Does having no female TF's in the TF 2007 movie a minus factor in quality+story?
Xgriml...@aol.com
quality+story?
I think that was a major bad mistake in deciding no female transformers
in the 2007 movie.
Everyone likes to see sexy female robots. taking this away too a
percentage of viewers away.
the first TF 1986 TF movie had a female arcee. I think it's just
expected the 2nd TF 2007 mopvie have a female robot too. Having male
robots drool over a sexy female robots shows there not gay & have human
qualities. it also makes the robots less droid like,more emotions equal
more soul qualities.
Heck even if the decision was made to not have arcee a core characters.
a side character with a few sentences+scenes+4 minutes total of screen
time couldn't hurt the over-all arc/story direction.
Hopefully the no arcee TF 2007 movie news means the following: another
female like elita-1 or blackaracknia got the part instead. SADLY I
DOUBT THIS WILL HAPPEN.
At any rate Deleting the female transformer element in the TF 2007
movie was a super,huge,gigantic mistake.
For almost all TF series,there's been female transformers in them.
TF G-1 1984-1986 had the 5+cybertron females,then there was arcee/the
medic. Beastwars had BA & Airrazor. Rid had AI/artificial intelligence
computer hollogram. Energon had Arcee. BM had BA & Stryka. Cybertron
has Override & that purple boat girl robot.
William Rendfeld
that female robots can even be considered 'sexy' by humans.
Still, we have to wait and see the movie itself. Granted, I'm somewhat
irritated that Arcee is no longer a part of the film (have been since
this was announced weeks ago), but I can deal with it.
That said, why are you bothering to comment on this now?
Brian Doyle
"William Rendfeld" <WARen...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1137300406....@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> I hardly see 'everyone' liking sexy female robots. Hell, I'm scared
> that female robots can even be considered 'sexy' by humans.
The sexual aesthetic of Maria from "Metropolis" has had many admirers since
1927.
> Still, we have to wait and see the movie itself. Granted, I'm somewhat
> irritated that Arcee is no longer a part of the film (have been since
> this was announced weeks ago), but I can deal with it.
>
> That said, why are you bothering to comment on this now?
This is Xgrimlock, that's all that need be said.
ShadowWing
"Brian Doyle" wrote
>
> "William Rendfeld" wrote
> > I hardly see 'everyone' liking sexy female robots. Hell, I'm scared
> > that female robots can even be considered 'sexy' by humans.
>
> The sexual aesthetic of Maria from "Metropolis" has had many admirers
since
> 1927.
That doesn't mean it's a good thing, does it?
--
updated before I die:
The Transformation Zone
http://pages.cthome.net/ShadowWing
Denyer
In fact, in original-era stories, it's specifically stated Arcee isn't
female... Hot Rod and Jazz think that gender might have something to do
with chassis design, though...
http://tfarchive.com/comics/guide/index.php?s=uk_231_240#234
D.
Kil - Michael McCarthy
news:1137340219.3...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> There aren't any male TFs, either.
>
> In fact, in original-era stories, it's specifically stated Arcee isn't
> female...
Only in the comics.
-Kil
-----
Michael "Kil" McCarthy
http://hometown.aol.com/michaelmcc79
http://livejournal.com/users/kil_michaelmcc
Nevermore
Xgriml...@aol.com wrote:
> Does having no females in the TF 2007 movie a minus factor in
> quality+story?
Did being have no fe-male TFers in the original Gee-wone cartoon series
season 1 is a minus factor in quality+story?
--
The ultimate Binaltech/Alternators resource page
http://www.binalternators.de/
Thunder 06
iam Rendfeld" wrote
>>
>>>I hardly see 'everyone' liking sexy female robots. Hell, I'm scared
>>>that female robots can even be considered 'sexy' by humans.
>>
>>The sexual aesthetic of Maria from "Metropolis" has had many admirers
>
> since
>
>>1927.
>
> That doesn't mean it's a good thing, does it?
Sure, it is. If we can perfect female robots, we won't need women (as
much, anyway) in real life! ;)
t.k.
Dam6
<Xgriml...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1137299192.8...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Are Transformers Male?
David Willis
Ravage
Gee-wone cartoon series
season 1 is a minus factor in quality+story?"
Season 1 only had 13 episodes. Season 2 showed the 5+ female autobots
on Cybertron. Anyways "MOST" TF fans view a TF series by the series &
not by each season or episode. The TF G-1 USA 1984-1986/7 had 7+
females in it.
maxmike!!
"ShadowWing" <the...@SPAMBLOCKADEsnet.net> wrote in message
news:wNtyf.303$ur7...@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com...
>> "William Rendfeld" wrote
>> > I hardly see 'everyone' liking sexy female robots. Hell, I'm scared
>> > that female robots can even be considered 'sexy' by humans.
>>
>> The sexual aesthetic of Maria from "Metropolis" has had many admirers
> since
>> 1927.
>
> That doesn't mean it's a good thing, does it?
After Soiyama's fembots, you're surprised at the idea of sexy robots?
mm
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
Thunder 06
>>There aren't any male TFs, either.
>>
>>In fact, in original-era stories, it's specifically stated Arcee isn't
>>female...
>
>
> Only in the comics.
I've never understood why all the fans need to have male and female
TFs--I mean, I can understand characters that have gender
characteristics, but why would robots need genders?
t.k.
Korin Duval
wrote:
>I hardly see 'everyone' liking sexy female robots. Hell, I'm scared
>that female robots can even be considered 'sexy' by humans.
Why not?
Of course, having half a boat on your back doesn't make you look much
sexy, but have you ever seen Hajime Sorayama's works?
Other kind of androids... I mean, ginoroids. ^_-
>Still, we have to wait and see the movie itself. Granted, I'm somewhat
>irritated that Arcee is no longer a part of the film (have been since
>this was announced weeks ago), but I can deal with it.
Same for me, to answer to the original post.
Korin Duval
--
"(...) Repaints are the dog's meow."
- A parody of Skybyte in Matt Nelson's Superdeformers
(C) 2002 of Matt Nelson.
maxmike!!
"Thunder 06" <dece...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:8uHyf.356256$ki.333688@pd7tw2no...
Since TFs seem to run the gamut of human emotions; hate, friendship, fear,
etc., it stands to reason that they might also have something approximating
romantic love. And since I doubt Sunbow was going to be willing to tackle
some hot Optimus/Hot Rod action in back in 1975, that meant adding the
opposite sex to the mix...
gem...@tpg.com.au
>If we can perfect female robots, we won't need women (as
>much, anyway) in real life! ;)
This is why the Patriarchy has been secretly sabotaging research into
dildoes which can take out the garbage and mow the lawn.
Denyer
(and only, I think) instance of female TFs comes from the Victory
manga, which features what appear to be TF children.
Definitions of 'female' stem from biology rather than pronouns. It also
doesn't mean "anything that looks like it has breasts", by which
criteria Ultra Magnus and most of the Decepticon jets are female.
Does Victory still qualify as 'original-era'?
D.
Blaster Master
emotions equal
SHUT
THE
CRAP
UP!!!!
If I want a movie where the "male robots" 'drool' over the "female robot",
I'll go out of my way and find some cheezy knock-off smut anime flick. What
you've done, by opening your mouth again on a topic like this is LOWER the
collective fandom IQ a good 20 points.
--
Blaster Master
a.k.a.
Brad S. Russell
<Xgriml...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1137299192.8...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Denyer
Mmm, I missed this bit first time around.
You really are fucking stupid, Deathy, not least for your grammar.
D.
Kil - Michael McCarthy
> There's not evidence of female robots in season two, either. The first
> (and only, I think) instance of female TFs comes from the Victory
> manga, which features what appear to be TF children.
The first instance of female TFs is in "The Search for Alpha Trion," which
features female Autobots who are called "female," and therefore are.
Xgriml...@aol.com
"Octane" the tripple changer. is on the run from Galvatron & the
Decepticons. because Octane stole Trpticon in previous episodes.
Anyways Octane is in Space in a freight shuttle & he's looking at the
"play boys" version of naked female robots
Gabi T.M. D'Galvatron
> quality+story ?
I don't think that it will necessarily hurt the movie , but I do think
that this movie shoud have one or two flashback sequences (specifically
to the raging war on Cybertron) , and it woud be a Good Thing IMO to
show femme bots and cons fighting/existing there .
It woud establish the Femmes , without necessarily having to cringe at
the Token Pink Femmebot .
I woud have liked to have a femmebot in the main cast , but I woud also
have been happy if it wasn't Arcee .
Nevermore
heavily impede the quality of the movie.
Thunder 06
> Since TFs seem to run the gamut of human emotions; hate, friendship, fear,
> etc., it stands to reason that they might also have something approximating
> romantic love. And since I doubt Sunbow was going to be willing to tackle
> some hot Optimus/Hot Rod action in back in 1995, that meant adding the
> opposite sex to the mix...
It would make them more alien and therefore, cool, to not have romance
in the organic sense.
t.k.
Punch/Counterpunch
This is Jimmy's town...see how populated and thriving it is? That's
because humans are reproducing with humans. But...Jimmy has discovered
robots. Now, he's dating and spending all his time with his female
robot. Others in Jimmy's community have discovered robots, too. Now
look at Jimmy's town five years later...see how desolate it is? The
moral of this educational film is:
DON'T DATE ROBOTS!
(For those of you who get the reference, congrats!)
-Punch/Counterpunch
Punch/Counterpunch
says...
>
> "Thunder 06" <dece...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
> news:8uHyf.356256$ki.333688@pd7tw2no...
