| No, I don't mean having as your waifu and considering her best girl ever. I mean actual crush like the real ones that people have over real girls with all the symptoms that you have when you're in love. It's not like that I have a massive crush on you, Frau Kaho Hinata from Blend S. It's just that I ran out of other options.  |
tlato_butFeb 6, 2019 8:51 AM
| "What a Player, what a Champion here at Wimbledon, the first man to win 8 Championships." Andrew Castle on Roger Federer winning his 19th Grand Slam title. |
| "When you fall in love with an anime Character?" Watashi wa mada Weeb ni natte imasen :) |
| It happens to me all the time. I've always found Anime characters more attractive than real people. |
 |
 I don't think this egao needs a caption. |
 ❅Aoishi❅ ✿My Profile ✿MyAnimeList ✿MyMangaList |
| i can really like a character, but no, never "love" it at that point. I felt sad because of ending an anime with characters i like alot, but no more than that. |
| I do not know if that is possible bro. Even if you like it a lot, I doubt you really feel in love. .Having those feelings for an anime character is really difficult. |
| I fell in love with any badass girl like Annie and Mikasa or any futa girls. cuz these types don't exist in real life, you know. |
 "というわけで。待望の、体 操 服！ でっあ～る。祭りであれば、余も着飾ってはいられぬと用意したが……うむ！ 心身ともに軽くなったようだ。どうだ？ 似合っているであろう、マスター？" - Random Quote From Internet by Saber Nero |
| lol I don't think thats possible for me. |
lavienker said: Btw falling in love/having a crush on an anime character and calling anime characters waifu/husbando isn't the same thing? I guess you could consider similar the semantics, but I differ in the sense that I have like 70 waifus, only 10 made the Top-10 in my MAL list which were my 10 favourites of the 70, but only Kaho Hinata is the one that not only I have as my main waifu, but also a real crush who gets tense whenever I see her. Note that my conception of waifu is more akin to consider a girl hot and/or cute. |
| "What a Player, what a Champion here at Wimbledon, the first man to win 8 Championships." Andrew Castle on Roger Federer winning his 19th Grand Slam title. |
| Despite my purchasing decisions in regards to Chie Satonaka, no. |
 |
| Even if I've joked about waifus and stuff like that I've never though of them anything more than a fictional character, I think that if someone really think of them in another way it's because they have issues. |
 |
 She's strong, cute, kind, thoughtful and badass girl. Rem is the perfect waifu for me. |
 |
| Love? Nah, but there are definitely some characters which I wouldn't kick out if they suddenly appeared in my room ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ |
  I will show no mercy for you You had no mercy for me The only thing that I ask Love me mercilessly |
| I won't be saying which one but I've noticed that my fangirling over a certain character reached abnormal levels and it scares me. |
 |
Aldnox said: Minerbit said: You'd be surprised. I know people who are legit in love with animu characters.I do not know if that is possible bro. Even if you like it a lot, I doubt you really feel in love. .Having those feelings for an anime character is really difficult. Anyways, nah I haven't reached quite that level yet, but I really like a few animu girls. Can you consider me if I bought a dakimakura of Kaho as a "people who are legit in love with animu characters"? Just asking. |
| "What a Player, what a Champion here at Wimbledon, the first man to win 8 Championships." Andrew Castle on Roger Federer winning his 19th Grand Slam title. |
| I know that feeling of falling in love with an anime character sadly. It's a nice feeling but also not because you can't be with them. I have a few waifus but my main waifu is like the character i love if you know what i mean. That also started me losing interest in 3D girls which i personally find fine. |
 |
Aldnox said: Minerbit said: You'd be surprised. I know people who are legit in love with animu characters.I do not know if that is possible bro. Even if you like it a lot, I doubt you really feel in love. .Having those feelings for an anime character is really difficult. Anyways, nah I haven't reached quite that level yet, but I really like a few animu girls. It's just that I'm surprised to have those feelings in a fictional character. I had a similar feeling with a character in a video game, but no more. One thing is that someone likes or believes "love" a fictional character, but falling in love is a little more complicated. Maybe it's possible, I'll have to figure out xD. |
Aldnox said: tlato_but said: Nah. I mean completely ignoring 3D girls due to this one 2D character.Can you consider me if I bought a dakimakura of Kaho as a "people who are legit in love with animu characters"? Just asking. So at least I'm flirting with the boundaries of weabooness and flatout insanity. Not that is good, but still within the "nomal range". |
| "What a Player, what a Champion here at Wimbledon, the first man to win 8 Championships." Andrew Castle on Roger Federer winning his 19th Grand Slam title. |
DaCraziGuy said: Even if I've joked about waifus and stuff like that I've never though of them anything more than a fictional character, I think that if someone really think of them in another way it's because they have issues. "people who are not like me have issues" |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
necro_dancer said: DaCraziGuy said: Even if I've joked about waifus and stuff like that I've never though of them anything more than a fictional character, I think that if someone really think of them in another way it's because they have issues. "people who are not like me have issues" People loving characters, aka imaginary people, has issues. Sorry, but if you really love (the thread said like if it were a real person) a character you should go to a psychologist. |
|
