Pony Trixie as a roommate, or Human Trixie as a girlfriend?

[Dawning Demon 950]

I would probably choose Human Trixie as a girlfriend rather then Pony Trixie as a pet. 

[KillerKingBakudan 702]

Do you realize how much your avatar looks like a ponified confederate plantation owner when you talk like that?

No, because for one, I'm not even talking about my own species. And "pet" is not a derogatory term, let alone a racial slur. It's something you care for.

 

If my dog suddenly became sentient, why would I no longer consider it a pet?

Edited July 22, 2015 by Lord-Pomegranate

[Daring_Do 552]

Do you realize how much your avatar looks like a ponified confederate plantation owner when you talk like that?

They're cartoon animals; Don't take it so seriously. You don't consider Jon Arbuckle a slave owner, do you?

[Admiral Regulus 2,769]

Trixie would make a very, very horrible girlfriend. I could not live like that, so I'll say as a pet.

Edited July 22, 2015 by Admiral Regulus

[KillerKingBakudan 702]

They're cartoon animals; Don't take it so seriously. You don't consider Jon Arbuckle a slave owner, do you?

Exactly.

 

And while we're on that subject, the breezies are intelligent enough to run their own society like the ponies are. If they had no place to go, Fluttershy would most certainly take them in and nurture them like any other animal. Why isn't anyone calling her a slave owner?

[Gearbox10mm 794]

"Pet" is not the right term to use if we're going by canon intelligence levels. 

 

If the only difference between the two Trixies are the bodies that contain her personality and intelligence, and If you consider human Trixie as an equal, someone you're capable of being in a relationship with, but only see pony Trixie as a "pet", then you are being derogatory towards her in the situation you described.

 

"Human Trixie as a Girlfriend or Pony Trixie as a Friend?" would be a better way to phrase it.

 

If the sentience and intelligence is there, you can not call her a pet, anymore than you could call a disabled person you help take care of a "pet".    

[Buck Testa 5,505]

First off Trixie is not an asshole and never was (unless under the influence of dark magic anyway) 

 

As for the options: I'm gay so the girlfriend thing is out. Unless we can just be buds then that's cool. 

Pony trixie as a pet is a no go either since that would pretty much be slavery, so again unless we are friends its not going to work. 

[Sapphire Lightning 784]

How about pony Trixie as fillyfriend? I would ask her to turn me in to an Equestrian unicorn and then we could go to Equestria. Bye bye Earth, don't let the door hit your tiny muzzles on the way out!

 

[Empty Room 512]

Are you telling me that I can't have it the other way round?! >=( /sarcasm

 

I'd have pony Trixie as a pet, that way I wouldn't get to hear her boast about every achievement she'd make. 

[CP3_P0n3 170]

As a girlfriend? YES, For the Great and Powerful s**x!

 

Honestly, I would love her as a pet since its fun to watch my horse say I'm the G&P Trixie! and trash those scary dogs

[GeekySonic 1,150]

Being in a romantic relationship with anyone is not something that interests me, in all seriousness.

 

I've actually been reminded of something. The human version of Trixie didn't have the same experience that the pony version of Trixie did. In that case, wouldn't pony Trixie be less of a dingleberry? Correct me if I'm wrong, but she did semi "reform", did she not?

 

Besides, the notion of co-existing with any pony is just amusing. Even though I might suffer, I doubt I could sit through listening to her calling herself "The Great and Powerful Trixie" without chuckling.

[KillerKingBakudan 702]

"Pet" is not the right term to use if we're going by canon intelligence levels. 

 

If the only difference between the two Trixies are the bodies that contain her personality and intelligence, and If you consider human Trixie as an equal, someone you're capable of being in a relationship with, but only see pony Trixie as a "pet", then you are being derogatory towards her in the situation you described.

 

"Human Trixie as a Girlfriend or Pony Trixie as a Friend?" would be a better way to phrase it.

 

If the sentience and intelligence is there, you can not call her a pet, anymore than you could call a disabled person you help take care of a "pet".    

A "pet" is already considered an "animal friend". They're interchangeable. That's why people have pets in the first place. They want them for their companionship, not to treat them like crap. I don't understand why some of you are making that conclusion.

 

The only reason we treat animals differently is because of their inability to communicate. It still doesn't change the fact that some animals are smarter and respond to humans better than others. You wouldn't value a lizard or an insect the same way you'd value a dog, for instance.

Therefore, Trixie's intelligence would warrant her being treated equally and, by definition of her being a pony, still be regarded as a "pet".

 

And not having a romantic relationship with her doesn't make her any less valuable as an individual. Let's be honest. Being smart does not/should not automatically make something sexually desirable. I have a dog. If you could magically make her brain develop like a human brain, give her vocal cords and have her wake up with the same intelligence that we have, that'd be the most awesome thing ever. But that doesn't mean I'd want to marry her.

 

First off Trixie is not an asshole and never was (unless under the influence of dark magic anyway) 

 

As for the options: I'm gay so the girlfriend thing is out. Unless we can just be buds then that's cool. 

