fembots [AGAIN]

[Clay]

Not all plants have both sexes. Some only have the one sex in their flowers thus requiring cross-pollenation. Botanica is also explicitly stated to be female, not a hermaphrodite.

So the exceptions are the rule?

Also, Jhiaxus had more than one test subject. both Spotlight: Arcee and Simpon Furman allude to this very fact. Both say Arcee was but the first test subject. The whole point of the experiment was to bring sexes into the speices, make them sexually reproductive. Either to make them male and female, or to reintroduce females back into the speices, after some long-forgotten catastrophe wiped them out, leaving only the males. We don't know the specifics, thus anything else is speculation. The fact is though, that his intent was to introduce (or reintroduce) gender (sexes) into the Cybertronian genome, and, as evidenced in Megatron: Origin, he was ultimately successful.

So where do all the robot cocks come from? If, as you think, they had them all along, what did all of the male transformers do with their reproductive urges whilst the females were non-existent?

Transformers do exhibit all of these characteristics. They've exhibited the ability to maintain homeostasis,

Where, full stop. I asked you this earlier, and you ignored it.

So, instead of trying to prove me wrong, let's just please get back to the main topic, as to whether we want to see more female Transformers in the next movie.

If more fembots means having more threads like this, kill them all.

[Tramp]

So the exceptions are the rule?

No. Plants flowers can have both male and female reproductive systems or only only male or only female reproductive system. It depends upon the species of plant. Botanica took on the form of an alien motile plant species of unknown physiology. All we do know about Botanica is that she is 100% female. She is not hermaphroditic.

So where do all the robot cocks come from? If, as you think, they had them all along, what did all of the male transformers do with their reproductive urges whilst the females were non-existent?

Who says Cybertronian reproductive systems are identical to Human reproductive systems? More than likely, the male reproductive system is a line with a plug which attaches to a female's port, no "screwing" involved. And, where they came from is simple—they would have grown as a result of the male chromosomes in their CNA, just as Arcee was made female as a result of the alterations to her CNA. As for any urges if they had meen male all along, we don't know, and it is beyond the scope of what we can conclude from canon. They could have been artificially surppressed, for all we know. As for actual reproduction, they would have needed to find alternative means, hence the use of protoforms, which is essentially a form of cloning and genetic engineering.

Where, full stop. I asked you this earlier, and you ignored it.

All continuities clearly exhibit their capability for maintaining homeostasis, evolution and adaptation, metabolism, self-organization with a complex cellular structure, and response to stimuli, and at least allude to growth and reproduction. Marvel explicitly shows asexual reproduction. The '86 movie, Victory #10 (translated right on this site), The Story of Wheelie, the Wild Boy of Quintesson, Beast Wars Neo manga, Cybertron comics, allude to sexual reproduction with the inclusion of marriages and families consisting of mothers, fathers, and offspring of various ages, they also exhibit the traits of growth as well. Marvel, and every continuity since has also included Cybertronian cellular structure and genetics (part of the self-organization with complex cellular structures)—most notably Marvel G2, Dreamwave, IDW, Beast Wars, and the movies. They all state that Transformers have a self-replicating cellular structure (nano-machine based) and a form of DNA. The live-action movies exhibit all of these with the statements of Optimus Prime, Ratchet, Maggie, the soldiers about the self-regenerating molecular armor, the Production Designer, and the inclusion of hatchlings in RotF. The cartoon continuity clearly shows growth (in the movie)through the Lithonian children of various ages, as well as Wheelie, and in the main series with Alpha Trion, beard growth and aging, along with Kup's and Ironhide's being elderly.

Example 1: Cybertronain DNA (from Marvel G2):

Example 2: Asexual reproduction through the process of budding (from Marvel G2):


Example 3: Cybertronian families, incuding husbands, wives, and babies (from Victory #10 on this site):

If more fembots means having more threads like this, kill them all.

You guys are the ones insisting on saying that Transformers absolutely have to be inherently genderless "because they are robots", even though only one continuity ever made that claim, and it is contradicted by nearly every other continuity.

