Your taste in anime women/men vs. real life women/men

[snowmaiden05]

Originally Posted by MidnightViper88

I can see the end of a lot of family bloodlines starting with this thread...

LOL xD seems like it..

I guess, anime/manga really do have a huge impact in our lives.. not that I only noticed it now.. But really, sometimes we just can't help but look for those traits that we idolize in an anime character with real people.. :3

[0utf0xZer0]

Originally Posted by snowmaiden05

LOL xD seems like it..

I guess, anime/manga really do have a huge impact in our lives.. not that I only noticed it now.. But really, sometimes we just can't help but look for those traits that we idolize in an anime character with real people.. :3

That's kind of the hypothesis I had before starting this thread. I understand MidnightViper's position, but I honestly don't think that looking for real girls who have the traits of anime girls you like will end you bloodline... provided you're only looking for traits, not close matches.

I think a bigger concern for many geeks is just social aptitude. I already know a cute, slightly nerdy meganekko, but I haven't had the nerve to ask her out - and discussing what happened in last week's Gundam 00 is definitely "friends" territory.

[MidnightViper88]

Originally Posted by 0utf0xZer0

TI understand MidnightViper's position, but I honestly don't think that looking for real girls who have the traits of anime girls you like will end you bloodline... provided you're only looking for traits, not close matches.

You apparently understand my position not so much...Go back and read my posts; What you're saying isn't what I meant...What I was talking about is that there are some people in this thread that have an awkward attraction to fictional anime characters with no interest whatsoever to real life women (Or men, but only women have been mentioned thus far)...With no attraction to real life women, they're not going to bother to seek out, date, and marry real life women, they'll never have kids, and thus their family bloodline ends without any offspring...It's my theory of one's personal life without any further insight, but even as a theory, it's kind of pathetic if it turns out to be real...

It's one thing to look at fictional anime characters as eye candy of sorts, but then to drop all interest in real life people? Abnormal...

[npcomplete]

well, there are some people who've never seen anime and will never have kids so the idea of "ending your family bloodline" is not so strange

as far as the preference of 2d > 3d, it's not that they've completely sworn off all interest in RL people, it's just that they haven't come across anyone yet whom they're attracted to (chaos; head, lol).. and maybe they never will..

[MidnightViper88]

It's only strange depending on the reason for being a lifelong virgin...

Anyway, Detachment from fantasy is another possible problem; Denial of reality is an understandable thing...

[Vexx]

Its mostly only a disaster for Japan where their marriage and birthrates are plummeting like paralyzed falcon.

Myself, still stewing on how to answer the OP query.... maybe tomorrow (I'll just edit here).

[Mumitroll]

1) Are there similarities between the kind of characters you're attracted to in anime and in real life, either in terms of looks or personality?

yes. both in RL and in anime, I like pretty, sincere and cheerful girls and intelligent, straightforward, sceptical guys

xcept that of course anime beauty >>> RL beauty. on other hand, anime intelligence <<< RL intelligence (for men at least, women not so sure ).

2) Have you ever had changes in your tastes in anime characters affect the type of person you're attracted to in real life?

yes. many years of graphically HQ anime overall made RL women look less attractive for me. some are still attractive, just not many. also, the abundant animeish innocent personality which I like a lot is, sadly, sorta hard to find with contemporary RL girls.

What, is it less loserish to say "I'm not attracted to 3D women" than it is to say "I'm not attracted to real life women"?

dont see anything "loserish" about either. people like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyotr_Ilyich_Tchaikovsky, or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla were not attracted to either kind of woman (and Tesla not even to anyone at all). does it make them losers?

simple answer: no. whether you are attracted to real women/men/children/cats/dogs/w.e., or not, is largely meaningless regarding your achievements in life and contributions to mankind.

With no attraction to real life women, they're not going to bother to seek out, date, and marry real life women, they'll never have kids, and thus their family bloodline ends without any offspring...

even that isnt true. even if you are not attracted to women, it absolutely doesnt prevent you from having children for obvious reasons.

