FANDOM


  • I would like to say that the Relationship between Nick and Judy is canon. because I have seen artwork of them Getting Married and having a Family. and Rich Moore did say that the shipping name Wilde Hopps is canon. so then I do ship it. and Judy might have a Crush on Nick in my opinion. because Nick said: You know you love me. then Judy said: Do I know that? Yes! Yes I do. also I would like to state that there could be a possiblity where Nick and Judy end up getting Married in the Sequel. so Rich Moore should get an idea from the fans on how to make a Zootopia Sequel. well let me know what you think about this topic! be sure to post your comments down below! 

      Loading editor
    • I don't think it's a bad idea at all. I actually want this to happen in the sequel, and I honestly think that Disney might actually do it.

        Loading editor
    • Nick Piberius Wilde wrote:
      I don't think it's a bad idea at all. I actually want this to happen in the sequel, and I honestly think that Disney might actually do it.

      well my Idea for the sequel is for Nick and Judy to get Married and have a Family.

        Loading editor
    • Jonah.pietila when I said: "I don't think it's a bad idea at all. I actually want this to happen in the sequel, and I honestly think that Disney might actually do it." I was referring to them getting married and having a family.

        Loading editor
    • I have seen that before

        Loading editor
    • That is so LEGIT!

        Loading editor
    • Nick Piberius Wilde wrote:
      That is so LEGIT!

      I know right?

        Loading editor
    • Rich appears to shipp them himself, but that still doesn't mean it's cannon, in fact I think he might have even confirmed that it's not cannon at this point(don't quote me on that though). Judy did say that she loved Nick, but she appeared to do so very casually, so it's fully possible that she meant it platonically.

      They may very well turn out to be a couple, but it's not made clear by the movie. I suspect that the directos wanted to make their relationship somewhat ambigious so that they could chose which way they want it go if they make a sequel.

      My own thoughts on the shipping is that they're cute, they could make a pretty adorable couple, I don't dislike that idea in of itself, but still kinda feel that it'd be for the best if they stayed just friends.

      For one, they're colleagues, and you're not really supposed to fall in love with your colleagues, especailly not if you have an important job that requires dicipline and focus, like being a police officer.

      The there's the point that romance is so cliche, it's done SO OFTEN, it's insane. Most movies have elements of romance in them and allmost every movie where there are two opposite-sex protagonists (at least when they are the only protagonists) have them hooking up. It'd be refreshing if for once we could have the protagonists just be firends. Do we need to constantly send kids the message that two people can't just be friends? It seems like they'd be just fine that way.

      Then there's the fact that I suspect that a romance could stifle the dynamic that Nick and Judy have. They're both pretty different and they have fun interactions with each other. I feel that if they were a couple, their ability to tease and play off each other would be stifled and softened to be replaced by the same usual romance cliches, shifting the focus from them and their interactions to their feelings. I feel that there needs to be some amount of space between the character for them to both be able to breath and interact refreshingly.

      I would be lying if I said I wans't at least a bit torn on this. There is a shipper in me who thinks they could be cute together, but I generally suspect and reason that the wisest course would be to have them stay friends. I am open to be convinced otherwise, it seems concievable that the directors may find that Nick and Judy getting together could add something important to the sequel, or that they could find a way to portray their relationship that didn't distract or reduce their ability to interact well on screen, and I suspect they'll probably end up making the right choice on this matter, no matter what that choice is, assuming they don't just do it as an act of fan-service.

      However, while I am cautially open-minded on the idea of Nick and Judy being a couple, I feel fairly convinced that if they DO hook up, their relationship should almost certanly feel relatively friendly and laid-back. I don't think it'd work if they were head-over-heels madly in love with each other, it'd get way to bogged down in cliches and take away way too much of the relation they allready have. I can see how them occatioanlly holding paws, giving a few looks and having a few subtle romantic momments could work, but I don't think that them swooning over each other and being caught up in "true, magical fantastic love" would work, we've seen that stuff a million times and it just seems like almost everything likeable about Nick and Judy's dynamic would suffer because of it.

      So if they are a couple in the sequel I hope that they neither get married or have any children, I just think that those things are to tired and cliche and would probably just be distracting. And again, I don't want kids who see it to keep being fed the message that guys and girls must allways hook up and that if they do hook up they should allways get married and have kids, as if that was the ultimate accomplishment. They should be taught that there are plenty of other important things in life than starting a family and that there can be plenty of meaningful relations aside from romantic partnership.

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      Rich appears to shipp them himself, but that still doesn't mean it's cannon, in fact I think he might have even confirmed that it's not cannon at this point(don't quote me on that though). Judy did say that she loved Nick, but she appeared to do so very casually, so it's fully possible that she meant it platonically.

      They may very well turn out to be a couple, but it's not made clear by the movie. I suspect that the directos wanted to make their relationship somewhat ambigious so that they could chose which way they want it go if they make a sequel.

      My own thoughts on the shipping is that they're cute, they could make a pretty adorable couple, I don't dislike that idea in of itself, but still kinda feel that it'd be for the best if they stayed just friends.

      For one, they're colleagues, and you're not really supposed to fall in love with your colleagues, especailly not if you have an important job that requires dicipline and focus, like being a police officer.

      The there's the point that romance is so cliche, it's done SO OFTEN, it's insane. Most movies have elements of romance in them and allmost every movie where there are two opposite-sex protagonists (at least when they are the only protagonists) have them hooking up. It'd be refreshing if for once we could have the protagonists just be firends. Do we need to constantly send kids the message that two people can't just be friends? It seems like they'd be just fine that way.

      Then there's the fact that I suspect that a romance could stifle the dynamic that Nick and Judy have. They're both pretty different and they have fun interactions with each other. I feel that if they were a couple, their ability to tease and play off each other would be stifled and softened to be replaced by the same usual romance cliches, shifting the focus from them and their interactions to their feelings. I feel that there needs to be some amount of space between the character for them to both be able to breath and interact refreshingly.

      I would be lying if I said I wans't at least a bit torn on this. There is a shipper in me who thinks they could be cute together, but I generally suspect and reason that the wisest course would be to have them stay friends. I am open to be convinced otherwise, it seems concievable that the directors may find that Nick and Judy getting together could add something important to the sequel, or that they could find a way to portray their relationship that didn't distract or reduce their ability to interact well on screen, and I suspect they'll probably end up making the right choice on this matter, no matter what that choice is, assuming they don't just do it as an act of fan-service.

      However, while I am cautially open-minded on the idea of Nick and Judy being a couple, I feel fairly convinced that if they DO hook up, their relationship should almost certanly feel relatively friendly and laid-back. I don't think it'd work if they were head-over-heels madly in love with each other, it'd get way to bogged down in cliches and take away way too much of the relation they allready have. I can see how them occatioanlly holding paws, giving a few looks and having a few subtle romantic momments could work, but I don't think that them swooning over each other and being caught up in "true, magical fantastic love" would work, we've seen that stuff a million times and it just seems like almost everything likeable about Nick and Judy's dynamic would suffer because of it.

      So if they are a couple in the sequel I hope that they neither get married or have any children, I just think that those things are to tired and cliche and would probably just be distracting. And again, I don't want kids who see it to keep being fed the message that guys and girls must allways hook up and that if they do hook up they should allways get married and have kids, as if that was the ultimate accomplishment. They should be taught that there are plenty of other important things in life than starting a family and that there can be plenty of meaningful relations aside from romantic partnership.

      well....I do prefer the Romantic side. Because Nick said: "you know you love me" then Judy said: "Do I know that? Yes. Yes I do"

        Loading editor
    • Jonah.pietila wrote:

      well....I do prefer the Romantic side. Because Nick said: "you know you love me" then Judy said: "Do I know that? Yes. Yes I do"

      Well, both Byron Howard and Rich Moore have stated that they aren't a cannon couple, at least not at this point. It is fiction, so you're free to imagine whatever headcannon you want, but as far as cannon goes, the admission of "love" seems entirely platonic, a kind of "I love you man", sort of bro-love, except between opposite-sex friends.

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      Jonah.pietila wrote:

      well....I do prefer the Romantic side. Because Nick said: "you know you love me" then Judy said: "Do I know that? Yes. Yes I do"

      Well, both Byron Howard and Rich Moore have stated that they aren't a cannon couple, at least not at this point. It is fiction, so you're free to imagine whatever headcannon you want, but as far as cannon goes, the admission of "love" seems entirely platonic, a kind of "I love you man", sort of bro-love, except between opposite-sex friends.

      well I just think that it's cannon because Nick and Judy can be in "Love" or either they can be friends. but I would prefer them to be in a Romantic Relationship. so that the sequel would have to create a new storyline for Zootopia 

        Loading editor
    • Jonah.pietila wrote:

      well I just think that it's cannon because Nick and Judy can be in "Love" or either they can be friends. but I would prefer them to be in a Romantic Relationship. so that the sequel would have to create a new storyline for Zootopia 

      That's what's refered to as "headcannon", basically something that's not officially cannon, but is the way that you prefer to add to the story/interpret from the story with your own imagination within your own conception of the story, in order for it to be the most satisfying or make more sense to you. It's prefectly fine to do and I totally get why you'd ship Nick and Judy. It's perfectly plausible that thye would like each other, there's nothing that goes explicitly against that idea, so your headcannon would be compatable with official cannon, but that's not the same thing as it being actual cannon.

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      Jonah.pietila wrote:

      well I just think that it's cannon because Nick and Judy can be in "Love" or either they can be friends. but I would prefer them to be in a Romantic Relationship. so that the sequel would have to create a new storyline for Zootopia 

      That's what's refered to as "headcannon", basically something that's not officially cannon, but is the way that you prefer to add to the story/interpret from the story with your own imagination within your own conception of the story, in order for it to be the most satisfying or make more sense to you. It's prefectly fine to do and I totally get why you'd ship Nick and Judy. It's perfectly plausible that thye would like each other, there's nothing that goes explicitly against that idea, so your headcannon would be compatable with official cannon, but that's not the same thing as it being actual cannon.

      well to me it's Canon because Jason Bateman once said that Nick and Judy make a cute couple. Link--> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afdP_Mjb69w

        Loading editor
    • Jonah.pietila wrote:

      well to me it's Canon because Jason Bateman once said that Nick and Judy make a cute couple. Link--> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afdP_Mjb69w

      Yes, that's his opinion of what he'd like to see, but he's just a voice actor (obviously that means he plays a crucial role in defining and maybe to some extent making decisions about the character, but his role as such is comparably minor compared to the writers adn directors), it's not clearly implied in the movie that they are a couple. I think Both Rich Moore and Byron Howard (who are actual directors whose artistic vision this movie is) have stated that Nick and Judy being a couple is not considered actual cannon in any sense.

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      Jonah.pietila wrote:

      well to me it's Canon because Jason Bateman once said that Nick and Judy make a cute couple. Link--> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afdP_Mjb69w

      Yes, that's his opinion of what he'd like to see, but he's just a voice actor (obviously that means he plays a crucial role in defining and maybe to some extent making decisions about the character, but his role as such is comparably minor compared to the writers adn directors), it's not clearly implied in the movie that they are a couple. I think Both Rich Moore and Byron Howard (who are actual directors whose artistic vision this movie is) have stated that Nick and Judy being a couple is not considered actual cannon in any sense.

      well I would prefer the Romantic side though. well there could be proof that Wilde Hopps is cannon 

        Loading editor
    • Nick Piberius Wilde wrote:
      That is so LEGIT!

      http://phantomcreature.tumblr.com/post/140884885905/thephantombeyond-mr-and-mrs-wilde-and-their I had to make another link because the blogger changed his name 

        Loading editor
    • Jonah.pietila wrote:
      I would like to say that the Relationship between Nick and Judy is canon. because I have seen artwork of them Getting Married and having a Family. and Rich Moore did say that the shipping name Wilde Hopps is canon. so then I do ship it. and Judy might have a Crush on Nick in my opinion. because Nick said: You know you love me. then Judy said: Do I know that? Yes! Yes I do. also I would like to state that there could be a possiblity where Nick and Judy end up getting Married in the Sequel. so Rich Moore should get an idea from the fans on how to make a Zootopia Sequel. well let me know what you think about this topic! be sure to post your comments down below! 

      hmmm....people should comment on this topic more often.

        Loading editor
    • Judy and Nick can't ever be a couple.

        Loading editor
    • Wolf 91 wrote:
      Judy and Nick can't ever be a couple.

      why not?

        Loading editor
    • Jonah.pietila wrote:
      Wolf 91 wrote:
      Judy and Nick can't ever be a couple.
      why not?

      Because they are not even of the same species.

        Loading editor
    • Wolf 91 wrote:

      Judy and Nick can't ever be a couple.

      Because they are not even of the same species.

      I'm not a shipper, but I don't see how species would be an obstacle, they're both mature, capable, informed, communicating adults (and assuming there are no health risks to it, which there probably aren't considering that the directors have said that interspecies reproduction is possible in this world, so there probably aren't any distinct dangers to it), why couldn't they be together if they wanted to, what would be the consequence?

      If anything I would imagine that the fact that they're different species could make it more romantic, because it signals that they're together not becasue they feel any expectation to be or because it's the obvious and easy choice, but becasue they like each other enough that they're ready to cross that boundary. I imagine that them being different species could be an everyday reminder that pormts them to constantly consider and be re-reminded of why they actually like each other.

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      Rich appears to shipp them himself, but that still doesn't mean it's cannon, in fact I think he might have even confirmed that it's not cannon at this point(don't quote me on that though). Judy did say that she loved Nick, but she appeared to do so very casually, so it's fully possible that she meant it platonically.

      They may very well turn out to be a couple, but it's not made clear by the movie. I suspect that the directos wanted to make their relationship somewhat ambigious so that they could chose which way they want it go if they make a sequel.

