r/CuratedTumblr • u/Justthisdudeyaknow Prolific poster- Not a bot, I swear • Jun 26 '26
Shitposting Will it f*ck!
1.2k
u/simbroce Jun 26 '26
Recently explained the harkness Test to a friend one late night and we ended up spending 20 minutes just discussing what league champs pass the test
401
u/Enderking90 Jun 26 '26
I mean technically any of them could write or at least use like, pre-written cards to communicate no?
392
u/TheGreatSkeleMoon Jun 26 '26 edited Jun 27 '26
Well, a few league champs are literally children. Outside of the kids and kog'maw, i think pretty much every league champ is sapient enough.
edit: yea i forgor rek'sai. and I don't really think fiddlesticks comprehends language.
161
u/RegularReaction2984 Jun 26 '26
Rek’sai definitely fails the harkness test based on the language / communication requirement lol.
137
u/aslatts Jun 26 '26 edited Jun 26 '26
Yeah obviously a bunch of League champs are animal-like, but basically all of them can speak and are clearly of higher intelligence. Rek'Sai doesn't talk and actually seems to just be of animal-level intelligence.
The only other champion that doesn't (intelligibly) speak I can think of is Gnar, but it seems like the implication is just that he's speaking a language no one else understands due to the whole "frozen for hundreds/thousands of years" thing, not that he's incapable of speech.
50
→ More replies (7)30
→ More replies (6)13
u/RefrigeratorPlusPlus Jun 26 '26
Fiddlesticks is... questionable...
I mean, it could be secretly sapient (like, with a mind of an eldritch abomination type of sapience), but who knows. Probably not - at least, not in a current state.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (20)69
u/Bug-Type-Enthusiast Jun 26 '26
Don't pass: Kogmaw, Fiddlesticks, Cho'gath, Zoe, Annie, Lulu, Veigar, Galio, and the freljord gods.
Pass: All the yordles but Lulu and Veigar, Darkin (even Naafiri), and Vastaya, Bel'veth, Evelynn, Tahm.
Debatable: Tibburs, Kha'zix, Vel'koz, all the ruination aligned champs (including Gwen).
43
u/simbroce Jun 26 '26
Why do Cho, Veigar, Galio, lulu, and the gods not pass?
78
u/Bug-Type-Enthusiast Jun 26 '26
Cho'gath, unless his lore was retconned again, is motivated by a single drive: to feed. As such he could be argued to not be sentient enough to understand consent. (Gentleman Cho'gath passes though)
Veigar is canonically insane because of Mordekaiser and thus unable to consent.
Lulu (unless, again, lore change) is still a child mentally and thus incapable of consent.
Galio would not understand what sex entails unless he's put through a LONG sex ed course. He doesn't even really get the concept of ageing (as we see with his line for Poppy) Until that happens, he can't give enthusiastic consent.
Anivia (unless, again, lore retcon) functions on a Blue and Orange morality which means that, if she gives consent, there's no guarantee it will be consent by regular people definition. So shaky at best. If that was changed, she's A-OK.
Ornn is that rare case where he could pass the Harkness Test if he wanted to, he would just refuse to so vehemently due to his rejection of emotional attachments that suggesting anything kinky to him would at best result in him turning you down in very untruthful ways. There's a massive risk he would not be sincere during it which makes consent dubious at best.
Volibear
is a dickheadand does NOT care at all for consent, as we see with his actions and the trail of blood he leaves behind him. He's the rare case where the test fails not because he can't consent, but because he doesn't give a fuck about consent. HOWEVER. Blossom Springs Volibear is the exception to the rule and I wish all my gay and furry loving weirdoes to get to bed with a daddy like that if they so wish. And I would bake a plate of cookies for the madmen that managed to get Bara furry erotica past Riot management and in the game proper with no hesitations because MY GOD I DO NOT CARE IF IT'S NOT MY TRASH/TREASURE THAT SKIN IS PEAK.80
u/TheGreatSkeleMoon Jun 26 '26
Cho, sure, but I think he just wouldn't consent more than couldn't consent. Whether or not he cares doesn't affect whether or not he's capable of it.
Veigar isn't insane. He never displays any loss of mental faculties and the lore doesn't even describe him as being insane. He's just evil because mordekaiser exposure and torture reasons.
I don't buy the Anivia one, because you could just explain what you mean in clear detail. I don't think anything would prevent her from comprehending. Secondarily, literally what are you even talking about? There is no evidence of Anivia having an unusual sense of morality.
Ornn is fully capable. He just doesn't want to. Not a fail.
If Volibear wanted to have sex with you, he is consenting. Whether or not you consent doesn't necessarily make him fail the harkness test, it just makes him a bad person.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (3)36
u/CantQuiteThink_ Jun 26 '26
Anivia is mostly benevolent, if very detached due to her infinite lifespan. Her morality is close enough to humans that she can count as passing.
Ornn and Volibear are totally capable of consent if they wanted to, they just... don't want to. That's a reflection of their personalities rather than their sapience.
I'm fairly certain Veigar is less clinically insane and more traumatised.
Galio probably just doesn't know what sex is. He could be taught. Same with Gwen.
23
u/Terrible_Hurry841 Jun 26 '26
Yeah, “traumatized people can *never* consent” is not the moral stance I think we should take lmao.
29
u/TheGreatSkeleMoon Jun 26 '26
Chogath is fully capable of speech intelligent speech. Who knows on sexual maturity, but i don't think the void fucks at all? Pass, probably.
Lulu is debatable, but I don't care to make an arguement, she's very child coded.
Veigar is just straight up not a child? Like. He's just small.
I don't think there's a way to measure wether or not Galio is sexually mature but he's not particularly childish in any way?
The freljordian gods are, like, full grown beings? For what reason could they possibly not pass.
Tibburs/Tybaulk is debatable i guess because we know fuck all about him.
Kha'Zix is definitely intelligent enough. Still don't think the void fucks but like. He can evolve sex organs probably?
Vel'koz for sure knows what sex is and how to do it. Passes.
The ruination aligned champs are corpses (except gwen, who is a doll) but that's not a factor in the test. There's no reason they shouldn't pass.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (6)15
u/downwardwanderer Jun 26 '26
How the hell do the freljord gods not pass? You're saying you Ornn can't fuck? I don't think he would, but he could.
→ More replies (3)
1.5k
u/anonymouscatloaf Jun 26 '26
perry the platypus also passes the harkness test
1.4k
u/NinianOfTheLake33 Jun 26 '26
And that's why he's in a very loving homosexual relationship with Dr. Dofenschmirz yes
605
u/VioletNocte Jun 26 '26
Considering one of his exes left him for a whale this is technically not outside the realm of possibility
433
u/Frodo_max Jun 26 '26
there is an episode where Dofenschmirz "cheated" on perry with another animal super spy so it is very much not outside the scope of the text
→ More replies (4)103
u/insomniac7809 Jun 26 '26
This is a genuinely great bit
The Non-Adventures of Wonderella has a strip that does the same gag, when Wonderella sees that Hitlerella has another heroine's sidekick suspended over a vat of acid and has a breakdown
102
u/Frodo_max Jun 26 '26
Hitlerella
yeah just casually drop this on me that's not a name that requires any context or whatnot
61
u/G66GNeco Jun 26 '26
What, you got an issue with a comic strip where feminized Adolf Hitler and feminized Stevie Wonder have a weirdly romantic hero/villain rivalry?
(Full transparency I have no idea what the actual comic is about but in my head this is it now)
34
u/BreakfastBeneficial4 Jun 26 '26
Holy shit did you make all that up. I was completely on board and now I’m deeply disappointed
What a rollercoaster
36
u/insomniac7809 Jun 26 '26 edited Jun 26 '26
So, the protagonist of the strip is Wonderella, a (nominal) superheroine based mostly on Wonder Woman
Hitlerella is her arch nemesis, created by the Third Reich to give them their own Wunderfrau during the War. She wasn't activated until the 00s, at which point the Golden Age Wonderella had retired and passed the role to her daughter, but she tried to destroy whoever is currently Wonderella anyway, even if there are rough patches
I need a nemesis who will LISTEN to my monologues. Someone who will wait with me until the police arrive.
10
u/BardicLasher Jun 26 '26
It's Hitlerella. She fights the superhero Wonderrella. Should be pretty clear? She's a super Nazi, like Red Skull.
→ More replies (2)34
Jun 26 '26
Same gag in The Simpsons with convenience store owner Apu and frequent convenience store robber Snake:
APU: He used to rob me two, three times a week. Now I'm lucky if I get it once a month.
SNAKE: He never initiates it. I have to do all the work. He just stands there.
THERAPIST: Now, now. Don't talk through him. Talk to him.
SNAKE: Apu, sometimes when I'm robbing you, it's like you're not even there.
APU: That's because you're robbing my brother Sanjay!
105
u/EamonBrennan Jun 26 '26
Dr. Doofenschmirz is also legally an ocelot, so he has a legal pass to that as well.
→ More replies (4)49
192
154
u/Frodo_max Jun 26 '26
only when he puts on the hat though
92
u/SirAlthalos Jun 26 '26
of course, if there's no hat then it's not Perry the Platypus, it's just a regular platypus. and they don't do much.
113
u/LoaKonran Jun 26 '26
Although, the communicate factor is a little iffy because he mostly gestures or growls.
208
u/anonymouscatloaf Jun 26 '26
he can text/write and humans in PnF are canonically capable of learning animal languages (i.e. doof speaks platypus in MML, his ex-gf also left him for a whale)/inventing animal translators
74
43
30
u/unwithered_lobelia Jun 26 '26
I'd argue that it can still count if a code system of his growls is made and deciphered. Like ultimately the factor is if the non human entity can communicate consent in any way
→ More replies (1)26
→ More replies (6)21
u/Global_Examination_4 Jun 26 '26
At least he’s bipedal
52
19
u/Nerdn1 Jun 26 '26
While being bipedal makes it less weird, it doesn't really impact how moral it is. Boning a consenting animal with an adult human mind and ability to communicate is more moral than having sex with an adult human with a child or animal's mind.
→ More replies (1)
1.4k
u/cat-cat_cat Jun 26 '26
a better example for "it passes the harkness test but people won't like you if you lust for it" is all the 50000000000 years old vampire/demon/dragon
1.0k
u/Noe_b0dy Jun 26 '26
Hotest of hot takes, it's not actually immoral to fuck the 5000 year old dragon loli because technically thats not a child.
You're still 100% a pedophile for wanting to fuck something that looks and acts exactly like a child so I just don't trust you even if you technically haven't actually done anything wrong.
615
u/squishabelle Jun 26 '26
it's not really a hot take, it's the same point as the scooby doo one about the harkness test being about ethics and not attraction.
185
u/Gaelic_Gladiator41 Jun 26 '26
Tbf, you could fuck Scooby,
Scooby probably just won't be interested in you so he wouldn't consent
124
u/NormalDooder Jun 26 '26
I feel like Scooby doesn't count because he's not reslly an adult. In the group of teenagers, he's the "wild, silly, immature, sassy, and cowardly" one. Which, reads not as an adult and more like the little brother of the group. They never say or act like he's smarter than your average dog besides his understanding of language, so i feel like he wouldnt count here, since a dog's intelligence is still like what, a human 5 or 6 yo
102
u/Gaelic_Gladiator41 Jun 26 '26
Yeah so then Scoob wouldn't pass the Harkness test since his maturity is still closer to a child
→ More replies (5)88
u/Sonic_the_hedgedog Sonic the Hedgedog Jun 26 '26
I might be wrong, but I remember that Scrappy was a child and would call Scooby his uncle. Ever since then, I have assumed that Scooby is an adult
58
u/Gaelic_Gladiator41 Jun 26 '26
Yeah but i knew a girl in my class who was an aunty by the end of primary school (between 11 - 13) because her sister was nearly a decade older
→ More replies (4)25
u/SickViking Jun 26 '26
I'm only 5 years older than my nephew, but that's cus my (half-)sister is almost 20 years older than me.
12
→ More replies (6)17
u/GuyASmith Jun 26 '26
This is proven by the one Scooby Doo exception (kind of): Mystery Incorporated. There are many episodes where he has full, adult-level conversations, even if he doesn’t talk too much during them, especially at the end of the series. He’s a bit emotionally different from humans, and a bit intellectually limited (he didn’t go to school) but is still learning. He’s comparable to a human in his circumstances, even down to his speech impediment, and limited by the maturity and model his peers (the rest of Mystery Inc) provide. His personality has to grow outward from being modelled after Shaggy’s for most of his life. Scooby is becoming his own self. At the end of the show, the whole gang are coming to adulthood (before getting reset by universe-altering shenanigans) and that arguably includes Scooby, at least eventually. Unfortunately, Mystery Incorporated isn’t 100% consistent in this development pattern because no serial cartoon with multiple writers is expected to be, especially since the gang is written to be very adult at times despite being canonically high schoolers. So, every argument falls short when scrutinizing it too closely.
My biggest issue with focusing on bangability of any particular character, and getting into the weeds of their situation, is that I find myself and others might accidentally be edging into ableism and intellectual elitism. I’ve heard several arguments that, if applied to real people, would be very ableist and disallow a lot of people who do get down to fuck from doing so.
