TF Views

Dominic wrote: Who said that women could not like TFs? Conversely, how many bronies bitch and whine about there not being enough male ponies? (Seriously. How many? I do not recall seeing that.)

That might be because male ponies are all over the place in MLP:FIM. While the show is still geared towards girls, and the main characters are all girls, they have many, MANY supporting male roles in the show. And the guys in that show are given a lot better treatment than the 1 or 2 token girls in each TF toon. They cover a whole gamut of personalities from nice guys to overbearing jerks and everything inbetween.

They put Windblade #1 in my pull list today, and I put it back on the shelf after glancing through it. I didn't care for the art, and I honestly have no real interest in the character.

BWprowl wrote:Starscream's goal doesn't necessarily have to have weight (yet), we've always known he was a jerk. The 'weight' comes from Windblade *herself* discovering he's a jerk, and how this affects her, both mentally after gathering the information, and physically, as she's blown up while she's still reeling from the effects of the revelation.

Windblade has been on Cybertron for 6 months, if she didn't figure it out in 6 months, why are we seeing it take place over one day? It's hard to swallow, they made a big deal out of "6 months later" and yet she showed no growth whatsoever, and the goal of "find out if Starscream is a jerk" was accomplished by talking to a handful of people. It's a limp conflict at best and surely nothing that could drive the miniseries.

Anyway, I'm not sure why I'm trying so hard to get you to like the book, you outlined just fine what didn't work about the book for you and said that it was half-decent anyway, unlike *some* people who went in looking to poo-poo the book because they misread some message board posts by the author months ago and did just that without seeming to even actually glance at the book itself. And I really enjoyed the book personally, and it's apparently doing pretty good anyway, so.

Probably because there isn't much support in our circle on this title. I kept it on my pull file, that's good enough for now.

My point was that if they were looking to draw attention away from the fact that they didn't include Nautica (which was obviously conscious since she appears in the flashback at all) then sticking her in that flashback was pretty much the opposite of the way to do so. They clearly didn't just forget about her with no reason, or she wouldn't be on-page at all. Anyway, Sparky already explained the full reason she's not around, so there you go.

Seems to me like if she's gone, then there could have been a brief callback to that thing we haven't seen yet. Hell, that could have been conflict, Chromia and Windblade bristling at the idea of their trio splitting apart, or Windblade feeling trapped as her friends one by one expand their horizons while she's stuck tending to Metroplex, the only city on Cybertron and she's the only Titan-talker. But alas....

If the only new females in the brand turn out to be lesbians, it's going to tarnish things, it's pretty cheap to grab an audience with lazy theatrics and it minimizes their role as equals when their sexuality is immediately taken to the most fetishistic place possible. I don't remember Windblade saying the only gender on her world was female, just that they evolved, so there may be menbots as well as fembots.

I'm not sure how characters being homosexual makes it 'fetishistic', at least in this context. Either way, the relationship between Windblade and Chromia is definitely more one of close friends, or surrogate sisters or something, I wouldn't argue otherwise.

It is a fetish because the majority of females in the story and the universe will be lesbians, a sexual minority in our society, a sexual minority that is especially fetishized by straight male readers. It's grotesque to use sexuality as a cheap weapon to get attention, if it's organic to the story and they're one of many and it's not among the first things you learn about them then maybe it could pass muster, but if that was the intention here it's used as titillation rather than an honest expression. What if it was a lesbian coven between the trio of Windblade, Chromia, and Nautica? Would that make it any clearer that it'd be used cheaply? Why would their sexuality define them so early and in such cliche fashion?

Dom wrote:The more I look at it, the more I think that the artist does not work for "Transformers" . This is similar to how Ramondelli does good city/battle-scapes. But, he is weak in terms of drawing infividual characters. (There are panels in "Chaos" and "Autocracy" that are gorgeously drawn. But, even putting aside the writing, Ramondelli's skill is over-shadowed by the fact that individual characters are not his strong suit.)

Ramondelli I think doesn't have fine detail work down for the TFs, his characters express differently and feel more consistent with the original Marvel issue 1's cover than anything in the brand.

