mccoyed

Cool idea for a thread!

Great epilogue there, Rogue Angel. Really enjoyed reading a throughline narrative tying so many builds together.

Stables Phase 3: Muninn Garrison

AoM Phase 3: Muninn Garrison / McCoyed / Mitgardia

The last Stables and chobo build is up!

It is summer, eleven years after Eidrin first brought the eggs to Muninn Ranch, Bergir and Meiken are long gone to the Gods. With the recent rumors of war and mounting tensions throughout Historica, the authorities have stationed a garrison at the ranch to protect the chobos as a military resource. The idyllic sanctuary that Muninn once was has all but disappeared. Even the homely house once kept by Maiken is now a bunkhouse for soldiers. Eidrin has grown into middle age and assumed the position of stablemaster of Muninn Ranch. He has regular meetings with Captain Rangvald, the officer in charge of the garrison at Muninn. His family still lives in their home a few miles away but are at Muninn frequently to help the soldiers care for the chobo. They don't always agree about how to go about it, hence the meetings. Eindal, a gentle boy who's grown up close to chobos and more at home with them than other people much of the time, protests as one of the warriors eagerly attempts to lasso a young chobo called Solvi. Eindal has much of the instincts and manner that Bergir believed make for a fine chobo rancher. Eidrin thinks his son will one day be twice the rancher he is. Meanwhile, Helva and Hurin approach Captain Rangvald's second in command in hopes of joining the army. Thyra, her mother and Eidrin's wife, attempts to dissuade her, not wanting to see her family torn apart. Helva is a woman grown now and has lost none of her mischief or thirst for adventure. She grips her axe and sling tightly, as if just bearing arms makes her an armswoman. The soldiers are mostly happy to ignore Eidrin's family and get on with the business of eating, training, and protecting their garrison. Too big now for any of the pens at Muninn Ranch, Kensley has a visit with Unnolt, the first to hatch from the eggs Eidrin brought here all those years ago. Chobos bond closely with their own, even if they're not born family. Unbeknownst to either chobo, Eidrin and Captain Rangvald are even now discussing Kensley's fate. Eidrin and Kensley are old friends, but he knows that the chobo is getting too big for the ranch and must be moved on to a proper home where he can be trained alongside other chobo as mounts in war. Rangvald shows Eidrin the order to draft Kensley and asks him to sign. Both men know that this day will come for all the chobo at Muninn. Neither suspects that the day has also come for Eidrin's firstborn daughter... Thanks for having a look. My notion here was to show passage of time both by changing the landscape and by showing a different season and the characters from previous MOCs after time has passed on. I hope that building directly onto a previous Phase doesn't disqualify this build or anything. I'm not sure I did a great job with the photos here as this is the biggest MOC I've done. I decided to post nearly all the photos here, but there are a few more at my flickr. This was my first time building masonry stonework in a MOC really and I'm not sure the technique I chose works as well as I'd like. Other than that, I'm happiest with the story of these builds and probably the landscaping of this one in particular. I won't be making trees like these ones again... too boring! This will close out my chobo builds for the time being. I know it's on a sad note and all, but we'll see what happens when the Civil War threatens proud Mitgardia. C&C is welcome as always!

Great wall. Love that it's angled and my favorite detail is the wooden panels over the crenelations.

Great little house. I agree with some of the CC others have said, especially with landscaping and the overall cleanness of the build.

Amazing work. For me, it's the little details that stand out this time as by this point seeing architecture this good from you is no surprise.

Annnnnnd that's where I bow out of this discussion.