      Exactly, Rich said that they are NOT a couple. He confirmed that he just said what the shipping's name was, not meaning the ship is canon. Besides, both directors said they made the ending opened to any future possibility.

        Loading editor
    • I REALLY SHIP THEM, THEY ARE SOOOO CUTE AS A COUPLE!!! I'm just afraid the movie will lose its non-shippers fans if it becomes canon. Even the directors said that if they make a sequel (very likely), half of the fans will be dissapointed :( There's no way to satisfy both sides, sadly.

        Loading editor
    • I'm so glad to hear, or in this case read, that people ship them. I ship them and I fangirl like crazy!!!

      Unfortunately, it's not canon yet. People have asked the directors if the like the ship name, they have also asked the voice actors and everybody ships them. However, it's not canon. It's going to be canon once they confess their love, or better for everybody, kiss.

      I just hope and pray that it will happen!!! And soon!! <3

      Long live WildeHopps!!! <3 <3 <3 My greatest OTP!!!

        Loading editor
    • Being friends with someone of a diffrent species is a good thing but when it comes to romance birds of a feather should flock togather.

        Loading editor
    • Wolf 91 wrote:
      Being friends with someone of a diffrent species is a good thing but when it comes to romance birds of a feather should flock togather.

      Why though? If it's meant as a persona esthetic judgement, then I totally repsect that, you may just feel that the prospect of an intraspecies relation is more satisfying to you and thus prefer that Nick and Judy not be a couple becasue of their species. But what you wrote kinda comes accross as a declaration, and if meant as such it's best if you can also motivate that stance.

        Loading editor
    • Well they are not birds, and love doesn't have limits.

      Just like with gender, color, nation, size, height and more... those things don't matter anymore!!!

      I think this generation is about going through all these stuff :)

        Loading editor
    • Chiplover123 wrote:
      Well they are not birds, and love doesn't have limits.

      Just like with gender, color, nation, size, height and more... those things don't matter anymore!!!

      I think this generation is about going through all these stuff :)

      Their is nothing wrong with having a romantic relationship with some one of a diffrient size-hight, color, nation or religion, relationshps like that are good but with someone of a another Species is just not right and is completaly aganst nature.    

        Loading editor
    • Wolf 91 wrote:

      Their is nothing wrong with having a romantic relationship with some one of a diffrient size-hight, color, nation or religion, relationshps like that are good but with someone of a another Species is just not right and is completaly aganst nature.    

      That's known as the "naturalistic fallacy", or the "appeal to nature fallacy". Nature has no real prescriptive abilities. Things that exists in nature are just examples of things that have worked out well enough to survive thus far. Animals tend to only court members of their own species becasue there is no reason for them to court anyone of any other species, it has no reproductive or survival advantage. But if it did, they would do it. What is and isn't natural is pretty much arbitrary, and there is nothing inheritly good about doing things in accordance with how nature does it.

      Besides, even if there are no examples of it in nature, I'd argue that that wouldn't make a hypothetical interspecies relationship unnatural, as long as the basis for that relationship is the same as it would be for a intraspecies relationship, because then it's still based on the same very natural imparative as an intraspecies relationship would be, especially considering that interspecies reproduction is possible in this world. The nature of love is what would allow for an interspecies relationship, you know what they say; love is blind.

      But either way, it doesn't matter what's "natural" or not, what matters is what you're after. There are lots of things that we and the citizens of Zootopia do that could be considered "unnatural", such as building building, having medicine, using technology, etc. We and they do these things, not becasue it's natural (because it isn't, according to most definitions of the word), but because it's fun and convenient. So why couldn't two members of different species hook up if they found that doing so would make them happy? Amor vincit omniat, youknow?

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      Wolf 91 wrote:

      Their is nothing wrong with having a romantic relationship with some one of a diffrient size-hight, color, nation or religion, relationshps like that are good but with someone of a another Species is just not right and is completaly aganst nature.    

      That's known as the "naturalistic fallacy", or the "appeal to nature fallacy". Nature has no real prescriptive abilities. Things that exists in nature are just examples of things that have worked out well enough to survive thus far. Animals tend to only court members of their own species becasue there is no reason for them to court anyone of any other species, it has no reproductive or survival advantage. But if it did, they would do it. What is and isn't natural is pretty much arbitrary, and there is nothing inheritly good about doing things in accordance with how nature does it.

      Besides, even if there are no examples of it in nature, I'd argue that that wouldn't make a hypothetical interspecies relationship unnatural, as long as the basis for that relationship is the same as it would be for a intraspecies relationship, because then it's still based on the same very natural imparative as an intraspecies relationship would be, especially considering that interspecies reproduction is possible in this world. The nature of love is what would allow for an interspecies relationship, you know what they say; love is blind.

      But either way, it doesn't matter what's "natural" or not, what matters is what you're after. There are lots of things that we and the citizens of Zootopia do that could be considered "unnatural", such as building building, having medicine, using technology, etc. We and they do these things, not becasue it's natural (because it isn't, according to most definitions of the word), but because it's fun and convenient. So why couldn't two members of different species hook up if they found that doing so would make them happy? Amor vincit omniat, youknow?

      But what if Nick or Judy want kids. Know if to species still share the same family then it could happen (like a Lion and Tiger making a Liger) but foxes and rabbits are not of the same family (foxes are canines and rabbits are lagomorphs) their for reproduction between Judy and Nick is not only unnatural but also impossible.

        Loading editor
    • Wolf 91 wrote:

      But what if Nick or Judy want kids. Know if to species still share the same family then it could happen (like a Lion and Tiger making a Liger) but foxes and rabbits are not of the same family (foxes are canines and rabbits are lagomorphs) their for reproduction between Judy and Nick is not only unnatural but also impossible.

      Well, even if they couldn't have kids, that'd just be one of those things they'd have to consider for themselves whether it's worth it or not, just like if you hook up with an infertile person or someone of the same sex.

      However, I think I remember the directors stating in an interveiw that intrspecies couples occationally happen in this world and they at least seem to imply that interspecies redproduction could happen (yeah, kinda oxymoronic if you think about it, considering that species is usually defined by chemical interfertility, so that'd almost imply that everyone was the same species, but anyway).

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      Wolf 91 wrote:

      But what if Nick or Judy want kids. Know if to species still share the same family then it could happen (like a Lion and Tiger making a Liger) but foxes and rabbits are not of the same family (foxes are canines and rabbits are lagomorphs) their for reproduction between Judy and Nick is not only unnatural but also impossible.

      Well, even if they couldn't have kids, that'd just be one of those things they'd have to consider for themselves whether it's worth it or not, just like if you hook up with an infertile person or someone of the same sex.

      However, I think I remember the directors stating in an interveiw that intrspecies couples occationally happen in this world and they at least seem to imply that interspecies redproduction could happen (yeah, kinda oxymoronic if you think about it, considering that species is usually defined by chemical interfertility, so that'd almost imply that everyone was the same species, but anyway).

      Interspecies relationships like Lion & Tiger or Wolf & Coyote could result in offspring. But only because their DNA is similer enough (and even then the offspring are infertile). The DNA of Foxes and Rabbits is to diffrent in order to concive offspring.

        Loading editor
    • Wolf 91 wrote:
      Jonah.pietila wrote:
      Wolf 91 wrote:
      Judy and Nick can't ever be a couple.
      why not?
      Because they are not even of the same species.

      that does not matter 

        Loading editor
    • Rouhad wrote:
      I REALLY SHIP THEM, THEY ARE SOOOO CUTE AS A COUPLE!!! I'm just afraid the movie will lose its non-shippers fans if it becomes canon. Even the directors said that if they make a sequel (very likely), half of the fans will be dissapointed :( There's no way to satisfy both sides, sadly.

      I ship them too!

        Loading editor
    • Wolf 91 wrote:

      Interspecies relationships like Lion & Tiger or Wolf & Coyote could result in offspring. But only because their DNA is similer enough (and even then the offspring are infertile). The DNA of Foxes and Rabbits is to diffrent in order to concive offspring.

      I'm not implying that it could happen in real life, I'm saying that it might be possible within the fairytale world of a disney movie. And again, even if they can't, that needn't be a dealbreaker.

        Loading editor
    • Wolf 91 wrote: But what if Nick or Judy want kids. Know if to species still share the same family then it could happen (like a Lion and Tiger making a Liger) but foxes and rabbits are not of the same family (foxes are canines and rabbits are lagomorphs) their for reproduction between Judy and Nick is not only unnatural but also impossible.

      Look, when I ship them, I don't necessarily want them to have kids.

      Besides, remember that "In Zootopia anyone can be anything", so saying a bunny and a fox can't be together because they're different species is Discrimination. It's like you didn't understand anything of Zootopia's moral.

        Loading editor
    • Rouhad wrote:

      Wolf 91 wrote: But what if Nick or Judy want kids. Know if to species still share the same family then it could happen (like a Lion and Tiger making a Liger) but foxes and rabbits are not of the same family (foxes are canines and rabbits are lagomorphs) their for reproduction between Judy and Nick is not only unnatural but also impossible.

      Look, when I ship them, I don't necessarily want them to have kids.

      Besides, remember that "In Zootopia anyone can be anything", so saying a bunny and a fox can't be together because they're different species is Discrimination. It's like you didn't understand anything of Zootopia's moral.

      Like I said earlier It's good to date someone from a diffrent race, ethnicity, religion, culture, country, social class, backround or oreintation thous are perfictly natural and ok, But dating someone of a completly diffrent Species is just unnatural. I meen Rouhad would you be BF & GF with a Maine Coon?

        Loading editor
    • Wolf 91 wrote:

      Rouhad wrote:

      Wolf 91 wrote: But what if Nick or Judy want kids. Know if to species still share the same family then it could happen (like a Lion and Tiger making a Liger) but foxes and rabbits are not of the same family (foxes are canines and rabbits are lagomorphs) their for reproduction between Judy and Nick is not only unnatural but also impossible.

      Look, when I ship them, I don't necessarily want them to have kids.

      Besides, remember that "In Zootopia anyone can be anything", so saying a bunny and a fox can't be together because they're different species is Discrimination. It's like you didn't understand anything of Zootopia's moral.

      Like I said earlier It's good to date someone from a diffrent race, ethnicity, religion, culture, country, social class, backround or oreintation thous are perfictly natural and ok, But dating someone of a completly diffrent Species is just unnatural. I meen Rouhad would you be BF & GF with a Maine Coon?

      In 'Real Life' it IS impossible to hook up with someone of completely different species, BUT this IS a fictional world.

      And of course we're not gonna tell the directors they're wrong, since they confirmed THEMSELVES that interspecies couples exist in Zootopia. What else do you want?? Directors confirmed it. Nuff said.

      And you still didn't answer my 2 previous points:

      Rouhad wrote: Look, when I ship them, I don't necessarily want them to have kids.

      Besides, remember that "In Zootopia anyone can be anything", so saying a bunny and a fox can't be together because they're different species is Discrimination. It's like you didn't understand anything of Zootopia's moral.

        Loading editor
    • Rouhad
      Rouhad removed this reply because:
      .
      18:53, May 6, 2016
      This reply has been removed
    • You keep stating that an interspecies relaiton would be unnatural. I already made a case for why it could in a sense be said that it wouldn't be unnatural, considering that your reason for having an interspecies relation could hypothetically be the very same reasons for which you'd have an intrapsecies relationship. But aside from that, I will again point out that you have made no case for things that aren't natural are bad.

      As for you question to Rouhad if she would date a cat, that's a false equivication becasue we're not talking about real world feral animals, we're talking about hypothetical creatures anthropomorphized to the point of complete personhood. And even if we're talking about an anthropomorphic main coon, it's not like whether she would or wouldn't date that person determines if doing so would actually bad. There are plenty of people I wouldn't date, but that doesn't mean no one should.

      Again, people are perfectly allowed to have their own aesthetic judgement, if you're uncomfortable even with the hypothetical idea of an interspecies couple on a personal level, then it's perfectly udnerstandable that you would not wish to see such a couple in the movies you watch. But be careful to distinguish such subjective preferences from assertions about what would and would be right.

        Loading editor
    • Jonah.pietila wrote:
      I would like to say that the Relationship between Nick and Judy is canon. because I have seen artwork of them Getting Married and having a Family. and Rich Moore did say that the shipping name Wilde Hopps is canon. so then I do ship it. and Judy might have a Crush on Nick in my opinion. because Nick said: You know you love me. then Judy said: Do I know that? Yes! Yes I do. also I would like to state that there could be a possiblity where Nick and Judy end up getting Married in the Sequel. so Rich Moore should get an idea from the fans on how to make a Zootopia Sequel. well let me know what you think about this topic! be sure to post your comments down below! 

      people should comment more often 

        Loading editor
    • Judy and Nick should never be a couple, it would go aganst sciance, nature and logic.

        Loading editor
    • Wolf 91 wrote:
      Judy and Nick should never be a couple, it would go aganst sciance, nature and logic.

      come on it would be cute!...besides other people see them as a couple 

        Loading editor
    • Wolf 91 wrote:
      Judy and Nick should never be a couple, it would go aganst sciance, nature and logic.

      I've allready addressed the whole "unnatural" thing, both why it's quite argueably false and why it's definetly irrelevant, but in what sense is it "against logic"? What is that even supposed to mean in this context? I guess you could say it'd be against logic in the sense that love tends to be somewhat irrational in general, but that's a pretty trivial point.

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      Wolf 91 wrote:
      Judy and Nick should never be a couple, it would go aganst sciance, nature and logic.

      I've allready addressed the whole "unnatural" thing, both why it's quite argueably false and why it's definetly irrelevant, but in what sense is it "against logic"? What is that even supposed to mean in this context? I guess you could say it'd be against logic in the sense that love tends to be somewhat irrational in general, but that's a pretty trivial point.

      well Nick and Judy can still be friends right?

