Would you help her open the jar?
>>43569717What's with all the shitty threads being made?
>>43569717I'd pick up and hug her filly while she's distracted.
>When ur mom is screem but u just want PB&J
>>43569717Yes.
>>43569717>Amethyst has a daughterWho's the husband?
>>43569749That would be me.
Yesnt
>>43569749zephyr breeze
>>43569717Yes because opening the jar could restart season 1
>>43569717I will rape her when she grow up
>>43569853Extraordinarily cute mare.
>>43569717I'd help her scream
>>43569853>when she grow upweak
>>43569717No but I'd join her screaming at the bread
>>43569853Oh God she's so cute!
>>43569749No husband. If sex ration in Equestria 70/30 like in show, and most mares want offspring, it's either herdequestria, or shared stallion duties. One way that could go is there's "marriage" with your true love and you live in with that mare, but good and close friends could get a "donation" if they wish. It's cucky either way, unless you want to headcanon in almost 50/50 sex ratio. Though Faust mentioned in interview that there's more equal ratio, if you take her off-script mentions as gospel.
>>43570758an imbalanced sex ratio doesn't make sense on any level, and the literal only evidence for it in the show is the show's habit of copy/pasting background ponies.if there actually were an imbalanced ratio, you'd expect at least a single line of dialogue in the show to at least arguably imply it, but there's nothing.in a case as extreme as this, where something this massive has absolutely nothing backing it up outside of animation shortcuts the show slowly phased out, i would say that absence of evidence does count as evidence of absence, and i consider a 1:1 ratio to be canon, not headcanon, just canon. the evidence for it is overwhelming. including, notably, that ponies are monogamous, which would almost certainly not be the case if the sex ratio were imbalanced.consequently, i consider an imbalanced sex ratio to be not a headcanon, but an au that somehow became common fanon. it contradicts every single relevent part of the show, and only complies with its budgetary limitations.and even if you do take copy/pasted mares as canon, why stop at just taking the idea that these background ponies are mares as important? why not be even more direct and take them being obvious clones as important? that arguably makes more sense. of course there being 20 amethysts is canon! that's what we see on screen, isn't it? nevermind that that's completely retarded snd contradicted by the show. it's what we see, so that means it's canon.it requires less mental gymnastics to believe that on that fateful summer sun celebration when filly twilight saw celestia raise the sun, there really were a bunch of daisy clones hogging all the rides, than it does to believe that there are significantly more mares than stallions in equestria.
>>43570783>what we saw on screen totally didn't happen guys, this is hard canon, you're not allowed to believe what is literally in the showYou know that multiple mares with the same background in the same place could look similar, right? How many fucking semi-rural earth ponies do you think have flower cutie marks?
>>43570801like i said, mental gymnastics. your headcanon requires equestria to be inhabited primarily by doppelgangers without anypony ever bringing this up, and somehow this is easier to believe than a 1:1 ratio of mares to stallions.you might as well treat animation errors as canon. those are "literally in the show" too.
>>43570825>my headcanonI haven't said anything at all about my headcanon.You're the one pushing your headcanon as hard confirmed canon and explicitly contrasting it with what you see in the showStop projecting retard.
>>43570783>what the show displays on screen for nine whole ass seasons doesn't countdoesn't matter what you consider to be canon, there is a gender imbalancethe show would never touch on herds, that shit is purely fanon however
>>43569853I will kill you to prevent this
>>43570875>nine whole ass seasons doesn't countnot even true. the background pony gender ratio slowly approaches 1:1 over the course of the show.>doesn't matter what you consider to be canon, there is a gender imbalanceas previously stated, believing that this visual imbalance is literally canon requires absurd levels of mental gymnastics. it simply makes more sense to brush off background pony recycling as a budgetary limitation than it does to try and force it into canon even when that doesn't make amy sense on any level.
>>43570783>I can arbitrarily claim [a thing that I don't like] as not canon and elevate my own, invented headcanon into canon statusCool. However that's not how this shit works.
>>43570935it's not arbitrary. one of the ideas makes sense and the other doesn't.
>>43570758A baby pony has to be fucked into existence somehow
>>43570061Gay>>43570151Indeed>>43570885Not going to happen
>>43570945>one of the ideas makes sense and the other doesn't.Things we see in the show having canonically occurred in the show makes sense, glad you agreeDon't claim that your headcanon/AU (since you do seem to be suggesting that we should be actively revisionist about the literal contents of episodes in disputing what ponies are present in which shots) is hard canon and everypony else is wrong for actually watch the show. The fact that you project a headcanon/AU onto other is just a tacit admission that you yourself know that what you're pushing is complete bullshit.
