fembots [AGAIN]

[Chris McFeely]

*shoots self in head*

[Tramp]

And there was one female character in both the Marvel and IDW continuities due to freakish misadventures despite the rest of the species being genderless. Proves nothing really. If anything from the film was going to back you up on that it'd be Jetfire talking about his dad. But it's never been male Transformers you're interested in is it?

Marvel UK introduced Arcee as a publicity stunt to attempt to sooth feminists. and backfired completely. She never appeared in the US continuity.

IDW established that the Transformers were once genderless, but Jhiaxus' experiment was designed to literally introduce gender into the species, thus furthering Cybertronian evolution. It was designed to make them a two-sex species, instead of an asexual one.

As far as the movie goes, Jetfire actually refers to both his mother and father. His statement begins with, "It all started with my mother." He later continues, "My father was a wheel, the first wheel..." You know the rest of the line. He talks about both his parents. You also have Arcee and her sisters, at least three females shown, and at least one more alluded to. They're also treated as being normal, nothing out if the ordinary. That implies that females are common in their species; that the species is a two-sex species—male and female. in the adaptations, we learn that Optimus Prime is an orphan, born a Prime and hidden away to protect him from The Fallen. Thus, he was raised by Megatron's father as if he were the elder's own son, and thus Megatron's brother.

Also, Arcee wasn't the only female in Dreamwave. There were multiples of them on Cybertron in War Within before the Great Shutdown. It wasn't untl that time where females disappeared, apparently all abducted by the Quintessons, and enslaved. That's what the story line was leading up to with Arcee being a mole sent by the Quints, and Elita-1 and her team being an extraction team.

Blatantly shown not to be true by actually reading the comics where the other Autobots are shocked and surprised to find out what Arcee is and have to have it explained to them very slowly. They'd hardly need that if they were all now gendered would they? Or are you seriously suggesting they all becaue male without realizing?

I've read Spotlight: Arcee and they were not shocked about Arcee being female. They didn't think anything of it being anything unusual. the only one making a big deal about it was Arcee herself. She started spouting off about the experiment because Ultra Magnus referred to her using the feminine pronouns, "her", and "she"—quite naturally, in fact—assuming that it was a subconscious thing with him "sensing" a difference. What she didn't understand, or refused to comprehend as a result of her psychosis and persecution complex, is that after the experiment that created her (of which, even Simon Furman said, she was but the first test subject of, not the only one), the species itself had evolved, the experiment was ultimately successful. There were more females, The species had indeed become two-gendered by the time of the reign of Sentinel Prime. In Megatron: Origin, we had Elita-1, Chromia, Crasher, a number of generic socialites and concubines. These were confirmed by Alex Milne. Jhiaxus experiment was explicitly designed to "introduce gender into the species". It was intended to divide the species into male and female. He modified Arcee's CNA to make her female. She was made physically and genetically female. Arcee was really the only "failure". because of the side-effects. Megatron: Origin explicitly shows multiple females and males interacting as males and females do. Thus, those side-effects must have been fixed or prevented in later test subjects. By the time Megatron began his revolt, Females were certainly treated as nothing unusual. They were quite common. The species had indeed become two-gendered.

Probably a good idea not to remind people of that post.

She was a female Decepticon. That's what he wanted.

I'd recommend everyone else go dig up the various other fembot threads we've had over the years for full and exact details of pretty much everything that's likely to be said here in order to save time and sanity. Plus you'll learn which of our Admins is Tramp's long lost twin brother.

There's really nothing to discuss. This is supposed to be about seeing more female Transformers in the next movie. I'd rather discuss that.

[inflatable dalek]

Marvel UK introduced Arcee as a publicity stunt to attempt to sooth feminists. and backfired completely. She never appeared in the US continuity.

It's the same continuity. Plus I'm not sure how they introduced a female character has any bearing on there being one despite the species as a whole being genderless.

IDW established that the Transformers were once genderless, but Jhiaxus' experiment was designed to literally introduce gender into the species, thus furthering Cybertronian evolution. It was designed to make them a two-sex species, instead of an asexual one.

And the entire species underwent this change without anyone noticing till Arcee explained it all?

in the adaptations, we learn that Optimus Prime is an orphan, born a Prime and hidden away to protect him from The Fallen. Thus, he was raised by Megatron's father as if he were the elder's own son, and thus Megatron's brother.

The adaptations are from working scripts and feature lots of changes and alterations. You can't really apply anything in them to the film itself (well, not right after saying that the Marvel UK stuff shouldn't be counted against the Marvel US stuff).

Also, Arcee wasn't the only female in Dreamwave.

No one said she was.

I've read Spotlight: Arcee

Obviously not very closely.

and they were not shocked about Arcee being female.

Yes they were, after Arcee patiently explained she was female. It's blatantly not the reaction of beings who are already gendered themselves.

(of which, even Simon Furman said, she was but the first test
subject of, not the only one)

And Shame McCarthy said there'd be a in fiction explanation for the Seekers becoming F15's in AHM. Sometimes the creators speak not true and Furman's claim there (and I believe his exact quote was there "MIGHT" have been other females, not that there were or that there was a mass species change that no one ever noticed) isn't backed up by the story itself.

Out of curiosity, if you firmly believe that the IDW Transformers started off as genderless but then became it as a result of Jhiaxus' experiments and also that gender is a essential part of complex life does that mean you don't consider any of the Transformers created prior to that to be alive? Including Jhiaxus himself when he made this change? Come to that, do you not properly consider any of the Marvel Transformers "alive" either (except for Arcee I suppose)?

There were more females, The species had indeed become two-gendered by the time of the reign of Sentinel Prime. In Megatron: Origin, we had Elita-1, Chromia, Crasher, a number of generic socialites and concubines.

Admitted art mistakes, from the same source that includes Orion Pax who's since been firmly retconned out. Hell, come to that all of Megatron: Origin has since been retconed out of IDW continuity so nothing in there applies to the rest of the fiction (the account of the start of the war being all about the Matrix in AHM being the big one).

He modified Arcee's CNA to make her female.

And how did he do this to everyone else? The procedure required a extremely painful looking groin attachment that I can't imagine many signing up for.

The species had indeed become two-gendered.

Even if you were right the species would only be one gendered, there's no hint that Jhiaxus created any men. But it's never been male Transformers you're interested in is it?

She was a female Decepticon. That's what he wanted.

I was more thinking of your second greatest ever post, involving the hint of breast.

There's really nothing to discuss. This is supposed to be about seeing more female Transformers in the next movie. I'd rather discuss that.

