>>51499554Maybe in your opinion but no one is obligated to agree with that inanity. Verily indeed in a general sphere Pokémon, as in the creatures themselves, perform pretty poorly in comparison to their pornography count.
But more to the point is that at the end of the day a Pokémon is a cute little critter, not a person nor a lover. It's a creature that you take care of just like a cat or dog, a creature that you play fetch with or pet, an affectionate critter that displays pet like affection. Pokémon at their core are magical dogs that come in various shapes and sizes. Of course this isn't something I made up. Oak in Gen I makes it clear Pokémon are kept as pets, much of the imagery involving the domestic sphere of Pokémon is lifted directly from domestic animals. Most telling is that Satoshi Tajiri explicitly states this in his very own biographical manga from 2018.
No amount of special pleading will ever change what Pokémon are. No one is obligated to entertain your brand of inanity no matter how much you whine about it, people are keen to pick up on the context Pokémon are built upon.
>>51499596Yes GalladeAnon. Pokémon is fantasy and as such operates by its own special context. Maybe you fail to understand that but it is what it is. Same with your posting habits and trying to negate the term pokephilia because it would go against your narrative by grouping Pokémon attraction in a single term.