Pony trixie as a pet is a no go either since that would pretty much be slavery, so again unless we are friends its not going to work. 

What do slave-owners do? They kidnap people or buy them off a slave trade, keep them chained or locked up in isolation, threaten them, beat them, deny them medical attention, put them through physical labor, and feed them just enough to ensure said labor is finished. That's not what's being denoted here.

 

Let's say I'm a pony from Equestria. If a family of humans offered to support me for the rest of my life, and respect my freedom to make my own decisions and do what I wanted, why would I care if they said they regarded me as a pet? I'd laugh it off for sure, but still, I'd be living like a celebrity for having literally done nothing. Most people would kill to live that kind of life. 

[Gearbox10mm 794]

You "own" a pet, you cannot own a sentient being. That is slavery and It doesn't matter how well you treat them.

[Sage 125]

I don't want to own a sentient creature, I don't exactly know how that's even possible (without it being slavery). Befriending, and supporting them by living together is something I could do though. I don't want Trixie as a girlfriend, not my type. 

Edited July 23, 2015 by Dual Leaf

[KillerKingBakudan 702]

You "own" a pet, you cannot own a sentient being. That is slavery and It doesn't matter how well you treat them.

Well, you sure as hell can't enslave somebody if you give them the choice to leave. That doesn't make a lick of sense.

[Daring_Do 552]

Some more examples (already mentioned Garfield): Snoopy, Scooby-Doo, Courage the Cowardly Dog...

 

Even applies in MLP itself, come to think of it... Angel definitely seems to be sentient. Fluttershy confirmed for slaver?

Edited July 23, 2015 by Daring_Do

[Buck Testa 5,505]

 

What do slave-owners do? They kidnap people or buy them off a slave trade, keep them chained or locked up in isolation, threaten them, beat them, deny them medical attention, put them through physical labor, and feed them just enough to ensure said labor is finished. That's not what's being denoted here.

 

Let's say I'm a pony from Equestria. If a family of humans offered to support me for the rest of my life, and respect my freedom to make my own decisions and do what I wanted, why would I care if they said they regarded me as a pet? I'd laugh it off for sure, but still, I'd be living like a celebrity for having literally done nothing. Most people would kill to live that kind of life. 

 

A pet is a creature you own man, there is no way you can spin that to make it not the case. You can treat a pet like family all day long, but you own them pure and simple. making a sentient being a pet means you own them, which is in fact slavery. Being nice to someone while still claiming they are your property doesn't make it better. 

 

Lets play with your example; If you were considered a pet in Equestria you would likely have to stay near your owner's property (as evidenced by all other pets in the show) and there are probably restrictions on where you can go. Remember when spike walked all the pets in one episode, guess who else would have a leash on that walk, why you the pet of course. No I'm not being crazy, I'm telling you how it is if you are a pet. There is also the idea that if you do something they don't like that you could be "put down", which is something that happens to pets in our world, or you could be stared down by fluttershy into a little house like the chickens or not given your own place to live like the cows and pigs who are also sentient might I add. This is just a couple things off the top of my head where your quality of life would be greatly restricted as someones property. There are leagues difference between a Friend and a Pet, and if you had a choice between the two I'd suggest the former over the latter. 

[Daring_Do 552]

Oh, and how could I forget... Mister Ed?

[Attack of the Pwns 894]

Pet does not feel at all like the correct term for an MLP pony, but I'd prefer pony Trixie crashing in my pad to human Trixie controlling a significant portion of my life. I've learned that a true car nut like myself trying to date a girl that is either neutral towards or against the idea of car culture usually ends badly, and I really can't see "The Great and Powerful Trixie" giving a hoot about turbos and rwhp, whereas it sounds like I could just leave pony Trixie at home when I go to car meets, car shows, etc. without her being offended. So yeah, pony Trixie all the way.

[KillerKingBakudan 702]

A pet is a creature you own man, there is no way you can spin that to make it not the case.

Of course there is. I'll have you know that I planned to give my dog up for adoption once. The only reason I still have her is because the person I sold her to told me she wouldn't stop yelping. She didn't want to leave, so I finally caved in and got myself a better job so I could take care of her. You can say I "own" my dog, but the fact is, I didn't force her to stay.

 

Would it really be that different if she was actually sentient? If she could talk and say she doesn't want to go, who would I be to say it's wrong to keep her around and throw her out?

 

 

I've actually been reminded of something. The human version of Trixie didn't have the same experience that the pony version of Trixie did. In that case, wouldn't pony Trixie be less of a dingleberry? Correct me if I'm wrong, but she did semi "reform", did she not?

She apologized to Twilight, but she didn't make it up to the rest of the Mane Six or anyone else in Ponyville. I doubt she'd completely change and stop being full of herself just because she realized what she did was wrong.

