JoJones What are you, a gay fish?

Or If Zora were real.

How spidery is she? We talking SoW Shelob or Monster Musume?

Monster Musume or more. Gotta have those spider parts.

But let's be real though; centaurs, am I right?

Look all I'm saying is when mankind ventures into space and meets all the weird aliens I'm 100% keeping it human I don't date xenos

Goodvillian 101 What's 'more' than Monster Musume?!

This is 3 min someone joking around that's part of a larger bit that comes from it, save your correcting guffaws.

I like how Zelda's second question was "How?"

I heard it was going to be, but they wouldn't give Del Torro the license so he was like "Fuck you I'll do it myself."

Zachary Anderson So did I. I wanted it to be.

Malhekrow PRAISE DAGON

In the previous friendcast iirc

I think the quote from Pat to Woolie was "We should REALLY go see that movie" after briefly referencing the...discussion around it

effluviah I suppose beastiality is OK now.

Last time I checked, this movie is not a documentary and fish men are not real. Get some critical thinking skills and see the film for what it is: A deeper social analysis. Have you seen the film yet? Also, considering the historical use of comparisons to bestiality to belittle homosexuals and other "sexual deviants", including relationships between or involving disabled individuals (history is not kind nor understanding of those of us who are "different"), and especially given that the female lead of the film is in fact mute, I find your comment to be both ignorant and offensive at a subtextual level when placed in a wider context. Is it bestiality when all these Twilight-loving teenagers are into vampires, which are essentially bat-men, given the origins of the Western mythos surrounding vampires? No? Okay then, cool. Glad we're clear now. Go see the movie, and if you already have, then perhaps see it again, this time without a blindfold on.

I think the thing Matt was trying to say was no one asking how the fish man had sex with her when there no sexual organ she can have sex with.

There was no explicit penetration in the film, as far as I remember. I believe that the film was making the point that the sexual organs were irrelevant; They could both be asexual or uninterested in traditional penetrative sex for all we know, and simply using close physicality to express their love. Sex doesn't need penetration to still be sex, and even if there was penetration, it was likely with hands, simply judging from what I remember was shown on screen (including an earlier scene in the film). I can't really think of a way to discuss it further without spoilers.... (I can't believe I'm talking about this lmao I love Del Toro so much.) I understand Matt's confusion, but the film is about more than sex with a fish dude. The sex goes deeper than physical elements and is a raw expression of the emotional connection between two individuals that are communicating on a higher level between each other, and the physicality is simply one way of expressing that. Plus, it's a fish dude, nothing about it implies that it's even possible to have "traditional" sex, and nothing about it is traditional, which is the point. It is a celebration of unique love between two very specifically different beings, who are in actuality, the only people able to understand each other. Sure, there could be fish dick, but I doubt it. It doesn't matter anyway. It's not about genital organs, it's about the organ necessary for life: The heart. Not trying to be a douche by the way, I just really love this movie, lmao. I'm super invested in fish man emotions.

It's not how she sees her relationship it's how people who sees that relationship that Matt has problem with. Like some homosexuals have problem getting friends and family approve their relationship pretty sure a fish person in a 1962 mindset is not something people just roll with.