Ardelon, What I was complaining about was that all adult female figs seem to have lipstick and/or makeup. My solution to this would be to limit this a bit more. Do more female faces that have different facial features as well. Have you ever seen a female fig with a cleft chin? I haven't. TLG has the unenviable position of trying to figure out how to do "feminine lips" on yellow plastic and I understand the decision to use brighter colors (lipstick). I think, though, that people can tell a fig's head is female if they do the typical eyebrow/eye shapes with emphasized eyelashes. The solution isn't to be 100% inclusive (because some men wear lipstick and have long eyelashes too!) but to be as inclusive as possible. To this extent, representing women in as many ways as possible is the goal. TLG is trying to do that. First off, my issue isn't with the breast and hip printing in and of themselves. My main argument was that yes, this stuff is sexualized. If we agree about that, then the discussion moves to whether or not this is actually a problem and if so, in what cases, etc. I'd say that sometimes the breast and hourglass figures are problematic but TLG has recently made great effort to add more variety to female figs so it's less and less a problem where all female figs are identified as such using these signifiers. But having said that, I would say that adding muscle detail to a male torso is more tricky an issue than it may seem. We live in a world where there isn't equivalence in the sexualization or commodification of the male torso. Do people objectify men based on their nice torsos? Sure they do. Are nice muscular torsos used to sell lifestyle and products? Absolutely. But as a starkly sexual image, it's more difficult to pin it down that way simply because men are allowed to walk around bare-chested or with minimal torso clothing and are not immediately thought of as projecting sex the way similarly attired women inevitably are. This speaks to a double standard in the way we codify sex in terms of body parts and imagery. Now. With that out of the way, I'd certainly offer that TLG isn't merely making more detailed fig torsos but rather creating idealized models of the masculine and feminine image, which while appealing to their target demographic (boys for most themes), also reinforces pernicious stereotypes. For another example of this same type of thing, look at how the animals in the Friends theme are modified to appear more soft-featured, cute, and exaggerated. This is meant to present an ideal of those animals, a cuteness maximum, to appeal to their target demographic (young girls). The idea here is that girls naturally like cute little animals more than more realistic ones, hence the stark difference between dogs in Friends and dogs in other themes. Note here that TLG has added a new Husky dog that nicely mixes both influences and thereby represents an animal fig that appeals to all kinds of people without underlining any stereotypes. The husky dog is a great example of why TLG is on the right track and cares about these issues. You're right. You did say that you believe feminism has more important fights. At the time, I missed that and thought you were stating that as a fact. I'd say that it's not just about opinions in the sense that "all opinions are created equal" or "everyone is entitled to their opinion". An opinion is only as good as the argument that supports it. I think you and I would agree to that much. You may also agree that one of feminism's core interests is in limiting the amount of gender stereotyping and segregation that goes on in all walks of life. To this effect, the debate around Lego fits well both as a point of reference for the issues and a point of reference for a company that does well in facing up to them rather than brushing them aside or ignoring them as many do and would have TLG do in kind. Look at this thread for examples of hands on the ears, eyes closed, la-la-la I can't hear you type of thinking on this subject. I haven't argued that this is such an issue. Only that it is one and that TLG has taken steps in dealing with it. What else can I offer? I need not submit evidence that Lego in itself causes harm when there's plenty of evidence to support the idea that reinforcing gender stereotypes and segregating play based on stereotypes is harmful with regard to equality. In this case, we've discussed equality in terms of equal representation and respect for women in minifigs, a subject TLG must take seriously given their recent behavior. We can also talk about equality in terms of changing our expectations and prescriptions. People don't understand that ideas like "this is what a woman looks like" or "this is what girls like to do" are constructed. As a result, they take these images and concepts axiomatically without realizing they are fluid and subject to evolution same as anything else. There is a demand that these stereotypes and models be abandoned or at least modified to better fit an equality-driven model of social good. Forgive me, I've said a lot of stuff in this thread and answered more than just you in various posts. I do not think removing all feminine signifiers is a solution. When I discuss variety what I mean is, as someone else pointed out, that if you've got to have breasts and makeup, at least have other kinds of body types and other kinds of beauty signifiers than those two most basic and adolescent. So I don't mind if breast prints remain. I don't mind if TLG sexualizes some female minifigs so long as they represent more variety to show that women do come in all shapes and sizes. They've recently done a lot to do this. Most people are treating me like I'm calling TLG out for their current behavior when I'm doing anything but. Most of my criticisms have limited scope because it must always be remembered that TLG has made strides in course-correcting and representing more variety in female representation. So it seems unnecessary to present a solution other than what TLG have already taken it upon themselves to do. Most of my responses in this thread that mention sexualization or try to demonstrate it were about whether or not that's what is happening. I haven't begun to talk about why it may be a bad thing if it is happening. It's more that it signals some underlying problems with TLG's gender policies that are in the process of being dealt with. I think I started off in this thread by agreeing with someone else that it's a thing and by saying it's occasionally inappropriate. But I know that not all female figs are printed with emphasizes breasts and curves. Some are, and others have breast lines but they are not emphasized in a sexualized manner. As others have pointed out, this speaks to the variety that I have mentioned as being crucial to improving the quality of representation in female figs vs. their male counterparts. Anyway, thanks for taking this subject seriously and for taking the time to read my posts and treat me with respect. Sorry if I came off disrespectful at any point. You'll notice I've been holding up this side of the debate pretty much alone all day and it's taken a toll. You'll notice I've been having many different disagreements throughout the thread and most are not as fruitful as this has hopefully been. I think what I'm gonna do here on out is ignore baiting posts and people just trying to shut down this discussion in general. I'll focus on people like you, Ardelon, who are actually interested in this subject.