> > Kil - Michael McCarthy wrote:
> >>>There aren't any male TFs, either.
> >>>
> >>>In fact, in original-era stories, it's specifically stated Arcee isn't
> >>>female...
> >>
> >>
> >> Only in the comics.
> >
> > I've never understood why all the fans need to have male and female TFs--I
> > mean, I can understand characters that have gender characteristics, but
> > why would robots need genders?
>
> Since TFs seem to run the gamut of human emotions; hate, friendship, fear,
> etc., it stands to reason that they might also have something approximating
> romantic love. And since I doubt Sunbow was going to be willing to tackle
> some hot Optimus/Hot Rod action in back in 1975, that meant adding the
> opposite sex to the mix...
> mm
Er...um don't you mean 1985
-Punch/Counterpunch
maxmike!!
Yeah, but let's face it; Transformers were designed as "people" from the
start. No bunch of alien spockoids would be harboring a 4 million year old
grudge against each other.
maxmike!!
"Punch/Counterpunch" <no...@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.1e35c864f...@news.la.sbcglobal.net...
Sorry. Missed by one key over. Of course, now that error will totally doom
the entire fabric of Transfan Reality as we know it.
Thunder 06
>
> DON'T DATE ROBOTS!
>
> (For those of you who get the reference, congrats!)
>
> -Punch/Counterpunch
I've read a couple of times now that they may be making more Futurama in
the...er, future. :) I hope that happens--I miss that show!
t.k.
Starshadow
> Having male
> robots drool over a sexy female robots shows there not gay & have human
> qualities. it also makes the robots less droid like,more emotions equal
> more soul qualities.
Oh lord. Let the flaming commence.....
I hope you have your fire-retardant jammies handy, Deathy.
Not that I don't think you deserve it.....
*****Starshadow*****
gem...@tpg.com.au
wrote:
>> Since TFs seem to run the gamut of human emotions; hate, friendship, fear,
>> etc., it stands to reason that they might also have something approximating
>> romantic love. And since I doubt Sunbow was going to be willing to tackle
>> some hot Optimus/Hot Rod action in back in 1975, that meant adding the
>> opposite sex to the mix...
>> mm
>
>Er...um don't you mean 1985
What happened in the 70s STAYS in the 70s.
(bow chicka-wow)
William Rendfeld
Nevermore wrote:
> I see your point. The lack of playbots and topless servo-drones will
> heavily impede the quality of the movie.
>
I doubt he understands your sarcasm there.
Nevermore
William Rendfeld wrote:
> I doubt he understands your sarcasm there.
He wouldn't understand sarcasm if it hit him right in the face.
Iron Wookiee
wrote:
Crap in a hat. I completely glossed over that nugget of joy.
"Homosexual = soulless automaton" eh?
THAT'S bad, even for Deathy... for once, I'm speechless.
Denyer
> features female Autobots who are called "female," and therefore are.
If I call you female, you're female?
Neat-o logic. You could probably run for president with it.
D.
Kil - Michael McCarthy
>> The first instance of female TFs is in "The Search for Alpha Trion,"
>> which
>> features female Autobots who are called "female," and therefore are.
>
> If I call you female, you're female?
Of course not.
But if a fictional character that looks female and sounds female is also
called female by other characters within that work of fiction, than that
character is female.
Denyer
> called female by other characters within that work of fiction, than that
> character is female.
Doesn't even hold true in real life. Plenty of people who are
biologically male identify as female, and people respond to them as
female through habit and courtesy.
The Quintessons produced domestic robots for service in alien
environments where some form of binary gender was probable. That some
of that programming remains, even though Transformers lack
biologically-defining characteristics such as gametes or literal
offspring, isn't surprising. Nor is it evidence of sexes.
D.
Autobus Prime
Denyer wrote:
> > if a fictional character that looks female and sounds female is also
> > called female by other characters within that work of fiction, than that
> > character is female.
>
> Doesn't even hold true in real life. Plenty of people who are
> biologically male identify as female, and people respond to them as
> female through habit and courtesy.
Denyer:
I can't really say I've ever, say, referred to a Mr. Jones as Mrs.
Jones,
and I do think if said Mr. Jones requested that everybody begin
referring
to him as 'Mrs. Jones' there would probably be eyebrows raised. I
would
say, then, that the statement you quoted would indeed hold true in the
vast majority of recordable instances, and THUS we uphold Mike McC's
conclusion. If you claim that exceptions invalidate any attempts at
inductive
reasoning you are pretty much invalidating most logic.
---the below is a general observation and has nothing to do with my
reply...
Flame on!
By saying this, of course, I am violating the principle that
"biological gender
is meaningless". This of course is a quasi-religious principle in
modern
popular thought. So much of our popular thought is just duckspeak from
quasi-religious principles. It's as asinine as the notion that the
mechanism
of evolution is a theory and is therefore equally valid or invalid as
any other
theory, however well-founded.
Flame off!
---the below is my signature.
Cordially yours:
Autobus Prime
w/minicon Farebox.
ShadowWing
"Denyer" wrote
>
> The Quintessons produced domestic robots for service in alien
> environments where some form of binary gender was probable. That some
> of that programming remains, even though Transformers lack
> biologically-defining characteristics such as gametes or literal
> offspring, isn't surprising. Nor is it evidence of sexes.
Fine, if we call them female emulations (much like the Maximals and
Predacons are/were/will be animal emulations), can we please put this
slagging debate to bed? Alita One, Chromia, Moonracer, Firestar, Arcee, and
others of their kind were designed to emulate the female form and
(stereo)type, and referred to themselves as female. They're as female as a
robot is going to get, so it's easier to refer to them as "Female Autobots"
(or Decepticons, in the case of Cybertron Thunderblast and the Victory
manga).
--
updated before I die:
The Transformation Zone
http://pages.cthome.net/ShadowWing
Kil - Michael McCarthy
If the Female Autobots have "female" programming, than that programming
means that they ARE female. Whether they fit the real world definition
of female as it is used in regards to biological lifeforms is not
relevant, as the Female Autobots are non-biological life forms who
exist in a fictional world that is not bound by the rules and
definitions of real world science.
-Kil
Xgriml...@aol.com
(1)Medical assistances,tiny hands/fingers are always better in surgery.
(2)The ultimate fast+quick spy. The thinner you are the faster you
are. that g-1 season 2 episode had a Man made female ninja that
megatron stole+reprogrammed into a evil decepticon ninja. that ninja
was faster than any autobot in season 2. she also beat them up pretty
fast too.
Who say transformers can't have kids. Can't prime & elita-1or any
other Male+Female TF couple build a empty robot & have vector sigma
fill it with life/spark.
What about the Generation 2 Comics. that shows the process of new TF
life thru un-locking the DNA code of regeneration process.
G.B. Blackrock
other Male+Female TF couple build a empty robot & have vector sigma
fill it with life/spark. "
By this logic, there's nothing stopping two "male" TFs from building an
empty robot, etc. In fact, Wheeljack and Ratchet built the Dinobots.
Does this make them gay? Except even THAT doesn't work, since gay
biological couples don't reproduce.
At best, robotic lifeforms are "male" and "female" (note the quotation
marks). A previous poster suggested "male-like" and "female-like,"
which I like even better. But these are biological terms, which do not
apply to robots.
(none of the preceding need apply to Beast Wars)
G.B. Blackrock
Xiphos
Way off topic, but this reminded me of an early Sluggy Freelance strip:
Torg&Riff: Scantily clad Sci-Fi chicks are cool!
First Officer Brennas: Actually, I am a male of my species.
Torg: Aw, you think what you want.
Riff: Could you jump up and down for us, mister?
Back on topic, I would have to concur with earlier statements with
regards to failing to see how having gendered alien robots either
increases or decreases the potential quality of a movie that is still
in pre-production.
Also, do a google on "Repliee Q1". Essentially, a proof of concept
model. Combine Real Doll technology with emerging robotic technologies
(Honda's ASIMO, Sony's bipedal robot kits, etc.) and you may very well
see people otherwise unable or unwilling to get dates out with robots.
Does that make the hypothetical and yet looming reality robots male or
female? Only in appearance.
--
Xiphos - As quoted earlier, DON'T DATE ROBOTS!
Xiphos
> I assume Female Transformers exist for the following purposes.
>
> (1)Medical assistances,tiny hands/fingers are always better in surgery.
> (2)The ultimate fast+quick spy. The thinner you are the faster you
> are. that g-1 season 2 episode had a Man made female ninja that
> megatron stole+reprogrammed into a evil decepticon ninja. that ninja
> was faster than any autobot in season 2. she also beat them up pretty
> fast too.
...
Your logic astounds.
> Who say transformers can't have kids. Can't prime & elita-1or any
> other Male+Female TF couple build a empty robot & have vector sigma
> fill it with life/spark.
By that logic, the only female TF is Vector Sigma/The Creation Matrix,
as that is where the actual life mechanics come from, and then really
reproducing in an asexual manner. The TF(s) who created the body would
be more akin to either a genderless drone, or the male. Really more of
a genderless drone, since the body is mostly a life support system for
the spark. With terrestrial life, all known examples of non-reproducing
drones are infertile females. While it would be grossly incorrect to
assume life elsewhere defaults to any known gender, much less male or
female, given the constraints of TF Universe design it would seem more
logical to assume ALL TFs are infertile female drones.
> What about the Generation 2 Comics. that shows the process of new TF
> life thru un-locking the DNA code of regeneration process.
This near incomprehensive recall of the G2 comic method of reproduction
through asexual budding (whereby a group of TF's discovered how to
reinstate their fertility) only reinforces the notion that all TFs are
female, with no actual sex seperation.
