Poll of the Day > The force is female

(+) Yeah! (+)

Some girls in my class keep tweeting this lol. I gave them a bunch of evidence why it's not but they don't seem to care

---

Well, Star Wars and the Force are kind of hot garbage now, so you could always agree with them and tell them it makes sense that it would be female now. You could even throw in a joke about how bi-polar it is, and how it makes people crazy.

Though to be fair, since the shitty reality now is that the Force is just a product of midichlorians, which is what you get when Lucas tries to un-science "mitochondria", and mitochondrial DNA only passes through female lines, maybe the Force IS female.
---

ParanoidObsessive posted...

Well, Star Wars and the Force are kind of hot garbage now, so you could always agree with them and tell them it makes sense that it would be female now. You could even throw in a joke about how bi-polar it is, and how it makes people crazy.

Though to be fair, since the shitty reality now is that the Force is just a product of midichlorians, which is what you get when Lucas tries to un-science "mitochondria", and mitochondrial DNA only passes through female lines, maybe the Force IS female.

I don't see the connection between midichlorians and mitochondria

---

^That kinda sounds like Parasite Eve.

---

ParanoidObsessive posted...

the Force is just a product of midichlorians

The Midichlorians create the Force, or just interact with it?

Now I'm picturing micro-organisms that excrete magic psychic energy as a waste product, like how yeast excretes gas bubbles.

---

I'm picturing that too.

Horse_ebooks posted...

I don't see the connection between midichlorians and mitochondria

The midichlorians are the powerhouse of the force.
---

The Force exist.

The midichlorions are just its way of interacting with the universe

---

How would it have any gender at all?
---

The Force got Anakin's mom pregnant.

The Force is male confirmed.

---

ParanoidObsessive posted...

the Force is just a product of midichlorians

Im pretty sure that midichlorians are a product of being strong with the force and not the other way around.

---

Horse_ebooks posted...

I don't see the connection between midichlorians and mitochondria

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midichloria



DirtBasedSoap posted...

Im pretty sure that midichlorians are a product of being strong with the force and not the other way around.

It's never actually explained in Phantom Menace, and because the negative backlash was so strong, it was never addressed again, so we literally don't know if it's the one way, the other, or some weird hybrid of the two.

The EU might have answered the question, but the EU is also terrible and is non-canon now anyway, so it doesn't really matter how the EU interpreted it.
---

ParanoidObsessive posted...

The EU might have answered the question, but the EU is also terrible and is non-canon now anyway, so it doesn't really matter how the EU interpreted it.

Got any source for that besides "DISNEY SAID SO!!!!"
---

Revelation34 posted...

Got any source for that besides "DISNEY SAID SO!!!!"

That's literally the only source I need because it's the only source that actually matters.

You can say "Well, I prefer the EU to what Disney has done with things" or "I like parts of the EU because of nostalgia", or even "I feel like stuff done while Lucas still owned it should count for more", but "canon" is a more official term, and it really only applies to what the current owners accept as "real" in the context of the universe, and are willing to use going forward.

You can dislike the canon, you can prefer other interpretations or prior canon more, but it doesn't really change what is canon and what isn't.

Disney can reboot the canon whenever they like, just like Lucas did. That's what owning a property means.

Disney already blatantly shitcanned most of the post-RotJ EU, recycled some of it, and stole a nugget or two out of what's left to jerk off fanboys ("Hey look, it's Thrawn! You like him, right?"). You're never getting any of it back, and they're not going to use any of it in future movies.

Like many other fandoms before you in the past, and like the Star Wars fandom itself before Lucas rebooted everything in the 90s, a lot of the expanded media "doesn't count".
---

ParanoidObsessive posted...

That's literally the only source I need because it's the only source that actually matters.

You can say "Well, I prefer the EU to what Disney has done with things" or "I like parts of the EU because of nostalgia", or even "I feel like stuff done while Lucas still owned it should count for more", but "canon" is a more official term, and it really only applies to what the current owners accept as "real" in the context of the universe, and are willing to use going forward.

You can dislike the canon, you can prefer other interpretations or prior canon more, but it doesn't really change what is canon and what isn't.

Disney can reboot the canon whenever they like, just like Lucas did. That's what owning a property means.

Disney already blatantly shitcanned most of the post-RotJ EU, recycled some of it, and stole a nugget or two out of what's left to jerk off fanboys ("Hey look, it's Thrawn! You like him, right?"). You're never getting any of it back, and they're not going to use any of it in future movies.

