A strange problem arises in Equestria that makes it impossible for stallions to impregnate their wives. Fortunately for them, some helpful zebra stallions are more than willing to take their place.
“Don’t worry about the collar, girls,” Zenia spoke reassuringly. “It’s just for the Lavender’s safety. If needed, they can pull him in any direction in an instant. An unfortunate necessity I’m afraid.”
Wonder why?
The stallion grunted as he thrust. Once… twice… three times. On the fourth rut he let out a loud triumphant groan into the air as his balls clenched up. His cock giving a small twitch as it release a payload of sterile sperm straight into the mare’s tunnel.
Now to be fair, he's drunk.
He never admitted it, but Cadance knew her husband had some weird incestuous attraction to his mom and sister.
... What?
But, upon Shining glancing upward to meet her gaze, Cadance suddenly saw that her husband didnotlook well! He looked rather ill and green, literally!
Oh dear.
“The doctor is sick too! All the royal guards are all sick! Every stallion in the castle is sick! This has never happened before! I-I-I don’t know what we should do!”
Ah. That's bad.
It was then Cadance remembered back to the warning Zed had disclosed to her. How the strange affliction rendering every pony stallion sterile was expected to develop into an actual illness! It wasn’t just expected, it was happening now!
Oh dear.
“It would likely be best if you removed your clothing. Being around that stallion for so long… it’s likely they became contaminated with his affliction in that time.”
This relies heavily on porn logic.
Reports were already flooding in of similar outbreaks and prompt treatment by the zebras in every other known pony settlement.
There have to be female physicians. Have them take blood samples, see what they're dealing with, see if there's any virus or infection or whatever that acts similarly.
Here is a philosophical challenge for those that dare: How many moral reasons can you give in favor of reproduction? Now how many can you give against it? Remember that you have to be consistent in your reasons. That is to say, If you think the reason "because you want to/feel like it" is legitimate then everything someone wants and/or feel like doing must be moral.
8857345 I reckon the males arent ill. Its obviously the zeebs doing but i think the reason that one stallion is in a collar is because he might be immune to whatever the zeebs ars trying to do
8858232 If I'm honest, no I don't think I can give moral reasons for the support of this kind of reproduction, as this breaks the trust and bond that a wife and husband are supposed to share while turning as many people(in this case mares) into nymphos who can only be satisfied by Zebras due to the fact that in this world apparently every mare is dissatisfied with their husbands before the Zebra show up. I don't care if this is a porn story, I don't care if it's a fetish story, this idea and how it's written are going against every single moral and guidelines I often see for writing and... that's bad.
8858232 Ethics are spooky. A better question would be, "Why should I want to reproduce?" to which I have to say you shouldn't because if we keep reproducing then eventually a new Hitler will be born--and we don't want another Hitler, do we? Also, humans just suck, I mean, like: War? Man-made extinctions? Climate Change? Dumb people who don't leave you alone because you're something they don't like? I mean, c'mon; you know it; I know it: Humans suck; stop making more humans.
8863968 But marriage is the foundation of domestic violence (I'm not saying you want domestic violence, btw), and I'm pretty sure we can agree that domestic violence is unethical, right? So, imo, marriage isn't morally justified anyways--and historically speaking, it was never about trust, it was about property rights and reproduction, which turns this back into a discussion about whether reproduction is moral or not. And marriage is an often hierarchical social construct and hierarchies don't justify themselves.
I mean, if the situation is non-consensual, I'd see the issue (being the absence of a union of egoists, since I want society to be organized along said lines so people can actualize their egoistic desires, like the totalitarian that I am) but I don't see how polyamory or open relationships betray the trust of partners anyways. So, I mean, so long as the exchange is agreed upon by all parties and can be opted out of at any moment--if you couldn't opt out of it at any moment, that'd be rape, and not many people like being raped, and I don't like seeing people being upset, so it'd be egoistic for me to eliminate rape--without major consequence, imo, it should be considered fine.
