... Okay, with that many stalks and babies, how on earth is that Reimu still so healthy? Even in the best circumstances, that much should be putting some strain on it, and more likely it'd be dying or dead.
Tea... I've been avoiding mentioning this for a while to avoid causing even more friction between us, but I'm finally going to say it, since it doesn't seem like any form of reconciliation is possible at this point... I find it odd how, just a month ago on the Google Group, you were lamenting the lack of musing and discussion about yukkuri properties... yet, whenever I try to do that, here or in the group, you dismiss me as taking things too seriously, or trying to apply consistent properties to yukkuris when they obviously are just whatever the writer wants and I should just take it at face value and not think about it more deeply. So which do you want -- discussion of yukkuri properties, or people just to shut up and look at the pictures/read the stories?
Erm... I've never stated yukkuris are humans. I've stated that by a strict philosophical definition, they, if real, would be "people" -- according to philosophy, a "person" is not necessarily a human, just a rational, self-aware being. Although yukkuris aren't very bright, they're self-aware and capable of some level of rational thought. Ergo, by that definition, a yukkuri is a person. By a definition that restricts personhood to humans, they're not... but neither is some 90% of the Touhou cast, so I question the practicality of such a definition in a Touhou-related community.
Also, discussion of the philosophical definition of personhood and its application to yukkuris _is_ discussion. It may not be discussion you _like_, but just because you dislike it doesn't mean that it's "deep philosophical crap" rather than discussion. For starters, there's nothing very "deep" about it. It's a fairly basic concept. Nor is there "crap" to it, given that it's just a statement of a basic philosophical tenet. So... that just leaves "philosophical", which... it is, by definition, since it concerns philosophy.
Oh, sorry. I meant "Yukkuris are people". The word "people" or "person" means humans, anyway. Nobody applies the philosophical definition in practical life, unless they're in a philosophical debate, of course. But we're here to talk about yukkuris.
>>I question the practicality of such a definition in a Touhou-related community.
This is only marginally touhou related now, anyway. Most of the stories don't involve the original touhou characters, most stories no longer take place in Gensokyo, focusing on cities or not detailing the location, and a lot of the artists don't seem to draw touhou material.
... Good examples of "Deep philosophical crap" are the philosophical zombie, or the idea that reality is nothing more than a hallucination or dream -- either that of the observer, or of a third party, in which the "observer" is just one more character in the dream, unaware of their role and nonexistence. There's plenty to think about there... but they're ultimately completely pointless from a practical perspective. And if they somehow become involved in yukkuri discussion -- any moreso than they are now by my contrasting them with other, more practical, philosophical considerations regarding yukkuris -- I swear to god I'll scream.
Error in statement detected. Trying to put any sort of philosophy into discussion on a website where people get entertainment out of retarded, talking blobs of food getting squashed is lulz worthy. Don't worry, there's no one else here stupid enough to try and turn yukkuri existence into philosophical discussion.
Wow, I just had an idea, I think that yukkuris are in fact the manifestations of the unconscious dreams and desires of people in comas. This is because philosophically, they are zombies. In turn, this leads us to the conclusion that reality is nothing but a dream, right? And that as the minds of human beings represent yukkuris, yukkuris must be people?
Now, see? That's the sort of post that makes me say you're harassing or trolling me, rather than just "disagreeing", and it's not the first like it. You're not just "disagreeing with me", but being rude, insulting, and generally mean-spirited, seemingly just for the sake of it. You say that people on the internet don't have to treat me like a "special and unique snowflake", but I think a little civility and courtesy shouldn't be too much to ask from most people and places.
I have tried to treat you with courtesy, and have tried to apologize when I haven't -- I've had bad days, been grumpy, jumped to conclusions, or just plain been rude, and I'm sorry for that. Is it really too much to ask for you to return the favor, or at least try not to deliberately antagonize me?
If it makes you feel any better, Nezumi, you're not the only one that he does this too... See the eternal battle between Tea and P.Suzuki over the Alice article on the Wiki.
>>I think a little civility and courtesy shouldn't be too much to ask
But this is a place that spawns vicious, intractable flamewars!
Hmm... Suzuki's a different matter though. He doesn't seem interested in actually listening to the reasoning against and just ignores it after being challenged to defend it, steering away from discussing the material and justifications and focusing on different matters like "you don't like my stories!".