DaCraziGuy said: People loving characters, aka imaginary people, has issues. Sorry, but if you really love (the thread said like if it were a real person) a character you should go to a psychologist. Meh, I'd disagree. It's not necessarily like a dreamt-up hallucination that the person is having or that they believe is a real, tangible entity. It's a character from a work of fiction, that they were introduced to by the work, got to see and know through the work, and ended up possessing feelings of intimacy towards the character because of that much. Like how pretty much everybody gets introduced to a character they end up growing attached to - just this time the sort of attachment is more intimate, in a way. The psychological issues would stem from the belief that the character is real and whatnot, or just generally an incapability of being able to cope with the fact that the character is fictional, for a more broad-yet-more-precise way of putting it. The former extremity becomes noteworthy because it's far removed from any sort of normalcy, even in an environment that tends to encourage and support this sort of thing. People like Jin15 from the MLP fandom are notorious and get a lot of attention for this type of behavior for a reason - they are not part of the norm, even by people who possess feelings like this towards a fictional character, and their behavior is often delusional and self-destructive at that. That, and the sheer extremity involved in having such an approach makes it laughable, and kind of fascinating in a creepy way sometimes whenever a case like that does pop up. The rest I'll try to explain a bit below, since I feel like it's a better launching point for that discussion. Minerbit said: I do not know if that is possible bro. Even if you like it a lot, I doubt you really feel in love. .Having those feelings for an anime character is really difficult. That is pretty true. There's no interaction. There is no chance at anything ever being reciprocated, there is no chance to try to convince or demonstrate yourself or to try anything related to standard attempts at how a relationship is formed. There is no chance for a relationship in the first place, there is no chance at your existence even being known. At the absolute best, you have imagination/fantasization, or stuff that basically amounts to proxies for simulating some kind of interaction, and those don't even really pass as a substitute for the real thing as much as a sort of brief satisfaction of something. There is an entirely separate fictional reality that will always stand between everything. There is always an extreme distance that can never actually be bridged, not even based on the slightest percent, it's always going to be at absolute 0. Everything is hopeless from the start. Which, yes, is a shitty situation to be in whenever feelings of intimacy are involved towards something or someone. It's just a matter of how much that can be accepted by the person in question and how well they cope with it, otherwise, yeah, it can pose an actual problem if it's latched onto long enough without a solution being found. I think most people kind of get put off by the concept because of as much, which is fine and understandable. I will say that it's entirely possible to understand and grasp these things and live with them without issue, but that depends on how much the person can accept and be capable of living with the parameters of the situation in the first place, if they don't decide to abandon it entirely outright. It's how much of an impact that it has on their psyche - or rather, in most cases, how they handle and respond to that impact. That's generally going to be the rule of thumb for anything that leads to it being considered a mental issue, how much the person in question is capable of living with it while experiencing minimal-to-no issues within their daily lives that stem from the impact itself. |
ManabanFeb 6, 2019 12:28 PM
 |
Aldnox said: DaCraziGuy said: I disagree with this. Sure, from a biological standpoint it's not a great idea, you can't reproduce with a picture, but other than that it's not a big deal. Let people love what they want.People loving characters, aka imaginary people, has issues. Sorry, but if you really love (the thread said like if it were a real person) a character you should go to a psychologist. I'm not saying that you should burn them, I would let them do what they want. But they are insane, you can't love something in the same way (or even more) than a person. You can't do anything with them, there is nothing to share and there is nothing to grow. It's the same as people that are in love with someone else without even talking to them at least once, they have issues. @Manaban , you can't be seriously in love with someone if you can't interact with them in any way, it's not just because they are fictional, there is no way to have a relationship if you can't be connected to the other part. Even if you "feel" that connection, if the other doesn't then you have nothing (this applies irl too). My way to describe these people that loves for real a character is: "harmless stalker/creep", they are not dangerous because their target is fictional. If a someone says or does the same things that this people say to their characters to someone real I'm sure that it won't be pretty because it's a "one sided connection". |
|
| The 3 girls in my favorites when I first saw them. I've since come to senses though...for the most part. |
DaCraziGuy said: People loving characters, aka imaginary people, has issues. Sorry, but if you really love (the thread said like if it were a real person) a character you should go to a psychologist. So platonic love is now considered a mental disease? I'm not one to judge because I made this thread specifically because I do have an actual crush (which I consider slightly more than platonic love) on Kaho Hinata. The real question should be where are the limits or the boundaries of a "platonic love" and actual insanity when you lose the conception of realism and fantasy. |
| "What a Player, what a Champion here at Wimbledon, the first man to win 8 Championships." Andrew Castle on Roger Federer winning his 19th Grand Slam title. |