And I see the question of ethics itself to be kind of useless and spooky (in the Stirnerite sense), since ethical systems generally speaking rely on circular logic and create an unjustified hierarchy over the mind. An ethical system is ethically justified by itself, making it circular in nature. I can't find any non-ethical justifications for ethics. One could argue they're necessary for society, but I disagree, because as someone without an ethical system, I still behave in ways that ultimately benefit others; I like seeing people happy because it gives me stomach butterflies and a sense of accomplishment; I like helping people and I like being respectful. I don't see any need for ethics whatsoever.
Regardless, society doesn't justify itself; the concept that we should act in accordance with the stability of society is based on a value system, and I've never seen any value system that doesn't justify itself without circular logic. I can't find any non-value based justifications for value systems other than the egoist one which, in it of itself, is kind of circular, since egoistic action itself is seen as a virtue. But, if you use that justification, then it comes down to wants and nothing more. What if I don't want society to exist (this is purely hypothetical, btw; of course I want society to exist)?
8864093 That's not exactly what I mean, the situation brought on by this story is the horrification of Cuckolding, where the goal is to eventually replace the cuck and have the dominant male(in this case, the Zebra) take their place. I don't know why they're doing it in this story but it's most likely to breed Ponies out of existence. The problem is; this is rape in all but name, with the Zebras having purposely made the contracts they give to ponies so long and so complicated that the signing is more out of the relief of not reading it any more than actually agreeing to it. The marriage part is simple, it may have started out like you said but it's grown into something meant for "loving" people. To take that away in such a manner as this story does is... downright cruel. Not to mention the fact that apparently every Zebra in this story's world is for the breeding of mares and all believe mares are only truly satisfied with rough sex from dominant stallions with large penises, which in itself is not only just bad writing and Gary Stuish wish fulfillment by the Author, but to me it also seems borderline racist.
Of course, the Author can write whatever he/she likes and the criticism and hatred of the fetish isn't going to stop them, which I respect them for. However the choices this story makes in it's character development, world building and plot are... distasteful. This isn't a story where the villain wins, this is a story where no one wins, it just takes the "winner" a bit longer to lose.
8864250 Well think. When shining was ill he was completley unable to have sex, he was dizzy n looked drunk but couldnt do the sex. This stallion suffered similar affects to shining but was still able to have sex. Whilst his performance was affected he was still able to perform just not well
8863968 I think I poorly worded my question. I did not mean specifically "this" kind of reproduction but reproduction it self. As in "why reproduce?" The idea of this story might indeed not be deeply thought out but it is a good thought experiment according to me. Does the stallions have a right to reproduce? Can one be angry specifically about that?
8864075 You gave a very interesting answer but it was your comment to RedRandom that got my attention as I never knew about Max Stirner before now. However, I do not think you are consistent. If you think humanity is such a drag and irremediable why are you also a totalitarian? For me the ideas of "stop making humans" and wanting a totalitarian society are mutual exclusive (unless it is a means to an end). They you say you do not have a ethical system yet you say your acts are based on what makes you happy. And that is a ethical system.
As for your question to RedRandom. I am a Contractist so I will say that if you are in a society that wants a society and you do not then you must be given the option to leave or accept the rules of the society. Yes, ethics are based on wants and nothing more. The only question for me is: How do I make the best possible society for me?
8864539 Ethical systems are dictatorial mental hierarchies concerned with the enforcement of right actions and the punishment of wrong actions whereas I reject the notions of right and wrong altogether and just say, "I do what I want, Mom!" For instance, in response to, "Murdering is wrong!" because I'm a terrible person, I'd probably say, "Oh yeah, well, shut up about morals and ethics; I'm going to nuke you, and you're going to like it!"
I'm not a totalitarian; that was a joke. The dissonance between the concept of the Union of Egoists—a uniquely egoist anarchist idea—and the statement that I'm a totalitarian for wanting people to pursue their desires without mental hierarchies was supposed to illicit a giggle or two.
Also, obviously, pony master-race. Humans suck because they don't have hooves. I could write a massive opus on why that is but, like Fermat, I'll just say my proof is too big for this web-page. (I was being a post-ironic misanthrope, though I never said humans were irredeemable--just sucky, mainly due to the presence of kyriarchy, which I don't think will vanish any time soon, unfortunately.)
8864577 Well, you have to live as you preach in order to not be a hypocrite. I prefer comfort over freedom to a point and so that is the society I want. As such, ethics happen. Considering you want everyone to do as they please then what I want must technically be ok .