        Loading editor
    • I think there's one thing this debate seems missing the point of...It's Cartoons!

        Loading editor
    • Jonah.pietila wrote:
      Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      Wolf 91 wrote:
      Judy and Nick should never be a couple, it would go aganst sciance, nature and logic.

      I've allready addressed the whole "unnatural" thing, both why it's quite argueably false and why it's definetly irrelevant, but in what sense is it "against logic"? What is that even supposed to mean in this context? I guess you could say it'd be against logic in the sense that love tends to be somewhat irrational in general, but that's a pretty trivial point.

      well Nick and Judy can still be friends right?

      Yes they can.

        Loading editor
    • Wolf 91 wrote:
      Jonah.pietila wrote:
      Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      Wolf 91 wrote:
      Judy and Nick should never be a couple, it would go aganst sciance, nature and logic.

      I've allready addressed the whole "unnatural" thing, both why it's quite argueably false and why it's definetly irrelevant, but in what sense is it "against logic"? What is that even supposed to mean in this context? I guess you could say it'd be against logic in the sense that love tends to be somewhat irrational in general, but that's a pretty trivial point.

      well Nick and Judy can still be friends right?
      Yes they can.

      okay...but sometimes they can be lovers. it's just other people's opinions!

        Loading editor
    • Jonah.pietila wrote:
      Wolf 91 wrote:
      Jonah.pietila wrote:
      Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      Wolf 91 wrote:
      Judy and Nick should never be a couple, it would go aganst sciance, nature and logic.

      I've allready addressed the whole "unnatural" thing, both why it's quite argueably false and why it's definetly irrelevant, but in what sense is it "against logic"? What is that even supposed to mean in this context? I guess you could say it'd be against logic in the sense that love tends to be somewhat irrational in general, but that's a pretty trivial point.

      well Nick and Judy can still be friends right?
      Yes they can.
      okay...but sometimes they can be lovers. it's just other people's opinions!

      Like I said that would go aganst both sciance and nature.

        Loading editor
    • Wolf 91 wrote:

      Like I said that would go aganst both sciance and nature.

      I think I've said all that needs to be said regarding whether it'd be "natural" and whether or not that'd even be relevant, so I won't continue to nag on your ad nauseam assertions allready addressed, but what do you even think you mean when you say that "it'd be against science"? Science is an empirical methodology, what would it have to do with this topic? And you also still didn't explain what you meant by it being "against logic" either.

      If you don't wanna have this discussion, that's fine I guess, but you can't just make declarations without substantiating and justifying them upon request. Anyone can make thos kinds of non-sequiter assertions, I could say that "your hairstyle is against mathematics!", but that claim would make no sense. How would I know that it's true that your hairstyle is against mathematics? What would it even mean for a hairstyle to be against mathematics? And even if there is some sense in which your hairstyle was "against" mathemathics, what would that mean or imply and why should anyone care? See what I mean? You need to be ready to defend the accuracy of your claims as well as justify their relevance.

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      Wolf 91 wrote:

      Like I said that would go aganst both sciance and nature.

      I think I've said all that needs to be said regarding whether it'd be "natural" and whether or not that'd even be relevant, so I won't continue to nag on your ad nauseam assertions allready addressed, but what do you even think you mean when you say that "it'd be against science"? Science is an empirical methodology, what would it have to do with this topic? And you also still didn't explain what you meant by it being "against logic" either.

      If you don't wanna have this discussion, that's fine I guess, but you can't just make declarations without substantiating and justifying them upon request. Anyone can make thos kinds of non-sequiter assertions, I could say that "your hairstyle is against mathematics!", but that claim would make no sense. How would I know that it's true that your hairstyle is against mathematics? What would it even mean for a hairstyle to be against mathematics? And even if there is some sense in which your hairstyle was "against" mathemathics, what would that mean or imply and why should anyone care? See what I mean? You need to be ready to defend the accuracy of your claims as well as justify their relevance.

      Because anyone who knows zoology knows that it just is't naturale for a canine and lagomorph to be mates. That would be like a human dating a rabbit.

        Loading editor
    • Wolf 91 wrote:
      Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      Wolf 91 wrote:

      Like I said that would go aganst both sciance and nature.

      I think I've said all that needs to be said regarding whether it'd be "natural" and whether or not that'd even be relevant, so I won't continue to nag on your ad nauseam assertions allready addressed, but what do you even think you mean when you say that "it'd be against science"? Science is an empirical methodology, what would it have to do with this topic? And you also still didn't explain what you meant by it being "against logic" either.If you don't wanna have this discussion, that's fine I guess, but you can't just make declarations without substantiating and justifying them upon request. Anyone can make thos kinds of non-sequiter assertions, I could say that "your hairstyle is against mathematics!", but that claim would make no sense. How would I know that it's true that your hairstyle is against mathematics? What would it even mean for a hairstyle to be against mathematics? And even if there is some sense in which your hairstyle was "against" mathemathics, what would that mean or imply and why should anyone care? See what I mean? You need to be ready to defend the accuracy of your claims as well as justify their relevance.
      Because anyone who knows zoology knows that it just is't naturale for a canine and lagomorph to be mates. That would be like a human dating a rabbit.

      okay. however there is such thing as Genetic Modification 

        Loading editor
    • Wolf 91 wrote:

      Because anyone who knows zoology knows that it just is't naturale for a canine and lagomorph to be mates. That would be like a human dating a rabbit.

      Here we go again, I feel that I've adequitly adressed this already, but I'll go through it again, thouroughly.

      Whether or not the kind of hypothetical interspecies relationship that would be if Nick and Judy hooked up could be considered unnatural depends on your definition of the word natural. It's a very vague word. If we define natural behaviours as behaviours based on evolved directives and desires, then Nick and Judy dating could be entirely natural, as they'd presumably be doing it for the exact same reason they'd otherwise be dating someone of their own species; because they may like each other (I'm not a shipper, so it's not my headcannon that they do), it just so happened that the urge that would normally have them seek out partners in their own species made them find ones in other species, but the directive compelling them could still be entirely natural. I've pointed this out before.

      But acording to the understanding of the word natural which defines a natural behaviour as something that is normalized on an evolutionary timescale for that animal, as opposed to being a behaviour with memeitc origins or the result of an individual reacting to circumstances for which it is not evolutionarily adapted (the latter which would be the case if Nick and Judy hooked up). If this is your understanding of what the word natural means, then Nick and Judy hooking up would be unnatural. But the problem is that according to this definition, all of modern civilization is unnatural, so you'd then have to be as opposed to all of civilization and memetics.

      If you disagree with this conclusion, provide your own definition of what is natural and show how it does not include interspecies relationship, whilst not excluding all the things you presumably enjoy about modern civilization.

      And again, regardless of the definition of the word "natural" used, you still haven't motivated why this would have any normative implication. If I grant that interspecies relations are necessarily unnatural, HOW exactly does it from that follow that they should not be engaged in?

      Once you've done that, I wouldn't mind you substantiating and justifying your claim about interspecies being "against logic" and "against science" in a similar manner.

      Your question to me if I'd date a rabbit is again irrelevant, the reasons why I wouldn't date a rabbit  are all about the fact that rabbits don't have the qualities I'm looking for in a partner (unless we're talking about a rabbit anthropomorphized in a manner similar to Judy, in which case I'd consider it), whether or not it'd be "natural" to date a rabbit is not a consideration for me, rendering your attempt at a comparison pointless.

      If you do not adequitly substantiate and back up your claim and it's conclusion, then I'm done with you on this topic, I've wasted enough time and effort already.

      Btw, I realize I may be using too many big, pretentious words here, it's a habbit, but I dunno how old you are or what your first language is, so if you want me to write a bit easier, just ask.

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      Wolf 91 wrote:

      Because anyone who knows zoology knows that it just is't naturale for a canine and lagomorph to be mates. That would be like a human dating a rabbit.

      Here we go again, I feel that I've adequitly adressed this already, but I'll go through it again, thouroughly.

      Whether or not the kind of hypothetical interspecies relationship that would be if Nick and Judy hooked up could be considered unnatural depends on your definition of the word natural. It's a very vague word. If we define natural behaviours as behaviours based on evolved directives and desires, then Nick and Judy dating could be entirely natural, as they'd presumably be doing it for the exact same reason they'd otherwise be dating someone of their own species; because they may like each other (I'm not a shipper, so it's not my headcannon that they do), it just so happened that the urge that would normally have them seek out partners in their own species made them find ones in other species, but the directive compelling them could still be entirely natural. I've pointed this out before.

      But acording to the understanding of the word natural which defines a natural behaviour as something that is normalized on an evolutionary timescale for that animal, as opposed to being a behaviour with memeitc origins or the result of an individual reacting to circumstances for which it is not evolutionarily adapted (the latter which would be the case if Nick and Judy hooked up). If this is your understanding of what the word natural means, then Nick and Judy hooking up would be unnatural. But the problem is that according to this definition, all of modern civilization is unnatural, so you'd then have to be as opposed to all of civilization and memetics.

      If you disagree with this conclusion, provide your own definition of what is natural and show how it does not include interspecies relationship, whilst not excluding all the things you presumably enjoy about modern civilization.

      And again, regardless of the definition of the word "natural" used, you still haven't motivated why this would have any normative implication. If I grant that interspecies relations are necessarily unnatural, HOW exactly does it from that follow that they should not be engaged in?

      Once you've done that, I wouldn't mind you substantiating and justifying your claim about interspecies being "against logic" and "against science" in a similar manner.

      Your question to me if I'd date a rabbit is again irrelevant, the reasons why I wouldn't date a rabbit  are all about the fact that rabbits don't have the qualities I'm looking for in a partner (unless we're talking about a rabbit anthropomorphized in a manner similar to Judy, in which case I'd consider it), whether or not it'd be "natural" to date a rabbit is not a consideration for me, rendering your attempt at a comparison pointless.

      If you do not adequitly substantiate and back up your claim and it's conclusion, then I'm done with you on this topic, I've wasted enough time and effort already.

      Btw, I realize I may be using too many big, pretentious words here, it's a habbit, but I dunno how old you are or what your first language is, so if you want me to write a bit easier, just ask.

      however...I'm a shipper. and I do ship Judy and Nick...so I guess I wouldn't consider it as Unatural. 

        Loading editor
    • Jonah.pietila wrote:

      however...I'm a shipper. and I do ship Judy and Nick...so I guess I wouldn't consider it as Unatural. 

      I believe you're missing the point, whether or not it's natural can't depend simply on whether you want it to be or not. You can't simply decide what conclusion you want to draw and then work backwards to rationalize that conclusion, that's dishonest.

      But it doesn't matter either way, since as I said, what is and isn't natural is poorly defined and there is no good reason to consider whether or not it's natural to have any normative implications. The term natural as commonly used (especially in regards to social matters) is often a buzzword, it's usually just something people talk about to provoke an emotional fear-response of that which is supposedly unnatural, in order for it to be dismissed. But it doesn't really matter if something is or isn't unnatural, because that alone does not tell us if a thing has good or bad consequences. There are plenty of good natural things and bad natural things, as well as plenty of good unnatural things and bad unnatural things, according to most definitions of the terms involved.

      So this whole argument is pointless, not just practically (as Nick and Judy aren't real), but hypothetically as well, becasue even if Nick and Judy or some equivalent possible interspecies couple were real, it's irrelevant whether or not that relationship could be considered natural. The only reasons I'm bothering with all this are intellectual, to combat fallacious thinking and backwards reasoning and promote nuanced, rational thinking over emotional responses.

        Loading editor
    • In case noone else are bothering to bring it up, but one's a fox and the other's a rabbit. Wouldn't that technically count as bestiality?

        Loading editor
    • The Timeless Hero wrote:
      In case noone else are bothering to bring it up, but one's a fox and the other's a rabbit. Wouldn't that technically count as bestiality?

      Depends on how you define that term. I don't think it's a term that can be applied to the hypothetical case of two intelligent, mature, informed, communicating, consenting  individuals minding their own business, I think that term should only apply when there is a major imbalance in such factors. And regardless of what kind of lable you put on it, it'd be stupid to morally an normatively lump one instance of a thing happening in with the other instances of that thing, if the particular instance isn't morally comparable to the other examples.

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      The Timeless Hero wrote:
      In case noone else are bothering to bring it up, but one's a fox and the other's a rabbit. Wouldn't that technically count as bestiality?
      Depends on how you define that term. I don't think it's a term that can be applied to the hypothetical case of two intelligent, mature, informed, communicating, consenting  individuals minding their own business, I think that term should only apply when there is a major imbalance in such factors. And regardless of what kind of lable you put on it, it'd be stupid to morally an normatively lump one instance of a thing happening in with the other instances of that thing, if the particular instance isn't morally comparable to the other examples.

      Whatever, but still, two different species, if you know what I mean.

      Besides, just because we've a male and a female teamed up together doesn't mean they've to have a romantic relationship.

        Loading editor
    • The Timeless Hero wrote: Whatever, but still, two different species, if you know what I mean.

      Besides, just because we've a male and a female teamed up together doesn't mean they've to have a romantic relationship.

      No, I don't "know what you mean", and I don't think you do either. I think it's an emotional reaction you have to an idea that you percieve as abnormal and thus seems to challenge your ideas of what is and isn't allowed and for what reasons, which is why you're against it, because you'd rather assume that that which doesn't fit into your conception of what is permissable behaviour must therefore be bad, instead of stopping to actually think. People's unwillingness to critically examine their own beliefs and reconsider their perceptions of things is one of the things that has enabled lots of biggotry throughout history. Your opposition to interspecies couples may not have any direct impact on the real world as there is only one species we recognize as having the ability to enter relationships with infromed consent, but I think the mindset with which you opposes the hypothetical instance of this is problematic.