NONE of this points to any form of sexual reproduction or even sexual
identity beyond some vague anthropomorphism on the creators part. While
I enjoyed the characters of Black Arachnia and Airrazor, the very
notion of polarized gender among a race of alien living autonomatons
shown to reproduce through asexual means is so laughable that is defies
my sense of reason. If anything, that the new series lacks any readily
identifiable "male" or "female" TFs bodes better than if it did.
The best reason for seemingly gendered TFs I've seen being attracted to
one another had more to do with function than with something we would
recognize as romance, but is expressed such that we could easily and
readily confuse it as such.
--
Xiphos - At no point have we ever been led to believe Cybertronians
posess Deoxyribo Nucleic Acids. If anything, we're led to believe they
may have some coherent-energy-based equivelant.
Autobus Prime
> reminded [Xiphos] of an early Sluggy Freelance strip:
>
> Torg&Riff: Scantily clad Sci-Fi chicks are cool!
> First Officer Brennas: Actually, I am a male of my species.
> Torg: Aw, you think what you want.
> Riff: Could you jump up and down for us, mister?
Nifty Sluggy stuff from way before the BAD thing happened!
The sooner the strip gets out of its current corner the better...
> Also, do a google on "Repliee Q1". Essentially, a proof of concept
> model. Combine Real Doll technology with emerging robotic technologies
> (Honda's ASIMO, Sony's bipedal robot kits, etc.) and you may very well
> see people otherwise unable or unwilling to get dates out with robots.
Riff: I wonder if she's fully biologically functional?
Torg:Either that or she's full of sharp jagged metal parts...
> Xiphos - As quoted earlier, DON'T DATE ROBOTS!
RRrrrroger that.
Xgriml...@aol.com
people of Earth can't even get a man-made robot to walk yet.
However when discussing a certain toy/comic/cartoon universe like
Transformers. it's best to state the facts of that particular TF
Universe. Without putting your own theories of how things should be.
LETS ALL PUT OUR OWN THEORIES OF HOW THE "REAL WORLD" WORKS & ENTER A
MAKE BELIEVE WORLD CALL THE TRANSFORMERS.
Anyways The TF Universe has shown several ways of reproduction here's a
few examples:
(1)Rattrap from beastwars talks about his aunt arcee.
(2)Beastmachines showed Cybertron with a Organic core. Beastmachines
showed that life on Cybertron started out a flesh & bone. the cave of
fossils bones were found. It wasn't clear but either the "Key to
vector sigma." made cybertron metal. or perhaps flesh became cyborg
them cyborg became all metal. there's was a definte evoultion process
vibe going on in the stories.
(3)Season 3 of TF G-1 1986 showed Cybertron with a organic core
(4)The very first episode of Transformers from 1984/maybe the quote
from the first issue of the marvel TF comic, say's the following:
"Life evoulved along the lines of mechanical instead of biological."
(5)In the TF movie,there was a robot planet that had kids,males &
females. this planet got eaten by Unicron in the first few minutes of
the movie. Yeah I realize those weren't transformers. however the TF
universe of things around it shows robots can reproduce & have kids.
(6)That G-2 Bonding thing of Unlocking the DNA to reproduce stands as
evidence of reproduction. that's why all of Jhiaxus army are called
"Generation 2" as in the next generation.
(7)According to Simon Furmans writting on Various TF comics. Primus &
Unicron fought. Unicron got trapped in a planet that could transform.
While Primu's planet could not transform. Primus built the first 13
transformers. Primus gave life to them by giving them tiny fragments of
his spark. Primus breath life into them the same way god breath life
into the people of earth.
(8)The Transformers do recognize the difference between male & female
transformers. Season 2 had a group of autobots have girl friends back
on Cybertron. in the TF Movie both springer & hotrod fight for arcee's
affection/attention. Geez this was & will always be a "G" rated
cartoon. you ain't gonna see any sex or prime waking up out of elita-1
bed or anything like that.
(9)Beastwars showed a actual couple dating & kissing. BA & Silvebolt
were that couple. Hasbro dared not show more because of the "G" rated
cartoon series.
(10)Can transformers re-produce?? they can do the following: G-2
Unlock DNA Regeneration code. Build robots & have vector sigma give it
life. according to the early marvel TF comic issues,the Matrix has the
power/all spark to grant life to lifeless machines. the TF Comic series
matrix granted life to the aerialbots,stunticons,Devestator,Omega
Supreme,Jetfire,etc...
(11)Various Transformer cartoons,comics,etc.. showed that transformers
bodies have self healing abilities similar to what we humans have.
Examples: the TF Japanese Masterforce Transformers have this ability.
Megatron from G-2 Comics has this ability. Prime from the G-2 comics
has this ability,etc..
Xgriml...@aol.com
facts created by the writters.
No need to get your "BIBLE" out & say it's doesn't make sense cuz God
said it ain't true. or try to pull out your biology book & read
regeneration terms from there.
THIS IS ALL FAKE STUFF NO ONE'S SAYING OTHER WISE.
HOW ABOUT ACTUALLY TRYING TO BACK UP YOUR TF CLAIMS BY USING TF
EXAMPLES.
GEEZ,Do you go the the Star trek/star wars message board/web sites &
say the following: (1) Xiphos wrote:the Next generation Character named
"Data" is a fake/fraud because there's no way artificual intelligence
will advance that far. can't anyone see it's a human in badly applied
make up.
(2) Xiphos wrote IT'S A LIE,Its a lie world peace never happened in
Star trek because of the arabs in the middle east.
(3)Xiphos wrote: I dismiss those phasers in star trek as a novety/joke
because in real life guns will never do that.
(4)Xiphos wrote: No way anyone could hold those SW light sabers & not
have there hands melt at the bottom of that stick.
(5) Xiphos wrote: Deathstar never existed darth vader was tricked into
looking at a picture out of a window. Really earth can't create one so
there. here's some science book mumble jumble to prove my claim.
Xgriml...@aol.com
Female. Try to back up your TF claims with actual TF facts from the TF
universe.
HERE'S SOME ACTUAL TF UNIVERSE FACTS:
(1) TF females have female voices,while TF males have male voices.
(2)Primus/Vector sigma is a guy & not a woman. it has a male voice &
not female.
(3) The male transformers don't have sexy curves in the legs,waist,etc.
no hint of female chest on the male transformers.
(4)Male transformers show interest in female transformers. if they were
all the same gender they'd be no sexual interest. Hasbro/Takara has
written the TF universe from the start as a "G" RATED universe. to
suggest there all gay goes against the very "G" rated code set by
Hasbro/Takara.
(5)The indenties/genders of all the "FIRST 13 TRANSFORMERS." Was never
disclosed thus far. I think the TF fandom has guessed on 9 maybe 10 of
the first 13 transformers identies. who's to say one of 13 were a
female. G-2 did show reproduction,perhaps the female reproduced using
those means.
(6)You said how is it possible that the TF GOD PRIMUS/Vector Sigma
being a male can create both male & female transformers armies. So
your theory was Primus was a female. Geez what about God who created
the humans/earth. he was a female too right. because going by your
laws/guide lines a female God can't create both female & male genders.
He's got to be female. In the Bible it states various times over God
is a male & the father of all creation. Why exactly does "a" God need
female organs to grant both female & male life. the whole idea of "a"
GOD is it's superior in every way to a mortal. A God can do anything
he pleases.
Denyer
> inductive reasoning
Which I don't.
> I do think if said Mr. Jones requested that everybody begin
> referring to him as 'Mrs. Jones' there would probably
> be eyebrows raised.
Clearly transvestites don't exist if they cause eyebrows to be
raised...
How about shimmying around to the main point of the statement, which
was that Transformers stem from robots programmed to respond with
particular behaviours to keep customers happy?
'Female' isn't a philosophical qualification. It's indicative of
particular biology.
D.
Denyer
As ShadowWing noted above, "female emulations" is as close as we'll get
to anything accurate. Sexes are not determined by behaviour.
> exist in a fictional world that is not bound by the rules and
> definitions of real world science.
...where green is purple, cats like dogs and up is sidesways and off to
the left a bit and that feels good, ooo...
Utter cop-out. "It's a fictional world, so the language we use to
describe it is meaningless too!"
D.
Denyer
A few (very few) Transformers have voices we identify as female, whilst
the default tends to be male (again, from our perspective.)
> Vector sigma is a guy
Vector Sigma is a (possibly hollow) slab of yellow crystal.
> The male transformers don't have sexy curves
Pshaw. Ultra Magnus has hotter nipples than Jenna Jameson.
> Male transformers show interest in female transformers.
Some Transformers show carbon-based lifeform analogue interaction
because they were designed to mimic other races. You can train a monkey
to fuck chickens, but this won't make them both bears.
> to suggest there all gay
There are no males -- you're the one gibbering about Transformers being
human. This is another reason trying to retcon sexes into the picture
is dumb; everyone else becomes immediately celibate or gay.
> G-2 did show reproduction
G2 showed metal budding off another single Transformer. See that newly
formed Transformer over there? Ironhide is its daddy AND its mommy, in
your scenario.
> your theory was Primus was a female
No. Primus is a big ol' ball of energy that can take on physical form.
Primus is also very arguably not a god, and definitely not in a
Christian-Judaeo tradition, but we'll leave that one for another day
when you've stocked the freezer up with ice.
D.
Denyer
Figurative speech. When I call you a dinosaur, I'm not actually
suggesting you have scales or predated birds.
> Beastmachines showed Cybertron with a Organic core.