Ok. But are ponies a master-race because of their biology or society?
8864539 If you put it like that, then for my answer I'd have to say yes, they do deserve to reproduce(I'm assuming you're talking about the ponies not the zebras) and they should be angry that they are not allowed to do anything but watch while a foreign people takes their place. I don't exactly have a reason as to why I feel that way, I just do. But, if I were to attempt to give a reason, I would say it's due to free will and that the taking away of the chance to reproduce and bring new life into the world is almost like ripping a small part of the free will people have away from them.
8864619 According to Shulamith Firestone, patriarchy emerged because of the biological family, so social structures may have biological drives. Specifically, in this case, sexual organs drove the creation of patriarchy, and as she established, economic class emerged due to patriarchy, too, and so did racism and heterosexism. So... Society is a product of the material conditions at the time. Once the means of reproduction are held in the commons, sex class may be abolished and along with that, patriarchy and gender, and we'll also need a socialist revolution, and some serious exercise of Critical Race Theory and Queer Theory. It'll be a long walk before things can get better.
So ponies are master-race because magic is better than hands. They have better material conditions. The only reason they're better though is because they're less violent. And they're less violent because of hooves. And they have hooves because of magic. Otherwise they'd be human, and humans suck.
And like i said, I want people to achieve their desires without ghosts dictating their actions.
8864621 Hmm, you have to give a reason or justify that feelings are enough for an action to be considered good. Like Unicorn System here.
As for your reason: What about the mares? Do they not have the free will to chose who they reproduce with (yes the zebras are more then likely lying to them but lets focus on the ponies for now)?
8864631 We are far off topic but I have a theory of my own. Capitalism (the on that Adam Smith proposed) will bring about the socialist utopia. Just let technology progress long enough and we will live in a post-scarcity society.
I am just trying to find the best way to get there.
8864633 I believe they do yes, If a mare had the free choice between say a pony or a zebra and chose the zebra(for her own reasons of course) then I'd be okay with that, because there is choice on all fronts. A situation such as this one however, that choice is taken away kind of.
8864658 Ok but then how does the stallions have a right to reproduce if the mares chose the zebras if we say (although something tells me that that is how this story will end) that they have a free choice?
8864417 Yeah, contractual sex is rape. I wasn't really arguing against that point. Rather, I was contesting the foundation of your ethical argument being centered around marriage.
And, as a social institution, I do not think marriage serves love; I think it polices it. There's also a bunch of stuff I could say about patriarchy, heterosexism, and the commodification of love, but the point is, why do people marry in the first place? Because they're in love? That's not a sufficient explanation. They marry because they're taught that marriage is the only way to have a valid, long-standing relationship; it's deemed as the ultimate display of love. And this causes some problems, for instance, by keeping together incompatible partners thereby creating an unstable household for child-rearing for some people, and giving more opportunities for domestic abuse.
Ultimately, marriage is there to reinforce the biological family and therefore reinforce heterosexism and patriarchy by policing relationships. And we do this policing by not providing the benefits marriage provides to everyone. There's a reason polyamorous people can't get married, and why gay people couldn't get married until recently. In short; abolish marriage xd.
And if your partner can be so easily replaceable, and that the grounds of that replacement is sex, then I wouldn't consider that love anyways.
8864679 (personally I gave up on the story, just another "Fall of Equestria" esque world with Zebras instead of Caribou, a waste if you ask me) If you gonna question the rightness of the stallions reproducing, who have by this point shown no real reason not to have that right, then it would be better to look at the Zebra. What gives them the right to come over, infect the males of the population and then breed their females into submission? What right do they have in forcing stallions to become sick and infertile, to render a species pretty much extinct? They don't have a right, at all. However the ponies have shown non of these qualities to not have that right either. So I'll say again, the stallions have a right to reproduce, if they choose not to that is their free will, if a mare willingly chooses another species over them, that gives that one member of the other species the right to reproduce.