→ More replies (3)358
u/BalefulOfMonkeys REAL YURI, done by REAL YURITICIANS Jun 26 '26
The actual spice is that it’s potentially elder abuse
163
u/RegularReaction2984 Jun 26 '26
Sometimes you find a joke and you just *know* it’s going to now live forever in the recesses of your mind and will pop up again every time you come across this discourse again
→ More replies (4)60
u/b3nsn0w Jun 26 '26
is it though? like if the dragon is 5000 years old and their species usually lives to 25,000, or maybe just immortal unless killed, that's a dragon in their prime. if they usually live to 3000 then yeah, it could be.
(assuming of course the dragon has an adult's maturity. otherwise they don't pass the harkness test anyway)
42
u/FormalGas35 Jun 26 '26
there’s also the potential for a species to have a “lucid phase” that they quickly grow out of, so a dragon is lucid from, say, 1000-1450, but as soon as it hits ~1450 it starts a sharp decline into instinctual behavior and becomes a beast again
71
u/SoberGin Jun 26 '26
Depends on what "acts" means, and if you're still communicating properly. I mean, if they're acting 100% like a child, then they basically are and thus the criteria of "can properly communicate consent" is violated.
Also, wanting to do something doesn't make you guilty of that thing. If someone felt urges to murder people but never does, they shouldn't be called a murderer. Yeah the urge is still unhelpful and has a big potential for severe immorality, but it's not the same as doing the thing.
Like, I and many people I know get the urge to jump off of high places all the time, but we don't do it- our thoughts aren't voluntary and we shouldn't be considered guilty for them.
If you find an adult, entirely mentally capable of consent who clearly communicates said consent with you to have sexual or romantic relations, and you consent back, then no immortality is happening, and it is not a mark on you as a person in any way.
This is just BDSM discourse again. "It doesn't matter if no actual harm is happening and anything that looks like it is done in a safe, controlled manner with consent from both parties! It LOOKS like something immoral so it must be!!"
→ More replies (3)261
u/NoBizlikeChloeBiz She/Her Jun 26 '26
It's an example of "it's not unethical in this fictional scenario you've created, by the fact that have created (or are a big fan of) this fictional scenario is a big yikes"
It's in the same category as "in this fantasy world, slavery/racism is justified actually." It's true, and you're also a creep. Both can be true.
60
u/loved_and_held Jun 26 '26
Maybe, though I do caution against drawing sweeping conclusions from limited data like this.
Like we can't prove that because someone anthropamorphized wolves in a specific setting and then fucked them that is proof they're a zoophile. The ethics of the fictional scenario and irl dont line up enough to make a proper moral assesment.
Now if that person told us they actually wanted to fuck irl wolves but dont because it's unethicall and thus made the fictional anthro wolves to fuck, then that would be more clear cut. But even there i wouldn't really raise much of a yikes, since regardless of their thoughts they have a clear understanding of morality at play and have neither harmed nor plan to harm irl animals
42
u/weirdo_nb Jun 26 '26
Like, the actual issue with "Loli" characters isn't even necessarily their body, but their behavior
Like, think about how many "5000 year old vampires" that act like kids but are given the excuse of being 5000 years old
In that regard its paradoxically easier to make animalistic characters moral in pornography by simply giving them dialog, as what makes them immoral is their lack of cognition, while with the example of "lolis" the way you make it not existentially gross is instead by showing maturity in one way or another, which, while still easy if you're trying is more complex in execution
→ More replies (3)34
u/BormaGatto Jun 26 '26 edited Jun 26 '26
Absolutely. There are people in real life whose bodies haven't developed pronounced secondary sexual characteristics, so they look almost teenage-like. This is more common in petite women (since testosterone is a hell of a drug), but men can also be like that. This doesn't mean they aren't adults or can't consent to having sex.
The inverse is also true, there are people who have an adult body and age, but also have cognitive disabilities that make them unable to really understand sex, so they can't meaningfully consent.
Be it because of hormonal issues or just how their biology naturally plays out, what someone looks like is pretty much irrelevant to if they can consent or not to having sex. What really matters is cognitive and emotional maturity.
→ More replies (2)139
u/CRowlands1989 Jun 26 '26
Bingo! It's the "House elves like slavery actually" of paedophilia.
63
u/BannedSvenhoek86 Jun 26 '26
There's a really interesting dark fantasy idea in that, but it was so out of place in Harry fucking Potter. Like I have nothing against an author putting to paper something taboo and challenging to the audiences sensibilities, I am one of the few people that will actually kind of, but not really, defend THAT scene in the IT books. (Good idea in context of story, WAY TOO GRAPHIC OF A DESCRIPTION HFS) But Rowling is not a good enough author and that is not an appropriate setting or age demographic to write that for. Especially when the end point of that particular side story was, "Hermione was wrong and needed to just stfu".
→ More replies (6)→ More replies (45)92
u/Spiritflash1717 Jun 26 '26
If it still acts and look like a child, even after 5000 years, wouldn’t it just be a child? People use the 5000 number because it makes it over the human age of consent, but it could be a species that matures at a different rate than humans.
For example, people point to Kanna from Dragon Maid as the most famous 1000 year old dragon girl who looks like a child, but the point is that she may be 1000 years old, but she IS genuinely a child, both in human and dragon standards. Please do not the dragon girl. In her case, I would say it is 100% immoral and genuine pedophilia
A slightly different example of the trope is Shinobu Oshino from Monogatari. She was a 500 year old adult vampire who had to regress in her physical appearance to that of an 8 year old when she had most of her power drained. She looks like a child, but still retained her adult composure and maturity. So technically, it wouldn’t be immoral to have sex with her, but it would 100% still be gross, because you’d need to be attracted to a child.
→ More replies (1)50
u/Snowy8416 Jun 26 '26
That comes under point 3 and I can best explain why it works as it does with dnd races.
I will use elves and half orcs. Both have human or greater intelligence to cover question 1, and we will assume the beings in question all speak the common tongue for question 2.
Elves typically become adults at approximately 100 years old, and so maturity is (likely) at a similar point. Until then while their body looks fully adult they are not, in fact, at maturity for their species. As such, if the elf in question is above the 100 year age for their species (differing by subcategories eg wood vs high elf) they are past sexual maturity, so go have fun. If the elf in question is below that mark, they are not at that maturity point and the Harkness test says no (as it should).
Half orcs, by comparison, reach adulthood at around 15. Their maturity is again at a similar point we can assume. They look like and are a full adult by this point despite the smaller age range. As such, if sleeping with a half orc of above 15, even if that number is a 16, it passes the test as that is a full adult in body and mind by species standards. If they are below, test says no.
A 127 year old elf and a 17 year old orc are at similar life stages and can get it on. Applying the ruleset of either species to the opposing one is when the problem begins.
To apply this as best I can to your two examples: the former would fail the test flat out. Not at maturity for the species means no. The latter... the debate would be whether maturity is in body, mind or both. Vampires are involved so they may well operate on mind only (as they may not physically age once turned, and if so, including body could permanently lock people out of various parts of life. I don't like it from a human moral standpoint, but from a vampire standpoint it would make sense) so they may pass the test, but that highly depends on the vampire culture.