Now you're getting somewhere... although it's pure conjecture that the
early organic inhabitants evolved into present life rather than, say,
the Quintessons wiping them out when they arrived to take control of
the Vector Sigma unit that had crashed there.
> "Life evolved along the lines of mechanical instead of biological."
Again, this is far more substantial evidence than most people tend to
come up with, although it's retconned out to some extent when Budiansky
goes on to mention the matrix (which he introduced as a mechanism for
introducing new toys/characters.) And torpedoed by Primus and budding
in G2.
Nevertheless, this is the best evidence for Cybertronians being some
form of non-carbon-based evolved life. Unfortunately for the current
discussion, evolution doesn't presuppose sexes... there are plenty of
organisms that reproduce asexually, and G2 in fact rather supports
that...
> Season 2 had a group of autobots have girl friends back on Cybertron
> / BA & Silverbolt
And it's interesting to look at ways programming has been passed along
and become part of social interaction. No step closer to indentifying
sexes rather than behaviour, though.
> Can transformers re-produce?
Not in any sense analogous to binary gender reproduction that we've
seen.
> transformers
> bodies have self healing abilities similar to what we humans have
And you extrapolate this to mean what, exactly? That they have other
analogues of human biology?
D.
Autobus Prime
>Clearly transvestites don't exist if they cause eyebrows to be
>raised...
Well, certainly they exist, but odds are that a particular person
referred to as 'female' will actually be female.
Then again, what if 'male & female Autobots' were more like our
'male & female pipe connectors' -- not really gendered but
somehow analogous in their manner of construction. Perhaps
the Quintessons were simply enamored of certain patterns in
nature and wished to preserve them in their creations? After
all, why did they make their robots four-limbed and bipedal,
with only one face? This is using the Quintesson origin, of course,
and you seem to be using a combination of them if I read your
posts correctly.
You mentioned the G2 'budding' process. It seems that this
would be doomed to eventually fail - from the limited 'genetic'
variation in the offspring (and of course from exuding the Swarm. (-: )
What would be required to eliminate these troubles? Well, we
would need some way to 'roll the genetic die', for one. Dividing
the race into compatible halves is an excellent way of doing this,
and perhaps the 'energy discharge' that created the Swarm was
once needed for the process of downloading and compiling the
data from the two 'parents'. Which parent we considered male
and which female would probably depend on a comparison
with the characteristics of human genders, since their 'biology'
would most likely be too alien for a direct comparison. This
doesn't mean that the genders would be subjective; just alien.
metal...@gmail.com
have appreciated it.
Kil - Michael McCarthy
That's not what I'm saying at all.
The weapon Optimus Prime uses in the G1 cartoon is a "laser rifle". That is
the language used to describe it within the fiction. Whether or not that
weapon behaves in accordance with the real world science of lasers is
immaterial. In the first episode of Beast Wars, Megatron states that energon
is an "element". Whether or not there's room for energon in the real world
periodic table is immaterial. That is the language used to describe it
within the fiction.
Elita-1 and company are described as being "female", therefore that is what
they are.
How can this be? I don't know, exactly. Really, I don't much care. As I view
it, this is simply The Way It Is.
I would perhaps suggest that biological definitions are irrelevant here, as
Transformers are not alive due to any biological process. What makes them
living beings then? Is it not their ability to think and feel and reason,
the fact that they have conscious minds? If the living, concious mind of a
Transformer possesses some form of gender identity, considering itself to be
"female," either owed to programming or perhaps even to the nature of it's
spark, would that not make that Transformer as much "female" as it is
"alive"?
Denyer
> company are described as being "female", therefore that is what they are.
In the fiction, yes -- that's how they view themselves. Regardless of
whether you view them as simply acting out remnants of old programming
or not, we are *not* in the fiction.
> I would perhaps suggest that biological definitions are irrelevant here, as
> Transformers are not alive due to any biological process.
Are they not? Serious question. Brain activity consists of electrical
impulses... the line between mechanical and biological is to some
extent artificial. Even if something is biological, though, it doesn't
follow that reproduction is sexual.
We likely couldn't distinguish a human from a sufficiently good
facsimile, so I certainly wouldn't quibble Transformers being alive
(lots of story potential in the Quints considering them not to be,
though.) And if Transformers had sufficient facsimile of reproductive
capabilities, "male" and "female" signifiers might be warranted.
> if the living, concious mind of a Transformer possesses some form
> of gender identity, considering itself to be "female," either owed to
> programming or perhaps even to the nature of it's spark, would that
> not make that Transformer as much "female" as it is "alive"?
No. Gender indentity is just that, an identity.
D.
Denyer
> referred to as 'female' will actually be female.
Odds are also good they won't be a robot, they'll be a carbon-based
organic, etc.
> You mentioned the G2 'budding' process. It seems that this
> would be doomed to eventually fail
Species in nature don't have the option of writing a clear genetic
script for their offspring. Budding has the potential to be a much more
precise process. There's also the potential to deliberately include
psuedo-randomised data to prevent limited variation ever being an
issue.
> Dividing the race into compatible halves
Why stop at two? More to the point, why bother with more than one when
you can control a budding process?
D.
Xiphos
> Granted this is all Sci-fi stuff that will never happen.
Yes, but that doesn't mean we can't try to reconcile the existing
fiction to match known or potential physical posibilities, as opposed
to remaining in the more juvenile "Let's Pretend" mode. Fine for the
cartoon, aimed squarely at kids, but I like to put more substance into
my SciFi.
> Heck the people of Earth can't even get a man-made robot to walk yet.
Oh really?
http://world.honda.com/ASIMO/history/ - looks to me like Honda's had a
bipedal walking humanoid since 1986. The current ASIMO line, which is
fully humanoid, is gearing up for commercial deployment.
http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/QRIO/top_nf.html - Sony's QRIO was
introduced to the public in 2003. Given the finished design and look,
we can surmise it's been in development for much longer, much like the
Honda ASIMO
A quick google on bipedal robots brought up this article
http://www.androidworld.com/prod28.htm
which details a number of successful University and independant bipedal
robot walker projects. Though with less finished looks about them.
Still, kinda looks like the people of Earth have been making bipedal
robots for at least a couple decades. Unless you're suggesting the
people of Earth did NOT create these.
> However when discussing a certain toy/comic/cartoon universe like
> Transformers. it's best to state the facts of that particular TF
> Universe. Without putting your own theories of how things should be.
I'm not sure I postulatyed any of my own theories. Hypothesis, perhaps,
with support from the show, but no theories. I've not published
anything for peer review to reach that level, to my recollection :)
> LETS ALL PUT OUR OWN THEORIES OF HOW THE "REAL WORLD" WORKS & ENTER A
> MAKE BELIEVE WORLD CALL THE TRANSFORMERS.
Caps, man. And where's the fun in that?
> Anyways The TF Universe has shown several ways of reproduction here's a
> few examples:
> (1)Rattrap from beastwars talks about his aunt arcee.
How is this an example of reproduction? All this shows is Cybertronians
possibly maintain some sense of family. Sunstreaker and Sideswipe were
"brothers", but were also stated as being manufactured, not born.
> (2)Beastmachines showed Cybertron with a Organic core. Beastmachines
> showed that life on Cybertron started out a flesh & bone. the cave of
> fossils bones were found. It wasn't clear but either the "Key to
> vector sigma." made cybertron metal. or perhaps flesh became cyborg
> them cyborg became all metal. there's was a definte evoultion process
> vibe going on in the stories.
> (3)Season 3 of TF G-1 1986 showed Cybertron with a organic core
These are valid points to the extent that Transformers may be
carbon-based. However there are other possible organic combinations for
forming the nanomachinery to power individual cells than what is found
in Terran life. This still does not validate the notion of binary sexes
immediately identifiable as male and female. Many species on this
planet exhibit no sex (asexual), or both sexes (hermaphroditic).
Indeed, if life throughout the Great Cosmos were limited to all things
being Male and Female, it would be a dull universe indeed.
> (4)The very first episode of Transformers from 1984/maybe the quote
> from the first issue of the marvel TF comic, say's the following:
> "Life evoulved along the lines of mechanical instead of biological."
Yes, and? So the living structures that compose a Cybertronian
naturally form circiuts (oh wait, neurons!), levers (oh wait, BONES!),
pulleys (oh wait, MUSCULATURE!) and gears (oh wait, some of the
processes in a cell to wind and unwind nucleotides). The two are not
mutually exclusive. To complicate this argument, some arthropods use
hydraulic mechanisms instead of muscle tissue to move their limbs.
> (5)In the TF movie,there was a robot planet that had kids,males &
> females. this planet got eaten by Unicron in the first few minutes of
> the movie. Yeah I realize those weren't transformers. however the TF
> universe of things around it shows robots can reproduce & have kids.
We saw A planet, Lithone, which appeared to have a rather angular
looking life form of unknown biology. Yes, it was presented in such a
way as to indicate children, but sexual reproduction is not the only
means by which offspring are produced, even on Earth. Also, Lithone is
not Cybertron, nor was there anything presented to even remotely
indicate Lithonians were in any way related to Cybertronians. If
anything, that Lithonians appear to have a juvenile stage indicates
immediately they develope and reproduce in a way completely different
from Cybertronians.
> (6)That G-2 Bonding thing of Unlocking the DNA to reproduce stands as
> evidence of reproduction. that's why all of Jhiaxus army are called
> "Generation 2" as in the next generation.
Yes, asexual reproduction. I've never contended this, and point to it
as a ready indication that Cybertronians are asexual. No males OR
females. In biological terms, the default gender is female, since all
information is passed from one parent.
