Ryoga decided that murdering Ranma and hiding the body was the best course of action.
He has rubbed Akane's breast's while in pig form to make Ranma angry.
LadyRelena wrote:You people are obviously making Ryoga to be much worst then he actually is and are going extremely overboard to do so.
>if the person hadn't wanted sex from the user of the rod before being affected by it, it'd essentially act like a date rape drug.
Both rape and murder are common enough it's just that many times they are played for comedy (typically known as black comedy) and the situations do not stay serious.
but it is quite obvious
Crescent Pulsar wrote:One: Even though Ryoga thought it wouldn't work, and thus that it wouldn't hurt to try, he was still hoping that the love rod would work. That's why, not too long afterward, he blames Ranma for ruining his "one, precious chance." So his attempt wasn't completely benign.
Two: When Ryoga envisioned how Akane would react, when he told her about the koi rod, it showed Akane being upset. That's because even he knew it was wrong, and couldn't imagine the scenario any other way.
Three: Ryoga really was intent on killing Ranma, even though she was an innocent victim of something that he had brought upon himself. What stopped him wasn't a change of mind, but Akane's interference and continued presence. Had she never arrived, he would have carried out what he had intended to do.
Four: Even Akane said, in person, that using the koi rod was wrong.
Five: And now what I've been trying to avoid, but I feel should properly be address before leaving: rape. Did it happen? No. But just imagine what could have been, for a second, if you will. Let's say that he snagged who he had intended to snag, Akane. Would he have tried to cure her? I highly doubt that, personally. He'd be too happy to receive her affections. Considering some of his delusions, he'd probably imagine that the love she was showing him was there all along, and that the koi rod had merely forced it out into the open. (I mean, in the same story, he imagines that Akane is happy about the love triangle being gone, and thus satisfied with Ryoga's killing of Ranma, while sitting nearby to said person's grave.) The thing is, we know such feelings from her, at that point and time (or any time), are not her feelings. So she's being forced to feel that way. And then nature takes its course, and they have sex. The thing about the koi rod is that the person forgets what happened once its effect is gone, so... you could say that, in essence, if the person hadn't wanted sex from the user of the rod before being affected by it, it'd essentially act like a date rape drug. I can hear some of the protestations already, but do you really think that Ryoga wouldn't take the situation that far, if Akane had been caught by the koi rod, and nothing had intervened? Seriously. After all, he didn't know how to cure Ranma, and only managed it by accident. He's not going to try to harm or kill Akane, as a solution. So, if it can't be helped, then he'd just accept the situation, since he'd be getting what he wanted while Ranma loses her. It'd be win-win, for him.
AdmiralTigerclaw wrote:You purposefully ignore the fact that Ryoga was no longer doing this in cold blood, but because he was humiliated and enraged. (Like he always is when Ranma messes with him. Or in this case, when it was just creepy.) Your claim that he was trying to kill ranma in what was essentially Pre-Meditated Murder was what was driving this part of the argument in the Koi-Rod story. Having already debunked this, this argument will become a straw man if you continue to try and milk it.
LawOhki wrote:The only thing you've debunked is the myth that you actually read the chapters or know what a straw man argument is.
Straw Man Fallacy wrote:The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following pattern:
- Person A has position X.
- Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
- Person B attacks position Y.
- Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a position simply does not constitute an attack on the position itself. One might as well expect an attack on a poor drawing of a person to hurt the person.
AdmiralTigerclaw wrote:The only despicable thing I'm finding here was that attempt to conciously distort the argument by purposefully leaving out that page, LawOhki.
Do not do so again.
LawOhki wrote:It's not until Ranma kisses him when Ryoga refuses to kill someone who won't fight back that there is any large scale humiliation or rage. Someone who is overcome by emotions does it RIGHT NOW, not hours later.
three headed dog wrote:Are you really arguing that an act is not despicable because you realize what your doing is a deplorable act and stop the action? That an act is not despicable because it is done because of a strong emotion? Is not murdering someone or in this case attempting to, in a fit of rage still a despicable act?
That Ryoga did not follow threw with his plan (which he carried out for quite awhile) shows that he realized what he was doing was wrong, it does not make the acts he took any less despicable. Had he followed threw with his plan it would be more despicable but what he did was despicable in and of itself.
Is not attempting to use something to force someone to do something, even if you don't believe it will work, still a bit despicable?
An action does not have to be completed for the act to be despicable. An action does not have to be premeditated to be despicable. An act does not even have to have malicious intent to be despicable, since a person can be despicable for other reasons (for example a person who forecloses on a house could be considered despicable, since he is kicking people out of their houses, but have no malicious intentions at all).
AdmiralTigerclaw wrote:The argument is that Ryoga is 'despicable', not the act. This is why it's a straw man. You are substituting the Act for Ryoga and attacking the Act.
The entire point of proving Ryoga was despicable here was hinging on the argument that Ryoga was going to commit cold blooded murder. Cold Blooded Murder is a despicable act, there is no argument about that. However...
I have proved that Ryoga could not commit cold blooded murder. In response to this, you and LawOhki have substituted the act itself (and its planning) and claim its Despicable-ness as proof of Ryoga's case.
The Argument is Invalid.
Return to Specific Series: Ranma
Users browsing this forum: No registered users