Would depend on the biology, wouldn't it? If it's necessary to say mate with humans, then being attractive to humans would be a biological pressure on their population which could mean the evolution of something like a fake butt wouldn't be illogical.
Would depend on the biology, wouldn't it? If it's necessary to say mate with humans, then being attractive to humans would be a biological pressure on their population which could mean the evolution of something like a fake butt wouldn't be illogical.
That's a good reason to put the vagina on the human part, not the scorpion part. There's no reason to put the anus there, though, since having a fuckable asshole is doing the opposite of helping you produce children. It also just seems extremely awkward for her - she needs to snap her spine at a point above the hip to stay "upright" without leaning forwards heavily, while having that kind of flexibility at the "hip" would make a lot more sense and allow her to have legs that support the weight of that torso directly underneath the torso, reducing the need to constantly rely upon muscular power to keep herself balanced.
That's a good reason to put the vagina on the human part, not the scorpion part. There's no reason to put the anus there, though, since having a fuckable asshole is doing the opposite of helping you produce children. It also just seems extremely awkward for her - she needs to snap her spine at a point above the hip to stay "upright" without leaning forwards heavily, while having that kind of flexibility at the "hip" would make a lot more sense and allow her to have legs that support the weight of that torso directly underneath the torso, reducing the need to constantly rely upon muscular power to keep herself balanced.
Not sure why you're conflating anus with buttocks, but the buttocks is used by a lot of primates for sexual attraction, especially to indicate fertility. Even if some of the features common in other primates might not be present in humans, it probably doesn't change that it still serves as a means of attractiveness in humans. Furthermore some hypothesize that the enlarged breasts that humans have, but other primates lack, stems from being used as a replacement to cover some of that fertility indicator that the buttocks has in other primates. The buttocks likely plays a role in sexual attraction in humans, so again it wouldn't be unreasonable to evolve even a fake buttocks if it improved the chances of drawing a human mate.
Of course I'm not super familiar with this series outside of some chapters, so heck if I know how all the various monster races work in it (or honestly care since it's all made up anyway). I'm just saying broadly that since a lot of these monster girls in series seem to require a human mate, it's not unreasonable if that alone was an evolutionary pressure to evolve features that would improve those chances, which would include human-like features like a buttocks. And again, it doesn't even have to be a real one, just something that mimics the appearance of one that would generate the same reaction from humans as a real one.
As for the spine issue, honestly wonky spines has always been the norm for these types of characters even without a buttocks. Additionally it's not like nature hasn't taken compromises with the body of animals if it served to improve the chances of leaving offspring down the road.
Monster Musume had a proto-type series known as "Weekly Life with Monster Girl". The art-style and designs evolved over time. Originally there was a spider-girl who was built like centaur, a human torso with a spider bottom. It was rather off-putting. When the main-stream series was released, the design shifted. Spider-girls would have human pelvises, complete with human genitals and butts, with the spider legs and abdomen leading out of the hips. It was a fantastic success, with the character Rachera being one of the most popular.
Not sure why you're conflating anus with buttocks, but the buttocks is used by a lot of primates for sexual attraction, especially to indicate fertility. Even if some of the features common in other primates might not be present in humans, it probably doesn't change that it still serves as a means of attractiveness in humans. Furthermore some hypothesize that the enlarged breasts that humans have, but other primates lack, stems from being used as a replacement to cover some of that fertility indicator that the buttocks has in other primates. The buttocks likely plays a role in sexual attraction in humans, so again it wouldn't be unreasonable to evolve even a fake buttocks if it improved the chances of drawing a human mate.
Of course I'm not super familiar with this series outside of some chapters, so heck if I know how all the various monster races work in it (or honestly care since it's all made up anyway). I'm just saying broadly that since a lot of these monster girls in series seem to require a human mate, it's not unreasonable if that alone was an evolutionary pressure to evolve features that would improve those chances, which would include human-like features like a buttocks. And again, it doesn't even have to be a real one, just something that mimics the appearance of one that would generate the same reaction from humans as a real one.
As for the spine issue, honestly wonky spines has always been the norm for these types of characters even without a buttocks. Additionally it's not like nature hasn't taken compromises with the body of animals if it served to improve the chances of leaving offspring down the road.
And birds use bright plumages to attract mates while insects use pheremones. That doesn't have anything to do with humans, however, and your argument is that she should have an unnecessary and physically awkward buttocks to attract human men. Animals like dogs focus on the butt because they mate from behind, but humans focus on faces because we interact with other humans face-to-face and also frequently have sex that way, too. There might be a joke in there about a harpy trying to shampoo her plumage to get extra bright for attracting a mate, but it would be severely unlikely to work on a human. (And yeah, these monster girls all having breasts even when they're apparently egg-layers that wouldn't lactate definitely point towards focusing on the front, as well.)
This whole thing is a spin-off mobile game and I don't know if it has any lore at all, but I'm pretty sure most of these monster girls (at least going by the core series, which I haven't read in years) have males of their species with only a couple rare types that actually need humans, but also can do it with men because that's the whole point of the series.