[Clay]

No. Plants flowers can have both male and female reproductive systems or only only male or only female reproductive system. It depends upon the species of plant. Botanica took on the form of an alien motile plant species of unknown physiology. All we do know about Botanica is that she is 100% female. She is not hermaphroditic.

How do we know that she's 100% female, instead of just a hermaphrodite robot that prefers feminine pronouns, other than you just believing it deep down, in your heart of hearts?.

Who says Cybertronian reproductive systems are identical to Human reproductive systems?

You do. Read what you said.

Think about this too. At least one female Transformer has clear sexual characteristics not part of their armor. Thunderblast from Cybertron has actual breasts under her armor. In the show, there are many scenes in which we get a partial glimpse of them. One of the best is when Lori challenges her and she is leading Lori and Windsabre towards the water. Her breasts can be seen bouncing back and forth as she runs. It's actually quite funny. The ancient Transformer, Beta, also had actual breasts, and was clearly female.

And also.

The exact location or appearance of said systems is not important. For all we know, theyr sex organs could be in their hands or feet. A male cephelopod's sex organs are in the tip of one of his arms You can't tell by looking at it that it is a sex organ. By the same token they could be lovated right where they are on us, between the legs (And, given that many have a panel on their cod pieces which looks like it could retract, that is very likely where they're located).

So you have said that you can't tell automatically what the sex organs are on a robot, except when they're located in the same places as humans, and that it's very likely.

All continuities clearly exhibit their capability for maintaining homeostasis, evolution and adaptation, metabolism, self-organization with a complex cellular structure, and response to stimuli, and at least allude to growth and reproduction. Marvel explicitly shows asexual reproduction. The '86 movie, Victory #10 (translated right on this site), The Story of Wheelie, the Wild Boy of Quintesson, Beast Wars Neo manga, Cybertron comics, allude to sexual reproduction with the inclusion of marriages and families consisting of mothers, fathers, and offspring of various ages, they also exhibit the traits of growth as well. Marvel, and every continuity since has also included Cybertronian cellular structure and genetics (part of the self-organization with complex cellular structures)—most notably Marvel G2, Dreamwave, IDW, Beast Wars, and the movies. They all state that Transformers have a self-replicating cellular structure (nano-machine based) and a form of DNA. The live-action movies exhibit all of these with the statements of Optimus Prime, Ratchet, Maggie, the soldiers about the self-regenerating molecular armor, the Production Designer, and the inclusion of hatchlings in RotF. The cartoon continuity clearly shows growth (in the movie)through the Lithonian children of various ages, as well as Wheelie, and in the main series with Alpha Trion, beard growth and aging, along with Kup's and Ironhide's being elderly.

FOR THE THIRD TIME, SHOW ME HOMEOSTASIS.

[Tramp]

How do we know that she's 100% female, instead of just a hermaphrodite robot that prefers feminine pronouns, other than you just believing it deep down, in your heart of hearts?.

The show establishes Botanica as female, not as a hermaphrodite.

You do. Read what you said.

Uh,uh. Reread what I said in that post again, I listed a set of *possible* methods of mating. I never said that they had to mate like humans do. Here is the exact quote:

Understand, sexual reproduction does not require individuals to be either male or female. Look at gastorpods like worms and slugs. They're hermaphrodites with each animal having both sexes. However, Sexual reproductive capability is required for a species to have genders. Being male or female requires the capability to reproduce through *some* sexual means be that actual intercourse like we do, *releasing an egg which is then fertilized externally, or pollenation as in plants*. Regardless, if a life form has genders, if it has males and females, it has the capability to reproduce sexually because that is what being male or female is for. That is the only function genders, I.E. sexes, have.

I never said that they *had* to have intercourse just like humans do, nor have I ever said that their reproductive systems would even look like ours. The reproductive systems of most animals on Earth don't look like Human reproductive systems, not even other mammals. Even copulation varies form species to species. for example, male Cephelopods, like the octopus, use one of their arms to insert a sack of sperm into a special orifice under the female. They don't have penises. There is no screwing. He deposits his sperm and that is it. Over and done with.

Cybertronian physical structure alone would mean that the shape of their reproductive systems would not be identical to our own, not by a long shot.
While it is *possible* that they *might* mate like humans do, and they systems *might* look similar to ours, at least superficially, That does not mean that they absolutely have to or even will. More than likely, a female's reproductive chamber would be nothing but a sphere or cylindrical structure with various additional assemblies and an valved port, while the male's is more likely to be a simple line with a plug on the end. They most assuredly *would not* look like human sex organs.

FOR THE THIRD TIME, SHOW ME HOMEOSTASIS.

Dreamwave's MtMtE #8, page, under the suheading of CR Chambers says:

By placing a wounded mechanoid in suspension, the chamber allows that robots *own internal regenration circuitry* to focus solely on repairs. The chamber senses which sections are damaged and redirects the mechanoid's own internal processors to focus on those areas *instead of general maintenance*; the chamber focuses and supercharges the *reganeration circuitry*, allowing repairs to take place up to hundreds of times faster *than they would otherwise*.

Note the marked sections in that passage. Internal regenerative circuitry, which normally does general self maintenance and healing of injury. That is homeostasis. That is maintaining internal equilibrium of the body's system. In the movie, when the soldiers are examining Scorponok's tail, the one says, "It's some kind of *self-regenerating* molecular armor. Self-regeneration. That is maintaining homeostasis.

There are your examples.

[Reflector]

While I recognize the characteristics of life as designed by astro- and xenobiologists, I maintain that they are dependent upon the assumptions that:

1) The source of new life in a species is exclusively intrinsic to members of the species;
2) The species faces a changing environment that necessitates acclimation;
3) Members of the species live relatively short lives for one reason or another.

If these assumptions are untrue, characteristics 6 and 7 are unnecessary for the maintenance of something we would otherwise consider alive. The situation of the Transformers has proven plainly that all these assumptions, in their case, are not applicable.

You have yet to show me how these things are necessary for a Transformer to be considered alive.

Now, I think the other points are fine. I'm totally down with thermodynamics, and I agree that any lifeform, whatever its chemical base, can't survive long without at least temporary approximation of thermodynamic equilibrium. But I maintain that higher biological functions are not necessary for something to be intuitively alive in an ecosystem where biologists' assumptions do not hold.

[Tramp]

While I recognize the characteristics of life as designed by astro- and xenobiologists, I maintain that they are dependent upon the assumptions that:

1) The source of new life in a species is exclusively intrinsic to members of the species;
2) The species faces a changing environment that necessitates acclimation;
3) Members of the species live relatively short lives for one reason or another.

If these assumptions are untrue, characteristics 6 and 7 are unnecessary for the maintenance of something we would otherwise consider alive. The situation of the Transformers has proven plainly that all these assumptions, in their case, are not applicable.

You have yet to show me how these things are necessary for a Transformer to be considered alive.

Now, I think the other points are fine. I'm totally down with thermodynamics, and I agree that any lifeform, whatever its chemical base, can't survive long without at least temporary approximation of thermodynamic equilibrium. But I maintain that higher biological functions are not necessary for something to be intuitively alive in an ecosystem where biologists' assumptions do not hold.

They aren't based upon assumptions. They're based upon the necessities of organisms to exist and propagate. What characteristics allow an organism and ultimately a species to exist and thrive, and without which it would parish. Those are essential qualities, no matter what form that organism takes. Let's go over your points:

1) The source of new life in a species is exclusively intrinsic to members of the species;

Reproduction is key because without it, the species would die out after a single generation. Life requires that the source of new life of that species *is indeed intrinsically exclusive to members of that species*, not through the use of tools, parts, factories, etc, but from the very being of the parent organisms. Procreation is the begetting of offspring by one or more parents. That is a fundamental necessity of life in order for a species to survive. That isn't an assumption. That is hard scientific fact. The whole point of life is to propagate itself from one generation to the next. That's no assumption. That's hard fact. That is physical law.

Secondly, maintaining a higher rate of anabolism over catabolism is also essential for an organism to survive.