      As for the how Nick and Judy could simply be freinds, I've never said otherwise, I've stated several times on this thread that I DON'T ship them and that I think they should stay FRIENDS, but that's just becuase I think it's best if it doesn't become a romance and instead focuses on friendly interactions, it has nothing to do with their species.

      The reason why I'm arguing here is not because I want them to be a couple, but becasue I think many of the people opposed to the shipping are so for bad reasons, and I critizise bad reasoning wherever I find it, both as an intellectual excersice and to encourage people to be better at critical thinking in other areas of their lives as well.

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:

      The Timeless Hero wrote: Whatever, but still, two different species, if you know what I mean.

      Besides, just because we've a male and a female teamed up together doesn't mean they've to have a romantic relationship.

      No, I don't "know what you mean", and I don't think you do either. I think it's an emotional reaction you have to an idea that you percieve as abnormal and thus seems to challenge your ideas of what is and isn't allowed and for what reasons, which is why you're against it, because you'd rather assume that that which doesn't fit into your conception of what is permissable behaviour must therefore be bad, instead of stopping to actually think. People's unwillingness to critically examine their own beliefs and reconsider their perceptions of things is one of the things that has enabled lots of biggotry throughout history. Your opposition to interspecies couples may not have any direct impact on the real world as there is only one species we recognize as having the ability to enter relationships with infromed consent, but I think the mindset with which you opposes the hypothetical instance of this is problematic.

      As for the how Nick and Judy could simply be freinds, I've never said otherwise, I've stated several times on this thread that I DON'T ship them and that I think they should stay FRIENDS, but that's just becuase I think it's best if it doesn't become a romance and instead focuses on friendly interactions, it has nothing to do with their species.

      The reason why I'm arguing here is not because I want them to be a couple, but becasue I think many of the people opposed to the shipping are so for bad reasons, and I critizise bad reasoning wherever I find it, both as an intellectual excersice and to encourage people to be better at critical thinking in other areas of their lives as well.

      This is a film about anthromorphic animals, why are we both thinking so hard about it?

      I never said you did. Besides, I'm not really into shipping anyway, maybe unless it's a femslash/yuri.

        Loading editor
    • The Timeless Hero wrote:

      This is a film about anthromorphic animals, why are we both thinking so hard about it?

      I already told you why, I do it for intellectual reasons, as well as to promote critical thinking.

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      The Timeless Hero wrote:

      This is a film about anthromorphic animals, why are we both thinking so hard about it?

      I already told you why, I do it for intellectual reasons, as well as to promote critical thinking.

      Don't worry about me anyway, I'm an Agnostic.

        Loading editor
    • The Timeless Hero wrote:

      Don't worry about me anyway, I'm an Agnostic.

      Are we talking about theism now? Or are do you mean you're agnotstic towards some other concept? In that case, which? I'm not following you. Or are you implying that you're good at critical thinking because you're agnostic regarding the existnace of divine deities?

        Loading editor
    • Nick and Judy are from two diffrent species, making them a couple makes zero sense.

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      The Timeless Hero wrote:

      Don't worry about me anyway, I'm an Agnostic.

      Are we talking about theism now? Or are do you mean you're agnotstic towards some other concept? In that case, which? I'm not following you. Or are you implying that you're good at critical thinking because you're agnostic regarding the existnace of divine deities?

      I'm just saying that my feelings over this 'pairing' doesn't come from whatever faith I have, okay? No problem, nothing personal.

        Loading editor
    • Wolf 91 wrote:
      Nick and Judy are from two diffrent species, making them a couple makes zero sense.

      Why? If we assume for a moment that they like each other (which isn't official cannon, nor my headcannon), then it seems that them being together makes about as much sense as anything else.

      There seesm to be a flaw in your thinking. Let me try to explain. Humans are neurologically lazy, we tend to try to not use any more brain power than what is needed, which is why we often relly on society and orthodox norms to think for us. This is why when we encounter an idea that doesn't fit with the way everyone else thinks, or that doesn't quite fit with the way we tend to think of the world as working, we often feel an emotional aversion to that idea.

      Most of the time this is fairly harmless, because the consensus is often the consensus for a reason, so this kind of intellectual lazyness doens't allways do any real harm. But sometimes it does. Have you ever wondered why things such as racism was more common in the past than it is now? Why didn't the people back then realize it was wrong the way we tend to do now? Because the idea that some people were inferior was normalized, and people felt no need to question it. They had grown up with the idea that races aren't equal, so if they ever encountered the idea that races could be equal, that comes into conflict with what they already think, and rather than boldly consider the idea that the races could be seen as equal, they usually chose to trust their current view of the world and dismiss the question, that's why those kinds of biggoted ideas are much harder to move beyond than one might think.

      So why did there use to be a serious opposition to the idea of interracial relations? Because most people didn't feel much need to question the way they veiwd other races, and since they didn't truly think of other races as equal, the idea of marrying someone of another race was to them absurd. To them, the idea of having a partner of another race seemed outlandish and unnatractive. And rather than wondering what this perception was based on, they chose to assume that their aversion to the idea of interracial relations was really just a kind of moral intuition that was informing them that it was wrong to have interracial relations.

      Interracial relations aren't harmful, but to those people it felt as if the idea was strange and impropper, so based on that emotional response they assumed it was somehow harmful or imoral.

      My point is that this kind of thinking is what you seem to be using. This isn't some horrible accusation against you, most people are not willing to examine their perception of the world or the reasoning behind their assumptions. I'm not saying you're a bad person, or that you're doing anything harmful (as interspecies relations of the hypothetical kind being discussed here aren't possible in real life, so your opposition to them isn't hurting anyone), but I am saying that it's important that we try to be aware of our own irrationality.

      So when you say things like "it's unnatural for individuals of different species to be together" (assuming we're talking about individuals of are human-like in their ability to make responsible decisions, etc) I want you to consider that the reason you think so may be because to you the idea of such a realtionship simply seems abnormal and strange, it's not something you feel you can identify with and it seems to go against the way you think of the world as working, and I think that's why you feel uncomfortable with the idea.

      What I'm asking you to do is to try to reevaluate this perception of yours. Try to put aside your immediate emotional reactions and consider by what right you would be justified wanting to deny the right to be with who one loves to two hypothetical members of different species who loved each other. Your position on this is not of any great direct consequence, but it could be a valuable experience of critical thinking, it's healthy to learn to challenge ones own beliefes, because being good at doing so is the best way to assure that you're on the right side of history. This kind of critical thinking is what allows you to know that the people of the future won't look back at you the same way that you now look abck at the people who used to be (or still are) racists, etc.

      Finally, I'd like to ask you to respond to this comment and confirm that you've read all of it, even if you don't think much of it, I'd at least like to know that you've considered it, after all the effort I went through writing it.

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      Wolf 91 wrote:
      Nick and Judy are from two diffrent species, making them a couple makes zero sense.
      Why? If we assume for a moment that they like each other (which isn't official cannon, nor my headcannon), then it seems that them being together makes about as much sense as anything else.

      There seesm to be a flaw in your thinking. Let me try to explain. Humans are neurologically lazy, we tend to try to not use any more brain power than what is needed, which is why we often relly on society and orthodox norms to think for us. This is why when we encounter an idea that doesn't fit with the way everyone else thinks, or that doesn't quite fit with the way we tend to think of the world as working, we often feel an emotional aversion to that idea.

      Most of the time this is fairly harmless, because the consensus is often the consensus for a reason, so this kind of intellectual lazyness doens't allways do any real harm. But sometimes it does. Have you ever wondered why things such as racism was more common in the past than it is now? Why didn't the people back then realize it was wrong the way we tend to do now? Because the idea that some people were inferior was normalized, and people felt no need to question it. They had grown up with the idea that races aren't equal, so if they ever encountered the idea that races could be equal, that comes into conflict with what they already think, and rather than boldly consider the idea that the races could be seen as equal, they usually chose to trust their current view of the world and dismiss the question, that's why those kinds of biggoted ideas are much harder to move beyond than one might think.

      So why did there use to be a serious opposition to the idea of interracial relations? Because most people didn't feel much need to question the way they veiwd other races, and since they didn't truly think of other races as equal, the idea of marrying someone of another race was to them absurd. To them, the idea of having a partner of another race seemed outlandish and unnatractive. And rather than wondering what this perception was based on, they chose to assume that their aversion to the idea of interracial relations was really just a kind of moral intuition that was informing them that it was wrong to have interracial relations.

      Interracial relations aren't harmful, but to those people it felt as if the idea was strange and impropper, so based on that emotional response they assumed it was somehow harmful or imoral.

      My point is that this kind of thinking is what you seem to be using. This isn't some horrible accusation against you, most people are not willing to examine their perception of the world or the reasoning behind their assumptions. I'm not saying you're a bad person, or that you're doing anything harmful (as interspecies relations of the hypothetical kind being discussed here aren't possible in real life, so your opposition to them isn't hurting anyone), but I am saying that it's important that we try to be aware of our own irrationality.

      So when you say things like "it's unnatural for individuals of different species to be together" (assuming we're talking about individuals of are human-like in their ability to make responsible decisions, etc) I want you to consider that the reason you think so may be because to you the idea of such a realtionship simply seems abnormal and strange, it's not something you feel you can identify with and it seems to go against the way you think of the world as working, and I think that's why you feel uncomfortable with the idea.

      What I'm asking you to do is to try to reevaluate this perception of yours. Try to put aside your immediate emotional reactions and consider by what right you would be justified wanting to deny the right to be with who one loves to two hypothetical members of different species who loved each other. Your position on this is not of any great direct consequence, but it could be a valuable experience of critical thinking, it's healthy to learn to challenge ones own beliefes, because being good at doing so is the best way to assure that you're on the right side of history. This kind of critical thinking is what allows you to know that the people of the future won't look back at you the same way that you now look abck at the people who used to be (or still are) racists, etc.

      Finally, I'd like to ask you to respond to this comment and confirm that you've read all of it, even if you don't think much of it, I'd at least like to know that you've considered it, after all the effort I went through writing it.

      So basically, you can't accept a different opinion from someone.

        Loading editor
    • The Timeless Hero wrote:

      So basically, you can't accept a different opinion from someone.

      Respecting someone else's right to hold an opinion doesn't mean I can't critizise that opinion, I believe all ideas including my own should be critizised, that's kinda the point I was making, critical thinking. This is especially true when we're talking about opinions that the opinion-holders seem unwilling to actually justify, because that indicated that they don't actually hold those opinions for good reasons, giving me all the more reason to urge them to question that opinion.

      So I can accept differing opinions, because if you can give good reason by which to show that I'm wrong I WANT TO HEAR IT, because I'm not out to preserve my beliefs, I want to correct them whenever possible. The argumentativeness I display is nothing less than the argumentativeness I expect from you, assuming that your position has merit.

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      The Timeless Hero wrote:

      So basically, you can't accept a different opinion from someone.

      Respecting someone else's right to hold an opinion doesn't mean I can't critizise that opinion, I believe all ideas including my own should be critizised, that's kinda the point I was making, critical thinking. This is especially true when we're talking about opinions that the opinion-holders seem unwilling to actually justify, because that indicated that they don't actually hold those opinions for good reasons, giving me all the more reason to urge them to question that opinion.

      So I can accept differing opinions, because if you can give good reason by which to show that I'm wrong I WANT TO HEAR IT, because I'm not out to preserve my beliefs, I want to correct them whenever possible. The argumentativeness I display is nothing less than the argumentativeness I expect from you, assuming that your position has merit.

      Calm down mate.

      That and you spelt "criticise" incorrectly.

        Loading editor
    • The Timeless Hero wrote:

      Calm down mate.

      That and you spelt "criticise" incorrectly.

      Well, you're implying that I'm intolerant, which I don't think I am, so of course I'll show some level of indignation when contesting that implication. And thank you for correcting my spelling, as I said, I want to be corrected when I'm wrong.

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      The Timeless Hero wrote:

      Calm down mate.

      That and you spelt "criticise" incorrectly.

      Well, you're implying that I'm intolerant, which I don't think I am, so of course I'll show some level of indignation when contesting that implication. And thank you for correcting my spelling, as I said, I want to be corrected when I'm wrong.

      You're welcome, but I'm want to say how overreactive you are.

        Loading editor
    • The Timeless Hero wrote:

      You're welcome, but I'm want to say how overreactive you are.

      I think you may be overestimating how wrought-up I am from the language I use. I listen to a lot of angry ranters and argumentative people, so the kind of language I use may come across as forceful in attitude, but that's not really how it sounds in my head, it's mostly my habbit to try to be elequent, passionate and confident in my langauge, you needen't interpret it as me being upset.

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      The Timeless Hero wrote:

      You're welcome, but I'm want to say how overreactive you are.

      I think you may be overestimating how wrought-up I am from the language I use. I listen to a lot of angry ranters and argumentative people, so the kind of language I use may come across as forceful in attitude, but that's not really how it sounds in my head, it's mostly my habbit to try to be elequent, passionate and confident in my langauge, you needen't interpret it as me being upset.

      I never said that this "interspecies relationship" would affect real-life, but still people complain about they fear that Elsa may become a lesbian. And yes, I try to read your comments, even though you haven't paragraphed them enough to make it a little bit more easier and less clustered.

        Loading editor
    • The Timeless Hero wrote:

      I never said that this "interspecies relationship" would affect real-life, but still people complain about they fear that Elsa may become a lesbian. And yes, I try to read your comments, even though you haven't paragraphed them enough to make it a little bit more easier and less clustered.

      Now you've lost me somewhat, you seem to have gone back to some eariler thing I said about the impact of attitudes towards (hypothetical) interspecies relationships, eventhough that's not in the comment you quoted. As best I can understand you, you seem to be implying that I implied that you think our position on hypothetical interspecies relations was important, which I don't think I ever did. Then you said something about people freaking out over the possibility of Elsa being cannonized as the first major gay disney character. Are you saying that if Nick and Judy hooked up, it would upset people similarly to how they are being upset by the possibility of Elsa being a lesbian? I guess it might. I don't care much myself for that, allthough I don't ship Wildhopps I don't think people who get outraged at everything that seems "unnatural" to them needs to be pandered to for that reason.

