This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

How can people be attracted to gardevoir and lopunny?

#371pbandjamesPosted 8/26/2013 3:15:53 AM
Twilight_Sonata posted...
I never meant to imply the only factor. if you think that something that I said is incorrect, mistaken, or oversimplified, I invite you to correct me and explain why. I don't appreciate anti-intellectualism from statements suggesting nobody should participate in conversations about things that they're not experts in. Nobody's gonna learn that way


Multiple times, you said if Pokemon were sapient, they could consent. This is misleading, and by itself incorrect. Your examples are misleading.

I'm saying, because the topic is already not about such things, I'm not going to specifically correct people and purposefully take the topic further off topic into intricate consent discussions. Nobody needs a lesson about whatever you want in a subject; that's just silly and ignorant. If somebody makes a topic about posting your favorite Pokemon, do you think that's a good place to have a discussion on quantum physics? The answer should be no; the TC in that case made the topic specifically because they wanted to talk about people's favorite Pokemon.

I'm also not against people discussing things they're not experts in; what I'm against is people who seem like they haven't even read three Wikipedia articles about the subject saying things like their thoughts are the greatest in the universe. It's just a pet peeve of mine.

And I'm pretty sure most people don't come to GameFAQs for classroom lessons. I'm not suggesting that we should never participate in intellectual conversations, merely there's a time and a place, and you obviously don't care.

does need to be in the open, it's never in the open, people say that it doesn't need to be in the open. It not being in the open is what keeps people ignorant, because it means that people never see it if they're not specifically looking for it. Responses of "Have that conversation, but have it over there" are just further cover up conversations been covered up for far too long, even if that's not what they intend to do or realize they're doing.


Have it way over there? You can have it on this very board if you make your own topic, and with it being a current "hot" discussion topic, you're almost guaranteed 100 posts, at the least. I didn't tell you to go in a dark corner; I told you to make your own topic. Nobody's covering up anything. You can make a very open on-topic topic. And if you make a topic, everybody who visits the board will see it listed, so that really makes it the opposite of "covered up."

And I think people should have the choice to search for it, considering this is an entertainment site. Not everybody wants to open a topic to read a deeply off-topic deep, intellectual discussion.
---
Professor Layton in Survivor: Smash Bros. A true gentlemen leaves no puzzle unsolved.
Game news is the best news.
#372pbandjamesPosted 8/26/2013 3:15:58 AM
Twilight_Sonata posted...
initial topic has already been solved. Multiple times. Continues to flourish alongside the tangent. The conversation has just developed and evolved, as is natural for conversations to do. no point in being upset about it.


So, you decide when topics have been "solved" now? That's a little arrogant.

Topics on a board aren't conventional conversations. You don't offer different topics to your friends, pick one, and then have random people chime in. That's more akin to something like a club meeting, in which people don't usually come in and change the topic out of the blue.

If it's okay for me to call somebody out, why is it my responsibility to take it to PMs? Why do I have to be the one to go out of my way to seek a more separated or private place for discussion? Why shouldn't it be the people who get overly defensive about being called out? Why shouldn't they be the ones you get mad at for getting a thread off topic? Why don't you tell them to PM me or start another thread if they want to continue the discussion? I'm sure that you'll say, as you have before, that I should be the bigger person, but I think that a double standard. I think it's very telling who in a conversation is expected to need to be polite and who isn't.


I'm telling you, because you specifically started and continued to argue with me. If the user you were previously arguing with responded, I would have told him the same things. If you consciously choose not to act responsibly, that's your fault. I'm not saying the onus is solely on you, but if you ignore it, then you're choosing to be an ass. You're not a special case, and I'm not biased, if that's the implication here. I've already said that, in fact:

pbandjames posted...
And I'm not just singling out you; I feel the same about everyone who does this, including in this topic.


So, let's stop emphasizing pronouns like a child trying to shift blame, and accept partial responsibility. Also, I can't find a single post where I said you should be the bigger person. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe I've said that. You should both have acted differently - I've already said that previously.

