How would you make a Female MOC?

yeah this, and we make characters that aren’t cannon either :stuck_out_tongue:

at this point in mocing we seem to have modified what we define most species in the MU with some of our own human traits such as body differences in gender while cannologically its only a mental difference, we’ve also done things like remove the elemental connection to gender for the most part.

To me we’ve kinda morphed some things in cannon into what we think is better, try to find someone who will only MOC matoran and have their gender the cannological elements, it kinda sucks that only like 3 out of 14 of the naturally occurring elements are female, it limits creativity so we got rid of it.

[quote=“ThatchMac, post:207, topic:15642”]
We have seen characters like Lewa 2016 who has very short shoulders but he is still male.[/quote]
yes okay but then all the male toa aside from him have broad shoulders and gali 2016 has small shoulders too, and her 2015 form looks like she has smaller shoulders and also like she has wider hips.

But I think its fun to build mocs that have a more complicated feminine shape rather than the simple male shape.

1 Like

I mean, the topic isn’t “How would you make a Female Toa” it’s just MOCs in general. Many good non-Toa MOCs exist, and only making Toa and other MU species would basically make MOCing the most basic it could be, which is kind of counterproductive (like @PakariNation99 mentioned).

2 Likes

So, Shadowgear’s recent podcast talks about this in great length. I would recommend checking it out. Also, it’s Shadowgear, so language warning and all that.

3 Likes

I wonder how must not mention user would revision himself.

3 Likes

Yeah that podcast dealt with a really big issue going on right now.

Here’s what I’ve learned about female mocs from the Gearbox Podcast: don’t just assume the gander of the moc on the way it looks. That very SJW now I’m saying it.

Well not exactly, its more about not complaining that “it doesn’t look female” most Mocs can be visually identified by normal body types, however some Mocs wont and thats not a bad thing.

1 Like

This is where most people go wrong.

During the course of building a MOC, you’re probably going to think that it’s great; which is totally fine. You’ll get excited, and revise it, and maybe overall it entirely. When all is said and done, you’ll probably think that its your best work, or one of them.

With MOCing, just like any other art form, you’re never truly done. You should always be trying to improve, especially when your subject is easy to screw up.

I’m currently working on a “Gali 2017” MOC, and I’m using Turaga Vakama’s mask in light blue for the hips. Thoughts?

Here’s some advice, Nuva chest armour should not be shammed upon. If you use it in a creative way it can look good.

1 Like

I’m having trouble with the same thing. The problem is Not necessarily avoiding oversexualization, but realistic shaping.

1 Like

im replying to a month old post but I hope you still care

What exactly are you having trouble with shaping, cause one thing I think some people do without realizing is making a kind of skin tight suit look for female mocs, there’s mocs where that’s intentional and it’s fine, but the problematic ones are ones that clash with how they would do males.
To me I try to go for small things, the generic hourglass kind of thing, and I limit myself to have the hips and shoulders be the same size, where on my male mocs with the same torso build, I give them broader shoulders.
You can always make exceptions to this rule of course, ultimately a moc is a gender because you said it is, figure changes from person to person, so you’ll sometimes get men that have more feminine shapes and women with more masculine shapes.

Good ideas! I don’t know if I’m still looking to make a FemMOC, but I’ll keep this in mind

Did my post just get deleted? I didn’t get a notification. I spent a lot of time writing that… could someone explain plz? @moderators?
Did anyone see my post, please tell me there was a witness! I don’t believe anything about it was inappropriate, and I am very much certain the post was made and saved.

1 Like

I think it was the large amount of words many might find offensive, even though they were censored.

On the subject, I want to share a YouTube video that does a good job discussing sexualization when it comes to character design:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ob03OLCS3ys

1 Like

Quick preface: no part of this post is meant to be antagonistic in any way to anyone.
First, to my knowledge, this site has an age limit for a reason. Censorship of the language used in my post in this context would only be appropriate when in the presence of children unable to understand the meaning behind such words and why they are not appropriate in their original context. They are used exclusively as examples of language used by this very community. To limit the language of someone trying to help rectify a clearly agreed upon problem in this community, yet not that of those causing the problem does not help. It, in fact is damaging. Some of the language from my post was directly quoted from posts on this very site that haven’t even been censored.
Second, if someone truly feels the language I used shouldn’t have been used, all it takes is a simple message/notification/anything asking “hey, some of the language you used was kinda uncool and I’d like it if you hadn’t used those words.” Literally just that, and I’d happily edit out that language. Instead, I didn’t even receive the slightest notice. If I hadn’t found my comment deleted, I’d have no idea anything about it had offended anyone. The crap I’ve heard just walking down the street in broad daylight is miles worse than anything I wrote in that post. I even put a disclaimer that I was essentially going to give some not very nice examples of the problem at hand to prepare or warn to steer clear anyone that might easily be offended, which is a heck of a lot more warning than I get irl in public.
Lastly, thank you for the reference to yet another guy talking about women’s bodies. I can appreciate support from an ally, but in this context, it comes across as a bit condescending like I don’t know what I’m talking about and should “sit still and look pretty.” I know that’s probably not what you or the maker of the video you linked intended, again I’m not in any way trying to antagonize, accuse or vilify, I’m just expressing my frustration over the lack of communication, clarity and responsibility around my deleted post. Thanks for at least offering some explanation on behalf of deleter of my post.