      As for paragraps, yeah, I never really got any good at those, the fact that I consume so relatively little written media compared to all the audible media probably doesn't help me learning either.

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      The Timeless Hero wrote:

      I never said that this "interspecies relationship" would affect real-life, but still people complain about they fear that Elsa may become a lesbian. And yes, I try to read your comments, even though you haven't paragraphed them enough to make it a little bit more easier and less clustered.

      Now you've lost me somewhat, you seem to have gone back to some eariler thing I said about the impact of attitudes towards (hypothetical) interspecies relationships, eventhough that's not in the comment you quoted. As best I can understand you, you seem to be implying that I implied that you think our position on hypothetical interspecies relations was important, which I don't think I ever did. Then you said something about people freaking out over the possibility of Elsa being cannonized as the first major gay disney character. Are you saying that if Nick and Judy hooked up, it would upset people similarly to how they are being upset by the possibility of Elsa being a lesbian? I guess it might. I don't care much myself for that, allthough I don't ship Wildhopps I don't think people who get outraged at everything that seems "unnatural" to them needs to be pandered to for that reason.

      As for paragraps, yeah, I never really got any good at those, the fact that I consume so relatively little written media compared to all the audible media probably doesn't help me learning either.

      Oh whatever.

        Loading editor
    • The Timeless Hero wrote:
      Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      The Timeless Hero wrote:
      In case noone else are bothering to bring it up, but one's a fox and the other's a rabbit. Wouldn't that technically count as bestiality?
      Depends on how you define that term. I don't think it's a term that can be applied to the hypothetical case of two intelligent, mature, informed, communicating, consenting  individuals minding their own business, I think that term should only apply when there is a major imbalance in such factors. And regardless of what kind of lable you put on it, it'd be stupid to morally an normatively lump one instance of a thing happening in with the other instances of that thing, if the particular instance isn't morally comparable to the other examples.
      Whatever, but still, two different species, if you know what I mean.

      Besides, just because we've a male and a female teamed up together doesn't mean they've to have a romantic relationship.

      I know that. but it would be cuter if a male and female had a romantic relationship together! :3

        Loading editor
    • Jonah.pietila wrote:
      The Timeless Hero wrote:
      Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      The Timeless Hero wrote:
      In case noone else are bothering to bring it up, but one's a fox and the other's a rabbit. Wouldn't that technically count as bestiality?
      Depends on how you define that term. I don't think it's a term that can be applied to the hypothetical case of two intelligent, mature, informed, communicating, consenting  individuals minding their own business, I think that term should only apply when there is a major imbalance in such factors. And regardless of what kind of lable you put on it, it'd be stupid to morally an normatively lump one instance of a thing happening in with the other instances of that thing, if the particular instance isn't morally comparable to the other examples.
      Whatever, but still, two different species, if you know what I mean.

      Besides, just because we've a male and a female teamed up together doesn't mean they've to have a romantic relationship.

      I know that. but it would be cuter if a male and female had a romantic relationship together! :3

      The Timeless Hero is right they are a boy and a girl and they are close together but that dous't meen they have to be romanticly involved and it's like I said before they are of two diffrent species.

        Loading editor
    • Wolf 91 wrote: The Timeless Hero is right they are a boy and a girl and they are close together but that dous't meen they have to be romanticly involved and it's like I said before they are of two diffrent species.

      Your repeated irrelevant assertions are to be honest quite irritating. I can't force you to be convinced by my arguments, but at least I've made arguments, quite throughly. You have made very little that even implies it's supposed to be an argument and you pretend that my pain-staking breakdowns attempting to show why your objections don't work never happned, and you continue to make the same tired, meaningless or irrelevant statements.

      You never tried to actually advance those statements into anything that could have any argumentative value, except from when you made the arguably quite weak point that an interspecies couple couldn't have biological children the normal way (allthough within the context of Zootopia, it might be possible they could, considering it's a disney story).

      As I said; I can't force you to be convinced by my arguments, nor can I stop you from repeating the same meaningless statements over and over without trying to advance any normative argument form it, and I don't quite want to. But if that's all you're gonna do, I would as a personal suggestion to you kindly ask you to stop repeating that, until you can show it has any normative relevance. The burden is on you to show the validity and soundness of the arguments you seem to belive your flat statments to be.

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      Wolf 91 wrote: The Timeless Hero is right they are a boy and a girl and they are close together but that dous't meen they have to be romanticly involved and it's like I said before they are of two diffrent species.
      Your repeated irrelevant assertions are to be honest quite irritating. I can't force you to be convinced by my arguments, but at least I've made arguments, quite throughly. You have made very little that even implies it's supposed to be an argument and you pretend that my pain-staking breakdowns attempting to show why your objections don't work never happned, and you continue to make the same tired, meaningless or irrelevant statements.

      You never tried to actually advance those statements into anything that could have any argumentative value, except from when you made the arguably quite weak point that an interspecies couple couldn't have biological children the normal way (allthough within the context of Zootopia, it might be possible they could, considering it's a disney story).

      As I said; I can't force you to be convinced by my arguments, nor can I stop you from repeating the same meaningless statements over and over without trying to advance any normative argument form it, and I don't quite want to. But if that's all you're gonna do, I would as a personal suggestion to you kindly ask you to stop repeating that, until you can show it has any normative relevance. The burden is on you to show the validity and soundness of the arguments you seem to belive your flat statments to be.

      You're absolutely right. Kudos deserved.

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      Wolf 91 wrote: The Timeless Hero is right they are a boy and a girl and they are close together but that dous't meen they have to be romanticly involved and it's like I said before they are of two diffrent species.
      Your repeated irrelevant assertions are to be honest quite irritating. I can't force you to be convinced by my arguments, but at least I've made arguments, quite throughly. You have made very little that even implies it's supposed to be an argument and you pretend that my pain-staking breakdowns attempting to show why your objections don't work never happned, and you continue to make the same tired, meaningless or irrelevant statements.

      You never tried to actually advance those statements into anything that could have any argumentative value, except from when you made the arguably quite weak point that an interspecies couple couldn't have biological children the normal way (allthough within the context of Zootopia, it might be possible they could, considering it's a disney story).

      As I said; I can't force you to be convinced by my arguments, nor can I stop you from repeating the same meaningless statements over and over without trying to advance any normative argument form it, and I don't quite want to. But if that's all you're gonna do, I would as a personal suggestion to you kindly ask you to stop repeating that, until you can show it has any normative relevance. The burden is on you to show the validity and soundness of the arguments you seem to belive your flat statments to be.

      The term 'Zoophilia' refers to a human's romantic/sexual attraction to another 'bestiality' refers to sexual intercourse between a human and another animal of a different species, right? Maybe it's because I was thinking of cross-species breeding/sex/relationship. Regardless, human or otherwise, we're still animals, rights? No matter how intelligent or not.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-reproductive_sexual_behavior_in_animals#Cross_species_sex

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_%28biology%29#Interspecific_hybrids

      Besides, there's a difference between race and species, that can be races with a species (e.g. Asians and Caucasians within Homosapiens, and Horses and Donkeys with Equus). True there are hybrid that do exist and I can understand such, like mules, ligers, zonkeys, etc, yet they're born from two animals of mostly the same ganus. Foxes and rabbits on the other hand, aside from being mammals, aren't even the same genus. But I guess the lines are pretty damn blurred.

        Loading editor
    • The Timeless Hero wrote:

      The term 'Zoophilia' refers to a human's romantic/sexual attraction to another 'bestiality' refers to sexual intercourse between a human and another animal of a different species, right? Maybe it's because I was thinking of cross-species breeding/sex/relationship. Regardless, human or otherwise, we're still animals, rights? No matter how intelligent or not.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-reproductive_sexual_behavior_in_animals#Cross_species_sex

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_%28biology%29#Interspecific_hybrids

      Besides, there's a difference between race and species, that can be races with a species (e.g. Asians and Caucasians within Homosapiens, and Horses and Donkeys with Equus). True there are hybrid that do exist and I can understand such, like mules, ligers, zonkeys, etc, yet they're born from two animals of mostly the same ganus. Foxes and rabbits on the other hand, aside from being mammals, aren't even the same genus. But I guess the lines are pretty damn blurred.

      You seem to have a tendency to respond to comments that aren't actually about the topic you're discussing. Anyway, I think I've already made the two main points on this topic that needs to be.

      First, it's worth pointing out that our current definitions of those words are from a society that knows only one species that is recognized as having personhood and ability to consent. I would argue that if there were more than one such species, relations between those species could not be compared to relations between "higher" and "lower" species, and thus the same terms most probably SHOULDN'T be applied to them, which is why I think those kinds of terms should not apply to the hypothetical instances of consensual relations between interspecies persons. A term I think I've heard thrown around to distinguish attraction to extraspecies non-persons to attraction to extraspecies persons is xenophilia.

      Second, regardless of what you would call an interspecies relationship between consenting persons, it would be fallacious to normatively equivicate such relations with other occurances that have the same lable, if there are important ethical differences.

      The words that you use to lable something are just a matter of what definitions is used for those words, simply arguing what to call something has no implications on what that thing actually IS. It doesn't normatively matter if you think a consensual relation between a sentient rabbit and a sentient fox would qualify as zoophilic or something like that, if that relations doesn't have the kind of traits that makes us object to other instances of things with that lable.

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      The Timeless Hero wrote:

      The term 'Zoophilia' refers to a human's romantic/sexual attraction to another 'bestiality' refers to sexual intercourse between a human and another animal of a different species, right? Maybe it's because I was thinking of cross-species breeding/sex/relationship. Regardless, human or otherwise, we're still animals, rights? No matter how intelligent or not.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-reproductive_sexual_behavior_in_animals#Cross_species_sex

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_%28biology%29#Interspecific_hybrids

      Besides, there's a difference between race and species, that can be races with a species (e.g. Asians and Caucasians within Homosapiens, and Horses and Donkeys with Equus). True there are hybrid that do exist and I can understand such, like mules, ligers, zonkeys, etc, yet they're born from two animals of mostly the same ganus. Foxes and rabbits on the other hand, aside from being mammals, aren't even the same genus. But I guess the lines are pretty damn blurred.

      You seem to have a tendency to respond to comments that aren't actually about the topic you're discussing. Anyway, I think I've already made the two main points on this topic that needs to be.

      First, it's worth pointing out that our current definitions of those words are from a society that knows only one species that is recognized as having personhood and ability to consent. I would argue that if there were more than one such species, relations between those species could not be compared to relations between "higher" and "lower" species, and thus the same terms most probably SHOULDN'T be applied to them, which is why I think those kinds of terms should not apply to the hypothetical instances of consensual relations between interspecies persons. A term I think I've heard thrown around to distinguish attraction to extraspecies non-persons to attraction to extraspecies persons is xenophilia.

      Second, regardless of what you would call an interspecies relationship between consenting persons, it would be fallacious to normatively equivicate such relations with other occurances that have the same lable, if there are important ethical differences.

      The words that you use to lable something are just a matter of what definitions is used for those words, simply arguing what to call something has no implications on what that thing actually IS. It doesn't normatively matter if you think a consensual relation between a sentient rabbit and a sentient fox would qualify as zoophilic or something like that, if that relations doesn't have the kind of traits that makes us object to other instances of things with that lable.

      Confusion aside, does that make me a bad person?

        Loading editor
    • Rouhad wrote:

      You're absolutely right. Kudos deserved.

      I just wanted to mention my appreciation for your support right now, at this point I'm increasingly questioning what I'm even doing here, I feel like I'm zealously commenting on an obscure topic regarding an awkward and unconsequential question, making obsurdly elaborate questions to people who don't allways listen. Not that I don't enjoy it, but it's starting to feel pointless and allmost obsessive and sad. So it's nice to hear that at least someone feels some degree of appreciation for what I do, makes it feel a bit less pathetic.

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      Rouhad wrote:

      You're absolutely right. Kudos deserved.

      I just wanted to mention my appreciation for your support right now, at this point I'm increasingly questioning what I'm even doing here, I feel like I'm zealously commenting on an obscure topic regarding an awkward and unconsequential question, making obsurdly elaborate questions to people who don't allways listen. Not that I don't enjoy it, but it's starting to feel pointless and allmost obsessive and sad. So it's nice to hear that at least someone feels some degree of appreciation for what I do, makes it feel a bit less pathetic.

      My apologies, it was my fault for bring up the still-controversial topic of bestiality, maybe I was looking at this the wrong way.

        Loading editor
    • The Timeless Hero wrote:he same genus.Confusion aside, does that make me a bad person?

      It's difficult to put confusion aside when a lot of what you say continues to be confusing. What is it that you're wondering might make make you a bad person?

        Loading editor
    • The Timeless Hero wrote:

      My apologies, it was my fault for bring up the still-controversial topic of bestiality, maybe I was looking at this the wrong way.

      I was mostly refering to Wolf 91

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      The Timeless Hero wrote:he same genus.Confusion aside, does that make me a bad person?
      It's difficult to put confusion aside when a lot of what you say continues to be confusing. What is it that you're wondering might make make you a bad person?

      I just feared that, with the way I said things and how you responded, you might've seen me in a negative light.

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      The Timeless Hero wrote:

      My apologies, it was my fault for bring up the still-controversial topic of bestiality, maybe I was looking at this the wrong way.

      I was mostly refering to Wolf 91

      Oh, okay...

        Loading editor
    • It would make no sense for Nick and Judy to be in a relationship if thier not of the same species. It would be like a human being in a relationship with a hourse: Unnatural.

        Loading editor
    • I have watched zootopia only three times and the truth is I don't ship Nick and Judy and I have my reasons.