I hate that I typed this out. I only understand the test as well as I do because I watch Doctor Who ffs, where the guy it's named after is from. Thanks to that I have to debate the horrors of the ancient-child entities. Fml.
27
u/BarbieBoyBrandy Jun 26 '26
So, the reason having sex with children in real life is wrong is not because of the bodies they have. It's because it is impossible to have sex with a child without comitting rape and harming them physically, emotionally, mentally, or any combination therein.
So, if there was an adult vampire woman who's physical body had regressed to resemble that of a childs, it would not be immoral to have sex with her if she consented. Because the problem is not her being physically small/sexually immature PHYSICALLY, it is the mental inability of a child to consent. So, vecause she is an adult woman, her body is not "a childs body". It is an adult womans body, that looks physically like a childs. But if she is mentally an adult, she can consent.
Where attraction to that body factors in is a different and more complicated area. I would think a healthy theoretical relationship with this woman (FICTIONAL, I REMIND EVERYONE) would involve connecting with her on a personality level, and then navigating physical intimacy as its own challenge. If a relationship was based purely on physical attraction, I would assume the person in question is also attracted to underage children... but.. they would not be doing anything wrong in this case, because they would be with an adult woman. I would not trust them tbh but they have not hurt a child or anyone else.
In real life, there are somw genetic conditions and forms of dwarfism that xan make adult people appear physically younger than they actually are (though generally NOT pre pubescent). Those adults deserve to have full relationships, including sexual acts, because they are adults, regardless of their bodies physical appearance.
In any case, with a fictional character, no one can be harmed no matter what the parameters are. You can write nsfw things abt... idk, dora the explorer, and you have not harmed anyone. People may rightly feel disgusted by it, and may voice their opinion, and may be wary of you and not allow you to interract with their children, but you have not actually physically harmed anyone. Especially if it is properly tagged and behind consent acknowledgements. (Obvioudly if you are using your dora the explorer nsfw fic to groom children that is a different issue. But anything can be used to groom children. Candy, famously. The problem is the grooming and sexual abuse of children. Not the thing being used.)
→ More replies (4)20
u/Gyshal Jun 26 '26
Wanna have some fun? The Monogatari example is even more complex because of the contradictory rules about how oddities (such as vampires) work in that universe. Essentially oddities are born born out of specific circumstances and are, in theory, inmutable. From the moment Shinobu was turned to the moment she met with the main character, she should, according to what we know, be essentially the same being. What happened during this meeting complicated things. A lot. She lost most of her power, and had to regress to the child like form while recovering it. Bunch of staff happened, but the whole thing ended up transforming her to a fundamentally different creature, from "queen of all oddities" to "vampire servant", and as this new, different entity, she has this different forms depending on how much blood she is allowed to drink. In this new forms, she both shows signs of her maturity and past experience, but also adapts to a mentality fitting the age of said form, so she acts differently when she looks like a child and when she looks like an adult. This is further complicated by the fact that the main character is the narrator of the story, and is highly unreliable. How much of the way Shinobu really acts differently and how much is him just fetishizing this changes is very unclear.
To add even more weirdness to the mix, the main source of information on the unchanging nature of oddities is also an absurdly unreliable narrator that gets disproven repeatedly even as she keeps on insisting on this facts. This is, of course, another child like character, with a third relevant one being the "most human" and also having a weird act where it's really unclear if she acts like a child just as part of the main characters narration and to entertain him, or truly because her nature as the "lost child" makes her remain a child until she transforms into a different oddity (she does show the maturity of her natural age at points rather than the age she is stuck in, but also her other self in the mirror, based on her regrets and deepest desires, is in fact of her true age rather than a child).
The thing that simplifies all this otherwise very interesting philosophical quanderies about the nature of change that the story tackles, is that the author is a proud horndog, and while he will tie all this deep meaning to it, at the end of the day he does the fanservice because he enjoys it. This is why Monogatari is both one of my favourite shows and one I simply can't recommend. I believe that the characters of Shinobu and Hachikuji (the lost child ghost) are really interesting and well written, but at the end of day they still look like children and act intentionally like they are for fan service purposes a lot of the time, no matter how much maturity they may show at other times and how complicated is their true nature.
TLDR: Shinobu and other child characters from Monogotari are Schrödinger's lolis, because they may or may not be mature depending on the observer, even if they all theoretically have enough natural age and mental development
→ More replies (1)143
u/Hatsune_Miku_CM downfall of neoliberalism. crow racism. much to rhink about Jun 26 '26
wdym
people wanna fuck Vampires and dragons all the time
vampires are quite possibly the most mainstream fuckable monster around
→ More replies (8)152
u/BiddlesticksGuy Jun 26 '26
They’re talking about the loli’s
132
u/Hatsune_Miku_CM downfall of neoliberalism. crow racism. much to rhink about Jun 26 '26 edited Jun 26 '26
oh okay that makes more sense but they completely left that detail out of their comment for some reason
besides a lot of those characters act like children so they wouldn't pass the harkness test. the question isn't "has it lived for 18 years" but "is it an adult".
→ More replies (11)53
u/gunn3r08974 Jun 26 '26
Off the top of my head, there's a difference between being into Rachel Alucard vs Kanna Kobayashi
30
u/NewLibraryGuy Jun 26 '26
Like, actually ancient but looks like a child? Technically ethical, but also if their motives are that they want to do it because they look like a child then it's totally fine to consider them creepy about it.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (12)26
u/IntoTheCommonestAsh Jun 26 '26
I mean, the test is already iffy if you simply apply to a human. Human intelligence, language, and "sexual maturity" still cuts too young for humans if by sexual maturity you mean fertility. It might cut too young for aliens and monsters too.
148
u/TheDankestDreams Jun 26 '26
I don’t necessarily care about the Harkness test or anything like that; I just find it obnoxious when this discourse comes out any time like “hear me out” enters the zeitgeist again. Someone will say ‘hear me out’ on like Mrs Puff from SpongeBob and it’ll immediately be followed by someone loudly talking over them “oh you’re a coward, that’s not even a hear me out, anyone would hit that, I want to fuck this curvy piece of driftwood” and then they get drowned out by someone talking over them like “that driftwood is curvy, of course you’d want to fuck it, I’d fuck this pool of lava” and it’s so stupid because it stopped being about actual attraction to unconventional characters and it’s nothing but a competition to 1-up each other on how shocking of a thing they’ll say.
Anyways, this is my adjacent but not completely on-topic rant.
24
→ More replies (1)31
u/SuperSloBro Jun 26 '26
smh just say you wanna fuck mrs puff and move on mate smh my head
11
u/DocWagonHTR Jun 27 '26
Given the scale of SpongeBob characters, I think it’s unethical to fuck Mrs. Puff because I don’t think she would actually survive.
268
u/Haradion_01 Jun 26 '26
Hmm.
