Windblade Confirmed as 4 Issue Mini-series

Sabrblade wrote:Gahhhh!!!

Burn wrote:Mindmaster = Speedy Gonzales ...

megatronus wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:Gahhhh!!!

Calm down.

Just. Calm. Down.

Sabrblade wrote:

megatronus wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:Gahhhh!!!

Calm down.

Just. Calm. Down.

I... was?

That "gahhhh" doesn't reflect how I felt in that post. I was serious, but not mad.

megatronus wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:

megatronus wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:Gahhhh!!!

Calm down.

Just. Calm. Down.

I... was?

That "gahhhh" doesn't reflect how I felt in that post. I was serious, but not mad.

Your original posts conveyed frenetic agitation. Glad to hear that wasn't the case

datguy86 wrote:I think we're all missing a vital point here. There's what Scott is attempting to do with the character, and what Japan will do to the character.

Ain't that right Arcee the Secretary and Airachnid the Stalker?

Ahhh, mostly just kidding.

Sabrblade wrote:

datguy86 wrote:I think we're all missing a vital point here. There's what Scott is attempting to do with the character, and what Japan will do to the character.

Ain't that right Arcee the Secretary and Airachnid the Stalker?

Ahhh, mostly just kidding.

Japan already did something indisputably awesome with the character: Turned her into a Kreon.

Seibertron wrote:I hate seeing this discussion. Let me make it really simple for everyone. There are Transformers who have male appearances, speech, and mannerisms and there are Transformers who have female appearances, speech, and mannerisms. They don't reproduce in a method with which we are familiar. It's really that simple.

Some things are best left not overcomplicating.

To those of you who are all about Transformers needing to be genderless, Transformers would become a pretty challenging and boring concept to read about a bunch of genderless robots who much be referred to without words such as him, his, her, hers, he, she, etc. Not to mention if you got your wish, I have a feeling that you guys would be bitching up a storm if a genderless Optimus Prime had a female voice actor or some other non-manly voice.

I'll take my Transformers as hims and hers. And I don't need to put any more thought into than that sentence to enjoy a fictional universe based off a child's toy brand. Thanks.

SW's SilverHammer wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:

datguy86 wrote:I think we're all missing a vital point here. There's what Scott is attempting to do with the character, and what Japan will do to the character.

Ain't that right Arcee the Secretary and Airachnid the Stalker?

Ahhh, mostly just kidding.

Japan already did something indisputably awesome with the character: Turned her into a Kreon.

But it's adorable

T-Macksimus wrote:Jerky Post of Awesome

Seibertron wrote:Simple Post of Awesome

Sabrblade wrote:Japan already did something indisputably awesome with the character: Turned her into a Kreon.

Sabrblade wrote:

SW's SilverHammer wrote:

Sabrblade wrote:Japan already did something indisputably awesome with the character: Turned her into a Kreon.

But it's adorable

"But"? We're in agreement that this Kreon is a good thing.
It's posts like these that make me really wish we also had a "saluting" emoticon.

Sabrblade wrote:It baffles me that fan are whining about this fan-built poll winner. She's what the fans wanted, so people are essentially whining about Hasbro/IDW giving the fans what they want.

MasterSoundBlaster wrote:I don't have an issue with her being a female, I don't have an issue that she's the fan made most of us wanted, my issue is that it's beginning to sound...Driftish. Both have Swords, A Japanese motif, and are being brought in via a 4-part series.

Flashwave wrote: Personally, I find myself subscribing to a theaory that "gender" for a Cybertronian is exactly like a stereotype: They didn't even know what it was until they discovered a trend on other planets as well for the men to generally be the stronger and the females were generally the lighter and tighter shapes

Noideaforaname wrote:If "he/him/his" was EVER used to refer to a Transformer, then Transformer gender already exists. "He/him/his" isn't gender-neutral.

Dead Metal wrote:

Noideaforaname wrote:If "he/him/his" was EVER used to refer to a Transformer, then Transformer gender already exists. "He/him/his" isn't gender-neutral.

Addressed in Spotlight Arcee.

ThunderThruster wrote:I have to ask, is it the character people hate, or the gender issue being raised with the character?

