James Bond cannot be genderbent

[Blood Brain Barrier]

This sounds like a pretty fun movie to watch. I'd enjoy it, but it wouldn't be Bond, it would be its own thing.

If the movie goes through literally all the same beats as a Bond movie except for the inversion of penis to vagina ratio, then I think I'd be compelled to describe it as a Bond movie, because to do otherwise is to say that the only Bond characteristic that matters toward his definition is his penis. Bond stops being defined by his actions, and is reduced to his cock n balls.*

Do you believe, in defiance of biology, physiology and psychology, that the only difference between a man and woman is genitalia? If so, why?

 

[Jute88]

You can genderbend him (or anyone for that matter), but I feel that it wouldn't be James Bond anymore. I feel him being a man is somewhat integral part of him. Bond being a woman would feel a bit off, atleast to me. If you want cool female spies, there's Joanna Dark and, um.... frell, I'm drawing a blank.

 

[JimB]

This sounds like a pretty fun movie to watch. I'd enjoy it, but it wouldn't be Bond, it would be its own thing.

If the movie goes through literally all the same beats as a Bond movie except for the inversion of penis to vagina ratio, then I think I'd be compelled to describe it as a Bond movie, because to do otherwise is to say that the only Bond characteristic that matters toward his definition is his penis. Bond stops being defined by his actions, and is reduced to his cock n balls.

Do you believe, in defiance of biology, physiology and psychology, that the only difference between a man and woman is genitalia?

I'm not a hundred percent sure what's going on here. Do you think that's what I said? Or do you think I hold real people and fictional characters to similar standards?

 

[aeroblaster]

If you want to know what James Bond's character would be like if it was genderbent, just watch the Kingsman movie and observe the Lancelot character. She is essentially a female James Bond.

 

[Woodsey]

I think a female James Bond would be cool. Not because the character is female but because it would finally put to rest the character vs code-name argument.

There is no argument, the code-name's always been wrong. Skyfall was the latest nail in the coffin but there has been continuity between different Bond actors before - Moore laying flowers at Tracy's grace, for instance. It only exists because some people can't accept, for whatever reason, and almost exclusively for this one character, that different actors have played the same character, and that that character has undergone several soft-reboots.You would never bother arguing, for instance, that Christian Bale and Ben Affleck's Bruce Waynes / Batmen are 'codename' versions of Kevin Conroy's just to excuse the change in actor.

(I really don't know why but the whole thing really rustles my jimmies.)

 

[Vault101]

snip.

gender-bending bond at least as an "idea" makes us consider our veiws on how we veiw gender

just what is a "female bond" anyway? is it a highly femme heterosexual woman who goes after men? or is she a lesbain? can the dynamic of the former ever truly be the same as the original bond? my answer is no because its a subversion and subversion cannot have the same weight as what they are subverting

 

[Bat Vader]

I think a female James Bond would be cool. Not because the character is female but because it would finally put to rest the character vs code-name argument.

There is no argument, the code-name's always been wrong. Skyfall was the latest nail in the coffin but there has been continuity between different Bond actors before - Moore laying flowers at Tracy's grace, for instance. It only exists because some people can't accept, for whatever reason, and almost exclusively for this one character, that different actors have played the same character, and that that character has undergone several soft-reboots.You would never bother arguing, for instance, that Christian Bale and Ben Affleck's Bruce Waynes / Batmen are 'codename' versions of Kevin Conroy's just to excuse the change in actor.

(I really don't know why but the whole thing really rustles my jimmies.)

For me it's because the idea of a super secret agent using their own name while on missions just seems incredibly stupid. I also hate continuities that use different actors meant to be the same character. If each Bond was a different Bond in a separate universe that would be one thing but saying it's been the same guy since the 60's who hasn't aged with no mention of different technologies or why he looks different just seems like a massive plot-hole.

While Bale and Affleck play the same character it isn't the same Batman/Wayne. It's Batman/Wayne set in a different movie universe. If someone high up in the movie studio came out and said that each new Bond actor is a different Bond in a separate movie universe I could accept that. As a continuity though with the different decades that have gone by a code-name makes so much more sense than an ageless immortal that gets plastic surgery every so often.

 

[Silvanus]

can the dynamic of the former ever truly be the same as the original bond? my answer is no because its a subversion and subversion cannot have the same weight as what they are subverting

It can have greater weight, though, of the original trope is so ubiquitous as Bond's hyper-virility is.