Steak said:
Monster Musume had a proto-type series known as "Weekly Life with Monster Girl". The art-style and designs evolved over time. Originally there was a spider-girl who was built like centaur, a human torso with a spider bottom. It was rather off-putting. When the main-stream series was released, the design shifted. Spider-girls would have human pelvises, complete with human genitals and butts, with the spider legs and abdomen leading out of the hips. It was a fantastic success, with the character Rachera being one of the most popular.
Considering your rather vehemently outspoken opinions on Monster Musume, I'm not sure whether you're speaking for anyone else or not. The images that we have got comments mostly on the original version of the arachne being a blood-drinker.
I mean, obviously, we have counter-arguments here that the butt is off-putting as well... (Although honestly, the thing that REALLY drives me nuts are those 'lamia' designs with two legs that then fuse back together at the knees to be a snake tail...) It's not like I keep up with the fanbase or anything, but Rachnera never seemed that hugely popular, and Miia (who incidentally has a human vagina and snake butt) blew the other girls out of the water, if only because she's main girl (although presumably lamia was chosen for main girl for a reason).
And if we're talking about the main set of girls, there was also the whole "horse pussy" thing with Centorea... But I mean, if you're not going to be into that sort of thing, you're probably not going to be into a centaur at all, even if they have a completely pointless extra fake butt sitting on top of their back.
If you're into ass and legs, then maybe, rather than try to mangle a concept to have them, you should just look for some other kind of monster girl, or, y'know, human girl if you want them to look human?
Yes, I agree. It's very effective. ignore that a 3rd of my uploads are harpies and even more are bird girls
This whole thing is a spin-off mobile game and I don't know if it has any lore at all, but I'm pretty sure most of these monster girls (at least going by the core series, which I haven't read in years) have males of their species with only a couple rare types that actually need humans, but also can do it with men because that's the whole point of the series.
Centaurs, mermaids, and orcs are the only species in the series with a confirmed male counterpart. Orcs are very piglike, mermen are fish-top human-bottom, and centaurs are just buff. Harpies and lamia are confirmed as female-exclusive.
Any other species is never brought up.
The mobile game has a tiny amount of lore beyond the characters' profiles themselves, but it's mostly on diet or retreading things we already know, like the physical undead-types needing frequent maintence.
No, my argument has always been in regard to the original argument, which was that there was no biological reason for them to have it. I'm simply arguing that there wasn't zero biological reasons for it, which is quite different for arguing that they had to have it.
Furthermore you bringing up colorful bird plumage is frankly yourself sabotaging your own argument. Birds like the male peacock have evolved bright and frankly large awkward plumage, much like a seemingly unnecessary buttocks. The bright plumage primarily only serves to decrease their chances of surviving predation by making them an easier target, but evolved to help show their fitness by being able to survive despite the handicap so that they can better attract a mate. Both survival and being able to attract a mate are evolutionary pressures, and clearly the ability to attract a mate in the peacocks situation was greater than the pressure of not being a big billboard saying eat me. If there is any evolutionary pressure on some of these monster girls to be able to attract a human mate, that's a non-zero reason for having an unnecessary buttocks. Even if it seems, as you say unnecessary and awkward. If having it at all meant they left more offspring than those that didn't have it, that's a non-zero evolutionary pressure that increases the chances they might have it. And again, I'm not saying they should have it, I'm simply saying that there isn't zero biological reason to have it.
And birds use bright plumages to attract mates while insects use pheremones. That doesn't have anything to do with humans, however, and your argument is that she should have an unnecessary and physically awkward buttocks to attract human men. Animals like dogs focus on the butt because they mate from behind, but humans focus on faces because we interact with other humans face-to-face and also frequently have sex that way, too. There might be a joke in there about a harpy trying to shampoo her plumage to get extra bright for attracting a mate, but it would be severely unlikely to work on a human. (And yeah, these monster girls all having breasts even when they're apparently egg-layers that wouldn't lactate definitely point towards focusing on the front, as well.)
Are you actually trying to suggest that humans are completely devoid of baser instincts and never consider breasts/butt/thighs/ect. when deciding if someone else interests them sexually? Cause I'm pretty sure those things are usually way more relevant than the face where sex is concerned. Humans can have sex about a dozen ways besides face-to-face, and lots of people enjoy looking at a nice ass while doing it from behind. Hell, where do you think the phrase "My eyes are up here." comes from? FYI, the idea that men are considerably more interested in a woman's breasts, and her body in general, than her face.
No, my argument has always been in regard to the original argument, which was that there was no biological reason for them to have it. I'm simply arguing that there wasn't zero biological reasons for it, which is quite different for arguing that they had to have it.
Furthermore you bringing up colorful bird plumage is frankly yourself sabotaging your own argument. Birds like the male peacock have evolved bright and frankly large awkward plumage, much like a seemingly unnecessary buttocks. [...]
You're missing the gap between your argument and conclusion I was pointing out, there.
I never said there's no such thing as biologically unnecessary parts that help with mating. I'm saying you are arguing that it's fine to have biologically unnecessary things because they attract human mates, and then your only reasoning is how they are useful in attracting non-human animals.