Fine, but as long as you make stuff up and pass it off as fact or continue to move the goalposts to meet your own ends (such as constantly shifting how ridgedly you define your one canon stance so that you dismiss the Marvel UK stuff from the rest of their run but count the novelization of ROTF as canon with the movie despite the differences) I will call you on it. You want to talk about how you like female Transformers, how you prefer the fiction with them in go for it.

[Blackjack]

Must we go through this again? Isn't there a thread like this in the Junkion files?

IDW established that the Transformers were once genderless, but Jhiaxus' experiment was designed to literally introduce gender into the species, thus furthering Cybertronian evolution. It was designed to make them a two-sex species, instead of an asexual one.

In IDW there are no female transformers at all, bar the transsexual Arcee. Furman confirmed that the fembots seen in Megatron Origin are art errors and the likes of Elita-One, Chromia and Crasher are not really femmes in IDW. Jhiaxus apparently gave up after Arcee. Smart.

In Spotlight Arcee the others were not surprised. Why? Because it's not the first time they've met Arcee, duh!

There definitely should be more of them. I would love to see Elita-1 make her debut in the third movie.

Elita's dead. Seriously. Starscream killed her in Reign of Starscream.

As far as the movie goes, Jetfire actually refers to both his mother and father. His statement begins with, "It all started with my mother." He later continues, "My father was a wheel, the first wheel..." You know the rest of the line. He talks about both his parents. You also have Arcee and her sisters, at least three females shown, and at least one more alluded to. They're also treated as being normal, nothing out if the ordinary. That implies that females are common in their species; that the species is a two-sex species—male and female. in the adaptations, we learn that Optimus Prime is an orphan, born a Prime and hidden away to protect him from The Fallen. Thus, he was raised by Megatron's father as if he were the elder's own son, and thus Megatron's brother.

This I have something to say about. Jetfire's a bit nutty and still slightly crazy when he said that line. Arcee, meanwhile, does not have sisters! She's a triplatine (spelling?) Autobot, like G1 Reflector, mentioned in the novelization. The toyline got it wrong to sell an additional character.

Optimus raised by Megatron's father? The orphan part I've seen, but this? Where the hell did you get that from?

[Halfshell]

I'm not going to do this again.

I'm not going to say how I'm hardly surprised that somebody who doesn't know the difference between breathing and ventilation thinks that one (or more) subjects being altered causes the evolution of an entire species.

I'm not even going to set fire to Summerhayes for not getting my joke and setting us up for all this, because he's new and didn't know.

Instead I'm simply going to back out of the thread and go have a stiff drink, and leave a vague comment about gender neutral creatures who appear female by the medium of my sig image.

For. Frak's. Sake.

[Blackjack]

I agree with Halfshell. Seriously. Just because one or two transformers have been altered, doesn't mean the entire species suddenly became organisms that sexually reproduce.

Someone close this thread already.

[wyze2099]

Personally, I've always found it weird how so many fans are okay with the idea of most Transformers being thought of as "he" and having male character traits (including male voice and being so macho it hurts -- see Optimus Prime, Ironhide, Cliffjumper, etc.), but the moment one or two show up seeming to be female, all of a sudden it's a problem. In fact, I'm amused by the idea that the fact that the term "genderless" is so easily applied to the above "male" characters, but not to the "female" ones. Ironhide gets to be seen as genderless even as he seems like a second away from chugging a beer and watching sports while scratching himself, but Chromia isn't as easily seen as genderless even though she acts the same way; how does that work?

Personally, I like the characters. Arcee, Moonracer, Chromia, Elita-One, Black Arachnia... they're interesting to me, just as Optimus, Hot Rod, Bumblebee, Starscream, and others are interesting. My personal canon for it all (and it's really hard to be in a fandom like Transformers and not develop a personal canon) is that Transformers as a race don't really have two sexes. Sex and gender are two different things, and any genders they might have develop from individual personalities and interactions with others of their own kind and with other lifeforms. While the concept of sex involves physical issues such as body parts, gender is more of a mental/emotional/societal construct. Transformers have been shown to have mentalities, emotions, and societies that are comparable to humans', even if they don't have the physical counterparts. So I think they're not genderless, but they are sexless.

It's easy for humans to conflate the two concepts, because to humans the two concepts are intertwined. Transformers would be less likely to conflate the two because for them the two concepts are completely unconnected. Notice how when a female Transformer is seen, the first thought in the mind of a fan and/or viewer is likely to be, "wait, does that mean they can have sex?" That's not necessarily a foregone conclusion. All the appearance of a female TF concludes is that some are curvier in body design and have more feminine-sounding voices than others. And considering the voices humans would hear are the result of a language translator that mimics a human language, the voices we hear are borrowed from humans anyway.

Interestingly enough, the IDW comics actually had a continuity set up that would have easily explained the presence of female TFs without having to give Arcee a sex change. The IDW Transformers set up shop on different inhabited worlds in order to either strip/mine destroy them or prevent such things from happening; that gives them plenty of access to cultures with gender concepts. If characters like Bumblebee and Jazz have shown us anything, it's that a organic race's cultures can rub off on a TF. Arcee's existence could be explained as a case of a Transformer being more influenced by the female half of a given culture than the male half.

Another pair of concepts that are often conflated would be sex and love. Again, to humans they're intertwined. But just because a Transformer would be incapable of the latter doesn't mean that the former is out of the question. These beings don't possess the electro-chemical brain processes that create emotions in humans, but they've still evidenced every single emotion a human is capable of. Hatred, greed, friendship, zealotry, jealousy, anger, sympathy, bravery, selflessness and more are represented. The TFs are shown to develop every kind of relationship with one another that one could imagine (brothers, comrades-in-arms, Energon-drinking buddies, arch nemeses, friendly rivals, best friends, superior/subordinate, etc.), yet I'm supposed to believe they somehow can form romantic relationships? Come on. The Transformers are long-lived beings; their idea of a weekend is probably longer than a typical human lifespan. It only makes sense that they'd be able to form deep relationships. Does this mean that there's really nothing stopping, say, a romantic pairing between Optimus and Ironhide (other than the idea of Peter Cullen dating himself)? Well, yes. Would that be very, very gay? No, and if they're the sexless beings most fans would insist, the point is moot anyway, y'know?

So that's how I'm able to rationalize the existence of female Transformers without tossing out the idea that they're all sexless. It all just happens to be a matter of gender, not sex.

Oh, and to respond to the original intent of the thread, one of the bigger disappointments about RotF for me was that Arcee and the other females were barely even in it. I wanted to see more of them.

[inflatable dalek]

Personally, I've always found it weird how so many fans are okay with the idea of most Transformers being thought of as "he" and having male character traits (including male voice and being so macho it hurts -- see Optimus Prime, Ironhide, Cliffjumper, etc.), but the moment one or two show up seeming to be female, all of a sudden it's a problem.

