That's a cheap cop out. In my opinion obviously, while it makes sense in a simple and effective way, JBern (iirc it was the first time someone wrote that?) Failed to see the implications, basically that almost all full Veelas were certainly born of rape.

Because thats the effect a Veela would have on a muggle, take his ability to choose. Its also a farce since the muggle also almost certainly doesn't know her true form and her purpose, ie impregnation. I also find hard to believe that a magical race would be able to keep going around raping muggles and the Ministries would simply allow it. It also brings a very dark view on Breaks and their personality.

People forget that just because they are hot consent is less of an issue...

So yeah, I'm tending towards either Asari Veela or Assexual reproduction, but the former is more interesting to me, specially if they keep that type of relationship as their norm, our het. Imagine that, the blond sex kitten fantasy race is mainly lesbian and specisist.

 

Just because you find an explanation morally repugnant does not mean it is a cheap cop out. I'd argue that such solutions are the opposite of a cheap cop out because they add a wealth of conflict to a story.

 

"They're just muggles."

Also, vampires exist in the Harry Potter universe.

I doubt vampires grow on trees, you know. And their existence is tolerated.

 

I would say that it's most logical that there are male veela's probably far less than there female counter parts living away from wizards and muggles.

 

Don't quote me when you didn't even bother to read what I wrote. I didn't equate 'morally bad=cop out', I equated 'simplistic explanation that refuses to acknowledge the sinister stuff = cop ou'l.

It's a cheap cop out because it doesn't really know what its defending. That's the whole point. This theory was first put by people who really didn't know what they were implying and people kept taking it without actually going deeper, thus making it very superficial. Nowhere I've seen people actually discuss the rape part. That's why its a coup.

 

Where are you pulling the rape from? The aura of theirs or from actual mythology?

 

I'm guessing he assumes muggles would be completely vulnerable to and unable to resist/defend themselves from the veela aura, and therefore would constantly be under its influence while in the presence of a veela.

If one is under an outside influence, then presumably they cannot consent, because any consent given under said influence is- I hate the way SJWs have ruined very nearly all forms of civil discourse*, because normally this paragraph wouldn't be giving me hives as I write it azkfhwf9fg.

However, that assumes that the veela aura is active all the time and that veela cannot choose to dampen it or 'turn it off,' which I am sure some would say is (for more than one reason) not necessarily supported by canon.

 

I think you are confused. The theory doesn't need to defend anything other than its legitimacy as an explanation because this is a discussion on biology. Your argument that it is a cheap cop out because the posters failed to talk about how it is rape has even less validity than the idea that it is too immoral. Since you have added the idea that it is rape can we call it something other than a cheap cop out now? Or do we eternally shit on it because the OP didn't include an extra paragraph about the morality of Veela biology.

 

It also assumes muggles will be more susceptible to the aura. Why is that a given? The only thing we know from Canon is that strong willed men can keep themselves sane around (quarter) Veela. Perhaps that's the exact same thing for muggle men.

More interestingly, perhaps the reason their auras are effective is because they tune into the magic of a wizard, enhancing lust by turning a man's magic against him. In this case, muggles would actually be safer.