Jump to content


Photo

One Piece Chapter 891 Discussion


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
149 replies to this topic

#121 Baks

Baks

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,634 posts

Posted 23 January 2018 - 03:38 AM

so you are saying that morality is created by the victors?. That's not how it works in one piece no matter what DD said.
one piece is about universal morality that comes from logic and accumulation of knowledge of humans.

Pretty much, you do realize that history is always written by the victors right.

"Understanding is a three edged sword":

https://m.youtube.co...h?v=HA2cxmFU9zQ

A quote from one of my fave tv shows ever, this can also apply to knowledge as well.

#122 tenchu

tenchu

    Warrior

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,747 posts

Posted 23 January 2018 - 04:27 AM

Pretty much, you do realize that history is always written by the victors right.

"Understanding is a three edged sword":

https://m.youtube.co...h?v=HA2cxmFU9zQ

A quote from one of my fave tv shows ever, this can also apply to knowledge as well.

yes i hear that quote of history written by victors many times and for the most part it is true but i dont get what your post have to do with my post. One piece follows the Universal morality that we humans(majority) of today have come to understand thru logic and time and accumulation of knowledge.

 

What DD said while having some true in it, is morally wrong and he's still evil and that's what the manga tries to portray.

 

 

 
 
 

 

 


  • Chillman likes this

24gvaiu.jpg


#123 Baks

Baks

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,634 posts

Posted 23 January 2018 - 06:15 AM

yes i hear that quote of history written by victors many times and for the most part it is true but i dont get what your post have to do with my post. One piece follows the Universal morality that we humans(majority) of today have come to understand thru logic and time and accumulation of knowledge.
 
What DD said while having some true in it, is morally wrong and he's still evil and that's what the manga tries to portray.


You do realize that morality is never that clear cut, both in real real life and the OP verse. It always comes in shades of black, white and grey.

Like someone like Luffy could be considered grey, sure he maybe very loyal to his friends. But he can considered morally iffy since he choose to become a pirate and he is also greedy, which is kinda considered to be a negative personality trait.

Though I will agree with you about Doffy, he is evil.

#124 tenchu

tenchu

    Warrior

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,747 posts

Posted 23 January 2018 - 06:32 AM

You do realize that morality is never that clear cut, both in real real life and the OP verse. It always comes in shades of black, white and grey.

Like someone like Luffy could be considered grey, sure he maybe very loyal to his friends. But he can considered morally iffy since he choose to become a pirate and he is also greedy, which is kinda considered to be a negative personality trait.

Though I will agree with you about Doffy, he is evil.

The morality that op is trying to shine is mostly black and white. it is showing the gray and corrupted version of morality and justice and saying that is wrong. Luffy is the most black and white character in OP. He's a criminal according to the corrupted justice of the world government but he has never done anything wrong in the universal morality that we all subscribe to.

 

c'mon tatekuya.


Edited by tenchu, 23 January 2018 - 06:46 AM.

24gvaiu.jpg


#125 Baks

Baks

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,634 posts

Posted 23 January 2018 - 08:40 AM

The morality that op is trying to shine is mostly black and white. it is showing the gray and corrupted version of morality and justice and saying that is wrong. Luffy is the most black and white character in OP. He's a criminal according to the corrupted justice of the world government but he has never done anything wrong in the universal morality that we all subscribe to.
 
c'mon tatekuya.


True enough about Luffy, but he has done a couple morally dubious decisions.

Like theft, when he stole all that gold during the end of the Skypiea arc.

Jailbreaking, this happened during the Impel Down arc when he helped free a bunch of criminals from lock up - most notably Croc and Buggy too.
  • Chillman likes this

#126 Saya

Saya

    Crack Monkey

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 247 posts
  • LocationIn the front row sit of a cinema

Posted 23 January 2018 - 12:57 PM

None of that matters.

You said you doubted Luffy's being a pirate selling slaves would make a favored and serializeable manga. That's all I'm replying to by showing you serialized manga where main characters/protagonists are evil and yes, immoral and people still read it (Death Note is super popular even). I addressed exactly what your post said. You're mumbling excuse saying unrelated stuffs like whether they succeeded or not!

 

And all 3 manga I listed, the main characters/protagonists are immoral, though to different extent.


Um. You were the one who suggested Death Note not me.

I used Death Note as an example since, it's the only manga from those you listed yourself.

I'm asking how is marrying Pudding not okay which is the root of all this discussion?

Because she was underage back at the time this discussion started?

And no, it doesn't undo anything. Not all characters are perfect/Mary Sue. They have shortcomings, weaknesses, they can make mistakes (we all know Sanji is a pervert who wants to peep, a cook who values his food yet put razor into Zolo's bento box and now he talked about not putting poison in BM's cake etc.). Except for blind fanatics, retarded people and children whose mind is not mature enough (who shouldn't read the manga in the first place. Parental guidance is there for a reason), no one with an educated brain would be unable to distinguish between the good point they should learn from a characetr and the bad one they shouldn't. Not to mention they can understand that maybe in the world of One Piece, the law, morality code and culture allows for it but in real world that isn't the case. You think the reader population is filled with idiot who can't get that? And frankly, if they are, it's their own fault for interpreting the work like that.


Your point being...?

Unless you were sliently targeting me, I don't see the purpose of this.

And who said Oda planned for Sanji to be a role model? Much less accessible to everyone? You're aware people can have very different standards? Please don't tell me just because he's a hero-ish character. You would only commit circular reasoning.


Sanji is one of the protagonist, it would only be logical. That's one of the reasons that you brushed aside.

Apart from that, Sanji is prepared to fufill his dreams and fight for that reason, which is one of the main point in One Piece anyway.

You should read a lot more and expand your mind. Or if you have, then check your memory why you don't remember such obvious knowledge.


Are you holding a grudge against me?
You are personally attacking me for what reason?