In my case as far as things like the Marvel comics go I don't regard them as being male though, they use he as a pronoun when speaking English because it's better than "It" but they're not gendered either, and "she" could be used just as well. I've also no problem with character played by female actors or not being butch macho macho types, it's the fembots mostly being incredibly sexist one dimensional cyphers I have issues with.

[Tramp]

It's the same continuity. Plus I'm not sure how they introduced a female character has any bearing on there being one despite the species as a whole being genderless.

UK is a splinter continity of Marvel. The US continuity ignored most of the UK material, and UK didn't include Generation 2, as far as I know.

And the entire species underwent this change without anyone noticing till Arcee explained it all?

Who says they didn't notice? By the time of Megatron: Origin, there were numerous males and females about, acting as males and females do. Jhiaxus' experiment was done under the Authority of Nova Prime. It's actually quite likely that, with the eventual success of the experiment, that all future generations of Cybertronians were "born" as fully male and female. Thus, by the time of Megatron: Origin, we see a population of Cybertronians with a mix of two sexes, not a genderless species.

The adaptations are from working scripts and feature lots of changes and alterations. You can't really apply anything in them to the film itself (well, not right after saying that the Marvel UK stuff shouldn't be counted against the Marvel US stuff).

Not entirely true, You can't necessarily count on the parts that are in direct contradiction, but you can count on the parts which fill in the gaps that the movie doesn't cover or leaves vague.

No one said she was.

It was implied.

Obviously not very closely.

Actually, yes, I did. I read it very thoroughly. There is nothing in that story which suggests that Ultra Magnus or anyone else was surprised or confused by Arcee being female. In fact, just the opposite. They recognized her as a female. They understood that she was female. They knew what a female was. They knew she was female. It was nothing new to them. The only one who had issues with her being female was Arcee herself and she was a bit "nuts". She didn't really have a firm grasp on reality. Nothing in Spotlight: Arcee contradicts Megatron Origin in regards to the Cybdertronian race becoming a two sex species. Arcee was simply the first test subject in that experiment, and ther e are clearly many more females by the time of Sentinel Prime's reign. Thus, the experiment was ultimately successful, and the species had evolved into a two sex species by that time. Arcee, in her delusions, never knew this, and thus concluded—based upon her own persecution complex—that Ultra Magnus was simply "subconsciously sensing" that she was somehow "different".

Yes they were, after Arcee patiently explained she was female. It's blatantly not the reaction of beings who are already gendered themselves.

No, they weren't. Magnus specifically addressed her as "she" as "her". Neither Ultra Magnus nor any other Cybertronian present questioned Arcee as to why she looked the way she did. None of them showed any confusion over her gender. He knew she was female right away, there was no surprise there, no confusion. Arcee was the only one who had "issues" with her being female, and that was because of her own psychosis, not any confusion by Ultra Magnus. Ultra Magnus was already very familiar with females since the time of Sentinel Prime's reign. He stood behind Elita-1 and Optimus during the funeral of Bumper and Fastback Chromia was also present. Thus, Magnus was intimately familiar with females. There was no confusion on his part. Arcee simply has a persecution complex over being made female by Jhiaxus, and accused Ultra Magnus of perpetuating that persecution because of what was done to her by using female pronouns in regards to her. When Ultra Magnus inquires about Arcee regarding "her" motivations, Arcee accuses Magnus spouting, "You don't even realize you're doing it... You unconsciously "sense" a difference!" It was Arcee's own trauma that prevented her from accepting what she was, The other Autobots themselves did not show any confusion at all about her being female. They knew she was female consciously. It was quite deliberate to use the feminine pronouns in regards to her because it was perfectly natural to do so. If they were shocked about anything, it was "how" she became female, not that she was female. They were already quite familiar with females in their species as evidenced in Megatron: Origin.

And Shame McCarthy said there'd be a in fiction explanation for the Seekers becoming F15's in AHM. Sometimes the creators speak not true and Furman's claim there (and I believe his exact quote was there "MIGHT" have been other females, not that there were or that there was a mass species change that no one ever noticed) isn't backed up by the story itself.

Spotlight: Arcee also explicitly states that Arcee was only the "first" test subject in the experiment, not the "only" one.

Out of curiosity, if you firmly believe that the IDW Transformers started off as genderless but then became it as a result of Jhiaxus' experiments and also that gender is a essential part of complex life does that mean you don't consider any of the Transformers created prior to that to be alive? Including Jhiaxus himself when he made this change? Come to that, do you not properly consider any of the Marvel Transformers "alive" either (except for Arcee I suppose)?

Asexual complex life exists in isolated environments with very little change, and those species aren't fully asexual, they're parthenogenic—Self-impregnating. parthenogenic creatures are usually subspecies of otherwise fully sexual species that evolve in very isolated communities. They are also capable of mating with males of related subspecies. This is the only way it can survive. The vast majority of asexual life is very simple, "usually" single-celled. The danger with parthenogenesis is that they;re all genetically identical which leaves them vulnerable to various pathogens or unexpected changes to their environment. Thus, it is highly impractical for complex life to be asexual, especially if that species is wide-spread or travels through vastly different environments, as the Transformers do. Thus, evolving into a sexually reproducing species is definitely advantageous. It would make perfect sense for Jhiaxus to seek evolving the species in that direction, particularly if he understood the inherent dangers in remaining asexual as a species.

Admitted art mistakes, from the same source that includes Orion Pax who's since been firmly retconned out. Hell, come to that all of Megatron: Origin has since been retconed out of IDW continuity so nothing in there applies to the rest of the fiction (the account of the start of the war being all about the Matrix in AHM being the big one).

Megatron Origin has not been officially retconned out. I'm a member of the IDW boards. It was talked about in half jest on the IDW boards, but quickly discarded after an overwhelming negative response to the idea. Also, the existance of Elita-1 and the other females weren't art mistakes, They were deliberately placed in the story by Alex Milne.

And how did he do this to everyone else? The procedure required a extremely painful looking groin attachment that I can't imagine many signing up for.

Simple, the "next generations" were created male and female right from the start. That's how it would be done. Once the experiment was successful, the genetic alterations would have been applied to raw protoforms before imbuement with a Spark, thus, the next generation, and all following generations, would be born male or female. That's how. It's also probably how he would have eventually succeeded in the experiment—by working with raw protoforms instead of live subjects.

Even if you were right the species would only be one gendered, there's no hint that Jhiaxus created any men. But it's never been male Transformers you're interested in is it?