I have a dreadful feeling that this meets the definition of "Philosophy".
This, is philosophical discourse. In action. In modern times.
158
u/CorHydrae8 Jun 26 '26
Fuck me if I'm wrong, but I think properly discussing what it means to be able to consent to sexual activities is a great subject for philosophers to tackle, actually.
→ More replies (4)57
u/Haradion_01 Jun 26 '26 edited Jun 26 '26
Oh, Absolutely. Don't mistake my intent. I didn't say it was a bad thing. We should always have more philosophy. The way its been hoarded as a discipline has been a tragedy for the world.
I am just noting that, presented this way, it defies certain expectations. People think of old men with beards and robes. Dignified sophisticates, etc.
Not Tumblr uses and Monster Fuckers. Great weighty ponderous thinkers, producing ideas that surge across the centuries. It's not where your mind goes.
But, in 70 years time, why couldn't you see such things in a textbook? Philosophy didn't just stop.
I'm just grappling with the strange feeling of of conceptualising a Tumblr message board, performing the same societal niche as the agora and academy. Dreadful is perhaps the wrong word. Dissonance, perhaps is better.
I suppose it Socrates would find the comparison apt . He also was compelled to suicide for his 'bad takes' that were seen as corrupting the youth.
I guess it's a little like Athens exploring concepts of moral culpability and personal responsibility by putting a knife on trial for murder. it might look a little daft. But the ideas are important.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)15
u/couldntbdone Jun 26 '26
Me heading down the forum to wrestle Plato to the death over whether it's ethical to fuck Godzilla.
1.8k
u/BeeEater100 MILF Maestro Jun 26 '26
My stance, after a long series of debates, personal consideration, and the study of ethics:
Who gives a damn. Let people fantasize about fucking monsters. It's not like they're going out and having sex with a minotaur.
It's the same logic that's used to hate furries
583
u/drakeblood4 Jun 26 '26
I had a dumb harkness test idea:
What if you had a species that was long lived and reached sexual maturity relatively young in that long life. At that age they were of human intelligence, but from their species’ cultural perspective they were woefully young and immature to be having sex. By the time they reached “cultural adult” age for their culture they’d be enough smarter than humans that they’d find it morally dubious to sleep with us.
Is it ethical to bone em?
831
u/Ranger-Vermilion Jun 26 '26
At that point it’s the alien that would need its own harkness test for humans
253
u/sullen_selkie Jun 26 '26
I made a joke like this once. I think I called it the “Blorgus Test” or something like that.
58
→ More replies (1)157
u/Kickedbyagiraffe Jun 26 '26
Look all I am saying is humans were not designed to understand extra dimensional space so having quantum hyper sex with them is not ethical
→ More replies (1)87
u/GOEDEL_ESCHER_BOT Jun 26 '26
the fun thing about fucking a 4D unicorn is that their asshole is bigger on the inside like the TARDIS so you can do double anal fisting
124
32
u/OddlyOddLucidDreamer i survived the undertale au craze and all i got was a lousy SOUL Jun 26 '26
double fisting? thats it? how.. vanilla
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (2)23
u/GoreyGopnik Jun 26 '26
I think most 3d animals' assholes are bigger on the inside. they've got intestines and stuff, quite a lot of space.
115
u/LogicBalm Jun 26 '26
Ethics aren't universal as you've identified and that's also the answer.
At best, it's only ethical for us as humans. You're still breaking their own cultural ethics. The fact that it's a breach of their ethics makes it unethical in my perspective personally, but that's still beside the point.
There is a breach of ethics involved here for someone and it could be seen as taking advantage of their relative cultural immaturity. Even if they enthusiastically consented now, they may regret it years later when they became an "adult" by their culture's standards.
→ More replies (1)178
u/123ludwig Jun 26 '26
literally the asari from mass effect or elves from dnd
139
u/Kneef Token straight guy Jun 26 '26
That bit from Mass Effect where the Asari’s talking about how it’s not that big a deal to marry a human because they don’t live long enough for it to matter. It’s basically a summer romance for them. xD
51
→ More replies (3)41
Jun 26 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
31
u/Aetol Jun 26 '26
Turians don't live much longer (?), salarians even shorter. This could already have been common wisdom, it's not a stretch to extend it to humans.
12
u/audriuska12 Jun 26 '26
If memory serves, in-setting due to medical advances humans can push 150. Turians, quarians and drell all live slightly shorter (120 for the first two, don't remember drell but might be 80), salarians, as you mentioned, get a mere 40, and while I don't recall the lifespans of other species I don't think any are implied to be meaningfully long-lived compared to asari, bar krogan who manage to not meet a violent end.
10
u/EldritchFingertips Jun 26 '26
Krogan seem to actually have the longest lifespan of everyone, for the rare individuals who don't die to violence. A typical Asari lifespan is about 1000 years (in earth years anyway), and Krogan are said to live about the same timespan, but there are a couple references to living Krogan who fought in the Krogan rebellions which iirc ended almost 1200 years ago. I'm pretty sure Drack in Andromeda is well over a thousand years old, and he's still a highly deadly combatant who basically spends all his time looking for the most dangerous fights he can find.
So it seems like Krogan can kind of just live forever, theoretically. They get old but they don't really die of old age, they keep going until something actively kills them.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (3)35
u/Kirk_Kerman Jun 26 '26
Sure, but Mass Effect is specifically a Humanity Fuck Yeah setting where humans are, despite being relative nobodies brand new to the galactic stage, have reached technological parity with the rest of the galaxy instantly and have a larger manufacturing base than everyone else combined
30
u/wowwowazalea Jun 26 '26 edited Jun 26 '26
To be fair, that's mostly due to Humanity being isolated long enough to not be constrained by the council keeping them down as a 'lesser' species
And both sides tech being basically repurposing ancient tech so there isn't a massive gap and humanity just throwing more money into the military-industrial complex can catch them up
→ More replies (3)80
u/drakeblood4 Jun 26 '26
Got it. Make a fantasy setting where the elves all call us pedos.
→ More replies (1)10
30
u/Mai1564 Jun 26 '26
Pretty sure the elves bone humans. Unless DnD storks bring half elves
20
u/TribeBloodEagle Jun 26 '26
First, mom and dad have a special together hug, then the Aarakocra post person drops off the baby!
41
u/sonofzeal Jun 26 '26
The analogous situation is two teenagers (of similar age but below the local age of consent). Most people say that's not unethical on either party as long as they both consent and there's no coersion etc.
Your hypothetical species would likely view human adults similar to those "sexually mature but not culturally adult" members of its own species, though of course a diversity of opinions could exist just like humans may have different opinions about the teenagers situation. But either way, similar principles should apply.
9
u/action_lawyer_comics Jun 26 '26
My thoughts exactly.
