• groet@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    2 days ago

    Might also be why all the other older hobbits dislike gandalf. They fear he is after their ladies

  • monkeyman512@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    106
    ·
    3 days ago

    I think that is a literal storyline in Belgarath the Sorcerer. The wizard, Belgarath, spends thousands of years monitoring and manipulating various family lines. One of those is a line of dryads who are tiny and all female. He was “forced” to mate with them or they would kill him with bows, but he didn’t really complain about it. He is able to avoid these “conflicts” in the future after discovering chocolate makes them orgasm.

    Some times you don’t think about how weird this shit gets until you explain it to someone else.

    • Venus_Ziegenfalle@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      56
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Some times you don’t think about how weird this shit gets until you explain it to someone else.

      Every anime ever

        • okwhateverdude@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          2 days ago

          I hate this aspect so much. Like, bro, can’t you just make cool cartoons without sexualizing the characters?

          • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            2 days ago

            Or just make the sexualised characters slightly more age appropriate. Gimme hot moms in their 30s or something

          • Azzu@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            10
            ·
            2 days ago

            Everything in life is directly or indirectly about sex. We’re literally machines “designed” for the purpose of procreation, i.e. sex. Just makes sense that all our stories are about it as well :D

            • snooggums@piefed.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              2 days ago

              While one can squint hard to see the connections to procreation with enough steps in between, that doesn’t mean everything should be sexualized. Working a farm to produce food food is necessary for one to live long enough to reproduce, but farming isn’t about sex.

                • Horsecook@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  Plant/insect/plant interracial threesomes. Insect prostitution. Animal sex. Animal prostitution. Animal masturbation, forced impregnation.

              • AnotherUsername@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                Every single fertility god and goddess throughout history is giving you the side-eye right now.

              • Azzu@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                2 days ago

                Obviously people like sex and want things sexualized, otherwise it wouldn’t be created. I like sexualized comics. If you don’t like it, then no one forces you to select to read/watch the comics that are sexualized. Obviously, since many people like sexualized stuff, you will have to deal with the (probably smaller) selection of comics that don’t do it, of which I’m sure they exist.

                I just don’t understand the need to hate things like this. I don’t hate it if a comic isn’t sexualized, even though that’s not what I prefer.

        • Miles O'Brien@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          2 days ago

          exasperated sigh LOOK they’re MENTALLY 10,000 YEARS OLD but only THE BODY is 12 OKAY??? IT’S TOTALLY NOT WEIRD MOM GUYS!!!1!1one!

          • snooggums@piefed.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            Also their 10,000 year old mental facilities just happen to align with a 12 year old’s personality because of their super long life spans! That’s totally not weird at all!

    • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      3 days ago

      Bad memories since I read last week about David and Leigh Eddings having both spent a year in prison for horrific abuse of their adopted children :(

        • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          2 days ago

          I still have them in my collection. All of Eddings, except High Hunt and The Losers. Now I don’t want to give them away, yet I no longer cherish them :(

          • Tonava@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            2 days ago

            Yeah, I loved pretty much all Eddings wrote, because it’s such simple, light-hearted style of fantasy. Even thinking the Death of the Author (they’re not profiting from the books you already own, and are quite literally dead so nobody suffers or benefits from you owning or reading the books) it leaves such a bad taste in your mouth. Since now every time you read or even think of the books, you remember what pieces of shit the authors were and it taints the whole thing.

            I always fear reading up about authors (and musicians, actors… etc.) because so many of them turn out to be such pieces of shit and that ruins everything

              • Tonava@sopuli.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                2 days ago

                Yeah… It sucks. I have some Marion Zimmer-Bradleys books in the shelf that have been unread for years because I learned of the author’s pedophilia when I was in the middle of that series. Really soured the whole thing. At least with Eddings they were caught and punished and didn’t do evil shit for decades afterwards, so you can keep up some hope they became better people in the end…

        • baines@lemmy.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          that intro in the kitchen is still stuck in my head

          fuck them both, so disappointed

    • baines@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      2 days ago

      it gets easier when you learn the author was a piece of shit

      ruins a beloved childhood book

      • Azzu@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        I still don’t really understand this sentiment. Could you please explain why this is the case for you? I really mean this as curiosity.

