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

Are humans eating Pokemon ethical?

  • Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. Pokemon X
  3. Are humans eating Pokemon ethical?

User Info: KingTumbleweed

4 years ago#91
Mr_Snorlax1986 posted...
KingTumbleweed posted...
Eat the more common, stupid ones. Magiarp, Basculin and Pidgey are all fair game. But not Farfetch'd, we don't want the poor thing extinct.

The only sign I see of Basculin intelligence is in Pokepark, but Magikarp and Pidgey have shown intelligence in the anime. Magikarp's anger at James, and Pidgey working with other Pokemon to build a playground.

There's your problem.
<('__'< ) <( '__' )> ( >'__')> ^( '__' ^) (^ '__')^ ^( ' o ' )^
Official Ferrothorn(Spahgetti) of Pokemon X/Y boards.

User Info: Laughingman_S

4 years ago#92
May in the morning:

May's dinner:
"It doesn't matter who we are. What matters is our plan. You should have respected my authoritah."

User Info: Insanititious

4 years ago#93
I'd love to eat a Lilligant.

Proud Member of Team Galactic.
Official Gothitelle of the Pokemon XY Board and Married to Loli of the Year, Marley.

User Info: Uru_Zeph

4 years ago#94
Mr_Snorlax1986 posted...
Uru_Zeph posted...
This all just kinda boils down to Nintendo (or whoever plans the shows) sending conflicting messages with "Pokemon." In the end, Pokemon are basically portrayed as sometimes sentient animals. It's like, nearly every wild Pokemon they encounter in the show acts just like a wild animal does. They attack each other to fight over territory, or just for some food. Then, once they get captured, all of a sudden they start taking on "sentient" qualities. Sometimes wild pokemon start to take on these qualities too, but only ever as a plot device and when interacting with non-wild Pokemon.

Fact of the matter is, Pokemon the TV show is a very poorly developed fiction. There's very little plot progression, continuity, or character development. It's like they refuse to flesh out their characters a little more or let them grow up or be anything besides flat and static. Also note, there's very few consistent characters; generally it's a party of three kids traveling together without much of a point beyond running into the occasional gym or contest. I believe that the Pokemon are given such human like characteristics to fulfill the certain lack of any other personality that the show has. Obviously, that's not the only reason; people, especially kids, are attracted to the idea of these friendly creatures that they could come to communicate and become friends with. And, in a show about battling these creatures, to not give them some sort of sentience would actually make the battles look MORE like glorified cock fights. I mean, at least if they are sentient, that implies some sort of willing participation, right? It's clearly not the same, then, as training a not-as-sentient dog to be a fighter when it didn't know any better or have any sort of will to be for or against it.

I guess I'll leave things with this; I pretty much ignore the TV show when it comes to how I envision the Pokemon world, because I refuse to acknowledge a world where the main character remains ten or eleven (don't remember) for over fourteen seasons as legitimate. The first season alone, canonically, took longer than a year.

The games come much closer to what I imagine Pokemon actually is; a creature collection game where the Pokemon have very similar mannerisms and processes as animals and are mysteriously forced into submission of a trainer (which they normally eventually grow to like) after being captured in a ball. Sometimes characters in the game make remarks about their Pokemon being their friends, but people in our world talk like that about their pets all the time too, so I see no conflict here.

As a final word, let's not forget that the Pokedex entries themselves (and some of the bookcases) in the games confirm that certain pokemon are, in fact, eaten. It's not treated as something abhorrent or unusual, thought it's never directly presented as a topic of the games or show either. I imagine it won't ever be approached with any sense of seriousness, because then the writers of Pokemon would have to acknowledge that little conflict of portrayal.

That's a pretty good post, but in the end I still disagree. I can't really write a lengthy post, but it's just that it's really a matter of opinion and interpretation.

Fair enough, to each their own. However, I don't think there's any getting around the fact that the video games definitely reference eating pokemon like it's a normal thing, and most pokedex entries make them out to sound like little more than animals with certain instinctual or behavioral patterns and no degree of ethics comprehension. Hydreigon and the Frillish/Jellicent lines come to mind. Let's not forget that the video games are the base of the Pokemon franchise, and *did* come before the show, and therefor have more weight as canon.

User Info: Hemerukio

4 years ago#95
Insanititious posted...
I'd love to eat a Lilligant.


Same boat as you.
Gen 5 FemAce is mai waifu.

User Info: Meta289

4 years ago#96
Would vegetarians be able to eat non-animal based Grass types?
Fact: Things are so much better when taken at face value.
  1. Boards
  2. Pokemon X
  3. Are humans eating Pokemon ethical?

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.

  • Topic Archived