And it's not very telling who's expected to be polite and who isn't, because everybody in a conversation should be polite, to a point. There aren't exceptions to be an ass.
---
Professor Layton in Survivor: Smash Bros. A true gentlemen leaves no puzzle unsolved.
Game news is the best news.
#373pbandjamesPosted 8/26/2013 3:17:25 AM
LightningAce11 posted...
Do you think it's right to have sexual thoughts about something that isn't the same species as you?


Considering that people have rape and murder fantasies, and are arguably accepted, I can't say I consider interspecies sex fantasies that bad. If it's a fantasy without obsession, I don't think it really matters.

In the case of reality with Pokemon, though, it wouldn't work in our current systems, and I don't believe it should be really be possible.

Pokemon, while being intelligent, are generally not capable of clearly and explicitly communicating consent. Implied consent is usually not accepted, because it's too interpretive and undefined, and could lead to things like date rape. Even if you could still somehow argue for implied consent, there's still the issue of the Pokemon not being able to clearly and explicitly communicate loss of consent during intercourse. Things need to be clear, so that a grunt of pain and displeasure is not misinterpreted. The Pokemon also needs to be intelligent enough to fully understand what it's doing, the consent it's giving, and that it can take that consent away at any time.

These same arguments apply to Elves and Vulcans. If you don't clearly understand what they want or when they want to stop, then intercourse would be risky, and might get you in trouble and hurt them. The difference between Pokemon, and Elves and Vulcans, would be that a good amount of people at least understand the Elvish and Vulcan languages, so they could report sexual crimes against them, while next to nobody understands the Pokemon ones, which makes reporting crimes a complicated mess.

If only ten people could really have fair relationships with Pokemon, do you think it's fair to say that those ten people can, but nobody else? Should you ban species intercourse between humans and Pokemon altogether, because the complications are too much legally, it would set precedent for some and not others, and it could cause more people to engage in the act illegally with such a double standard? Or do you allow it for the happiness of only those ten, and any future others that could fairly communicate? The problem with Pokemon is that only a few could actually be declared capable of fair intercourse, while the Elves and Vulcans don't actually have this problem, because their languages and intelligence are generally the same and can be assessed and the languages learned.
---
Professor Layton in Survivor: Smash Bros. A true gentlemen leaves no puzzle unsolved.
Game news is the best news.
#374Twilight_SonataPosted 8/26/2013 3:34:44 AM(edited)
pbandjames posted...
I'm saying, because the topic is already not about such things, I'm not going to specifically correct people and purposefully take the topic further off topic into intricate consent discussions.

If you're not willing to do that, then your objection is not useful, and nobody has learned anything from it. Here, how about I reply to your points in similarly uselessly shallow ways? Let's see how productive of a conversation we can get.

Not everybody wants to open a topic to read a deeply off-topic deep, intellectual discussion... And I'm pretty sure most people don't come to GameFAQs for classroom lessons. I'm not suggesting that we should never participate in intellectual conversations, merely there's a time and a place, and you obviously don't care.

You are correct that I do not care.

Nobody's covering up anything. You can make a very open on-topic topic. And if you make a topic, everybody who visits the board will see it listed, so that really makes it the opposite of "covered up."

*facepalm*

If the user you were previously arguing with responded, I would have told him the same things.

I do not believe you.

And it's not very telling who's expected to be polite and who isn't, because everybody in a conversation should be polite, to a point. There aren't exceptions to be an ass.

Good lord, if you only knew how telling this was.
#375Twilight_SonataPosted 8/26/2013 3:39:30 AM
I'm going to double-post here just because I'm curious about something:
Are you confusing sapience and sentience?
#376Twilight_SonataPosted 8/26/2013 3:50:46 AM
Aaand triple post:

pbandjames posted...
Pokemon, while being intelligent, are generally not capable of clearly and explicitly communicating consent.... Elves and Vulcans don't actually have this problem, because their languages and intelligence are generally the same and can be assessed and the languages learned.

I'm pretty sure Meowth and N have proven, the former for a very long time now, that Pokemon have language and that many have intelligence easily comparable to that of humans. And even if they didn't, Pokemon aren't real, so it's not hard to fantasize about alternatives where that is the case, as I'd be willing to bet most people with Pokemon attractions do.
#377CA0001Posted 8/26/2013 4:12:45 AM
Let me just throw this out, Pokemon have shown themselves in all media, games, anime, manga etc. to be as sentient and conscious as humans are.

