POTP Deluxe Jazz "error"

[DELTAprime]

Actually James Roberts has made it clear that it goes far beyond a mere outwards appearance and attitude.

The article does not say anything about that.

Two males (or in this case two robots that we think of as males) in a relationship is deemed by modern culture to be acceptable. Racism, bigotry and neo-nazism is not.

[bowspearer]

The article does not say anything about that.

Actually to quote from just two parts of the article:

Kiss me, Chromedome: how the Transformers found peace and same-sex partnerships

A spin-off comic has shape-shifted the smash ’em up Transformers robots into a world of same-sex partnerships

And:

Fans of Chromedome and Rewind may be touched to learn that the two are now in a romantic relationship.

So clearly it does say exactly that.

Two males (or in this case two robots that we think of as males) in a relationship is deemed by modern culture to be acceptable. Racism, bigotry and neo-nazism is not.

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.

[DELTAprime]

Actually to quote from just two parts of the article:



And:



So clearly it does say exactly that.

No that does not say transformers gender is any deeper than attitude or appearance. Gender and sexuality are not the same.

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.

There is no law that says love is limited to beings that reproduce.

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.

With the exception of the Bayverse Transformers has always been progressive, pushing for greater ideals in young and old fans alike. If this is a problem for you I suggest you stop giving Hasbro and Takara any of your money or time.

[bowspearer]

No that does not say transformers gender is any deeper than attitude or appearance. Gender and sexuality are not the same.

Except that sexual orientation and romantic relationships are entirely centred around sexuality rather than gender. Ergo your point here is moot.

There is no law that says love is limited to beings that reproduce.

Amicitia certainly, however eros is a fundamentally different situation; that's the dist8nction you fail to grasp.

With the exception of the Bayverse Transformers has always been progressive, pushing for greater ideals in young and old fans alike. If this is a problem for you I suggest you stop giving Hasbro and Takara any of your money or time.

You do realise that 'being progressive' in recent hostory has included things such as eugenics, Social Darwinism, The Stolen Generation and The Holocaust, don't you (

[bowspearer]

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.

Wrong- I have a problem with shoddy universe building for the sake of virtue signalling and take issuexwith sexual relationships in the Transformers universe when they are blatanty incompatible with the established universe.

But by all means, keep reading into my posts what you want to read into them. You clearly excel at the cognitive dissonance such actions require.

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.

Which aren't in and of themselves romantic relationships, that's the point.

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.

If I have such a problem with LGBTIQ relationships in media, then why did I say that in Beast Wars and particularly beast machines that LGBTIQ relationships would work. Furthermore if I am opposed to them, then why did I say that pseudo LGBTIQ relationships are also potentially possible in the G1 Cartoon community, just as pseudo heterosexual relationships are known to exist.

The fact is that what I have a problem with is shoehorning sexual relationships into continuities and characters where it flies in the face of the established universe; it smacks of blatant and overt virtue signalling and it doesn't do those it's trying to represent any favours.

[griffin]

I don't understand why this has turned into a sociological debate, when Hasbro clearly stated that they don't intend to have Political messages/support on toys (Politicians... not political correctness ideologies).

Completely different concepts people.

One concept is about a Politician or their party (as in, the people you vote for)... the other concept is about social ideology and political correctness (as in, concepts in general society, that may or may not be policies by politicians) Sometimes they can be related, like when a Politician advocates or opposes an ideological cause (like gay rights), but in the case of this Jazz toy, they are not related - MAGA was a general Trump slogan (not advocating/opposing a specific policy or ideology), and this toy gives people the impression that Hasbro supports Trump or the Republicans.

So maybe we should at least leave the unresolvable ideological debates, to topics that it actually relates to (which it doesn't on this Jazz toy), as it will never have people agreeing to opposing opinions (as seen here with just a handful of people)... which spoils topics like these for being off-topic.

So wait, Hasbro hates this message because it's political,

That's not the "political" Hasbro were referring to. They are stating that they don't intentionally support a political party with their toys... not the word "political" as in "ideology".

[philby]

Nicely put Griffin 🙂

[SMHFConvoy]

I don't understand why this has turned into a sociological debate, when Hasbro clearly stated that they don't intend to have Political messages/support on toys Politicians... not political correctness ideologies).

I think this conversation needs to take place. It's been brewing for sometime and it was bound to come up on the boards sooner or later.

[Trent]

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...

[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!