Edited July 23, 2015 by Lord-Pomegranate

[Sheheuwi9sidufud7eiwkn3 75]

Human Trixie would be that girlfriend that would in a way "demand to be worshipped" if you get what I am saying. She would require that you do EVERYTHING for her. So probably as a pet. I just hope it wouldn't be a world like My Little Dashie where you would have to keep her locked up all the time, rather a world where people could co-exist with (intelligent) ponies just fine. I don't know how much if a "pet" she would be though, she would most likely try to take over your soul in a creepy kinda way... I'd call animal control to get them to lock her up. 

[Buck Testa 5,505]

Of course there is. I'll have you know that I planned to give my dog up for adoption once. The only reason I still have her is because the person I sold her to told me she wouldn't stop yelping. She didn't want to leave, so I finally caved in and got myself a better job so I could take care of her. You can say I "own" my dog, but the fact is, I didn't force her to stay.

 

Would it really be that different if she was actually sentient? If she could talk and say she doesn't want to go, who would I be to say it's wrong to keep her around and throw her out?

The person you sold her to. Regardless of whether you decided to keep her afterward means diddly, you have the ability to sell her BECAUSE you own her. 

 

Sentience is what makes us "human", it's what made being able to have this conversation possible in the first place. Without sentience we would just be naked feral animals running around the woods. You are confusing affection for respecting a sentient beings rights. The ownership you have of your dog would be in no way acceptable with a sentient being regardless of how affectionate you are. 

 

If you advocate the ownership of sentient beings, you advocate slavery, because that is what it is. There were slave owners who were really nice to their slaves, but they were still morbidly abusing the slaves rights by owning them in the first place. 

[KillerKingBakudan 702]

The person you sold her to. Regardless of whether you decided to keep her afterward means diddly, you have the ability to sell her BECAUSE you own her. 

 

Sentience is what makes us "human", it's what made being able to have this conversation possible in the first place. Without sentience we would just be naked feral animals running around the woods. You are confusing affection for respecting a sentient beings rights. The ownership you have of your dog would be in no way acceptable with a sentient being regardless of how affectionate you are. 

 

If you advocate the ownership of sentient beings, you advocate slavery, because that is what it is. There were slave owners who were really nice to their slaves, but they were still morbidly abusing the slaves rights by owning them in the first place.

 

I legally own my dog, but I tried selling her because it's a better alternative to leaving her stranded outdoors with no sense of direction, and every possibility of being abused or run over by a car.

 

Regardless, I wouldn't do that if she was sentient. If she was self-reliant, and she had the vocal ability to flat out tell me she didn't want to live with me anymore, I'd let her walk out. It'd tear me up to see her go, but it's the only conscionable thing I could do. So no, I don't advocate slavery.

 

Now again, if she was sentient, what if the reverse were true and she told me she wanted to stay? How is it possible to make a slave out of somebody when you're keeping the door wide open for them to leave? I've yet to hear anyone explain the logic in that.

[Buck Testa 5,505]

 

 

Now again, if she was sentient, what if the reverse were true and she told me she wanted to stay? How is it possible to make a slave out of somebody when you're keeping the door wide open for them to leave? I've yet to hear anyone explain the logic in that.

 

That is not the point I'm making and you know it. Your TITLE, your argument, your reasoning up to this point has been, AND I QUOTE

 

 

 

Would it really be that different if she was actually sentient?

 

You are acknowledging in this post EXACTLY what the difference is. Your relationship with your dog would fundamentally change if she became sentient. She would not be qualified to be a pet because she would be considered your equal, because she is sentient. You acknowledge that owning her at that point would be illogical because she would be able to make her own coherent rational thoughts and decisions.

 

Trixie in this scenario would be a pet, which fundamentally goes against the idea you are now trying to make because of the simple fact that you would own her and thus have the right to decide her fate barring whatever laws restrict your behavior. You would be able to Sell trixie, you would be able to make her stay places she doesn't want to , you will be able to have her on a leash or fenced up in a yard, because she is your property. Regardless of whether you would actually DO those things means nothing because you CAN do them as her owner. Her rights are in your hands, which is where the problem lies.

 

If your dog was sentient, and you still considered her a pet and still had papers saying she was your pet, then you own her.

If a pony was sentient, and you still considered her a pet and still had papers saying she was your pet, then you own her.

 

Your proverbial actions are not in question, its ownership of the individuals rights that are in question. You should not own a sentient being, you should not have a sentient being as a pet, regardless of how you treat it. If the dog wants to stay AS A FRIEND and NOT as a PET then that is fine, because her rights are ultimately her own. But if you STILL own her in this scenario and just pretend you don't, that is wrong, because her rights would not be her own.  

[Gearbox10mm 794]

You might be slightly missing the point. If your pet dog one day became sentient, with the intelligence of a human and the ability to communicate to the point were it would be able to make it's own decisions and take care of itself, it would no longer be your pet. It would be a fellow being will all of the rights and freedoms that you have. 

 

If you kept it locked up against it's will and under your control, that would be slavery. If you let it do as it wished, to stay or to go, that would not be slavery, but you could no longer call it your pet, even if it still lived with you.  

 

Apparently Buck types faster than I do.