DaCraziGuy said: It's the same as people that are in love with someone else without even talking to them at least once, they have issues. @Manaban , you can't be seriously in love with someone if you can't interact with them in any way, it's not just because they are fictional, there is no way to have a relationship if you can't be connected to the other part. Even if you "feel" that connection, if the other doesn't then you have nothing (this applies irl too). You can be, though. You learn more and more about them through watching them. You see how they respond to things. What they're interested in. What their values are and what mannerisms they have. You can even hear their thoughts or underlying sentiments in some cases, if the character has internal monologues and such. Y'know, the basic shit of getting to actually know someone, sans literally hearing their internal monologues, obviously. What they're like and what they're all about, so on and so forth. Pretty much everything that makes someone fall in love with another, and when being applied in reality, the interactions are often just a proxy to either get to know these things that would make you fall in love them, or to see these elements of their personality as a form of reaffirmation in a relationship, et cetera. The issue isn't whether or not you can be in love with them without these things - through knowing them via the work they're in, you very much can respond to a character that way and it'd have sincerity in the same way those feelings could be aimed at a real person. The issue of non-interaction is more aligned with whether or not you can be in a relationship with them. Which, no, is indeed never going to be the case, because - shocker - they're not real in the first place, so interacting with them is impossible. DaCraziGuy said: My way to describe these people that loves for real a character is: "harmless stalker/creep", they are not dangerous because their target is fictional. If a someone says or does the same things that this people say to their characters to someone real I'm sure that it won't be pretty because it's a "one sided connection". The way you word it makes it come off like you're making an issue of coming into possession of these feelings by watching a character, rather than by interacting with a person. Keep that in mind with my response here, because you didn't exactly elaborate a whole lot and so I just went with how it reads to me. And if that is indeed the case, then shouldn't merely liking a character platonically or finding them interesting be grouped within the same type of behavior because of the methods that are being used to actually see the character in that light, even if intimacy is removed from the equation? Because, in the same vein, you're not actually interacting with them and your interest isn't being reciprocated in any way, you just find them interesting in some way, shape, or form, so you sit back and watch them from a distance. Peer through the glass to just watch them do things. If you sat back and did nothing but watch somebody real that you found interesting without ever interacting with them - even if there were geniunely no feelings of intimacy involved - then it is also not going to be pretty, because it's also completely one-sided. If you wrote about how interesting you found this on forums or what you like about them on the internet when all you've done is watch them a whole fucking lot, then yes, it's probably going to come off as stalker-y and weird. Yes, even if intimacy isn't a factor at play. Yet people exhibit these behaviors about characters they enjoy regularly, with all kinds of media, whether they're tucked away on an internet discussion board or in the breakroom of their workplace. For some reason, I highly doubt you see that as being in-line with the same label you're applying here, but when the issue is ostensibly what it is - again, the "stalker-y/creepy" coming from the watching over interacting element involved in coming to know the character in question - then I don't think it's actually separable. The way you worded it makes it sound like you're making it an issue of the methods they used to come into possession of these feelings, even though the methods don't actually diverge from the "standard" way of consuming fiction - the divergence from the "standard" is in the response to the fiction itself. So yeah, safe to say I don't really think that the argument you're trying to make to compare it to those behaviors is very fair, because it isn't something that seems capable of existing in a way that has any nuance to it and can't operate without being applied selectively to one thing without shoving aside the bigger picture of it. It also kind of makes it come off like you're just trying to justify yourself through wanton shitflinging without thinking of the implications of your arguments here, if I can be so direct with you, because it seems kind of ridiculously short-sighted to me. |
ManabanFeb 6, 2019 1:47 PM
|
DaCraziGuy said: Aldnox said: I disagree with this. Sure, from a biological standpoint it's not a great idea, you can't reproduce with a picture, but other than that it's not a big deal. Let people love what they want. I'm not saying that you should burn them, I would let them do what they want. But they are insane, you can't love something in the same way (or even more) than a person. You can't do anything with them, there is nothing to share and there is nothing to grow. It's the same as people that are in love with someone else without even talking to them at least once, they have issues. @Manaban , you can't be seriously in love with someone if you can't interact with them in any way, it's not just because they are fictional, there is no way to have a relationship if you can't be connected to the other part. Even if you "feel" that connection, if the other doesn't then you have nothing (this applies irl too). My way to describe these people that loves for real a character is: "harmless stalker/creep", they are not dangerous because their target is fictional. If a someone says or does the same things that this people say to their characters to someone real I'm sure that it won't be pretty because it's a "one sided connection". first of all, i don't think u can ever truly "love" a person, yeah thats bullshit the love for fictional things is more of an admiration maybe? i can't put it into words and come on now, "harmless stalker/creep" is going a bit too far isn't it? im quite a degenerate myself but i also pat myself on the back and think "at least im not a creep/stalker" u are comparing a harmless choice of lifestyle to a fuckin crime here look at religious people, have they seen god? no, but they still worship it they are far worse than "waifuists", because the waifu or husbando is at least "Real" things exist as long as they stay in memories of people, in this sense... the waifu is as real as me, you or a popular music from 80s |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