Having different percpective of life doesn't make one person stupid. I am being polite and you should too.

Not quite. But it's true a lot of things are socially/culturally constructed. It's not that people can do whatever the hell they want and say ''eh, given my own morality it's okay''. There should still be some basic standard, for example: 

1. It must not hurt other people for wrong reason (note that there two clauses here: hurting people and for wrong reason)

2. You must not be double standard.

 

But anw, your answer is just dodging. You claim it's a crime, not just that it's immoral, so better be responsible for your words and show me how it's a crime. Don't run away after being so self-righteous! Haizzz...


A crime is when you do the opposite of the law, which basically any pedophiles and child molesters are doing, at least, in North America, I don't know elsewhere.

Having sexual attirences with childrens are wrong in all the way. I already told you that childrens aren't meant to have reproduction behaviors. That is their wrong doings.

A majority of people have agreed for it to be a crime, what else do you want?

Okay, I don't see why other animals are a factor here. Even if they have child molestors, pedos or rapists that doesn't at all change the way we human should behave, unless you want to return to Stone Age (or whatever-Age where you can do those things) or become one with nature by abandoning civilization and living like other animals. Let's talk human!


Sorry to disappoint you, maybe you learned that humans are animals.

Also , you have more than once shown your lack of knowledge (simple stuffs at that like what a crime is or the definition of the terms you use) so I advise you to not talk about stuffs in vague manner like ''I doubt'' and use it as somewhat a basic to your argument.


You are right, I should have been to my crystal ball and looked at every animal species that exist. I will do that next time.

Really? You couldn't understand the purpose of the word "doubt".


To answer your question, yes, it is okay. That word harm in your post shouldn't be in quotation mark because indeed they don't harm anyone. When they do, they are child molesters/child abusers/rapists/murderer etc. The word pedophile, put it simply, only tells you a person is sexually attracted to prepubescent kids. That's all there is to it. And it's not just physically. They shouldn't stare inappropriately and cause emotional or psychological distress, too.


Pedo means children, more or less and Philia means to love or being abnormally affectionate of something.

I'm well aware but the thing is...you can have sex for pleasure so reproductive act isn't the only purpose of sex (that doesn't even mention very specific and out-there circumstances). There's a reason why people whose mature bodies can reproduct use condoms...they don't want to reproduct, surprise?...Children can feel pleasure so by your logic it's alright, right? Not to mention gay and lesbian sex can't reproduct (unless the world has evolve beyond what I know and I would love to see evidences of that from you...) so you are saying gay and lesbian sex is crime, too?


Are you being serious? You should be aware that I was referring to the natural purpose of the act.

I'm not saying that, unlike homosexual persons, a children doesn't have the conscience or the maturity of their thoughts. Which, except for rare cases, shouldn't want to feel pleasure with a adult doing these kinds of things.

But funny enough, also by your logic, pedophiles and child molesters who are gay/lesbian are okay because their act isn't reproductive so you don't need to worry about whether the children are suited for it...now if you reply ''I don't mean that, obviously consent matters and then these children needs to be old enough to decide'' then good, you know what the actual problem is and this reproductive reasoning is complete bullshit.


True, just that it's for reproduction. You know that condoms are made to stop the reproductive act of sex? Yes, they are made to stop us from making babies and having not to fear being impregnated, which a human body does for the sole purpose of having childrens. Or maybe you didn't know that?

So there's no difference as far as morality is concerned. Heterosexual women feel attracted to men and vice versa. Gay are attracted to each other. Lesbian are attracted to each other. Bisexual love both men and women. Asexual don't want sex. Pansexual don't care. Sadists love masochists and vice versa. People with foot fetish like feet. Acrotomophilia desire amputee (who said losing a limb decreases your sexual appeal, right?). Coprophilia excited for a 2 lovers 1 cup session. Some people like to have sex in front of mirror, others want a leash on their neck. Exhibitionists show all. Pedophile are attracted to children.


Your point being?


My goodness, are you serious or are you just playing devil to stir up this thread and boost forum activity?  I do know our forum has been quite deserted but... 


I am not interested in boosting forum activities and I rarely post anyway.

No. But that doesn't matter. I just showed you what pedophile means and it has nothing to do with Pudding. Don't ask irrelevant question to avoid your responsibility to back up your argument.


It's not irrelevant, I wanted to know, which makes it relevant.

Rapists...well...rape. They do something bad. Pedophile is just a word for people with sexual attraction to prepubescent kids. It doesn't mean they do something bad. If they do, the term is child molester/child abuser. Same way heterosexual is a word for people who are sexually attracted to the opposite sex. Do you think heterosexuality is a crime? No! How long will it take you to understand something so easy to understand?


I always thought it was a crime! Whatever should I do?

Being righteous is good and all but make sure you're being intellectual.


LOL
Whatever you say.
  • Petite Fleur likes this

#127 captain kidd

captain kidd

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,173 posts

Posted 23 January 2018 - 04:30 PM

Well, what could be the reason one has problem with the idea of Pudding being 14-15? I can only imagine a few

1. No suspension of disbelief: Can a 15 year-old look like that (height, boobs etc.)?
Well, the answer is yes...This is different from age of consent. As far as body goes, girls (and boys) can hit puberty pretty early and be well-developed by age 14-15. Depends on each individual but yeah, not that strange.

Besides, One Piece is a fictional world where leg day is skipped and human can be pretty huge (BM, WB), or say Brulee is younger than Katakuri despite looking so old, clearly appearance is not that straightforward. Whether out-verse or in-verse perspective, there's no problem. :shrug:


2. She married
Putting aside the fact that BM planned to kill the Vinsmokes anw (so Pudding wouldn't be Sanji's wife), in several cultures, it is possible to marry that young and that's our real world. One Piece is, again, a fictional world so it may have its own even-crazier culture, not to mention specifically WCI culture, and hell, it is BM territory, she can make her own law. Oda is telling a story of that world, it's not like he's vocally supporting child molesting so rather than being needlessly criticizing I suppose readers can just treat it as a...story. There's nothing wrong. When I read Rurouni Kenshin and it's said in old Japan 15 year-old boy is already considered a man and can have wife, fight etc. I was like ''oh, I see. New knowledge''. Done. Should I have been indignant?


3. Publication
LOL, this is One Piece, 99.99% Oda won't show Pudding having sex or doing weird stuffs so relax.


4. Fuck the above 3, wrong is wrong.
Okay...yet people have no problem with pirating...


Glad you added number 4.
1- The body type is not even a factor, if we accept burgess and wb's bodies i see no problem with a 15 year old looking like that.

2/3- ya.....so? In cultures right now (2018) men have relations with goats and young boys. Like you say, wrong is wrong regardless of what culture accepts it.


If pudding is really 15, well i wish i could be dramatic and say i lost even more respect for sanji....but you all know me..... there wasnt much left to lose. Add pedo to sanji's list of accomplishments post ts.

Bonus- idk how old carrot is but oda put her in a bath scene with nami, so ya there wont be sex scenes but pudding will probably have a fan service scene never the less. Which makes oda a pedo by nornal standards.


Oh i do have a problem with pirating that is why i am a big akainu fan.
 

The morality that op is trying to shine is mostly black and white. it is showing the gray and corrupted version of morality and justice and saying that is wrong. Luffy is the most black and white character in OP. He's a criminal according to the corrupted justice of the world government but he has never done anything wrong in the universal morality that we all subscribe to.

c'mon tatekuya.


Wrong.
1st off ID......need i say more? Luffy leading a prison break consisting of the worst criminals in the world is objectively horrible.

2nd he is an insane vigiliante. Just like batman found out, you can just go beating up people in a civilized society because you disagree with them. If course alot of times luffy is acting in selfe defense and defense of others, but not always. The franky family for one he just showed up and beat them up. (Some of them beat up usopp but luffy beat up way more of them)

3rd EL..... on face value it sounds really nice "luffy freed robin" but then you realize luffy beat up probably killing 1000s of marines whos only job was to guard an island. Marines who dedicated their lives to justice got killed because luffy didnt believe in justice. If you dont think what luffy did is wrong, next time you think someone was falsly imporsoned dont appeal their case, instead get a ton of guns and go break them out of prison.... see how heroic you look on the evening news.

4th harboring criminals. Nami is a theif who picked the pockets of everyone in her home town, sanji beat up a marine and zoro tool to the seas for the sole purpose of killing mihawk. Not to mention robin.

5th evading arrest. If luffy truely has done nothing wrong. Why did he run from smoker?

6th if you are into gun control like the japanese are.... well he is prbably violating some serious gun control laws owning those cannons on his ship. (Trololol)

So there you have it 5 examples of luffy being legitimately bad and violating the universal morality we all subscribe to.
 
captain "Nostradamus" kidd
banner.png
 

#128 Petite Fleur

Petite Fleur

    ~ Spider Lady - Kiri's Wife ~ Professional Cuddle Bug

  • Blessed by Uglypuff
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,917 posts

User's Awards

     

Posted 23 January 2018 - 04:31 PM

Please respect other people's culture, thank you.

 

I don't respect anything that advocates child molestation. I don't care if it is your religion, culture, opinion, etc. Welcome to the list of child molestation advocates on OMF.


  • Saya likes this

2mGKRJi.png
▂▅▇█▓▒░◕‿‿◕░▒▓█▇▅▂

Spoiler Quotes

#129 captain kidd

captain kidd

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,173 posts

Posted 23 January 2018 - 04:33 PM

Pretty much, you do realize that history is always written by the victors right.

"Understanding is a three edged sword":

https://m.youtube.co...h?v=HA2cxmFU9zQ

A quote from one of my fave tv shows ever, this can also apply to knowledge as well.


Thats not true at all. The US defeated the soviet union in 1993 yet still millions of idiots believe in their system of government.
I guess when we won we forgot to write "capatilism = good, communism = bad" into the history books.... darn...
 
captain "Nostradamus" kidd
banner.png
 

#130 Grimmjagger

Grimmjagger

    Warrior

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,362 posts
  • LocationCaNdY fAcToRy

Posted 23 January 2018 - 04:44 PM

I don't respect anything that advocates child molestation. I don't care if it is your religion, culture, opinion, etc. Welcome to the list of child molestation advocates on OMF.


No one advocated that crap.
 

Thats not true at all. The US defeated the soviet union in 1993 yet still millions of idiots believe in their system of government.
I guess when we won we forgot to write "capatilism = good, communism = bad" into the history books.... darn...


Should have sent a leader to rule them, they wouldn't stray from the path

Follow my stories!
https://onemangaforu...agger-magazine/
Grimmjagger's magazine

My Lyrics
https://onemangaforu...lust/?p=1163928


#131 Petite Fleur

Petite Fleur

    ~ Spider Lady - Kiri's Wife ~ Professional Cuddle Bug

  • Blessed by Uglypuff
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,917 posts

User's Awards

     

Posted 23 January 2018 - 04:49 PM


No one advocated that crap.

 

This myth has already been addressed, even Tale has apologized for trying to say that nobody is advocating for it after he realized that at least one person is. Please read the thread before participating.


2mGKRJi.png
▂▅▇█▓▒░◕‿‿◕░▒▓█▇▅▂

Spoiler Quotes

#132 Grimmjagger

Grimmjagger

    Warrior

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,362 posts
  • LocationCaNdY fAcToRy

Posted 23 January 2018 - 04:59 PM

This myth has already been addressed, even Tale has apologized for trying to say that nobody is advocating for it after he realized that at least one person is. Please read the thread before participating.


I read all those thing on that thread, none advocated for it.