It's only strange depending on the reason for being a lifelong virgin...

again, why so? real attraction (i.e.: love) and having sex are two completely different things.

[MidnightViper88]

*facepalm*

Mumitroll...

There is a specific reason why I worded my statements in a "Cause and reason" structure in order to maintain thread relevance...What you're doing is making assumptions far beyond the obvious context of what my posts contained and making something else out of it...There's a reason why I state things to the certain effect of "People aren't interested in real life women because they're too interested in fictional anime women" and not "People aren't interested in real life women because they're losers in general"...

If someone says "I don't prefer real life women because I prefer fictional anime women", it outlines a specific reason and context, different from a more general statement "I don't prefer real life women" which is left up for interpretation...In this thread you're seeing a lot of the former statement and none of the latter statement, which is why I'm not addressing those who aren't attracted to real life women without any accompanying specific reasons...Were Turing, Tchaikovsky, and Tesla not attracted to women because they had a deeper attraction to fictional anime women? No...As a matter of fact, those three have never heard of "anime" in the first place because it didn't exist back then...Context irrelevance...

You should've read my last post in reverse chronological order because it would've then given you a more general explanation to the "not attracted to real life women" reasons...I clearly said "It's only strange depending on the reason for being a lifelong virgin", keyword: Depending...Is there a such thing as normal justification? Absolutely...There's a big difference in saying "I'm not attracted because my attention lies with science" and "I'm not attracted because my attention lies with fictional characters", one being an understandable explanation, the other being an awkward explanation...Dimebag Darrell (Guitarist of Pantera/Damageplan) and Jason Newstead (Bassist of Metallica) were to people completely devoted to their love of playing music; Dimebag had a girlfriend and no kids, Jason doesn't bother dating...Is that understandable? Yes...

In either case, the last paragraph is out of line with the context of this thread, so I'll leave it at that...

[wontaek]

My wife says the anime girl who she think resembles her most, personality wise, is Rafiel from Banner of Stars. I dare not disagree.

[Mumitroll]

Originally Posted by MidnightViper88

What you're doing is making assumptions far beyond the obvious context of what my posts contained and making something else out of it...

i dont see much of a difference. actually, i think this whole notion of "thread relevance" is pretty childish. i already explained it in some detail in some of my answers in the politics threads, and its not really different here.

I dont see an overly large difference between liking anime characters and liking various other imaginary characters, out of books or any other works of fiction for example. its merely a difference in imaginative ability - anime makes it much easier than books, for example, since you get both ultra-quality visual imagery and exquisite audio data served to you on a silver plate, instead of mere written text where you have to use your own imagination to invent both images and voices.

If someone says "I don't prefer real life women because I prefer fictional anime women", it outlines a specific reason and context, different from a more general statement "I don't prefer real life women" which is left up for interpretation...

so what? why should the exact reason why somebody likes someone or something else instead of RL women matter to you? it's completely unimportant in regard to their actual level and potential contributions.

Were Turing, Tchaikovsky, and Tesla not attracted to women because they had a deeper attraction to fictional anime women? No...As a matter of fact, those three have never heard of "anime" in the first place because it didn't exist back then...Context irrelevance...

i dont think so. two of them liked men better, and the third one didnt like pretty much anybody. but you have no guarantee they wouldnt have liked anime women, for example. or some other kind of imaginary attractive character. would it in some way diminish their achievements? nah. it's all trifles, largely meaningless compared to their real ability.

There's a big difference in saying "I'm not attracted because my attention lies with science" and "I'm not attracted because my attention lies with fictional characters", one being an understandable explanation, the other being an awkward explanation...

while there is - probably - a difference regarding the actual social performance of the person in question, if you ask me, I dont even care much. 90% - or more - of people who are attracted to "real" 3D females dont ever achieve anything meaningful. does that mean they should give their women up - and whatever other pointless interests they may have - and focus on whatever professional field they have chosen to improve their results? I dont think so.

human life is not a zoo - where a panda bear is supposed to mate and produce offspring - or a concentration camp (at least for most of us). my opinion is that you should be able to do what you like to do, and not what others want you to, as long as it doesn't hurt anyone.

again, to re-state: I think your whole point of trying to argue that "real" women > 2D women is more low-level social conditioning than anything else. it may all change quite a lot within the next 50-100 years. it will certainly change bigtime once highlevel AI in combination with very mobile HQ androids becomes widespread.