| When you fall in love with an Anime character, you truly ascend to higher plains and gain a galaxy brains, it's nice to fall in love with them since then you know unlike real girls they won't change or judge the feelings you have for them ha. |
  Ascended Taste I only came back to this site for the forum sets and to promote my RYM list... Anilist ftw still :dab: |
Manaban said: You can be, though. You learn more and more about them through watching them. You see how they respond to things. What they're interested in. What their values are and what mannerisms they have. You can even hear their thoughts or underlying sentiments in some cases, if the character has internal monologues and such. Y'know, the basic shit of getting to actually know someone, sans literally hearing their internal monologues, obviously. What they're like and what they're all about, so on and so forth. Pretty much everything that makes someone fall in love with another, and when being applied in reality, the interactions are often just a proxy to either get to know these things that would make you fall in love them, or to see these elements of their personality as a form of reaffirmation in a relationship, et cetera. The issue isn't whether or not you can be in love with them without these things - through knowing them via the work they're in, you very much can respond to a character that way and it'd have sincerity in the same way those feelings could be aimed at a real person. The issue of non-interaction is more aligned with whether or not you can be in a relationship with them. Which, no, is indeed never going to be the case, because - shocker - they're not real in the first place, so interacting with them is impossible. DaCraziGuy said: My way to describe these people that loves for real a character is: "harmless stalker/creep", they are not dangerous because their target is fictional. If a someone says or does the same things that this people say to their characters to someone real I'm sure that it won't be pretty because it's a "one sided connection". The way you word it makes it come off like you're making an issue of coming into possession of these feelings by watching a character, rather than by interacting with a person. Keep that in mind with my response here, because you didn't exactly elaborate a whole lot and so I just went with how it reads to me. And if that is indeed the case, then shouldn't merely liking a character platonically or finding them interesting be grouped within the same type of behavior because of the methods that are being used to actually see the character in that light, even if intimacy is removed from the equation? Because, in the same vein, you're not actually interacting with them and your interest isn't being reciprocated in any way, you just find them interesting in some way, shape, or form, so you sit back and watch them from a distance. Peer through the glass to just watch them do things. If you sat back and did nothing but watch somebody real that you found interesting without ever interacting with them - even if there were geniunely no feelings of intimacy involved - then it is also not going to be pretty, because it's also completely one-sided. If you wrote about how interesting you found this on forums or what you like about them on the internet when all you've done is watch them a whole fucking lot, then yes, it's probably going to come off as stalker-y and weird. Yes, even if intimacy isn't a factor at play. Yet people exhibit these behaviors about characters they enjoy regularly, with all kinds of media, whether they're tucked away on an internet discussion board or in the breakroom of their workplace. For some reason, I highly doubt you see that as being in-line with the same label you're applying here, but when the issue is ostensibly what it is - again, the "stalker-y/creepy" coming from the watching over interacting element involved in coming to know the character in question - then I don't think it's actually separable. The way you worded it makes it sound like you're making it an issue of the methods they used to come into possession of these feelings, even though the methods don't actually diverge from the "standard" way of consuming fiction - the divergence from the "standard" is in the response to the fiction itself. So yeah, safe to say I don't really think that the argument you're trying to make to compare it to those behaviors is very fair, because it isn't something that seems capable of existing in a way that has any nuance to it and can't operate without being applied selectively to one thing without shoving aside the bigger picture of it. It also kind of makes it come off like you're just trying to justify yourself through wanton shitflinging without thinking of the implications of your arguments here, if I can be so direct with you, because it seems kind of ridiculously short-sighted to me. First this: You learn more and more about them through watching them. You see how they respond to things. What they're interested in. What their values are and what mannerisms they have. You can even hear their thoughts or underlying sentiments in some cases, if the character has internal monologues and such. This is creepy hahaha Again, you are missing the point, you can't interact with the characters. Just by the fact that you don't exist in their world you don't know them. Maybe if you meet them they are going to hate you. There is no interaction so there is no real feeling. If you have real feelings(or you think you do) it's because: A - you are insane B - you are alone C - you never had real feelings for anyone My example of the creep/stalker was an extreme, but I'm sure that if you go and say to someone I love you and I've been watching you since long ago without even being at least someone they know you are going to be treated as a creep, even if you don't do anything bad. That happens because it's unnatural to get those feelings on your own to an extreme as "love". |
|
