Because Condoms can't break or tear amiright?
Because Condoms can't break or tear amiright?
@MFauli most people who believe in abortion at all believe that only a woman has a right to decide if she's going to abort, and that the man's opinion on the issue doesn't matter whether he's for or against it. These same people also tend to believe that the man picks up a responsibility to the mother to support her (not sure how that works) in addition to a responsibility to the child. These types of people can't really be reasoned with on such an issue so trying to defend the argument that facilitating abortion is a valid way for a man to take responsibility is pointless if someone.
As to the blame for the pregnancy it's both of their faults it would have only taken one of them to either take precautions or stop the sex (Itou never struck me as the type to forcibly open clenched thighs). Yet neither did so both are equally at fault.
Last edited by Yukimura; Fri, 10-05-2007 at 05:50 PM.
Well, we live in a modern world where abortion is nothing strange anymore. So it really is the motherīs choice to keep or not to keep the baby.
As for Itou and Sekai, sure both could be careful about that matter, but in the end, like you said, itīs the motherīs decision, so itīs also the to-be motherīs decision to be careful or not to be careful. If Itou isnt careful, oh well. If Sekai isnt careful, sheīll get pregnant. So one can argue as long as he wants, the main responsibility of pregnancy always lies on the womanīs side.
But now weīre off-topic, arent we? ^^
@Yuki - You completely misunderstood what I ws trying to say. You agreed with Mfauli that Sekai has ultimate responsibility, but you are saying it on a completely different level. He is basically saying that everything is Sekai's fault, including the wrong decisions of Itou, SINCE she was the one who changed him. Saying that she changed him presupposes that he is not to blame for what he has become. So even if Mfauli keeps saying that he thinks that Itou is NOT innocent and has faults, as long as he keeps such a view, his qualifier is worth shit and basically redeems Itou of the main sins that should be attributed to him in the story. You are simply saying that Sekai started everything on more objective terms (which I still oppose with my argument before), even using legalistic basis for your analysis (which I also do not agree to). But your proposition makes tons more sense than his. --I do resent you calling me "not a good debater" because I am. I do have to admit that I lost my temper because of Mfauli's incoherent and baseless arguments and stopped clarifying the stuff I said, particularly because I thought everyone but him understood my position.--
I just find it unfair that the "practice sessions" became Sekai's fault alone. We musnt forget that when she said to practice the kiss Itou tried to kiss her for real, and that Itou responded to all of it with his own free will. Part of the responsibility of that event is his, an accomplice per se. So if you have to use this event as the triggering cause (which I still do not believe to be the case since it is waaay too far from the result with too many events in between where things could have changed), the fault lies in BOTH Sekai and Itou. It can be argued that since Sekai offered it she is more to blame, but that does not redeem Itou of anything either. This simply means that Sekai didnt make Itou into what he became. If anything, both of the actions at this point changed him (following your way of argument of course).
About the feminist thing, I did qualify it by saying "at least the moderate ones" (extreme feminists are almost like chauvinists only of the opposite sex IMHO). Moderate feminists almost share the same views as I do, and a majority of the people have accepted the reforms they have pushed for in the present world. It is not an exaggeration to say that gender equality is owed to them. Chaunist is a derogatory term due to the fact that most (if not all) societies of the world before was a patriarchy, and this term was utilized to label men who are biased towards men and against women, thereby further oppressing the "marginalized". As you can see, it is because people like Mfauli exist that the term has become negative in meaning.
The main responsibility for an abortion does lie on the woman's side (personally I think that the decision should be a consensus from both parents, unless special circumstances prevent such a thing), but the fact that she got pregnant is half Itou's responsibility. Saying otherwise is obviously extremely biased towards men, and this claim I simply cannot let slide.
