Current Events > If you eat meat in the Pokemon world, you're a sick fuck

(+) Yeah! (+)

TomClark posted...

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/4/5/1/AAABqgAAD6HD.jpg

That boy is a monster. It's like feeding chickens chicken nuggets

Srk700 posted...

Be very careful. That berry might very well be a Cherubi.

There's a milk pokemon too. Can't even trust that.

Blue_Inigo posted...

That boy is a monster. It's like feeding chickens chicken nuggets

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/4/6/2/AAWfh3AAD6HO.png

I would have a pikachu sandwich restaurant.

Finis-XII posted...

The comparisons to real-life animals in the pokdex are there for the players benefit, not to be taken as in-universe Pokmon canon. Pokmon are literally the animals of the Pokmon world, it's been well established at this point.

then why aren't they called animals instead of pokemon? Why make the distinction?

And no, you're filling out the pokedex, remember?

Kimbos_Egg posted...

then why aren't they called animals instead of pokemon? Why make the distinction?

They're called pokmon............because it's Pokmon and that's just what animals are called in the Pokmon universe. There isn't a distinction.

And no, you're filling out the pokedex, remember?

And? My point stands. The comparisons to real-life animals are just meant to be a frame of reference to what real-life creature the pokmon is based on.

For example Pidgey is referred to as a "tiny bird" pokmon, meaning it's yeah, a bird. In other words, what in real life we would call...an animal. It doesn't mean Pidgey is some separate species from "birds", that makes no sense.

Kimbos_Egg posted...

then why aren't they called animals instead of pokemon? Why make the distinction?

And no, you're filling out the pokedex, remember?

I think the best way to understand this is that's just what people in the Pokemon universe call certain group of Pokemon. We see in Scarlet and Violet people referring to fishes, birds, and dogs but that doesn't mean we have to assume they're referring to real dogs and fishes but Pokemon that they categorize with those labels. Instead of real foxes, in the Pokemon universe foxes refers to Pokemon like the Fennekin and Zorua line. Birds in universe would be Pidgey, Talonflame and the like, in-universe people categorize Pokemon that way and use those labels. This is most likely the case since we know from official sources that's the case, even as far back as 1996 thanks to Takeshi Shudo's blog and one of the things he mentions there is how there was a decision that Pokemon would mirror the relationship of animals in the real world. Takeshi Shudo also refers to Pokemon as a group of animals made up of familiar objects and creatures. Notice from this leaked product guide how they even put in italics the word replace to put emphasize on the concept.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/4/4/6/AARO5TAADSUG.jpg

I think if people want to have a greater understanding of the way Pokemon is they should definitely read Satoshi Tajiri's biography, it was only recently translated a few months back and it's been out since 2018. It really sheds a lot of light on what Pokemon is and wants to convey, and it fits neatly with things like the late Takeshi Shudo's blog writings and that 2012 leaked product guide.

To put it short the big inspiration for Pokemon was Satoshi Tajiri's childhood spending time out in nature and interacting with the wild life, in his biography it's revealed he not only caught bugs, and other animals, but also studied them and took care of them. When he went to middle school the creek which he explored had been filled up with concrete to make ways for more buildings which clearly made a big impact in his life. Pokemon is really about exploring nature and interacting with the creatures that reside within it, it's an idealized version of Tajiri's childhood but magical and at the start of his biography he dreams of being a child again and exploring nature but instead of real animals he imagines Pokemon instead. I put together the relevant pages but I would recommend anyone into the history behind Pokemon to really read it.

https://imgur.com/z89Tq8r

It's full of really neat insights into the origin of Pokemon and it helps explain a lot of things like why Pokemon are designed a certain way or why Pokemon behave and are treated certain ways, Tajiri pretty much views Pokemon as being pets in the same vein as cats and dogs which is in turn reflected on how Pokemon behave and how the player interacts with them in the games. I imagine Tajiri's world is one where instead of real animals they're replaced by these friendly, magical creatures know as Pokemon which is reflected on how the series develops and how people perceive the Pokemon themselves.

i could eat a Pichu for hours

Are microscopic life forms also classified as Pokemon?
Can you get stealth rock powered disinfectant to slow them down?

You will have to tear my Kanto Fried combusken from my cold dead hands

I also want to add a bit more to my post above because it's important to point out how important it is to Pokmon identity is the inspiration behind it and how it plays out in how Pokmon constructs it's identity.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/5/0/1/AARO5TAAD6Xd.jpg
This is the epilogue of Tajiri's manga, compare it to the prologie which starts with Tajiri dreaming of being a child again in a world he created and how it ends with a child seeing a sparrow and thinking of it as a Pokmon. Tajiri's experience in exploring nature as a child and taking care of animals greatly shaped up the identity of Pokmon. In this case it's no small wonder the Pokmon company itself is telling 3rd parties and merchandisers not only that real animals don't exist within the Pokmon universe but that Pokmon replace them. And this is because of the frameworkTajiri created for Pokmon based off his own childhood.

If Pokmon is meant to convey a feeling of exploring nature and interacting with animals in a positive way it would make zero sense for real animals to exist because that would only diminish that message. The panels I showed show just how important was for Tajiri to get that point across with Pokmon. In Tajiri's biography both Ken Sugimori and Satoshi Tajiri think of Pokmon as these friendly animal-like creatures. Thanks to this biography we can start to have a better picture of Pokmon identity thanks to other outside sources like Takeshi Shudo's blog.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/2/1/8/AARO5TAADz8y.png
This is a section from his blog, he has plenty of entries discussing his tenure as the headwriter of the original Pokmon anime, and here he mentions how it was decided that Pokmon would mirror real animals from the real world before the creation of the anime back in 1996. We know from old interviews like the one with Tajiri and Ishihara that Tajiri was heavily involved with the development of the anime and this view point aligns with what we see in his biography.

I know I wrote a lot but in order to get a coherent picture of what Pokmon are you have to dig a little deeper. People think of Pokmon as animals because the series actively pushes that view even from the very start of the series. I'm currently playing Scarlet and there is a sense of exploring nature and interacting with animals, even if Pokmon are fantasy creatures, because that's what Tajiri was aiming for when creating Pokmon.

I mean its not uncommon in Pokedex entries to see references to certain pokemon being eaten by other pokemon. I dont see why it'd be a huge stretch for people to eat pokemon. Though the few references of that I can think of are treated as unethical. (Slowpoke tails and farfetchd becoming an endandered species)

Though I guess they could always do some copout and say the meats in the game are actually a non-Pokemon plant-based protein that coincidentally looks and tastes exactly like meat in the real world lol

It's ok to force Pokemon to fight each other their whole lives but it's not ok to eat them for dinner?

There has to be certain species of pokemon that are acceptable for eating.

Same as there are some animals we eat and others that are not considered ethical to eat.

TomClark posted...

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/4/5/1/AAABqgAAD6HD.jpg

At least Slowpoke can grow his tail back. 2 Kinglers are murdered for this meal >_>

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/5/8/9/AAfOu0AAD6Y1.jpg