Follow my stories!
https://onemangaforu...agger-magazine/
Grimmjagger's magazine

My Lyrics
https://onemangaforu...lust/?p=1163928


#133 Enbima

Enbima

    Warrior

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,736 posts
  • LocationGourmet World

Posted 23 January 2018 - 05:32 PM


Oda fixed it.
She is the 36th daughter now.
Meaning she is younger than pudding.

hahaha he probably heard the sirens. Thats why he changed it.

 

Seriously, hes just playing with numbers, but he draws them very much alike. That guy has a sick mind.


  • Grimmjagger likes this

To be effective In combat, a warrior must not feel for his enemy. Close your heart to their desperation. Close your heart for their suffering. The road ahead is long and unforgiving. No place for a boy. You must be a warrior.

- Goku to Gohan.

 stop dreaming


#134 TrolonoaZoro

TrolonoaZoro

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,459 posts
  • LocationOld Zoro is still an artist with a Katana.

Posted 23 January 2018 - 11:40 PM

I don't respect anything that advocates child molestation. I don't care if it is your religion, culture, opinion, etc. Welcome to the list of child molestation advocates on OMF.

16 years old are not children, they're more adult than children. (on average) it can still be creepy but not if you make sure theyre ready to let you beat it. 

so please take me off that list.


Edited by TrolonoaZoro, 23 January 2018 - 11:41 PM.

4789title.jpg

"Don't worry, nothing is gonna happen to you that won't happen to the rest of us"

Spoiler

#135 capu

capu

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 831 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 24 January 2018 - 01:41 AM

stop this discussion about that molestation crap here! This is chapter discussion thread! But u r discussion about pedos and stuff------who cares about that in a chapter discussion thread...... there are other theads for off topic discussions go there!


  • Five-Tailed-Fenrir, Chillman and Grimmjagger like this

#136 Fulmine

Fulmine

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,331 posts

Posted 24 January 2018 - 03:14 AM


Oh i do have a problem with pirating that is why i am a big akainu fan.

No problem as in being okay reading the manga and doesn't question what's wrong with Oda...My point is if people (Enbima is the one who started) are so righteous they feel the need to point out Oda is drawing a 15 year-old in marriage and ask what the hell is wrong with him as a mangaka then why the hell do they not ask what the hell is wrong with him drawing a 17 year-old going around releasing the world's most dangerous criminals out of prison for his personal purpose and keep reading this story for so long? :laugh: And not to mention a lot of critically acclaimed works in other mediums (films, anime, music) that talks about sensitive topics.

 

Clearly all of them understand Oda is just telling a story with dark, for lack of better words, elements. That's different from advocating these elements itself. Every educated reader should understand what they should learn from Luffy (have a dream, never give up, care about friends, etc.) and what they should not (I love my brother so much I decide the rest of the world deserves a bunch of Impel Down Level 6 criminals). So thinking just because a hero-ish character doing something bad means author's advocating for that bad thing is stupidly arrogant. These people think the reader population is filled with idiots who can't think...

 

The same should apply for Sanji. He's a good character but that doesn't mean readers would imitate him blindly. And hell in Sanji's case, it's not like he's actually a child molester. They haven't had sex or any physical contact that's out of bound. Pudding is willing (though for different reasons before and after the ceremony), and the culture and law in-verse probably allow it. So from Sanji's perspective, if not perspective of everyone in-verse, it's a perfectly okay action. Sure, in real life law would not account for intention in most cases but the point is when you read a manga, you as a reader have a near omnipotent point of view (I'd say only the author, editor and know-it-all kind of character like Aizen would know more than us readers), so you can afford to understand the characetr more than you would someone in real life, and so you can clearly distinguish between an author's portraying an in-verse world plus a character without ill will AND an author who is advocating for ill action through a hero character (which would indeed warrants a ''what is wrong with mangaka these days?'').

 

 

 

 

 


Um. You were the one who suggested Death Note not me.

I used Death Note as an example since, it's the only manga from those you listed yourself.

Yep. And? I literally see no meaning in repeating a fact which does not in any way add to the discussion. Are you trying to refute me or just being Ms/Mr Obvious?

 

I suggested Death Note (as well as 2 other manga) as an example where the main character/protagonist is evil/immoral. It perfectly addresses your lack of knowledge about manga world where you thought Luffy's being a pirate selling slaves would be a problem as a manga premise and then used that to attack the Sanji case.

 

And your example only supports my point. 

 

 


Because she was underage back at the time this discussion started?

15 is underage? So what age is not underage? By which country's law? Does that country exist in One Piece? I don't remember any law (or cultural view) in One Piece saying so...Not to mention Pudding is willing and she's not your average 15 year-old. So an exception she may as well be. And before you tell me ''but real life'', go back and read the discussion from start to now to know what is actually being discussed.

 

 


Your point being...?

Unless you were sliently targeting me, I don't see the purpose of this.

The same one I said before. That Sanji's being a hero makes no difference. You think making a hero who does evil thing is problematic because it may send the wrong message but readers should be capable enough to understand what they should learn and not learn from a character, whether the characters are portrayed clearly as villainous or not is not an issue because even good people have shortcomings or mistakes. In real life do you just listen and imitate everything from anyone you deem good? Do you not selectively and carefully choose what you should learn from a person? If you can then do the same for a manga. Don't shift your responsibility as a reader and human being to the author.

 

And please, if I think you're stupid I would say so. What's the point of silently targeting you? You're who? :huh:

 

 


Sanji is one of the protagonist, it would only be logical. That's one of the reasons that you brushed aside.

Apart from that, Sanji is prepared to fufill his dreams and fight for that reason, which is one of the main point in One Piece anyway.