EDIT: also my call for Mfauli was to disprove my counter arguments (which he never did, although Yuki gave it a shot), and get someone to agree with his rebuttal (not just the skeleton idea). So technically, Yuki's complaint about my challenge does not apply. I know it sounds like I want to ignore him if he cant do this, and that is because I DO want to ignore him. Listening to anyone argue like him is really a waste of time, especially since he seems hell-bent on keeping his position.
Last edited by shinta|hikari; Fri, 10-05-2007 at 10:47 PM.
Peace.
Ok... I'll add another one since the previous ones I posted where general (and ignored).
If you say it is Sekai's fault that Makoto changed... that Sekai changed him... and he wasn't at fault then... using this logic can we say the following?
Rape-boy is in fact innocent and pure and was lead to that situation by Katsura because she allowed him to rape her. She changed him from the innocent pure-boy he was to a rape-boy because Katsura didn't stop him from spreading her legs.
Same situation. 4 characters. If MFauli's theory on Sekai and Makoto is correct, then rape-boy (whatever his name) and Katsura's as well.
The point of my implication that you were being a poor debater was to help you recognize that you were not displaying the qualities of a good debater in your posts to MFauli. You seemed knocked off track by MFauli's poor reasoning and started responding in a less civilized manner as a result. I sensed emotions and arrogance in your comments instead of just facts and logical arguments. Once you let your emotions into the argument I felt it made you less credible and I called you out on it because I would want to be called out as well. Just because MFauli can't argue his response doesn't mean your claims becomes more valid.Originally Posted by shinta|hikari
Even if MFauli is as ignorant as you say if you want to have a rational discussion with him calling him names does not help at all. From the wording of your last few posts I sensed more and more emotion from you which made it look like you couldn't withstand the assertions of someone who's points don't make sense to you without losing your composure and attacking them personally.
You said I "completely misunderstood" and then proceeded to explain the differences between what MFauli said and what I said but I would be better able to understand you if you clarified exactly which comment of yours I misunderstood and clarified what it was you were trying to say.
It was and currently is my understand that this was the challenge you offered to the "Blame Sekai for * argument" was this:
Was I correct in the assumption that this "paradox" was why you don't agree that Sekai could be the one to blame for the events of School Days?
NOTE: If you are simply tired of this discussion and don't feel like continuing I don't think anyone would give you grief about that. But I would like to think that you are better than anger posting when you are at your wits end. I don't speak for anyone else but I want to understand your reasoning because it's different from mine and yet you so strongly support it, however if you don't want to clarify your argument to me then just say so and I"ll keep my own counsel.
Last edited by Yukimura; Sat, 10-06-2007 at 02:25 AM.
Its not a paradox. It is a negative example. That was just an example that illustrates how the reasoning used to hold Sekai liable is wrong by showing that using the same reasoning on something else can produce such a senseless conclusion. Let me explain:
My reasoning was simple. Sekai cannot be the instigator or liable as you put it, since so many events have happened in between the "cause" and the "effect". The cause that Mfauli and you are trying to posit is not even directly linked to the final outcome. It doesnt even clearly cause Itou's change in behavior. Sekai didnt force Itou to become anything. The "practice" thing is not causative of Itou's reaction. He could have responded in numerous ways, one of which is to simply not participate in such an activity. Saying that just because Sekai initiated the idea of the practice she is to blame or is liable for all the events that followed is similar to saying that Einstein (since the A-bomb is based on some of his ideas) is at fault for the deaths in hiroshima via the atomic bomb.
To put it in more simple terms, Sekai was indeed "wrong" for doing that practice thing, but you cannot trace back all that has happened to just that. It didnt cause it, nor was it necessary for it to happen (some other event could have led to the same tragedy). You cant blame the swordmaker for the murders a person commits using his sword. You cant charge a teacher to be aiding in tax evasion if his lessons gave a person the knowledge to cheat the system. And you cant say that Itou became a jerk, cheated on those women, ran from his responsibilites just because of Sekai's practice sessions. The logical chain just isnt there. Life isnt a>b>c>d therefore a>d, especially because at any point in b and c there is free choice on everyone's part, and majority of the most influential decisions were in Itou's hands.
