Discussion in 'Transformers General Discussion' started by Mr. Chaos, Aug 5, 2018.
And we still love. I'm sure even cave people loved back then.
I'm pretty sure they had mating instincts too...
"There is very much a reason why we wear jewelry. It's the same reason some birds make nests decorated with trash...to catch the eye of potential mates. We may have evolved from that in it's now an expression of self...but the root is still to catch the eyes of others."
I see, but we can still live without it. Maybe wearing one is to attract a mate. I found one that said may, but the the key word is may. Do people who wear jewlery attract more mates? I assume that what's they're for, but wasn't for sure. We can still get a mate with out wearing jewerly. I have men hitting on me with or without wearing any gemstones on my body.
"The "pathogens", though, are not genetic based like people. Reproductive diversification really only works with organics. Rocks don't get sick from pathogens...and neither does sunlight. The comparison isn't even apples and oranges...it's apples and a Nissan 370Z.:"
Transformers have genes or cells or something similar too cells ( nanobots). Rocks don't. Transformers can and do get sick from pathogens ( Prime is a good example). Maybe not the same one that effects organics. Again they are living organism too and not just sentient manchines. Transformers ( in all or at least most universes) are made out of metallic cells that have genetic coding. Also what evidence do you have that the pathogens that get transformers sick have no genes? What's the point of having genes if you can't or don't pass it on? Also in the g1 universe they may not be genetic pathogens, but some in TF universes they could be.
"Because "romantic" love is an emotion born out of mating urges. If there isn't any reason to mate, there's no reason to romance."
I agreed, but for them, they probably pick up romantic relationship from organic beings and decided to put it in their culture. There is no bio reason, but I still don't see reason why they can't be romantic relationship. They're reason would not be a biological reason, but a culture reason ( influence by us or any other organic beings) instead. Also they can't always depend on outside sources to make life. It could work in the g1 universe ( maybe not in that universe either), but not the universe like like Prime. In Prime universe, bots are not built and are not consider as manchines. They're forged, but again if something happens to the well or any of their outside sources for reproducing, then they need to mate ( not like organics) or at least asexually reproduce. Matter of fact having them be built will just make non living manchines ( depending on the continuity). Life begats life. Again, what's the point of having genes if you can't pass it on? What is the point of femmes having widen hips if they can't or don't give birth? The only reason I can think of is that we humans made them and that the reason. That's a good for an out universe explanation, but not a in universe one. Also nonhuman/non animals being a couple always exist. For example, in Cars, we have two cars falling in love. There's no reason for them to fall in love or to have a gender/sex, but they still do. I never seen or heard anyone question about them being couple or cars having a gender/sex. It's always Transformers. Transformers probably didn't have kids and have romantic relationship until they visit organic planets. And even then most don't have kids or fall in love. Actually maybe in some TF universe falling in love could be a bio thing because they use to be organic or again their outside sources for making new life has been stolen, lost or destroyed.
Still don't see how it's rule 34. I didn't say they have sex the same way we do. Again, it's not anything icky or graphic.
No...but you need to be grounded in adequate "suspension of disbelief". Otherwise, Furman's "magical asexual birthing" method is just as valid as yours.
Which is why I came up with the quint reason. It's not a good one, but it's the only one I can think of right now. Also any reason is better then no reason. I would come up with a better reason, but it will take a while or so. Came up with a better reason. The femme and mech built a fetus/baby/child bot and put their coding information in their child. The femme can carrying them if she wants to. I know said that life begat life, but should all life begat the same way. However if something happens to their resources for making new life then they may have to sexually reproduce, but in a different way. Both sex/gender ( they aren't sexed/gendered the way organics are) take a piece their metal skin ( made out of nanobots) and use them to make a fetus/baby/child or even an adult out of it.
You think that this makes them organic or too human. It doesn't. It makes them lifeforms. Living organism. Okay maybe in the the g1 universe it does, but not in universes were genes and cells exist in transformers. Sexually and/or asexually reproducing should not only be organic thing. The reason why some of you people think so is because some of you guys keep forgetting that they're more then sentient manchines. They're not organic, but neither are they just sentient manchines ( okay on some continties they are). Earth bots/manchines don't reproduce that way, but again transformers aren't earth bots/manchines and aren't or shouldn't be bound by their rules. Also there's no universal law that states that only organics can sexually/asexually reproduce. Watch Batteries Not Included; there a femme nonhumanoid bot gave birth. IMO that a lot better then them building babies or using what transformers use because it makes them living organism. The creators of that movie know that alien bots don't need to be bound by rules that apply to earth bots. If the femmes can get pregnant, then they go through a cycle, right? Nope. That's taking it too far. Having them get pregnant is far enough. Besides an ovatron only release once the spermatrons enters the body.
"Still not the same as genetic pathogens"
It may not be the same as that, but they can still get sick. Well at least in some universes they can. Anyway, I like the idea of transformers being living organism because we had plenty of sentient manchines, but not manchines that are not only sentient, but biological beings too.
