What do you think? Place your vote!
(Placed your vote already? Remember to login!)

Critical Analysis of Twilight Calling Bella a necrophiliac is...

29 fans picked:
Factually incorrect
Factually incorrect
   79%
Factually correct
Factually correct
   17%
A matter of opinion
A matter of opinion
   3%
 goodtimes posted sa loob ng isang taon na ang nakalipas
Make your pick! | next poll >>
save

7 comments

user photo
Factually incorrect
cassie-1-2-3 picked Factually incorrect:
The fact alone that Edward is not a rotting corpse should be enough.

to elaborate more on this, this question was asked someone a while age:

"Bella is a necrophiliac, right?
She has sex with a dead corps, and that's what necrophiliacs are. Why is this even legal? Is there no end to the disgusting messages this woman sends children?"

And my answer was:
"Technically... Edward is not a corpse.

Necrophilia is the sexual attraction to corpses/cadaver

A corpse/cadaver is a dead human body.
It can be argued that Edward is no longer human, thus there is no human body to be considered dead.
For argument's sake, if you want to say Edward is still technically human, corpses are identified by the degree of decomposition they have undergone.
There has been zero evidence that would indicate that Edward's body has decomposed at all.

Coming from a completely different angle, necrophilia was originally coined as a pathological term, coined by Richard von Krafft-Ebing.
A necrophiliac is a person who seeks sexual gratification from an inanimate dead body. The appeal to necrophiliacs is the inanimateness. They seek intimacy with a body that will not move or react in any way. It's the need to be in control, to secure your safety and security. "


The word "necrophilia" is not an opinion word. It has a definition that is not up for interpretation.
It's just as much of an opinion as "The world's largest amphibian is the giant salamander" is.
And just as factually correct as "bacon is made out of gummy worms".
posted sa loob ng isang taon na ang nakalipas.
last edited sa loob ng isang taon na ang nakalipas
 
user photo
Factually incorrect
cassie-1-2-3 picked Factually incorrect:
But I can't really expect people to actually look up definitions.
Most who criticize Twilight like this seem to rely on the knowledge they believe they already posses.

(I realize I'm being judgmental and making assumptions)
posted sa loob ng isang taon na ang nakalipas.
last edited sa loob ng isang taon na ang nakalipas
 
user photo
Factually incorrect
DramaQueen1020 picked Factually incorrect:
Whoa. Cassie, that was great!
posted sa loob ng isang taon na ang nakalipas.
 
user photo
Factually incorrect
November99 picked Factually incorrect:
If Bella/Edward is necrophilia, then all other vampire/romance must be too.

I'm curious who said factually correct.
posted sa loob ng isang taon na ang nakalipas.
last edited sa loob ng isang taon na ang nakalipas
 
user photo
Factually incorrect
Book-Freak picked Factually incorrect:
Edward isn't a corpse.
posted sa loob ng isang taon na ang nakalipas.
 
user photo
Factually incorrect
Dragonclaws picked Factually incorrect:
Edward is more like a living person with some disease that hardens the skin and stops the heart. While all vampires are this to a degree, sparklepires are particularly less corpse-like than others.
posted sa loob ng isang taon na ang nakalipas.
 
user photo
Factually incorrect
Flickerflame picked Factually incorrect:
Edward isn't a corpse. As Cassie pointed out, it's the inanimation which attracts necrophiliacs. Is there a term though for people who are attracted to those without heartbeats or need for breathing but are still animate?
posted sa loob ng isang taon na ang nakalipas.
 
idagdag ang iyong komento

Sign In or join Fanpop to add your comment