Why do you think Leela did 'it' with Zapp?

[Reply #40 on:]

Buzz off cupcake, I was just about to offer her a cigarette.   

[Reply #41 on:]

**Warning: excessively long rehash of my own arguments here**

Perhaps I’m being oversensitive here, but I see no reason for you to accuse me of unfair tactics or deliberately trying to confuse. My aim is not to "baffle you with bullschtick," and it never was.  I'm trying to make my points clearer; if I was unsuccessful, well then, I just have to try again now, don't I? I shall therefore go into TRUE long-windedness, to make sure my motives for each of the things you mistakenly characterize as unfair tactics are made abundantly, painfully, exhaustively clear, in the hopes that I may be cleared of the heinous charge of obfuscation.  (I've provided a link to the definition of that, because I'm sorry, but I don't know HOW to argue without using $20 words, most of them are a lot more precise than the inexpensive everyday ones, and precision is usually what I'm after when I discuss things seriously.  You can leave the window open (it's bartleby.com) and look up anything else you need to, okay? )

 

Originally posted by futz:
Or maybe someone who parses words

It is common practice in a debate to define one's terms, to make sure that we aren't using the same words to mean different things.  I've always found that, in most cases, tracking down a word's origin reveals its core meaning most clearly and makes it less likely that I'm misusing it.

In the case of pity, empathy, and sympathy, the Latin and Greek roots do indeed influence the way they are used in casual conversation, and do accurately imply the emotional states they are used to represent.  It was not to display my education that I wrote all that (I am, like Fry, a registered drop-out), and I don't actually know Latin or Greek*; but I keep my online dictionary links handy and use them as often as I need to to understand what I'm reading or writing.  And also because I just enjoy knowing where words come from and how they’ve evolved.

 

makes up things people didn't say

Such as Leela's mental monologue?  Well, heck, just *describing* what I thought her mental process was hadn't worked; so I illustrated it instead, purely as an example of what I meant.

If you meant that I made up things YOU never said, I don't know what you mean.  I know of course you never actually said "Nyaah!", but I wasn't saying you had; I never intended that as a literal quote, and did not (and still do not) expect anyone to take it as such.  What I meant was that by pointing out that the word "disfigured" can have unpleasant connotations, you were nit-picking the form of Venus' argument rather than responding to the gist of it (that Leela's violence in all three cases was heartily provoked by the recipients).  It's the equivalent of pointing out a misspelled word, since I believe it is Waterford-crystal-clear that Venus did NOT use "disfigured" in anything but a purely descriptive way, in other words, to indicate that Sally has a cosmetic birth defect.

 

buries it in a long-winded rationlization

Long winded, okay, I accept the accusation.  (Just remember what thread Xanfor so kindly mentioned me as an inspiration for. )  But rationalization?  How was I being insincere, or making excuses for my behavior, considering that my behavior (arguing my point in a forum) was, as far as I know, perfectly acceptable, and that I obviously think that my opinion (that Leela acted out of kindness, not out of a desire to be superior) is a perfectly acceptable interpretation of the episode?  What was I doing that I had to rationalize?

 

and thinks winning a discusion is merely getting the last and most words in

Nonsense - I don't use great numbers of words to "win" any competition, but because I'm anal-retentive and can't resist explaining every last detail of WHY I think WHAT I think.  On an emotional level I feel that, if I explain my point well enough, anyone else will be able to understand it, even if they still largely disagree with it.

I could accuse YOU, with equal reason, of thinking that winning means getting the last and RUDEST words in - but I do NOT make any such accusation.  I DO think a lot of the things you have said in this thread are unnecessarily rude, but I'm not going to speculate about why you do - you may not think they’re rude at all. 

I do wonder, however, why you also keep posting if you truly think, in fact, that:

 

there really isn't anything to win

Obviously, you and I BOTH think there is something to accomplish (I don't really think of it as "winning" ) by continuing to post.  But I can only speak to my own motives, and they have changed as the discussion has continued.  So here, in aforementioned painful detail, is the list of my motives for each of my posts in this thread:   

My overriding motive in arguing Leela’s defense has long been to protect a character I feel is much maligned, for little reason, by a sizeable portion of the fandom.

