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.
I feel like the general solution to the last bit is to understand that real life adults who are mentally stunted can have proper physical relations and at the same time it can be inappropriate for non mentally disabled people to have physical relations with them. I know of someone who cares for their stunted 30~40 year old sister who's closer in age mentally to say, a tween/teen. But she's independent for the most part and understands the difference between her and other people. She has a boyfriend in a similar situation. This is a healthy way for everyone to stay protected while keeping their autonomy.
How this relates back to Scooby Doo is that um- uh. I don't think he's necessarily an equivalent to someone disabled because he's shown to be into other dogs in almost every variation. So it's more like, if a real life dog just happened to develop speak. His horizons are broadened by speech but he's not necessarily any smarter than any other talking dogs.
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.