POTP Deluxe Jazz "error"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bowspearer

So wait, Hasbro hates this message because it's political, yet they've had no issue with the IDW comics heavily pushing an identity politics based agenda so strongly that they've introduced homosexual relationships among characters who don't even sexually reproduce to begin with?????????????

Way to be consistent there Hasbro.

---

Homosexual characters existing isn't a political statement.

It's trite to politicise their entire existence.

Transformers romances date back to the original G1 source material.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bowspearer

Actually to quote from just two parts of the article:



And:



So clearly it does say exactly that.



If we were talking human characters or an alien lifeform which actually engaged in sexual reproduction, then you would have a valid point. Such a move would be inspired, would treat these issues seriously and would be a positive thing.

However aren't talking about beings which reproduce sexually - we're not even talking about the G1 Cartoon continuity where the Autobots suffered from what I would describe as the C3PO effect (ie they acted they way they did because of programming as evolutions of consumer goods, without any genuine understanding of what romantic feelings actually are and in a manner utterly divorced from reproduction).

What we are talking about here are completely asexual beings who reproduce with sparks naturally seeding from a planet and then either naturally or artificially being implanted into a metallic biomass of some kind.

While pushing homosexual relationships in stories about characters who sexually reproduce is as valid a move as doing so with heterosexual relationships, doing it in a storyline about biologically asexual beings, simply comes across as disengenuously anthropomorphising, blatantly forced and yes I'd make the same call about ANY sexual relationship between transformers of ANY nature. In doing so, I'd go so far as to say that it cheapens, rather than helps, LGBTIQ issues and reduces the whole thing into a trivial sideshow.

However all of that ignores the bigger issue. It is impossible to claim that you do not want Transformers to be political when as a war story, Transformers has always been political.

If Hasbro want Transformers to push issues important to the Political Left, then they should just come out and say so.

However this idea that they don't want Transformers to be political when it always has been, just comes across as completely hypocritical.

---

Man. You must have really hated the whole Silverbolt/Black Arachnia thing in Beast Wars then. And Tigerhawk must have made your mind explode.

The whole Hot Rod/Arcee/Springer thing that Dreamwave had going on...

...could this make him a rare collectable?

I'd buy one misb just for that purpose, when are they coming here because ebay scalpers aren't helping!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hYpNoS

...could this make him a rare collectable?

I'd buy one misb just for that purpose, when are they coming here because ebay scalpers aren't helping!

---

Maybe that was the whole aim of the exercise! Get me greedy paws on some and be rich in 15 years :cool::D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SharkyMcShark

Homosexual characters existing isn't a political statement.

It's trite to politicise their entire existence.

---

Homosexual characters who are of a race that sexually reproduce isn't a cheap political statement certainly. Conversely, homosexual characters who aren't of a sexually producing race and where there is nothing in their psychology and and biology to suggest sexuality, is a cheap political stunt which cheapens the issues attempting to be addressed.

I wont address your point about G1 here, specifically because I'll deal with it when I respond to Trent's comments aqbout Dreamwave.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trent

Man. You must have really hated the whole Silverbolt/Black Arachnia thing in Beast Wars then.

---

Howso. You're talking about chalk and cheese here. For starters, it's established in the Beast Wars series that the Maximals and Predacons are so affected by the DNA they scan that they gain animalistic behavioural traits. Black Arachnia as a Predacon, never had the behavioural block which she would have if she were a Maximal, while Silverbolt as a Fuzor had a malfunctioning statis pod, meaning that the programming block Maximals typically got most likely was too corrupted to ever be implemented. It's the same reason that Airrazor and Tigertron's relationship is credible as both of their pods, and theirfore their MAximal programming was also corrupted.

Furthermore, by the time you get to Beast Machines (and yes, I'm going there), you're not merely talking about robots with bio-organic exoskeletons and their behavioural influences; it's reasonable to postulate as the Maximals were actually technorganic, that they evolved to beings which could technically sexually reproduce (although some of the mechanics involved, such as with Botanica and Rattrap, would have been problematic).