8864685 Nah, for me Marriage has always been the final step, the official statement of a couple wanting to be together for the rest of their lives. I'm aware of how it is more or less a way of policing a life long relationship and how that can have it's own negative sides. But, say you were to compare marriage as flawed as it is to the situation in this story, what do you think is the better option? I'll say right now I'll take a shitty marriage any day of the week instead of having to suffer through that.
8864691 Just work with me. Ignore the situation and confront the idea. The zebras are acting immoral according to me so that is not the problem.
So if a pony stallion have a right to reproduce (so not letting them reproduce is wrong), but if the mare choses another of their own free will then they do not have that right anymore?
8864709 I wouldn't take either. Idk what would be worse. Tbh I'd rather be raped once than live my life with someone who I'm not compatible with or doesn't love me. That isn't to trivialize the pain of rape victims, of course; I just hate being in bad or insincere relationships more than anything.
So if a pony stallion have a right to reproduce (so not letting them reproduce is wrong), but if the mare choses another of their own free will then they do not have that right anymore?
They do. They have the right to reproduce, if they find a consenting partner or a legal substitute situation.
I have the right to drive a car. I don't own a car. So I don't usually drive anywhere.
8864727 They do have the right, they just don't do it at the time. If they find another mare who wants to reproduce with them, does that mean the right is just suddenly back? No, cause it never left.
This part is just if you want to know why I was happy with the conclusion: Reproduction is a negative right and not a positive one. That is to say, actively preventing someone from reproducing is wrong but no one has to help you. Negative right=not preventing. Positive right=helping.
shining armour is sick i blame zebras which hurts me to say as i really like zecora but shining gets sick a chapter after cadance is told to sign a law to quarantine the male ponies from the female ponies because they will get sicker and guess what the male pony she loves gets sick the next chapter. all i can do and if i was there is: *walk up to cadance look her right in the eye and slap her muzzle so hard that my hand hurts and yell* damn it cadance your being played girl you stupid pony princess can't you see it's the zebras' fault shihing was fine until you made your stupid deal with zed and then you both have zebra tea without checking now your so aroused you can't think straight and shining is deathly sick yet here i am a male human who didn't drink the tea he offered and i'm perfectly fine. fact check you crazy equine princess.
If you haven't noticed yet, all zebra names begin with the letter "Z", just like all griffon names in the show begin with the letter "G".
Please tell me there's another chapter coming!
8856477
There is another chapter, but it's a bit of a change of pace as before.
Do you think we could get some side chapters talking about the other princesses and their interactions with the zebras?
It would be a shame if this mysterious disease turned all the stallions into mare's for the Zebras.
Wonder why?
Now to be fair, he's drunk.
... What?
Oh dear.
Ah. That's bad.
Oh dear.
This relies heavily on porn logic.
There have to be female physicians. Have them take blood samples, see what they're dealing with, see if there's any virus or infection or whatever that acts similarly.
8856309
I DID notice that.
Here is a philosophical challenge for those that dare: How many moral reasons can you give in favor of reproduction? Now how many can you give against it? Remember that you have to be consistent in your reasons. That is to say, If you think the reason "because you want to/feel like it" is legitimate then everything someone wants and/or feel like doing must be moral.
Well the subjugation of the white-I mean pony males is coming along nicely. This reminds me of Z-Book.
8857345
I reckon the males arent ill. Its obviously the zeebs doing but i think the reason that one stallion is in a collar is because he might be immune to whatever the zeebs ars trying to do
8857014
Well all the males do have the symptoms of morning sickness all of a sudden
8858232
If I'm honest, no I don't think I can give moral reasons for the support of this kind of reproduction, as this breaks the trust and bond that a wife and husband are supposed to share while turning as many people(in this case mares) into nymphos who can only be satisfied by Zebras due to the fact that in this world apparently every mare is dissatisfied with their husbands before the Zebra show up. I don't care if this is a porn story, I don't care if it's a fetish story, this idea and how it's written are going against every single moral and guidelines I often see for writing and... that's bad.
8858232
Ethics are spooky. A better question would be, "Why should I want to reproduce?" to which I have to say you shouldn't because if we keep reproducing then eventually a new Hitler will be born--and we don't want another Hitler, do we? Also, humans just suck, I mean, like: War? Man-made extinctions? Climate Change? Dumb people who don't leave you alone because you're something they don't like? I mean, c'mon; you know it; I know it: Humans suck; stop making more humans.
8863968
But marriage is the foundation of domestic violence (I'm not saying you want domestic violence, btw), and I'm pretty sure we can agree that domestic violence is unethical, right? So, imo, marriage isn't morally justified anyways--and historically speaking, it was never about trust, it was about property rights and reproduction, which turns this back into a discussion about whether reproduction is moral or not. And marriage is an often hierarchical social construct and hierarchies don't justify themselves.
I mean, if the situation is non-consensual, I'd see the issue (being the absence of a union of egoists, since I want society to be organized along said lines so people can actualize their egoistic desires, like the totalitarian that I am) but I don't see how polyamory or open relationships betray the trust of partners anyways. So, I mean, so long as the exchange is agreed upon by all parties and can be opted out of at any moment--if you couldn't opt out of it at any moment, that'd be rape, and not many people like being raped, and I don't like seeing people being upset, so it'd be egoistic for me to eliminate rape--without major consequence, imo, it should be considered fine.
And I see the question of ethics itself to be kind of useless and spooky (in the Stirnerite sense), since ethical systems generally speaking rely on circular logic and create an unjustified hierarchy over the mind. An ethical system is ethically justified by itself, making it circular in nature. I can't find any non-ethical justifications for ethics. One could argue they're necessary for society, but I disagree, because as someone without an ethical system, I still behave in ways that ultimately benefit others; I like seeing people happy because it gives me stomach butterflies and a sense of accomplishment; I like helping people and I like being respectful. I don't see any need for ethics whatsoever.
Regardless, society doesn't justify itself; the concept that we should act in accordance with the stability of society is based on a value system, and I've never seen any value system that doesn't justify itself without circular logic. I can't find any non-value based justifications for value systems other than the egoist one which, in it of itself, is kind of circular, since egoistic action itself is seen as a virtue. But, if you use that justification, then it comes down to wants and nothing more. What if I don't want society to exist (this is purely hypothetical, btw; of course I want society to exist)?
8863855
I'm inclined to agree.
8864093
That's not exactly what I mean, the situation brought on by this story is the horrification of Cuckolding, where the goal is to eventually replace the cuck and have the dominant male(in this case, the Zebra) take their place. I don't know why they're doing it in this story but it's most likely to breed Ponies out of existence. The problem is; this is rape in all but name, with the Zebras having purposely made the contracts they give to ponies so long and so complicated that the signing is more out of the relief of not reading it any more than actually agreeing to it. The marriage part is simple, it may have started out like you said but it's grown into something meant for "loving" people. To take that away in such a manner as this story does is... downright cruel. Not to mention the fact that apparently every Zebra in this story's world is for the breeding of mares and all believe mares are only truly satisfied with rough sex from dominant stallions with large penises, which in itself is not only just bad writing and Gary Stuish wish fulfillment by the Author, but to me it also seems borderline racist.
Of course, the Author can write whatever he/she likes and the criticism and hatred of the fetish isn't going to stop them, which I respect them for. However the choices this story makes in it's character development, world building and plot are... distasteful. This isn't a story where the villain wins, this is a story where no one wins, it just takes the "winner" a bit longer to lose.
8864250
Well think. When shining was ill he was completley unable to have sex, he was dizzy n looked drunk but couldnt do the sex. This stallion suffered similar affects to shining but was still able to have sex. Whilst his performance was affected he was still able to perform just not well
8863968
I think I poorly worded my question. I did not mean specifically "this" kind of reproduction but reproduction it self. As in "why reproduce?" The idea of this story might indeed not be deeply thought out but it is a good thought experiment according to me. Does the stallions have a right to reproduce? Can one be angry specifically about that?
8864075
You gave a very interesting answer but it was your comment to RedRandom that got my attention as I never knew about Max Stirner before now. However, I do not think you are consistent. If you think humanity is such a drag and irremediable why are you also a totalitarian? For me the ideas of "stop making humans" and wanting a totalitarian society are mutual exclusive (unless it is a means to an end). They you say you do not have a ethical system yet you say your acts are based on what makes you happy. And that is a ethical system.
