HOME | DD

#antisonelise #antisonicxelise #itisntbeastality #nobeastiality
Published: 2017-05-12 18:54:32 +0000 UTC; Views: 3442; Favourites: 44; Downloads: 1
Redirect to original
Description
Yes I dislike Sonic and Elise as a pairing. And no, it isn't because it's 'beastality'. I'm discouraged that I even have to explain this.Roger and Jessica Rabbit was a human x anthropomorphic pairing and there are more anthro x human shippings out there. No one seemed to complain, but when Sonic x Elise comes around... All heck breaks lose.
You see folks, Sonic is an anthropomorphic fictional character. He obtains a human like intellect. Sonic's anatomy is basically like a human's and their proportions. He's civil, has morals, can consent, can walk, can talk, can eat human coursed meals like a human, wears shoes and gloves, and comprehends things. In other words, Sonic could say 'yes' or 'no', and Elise wouldn't be taking advantage of his primitive nature in anyway. She wouldn't just be having an intercourse with an animal who cannot understand or say 'no'. (Matter of fact why in the world does shipping human x Anthro resulted in sexual intercourse?) I also don't see any indication that this pairing would be for and with sexual relations between the two.
Let's not forget Sonic's first planned girlfriend, it wasn't Sally or Amy who are which both anthros, was a human named Madonna. I'm not lying nor fibbing when I state this. sonic.wikia.com/wiki/Madonna
Even if you do believe it's wrong or it makes you uncomfortable, that's fine. I'm not big myself these type of pairings and I'm usually neutral on them. But saying this pairing is beastality is a far stretch. Even if you DO believe them having a relationship is ''wrong'', you can't say it's beastality.
Bestiality is the definition when an animal and a human are screwing each other.
Sonic and Elise never done so. So what's the problem here?
So no, I don't dislike this shipping because of the infamous excuse ''beastality''. I dislike it because it lacks development and chemistry for me. I despise Sonic and Elise because of how cliche, rushed, and just out of the blue it was. I also didn't like Elise's character. I thought Sega's attempt of making their moment blowing out the flame 'memorable', or their new found relationship, was a horrible and poor one. I'm sure it could have turned out better if the development and kinks of the game wasn't pushed and rushed, but sadly this isn't the case.
Note: If you want to make a 'selfish' moment look respectable/endearing, at least make it make sense, or developed. youtu.be/bmtzPw9FwDU
Gee, spare a memory of a hedgehog you just met, or save your people and the world from chaos. I kid you not. Elise had the choice to blow A CANDLE out and save everyone or to spare her a memory of Sonic destruction. (I mentioned this before in my other meme 'Amy is ever so selfish' and compared the two.)
Erase the demon that would devastate thousands future and present, or save it for her and Sonic's encounter.Take your pick!
She apparently had the guts to say she didn't care what happened to the world on top of that. Given her reaction, I wonder if she would have done it on her own if Sonic didn't say ''Just smile.''
To be honest the pairing, given its representation, only seems to be a one-sided thing whereas Sonic would cater to Elise, her safety, and to help her and her flaws. Nothing would come in return to Sonic. There are absolutely no dynamics of this pairing from what I know besides the cliche damsel x hero, and would complicate/tie down Sonic. I give Sonic props as well for not snapping or cracking after saving her in the same game 'x' many times and dealing with her moment of confession. Then again he might have practice from saving and entertaining Amy. But on her defense, Amy actually escaped and wasn't as nearly damsel-ish as Elise. In fact didn't Amy herself save her at one point?
I can't grip or see it as a pairing, and how they could work. Let alone work with Sonic's given personality without totally altering his character and responsibilities within itself. The only thing I see this pairing is a long distant platonic relationship.
Related content
Comments: 50
JohnSpartan1982 In reply to ??? [2017-06-21 21:57:59 +0000 UTC]
And Beauty and the Beast had a good point too eh?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Rocketeer-Raccoon In reply to JohnSpartan1982 [2017-06-21 22:07:31 +0000 UTC]
Only problem with Beauty and the Beast is that the Beast pretty much took the beauty as his prisoner in exchange for her father who he held as his hostage, only to then fall in love with the beast but isn't that stockholm syndrome?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
JohnSpartan1982 In reply to Rocketeer-Raccoon [2017-06-21 22:19:15 +0000 UTC]
Yup but he did learned his lesson you know and behaved better as she learned beauty is from within.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Rocketeer-Raccoon In reply to JohnSpartan1982 [2017-06-21 22:28:36 +0000 UTC]
Oh I see, it was a long time ago since I watched Beauty & the Beast but lots of people seem to hate Beauty and the Beast because they think of it as stockholm syndrome. Another Disney movie I think is foul in some ways is The Little Mermaid because she's basically in love with someone she has never met before and also I know about the original darker story which is nothing like it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
JohnSpartan1982 In reply to Rocketeer-Raccoon [2017-06-21 22:35:55 +0000 UTC]
Well Beauty and the Beast is quite a beloved movie and some say it's better than LM as LM was about it's more important of how a person looks while BATB did the opposite you know, it's about love isn't by appearance or glitz and glamour with all that superficial nonsense but what the person in the skin or the soul for that is what soulmate means.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Rocketeer-Raccoon In reply to JohnSpartan1982 [2017-06-21 22:51:03 +0000 UTC]
I suppose I should give Beauty and the Beast a new watch, although not the recent live-action version though, I think these live-action versions are kind of pointless to be honest. I agree, the Little Mermaid is a weak movie.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Rocketeer-Raccoon In reply to JohnSpartan1982 [2017-06-21 23:01:09 +0000 UTC]
To both things I presume.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
IvoryAlmonds In reply to ??? [2017-05-13 17:46:23 +0000 UTC]
Yup. The lack of double standards is strong in this one. Then again what do we expect. It's the Sonic fandom .
It is stupid, and I think half of the people who use it don't even know what the term means. Basically it means a human mindlessly screwing a primitive animal. Mostly all definitions available in dictionaries say 'Human and animal intercourse'. Last time I checked, Sonic isn't primitive, and she isn't 'mindlessly' screwing him or screwing him period.
Yes I really think the moment was a big no no and wtf, but people are still harping over it, beating a frankly dead and erased (pun intended.) horse. It is indeed.
👍: 1 ⏩: 0