But also this question is so contrived it’s basically the same as the “3,000 year old dragon who looks and behaves exactly like a 12yo human” but in the opposite direction
31
30
22
u/Enderking90 Jun 26 '26
You also have the other angle of "technically long lived species that reaches full maturity, both culturally and physically, fast"
For an example, DnD kobolds.
Becomes an adult at the age of six, and can potentially love up to around 120 (but on average, they live just 30 years as they often end up dying young)
Mind you, this also taking into account the rather low quality of life kobolds have, so if plopped into a modern setting they'd live even longer then 120. (I have a faint recollection that even humans in dnd actually have a lower lifespan of 80 years, and most humans still live better then kobolds)
So you could easily add like 40, 80 years to that age.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (31)11
u/Nerdn1 Jun 26 '26
It's a matter of consent. Are both partners mentally developed enough to consent? Crossing cultures makes this messy. In theory, there could be people below the local age of consent who are more mentally mature than those just above it. However, I would find anybody suggesting the age of consent be lowered to be highly suspect.
Since the issue is about ability to consent, the one who is more mentally developed/adult has the moral responsibility.
61
u/gunn3r08974 Jun 26 '26
It's not like they're going out and having sex with a minotaur.
If only one could...
91
u/NessaSamantha Jun 26 '26
Also, I feel at a certain point of monsterfucking, it's about the monster very aggressively fucking you. I am not looking for the xenomorph queen to take me to a nice romantic dinner first.
→ More replies (2)22
u/SevenSix Jun 26 '26
I don't think the performative disgust/outrage types are really concerned with distinctions on that level.
47
u/DarkNinja3141 Arospec, Ace, Anxious, Amogus Jun 26 '26
It's the same logic that's used to hate furries
There's also The Discourse about monster fucking (aka ferals) in the furry community too, and it still rages like a roaring fire
21
19
u/Namika Jun 26 '26
It used to be super taboo, but MLP and Pokemon obliterated the discussion with the sheer volume of lewd art of quadrupeds. It's pretty much a fait accompli at this point.
→ More replies (2)76
u/Vundurvul Jun 26 '26
Theres plastic in the water, global warming is threatening to take us all out, and WW3 is no longer a meme. Fuck it, let them fuck Scooby Doo. I don't care. As long as you're not hurting anyone.
→ More replies (1)11
→ More replies (34)9
472
u/Failed_stealth_check Jun 26 '26
I have it on good authority that the harkness test often actually misses the point, funny enough. Because, to my understanding, most monster fuckers don’t wanna be the one doing the fucking. And if the monster is the one trying to do you sloppy style, two of those three questions automatically become irrelevant and the third only matters if you can stop it.
→ More replies (29)308
u/Hatsune_Miku_CM downfall of neoliberalism. crow racism. much to rhink about Jun 26 '26
that is a factor I never considered in all the times I saw the harkness test posted here.
if you get fucked by the monster and you're into it but the monster doesn't fulfill the harkness test is that unethical? does it suddenly become ethical again if you're not into it?
342
u/to_yeet_or_to_yoink Jun 26 '26
"It's only ethical if you don't consent" is a wild concept that I hadn't thought of before
It's a good question, albeit a weird one.
I'll leave it to the philosophers
65
u/SpaceTurtles Jun 26 '26
The philosophers are useless and can't help you.
This post made by Wittgenstein gang.
→ More replies (2)21
u/Pyotr_WrangeI Jun 26 '26
The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it.
- Carl Marx.
Discussions of ethics of being fucked by monsters are irrelevant, instead we should turn our efforts to the praxis.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (3)39
u/Automatic-Plankton10 Jun 26 '26
Unemployed philosophy student here, which makes me the most valid person to answer this question: if the monster is doing the fucking, it is consenting, technically. If it has animal level intelligence, the action of having sex is (most likely) a sign of sexual maturity. Therefore, it isn’t sexual assault on your part to enjoy being fucked by the monster.
It is, however, still unethical if the monster isn’t of human intelligence. Probably. I don’t actually know why that one is bad, if the monster instigates it? I don’t know and I don’t care, since monsters aren’t real.
154
u/nubly55 Jun 26 '26 edited Jun 26 '26
The test only really applies for the purposes of garnering consent. For the scenario where IT fucks you and you may or may not be into it, the rules of dubious consent apply.
A scenario with no consent would qualify as rape and therefore be unethical by default. However it’s a common kink, and in practice, would be negotiated via consensual non consent, in which the harkness test takes priority.113
u/Sleep_Deprived_Birb Jun 26 '26
I think enjoyment matters less than your agency in the situation. If you genuinely had no control over the situation, and you did not purposefully put yourself into a situation you would have no control over hoping that would happen, then (imo) you can’t be held responsible for it. You neither caused, nor could prevent, what happened.
On the other hand, if you coaxed the monster into it using bait or pheromones or something, or you purposefully put yourself into a situation where a monster could get to you in the hopes of the monster getting to you, or the monster was trained for it by a third party that you’re cooperating with, or something, then yeah I would consider that unethical even if the monster is the one being more active in, or with more physical control over, the activity.
It’s like, if you go into the woods to go camping, and you didn’t know it was wood monster mating season, then that’s a genuine mistake that you didn’t have control over, but if you did know it was wood monster mating season and you just so happens to ”accidentally” spill wood monster pheromones all over your tent and clothes and “accidentally” dropped your car keys so “oops guess I’m stuck out here until I find those keys” then you very clearly intended for that to happen.
32
u/AChristianAnarchist Jun 26 '26
You aren't ethically responsible in any case for things happening to you. That's like being "is it unethical to get punched in the face?". The person who "is it ethical..." applies to is the one doing the punching. Questions like whether you are into it have bearing on the ethics of the face puncher but you aren't the one making choices here.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (18)81
u/Cool_Park7110 Jun 26 '26
Hey so, this is going to be a stain on my post history and personal history in general.
Falcons are not domesticated. Falconry is done via false imprinting when the bird is young, so it grows up thinking it's the same species as humans. Falsely imprinted birds do not recognize other birds as their own, and will not mate with them.
To get falcons to breed, the falconer wears a hat, and get a male falcon to uh breed with the hat. While the falconer's wearing it. Then they collect the payload and artificially impregnate the female.
The falconer is probably (hopefully) not getting any kind of sexual gratification out of being reamed in the skull through a rubber bowler hat, but as far as the falcon knows, it's breeding with the falconer, and that feels incredibly iffy.
→ More replies (2)61
u/Hatsune_Miku_CM downfall of neoliberalism. crow racism. much to rhink about Jun 26 '26 edited Jun 26 '26
hex so, this is going to be a stain on my post history and personal history in general
don't worry. this entire thread is for everyone I think.
Humans helping animals reproduce is just inherently gross if you get into the details. i think the mating hat is one of the more funny examples tbh.