Logical? I just showed you protagonists can be immoral, by author's choice. I don't brush it aside. I perfectly addressed it but you dodged my argument LOL

 

And? He has good points? Yeah, I know. He's one of the heroes who are conveying One piece's main theme? Yeah, I know. And my argument is exactly that even if he is, he can still do wrong and readers should be smart enough to avoid making the same mistake at him. Not blaming the author for making a bad role model when it's only a design to serve the story, at least until you can prove Oda actually advocates for it.

 

 

 


Are you holding a grudge against me?
You are personally attacking me for what reason?

Having different percpective of life doesn't make one person stupid. I am being polite and you should too.

No. Why should I? I barely know you LOL

I'm not.

 

Where did I say you're stupid in that quote? :o I only advised you to read more and expand your mind because clearly you know nothing about manga where main characters/protagonists are evil/immoral and your understanding of an author's writing a story is bad to the point you think a hero doing a bad thing is the same as author advocating for it and author needs/must show he/she's villainous. That's the same as telling someone who doesn't know something to go read around that something. How is that calling you stupid? It's just lacking knowledge. Stupid describes those who, even after obtaining the knowledge, still don't know what it means or how to make use of it.

For example:

-A had never learnt maths so she didn't know how to solve quadratic equations. But once she did, she caught up to those who started maths way earlier than her. She's not stupid.

-B can only solve quadratic equations after studying for four times the amount of time an average student would spend (Obviously, I don't count specific cases like he doesn't like maths and ignore the subject period or he suffers some medical condition where his brain is underdeveloped etc.) . He's stupid.

 

So I'm not calling you stupid in the least. Having different perspective of life doesn't make one person offensive, much less when I actually understand what I'm talking about. Heed your own advice!

 

You are oversensitive, aren't you? :lol:

 

 

 


A crime is when you do the opposite of the law, which basically any pedophiles and child molesters are doing, at least, in North America, I don't know elsewhere.

Again, not any pedophiles. Pedophiles by definition don't do anything. They commit no crime. When they do, child molester is the term. Please use them correctly and don't accuse people of what they don't do. You're just being stubborn and not admitting you are wrong about what you're talking.

 

And funny enough you bring up law. At first I thought you had some absolute, universal morality you so believed in and argued for it because you're adamant something shouldn't be touched...

You're aware law is not absolute? That's why it varies between countries and even between states in America. Hell, in certain countries, pre-marital sex is against the law, doesn't matter how old you are which is not the case in a lot of places in North America. So if in Japan or Europe or in One Piece world (the only place where it matters) the law is not like North America law then Sanji did nothing wrong (as well as other cases where you would call them child molesters) so how can you call it a crime? Much less make a definitive statement like what you said


It's never ok. Regardless, fiction or reality.

Next you will tell me, ''oh I only speak for where I live'' then I would throw that back at you: other people may also speak for where they live and most importantly, where the characters live (in One Piece).

 

Sorry, reality doesn't just consists of just North America, much less fiction. Please discover other continents...

 

And the funniest of all, child marriage is legal in several places in North America. Of course, as exceptions, with parental/judicial consent and whatnot but Sanji and Pudding totally have that as well as the willingness of both parties (well, technically they should still need pre-marriage counsellor in some states but why when your purpose is killing your spouse and your mother-in-law, right?). So Sanji commited no crime and did nothing wrong even by your standard: North America law. Wow, Oda clearly researched your country of choice's law very well before writing his story yet you still have problem :laugh:

 

 


Having sexual attirences with childrens are wrong in all the way. I already told you that childrens aren't meant to have reproduction behaviors. That is their wrong doings.

Yet sex can be for pleasure, not just reproduction. You don't know that? Well, time to expand your mind again.

 

Doings? Who does what? Like I have said for several times, pedophiles don't do anything (those who do would be called child molesters/abusers/etc.). They are only sexually atracted to prepubescent kids in their head. If they don't do anything then why are you even accusing them of crime and wrong doings with that ''children are not ready'' reason? If no one has sex with them (or does anything harmful in general to) then no consequence can even happen.

 

 


A majority of people have agreed for it to be a crime, what else do you want?

Fun fact: there's such a thing call argumentum ad populum.

 

And like you, they may not understand the difference between pedophiles and child molesters (hell, they may even think those two are the same thing) so their opinion could be invalid (they may agree with me, but use wrong terms).

 

 


Sorry to disappoint you, maybe you learned that humans are animals.

I did. I said ''other animals''. Do you know why I phrased it like that? Because, surprise, I know humans are animals. My argument is other animals' behavior shouldn't influence us humans. Nice Strawman! :rolleyes:

 

 


You are right, I should have been to my crystal ball and looked at every animal species that exist. I will do that next time.

Really? You couldn't understand the purpose of the word "doubt".

You should. You're proving my point. You don't know about something, you ask, you go research, you don't get to use it as a basic for your argument. It's simple as that.

I perfectly understand the word ''doubt''. It means you don't know for sure, as you just admitted, and yet you felt adequate to bring it up as a support for your stance...

 

 


Pedo means children, more or less and Philia means to love or being abnormally affectionate of something.

Well, first of all, by your own definition, still no harmful action is done. Love and be affectionate is not the same as molest or abuse or have sex with or taking explicit sexual pictures etc. So you agree with me. Thanks!

 

Second, yep, you showed you don't know what you're talking about again. Children? Define it! There are 5 year-old children and there are 12 year-old children and there are 14 year-old children. There are those who hit puberty and there are those who have not. It's not as simple as you think. Read about it!

https://en.wikipedia...wiki/Pedophilia

https://www.britanni...opic/pedophilia

 

Just some simple links.

 

Anw, Pudding can be 14-15 and clearly not prepubescent (obviously so) so there's no pedophilia here. And like I said, she's not your average girl. She's a Yonkou crewmember, living in an environment where she can kill people and get exposed to a lot of stuffs. Her mental age isn't like an average 14-15 year-old. Now, that may not be taken into consideration in real life law but at least it (as well as other things in the manga) serves as a context to understand this isn't a simple and stereotypical disgusting case of child marriage.