2 Likes

Well, I wouldn’t say that. I simply offered what I thought might have been the cause. I have no idea why it was deleted or who deleted it. So I’m not explaining on anyone’s behalf.

Ultimately these things are at the mods’ discretion, and whatever they say is what goes. Believe me, I’ve had posts deleted/moved/altered, and sure, they might be posts one took time to make, but it’s not up to us to challenge their decisions. It’s just how it is.

It rightly isn’t, but the creator of the video I linked has experience in character design as a profession. I take the word of a professional as a highly informed opinion.

Maybe the way he presents the topic can come off as a bit condescending, but that tone is in no way directed towards the audience of the video, rather the designers at Riot Games that he feels compromised artistic integrity.

And truthfully, I believe he makes a good point. When sexualization (which is a tool of character design and not inherently good or bad, as he explains) is used in such a way that the aspects of the character cannot be clearly gathered, it is to the detriment of that character.

He uses a great example in the video (and it’s arguably his strongest one) where he points to the one character that’s supposed to be a high noble-woman and a town sheriff (forgive me, I don’t play LoL). Instead, the character designers at Riot chose to use sexualization in a way in which the qualities of high nobility, lawful justice, order, structure, etc. are not clearly seen with a glance at the character (which is a goal any good character design should strive for).

MOCing is in essence character design, and because of that I’ll hold the same standards to it. The problem pervading female MOCs isn’t the use of sexualization, it’s improper use of it to the detriment of the character. Very few of these hyper-sexualized MOCs actually have sexuality as anything to do with their character, and to that end any character traits they do have aren’t easily seen in the design without reading a lengthy bio.

As the creator of the video explains, it’s okay to have sexualized characters, and it’s okay to have sexualized MOCs. Some people want to express those kinds of MOCs as a piece of art. Some people see that as a desirable and/or artistic quality, and others do not, but that isn’t a problem with sexualization, it’s human nature.

The problem comes from MOCs that use this design tool when it doesn’t fit the character, and again, it’s a problem only in that we want people to make the best MOCs they possibly can, not because of their design choices.

It’s an especially slippery slope for Bionicle MOCs considering their biomechanical nature, and the fact that sexuality and sexual attraction aren’t real concepts in the lore of Bionicle. Thus, it’s a bit weird by definition to include sexuality as a design choice, but it can be done. Roodaka comes to mind as a character that uses it well, as it fits her character of being a seductress. Yes, it’s weird for Bionicle, but it had merit to her personality.

It just has to work with the character.

1 Like

Again, I’m not trying to chew you out or anything, but if your guess at why my post was deleted was only to speculate on moderator intentions and revere them as unquestionable deities of this webpage, I really don’t see the point for which it was made. They really aren’t above anything. They’re people and you can call them out anytime just like anyone else. Theirs nothing wrong with that, and nothing directly preventing that. Sure it might take some prying, but after I reached out to a cast member, as they are apparently the only responsible people of authority on this site, I did get to the bottom of it. This isn’t to be an attack aimed at the mods, just me expressing the fact that I don’t believe they’re doing a good job of being mods and am disappointed by this. I’m happy to discuss with whoever deleted my post why they thought it was a good idea to delete my post without explaining why, or even notifying me.

Thanks for the review of the video I guess. Like I said, I knew your intentions were not meant as condescending. There’s no need to jump to defend yourself or the maker of that video as not condescending.