Sigh. No one is trying to get TLG's attention or try to get them to "change their ways". They are already changing to be more representational and female friendly in general. No one is saying detailed female torsos are a problem, it's just which details and with what degree of emphasis that can be criticized. As for the "don't like it, don't buy it" attitude... that's completely trivial and simplistic. Severity matters. You can like and support something and have small reservations. Very little in life is all or nothing. Yes, it would make more sense for people complaining to quit supporting a product if their issue is severe enough. I don't think anyone on EB has that attitude. We're all Lego enthusiasts criticizing or discussing from an insider, friendly perspective. No one is being overzealous and no one is campaigning. Why is it that everyone in the "who cares?" or "everything's a-ok" camp is making it like those with concerns are waving torches and pitchforks? It's come up again and again in this thread and it's nonsense. I would agree with you that most of the young people receiving or buying TLG themed sets aren't overly concerned with any gender debate around Lego. That said, AFOLs who are parents have a vested interest in how toys are marketed to their kids and what stereotypes or images those toys reinforce. In other words, people have every right to talk about this and to criticize if they feel that there are criticisms to be made.Trying to close down criticism the way you and others are is cowardly to the extreme. If there's no problem, TLG and its choice can hold up under scrutiny and critical analysis.

Gorgeous work. All your very unique techniques and stylistic choices are working for you here, Gunman. I think the saws and boat are the most impressively creative uses of parts in the build, but the waterwheel is great (though it looks sharp and scary enough to be orcish or something) too. You really have a knack for making gigantic builds look like childs' play.

Hey Bregir! Your name is super similar to Muninn Ranch's stablemaster! The next installment is finished and waiting to be photographed as it's 1/3 bigger than this one. I will probably retire the chobos for a while after that, but they'll likely resurface somewhere in my Mitgardia builds since the response has been so great.

Yeah that is just crazy epic in scale. Very impressive work all around. How did you get so many of those figs?

It's the "first world problem" thing I took issue with. Saying you contributed nothing was not an attack. To attack you, I'd have to say something about you, not your post. There's another commentor here who didn't backread so I did have to repeat myself. Other than that, more people enter the discussion and quote me so I have to respond. Just like right now. The merit of an argument doesn't rest with how many people agree with it. Is someone supposed to shut up just because people disagree with them? Besides, plenty of people in this thread have also argued the same side as I have. I don't think there's much point in playing a numbers game when it comes to ideas. Who believes something more, or how many people share the belief, doesn't make it more correct. That one woman did disagree with some part of what I was saying, but also was targeting other comments others' have made. In any case, her posts weren't easy to follow... And there are other problems besides variety. We've covered quite a wide array of related issues in this thread, all circling around how TLG prints female figs. There are some problems, but we've talked a lot about how things are improving. The discussion has long since moved away from discussing TLG directly and into arguments among ourselves about this or that point. Or you could, I dunno, read the thread.

If you don't have anything to say, don't say anything. That this thread exists does not require you to contribute to it. If you think this discussion is pointless, stupid, irrelevant, etc then why are you wasting your time telling us that? Seems like you must care on some level if you feel the need to comment. If you want to go around making claims about others' need for therapy, you come off as more than rude. Please contribute something useful and avoid directly or implicitly attacking other members of EB on a personal level.