tlato_but said: DaCraziGuy said: People loving characters, aka imaginary people, has issues. Sorry, but if you really love (the thread said like if it were a real person) a character you should go to a psychologist. So platonic love is now considered a mental disease? I'm not one to judge because I made this thread specifically because I do have an actual crush (which I consider slightly more than platonic love) on Kaho Hinata. The real question should be where are the limits or the boundaries of a "platonic love" and actual insanity when you lose the conception of realism and fantasy. By relationship I meant interacting with someone, not only dating. You can interact with your platonic love (if it is real) and receive an answer so there is no problem with that imo. You said having a crush on a character like with a real girl btw, so I'm not sure what are you trying to say with this thing about platonic love now. Having a crush would be having the need to make a connection with that crush, you can't have a connection with a character so you can't have a crush. It's not the same having a crush than liking a character. |
|
necro_dancer said: first of all, i don't think u can ever truly "love" a person, yeah thats bullshit the love for fictional things is more of an admiration maybe? i can't put it into words and come on now, "harmless stalker/creep" is going a bit too far isn't it? im quite a degenerate myself but i also pat myself on the back and think "at least im not a creep/stalker" look at religious people, have they seen god? no, but they still worship it things exist as long as they stay in memories of people, in this sense... the waifu is as real as me, you or a popular music from 80s If you think you cannot truly love a person then you are too edgy for me. The OP say having a crush like the one you have with a real girl, just with that you are saying you don't have a real crush. The religious deal, another edgy comment. You can't, you won't and you couldn't interact with your waifu, she is not real and if you never had a feedback from them you never are going to understand nothing of them. Saying to someone that you love them and you know everything about them without talking to them before anything will get you labeled as a stalker. Sorry but it's like that. |
|
tlato_but said: No, I don't mean having as your waifu and considering her best girl ever. I mean actual crush like the real ones that people have over real girls with all the symptoms that you have when you're in love. I don't see the meaningful difference. The only one I can think of is that I can't look back to moments I spent with the fictional girl since they obviously don't exist whereas I can with a "real" girl. The desire to be with them is the same even if one isn't actually possible. |
 |
| that was common for me when I was a teenager, especially bc I had absolutely no social skills required to fall in love and connect with actual people, so I projected it onto characters. but after going through that and maturing my "sociability", it stopped. now I tend to feel "in love" with stories, like feeling my heart race when reading something, dreaming about it etc |
[url=https://myanimelist.net/profile/mifti] [/url] |
| but tbh I think the idea that you're insane if you feel like you're legit in love with a fictional character shows a very limited view of what can be considered love. it's such a broad yet particular feeling, so limiting it to only one reasonable possibility sounds.........dumb |
[url=https://myanimelist.net/profile/mifti] [/url] |
DaCraziGuy said: First this: You learn more and more about them through watching them. You see how they respond to things. What they're interested in. What their values are and what mannerisms they have. You can even hear their thoughts or underlying sentiments in some cases, if the character has internal monologues and such. This is creepy hahaha Again, you are missing the point, you can't interact with the characters. Just by the fact that you don't exist in their world you don't know them. Maybe if you meet them they are going to hate you. There is no interaction so there is no real feeling. If you have real feelings(or you think you do) it's because: A - you are insane B - you are alone C - you never had real feelings for anyone My example of the creep/stalker was an extreme, but I'm sure that if you go and say to someone I love you and I've been watching you since long ago without even being at least someone they know you are going to be treated as a creep, even if you don't do anything bad. That happens because it's unnatural to get those feelings on your own to an extreme as "love". Gee, Iunno, man. Is it fair to say that I'm the one missing the point, whenever I responded to both of these arguments already - both the part about the interaction and being in love and the method by which we do so with fictional characters - and your response just so happens to doubling down on your initial stance without actually challenging the counterpoints I tried making? -_- I have to ask you to go back and look at the second half of my post now. The line with "stalker/creepy" wasn't too difficult to discern what you meant, so I went ahead and responded to you there prior, and your issues with the method leading to response to a character and where I perceived the flaws in this stance to be. Also, the crux of my argument was that being in a relationship requires interaction, whereas falling in love with someone requires getting to know about them - and in real life, interaction leading to falling in love is going to be more or less the proxy of getting to know about them. Given that the characters in fiction are being outlined in narratives that display their responses, mannerisms, values, and personality traits, it's entirely possible to get to know a character through watching them in a piece of media. But I already said that too, and you just cut out the part where I brought up getting to know them and went "creepy haha," which I don't care if you find it creepy or not, but it sure as hell doesn't invalidate the point about the means by which we get to know characters. Like, please, if you're going to respond, then at least respond in a way that actually moves the discussion forward, rather than setting it back under circumstances that in no way call for it. All this feels like is if you tl;dr'd my post so you just reiterated the sentiment I was already challenging like I wasn't grasping where you're coming from - which inadvertently confirms to me that I knew exactly where you were coming from, because I wasn't 100% sure at first but you pretty much just told me "yeah, y'know, everything you spent a long-ass time writing a counter-argument for? You got the points I was trying to make. I just didn't read your counter-response so I'm going to reiterate the points you were challenging as if they went unchecked, and then try to blame you for misunderstanding what I was trying to say, lol!" At which point you may as well not even respond >_> That shit's more irritating and makes trying to discuss shit more of a hinderance and a hurdle than actually, y'know, a matter of perspective sharing or being beneficial to anybody involved. |