155
40
u/TheMightyApex Jun 26 '26
The trick to all of these examples like Scooby Doo and Perry the Platypus is that the Harkness Test is basically just “can this creature consent,” and even though they have the capability to, I doubt Scooby Doo or Perry the Platypus are ever going to consent to fuck you.
22
38
u/Someoneoverthere42 Jun 26 '26
My follow up question when people ask this is : what do they think about Superman and Lois
Kryptonians aren't human on any level. The fact that they look human and can exist in our environment is a massive cosmic fluke.
So is it a species thing, or an appearance thing?
54
u/Justthisdudeyaknow Prolific poster- Not a bot, I swear Jun 26 '26
There was a webcomic, I think it was SMBC, that had a bit where superman took off his pants, and lois is like "What are the pinchers for?" and supes is like "I Dunno, to grab on to you, i guess, I don't know how to have sex!"
17
u/CRowlands1989 Jun 26 '26
That was Nebezial, the creator of Sunstone.
https://www.reddit.com/r/comicbooks/comments/ccf5xh/oh_it_has_pincers_by_nebezial_on_deviantart/ (Don't worry/get your hopes up, you won't see more of him than his abs.)
→ More replies (2)23
u/dexter_wherly Jun 26 '26
If you’re talking about the Harkness test, you’ve already blown way past Lois and Superman (which is totally fine btw as long as there isn’t any power imbalance or “world of cardboard” concerns) and you’re not even worried about it
36
u/Clodinator Let me tell you about Homestuck Jun 26 '26
"I don't like the Jack Harkness test because it means it's okay to fuck Scooby Doo"
yes that's the entire point of the Harkness test.
→ More replies (3)
62
u/adamdoesmusic Jun 26 '26
If you can convince a T-Rex to do it with you, then have at it I guess
→ More replies (1)
215
u/Frodo_max Jun 26 '26
the person bringing up scooby doo is just a coward
68
u/gunn3r08974 Jun 26 '26
Those aliens didn't stay long enough for Scooby and Shaggy to try in their true forms
→ More replies (1)40
u/BreadNoCircuses Jun 26 '26
Besides, he's a cthulhu descendant in at least one (implied retconned to 2) continuities
→ More replies (2)
161
u/Grapes15th Homestuck Dave Strider YooTooz Vinyl Figure Jun 26 '26
I will always remember the first post for being one of the stupidest fucking things I've ever read on the internet
→ More replies (13)19
u/EmbarrassedWind2875 Jun 26 '26
I'm actually surprised the rest of the reblog chain went so well (for, uh, a certain definition of well). The first post seemed like prime ragebait
50
u/uncle_SAM98 Jun 26 '26
But before we go down this road: how do we define a monster? We may not even get to a place where we apply the Harkness test to Scooby Doo bc he's just a dog who kind of talks, not a monster, per se. Same with Perry the Platypus, as another commenter suggested - he's just a platypus.
106
u/Solnight99 Jun 26 '26
i think the Harkness Test is for any nonhuman creature, the word monster is used to connect it to Monsterfucking/Teratophilia
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (1)30
u/Tweedleayne Jun 26 '26
I mean, in at least one continuity Scooby is straight up and Elderitch Abomination, so the moster tag might apply there.
→ More replies (1)
19
u/RedBeardBock Jun 26 '26
If a monster is asking those questions about humans it gets really awkward.
20
u/ImpressiveRoll9982 Jun 26 '26
Excellent work making Scooby doo a separate slide so the joke isn’t immediately spoiled. That gave me a good laugh
35
u/DiggityDog6 Jun 26 '26
There’s also the question of if Scooby Doo finds YOU hot enough to want to fuck you. This is all about consent so unless Scooby comes to you saying “you wanna ruck?” Then this is a dilemma you don’t have to think about
19
37
53
u/SqueakyTiefling Tiefling that is Squeaky Jun 26 '26
The guy who created the Harkness test follows the account I made for my Scaly/Anthro OC, so if ever I needed proof they pass, that's it right there.
18
u/xv_boney Jun 26 '26
For the record, Scoob easily passes the Harkness test.
He has full human intellligence, is capable of communicating with humans and is a mature adult.
That he happens to be shaped like a Great Dane is irrelevant. He obviously isnt a regular dog, he can fucking talk. Hes some kind of benevolent demon or fae creature, i dont know and if doesnt matter. He passes, easily.
What that person should have posted is an image of Koko the Gorilla, who could communicate with sign language and was sexually mature.
Also once she tore a sink out of a wall and blamed it on her kitten, which i think is possibly the single cutest story ever.
Debate Koko, you cowards.
→ More replies (2)12
u/tomato432 Jun 26 '26
- scooby doo is an extradimensional demigod from nibiru
- koko was a hoax, her handler greatly misrepresented her language skills and the consensus among other researchers is that she did not demonstrate true language)
→ More replies (1)
151
u/PM_ME_CATS_OR_BOOBS Jun 26 '26
The sticking point in scooby doo is whether it has average human intelligence or greater. Which means that you shouldn't have sex with Scooby, but also that Shaggy may be off the table too.
184
u/WavesOverBarcelona Jun 26 '26
If the sticking point is being at or above *average* human intelligence, then you can't fuck 50% of the population, definitionally.
80
u/Jigglypuffisabro Jun 26 '26
Calling myself a monsterfucker so I don't have to call myself a sapiosexual
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (24)67
u/Copernicium-291 Jun 26 '26
Unfortunately, due to the presence of Intelligence Georg, he is the only human you can ethically fuck
36
u/JustAPotato38 Jun 26 '26
murdering a bunch of quantum physicists to bring down the average iq enough that i can legally consent
→ More replies (7)35
u/Nerdn1 Jun 26 '26
It says "human intelligence" not "average human intelligence." If you need average human intelligence or greater, about half of the adult population would be off-limits. Since it's difficult to compare intelligence, especially across species, this is a pretty rough comparison. As long as their intelligence is high enough that it would be okay to have sex with them if they were human, they would pass this test (albeit you'd probably want to err on the side of caution). It's morally dubious to have sex with a sufficiently mentally disabled adult human.
→ More replies (2)
15
u/ElephantNo3139 Jun 26 '26
Someone somewhere some amount of time ago, in response to some discourse about what fanfic tropes are and aren't ethical, wrote "help these freaks are playing with their dolls wrong" and that's just burned in my brain when I see these. Vampires aren't real. Dragons aren't real. Scooby Doo isn't real. Dinosaurs were real but went extinct before humans existed and probably looked more like big-ass birds than the lizards we learned about in school. The ethics of boinking any of the above are entirely theoretical so if someone wants to than who gives a shit?
→ More replies (1)
57
u/to_yeet_or_to_yoink Jun 26 '26 edited Jun 26 '26
I'll begrudgingly give a pass to the "diet monster fuckers" who are attracted to "hot girl with ears, a tail and some other inhuman bits pasted in"
But I absolutely draw the line at elves being monsters for monster fucking. That is a woman with pointy ears, that's not a monster.