[ganbaru]

Originally Posted by Mumitroll

I dont see an overly large difference between liking anime characters and liking various other imaginary characters, out of books or any other works of fiction for example. its merely a difference in imaginative ability - anime makes it much easier than books, for example, since you get both ultra-quality visual imagery and exquisite audio data served to you on a silver plate, instead of mere written text where you have to use your own imagination to invent both images and voices.

Every media have his own adventages and inconvenients, some have better visual, others a better description. Some peoples would prefer book for the description even if the ''mere written text'' is not as easier than the ''ultra-quality visual imagery and exquisite audio data ''. In fact, the texts should make your brain work more, and this is always a good thing.

[BetoJR]

Just to state something that should be extremely obvious: the comments about a person preferring fictional characters, be they male or female, over their real life equivalents, has lots of merit. It does indicate some kind of disassociative disorder, however mild it may be. Lots of people have an opinion about this, and it could lead to interesting discussions.
I, for one, thought this kinda behavior was limited to extremely obsessed people, who have problems dealing with reality - and I never expected to read comments in a board like this with people professing such preferences. Again, my opinion. You may disagree.

But, please, do not confuse it with people who have no interest in either fictional or real life partners, or - gasp - people who simply prefer their partners outside of their socially perceived correct gender. That's a whole different ball of whack and not pertinent to the thread in any way. And, yes, there is such a thing, even if some people disagree, or think it childish. The whole point of threads in a discussion forum is to keep the subject being discussed within some kinda boundary - albeit, sometimes it is quite a dubious one, I admit.
But it's one of the tools we have to organize things, and should be followed.

[Mumitroll]

Just to state something that should be extremely obvious: the comments about a person preferring fictional characters, be they male or female, over their real life equivalents, has lots of merit. It does indicate some kind of disassociative disorder, however mild it may be.

why so? quoting the wiki definition "Dissociative disorders[1] are defined as conditions that involve disruptions or breakdowns of memory, awareness, identity and/or perception." I dont see any reason to postulate this *must* be the case for people who like imaginary characters better than RL people - although granted that it *can* be the case - but so can it be for people who like collecting stamps, building model railways or thinking about algebraic topology problems over dealing with RL people. so what?

I, for one, thought this kinda behavior was limited to extremely obsessed people, who have problems dealing with reality - and I never expected to read comments in a board like this with people professing such preferences. Again, my opinion. You may disagree.

nah. my position for example is nowhere near obsessed.. I'm merely uninterested in most people in RL, be it men or women. in RL its rare that people are really interesting+goodlooking+sweetvoiced+likeable, and even if some are, often there is no chance for them to show it to you. in anime on the other hand, it's more or less default (well at least the goodlooking+sweetvoiced+likeable parts). no wonder too, since they've been polishing the art of moe~ for so long

But, please, do not confuse it with people who have no interest in either fictional or real life partners, or - gasp - people who simply prefer their partners outside of their socially perceived correct gender. That's a whole different ball of whack and not pertinent to the thread in any way.

it is a bit different, but not overly so if you take a step back and look at it from a more general perspective. all of those are typically considered "deviations" by current social standards (although one could argue that misanthropy actually isnt). to what extent, varies depending on the society you live in. in Saudi Arabia, homosexuality is in theory punishable by death, and more commonly by high prison terms. on the other hand, in Japan there are probably many thousands of 2D addicts, and while they are of course also considered outcasts in the mainstream, there are no legal penalties about it whatsoever. why should there be?

lastly, being simply misanthropic is a fairly common trait all over the world, and has been for ages. many famous philosophers like Schopenhauer or Nietzsche were misanthropes. again, so what?

also, keep in mind that this is merely a snapshot of today's social norms. which are far from being even close to stable. on the contrary, they change all the time. merely 50 years ago, Turing was forced into suicide for being a homosexual, despite being a major figure in mathematics - in one of the first-world countries. today it is relatively widely accepted, although still far from being universally accepted. myself i strongly suspect in 50-100 years preferring 2D (or artificial 3D) over "real" 3D will be commonplace. given a sufficient technological level, it's easier to make an ideal partner than to find one who is naturally ideal or anywhere close to it. this is not my original idea either. it was expressed by various people, like for example Henry Kuttner, William Gibson, etc.

it is a whole other question whether this is actually good or bad for mankind in general. most people who've thought about it consider it to be probably fairly bad, with some opinions ranging even as far as completely detrimental for humanity. my own opinion is not very far from that. in general, I think any kind of elaborate virtual world/personality/partner/w.e. that eats up time is probably bad from a mankind standpoint. it results in stagnation or even regress. it can be nicely observed already today in the rich countries - current students are getting ever worse on average - there's simply too much fun stuff to do except studying. there are ever more singles - life as a single is becoming ever more comfy and pleasing - and fewer children. Japan is a prime example of this since it's probably most advanced in the virtualization aspect. the highly detrimental demographic results are already becoming very plainly visible - Japan is on a steady way towards becoming a nation of old people. e.g. Germany is a bit behind, but not very different.

in 100 years, once very HQ virtual worlds with full sensory integration become available - I dont even mention an interface to the brain - RL will probably go very much downhill. there's simply no getting around the fact that imagination is potentially far more attractive than RL. tough luck for us RL people

well thats provided that humanity will actually live till then - which I am reasonably sceptical about

[BetoJR]

In all fairness, Mumitroll, you kinda disavow your whole point with your closing statements: if it is detrimental to mankind as a whole to "like" fictional people over real life people, how can it be okay to do so? Or do you (or whomever thinks so does) claim to not be a part of mankind? Again, another whole ball of whack. And please, no cross-connections: we're discussing a point dealing with preferences of fictional over real, when dealing with the same concept. Don't mix this with other obsessive-compulsive (however debatable) kinda behavior, as I, for one, have no interest in discussing them.

Note that I don't dwell over the point of the other "deviant" patterns of behavior you mention (be they misanthropy, homosexuality, whatever), as they are not, to my view, a matter of perception of reality itself. No matter how the standards of society might change one day - today, this behavior we're discussing is not something I'd consider normal. Sorry.

As for your quip about dissociative disorders, forgive me, but the whole problem of awareness and perception seems pretty much the focus when someone claims to prefer fictional men/women over real ones, to the point of not acknowledging the later. At least, it does seem like it to most psychiatrists I know...

[Mumitroll]

In all fairness, Mumitroll, you kinda disavow your whole point with your closing statements: if it is detrimental to mankind as a whole to "like" fictional people over real life people, how can it be okay to do so?

hehe. this is very simply answered: something that may be okay for an individual is not necessarily good for mankind, and vice versa. two extreme examples: 1) it would be completely detrimental for mankind if everyone suddenly became a hardcore numismatist and neglected their other interests, even although for a single person this is a fairly traditional and respected hobby. and 2) it would be extremely beneficial for mankind if everyone suddenly adopted theoretical communist ideals and would work for the greater good of everyone instead for themselves - but that isnt exactly something realistic either, and would meet (and has met) with fervent opposition from most individuals - who dont want to work "for the greater good" but rather prefer to make money for themselves, at the expense of others if necessary.

And please, no cross-connections: we're discussing a point dealing with preferences of fictional over real, when dealing with the same concept. Don't mix this with other obsessive-compulsive (however debatable) kinda behavior, as I, for one, have no interest in discussing them.

the problem is that you cannot just make a random cutoff like that. this isnt mathematics or physics. borders are fairly fluent here, especially if you think a bit further, extrapolating current technology developments. for example, what is "fictional" and what is "real"? for now, we can define anime 2D characters to be fictional, and normal 3D people to be real. now, fast-forward 50 or 100 years into future. assume you have a very developed and highlevel AI, perhaps some kind of (maybe simplified) simulation of a human mind, and very HQ, mobile, human-looking androids. this is all not unrealistic. in fact i am maybe too conservative with those estimates - people like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_Kurzweil etc are a lot more optimistic. now, take an anime character, expand their personality along the general lines of the plot, and insert it (including voice/behavioral patterns/etc) into an android looking just like that character (in 3D). is that still "fiction"?

if you say "yes": fast-forward a little further into future, to the point where AI is at the level or perhaps even beyond human mind complexity, and robot technology is obviously similarly advanced (its easier anyway). take an anime character, auto-expand its personality along plot lines, generate memories corresponding to the plot, and insert into an android. the android will behave just like that anime character if it were a human. hard to argue that there is still any fiction left about that, isn't it?

if you say "no": then you basically have to admit that there is no fundamental difference between 2D "fiction" and 3D "reality", just technical issues.

and if you dont insist on having "tangible" stuff - i.e. if for you a virtual conscience is the same as a "3D" one based on a real brain - then with the creation of a brain interface this whole argument will become meaningless. consciences would be able to take any kind of form, and any distinction between "real" and "fictional" would largely disappear.

Note that I don't dwell over the point of the other "deviant" patterns of behavior you mention (be they misanthropy, homosexuality, whatever), as they are not, to my view, a matter of perception of reality itself. No matter how the standards of society might change one day - today, this behavior we're discussing is not something I'd consider normal. Sorry.

why so? give any logical reason - except being socially conditioned to think like that.

As for your quip about dissociative disorders

well, you brought the term up. I wouldnt use it in this context, since I believe it to be rather inappropriate.

forgive me, but the whole problem of awareness and perception seems pretty much the focus when someone claims to prefer fictional men/women over real ones, to the point of not acknowledging the later. At least, it does seem like it to most psychiatrists I know...

why so? take a highly misanthropic person. say, Schopenhauer or Nietzsche. and assume that there would be anime in their time. it is not all that unthinkable that they would like its protagonists - if they would cater to their ideals (not too hard for the anime industry as we know, given that there's anime for all kinds of tastes). defacto that would mean they would like 2D "over" 3D. now, taking your position, misanthropy is "ok", but when a misanthrope would like fictional characters, it would no longer be "ok"? where is the logic in this?

and btw, again, similar to the discussion in the economy thread.. "most psychiatrists" is not an authority for me. if you are unable to defend your standpoint with logical argumentation, you lose. simple as that. no matter what "most XYZ" may think - or be believed to think.

[BetoJR]

Originally Posted by Mumitroll

hehe. this is very simply answered: something that may be okay for an individual is not necessarily good for mankind, and vice versa.

Honestly, that's a very bad way to counter my point, as you were advocating that it's okay for everyone to behave like this, in a manner detrimental to the whole. Or you're simply saying it's okay for you, and a select few, but not the rest of the human race? Back to my original point.

Originally Posted by Mumitroll

it would be extremely beneficial for mankind if everyone suddenly adopted theoretical communist ideals and would work for the greater good of everyone instead for themselves - but that isnt exactly something realistic either, and would meet (and has met) with fervent opposition from most individuals - who dont want to work "for the greater good" but rather prefer to make money for themselves, at the expense of others if necessary.

That's because the concept of communism is, in itself, flawed. We can't expect the masses to behave selflessly. Expecting it to actually happen is a completely unreal thing to do - as it is a very tried and true utopic concept.

And, like I said, I have no interest in digressing over other assorted "deviant" behavior, so your first point is forfeit.

Originally Posted by Mumitroll

the problem is that you cannot just make a random cutoff like that.