At first my motive in this thread (before you posted here) was explain why I don’t think Leela was at all impressed with Zapp after he jailed her and her friends.

In my next post (the first one where I responded to you) my motive was explain why I think being “superior” to Zapp played no part in her decision to sleep with him; I ended by saying that I thought you were attributing too much logic to Leela’s choice to “do it”.

In my next post, I wanted to elaborate on that, and also to try to get to the source of our differing interpretations.  Now, I did theorize that possibly the reason behind your opinion was an assumption that Leela had to be attracted to Zapp to sleep with him; I also unwisely used the word “is” rather than saying “may be,” and for that I apologize...I did not intend to say that you DID assume that, only that I thought PERHAPS you were assuming that, and that it might be the reason why you and I saw her actions in different lights, and I pointed out that attraction isn’t necessarily required for women to have sex.

In my next post, I wanted to AGREE with you about pity and superiority being connected and accept your clarification of what you had early said (while still maintaining that it didn’t apply to Leela).  I pointed out the difference between pity, sympathy, and empathy NOT to impress or obfuscate, but to clarify what I meant when I used the words.  I also mentioned that Venus had you cold on the issue of Leela’s violence toward boyfriends, because, well, she DID.

In my next post (the last before this one) my motive was twofold: to express amazement that you could think I was giving Leela’s decision credit for too MUCH logic, when I thought I had said the opposite.  To illustrate this, I wrote a bit of fiction, SHOWING what I meant (since telling hadn’t worked).  The second part of my motive was to point out that you were unfairly accusing Venus of insensitivity by nit-picking her word choice while ignoring the very accurate substance of her argument, and to point out that your own word choice had so far been insensitive enough that I didn’t think you ought to cast the first politically correct stone.  And I was snarky about it because I don’t approve of such diversionary tactics, especially when they’re aimed at Venus who is a gem and deserves only the best treatment from everyone, and who had done nothing to deserve the dismissal you gave her.

And lastly my motive for THIS post is because it *does* bother me to be accused of unfairness in argument or trying to generate confusion.  I take that sort of accusation seriously on a forum, because a forum is “A public meeting place for open discussion,” and I value discussion *very highly,* and don’t want anyone to think I approach it disrepectfully or nothing but self-aggrandizement in mind.

