"That's an interesting excuse - I mean, process."
- Humbert Humbert on Imprinting
Imprinting (totally ripped off from the House of Night series) is defined as the process by which a sexually mature Meyerwolf becomes unhealthily obsessed with the
child woman most fit to carry his werewolf babies with whom his genes are most compatible.
This allows the werewolves to get away with "falling in love" with prepubescent children without counting as a pedophile. It also frees Meyer from annoying things like relationship development, character development and plot, because heaven forbid the relationships featured in Meyer's
pile of trash books are anything but lust-fueled powerplays.
Jacob also states that the imprinter will become whatever the imprinted wants him to be, whether that is a brother, a romantic interest, or a father figure. This is supposedly to take away the creep factor, but it totally fails, as the purpose of imprinting is reproduction, which implies that the relationship between the imprinter and the imprinted will become sexual at one point.
Also, for a book series that's supposedly about choice, how can a process that by definition takes away choice logically fit in? Answer: it doesn't.
Pedophilia, Sexual Abuse, and SexismEdit
Added by FormerlyNib
Many of the claims for pedophilia in this series is not so much in regard to the Edward/Bella romance (although there is a case to be made there), but to Jacob /Nessie and Quil/Claire romances. Both boys are sexually mature adolescents, while the girls are still toddlers. The relationships between them may, for now, be that of an older brother figure and a girl he thinks of as his little sister, but this relationship is expected to become sexual in the future.
Our friends over at Wikipedia define child grooming as "the deliberate actions taken by an adult to form a trusting relationship with a child, with the intent of later having sexual contact". According to them, "the act of grooming a child sexually may include activities that are legal in and of themselves, but later lead to sexual contact. Typically, this is done to gain the child's trust as well as the trust of those responsible for the child's well-being. Furthermore, research has shown children are less likely to report a crime if it involves someone that he or she knows, trusts, and/or cares about. Additionally, a trusting relationship with the family means that the child's parents will be less likely to believe any potential accusations."
A major example of abuse in terms of imprinting is the relationship between Sam and Emily. When Emily refused to be with Sam after he broke her cousin's heart by leaving her to be with his One Twu Wuv™, Sam fursploded in anger and nearly tore off Emily's face. The resultant injuries were so bad that Emily was forced to tell the rest of the world that she had been mauled viciously by a bear. According to Meyer, Emily was so "flattered" by such devotion ("devotion" here meaning "I love you so much that if you don't get together with me I'm gonna claw your face off") that she decided to be with Sam anyway, despite her misgivings about Leah earlier on.
Most people would say Emily was literally beaten into submission, but Meyer says "ROMANCE!"
Among the biggest examples of how imprinting completely screws things up is none other than Leah Clearwater, whose newly-made-werewolf boyfriend ditched her for her cousin Emily, and rather than be shown any sympathy by anyone for her understandable heartbreak, she was proceeded to be considered a bitch by all for not accepting this form of
pedophilic sexual abuse Twu Wuv™. Never mind that this form of love falls more along the lines of lust and had no prior foundation before being considered set in stone.
Imprinting is also inherently sexist, as the woman has no choice in the relationship. The woman may not even like or know the imprinter, or may already be in a relationship, yet it is assumed if the imprintee rejects her imprinter, she will have the same fate as Emily. It's also sexist against men due to the clear indication that they can't even attempt to resist the imprint and essentially lose everything they were before.
While the male werewolves can imprint on anyone (Jacob "sensed" Renesmee's egg inside Bella, and that's why he was attracted to her-- no, really, that's SMeyer's own words), the female werewolves (Leah) are infertile and cannot imprint. (see below)
Imprinting: Utterly IllogicalEdit
The idea of imprinting has been widely discussed and condemned due to the contradictions that S. Meyer
's crap writing skills have has presented. She put forward the idea of imprinting as a need to skip any real plot development pass on the werewolf genes. This fails for several reasons, primarily because animal behaviour is dictated by sexual response, in this case the need to pass on genes would only be activated when the male is put into contact with a sexually mature female. The whole concept is sexual. When this is applied to toddlers and newborn babies it take a particularly sinister turn. After all, if the idea is to pass on the genes then the entire implication is sexual. No matter how Smeyer might try to defend it, the entire act of imprinting is geared for sex. Claims that the wolves will be whatever the imprintee needs them to be until such a time as they are ready for sex does not help the imprinting image in any way. In the real world we call this child grooming. Or pedophilia. It also makes zero biological sense for female werewolves to be infertile and unable to imprint. Women are just as good at passing on genes as men.