A big bright red hind quarters is attractive to a baboon, but it's a source of mockery from humans. What attracts other animals (like bright plumages for birds) doesn't apply to humans, and your argument jumps from "this attracts animals" to "therefore it's justified if it attracts human human mates" without filling in how that's relevant to humans. I'm skeptical having this kind of stupid fake butt is actually going to attract anyone who wasn't already going to be attracted to the rest of the woman parts enough to justify itself.
Yes, I agree. It's very effective. ignore that a 3rd of my uploads are harpies and even more are bird girls
OK, I take it then that you'd find it unsettling if someone tried to take something like a harpy and then shaved off all the feathers because they're (a hypothetical) hand fetishist and hated that harpies had wings instead of hands, right?
It's again this strange thing where if you are the sort of fetishist that wants the ass, why are you trying to force a creature that specifically doesn't have that part to have one just to satisfy that fetish when there are just plain human women who do, instead of trying to ruin a character design?
Veradux said:
Centaurs, mermaids, and orcs are the only species in the series with a confirmed male counterpart. Orcs are very piglike, mermen are fish-top human-bottom, and centaurs are just buff. Harpies and lamia are confirmed as female-exclusive.
Any other species is never brought up.
The mobile game has a tiny amount of lore beyond the characters' profiles themselves, but it's mostly on diet or retreading things we already know, like the physical undead-types needing frequent maintence.
It's been a while, so I didn't recall that they were all ugly bastards or just not mentioned, but still, I don't recall there being more than a couple of races where they actually say they have no men and have to mate with men.
Are you actually trying to suggest that humans are completely devoid of baser instincts and never consider breasts/butt/thighs/ect. when deciding if someone else interests them sexually? Cause I'm pretty sure those things are usually way more relevant than the face where sex is concerned. Humans can have sex about a dozen ways besides face-to-face, and lots of people enjoy looking at a nice ass while doing it from behind. Hell, where do you think the phrase "My eyes are up here." comes from? FYI, the idea that men are considerably more interested in a woman's breasts, and her body in general, than her face.
I was including breasts and vagina in the "front", and "eyes up here" is explicitly about breasts, which I explicitly mentioned. Even then, I'm not sure how judging women by facial looks isn't "baser instincts" itself...
As for how sexual attraction works, yeah, an ugly face is absolutely a deal breaker for a lot of men, to the point of it being a common joke for a man to get interested in a sexy body only to see an ugly face and then completely get repulsed. That's also the joke with the aforementioned "other kind of mermaid" that was in MonMusu. The mermaid with no human butt or thighs but a human front torso and face is the attractive one that at least the majority of the audience is expected to go for, and the merman with human ass and thighs but a fish face is an ugly bastard that the story expects nearly nobody in the audience would want. (For that matter, the face is also the classic dividing line between whether it's a catgirl or an anthropomorphic cat furry. It's the one feature so important it gets considered an entirely different fetish if it's changed.)
And again, my argument is if you are all about the ass and thighs, why are you going for a creature that doesn't have those things in the first place? It's again back to the "horse pussy" argument - if you're into actually having sex with a centaur, you kind of have to be OK with a horse's hind quarters to start with. Asking for a human ass and on top of the horse's back and vagina in front kind of implicates you're not into the entire basic concept of a "centaur" to start with, so maybe you should just leave the centaur alone and look for any kind of monster girl (or just plain human girl) that has those things you're looking for?
OK, I take it then that you'd find it unsettling if someone tried to take something like a harpy and then shaved off all the feathers because they're (a hypothetical) hand fetishist and hated that harpies had wings instead of hands, right?
It's again this strange thing where if you are the sort of fetishist that wants the ass, why are you trying to force a creature that specifically doesn't have that part to have one just to satisfy that fetish when there are just plain human women who do, instead of trying to ruin a character design?
I feel that the only reason you're perceiving a gap is your own assumptions that (1) monster girls can't mate with humans and leave offspring and (2) that in all cases that monster girls have a male counterpart in which to reproduce with thus would inherently evolve to be attractive to their own kind. The fact that you're making these assumptions, makes me question if you're even arguing in good faith, but I'll assume you are for the sake of it.
Given I'm arguing that there is a non-zero chance in which a "fake buttocks" might have evolved, in a scenario where monster girls can mate with humans and have a male counterpart, if a population of them found it easier to mate with humans over mating with their own males, then it would be natural that traits that would make them more attractive to humans would be an evolutionary pressure on their population. And before you try and bring up faces and all that stuff, evolution takes time, so these traits may have been a pressure on their population long before the development of any real human civilization beyond nomadic cave dwellers.
In a scenario where they lack a male counterpart and depended on humans for reproduction, that right there would mean a long time history between their race and humans and a long enough time for evolutionary pressures to shape them to be more appealing and closer to the human form matching closer to human females.
Either way, those are scenarios that could exist, which means that there is a non-zero chance that something like a fake buttocks evolving is non-zero. It can be as slim of a chance as you want it to be, but as long as it isn't zero chance, then my argument still stands.