I do have to admit that I was getting emotional, and I owe you thanks for pointing it out. In fact, I didnt see one line of your previous post about ignoring the comment if you misunderstood the challenge I gave to Mfauli. It is just that I was surprised as to how foolish Mfauli's ideas and arguments were getting, and how he seemed to not even read or try to understand the arguments and rebuttals I wrote down, that I lost my temper (and I still believe rightfully so).
What you misunderstood was that I didnt posit the condition of me accepting his views if someone agreed with them, but if he somehow defends his views properly and someone recognizes his defense as valid. Since you gave your own explanation it is of a different matter. He has so far not addressed the point (which is the basis of his entire "blame Sekai" theory), much less get anyone to recongize it.
Still, despite the language that I used against him (including calling him an idiot, which I can objectively defend he is), I think that my arguments are sound.
EDIT: Just to clear things up, part of the reason I kept emphasizing that Mfauli is an idiot is because a persons ideas reflect his character and capabilities. If I simply argue on objective terms he will simply ignore it. I really think that he deserved to be reprimanded for the stuff that he keeps spouting, particularly since it can insult or hurt other people (albeit inadvertently).
Last edited by shinta|hikari; Sat, 10-06-2007 at 03:38 AM.
Peace.
LOl arguing with a bunch of non native speakers is funny.
Anyway MFauli there is no way for you to convince shinta that you are not wrong because you are trying to logically argue an abstraction. shinta has stated he believes only concrete causations transfer responsibility. Example if you pull the trigger on a loaded gun pointed at a person the you are responsible for that person's death. However I think shinta would say if you told another person holding a loaded gun that the gun was empty then you are not responsible for the death the cause if they decide to pull the trigger without checking for themselves.
You (and I) seem to hold that responsibility can be transfered if a person acts in a way that is likely to result in a particular outcome regardless of the other choices. This is a socially preferable abstraction which makes it easier to hold people responsible when they do things that socially they shouldn't have done (like taking advantage of people less intelligent than themselves and convincing them to do things they shouldn't).
This dichotomy is not something that can be reasoned out with words because it's a part of how people choose to perceive the world. I think the way I do because I would want a person who offered a bum on the street money to kill me to be punished regardless of what choice the bum on the street made.
shinta your reasoning is logically sound as it places the blame on personal responsibility. However it is impractical in real world application because at some point people have to trust outside sources and if they are lied to or mislead by that source then the source should share the blame. Logic tends to ignore things like emotions, trust, deception, and expectations but these things all exist in our lives and I don't think it's fair for you to condemn people who aren't willing to sweep them under the rug just because you are. I'm not saying you have to agree but I'm trying to say opinions on who's responsible for what really come down to the personal values of the judge more than some sense of absolute right or wrong.
EDIT: Wait a tick...shinta if you're arguing that people's choices are the ultimate bearers of responsibility then what did Itou do wrong? Everything he did required another person to choose a response to him and as you've implied there are no certainties when dealing with how a person will react to another persons actions. If Sekai isn't responsible for Itou's reactions then is Itou responsible for the reactions of any of the other characters?
Last edited by Yukimura; Sat, 10-06-2007 at 10:27 PM.
@Yuki - Sekai is not the ultimate cause simply because her action does not even directly lead to the events that happened. Those are caused directly by Itou's actions, and therefore he is liable for them.
Let me clarify... again.
Sekai is indeed at fault for tempting Itou with the practice sessions. But she cannot be blamed for Itou cheating on other women because that is something Itou decided to do. Indeed she started it, but it does not mean that she "caused" it. That is what Mfauli has been trying to prove since the beginning. He was trying to equate the start to the ultimate cause, which I have explained to be illogical.
