It's the way the manga portrayed them before anyone was married. Their thirst for Sasuke was before anyone got married and had kids. The manga never portrayed any of these women as adulterous homewrecker whores that would either abandon their own families or mess with anyone else's.
Not to mention that most of these women would have absolutely no history or relationship with Sasuke, thus making them even bigger whores.
I guess you really just want the NV's women to be horny apes.
Your rant and disrespect is unwarranted, I set terms which you ignored. You obviously ignored my post and let your personal experience(broken family)/beliefs(religious)/bias(from the aforementioned) cloud your judgement. Let not emotions interfere with reason that is my final lesson for tonight.
Your rant and disrespect is unwarranted, I set terms which you ignored. You obviously ignored my post and let your personal experience(broken family)/beliefs(religious)/bias(from the aforementioned) cloud your judgement. Let not emotions interfere with reason that is my final lesson for tonight.
Also, you are the one with the blatant disrespect. You have blatant disrespect for Sai, for Inojin, and any other innocent man and/or family that would be broken up and damaged just so that the wife/mother could be a ***** and revive a dead clan.
It's the way the manga portrayed them before anyone was married. Their thirst for Sasuke was before anyone got married and had kids. The manga never portrayed any of these women as adulterous homewrecker whores that would either abandon their own families or mess with anyone else's.
Not to mention that most of these women would have absolutely no history or relationship with Sasuke, thus making them even bigger whores.
I guess you really just want the NV's women to be horny apes.
I really need to publish my next chapter... it's been stalled, now, for like nine months, but it deals with this concept quite thoroughly.
As it used to be in the world, men held political power because women chose them as the superior mates. Fodder men got put into the army to go hug a spear or go beat away at dirt in the field. Women chose men who had the financial and political resources to convey benefits to their children (even if 'illegitimate'). These men had wealth, status, and influence. Their children would get better education, their sons become higher ranked within society, and their daughters more likely to find their way into other powerful lineages.
Again, society tends to have the view of men and women inverted. Women can be especially brutal in the 'art of love' because they are a large selective factor in our species. Far more so than climate. Men are quite literally fodders to strike down threats to the womb.... which is why men do their damnedest to acquire wealth and status.
So, it's not entirely unusual for multi-wife scenarios to unfold, especially around men who are especially successful in life. The egalitarian view of one man and one woman was always a bit more of a middle-class thing.
However... this is can be considered a rather barbaric way of living. Are women who choose such a life truly happy? Are the men who allow it truly happy with the arrangement? Is it wanton abandoning of the wounded who could recover?
I've always seen the issue addressed as a sort of possessive one. "I don't want to share my man" - or "I can only handle one woman" - but never really from the philosophical point of why it is we would consider it wrong for women to seek material/social advantage for their children over some manner of emotional or personal fulfillment.
The entire point of one-on-one relationships are just people attempting to apply emotional ethics between each other to have some form of emotional security. Outside of that it's more so impossible to list any real benefits from relationships that would aid a population. Marriage is different however but more so on a personal level and where socioeconomic factors are concerned.
The entire point of one-on-one relationships are just people attempting to apply emotional ethics between each other to have some form of emotional security. Outside of that it's more so impossible to list any real benefits from relationships that would aid a population. Marriage is different however but more so on a personal level and where socioeconomic factors are concerned.
On the population level, monogamous pairings are typically reflected among economically stable populations and generally have superior 'fodder' relative to nations with older harem-derived structures. Such populations typically run into fewer issues related to recessive trait expression. Put more simply - when the average man is 'king of his household' - he strives to give his children the attention and benefits classically reserved for nobility.
I would argue that harem type structures are more a sort of survival instinct among women. When times get tough, women are very shrewd in their selection of men. When times are fair, women would rather dominate the attention of one man rather than be a part of the denominator. Not to say that women are not still drawn toward sufficiently desirable men, but men also value fidelity among women when they are looking to build a legacy. In short - the pool boy is likely to bang the housewife because that 'accident' benefits his seed, so to speak. In contrast, the man building a homestead is not going to be interested in trying to steal away someone who will potentially leave him for 'something better' in the future.
It's the way the manga portrayed them before anyone was married. Their thirst for Sasuke was before anyone got married and had kids. The manga never portrayed any of these women as adulterous homewrecker whores that would either abandon their own families or mess with anyone else's.
Not to mention that most of these women would have absolutely no history or relationship with Sasuke, thus making them even bigger whores.
I guess you really just want the NV's women to be horny apes.
In the Gaiden when Sasuke,Naruto and Sakura return after defeating Shin, Ino yells Sasuke kun and we have Salad putting herself between her and Sasuke. Sasuke can easily get more women if he wants to. Look at Rosd to Ninja Sasuke. He could get any girl he wants. But I think he doesn't want half blood Uchihas around. We have already seen how slow Salad is.
In the Gaiden when Sasuke,Naruto and Sakura return after defeating Shin, Ino yells Sasuke kun and we have Salad putting herself between her and Sasuke. Sasuke can easily get more women if he wants to. Look at Rosd to Ninja Sasuke. He could get any girl he wants. But I think he doesn't want half blood Uchihas around. We have already seen how slow Salad is.