And to be even more appalling, research on dolphins have reached a level in recent years that it can't be scientifically proven that they are another intelligent species beside humans living on Earth.

They have all the requirements to be addressed as "persons", they have language, culture, creative and artistic expression, ability to understand abstract concepts, reciprocity, altruism, ability to take part in games, make tools and use them etc. many more qualities that we humans pride ourselves in.

The only thing that makes us different animals from dolphins are our physical form and culture. They didn't evolve a need to build buildings and make money like us, but they evolved sonic pulse cannons to stun and kill fish to eat.

It is not that animals are stupid beings that can't think for themselves, its just that we have not yet accumulated enough research on them to conclude whether they have intelligence.

But back on the topic, as I've stated many times, people are attracted to qualities of characters by form and content regardless of whether they are fictional or real.
---
FC: 0518 8972 2483 (Black) 0046 9893 2351 (White2)
#378pbandjamesPosted 8/26/2013 6:15:58 AM
Twilight_Sonata posted...
Here, how about I reply to your points in similarly uselessly shallow ways? Let's see how productive of a conversation we can get.


My original complaint was that this whole topic became a completely unrelated argument, in which some people subtly spread misinformation, and that these people acted or seemed falsely superior in opinion. So no, my objection still stands. Being off topic is indeed an actual thing.

I think you've already your established your immaturity, but explore it further if you must.

You are correct that I do not care.

Which makes you an ass, because you are aware that you are doing something wrong, yet you won't correct yourself.

*facepalm*

Because having a devoted topic is a bad thing? I guess you feel some need to make your own topics inside other people's topics, rather than create your own.

I do not believe you.

If you can't accept the truth, then just continue believing that everyone who argues with you is "wrong" and "out to get you, specifically" then, since that's what you've shown to me. I found the both of you annoying. I've been arguing with you because you started arguing with me. Did the other user? No. Could they have? Yes. Would I have the same responses? Pretty close, probably, depending on theirs.

That you can't accept you begun the argument between us, and that you believe I was somehow "waiting for you," or whatever you believe, is amusing to me.

Good lord, if you only knew how telling this was.

I'm not sure how believing that people should be polite to each other most of the time is "telling," but alright. You must know everything, from the level of condescension in your post.

If you only knew how telling your entire post was.

I'm going to double-post here just because I'm curious about something:
Are you confusing sapience and sentience?


No. Are you?

I'm pretty sure Meowth and N have proven, the former for a very long time now, that Pokemon have language and that many have intelligence easily comparable to that of humans. And even if they didn't, Pokemon aren't real, so it's not hard to fantasize about alternatives where that is the case, as I'd be willing to bet most people with Pokemon attractions do.


By comparing Elves and Vulcans to Pokemon collectively, you're acting like the species is one group like Elves or Vulcans, but really, Pokemon are multiple species represented by one word, while Elves and Vulcans are just one species each.

I never said that Pokemon do not have a language. Pokemon do have a language, but it is seemingly impossible for regular humans to learn and use in communication, much like in our own world. N and Mewtwo are just special scientific anomalies in the Pokemon world. Their presence doesn't invalidate anything I said, because their abilities aren't able to be taught, shared, or genetically handed down. And the intelligence of Pokemon is not clear in every case, as they can't properly communicate. Regardless of their intelligence, if they can't communicate, they can't feasibly have fair intercourse in every case.

And yes, people change things in fantasies. I'm not arguing against the fantasies at all, as I've already said.
---
Professor Layton in Survivor: Smash Bros. A true gentlemen leaves no puzzle unsolved.
Game news is the best news.
#379DunnoBroPosted 8/26/2013 6:35:28 AM
Degeneracy.
---
>Implying I don't actually know
3DS FC: 3308 4781 6052
#380ImmaLelouchPosted 8/26/2013 8:00:46 AM
TC, wut r u doin. TC, stahp
---
http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BGGuEnPCIAApMxP.jpg:large
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BLcaYUgCMAAEJ_Y.jpg