> (7)According to Simon Furmans writting on Various TF comics. Primus &
> Unicron fought. Unicron got trapped in a planet that could transform.
> While Primu's planet could not transform. Primus built the first 13
> transformers. Primus gave life to them by giving them tiny fragments of
> his spark. Primus breath life into them the same way god breath life
> into the people of earth.
That doesn't prove one way or the other of the sexing of a
Cybertronian, only that Cybertronian lore indicates them as their god's
"Chosen", in much the same way any given terran religion (not just the
Judeo-Christian religion) sets the central worshippers as their god's
"Chosen". All this illustrates is that Cybertronians have a theology
too. Theology != sex.
> (8)The Transformers do recognize the difference between male & female
> transformers. Season 2 had a group of autobots have girl friends back
> on Cybertron. in the TF Movie both springer & hotrod fight for arcee's
> affection/attention. Geez this was & will always be a "G" rated
> cartoon. you ain't gonna see any sex or prime waking up out of elita-1
> bed or anything like that.
Nor should we. We have seen Transformers that we identify through
anthropomorphism as male and female, but the evidence is that this is
not for any sort of reproductive process. You acknowledge yourself
above in point (6) that Cybertronians are presented as reproducing
asexually, not sexually.
> (9)Beastwars showed a actual couple dating & kissing. BA & Silvebolt
> were that couple. Hasbro dared not show more because of the "G" rated
> cartoon series.
And it was damned cheesy :) It was a social interaction. I will accept
that perhaps Beastwars era Cybertronians have developed some sense of
gender, and perhaps even rudimentary sexual characteristics. Whether
this is used for reproductive purposes, or purely for social bonding is
unclear.
> (10)Can transformers re-produce?? they can do the following: G-2
> Unlock DNA Regeneration code. Build robots & have vector sigma give it
> life. according to the early marvel TF comic issues,the Matrix has the
> power/all spark to grant life to lifeless machines. the TF Comic series
> matrix granted life to the aerialbots,stunticons,Devestator,Omega
> Supreme,Jetfire,etc...
At what point did the argument become whether or not Cybertronians
reproduce? I aree, the clearly do. Through asexual means, as you have
also demonstrated.
> (11)Various Transformer cartoons,comics,etc.. showed that transformers
> bodies have self healing abilities similar to what we humans have.
> Examples: the TF Japanese Masterforce Transformers have this ability.
> Megatron from G-2 Comics has this ability. Prime from the G-2 comics
> has this ability,etc..
I also seem to recall an episode where Wheeljack put a band-aid like
plate on a wound under Prime's arm so it could better heal. This
indicates some self repair mechanism in place, yes. This still does not
prove any sort of sexual reproduction or sexual identity pre-Beastwars.
If you insist on arguing the form has anything to do with it, I again
point to to real-world biology. Not all species have smaller, sleeker
females with bigger, buffer males. In most species, the opposite is
actually true: the males are the smaller, sleeker form with the females
being the big hulking brutes. Perhaps an extreme example of this would
be certain members of the Ceratioidei family, where the male appears as
a parasitic attachment on the MUCH larger female.
(http://uwfishcollection.org/staff/20-Dimorphism.pdf). Or look at any
number of species of songbird. Which one's the colorful, pretty one?
Which one's the plain one? Which one's the sexy, curvy one? (If you
give an answer to Q3 other than "neither", I will be deeply sidturbed).
Perhaps this should be answered before proceeding: How do you define
sex? (And by that, I mean sex as in gender, not sex as in sexual
copulation)
--
Xiphos - So, we're in agreement. Cybertronians reproduce asexually
through budding. No sexes required.
Xiphos
> XIPHOS,GEEZ dude where talking about the "make believe" TF universe
> facts created by the writters.
No, we're discussing your view of the neccessity of "male" and "female"
Cybertronians in the upcoming live action movie, and your beliefe that
the movie is somehow intrinsically lessened by not providing such
sexual dimorphism among a group of alien asexual beings.
> No need to get your "BIBLE" out & say it's doesn't make sense cuz God
> said it ain't true. or try to pull out your biology book & read
> regeneration terms from there.
If you want to get into it, I follow the path of atheism. However, that
is my unverifiable beliefe, and I don't believe it was ever brought up.
What I have been discussing are real-world biology terms as they can be
applied to a hypothetical xenobioform.
> THIS IS ALL FAKE STUFF NO ONE'S SAYING OTHER WISE.
Couldn't agree more.
> HOW ABOUT ACTUALLY TRYING TO BACK UP YOUR TF CLAIMS BY USING TF
> EXAMPLES.
Hmm, odd, I thought I had. One's you've subsequently used. Followed up
by backing up with real-world biology.
> GEEZ,Do you go the the Star trek/star wars message board/web sites &
> say the following: (1) Xiphos wrote:the Next generation Character named
> "Data" is a fake/fraud because there's no way artificual intelligence
> will advance that far. can't anyone see it's a human in badly applied
> make up.
I don't post to Star Trek or Star Wars boards, however I have entered
quite lively conversations dissecting the real-world physics and
challenges required to achieve many of the effects put forth in both
series. As for Data, nothing we know about neural networks and
artificial intelligence today prohibits the creation of a real-world
Data. If anything, current works are showing a scary level of promise
for sapient consructs within our lifetimes.
> (2) Xiphos wrote IT'S A LIE,Its a lie world peace never happened in
> Star trek because of the arabs in the middle east.
Star Trek very clearly follows an alternate timeline, with alternate
breakthroughs in our understanding of physics, and alternative world
history. I'm more interested in discussing the potential of real-life
warp fields through strong electromagnetic interactions. Best of luck
to Professor Jochem Hauser and his team for failing to disprove the
Heim hypothesis!
> (3)Xiphos wrote: I dismiss those phasers in star trek as a novety/joke
> because in real life guns will never do that.
Do I really need to google up every bit of technology advancement for
you?
These exist already!
> (4)Xiphos wrote: No way anyone could hold those SW light sabers & not
> have there hands melt at the bottom of that stick.
Sure they could, ceramics are great! Other potential insulators exist
too, but ceramics jump to the forefront of my mind.
> (5) Xiphos wrote: Deathstar never existed darth vader was tricked into
> looking at a picture out of a window. Really earth can't create one so
> there. here's some science book mumble jumble to prove my claim.
With sufficient engineering, a death-star like structure could
potentially exist, sure. Really, what's your problem? All I've said was
that there's nothing in the canon that indicates pre-BeastWars era
cybertronians have anything that more than passingly resembles sex and
sexual interactions.
The he spewed:
> Xiphos,No where in the TF Universe does is state all transformers are
> Female. Try to back up your TF claims with actual TF facts from the TF
> universe.
I did. The Transformers reproduce asexually; we have both established
and agreed to this. In biology, asexual reproduction defaults to
femenine gender, as no genetic information from a male donor is
involved. Therefore all Cybertronians are biologically female.
> HERE'S SOME ACTUAL TF UNIVERSE FACTS:
> (1) TF females have female voices,while TF males have male voices.
Bart Simpson is voiced by a female voice actress, but is portrayed as a
little boy. By your logic, Bart Simpson is a transvestite.
> (2)Primus/Vector sigma is a guy & not a woman. it has a male voice &
> not female.
Again, this is a matter of perspective. One does not have "male" or
"female" voices. "Masculine" and "femenine", perhaps, but these do not
neccessitate gender identification. What one group (in this case,
human) views as "femenine" or "masculine" can and does vary greatly
with what another group may view as such.
> (3) The male transformers don't have sexy curves in the legs,waist,etc.
> no hint of female chest on the male transformers.
The original Decepticon Jets, Jazz, as mentioned Ultra Magnus... Then
there's the likes of Speedbreaker. And what of Nightbeat/Minerva? To go
the other way, where's the sexy curves and femenine breasts on any
non-human animal? Transformers != Humans.
> (4)Male transformers show interest in female transformers. if they were
> all the same gender they'd be no sexual interest. Hasbro/Takara has
> written the TF universe from the start as a "G" RATED universe. to
> suggest there all gay goes against the very "G" rated code set by
> Hasbro/Takara.
What we've seen is social interaction and increased social interest
between specific individuals that in many cases happen to fit our
anthrocentric view of male and female. In the Japanese series, we've
seen similar social interest between individuals we would identify as
both male. However, since we have determined that all Transformers are
asexual, there must be an alternate purpose for that social interest
than sexual reproduction, as sexual reproduction does not exist among
Cybertronians.
> (5)The indenties/genders of all the "FIRST 13 TRANSFORMERS." Was never
> disclosed thus far. I think the TF fandom has guessed on 9 maybe 10 of
> the first 13 transformers identies. who's to say one of 13 were a
> female. G-2 did show reproduction,perhaps the female reproduced using
> those means.
Again, G2 showed asexual reproduction.
> (6)You said how is it possible that the TF GOD PRIMUS/Vector Sigma
> being a male can create both male & female transformers armies. So
> your theory was Primus was a female. Geez what about God who created
> the humans/earth. he was a female too right. because going by your
> laws/guide lines a female God can't create both female & male genders.
> He's got to be female. In the Bible it states various times over God
> is a male & the father of all creation. Why exactly does "a" God need
> female organs to grant both female & male life. the whole idea of "a"
> GOD is it's superior in every way to a mortal. A God can do anything
> he pleases.