Road to ninja Sasuke has an entirely different personalities than canon Sasuke.
Ino yells Sasuke kun and says long time no see. She simply hasn't seen him in a long time. Sarada reacts the way she does because Ino acted so casually with Sasuke, while Sarada herself was basically just meeting him.
Also, does nobody really give a crap about the damage that would be done to Sai and Inojin if Ino left Sai just to fulfill some ***** desires?
Also, I don't know what you have against Sarada. She is great. She has none of the character flaws that either of her parents had as kids. She uses the sharingan 1000 times better than part 1 Sasuke ever did. She isn't afflicted by the curse of hatred. Sarada is great.
I really need to publish my next chapter... it's been stalled, now, for like nine months, but it deals with this concept quite thoroughly.
As it used to be in the world, men held political power because women chose them as the superior mates. Fodder men got put into the army to go hug a spear or go beat away at dirt in the field. Women chose men who had the financial and political resources to convey benefits to their children (even if 'illegitimate'). These men had wealth, status, and influence. Their children would get better education, their sons become higher ranked within society, and their daughters more likely to find their way into other powerful lineages.
Again, society tends to have the view of men and women inverted. Women can be especially brutal in the 'art of love' because they are a large selective factor in our species. Far more so than climate. Men are quite literally fodders to strike down threats to the womb.... which is why men do their damnedest to acquire wealth and status.
So, it's not entirely unusual for multi-wife scenarios to unfold, especially around men who are especially successful in life. The egalitarian view of one man and one woman was always a bit more of a middle-class thing.
However... this is can be considered a rather barbaric way of living. Are women who choose such a life truly happy? Are the men who allow it truly happy with the arrangement? Is it wanton abandoning of the wounded who could recover?
I've always seen the issue addressed as a sort of possessive one. "I don't want to share my man" - or "I can only handle one woman" - but never really from the philosophical point of why it is we would consider it wrong for women to seek material/social advantage for their children over some manner of emotional or personal fulfillment.
On the population level, monogamous pairings are typically reflected among economically stable populations and generally have superior 'fodder' relative to nations with older harem-derived structures. Such populations typically run into fewer issues related to recessive trait expression. Put more simply - when the average man is 'king of his household' - he strives to give his children the attention and benefits classically reserved for nobility.
I would argue that harem type structures are more a sort of survival instinct among women. When times get tough, women are very shrewd in their selection of men. When times are fair, women would rather dominate the attention of one man rather than be a part of the denominator. Not to say that women are not still drawn toward sufficiently desirable men, but men also value fidelity among women when they are looking to build a legacy. In short - the pool boy is likely to bang the housewife because that 'accident' benefits his seed, so to speak. In contrast, the man building a homestead is not going to be interested in trying to steal away someone who will potentially leave him for 'something better' in the future.
While you speak very logically, one of my big gripes here is not necessarily the multiple wives concept (even though I disagree with that too). My main gripe in the conversation at hand is the notion of a wife actually leaving her husband and child for another man (just for whorish reasons such as looks). I hate the blatant disregard of other men and families that people in this thread are showing.
While you speak very logically, one of my big gripes here is not necessarily the multiple wives concept (even though I disagree with that too). My main gripe in the conversation at hand is the notion of a wife actually leaving her husband and child for another man (just for whorish reasons such as looks). I hate the blatant disregard of other men and families that people in this thread are showing.
I don't blame you, here, or completely disagree. Relationships are complicated enough before adding in kids/family. Two kids (effectively) get involved with each other because it is fun, a kid results, but then they find out they have little in common, or all kinds of other scenarios. On one hand, I can't blame a woman for leaving a relationship that is not fulfilling for one that is fulfilling. However, it is not at all a 'clean' affair when kids are involved, and especially if the father is still involved, as well.
I think there is a difference between "I am not happy or getting what I need out of this relationship", realizing it in another, versus "oh, a new horse to ride!" Obviously, one should always deal with their responsibilities and commitments before making such a change - though it doesn't make it any easier, either. Many people, rather than actually having that conversation of: "I am not getting what I need, and neither are you" just delay dealing with it until after the "dear john" letter. So, it often appears like someone simply ups and leaves.
None of this is aided by the differences in how men and women tend to process problems. Men tend to be fixers. We see a problem and we immediately begin formulating a plan of action to fix it, and start carrying it out. Women often like to express problems in a social context. Consider the following:
Men and women both get horribly confused by each other when the problem involves the relationship between the two. If it was a problem with the door, or the faucet, or something like that - the woman expresses her frustration with said object and the man responds to fix the problem. Perfect harmony. When the problem involves how the two are relating to each other... she just wants to talk while he just wants to fix the problem, and he just doesn't ever seem to care about expressing anything while she's communicating.
OT; It’s wishful thinking but even now, it’s entirely too late for a second child. Sarada is already 12-13. The time skip would be fucking pointless as we wouldn’t be able to see any potential.
Short version, Kishimoto fucked up by making Sarada an only child. To be frank he’d been making shit decision since he decided that Kaguya was a good idea.
