Pokemon is a disgusting universe...

Status
Not open for further replies.
GTA is targeted at adults however, as evidenced by the ratings on the box. Aren't you required to be 17 to even buy the game? Pokemon is given to children barely old enough to read, and is often their first introduction to fantasy universes. So the comparison isn't too valid.
 
Yes, as has been said before, if you're so worried about morals, why are you looking at Pokémon? Dogfighting and animal fighting, though cruel, is nothing compared to direct homicide - and there are plenty of games glorifying killing! And besides, there is reasonable evidence that Pokémon battles are completely voluntary (take Iris' Excadrill, for example. When it doesn't wanna fight, Iris never forces him to fight. Nagging, yes, but never forcing.)
 
That means a real bond has to be between them and their trainers, not any type of slavery, which dogfighting is.
Click to expand...

That's like saying there is a "real bond" between a manager and his prize fighter. No, the fighter is who freely chooses to fight. A pokemon is forced to, just like animals are forced to fight or entertain us.

If the animals don't mind, we can watch.
Click to expand...

Animals can't communicate to us intelligently. When you see a rodeo, you can't tell if the horses "don't mind".

Just as Pokémon are groomed and treated with care, that means cockfighting is justified as Pokémon battles, and vice versa/
Click to expand...

It isn't justified. It is still promoting violence for entertainment, at the expense of a pokemon's health.
 
Toujours said:
GTA is targeted at adults however, as evidenced by the ratings on the box. Aren't you required to be 17 to even buy the game? Pokemon is given to children barely old enough to read, and is often their first introduction to fantasy universes. So the comparison isn't too valid.
Click to expand...
No - ratings are merely a system to notify parents of probable offensive content in a game. You could be three if you wanted; anyone can buy those games, if you have the money.

I've heard of five-year-olds who play Call of Duty, so I wouldn't say that that comparison is completely invalid.
 
kylio_27 said:
That's like saying there is a "real bond" between a manager and his prize fighter. No, the fighter is who freely chooses to fight. A pokemon is forced to, just like animals are forced to fight or entertain us.



Animals can't communicate to us intelligently. When you see a rodeo, you can't tell if the horses "don't mind".



It isn't justified. It is still promoting violence for entertainment, at the expense of a pokemon's health.
Click to expand...

Pokemon are shown as having near the intelligence of humans, if not equal and higher. Take Alakazam and Metagross, they're both supposedly much much smarter than humans. They understand human language and can communicate in a rudimentary way with humans, as shown in the anime. Pokemon are not animals, they're Pokemon. You can make real life analogies all you want, but you're working under the assumption that Pokemon are identical to animals except with magical powers, which has been shown in the anime and manga over and over again that that is just not true.

Edit:

No - ratings are merely a system to notify parents of probable offensive content in a game. You could be three if you wanted; anyone can buy those games, if you have the money.

I've heard of five-year-olds who play Call of Duty, so I wouldn't say that that comparison is completely invalid.
Click to expand...

That's false. You can't buy GTA: Vice City unless you are 17 years old, or someone older than that buys it for you. It's rated Mature by the ESRB, which is an age-restricted rating for 17 and over. On the contrary, Pokemon is rated E, which is everyone 6 and above. So while GTA only has to be appropriate enough for 17 year olds, Pokemon has to have appropriate content for 6 year olds.
 
Don't you realize that Pokemon is fake idk how many times we gotta tell you this. The anime is fake and the games are fake. So it's IMPOSSIBLE to harm a pokemon.
 
kylio_27 said:
That's like saying there is a "real bond" between a manager and his prize fighter. No, the fighter is who freely chooses to fight. A pokemon is forced to, just like animals are forced to fight or entertain us.

It isn't justified. It is still promoting violence for entertainment, at the expense of a pokemon's health.
Click to expand...
Again, referring to Iris and Excadrill.

And no - the Pokémon isn't hurt seriously - they merely sustain injuries, ones that can be healed completely. It might be as severe as Paul's beatings to Ash, but in the end, everyone's happy and back to normal.
 
there are plenty of games glorifying killing!
Click to expand...

Yup. It's disgusting.

there is reasonable evidence that Pokémon battles are completely voluntary
Click to expand...

Two roosters(or whatever animal) could just refrain from fighting one another, which would suggest they voluntarily decided not to fight. The problem, however, is that the pokemon universe as a whole promotes this violent entertainment, regardless of whether or not it truly is voluntary.

Just to clarify, I am opposed to prize fighting. It is disgusting, but at least it is two human beings who voluntarily choose to do so, not animals manipulated to do so against their free will.
 
kylio_27 said:
Animals can't communicate to us intelligently. When you see a rodeo, you can't tell if the horses "don't mind".
Click to expand...

