said for romantic relationships, or any kind of pair bonding.

Then there's the fact that unlike the G1 Cartoon's Cybertronians, they're not manufactured military robots and robot maids and butlers - so you don't even have xenopsychological grounds for them in the absence of the xenobiology, like you do with the G1 Cartoon Autobots.

So yes, when you're looking at this from the perspective of Scifi, romantic relationships between Cybertronians are at best, a square peg in a round hole.


I thought the Rewind/Chromedome romance was very sweet. The main problem (as I see it and I may be wrong) was that it proved too popular so then IDW started sticking in romances right left and center. It was when we reached the Onslaught/Blast Off one where I (and, according to the ranting on a lot of online TF boards, many others) went "OK, that doesn't fit at all. Enough with shoehorning in the romances already!".

Popular doesn't necessarily mean that it's well crafted storytelling for the genre a story is a part of though - and yes, there can be very good characterisation in something, but for the genre it's in, it can be a square peg in a round hole, which is what the whole Rewind/Chromedome relationship ultimately fell into the trap of being. In fact I'd describe it as blatant anthropomorphism. Yes it was well written anthropomorphism - but anthropomorphism which made it poor storytelling for its genre nonetheless.

Bear in mind that with Transformers, all anyone has to do is look at the financial success vs the quality of the live action movies for example, to see that just because something is popular, is absolutely no indication that a story is going to be good quality - I mean, AoE anyone.

[bowspearer]

Jesus Christ, I'm so sick of the, "Female robots? Same sex relationships? It must be some sort of agenda." argument.

With the exception of Arcee, gender doesn't fit the xenobiology or xenopsychology of IDW's Cybertronians. Yet rather than distancing her own tendencies for anthropomorphism from things, Mairghread Scott publicly and baselessly accused Simon Furman of misogyny. Then she brought female Transformers - and by extension a naturally gendered Cybertronian race into this continuity. A naturally gendered Cybertronian race is at odds with the xenobiology and xenopsychology of the race. Scott did nothing to properly reconcile this massive inconsistency.

Scott has failed to reconcile this glaring plothole. Her scathing attack on Simon Furman could reasonably be taken as evidence that not only has she no desire to fix the glaring genre-based continuity issue, but regards any criticisms of this as "misogyny". As such, it is entirely reasonable to assert that gender being shoehorned into this particular continuity is a clear case of political agendas being put ahead of well-crafted storytelling.


It has no place here.

Really, because last I checked, people were talking in these IDW threads of late about the downfall of the story and issues with the quality of storytelling. How does criticising bad anthropomorphism which puts story out of its genre, not fit with that.

Just because you're not a fan of an argument, doesn't mean it doesn't have a valid place in the wider conversation being had

[BigTransformerTrev]

OK mate, this is obviously something that you feel strongly about and have put a lot of thought into. And I did read your post, though I wont address any particular points as it all comes down to as I said:


There are no rules in fiction

Doesn't matter if its science fiction or fan fiction or erotic fiction - the fact it is fiction means anything goes. Of course that can make it bad fiction and we all certainly know there is plenty of that about. But you assume rules where none exist. There is no rule that Transformers cant have romantic feelings because they are not real. Doesn't fit into your philosophy of how Transformers should act and that's fine, but you must allow for others to feel differently.

You can discuss xenobiology and xenopsychology all you like, they are quite interesting subjects, but once again, you assume rules where none exist as this is fiction. You could argue for instance that greed should not exist in the early Cybertronian empire as there was more than enough energon to go around so greed serves no purpose in their society and as such should not exist, but that removes what is often a driving force for storylines and that is what these are - stories.

And yes, anthropomorphism exists in Transformers and it always will. One could argue that it is almost impossible to have Transformers without it. Readers and viewers need to be able to relate on some level to the characters. Greed, love, hate, jealousy, covetousness, anger, passion, social justice, honor, integrity - these are all for the most part essentially human characteristics. Without them you would just have a bunch of robots acting in such an alien (or perhaps simply robotic) fashion that it would alienate most fans. And most (not all) Transformers resemble humans in their main robot mode (bipedal, 2 arms, 2 legs, 2 eyes, hands with opposable thumbs, head on top etc) because this is what the public can relate to best. If we were to look at Transformers at their core, there is no major reason any of them should appear humanoid - they could have fifteen arms and their heads in their torso's etc - but those toys are hard to put in heroic poses.

So mate, I appreciate your passion and yours is an interesting point of view. But that is all it is - a point of view - much like mine is, so please don't get cross if people don't agree with it and remember that there are no hard and fast rules in a completely fictitious universe. If we were to take fiction too seriously, then The Third Little Pig should not have been able to build his house with bricks as trotters lack the dexterity to handle a trowel ;)

I hope you enjoy the reboot of the IDW'verse when it happens. Maybe it will fit more with your philosophy :)

[SMHFConvoy]

Bowspearer, Scott didn't bring female Transformers into continuity.

