>>50225313It's not an issue about being dumb but given their place and station in their universe Pokémon are unable to consent period.
I've been holding off rewatching the anime for an essay I want to write but even small glimpses that people post here and there only strengthen this to be the case. The reason is that Pokémon lack agency. I've stressed that they are not people, and this is heavily enforced by the series itself, and that they also occupy a specific context. I usually try to show this visually but sometimes the series shows it via actions. Lusamine dialog about how trainers keep their Pokémon in their PCs at their whims is one such example.
Recently I saw this screencsp which is pretty straightforward. The Pokémon here completely lacks agency and the whole situation is more or less treated as if the Pokémon was just a pet getting a haircut or something along those lines. Of course it's much more severe than a haircut since it involves the complete physical change of the Pokémon but the decision was up to it's owners and not the Pokémon itself and the scene plays it off as not a big deal, verily the little girl is crying how she wanted to raise it as it's cute pre-evo. Moments like this shine that Pokémon exist as pets and lack agency for things such as consent. Even as wild critters in the wild this doesn't manifest itself.
Pokephilia is an abuse of this dynamic and power. It is a groomer fantasy period and it involves molesting innocent creatures under one's care. These are not relationships between two adults nor two people but between owner and pet.