It does spawn vicious intractable flame wars. I've seen more than one comment thread start with someone impugning the morality of those who enjoy yukkuri guro or someone making pro-violence comments on a non-violent image, then devolve into a shouting match consisting of little more than name-calling.
Uhm... No. I've complained about the immorality of characters who engage in it, but I don't actually care if you like it or not. Producing or enjoying violent media is not an indicator of personal morality, and given some of the media I consume or have discussed producing, it would be hypocritical of me to suggest otherwise. I don't find it appealing, but I don't suggest that people who do are bad people.
You certainly do, seeing as you always do your best to compare it to real things such as "child abuse" and "murder". And then there's all the deep philosophical crap trying to make yukkuris human, sapient, sentient, whatever the word is, and going off on tl;dr essays on it. You pretty much are a hypocrite, seeing as you approve of humans getting torn apart when you start flinging around complaints when yukkuris get harmed. Even in justified cases. Discussion about the "immorality of characters who engage in it" is pretty much a cover to comment on the people who like it, which becomes pretty clear when words like murder pop up.
"Discussion about the "immorality of characters who engage in it" is pretty much a cover to comment on the people who like it,"
I'd be careful here; while that can be case (especially when heady topics like politics and religion are at issue), it is not necessarily always the case. In this case, Nezumi has specifically denied it, so I'd suggest being careful which lines you're reading between, lest you end up reading a blank space.
He might have denied it, but people lie all the time. Anyway, I'm talking (and quoting) about the comments that Nezumi has specifically made, so I'm pretty sure what I'm reading about.
People source http://www.thefreedictionary.com/people 9.Informal Animals or other beings distinct from humans: Rabbits and squirrels are the furry little people of the woods.
That's not the definition you're using,you mean. What 's definition that yakultrain use?We do not know. I just point out possible and I am taking it easy.
wait wait I ask this for my english learning. Informal word is use when talking or chat but didn't use in writing,isn't it? like I wanna walk on land(disney).But if it can't use where will we use informal word.
Informal words can be used in writing, it just depends on the tone and purpose of the writing. You can use informal words in novels, blogs, etc, but would generally not use them in news articles and non-fiction, and would absolutely not use them in things like legal briefs or academic papers.
I'm not as subtle as you give me credit for. If I cared about the people enjoying it, I'd actually be going after them. I compare it to real-life things because, in-fiction, it seems like a valid comparison. People who enjoy things including child abuse, murder, etc. with humans aren't bad people -- and I've never suggested such. Why is it that pointing out what I judge to be valid parallels between such things and yukkuri abuse is my suggesting that people who enjoy it with yukkuris are bad people? I can't see a valid reason to read it that way, and the fact that you do honestly confuses me.
I don't suggest that all yukkuris should live. Some do horrible things to humans, youkai, or other yukkuri -- or attempt to -- and deserve death or other punishment -- although I'd prefer not to be the one to inflict it, myself. However, some anons and such in stories go beyond what is reasonable. When a yukkuri is rude, chastising or ignoring it is reasonable. Killing it is not. When it tries to kill you (whether successful or not) or invades your home, killing it is reasonable. Slowly torturing it is not. Ultimately, though, both happen in stories and comics, because both appeal to readers.
Also, although people lie all the time, I don't. I doubt you'll just take my word for it, but I have a neurological condition that, among other things, makes it difficult for me not to be honest, even when it's not a good idea.
Also, I'm a she, but that's minor compared to the rest of this, so... yeah.
And now I would like to say that Tea is out of line.
"Pretentious tl;dr bullshit" and calling someone mentally retarded. You really gotta take shots like that before you can debate properly? I don't care much if Nezumi is a guy or girl, but you're seriously asking to be punched sometimes.
All the debate actually came before, but nevermind. There's plenty of other examples of taking shots on this site and people being asses, so it's not really surprising. The comment about mental retardation could be correct, seeing as she supposedly has some sort of neurological disorder... but eh, this is actually getting kind of boring. Time to watch some yukkuris get punched.
Tea couldn't read the tl;dr bullshit because at this point it doesn't even matter what Nezumi says, only proving himself right and making a fool of himself in the meantime
"Uhm... No. I've complained about the immorality of characters who engage in it, but I don't actually care if you like it or not. Producing or enjoying violent media is not an indicator of personal morality, and given some of the media I consume or have discussed producing, it would be hypocritical of me to suggest otherwise. I don't find it appealing, but I don't suggest that people who do are bad people."
