|
Post by Creshosk on Sept 19, 2006 22:53:59 GMT -5
Came late to this debate but I think I can manage. I will not dispute the fact that Seiya does love Usagi, nor deny Usagi's feelings towards her. I do however dispute the case on the impossibility of them ever becoming a couple. First is Chibiusa ie Small Lady. She would not exist if Usagi and Seiya connected. That results in to total negation of three seasons (R, S, SuperS). The pink spore played a role in the defeat of the Dead Moon Clan and Dead Moon Circus. Without her the outcome of the battle would not be as positive. Also Usagi would be sentencing her flesh and blood to death by non-existance. Thats murder and no matter how you reason against it, it is still murder. Usagi would be labeled a murderer. I challenge you to cite me the leagal precident in this day in age whereby it's illegal to "go after" someone other than the one you're intended to be with due to a possible future that has probably already been diverted due to the influence of knowledge of its existence imparted upon those whom theat future directly effects. Murder is a legal term. Stop trying to appeal to emotion by throwing it around so callously. I doubt you'd be able to prove intent. This is based upon the number of times Usagi has risked her life for "the spore". That would tarnish her reputation as a champion for love and justice. And haunt her conscience for the rest of her natural life. because she fell in love with another person? Another thing is what would be the point in the show if they did get together? The whole series hinges on the forbidden romance being an mortal man and omnipotent goddess. I think you're overstating the importance of the name Endymion being applied to Mamoru. It was said that Seiya does treat and understand Usagi better than Mamoru. I agree. However notice that Seiya is really a female. Sailor Senshi can only be female. Therefore Seiya being a female knows more about females than males. Its no wonder why they get along better, that "sisterhood factor" is in effect. I'm noticing that there are some homophobic and or sexist overtones to this paragraph. Seiya only treats Usagi as nice as she does because she's female and has nothing to do with her personality as an individual? A person's behavior and school of thought is heavily influenced by thier enviroment and past upbringing. That would be getting into the nuture vs nature argument. and your stance would imply a caste system that would limit a person from ever reaching beyond their current station in life. After all Evil begets evil right? If you grow up in a harsh environment you have no choice but to act in the way that you are accustomed? Orphaned at age six with no living relatives, Mamoru had the cards naturally stacked against him early in life. In a country such as Japan it is even harder since hertiage plays a big factor and a prevalent mentality of becoming successful is stressed and failure results in suicide. Not as much as it used to. You develop hard defences and grow fast from that enviroment. And people wonder why he is indifferent or even cold hearted while Usagi is this bouncy bundle of joy who had friends and family to support her while Mamoru didnt. So which side of this issue are you on? You've stated indirectly that Seiya would be better for Usagi since they have so much in common and that Seiya is warmer due to some unproven theory about human nature. Yet earlier youargued that Usagi would be a "muderer" for not being with Mamoru.
|
|
|
Post by engineer on Sept 20, 2006 0:27:55 GMT -5
Murders can be done unintentionally - unintentional homicide. And no there is no legal precedant since time travel technology has not been perfected yet. But is this really the case? You kill a child either by putting a bullet through the head or denying it existance by not mating with the intented father the child, end result is still the same. The child's life is terminated.
Yes.
Enlighten me.
Because she understands Usagi more due to the fact of gender. Its not the only factor but it is a major factor. I've seen this in real life too, girls communicate better among each other than guys. There is nothing homophobic or sexist about it but it is nature itself. Women can make babies, guys cant. Guys are physcially stronger than women. Is it sexist? No. Its how we are made and hardwired. Denying a blind man from piloting a commerical airplane is not called discrimmatory but called the application of common sense.
Yes. We are taught in the beginings of our life what to like, hate, act etc from the people around us and the enviroment we live in. For example men are taught to go after slim, big breasted women. Why? Media (internet, newspapers, tv) for one. Humans can be programmed just like computers. They can be taught just like a dog can be taught to catch a frizbee albeit more complex.
True. But Mamoru wasnt born and rasied in our present time was he? The Japan of today is quite different from the Japan of 20 to 30 years ago.
I already stated what side of the issue I am on last post. And I absolutely loathe repeating myself be it in the classroom or web boards.