Of course I can. This is a discussion, after all. I'm not a futurist, nor do I intend to discuss the finer topics of divination, so I'm arguing using present day terms. To me, and to the vast majority of people, there is a clear difference between fiction and reality. If the lines start to blur, it's time to get in touch with professional help. But hey, maybe that's just me.

Originally Posted by Mumitroll

why so? give any logical reason - except being socially conditioned to think like that.

Why should I? We live socially. If you delude yourself by thinking to be outside society, your perception truly is blurred beyond repair.

Originally Posted by Mumitroll

well, you brought the term up. I wouldnt use it in this context, since I believe it to be rather inappropriate.

Believe what you will. Experts disagree. And so do I.

Originally Posted by Mumitroll

why so? take a highly misanthropic person. say, Schopenhauer or Nietzsche. and assume that there would be anime in their time. it is not all that unthinkable that they would like its protagonists - if they would cater to their ideals (not too hard for the anime industry as we know, given that there's anime for all kinds of tastes). defacto that would mean they would like 2D "over" 3D. now, taking your position, misanthropy is "ok", but when a misanthrope would like fictional characters, it would no longer be "ok"? where is the logic in this?

Because then the person in question would be perceived as to be transferring feelings that don't exist or are barely registered in real life (remember what a misanthrope is?) to fiction. Again, you may think that's okay, but I don't. Simple.

Originally Posted by Mumitroll

and btw, again, similar to the discussion in the economy thread.. "most psychiatrists" is not an authority for me. if you are unable to defend your standpoint with logical argumentation, you lose. simple as that. no matter what "most XYZ" may think - or be believed to think.

Dude, you lost me right here. If you simply cannot acknowledge people who are more knowledgeable than you in any given field and have to "see for yourself", be my guest. I don't have the time or the patience to know everything, so I'm quite content to acquire knowledge through tried-and-true methods, when it's not something that really concerns me - or that I don't have the time to exhaustively research (I do have a life, after all).

And I have no idea what you're talking about, when you refer to a thread about economy. I don't participate in one, so I don't really care about what happens in it.

[NoSanninWa]

Originally Posted by BetoJR

Honestly, that's a very bad way to counter my point, as you were advocating that it's okay for everyone to behave like this, in a manner detrimental to the whole. Or you're simply saying it's okay for you, and a select few, but not the rest of the human race? Back to my original point.

He's not saying any of that. Both of you are using different definitions of what is "okay" for an individual. You're talking about a value judgment, but he's just saying that it won't cause an individual any suffering or disability. You're both successfully making your points -- you're just not communicating with each other.

While it won't cause an individual any suffering or disability, it can still destroy society.

[BetoJR]

The underlining theme of his reply seems to be that he doesn't really care about the whole "destroy society" thing. So, you can see where I take exception to it.

[animeboy12]

I left thinks people would respond with yes or no. Now what is this?

[NoSanninWa]

Originally Posted by BetoJR

The underlining theme of his reply seems to be that he doesn't really care about the whole "destroy society" thing. So, you can see where I take exception to it.

Thanks for pointing out the purpose of your argument. Now we're going off into philosophy as we discuss the relative merits of individual good vs societal good.

The question here is if someone would accept a mate they deem inferior to their dreams in order to serve their role as part of society. This is honestly not very different from asking someone to accept an arranged marriage in order to fulfill their position in society. As people's sense of themselves as cogs in a group diminishes, history is showing that they start to insist that they need to be "in love" with their mate. If someone can only love an artificial woman, then we have a conflict.

Originally Posted by Mumitroll

in 100 years, once very HQ virtual worlds with full sensory integration become available - I dont even mention an interface to the brain - RL will probably go very much downhill. there's simply no getting around the fact that imagination is potentially far more attractive than RL. tough luck for us RL people

well thats provided that humanity will actually live till then - which I am reasonably sceptical about

That's not a farfetched point and it is the origin of this argument.

If a majority of people do not procreate, it would obviously "destroy society" as he posits. Do you believe that someone should accept a mate that they are not in love with in order to procreate?