Interestingly enough the Beast Wars and particularly Beast Machines cartoons are places where you could credibly have a homosexual realtionship.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trent

And Tigerhawk must have made your mind explode.

---

Again, howso. The Vok fused two sparks and protoform shells together. It's no more out there than "Tuvix" (to bring up a Star Trek reference).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trent

The whole Hot Rod/Arcee/Springer thing that Dreamwave had going on...

---

You mean the Dreamwave continuity which was based on the G1 animated series continuity? You know, where as "consumer goods", the Autobots were, in addition to being manual labour droids, essentially robot butlers and robot maids, developed to behave as male and female to appeak to the clients of the Quinessons before the Great uprising?

There is nothing out of place with that, because any "romantic" feelings, are quite literally what I would describe as "C3P0 Syndrome". To elaborate, Anthony Daniels has noted that C3P0 is programed to act empathetic, courteous polite and adhering to etiquette to a fault, yet he has no genuine understanding of what those things are.

Any "romantic relationship" in the G1 Cartoon Continuity can be dismissed as nothing more than superficially going through the motions and an evolutional throwback to the days when the Transformers were ruled over by the Quintessons.

Again, from simply a behavioural sense, a superficial (and yes, all the "romantic" relationships in the cartoon were superficial) homosexual relationship which "went through the motions", is possible. However having said that I'd question its likelihood as such interactions would be likely to be regarded as programming glitches. Then again, who knows, maybe some races which the quintessons sold Autobots to had large homosexual client bases and so "gay" male Autobots and "lesbian" female Autobots (I'm using inverted commas because it would have been most likely in terms of behaviours only based on what has been seen) could possibly been a "product subline" of the Quintessons.

The same cannot be said for the IDW continuity, where there is no rational explanation for sexual relationships of any kind; in fact it has been overtly established that when it comes to reproduction themselves, the Transformers are non-sexual and their reproduction system is actually best described as gaiasexual (ie it is the planet that gives birth to them).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bowspearer

-snip-

---

Look, you've got two problems here.

The first is that you've completely omitted reference to any heterosexual IDW relationships in your discourse. I'll be honest, this aroused my suspicion.

The second is that you're approaching this from the classic starting point that procreation is the root of attraction. The fact that it's not renders your point about the relationships of IDW bots entirely moot, be they homosexual or the entirely untouched on by you heterosexuals.

(The third, if you'll allow me the luxury, is that you're doing the even more classic 'I (presumably?) have nothing against homosexuals but here is my over-reasoned logic about why they shouldn't appear in XYZ media' routine).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bowspearer

Homosexual characters who are of a race that sexually reproduce isn't a cheap political statement certainly. Conversely, homosexual characters who aren't of a sexually producing race and where there is nothing in their psychology and and biology to suggest sexuality, is a cheap political stunt which cheapens the issues attempting to be addressed.

I wont address your point about G1 here, specifically because I'll deal with it when I respond to Trent's comments aqbout Dreamwave.



Howso. You're talking about chalk and cheese here. For starters, it's established in the Beast Wars series that the Maximals and Predacons are so affected by the DNA they scan that they gain animalistic behavioural traits. Black Arachnia as a Predacon, never had the behavioural block which she would have if she were a Maximal, while Silverbolt as a Fuzor had a malfunctioning statis pod, meaning that the programming block Maximals typically got most likely was too corrupted to ever be implemented. It's the same reason that Airrazor and Tigertron's relationship is credible as both of their pods, and theirfore their MAximal programming was also corrupted.

Furthermore, by the time you get to Beast Machines (and yes, I'm going there), you're not merely talking about robots with bio-organic exoskeletons and their behavioural influences; it's reasonable to postulate as the Maximals were actually technorganic, that they evolved to beings which could technically sexually reproduce (although some of the mechanics involved, such as with Botanica and Rattrap, would have been problematic).

Interestingly enough the Beast Wars and particularly Beast Machines cartoons are places where you could credibly have a homosexual realtionship.



Again, howso. The Vok fused two sparks and protoform shells together. It's no more out there than "Tuvix" (to bring up a Star Trek reference).