Male is the opposite of female. The conclusion is that they were already inherently "male" to begin with. Depending upon the final composition of the Thirteen Original Transformers, it is quite possible that the race had originally been male and female from the start, but something happened to them which cause females to disappear some time in the unrecorded past, leaving only males. This makes sense given that one of the Original Thirteen 9Who are multiversal beings)is a gestalt, yet, in IDW, gestalt technology was apparently invented by Jhiaxus through manipulating the CNA of the "Pretender" Monsters sans the pretender part in IDW) to create Monstructor. Thus, we can conclude that Jhiaxus uncovered a latent gene in these beings and was able to awaken it. This is quite likely what happened with Arcee as well, Jhiaxus may have uncovered something that Transformers had once been and re-introduced it in the species.

I was more thinking of your second greatest ever post, involving the hint of breast.

There was more than a "jhint" of it, but that was not what I was referring to. I was just listing off all of the female Decepticons shown in canon to date.

Fine, but as long as you make stuff up and pass it off as fact or continue to move the goalposts to meet your own ends (such as constantly shifting how ridgedly you define your one canon stance so that you dismiss the Marvel UK stuff from the rest of their run but count the novelization of ROTF as canon with the movie despite the differences) I will call you on it. You want to talk about how you like female Transformers, how you prefer the fiction with them in go for it.

I don't make stuff up and pass it off as fact. I look at the actual evidence and science and draw logical conclusions based upon it. I don't dismiss the Marvel UK stuff from the rest of the material. It is officially segregated from the US because Marvel US ignored the UK material. The UK material is very conspicuously disregarded in the US comics. Thus, it is a branch continuity off of the US line, but is not an integral part of it. It is not the same continuity as the US one. It is a divergent continuity from the US one consisting of stories which do not take place at all in the US, and which sometimes completely contradict the US continuity. They are not the same continuity. Arcee is not a part of the US continuity at all. She was exclusive to UK continuity.

As for the novelization and comic adaption of the film, I acknowledge the differences resulting from their being written before the film was completed, but, they are considered as part of the same continuity and simply different interpretations of that same story. Thus, the differences don't outweigh the over-all similarities, and they do fill in the gaps where the movie is vague, and thus answer questions the movie leaves unanswered, which is part of why they are written, as are the prequel comics.

Must we go through this again? Isn't there a thread like this in the Junkion files?



In IDW there are no female transformers at all, bar the transsexual Arcee. Furman confirmed that the fembots seen in Megatron Origin are art errors and the likes of Elita-One, Chromia and Crasher are not really femmes in IDW. Jhiaxus apparently gave up after Arcee. Smart.

Yes, they are female, yes, they are a part of the story. Crasher appears multiple times throughout the story. That's not an error. It was deliberate. Simpn furman also dod not state that Arcee was the "only" female. He said she was the "first". He also stated flat out that Jhiaxus did not necessarily end his experiments. They he indeed "may" have created others. He has never denied the existance of the females in Megatron Origin, he never said that they were errors either, and nothing in Spotlight Arcee contradicts their existence either.

In Spotlight Arcee the others were not surprised. Why? Because it's not the first time they've met Arcee, duh!

They're not surprised because they knew about females already. They were familiar with females already.

Elita's dead. Seriously. Starscream killed her in Reign of Starscream.

Megatron was dead too, and he came back to life. Your point? If the movie writers want to bring Elita-1 into the next movie, they can.

This I have something to say about. Jetfire's a bit nutty and still slightly crazy when he said that line. Arcee, meanwhile, does not have sisters! She's a triplatine (spelling?) Autobot, like G1 Reflector, mentioned in the novelization. The toyline got it wrong to sell an additional character.

The movie does not explicitly established Arcee as a tripartite being. Reflector wasn't one either, by the way. Reflector was three individual robots—Spectro, Spyglass, and Viewfinder—that combined into a camera named Reflector. While the noveliation and comic adaption allude to it, it's not firmly established there either, and appears to have been discarded from the movie by the writers entirely. The toy bios explicitly establish them as individual beings, which makes sense since they have individual robot modes, and individual alternate modes and act independently of one another. In fact, one member of the Tformers boards brought up a very interesting point that contradicts Arcee being tripartite, When she is addressed in the opening sequence, she says "We're ready!" emphasis on "We're" , plural. Her team. Not "I am ready, but "we" are ready. Arcee is the leader of the sisters. She's not like the duocons, Skylynx, or Magnaboss (the only real transformers whose personalities are split between multiple bodies).

Optimus raised by Megatron's father? The orphan part I've seen, but this? Where the hell did you get that from?

Yes, In the first movie, Optimus and Megatron are established as brothers. the Nintendo DS game and a number of other ancillary sources establish that they shared the same father and that Megatron killed their father and ate his Spark. Defiance and the adaptions of RotF establish Optimus as an orphan, born a Prime, and hidden from The Fallen, while Megatron is conclusively not a Prime. In fact, according to Defiance, being "made" a prime was one of the promises The Fallen made to Megatron in oder to seduce him. It is later revealed in the comic adaption and novelization, that Primes are not made, they're born. You can't be made a Prime. Thus, Optimus had to have been adopted by Megatron's father in order for them to share a father and thus be brothers, since Optimus is explicitly stated to be an orphan, the last of the dynasty of Primes, while previously been stated to be brothers with Megatron, sharing the same father, whom Megatron later murdered.

Personally, I've always found it weird how so many fans are okay with the idea of most Transformers being thought of as "he" and having male character traits (including male voice and being so macho it hurts -- see Optimus Prime, Ironhide, Cliffjumper, etc.), but the moment one or two show up seeming to be female, all of a sudden it's a problem. In fact, I'm amused by the idea that the fact that the term "genderless" is so easily applied to the above "male" characters, but not to the "female" ones. Ironhide gets to be seen as genderless even as he seems like a second away from chugging a beer and watching sports while scratching himself, but Chromia isn't as easily seen as genderless even though she acts the same way; how does that work?

Personally, I like the characters. Arcee, Moonracer, Chromia, Elita-One, Black Arachnia... they're interesting to me, just as Optimus, Hot Rod, Bumblebee, Starscream, and others are interesting. My personal canon for it all (and it's really hard to be in a fandom like Transformers and not develop a personal canon) is that Transformers as a race don't really have two sexes. Sex and gender are two different things, and any genders they might have develop from individual personalities and interactions with others of their own kind and with other lifeforms. While the concept of sex involves physical issues such as body parts, gender is more of a mental/emotional/societal construct. Transformers have been shown to have mentalities, emotions, and societies that are comparable to humans', even if they don't have the physical counterparts. So I think they're not genderless, but they are sexless.

