>>55639572Yes. I agree it would have been better if they hadn't brought it up at all. But they did and said that while it used to happen, it doesn't any more. They likely did it because it was gen 4 which also introduced Arceus. So they must have felt the need to explain the Pokémon world somewhat, such as what makes humans and Pokémon different. It's seems what they're going for is that the split happened very late in history, since concepts like marriage even existed at all during the time.
>>55639688>B-but it didn't say the word "illegal" in it!They used to do it and now they don't. USED TO.
>>55656357Yes, I don't like it, but in that post I'm just saying what Sinnoh Folk Story says and what it's clearly trying to go for. It clearly says marriage between Pokémon and humans isn't a thing and that Pokémon and humans are different. I tried to keep headcanon out of it. It's obvious humans and Pokémon are different, but in what way it means is kind of open to interpretation.
So here's what I think. I think that all or at least most Pokémon have human-level sentience/sentience, but that doesn't mean Pokémon and humans can have romance. Pokémon just don't think the same as humans. The average Pokémon only really cares about Pokémon Battles and the others want to be pets, stay in the wild or compete in other forms of competition or stuff like that. They don't want to live like humans do and do many human things. Pokémon and humans have a very specific kind of relationship that gets complicated if romance is involved. A Pokémon's and human's roles in society and way of thinking are very different. It's most likely a Pokémon will feel disturbed if a human showed romantic feelings for them, or if it felt those feelings itself for a human. And even if they both agreed to it, then it still wouldn't feel natural for the Pokémon, and they would have to hide it, because there's no getting around the fact that it's canon that it's considered wrong.
