Character Discussion Why do people see any problem with Sanji and Pudding?
- Thread starter Nightcore Lion
- Start date
Now this is a clear example of how SHALLOW discussions here are.
A 18 year old and a 30-40-50 year old are also on "different stages in life". The older person can also use things like money or influence to seduce the 18 year old, no?
Are they pedophiles? If they wait until a 17 year old turns 18 on the very next day, does he stop being a pedo, then? Is the time frame on a couple of hours enough to "change a person's moment of life"?
I find it quite amusing how people here like to vomit a bunch of morality nonsense, then 5 minutes later are complaining about "woke" stuff on the internet.
"Age" is but ONE criteria utilized to protect kids and teens from, NOT ONLY, pedos, but all kinds of sexual pedos.
That "25-30 years old friend of yours" who likes to go for 18 year olds because he can seduce them more easily is also a sexual predator. That other friend who likes to go for the drunk girls, is also a sexual predator.
You fuckers have no fucking idea what this subject is or how deep is goes, but y'all like to come here and repeat a bunch of nonsense like fucking parrots and pretend y'all are "saints".
Let me tell you something: you directly contribute to "rape culture" worldwide, by pretending to understand the subject and just living with shallow views and simplistic arguments.
Do you defend sex ed on schools, so kids can learn to spot sexual violence against themselves or others close to them?
Do you defend a public initiative to protect and take care or sexual violence victims?
Do you protest when some anime portrays sexualized kids and then give some excuse of "they're actually 18+ they just look and act and think like a kid"?
I'm gonna guess "no".
I'm gonna guess you just like to fap to Ulti's hentai pics, even though the character acts like she's 12 years old. BUT HEY, IF THE AUTHOR SAYS SHE'S LEGAL, THEN THAT'S ALRIGHT, RIGHT?
Bunch of fucking mouth breathing morons. Ban me, delete this, whatever, but this "sanji is a pedo" discussion has way past the point of complete and utter nonsense. Instead of actually discussing a pertinent topic, it's just a bunch of fucking virgins and retards trying to go for the "TURN DOWN FOR WHAT" meme sentences.
A 18 year old and a 30-40-50 year old are also on "different stages in life". The older person can also use things like money or influence to seduce the 18 year old, no?
Are they pedophiles? If they wait until a 17 year old turns 18 on the very next day, does he stop being a pedo, then? Is the time frame on a couple of hours enough to "change a person's moment of life"?
I find it quite amusing how people here like to vomit a bunch of morality nonsense, then 5 minutes later are complaining about "woke" stuff on the internet.
"Age" is but ONE criteria utilized to protect kids and teens from, NOT ONLY, pedos, but all kinds of sexual pedos.
That "25-30 years old friend of yours" who likes to go for 18 year olds because he can seduce them more easily is also a sexual predator. That other friend who likes to go for the drunk girls, is also a sexual predator.
You fuckers have no fucking idea what this subject is or how deep is goes, but y'all like to come here and repeat a bunch of nonsense like fucking parrots and pretend y'all are "saints".
Let me tell you something: you directly contribute to "rape culture" worldwide, by pretending to understand the subject and just living with shallow views and simplistic arguments.
Do you defend sex ed on schools, so kids can learn to spot sexual violence against themselves or others close to them?
Do you defend a public initiative to protect and take care or sexual violence victims?
Do you protest when some anime portrays sexualized kids and then give some excuse of "they're actually 18+ they just look and act and think like a kid"?
I'm gonna guess "no".
I'm gonna guess you just like to fap to Ulti's hentai pics, even though the character acts like she's 12 years old. BUT HEY, IF THE AUTHOR SAYS SHE'S LEGAL, THEN THAT'S ALRIGHT, RIGHT?
Bunch of fucking mouth breathing morons. Ban me, delete this, whatever, but this "sanji is a pedo" discussion has way past the point of complete and utter nonsense. Instead of actually discussing a pertinent topic, it's just a bunch of fucking virgins and retards trying to go for the "TURN DOWN FOR WHAT" meme sentences.
When I first read whole cake island, I thought they looked cute together and it didn't even occur to me that some people would find pudding's age problematic. I was flabbergasted to see the comments of some people just because she is 16 and sanji 21.
Just look at Pudding:
Does that look like a child to you? She has the same exact character model as all adult females in the series... Sanji is turned on by all of the other girls but he is supposed to magically feel nothing towards her? Last time I checked, physical attraction is visual.
When Sanji saw her for the first time, he reacted like he usually does, of course he would be attracted to her.
I saw lots of people calling him a pedo.... Do these people even know the meaning of the word they're using? Pedos are into kids. They get turned on by the appearance of a prepubertal child's body. If they saw pudding, they would feel nothing. Meanwhile most normal men who are attracted to the appearance of a grown woman, would be attracted to pudding, because that's what her body looks like.