How can anybody say they hate the character of WindBlade, when we don't even know what her character will be. Yes, we've seen the designs, and if that's not your cup of tea, fine, but you cant base your decision about liking her character, when it hasn't yet been presented.

Flashwave wrote: Personally, I find myself subscribing to a theaory that "gender" for a Cybertronian is exactly like a stereotype: They didn't even know what it was until they discovered a trend on other planets as well for the men to generally be the stronger and the females were generally the lighter and tighter shapes

^This is pretty much what I run with, hassle free and simple.
Yes, these are fighting robots, but has everyone forgotten that some of the most formidable warriors in our own history were women!? Get over it!

Ultra Markus wrote:

Seibertron wrote:I hate seeing this discussion. Let me make it really simple for everyone. There are Transformers who have male appearances, speech, and mannerisms and there are Transformers who have female appearances, speech, and mannerisms. They don't reproduce in a method with which we are familiar. It's really that simple.

Some things are best left not overcomplicating.

To those of you who are all about Transformers needing to be genderless, Transformers would become a pretty challenging and boring concept to read about a bunch of genderless robots who much be referred to without words such as him, his, her, hers, he, she, etc. Not to mention if you got your wish, I have a feeling that you guys would be bitching up a storm if a genderless Optimus Prime had a female voice actor or some other non-manly voice.

I'll take my Transformers as hims and hers. And I don't need to put any more thought into than that sentence to enjoy a fictional universe based off a child's toy brand. Thanks.

my thoughts exactly, never has sexuality had any part of transformers, male/female relationships sure but nothing more

Va'al wrote:

Dead Metal wrote:

Noideaforaname wrote:If "he/him/his" was EVER used to refer to a Transformer, then Transformer gender already exists. "He/him/his" isn't gender-neutral.

Addressed in Spotlight Arcee.

Very, very badly. Why is the default 'he' to begin with, for example?

Dead Metal wrote:

Va'al wrote:

Dead Metal wrote:

Noideaforaname wrote:If "he/him/his" was EVER used to refer to a Transformer, then Transformer gender already exists. "He/him/his" isn't gender-neutral.

Addressed in Spotlight Arcee.

Very, very badly. Why is the default 'he' to begin with, for example?

Why doesn't the English language have a gender neutral but still personal version of he/she?

craggy wrote:

Dead Metal wrote:

Va'al wrote:

Dead Metal wrote:

Noideaforaname wrote:If "he/him/his" was EVER used to refer to a Transformer, then Transformer gender already exists. "He/him/his" isn't gender-neutral.

Addressed in Spotlight Arcee.

Very, very badly. Why is the default 'he' to begin with, for example?

Why doesn't the English language have a gender neutral but still personal version of he/she?

well that's easy, all the people we've encountered in the creation of the language have been a gender.

kaijuguy19 wrote:What are your thoughts on the IDW Arcee origin that Furman made?

Okay, this question has come up a lot and it’s time to finally answer.

In a vacuum, Furman’s story is completely legitimate. The idea that someone is fundamentally changed against their will and struggles/rages against that is a really interesting idea. In fact, I wrote a very similar thing with the Dinobots. It taps into a deep human fear that God exists and is apathetic to/causes our pain.

Also dealing with characters that are literally alien naturally leads writers to play with/explore what aspects of humanity do and do not translate: are they alive? does Primus really equate to God if they have concrete knowledge of his existance? what does it mean to be male/female in a non-reproductive species?

The issues I have with Furman’s choice is that we don’t exist in a vacuum and the suggestion that 1. women only exist in aberration 2. being a women is inherently traumatic 3. being a women has any correlation to mental illness are extremely upsetting. Do I think Furman was trying to make a statement about human women with Arcee’s origins? No. In fact, the largest share of blame lies with the tokenization of women in the brand in general. If Arcee was one of many women transformers and she became female in this manner, it would not be an issue for women writ large (although still troubling for the transgender community). It is because she is the ONLY women (and that this story ensures that she will ALWAYS BE the only woman) that Arcee’s story becomes untenable.

Hopefully John, James and I have come up with a way around this Gordian Knot that will satisfy the fan-base, but satisfying-or-no, the most immediate imperative is to ENSURE this story does not continue to keep women readers, fans and characters at arm’s length from the brand. I’ve often said that everyone should feel that they are allowed to like Transformers and it is my complete and utter privilege to take this next step to make that happen.