Totally. And torso prints like this one tend to demonstrate TLG's willingness to combat this issue. The hilarious part is how many people are arguing that this is a baseless, stupid, or irrelevant discussion (all of which are dudes) while TLG itself is way ahead of the game on tackling it in their own quiet way. We're not so much talking about a bad situation that needs to change right now here. We're talking about an old situation that is already changing. Thanks to how socially responsible and awesome TLG is as a company. Too bad not all their fans are as enlightened about gender issues.

Yeah, this is a prime example of some guy who doesn't have anything useful to say trying to kill a discussion by trivializing it.

That's a solid, even-handed point about the subtle differences. That said, I would probably still use that torso as male if there's no breast lines on the sweater undershirt.

I don't have a problem with TLG printing breast shapes. That's fair enough where appropriate. But look at the two very different torso prints I showed in a previous comment. Note the difference. If you, as a woman, want to see cleavage and so on in minfigs then that is a point of view we all have to consider but it by no means single-handedly erases my concerns or those of others who think TLG might have made some errors of judgment. And anyway, this isn't a case of bodyshaming. No one is suggesting we remove female bodies from Lego or anything that ridiculous. I mean, there are some here who think the hourglass-figure printing goes too far. What do you think? Do you think all women should or do have hourglass-figures and big round breasts? Do you think that, if they don't, that they should and therefore TLG is right to represent women like this, as a sort of idealized version of feminity using commodified body parts and representations of them (low-cut tops and cleavage are commodified representations of breasts, I'd say)? You're just contributing to something you and the rest of EB could ignore. I dunno, your logic is all backwards to me. What trampoline feeling? I'm not sure anyone is clear on what you mean by that. Anyway, you're right that there's lots of variety in male figs. I disagree that there's lots of variety in female figs. It's weird that you don't see this since you'd have to be living in a dreamworld to not notice the ratios of female to male minifigs in sets and themes. By virtue of this if nothing else, there is way way less variety in female figs. TLG is taking steps to fix this so we're all happy about that element of the issue. I've said before that I don't think TLG is "selling sex" per se. But that emphasizing sexualized depictions of female bodies amounts to that incidentally. TLG acknowledges this issue by improving on it. That's why they're a great company. In other words, their actions demonstrate that they are trying to find a happy medium on this issue. They don't agree with you that there isn't one. I do think you may have a point about what the two different torsos demonstrate. To the purpose of arguing that there is sexualized vs. nonsexualized female imagery in female minifigs, I think the comparison works well. But it also demonstrats what you're saying: that there actually already is variety in female figs. That's not something I ever denied, but it's worthwhile to keep it in mind here so thanks for that. But you have to stop putting words in my mouth, man. I never said I don't care what non-feminist women think. I just said anecdotes don't prove much and therefore I don't care what she thinks about this issue. If she were here speaking for herself and presenting a cogent argument, I'd care plenty. It demonstrates bias because it's your anecdote that supports your point of view. I haven't been using anecdotes because of that. I have them, same as anyone.

Majority of who? People in this thread? Obviously not. People in EB? Maybe, but if so they don't have to (and aren't anyway) comment here. People on the internet? That seems debatable. People in the world? Now we're overshooting our scope a tad, eh? No poll here would really make much of a difference as the sample size and demographics on EB are skewed. But you're welcome to try it. It won't prove anything to me, but go ahead man. No one's stopping you. If you really think this is so irrelevant and you really don't care, why are you commenting here?

I don't really understand why you think calling it irrelevant makes it irrelevant. If it were irrelevant, no one would talk about it. In a thread about female minifigs, what could be more relevant than talking about female minifigs? Do you mean culturally irrelevant? Only if you live under a rock called The Past 50 Years of Social Progress on Gender. Is it dark under your rock?

Have a look at my flickr for this build, if you don't mind. It'll show how I connected it. It's not just laid together, but I agree that it kind of looks that way. Might be easier to make some concrete suggestions if you see more of how I did it.

Yeah, you've got it all figured out buddy.