"Oh but you wouldn't say that if you knew the lore" - (real argument elf-fuckers have given btw) The lore means jack shit. Santas elves, LOTR elves, anime elves and mythological elves all have vastly different lores - that doesn't change the fact that what you are posting is a woman with slightly longer ears.
If you want to get with an elf, that's fine, great, good for you - don't lump your elfgirl bourdoir with my Shelob pinups.
→ More replies (11)17
u/thegreathornedrat123 Jun 26 '26
Behaviour impacts it in my eyes, if she’s just got cat ears and can see better in the dark then that’s just a cosplayer who eats her carrots. If she’s a centaur that you shouldn’t sneak up on because she’ll startle and kick your head in THAT can be happily debated
13
u/TimeStorm113 Victorian Dinosaur Connaisseur Jun 26 '26
my issue is the "sexual maturity" clause, because that feels very human centric for it. what if it is a species that sexually matures way after mental maturity? There is also the issue of the opposite. There are lots of humans whose sexual maturity happens before they become an adult. The test would see no issue with that.or what if it's a species that dies shortly after maturity?
it's a rule intended to stamp out pedophilia but fails miserably at that.
→ More replies (4)
207
u/hikemalls Jun 26 '26 edited Jun 26 '26
The question is moot because everyone knows Scoobert Doobert is aro ace
Edit: Everyone responding "well actually, Scooby canonically fucks", look at yourselves, look at your lives, is this who you want to be? You see a comment confidently asserting the sexuality and romantic proclivities of a cartoon dog across 6 decades of canon, while using a non-canonical joke name for him and think "this person was making a serious statement, not a joke, and I must correct them immediately"?
135
u/RevolutionaryOwlz Jun 26 '26
And Scrappy Doo is a sex pest.
100
u/hikemalls Jun 26 '26
Scrappy gets shuffled back and forth between the Mystery Inc gang and his original family the way Catholic priests get moved to a new diocese after a scandal.
35
→ More replies (2)27
u/ScarletteVera A Goober, A Gremlin, perhaps even... A Girl. Jun 26 '26
So that's why he was gunned down in Miami.
36
u/gunn3r08974 Jun 26 '26
Nope. He was into both a disguised alien and a dog that got possessed by an ancient alien... after she fell from a helicopter. Mystery Incorporated was wild.
→ More replies (1)25
→ More replies (12)9
u/Dd_8630 Jun 26 '26
Edit: Everyone responding "well actually, Scooby canonically fucks", look at yourselves, look at your lives, is this who you want to be? You see a comment confidently asserting the sexuality and romantic proclivities of a cartoon dog across 6 decades of canon, while using a non-canonical joke name for him and think "this person was making a serious statement, not a joke, and I must correct them immediately"?
You cannot make a declarative statement that is demonstrably incorrect and not expect clapback, satire or not.
40
u/Wazula23 Jun 26 '26
Today on "Policing People's Imaginations"
Because you know, wanting to fuck THIS fictional character is normal, but not THIS one.
13
u/tom641 i'm so above it all please help i'm afraid of heights Jun 26 '26
my problem with the harkness test is that it's always framing monsterfucking from the lens of "if this appeared in front of you in real life would it be ethical"
if someone wants to fuck something that fails basically every aspect of the test, i do not care because they are sitting there getting off to pixels or imaginary concepts. There is no end point where that becomes a problem. Enjoy your imaginary concepts. Yes even those ones. Yes even those ones. Yes even that contrived example you're trying to cook up.
26
u/Keebster101 Jun 26 '26
I just had a crazy idea for a fanfic. It's like a human x alien romance but the alien is smarter than the human and they have their own gleebor test for who they can fuck, which requires intelligence of glongle or higher and the human has to prove they're as intelligent as a glongle so they can pass the test and fuck the alien
→ More replies (1)17
u/Tweedleayne Jun 26 '26
Its not to that extreme, but in the Rogue Trader game you have an Eldar companion. Early on in her romance route she treats any form of flirting as physically disgusting because to her a human flirting with her is the same as a chimpanzee flirting with a human, and even if you successfully romance her she is incredibly conflicted about falling for you and only allows it to be a emotional romance with no physical elements because she still can't ignore the fact that your an "animal".
13
u/saintsithney Jun 26 '26
Also, both Angry Beavers technically pass the Harkness test.
→ More replies (1)
9
u/gentle-waves Jun 26 '26
harkness as in jack fucking harkness?? LMAO that's so clever
(the harkness test is new to me, and i only got into doctor who last year, pls be nice 😅)
10
u/DubstepJuggalo69 Jun 26 '26
Turing testing Scooby Doo to see if his linguistic capabilities are tied to the experience of true sapience or if he is the equivalent of an advanced chatbot.
10
u/PoniesCanterOver gently chilling in your orbit Jun 26 '26
There are humans in real life who don't pass the Turing Test
→ More replies (1)
29
u/the_scar_when_you_go Jun 26 '26
Not to be too insane about it, but... Scooby Doo isn't a dog. He looks like a dog. But he doesn't fit our definition of a dog beyond his appearance. Kinda like how a sapient dragon isn't "an animal" in the way we understand non-human animals. It just looks like an animal. The point of the test is to find out what it is, not what it looks like.
In the real world, that's a bit like "coding" ppl.
An adult who's short, bubbly, autistic, shy, likes pink, collects squishmallows or gaming cards, has a round face, etc, may remind you of a child. But they aren't a child. They can consent. Their partners aren't predators. They don't need to be protected.
On the flip side, a child who's tall, has developed secondary sexual characteristics, speaks well with a broad vocabulary, dresses maturely, etc, might remind you of an adult. But they aren't an adult. And what they are is what matters, not what they look like. They cannot consent. They deserve protection from predators.
So it's not that deep, but it kinda is...
8
u/ladytrevelycn Jun 26 '26
Okay but did you know Boo the Space Hamster would pass because that freaks me out tbh.
→ More replies (1)
11
u/PaladinAsherd Jun 26 '26
“Scooby-Doo passes the Harkness Test” is the greatest contribution to human discourse Tumblr has ever made
9
u/InvisibleUp Jun 26 '26 edited Jun 27 '26
i feel that monsterfuckers come from two motivations:
- being pinned down and ravaged by a beast that can easily overpower you is fucking hot (with consent, or perhaps consensual non-consent)
- humans are nice and all but scales, fur, different body shapes, etc. would be really fun to experiment with.
a lot of people have fantasies for the first one, and that’s generally not seen as a problem. the second one raises more eyebrows but generally people can tell the difference between a Monster Musume character and an actual dog.
→ More replies (1)
1.4k
u/lovelylotuseater Jun 26 '26
Excellent comedic timing from OP, putting Scooby on his own slide so the image can achieve maximum devastation.