As far as personality wise, she was far from innocent. She allegedly seduced and tricked countless men and got them assassinated before Sanji. Are people forgetting those details? Not to mention that these people are also severely lacking in historical contextualisation. One piece is believed to be set between 1300's and 1500's. Age of consent wasn't even a thing at that time, if you looked grown up, you were seen and treated as an adult by society. Most were seen as adults at 14-15 ish. People were already working, fighting wars and getting married as teenagers in this historical period. Applying modern logic and morals to the past is ridiculous.
Also let's not forget that not every country is America, culture and laws are different everywhere. In the vast majority of the world, the age of consent varies from 14-16 as you can see:
In my country, guys in their early twenties dating older teen girls (16-17) is pretty normal. So I didn't bat an eye until I saw Americans going crazy over it.
Just look at Pudding:
Does that look like a child to you? She has the same exact character model as all adult females in the series... Sanji is turned on by all of the other girls but he is supposed to magically feel nothing towards her? Last time I checked, physical attraction is visual.
When Sanji saw her for the first time, he reacted like he usually does, of course he would be attracted to her.
I saw lots of people calling him a pedo.... Do these people even know the meaning of the word they're using? Pedos are into kids. They get turned on by the appearance of a prepubertal child's body. If they saw pudding, they would feel nothing. Meanwhile most normal men who are attracted to the appearance of a grown woman, would be attracted to pudding, because that's what her body looks like.
As far as personality wise, she was far from innocent. She allegedly seduced and tricked countless men and got them assassinated before Sanji. Are people forgetting those details? Not to mention that these people are also severely lacking in historical contextualisation. One piece is believed to be set between 1300's and 1500's. Age of consent wasn't even a thing at that time, if you looked grown up, you were seen and treated as an adult by society. Most were seen as adults at 14-15 ish. People were already working, fighting wars and getting married as teenagers in this historical period. Applying modern logic and morals to the past is ridiculous.
Also let's not forget that not every country is America, culture and laws are different everywhere. In the vast majority of the world, the age of consent varies from 14-16 as you can see:
In my country, guys in their early twenties dating older teen girls (16-17) is pretty normal. So I didn't bat an eye until I saw Americans going crazy over it.
Want a serious answer? Mainly a matter of actor-observer asymmetry since I'm sure many of them would be totally fine with hitting on a sixteen-year-old if their culture not only accepted such behaviour but also supported it legally (which is Japan's case with the age of consent established in 13 while the minimum for marriage was 16 until very recently). Of course I wouldn't have dated a girl of such age back in my early twenties (neither today!), but I'm talking from my perspective of being upbrought in a different culture with another legal system and views on consent. Would my twenty-year-old self have thought the same about a sixteen girl if I had the mind of a Japanese old man writing a story placed in a society not as developed as ours, on top of that? (because One Piece world doesn't seem XXI century). I'm honest enough to say that I can't tell the answer.
As Ortega y Gasset said, "I am I and my circumstance"; and it's very comfortable to ignore the circumstances in other people's behaviour because that way you convince yourself they wouldn't affect you if in their shoes.
As Ortega y Gasset said, "I am I and my circumstance"; and it's very comfortable to ignore the circumstances in other people's behaviour because that way you convince yourself they wouldn't affect you if in their shoes.
21 year olds are exactly as retarded as teenagers and if the law cared about maturity nobody would be allowed to drink or fuck until 26 or higher
unless sanji was gay, then an american or british writer would make pudding 12 and act like its completely fine for an adult and a preteen to have a sexual relationship
Post automatically merged:
It's a culture issue, if Oda was a western writer then Pudding would have been 18 its nothing to get worked up about it 
First of all, no, someone significantly older taking advantage of an 18 year old isn't very moral either, for the exact reasons I stated. Nicholas cage had a kid with someone half his age and a lot of people take issue with it.
No, I don't enjoy underage characters or find them sexually appealing, I don't consume loli stuff and excuse it because of their age as that would still be finding a child physically attractive, and you're doing a lot of guessing here because you're an idiot. I only spoke on the topic you brought up, being Sanji and Pudding's ages as well as how westerners would likely consider it.
No, I don't enjoy underage characters or find them sexually appealing, I don't consume loli stuff and excuse it because of their age as that would still be finding a child physically attractive, and you're doing a lot of guessing here because you're an idiot. I only spoke on the topic you brought up, being Sanji and Pudding's ages as well as how westerners would likely consider it.
Last edited:
Pedophillia: Pedophilia (alternatively spelt paedophilia) is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children.
Prepubescent: relating to or being in the period of life just before puberty. prepubescent growth.
Puberty: the period during which adolescents reach sexual maturity and become capable of reproduction.
I am not foolish enough to give my own opinion on such a deep topic, but by definition, Sanji is objectively not a Pedophile. Pudding not only CAN reproduce, but she doesn't deviate from the model of a Nami or Robin (Physically). I would implore the mods to not allow such misinformation on a topic like this, since there may be actual victims of Pedophilia who wouldn't appreciate such a topic being fiddled with by people with agendas related to fictional drawings.
Prepubescent: relating to or being in the period of life just before puberty. prepubescent growth.
Puberty: the period during which adolescents reach sexual maturity and become capable of reproduction.