If a person paid a bum on the street to kill you, then it is obvious that he is directly involved in the result, which is you dying (assuming it succeeds). This connection is not applicable with Sekai. Sekai tempting Itou may have directly resulted in him cheating on Katsura with Sekai, but this has no direct relation to him sleeping with Otome, Kiyora, the twin tail, the three girls, or becoming a jerk with no sense of responsibilty. Again, motive plays a role here (as I have mentioned before), but even wthout that, the connection I think is clear with this illustration.
The reason why I gave that argument against Mfauli is not to say that fault is removed due to the possibility of numerous responses of the other party, but rather to prove that there are numerous possibilities, since he equated "start" with "cause" (cause here being something that will defintely result in the said effect) as a basis in all of his arguments. I never said that Sekai was not responsible. I just stated that (following Mfauli's train of thought) Itou is partly at fault in that "practice" scenario for reacting that way. I think we have already established that all characters in this show are at fault one way or another, specifically because of their responses.
In short, Sekai may be partly to blame for Itou cheating on Katsura with Sekai (arguably the start of this mess), BUT, she is not the "cause" of the entire mess, as Mfauli has argued in all of his posts. As proof, I submit his statements here:
I think its quite obvious that he equates "start" with "cause" in all of these statements. And yet, he admits now that it was not really a cause, but merely a start, saying that Itou was just more prone to being influenced in such a way. This is the argument that I was trying to attack, and I think it is pretty much sunk now.
EDIT: @Yuki - I do understand your point, but even you have to admit that passing on responsibility has its limits. If the mother of the person who hired that bum to kill you was a bad mother that didnt teach her child morals, she still cannot be blamed for your death (and she cant be charged with murder either), even if her actions did make it more likely for her son to commit/plot murder, simply because 1) she never even thought such a thing would happen, 2) she is only guilty for being a bad mother, not a murderer.
You seem to misunderstand me a lot. I cant even begin to imagine how you can think that I am sacrificing emotions for logic, or that I believe that only concrete causations transfer responsibility. Responsibility is there (again with limits), but I wouldnt call it the "cause" as Mfauli did. I would suggest you try reading my posts while placing it in the context of the argument, instead of taking each statement as it is written and generalizing from them.
Last edited by shinta|hikari; Sat, 10-06-2007 at 02:48 PM.
Peace.
I don't know if I'm just slow to catch this, but one reading of the word "Itou" can be the verb to dislike or hate, and most notably "to grudge." Certainly intentional, though I don't know if the kanji of his name is the same.
Thats interesting. On the other hand, one reading for his name Makoto is sincerity/truth/honesty. That is obviously not what Itou's character is. Maybe its a play on words in contrast to his character? A sort of irony or sarcasm perhaps?
Peace.
@shinta: Several of your posts have been fairly easy for me to misunderstand which is why I keep seeking clarification. Your edit above did not offer me as much as I would have liked. I perceived that you disagreed with my assessment of your values, but then what are your values in your own words?
In the scenario I outlined above with the gun and the person who made the claim to the wielder that it was not loaded would you or would hold the person who said the gun was empty accountable for the death if the person with the gun pulled the trigger?
To respond to your mother scenario with more misunderstanding:
Your statement "She cannot be blamed for your death" is that supposed to mean legally blamed or that my family shouldn't be angry with her because of what the son she raised did? Because you mentioned not being charged with murder in the next phrase I am inclined to think your first comment is not talking about legal blame but some other kind of blame. Since you're probably tired of reading responses based on my misunderstandings I will wait for clarification before posting a response.
Most of my posts were answers to Mfauli's arguments, thus they were not explained in detail, since in depth explanation of my own views will only deviate from my criticisms of his views. I do understand why you misunderstood, and it is a good thing that you now ask for clarification before concluding on what I actually meant by what I said.