 

 


Are you being serious? You should be aware that I was referring to the natural purpose of the act.

...Being Ms/Mr Obvious again? Yes, I know what you're referring to, and I'm telling you we human can have sex for ''not natural'' purposes and so your reasoning which is children are not ready for reproduction is out of the window because they may not even do it for that purpose in the first place. How can they be not ready for the consequence of something they don't even do? That's like worrying about a guy's unreadiness for a job that he never applies to begin with...

 

Either you give a reason that covers all bases and says loud and clear children should not have sex period (of course, with evidences backing that up) or not. You give a reason like reproduction and I refuted that. Your sentence is dead clear


Reproductive act, that is the puropse of having sex, which childrens are not suited for.

Not a word about other purposes of having sex. So don't try to change argument and appear as if you actually talked about more than that after I corrected you!

 

 


I'm not saying that, unlike homosexual persons, a children doesn't have the conscience or the maturity of their thoughts. Which, except for rare cases, shouldn't want to feel pleasure with a adult doing these kinds of things.

Oh, so you do know there are rare cases. Then maybe Pudding is such rare case and so Sanji was right to think it was okay, right?

 

 


True, just that it's for reproduction. You know that condoms are made to stop the reproductive act of sex? Yes, they are made to stop us from making babies and having not to fear being impregnated, which a human body does for the sole purpose of having childrens. Or maybe you didn't know that?

How can gays and lesbians reproduce (when having sex with someone of same biological sex, that is)? :huh:

 

LOL no, you can also use condoms to prevent STDs but no one who wants to reproduce would put condom on to begin with (unless they think they can just poke a hole at the tip or they want to rely on the small chance that the condom doesn't work and even then not all pedophiles use condoms or even want to impregnate) so it doesn't hurt my point in the slightest.

 

You have anything else to delay your admitting you're wrong?

 

 

 


Your point being?

That pedophiles are sexually attracted to prepubescent kids, just like homosexual people are attracted to the opposite sex (though the former is classified as a disorder). It's only when they harm or violate people that they commit crimes and are immoral. Otherwise it's just a fantasy in their head. You can't call it a crime or immoral just because they masturbate to their fantasy.

 

You keep glossing over that very fact and try to put the crime label on them but you can't.

 

 


It's not irrelevant, I wanted to know, which makes it relevant.

I'm not talking about your right to know. That's why I did answer you with a ''no''. Please read and understand what you read!

I'm saying it isn't relevant because your argument has never been about her precise age. You talk about pedophilia without knowing what children means in the term's definition. So why even asked her age when I told you how pedophilia is defined? Even if she's 15 that doesn't change the fact that pedophilia doesn't apply to Sanji because Pudding is not a pre-pubescent kid nor was it ever said how minor is defined in One Piece.


 

stop this discussion about that molestation crap here! This is chapter discussion thread! But u r discussion about pedos and stuff------who cares about that in a chapter discussion thread...... there are other theads for off topic discussions go there!

Because it direclty relates to whether Sanji does wrong and what the chapter advocates. :rolleyes:


Spoiler Favorite male characters in manga/hwa/hua

#137 captain kidd

captain kidd

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,173 posts

Posted 24 January 2018 - 07:18 AM

No one advocated that crap.
 

Should have sent a leader to rule them, they wouldn't stray from the path


I am talking US citizens. Citizens of the country that won.

There are ton of examples that prove that "winners write histroy" nonsense wrong. In the 1700s colonists waged wsr with native Americans, native americans who prwticed slavery canabilism and human scarfice. Yet a good chunk of my country, the country who won the battles, consider the native Americans as the victims and think we are evil for what we did.
We won. So why didnt we write history to properly show it?

Then of course lets not forget world war 2. It was stsrted because hitler rose to power using the deep seeded hatred the germans had over the results of world war 1. Well.... germans lost world war 1, why didnt the victory write history better to eliminate german hatred?

Oh not to mention we tried to write history but failed. The treaty made germany take full blame for World War 1 but every one knows it wasnt actually their fault. So if the winners write history how come they were unable to write history? If what you say is true ans victors write history then in history class no one should be learning about archduke ferdinand.
  • Chillman and Grimmjagger like this
 
captain "Nostradamus" kidd
banner.png
 

#138 captain kidd

captain kidd

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,173 posts

Posted 24 January 2018 - 07:52 AM

No problem as in being okay reading the manga and doesn't question what's wrong with Oda...My point is if people (Enbima is the one who started) are so righteous they feel the need to point out Oda is drawing a 15 year-old in marriage and ask what the hell is wrong with him as a mangaka then why the hell do they not ask what the hell is wrong with him drawing a 17 year-old going around releasing the world's most dangerous criminals out of prison for his personal purpose and keep reading this story for so long? :laugh: And not to mention a lot of critically acclaimed works in other mediums (films, anime, music) that talks about sensitive topics.

Clearly all of them understand Oda is just telling a story with dark, for lack of better words, elements. That's different from advocating these elements itself. Every educated reader should understand what they should learn from Luffy (have a dream, never give up, care about friends, etc.) and what they should not (I love my brother so much I decide the rest of the world deserves a bunch of Impel Down Level 6 criminals). So thinking just because a hero-ish character doing something bad means author's advocating for that bad thing is stupidly arrogant. These people think the reader population is filled with idiots who can't think...

The same should apply for Sanji. He's a good character but that doesn't mean readers would imitate him blindly. And hell in Sanji's case, it's not like he's actually a child molester. They haven't had sex or any physical contact that's out of bound. Pudding is willing (though for different reasons before and after the ceremony), and the culture and law in-verse probably allow it. So from Sanji's perspective, if not perspective of everyone in-verse, it's a perfectly okay action. Sure, in real life law would not account for intention in most cases but the point is when you read a manga, you as a reader have a near omnipotent point of view (I'd say only the author, editor and know-it-all kind of character like Aizen would know more than us readers), so you can afford to understand the characetr more than you would someone in real life, and so you can clearly distinguish between an author's portraying an in-verse world plus a character without ill will AND an author who is advocating for ill action through a hero character (which would indeed warrants a ''what is wrong with mangaka these days?'').




