Katawa Shoujo Forums

Xenokitten wrote:However, I fear, these days, in America at least, that my viewpoint is the vast minority, and could be tied to the fact that I represent a small portion of the female fans of this game ;p

Nope, you are not too far out of step with a lot of peoples ideals. The problem is most folks suck at living up to their ideal and follow the latest impulse recieved from their gonads.
I can't say there is anything wrong with you for living up to your personal standards as opposed to Hollywoods.

I tend to set my standards pretty high when it comes to choosing a lady. If there are any glaring physical or emotional problems, I won't even consider it. That having been said, I don't consider missing a limb or two or access to any of the 5 senses as a glaring problem.

Well, I'm legally blind myself (My eyesight isn't as bad as Kenji's, but it's not far off). I have only one good eye, the bad eye is kind of like looking through a keyhole sideways (that's how bad the field of vision is), plus the good eye is also pretty near-sighted, so.... yeah.


I've been around many people with diverse disabilities for a good portion of the beginning of my life, so it's not a big issue of whether or not I'd date a disabled person. It's whether or not they'd accept me. Sight plays no part in my selection of a potential mate or a companion. Sadly, that's not true for most people...

GMKGoat wrote:That having been said, I don't consider missing a limb or two or access to any of the 5 senses as a glaring problem.

One simple word: smell

You won't even know what makes that person unattractive because it often works on a very subtle level but thankfully that flaw can be changed quite quickly. You just have to coat yourself in perfume and voilà you do not have to fear other people's smell.


Jokes aside, attraction is a tricky and individual thing and even after my fair share of years on this planet I cannot pinpoint exactly why I fall for that particular person. They can be black- or red-haired, tall or small and I can fall in love without that magic moment that some people so desperately look for.
And that is part of why I am not able to give a definite answer about this topic.

Miroku wrote: I've been around many people with diverse disabilities for a good portion of the beginning of my life, so it's not a big issue of whether or not I'd date a disabled person. It's whether or not they'd accept me. Sight plays no part in my selection of a potential mate or a companion. Sadly, that's not true for most people...

Acceptance is the very foundation of every healthy relationship but there will always people who accept you. We are living on a planet with so many human beings that the probability of such people not-existing is nearly zero.

I would totally date a cripple.
Picture if you will:
My left arm, wrapped about the shoulders of a woman who is missing her legs/arms/insert disability here. She's giving a grand smile, exhibiting happiness. My right hand is next to my face, giving an exaggerated thumbs up. I am smiling like Ace Ventura. My teeth are making a *ping*ing sound, and there is a twinkle in my eye.

I'm going to be what I am best, a profound cynic to the topic's question:

No.

Of course, my definition of Physical Disability differs from most. If they can act normal without third-person support, they aren't disabled. Electronic prosthetics, mechanical limbs, these eliminate, mostly, the disability in my eyes. Someone using the sensory-touch-sight shock system who is blind: not disabled, just a slow walker. A lip-reading deaf non-mute that has a synthesizer, not a problem. All of these exist, cures for everyone in this game. If one of these approached me, I'd have no problem with them, though maybe because (quothe Kaiba) I have a hard-on for technology, but if they can get past it, they're valid mating material. For amps, if they can perform normal functions normally, even without a false limb, still fine with me. (As an aside, if I were on cordial terms with a mute for a long time (over 2 years), I may master ASL completely and try to further the relationship, since then there would be no communication difficulties between us.)

If they cannot, however, nothing helps or they refuse things that may help, then as Darwin intended, they should not mate, not with me, nor anyone else. Doesn't stop them from having a full life otherwise, but a lot of physical disorders are genetic and can be bred out. I would also likely not be on more than polite terms with them either, since they would not be able to fit in most of my circles.

Disfigurement like Hanako... I have a standard for image, as most of us do, if it is as mild as Hanako's (25-30% or less), it is no issue, but a 50% or more scar tissue with no hope or desire for reconstructive surgery, I may be friends with them (since it isn't performance-hindering), but would not date them.

Such is the way of life: if something cannot thrive in the current environ, it dies along with its ilk. If it can evolve, even electronically, to meet or pass the rest of the population, its genus may continue in later generations.

bitpeg wrote:I would totally date a cripple.
Picture if you will:
My left arm, wrapped about the shoulders of a woman who is missing her legs/arms/insert disability here. She's giving a grand smile, exhibiting happiness. My right hand is next to my face, giving an exaggerated thumbs up. I am smiling like Ace Ventura.

Why are your teeth not making that shiny *ping* sound?

Eligre wrote:I'm going to be what I am best, a profound cynic to the topic's question:

No.

Of course, my definition of Physical Disability differs from most. If they can act normal without third-person support, they aren't disabled. Electronic prosthetics, mechanical limbs, these eliminate, mostly, the disability in my eyes. Someone using the sensory-touch-sight shock system who is blind: not disabled, just a slow walker. A lip-reading deaf non-mute that has a synthesizer, not a problem. All of these exist, cures for everyone in this game. If one of these approached me, I'd have no problem with them, though maybe because (quothe Kaiba) I have a hard-on for technology, but if they can get past it, they're valid mating material. For amps, if they can perform normal functions normally, even without a false limb, still fine with me. (As an aside, if I were on cordial terms with a mute for a long time (over 2 years), I may master ASL completely and try to further the relationship, since then there would be no communication difficulties between us.)

