Critical Analysis of Twilight
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 correct
|
|||
|
A matter of opinion
|
|
Make your pick! | next poll >> |
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".
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)
I'm curious who said factually correct.
Sign In or join Fanpop to add your comment