IDW and Hasbro did, Scott was hired to, which she did after Roberts and Barber wrote Dark Cybertron.

[bowspearer]

There are no rules in fiction.

That's not exactly true. There are rules for different genres. If this were Fantasy, then sure, you could take an "anything goes" approach, but with Science-Fiction, you're always going to find that there is a reasonable expectation and a convention that it adhere to the science of that world - even if the science involves things which are purely theoretical. Ergo where you could get away with Transformer pair-bondings period if it were fantasy or general fiction, with Science-Fiction it is going to come down to the xenobiology and xenopsychology of Cybertronians in that particular continuity.


Doesn't fit into your philosophy of how Transformers should act and that's fine, but you must allow for others to feel differently.

I never said people couldn't enjoy it; if anything the reverse seems to be true. There appears is a complete lack of tolerance in the Transfan community for anyone who dares to take issue with the introduction of gender and relationships into the IDW continuity on the grounds of compatibility with the Cybertronian xenobiology and xenopsychology is somehow automatically a homophobic, transphobic misogynist.


You can discuss xenobiology and xenopsychology all you like, they are quite interesting subjects, but once again, you assume rules where none exist as this is fiction.

Again, we're talking Science-fiction, not general fiction though and so there are certain conventions there - which in this case includes making sure that behaviours are congruent with the biology and psychology of a race.


You could argue for instance that greed should not exist in the early Cybertronian empire as there was more than enough energon to go around so greed serves no purpose in their society and as such should not exist, but that removes what is often a driving force for storylines and that is what these are - stories.

Actually in the IDW universe there is a credible explanation for that. All life has a keen instinct for self-preservation and an argument could be made that jealousy is a darker manifestation of that impulse. This is where the concept of a Stage-6er becomes so crucial. In what would be a functionalist society, you have these 'uber-sparks' if you will, vastly superior. In a functionalist society, these will be seen as superior and practically worshipped by that society. Conversely, this will breed feelings of entitlement, superiority and contempt for lesser members of society by the Stage-6ers. This in turn will breed inferiority, mistrust and loathing. This will in turn out of self-preservation lead to things like hate, fear, greed and envy.

So actually even though we know these as human traits, they're something which the xenobiology and xenopsychology of IDW's Cybertron make not only possible, but arguably inevitable.


And yes, anthropomorphism exists in Transformers and it always will. One could argue that it is almost impossible to have Transformers without it. Readers and viewers need to be able to relate on some level to the characters.

However there's good anthropomorphism and bad anthropomorphism when it comes to sci-fi. Good anthropomorphism doesn't clash with the existing xenobiology and xenopsychology of an alien race; bad anthropomorphism disregards them entirely.


So mate, I appreciate your passion and yours is an interesting point of view. But that is all it is - a point of view - much like mine is, so please don't get cross if people don't agree with it and remember that there are no hard and fast rules in a completely fictitious universe. If we were to take fiction too seriously, then The Third Little Pig should not have been able to build his house with bricks as trotters lack the dexterity to handle a trowel ;)

As I said, the notion of there being no rules simply doesn't apply to Science-fiction as a genre and there's no getting around that. However that doesn't mean that everyone is going to have the same level of enjoyment out of things, or be bugged to the same level by it. Like I said I'm on the Spectrum, so I'm open to this being a quirk of mine as I could picture Sheldon Cooper doing the same thing. Likewise, there's nothing to say that people can't suspend their awareness of the rules of science-fiction being breached and enjoy romances in IDW's Transformers in the same way they would a human romance or there being naturally occurring genders in a universe which is completely incompatible with it. People's right to enjoy it in that matter should absolutely be respected.

However the same has to be true of those people who are critical of it because it fails to adhere to the rules of science fiction where it once did. That can't happen when people are too busy reading what they want to read and crying "misogyny" or "white supremacist" at every turn - because they're only willing to respect and engage in discussion with those who adhere to their political ideology lock, stock and barrel in an unquestioning manner.

[BigTransformerTrev]

As I said, the notion of there being no rules simply doesn't apply to Science-fiction as a genre and there's no getting around that.

No, I'm sorry but that statement is untrue. There are things that Science-fiction should have in it to make it good science-fiction, but there are no concrete rules stating how science-fiction has to go - except it should contain elements of science/technology and of course be fictitious.

I obviously however am going to be unable to convince you of this premise so will not insult you further by trying to change your mind regarding something you have made up your mind regarding. Good luck to you.

[bowspearer]

Bowspearer, Scott didn't bring female Transformers into continuity.