As for your question to RedRandom. I am a Contractist so I will say that if you are in a society that wants a society and you do not then you must be given the option to leave or accept the rules of the society. Yes, ethics are based on wants and nothing more. The only question for me is: How do I make the best possible society for me?
8864539
Ethical systems are dictatorial mental hierarchies concerned with the enforcement of right actions and the punishment of wrong actions whereas I reject the notions of right and wrong altogether and just say, "I do what I want, Mom!" For instance, in response to, "Murdering is wrong!" because I'm a terrible person, I'd probably say, "Oh yeah, well, shut up about morals and ethics; I'm going to nuke you, and you're going to like it!"
I'm not a totalitarian; that was a joke. The dissonance between the concept of the Union of Egoists—a uniquely egoist anarchist idea—and the statement that I'm a totalitarian for wanting people to pursue their desires without mental hierarchies was supposed to illicit a giggle or two.
Also, obviously, pony master-race. Humans suck because they don't have hooves. I could write a massive opus on why that is but, like Fermat, I'll just say my proof is too big for this web-page. (I was being a post-ironic misanthrope, though I never said humans were irredeemable--just sucky, mainly due to the presence of kyriarchy, which I don't think will vanish any time soon, unfortunately.)
Social contracts, btw, are spooky.
8864577
Well, you have to live as you preach in order to not be a hypocrite. I prefer comfort over freedom to a point and so that is the society I want. As such, ethics happen. Considering you want everyone to do as they please then what I want must technically be ok .
Ok. But are ponies a master-race because of their biology or society?
8864539
If you put it like that, then for my answer I'd have to say yes, they do deserve to reproduce(I'm assuming you're talking about the ponies not the zebras) and they should be angry that they are not allowed to do anything but watch while a foreign people takes their place. I don't exactly have a reason as to why I feel that way, I just do. But, if I were to attempt to give a reason, I would say it's due to free will and that the taking away of the chance to reproduce and bring new life into the world is almost like ripping a small part of the free will people have away from them.
8864619
According to Shulamith Firestone, patriarchy emerged because of the biological family, so social structures may have biological drives. Specifically, in this case, sexual organs drove the creation of patriarchy, and as she established, economic class emerged due to patriarchy, too, and so did racism and heterosexism. So... Society is a product of the material conditions at the time. Once the means of reproduction are held in the commons, sex class may be abolished and along with that, patriarchy and gender, and we'll also need a socialist revolution, and some serious exercise of Critical Race Theory and Queer Theory. It'll be a long walk before things can get better.
So ponies are master-race because magic is better than hands. They have better material conditions. The only reason they're better though is because they're less violent. And they're less violent because of hooves. And they have hooves because of magic. Otherwise they'd be human, and humans suck.
And like i said, I want people to achieve their desires without ghosts dictating their actions.
8864621
Hmm, you have to give a reason or justify that feelings are enough for an action to be considered good. Like Unicorn System here.
As for your reason: What about the mares? Do they not have the free will to chose who they reproduce with (yes the zebras are more then likely lying to them but lets focus on the ponies for now)?
8864631
We are far off topic but I have a theory of my own. Capitalism (the on that Adam Smith proposed) will bring about the socialist utopia. Just let technology progress long enough and we will live in a post-scarcity society.
I am just trying to find the best way to get there.
8864648
That's what Marx said though. Not that I have anything wrong with Marx.
8864650
And I think he is right .
8864633
I believe they do yes, If a mare had the free choice between say a pony or a zebra and chose the zebra(for her own reasons of course) then I'd be okay with that, because there is choice on all fronts. A situation such as this one however, that choice is taken away kind of.
8864653
Spontaneous Marxism emerges in the forum. Happy horse noises ensue.
Historical materialism makes me horny. I am welcoming of this new development, Comrade.
8864658
Nah, they could just let society die.
8864633
Please, call me Page Heart.
8864664
Or that, but I have hope in both Humanity and cute little ponies
8864658
Ok but then how does the stallions have a right to reproduce if the mares chose the zebras if we say (although something tells me that that is how this story will end) that they have a free choice?
8864417
Yeah, contractual sex is rape. I wasn't really arguing against that point. Rather, I was contesting the foundation of your ethical argument being centered around marriage.