Anyway....that’s where I’m coming from.

~~~

* P.S. to Xanfor: but thanks for the compliments.  I laughed a great deal at your post, and should have said so in my next one, but I got distracted by all the argumentation I was doin'.  Anyway, a belated  for that whole post. 

[Reply #42 on:]

holy shit. How do you right such detailed stuff? AND you made sense-you were'nt just bullcrapping around the bushes. Still a bit of confusingly big words for me, but i got it this time, so i aint complaining. 

[Reply #43 on:]

Damn Shiny, you prove that it's possible to always win.

 

Originally posted by Shiny:My overriding motive in arguing Leela’s defense has long been to protect a character I feel is much maligned, for little reason, by a sizeable portion of the fandom.

A truly unfortunate occurrence in the fandom. Far too many people write off many of her actions as "shallow" or "self centered." Both of these and their related opinions are almost totally unfounded.

 

Originally posted by KitKatBar-Fry:
How do you right such detailed stuff? AND you made sense-you were'nt just bullcrapping around the bushes. Still a bit of confusingly big words for me, but i got it this time, so i aint complaining.

If your gonna hang out around here than you should get used to Shiny kicking ass and not giving a damn about who's name it was.

After all...

[Reply #44 on:]

go shiny, go! yaaa..?
*stops and realizes she could never write anything like that if her life depended on it*
awww...keep it up, Shiny! confuse yet amaze me with your smart-ingness. 

And hopeless shipper, thanks for the warning. i now know that posts like that are normal, and not a by-product of brain-engineering.

[Reply #45 on:]

Not a warning, just saying that people who disagree with Shiny better have solid evidence, because you can't beat her on character analysis.

[Reply #46 on:]

Meh, sounds more like Cathy than Leela.

[Reply #47 on:]

@Hopeless shipper: oh, don't take it as if I thought of it only as a warning. I didn't-I thought of it as a statement that WARNED me not to call the FBI because someone with a genetically enhanced brain is running around, posting stuff on PEEL. 

Who is Cathy?

@shiny: You'd better be listening to this, shiny. compliments don't just grow on trees, you know. At least not in my town, anyways. 

[Reply #48 on:]

Eh-hem.

Dear Shiny,

It has come to my attention that your last post was of quite a remarkable nature. Naturally, I proceeded to read the entire thing, as I do all your posts. Indeed, this post was, much as all of your previous posts, quite worthy of acknowledgment. However, I have found this particular post such a complimentary and precisely rigorous analysis of rationalization that I have deemed it worthy of it's own file on my hard drive. The fact that it was written by someone au fait in both female cogitation and unisexual emotionalisms only aggrandizes both mine and all other members of the PSC's (PEEL Shipper Community) and POTC's (PEEL's On-Topic Community) profoundly ardent admiration of you. This devotion we have for you can not be transposed to any other individual, and many of us will grieve the day of your deification and departure from this board. Perhaps you will move on to greater things, as opposed to your current obliged comeback to futz's comparing Leela to a comic strip character who just got married last year. But nevertheless, you are here, and whilst thou are here, we will continue our adorations expectantly. The fact that you know neither Latin nor Greek is of no concern, and those to whom it is a concern should not be posting in a SEAE message site. (Exceptions, of course, to our British and Australian posters.) Now, the post in question that I have been praising is, granted, quite a wholly remarkable post. However, I seem to recall that you address your diffusely long-windedness and sesquipedalianism as a 'nuisance' to the average poster. Allow me to elaborate while paraphrasing the fourth simple rule: When is comes to posting, you are the indefectible standard, and they are the nuisance. Also, allow us to assure you that should someday you be defeated in an argument of rationale, your honor and our obeisances to you will not surcease. You are PEEL's Official Declared Apprehender of 'Futurama's' Characters and Prime Apprehender of All Those Who Falsely Define Anyone's Cerebrations. You are as nonpareil as a nonpareil, and you always will be. Venus, the Queen of the 'Ship, and I, the... Intendant Commander of the 'Ship, now present you with the Purple Hair Award for Astounding Intellectual Endurance.

(And of course, a Purple Heart to everyone who listened to you)

(  )

[Reply #49 on:]

yaaaaay! I get a purple heart.  listen to what Xanfor says. I dont think ive ever seen such a sweet post. that is such a compliment.
Xanfor, that last post showed a lot of love. 

But more on-topicness and less compliments- Why did leela do the wild thing with Zapp?

[Reply #50 on:]

 

Originally posted by futz:

Note to self: If Leela plants boot in Venus's teeth because Venus called a perfectly beautiful child with 3 ears "disfigured", cheer for Leela.

I meant that in the sense that she's seen as disfigured in the eyes of the general public. It probably has a lot to do with why she was abandoned in the first place and why she has yet to be adopted. Just as how Leela is seen to be disfigured by general society.

[Reply #51 on:]

Sounds like an Amyism.

[Reply #52 on:]

Amyism or not it's not an inaccurate accessment. As Leela said in Cyberhouse Rules people stare at her, try to avoid staring at her, or try to burn her. The general public look at her and consider her to be a freak. that's why she was tormented in the orphanarium and ignored by prospective parents. She herself seemed to consider herself as being disfigured which is why she had the surgery in the first place. And everyone encouraged her to do it. Only Fry sees her as being beautiful.

[Reply #53 on:]

good old fry

[Reply #54 on:]

It's called unconditional love

[Reply #55 on:]

Sorry, it was ment as a joke. You remember those don't you? Futurama you know, fantasy, cartoon - ha, ha? I seem to remember something about excessive use of emoticons or I would have used one.

So after all this chapter and verse and legal fine print - why'd Leela boink Zapp?

Inquiring minds want to know, storyboards are due Friday, no overtime for the art department, and the network called to say they're Comedy Central not Lifetime and want a total re-write in dialog.

[Reply #56 on:]

haha. 'boink'. lol.

[Reply #57 on:]

What, you think there's a definitive answer to the question in the thread title?       

Okay, futzman, here you go:

     

"For a split second my common sense was overwhelmed by pity." ~Leela

End of story.

Everything else we yammer about here is speculation - you know that, right?  But some of us enjoy it.

Oh, and if my own speculation seemed too, er, feminine in tone for you, it just might be because Leela is... (brace yourself) ...female.

(If you're confused about THAT, no wonder you find it difficult to fathom her motives.      )

Shiny


P.S. -    and thanks to KKBF & HS,      & thanks to Xanfor, and a hearty "you go girl!" to Venus (and don't worry, no one else was confused about your meaning.  Some folks are just a little slower at reading comprehension than others....    ).

[Reply #58 on:]

*gasps*
leela? femineme? Female?
but of course.  all of us girls are, at one point or another, filled with pity.
But just cuz i pitied my brother when he was crying cuz i took his gameboy doesn't mean i give it back.

[Reply #59 on:]

Yeah, one sentence! Booya!

??? Figuring out women would be a waste of a man's time, and kind of creepy, like wearing their underwear.

[Reply #60 on:]

   

Originally posted by futz:like wearing their underwear.

EDITED FOR CREEPINESS

(There is no shame in trying to figure out how to think like a woman. After all, most expect you to be a mind reader...)

[Reply #61 on:]

yah, futz. c'mon. interact with your femineme side. don't sue me if you go overboard and start getting stares from people, though. and our underwear is NOT meant to be worn by men, no. that is as wrong as letting Hitler be ressuected from the dead.

Back to Leela-what i was trying to say in my earlier post is that just because Leela was filled with pity does not mean she had to sleep with him. true, that may have been the reason, but let's stop hearing stuff from me, since i started this thread mainly so i can hear OTHER people's opinions, not mine.

[Reply #62 on:]

Sue? That reminds me, if it's not too off topic, Leela seems only slightly dismayed about being featured on Zapps's web site.
Yet she is highly dismayed about what got her there. But she never made him take it down. Is that because:

1. It's sad but true.
2. Any publicity is good publicity.
3. It's somewhat flattering, even from Zapp.
4. Something to do with giving into urges far more shocking.

[Reply #63 on:]

and the fact that if the looked hurt or upset by it, Zapp could have used it against her later on.

[Reply #64 on:]

I just thought of something (ow!). Some of the things Leela says in episode before this one sort of sound like it's when she's with Sean. So it might be a which happened first, couch fibers on his butt or the web site. It being totally mutual.

[Reply #65 on:]

Hurm....maybe leela just really had a desire to make love or something like that. zapp came along and well...

[Reply #66 on:]

yah, but still, she kept talking on and on about how she had standards, and then she all of a sudden wraps them up,drops them in a barrel, and kicks the barrel out to sea? not very Leela-like. maybe Fry-like, but she has a tendancy to stick to things.

BTW, llama, congrads on becoming a bending unit.

[Reply #67 on:]

Maybe she though her standards were getting her no where.

[Reply #68 on:]