First, in your scenario about the loaded gun, obviously, the person that told him that the gun was not loaded was accountable for the death, since the person that actually shot it believed that the gun wont fire any bullets and therefore cannot hurt anyone. The problem with your analogy is that it does not apply to Sekai's scenario. It is technically a false analogy since the situation is much too different.
First off, it is quite obvious that if you tell someone that a gun is not loaded when it is, the danger that it will injure or kill someone greatly increases. That is in fact something that the person who lied should know, and therefore, any injury or death caused by his lie is his responsibility. However, part (though only a small part) of the responsibility does lie with the shooter, since he indeed didnt check. There is an obvious direct connection from the lie to the death, as causative factor and effect.
As I have already stated 3 or 4 times, Sekai's case (at least the case being argued by Mfauli that she is the "cause" of everything) is different. She may be held responsible for Itou cheating on Katsura with her as a result from her tempting practice sessions (though Itou is also partially responsible as with the shooter), she does not have anything to do with Itou sleeping with Kiyora, or the rest of the gang, as well as running away from his responsibilities. Sekai probably knew that Itou might go for her instead of Katsura because of her actions. She is then partly responsible for Itou cheating on Katsura in terms of motive. But consider this. Did Sekai even think that her actions could possibly cause Itou to become a sex jerk? Of course not. She simply thought that Itou chose her over Katsura since Itou loves her. So then she is not to blame for the following events in terms of motive.
If for example the shooter did shoot someone, and then suddenly realized that he loves to kill (despite knowing that killing is wrong, like how Itou knew that cheating and lying to women was wrong but kept doing it) and started killing huge numbers of people, those deaths can no longer be blamed to the person who lied, since that is obviously the twisted decision of the shooter himself. This basically means that the person that lied did start it, but he was not the "cause" of the entire killing spree, since the weight of the fault lies mainly on the choices of the shooter. I am not saying that the liar is fault-free (as Sekai is hardly fault-free either), but it is absurd to attribute events that Itou (shooter) initiated and conducted without (liar) Sekai's control to (liar) Sekai.
About the mother part, indeed aside from legal liability, there is also the moral issue. Of course the family CAN be angry at the mother for raising her son badly. But they cant be angry at her for killing their family member, since that was an act committed freely by the son. To clarify, I will ask you this: Who do you think the family members of the murdered person will feel more enmity at, the mother, or the killer son? Anger in this case, is reflective of who the victim's family believes to bear the responsibility of the crime. I argued this way since Mfauli was trying to prove that the main responsibility or fault lies with Sekai (which I believe to be untrue), as seen from his posts.
I hope this long post clarified everything. I actually think its pretty clear if you simply understand my previous posts in the context of the entire argument, and not in bits and pieces.
EDIT: IMO, "values" are too complex and its applications too varied depending on each situation to put into words, much less a few lines in a post. If you have to know my "values", I think the best way is to try to discern them from how I explained my views intead of asking for a text definition of it which will ultimately fail in capturing its essence. I do believe though, that simplifying "values" is never the best way of understanding them.
Last edited by shinta|hikari; Sun, 10-07-2007 at 06:07 AM.
Peace.
I more than enough explained that. We can consider Itou being a normal boy in the beginning of the series. Imagine him as a blank sheet of paper. Then Sekai helped him and the sheet of paper got some first information about "love". Then Katsura didnt want to have sex right after them becoming a pair. New information was written onto the sheet of paper ("girls need some work, you have to gain their trust"). BUT: Now Sekai comes and offers her training lessons. She interrupts the normal process of finding out what love/a love relationship is about, and adds another piece of information onto the sheet of paper: "It is okay to have sex with other girls, even when being in a relationship".she does not have anything to do with Itou sleeping with Kiyora, or the rest of the gang, as well as running away from his responsibilities
I admit it is kind of big interpretation, but if Itou wouldnt have gotten this information, heīd never have fucked Kiyora, Kato, or anyone else.