Anabolism is, "Biol. Phys. Constructive metabolism. The synthesis in living organisms of more complex substances from simpler ones (opposed to catabolism."

Catabolism is, "Biol. Phys. Destructive metabolism. The breaking down in living organisms of more complex substances into simpler ones with the release of energy (opposed to anabolism."

Life must be capable of maintaining a higher rate of anabolism over catabolism in order to maintain its own existance—to build new tissue, to stave off infection, to repair damage, etc. That is why growth is so important. That is important no matter what the organism is made up of, or where its from, be it Earth or another planet. All seven of these characteristics are that important.

2) The species faces a changing environment that necessitates acclimation;

All environments change over time. The galaxy changes over time. The Universe changes over time. *everything* changes over time. This is a fundmental law of physics. Nothing remains the same forever. Thus, organisms must be capable of adapting to a changing environment.

3) Members of the species live relatively short lives for one reason or another.

Regardless of how long the life-span of a species of organism is, unless it's *immortal*, it needs to be capable of procreation in order to continue the species. *No individual organism lives forever*. All organisms die. It is inevitable. *Everything dies eventually*. Thus, no matter how long an individual lives, it needs to be capable of reproducing in order for the species as a whole to continue on through the generations. It is essential to life. Therefore all seven criteria must be met for life to exist.

[Clay]

Cybertronian physical structure alone would mean that the shape of their reproductive systems would not be identical to our own, not by a long shot.
While it is *possible* that they *might* mate like humans do, and they systems *might* look similar to ours, at least superficially, That does not mean that they absolutely have to or even will. More than likely, a female's reproductive chamber would be nothing but a sphere or cylindrical structure with various additional assemblies and an valved port, while the male's is more likely to be a simple line with a plug on the end. They most assuredly *would not* look like human sex organs.

Think about this too. At least one female Transformer has clear sexual characteristics not part of their armor. Thunderblast from Cybertron has actual breasts under her armor. In the show, there are many scenes in which we get a partial glimpse of them. One of the best is when Lori challenges her and she is leading Lori and Windsabre towards the water. Her breasts can be seen bouncing back and forth as she runs. It's actually quite funny. The ancient Transformer, Beta, also had actual breasts, and was clearly female.

The exact location or appearance of said systems is not important. For all we know, theyr sex organs could be in their hands or feet. A male cephelopod's sex organs are in the tip of one of his arms You can't tell by looking at it that it is a sex organ. By the same token they could be lovated right where they are on us, between the legs (And, given that many have a panel on their cod pieces which looks like it could retract, that is very likely where they're located).

So transformer sex organs would not look like or be in the same locations human sex organs, except when they obviously have breasts and panels on their crotch pieces. Okay.

Dreamwave's MtMtE #8, page, under the suheading of CR Chambers says: Note the marked sections in that passage. Internal regenerative circuitry, which normally does general self maintenance and healing of injury. That is homeostasis. That is maintaining internal equilibrium of the body's system. In the movie, when the soldiers are examining Scorponok's tail, the one says, "It's some kind of *self-regenerating* molecular armor. Self-regeneration. That is maintaining homeostasis.

There are your examples.

By placing a wounded mechanoid in suspension, the chamber allows that robots *own internal regenration circuitry* to focus solely on repairs. The chamber senses which sections are damaged and redirects the mechanoid's own internal processors to focus on those areas *instead of general maintenance*; the chamber focuses and supercharges the *reganeration circuitry*, allowing repairs to take place up to hundreds of times faster *than they would otherwise*.

That's not homeostasis; that's like Windows Safe Mode. Case in point being that transformers don't actually require bodies all the time, such as the Combaticons being stored in a data bank, or Optimus Prime on a floppy disk.

[Ackula]

Do we really have to have this same damn thread again? Why the hell do you guys insist on trying to apply logic and science to a cartoon/comic/ect that was made to promote a kid's toyline, and insist that it will hold water? Who gives a shit if Transformers sexually reproduce, or how they do it? This whole thread is the reason why the fandom gets a bad wrap by most sensible normal people.