Actually, you can't have "gender" without sexes. The very definition of the word "gender" confirms this. By definition "gender" refers either to the physical sex or the social, cultural, psychological, or behavioral traits typically associated with one's sex. It is not separate from the physical sex. "gender roles" are determined by the physical sex of an individual. IT is the very existence of the physical sexes which created "gender roles", and it is not exclusive to humans either. Virtually every sexually reproductive species (barring hermaphrodite species, such as worms, snails, and slugs) divides the roles played along gender lines with males and females fulfilling different roles in the survival of the species. Among lions, the females do the majority of hunting and they raise the young while the males defend the Pride. Clear gender roles.

Axesually reproducing species don't divide themselves along gender lines because they are all exactly the same. There are no sexes between which to divide roles.

Thus, "gender" is inherently dependent upon physical sexes.

[Tramp]

delete

[Rurudyne]

Based on LKW's Robots in Disgises I would say that sexism is rampant in Optimus Prime's little world and than it proves Megatron the more enlightened spark between the two.

This completely random thought brought to you by "Plug a Fan Fic" ... have you plugged a favorite fan fic today?

[Denyer]

No. In that Earth machines don't exhibit the necessary processes needed for life.

Who mentioned Earth machines? We're discussing a fictional universe in which consciousness is frequently seen to exist without most of the criteria (which are, if anyone in the audience somehow missed it, based on organic life) you list.

Energy beings also don't qualify as life in your assessment.

Cartoon (including US, Japanese, BW-BM, and Universe): multiple females and males

A few body shells and pronouns does not female sex make, especially for fictional characters that mimic other civilisations. You might get a pass on the writer around at the end of the Japanese manga tie-in, although even there isn't evidence of cellular offspring. (And as a side-note, Japanese culture makes use of familial terms to denote social bonds.)

Dreamwave: Males and females with most females taken during the Great Shutdown.

Positively stacks of evidence...

By the time of Megatron: Origin, Transformers have evolved into male and female

Body shells introduced by artist, writer did not include.

Animated:

Has that hilarious bit with Prime and Sari.

In the vast majority of cases, you have nothing more than appearance, English translation and personal obsession with rendering that as meaningful sexes.

[Tramp]

Who mentioned Earth machines? We're discussing a fictional universe in which consciousness is frequently seen to exist without most of the criteria (which are, if anyone in the audience somehow missed it, based on organic life) you list.

Energy beings also don't qualify as life in your assessment.

Consciousness isn't a qualification for life. It's simply an extension of one quality of life (response to stimuli). a computer artificial intelligence could be made sentient, but it wouldn't be life. Most animals and all plants, are not sentient, and yet, they are life. Sentience does not equate to life.

A few body shells and pronouns does not female sex make, especially for fictional characters that mimic other civilisations. You might get a pass on the writer around at the end of the Japanese manga tie-in, although even there isn't evidence of cellular offspring. (And as a side-note, Japanese culture makes use of familial terms to denote social bonds.)


Positively stacks of evidence...




Body shells introduced by artist, writer did not include.


Has that hilarious bit with Prime and Sari.

In the vast majority of cases, you have nothing more than appearance, English translation and personal obsession with rendering that as meaningful sexes.

The pages you refer to, particularly the one about protoforms, state flat out that the use of protoforms imbued with sparks is "not the only method they have" to creat new life. They have "other potential". Secondly, their bodies aren't just shells, They're made up is self-replicating nano-machine cells containing genetic material. They have a form of DNA. There is no point in "building" baby bodies when adult bodies are easily created and much more practical. And, none of the confirmed "created" bots were ever shown to be children, and did not have mothers and father. Only those bots who are children, had mothers and fathers, and are not shown to be constructed at all. In IDW, Arcee was made female down to the genetic level through direct manipulation of her fundamental CNA. She was altered genetically. to make her physically female, not just psychologically.

Physical sexual dimorphism in the bodies, cellular structures, Genes, courthship, marriage, families, children, all this points specifically to their being physically and literally male and female. Only Marvel explicitly established them as inherently genderless, and that was primarily because of Simon Furman. No other writer establishes them as such, no other continuity does.

[inflatable dalek]

UK is a splinter continity of Marvel. The US continuity ignored most of the UK material, and UK didn't include Generation 2, as far as I know.

The UK did have a Generation 2 comic.

It's actually quite likely that, with the eventual success of the experiment, that all future generations of Cybertronians were "born" as fully male and female.

The experiment was a failure. Unless you consider the perfect woman to be a boarderline psychopath.

Not entirely true, You can't necessarily count on the parts that are in direct contradiction, but you can count on the parts which fill in the gaps that the movie doesn't cover or leaves vague.

But you do sprout on about the bits that contradict the film (how many Prime's there are, the buisness about the sarcophagus). This makes your whole stance seem just a bit silly.

Actually, yes, I did. I read it very thoroughly. There is nothing in that story which suggests that Ultra Magnus or anyone else was surprised or confused by Arcee being female. In fact, just the opposite. They recognized her as a female. They understood that she was female. They knew what a female was. They knew she was female. It was nothing new to them.

No they didn't.

He stood behind Elita-1 and Optimus during the funeral of Bumper and Fastback Chromia was also present.

In a panel of art that's flat out wrong- He's standing behind Orion Pax (who doesn't exsist in this continuity) as a white version of Prime (which he isn't supposed to be in this continuity).


Spotlight: Arcee also explicitly states that Arcee was only the "first" test subject in the experiment, not the "only" one.

Asexual complex life exists in isolated environments with very little change, and those species aren't fully asexual, they're parthenogenic—Self-impregnating. parthenogenic creatures are usually subspecies of otherwise fully sexual species that evolve in very isolated communities. They are also capable of mating with males of related subspecies. This is the only way it can survive. The vast majority of asexual life is very simple, "usually" single-celled. The danger with parthenogenesis is that they;re all genetically identical which leaves them vulnerable to various pathogens or unexpected changes to their environment. Thus, it is highly impractical for complex life to be asexual, especially if that species is wide-spread or travels through vastly different environments, as the Transformers do. Thus, evolving into a sexually reproducing species is definitely advantageous. It would make perfect sense for Jhiaxus to seek evolving the species in that direction, particularly if he understood the inherent dangers in remaining asexual as a species.

So what was the answer to the question? Do you consider them to have been alive before?

And before we get bogged down in what we think of real world biology (and I disagree with lots of what you said there) lets not forget that in no continuity where we know their origin are the Transformers a naturally occurring life form, the rules of nature don't really apply to them (and that works both ways, for those of us who think a life form that different wouldn't have men and women like us you can't really argue against the cartoon's take having the Quintesson's build some women as a marketing ploy).

Megatron Origin has not been officially retconned out.

It has, simply be effort of them doing comics that contradict it.