You mean the Dreamwave continuity which was based on the G1 animated series continuity? You know, where as "consumer goods", the Autobots were, in addition to being manual labour droids, essentially robot butlers and robot maids, developed to behave as male and female to appeak to the clients of the Quinessons before the Great uprising?

There is nothing out of place with that, because any "romantic" feelings, are quite literally what I would describe as "C3P0 Syndrome". To elaborate, Anthony Daniels has noted that C3P0 is programed to act empathetic, courteous polite and adhering to etiquette to a fault, yet he has no genuine understanding of what those things are.

Any "romantic relationship" in the G1 Cartoon Continuity can be dismissed as nothing more than superficially going through the motions and an evolutional throwback to the days when the Transformers were ruled over by the Quintessons.

Again, from simply a behavioural sense, a superficial (and yes, all the "romantic" relationships in the cartoon were superficial) homosexual relationship which "went through the motions", is possible. However having said that I'd question its likelihood as such interactions would be likely to be regarded as programming glitches. Then again, who knows, maybe some races which the quintessons sold Autobots to had large homosexual client bases and so "gay" male Autobots and "lesbian" female Autobots (I'm using inverted commas because it would have been most likely in terms of behaviours only based on what has been seen) could possibly been a "product subline" of the Quintessons.

The same cannot be said for the IDW continuity, where there is no rational explanation for sexual relationships of any kind; in fact it has been overtly established that when it comes to reproduction themselves, the Transformers are non-sexual and their reproduction system is actually best described as gaiasexual (ie it is the planet that gives birth to them).

---

Yeah ok. The flaws and contradictions in your arguments are impressive. Almost troll-worthy. So, rather than reply to particular points, I'm going to summarise your argument for you:

Dude has no problem with giant robot hetero relationships throughout the history of the franchise, but the second we see non-hetero relationship, minds are lost.

:rolleyes:

The franchise is a sausage fest. The hole was dug 30 years ago for commercial reasons so now if a bot wants a super special friend their options are limited.
Unless you take the Seaspray option. Does that mean G1 supported Furries or worse?

There are three solutions.
1 bots can't have relationships deeper than comradeship.
2 increase the number of female bots. I am sure that won't bring out the Neanderthals.
3 deal with life being complex and messy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SharkyMcShark

Look, you've got two problems here.

The first is that you've completely omitted reference to any heterosexual IDW relationships in your discourse. I'll be honest, this aroused my suspicion.

---

The reason I omitted them was because I honestly wasn't aware of them. I stopped reading IDW aroubd issue 40 because I was completely unimpressed with the way gender was shoehorned into a continuity where it simply didn't fit - where it became clear that identity politics had become more important than universe building. I absolutely have just as much of a problem with any heterosexual relationships in the IDW continuity and for the exact same reasons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SharkyMcShark

The second is that you're approaching this from the classic starting point that procreation is the root of attraction. The fact that it's not renders your point about the relationships of IDW bots entirely moot, be they homosexual or the entirely untouched on by you heterosexuals.

---

No, I'm approaching this from an entirely logical and commonsensical starting point. It is a biological fact that sex exists for the purposes of procreation and that sexual attraction (which includes romantic attraction) exists to facilitate that procreation. That's simply a biological fact. The fact that it operates differently in homosexuals doesn't change its primary design.

Furthermore you have the writers openly stating that these are romantic relationships and therefore fall under the category of 'eros' rather than deep 'amicitia' to draw on the Ancient Greek terminology. The former is a square peg un a round hole; the later makes sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SharkyMcShark

(The third, if you'll allow me the luxury, is that you're doing the even more classic 'I (presumably?) have nothing against homosexuals but here is my over-reasoned logic about why they shouldn't appear in XYZ media' routine).

---

No I argued against sexual relationships appearing in the IDW comics period because it's essentially fitting a square peg in a round hole.

They're alien robots who cannot reproduce sexually all of the relationships that they're going to have are going to be deeper emotional and intellectual bonds.

There's nothing wrong with LGBTQI representation in media and it's presence is not a threat to CIS white males. If you can't deal with go scurry under a rock, the rest of the world wants to move on.