>>43569717>ask some humans for help with a jar>they immediately get into an argument about gender balance and relationship politics
>>43573483"everything we see in the show is literally canon as depicted" is simply an indefensibly stupid idea. if you aren't prepared to explain how rarity briefly turning into an alicorn in pinkie pride actually is completely canon, you cannot tell me that>we saw it in the showis enough to consider truly nonsensical things canon.>but that's an animation error, it doesn't count!and the copy/pasted background ponies are an animation shortcut. while one is a mistake and the other isn't, neither is deliberate in a way that would make considering them a literal depiction of canon a reasonable thing to do.there's a reason that nobody actually seriously believes that equestria is infested with doppelgangers despite the fact that that's clearly what we see in the show. background details you're literally meant to ignore should not be taken as evidence for massive, setting upending worldbuilding revelations.
>>43570935First time back on this godforsaken board in years, as I fell off the ride around season 4/5.After filtering all the fucking generals that made me leave, this is one of a handful threads I was left with, and this chain convinced me the old ways are still going strong.Beautiful reactional, excellent greentext, it completely invalidates the raging autist I'd normally agree with. Copy+Pasting is the one and only reason there's a perceived imbalance (which iirc wasn't even that extreme, like 70/30 for Grand Galloping Gala? Well within normal statistical distribution when we're dealing with so few unique ponies.)
>>43569749She breeds herself with her own cock.
>>43574009Sure is a lot of strawmen right here lol>if you aren't prepared to explain how rarity briefly turning into an alicorn in pinkie prideThere are a lot of options for that. None of this has to do with the fact that you are arbitrarily asserting something which has no basis in the show as incontestable hard canon and then from that position trying to claim that we must discount the actual content of the episodes.Nowhere in the script does it say that there is a 1:1 gender ratio, so the claim that there is a 1:1 gender ratio is pure headcanon. The claim there there is a 1:2 gender ratio etc. would be as well, btw, since they don't talk about it, but we can talk about the actual ratio that appears in crowds and in key roles in the show. You are asserting a positive with no evidence and then using that assertion to attack actual factual information (what we see).It's especially funny because you're trying to deflect by talking about something which has fucking nothing to do with the core concept anyway. If there was a 1:1 gender ratio then trying to apply this same sort of retarded troll logic would land in mega extreme RGRE because >80% of relevant ponies and every pony in the highest positions is a mare. Forget random background pony crowds that we don't even know the gender of, just their appearances. Pretty much every pony in a position of power or a high-importance job is a mare, including and infact especially in unisex roles.
>>43569717Depends. What's in the jar?
>>43569725Hownu.ru?
>>43570783>this shit that is totally evident in most the show totally isn't canonLol. Cope and seethe.
>>43574009>this animation error disproves what we saw for 9 seasons.
>>43575122>There are a lot of options for that.well, i'm all ears. what is your perfectly reasonable explanation for rarity becoming an alicorn for all of five seconds.>None of this has to do with the fact that you are arbitrarily asserting something which has no basis in the show as incontestable hard canon and then from that position trying to claim that we must discount the actual content of the episodes.there is no basis in the show for an imbalanced gender ratio outside of copypasted background ponies. that's literally all you have. the only defense for an imbalanced ratio is taking everything you see on screen as 100% literal truth, no matter what, which is retarded because you'd have to take animation errors as canon too.>Nowhere in the script does it say that there is a 1:1 gender ratio, so the claim that there is a 1:1 gender ratio is pure headcanon.true, but from a worldbuilding standpoint, having significantly more females than mares would be a very significant deviation from our world. with a deviation like that, you should really explain it to the audience so they understand that it exists. when there is no deviation, suck as if the ratio of males to females were 1:1, you obviously don't need to explain it. the show's silence on the subject is itself evidence that i'm right.furthermore, the very fact that ponies are monogamous with nulear families strongly implies a balanced ratio. a culture would not develop monogamy if there were significantly more of one sex than the other.and from a biological standpoint, an imbalanced ratio also doesn't make sense for any creature that uses>normal mammalian reproductionhence why all mammals (and the vast majority of creatures that use sexual reproduction) have equal sex ratios.>It's especially funny because you're trying to deflect by talking about something which has fucking nothing to do with the core concept anyway.it has everything to do with the core concept. the only reason one could come to the conclusion that equestria has more mares than stallions is by taking every single thing we see in the show, no matter how absurd, as gospel truth. i'm simply pointing out the many flaws with that approach.>>43575357if it's so evident, where's your evidence?>>43575374absolute utter brainlet. i know trying new things can be hard, but please, think. the literal only piece of evidence for an imbalanced sex ratio in ponies is that most background ponies are mares. but the primaey reason that most background ponies are mares is that the same few background ponies get copy/pasted constantly. so if you want to believe that equestria has so many more mares than stallions, you have to believe that most ponies in equestria are doppelgangers. and even if you're okay with that, at that point you're just taking every single thing depicted in the show as canon, no matter how ridiculous, so by the literal exact same logic as saying that an imbalanced sex ratio is canon, so is every animation error.
>>43575374oh yeah, forgot to mention>for 9 seasons.literally false. the show slowly started using male background ponies more over its run, until it was pretty much 1:1. so even if you want to pretend that an imbalanced ratio ever was canon, it got retconned.