 
Yep. And? I literally see no meaning in repeating a fact which does not in any way add to the discussion. Are you trying to refute me or just being Ms/Mr Obvious?

I suggested Death Note (as well as 2 other manga) as an example where the main character/protagonist is evil/immoral. It perfectly addresses your lack of knowledge about manga world where you thought Luffy's being a pirate selling slaves would be a problem as a manga premise and then used that to attack the Sanji case.

And your example only supports my point.


15 is underage? So what age is not underage? By which country's law? Does that country exist in One Piece? I don't remember any law (or cultural view) in One Piece saying so...Not to mention Pudding is willing and she's not your average 15 year-old. So an exception she may as well be. And before you tell me ''but real life'', go back and read the discussion from start to now to know what is actually being discussed.


The same one I said before. That Sanji's being a hero makes no difference. You think making a hero who does evil thing is problematic because it may send the wrong message but readers should be capable enough to understand what they should learn and not learn from a character, whether the characters are portrayed clearly as villainous or not is not an issue because even good people have shortcomings or mistakes. In real life do you just listen and imitate everything from anyone you deem good? Do you not selectively and carefully choose what you should learn from a person? If you can then do the same for a manga. Don't shift your responsibility as a reader and human being to the author.

And please, if I think you're stupid I would say so. What's the point of silently targeting you? You're who? :huh:


Logical? I just showed you protagonists can be immoral, by author's choice. I don't brush it aside. I perfectly addressed it but you dodged my argument LOL

And? He has good points? Yeah, I know. He's one of the heroes who are conveying One piece's main theme? Yeah, I know. And my argument is exactly that even if he is, he can still do wrong and readers should be smart enough to avoid making the same mistake at him. Not blaming the author for making a bad role model when it's only a design to serve the story, at least until you can prove Oda actually advocates for it.



No. Why should I? I barely know you LOL
I'm not.

Where did I say you're stupid in that quote? :o I only advised you to read more and expand your mind because clearly you know nothing about manga where main characters/protagonists are evil/immoral and your understanding of an author's writing a story is bad to the point you think a hero doing a bad thing is the same as author advocating for it and author needs/must show he/she's villainous. That's the same as telling someone who doesn't know something to go read around that something. How is that calling you stupid? It's just lacking knowledge. Stupid describes those who, even after obtaining the knowledge, still don't know what it means or how to make use of it.
For example:
-A had never learnt maths so she didn't know how to solve quadratic equations. But once she did, she caught up to those who started maths way earlier than her. She's not stupid.
-B can only solve quadratic equations after studying for four times the amount of time an average student would spend (Obviously, I don't count specific cases like he doesn't like maths and ignore the subject period or he suffers some medical condition where his brain is underdeveloped etc.) . He's stupid.

So I'm not calling you stupid in the least. Having different perspective of life doesn't make one person offensive, much less when I actually understand what I'm talking about. Heed your own advice!

You are oversensitive, aren't you? :lol:



Again, not any pedophiles. Pedophiles by definition don't do anything. They commit no crime. When they do, child molester is the term. Please use them correctly and don't accuse people of what they don't do. You're just being stubborn and not admitting you are wrong about what you're talking.

And funny enough you bring up law. At first I thought you had some absolute, universal morality you so believed in and argued for it because you're adamant something shouldn't be touched...
You're aware law is not absolute? That's why it varies between countries and even between states in America. Hell, in certain countries, pre-marital sex is against the law, doesn't matter how old you are which is not the case in a lot of places in North America. So if in Japan or Europe or in One Piece world (the only place where it matters) the law is not like North America law then Sanji did nothing wrong (as well as other cases where you would call them child molesters) so how can you call it a crime? Much less make a definitive statement like what you said
Next you will tell me, ''oh I only speak for where I live'' then I would throw that back at you: other people may also speak for where they live and most importantly, where the characters live (in One Piece).

Sorry, reality doesn't just consists of just North America, much less fiction. Please discover other continents...

And the funniest of all, child marriage is legal in several places in North America. Of course, as exceptions, with parental/judicial consent and whatnot but Sanji and Pudding totally have that as well as the willingness of both parties (well, technically they should still need pre-marriage counsellor in some states but why when your purpose is killing your spouse and your mother-in-law, right?). So Sanji commited no crime and did nothing wrong even by your standard: North America law. Wow, Oda clearly researched your country of choice's law very well before writing his story yet you still have problem :laugh:


Yet sex can be for pleasure, not just reproduction. You don't know that? Well, time to expand your mind again.

Doings? Who does what? Like I have said for several times, pedophiles don't do anything (those who do would be called child molesters/abusers/etc.). They are only sexually atracted to prepubescent kids in their head. If they don't do anything then why are you even accusing them of crime and wrong doings with that ''children are not ready'' reason? If no one has sex with them (or does anything harmful in general to) then no consequence can even happen.


Fun fact: there's such a thing call argumentum ad populum.

And like you, they may not understand the difference between pedophiles and child molesters (hell, they may even think those two are the same thing) so their opinion could be invalid (they may agree with me, but use wrong terms).


I did. I said ''other animals''. Do you know why I phrased it like that? Because, surprise, I know humans are animals. My argument is other animals' behavior shouldn't influence us humans. Nice Strawman! :rolleyes:


You should. You're proving my point. You don't know about something, you ask, you go research, you don't get to use it as a basic for your argument. It's simple as that.
I perfectly understand the word ''doubt''. It means you don't know for sure, as you just admitted, and yet you felt adequate to bring it up as a support for your stance...