Actually, with the exception of Arcee, she did and Arcee has a fundamentally different origin than Windblade and every single female Cybertronian in IDW. Where Arcvee makes sense in a gaiasexual Cybertron as the product of genetic experimentation, the other female Transformers simply have a "they've always been there" explanation and origin, which is completely incompatible with the xenobiology and xenopsychology of IDW Cybertronians, as compared to say, Sunbow Cybertronians.


IDW and Hasbro did, Scott was hired to, which she did after Roberts and Barber wrote Dark Cybertron.

Even if you're going to make that argument, you still have the issue of the way she went about it and her very public statements on the issue. It's not simply a matter that she failed to recognise a fundamental incompatibility between the notions of naturally gendered (as opposed to naturally functioned) Cybertronians and a gaiasexual Cybertronian race. Her attacks on Simon Furman make it clear that she is hostile to recognising the incompatibility to the point where as her tirade against Simon Furman suggests, she clearly believes that Furman and anyone who enjoyed that story, are nothing but a pack of hateful misogynists who must view all women as no different to science experiments from The Island of Dr Moreau.

That makes her a very poor choice to introduce gender into IDW as it requires someone who can set their own feelings and political agendas aside long enough to put the story first and reconcile that incompatibility in a manner which works for a piece of Science-fiction; Scott failed woefully at doing so on every level.

[bowspearer]

No, I'm sorry but that statement is untrue. There are things that Science-fiction should have in it to make it good science-fiction, but there are no concrete rules stating how science-fiction has to go - except it should contain elements of science/technology and of course be fictitious.

You've contradicted yourself here a little. Like you said, there are certain conventions that science-fiction needs to adhere to for it to be good science-fiction; the moment it fails to adhere to those it can rightly be criticised as bad science-fiction. That logically implies that there are indeed a set of rules for science-fiction which must be adhered to if it is to be deemed good science fiction. That therefore further implies that there are a set of rules which science fiction writers should adhere to.

You've said science-fiction:
should contain elements of science/technology and of course be fictitious.

However that omits one thing. Good science-fiction should always make sure that its story is compatible with whatever science and technology it has present. Those scientific phenomenon might be utterly fantastical to our current understandings of science, however the characters in that universe should be as bound to them as we are by the laws of physics. That means, to bring this full circle, that if the biology of a particular alien race is set up to have certain characteristics, that it should endeavour to portray characters from alien races in a manner which are consistent with those characteristics.

Like I said, the problem with naturally occurring gender and pair-bonding being introduced out of nowhere and to a version of Cybertronians which they are incompatible with, is that it takes it from the realms of good science-fiction, to bad science-fiction, that is trying to be fantasy without realising it.

And btw, you're not upsetting me, I'm actually enjoying having a rational discussion on this without certain parties baselessly villifying me as a member of the alt-right.

[BigTransformerTrev]

You've contradicted yourself here a little. Like you said, there are certain conventions that science-fiction needs to adhere to for it to be good science-fiction; the moment it fails to adhere to those it can rightly be criticised as bad science-fiction. That logically implies that there are indeed a set of rules for science-fiction which must be adhered to if it is to be deemed good science fiction. That therefore further implies that there are a set of rules which science fiction writers should adhere to.

No contradiction. I'm not making a differentiation between good and bad science-fiction, I am saying that, besides containing science/technology and being fictitious there are no rules stating how it has to go in order for it to be considered science-fiction. Therefore Transformers romance does not break any sci-fi rules.

Whether it is good or bad science-fiction is usually in the eye of the reader, but yes I personally think there are things that should go in to make it good - in my opinion. But it's just my opinion - my opinion is not fact no matter how much I may believe in it.




Like I said, the problem with naturally occurring gender and pair-bonding being introduced out of nowhere and to a version of Cybertronians which they are incompatible with, is that it takes it from the realms of good science-fiction, to bad science-fiction, that is trying to be fantasy without realising it.

Which is your opinion. The opinion of some others here differ. What can be good science-fiction to one person can be bad-science fiction to another. So you think gender and romance have been handled poorly in IDW and that's fair enough. Personally I liked it for the most part, I didn't think it was bad fiction. But then I didn't like the Onslaught/Blast Off romance as it didn't ring true, I know there are others in this thread/on this site who feel completely differently to me.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion - in fiction there are rarely any absolutes.

Anyway mate, I'm taking my kids to their Easter Bonnett parade at Preschool now and then camping tonight so don't take it the wrong way if I do not engage in this debate further as time will preclude me from doing so - as I said, good luck to you.

[bowspearer]

No contradiction. I'm not making a differentiation between good and bad science-fiction, I am saying that, besides containing science/technology and being fictitious there are no rules stating how it has to go in order for it to be considered science-fiction. Therefore Transformers romance does not break any sci-fi rules.