Also, the existance of Elita-1 and the other females weren't art mistakes, They were deliberately placed in the story by Alex Milne.

They are art mistakes because, along with Orion Pax and white Ultra Magnus they cotradict stuff they were planning and later carried out. He might have done it intentionally, but Nel Yomatov intentionally coloured half the characters wrong, that doesn't mean it's not a mistake.

Male is the opposite of female. The conclusion is that they were already inherently "male" to begin with.

A false premise, why would there be males if there were no females?

Depending upon the final composition of the Thirteen Original Transformers

8 now, thanks to the film.

Thus, we can conclude

You can conclude. The fact you're the only one doing so should give you pause for thought.

I don't dismiss the Marvel UK stuff from the rest of the material. It is officially segregated from the US because Marvel US ignored the UK material. The UK material is very conspicuously disregarded in the US comics.

Deathrbinger, Emerite Xaaron, Primus. All from the UK comic, all later in the US comic. See, a perfect example of you making up stuff and passing it of as fact (and you can't plead ignorance, you've had this pointed out to you before). Add in you counting the bloody aweful novelisation of the film as primary evidence for the film just shows up your huge double standard. You ignore the UK comic because you haven't read it, pure and simple. Which is fine for you, but don't try and pass it off as the word of God.

The only reason I bother to keep arguing is in case some poor sap wanders in here as their first ever thread and thinks you might be telling something resembling the truth.

[Halfshell]

I'm sorry. I know I said I wouldn't, but this:

Male is the opposite of female. The conclusion is that they were already inherently "male" to begin with.

is clearly bullshit.

Plants contain both male and female components. If you remove the male parts, it is female by default.

You therefore have a plant that is solely female. That does not automatically make every other plant male.

Botanica's a plant. "She" is both male and female.

Incidentally...

It's actually quite likely that, with the eventual success of the experiment, that all future generations of Cybertronians were "born" as fully male and female.

No it isn't. That logic itself automatically extends to the premise that a human undergoing HRT in preparation for a gender-reassignment operation they never receives means that all future humans are born as oh why the **** am I bothering. Logic left the building long, long ago.

Let's assume for argument's sake that Jhiaxus created a batch of Transformers that did, in fact, have wombs. And are capable of giving birth to other Transformers upon receiving the imprint of information from a non-female Transformer. Let's assume that. It might be fair to assume that the product of those specific couplings might be male or female.

IT DOESN'T MEANT THAT ALL TRANSFORMERS CREATED THE "STANDARD" (read: pre-existing) WAY WOULD BE.

If I go off and have a child that's half-French, it doesn't mean that all my relatives future children will be born half-French.

REVERSE THE GODDAMN POLARITY.

SUMMERHAYES I KILL YOU NOW.

[Tramp]

The UK did have a Generation 2 comic.

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.

The experiment was a failure. Unless you consider the perfect woman to be a boarderline psychopath.

his work in Arcee was a failure, we don't know about his other test subjects. As both Spotlight: Arcee and Simon Furman himself established, Arcee was but the first test subject in that experiment, not the only one. The first test subject in any experiment is usually a failure. Otherwise why continue if you perfect it on the first try? Thus, the experiment as a whole wasn't a failure, just his first try was. Megatron: orign is proof enough that it was ultimately successful.

But you do sprout on about the bits that contradict the film (how many Prime's there are, the buisness about the sarcophagus). This makes your whole stance seem just a bit silly.

the movie only shows seven of the Primes. It doesn't explicitly state that "only" Seven primes were created. That leaves the door open for the other six, especially since Hasbro had decreed that the Thirteen are multiversal singularities, and thus, the Primes for the movie are the same ones which constitute the Thirteen Original Primes created by Primus. The movie may have only shown seven because of budget constraints, but there are supposed to be a full thirteen.

No they didn't.

Yes, they did. Ultra Magnus identified her as female right from the get-go, which is what started Arcee off on her tirade to begin with. There was no confusion over her gender. They knew she was female.

In a panel of art that's flat out wrong- He's standing behind Orion Pax (who doesn't exsist in this continuity) as a white version of Prime (which he isn't supposed to be in this continuity).

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.

Spotlight: Arcee also explicitly states that Arcee was only the "first" test subject in the experiment, not the "only" one.



So what was the answer to the question? Do you consider them to have been alive before?

Life can either be sexually reproducing or asexually reproducing. Complex life tends towards sexual reproduction because of the inherent benefits for doing so and inherent risks for not evolving as such. As long as there is procreation (as well as the other six fundamental life functions) you have life. In most continuities, Transformers are divided into two sexes, a clear indication of sexual reproduction, because "omnly" sexually reproducing life have distinct sexes—distinct genders. Asexual life doesn't, which is why Marvel Transformers (and only Marvel Transformers) were stated to be inherently "genderless" and no females existed at all. That claim was never made in either the cartoon, Japanese continuities, nor any subsequent continuity.

And before we get bogged down in what we think of real world biology (and I disagree with lots of what you said there) lets not forget that in no continuity where we know their origin are the Transformers a naturally occurring life form, the rules of nature don't really apply to them (and that works both ways, for those of us who think a life form that different wouldn't have men and women like us you can't really argue against the cartoon's take having the Quintesson's build some women as a marketing ploy).

Yes, the rules of nature do apply. These are physical laws, whether a life form is naturally occurring or artificially created. the science of nanotechnology has the potential to one day actually create machine-based life that is fully capable of self-replication through asexual or sexual means via the creation of molecular assemblers capable of self-replication, which can then create self-replicating cells, and so forth. It's called "biomimetics".
Transformers were created as living organisms by Primus. They weren't created as mere machines. As for the Quints, yes I can argue against that, becuase that has already been covered in canon. The Quints usurped Primus and preprocessed his chldren into their "products". Thus, the transformers being male and female in the cartoon had nothing to do with the Quints creating them, they were always make and female even before the Quints enslaved them. All life, no matter its chemical make-up is required to exhibit certain key life functions in order to even survive individually and as a species. without all of those characteristics, the individual organism, and the species as a whole would die out quickly. These are physical laws. IT matters not whether the species was "naturally occurring", artificially created, divinely created, organic, silicon-based, crystalline, etc. It doesn't matter. the same rules apply.

It has, simply be effort of them doing comics that contradict it.

There is no inherent contradictions. Spotlight Arcee does not inherently contradict Megatron: Origin, nor does any other story. New stories may have added new details, but there is no inherent contradiction. And IDW has never stated that Megatron: Origin has been taken out of continuity. In fact, they have said just the opposite. There are no plans to remove that story from IDW continuity.