I'm not terribly concerned with the artist's specific style working or not working for the brand in either case - I ended up enjoying TF: Animated and that's not much different from this style, Stone's style has more robotic detail than TF:A's so it deserves a pass as styles go - but it's the execution I take issue with, and I take it with Ramondelli as well as Stone, now that you mention it. Ramondelli can really dazzle the senses with his use of rich, dark colors and strong lines, but he can't seem to get a mouthplate's size and location to stay consistent from panel to panel - I'm not remotely an expert, but it's stuff like that from him which is distracting and looks sloppy.

I would like to see Stone on a capes and tights book that did not have much in the way of armour of tech.

I honestly think you're selling Stone short on the tech she brought to the party on this book, it's not the flaw, there's enough and it's mostly consistent IMO.

Why does there need to be a fight every issue?

There doesn't, but it's the quickest way to drive conflict, and all drama is conflict. This book has no conflict, and that's dangerous close to just being Diary of a wistful wobot.

Furman has long thought that differentiated genders in robots was stupid. And, I tend to agree with him. TFs do not reproduce sexually, and would have no need for differentiated genders. (DvD wrote a good "Transformers are Gendered" essay earlier this year. But, it was less about reproduction and more about function.) He assumed that TFs were roughly analoguous to biological males (because that was the easiest thing to do and stay consistenet with Hasbro's marketing) and went with it. Oh, and "Spotlight: Arcee" was good.

I don't give half a shit what Furman's opinion is, he can think it all he wants, but he's not the brand's creator and the brand's creator says there is. Why draw the characters with male physiques and male facial structures, why give them distinctive handheld weapons rather than something more alien? Because that's what the audience knows, the audience knows what heroic guys look like and what the guns and blades they use to save the day look like. And once you start falling down that rabbit hole of concessions, you have to ask yourself why you're limiting yourself to just what half the audience is rather than the whole.

The argument that biological males are easiest is crap in a hat, he made a conscious choice to stay with males and throw out females. Real organic robots would be more akin to the Bayverse, or just Roombas bumping into each other a la Battle Bots, but that's not what this brand is about, this brand is about alien technological entities who are recognizably people, and tells stories that fit the form.

Try putting yourself in a female TF fan's shoes, looking at a brand that views them as at best tertiary and at worst as freaks who shouldn't have broken their dicks off -- that has to go.

Really?

Who said that women could not like TFs? Conversely, how many bronies bitch and whine about there not being enough male ponies? (Seriously. How many? I do not recall seeing that.)

Sure, ignore every fucking word I said, whatever.

Nobody said that women could not like TFs, except you in your fallacy question there.

And if Bronies are your go-to example of a working, mature, balanced universe, you have a pretty weak argument. Moreover, even the goddamned MLP universe apparently has SOME males because you just said "not being enough male ponies", whereas Furman's Transformers there are zero females until one is foisted upon him, and then he makes her a singularity and a maniac for it.

If a book or property is marketed as an ongoing series/story, I want there to be some passage of time. For example, I think Bendis established that 100 issues of "Ultimate Spider-Man" worked out to a year.

I generally do not expect comics to hold together above the compilation level (or maybe for the duration of a writer's tenure on the book). But, if the book is marketed as ongoing, and has used real-time in the past, I want to know if the new writers are doing the same.

A) In what way is it up to what you'd like?
B) It went out of its fucking way to make a clear passage of time: dawn to dawn, one single day.
C) There's no statement that this is an ongoing story, this is a miniseries that takes place in its own timeline and doesn't have to be slave to RID/MTMTE's timeline.

But, "space robot romance" has been enough of a thing in the fandom and fanfic that I *really* do not want it in my official content. Similarly, some of my favourite parts of "Dark Wolverine" were scenes that had Daken and Sofen (effectively two sexual predators) interacting.

I'll never understand your insistence on allowing the meta to affect your consuming of the actual content. It's also an argument that can only work inside of one person: you - which effectively makes it an anomaly rather than an argument.

But, for the purpose of TF, I see it as pandering to shippers.

If you were right, it would come off as pandering, I agree. But I don't think you're right, and I believe the group has broken your argument's back entirely.

And on the other hand, I really liked the tasteful and thoughtful and poignant manner in which MTMTE handled its bot/bot relationship, it didn't pander whatsoever, it was respectful and tasteful and built upon and into the characters themselves without being a major defining element.