Like many other fandoms before you in the past, and like the Star Wars fandom itself before Lucas rebooted everything in the 90s, a lot of the expanded media "doesn't count".

No that is blatantly false. Canon is what the original creator approves or created themselves.
---

lulz

---

ParanoidObsessive posted...

That's literally the only source I need because it's the only source that actually matters.

You can say "Well, I prefer the EU to what Disney has done with things" or "I like parts of the EU because of nostalgia", or even "I feel like stuff done while Lucas still owned it should count for more", but "canon" is a more official term, and it really only applies to what the current owners accept as "real" in the context of the universe, and are willing to use going forward.

You can dislike the canon, you can prefer other interpretations or prior canon more, but it doesn't really change what is canon and what isn't.

Disney can reboot the canon whenever they like, just like Lucas did. That's what owning a property means.

Disney already blatantly shitcanned most of the post-RotJ EU, recycled some of it, and stole a nugget or two out of what's left to jerk off fanboys ("Hey look, it's Thrawn! You like him, right?"). You're never getting any of it back, and they're not going to use any of it in future movies.

Like many other fandoms before you in the past, and like the Star Wars fandom itself before Lucas rebooted everything in the 90s, a lot of the expanded media "doesn't count".

According to death of the author, the owners intent doesn't matter and only the reader/viewer's take on it matters and Disney isn't even the creator of it so it's even less valid

---

Revelation34 posted...

No that is blatantly false. Canon is what the original creator approves or created themselves.

Literally not what that word means at all. Sorry Charlie.

If George Lucas said tomorrow that Greedo and Han actually dated in high school, and Disney said "Ha ha, no", Lucas doesn't win that argument.



Muscles posted...

According to death of the author, the owners intent doesn't matter and only the reader/viewer's take on it matters and Disney isn't even the creator of it so it's even less valid.

Two problems with that, though:

1) Death of the author isn't really a universally accepted concept. Plenty of literary critics think it's bullshit, and even those who are open to it don't necessarily see it as the only possible interpretation of a work.

2) Once you start talking about audience interpretation you're not really talking about "canon" anymore, so it's kind of immaterial to the conversation at hand anyway.
---

My spouse (who is French) tells me that in their language, it's referred to as "la Force", with la being the term used to refer to "female" subjects (and le being used to refer to "male" subjects). Apparently French is one of the languages where everything has a gender, somehow. I don't really get it.

All I know is what was already pointed out in the spoiler in post #11. As far as I'm concerned, assuming the Force has to be one or the other (which already doesn't make ANY sense to me; you'd think the Force would be something that transcends all of this sex/gender crap), the actual evidence provided in the films points more toward "male" than anything else.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

Literally not what that word means at all. Sorry Charlie.

If George Lucas said tomorrow that Greedo and Han actually dated in high school, and Disney said "Ha ha, no", Lucas doesn't win that argument.

Two problems with that, though:

1) Death of the author isn't really a universally accepted concept. Plenty of literary critics think it's bullshit, and even those who are open to it don't necessarily see it as the only possible interpretation of a work.

2) Once you start talking about audience interpretation you're not really talking about "canon" anymore, so it's kind of immaterial to the conversation at hand anyway.

Actually he would since he's the original creator.
---

Philip027 posted...

the actual evidence provided in the films points more toward "male" than anything else.

Well, as we know, it binds and penetrates everything, sooo...



Revelation34 posted...

Actually he would since he's the original creator.

Still literally not what that word means at all, regardless of how hard you might wish otherwise.
---

ParanoidObsessive posted...

Well, as we know, it binds and penetrates everything, sooo...

Still literally not what that word means at all, regardless of how hard you might wish otherwise.

Sure if you don't actually know what the word means.
---

lol

---

ParanoidObsessive posted...

Literally not what that word means at all. Sorry Charlie.

If George Lucas said tomorrow that Greedo and Han actually dated in high school, and Disney said "Ha ha, no", Lucas doesn't win that argument.

Two problems with that, though:

1) Death of the author isn't really a universally accepted concept. Plenty of literary critics think it's bullshit, and even those who are open to it don't necessarily see it as the only possible interpretation of a work.

2) Once you start talking about audience interpretation you're not really talking about "canon" anymore, so it's kind of immaterial to the conversation at hand anyway.

I think DotA is trash but as long as it is around I'll use it too, lmk when it's dead

Can there be any true canon if everyone's interpretation is equally valid?

---

sequel trilogy isnt canon

fucking fight me

---