They are art mistakes because, along with Orion Pax and white Ultra Magnus they cotradict stuff they were planning and later carried out. He might have done it intentionally, but Nel Yomatov intentionally coloured half the characters wrong, that doesn't mean it's not a mistake.

No, it doesn't. "Orion Pax" as you refer to him is never addressed as such. It is fans who have dubbed him so. Ultra Magnus didn't get his armor until much later. Milne's depiction of him is a direct homage to Magnus being Prime's twin, and establishes his appearance before the armor. There is no contradiction. The females are not mistakes either. They are in the story, and confirmed as such by Alex Milne.

A false premise, why would there be males if there were no females?

It's not a false premise, especially since parthenogenic subspecies of real life forms are all female with no males. It is possible, with a speices which has been forced to resort to artificial means of reproduction because of the extinction of one sex to be a single sex population. In most species, nature has a way to take care of that problem (such as certain species of fish capable of spontaneously changing sex when there is a depletion of that particular sex in a population). It is also possible for a previously asexual species to evolve into a sexual species. How else would sexual reproduction have evolved to begin with? It's not a false premise.

8 now, thanks to the film.

???? What you you mean by "8"?

My point about the composition of the Thirteen is the ratio of males to females. We don't yet know the identities of all thirteen Primes yet.

You can conclude. The fact you're the only one doing so should give you pause for thought.

No, it shouldnt' becuase my conclusions are based on solid evidence and scientific fact, yours ar based upon the faulty assumption that "because Transformers are "robots", they have to be built and have to be inherently genderless" regardless of evidence to the contrary. Marvel was the only continuity to establish Transformers as "inherently" genderless and asexual. No other continuity has done so. In fact, they have gone out of their way to establish them as fully and literally male and female.

Deathrbinger, Emerite Xaaron, Primus. All from the UK comic, all later in the US comic. See, a perfect example of you making up stuff and passing it of as fact (and you can't plead ignorance, you've had this pointed out to you before). Add in you counting the bloody aweful novelisation of the film as primary evidence for the film just shows up your huge double standard. You ignore the UK comic because you haven't read it, pure and simple. Which is fine for you, but don't try and pass it off as the word of God.

Characters is one thing. the stories is another. The UK stories have no place in US continuity, and, in fact, are often contradicted. The UK characters that have appeared in the US stories only appeared after Simon Furman brought them over with him, and imported them into the continuity. There was no effort made to unify US and UK continuities, particularly in the US. Each continuity went in their own direction. They are not one and the same.

The only reason I bother to keep arguing is in case some poor sap wanders in here as their first ever thread and thinks you might be telling something resembling the truth.

I do speak true. And it is backed up by evidence and science.

[Tramp]

I'm sorry. I know I said I wouldn't, but this:



is clearly bullshit.

Plants contain both male and female components. If you remove the male parts, it is female by default.

You therefore have a plant that is solely female. That does not automatically make every other plant male.

Botanica's a plant. "She" is both male and female.

Botanica was female, not a hermaphrodite. Some plant species have members that are strictly male or female. Some flowers have only male reproductive systems while others have only female reproductive systems requiring cross-pollenation. Botanica was a Transformer who took on a plant alternate mode. Her genetic structure though was primarily that of a Cybertronian female, she is not both male and female.

Incidentally...


No it isn't. That logic itself automatically extends to the premise that a human undergoing HRT in preparation for a gender-reassignment operation they never receives means that all future humans are born as oh why the **** am I bothering. Logic left the building long, long ago.

Arcee was altered genetically, not just physically. And the experiment was specifically intended to introduce gender into the species as a whole, not just individual test subjects, thus, the natural extension of that is to introduce genes (or fundamentally alter them, as was done with Arcee) so that these characteristics are passed down from one generation to the next. That was the whole point in the experiment to begin with. It wasn't just a physical "sex change". It was a fundamental altering of her very genetic structure.

Let's assume for argument's sake that Jhiaxus created a batch of Transformers that did, in fact, have wombs. And are capable of giving birth to other Transformers upon receiving the imprint of information from a non-female Transformer. Let's assume that. It might be fair to assume that the product of those specific couplings might be male or female.

IT DOESN'T MEANT THAT ALL TRANSFORMERS CREATED THE "STANDARD" (read: pre-existing) WAY WOULD BE.

If that was the point of the whole experiment, then yes, it would be. The entire point of Jhiaxus' experiment was it "introduce gender into the species and thus push Cybertronian evolution". His whole point was to further the evolution of the species as a whole by introducing sexes into the species. His experiments in combiner technology was also to further Cybertronian evolution. That was the whole point. So yes, it does mean that this would eventually be applied to all future generations to be passed down within their genetic code so that all Cybertronians from then on would be male or female, whether protofrom created or born. The whole point was to transform the species into a two sex species instead of a "genderless" one.

If I go off and have a child that's half-French, it doesn't mean that all my relatives future children will be born half-French.

No, but all future generations will share your DNA and your partner's. In fact, the offspring would certainly carry her undiluted mitochondrial DNA, and any females would pass that down along the female bloodline. They would thus have French blood in them. All daughters would be "half French"

[Clay]

No, but all future generations will share your DNA and your partner's. In fact, the offspring would certainly carry her undiluted mitochondrial DNA, and any females would pass that down along the female bloodline. They would thus have French blood in them. All daughters would be "half French"

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?

Jhiaxus can make one, non-genderless transformer and call it girly Arcee. It doesn't mean that he captured every single other robot and gave it a cock.

And why, exactly, isn't a Botanica a hermaphrodite according to your logic? She has all the physical features of a plant, which is hermaphroditic. If physical appearances to the tune of tit-plates are your evidence for robots being females, why is Botanica only female when she has the characteristics of a dual-sexed plant?

[Reflector]

Yes, the rules of nature do apply. These are physical laws, whether a life form is naturally occurring or artificially created.

Why? The purpose of these physical laws is to interpret the occurrences of a single datapoint - the evolution of life on one planet under very specific (and, speaking in cosmic terms, outrageously unlikely) circumstances. While I agree that, for the most part, they're general enough to elaborate the requirements for a similar occurrence elsewhere in the universe, they're completely worthless when creation involves deities or AI or some other function that bypasses most of the process that occurred on Earth.

As examples: Why should the laws of evolution apply to a species that, as far as we know, has no natural predators and a mostly static environment? Why would a species require genetic diversity if it were (and going by every creation story we've been given, it's not unreasonable to assume they are) the only one inhabiting its planet? Why should they even need to reproduce if they are virtually immortal, save interruptions by violence?

