• Daft_ish@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    She doesn’t want to kill people because society has taught her that killing is wrong. There is no societal precedent for someone with her ability. If a shark was raised to believe it was a tuna it doesn’t change the fact that it’s a shark.

    And I know for a fact that ADHD people don’t appreciate the fact they have to medicate to be valued in their society.

    Edit: but can’t you just except that I am on magnetos side, professor x?

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      She doesn’t want to kill people because society has taught her that killing is wrong.

      Yeah, something about perpetuating your own species seems like a logical reason to teach people that.

      Also, most people instinctively do not want to kill. That’s why military training has to cram the idea of “you have to kill people” down their trainees’ throats, and reportedly many still don’t pull the trigger when they see they will actually end up killing someone.

      Honestly, this makes me worry about you and what you’ve done or plan to do.

      • Daft_ish@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Lol

        We’re talking about fictional characters. Rogue is no longer of the same geneious as homosapian. Her progeny will define a whole evolutionary line. Your simple mindedness makes me worried people like you vote.

        Rogues only obligation is to preserve the traits she has been given for survival of her species.

          • Daft_ish@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            Like I mentioned before there are instances where rogue has complete control. Also she could find a suitable mate that is powerful enough to withstand her power.

            Edit: I’m glad I could introduce someone to the driving conflict in xmen. Your welcome.

        • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          8 months ago

          i… i think you need to go watch crash course’s videos on genomics and evolution, this isn’t how evolution works.

          also nice personal insult there, definitely makes people want to listen to anything you have to say

        • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          There’s a lot wrong with what you just said.

          1. It’s “Genus”.

          2. Homo is the genus, Sapiens is the species.

          3. Taxonomy works in retrospect. We don’t classify new species nor branches until they already exist. We can’t simply predict.

          4. A species is defined as a group that can interbreed and produce viable, fertile offspring. Mules for instance aren’t a distinct species because they are largely infertile. This is why we classify in retrospect.

          4.5. As a result it’s impossible to know if Rogue would even constitute a new species. She would need to be capable of having children who can have children with each other. And I don’t even want to get into how fucked up the implications of that are. It also means that if Rogue or her children could have viable offspring with ordinary humans, they cannot be different species.

          1. Even if she was a whole new species, Rogue would probably not be an entirely separate Genus either. She would likely be Homo still. The split for her species wouldn’t go that high up in taxonomy.

          2. An organism is not only obligated to preserve its specific traits. It’s obligated to preserve as many traits similar to its own as possible. This is why you’ll see family groups in nature work together. Uncles and aunts will nurture their nieces and nephews because a substantial portion of their own genetics lives on in their siblings’ progeny. They can still pass on some of their traits in that way.

          6.5. This is why some people think gay people exist, from an evolutionary perspective. A tribe with 12 adults and 5 children is able to better provide for their collective kids than a tribe of 12 adults and 6 children. Some of the gay people’s DNA is still in their nieces and nephews.

          1. Sometimes you don’t need to even share genetics with someone else. Completely unrelated cat moms will raise their litters together, because it raises their chance of survival overall.

          This is all basic college biology. You should be able to find it fairly easily.