Maybe I am wrong. But, given how fannish the content has gotten over the years, I am wary. (I can even concede a degree of hypocrisy as I tend to count Strika and Obsidian as *one* of my favourite characters.) I know that TF is (very) soft sci-fi, and that aliens are only going to be so "alien". But, I do not want them overly humanized either.

Ignoring the hypocrisy, I will just say that unless you're willing to have every character be a goddamned hermit, there is something universal about pair bonding between characters who share close quarters and fight and work alongside each other. Look at your connection to animals you care for, it's not a romantic pairing but you give love and receive it - it's not overly humanized, it's just a fact of LIFE.

Prowl wrote:Okay, first of all, if you think 'introducing more than a single female character into the canon' counts as 'pandering', you seriously need to re-evaluate your view on these things, because wow.

Second of all, it's not even as if she's inserting new female characters for shits and giggles, she's doing it because the CHARACTER she's been specifically tasked with HASBRO to write a comic about is a FEMALE. There was literally no way around 'pandering' as you call it by introducing additional female characters. It simply had to occur. Windblade isn't Drift or Rung, a new character wholly invented by the writer to fill a particular role in their story, she's a character that the fans voted on the characteristics of as things they would like to see, that Hasbro then mandated be represented in the comic. Nothing about her was created as a way to push any agenda you may think Scott had, she's simply running with what she's been given.

I think you may have misunderstood Dom on that one, I don't think he was talking about introducing the female character as pandering but making her a lesbian as pandering.

Question: if Furman excluded females and ended up making Arcee the only female an anomaly that is driven mad by it, if Furman did all that because he was a homosexual misogynist, would that meta information affect your opinion of the in-comic decision? (Please keep in mind that I'm in no way stating Furman's opinions or sexual orientation or anything, I'm asking a fully hypothetical question.)

I ask because Dom has been conversing here almost entirely in terms of the meta aspects of this book, and to me there is a universal truth that deserves discussion in which it doesn't matter why Furman did what he did, only that he did it; that his actions are all that matter in this case, not his personal beliefs about why.

It's always been my stance that Furman thinks female TFs are a stupid idea (and I don't think he would be alone in that opinion), but to bend an entire company's youngling universe to that will and make Arcee (and by extension, all future possible female TFs) an explicit anomaly is a shitty thing to do. Period. *

Imagine I hate Lamborghinis. Sideswipe is long established to be a Lamborghini. It's an essential part of his character, I can't just hack it out.

Spoiler

(Alternators notwithstanding.)

So I make it so Sideswipe being a Lamborghini is a totally messed up thing. He used to have another altmode but now he's a Lambo, he's a freak of nature and he's fucked for life. Not just that, but the mere act of being a Lamborghini makes you weird to any other TF. I have no effectively screwed over any possible future characterisations for Sunstreaker, Red Alert, Deep Cover, Mach Alert/Prowl from RID, Eaglekiller, and any other TF who might possibly ever have been a Lamborghini.

Isn't that stupid as hell? Now replace Lamborghinis with females and you understand my frustration.**


*Then again, Furman was probably assuming IDW would go tits-up in a year and a half anyway, and he'd get contacted by the next guys to start writing for them after that.

**Incidentally, replace Lamborghinis with "dudes with mono eyes and limbs that are weapons" and you have accurately described what happens in-canon to Empurata victims. The difference is, very few humans have one eye and robot limbs.

Well, I thought it was a new and interesting take on the character and the situation in general. But, I also don't think it necessarily rules out any other naturally occurring female robots. The whole thing with Gorlam Prime basically turning from an organic civilization into Cybertron II essentially sets up that alternative. Also, the thing to remember with Arcee is that it wasn't being made female that made her all psycho, it was the fact that she was radically physically altered against her will. I suppose it would essentially be the closest thing to Cybertronian rape. It was a traumatic physical experience that she never got over. So, being psycho isn't a side effect of being female, it was an effect of Jhiaxus' experiment/torture. It certainly wasn't Furman's way of saying "Bitches be crazy".

Never said it was; my reading of it is "females are an anomaly and have no place in this universe I have personally curated."

Mind you, I may also be reading into things from Furman's original UK introduction of Arcee.