        1. I feel that you cannot watch a single Disney movie without there being love. I like that zootopia at least does not have any kissing. I kind of like seeing Nick and Judy as friends. If you ask me, I think that Nick and Judy's relationship is quite platonic. I would rather them stay that way. Zootopia is about excepting change and dealing with stereotypes and prejudice, not a prince saving a princess with a from a deep sleep with a kiss. I love how Zootopia is and I don't like the idea of the relationship changing from a friendship to a love. 

         2. If the two become a couple there will be many things they can't do. One of the things they might not be able to do is joke around all the time. They would have to act all lovey dovey. A second thing they would not be able to do if the two had kids is be in the ZPD. They would be too busy caring for their child to attend.

         3. The two are completely opposite. Judy is optimistic, determined , and energetic while Nick is calm , cool , charming , secretly insecure , and doing his stereotype's part. Plus, Judy is a bunny and Nick is a fox, if they had a baby... It would not look very promising.          

         4. They seem like friends anyway. Many WildeHopps shippers (Judy and Nick shippers) say the two are Canon but I really done agree. Many shippers say "Judy agreed that she loves Nick. OMG! OMG! They should totally be together", but actually I think Nick and Judy meant "I love ya' buddy", and not "I love you honey". They are like Buzz and Woody only their friendship is not a boy and boy or a girl and girl, it is a boy and girl friendship. Those exist you know.

          I am totally ok with you not agreeing. But, whatever you shippers say won't change my mind about not shipping them. Yes, some of you shippers will tell me " oh but the people who made zootopia said that the two make a good team/couple" and here is what I think of that, when someone says they make a good team/couple that doesn't always mean a love couple. Have you ever heard two friends say "we'll make a good couple" because I sure have. To me the two are BBFFF (Best Bunny Fox Friends) but think whatever you want.

        

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      Rich appears to shipp them himself, but that still doesn't mean it's cannon, in fact I think he might have even confirmed that it's not cannon at this point(don't quote me on that though). Judy did say that she loved Nick, but she appeared to do so very casually, so it's fully possible that she meant it platonically.

      They may very well turn out to be a couple, but it's not made clear by the movie. I suspect that the directos wanted to make their relationship somewhat ambigious so that they could chose which way they want it go if they make a sequel.

      My own thoughts on the shipping is that they're cute, they could make a pretty adorable couple, I don't dislike that idea in of itself, but still kinda feel that it'd be for the best if they stayed just friends.

      For one, they're colleagues, and you're not really supposed to fall in love with your colleagues, especailly not if you have an important job that requires dicipline and focus, like being a police officer.

      The there's the point that romance is so cliche, it's done SO OFTEN, it's insane. Most movies have elements of romance in them and allmost every movie where there are two opposite-sex protagonists (at least when they are the only protagonists) have them hooking up. It'd be refreshing if for once we could have the protagonists just be firends. Do we need to constantly send kids the message that two people can't just be friends? It seems like they'd be just fine that way.

      Then there's the fact that I suspect that a romance could stifle the dynamic that Nick and Judy have. They're both pretty different and they have fun interactions with each other. I feel that if they were a couple, their ability to tease and play off each other would be stifled and softened to be replaced by the same usual romance cliches, shifting the focus from them and their interactions to their feelings. I feel that there needs to be some amount of space between the character for them to both be able to breath and interact refreshingly.

      I would be lying if I said I wans't at least a bit torn on this. There is a shipper in me who thinks they could be cute together, but I generally suspect and reason that the wisest course would be to have them stay friends. I am open to be convinced otherwise, it seems concievable that the directors may find that Nick and Judy getting together could add something important to the sequel, or that they could find a way to portray their relationship that didn't distract or reduce their ability to interact well on screen, and I suspect they'll probably end up making the right choice on this matter, no matter what that choice is, assuming they don't just do it as an act of fan-service.

      However, while I am cautially open-minded on the idea of Nick and Judy being a couple, I feel fairly convinced that if they DO hook up, their relationship should almost certanly feel relatively friendly and laid-back. I don't think it'd work if they were head-over-heels madly in love with each other, it'd get way to bogged down in cliches and take away way too much of the relation they allready have. I can see how them occatioanlly holding paws, giving a few looks and having a few subtle romantic momments could work, but I don't think that them swooning over each other and being caught up in "true, magical fantastic love" would work, we've seen that stuff a million times and it just seems like almost everything likeable about Nick and Judy's dynamic would suffer because of it.

      So if they are a couple in the sequel I hope that they neither get married or have any children, I just think that those things are to tired and cliche and would probably just be distracting. And again, I don't want kids who see it to keep being fed the message that guys and girls must allways hook up and that if they do hook up they should allways get married and have kids, as if that was the ultimate accomplishment. They should be taught that there are plenty of other important things in life than starting a family and that there can be plenty of meaningful relations aside from romantic partnership.

      I totally agree with this. 

        Loading editor
    • I do think Nick and Judy are cute friends though.

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      Rich appears to shipp them himself, but that still doesn't mean it's cannon, in fact I think he might have even confirmed that it's not cannon at this point(don't quote me on that though). Judy did say that she loved Nick, but she appeared to do so very casually, so it's fully possible that she meant it platonically.

      They may very well turn out to be a couple, but it's not made clear by the movie. I suspect that the directos wanted to make their relationship somewhat ambigious so that they could chose which way they want it go if they make a sequel.

      My own thoughts on the shipping is that they're cute, they could make a pretty adorable couple, I don't dislike that idea in of itself, but still kinda feel that it'd be for the best if they stayed just friends.

      For one, they're colleagues, and you're not really supposed to fall in love with your colleagues, especailly not if you have an important job that requires dicipline and focus, like being a police officer.

      The there's the point that romance is so cliche, it's done SO OFTEN, it's insane. Most movies have elements of romance in them and allmost every movie where there are two opposite-sex protagonists (at least when they are the only protagonists) have them hooking up. It'd be refreshing if for once we could have the protagonists just be firends. Do we need to constantly send kids the message that two people can't just be friends? It seems like they'd be just fine that way.

      Then there's the fact that I suspect that a romance could stifle the dynamic that Nick and Judy have. They're both pretty different and they have fun interactions with each other. I feel that if they were a couple, their ability to tease and play off each other would be stifled and softened to be replaced by the same usual romance cliches, shifting the focus from them and their interactions to their feelings. I feel that there needs to be some amount of space between the character for them to both be able to breath and interact refreshingly.

      I would be lying if I said I wans't at least a bit torn on this. There is a shipper in me who thinks they could be cute together, but I generally suspect and reason that the wisest course would be to have them stay friends. I am open to be convinced otherwise, it seems concievable that the directors may find that Nick and Judy getting together could add something important to the sequel, or that they could find a way to portray their relationship that didn't distract or reduce their ability to interact well on screen, and I suspect they'll probably end up making the right choice on this matter, no matter what that choice is, assuming they don't just do it as an act of fan-service.

      However, while I am cautially open-minded on the idea of Nick and Judy being a couple, I feel fairly convinced that if they DO hook up, their relationship should almost certanly feel relatively friendly and laid-back. I don't think it'd work if they were head-over-heels madly in love with each other, it'd get way to bogged down in cliches and take away way too much of the relation they allready have. I can see how them occatioanlly holding paws, giving a few looks and having a few subtle romantic momments could work, but I don't think that them swooning over each other and being caught up in "true, magical fantastic love" would work, we've seen that stuff a million times and it just seems like almost everything likeable about Nick and Judy's dynamic would suffer because of it.

      So if they are a couple in the sequel I hope that they neither get married or have any children, I just think that those things are to tired and cliche and would probably just be distracting. And again, I don't want kids who see it to keep being fed the message that guys and girls must allways hook up and that if they do hook up they should allways get married and have kids, as if that was the ultimate accomplishment. They should be taught that there are plenty of other important things in life than starting a family and that there can be plenty of meaningful relations aside from romantic partnership.

      I agree to this but at the same time I really am not that open minded about the two being in love. Even if it is a laid back love relationship. I want it to just be a friendship

        Loading editor
    • Zootopialover45 wrote:
      I have watched zootopia only three times and the truth is I don't ship Nick and Judy and I have my reasons.

      1. I feel that you cannot watch a single Disney movie without there being love. I like that zootopia at least does not have any kissing. I kind of like seeing Nick and Judy as friends. If you ask me, I think that Nick and Judy's relationship is quite platonic. I would rather them stay that way. Zootopia is about excepting change and dealing with stereotypes and prejudice, not a prince saving a princess with a from a deep sleep with a kiss. I love how Zootopia is and I don't like the idea of the relationship changing from a friendship to a love. 

       2. If the two become a couple there will be many things they can't do. One of the things they might not be able to do is joke around all the time. They would have to act all lovey dovey. A second thing they would not be able to do if the two had kids is be in the ZPD. They would be too busy caring for their child to attend.

       3. The two are completely opposite. Judy is optimistic, determined , and energetic while Nick is calm , cool , charming , secretly insecure , and doing his stereotype's part. Plus, Judy is a bunny and Nick is a fox, if they had a baby... It would not look very promising.          

       4. They seem like friends anyway. Many WildeHopps shippers (Judy and Nick shippers) say the two are Canon but I really done agree. Many shippers say "Judy agreed that she loves Nick. OMG! OMG! They should totally be together", but actually I think Nick and Judy meant "I love ya' buddy", and not "I love you honey". They are like Buzz and Woody only their friendship is not a boy and boy or a girl and girl, it is a boy and girl friendship. Those exist you know.

        I am totally ok with you not agreeing. But, whatever you shippers say won't change my mind about not shipping them. Yes, some of you shippers will tell me " oh but the people who made zootopia said that the two make a good team/couple" and here is what I think of that, when someone says they make a good team/couple that doesn't always mean a love couple. Have you ever heard two friends say "we'll make a good couple" because I sure have. To me the two are BBFFF (Best Bunny Fox Friends) but think whatever you want.

        

      I have a thing for Number 3. If Nick and Judy had a child. it would either be a Rabbit with a Fox's Tail or a Fox with a Rabbit's Tail 

        Loading editor
    • Cool. I mean I don't ship them but I am ok if you do. :)

        Loading editor
    • Zootopialover45 wrote:
      Cool. I mean I don't ship them but I am ok if you do. :)

      that is one of my Ideas for a Zootopia Sequel. I believe that Hybrid Breeding can actually work 

        Loading editor
    • UpJonah.pietila wrote:
      Zootopialover45 wrote:
      Cool. I mean I don't ship them but I am ok if you do. :)
      that is one of my Ideas for a Zootopia Sequel. I believe that Hybrid Breeding can actually work 

      Yea, I think it could. I still don't ship them but I like that you ship them for good reasons. Sorry I don't ship them. I know it could work.

        Loading editor
    • Zootopialover45 wrote:
      UpJonah.pietila wrote:
      Zootopialover45 wrote:
      Cool. I mean I don't ship them but I am ok if you do. :)
      that is one of my Ideas for a Zootopia Sequel. I believe that Hybrid Breeding can actually work 
      Yea, I think it could. I still don't ship them but I like that you ship them for good reasons. Sorry I don't ship them. I know it could work.

      of course I ship Nick and Judy for good reasons. what Zootopia Pairing do you prefer other than Wilde Hopps?

        Loading editor
    • Jeez man. I believe for Nick and Judy the best ship is friendship. Think whatever you want though.  nothing can change my mind unless they are canon. I'm happy you ship them though.

        Loading editor
    • Zootopialover45 wrote:
      Jeez man. I believe for Nick and Judy the best ship is friendship. Think whatever you want though.  nothing can change my mind unless they are canon. I'm happy you ship them though.

      okay

        Loading editor
    • Why do Nick and Judy need to be in a relationship if their already great friends. Besides them being in love just is't natural.

        Loading editor
    • Wolf 91 wrote:
      Why do Nick and Judy need to be in a relationship if their already great friends. Besides them being in love just is't natural.

      We already get it. Thank you sir.. You should write real arguments instead of repeating the same point over and over again if you insist that much in participating in the thread.

        Loading editor
    • Jonah.pietila wrote:
      Zootopialover45 wrote:
      Jeez man. I believe for Nick and Judy the best ship is friendship. Think whatever you want though.  nothing can change my mind unless they are canon. I'm happy you ship them though.
      okay

      It is cool you ship em though :)

        Loading editor
    • Wolf 91 wrote:
      Why do Nick and Judy need to be in a relationship if their already great friends. Besides them being in love just is't natural.

      What you're doing is called "Argumentum ad nauseam", it's the formal logical fallacy to trying to convince through repition. (It's latin and basically means that you're repeating something to the point where it's nausiating) You're substituting argumentation for mantra-like repitition, as if what you're saying will make sense and convince us if you write it enough times. It won't. Enagage with the actual responses brought against your comments and stop restating the same non-normative and factually questionable thoughts over and over again.

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      Wolf 91 wrote:
      Why do Nick and Judy need to be in a relationship if their already great friends. Besides them being in love just is't natural.
      What you're doing is called "Argumentum ad nauseam", it's the formal logical fallacy to trying to convince through repition. (It's latin and basically means that you're repeating something to the point where it's nausiating) You're substituting argumentation for mantra-like repitition, as if what you're saying will make sense and convince us if you write it enough times. It won't. Enagage with the actual responses brought against your comments and stop restating the same non-normative and factually questionable thoughts over and over again.

      That's what I said above.

      Wolf, we're not deaf. We got your point. We just disagree. If you can't write a real argument though, no need participating in the thread seeing that you're just repeating the same point over and over again. 

        Loading editor
    • I know I say the same thing but because i have a feeling you guys are't exactly understanding what I'm saying.

        Loading editor
    • Wolf 91 wrote:
      I know I say the same thing but because i have a feeling you guys are't exactly understanding what I'm saying.

      We did understand, just don't care..

