Interested in advertising on Derpibooru? Click here for information!
Help fund the $15 daily operational cost of Derpibooru - support us financially!
Description
No description provided.
Help fund the $15 daily operational cost of Derpibooru - support us financially!
No description provided.
I think I remember that, too. But that one got called out as well, so if it’s the same one it would be kind of sad. (Well even more).
You know, this kind of reminds me of another background pony who acted like they had dissociative identity disorder to try to fake having support when whining about Flutterdash (assuming this isn’t the same one). The depths some haters sink to are just hilarious.
Firtst, true you are not worth it (these Background Pony ID’s are constant per commenter per picture, so we can tell you are the same one as @Background Pony #AD36 ).
Tell me wich inferior ship do you adhere to (you clrearly realize it’s worse, or you wouldn’t be so upset). Only Fluttershy and Rainbow Dash even know each other for a significant amount of time. They haven’t been fiendshiped by the elements of harmony neither are they faceless supernumeraries.
Can’t you see he’s crying, you dick?!
Dude, let the guy have his space. He’s not worth it.
And now you gona leave your shit on any flutterdash pic? FILTERS, (insert powerfull swearing word)!
“I don’t mind pairings unless I do”
not too fight against your reasoning or anything, but your reasoning for Twilestia is interesting. As the show clearly states, they are becoming more equal to each other now that they’re both princesses. Although I despise MMC, it helped give a shift in the reasoning for Twilestia. and they aren’t primarly just teacher and student. That’s why I enjoy Twilestia so much, their relationship is one of the most complex relationships in MLP. They can be teacher-student, friends, to some people, mother-daughter, and to others, lovers.
@Background Pony #68CF
Okay, then!
For Rarilight, Spike would probably object to Twilight, who knows about his crush, moving in on his girl. On that subject, Sparity has the problem where Rarity likes Spike for his cuteness, but doesn’t see it as romantic. Twispike, in addition to little chemistry, may be considered incest. Flarity would probably be based on looks more than feelings. In Appleshy, while the two are compatible, it pairs the two most likely to put friendship before romance. Applepie has a really awful pun for a name, and while Applejack is likely to accept Pinkie, she might not have feelings the same way. Twijack doesn’t have a lot of interest to it. Raripie is basically putting the two most likely to be over-dramatic together, which is a recipe for disaster, and its naming missed a perfectly good pun. Applespike is based off one episode that wasn’t even about romance. Twixie will run into issues with Trixie’s jealousy of Twilight even after redemption. Flashlight was basically a romance introduced to reduce how much Twilight looked like a lesbian. Twilestia is not what the word “apprenticeship” means. Trixieshy is based heavily on one not-very-good fanfic. Shining Armor/Cadance has no consistent name that I can find and basically pairs two characters who popped up out of absolutely nowhere. Diamondbloom puts together two characters who pretty much hate each other in canon. Spinona’s only basis is Spike becoming a dog in Equestria Girls. Macora’s name sounds like the now-sunk “Makorra” ship, and Big Macintosh and Zecora have interacted exactly zero times. Applemac is just plain wrong. Winonajack is even worse. Gummytiara… let’s not even go there.
To be serious, I don’t mind most pairings as long as they aren’t incestuous and don’t have other creepy elements. I just feel that all pairings should get their fair share of respect and disrespect. If you have ideas on how, say, Twinkie could actually work, then that’s perfectly fine and I might actually be interested in exploring those things.
no, go on, I was enjoying that :P
If I could throw in my two scents, I enjoy twinkie, I feel like twilight might not always enjoy the insanity, but I think she’s at least learn to accept it (and besides, I don’t think we’ve had an episode with pinkie actually doing something to break from her insanity for awhile.)
Hey, YOu were on a roll there.
In defence, I’d like to state that Fluttershy and Rainbow Dash have learned to work with their differences at this point and use their strengths to cover each others’ weaknesses. Rainbow’s fiery, reckless personality could help Fluttershy be courageous herself, whereas Fluttershy’s quiet, caring nature could help Rainbow keep a cool head. I don’t see as much of that with other pairings (Applejack pairings are close, but don’t have the support being two-way).
And to rectify the situation I mentioned earlier: Appledash could work, but the lack of contrast makes the relationship somewhat less interesting. For Pinkiedash, I don’t see Rainbow as being level-headed enough to handle Pinkie for long periods of time. Twinkie has the problem of Twilight not being willing to put up with Pinkie for long periods of time. A similar problem exists with Twidash, although to a lesser extent. Fluttermac and Soarindash are basically there for the sake of being straight pairings with no regard to the fact that the characters in question hardly know each other. Raridash has less of a problem, but they still rarely interact. Flutterpie is misnamed (I prefer “Pinkieshy”) and although Pinkie tries to control herself around Fluttershy, she’s still not the most steady. Twishy is basically putting the two most socially awkward of the Mane 6 together, which means lots of difficulty starting… Okay, most of you have probably stopped reading at this point, so I might as well stop.