Yeah, of course not, because she was stupid, ignorant and selfish. She didnt care about Katsura, and she didnt care about Itou. She wanted Itou, nothing else mattered.Sekai probably knew that Itou might go for her instead of Katsura because of her actions. She is then partly responsible for Itou cheating on Katsura in terms of motive. But consider this. Did Sekai even think that her actions could possibly cause Itou to become a sex jerk? Of course not.
And still the person who lied is the cause of everything. Whenever something like that happens, a limit is broken. You know, there are legal limits, like someone never had sex and says "i dont need", and once he had, he cant have enough. Or some says "i hate Sushi, raw fish is disgusting" then tries it and loves it. These are limits that break or dont break. But something or someone is always the cause. If someone is a killer deep within, you cant blame him, because under normal situations heīd never do anything bad. The cause is the cause and remains the source of everything that happens after certain actions.And before you come with an argument like "so Sekaiīs mother is the cause for she raising Sekai", no. Thatīs a natural happening. You cant do anything about that. But i doubt Sekai letting fuck herself was a natural thing...well, maybe to herself, lol.If for example the shooter did shoot someone, and then suddenly realized that he loves to kill (despite knowing that killing is wrong, like how Itou knew that cheating and lying to women was wrong but kept doing it) and started killing huge numbers of people, those deaths can no longer be blamed to the person who lied, since that is obviously the twisted decision of the shooter himself.
Haha, you are making a fool of yourself. I suggest you stop now.
No one is a blank sheet of paper. Itou was alive for more than a decade for crying out loud. Are you really trying to say that he knows absolutely 0 about anything (or specifically women)? You yourself admitted that Itou was more likely to react in such a manner to Sekai's practice sessions. Why is this so? Obviously because of his background, and maybe even partly to him being a naturally horny guy. How is being prone to becoming a jerk compared to someone else make him "blank"? It is amazing how you can even think that any person can be that innocent.
Ara. Sekai didnt care about Katsura? She held out for quite a long time even with Itou's insistence of having an affair with her (swimming scene etc.) BECAUSE she cared about Katsura, unlike Itou. She even explicitly stated, while rejecting Itou, that she does not want to hurt Katsura by cheating with Itou.
Ara. You completely missed the point of the argument. Now you even misconstrued my argument for being essentialist (as in saying that there is such a thing as a "killer deep within") You didnt even explain the contradiction in your reasoning that I exposed.
As seen here, you admitted before that Sekai is not the "cause" but merely the start of the situation before. I have already argued that starting the situation is different from causing the whole mess, which you are asserting. You did not even argue against my argument, but merely gave statements that have no justification. Like this:
Your argument in that previous post merely argued that Sekai’s actions started the situation (which even I admit in all of my previous posts). It does not prove that Sekai’s actions “caused” everything else that happened. Until you manage to do this, you are simply being a sore loser that cannot admit that he cannot defend his ideas.
If you cant get it after such a detailed and clear explanation, I am forced to believe that you are simply incapable of understanding logical arguments.
EDIT: about the Sekai's mother part of your rant, are you trying to say that raising a child that has no morals is a "natural thing" and that you cannot do anything about it? Well, for one, the mother could have raised her better. And no, I did not even think of such an argument, since it is absolutely idiotic, and thinking that someone will even reply in that way is idiotic as well. What do you mean by a "natural thing" anyway? (please answer this, I am genuinely curious)
Last edited by shinta|hikari; Sun, 10-07-2007 at 10:56 AM.
Peace.
I think this applies to the both of you. You've both begun to repeat arguments over and over.
Sekai did genuinely care for Katsura as a friend...to a point. MFauli is partially correct in saying that she didn't care because we know that Sekai befriended Katsura in an effort to get closer to Itou, after inadvertently seeing his cell phone wallpaper. She wanted to make it up to him after "ruining his love charm" on the first day.