      Should I remember you that I've replied to you along with others notably Lazy Skeptic many times before, but we disagreed. If by 'not understanding your point' you mean 'disagreeing with you', then you're on the wrong page sir. This a thread, a place for arguments, so basically there'll be agreement and disagreement. 

      I'll stay faithfull to what I said before, that they should be a couple, but still respect your opinion though.

        Loading editor
    • Wolf 91 wrote:
      I know I say the same thing but because i have a feeling you guys are't exactly understanding what I'm saying.

      Actually, I do think I understand, it's just that your reasoning appears to be wholy fallacious.

      I have already tried to explain this to you form every angle I could think of.

      I've explained that the word natural is vague, and I've asked you to at least define it if you're going to use it to argue a point. You have not done so.

      I've explained why there are definitions of the word "natural" that could include certain types of interspecies relationships. You have done nothing to adress how this affects the point you're trying to make.

      I've explained that regardless of whether or not something is natural has no logical or normative implication on anything. It's just a frigging label. I (and most philosophers, as far as I'm aware) do not think that saying that something is "unnatural" has anything inheritly to do with whether or not we ought, or ought not do it, and you yourself have not explained why it should.

      I've explained that your own attempts at comparing the Wildehopps shipping with me dating some non-human animal are pointless, because you're missing the point on what factors determine my interest in a potential relationship.

      I've explained that if you are going to condemn that which is unnatural, then you'd also have to condemn pretty much all of modern civilization, according to most definitions of the term. You have made no attempt to provide a definition of "natural" that includes the things you presumably (or rather evidently, considering that you're using the internet) embrace, but exclude interspecies relationships. Nor have you made any attempts at justifying why naturality is inheritly relevant in courtship, but not in other things, like friendship.

      I've explained that your reasoning seems to rely on fallacious, emotion-based thinking. You have done next to nothing to contest that impression.

      I've explained why the kind of thinking that you seem to preform has lead to bad things in the past (and present), in an attempt to get you to see why that thinking is bad. You have not responded and you display no sign of having understood my message.

      Do you actually read my responses to you? I know they get pretty long, but it shouldn't take any more effort for you to read them than it does for me to write them. Besides, I wouldn't have to write so many thorough comments if you actually acknowledged and engaged with what I had to say.

        Loading editor
    • Rouhad wrote:
      Wolf 91 wrote:
      I know I say the same thing but because i have a feeling you guys are't exactly understanding what I'm saying.
      We did understand, just don't care..

      Should I remember you that I've replied to you along with others notably Lazy Skeptic many times before, but we disagreed. If by 'not understanding your point' you mean 'disagreeing with you', then you're on the wrong page sir. This a thread, a place for arguments, so basically there'll be agreement and disagreement. 

      I'll stay faithfull to what I said before, that they should be a couple, but still respect your opinion though.

      It's just that you guys seem to act like the fact that thier diffrent species is't a big deal even thou it is.

        Loading editor
    • Wolf 91 wrote:
      Rouhad wrote:
      Wolf 91 wrote:
      I know I say the same thing but because i have a feeling you guys are't exactly understanding what I'm saying.
      We did understand, just don't care..

      Should I remember you that I've replied to you along with others notably Lazy Skeptic many times before, but we disagreed. If by 'not understanding your point' you mean 'disagreeing with you', then you're on the wrong page sir. This a thread, a place for arguments, so basically there'll be agreement and disagreement. 

      I'll stay faithfull to what I said before, that they should be a couple, but still respect your opinion though.

      It's just that you guys seem to act like the fact that thier diffrent species is't a big deal even thou it is.

      -_- First, it's called an opinion sweetheart. It isn't a big deal for us, it is for you. Beauty of opinions.

      And second, why do you even think it's a big deal? Do you actually know better than ZOOTOPIA'S DIRECTORS??? They said in an interview that, Nick and Judy CAN be a couple because interspieces couple do exist in Zootopia, but their future relationship is still undecided. But they actually can. Now I am not saying you SHOULD ship them, but your whole 'they're different species' point, is wrong, according to the directors themselves.

      Keep deluding yourself bro, but THIS point AMONG YOUR OPINION is actually WRONG. If you insist on them being friends, then find something else to argument with, an other idea, an other point.  Nuff said

        Loading editor
    • Rouhad wrote:
      Wolf 91 wrote:
      Rouhad wrote:
      Wolf 91 wrote:
      I know I say the same thing but because i have a feeling you guys are't exactly understanding what I'm saying.
      We did understand, just don't care..

      Should I remember you that I've replied to you along with others notably Lazy Skeptic many times before, but we disagreed. If by 'not understanding your point' you mean 'disagreeing with you', then you're on the wrong page sir. This a thread, a place for arguments, so basically there'll be agreement and disagreement. 

      I'll stay faithfull to what I said before, that they should be a couple, but still respect your opinion though.

      It's just that you guys seem to act like the fact that thier diffrent species is't a big deal even thou it is.
      -_- First, it's called an opinion sweetheart. It isn't a big deal for us, it is for you. Beauty of opinions.

      And second, why do you even think it's a big deal? Do you actually know better than ZOOTOPIA'S DIRECTORS??? They said in an interview that, Nick and Judy CAN be a couple because interspieces couple do exist in Zootopia, but their future relationship is still undecided. But they actually can. Now I am not saying you SHOULD ship them, but your whole 'they're different species' point, is wrong, according to the directors themselves.

      Keep deluding yourself bro, but THIS point AMONG YOUR OPINION is actually WRONG. If you insist on them being friends, then find something else to argument with, an other idea, an other point.  Nuff said

      Relax mate, we just don't know how Disney would handle cross-breed/cross-species/interspecies.

        Loading editor
    • The Timeless Hero wrote:

      Rouhad wrote:
      Wolf 91 wrote:
      Rouhad wrote:
      Wolf 91 wrote:
      I know I say the same thing but because i have a feeling you guys are't exactly understanding what I'm saying.
      We did understand, just don't care..

      Should I remember you that I've replied to you along with others notably Lazy Skeptic many times before, but we disagreed. If by 'not understanding your point' you mean 'disagreeing with you', then you're on the wrong page sir. This a thread, a place for arguments, so basically there'll be agreement and disagreement. 

      I'll stay faithfull to what I said before, that they should be a couple, but still respect your opinion though.

      It's just that you guys seem to act like the fact that thier diffrent species is't a big deal even thou it is.
      -_- First, it's called an opinion sweetheart. It isn't a big deal for us, it is for you. Beauty of opinions.

      And second, why do you even think it's a big deal? Do you actually know better than ZOOTOPIA'S DIRECTORS??? They said in an interview that, Nick and Judy CAN be a couple because interspieces couple do exist in Zootopia, but their future relationship is still undecided. But they actually can. Now I am not saying you SHOULD ship them, but your whole 'they're different species' point, is wrong, according to the directors themselves.

      Keep deluding yourself bro, but THIS point AMONG YOUR OPINION is actually WRONG. If you insist on them being friends, then find something else to argument with, an other idea, an other point.  Nuff said

      Relax mate, we just don't know how Disney would handle cross-breed/cross-species/interspecies.

      Sorry dude, but I can't count how much times in the past I've been trying to be calm with this user who wants us to definitely 'agree' with his point. If his grammar mistakes aren't already enough.. I lost my temper that time.

      Anyway, like I said before, the whole different species issue isn't a problem to the directors. Though their future relationship is still undecided. Even though I ship them, I would prefer if they adopt kids instead of hybrid.

        Loading editor
    • Wolf 91 wrote:

      It's just that you guys seem to act like the fact that thier diffrent species is't a big deal even thou it is.

      Why is it? I understand tha the idea feels weird to you, but do you have any reason for feeling that way? You think an interspecies relationship would be normativvely negative. But why do you think that? What negative direct or indirect consequence would an interspecies relationship have inheritly that we ought to avoid, and why is it worth avoiding? Would it become destructive? Would it have some negative effect on society? Would it violate someone else's freedoms? Etc. Would it do anything like that?

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      Wolf 91 wrote:

      It's just that you guys seem to act like the fact that thier diffrent species is't a big deal even thou it is.

      Why is it? I understand tha the idea feels weird to you, but do you have any reason for feeling that way? You think an interspecies relationship would be normativvely negative. But why do you think that? What negative direct or indirect consequence would an interspecies relationship have inheritly that we ought to avoid, and why is it worth avoiding? Would it become destructive? Would it have some negative effect on society? Would it violate someone else's freedoms? Etc. Would it do anything like that?

      It's like I said before, If Nick and Judy ever wanted to have kids they could't because their DNA is too diffrant. Also it jsut would not make any sense, it would be like you or me being in a relationship with a Hyena and we both know that a human and a Hyena sould't be in a relationship because it's not right. You can't ingnore the elephant in the room. Also thier already good friends, why do they need to be a couple. 

        Loading editor
    • Wolf 91 wrote:

      It's like I said before, If Nick and Judy ever wanted to have kids they could't because their DNA is too diffrant. Also it jsut would not make any sense, it would be like you or me being in a relationship with a Hyena and we both know that a human and a Hyena sould't be in a relationship because it's not right. You can't ingnore the elephant in the room. Also thier already good friends, why do they need to be a couple. 

      Yes, you've said that already, but just because they couldn't have children (that is assuming they can't, this is a disney story, so for all we know maybe they could) doesn't mean they couldn't be together, assuming they wanted to, you're just mentioning a point of inconvenience in the potential relationship, for which there would be alternate solution, such as adoption, assuming they even want children, some people don't so it may not even be a consideration. There are plenty of people who get together despite knowing they can't have kids together, that doesn't mean they shouldn't as long as they are aware of that drawback.

      As for your second objection, that's again a false equivalency. Two adults of different species but human-like sentience hooking up is simply not equivalent to one adult of human-like intelligence and a feral animal. You compare it to me as a human hooking up with a hyena, but the reason I (as you put it) "know that a human and hyena shouldn't be together" isn't the same as you think. For me the reason is becasue me and the hyena are not cognitively comparable and the hyena wouldn't be able to give informed consent about such a relationship. The reason I don't date hyenas has nothing (inheritly) to do with what species they are.

      Again, if we found a hyena (or any other non-human creature) of human-like cognitive abilities and the ability to give infromed consent in regards to matters concerning relationships, I would not be necessarily opposed to that someone having a interspecies relationship with that creature.

      And again, I'm not saying Nick and Judy need to be a couple, I am not a shipper, my headcannon is that they're platonic friends.

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      Wolf 91 wrote:

      It's like I said before, If Nick and Judy ever wanted to have kids they could't because their DNA is too diffrant. Also it jsut would not make any sense, it would be like you or me being in a relationship with a Hyena and we both know that a human and a Hyena sould't be in a relationship because it's not right. You can't ingnore the elephant in the room. Also thier already good friends, why do they need to be a couple. 

      Yes, you've said that already, but just because they couldn't have children (that is assuming they can't, this is a disney story, so for all we know maybe they could) doesn't mean they couldn't be together, assuming they wanted to, you're just mentioning a point of inconvenience in the potential relationship, for which there would be alternate solution, such as adoption, assuming they even want children, some people don't so it may not even be a consideration. There are plenty of people who get together despite knowing they can't have kids together, that doesn't mean they shouldn't as long as they are aware of that drawback.

      As for your second objection, that's again a false equivalency. Two adults of different species but human-like sentience hooking up is simply not equivalent to one adult of human-like intelligence and a feral animal. You compare it to me as a human hooking up with a hyena, but the reason I (as you put it) "know that a human and hyena shouldn't be together" isn't the same as you think. For me the reason is becasue me and the hyena are not cognitively comparable and the hyena wouldn't be able to give informed consent about such a relationship. The reason I don't date hyenas has nothing (inheritly) to do with what species they are.

      Again, if we found a hyena (or any other non-human creature) of human-like cognitive abilities and the ability to give infromed consent in regards to matters concerning relationships, I would not be necessarily opposed to that someone having a interspecies relationship with that creature.

      And again, I'm not saying Nick and Judy need to be a couple, I am not a shipper, my headcannon is that they're platonic friends.

      I aged with what you said at the end. I think the best ship is friendship.

        Loading editor
    • Wolf 91 wrote:
      Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      Wolf 91 wrote:

      It's just that you guys seem to act like the fact that thier diffrent species is't a big deal even thou it is.

      Why is it? I understand tha the idea feels weird to you, but do you have any reason for feeling that way? You think an interspecies relationship would be normativvely negative. But why do you think that? What negative direct or indirect consequence would an interspecies relationship have inheritly that we ought to avoid, and why is it worth avoiding? Would it become destructive? Would it have some negative effect on society? Would it violate someone else's freedoms? Etc. Would it do anything like that?
      It's like I said before, If Nick and Judy ever wanted to have kids they could't because their DNA is too diffrant. Also it jsut would not make any sense, it would be like you or me being in a relationship with a Hyena and we both know that a human and a Hyena sould't be in a relationship because it's not right. You can't ingnore the elephant in the room. Also thier already good friends, why do they need to be a couple. 

      What you said at the end is right. They should just stay friends.

        Loading editor
    • Zootopialover45 wrote:
      Wolf 91 wrote:
      Lazy Skeptic wrote:
      Wolf 91 wrote:

      It's just that you guys seem to act like the fact that thier diffrent species is't a big deal even thou it is.

      Why is it? I understand tha the idea feels weird to you, but do you have any reason for feeling that way? You think an interspecies relationship would be normativvely negative. But why do you think that? What negative direct or indirect consequence would an interspecies relationship have inheritly that we ought to avoid, and why is it worth avoiding? Would it become destructive? Would it have some negative effect on society? Would it violate someone else's freedoms? Etc. Would it do anything like that?
      It's like I said before, If Nick and Judy ever wanted to have kids they could't because their DNA is too diffrant. Also it jsut would not make any sense, it would be like you or me being in a relationship with a Hyena and we both know that a human and a Hyena sould't be in a relationship because it's not right. You can't ingnore the elephant in the room. Also thier already good friends, why do they need to be a couple. 
      What you said at the end is right. They should just stay friends.