TLDR version: Arcee’s origin is offensive because we don’t have any other female origins to balance it. We’re working on it, stay tuned.

PS To fans that still claim Transformers are asexual: Academically, you have legitimate standing, but practically, ask yourself this: Jazz has been voice by actors from three different races over the years. If, in the next video game, Jazz was voiced by a woman, would you feel the character had been changed at all? If so, you do not perceive Transformers to be asexual. If not, you are a rare, rare bird indeed.

'Til All Are One,
Mairghread

razorsaw wrote:Ms. Scott, I am very satisfied with the idea you put forth in your post. However, I would like to point out that you used asexual in the wrong context. Asexuality does not refer to gender identity, it refers to sexuality. The word you are looking for is gender neutral. I should note however I agree with the essence of what you were saying. This is just an important part of inclusiveness to get this right, and tbh part of the blame is on the dilution of definition by popular culture.

Thanks for your comment, and you are right that ‘gender nuetral’ would have been a more accurate term. However, I would argue that fans talking about Transformers being ‘asexual’ aren’t wrong. I think they (like I), do actually mean the dictionary definition of ‘lacking sex or sex organs,’ but they (and I) are just also lumping gender-nuetrality into that. I admit this is a cisgender-normative (is that the right word?) point of view and will work to be mindful of that in the future. I’m already plowing through the 47 page GLAAD document on correct LGBT terminology, but it may take me a while to get used to all this.

On a lighter note: Really, GLAAD? 47 pages? I am NEVER going to get this right!

On a serious note again: I will try to get this right and would love if you (that’s all of you, Internet) would please keep helping me. English is my profession, after all, and I want to be as precise with it as possible. Although I will have to take some time off to actually write the comic.

'Til All Are One,
Mairghread

Sabrblade wrote:Back when we quoted Ms. Scott's posts from her Tumblr, there were two more on this subject that did not get quoted here. And with the talk of Spotlight: Arcee why one would need to explain Windblade's gender, I feel these would contribute to this talk.

Va'al wrote:She's not making a big deal out of it, she's posting on her Tumblr about how she's defining her work and the preparation involved in it and how she wants to relate to and deal with the fans in an inclusive way.

It *is* a big deal that this is the first female character who is not a deviation or aberration or experiment in the IDW continuity, that it's both a woman writing and a woman drawing, and that it's the result of a fan poll!

Please do not use the 'what about the menz' argument here, as we're clearly missing the whole point if that's what we're resorting to. The whole universe/franchise is gendered, with the balance in favour of the male side of the issue, even though they are allegedly genderless. Yes, because of the English language and its gendered properties with personal pronouns, but that nonetheless the status quo and a fact.

Dead Metal wrote:This comic is set in the idw G1 universe, in which unlike other incarnations, the Transformers species is genderless.

You know what would be awesome

An Elita-1 that can turn into a truck and bench-press Optimus Prime.

Can you imagine how happy I would be

[heavy breathing]

I think it's important to remember that Mairghread Scott was asked to give her opinion on Arcee's origin. Which she gave. And it's not even a new opinion either: Spotlight Arcee has been a controversial topic of conversation for a long time. Intentional or not, it does say something about gender - the female gender in particular - and it's been marked as offensive by many fans.

Here's a question: are any of you who disagree with Mairghread Scott's comments female? Because your own gender can have a huge impact on how you perceive the entire Transformer gender issue. (Male privilege: look it up.) A lot of guys do not seem to see Transformers being referred to by the male pronoun, Arcee's story, or the lack of female Transformers as a big deal, but ask female fans and you'll hear a different story. Why? Because this is something that directly affects us. Because stories don't exist in a vacuum, they reflect our society. Even the male-pronoun-as-default says something about society and our place in it. It's not something many people, even women, are aware of, but it's inevitable. Talk about Arcee being mad, not because she was turned into a woman, but because she was experimented upon, ignores the fact that the experiment was about turning her into a woman and especially considering she's the only woman she carries all the burden of what it means to be female means in the story. She's the only Transformer whose story has something to say about the female gender and also, the purpose of the story was to introduce a character who was specifically female. If it was just about a character who was the unwilling subject of an experiment, they could have left it at that and ignored gender entirely. That wasn't the case.