As to your comments on what problems surround female MOC building, I’m honestly not going to get into a discussion about them right now. At least not until I get the business around my first post sorted out (just waiting on a reply, things should be good with a revised less vulgar re edit to my knowledge). Since I’m getting this sorted out through a third party, the cast member, I don’t know all the reasons my post was deleted, and if it’s because of my views on the subject in addition to language, I’d rather not post anything that’s gonna get deleted again. Granted, this post could easily get deleted too for criticizing what I see as a flaw with the message boards, but that would just further show the, in my opinion, misguided censorship policy of this webpage. Covering up whatever is uncomfortable to avoid talking about it might be a natural desire, but it seldom solves anything. What censorship is supposed to do is prevent language made with malice and the intention of causing offense and hurt, not to cover up unpleasant, inconvenient or uncomfortable topics from being discussed.

2 Likes

I think that a tinner waste articulation is enough to determine that a moc is a female.

I think any moc can be female regardless of style. Look and Gali Mistika, or Krehkka for gosh sake. But if you really want it to look feminine, then wider hips and a thinner waist should do it.

1 Like

The truth of this issue imo has less to do with how to make female mocs, and more to do with how the community itself reacts to them. It’s honestly the same crap as body types and clothing irl (warning! Bout to dish out some truths here. I’m no hard core sjw, this is just a fact of reality, please don’t try to debate this with me, I do not have the slightest interest in debating what I see and hear out on the town). If you’re “too fat” it’s ok to be fat shamed, if you’re too fit, it’s ok to be cat called. If you cover up, you’re not feminine enough, if you show too much skin, you’re too sexual. If a MOC isn’t feminine enough, it’s not a female MOC, if it’s too feminine, it’s hyper-sexualized. Because Bionicle MOCs are works of art, we naturally want to evaluate their quality. However, while it’s great to rate the artistic quality of a MOC 1-10, or what have you, all too often does this community include the “attractiveness” of a female MOC in determining the artistic value of the MOC. Suddenly having just the “right” sized breasts, buttocks and wasteline is what determines the artistic quality of a MOC. This is what I think is at the center of the discussion of female MOCs (of course this same problem can be seen in the choices made while building female MOCs as well, but I’ll touch on that later). I think it’s because of this issue that people draw such a fine line between not feminine and overly sexualized. If a MOC is not exactly on that line, suddenly there is a problem.

The most helpful piece of information to keep in mind when building a female MOC is the reason female MOCs are such a sensitive topic in the first place. As said earlier, it started with people judging the artistic quality and value of female MOCs based off of how sexually attractive or sexualized the MOC is. The response to this was construction of more sexualized MOCs. However, there soon became a backlash against this as well. Hyper-sexualized MOCs became heavily criticized for being offensive or indecent. Furthermore, this criticism went way to far. The point at which a MOC can be considered overly sexualized is right next to the point at which it can be ridiculed for not being feminine or sexualized enough. This is where the fine line female MOCs have to balance on to not be ruthlessly criticized for one thing or another comes from. In addition to remaining stagnant, discussion over female MOCs has become increasingly toxic, almost to the point that any mention of female MOCs has to involve some sort of comment relating to what is ‘proper,’ acceptable or desirable for a female MOC to look like.

Taking a que from the progress, or lack there of, on similar issues irl, I seriously doubt this problem will be solved any time soon (the Bionicle community will likely die out before it does). With that in mind, the best way I’ve found to play around this is to not make female MOCs until one becomes an accomplished MOCist. It’s basically the building equivalent of “sit still look pretty” and it kinda sucks. Depressing comparisons aside, possessing greater MOC building skill is the best way to be able to balance on the fine line between your MOCs being seen as not female, and being seen as offensive, to put it mildly. Of course, by no means am I saying don’t build female MOCs if you want to make them when you’re new to MOC building, just that you shouldn’t expect much/any helpful criticism of your MOC if you choose to share it.

I share this rather depressing advice because I’ve learned a harder way what is acceptable in the MOC building community. My first MOC posted on this website, which was female, had some rather harsh feedback (I’m not gonna link it because it’s ancient, of mediocre quality artistically, and only important if someone really wants to see an example of how female MOCs can be treated even on this site, so if you’re really that curious, go ahead and look it up). Granted, there were a number of polite comments, saying, not bad for a first post, and the like, but these comments were little consolation next to the more negative comments. Contrasting the reaction to my first MOC posted on this site to the reaction of my most recent self MOC, Etherine, the difference is clear. My recent self MOC has received a considerably warmer welcome, in part likely because it is of greater artistic quality, but, in all likelihood, just as greatly due to having the proportions that conform to the MOC building community’s standards.

I hope this was informative, and not too discouraging, but I felt it ought to be said.

For anyone that read through this entire post, congrats! The original version of it was deleted likely for being too explicit by the standards of this website (don’t actually know cause I never heard directly from the mod that took it down). This is an edited down, and censored version of the original post.

4 Likes