I'm not even going to address him by his name, for fear of a direct response, but come on man. You can believe whatever you want, but it doesn't make it real. I can argue a Flying Spaghetti Monster, an Invisible Pink Unicorn, a Greek Goddess of Discord, or even Bob... made the Universe and the Transformers..and made them all bisexual...doesn't mean its so..even if I believe it in my heart of hearts. Just give it a ****ing rest already, no one wants to see this same thread again, it isn't even amusing anymore just seeing how damn insane he can be.

[Tramp]

So transformer sex organs would not look like or be in the same locations human sex organs, except when they obviously have breasts and panels on their crotch pieces. Okay.

Yes, Thunderblast has breasts and Transformers have "crotch plates". That doesn't reveal what their reproductive systems themselves look like. Breasts are a secondary sexual characteristic, and a source of "food" for young. Wide hips are also a sexual characteristic allowing for birth. It still does not reveal what a female's internal reproductive systems look like, nor does it reveal what a male's internal or external systems would look like. The closest we have to any idea of what a male's reproductive organ *might* look like, is when Bumblebee "lubricates" on Simmons", and that's not a definite since it is only based upon the assumption that the same "organ" is used for both functions, which is not a given, by any means. It could just be the means of excreting old lubricant. Ultimately though, it really doesn't matter what their reproductive systems actually look like. Who really cares? We're not xenobiologists or astrobiologists, doing in-depth study of Transformer physiology.

My point is that they *can* reproduce, they are *literally* male and female in virtually every continuity, except Marvel. Nothing says that they have to be "inherently genderless", or that they are inherently genderless, except in Marvel comics. Marvel Comics was the *only* continuity to explicitly establish them as inherently genderless, and even there, they could reproduce asexually through budding. Thus, procreation is certainly not out of the question in any continuity. Does it really matter how Transformers mate? does it really matter what their reproductive systems might look like? Does it matter how they give birth? The answer to all of those questions is an emphatic NO. All that matters is that they show all of the necessary life functions, they are male and female, they have exhibited marriage and offspring from the union of male and female. There is evidence that they do exhibit some form of sexual reproduction. That is all that matters. The rest is unimportant.

That's not homeostasis; that's like Windows Safe Mode. Case in point being that transformers don't actually require bodies all the time, such as the Combaticons being stored in a data bank, or Optimus Prime on a floppy disk.

Yes, it is homeostasis. It is the body's ability to maintain its own equilibrium. Transformers have internal regenerative systems. Their bodies are made up of self-replicating nano-machine cells. When some are damaged, new ones automatically replicate to replace them—in fact, they're constantly being replicated and replaced over time, thus maintaining their internal and external systems. They're self-regenerating. They have built in cooling systems which automatically regulate their temperature. That too is maintaining homeostasis. Homeostasis is, "The tendency of a system, especially, a physiological system, to maintain internal stability, owning to the coordinated response of its parts to any situation or stimulus tending to disturb its normal condition or function." Transformers are capable of doing that. When the temperature rises, they have cooling systems that automatically kick in. When they're injured, they heal. When tired, they sleep. They maintain homeostasis.

[inflatable dalek]

Perhaps, but it wasn't the same stories as the US had. The US only had the twelve issues which centered on Jhiaxus and the Swarm.

Several of the UK issues reprinted the Marvel stuff, hence it being the same stories (though not all of them).

Optimus is never addressed by name as "Orion Pax" in the story. His appearance in that story is a combination of Oprion pax and Optronix (from War Within) without his helmet on. He's never addressed by name though. So, he is indeed "supposed" to be there. The same with Magnus, This story happens before magnus got his armor. There is no error there. The females are not an error either. Alex Milne himself confirmed that it was deliberate. It's not a mistake, and the appearance of the females does not contradict Spotlight Arcee in any way.

Except fact fans Ultra Magnus is deliberately drawn transforming in his spotlight in a way to show he isn't a white Optimus Prime. Hence the art error. Spotlight Blurr shows Optimus in the early days of the war didn't look like the War Within Design with Orion Pax's head. All Hail Megatron says Origin didn't happen. So it's a mistake filled page in a non canon comic.