|
|
|
Post by Creshosk on Sept 20, 2006 2:46:10 GMT -5
Murders can be done unintentionally - unintentional homicide. No, they cannot. Unintentional murder is "manslaughter" not Murder. Murder indicates intent. No intent no Murder. And no there is no legal precedant Then there is no murder nor manslaughter. Your argument is nothing more than an appeal to emotion by misusing legal terms. since time travel technology has not been perfected yet. But is this really the case? You kill a child either by putting a bullet through the head or denying it existance No, only the former case. As Zyppora said before each Sperm cell and each Ovum are potential children as well. You don't honestly believe that a woman kills another human once a month and that men kil millions with each ejaculation do you? by not mating with the intented father the child, end result is still the same. The child's life is terminated. Lets look at this. Aside from the millions of deaths mentioned above. there are other possible children that you are likewise denying existences. At base for each and every member of the opposite gender you are capable of reproducing with you are denying at least one child. Now with scientific advances such as gene splicing it might even be possible for two people of the same gender to be able to reproduce. This doubles the number by allowing more possible existences that you would be denying by not trying to reproduce with every single other person on the planet. that's at least 6 billion deaths by denial of exitence that you yourself are responsible for. With the inclusion of fertility drugs this would allow for more possible children to gain existence. it's not unheard of for two people two be able to have multiple children, 24 has been seen before. So thats 144 billion children that you are sentencing to death outside of those above. Including the 3 million a day potential per male the numbers of children you are personally responsible for the deaths by denial of existence of. I hope you can see how horribly flawed your logic is and why it's patentedly invalid. I see sarcasm and rhetorical questions are wasted on you. You'll note through much of Sailor Moon, Mamoru and Usagi are denied contact with one another. Instead the show and the manga focus on Usagi and activities that have nothing to do with bringing her and Mamoru closer together. Her romance with Mamoru who was only Endymion in his previous incarnation is more of a side story than the central focus of Sailor Moon. Because she understands Usagi more due to the fact of gender. Adding to Seiya's side. after your Usagi would be a murderer I fail to see why you would bother to point this out by showing support for the concept of Usagi being said murderer. Its not the only factor but it is a major factor. I've seen this in real life too, girls communicate better among each other than guys. then homosexuality certainly has the "understanding" argument in its favor. Despite that beinging a horrendous stereotyping as it is individuals rather than gender that allows for sensitivity to other needs. There is nothing homophobic or sexist A homophobic sexist person would not see such errors and would assume them to be normal. about it but it is nature itself. "That's just the way it is" is a poor excuse for sexism or homophobia. Women can make babies, guys cant. Correction: Sans genetic splicing you still need a sperm cell as well as an ovum to produce a baby. Guys are physcially stronger than women. Is it sexist? No. Yes. You are stereotyping a gender. Not all men are strong. Not all women are weak. Its how we are made and hardwired. Which explains scrawny little male nerds and body building women... or you know not. Denying a blind man from piloting a commerical airplane is not called discrimmatory but called the application of common sense. and this is a red herring argument. Yes. We are taught in the beginings of our life what to like, hate, act etc So a baby is born knowing what to hate, what to like how to act? Well then I certainly guess that it's acceptable to go around pooping in our pants and eating anything we find on the ground. from the people around us and the enviroment we live in. For example men are taught to go after slim, big breasted women. Social fatalism not withstanding despite your beliefs people are taught different things by different people. Why? Media (internet, newspapers, tv) for one. You are aware that there are those that reject such sentiments? Humans can be programmed just like computers. Really, well I'll just hack into a person remotely drop a new program in there delete the... how do you suppose I would do that? They can be taught just like a dog can be taught to catch a frizbee albeit more complex.[/quoute]And thus is still a red herring which has nothing to do with the previous conversation. True. But Mamoru wasnt born and rasied in our present time was he? No, he was raised in 1292... OR you know not. The Japan of today is quite different from the Japan of 20 to 30 years ago. So your previous argument is invalidated by yourself. I already stated what side of the issue I am on last post. You cotradicted yourself and made points for both sides. And No you did not directly say who you think Usagi should be with. And I absolutely loathe repeating myself be it in the classroom or web boards. Then you should make your point clear the first time. Rather than being vauge, riddled with inaccurate data and contradictions. Then you wouldn't have to repeat yourself.
|
|
|
Post by Creshosk on Sept 20, 2006 3:05:50 GMT -5
First arguement would depend if temporal mechanics can actually affect the memory of one's brain. That is a big assumption. Alright say that it does. There will be a point when Usagi will be considered a murderer at the onset of breaks up and doing the willy nilly with Seiya or any other person. She is cognizant of this fact that doing this will destroy Chibiusa. And that is the moment of murder. You really shouldn't talk about things you don't understand. Temporal mechanics are alot of different theories. For all we know Chibiusa might never exist. In fact her time traveling might have tainted the causality of the current timeline. For all we know Usagi might have a different daughter, or even a son. Leaving Chibiusa to be only from a posible future. Much like how Mirai Trunks interacting in the past of his world unchangably denied him his existence in the way that he was. Since in his world Veheta was never around to influence the way he was raised, he only had the gentle Gohan to raise him. Now with the timeline changed by his interaction Vegeta survived and thus Trunks was raised by Vegeta who is a bit more harsh than Gohan was. Of course we also see in the Marvel Universe Rachael Summers in her timeline never had a brother. How ever in the 616 timeline Nathan is born and Rachael never is. she was only a possability that was never realized. Also I'd like to point out to the fact in the episode of the last battle with the Dead Moon Circus Chibiusa was fading in and out and one point totally dissappeared. This was because Queen Nelphenlia captured Mamoru. No Mamoru means no Chibiusa - fact established and verified. Yet Usagi et al. still remembered Chibiusa and fought to get her back. Sailor Moon admitedly has a poor grasp on the timeline. Chibiusa never should have faded out. That was merely a ploy to get her character out of the way. If Mamoru and Usagi had her at a later point after Mamoru was returned she would have still existed since she came back from the future after she was concieved. So despite being captured Mamoru was rescued and he and Usagi still would have got together after that and had a child. Them not being together would have no effect as they wouldn't have had her until afterwardds anyway. so if she was to fade form existence due to the capture she never should have existed in the first place to come back. So yes Sailor Moon has a poor grasp of temporal mechanics and combined to incompatible theories about the future being set (her existence proves that they get together) and the future not being set. (Mamoru and Usagi not being together caused her to cease to exist. So all you've managed to do is point out a plot hole. Welcome to fiction. So the concept of temporal mechanics affecting the memory of the brain is not very strong. Ireallivent. all you've mangaed to do ifs find a plot hole. The second arguement (on Biology 101) is based from your own cultural perspective on what defines a child. Negative. His argument is factual data based off of scientific research that is accepted world wide. Some cultures claim life of a child begins at conception while others do not hold this belief. Regardless, no conception means no physical life. regardless of when philisophical "life" begins. Since Usagi is Japanese that arguement should be re-evaluated from a Japanese perspective. Negative. Philisophical ideas have no bearing on scientific data. And I'm pretty sure that the Japanese are well aware of the fact that the sperm cell from a male and the ovum from the female are both required to create new life.