ManabanFeb 6, 2019 2:19 PM
|
DaCraziGuy said: necro_dancer said: first of all, i don't think u can ever truly "love" a person, yeah thats bullshit the love for fictional things is more of an admiration maybe? i can't put it into words and come on now, "harmless stalker/creep" is going a bit too far isn't it? im quite a degenerate myself but i also pat myself on the back and think "at least im not a creep/stalker" look at religious people, have they seen god? no, but they still worship it things exist as long as they stay in memories of people, in this sense... the waifu is as real as me, you or a popular music from 80s If you think you cannot truly love a person then you are too edgy for me. The OP say having a crush like the one you have with a real girl, just with that you are saying you don't have a real crush. The religious deal, another edgy comment. You can't, you won't and you couldn't interact with your waifu, she is not real and if you never had a feedback from them you never are going to understand nothing of them. Saying to someone that you love them and you know everything about them without talking to them before anything will get you labeled as a stalker. Sorry but it's like that. sorry but people using the word "edgy" for no reason (and in the wrong way for that matter) is just too cringy for me, have a nice day |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Manaban said: DaCraziGuy said: First this: This is creepy hahaha Again, you are missing the point, you can't interact with the characters. Just by the fact that you don't exist in their world you don't know them. Maybe if you meet them they are going to hate you. There is no interaction so there is no real feeling. If you have real feelings(or you think you do) it's because: A - you are insane B - you are alone C - you never had real feelings for anyone My example of the creep/stalker was an extreme, but I'm sure that if you go and say to someone I love you and I've been watching you since long ago without even being at least someone they know you are going to be treated as a creep, even if you don't do anything bad. That happens because it's unnatural to get those feelings on your own to an extreme as "love". Gee, Iunno, man. Is it fair to say that I'm the one missing the point, whenever I responded to both of these arguments already - both the part about the interaction and being in love and the method by which we do so with fictional characters - and your response just so happens to doubling down on your initial stance without actually challenging the counterpoints I tried making? -_- I have to ask you to go back and look at the second half of my post now. The line with "stalker/creepy" wasn't too difficult to discern what you meant, so I went ahead and responded to you there, and your issues with the method leading to response to a character and where I perceived the flaws in this stance to be. Also, the crux of my argument was that being in a relationship requires interaction, whereas falling in love with someone requires getting to know about them - and in real life, interaction leading to falling in love is going to be more or less the proxy of getting to know about them. Given that the characters in fiction are being outlined in narratives that display their responses, mannerisms, values, and personality traits, it's entirely possible to get to know a character through watching them in a piece of media. But I already said that too, and you just cut out the part where I brought up getting to know them and went "creepy haha," which I don't care if you find it creepy or not, but it sure as hell doesn't invalidate the point about the means by which we get to know characters. Like, please, if you're going to respond, then at least respond in a way that actually moves the discussion forward. All this feels like is if you tl;dr'd my post so you just reiterated the sentiment I was already challenging, at which point you may as well not even respond >_> That shit's more irritating and makes trying to discuss shit more of a hinderance and a hurdle than actually, y'know, a matter of perspective sharing or being beneficial to anybody involved. i get what u are saying man (i read the whole conversation between u two) but u should probably ignore that idiot his response to me was just him calling me edgy lmao. at first i thought he simply doesn't understand the concept but now i think he just doesn't want to understand (so he can keep feeling superior about himself for being into real girls-pretty sure he thinks losing virginity is the biggest achievement possible in life) |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