Following upon that, a word on "gender politics". The term has been bandied around like it's a new thing, now that more female Transformers are being introduced into IDW, but it isn't. Intentionally or not, it has always been a part of Transformers, since the very first moment female Transformers were introduced in the cartoon or perhaps even before that. Cartoons say something about gender due to male characters on avarage outnumbering female characters three-to-two or more (this is a fact, look it up). They say something about gender by having only one female character (Arcee) in a cast of guys (also known as "the Smurfette Principle"). They say something about gender by having female characters be seperate from the main, male cast (Chromia and gang). It says something about gender when Bob Budiansky wants Ratchet as a female character and is told "no, this is a boy's series - no females allowed". It might not be intended as such, it might not be noticible (especially if it doesn't affect you) because we're so used to it, but gender politics is always there. It's always been a subtle part of the status quo. It doesn't suddenly get implemented because IDW/Hasbro/Scott realise there's a significant female audience (as well as a large part of the existing male audience) which sees the lack of female representation in the comics as a problem and they want to address it. But it's interesting how gender politics only gets thrown around (as an accusation) when it's about the INclusion of female characters (particularly by a female writer), not about the EXclusion of them.

Here's the thing though: the only way gender politics would not have been a part of Transformers would have been if female characters had been included in the series, in equal measures, from the get-go, without the gender issue ever being addressed.

Va'al wrote:And again, male pronouns are used by default. Therefore introducing an element of gender in the representation of the characters, even if they do not identify with gender themselves (as characters).

In *no way* can anyone claim that introducing more female characters in a male-dominated franchise, universe, and brand is offensive to the male side of the fandom/creators. I'm sorry, but no, that is one thing that does not, and cannot hold. How is this not part of these other 'actual causes'? As Scott said herself, these comics do not exist in a vacuum. Nor does the brand, or the industry. It exists in a society that does distinguish, in a more or less informed manner, between different genders, or different points on the gender spectrum, including through language. And that is why, even though this incarnation of the chracters is 'genderless', the discussion must be had, is being had and needs a nudge in the right direction for full representation.

Va'al wrote:In other news:

You know what would be awesome

An Elita-1 that can turn into a truck and bench-press Optimus Prime.

Can you imagine how happy I would be

[heavy breathing]

(from http://mscottwrites.tumblr.com/ )

Well, there's a difference between reading stories in a vacuum and stories in a vacuum, period. Stories don't happen in a vacuum - they are always a reflection of the society the writer lives in, whether that's intentional or not. It's not bad to want to read stories as an escapist something separate from everything else and enjoy it that way and I can understand that some fans do prefer that. However, that doesn't mean stories and their themes can't be discussed from a social perspective or that the social messages they send (whether deliberately so or not) aren't relevant.

If you're referring to politics/social commentary in the stories themselves, well, we've already had that in Megatron Origins and MTMTE. Far as I can see, all it did was provide more depth and detail to the work and made it more enjoyable, not less.

And I wouldn't let people's "gender politics" complaints worry you. I consider the Windblade mini to have huge positive implications for gender in Transformers, but that's outside discussion. I'm sure the comic itself will be entertaining and fun and not at all preachy.

Va'al wrote:But think of this: what voice does the main cast of RID or MTMTE have in your mind when you read the comics?

(And again, the fact that *these* comics have genderless characters is actually not a relevant point - see Sprite's comment below, and this one.)

Well, there's a difference between reading stories in a vacuum and stories in a vacuum, period. Stories don't happen in a vacuum - they are always a reflection of the society the writer lives in, whether that's intentional or not. It's not bad to want to read stories as an escapist something separate from everything else and enjoy it that way and I can understand that some fans do prefer that. However, that doesn't mean stories and their themes can't be discussed from a social perspective or that the social messages they send (whether deliberately so or not) aren't relevant.

If you're referring to politics/social commentary in the stories themselves, well, we've already had that in Megatron Origins and MTMTE. Far as I can see, all it did was provide more depth and detail to the work and made it more enjoyable, not less.

And I wouldn't let people's "gender politics" complaints worry you. I consider the Windblade mini to have huge positive implications for gender in Transformers, but that's outside discussion. I'm sure the comic itself will be entertaining and fun and not at all preachy.