The Torah, and it's butchured incarnation known as The Old Testament,
have undergone multiple revisions, rewrites, and ranslations throughout
history. It was always my understanding IEHUA (or Jehova or Yahwe or
however you wish to spell it - I'll stick with IEHUA for now) was
gender indeterminite, being above male or female. However, most human
natural languages, including English, lack a gender indeterminite
pronoun for a person or entity (with "it" explicitely indicating a
thing). Given the patriarcal society that this religion arose from, it
seems understandable that the default pronoun selected when referring
to IEHUA selected would support a masculine bias.
To that end, it would seem reasonable to assume that Primus similarly
was neither male nor female, but rather being a dietic force, above the
need for gender or any form of reproduction to create life.
I'll leave any further discussions of religion and religious text
interpretations for the appropriate forums; this is not it.
--
Xiphos - Religion is actually a fascinating topic, but a very sensitive
one for most people.
Xgriml...@aol.com
Why would 2 asexual beings feel the need to kiss one another?
How about the way Rattrap in BM starts hugging Botanica at the end of
the series. Rattrap proclaims his love for BA. Why would rattrap do
that if there all the same Asexual sexes.
How about all the hand holding in the TF G-1 season 2 episodes with the
female transformers & the male transformers. Why would asexual beings
feel the need to express love for one another.
How about the TF G-1 Japanese exclusive headmasters series. When
Chromedome ask Arcee to dance & they hold hands & stuff. Why would
Asexual being feel the need to dance with the opposite sex & stuff?
How About Arcee love for Daniel as a temporal mother figure in USA
Rebirth parts 1-3.
Why would a ASEXUAL being as arcee feel the need to act like a
woman/mother & help dainel out this his kid problems.
FACT: Hasbro/Takara view have put a permanet "G" Rating on all TF
Cartoon,comics,toys,etc.. To say there Gay goes against the laws Hasbro
set for the TF universe.
Geez it's obvious to assume stuff happens in the back ground that we
aren't allowed to see.
Geez,by your high standards. When entering the TV SHOW "PG" Sitcoms
Universes,none of the married couples have sex because the viewers
didn't see the sex.
Why can't the same laws Apply for the Transformers universe. after all
most male or female transformers are over the age of 18 years of age.
to assume the season 2 TF G-1 Female transformers & males never had sex
because the viewers didn't see the sex is just being really oblivious.
the same deal goes for BA & Silverbolt just because we the viewers
didn't see them have sex doesn't mean they didn't
Geez,when vieweing cartoons,shows/movies,etc.. the viewer only sees a
small portion of what goes on in the lives of those individuals in that
particular universe. there's a little thing called fading to black &
off scence stuff.
Denyer
Because it's fun. If you have a head full of programming that accords a
pleasure response to an act, you'll do it. Give those Quints a tasty
biscuit.
Plus, human males kiss human males and human females kiss human
females, and sure as hell aren't going to reproduce as an outcome...
> To say there Gay goes against the laws Hasbro set for the TF universe.
It's really not sinking in, is it? They aren't gay for the same reason
they aren't straight.
D.
Xiphos
> Xiphos,What about all those kisses between BA & Silverbolt in BW & BM??
With regards to Beastwars/machines, I have conceded the possibility of
the development of sexual dimorphism among Cybertronians. I will assume
you have yet to read my other response in its entirity.
> Why would 2 asexual beings feel the need to kiss one another?
Since there are no real world examples of a culture of sapient asexual
entities, I cannot answer that question. My guess would be for similar
reasons we do: to express emotional affection. Emotional affection is
not limited to sexual reproduction or sexual dimorphism, nor is sexual
dimorphism known to be a prerequisite for emotions. We have
insufficient data to make such an assumption.
> How about the way Rattrap in BM starts hugging Botanica at the end of
> the series. Rattrap proclaims his love for BA. Why would rattrap do
> that if there all the same Asexual sexes.
>
> How about all the hand holding in the TF G-1 season 2 episodes with the
> female transformers & the male transformers. Why would asexual beings
> feel the need to express love for one another.
Love is not intrinsicaly a sexual emotion. Asexual, platonic love does
exist, and there's no reason to assume it could not exist within a
completely asexual race of highly social beings.
> How about the TF G-1 Japanese exclusive headmasters series. When
> Chromedome ask Arcee to dance & they hold hands & stuff. Why would
> Asexual being feel the need to dance with the opposite sex & stuff?
Again, dancing is not limited to sexual motives. You are making flawed
assumptions here which beg the question.
> How About Arcee love for Daniel as a temporal mother figure in USA
> Rebirth parts 1-3.
Again, social requirements. The same reason a human woman would show
maternal care towards another's young; it's beneficial not only for the
species but for society as a whole.
> Why would a ASEXUAL being as arcee feel the need to act like a
> woman/mother & help dainel out this his kid problems.
Why not? Daniel is an established member of their social structure.
Arcee exhibited concern and a desire to nurture a young member of that
community. It has nothing to do with the presence or absence of sexual
dimorphism.
> FACT: Hasbro/Takara view have put a permanet "G" Rating on all TF
> Cartoon,comics,toys,etc.. To say there Gay goes against the laws Hasbro
> set for the TF universe.
Yeah, like Japanese dub Tigatron and Airrazor. Woops!
> Geez it's obvious to assume stuff happens in the back ground that we
> aren't allowed to see.
Sure. It's also proper to draw conclusions of what goes on in the
background based on what has been presented in the foreground. This
includes explicite demonstration os asexual reproduction.
> Geez,by your high standards. When entering the TV SHOW "PG" Sitcoms
> Universes,none of the married couples have sex because the viewers
> didn't see the sex.
If children are present, it is safe to assume copulation did take place
at some point. There are also often audial cues or subtle inuendos.
These are ALSO known bioforms of known habits and biological
requirements.
> Why can't the same laws Apply for the Transformers universe.
They do. We've both agreed Transformers have been explicitely shown as
reproducing asexually, with a complete lack of anything resembling
gametes. What we have also seen is intense, recognizable social
behaviors which, to our sexual mammalian minds, closely resembles
sexual behavior. HOWEVER, given what we know - they reproduce asexually
- it seems reasonable to assume that sex is not involved.
Beastwars/machines not withstanding. We shall address that farther
down.
> after all
> most male or female transformers are over the age of 18 years of age.
Most Cybertronians we've been introduced to are well over this age :)
> to assume the season 2 TF G-1 Female transformers & males never had sex
> because the viewers didn't see the sex is just being really oblivious.
But assuming they didn't because we've seen enough of their biological
habits to know that THEY DON'T is being logical. But, for the sake of
argument, let's assume that Cybertronians do engage in both sexual and
asexual reproduction (as sea anemonies do). What information is
transferred, in what manner, and what is expressed in the new TF? We
know a new body is constructed externally, not grown internally, say in
a womb or egg. So coital reproduction is likely flat out. We also know
the only required component for a Cybertronian life is the spark or
laser core. Therefore, the actual data defining the Cybertronian is
known to be contained within the spark or laser core. Sexual
reproduction, then, would likely involve passing whatever passes for
genetic material between the two sparks.
But the budding shown throws a monkey wrench into this scenario. Here
we see Cybertronians behaving in a manner indicative of some form of
multicellular composition. Easy enough to work around: the spark/laser
core contains as a part of it's structure a collection of nano-machines
(or cells) whose job it is to assimilate and incorperate the
superstructure into which it has been inserted. This allows for the
insertion of a spark/laser core as seen in "Starscreams Brigade" as
well as the budding presented in the G2 comic; once the body has been
assimilated and converted into a collection of living nano-machines,
the option to bud a new spark/laser core AND body from the existing
body becomes an option. But nothing presented still indicates the
presence of sexual reproduction once in this embodied stage.
Here's a possibility: the AllSpark is actually the spawning grounds,
where sparks engage in a sea-hare type of massive orgy, constantly
exchanging data forming and reforming new sparks. Once a spark is
extracted, it stops intermingling this genetic facsimile and begines
looking for a host body to emerge into it's next stage in life. Either
the Quintessons or Primus intentionally added a block to prevent the
new Cybertronian from knowing about it's own asexual reproductive
capabilities to prevent the amok reproduction seen in the G2 comic.
> the same deal goes for BA & Silverbolt just because we the viewers
> didn't see them have sex doesn't mean they didn't
There's no reason to assume that they did, either. Sure, a race as
advanced as Cybertronians probably has some killer contraceptive
measures, but we still have one reason to beleive it Never Happened: no
other baby TF's. They ALL come online as adults, both mentally and in
appearance. If anything, I can use that to give further credence to the
spark reproduction line of thought. Sorry, Deathy, no Silverbolt penis
going into Black Arachnia vagina for you! Best case scenario you get
some whispy tendrils going from one glowey orb to another glowy orb.
> Geez,when vieweing cartoons,shows/movies,etc.. the viewer only sees a
> small portion of what goes on in the lives of those individuals in that
> particular universe. there's a little thing called fading to black &
> off scence stuff.
Granted, but there's also such a thing as NOT assuming anything
happened, either. Do you assume that Luke and Leia did the horizontal
mambo on the Millenium Falcon? Do you assume Kirk went around doing
every babelien they came across, or board his ship? How about all that
B5 slashfic that was rendered flat out wrong when it was revealed the
Centauri only resemble us when fully clothed? Could you even identify a
male or female Pak'Ma'Ra? Or even a male or female penguine?
My whole original point was, and remains, that exclaiming the upcoming
live action Trasformers movie to be less in quality simply because it
portrays Transformers in a sexually ambiguous manner, with no "female"
Cybertronians anywhere, to be asanine.
--
Xiphos - really, what is this fascination of watching big alien
shapeshifting arthropoids bang eachother?