But Shinta is also partially correct. Sekai did start up a genuine friendship with Katsura. Not necessarily a close one (as she was quick to snap up her chance with Itou), but one nonetheless. Sekai was very concerned with having Makoto tell Katsura that it was over between them, and now he was with her. She demanded it over and over, and Makoto kept lying to her.
This series is based off an ero-game. You need to know ALL the details from EVERY path before you can make very specific points about one character or another. We only got the smallest snapshot of Sekai's background. She does not seem to have the most pleasant relationship with her mother. Perhaps we would have learned much more about that if the series had followed a "Good End" path. Anime adaptations of ero-games and love simulators have to appease all fans of the games at least to a point. So time must be spent on Setsuna, Otome, Hikari, etc. We're probably missing quite a lot.
[QUOTE=shinta|hikari]
No one is a blank sheet of paper. Itou was alive for more than a decade for crying out loud. Are you really trying to say that he knows absolutely 0 about anything (or specifically women)?/QUOTE]
Yes.
Thatīs why he was so shy and didnt talk to Katsura in the train.
Thatīs why he was so fixated on having sex, because he never had had sex before.
In terms of "love" Itou was a blank sheet of paper. And Sekai ruined this innocent sheet, therefore being the cause.
Im ignoring the rest of your posting as itīs repetition, nothing new at all.
Only one thing: Yeah, there probably was a higher chance for Itou reacting the way he did, but thatīs what you call an individual mind. Noone is the same. But only because some have a higher chance of reacting in a certain way doesnt make them worse persons.
@Mfauli -What can I say... Baka?
Hmm... Homicidal maniacs have a higher chance of killing someone just because they look at them the "wrong way" (or some other unfathomable reason). Following your argument, they are not "worse persons" at all. Ara.
You just said that everyone has an "individual mind" and can thus react in their own way. Saying that Itou is a "blank sheet of paper on love" that will automatically act out whatever is written on it is contradicting your other statement, since it removes his ability to think by himself. BTW, being shy and being fixated on sex is not being blank or ignorant of anything concerning love. It is a normal thing for some young guys.
@Ryll - the arguments we made were simply based on the anime. Anything concerning the Ero-game is of course not included. It may be the "incomplete" version, but nothing prevents us from making arguments and conclusions based on that alone. The reason why I kept repeating the argument is because he keeps ignoring it. I, on the other hand, have addressed everything he said. It is very unfair to equate me with someone like that.
BTW, Mfauli is not partially correct about Sekai, since his statement implied that Sekai didnt care about Katsura at all, and that all she cared about is herself. How can you resolve the idea that both of us are partially correct if his statement is a complete negation of mine and vice versa? If mine is the least bit true, then his statement is completely false, since he generalized, while I gave leeway implying that Sekai did care about Katsura, but not enough to keep her hands off Itou.
I do agree that this has to end, and seeing that Mfauli seems to be stuck and cant respond to the last counter argument, as well as having contradicted himself at least twice, I will let it rest here.
Peace.
Does there really need to be a feminism vs chauvinism debate in here now too? While it would be awesome, something like that belongs in General Discussion. Since you both recognize your arguments will go nowhere with each other maybe it's time to change the topic to something lighter like which girl was best in bed or which girl swallowed? My money is on Otome for both, since she seemed the most sexually forward and she was so mad when she figured out Makoto was a douche. Maybe she was so upset because she let him do some extra naughty stuff...
Last edited by Yukimura; Mon, 10-08-2007 at 11:22 AM.
Hey, it was never a feminism vs. chauvinism debate for me. Just an anti-chauvanism one.
Why not a topic about who the best girl in the bunch was? My money is on Otome on this, since she was practically the only one who was able to realize something and gain something good from the encounter. She also seemed the most honest of the bunch, in the sense that she wanted Itou from the beginning, and all she did was consistent and based on that (including pushing herself on him in the culture festival). She was also the only one (from the 4 girls who actually love Itou) who figured out Itou was a jerk in time.
Peace.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