"The fact that they're gendered already doesn't make any sense"
True, but cars in Cars have genders and yet no one seem to bat an eye on that. I think is because females cars always existed in Cars. If Hasbro would've allow Bob to make female transformers from the start, then the question on robot genders wouldn't exist. Also it may not be silly for them to have a gender/sex. Sure earth manchines/bots don't have them, but Transformers are not earth bots. They are sentient manchines, but also living organism. Rules that apply to organics shouldn't always be apply to them, but neither should the rules that apply to earth bots/manchines. Also there's no universal law that states that only organics can have a gender/sex. I'm not going to debate whatever they sex organs or reproductive parts or not. They may have their own version, but they're never going to show it. Maybe they do have them or not, but agian they'll never show it or mention it. I know that robots/manchines don't have reproductive organs, but remember they're not just manchines with emotions and personalities, but also living mechanical organism who shouldn't always be bound by the same rules and logic of earth robots. Can transformers have a gender/sex? I see why not, but they don't need to be born with one. They can pick it up from organic planets. It could be that quintessons made them or reegineer them to have a gender/sex to save money and/or out of curiosity.
No Transformer should have a love interest!
Meg's already got love interest. Name's Megatron.
In most of continuities Meg's far too self-centered and narcisstic for forming any kind of emotional investment with other person.
Now, if this was a human villain... He'd probably have a bedmate just for the need... But it's not the case with Cybertronians so even this one reason is non-existent for him.
Agreed on the last part. There's no biological need for them to be in a romantic relationship. However, that still doesn't mean that they can't can't be in one. After all nonhuman/non animal couples existed in other media ( cars in Cars for an example). Why not transformers? They would probably pick it up from organic planets and even then most don't fall in love. It could be that creator/s out of curiosity want to see what's it's like for robotic beings to fall in love.
I imagine megaton as being like DIO, so supernaturally charismatic/ terrifying that many of his subordinates find solace in the absolute presence of him. I'd also like to see the hilarity of Megatron dealing with his personal harem, with relative indifference.
Tidal wave (clingy jealous huge one)
Lugnut (GLORIOUS genki guy)
Demolishor (submissive dumb one)
Sky byte (artsy mysterious poet)
Soundwave (childhood friend/shrinking violet)
But to address the actual question, if he has a love interest, they should help humanize him, showing that even the most brutal dictators have a capacity for compassion, creating an interesting juxtaposition. Maybe megempress is a civilian he wants not to associate his comttinued atrocities with, maybe he confides in soundwave, and they just rely on each other for strength in a seemingly endless war.
him having a devoted female subordinate(nightbird/slipstream) that is loyal and maybe feels a bit more to him, with him only showing favor or a nicer demeanor to them, like voldemort and belatrix in harry potter
Megatron explicitly can't be in one because of the way he's always depicted in canon, plain and simple. I don't care about non-canon theories about the entire species as a whole, but the way Megatron was depicted in mass media he's basically narcissm personified and that's including even his IDW self. This kind of personality has no need for others save for maybe a very pathological relationship of keeping around someone to worship him the way Joker kept Harley Quinn.
The people who said that asexual beings don't need to be in a romantic relationship are right. There's no bio need to look for a mate if you don't or don't need to sexually reproduce. However, that doesn't mean that they can't. I can see them developing one after being on an organic planet for too long or maybe their creator/s want them to be in a romantic relationship to save money and/or out of curiosity. Also nonhumans/nonanimals being in a romantic relationship existed in other media such as Cars and never heard or read anyone complaining about that or them having a gender/sex, so why Transformers? I think it's because romantic relationships and gender/sex always existed in Cars from the start. If romantic relationship and gender/sex in Transformers always exist from the beginning then people wouldn't be ask question about thoes. Also asexual people can be in a romantic relationship even though they have no desire to have sex at all, so why not asexual robotic lifeforms? I guess the body of asexual people don't know that they're not into sex. Do asexual people get sexual urge, but just repress them? If not, then they don't need to look or be in a romantic relationship.
Ps. I know that gender and sex are not the same, but without the concept of sex, gender would not exist at all.
Agreed. Someone like Megatron shouldn't have a love interest but himself.
Well, there are baby cars in Cars...so obviously, cars in Cars reproduce via binary reproduction methods somehow. I've only ever seen the first movie, so unless there's a scene where cars are manufactured in the other two movies...I think folks just assume they're basically humanized cars -- in all ways.
Dio? as in Ronnie James?
Hmm Megs doing a cover of Holy Diver or Rainbow in the Dark? Intriguing LOL
It would probably be more like Christopher Lee...
Megatron is defined by his Decepticon soldiers and his enemies, chiefly Optimus Prime.
But I can see the idea having potential, in an unconventional way.
There are stories of how a monster falls for a pretty girl, and captures her to make her his possession/prisoner. It's been done in tales: Hades and Persephone, Ravaana and Sita, Beast and Belle. A monstrous character, and the subject of his attentions - unattainable, but irresistible (maybe too pure, or unyielding). I think that way could work with Megatron and whoever he sets his eye on.
The question is how much you can allow a love interest to affect Megatron. I think that he'd eventually leave her behind to continue his campaigns, but would still think of her.
Kind of? No doubt that this DIO was named after that DIO, but I'm talking about Dio Brando From Jojo's Bizarre adventure.
I've read about the baby car, but the baby could've been built for all we know. Even transformers kids existed although they're rare ( probably because of the war. Transformers always seem to be or mostly be about war and you don't bring babies into war). G1 Wheelie is a good example. There's also the robot kids in that Victory comic. If one living mechanical being can have kids, then why not another mechanical lifeforms.
If they can reproduce, then yes, romance is fine.
I don't know Windblade's backstory whatsoever aside from the Machinma stuff (which I found to be awesome honestly) but someone like that would be ok I suppose.
But I really believe Megatron's true love is for Cybertron and the Cybertronian Race. He would give his life for both and that's pretty selfless... in some continuities anyway...
Separate names with a comma.