|
|
|
Post by Zyppora on Sept 20, 2006 4:20:12 GMT -5
Murders can be done unintentionally - unintentional homicide. And no there is no legal precedant since time travel technology has not been perfected yet. But is this really the case? You kill a child either by putting a bullet through the head or denying it existance by not mating with the intented father the child, end result is still the same. The child's life is terminated. Can't help but kick. Murder/manslaughter/homicide requires a life to be ended. How many cells do you think die on a daily basis in one person's body? Putting a bullet through someone's head is murder, I agree there. But you can't kill a child when it's not a child yet. Reference to my story about sperm and ovum cells. Besides, there is such a thing as monogamy. Refer to Creshosk's story about 144 billion killed 'children'. To be correct, this number is way higher. 6 billion people all having one baby with each other. That would mean (man - woman) 3 billion women each having 3 billion children (one from each of the 3 billion men). 3 billion * 3 billion = 9,000,000,000,000,000,000 children. And that's not considering the same-sex possibilities of reproducing. And yet the world's population rises what? only a few tens/hundreds of thousands each year? that's 8,999,999,999,999,500,000 children are killed. Who's gonna be responsible for that? Killing sperm cells is inevitable. Each ejaculation normally exerts 3 million of these little critters and 99.9999% won't be able to fertilize an ovum. That means 2.99 million 'children' die each ejaculation. Now let's take one man, and one woman. The woman will give one ovum each month (unless pregnant). That would mean that every 9 months, the man and the woman will have to have intercourse just to not kill a 'child' on the woman's side. So at least every 9 months there will be 2.99 million deaths instead. The woman is fertile starting from her 15th birthday to her 55th (those are rough estimations, and probably incorrect, considering the amount of supplements, hygenic additions and other unnatural junk they put on food these days). That's 40 years total. 40 years equals 480 months. That would mean 480 / 9 = 53.33 children. Say 53. That's 53 * 2.99 million = 159.467 million children. Dead. That's quite a bit for one woman and one man. Then there's 3 billion men and women on Earth (for convenience's sake, I used a 50/50 rate between the genders). That means 3 billion couples * 159.467 million children = 478,400,000,000,000,000 dead children each generation. And that's excluding the non-fertilized ova (of which there are quite a lot on a global scale on a monthly basis) and male 'solo flights' (of which there are plenty on a global scale on a daily basis). As a sidenote: if there was murder/manslaughter/homicide, where's the victim's body? Conclusion: Before you say stuff, stop and think about it for a second.
|
|
|
Post by engineer on Sept 20, 2006 5:18:49 GMT -5
But how many parents actually meet thier childern when they have not even had sex? Well Usagi did in this case. Assuming that is Usagi smart enough to know that not mating with that particular male results in the prevention of Chibiusa from ever existing. That is called intent.
And no matter where I go a polite debate cannot occur without sarcasism and rhetocial questions being thrown around.
The driving force for them to ever be reincarnated was to be together. First and second season dealt with the romance between the two species. At one point in the series thier love was responsible for one of many power ups for Sailor Moon. I fail to realize how that could be regulated to a side story.
I didnt say not all men are strong and all women are weak. There will always be outliners. And the comment about producing a baby, I meant women can house and norish a baby better than men can. They have the tools to do that. I accept the fact that the two genders can do things better than the other. Of course in our PC world and going against nature by turning men into women and women into men that is changing. It is not yet determined if this would have a positive or negative outcome.
Im not sure if you are trying to be funny here or what. The kid receives instructions on what is acceptable and what is not. If the parents teach the child that it is alright to poop in thier pants and eat anything that cross thier path the kid will follow through. If a parent calls each black person "the n-word " in front of the child high chances are the kid will also call the next black person they see "the n-word".
