Skip Navigation
161 comments

  • The difference is Pokemon makes it clear that the Pokemon enjoy battling and do it voluntarily

    Are these the same people who accept JK Rowling's "the house elves are slaves but they like it so it's cool and even the idea of emancipation is a joke" with no further introspection?

    • Literally a pro slavery argument...

    • Taking my Charmander down to the Pokemon center to get electroshock treatment for her drapetomania and then trauma-bonding afterwards with pokemon treats that are basically like heroin

    • You would think, but in the lore Pokemon do just casually form fight clubs and have small wars. In addition, something about teaming up with humans allows them to unlock power boosts or just having access to a coach. Granted, the levels of intelligence and similarity to human psychology can vary from Mon to Mon. One example is that Basculin in the lore is basically just a violent trout, making it less of a moral concern to many in-universe gourmands. Meanwhile other Pokemon like Alakazam or Orangaru is effectively a human with magic powers.

    • The curtin is only blue sometimes

    • I think the difference is this, JK wanted to write a serious, complex fantasy world that touched on actual real world issues like fascism and racism, but sucked shit at world building and kept dropping random crap in there that she then later had to scramble to justify. Examples being easily accessible time travel, and institutionalized chattel slavery. A more clever fantasy author could have dreamt up a race of fey creatures who enjoyed doing favors for humans in exchange for little gifts or something, but then greedy humans abused the relationship, and while these fey beings still wanted to be helpful to humans they objected to the ones who grossly exploited their natural kindness. But JK ain't smart enough for that, she just put a fully sentient, basically the same mentally as a human, slave character, who is explicitly called a slave, in her story to make a villain seem more evil and then didn't want to deal with the implications world-building wise.

      Pokémon was just like "hey a game where you collect cute little monsters and have them do little battles would be fun". Then people tried to write serious stories in the setting and people realized that any real world allegory of this were kinda fucked. Buy Pokémon has never had very robust or serious world building, and is the work of a variety of authors, not the sole vision of one writer. It's in sort, kind of a mess, so trying to do a serious breakdown of it is a bit of a folly, since it's design is resistant to that sort of thing, it's a silly world designed to sell fun toys and games. We can do these little nerdy deep dives for shits and giggles but we're not really deconstructing anything serious.

  • I'm gonna brutalize one Pokemon for every dumbass comment in this thread. Sorry comrades but I've already stomped a Maushold to death and that's basically 4 pokemon in 1

  • also the whole debate over this shit is basically a veiled form of the vegan struggle session so lets just stop pretending we're concerned for the rights of pixels in the shape of an orange dragon

    chill out, people want to have fake monsters fight each other

  • Hot take: game is fun, not great but it's early acess so it could get better

    Honestly feels more like the Pokémon anime than the games in many ways but in a good way, little things like letting out my fire pal as a light source while mining at night feels better than anything gamefreak has done in the last 20 years

  • This is less true for me than others because I spent 80% of my time in Pokemon X in Pokemon Aimie playing games with, petting, and feeding my Pokemon rather than battling with them

    But yeah.

  • Lmao such a Liberal response to say “hey we pretend the slaves are our friends so that makes it better”.

    No that makes it worse you fools

    • This is fine from a media criticism angle but you phrased this post kinda like the Pokemon are real and actually your (like you the player, nor your avatar in game's) literal slaves.

      • I’m talking about the text and the comments in the OP justifying it. Weird derailing and overly defensive comment.

        There’s nothing immoral about being evil in a video game. I love doing evil playthroughs in RPGs and killing innocents and stealing and all that. I don’t come up with an elaborate ideology for why I actually am a good guy though out of character online, why it’s actually fine to slaughter the weak. That’s what people who defend the Pokémon universe from a moral perspective online are doing when they say stuff like “Pokémon are actually our friends and volunteers”.

        Just say “yep we are enslaving em and battling em because it’s fun”

        It’s the difference between someone who likes playing 40k and the lore vs. someone who spends all their time literally arguing online why the Imperium of Man is justified and good.

    • slaves loved working thus it was morally correct to enslave them = pokemon love fighting

  • From the library in Diamond/Pearl/Platinum

    A young man, callow and foolish in innocence, came to own a sword. With it, he smote Pokémon, which gave sustenance, with carefree abandon. Those not taken as food, he discarded, with no afterthought. The following year, no Pokémon appeared. Larders grew bare. The young man, seeking the missing Pokémon, journeyed afar. Long did he search. And far and wide, too, until one he did find. Asked he, "Why do you hide?" To which the Pokémon replied... "If you bear your sword to bring harm upon us, with claws and fangs, we will exact a toll." "From your kind we will take our toll, for it must be done." "Done it must be to guard ourselves and for it, I apologize." To the skies, the young man shouted his dismay. "In having found the sword, I have lost so much." "Gorged with power, I grew blind to Pokémon being alive." "I will never fall savage again. This sword I denounce and forsake." "I plead for forgiveness, for I was but a fool." So saying, the young man hurled the sword to the ground, snapping it. Seeing this, the Pokémon disappeared to a place beyond seeing...

    Long ago, when Sinnoh had just been made, Pokémon and humans led separate lives. That is not to say they did not help each other. No, indeed they did. They supplied each other with goods, and supported each other. A Pokémon proposed to the others to always be ready to help humans. It asked that Pokémon be ready to appear before humans always. Thus, to this day, Pokémon appear to us if we venture into tall grass.

    I've always interpreted that Pokemon choose to show up and challenge humans when they want to join them, and will flee/not show up if they don't want to be with people. Pokemon are clearly stronger than humans and will straight up not listen to you if you don't have enough badges.

    Also, battles don't seem to be "real fighting' in the way that they get injured or anything. Real sickness and injury, death, etc are presented as something completely different from status effects and fainting.

    Okay, thats my incredibly nerdy take.

    Anyway, I'm not so offended by Palwords "animal exploitation" joke as much as it makes me roll my eyes in a "Mario is high on mushrooms lololol Mario is possessing people with cappy lolol" way. It an old and easy joke. I feel like entertainment is nihilistic enough as it is.

    I think a better idea would be a game where the Pals are being exploited by the bad guys and you free them and lead them in a bloody revolution for freedom lol.

161 comments