[FFML] [Fic][Ranma][Pokewomen][Crossover][Dark][Lemon]NoTurningBackPrologue 1

[Farzad Mansouri]

You arguments are very persuasive.  What I find
lacking in the setting (and what prevents me from
writing anything Poke-related) is the fact that the
Poke-girl become 'submissive' or more appropriately
dependent on someone capturing them and taming them. 
I seriously can't see them forming into armies and
nearly wiping out the human race if all you have to do
is tag and bag them in a pokeball.  And while the idea
of having a devoted harem sounds awesome personally
I'd like just one special woman who likes me for who I
am and not because hormones and psychological
conditioning (better know as 'brainwashing') dictates
it. 


--- Juan Pablo Garibotti <jp_garibotti at hotmail.com>
wrote:

>  
> I feel you misunderstood what he was saying. Looking
> at the pokegirl universe, and pokegirls themselves,
> a few differences between them and humans become
> evident.
>  
> First, the fact that they only remain functional so
> long as they are 'tamed' regularly, as the original
> "Wild Horses" put it. Second, taming has the
> additional effect of making the pokegirl submissive
> to the tamer. The pokegirl is several times stronger
> than a human, and has an array of supernatural
> powers, yet after taming they do not attempt to use
> force even against the cruelest tamers, despite the
> fact that they would win. While the pokeball's
> brainwashing has some part in it, it appears to be a
> reinforcement of an already existing psycological
> dependence. This is a psycological dependence not
> found in regular humans. 
>  
> There are a number of other differences, but I
> believe these two are the most relevant to the
> discussion of pokegirl rights (and human rights and
> responsibilities regarding them).
>  
> The first, and most important question is, do
> pokegirls have the right to be sentient? As anyone
> familiar with the setting knows, a pokegirl's
> sentience is not an inherent trait. A feral pokegirl
> is effectively an animal, they can't think. This is
> a fact widely demonstrated in the setting. Going
> through the wilderness is dangerous because they'll
> behave instinctively and if they're territorial they
> might attack, or if they're hungry or for whatever
> other reason.
>  
> The kneejerk reaction is "yes, they have a right to
> be sentient! After all, noone would dispute the
> right of a human to keeping their minds." However,
> giving the entire pokegirl population sentience is
> impossible. They outnumber humanity, and they each
> require an taming to go from feral to sentient. If
> you agree that all pokegirls have a right to be
> sentient, you'd have to go out and take each and
> every pokegirl and tame them. You'd then have to
> keep them tamed, so they don't revert to the feral
> condition. The pokegirl universe doesn't have te
> manpower for such an undertaking.
>  
> I am assuming that if you agree someone has a right,
> then you agree everyone else has an obligation to
> ensure that right is protected.
>  
> The logical conclusion is, then, that you can't
> afford to give them all the right to sentience. And
> by points I'll be bringing up later, I'd point out
> now that given their particular biologies, forcing
> sentience on them is also immoral.
>  
> So you are now in the position that you have to
> decide which pokegirls have a right to sentience. As
> you mentioned, sentience is the fundamental quality
> that makes one eligible for a host of other rights.
> The pokegirls who have a right to be sentient should
> be treated "as humans", while the ones that don't
> will have to be given rights between those of a
> human and those we give animals, because on a
> practical level that is where they are. They are not
> sentient, but under a given set of circumstances
> they might become, and we wouldn't want them to
> start their life "as humans" with the scars of
> having being treated as animals before.
>  
> My own personal view on what would be practicable
> and moral is that once tamed and sentient, they have
> a right not to be reduced to animals again. However,
> this is just the beggining of a mess of rights that
> will have to necessarily be different to those of
> humans.
>  
> So, you have a sentient pokegirl. Humans can go
> without sex for as long as they wish, and this
> doesn't result in anything other than some
> frustration for the individual. A pokegirl that
> chooses to go without sex will eventually lose her
> senses, and become a danger to herself and other
> around. Humans cannot be forced to have sex against
> their will, not according to western moral values
> anyway (the ideal we're trying to apply to pokegirls
> in this exercise). However, by trying to protect
> this right for pokegirls, we find that we're
> infringing on everyone else's right to not be
> endangered. So, should a pokegirl have the same
> protection against being forced into some form of
> sexual act that humans have? Again, their biology
> leads to having to set a number of situations where
> infringing on the pokegirls rights is ok, meaning
> they only have the right under a given set of
> circumstances.
>  
> Then there's the psychological dependece aspect to
> consider. In human relationships, two consenting
> adults can do whatever they want and part ways if
> things don't work out. Introducing a pokegirl, a
> relationship now has to have a few caveats. The
> obvious things are that the human should not "take
> advantage". However, there are some other aspects to
> consider, where the human himself needs to be
> protected. If the relationship doesn't work, and
> given we've established a right to sentience for the
> pokegirl, who is supposed to keep her sane until she
> finds another regular source of taming? Given the
> psichological dependence (meaning the pokegirl is
> unlikely to be the source of the breakup), is the
> human supposed to stick to her forever? I said
> before humans can't be forced into sexual acts they
> do not desire. Would this hold water in
> human-pokegirl relationships? Should the human be
> expected to keep taming the pokegirl after things
> went bad, so that the pokegirl doesnt lose her mind
> or suffer psichological issues?
>  
> In short, your argument that the biological issues
> are nonexistant and that as sentient beings
> pokegirls are entitled to the same rights as any
> human is simplistic and misses a very big deal of
> the point. Yes, there are some things which are
> terrible, but in the human-pokegirl interaction in
> particular, not even rape is clearcut. There are
> situations in which forcing a human or pokegirl to
> have sex even when they don't wish to becomes
> necessary because pokegirls become attached to
> humans they sleep with and become dangerous if they
> don't have sex.
>  
> The subject is a lot more convoluted, I just meant
> to bring up some of the more glaring points. I'm
> certain quite a few fics can be done on just how
> "pokegirl-human equality" could be constructed in
> the setting.
>
_________________________________________________________________
> Discover the new Windows Vista
>
http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista&mkt=en-US&form=QBRE
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
>
http://www.chez-vrolet.net/pipermail/ffml/attachments/20080906/38cc5577/attachment.htm
> 
> 
> --- 
>          .-------Anime/Manga Fanfiction Mailing
> List--------.
>          |   Administrators -
> ffml-admins at chez-vrolet.net   |
>          |   Unsubscribing -
> ffml-request at chez-vrolet.net 
=== message truncated ===


----------

A man earns the title 'Great' by having power and NOT abusing it.
-Old Persian philosophy