And they are of a small minority. Conditioning works. And Playboy Magazine is not going to change thier requirements of models anytime soon.
Again, Im not sure if you are being funny or what. The human mind can be regarded as a computer, a complex one mind you. And like any computer it can be programed. You can insert "programs" into the brain to coerice a person to desired act and think a certain way. Various government agencies included the CIA (1950's Project Bluebird) have experimented with using mind altering drugs, sound, EM radiation, and images to induce a perfered behavior in the subject. If you want I can PM you some articles detailing such experiments. This is not limited to government black book projects. The entertainment and comsumer industry have used and still use sublimial messaging in radio, tv, and internet to entice the masses to by thier products. They have been doing this for years.
........ok Chiba Mamoru was born August 3, 1974 and rasied afterwords. Not in the year 1292. That would make him the oldest person on earth.
|
|
|
Post by Creshosk on Sept 20, 2006 5:22:06 GMT -5
Murders can be done unintentionally - unintentional homicide. And no there is no legal precedant since time travel technology has not been perfected yet. But is this really the case? You kill a child either by putting a bullet through the head or denying it existance by not mating with the intented father the child, end result is still the same. The child's life is terminated. Can't help but kick. Murder/manslaughter/homicide requires a life to be ended. How many cells do you think die on a daily basis in one person's body? Putting a bullet through someone's head is murder, I agree there. But you can't kill a child when it's not a child yet. Reference to my story about sperm and ovum cells. Besides, there is such a thing as monogamy. Refer to Creshosk's story about 144 billion killed 'children'. To be correct, this number is way higher. 6 billion people all having one baby with each other. That would mean (man - woman) 3 billion women each having 3 billion children (one from each of the 3 billion men). 3 billion * 3 billion = 9,000,000,000,000,000,000 children. And that's not considering the same-sex possibilities of reproducing. And yet the world's population rises what? only a few tens/hundreds of thousands each year? that's 8,999,999,999,999,500,000 children are killed. Who's gonna be responsible for that? Killing sperm cells is inevitable. Each ejaculation normally exerts 3 million of these little critters and 99.9999% won't be able to fertilize an ovum. That means 2.99 million 'children' die each ejaculation. Now let's take one man, and one woman. The woman will give one ovum each month (unless pregnant). That would mean that every 9 months, the man and the woman will have to have intercourse just to not kill a 'child' on the woman's side. So at least every 9 months there will be 2.99 million deaths instead. The woman is fertile starting from her 15th birthday to her 55th (those are rough estimations, and probably incorrect, considering the amount of supplements, hygenic additions and other unnatural junk they put on food these days). That's 40 years total. 40 years equals 480 months. That would mean 480 / 9 = 53.33 children. Say 53. That's 53 * 2.99 million = 159.467 million children. Dead. That's quite a bit for one woman and one man. Then there's 3 billion men and women on Earth (for convenience's sake, I used a 50/50 rate between the genders). That means 3 billion couples * 159.467 million children = 478,400,000,000,000,000 dead children each generation. And that's excluding the non-fertilized ova (of which there are quite a lot on a global scale on a monthly basis) and male 'solo flights' (of which there are plenty on a global scale on a daily basis). As a sidenote: if there was murder/manslaughter/homicide, where's the victim's body? Conclusion: Before you say stuff, stop and think about it for a second. Aye, I was refering to a singular individual in my scenerio. Though there is another outward possability. Asexual reproduction... cloning that is. And since there is no real limit on how often a person might be able to clone themself with the right technology(Darn those scientists for being an accesory to murder by not inventing these technologys which would help bring in more potential children) So while technically infinity would be an imposability. The number of potential children being killed every second by the very events that would set into motion their existence would be mind bogglingly huge.