necro_dancer said: Manaban said: Gee, Iunno, man. Is it fair to say that I'm the one missing the point, whenever I responded to both of these arguments already - both the part about the interaction and being in love and the method by which we do so with fictional characters - and your response just so happens to doubling down on your initial stance without actually challenging the counterpoints I tried making? -_- I have to ask you to go back and look at the second half of my post now. The line with "stalker/creepy" wasn't too difficult to discern what you meant, so I went ahead and responded to you there, and your issues with the method leading to response to a character and where I perceived the flaws in this stance to be. Also, the crux of my argument was that being in a relationship requires interaction, whereas falling in love with someone requires getting to know about them - and in real life, interaction leading to falling in love is going to be more or less the proxy of getting to know about them. Given that the characters in fiction are being outlined in narratives that display their responses, mannerisms, values, and personality traits, it's entirely possible to get to know a character through watching them in a piece of media. But I already said that too, and you just cut out the part where I brought up getting to know them and went "creepy haha," which I don't care if you find it creepy or not, but it sure as hell doesn't invalidate the point about the means by which we get to know characters. Like, please, if you're going to respond, then at least respond in a way that actually moves the discussion forward. All this feels like is if you tl;dr'd my post so you just reiterated the sentiment I was already challenging, at which point you may as well not even respond >_> That shit's more irritating and makes trying to discuss shit more of a hinderance and a hurdle than actually, y'know, a matter of perspective sharing or being beneficial to anybody involved. i get what u are saying man (i read the whole conversation between u two) but u should probably ignore that idiot his response to me was just him calling me edgy lmao. at first i thought he simply doesn't understand the concept but now i think he just doesn't want to understand (so he can keep feeling superior about himself for being into real girls-pretty sure he thinks losing virginity is the biggest achievement possible in life) Y'see, we can't call them an idiot. They're behaving like one, certainly, but that's because they're not reading the responses they're getting and are making really poor responses as a result. If they put forth more of an effort, we might be able to have an actual discussion here, but meh. But if we call them that, then we're giving them the tools to build a narrative that "Nobody wants accept it lol so they get mad at me." We're invalidating the point they're trying to make, but doing so through aggressive ad hom rather than challenging them on it. At this point, it opens everything said in response to them up to just whittling it down to the people who called them an idiot and building the whole context of what's going on around that. Do I know if this is how they will handle it? No, I don't. But it sure as hell happens often enough that I'd rather everybody pull back on just going down this route in cases like this >_> This happens all of the time whenever I get pissed off at people doing this exact thing when I try to make arguments defending ecchi or something. It's always blegh, but it has to be played along with to some extent. Such is life. |
ManabanFeb 6, 2019 2:25 PM
|
| sounds like you are suffering form severe problem, you have no life. Anime characters are not real people. Not just in the obvious way, but theyre not written to be multi dimensional like a real human is. Its also TV so they cut out all the bits of real life that are just slow and mundane. |
| https://combosmooth.itch.io/ - I make free-to-play browser games for PC and I sell pixel art animation here |
Manaban said: DaCraziGuy said: First this: This is creepy hahaha Again, you are missing the point, you can't interact with the characters. Just by the fact that you don't exist in their world you don't know them. Maybe if you meet them they are going to hate you. There is no interaction so there is no real feeling. If you have real feelings(or you think you do) it's because: A - you are insane B - you are alone C - you never had real feelings for anyone My example of the creep/stalker was an extreme, but I'm sure that if you go and say to someone I love you and I've been watching you since long ago without even being at least someone they know you are going to be treated as a creep, even if you don't do anything bad. That happens because it's unnatural to get those feelings on your own to an extreme as "love". Gee, Iunno, man. Is it fair to say that I'm the one missing the point, whenever I responded to both of these arguments already - both the part about the interaction and being in love and the method by which we do so with fictional characters - and your response just so happens to doubling down on your initial stance without actually challenging the counterpoints I tried making? -_- I have to ask you to go back and look at the second half of my post now. The line with "stalker/creepy" wasn't too difficult to discern what you meant, so I went ahead and responded to you there prior, and your issues with the method leading to response to a character and where I perceived the flaws in this stance to be. Also, the crux of my argument was that being in a relationship requires interaction, whereas falling in love with someone requires getting to know about them - and in real life, interaction leading to falling in love is going to be more or less the proxy of getting to know about them. Given that the characters in fiction are being outlined in narratives that display their responses, mannerisms, values, and personality traits, it's entirely possible to get to know a character through watching them in a piece of media. But I already said that too, and you just cut out the part where I brought up getting to know them and went "creepy haha," which I don't care if you find it creepy or not, but it sure as hell doesn't invalidate the point about the means by which we get to know characters. Like, please, if you're going to respond, then at least respond in a way that actually moves the discussion forward, rather than setting it back under circumstances that in no way call for it. All this feels like is if you tl;dr'd my post so you just reiterated the sentiment I was already challenging like I wasn't grasping where you're coming from - which inadvertently confirms to me that I knew exactly where you were coming from, because I wasn't 100% sure at first but you pretty much just told me "yeah, y'know, everything you spent a long-ass time writing a counter-argument for? You got the points I was trying to make. I just didn't read your counter-response so I'm going to reiterate the points you were challenging as if they went unchecked, and then try to blame you for misunderstanding what I was trying to say, lol!" At which point you may as well not even respond >_> That shit's more irritating and makes trying to discuss shit more of a hinderance and a hurdle than actually, y'know, a matter of perspective sharing or being beneficial to anybody involved. IF YOU CAN'T INTERACT WITH SOMEONE YOU CAN'T FALL IN LOVE, IT'S AS SIMPLE AS THAT. You can like or be interested on someone you could say, but if you are not part of the ecuation you never are going to develop anything real because you are not part of it. Saying that "knowing someone" is a proxy of what interacting with someone is then you are making a huge mistake. So the reasons why someone might "love" a characters are still A, B or C. You don't need to answer anymore, because I have the same feeling as you. |