Well, first of all, by your own definition, still no harmful action is done. Love and be affectionate is not the same as molest or abuse or have sex with or taking explicit sexual pictures etc. So you agree with me. Thanks!

Second, yep, you showed you don't know what you're talking about again. Children? Define it! There are 5 year-old children and there are 12 year-old children and there are 14 year-old children. There are those who hit puberty and there are those who have not. It's not as simple as you think. Read about it!
https://en.wikipedia...wiki/Pedophilia
https://www.britanni...opic/pedophilia

Just some simple links.

Anw, Pudding can be 14-15 and clearly not prepubescent (obviously so) so there's no pedophilia here. And like I said, she's not your average girl. She's a Yonkou crewmember, living in an environment where she can kill people and get exposed to a lot of stuffs. Her mental age isn't like an average 14-15 year-old. Now, that may not be taken into consideration in real life law but at least it (as well as other things in the manga) serves as a context to understand this isn't a simple and stereotypical disgusting case of child marriage.


...Being Ms/Mr Obvious again? Yes, I know what you're referring to, and I'm telling you we human can have sex for ''not natural'' purposes and so your reasoning which is children are not ready for reproduction is out of the window because they may not even do it for that purpose in the first place. How can they be not ready for the consequence of something they don't even do? That's like worrying about a guy's unreadiness for a job that he never applies to begin with...

Either you give a reason that covers all bases and says loud and clear children should not have sex period (of course, with evidences backing that up) or not. You give a reason like reproduction and I refuted that. Your sentence is dead clear
Not a word about other purposes of having sex. So don't try to change argument and appear as if you actually talked about more than that after I corrected you!


Oh, so you do know there are rare cases. Then maybe Pudding is such rare case and so Sanji was right to think it was okay, right?


How can gays and lesbians reproduce (when having sex with someone of same biological sex, that is)? :huh:

LOL no, you can also use condoms to prevent STDs but no one who wants to reproduce would put condom on to begin with (unless they think they can just poke a hole at the tip or they want to rely on the small chance that the condom doesn't work and even then not all pedophiles use condoms or even want to impregnate) so it doesn't hurt my point in the slightest.

You have anything else to delay your admitting you're wrong?



That pedophiles are sexually attracted to prepubescent kids, just like homosexual people are attracted to the opposite sex (though the former is classified as a disorder). It's only when they harm or violate people that they commit crimes and are immoral. Otherwise it's just a fantasy in their head. You can't call it a crime or immoral just because they masturbate to their fantasy.

You keep glossing over that very fact and try to put the crime label on them but you can't.


I'm not talking about your right to know. That's why I did answer you with a ''no''. Please read and understand what you read!
I'm saying it isn't relevant because your argument has never been about her precise age. You talk about pedophilia without knowing what children means in the term's definition. So why even asked her age when I told you how pedophilia is defined? Even if she's 15 that doesn't change the fact that pedophilia doesn't apply to Sanji because Pudding is not a pre-pubescent kid nor was it ever said how minor is defined in One Piece.
 

Because it direclty relates to whether Sanji does wrong and what the chapter advocates. :rolleyes:


I understand where you are comming from. BUT, i do want to point out a few things.

1st, "criminal" is a person it isnt a mind set. I remember a funny (in an extremely dark way) story of a cop who arrested a pedophile, when the cop was questioning the piece of garbage he asked him "are you the guy i have reports about exposing himself in public?"
The pedo responded "no that guy is disgusting"
Just because a criminal does something bad, doesnt mean he is ok with all other crime. In prison some murders will be disgusted by men who hit their wife.

That being said i do feel like pedophilia is one of the worst crimes there is, espically worse then anything luffy has ever done. Maybe bartolomeo's torture would top it.



2nd oda not advocating it and using it as a story telling element. I agree that there are things heros do that should never be done. (Luffy running from the marines could be responsible for many kids running from the cops if kids imitated all luffys actions exactly)

But there comes a point in any work of fiction when a theme comes up so much the author is clearly has alterier motives. For example, if i am writing an action movie, and all the good guys, not one good guy, all the good guys, have cross tattoos and bibles and pray before battle, then all the bad guys, not one bad guy, all the bad guys, have islamic tattoos and carry qurans. It would be very obvious i made the good guys christians and the mad guys muslims right? I may even get critics hating my movie for the negative poetrayal of muslims. After a while it stops being a topical refrence and starts being me trying influence how my audience sees muslims. (This is an extreme example in no way ment to say oda is doing this)

Look at oda's work. EVERY princess is 16. Vivi-16 mermaid princess-16 rebecca-16. (Vivi is 18 post ts)
At first you think- ok that is innocent enough, "princess" kinda implies young, so oda made them young, but old enough that luffy isnt a baby sitter and they can kinda fight.
But then look at what oda does with the princess.
Vivi- was in the same "dancer" outfit nami was in (also sanji was his normal sanji self to vivi) oh and lets not forget she was involved in the bath scene
Mermaid princess- luffy jumped around on her chest.... not to mention her cloths
Rebecca- her armor....nuff said...

So at what point is it clear how oda thinks about 16 year olds?
 
captain "Nostradamus" kidd
banner.png
 

#139 Locormus

Locormus

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 485 posts
  • LocationBehind bars..

Posted 24 January 2018 - 08:07 AM

ARE BIG MOM SONS STRONG BECAUSE THEY ARE SONS OF HER OR DID THEY TRAIN MUCH?


BECAUSE THE STORY DEMANDS HIGH LEVEL OPPONENTS.

#140 captain kidd

captain kidd

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,173 posts

Posted 24 January 2018 - 08:10 AM

BECAUSE THE STORY DEMANDS HIGH LEVEL OPPONENTS.


Kinda a cop out.
 
captain "Nostradamus" kidd
banner.png
 




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users