|
|
|
Post by Creshosk on Sept 20, 2006 5:52:23 GMT -5
But how many parents actually meet thier childern when they have not even had sex? Why should she be a special exception simply because she can time travel? Did you read a thing that we've been saying? I even cited two examples of indivisduals that time traveled, and proved to be anomolys when their possible futures were denied. Well Usagi did in this case. Assuming that is Usagi smart enough to know that not mating with that particular male results in the prevention of Chibiusa from ever existing. That is called intent. Still no legal prescident. And by continuing to say that it would be you are spreading false information. I formally ask you to cease and desist with this intelectually dishonest activity. And no matter where I go a polite debate cannot occur without sarcasism and rhetocial questions being thrown around. If you tried to supliment your own personal feelings with logic, reasoning, evidence and other criteria of "debate" you might be graced with politeness of debate. But without such necessities for it to be a debate you reap what you sow. The driving force for them to ever be reincarnated was to be together. Negative. Queen Serenity's power enabled them to be. First and second season dealt with the romance between the two species. At one point in the series thier love was responsible for one of many power ups for Sailor Moon. I fail to realize how that could be regulated to a side story. Because it was not the primary focus. How many episodes in the first season dealt with them being together? The first season ended the episode before Jupiter arrived. They still weren't together at that point in time. The second season flowed up until the showdown with Beryl up until the last of it from the point where they got their memories back Mamoru (calling himself Prince Endymion) was on Beryls side. The Doom tree series they weren't together at all. The R series they still weren't quite together until later on, they were only really introduced to the fact that they would be together. However their romance was not the main focus here either... In fact their romance wasn't a main focus in S, that would be the messiah and the search for the grail plotline with the awakening of Saturn. Not in SuperS either. That was the hunt for pegasus. In Stars Mamoru isn't even around except for at the begning, a flash back or two and near the end. Their romance was never the main focus. I hardly see how their romance can be anything but a sidestory if its never brought into focus. In fact the director of the anime in an interveiw explained he didn't like mamoru but couldn't kill him off, and that's why their is so many lesbian relationships in his next project, Revolutionary Girl Utena. I didnt say not all men are strong and all women are weak. Guys are physcially stronger than women. Yeah, you did. There will always be outliners. And the comment about producing a baby, I meant women can house and norish a baby better than men can. They have the tools to do that. And a single guy is capable of making more babies than a single woman. I accept the fact that the two genders can do things better than the other. Of course in our PC world and going against nature by turning men into women and women into men that is changing. In nature there are animals that can change their gender naturally by themselves. It is not yet determined if this would have a positive or negative outcome. Aye, because it has a neutral outcome. Though one could argue its positive because it makes people happy. Im not sure if you are trying to be funny here or what. The kid receives instructions on what is acceptable and what is not. If the parents teach the child that it is alright to poop in thier pants and eat anything that cross thier path the kid will follow through. If a parent calls each black person "the n-word " in front of the child high chances are the kid will also call the next black person they see "the n-word". Yes. because children are always mindless drones who do exactly what their parents say no matter what... oh and since you are incapable of telling when a person is being sarcastic: I was being sarcastic. And they are of a small minority. Prove it. Get me the hard data to back up this claim. Conditioning works. And Playboy Magazine is not going to change thier requirements of models anytime soon. Non-seqquiter arguments are invalid. Remain on topic. Again, Im not sure if you are being funny or what. The human mind can be regarded as a computer, a complex one mind you. And like any computer it can be programed. You can insert "programs" into the brain to coerice a person to desired act and think a certain way. You're a schizophrenic aren't you? Schizophrenic dilusions are not valid arguments. Various government agencies included the CIA (1950's Project Bluebird) have experimented with using mind altering drugs, sound, EM radiation, and images to induce a perfered behavior in the subject. If you want I can PM you some articles detailing such experiments. This is not limited to government black book projects. The entertainment and comsumer industry have used and still use sublimial messaging in radio, tv, and internet to entice the masses to by thier products. They have been doing this for years. You're also a paranoid conspiracy theorist. Paranoid Conspiracy theories are not valid in debate. ........ok Chiba Mamoru was born August 3, 1974 and rasied afterwords. Not in the year 1292. When I say something that is extramely odd, chances are I'm being sarcastic to show how fallicious your arguments are. Oh and spreading of disinformation will not be tolerated. That would make him the oldest person on earth. And you wonder why you aren't treated with civility. If your parents never got together and had you, you would cease to exist. Incorrect, I never would have existed in the first place. In the case of SM its not a might or maybe, it is a fact that she would cease to exist. I already told you that all you did was point out a plot hole. If Mamoru and Usagi never met Chibiusa never would have existed, never would have been born, never would have gone back in time, never would have met Usagi. How could she? She was never born. Again, plot hole. You have as poor a grasp of the temporal theiories as the ones who wrote those episodes. If they had sex later or eariler then high chances are it would not be Chibiusa. They knew the her birthdate therefore the moment they had sex to make her. This all depended on one particular sperm and one particlar egg at a particular time and date. As opposed to the other sperm cells and egg cells and potential children form those parirings that were denied existeence by people not having sex. Exactly in the same manner of Chibiusa's parents not having sex because Usagi was doing something else. And no Usagi couldnt have a male offspring based on the canon laws set up by Naoko. Incorrect. Post proof. Because these rumors have been around for quite some time. How was that irrelvant? I just pointed out A plothole nothing more. that memories are immune to time dialations relative to this particular universe. I already pointed out how both yours and the companies poor grasp on temporal mechanics are not admisible as evidence. When Mamoru was captured by Q. Nelphenia they still remembered her even though she ceased to exist. In Stars where Galaxia killed Mamoru (which effectively terminates Chibiusa) they still remembered her and photos of her where still there. Ireelivent, I've already covered this. Reapeating your ignorance will not help your point.
|
|
|
Post by Zyppora on Sept 20, 2006 10:03:42 GMT -5
Incorrect, I never would have existed in the first place. I already told you that all you did was point out a plot hole. If Mamoru and Usagi never met Chibiusa never would have existed, never would have been born, never would have gone back in time, never would have met Usagi. How could she? She was never born. This is the right answer. Chibi-Usa wouldn't cease to exist since she never would exist. How can something that is not, cease? Again, plot hole. You have as poor a grasp of the temporal theiories as the ones who wrote those episodes. No, I refuse to believe that those who wrote the episodes have a poor grasp on temporal theories. With a good logic mindset, everyone would figure out what I just mentioned in this post. The reason they did it the way they did, however, is probably because of the audience: teens that DON'T have this mindset. Or at least wouldn't use it to explain what would happen, should the creators keep themselves to the laws of time. Chibi-Usa would disappear from the series. Usagi and Mamoru would not grief, they would not be sad. Since Chibi-Usa was never part of their lives (and will never be). The fading she manifested when Nehelenia captured Mamoru is a plot hole indeed. Chibi-Usa shouldn't have faded at all. She should have remained the same. And the memories should have remained as well (as they did). And everything Chibi-Usa (might have) changed in the current timeline should have remained. Why? Because in the end, Mamoru is returned to normal, allowing him to get together with Usagi anyway, and bearing Chibi-Usa anyway. Even when Galaxia 'killed' Mamoru, he was brought back, allowing for Chibi-Usa's future to be secured.
|
|
|
Post by Creshosk on Sept 20, 2006 22:34:12 GMT -5
No, I refuse to believe that those who wrote the episodes have a poor grasp on temporal theories. Truth hurts but its true. With a good logic mindset, everyone would figure out what I just mentioned in this post. The reason they did it the way they did, however, is probably because of the audience: teens that DON'T have this mindset. Or at least wouldn't use it to explain what would happen, should the creators keep themselves to the laws of time. Like DBZ did? So girls are not as capable as grasping these complex ideas as boys are? OR Americans are more easily able to get this? No, rather than taking either a racist or sexist stance I'm going to blame the short comings on the people who came up with it. Chibi-Usa would disappear from the series. Usagi and Mamoru would not grief, they would not be sad. Since Chibi-Usa was never part of their lives (and will never be). Conflicting temporal mechanics theories that were not combined in a satisfactory manner. Since Mamoru was rescued and they got together afterwards Chibiusa should never have faded. The fading she manifested when Nehelenia captured Mamoru is a plot hole indeed. plot hole= logical inconsistency. Chibi-Usa shouldn't have faded at all. She should have remained the same. And the memories should have remained as well (as they did). And everything Chibi-Usa (might have) changed in the current timeline should have remained. Why? Because in the end, Mamoru is returned to normal, allowing him to get together with Usagi anyway, and bearing Chibi-Usa anyway. Even when Galaxia 'killed' Mamoru, he was brought back, allowing for Chibi-Usa's future to be secured. Yup. AS you can see they screwed up.
|
|
|
Post by Zyppora on Sept 21, 2006 6:01:01 GMT -5
Like DBZ did? So girls are not as capable as grasping these complex ideas as boys are? You cannot compare the temporal issues between Sailor Moon and DBZ. First of all, DBZ was aimed at a more mature audience. As you probably know, Sailor Moon was aimed at both girls and boys, so that's a non-argument. Third, in DBZ, Trunks' timeline was part of the actual plot, and explained (more or less). In Sailor Moon, Chibi-Usa's fading and other implications of Mamoru and Usagi not getting together are a side effect. I'm sure you've heard of the abbreviation KISS. OR Americans are more easily able to get this? www.bash.orgRead a few quotes there and you'll see what I mean. No, rather than taking either a racist or sexist stance I'm going to blame the short comings on the people who came up with it. KISS. Conflicting temporal mechanics theories that were not combined in a satisfactory manner. Since Mamoru was rescued and they got together afterwards Chibiusa should never have faded. plot hole= logical inconsistency. Thus ending my 'what if' rant. Chibi-Usa shouldn't have faded at all. She should have remained the same. And the memories should have remained as well (as they did). And everything Chibi-Usa (might have) changed in the current timeline should have remained. Why? Because in the end, Mamoru is returned to normal, allowing him to get together with Usagi anyway, and bearing Chibi-Usa anyway. Even when Galaxia 'killed' Mamoru, he was brought back, allowing for Chibi-Usa's future to be secured. Yup. AS you can see they screwed up. Indeed, but not because of a lack of temporal theories. KISS for the kids. I think they chose the right way to manifest the effects of Mamoru's capturing.