I am not foolish enough to give my own opinion on such a deep topic, but by definition, Sanji is objectively not a Pedophile. Pudding not only CAN reproduce, but she doesn't deviate from the model of a Nami or Robin (Physically). I would implore the mods to not allow such misinformation on a topic like this, since there may be actual victims of Pedophilia who wouldn't appreciate such a topic being fiddled with by people with agendas related to fictional drawings.
Morality is transcendental. It makes no sense to talk about moral values as if they depended on the place or time.
What must be judged is whether or not doing something is correct, regardless of whether or not people did it in the past in some or other place.
A lot of people have already also treated cannibalism, human sacrifices, and slavery as if these things were normal, but this doesn't make these things better anyhow.
Custom =/= Culture
Customs and laws arbitrarily made by people with more power may be different in different places.
But culture is something people can have a higher or lower level of, and arbitrary laws written by people in a constitution should not be used as reference to judge whether something is correct or not.
Even supposing that in most countries it's considered legal for people to "marry" when they're still 16, that doesn't make it more acceptable; Truth is not determined by a number of votes.
In this case, of course, Sanji is not a paedophile, but there's still a relatively big difference of age, because Sanji is already a fully developed adult, while Pudding is not; not her body nor her mind is fully developed yet.
The fact that Pudding did some terrible things in the past doesn't mean she's already mature enough to make a decision that is supposed to last for the rest of her life, which is marriage; On the contrary, the fact that she seduced many men and got them assassinated is a clear sign of her immaturity, since she lacked the discernment to understand how bad that was.
I do want Sanji and Pudding to marry in the end, but only after some years, when Pudding is already an adult woman.
What must be judged is whether or not doing something is correct, regardless of whether or not people did it in the past in some or other place.
A lot of people have already also treated cannibalism, human sacrifices, and slavery as if these things were normal, but this doesn't make these things better anyhow.
Custom =/= Culture
Customs and laws arbitrarily made by people with more power may be different in different places.
But culture is something people can have a higher or lower level of, and arbitrary laws written by people in a constitution should not be used as reference to judge whether something is correct or not.
Even supposing that in most countries it's considered legal for people to "marry" when they're still 16, that doesn't make it more acceptable; Truth is not determined by a number of votes.
In this case, of course, Sanji is not a paedophile, but there's still a relatively big difference of age, because Sanji is already a fully developed adult, while Pudding is not; not her body nor her mind is fully developed yet.
The fact that Pudding did some terrible things in the past doesn't mean she's already mature enough to make a decision that is supposed to last for the rest of her life, which is marriage; On the contrary, the fact that she seduced many men and got them assassinated is a clear sign of her immaturity, since she lacked the discernment to understand how bad that was.
I do want Sanji and Pudding to marry in the end, but only after some years, when Pudding is already an adult woman.
If this post is the conclusion you reached after reading what I wrote, I have nothing to say to someone as illiterate as yourself.
Maybe learn how to read and comprehend texts, then notice that I've never defended any of the things you said I did.
But thanks for showing my point.
Maybe learn how to read and comprehend texts, then notice that I've never defended any of the things you said I did.
But thanks for showing my point.
Finally, some genuine self introspection instead of virtue signalling.
You must be religious to believe that morality is transcendental. Humans are just animals who happened to evolve intelligence. There is no such thing as objective right and wrong. Morality is just a social construct subjected to constant change.
You seem to think that morality has been consistently evolving in the right direction. Why is that? Just because you were brought up in the current system? Of all of the moral systems that have existed throughout human history, it just so happens that the one you were socialised to believe in, is the one true one that is transcendental. I'm sure muslim suicide bombers believe just that.
For example, in the Roman Empire they didn't kill homos. But they started doing that in the middle ages. At the time it was seen as progressing away from degeneracy. Evolution isn't linear. It doesn't follow along a path to a specific end goal, it just takes turns to different directions.
Yes it is, it is within a society. Everyone agrees that killing children is wrong, therefore it is the truth. That's not a scientific or mathematical fact. It's just something that we all agree on. If a society believes that 16 year olds can consent, then they can. This social truth is also subjected to constant change.
Post automatically merged:
You must be religious to believe that morality is transcendental. Humans are just animals who happened to evolve intelligence. There is no such thing as objective right and wrong. Morality is just a social construct subjected to constant change.
You seem to think that morality has been consistently evolving in the right direction. Why is that? Just because you were brought up in the current system? Of all of the moral systems that have existed throughout human history, it just so happens that the one you were socialised to believe in, is the one true one that is transcendental. I'm sure muslim suicide bombers believe just that.
For example, in the Roman Empire they didn't kill homos. But they started doing that in the middle ages. At the time it was seen as progressing away from degeneracy. Evolution isn't linear. It doesn't follow along a path to a specific end goal, it just takes turns to different directions.
Yes it is, it is within a society. Everyone agrees that killing children is wrong, therefore it is the truth. That's not a scientific or mathematical fact. It's just something that we all agree on. If a society believes that 16 year olds can consent, then they can. This social truth is also subjected to constant change.
Last edited: