So..Zoe gets to be openly gay but
Juleka and Rose and Marc and Nathaniel, who VERY WELL COULDVE BEEN MADE OPENLY GAY THIS ENTIRE FUCKING TIME.
Can't.
Okay, sure. And no little fuckin hints don't really count if the rando new character you shit out suddenly gets to do it.
Literally what has Zoe don't but EXIST for no actual reason?? She's every character rolled into one but she gets every storyline handed to her and rushed out of no where?? Tf. Make it make sense.
The only good thing she has is a cute character design, outside of her hero costume which is absolutely heinous.
18 notes
·
View notes
Sorry about the color mix up. I appreciate the reply and additional info! I guess bc I know nothing about peafowl (and the fact i dont breed any type of animal), I'm having a hard time understanding how being sterile would be unethical. I do somewhat get the shortened life span. I really would like to understand this, I just sometimes need stuff explained like I'm 5.
Up front, there's no "somewhat get" to a shortened lifespan being caused by a mutation in captive populations. If an animal is capable of living 20+ years (and some live 30+ or even 40+!) and some non-essential mutation is causing them to live 7-9 years, it's flat out absolutely unethical to breed that mutation, full stop, regardless of anything else going on. That's indicative of a MAJOR problem in their genetics. There's NO ethical reason to breed that because humans like how it looks. So, even without the sterility, these birds would 100% be unethical to produce.
The short answer on sterility is this: we don't know WHY they are sterile, but they shouldn't be, and that means something has gone wrong. When something goes wrong with an animal, and it's something genetic that can be passed on, the ONLY responsible and ethical thing for a breeder to do is to stop using that animal for breeding and closely monitor any already-produced offspring for signs of the problem, and likely not breed them, either.
The longer more complicated answer is this: sometimes it's possible to separate the problem from the aesthetic when it comes to morphs, like it was for cameo + blindness, but sometimes it's NOT, like it wasn't for spider + head wobble for ball pythons. In those instances, it's... difficult. Because you're LIKELY going to produce animals that suffer the same problem as their parent(s), in the attempt to separate the problem from the aesthetic, and sometimes that's ALL you're going to produce. As a breeder, it's your absolute responsibility to NOT release the offspring into the general population, where the problem may be replicated without control, and to keep or cull the affected individuals if the problem cannot be separated from the aesthetic, or AT BEST find them guaranteed pet-only homes that will NEVER breed them.
Sometimes the problem IS purely aesthetic or harmless, like it was for pied in peafowl, and sometimes it's not, like it was for vitiligo in peafowl. The problem comes when you ASSUME a mutation is the first, and treat it like the first when it's really the second. This has caused FAR reaching consequences in the peafowl community, and I'm sure in others, where now the autoimmune disease that first bronze had has been passed into genpop by folks who thought they were breeding a harmless new variation of pied. Hybrid animals are often sterile (not in peafowl though, hybrid cristatus-muticus birds are fertile) because of a mismatch in chromosome pairing numbers, and often that's harmless. So, in some cases sterility is not an issue because it's the expected result or is otherwise harmless... but in the case of peafowl, it's NOT an expected result and we don't know if it's caused by something harmless or not.
Some species, like mice and horses and cattle and dogs, genetic testing and DNA mapping done with millions of dollars has proven that while some stuff isn't purely aesthetic, it also doesn't cause harm to the animal in a way that affects quality of life or that can be adapted for in captive care. For example, in chickens, the frizzle gene causes curled feathers in single copy and an absence of feathers in double copy. This gene is considered ethical to produce IF the breeding is done responsibly by putting a single copy bird over a zero copy bird, which produces smooth coats and frizzle coats, but it is unethical to produce double frizzles (called "frazzles") because frazzles cannot thermoregulate, can easily sunburn, and easily suffer skin injury during normal chicken activity.