A) In what way is it up to what you'd like?
B) It went out of its fucking way to make a clear passage of time: dawn to dawn, one single day.
C) There's no statement that this is an ongoing story, this is a miniseries that takes place in its own timeline and doesn't have to be slave to RID/MTMTE's timeline.

"Windblade" is also marketed as part of IDW's long-running TF comics. IDW's comics (as a whole) have been set in real time. But, after nearly a decade with the license, that seems to be breaking down (not just in Windblade). Taking place in real-time (more or less) made "Transformers" unique. I would hate to see that go away. (RiD and MTMTE seem to be breaking with that as well.)

It's always been my stance that Furman thinks female TFs are a stupid idea (and I don't think he would be alone in that opinion), but to bend an entire company's youngling universe to that will and make Arcee (and by extension, all future possible female TFs) an explicit anomaly is a shitty thing to do. Period. *

How? Every time DC does a reset, every time any company launches a book, certain things are established and other things are ruled out. Why is it so wrong that Furman tried to extirpate a character-gimmick that seems like a Silver-Age throwback?

Question: if Furman excluded females and ended up making Arcee the only female an anomaly that is driven mad by it, if Furman did all that because he was a homosexual misogynist, would that meta information affect your opinion of the in-comic decision? (Please keep in mind that I'm in no way stating Furman's opinions or sexual orientation or anything, I'm asking a fully hypothetical question.)

I will not accuse you of conflating homosexuality and misogyny if you do not accuse me of homophobia.

Short answer, yes, if I found out that was Furman's motive, it would affect how I saw his handling of Arcee. One of my problems with the last 20 pages of "Enders Game" (beyond the fact that it sucks) is that it springs from the foetid loins of Card's insane universalism. ("Everybody is, or wants to be like, us....white folks. Even aliens want to be like us.")

But, I am pretty sure that it was not Furman's motive. (And, for the record, if Furman is gay, I do not care. I hope he is banging Transformers groupies half his age and not making any commitments to them. Go Furman!)

I ask because Dom has been conversing here almost entirely in terms of the meta aspects of this book, and to me there is a universal truth that deserves discussion in which it doesn't matter why Furman did what he did, only that he did it; that his actions are all that matter in this case, not his personal beliefs about why.

The "why" matters because that is what Furman was actually saying/trying to say.

Dominic wrote:"Windblade" is also marketed as part of IDW's long-running TF comics. IDW's comics (as a whole) have been set in real time. But, after nearly a decade with the license, that seems to be breaking down (not just in Windblade). Taking place in real-time (more or less) made "Transformers" unique. I would hate to see that go away. (RiD and MTMTE seem to be breaking with that as well.)

I think you are literally the only person who ever noticed or cared about that. Time scales in stories change and flow all the time, you can't let yourself get worked up about it.

How? Every time DC does a reset, every time any company launches a book, certain things are established and other things are ruled out. Why is it so wrong that Furman tried to extirpate a character-gimmick that seems like a Silver-Age throwback?

You actually think "Female characters" is a 'gimmick'? Can we be done with this conversation now?

Seriously, how can you not see "Girls of a species existing is fucked-up and crazy" as something that might upset a few people? Specifically, y'know, girls?

But, I am pretty sure that it was not Furman's motive.

What about Furman's more apparent motive of "Girls in my comic books are stupid and I don't want to write them"?

The "why" matters because that is what Furman was actually saying/trying to say.

And I don't think Scott was trying to say anything with her quickie retcon of 'colony of some-female Transformers' other than "Hey, wouldn't it be nice if there were female characters that weren't deranged sex-changed males?". She makes no indictment of Furman's concept on the page; she never even mentions Arcee. If Windblade and Chromia were meeting Arcee in the comic and recoiling in disgust and talking about what a "bad idea" she was, you might have a point, but they don't, and you don't.

What about Furman's more apparent motive of "Girls in my comic books are stupid and I don't want to write them"?

Yeah, Furman hates writing women. That is why the first POV character he introduced in IDW was Verity Carlo. Mercy (from "Dragon's Claw"), several human female characters from TF UK and likely some others (from books I have not read) are all indicative of Furman's disdain for writing women.

Saying "girl robots are stupid" is not the same as saying "girls are stupid". One is showing disdain for Silver-Agey junk. The other is actually calling people out for their gender.