Nezumi, what kind of media do you consume and have considered "producing"? Let's have some insights into your character. Is it sexual in nature? And why do you enjoy it while finding this unappealing?
And I think you're wrong on the issue that people who enjoy this aren't bad people. They may not be bad people per say but they certainly aren't good either. If I had to guess I'd say a lot of these people are pathological antisocials. I would say that watching and enjoying yukkuris getting demolished is therapeutic; it allows all the stress and pent-up frustration from everyday life to be released.
Haven't you ever seen a child do something nasty and secretly wished you could kick their face in? Aren't there groups of people around you that annoy and torment you? Does your boss ever get on your nerves? They are all yukkuris. You don't care about these people's good qualities, their redeeming factors; at the moment of anger their flaws and antagonizing qualities are ever so visible. So your argument that some of them are good and not all deserve to die is moot, because we don't see that. We see evil intent behind every smile. And whether they're good or bad, whether they deserve it or not, doesn't matter, because they're harmful to our quality of life either way. They are parasitic, gluttonous sacks of food with close to zero independent utility. Their utility and usefulness comes from their ability to be tortured and readily consumed.
Yukkuris have become the target of people's cruelty and sadism. The human bullies and their victims have more or less united against them and the torture has become an initiation ritual in certain groups, a rite of passage. Basically, they have more utility and usefulness being maimed and killed than in being safeguarded and legally protected.
And this concludes my PhD thesis on the social and psychological implications of human/yukkuri interaction.
SUN: You realize you could say the same of all domestic pets, right? They have almost zero utility other than stress relief, but they relieve stress just by virtue of being nice to have around. I do hope I'm right when I say that abusing your well behaved dog or cat is not the norm wherever you live. You pour money into keeping it alive so it can love you back, right? If that is the case, then why should a good yukkuri be any different? "They have more utility being maimed and killed than being safeguarded." Double standards ahoy. A dog or cat can be good and loved for it, but a good yukkuri still defaults to a stressball in your eyes? (assuming you don't see dogs/cats the say you see yukkuris)
"We see evil intent behind every smile." That comes off as a little paranoid (or more of the same when it comes to excuses to kick their faces in). Out of curiosity, would you be one of those people who can't take a kind act at face value? One of the people that hold the idea that humans only do kind things to get stuff in return? If so, then that explains your point of view. If not, then this is likely an excuse.
Oh, and I do hope you're not being overly presumptuous with your mass usage of "we." We don't want to incorrectly speak for other people, do we?
Tea and yakultrain: Take an example from SUN. I sure as hell don't agree with his points, but he's not being an ass here. (now when This is involved, then that might change)
@ Yukkuri Spark: >>You realize you could say the same of all domestic pets, right? You speak to the single user that openly admits to comitting animal torture. He sets no double standards. The rest of that paragraph is more or less lost on him. >>If so, then that explains your point of view. He's said before something about believing in inherent human goodness or something. "The children are our future" type of shit. At the very least, you've summed up my perspective. >>now when This is involved, then that might change Tehehe.
I don't torture animals per say as they are not worth torturing, but sometimes you gotta' teach the little furballs a lesson. For example the squirrels that leech off the bird seed and the dogs that bark at odd hours of the night when I'm trying to sleep. You can't sue them or reason with the animals and dog owners are an obstinate bunch that don't consider the dog's barking a form of noise pollution. I tried being reasonable and nice but as they say "Nice guys finish last." Consequently there are no more rude dogs in close proximity and the birds can now enjoy their food without belligerent squirrels interfering. I like cats the most, though, because they have dignity and are quite discreet. I see cats walking through my backyard from time to time but they don't make noises when I'm resting or leave massive turds laying around the yard or start chittering at me; cats are probably the most civilized animals.
Besides, people like you see anything as torture. Spanking a kid is "child abuse." Expressing unfavorable remarks towards women is "misogyny." Using an inappropriate word is "racism." And This likes to pretend that he has the moral high ground even though he has revealed his hypocrisy and hate for people many times. It's funny he sees my "animal torture" as heinous even though he has expressed his violent and totalitarian views of ruling over his fellow man. It's you that can't be reasoned with.