If they cannot, however, nothing helps or they refuse things that may help, then as Darwin intended, they should not mate, not with me, nor anyone else. Doesn't stop them from having a full life otherwise, but a lot of physical disorders are genetic and can be bred out. I would also likely not be on more than polite terms with them either, since they would not be able to fit in most of my circles.

Disfigurement like Hanako... I have a standard for image, as most of us do, if it is as mild as Hanako's (25-30% or less), it is no issue, but a 50% or more scar tissue with no hope or desire for reconstructive surgery, I may be friends with them (since it isn't performance-hindering), but would not date them.

Such is the way of life: if something cannot thrive in the current environ, it dies along with its ilk. If it can evolve, even electronically, to meet or pass the rest of the population, its genus may continue in later generations.

lol, standards.

Deimos wrote:

bitpeg wrote:I would totally date a cripple.
Picture if you will:
My left arm, wrapped about the shoulders of a woman who is missing her legs/arms/insert disability here. She's giving a grand smile, exhibiting happiness. My right hand is next to my face, giving an exaggerated thumbs up. I am smiling like Ace Ventura.

Why are your teeth not making that shiny *ping* sound?

Now they are.

Deimos wrote:
Acceptance is the very foundation of every healthy relationship but there will always people who accept you. We are living on a planet with so many human beings that the probability of such people not-existing is nearly zero.

Finding someone like that.... who accepts you for you, faults and all.... is actually much harder than you think. And add to that the ever-expanding population of this planet, and you're looking at a very big haystack to look for that needle in.


But I digress. This is about whether or not I'd date a disabled person or not. I would, if the opportunity presented itself.

Eligre wrote:I'm going to be what I am best, a profound cynic to the topic's question:

No.

Of course, my definition of Physical Disability differs from most. If they can act normal without third-person support, they aren't disabled. Electronic prosthetics, mechanical limbs, these eliminate, mostly, the disability in my eyes. Someone using the sensory-touch-sight shock system who is blind: not disabled, just a slow walker. A lip-reading deaf non-mute that has a synthesizer, not a problem. All of these exist, cures for everyone in this game. If one of these approached me, I'd have no problem with them, though maybe because (quothe Kaiba) I have a hard-on for technology, but if they can get past it, they're valid mating material. For amps, if they can perform normal functions normally, even without a false limb, still fine with me. (As an aside, if I were on cordial terms with a mute for a long time (over 2 years), I may master ASL completely and try to further the relationship, since then there would be no communication difficulties between us.)

If they cannot, however, nothing helps or they refuse things that may help, then as Darwin intended, they should not mate, not with me, nor anyone else. Doesn't stop them from having a full life otherwise, but a lot of physical disorders are genetic and can be bred out. I would also likely not be on more than polite terms with them either, since they would not be able to fit in most of my circles.

Disfigurement like Hanako... I have a standard for image, as most of us do, if it is as mild as Hanako's (25-30% or less), it is no issue, but a 50% or more scar tissue with no hope or desire for reconstructive surgery, I may be friends with them (since it isn't performance-hindering), but would not date them.

Such is the way of life: if something cannot thrive in the current environ, it dies along with its ilk. If it can evolve, even electronically, to meet or pass the rest of the population, its genus may continue in later generations.

Woooo ..., someone who is cynic to the very ancient core of it's meaning.

While your definitions are agreeable I highly advise you to word the highlighted section in a different way - someone might get offended.

Also:

Eligre wrote: as Darwin intended, they should not mate, not with me, nor anyone else. Doesn't stop them from having a full life otherwise, but a lot of physical disorders are genetic and can be bred out.
Such is the way of life: if something cannot thrive in the current environ, it dies along with its ilk. If it can evolve, even electronically, to meet or pass the rest of the population, its genus may continue in later generations.

If your are defining life with spreading your genome (by the way Darwin was writing about animals - not humans, Social Darwinism was not something that Darwin as a devout Christian would have really liked) than you are not giving them a life by your own definition.

Miroku wrote: Finding someone like that.... who accepts you for you, faults and all.... is actually much harder than you think. And add to that the ever-expanding population of this planet, and you're looking at a very big haystack to look for that needle in.

I never claimed it to be easy, but looking for that person is one of the biggest adventures this life has to offer. And I do not back off from a challenge.

Deimos wrote:And I do not back off from a challenge.

I challenge you to a duel.

bitpeg wrote: I challenge you to a duel.

With what weapons are you familiar, my dear fellow gentleman?

Fuck yeah, internet duel!




Aside from that, I admire Eligre's honesty. However, that Darwinism stuff rubs me the wrong way. In a, like, eugenics sort of way.

Eligre wrote:If they cannot, however, nothing helps or they refuse things that may help, then as Darwin intended, they should not mate, not with me, nor anyone else.

Nice philosophy you got there, too bad it belongs back in the stone age.

In case you hadn't noticed most of us live in an age where we don't need to keep the gene pool "clean" to survive as a race. Where rather than killing off the unhealthy we support them and give them the chance to have the best life they can have with whatever condition they may have.

Denying someone the right to life or to the right to breed because they have bad genes is small mindedness of the highest level.

Deimos wrote: With what weapons are you familiar, my dear fellow gentleman?

My preferences lie with the S&W Model 10, manufactured in the good old USA. One bullet in each firearm, sir. We duel at dawn.