When I read these studies it always comes down to the discrepancy between self perception and perception by the spouse or fulfillment of minima in fixed criteria. Similarities play a role in initial attraction not as predictors for success of the relationship.
The non availability of low similarity-couples can and is traced back to change over time in the study you mentioned.
Also if it comes to classification by “the big five” I didn’t find any glaring dissimilarities between the two. Of course there is a difference in extraversion, but Rarity scores significantly higher here than Dash. In the other categories there a slight differences to identical results. No mirrored graphs here at all. (I don’t know if these online self test compensate for wrong self perception, I chose to not simulate that.)
But in the end it’s all statistics with a lot of deviation, not some fundamental laws. I don’t think too much of the social sciences to be honest.
@Background Pony #3DDD
Seriously? In with Applejack neither would have to give up their desired lifestyle?
Also, Applejack can not really keep up, in stubbornness, yes (they each bring out the worst in each other), but all the physical competition comes down to “it only works without the wings”. Fluttershy is probably more able to keep up with Dash’s lifestyle, there’s a difference between that and being able to compete on each others field of expertise.
Soarin has no personality, therefore he is not a character of any interest to me.
It would be disingenuous of me to suggest that “The Big Five,” or any other specific personality trait “defines,” a relationship. That’s not the argument. Relationships are defined subjectively by the people experiencing them. But overall satisfaction and success can be measured, and similarity is a strong predictor, whether it is causal or not.
Even Shiota and Levenson’s (2007) groundbreaking long-term marriage study, which found that in cases of extreme similarity there was a slight negative satisfaction trajectory, wasn’t able to study couples with low similarity levels because there weren’t any available to study.
I read/scanned a few more.
Again that’s all referring to initial attraction, the first filter applied to select possible candidates out of strangers.
The study also found that the partner actually picked did not necessarily correspondent with these initial criteria, and that the resulting success was based on key attributes that had to fulfill a minimum (not match the other partner).
I wasn’t able to find a study covering this in same sex couples, but judging from the 3 that I know similarities (especially in Dominance Submission) is not what defines these relationships. (I know small samplesize, but it’s all I have for now)
You read one article, go ahead and keep reading, and don’t hesitate to check any of the other articles that are referenced too. There is an extensive body of work on this subject.
Also, I think you may have missed the part of the article at the bottom of page 17, titled “Do Individuals Prefer Partners Similar to Themselves?” Which shows that all shows “Across all four subsamples, individuals preferred partners who were similar to themselves on personality characteristics.”
(There really aren’t that many difference in same sex relationships when you control for things that the partners find important, which is the biggest difference. A larger percentage of same sex couples highly value equality, and so you will find that Dominance and Submission, which is one of the few complementary traits that gets traction amongst couples that don’t highly value it, is more likely to show similarity in same sex couples.)
I’m sorry, I have to correct myself here, I read through.
“Personality and mate preferences: five factors in mate selection and marital satisfaction,” Botwin MD, Buss DM, Shackelford TK, California State University, 1997.
I had the other one still saved to clipboard,
from reading the abstract. (Article seems not applicable).
I read one of the articles you provided
(“Attitudes and attraction: A new test of the attraction, repulsion and similarity-dissimilarity asymmetry hypothesis”)
I chose this one since it seemed most like actually covering the success of relationships, not the initial selection of partners and first glance attraction.
It did come to the conclusion that most generally desire a mate similar to them, but also embodiment of one’s ideals, which is not correlated with what one self embodies. The actual success of the relationship however is based on absolute criteria constant across sample group (agreebleness, emotional stability, intellect-openness).
Since the initial attraction angle does not apply here (childhood friends, know each other well) (this is what makes this ship my favorite), this does not invalidate the success of Flutterdash the slightest, it makes it a little less likely to begin at worst.
(Also I suspect there might be more differences in same sex relationships. The study found trends specific to men and women. A lot of the superficial impression “they are exact opposites” would be a lot less glaring, if Rainbow’s gender was reversed. )
I’m not taking the shipping seriously, they sure do look cute together, but when people say things like: “the yin and yang balance” I feel obliged to say something about it, as there are some rather important real life applications.