        I can certainly understand current things, like if there is a book author right now that is a piece of shit and they try to sell a new book, of course I won’t buy it. Also not support their old stuff. But why exactly is their effect in the past tainted by this? LotR is still an amazing book, talking about lots of good things like friendship, loyalty, self-sacrifice etc, creating a beautifully interesting fantasy world. Why is this ruined, why can you not appreciate this now that you know the author is a piece of shit?

        • notthebees@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          39
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          For context, David and Leigh Eddings were convicted in the late 60s for child abuse in South Dakota. They literally put their adopted children in cages.

        • vithigar@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          ·
          2 days ago

          I think they’re talking about David and Leigh Eddings, authors of Belgarath the Sorcerer.

          • Azzu@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Didn’t know that :) don’t know that book then, thought I was just forgetting something about LotR. But my original question still stands.

            • vithigar@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              20
              ·
              edit-2
              2 days ago

              Well, in this case it’s a book that features small sexualized female creatures, which is already pretty ick, but then you put the fact that the Eddings’ went to jail on multiple charges of “extensive physical child abuse” and that’s a whole new layer of closely connected grossness.

              It’s one thing to accept death of the author when the material isn’t related to whatever it is the author did. It’s a bit more unsettling when the work seems like it was influenced by those same proclivities.

              • Azzu@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                2 days ago

                Understandable, thanks for the correction :) as I thought it was about LotR, my comment is basically completely irrelevant xD

            • nomy@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              “You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make them drink.”

    • bluesheep@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      3 days ago

      He is able to avoid these “conflicts” in the future after discovering chocolate makes them orgasm.

      So just regular humans then, got it.

    • pinball_wizard@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      This is the first I’ve read this particular take, but I got about the same from my recent read of “The Hobbit”. This is, at the least, heavily implied.

      There’s clearly a past relationship, causing loyalty, and it specifically follows the Took bloodline.

      I’m sure there are other explanations than Gandalf loving and sleeping with a Took sometime in the past…but there aren’t really any simpler explanations that include the familial (possibly genetic) aspect.

      • Gandalf always checks in with Took family members, and has done so longer than anyone can remember.
      • Took family members tend toward an adventurous spirit that defies explanation in their Hobbit culture. Took family members tend to leave home, return wealthy, and say very little about their time spent away.
      • Gandalf only takes an interest in Bilbo upon learning that Bilbo has Took bloodline.
      • Various characters criticise Gandalf’s involvement with Hobbits in ways that maybe have “there’s more to this” undertones. This one is iffy, there’s always “more to this” with Gandalf, anyway.
      • Everyone knows Gandalf loves Hobbit…smoking weed.

      It could really be as simple as Gandalf and a Took Hobbit ages back had adventures and became practically brothers/sisters in arms. Perhaps Gandalf owes some kind of oath to a dying Took. But it doesn’t feel like an oath in the books.

      Gandalf acts like distant family.

      But there’s undeniably an awful lot of “Gandalf acts like an agesless great great grand uncle to all Tooks” going on.

      • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Wrong.

        Some of Tolkien’s specific inspirations were the Germanic Sagas, including the Nibelungenlied and Volsunga Saga.

        A theme of both is that heros are often descendants of the Aesir, specifically Odin, and Gandalf is patterned after Odin to an undeniable degree, a wise and enigmatic warrior-mage often depicted as grey cloaked, proficient in rune lore, carrying a staff or spear.

        Not only that, Gandalf means elf with a stick, and a common theory for his origin among the men that knew he lived longer than mortals is that he was literally just an elf.

        Tolkien may or may not have specifically intended it, but he’d certainly agree that you could read it that way with the influences he drew from, and it is also a special point of his Middle Earth (aka Midgard btw) that the history they tell isn’t necessarily the history that happened. The hobbits having forgotten that it was Gandalf banging GranGran Took or mistaking him as an elf isn’t just a likely theory, it’s a probable one. Further, we also know that Maia WILL marry and have children from some of his other histories.

        Or not, and it was just an elf who died or returned to Valinor, with Gandalf just keeping an eye on the line! He’s tricky like that.

  • Lucky_777@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    3 days ago

    I can believe this. Pull some Old Toby out for the ladies and get all staffed up. Gandalf is coming out baby