G.B. Blackrock
Xiphos wrote:
> Granted, but there's also such a thing as NOT assuming anything
> happened, either. Do you assume that Luke and Leia did the horizontal
> mambo on the Millenium Falcon? Do you assume Kirk went around doing
> every babelien they came across, or board his ship?
Actually, allowing for hyperbole... yes. Kirk's always been assumed to
be the lady's man....
But seriously, a well-thought out reply to an increasingly insane and
irrational thread.
G.B. Blackrock
Xiphos
> Xiphos wrote:
> > Granted, but there's also such a thing as NOT assuming anything
> > happened, either. Do you assume that Luke and Leia did the horizontal
> > mambo on the Millenium Falcon? Do you assume Kirk went around doing
> > every babelien they came across, or board his ship?
>
> Actually, allowing for hyperbole... yes. Kirk's always been assumed to
> be the lady's man....
...
D'Oh! You're right. My mistake.
> But seriously, a well-thought out reply to an increasingly insane and
> irrational thread.
Thank you :) I'm a bit rusty, but Deathy's been good practice.
--
Xiphos
Denyer
> shapeshifting arthropoids bang eachother?
>From the point of view of fanfic writers, the need to have something
they're in control of. Typically it's something mentally stored as a
favourable (i.e. grossly simplified) understanding of relationships
when they were younger, and now they're retrofitting sex and other
things into the fiction, in ways that they're comfortable with.
People have to *think* in order to not filter everything through their
own personal reality. Most readers, in the absence of a description or
context for a human character, will tend to imagine a character as
being of the same ethnicity as themselves, for example.
> dancing is not limited to sexual motives
It's incredible having to point this out to a supposed fellow adult,
isn't it?
D.
Xiphos
> > what is this fascination of watching big alien
> > shapeshifting arthropoids bang eachother?
>
> From the point of view of fanfic writers, the need to have something
> they're in control of. Typically it's something mentally stored as a
> favourable (i.e. grossly simplified) understanding of relationships
> when they were younger, and now they're retrofitting sex and other
> things into the fiction, in ways that they're comfortable with.
It was a rhetorical question, but thanks for the correct response :)
> People have to *think* in order to not filter everything through their
> own personal reality. Most readers, in the absence of a description or
> context for a human character, will tend to imagine a character as
> being of the same ethnicity as themselves, for example.
It really is an interesting substudy of psychology, isn't it? Mentally
seperating ones self from the self is a good mental excercise, and not
an easy one to achieve. We only have our experience to go by, therfore
we must make the assumptions that anything not explicitely stated and
not within our realm of experience must be as we know it. When
something outside our realm of experience comes along to alter said
experience, we do all sorts of weird things to try an reconcile the new
information before accepting it, if it ever is accepted. The old blind
men and the elephant.
> > dancing is not limited to sexual motives
>
> It's incredible having to point this out to a supposed fellow adult,
> isn't it?
I'd say yes, but it is Deathy we're discussing here.
--
Xiphos
Iron Wookiee
>It really is an interesting substudy of psychology, isn't it? Mentally
>seperating ones self from the self is a good mental excercise, and not
>an easy one to achieve. We only have our experience to go by, therfore
>we must make the assumptions that anything not explicitely stated and
>not within our realm of experience must be as we know it. When
>something outside our realm of experience comes along to alter said
>experience, we do all sorts of weird things to try an reconcile the new
>information before accepting it, if it ever is accepted. The old blind
>men and the elephant.
I want to say that I was delighted by this post. Rarely does ATT see
such insight into the psyche. I also never expected to see a reference
to the blind men from Indostan.
Nice job.
Kil - Michael McCarthy
>> That is the language used to describe it within the fiction. Elita-1 and
>> company are described as being "female", therefore that is what they are.
>
> In the fiction, yes -- that's how they view themselves. Regardless of
> whether you view them as simply acting out remnants of old programming
> or not, we are *not* in the fiction.
No, we are not, but the characters are, and when discussing the fictional
universe that they inhabit I think the terminology used within that universe
is applicable.
>> I would perhaps suggest that biological definitions are irrelevant here,
>> as
>> Transformers are not alive due to any biological process.
>
> Are they not? Serious question. Brain activity consists of electrical
> impulses... the line between mechanical and biological is to some
> extent artificial. Even if something is biological, though, it doesn't
> follow that reproduction is sexual.
>
> We likely couldn't distinguish a human from a sufficiently good
> facsimile, so I certainly wouldn't quibble Transformers being alive
> (lots of story potential in the Quints considering them not to be,
> though.) And if Transformers had sufficient facsimile of reproductive
> capabilities, "male" and "female" signifiers might be warranted.
>
>> if the living, concious mind of a Transformer possesses some form
>> of gender identity, considering itself to be "female," either owed to
>> programming or perhaps even to the nature of it's spark, would that
>> not make that Transformer as much "female" as it is "alive"?
>
> No. Gender indentity is just that, an identity.
I do not mean to suggest that Transformers have any capacity for sexual
reproduction, or possess sexes as such.
However, when I see Orion Pax identify Ariel as being his "girlfriend" after
she kisses him on the cheek, I see no reason not to take that scene at face
value, as an identication of some form of gender -- gender that is as real
to the characters as anything else about their lives and does not require me
to invent some new genderless meaning for the gender-specific term
"girlfriend" -- existing amongst Transformers.
While this IS seemingly impossible, in watching Transformers I readily
accept the seemingly impossible as truths within their universe on a regular
basis.
Xiphos
> > I would perhaps suggest that biological definitions are irrelevant here, as
> > Transformers are not alive due to any biological process.
>
> Are they not? Serious question. Brain activity consists of electrical
> impulses... the line between mechanical and biological is to some
> extent artificial. Even if something is biological, though, it doesn't
> follow that reproduction is sexual.
This is a common fallacy. Alive != concious. An amoeba is no more aware
of it's identity of self as a tree is capable of discussing the finer
points of Shakespear. To that end, Cybertronians are alive in that:
1. they exhibit the ability to reproduce - That is to say they can
recreate themselves and combinations of themselves, prolonging and
continuing a coherent pattern (this is where fire fails the "Is it
life?" test). On Earth, this is cellular structure and genetic
material.
2. They exhibit the ability to repair damage to their own structures -
Even one-celled organisms are capable of some degree of self-repair,
provided the damage is not sufficiently extensive. This is where modern
robots fail, and also where the promise of true nano-machinery severly
blurrs the line between life and automaton.
Any more complex defenitions of what is "life", you start excluding
known examples of life (for example, a sense of self pretty much
excludes, well, almost everything not an animal)
Sentient, much less sapient, is another story. To the best of our
understanding, there's nothing preventing a non-living system from
being sentient, or even sapient. Indeed, there have arguably been
developments in robotics just within the past year of robots that
exhibit a rudimentary sense of self. Yet because they can neither
procreate nor regenerate they cannot be considered alive.
> We likely couldn't distinguish a human from a sufficiently good
> facsimile, so I certainly wouldn't quibble Transformers being alive
> (lots of story potential in the Quints considering them not to be,
> though.) And if Transformers had sufficient facsimile of reproductive
> capabilities, "male" and "female" signifiers might be warranted.
>From what's been established in this thread, our best case scenario is
that Cybertronians are hermaphroditic, which still negates any hope of
a true biologically defined "male" or "female".
> > if the living, concious mind of a Transformer possesses some form
> > of gender identity, considering itself to be "female," either owed to
> > programming or perhaps even to the nature of it's spark, would that
> > not make that Transformer as much "female" as it is "alive"?
>
> No. Gender indentity is just that, an identity.
Precisely.
--
Xiphos - Y'know, I should probably, like, do some actual work. I mean,
they are PAYING me here to do computer type stuffs...
Xiphos
> I do not mean to suggest that Transformers have any capacity for sexual
> reproduction, or possess sexes as such.
>
> However, when I see Orion Pax identify Ariel as being his "girlfriend" after
> she kisses him on the cheek, I see no reason not to take that scene at face
> value, as an identication of some form of gender -- gender that is as real
> to the characters as anything else about their lives and does not require me
> to invent some new genderless meaning for the gender-specific term
> "girlfriend" -- existing amongst Transformers.
Why not? It makes for a good and fun thought expeiment. What possible
reasons would an asexual race of vaguely humanoid arthropoids have from
expressing such strikingly recognizale behavior? Perhaps they ARE
romantically involved, and Cybertronians really are hermaphroditic.
Perhaps there's some alternate underlying social behavior that happened
to converge into a behavior strikingly similar to ours.
While the more correct answer is the writers were inconsistent and
anthropomorphising, and that each story of The Transformers gives us
inherently conflicting explanations and ideas for the biology and
psychology of a race of giant, vaguely humanoid, shapeshifting
arthropoids, it's not nearly as much fun as trying to reconcile the
inconsistancies into a coherent explanation that at the very least
spans the G1/G2/BW continuities.
> While this IS seemingly impossible, in watching Transformers I readily
> accept the seemingly impossible as truths within their universe on a regular
> basis.
I like when Spike talks to that girl in Peru somewhere in "Fire on the
Mountain" face to face. With Spike in front of Mt. St. Hilary.
--
Xiphos - We do what we can with what we're given.
Autobus Prime
Denyer wrote:
> >[I had] mentioned the G2 'budding' process. It seems that this
> > would be doomed to eventually fail
>
> Species in nature don't have the option of writing a clear genetic
> script for their offspring. Budding has the potential to be a much more
> precise process.
Well, since Transformers are, according to the fiction, a very advanced
lifeform, their 'genetic' code would no doubt be extremely complex. In
order
to let them write a 'clear genetic script', they would need
unbelievable
internal computing powers to predict possible outcomes from each
genetic
characteristic. Much better to let evolution sort this out.