For peafowl, we have NO genetic testing. We do not have the genome mapped. As far as I know there's a research group working on it (mostly for green peafowl though, in conservation efforts), but that's not remotely finished or available to the public to test anything. We don't know where any of the morph mutations sit, or what is causing them or if they do anything beyond just change the color. Sometimes color mutations are the result of malfunctions in enzymes. For charcoal specifically, we don't know what the mutation does, besides what we can observe on the outside- the birds have half or less the lifespan of normal birds, poor feather quality, and the hens are sterile. Is the sterility harmless like it is in some hybrid animals, or is it actually a major organ failing? Is it the only major organ that fails due to this mutation, or is it just the first sign of their shortened lives? Is it some deficiency in something the birds need to be healthy? Does it hurt the bird? We don't know, but we do know the mutation and the problems (multiple, please do NOT forget that this is one OF MORE THAN ONE problems) can't be separated, and so until we do know why and whether it's harmless or not, the ONLY ethical response to seeing a problem in a major organ's function linked inextricably to a mutation in color is to not propagate that mutation. If someone wanted to fork over the millions it takes to sequence and map genomes and then determine exactly what is going on with peafowl, that would be nice and good, but I don't see that happening. When I win the lottery big, I'll be doing it, but til then we can only follow normal breeding guidelines
Also, to put this into perspective... peafowl mature sexually around 3 years old. They are chicks until the turn of the new year following their hatch. They are yearlings that year, and immature 2yo next year. They aren't actually considered fully grown until 6 years old, and should live another 14+ years. Charcoal birds die a 1-3 years after full maturity. Is it a coincidence that they fail to thrive shortly after full sexual maturity, or is it linked? Again, we don't know. We don't know if the sterility is fine or if it's just a symptom of something worse.
Even without the sterility, though, charcoal has enough issues it would be unethical. If it was JUST sterility, with no other deleterious effects, then maybe it would be different. But it's not.
108 notes
·
View notes
I have been meaning to talk about how accomplished Jun is though. She:
is such a powerful psychic that her clan apparently considered her a 'chosen one'
is literally such a strong fighter that she is able to suppress projecting her aura - something only the most powerful are able to do - which is why animals feel safe to approach her
fought well enough in the second tournament that Kazuya still thinks about her strength 22 years later in the story mode and waxes lyrical about it in his character ending (❓ on if she actually faced him though)
defeated Devil while pregnant ✔️ (only the half, but still counts)
has the survival skills to not only survive but thrive far from civilization
defeated Ogre ✔️
achieved the above via drawing power from sacred ground, something the average person obviously cannot do
is implied to have Yatagarasu guiding her per one of her intros
54 notes
·
View notes
Modern AU Seteth is always on the verge of explosion -
Let it be Manu who’s, well, Manu -
Willy’s random friday evening text messages “hey bro can you take care of kid for the weekend I’m going to fuck your sister, I dropped him at your place with his artistocats dvd, k thx” -
(always followed by Rhea’s following “thank you for babysitting, we’re going on a sightseeing tour this week-end with your car I borrowed :p”)
Hanneman’s usual “I need to probe your anus, for science I swear!” -
Flayn’s “I’m going to watch a movie with Mercedes and Annette and the rest of the gang!” when he knows who is the “rest of the gang” -
Billy’s random ass questions “Ladlegard invited me this weekend to have “tea” in her mansion but no one else was invited and she told me we will be alone, should I go or will it be unprofessional?” -
Macuil’s usual “Don’t call me brother, I am very busy. Call me only when you’re about to die, and even in that case, leave a message” -
Indech’s “Sure I don’t have anything to do this week-end, but I prefer to stay in my house instead of going to yours, I prepared a prank for the neighbour with dynamite and I want to know how it’ll turn out” -
and sometimes, the icing on the cake, his mom invites herself over, to remind him how his house is small and he’s broke “I know you can do better than that!”, eats some sweets with the kids, maybe watches a DVD or two and then leaves.
6 notes
·
View notes