And, as a social institution, I do not think marriage serves love; I think it polices it. There's also a bunch of stuff I could say about patriarchy, heterosexism, and the commodification of love, but the point is, why do people marry in the first place? Because they're in love? That's not a sufficient explanation. They marry because they're taught that marriage is the only way to have a valid, long-standing relationship; it's deemed as the ultimate display of love. And this causes some problems, for instance, by keeping together incompatible partners thereby creating an unstable household for child-rearing for some people, and giving more opportunities for domestic abuse.
Ultimately, marriage is there to reinforce the biological family and therefore reinforce heterosexism and patriarchy by policing relationships. And we do this policing by not providing the benefits marriage provides to everyone. There's a reason polyamorous people can't get married, and why gay people couldn't get married until recently. In short; abolish marriage xd.
And if your partner can be so easily replaceable, and that the grounds of that replacement is sex, then I wouldn't consider that love anyways.
8864679
(personally I gave up on the story, just another "Fall of Equestria" esque world with Zebras instead of Caribou, a waste if you ask me)
If you gonna question the rightness of the stallions reproducing, who have by this point shown no real reason not to have that right, then it would be better to look at the Zebra. What gives them the right to come over, infect the males of the population and then breed their females into submission? What right do they have in forcing stallions to become sick and infertile, to render a species pretty much extinct? They don't have a right, at all. However the ponies have shown non of these qualities to not have that right either. So I'll say again, the stallions have a right to reproduce, if they choose not to that is their free will, if a mare willingly chooses another species over them, that gives that one member of the other species the right to reproduce.
8864685
Nah, for me Marriage has always been the final step, the official statement of a couple wanting to be together for the rest of their lives. I'm aware of how it is more or less a way of policing a life long relationship and how that can have it's own negative sides. But, say you were to compare marriage as flawed as it is to the situation in this story, what do you think is the better option? I'll say right now I'll take a shitty marriage any day of the week instead of having to suffer through that.
8864691
Just work with me. Ignore the situation and confront the idea. The zebras are acting immoral according to me so that is not the problem.
So if a pony stallion have a right to reproduce (so not letting them reproduce is wrong), but if the mare choses another of their own free will then they do not have that right anymore?
8864709
I wouldn't take either. Idk what would be worse. Tbh I'd rather be raped once than live my life with someone who I'm not compatible with or doesn't love me. That isn't to trivialize the pain of rape victims, of course; I just hate being in bad or insincere relationships more than anything.
8864727
They do. They have the right to reproduce, if they find a consenting partner or a legal substitute situation.
I have the right to drive a car. I don't own a car. So I don't usually drive anywhere.
8864727
They do have the right, they just don't do it at the time. If they find another mare who wants to reproduce with them, does that mean the right is just suddenly back? No, cause it never left.
8864734
8864744
Very well .
8864750
Sorry for sounding like a broken record with the whole Zebra comparison.
8864792
It's alright .
This part is just if you want to know why I was happy with the conclusion: Reproduction is a negative right and not a positive one. That is to say, actively preventing someone from reproducing is wrong but no one has to help you. Negative right=not preventing. Positive right=helping.
I love this, but I absolutely fucking hate that I love this, someone kill me
me vs my morals
Edit: Turns out I love the concept from the zebra side, though Polaris would do a much better job with sexually overtaking another country
Actually, not a bad plan for a story someday
If I didn’t know better then I would say all of my favorite authors are the same...
8864811
Wat
8864811
You have confused this foxes brain
shining armour is sick i blame zebras which hurts me to say as i really like zecora but shining gets sick a chapter after cadance is told to sign a law to quarantine the male ponies from the female ponies because they will get sicker and guess what the male pony she loves gets sick the next chapter. all i can do and if i was there is: *walk up to cadance look her right in the eye and slap her muzzle so hard that my hand hurts and yell* damn it cadance your being played girl you stupid pony princess can't you see it's the zebras' fault shihing was fine until you made your stupid deal with zed and then you both have zebra tea without checking now your so aroused you can't think straight and shining is deathly sick yet here i am a male human who didn't drink the tea he offered and i'm perfectly fine. fact check you crazy equine princess.