That's just it. There are conventions with good science-fiction - namely that it adheres completely to the laws of science set up in that particular universe. In other universes, like say, Beast Wars, romance is compatible with it, but not this one. So in breaking continuity with its own laws of science - in this case biology, it is technically bad science fiction for failing to fully adhere to the rules of the genre.


Whether it is good or bad science-fiction is usually in the eye of the reader, but yes I personally think there are things that should go in to make it good - in my opinion. But it's just my opinion - my opinion is not fact no matter how much I may believe in it.

Which is your opinion. The opinion of some others here differ. What can be good science-fiction to one person can be bad-science fiction to another. So you think gender and romance have been handled poorly in IDW and that's fair enough. Personally I liked it for the most part, I didn't think it was bad fiction. But then I didn't like the Onslaught/Blast Off romance as it didn't ring true, I know there are others in this thread/on this site who feel completely differently to me.

I agree with the spirit of what you're saying, but I'd assert that you're conflating how enjoyable or well written a story is with how well it works as science-fiction. I can think of at least one example going completely in the opposite direction. With IDW, there's no doubt the characters have been well-written, plenty of people have found it enjoyable and there were some well-written plot-points. However it fails as sci-fi for failing to stay within the rules of science it established for itself.

Conversely take 2001: A Space Odyssey. It's hard science-fiction and is absolutely compatible with the laws of science it set up for itself. In that regard, it dots every 'i' and crosses every 't', figuratively speaking. However the scene with Dave being taken through the wormhole, literally put me to sleep when I was wide awake before that.

Essentially how well something works within a genre and things like characterisations, plot, etc, are two different things. Like you said, everyone is going to have a different opinion on things, but that's largely because everyone is going to take something different from it and be focused on different things. However that doesn't mean there aren't objective yardsticks which people can measure aspects of a piece of fiction by and either praise or criticise them accordingly.

[bowspearer]

Please don't make me close another comic topic.
Ignore people who don't agree with your personal opinions or won't see your perspective on things.

While I certainly appreciate your concern, I don't see this turning into a repeat of that thread at this point. Yes there's some disagreement, but if anything BigTransformerTrev and I are having a rational, civil discussion where there's absolutely no ill-feeling involved. Unless someone enters out of left field to throw a spanner in the works, I can't see this thread being a repeat of the other one.

[SMHFConvoy]

Scott was hired.

The decision to bring gender to Transformers was Hasbro's, judging by the POTP line I'd say they were very happy with the results and that the reboot will feature female characters of a robotic persuasion and hopefully plenty of unconventional relationships.

It's not an agenda it's the reflection of the world.

[bowspearer]

Scott was hired.

Which doesn't absolve that decision from criticism when it's justified.


The decision to bring gender to Transformers was Hasbro's, judging by the POTP line I'd say they were very happy with the results and that the reboot will feature female characters of a robotic persuasion and hopefully plenty of unconventional relationships.

Provided that Cybertronian xenopbiology and xenopsychology in the reboot are compatible with it as they have been in the Sunbow and Mainframe continuities, I'll be fine with it.


It's not an agenda

And yet Scott's actions and her attitudes clearly suggest she put her own agendas and politics ahead of universe building. I've already pointed to Scott's tirade against Furman and the way things weren't reconciled properly as evidence of that. If you're contradicting me, then where is your evidence to back that assertion up?

Never mind the fact that the irony is that if she'd stepped back and gotten some perspective, she'd have seen that there didn't have to be a choice.


it's the reflection of the world.

Whose world - ours or the world of the Transformers? If it's the later, in which continuity?

See here's the thing; you're not being rational. My issue is that the xenobiology of the IDW was incompatible with gender and pair-bonding, yet the writing team not only failed to reconcile this; they were in at least one prominent instance, utterly hostile to the person who created the universe to begin with.

You're engaging in a false equivalency fallacy where because I take umbridge with how things have been handled, I must be hostile to the concepts of gender and pair-bonding in Transformers to begin with. Yet every single comment I have made here shows that fallacy to be not only baseless, but completely disingenuous.

The irony is that off the top of my head, in one response I came up with at a solution to introduce them and have it work as sci-fi within 30 seconds. If my position were what your reaction to it infers it is, then surely I'd be saying why it couldn't work at all, rather than "they should have done it this way instead".

It's an utterly fallacious and irrational position and when taken to its conclusions, is the reason why the last thread was locked.

Here's the thing that really bemuses me about your position. If you're so passionate about these issues being given the portrayal they are, then wouldn't you want that portrayal to be handled as well as possible so that it could be acclaimed rather than panned? Wouldn't you want it done in a way which minimised its exposure to criticisms rather than opened it up to them?