>>50792328Let's ask ourselves who is this a problem for? Do the people who run the series think that's a problem? Aside from the sexualization I doubt it. In fact it's the people who run this series, and people who have worked on it, who have explicitly stated that Pokémon are animal characters. I see more people refer to Pokémon as animals more than monsters and I would argue that's how they want people to perceive Pokémon as. It's the way Pokémon are portrayed and the place in the universe the reason these conversations pop up in the first place. I doubt the series runners see it as a problem and it's possibly they might see it as ok.
Second do people into Pokémon porn see it as a problem? I don't see it. If those smash and pass numbers reflect a general opinion combined with porn numbers from the rule34 search bar are any indication. If the tier list I posted also reflects a general perception than I doubt many see it as an issue. Pokémon has long been embedded in the nsfw part of that subculture identity and the numbers you see reflect this. If the series itself pushes a certain viewpoint what's the initiative for people to see it your way and decontextualize a character from a well liked context?
Do people who make content see it as a problem? Again probably not. It's possible many of the people who make content belong to said subculture due to how strongly connected both are. In YouTube most of the profilic pokephile content creators appear to identify with furries.
In reality it's not as big of an issue as you make it out to be, it's more of an issue where you don't like certain labels. And that's totally ok, but we are talking about identities, appropriation and perceptions that have been building up for more than two decades. I see it all the time on /v/, search in the archives for "hmofachads" to see exactly how obsessive people are over being regulated to a certain label. In the end its possible not many people see it as an issue.