Renesmee and Jacob would not make good babies. The purpose of imprinting is to find a/the person with whom werewolf genes can be passed on to offspring. BUT, if Renesmee is part-vampire, how would it be possible to foster successful werewolf children? Either it would not happen, or the children would fursplode the minute they were concived/left the womb/sometimes inbetween that. It would be two warring species being in the same body for nine months. Do you think it would even live? As you can see, Jacob imprinting on Renesmee was obviously no more than a reason for the pack not to fursplode on her ass.
Imprinting in the Real World or Why Smeyer Fails-EpicallyEdit
If Meyer had gotten up off her lazy, fat ass and did A Strange Custom Good Writers do called "research", she would have learned all about imprinting. Oh wait! She did research! She watched one nature show about ducks! YAY DUCKYS!
"Imprinting was inspired by two different sources: ducklings and dragons. Imprinting actually exists in nature, but usually between parents and their offspring. I saw a nature documentary about ducklings imprinting on their moms and it always stuck with me. The other inspiration is Anne McCaffrey's dragon books (which, if you haven't read them, do so now! Start with Dragonflight). In her mythology, humans and dragons bond so tightly that if one of them dies, the other either suicides or goes mad. They love each other with an absolute and unreasoning love that never falters or changes. I was always captivated by this concept, and I wanted to explore that kind of life-changing and compulsory relationship."
But Imprinting in the real world is more than that. It is NOT a process where imaginary creatures find their Soul Mate Forever Love, but a learning behavior that actually helps a young animal (Non-Human or Human) and ADVANCES a species. There are 3 forms of Imprinting: Filial Imprinting, the Westermarck Effect & Sexual Imprinting.
This is what Wikipedia. com says on all Forms of Imprinting:
The best known form of imprinting is filial imprinting, in which a young animal learns the characteristics of its parent. It is most obvious in nidifugous birds, which imprint on their parents and then follow them around. It was first reported in domestic chickens, by the 19th century amateur biologist Douglas Spalding. It was rediscovered by the early ethologist Oskar Heinroth, and studied extensively and popularised by his disciple Konrad Lorenz working with greylag geese. Lorenz demonstrated how incubator-hatched geese would imprint on the first suitable moving stimulus they saw within what he called a "critical period" between 13–16 hours shortly after hatching. Most famously, the goslings would imprint on Lorenz himself (more specifically, on his wading boots), and he is often depicted being followed by a gaggle of geese who had imprinted on him. Filial imprinting is not restricted to animals that are able to follow their parents, however; in child development the term is used to refer to the process by which a baby learns who its mother and father are. The process is recognised as beginning in the womb, when the unborn baby starts to recognise its parents' voices
Reverse sexual imprinting is also seen: when two people live in close domestic proximity during the first few years in the life of either one, both are desensitized to later close sexual attraction. This phenomenon, known as the Westermarck effect, was first formally described by Finnish anthropologist Edvard Westermarck. The Westermarck effect has since been observed in many places and cultures, including in the Israeli kibbutz system, and the Chinese Shim-pua marriage customs, as well as in biological-related families. '
In the case of the Israeli kibbutzim (collective farms), children were reared somewhat communally in peer groups—groups based on age, not biological relation. A study of the marriage patterns of these children later in life revealed that out of the nearly 3,000 marriages that occurred across the kibbutz system, only fourteen were between children from the same peer group. Of those fourteen, none had been reared together during the first six years of life. This result provides evidence not only that the Westermarck effect is demonstrable, but that it operates during the critical period from birth to the age of six (Shepher, 1983). When close proximity during this critical period does not occur—for example, where a brother and sister are brought up separately, never meeting one another—they may find one another highly sexually attractive when they meet as adults. This phenomenon is known as genetic sexual attraction. This observation is consistent with the hypothesis that the Westermarck effect evolved because it suppressed inbreeding. This attraction may also be seen with cousin couples.
Sexual imprinting is the process by which a young animal learns the characteristics of a desirable mate. For example, male zebra finches appear to prefer mates with the appearance of the female bird that rears them, rather than mates of their own type (Immelmann, 1972). The famous psychologist John Money called it the lovemap.
- ↑