>There's also the potential to deliberately include
> psuedo-randomised data to prevent limited variation ever being an
> issue.
This deals nicely with the computing-power problem -- randomization
would
be very easy. Unfortunately, you'd get a lot of unviable offspring,
because
most random changes will not be beneficial. Evolution would not sort
this
out, either, because the changes would continue to be random.
> > Dividing the race into compatible halves
>
> Why stop at two? More to the point, why bother with more than one when
> you can control a budding process?
Occam's Razor. Two is the least number of 'parents' you can have for
sexual
reproduction. The simplest solution, if it works, is usually best.
Other question
answered above. As we saw in G2, though, the budding process wasn't as
well-controlled as the Cybertronians thought it was.
Denyer
> sexual reproduction.
Sure. Why would the reproduction be sexual? Is degradation of material
viability an issue with budding? More to the point, we've seen evidence
of asexual reproduction, but none for sexual reproduction.
Transformers have a very limited evolutionary chain, if at all, living
for millions of years and initially being created by an outside
third-party. It's possible that each created TF carries enough data for
personality templates to bud succesfully only a few times (hence the
system breaking down and the Swarm coming into being.)
Or that budding was intended as a very occasional resource for
providing new troops in a hurry, but a flawed method -- hence Primus
locking those memories and the TFs relying on the matrix and matrix
flames for creating new TFs.
> As we saw in G2, though, the budding process wasn't as
> well-controlled as the Cybertronians thought it was.
True (although the process was being hurriedly and forcibly
rediscovered after a several million year gap in its usage, which
should probably be borne in mind.) They did get new Cybertronians who
were very clearly distinct entities and personalities from their
progenitors.
> randomization would
> be very easy. Unfortunately, you'd get a lot of unviable offspring
Randomisation within limits. It's possible to interpolate and splice
DNA fragments (that part of Jurassic Park isn't complete hogwash) so
it'd be a matter of judging where it's safe to do so, if that method
were utilised.
We don't know if there were any unviable TFs created through budding...
don't really know much about it at all, really. Prime's dream /
time-travel sequence may not be literal.
D.
Denyer
> sexual reproduction.
Sure. Why would the reproduction be sexual? Is degradation of material
viability an issue with budding? More to the point, we've seen evidence
of asexual reproduction, but none for sexual reproduction.
Transformers have a very limited evolutionary chain, if at all, living
for millions of years and initially being created by an outside
third-party.
> As we saw in G2, though, the budding process wasn't as
> well-controlled as the Cybertronians thought it was.
True (although the process was being hurriedly and forcibly
rediscovered after a several million year gap in its usage, which
should probably be borne in mind.) They did get new Cybertronians who
were very clearly distinct entities and personalities from their
progenitors.
> randomization would
Xiphos
:)
Autobus Prime wrote:
> Denyer wrote:
> > >[I had] mentioned the G2 'budding' process. It seems that this
> > > would be doomed to eventually fail
Why? It's kept quite a number of species alive and viable here on earth
for hundreds of millions of years at least.
> > Species in nature don't have the option of writing a clear genetic
> > script for their offspring. Budding has the potential to be a much more
> > precise process.
>
> Well, since Transformers are, according to the fiction, a very advanced
> lifeform, their 'genetic' code would no doubt be extremely complex.
Genetic complexity != social complexity. By that logic, deciduous
forests are far more advanced than humans in the social and technology
department, and we're only ~ 1/3 more advanced than worms.
> In order
> to let them write a 'clear genetic script', they would need
> unbelievable
> internal computing powers to predict possible outcomes from each
> genetic
> characteristic. Much better to let evolution sort this out.
Given what we've seen of Cybertronian, or even Quintesson technology,
why is this such a streatch? If we told someone in 1945 that by 2005
we'd have computers so powerful that they could render a near
photorealistic world on the fly, communicate with thousands of others
around the world, and yet easily set up on your lap and require only a
dozen volts to run you'd be labled a wishful thinker of a futurist (At
the same time, say we'd have flying cars and it would be considered a
given). Work being done NOW in the department of qbits and
nanocomputing shows enormous promise in making huge leaps in computing
power. Now, give yourself a mere few thousand years of working out new
computing methods, algorithms, and ever increasing computing
efficiencies. Sure, you may hit a physical limits wall within that
time, but the ability to parse and simulate the outcome of a given
genetic data stream is well within the realms of possibility.
> >There's also the potential to deliberately include
> > psuedo-randomised data to prevent limited variation ever being an
> > issue.
>
> This deals nicely with the computing-power problem -- randomization
> would
> be very easy. Unfortunately, you'd get a lot of unviable offspring,
> because
> most random changes will not be beneficial. Evolution would not sort
> this
> out, either, because the changes would continue to be random.
Again, not neccessarily. Note he said PSEUDO-random. To quote John Von
Neumann, "Anyone who considers arithmetical methods of producing random
digits is, of course, in a state of sin." If you know you have a
variable, or set of variables, which MUST remain within certain
constraints, you can seed a pseudo-random generator to produce
sufficient variation to keep the line viable and less predictable in
key areas. This is actually much of what modern cryptography is all
about, and could be applied in this scenario quite nicely.
> > > Dividing the race into compatible halves
> >
> > Why stop at two? More to the point, why bother with more than one when
> > you can control a budding process?
>
> Occam's Razor. Two is the least number of 'parents' you can have for
> sexual
> reproduction. The simplest solution, if it works, is usually best.
... wait, are you suggesting nature sticks to occams razor? You are
typing with EIGHT fingers and two thumbs, right? You looked at the
mouth of any given arthropod? And what's up with the nautilus? That's
an entire newsgroup worth of discussion right there :D
Besides, I can't see anything that designs something like the
Transformers as following Occams Razor. They're basically walking Rube
Goldberg devices.
> Other question
> answered above. As we saw in G2, though, the budding process wasn't as
> well-controlled as the Cybertronians thought it was.
Perhaps. But that's not what the issue was. Unintended side effects
aside, it was what was presented to us as a Cybertronians primary means
of reproduction outside the matrix/allspark.
--
Xiphos - Yeah, so, I kinda slacked off yesterday. Lots to do at work to
cover that up today :D
Autobus Prime
Xiphos wrote:
> Good morning. Before I start with the IT work, I just had to chime in
> :)
Good morning! Before I start designing forge dies, likewise...
> Autobus Prime wrote:
> > Denyer wrote:
> > > >[I had] mentioned the G2 'budding' process. It seems that this
> > > > would be doomed to eventually fail
>
> Why? It's kept quite a number of species alive and viable here on earth
> for hundreds of millions of years at least.
True. But even bacteria have some form of sexual reproduction to
stir up the gene pool now and then. A species reproduced by pure
cloning is merely a killer epidemic waiting to happen.
> > > Species in nature don't have the option of writing a clear genetic
> > > script for their offspring. Budding has the potential to be a much more
> > > precise process.
> >
> > Well, since Transformers are, according to the fiction, a very advanced
> > lifeform, their 'genetic' code would no doubt be extremely complex.
>
> Genetic complexity != social complexity. By that logic, deciduous
> forests are far more advanced than humans in the social and technology
> department, and we're only ~ 1/3 more advanced than worms.
You caught me. :) Still, see below.
> > In order
> > to let them write a 'clear genetic script', they would need
> > unbelievable
> > internal computing powers to predict possible outcomes from each
> > genetic
> > characteristic. Much better to let evolution sort this out.
>
> Given what we've seen of Cybertronian, or even Quintesson technology,
> why is this such a streatch?
Well, despite the advances in computing you mentioned, we certainly
don't have sufficient simulation capacity to find an optimal offspring
for even a bacillus - or even a virus. There are just too many
variables.
Given time, possibly such a system could develop - perhaps this is the
real "secret of Vector Sigma".
> ... wait, are you suggesting nature sticks to occams razor?
Yes, in the long run, when complication has lethal results. I could
see a simple lifeform that reproduced by division eventually developing
a way to pool genetic information from two parents. This would
enhance the species' chances of survival. I can't see it going from
two
to three -- it is harder to find two mates than one, so the change
would
not be to the species' benefit.
> > Other question
> > answered above. As we saw in G2, though, the budding process wasn't as
> > well-controlled as the Cybertronians thought it was.
>
> Perhaps. But that's not what the issue was. Unintended side effects
> aside, it was what was presented to us as a Cybertronians primary means
> of reproduction outside the matrix/allspark.
Leaving it open to debate whether this process was developed by the
Liege
Maximo or his minions, or simply used the mechanics of an earlier
system
of reproduction that was forgotten (in a sort of Brave New World
fashion).
But wasn't it said in G2 that the latter was actually the case? If so,
there
must have been some way to mitigate the bad effects of the budding
process.
Punch/Counterpunch
>
> I've read a couple of times now that they may be making more Futurama in
> the...er, future. :) I hope that happens--I miss that show!
>
> t.k.
>
Me, too...me, too. Only four seasons on DVD is NEVER enough!!!
Speaking of DVDs, I still wonder if the second half of Armada is ever
going to come out...I would really like to see the complete seasons of
all the recent TF shows (Armada, Energon, and Cybertron) come out on
DVD.
-Punch/Counterpunch
Ethan Hammond
so very, very much, I would rather have a serious
and well done G1 movie, even if it means making
such a great sacrifice and having no fembots,
FEMBOTS! *SHAKES MINERVA*
--
All Purpose Culture Randomness
http://www.angelfire.com/tx/apcr/index.html