>>51618855Not look, are. Pokemon take on that role in their world, and this is something the creators and various other sources have attested to. I've said it enough times but even the man behind Pokemon unapologetic said Pokemon are like cats and dogs. And this is a way the series constructs Pokemon.
Pokemon occupy the same space as real critters. This is why our sources, like the late Takeshi Shudo and the 2012 product guide, makes a distinction between *real* critters and Pokemon but never take out Pokemon from the concept of what a critter is.
Verily indeed, the series constructs Pokemon in a way that they may be perceived as cute, innocent critters, and this is how Satoshi Tajiri described Pokemon. For example the interactions between the player and their Pokemon mirror the interactions between a pet dog and their owner right down to their behaviors during picnic. You wash them down just like one does their pet dog and they act innocent, cute and animal-like in camp even chasing a ball around like a pack of domesticated dogs.
This is why people have issues with Pokephilia. It is not in any way real zoofilia but I could see why people may think of it as *fictional* zoofilia. Perverts and other inane group of people are basically sexualiazing what are magical dogs that come in various shapes and forms, people are keen to pick up on the context the people who run Pokemon want the Pokemon to be perceived as and people see that it is wrong to sexualize these innocent, cute critters.
Pokemon constructs a fantastical world full of wonderful, magical critters that should be seen as domesticated animal, not a lover. Pokemon utilizes these concepts to construct their world which resonate with us in the real world.