|
|
|
Post by Creshosk on Sept 21, 2006 16:39:16 GMT -5
Like DBZ did? So girls are not as capable as grasping these complex ideas as boys are? You cannot compare the temporal issues between Sailor Moon and DBZ. We're discussing temporal mechanics so comparing contrasting applications of temporal mechanics theories is indeed valid. First of all, DBZ was aimed at a more mature audience. Dbz was aimed at boys around the same age of the girls that Sailor Moon was originally aimed at. As you probably know, Sailor Moon was aimed at both girls and boys, No it wasn't. Sailor Moon was originally aimed at girls, not boys. so that's a non-argument. Third, in DBZ, Trunks' timeline was part of the actual plot, and explained (more or less). And this has any relevance ... how? In Sailor Moon, Chibi-Usa's fading and other implications of Mamoru and Usagi not getting together are a side effect. An application of two conflicting temporal mechanics theories. and as we both have said a plothole. A logical and continuity error. I'm sure you've heard of the abbreviation KISS. Aye, and now you'll use a hackneyed saying to try and justify what you've already admitted to being a plothole. www.bash.orgRead a few quotes there and you'll see what I mean. That has nothing to do with the continuation of the previous two examples cited earlier and their original target audiences. If you cannot follow the train of thought of the discussion it might be better for you to stick to threads that you can. If you do not understand the arguments made within debate it would perhaps be best if you refrained from participation. Indeed, but not because of a lack of temporal theories. Incorrect. KISS for the kids. I think they chose the right way to manifest the effects of Mamoru's capturing. No, not kids young teenagers. And I'm sure they are capable of understanding a great deal more than you give them credit for. Even simpler: Send Chibiusa back to the future for some contrived reason and don't even mention her. So no your KISS theory is thrown out the window due to the presence of a simpler explanation.
|
|
|
Post by Zyppora on Sept 22, 2006 5:59:11 GMT -5
We're discussing temporal mechanics so comparing contrasting applications of temporal mechanics theories is indeed valid. I never said it was invalid. Just that comparing Sailor Moon and DBZ on their respective issues on temporal theories and mechanics is kind of like comparing apples and peaches. Dbz was aimed at boys around the same age of the girls that Sailor Moon was originally aimed at. DBZ was aimed at teenage boys, whereas Sailor Moon was aimed at younger girls, and secondary also teenage boys because of the eyecandy. No it wasn't. Sailor Moon was originally aimed at girls, not boys. See above. And this has any relevance ... how? Are we not discussing the differences between DBZ and Sailor Moon on temporal theories? How would Trunks' timeline and its purpose in the series not be relevant? An application of two conflicting temporal mechanics theories. and as we both have said a plothole. A logical and continuity error. Aye, and now you'll use a hackneyed saying to try and justify what you've already admitted to being a plothole. Considering the situation the Senshi were in, would you, were you a member of the design/plot crew, have a better idea in mind? One that draws more of an audience? And yes, that's a genuine question towards you, who questions the choices the current crew made. That has nothing to do with the continuation of the previous two examples cited earlier and their original target audiences. If you cannot follow the train of thought of the discussion it might be better for you to stick to threads that you can. Just bouncing the ball back, kiddo. If you do not understand the arguments made within debate it would perhaps be best if you refrained from participation. Playing on the man again, I see. Rather than taking a racist or sexist stance, you blame it on people that you don't even know. At least with taking a racist or sexist stance you know what you're talking about. You don't know what went on when the scenes of the series were decided on. You don't know the motives of the crew that made them choose to do it the way we see it: a fading Chibi-Usa. You don't know the crew. You don't know who they are, nor how their intelligence is. Some of them may just be rocket scientists, working on the Sailor Moon series as a hobby/volunteer/etc. Point is, you can't judge someone like a member of the Sailor Moon crew, simply because you don't know them. Saying they lack knowledge of temporal theories is like saying Schrodinger's cat is dead before you open up the box. You DON'T KNOW it. KISS for the kids. I think they chose the right way to manifest the effects of Mamoru's capturing. No, not kids young teenagers. And I'm sure they are capable of understanding a great deal more than you give them credit for. And since when are young teenagers not kids? I'm 23 years old, and I'm still my parents' kid. And no, not even I would understand if Chibi-Usa would disappear suddenly and the Senshi would not even remember her, even though I can figure it out logically. We both know her fading was a plot hole. But it served a purpose: angst. To show that there's a crisis going on and that time is against the Senshi. Even simpler: Send Chibiusa back to the future for some contrived reason and don't even mention her. So no your KISS theory is thrown out the window due to the presence of a simpler explanation. 'for some contrived reason'. Yea, considering what you just said about me giving the audience not enough credit, I'm pretty sure they'd mindlessly buy 'some contrived reason' to get her out of the picture. As I said above, Chibi-Usa's fading serves a purpose.