As an aside on the original topic, I rather like Zisteau's interpretation. If the Autobots learned about our culture from the internet, they'd likely know that females are second-class citizens, to one degree or another, in almost every remaining human civilization. It's not unlikely they'd make some small effort for a few of their agents to relate. As for the male pronouns applied to the rest of them, they'd likely infer that they're more likely to be respected when interfacing with political leaders of a patriarchal society going by "him" rather than "her" or "it."

And yes, this ignores the G1 cartoon, because that was ridiculous.

[Tramp]

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.

Jhiaxus can make one, non-genderless transformer and call it girly Arcee. It doesn't mean that he captured every single other robot and gave it a cock.

And why, exactly, isn't a Botanica a hermaphrodite according to your logic? She has all the physical features of a plant, which is hermaphroditic. If physical appearances to the tune of tit-plates are your evidence for robots being females, why is Botanica only female when she has the characteristics of a dual-sexed plant?

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.

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.

Why? The purpose of these physical laws is to interpret the occurrences of a single datapoint - the evolution of life on one planet under very specific (and, speaking in cosmic terms, outrageously unlikely) circumstances. While I agree that, for the most part, they're general enough to elaborate the requirements for a similar occurrence elsewhere in the universe, they're completely worthless when creation involves deities or AI or some other function that bypasses most of the process that occurred on Earth.

As examples: Why should the laws of evolution apply to a species that, as far as we know, has no natural predators and a mostly static environment? Why would a species require genetic diversity if it were (and going by every creation story we've been given, it's not unreasonable to assume they are) the only one inhabiting its planet? Why should they even need to reproduce if they are virtually immortal, save interruptions by violence?

As an aside on the original topic, I rather like Zisteau's interpretation. If the Autobots learned about our culture from the internet, they'd likely know that females are second-class citizens, to one degree or another, in almost every remaining human civilization. It's not unlikely they'd make some small effort for a few of their agents to relate. As for the male pronouns applied to the rest of them, they'd likely infer that they're more likely to be respected when interfacing with political leaders of a patriarchal society going by "him" rather than "her" or "it."

And yes, this ignores the G1 cartoon, because that was ridiculous.

The reason why is simple. Each of the criteria put forth by biologists, astrobiologists, and xenobiologists, exist because, without all seven, a given life form couldn't survive. They're necessary chemical reactions which allow life to survive and continue.

1. Homeostasis is what maintans the internal equilibrium of an organism. Life, by its very nature is self maintaining. It doesn't require outside means to maintain its internal equilibrium. A car, for example, or a rock, can't maintain its own internal equilibrium. It can't prevent entropy. Life can maintain its own internal equilibrium, thus working against the force of entropy. Without this ability, the organism couldn't survive.
2. Life is self-organized with a complex cellular structure of interdependent systems. Without this ability to self-organize, its systems couldn't maintain homeostasis. They couldn't metabolize nutrients. They couldn't grow. It couldn't survive. Rocks, cars, and other objects are not self-organized. Cars have interdependent systems, but they require mechanics and engineers to organize those systems and maintain them. Thus, they are not life.
3. Life forms metabolize nutrients for growth and energy. Without this ability, an organism could not survive. Rocks don't metabolize nutrients. Cars burn fuel for energy, but not growth.
4. Life forms grow. They maintain a higher rate of anabolism than catabolism, thus increasing in mass in all of its parts. Anabolism is constructive metabolism, catabolism is destructive metabolism. Without the ability to maintain a higher rate of anabolism over catabolism, an organism, would destroy itself through its own metabolic processes. It couldn't survive.
5. Life responds to stimuli. This is the ability that allows plants to turn their leaves towards the sun or trees to shed their leaves in the autumn to conserve energy, predators to find their prey, prey animals to spot predators and flee. Without this inherent ability, plants couldn't absorb sunlight, organisms couldn't find food or avoid predation. They couldn't survive.
6. Life has the ability to adapt and evolve in response to changes in their environment over time through natural selection, and genetic mutation from one generation to the next. Without this ability, organisms would only be capable of surviving in an unchanging environment, and any changes would cause catastrophe, wiping out the species because it simply couldn't deal with it. the organism couldn't survive.
7. Life reproduces through either sexual or asexual means. The sole purpose of life is to propagate from generation to generation, passing on the genes from parent(s) to offspring. Cells divide into two, plants pollenate and produce seeds which grow into new plants, fish, birds, insects, reptiles, etc, mate and lay eggs, mammals mate and give birth. The cycle of life continues from generation to generation, each species united as a species by common genes and by the begetting of the offspring by its parent(s) own bodies, not outside resources such as factories or parts. Everything that makes up the offspring comes from the parent(s). Cars are manufactured from parts in factories, there is no relation between the car and the machines that construct it. A rock cannot procreate. It cannot bring forth offspring. Thus, a car, and a rock are not life. Without this key ability, life cannot continue past the current generation.

These are essential functions without which life could not exists. That is why Astrobiologists (biologists seeking Earth-like life on other planets) and Xenobiologists (biologists seeking non-Earth-like life on other worlds) use this criteria. It is because it is absolutely essential to all forms of life, regardless of its form or chemical make-up. —Criteria for life
Origin and Definition of life

There is also this quote from biologist Jack Cohen:

"Biologist Jack Cohen and mathematician Ian Stewart, amongst others, consider xenobiology separate from astrobiology. Cohen and Stewart stipulate that astrobiology is the search for Earth-like life outside of our solar system and say that xenobiologists are concerned with the possibilities open to us once we consider that life need not be carbon-based or oxygen-breathing, so long as it has the defining characteristics of life. (See carbon chauvinism)."— Astrobiology

Note the key phrase there about Xenobiology, the possibilities of life which need not be carbon-based or oxygen breathing, *so long as it has the defining characteristics of life*.

Life does not necessarily need to be carbon-based organic. Life does not necessarily need water. Life *does* need to exhibit all seven defining characteristics that determines if something is life or not.

Transformers do exhibit all of these characteristics. They've exhibited the ability to maintain homeostasis, they've exhibited a self-organized cellular structure, they've exhibited a metabolism, they've exhibited growth, they've exhibited adaptation and evolution, they've exhibited response to stimuli, they've exhibited reproduction (asexually in Marvel, and apparently sexually in a number of other continuities). Nothing in canon disputes these facts. Nothing in canon says that Transformers absolutely have to be genderless, or even are genderless except in Marvel where it is explicitly stated. Nothing in canon says that they absolutely can't conceive offspring through the union of male and female, and then give birth to said offspring after a period of gestation. Nothing in canon says that this is an impossibility. Canon sources do allude to it being possible, however, and show the results of it in the form of babies with mothers and fathers, something not exhibited with those Transformers who were definitely constructed. Thus, there is nothing saying that Transformers are not literally and truly male and female in the most literal of definitions.

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.