Pokemon can communicate with us... they have a happiness level/system and in HG/SS if you look at your Pokemon and press "A" it will tell you how they are doing (good, bad, etc.). Bare in mind this is all programmed meaning it is not real (it is just a game).

Read me: https://www.psypokes.com/lab/happiness.php

kylio_27 said:
It isn't justified. It is still promoting violence for entertainment, at the expense of a pokemon's health.
Click to expand...

WRONG - actually the NDS (or whatever platform the game is on) is calculating the Pokemon's digital (not real) health. These values (of health) are all managed by a numeral system.

EDIT: @OP to get technical you are abusing the NDS (wear and tear) - so can I claim "NDS ABUSE!!!" like you are (but not with Pokemon)?
 
ShinyUmbreon189 said:
Don't you realize that Pokemon is fake idk how many times we gotta tell you this. The anime is fake and the games are fake. So it's IMPOSSIBLE to harm a pokemon.
Click to expand...
Critical thinking is not a skill of yours, it seems.

I'm not trying to mini-mod, but I must point out that all threads in PG tray Pokémon as if it was real.
 
And no - the Pokémon isn't hurt seriously - they merely sustain injuries, ones that can be healed completely.
Click to expand...

Still doesn't justify the promotion of capturing these beings against their free will, and promoting violent entertainment with them.
 
kylio_27 said:
Yup. It's disgusting.



Two roosters(or whatever animal) could just refrain from fighting one another, which would suggest they voluntarily decided not to fight. The problem, however, is that the pokemon universe as a whole promotes this violent entertainment, regardless of whether or not it truly is voluntary.

Just to clarify, I am opposed to prize fighting. It is disgusting, but at least it is two human beings who voluntarily choose to do so, not animals manipulated to do so against their free will.
Click to expand...

Do you not realize that Pokémon battles are an agreement between four living, conscious souls, while the roosters are no more than glorified slaves in this situation?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
kylio_27 said:
Still doesn't justify the promotion of capturing these beings against their free will, and promoting violent entertainment with them.
Click to expand...

Would it be fair for me to see that you are abusing the NDS (wear and tear) - so can I claim "NDS ABUSE!!!" like you are (but not with Pokemon)?

After all since we are talking about abuse of something that is not living why can't I do it to?
 
In the world of Pokemon there are trainers people who battle with them, breeders people who train them and raises their Pokemon, abusers ones who try to harm pokemon (team rocket for example) and trainers who don't even battle their pokemon. So not all people battle their pokemon. The poke ball isn't bad for a pokemon it actually gives it time to rest. If you watched the anime than you will notice that when they are battling trainers will return their pokemon back to their pokeball if they are getting destroyed by another trainers pokemon. Sometimes they will forfeit because they don't wanna harm their pokemon anymore. Also, explain why everytime a trainer sends out a Pokemon it looks happy? They aren't forced to battle. In some of the earlier episodes Ash's pikachu wouldn't battle. If the pokemon didn't wanna battle then it wouldn't battle.
 
Do you not realize that Pokémon battles are an agreement between four living, conscious souls, while the roosters are no more than glorified slaves in this situation?
Click to expand...

You brought up stockholm syndrome before. How did the pokemon get to a conditioned state of compliance(for the most part)? They were living free, were captured, and then all of a sudden enjoy fighting?

And the true point in all of this, is that pokemon promotes senseless violence. If a "trainer" really cared for his/her pokemon, he wouldn't even expose them to such things.
 
Skitty1 said:
Who and what?... ???

Also your avy is making me hungry :(
Click to expand...
When Excadrill doesn't want to battle, Iris doesn't make her. Sure, she'll nag, but it's not the same as forced battling.

kylio_27 said:
You brought up stockholm syndrome before. How did the pokemon get to a conditioned state of compliance(for the most part)? They were living free, were captured, and then all of a sudden enjoy fighting?

And the true point in all of this, is that pokemon promotes senseless violence. If a "trainer" really cared for his/her pokemon, he wouldn't even expose them to such things.
Click to expand...
Then what can we say? We keep animals in their own little Pokeballs, called a backyard.

And why do they all come out with a smile? Why doesn't Iris force Excadrill to fight? Well, it's because it's a fun way of entertainment for everyone, Pokemon and trainer alike.
 
Last edited:
kylio_27 said:
You brought up stockholm syndrome before. How did the pokemon get to a conditioned state of compliance(for the most part)? They were living free, were captured, and then all of a sudden enjoy fighting?

And the true point in all of this, is that pokemon promotes senseless violence. If a "trainer" really cared for his/her pokemon, he wouldn't even expose them to such things.
Click to expand...

The trainer can't walk in grass without the risk of getting attacked so the trainers Pokemon partner doubles as his protection (like a dog or other companion). You would have known this if you actually played the game(s) or read a wiki or whatever.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top