|
|
|
Post by Creshosk on Sept 25, 2006 19:56:16 GMT -5
We're discussing temporal mechanics so comparing contrasting applications of temporal mechanics theories is indeed valid. I never said it was invalid. By saying I can't compare two things you're saying that the comparison is invalid. Just that comparing Sailor Moon and DBZ on their respective issues on temporal theories and mechanics is kind of like comparing apples and peaches. Again you're saying that the comparison is invalid and this right after you said that you didn't say that it's invalid. If it's not invalid then why can such a comparison not be made? DBZ was aimed at teenage boys, whereas Sailor Moon was aimed at younger girls, Nope, teenagers as well. and secondary also teenage boys because of the eyecandy. Not originally an intended effect. So teenage boys were not part of the original target audience. It was originally run in Nakayoshi a shoujo(Girls) magazine which was not marketed toward boys. Rather than doing a "see above" response why not put the end quote modifier after the section that all you'd respond to is "see above"? Are we not discussing the differences between DBZ and Sailor Moon on temporal theories? How would Trunks' timeline and its purpose in the series not be relevant? No, DBZ was used as an example of another more proper application of temporal mechanics, nothing more. Considering the situation the Senshi were in, would you, were you a member of the design/plot crew, have a better idea in mind? One that draws more of an audience? And yes, that's a genuine question towards you, who questions the choices the current crew made. I already told you. Sent her to the future and don't bring her back for Stars. Much simpler. Just bouncing the ball back, kiddo. And you hit the net... Next time try to hit it over the net. Playing on the man again, I see. Rather than taking a racist or sexist stance, you blame it on people that you don't even know. At least with taking a racist or sexist stance you know what you're talking about. You don't know what went on when the scenes of the series were decided on. You don't know the motives of the crew that made them choose to do it the way we see it: a fading Chibi-Usa. No that's me telling you that if you think my argument is too complex then you shouldn't be participating. You don't know the crew. You don't know who they are, nor how their intelligence is. Some of them may just be rocket scientists, working on the Sailor Moon series as a hobby/volunteer/etc. Point is, you can't judge someone like a member of the Sailor Moon crew, simply because you don't know them. Saying they lack knowledge of temporal theories is like saying Schrodinger's cat is dead before you open up the box. You DON'T KNOW it. Please. When a person paints a picture of an apple you can clearyly say that he painted a picture of an apple. When they poorly apply temporal theories to their work you can say that the temporal theories were poorly applied. And why would they be poorly applied as they were? Poor application is evidence of poor understanding. So don't try to say "You don't know me man! you don't know me!" or in this case them. Because it's an invalid argument. And since when are young teenagers not kids? I'm 23 years old, and I'm still my parents' kid. And no, not even I would understand if Chibi-Usa would disappear suddenly and the Senshi would not even remember her, even though I can figure it out logically. Strawman argument and anecdotal evidence. So it's more logical to talk down to the target audience? We both know her fading was a plot hole. Then why try to defend it as if it were not? A plot hole is a screwup. They made a plot hole. Therefore they screwed up. Why try to deny such an allegation? But it served a purpose: angst. To show that there's a crisis going on and that time is against the Senshi. and the other senshi fading didn't serve a similar point? No, you're just trying to justify a screw up even though you openly call it a screw up. 'for some contrived reason'. Yea, considering what you just said about me giving the audience not enough credit, I'm pretty sure they'd mindlessly buy 'some contrived reason' to get her out of the picture. We did the first time they did it. As I said above, Chibi-Usa's fading serves a purpose. No it didn't. The purpose was served in a far better fashion in another manner. Her fading only served to show a poor application of temporal mechanics when combined with the fact the senshi already traveled to the future. They established previously that things are set, fixed finite. Then they blatently disregard what they've already done by saying that the future is not established. This is a common occurence in fiction when handled by people who have no concept of temporal mechanics. The evidence is there. They don't fully understand the concepts that they applied.
|
|
|
Post by yumecosmos on Dec 11, 2006 17:13:02 GMT -5
Since none of us are time travellers, I think it's better not to try to apply logic to time travel. All of it is based on too many assumptions that no one can verify. Anyway, I don't think Chibiusa is the only reason Mamoru and Usagi should be together.
Gender aside, future children aside, all canon aside, I still think Mamoru is better for Usagi. My main reason for saying this is that Seiya sometimes seems more concerned with her own feelings than what Usagi wants. The main example is her trying to kiss Usagi while Usagi is crying over Mamoru. I don't think that was appropriate or tactful on Seiya's part, even if she was trying to comfort her. Rather than just asking what she can do to make Usagi feel better, Seiya wants to know why she isn't good enough. By contrast, in the R season, Mamoru goes so far as to break up with Usagi in order to protect her, completely disregarding his own feelings. It may sound convoluted to say that Mamoru loves her more because he's willing to leave her, but I think it shows how much he cares for her. Seiya loves Usagi, but she also wants to satisfy her own feelings. Mamoru puts Usagi's well-being above everything. He wants her to be happy, even if it's not with him. And I think in the end he needs Usagi more than Seiya does. Seiya has some self-confidence of her own. But Mamoru, in spite of the arrogant facade he puts on, seems to demand perfection of himself, and when he feels he isn't strong enough (no matter how unfounded that assesment may be) he tears himself apart. Usagi believes in him and depends on him, and I think he needs that more than he lets on.
Besides, Seiya has Kakyuu. (Allow me this small bit of fanon... ^^; ) Episode 196: Kakyuu is already dead, and Fighter has to choose between staying to protect Usagi or going to avenge her princess. And Fighter chooses to avenge Kakyuu. The rational option at that point would be to stay together and protect the princess who is still alive, not go running off on a suicidal mission. But it's more important to Fighter to take revenge for Kakyuu, even though there is nothing to be gained from it and she knows she will probably die. (That she does not actually die in the end does not change the fact that she believed she would when she made the decision.) I'm not saying that Fighter and Kakyuu are necessarily lovers, but it's obvious whom Fighter's life is dedicated to.
|
|