Actually, with McCarthy's raging machismo I suppose the only female TF we'll be likely to see on his watch is one based on Grace Jones.

Characters is one thing. the stories is another. The UK stories have no place in US continuity, and, in fact, are often contradicted.

You momin, the appearence of Deathbringer was in a flashback to the UK story in which he appeared. Primal Scream flashbacks to a flashback in the story Legacy of Unicron. 4 issues of the UK comic were reprinted in the American title and prsented as having happened a while ago rather than as a wacky alternate micro continuity. Is there UK stuff that doesn't fit in with the US stuff (and indeed other UK stuff)? sure. But then there's US material that doesn't fit in with the American comic either- The Movie Adaptation, Big Broadcast of 2006 (though by reading the UK comic you do get it worked in) and the first GI Joe crossover (forget the tokenistic mentions of events in the comic and the crossover itself getting a mention in the main comic, it features characters who should be deactivated and kills a few who show up almost immediately in the monthly). Doesn't stop the bulk of it being all one vision.

And speaking of stuff that doesn't connect to anything else, as the Victory Manga depicts a completely different ending to the cartoon it's in its own little side bubble where what it shows applies basically only to the manga. As you can use TF manga to claim that Decepticons have penis tongues with which they like to squirt over women who look like schoolgirls they might not be the best source for a balanced view on robot sexuality.

See, that is you both making things up and moving the goal posts, well done.


And despite your slightly desperate attempts to "prove" otherwise ("Jhiaxus so totally changed the entire species on a really drastic level which resulted in no huge phyiscal differences or anyone suddenly growing a penis and no one noticed. Honest") the IDW Transformers not called Arcee are clearly supposed to be genderless.

Now to once again clarify here, no ones saying that there aren't female and maleTransformers in just about every continuity. And no one is against the presence of well written female characters (though there's the problem in a nutshell, most are bloody awful). And if you enjoy tittybots so much you want to draw them in sexy poses (though to be honest drawing the same characters as babies is a bit Freudian), examine thunderblast's tits in close detail or write a Confessions of a Autobot style mosaic where Ironhide's daughter takes it up the crankshaft in the middle of the street that's entirely up to you as long as I don't have to ever look at/read such things again. Enjoy it, just don't try warping the whole thing around your fetishes in front of the rest of us.

[Halfshell]

His point is that he can have other, non-half-french offspring, not to mention that, if this kid is a boy, it will not pass on mitochondrial whatsit to any further offspring. Moreover, said Halfshell offspring could very well not have any offspring at all, ever, thus completely ending the half-french Halfshell dynasty with one individual. Do you see how there are many more possibilities than what you immediately jumped to?

And also how it has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the future descendants of my other relatives.

A liger is the descendant of a lion and the descendant of a tiger. Therefore all descendants of lions are ligers, and all descendants of tigers are ligers.

Logical fallacy. You see? Well, obviously Clay sees. But the rest of you, yes?

Not all plants have both sexes. Some only have the one sex in their flowers thus requiring cross-pollenation

Right. But some having just the one sex doesn't automatically mean that all the others are solely the opposite sex. I don't know why I'm still even in this thread.

[Reflector]

They aren't based upon assumptions. They're based upon the necessities of organisms to exist and propagate.

I give up. I don't know this McFeely fellow, but he's got the right idea.

Incidentally, when does your book come out?

[Cliffjumper]

Eh, we've all been here sooo many times before. Tramp zealously believes one thing, and pretty much everyone else believes the other. This is never going to go anywhere at all. I'd be grateful if people could try to steer clear of this topic unless they have something new to add, because these cyclical 'debates' sure don't manage that.

[Clay]

Eh, we've all been here sooo many times before. Tramp zealously believes one thing, and pretty much everyone else believes the other. This is never going to go anywhere at all. I'd be grateful if people could try to steer clear of this topic unless they have something new to add, because these cyclical 'debates' sure don't manage that.

To clarify, it's not that I'm not open to a cogent discussion on the topic, but certain posters' complete and total inability to entertain the thought that they might be wrong is what gets me going, and I have a feeling it's the same for the other rational folk as well.