yah, but she was pretty much right back to them afterwards. besides, if she was looking for sex, then why did she deny Zapp's attempts until he started crying? She even wasyed a glass of sham-pagin  *sniff* how could she...

[Reply #69 on:]

That poor glass of sham-pagin. Maybe sensible, resourceful, smart Leela died or something.

[Reply #70 on:]

It was probably DOOP standard issue champageny and not moderately priced, domestic, non-vinatage champagne. DOOP SIC is also an excellent varnish remover.

[Reply #71 on:]

eheheh. still, to waste any drink... i mourn for that drink. nothing will bring it back...
i dont think leela's smartness could just evaporate like that-she was very cautious till zapp started whining. then something happened. this thread is for finding that out. which many people have already given their opinion on.

[Reply #72 on:]

Yeah....i think that this thread had gone a wee bit off course. I mean, we are still talking about Leela and Zapp, but...not really...i dunno...i'm sleepy...

[Reply #73 on:]

you'r sleepy? musta been something in the shampa-
*falls over and snores*
where's shiny when you need her. she'd be good at explaning stuff.
as for me, i still think that once zapp started whining, leela relaxed a little. she accepted the champagne. she had a few, and before you know it, she's too innebiated to know what she's doing. that would explain why she screamed when she woke up-she remambered she got drunk, then woke up by his side, and put two and two together. 2 and 2 is 5.

[Reply #74 on:]

Wow! Nice deduction, KitKat. And, for your information, 2 + 2 = 696754438.   

[Reply #75 on:]

696754438? damn. musta forgotten to carry the one...
thanks for the compliment. i try to make it to-the-point but not complicated.

[Reply #76 on:]

Well Leela thinks she's pragmatic, stable, wise but everyone else sees the one-eyed woman who thinks she's an alien, deserted her job with a 1000+ year old guy after knowing for him less than an hour, drives a light-speed spaceship with no depth perception that hangs around with lobsters, robots, and Chinese girls from Mars, etc.

And it seems that most of Leela's relationships sends another mis-perception of herself down in flames. But she keeps on trying anyway because she's strong. I think she has a over riding need for adventure and exploring she isn't really aware of.

[Reply #77 on:]

All right, let's recap the episode, shall we?

Leela is a new captain.  (LLLiS is first season, episode 4.)  She's been a you-gotta-do what you-gotta-do cryogenicist since around her orphanarium days.

Leela has an assignment she really cares about -- saving the animals of Vergon 6.  (Classic quote by Farnsworth: "I didn't say anything about animals. Now it seems that the planet will collapse within three days. Incidentally, this will kill all the animals." )

Leela has her (first-season) standards:   "I don't care how many eyes a man has ... as long as it's less than five. All I'm looking for is a guy who's adventurous, self-confident...maybe a snappy dresser."

Then an immediate cut to Zapp: "These new uniforms are pretty snappy, eh, first officer?"

Using cartoon, sitcom, or any other sort of dramatic logic, whaddya think's gonna happen?

Further, Leela is pressured by her job, her obligations to the imprisoned Fry and Bender, the animals of Vergon 6, her loneliness mixed with the as-yet-legendary stature of Zapp, her lifelong training to follow the status quo, and her pity, to make one simple sacrifice.  One simple sacrifice that she wakes up screaming from the next morning.

C'mon.  I've slept with guys for far, far fewer reasons, most of them much less logical than Leela's motives.  (And I've woken up shuddering, too.)  Give her a friggin' break.

Zapp used his power and reputation to try to get Leela into bed.  When that didn't work so well, he tried sham-pag-en and pity.  All on a woman who thought herself an alien and an orphan with no romantic prospects and plenty of duties to others.   

Jeez.  You have to have sex-lexia not to understand why she made one night's huge, extremely regrettable, beginner's mistake.  Shiny has posted several excellent, inside-Leela's-mind-and-character explanations.  All I can add, being me, is some more storyline logic and some cynical explanations.

Face it.  Zapp used a vulnerable captain with little space or emotional experience.  Big surprise.  I'd say he's a d!ck, but I don't want to insult d!cks.  Unlike Zapp, they're actually useful.  And unlike Zapp's, they usually stay at attention much longer.

(And no, d!cks doesn't mean ducks.)

[Reply #78 on:]

 

Originally posted by TomAllen:

C'mon.  I've slept with guys for far, far fewer reasons, most of them much less logical than Leela's motives. 

um, tom? you wrote 'ive slept with guys.' your profile says you are male. was it a typo?

nice understanding of Leela's motives. i'd give it 3 thunbs up, but my other thumb is, unfortunately, in the shop today. i give you 2 hairy thumbs up.

[Reply #79 on:]

If only i had 2 more thumbs...then I'd give you 10 thumbs up. Nice, TomAllen.