Oh, and even in the most prosaic interpretation of the phrase, children are indeed our future. The way we treat our children determines what kind of future we will have.
>>Spanking a kid is "child abuse." Spanking a child leads to obedient children. I have no qualms with this. >>Expressing unfavorable remarks towards women is "misogyny." That's more or less an expression of the definition of misogyny. >>Using an inappropriate word is "racism." Stating your distaste for a whole race of people is racism. >>he has reveled in his hypocrisy Fix't >>he sees my "animal torture" as heinous I don't much care what you do. I was simply responding to Yukkuri Spark for you, so that you wouldn't have to type that whole personal attack/defense post. >>The way we treat our children determines what kind of future we will have. We shouldn't have more fucking children, so that our generation can always decide the future.
>>That's more or less an expression of the definition of misogyny.
No, misogyny is the prejudice against and hatred of women. It is a strong expression. "I don't like the fact that women tend to be overly emotional and irrational" is not an expression of misogyny.
>>Stating your distaste for a whole race of people is racism.
"I don't think dark skin is attractive at all" is not an expression of racism. To be racist it has to be followed by "so black people shouldn't have the right to _____."
>>Fix't
No, you changed it to mean something entirely different. "Revealed his hypocrisy" and "reveled in his hypocrisy" are two different and valid phrases. Freudian slip there?
>>I don't much care what you do. I was simply responding to Yukkuri Spark for you, so that you wouldn't have to type that whole personal attack/defense post.
No, earlier you drew particular attention to it, multiple times if I remember correctly. "I don't care what you do" is simply a defense mechanism; you do have some opinion about it however subtle.
>>We shouldn't have more fucking children, so that our generation can always decide the future.
For someone that tries to appear smart you really don't make much sense. When I use the world "we" I mean "humanity." You and I are simply part of a larger whole and I shudder at the thought of our generation of apathetic libertines deciding the future. The current generation only cares about obtaining pleasure now- they can't delay their gratification long enough to decide a worthwhile future.
And what's the point of deciding the future when there is no one there to live it? And what's with this nebulous concept of "THE FUTURE"? It seems that this degraded society has robbed you of your paternal extincts and that's a damn shame.
>>"I don't think dark skin is attractive at all" Your exact words were "I think black people look revolting." I keep track of these things. >>are two different and valid phrases One is simply an extension of the other. I do not simply admit to hipocrisy, I readily embrace it. >>The current generation only cares about obtaining pleasure now- they can't delay their gratification long enough to decide a worthwhile future. I don't care what happens to ANYTHING after I die. In my mind the future only extends to the point I cease being in it. >>paternal extincts I quite like that typo'd phrase.
>>Your exact words were "I think black people look revolting." I keep track of these things.
That doesn't negate my point. "Revolting" is merely a synonym of "unattractive." That's nothing to do with racism, which has elements of hate, intolerance, and superiority. Hating based on the premise of looks would be vain and that's not me at all.
>>One is simply an extension of the other. I do not simply admit to hipocrisy, I readily embrace it.
I don't see how it's something to embrace and revel in, as I think it's a psychological illness. What triggered this behavior to begin? And what has it brought you aside from attention on the internet?
>>I don't care what happens to ANYTHING after I die. In my mind the future only extends to the point I cease being in it.
What a selfish and immoral viewpoint, but sadly all too common. This mindset is dangerous and has all kinds of negative implications for our society. I can only wonder what caused it to come about.
>>I quite like that typo'd phrase.
Well I shot myself in the foot there didn't I? Well your way of life is fine only as long as a minority practice it. If this becomes the norm and the value of family is extinguished then humanity is indeed doomed for extinction. At this point there's nothing left but for a despotic government to take over and manage the child-birthing process. We're getting ever closer to the vision outlined in Brave New World.
I've been e-mailed about this nonsensical, irrelevant conversation, but as long as people keep it in this thread and don't spread it elsewhere I'm okay with it.
3: And so Reimu's body became loding for 16 lovely real yukkuri.
Typically, through stalk conception, the number of children born are roughly from two to four.
4: In the face of this reality, Marisa was uneasy
*gulp*
5: Be born easy!
*munch*
[Reimu took it easy]
--- Hmm...that took me a little while to scroll down to the comment box. Gonna assume the tags are right and a translation isn't in that text forest somewhere.
As with pretty much every strip so far, the text seems weird to me and I think a check is needed on the translation.