|
necro_dancer said: DaCraziGuy said: If you think you cannot truly love a person then you are too edgy for me. The OP say having a crush like the one you have with a real girl, just with that you are saying you don't have a real crush. The religious deal, another edgy comment. You can't, you won't and you couldn't interact with your waifu, she is not real and if you never had a feedback from them you never are going to understand nothing of them. Saying to someone that you love them and you know everything about them without talking to them before anything will get you labeled as a stalker. Sorry but it's like that. sorry but people using the word "edgy" for no reason (and in the wrong way for that matter) is just too cringy for me, have a nice day Calm down Sasuke, don't get mad hahaha. With the way you talked about "truly love" and religion I couldn't find a better for. Sorry for my limited vocabulary, lol. |
|
| Hmm i do really really love Osomatsu, but it's way different to being in love with someone irl. He's a character created by people. He's a drawing, so there's always going to be a disconnect that doesn't let me fall in love the same way i can with a real person. I can get invested in a character, but genuinely falling in love with them probably isn't going to happen. If technology could make him real though, then that's another matter! I still love you Osomatsu <3 |
DaCraziGuy said: IF YOU CAN'T INTERACT WITH SOMEONE YOU CAN'T FALL IN LOVE, IT'S AS SIMPLE AS THAT. You can like or be interested on someone you could say, but if you are not part of the ecuation you never are going to develop anything real because you are not part of it. YOUR ARGUMENT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE BECAUSE YOU ARE CONFLATING BEING IN LOVE WITH BEING IN A RELATIONSHIP AND I HAVE SAID THIS ALREADY. WHY YOU'RE CAPS LOCKING ME, I HAVE NO CLUE, BUT I MAY AS WELL JOIN IN ON IT. DaCraziGuy said: Saying that "knowing someone" is a proxy of what interacting with someone is then you are making a huge mistake. Ok, fair enough. Now, how am I making a mistake, rather than just telling me that I am making a mistake? Where am I wrong, what is your counterargument, what the fuck is your actual response behind just going "nu uh you're wrong"? From my perspective, the only way that - "you can only know someone by interacting with them" would make sense is if you were looking at things in a vacuum of someone's entire existence in terms of how they responded to *you* - *you* being the individual in question, rather than in reference to you specifically. People's mannerisms, behaviors, personality, et cetera, aren't entirely centered around their interactions with a single individual, though, and to view things from such a lens is something I'd challenge as being reductive to the person whose personality is being discussed. People exist outside of their interactions with one singular individual. It is by watching them behave within a fictional setting and a fictional narrative that we come to know fictional characters in this sense. You consider this creepy, I point out that it's an all-encompassing feature of enjoying a fictional character even if intimacy is removed from the equation, you don't read that and more or less turtle up. The other way this could be interpreted is if you're neglecting the entire aspect of how fiction is consumed and the means it is done so by, but I tried going over that in the post you extremely blatantly just didn't read yet pretended that you did, and you acted like I didn't say anything and doubled down on the exact stances I was laying out counterarguments for, so what the fuck is the point of even pointing that out to you? Or it could be neither of those things, I could be missing something ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Fuck if I know what you mean, considering you just told me that I was making a mistake and then said nothing to substantiate it. DaCraziGuy said: So the reasons why someone might "love" a characters are still A, B or C. You don't need to answer anymore, because I have the same feeling as you. It's incredibly arrogant to just begin making accusations of mental deficiencies, ignore every single perspective brought to counter your own, and then double down and say that your conclusion is the only correct one. Like, this is not how you converse with people. This is not how discourse happens, this is not how anything worthwhile happens. It's like you're just plugging your ears and going "la-la-la-la-la can't hear you" to everybody who isn't aligned with you on this subject, yet continue to respond to them and assert yourself correct as regardless. This is how a child behaves, for fuck's sake. |
ManabanFeb 6, 2019 3:02 PM
|
More topics from this board
» ❄️ Anime Winter 2024 Male Characters Tournament ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )ISeeLifePeople - Apr 14 |
284 |
by Jonas-K
»»
4 minutes ago |
|
» What is the best character of Takehito Koyasu?Jonas-K - Sep 2, 2023 |
16 |
by Quirino_2229
»»
16 minutes ago |
|
» Why do veteran weebs hate "casuals"? ( 1 2 )Clovis - Apr 29 |
58 |
by decco6226
»»
19 minutes ago |
|
» According to MAL, what are your anime hidden gems? ( 1 2 )NoelleIsSleepy - 6 hours ago |
51 |
by LoveLikeBlood
»»
21 minutes ago |
|
» What does it mean when you rate an anime 6? ( 1 2 )Akuya - Yesterday |
94 |
by LoveLikeBlood
»»
25 minutes ago |