      Thank you.

        Loading editor
    • I still want Nick and Judy to be a couple. I don't care if you users give me a million excuses of why that can't happen. I already found a bunch of art on Deviantart of Nick and Judy as a couple, and a bunch of Fanfictions about them too. And Zootopia is just a fictional universe. And when you want to make a Fanfiction or whatever of that fox and bunny being a couple, you can throw reality out the window if you want. Deviantart artists and Fanfiction writers, they do what they want. I'm gunna support Nick and Judy, no matter what excuses you users give me. I know bunnies and foxes don't get along in the real world, but in Zootopia, most foxes like Nick have evolved and are no longer like that. In Zootopia, Nick is not like a fox that kills and eats bunnies, almost all predator and prey in Zootopia have evolved and got along. I would like it if Nick and Judy have kids, even if the kids are hybrids or not. I actually do not want any excuses from you users, that can happen in a Fanfiction or a sequel (even though heavily unlikely). All you need to do is throw reality out the window, which filmmakers and Fanfiction writers can do if they want to do it. Most films are made to make us happy, like Zootopia. Even though there's things that are impossible in the real world, that just happens in films to make us happy, like me. Even Fanfiction writers do that. I'm gunna henceforth, support Nick and Judy as a paring. If you have excuses of why that can't happen, look at this whole thing I wrote again.

        Loading editor
    • I largely agree with Ethan3111678, it's fiction, so things don't need to make sense more than necessary for us to suspend our disbelief, as long as realism is sacrificed for the sake of entertainment, satisfaction or though-provokation. (The reason I'm not a shipper isn't beasue I don't like the couple, they're pretty cute, but there are some less-than ideal factors between them, and more than anything, I want the to remain friends in order to keep the cinematic experience fresh, as I've already said)

      But while logistical or philosphical arguments needen't ruin a fictional scenario, they CAN still be very much relevant to the quality adn consequences of the art, it depends. The problem here is that the objections most people raise against the shipping are just appeal to nature fallacies. My own efforts to combat those arguments have nothing to do with my opinions on the shipping, I debunk for the sake of those who's personal and subjective views on the shipping are different than mine (such as yourself), as well as for the debunking's own sake, as a personal and interpersonal intellectual practice.

        Loading editor
    • I see, Lazy Skeptic. But will you still let me support the NickxJudy pairing? Because there are more users who do ship them than ones who don't.

        Loading editor
    • Ethan3111678 wrote:
      I see, Lazy Skeptic. But will you still let me support the NickxJudy pairing? Because there are more users who do ship them than ones who don't.

      Of course, that was part of the point, it falls within the realm of the primarily subjective, and as I said, I do have sympathy for the shippers. I was saying that while subjective aspects of such questions argumentation is nothing other than an idle and curious examination of perspective, but when someone make more concrete arguemtns about what makes sense or what would and wouldn't be right, they can and should have those claims subejcted to scrutiny, no matter how trivial the topic.

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:
      I see, Lazy Skeptic. But will you still let me support the NickxJudy pairing? Because there are more users who do ship them than ones who don't.

      Of course, that was part of the point, it falls within the realm of the primarily subjective, and as I said, I do have sympathy for the shippers. I was saying that while subjective aspects of such questions argumentation is nothing other than an idle and curious examination of perspective, but when someone make more concrete arguemtns about what makes sense or what would and wouldn't be right, they can and should have those claims subejcted to scrutiny, no matter how trivial the topic.

      I see. I understand.

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:
      I see, Lazy Skeptic. But will you still let me support the NickxJudy pairing? Because there are more users who do ship them than ones who don't.

      Of course, that was part of the point, it falls within the realm of the primarily subjective, and as I said, I do have sympathy for the shippers. I was saying that while subjective aspects of such questions argumentation is nothing other than an idle and curious examination of perspective, but when someone make more concrete arguemtns about what makes sense or what would and wouldn't be right, they can and should have those claims subejcted to scrutiny, no matter how trivial the topic.

      And do you mind telling what I told you to Wolf 94?

        Loading editor
    • Ethan3111678 wrote:

      And do you mind telling what I told you to Wolf 94?

      I'm not entirely sure I know what you're refering to. I should tell him what? That you want to support Wildhopps? I don't see why you couldn't tell him yourself. Either way, I doubt talking to that guy will accomplish much of anything. He gives the impression of being unwilling to re-think his intuitions or considering the merits of other points of veiws, at least in these matters.

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      And do you mind telling what I told you to Wolf 94?

      I'm not entirely sure I know what you're refering to. I should tell him what? That you want to support Wildhopps? I don't see why you couldn't tell him yourself. Either way, I doubt talking to that guy will accomplish much of anything. He gives the impression of being unwilling to re-think his intuitions or considering the merits of other points of veiws, at least in these matters.

      Oh, I see.

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      And do you mind telling what I told you to Wolf 94?

      I'm not entirely sure I know what you're refering to. I should tell him what? That you want to support Wildhopps? I don't see why you couldn't tell him yourself. Either way, I doubt talking to that guy will accomplish much of anything. He gives the impression of being unwilling to re-think his intuitions or considering the merits of other points of veiws, at least in these matters.

      I just think he never heard of film makers throwing reality out the window and and making impossible things possible in their movies, and that they are designed for entertainment.

        Loading editor
    • Ethan3111678 wrote:

      I just think he never heard of film makers throwing reality out the window and and making impossible things possible in their movies, and that they are designed for entertainment.

      Well, I never felt much personal motivation to do that, I prefer contending with arguments rather than bypassing them, it is more valuable to me to engage with his fallacious reasoning than to point out that reasong doens't necessarily matter here. Especially as I'm not a shipper, I have no insentive to convince him that the shipping is alright for the sake of him being ok with the shipping.

      And even if I could convince him that it wouldn't be some sort of big deal if Wildhopps happened or not, that won't change how he feels about it personally.

        Loading editor
    • Alright. I understand. And if any more of you users out there have any more excuses of why WildeHopps can't happen, read my first comment I posted on this page.

        Loading editor
    • Ethan3111678 wrote:
      I still want Nick and Judy to be a couple. I don't care if you users give me a million excuses of why that can't happen. I already found a bunch of art on Deviantart of Nick and Judy as a couple, and a bunch of Fanfictions about them too. And Zootopia is just a fictional universe. And when you want to make a Fanfiction or whatever of that fox and bunny being a couple, you can throw reality out the window if you want. Deviantart artists and Fanfiction writers, they do what they want. I'm gunna support Nick and Judy, no matter what excuses you users give me. I know bunnies and foxes don't get along in the real world, but in Zootopia, most foxes like Nick have evolved and are no longer like that. In Zootopia, Nick is not like a fox that kills and eats bunnies, almost all predator and prey in Zootopia have evolved and got along. I would like it if Nick and Judy have kids, even if the kids are hybrids or not. I actually do not want any excuses from you users, that can happen in a Fanfiction or a sequel (even though heavily unlikely). All you need to do is throw reality out the window, which filmmakers and Fanfiction writers can do if they want to do it. Most films are made to make us happy, like Zootopia. Even though there's things that are impossible in the real world, that just happens in films to make us happy, like me. Even Fanfiction writers do that. I'm gunna henceforth, support Nick and Judy as a paring. If you have excuses of why that can't happen, look at this whole thing I wrote again.

      I like that that you Ship them but just can't ship them. I feel they could be just friends

        Loading editor
    • Zootopialover45 wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:
      I still want Nick and Judy to be a couple. I don't care if you users give me a million excuses of why that can't happen. I already found a bunch of art on Deviantart of Nick and Judy as a couple, and a bunch of Fanfictions about them too. And Zootopia is just a fictional universe. And when you want to make a Fanfiction or whatever of that fox and bunny being a couple, you can throw reality out the window if you want. Deviantart artists and Fanfiction writers, they do what they want. I'm gunna support Nick and Judy, no matter what excuses you users give me. I know bunnies and foxes don't get along in the real world, but in Zootopia, most foxes like Nick have evolved and are no longer like that. In Zootopia, Nick is not like a fox that kills and eats bunnies, almost all predator and prey in Zootopia have evolved and got along. I would like it if Nick and Judy have kids, even if the kids are hybrids or not. I actually do not want any excuses from you users, that can happen in a Fanfiction or a sequel (even though heavily unlikely). All you need to do is throw reality out the window, which filmmakers and Fanfiction writers can do if they want to do it. Most films are made to make us happy, like Zootopia. Even though there's things that are impossible in the real world, that just happens in films to make us happy, like me. Even Fanfiction writers do that. I'm gunna henceforth, support Nick and Judy as a paring. If you have excuses of why that can't happen, look at this whole thing I wrote again.

      I like that that you Ship them but just can't ship them. I feel they could be just friends

      Whatever you say.

        Loading editor
    • Jonah.pietila wrote:
      I would like to say that the Relationship between Nick and Judy is canon. because I have seen artwork of them Getting Married and having a Family. and Rich Moore did say that the shipping name Wilde Hopps is canon. so then I do ship it. and Judy might have a Crush on Nick in my opinion. because Nick said: You know you love me. then Judy said: Do I know that? Yes! Yes I do. also I would like to state that there could be a possiblity where Nick and Judy end up getting Married in the Sequel. so Rich Moore should get an idea from the fans on how to make a Zootopia Sequel. well let me know what you think about this topic! be sure to post your comments down below! 

      Platonic love I'm fine with, romantic love between two completely different species isn't exactly... you know... possible.

        Loading editor
    • Aramirtheranger wrote:

      Jonah.pietila wrote:
      I would like to say that the Relationship between Nick and Judy is canon. because I have seen artwork of them Getting Married and having a Family. and Rich Moore did say that the shipping name Wilde Hopps is canon. so then I do ship it. and Judy might have a Crush on Nick in my opinion. because Nick said: You know you love me. then Judy said: Do I know that? Yes! Yes I do. also I would like to state that there could be a possiblity where Nick and Judy end up getting Married in the Sequel. so Rich Moore should get an idea from the fans on how to make a Zootopia Sequel. well let me know what you think about this topic! be sure to post your comments down below! 

      Platonic love I'm fine with, romantic love between two completely different species isn't exactly... you know... possible.

      Well, Zootopia is a fictional universe, and as I said before, although it's not possible in the real world for two different species to be in love, that can be possible in the fictional world of Zootopia because if great films want to be made, the filmmakers can throw reality out the window if they want.

        Loading editor
    • Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Aramirtheranger wrote:

      Jonah.pietila wrote:
      I would like to say that the Relationship between Nick and Judy is canon. because I have seen artwork of them Getting Married and having a Family. and Rich Moore did say that the shipping name Wilde Hopps is canon. so then I do ship it. and Judy might have a Crush on Nick in my opinion. because Nick said: You know you love me. then Judy said: Do I know that? Yes! Yes I do. also I would like to state that there could be a possiblity where Nick and Judy end up getting Married in the Sequel. so Rich Moore should get an idea from the fans on how to make a Zootopia Sequel. well let me know what you think about this topic! be sure to post your comments down below! 
      Platonic love I'm fine with, romantic love between two completely different species isn't exactly... you know... possible.
      Well, Zootopia is a fictional universe, and as I said before, although it's not possible in the real world for two different species to be in love, that can be possible in the fictional world of Zootopia because if great films want to be made, the filmmakers can throw reality out the window if they want.

      Actually Aramirtheranger is right. It just would't be right nor would it make sense for romantic love to happen between to charecters who are of diffrent species.

        Loading editor
    • Wolf 91 wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Aramirtheranger wrote:

      Jonah.pietila wrote:
      I would like to say that the Relationship between Nick and Judy is canon. because I have seen artwork of them Getting Married and having a Family. and Rich Moore did say that the shipping name Wilde Hopps is canon. so then I do ship it. and Judy might have a Crush on Nick in my opinion. because Nick said: You know you love me. then Judy said: Do I know that? Yes! Yes I do. also I would like to state that there could be a possiblity where Nick and Judy end up getting Married in the Sequel. so Rich Moore should get an idea from the fans on how to make a Zootopia Sequel. well let me know what you think about this topic! be sure to post your comments down below! 
      Platonic love I'm fine with, romantic love between two completely different species isn't exactly... you know... possible.
      Well, Zootopia is a fictional universe, and as I said before, although it's not possible in the real world for two different species to be in love, that can be possible in the fictional world of Zootopia because if great films want to be made, the filmmakers can throw reality out the window if they want.

      Actually Aramirtheranger is right. It just would't be right nor would it make sense for romantic love to happen between to charecters who are of diffrent species.

      We ALREADY got the point. THANK YOU -_- 😑😑👏🏻👏🏻

        Loading editor
    • Aramirtheranger wrote:

      Platonic love I'm fine with, romantic love between two completely different species isn't exactly... you know... possible.

      That's a very extraordinary claim you have there, given the absolute nature of it.

      Given the range of human diversity and aberration when it comes to our attraction, I'd be genuinly shocked to learn that there wasn't at least some weirdo somewhere who was head over heels genuinly attraced, infatuated and in love with their pet or something. And even if that feeling couldn't be mutual (which I've heard stories about how they supposedly could be) it would still be proof that interspecies love is possible, even if it may be sub-optimal in many respects to say the least.

      But even if there isn't such a person (hopefuly there aren't too many), that wouldn't be prove that romance couldn't be interspecies, only that the qualities people seek in romance appearently can't be found in the available non-human creatures around us.

      But if there was another species who had most of the major defining neurological qualities of a human, I see no reason why we COULDN'T fall in love with them and vice-versa. Sure, most people would stick to their own species, similarly to how people tend to stick to their own ethnicity, but I don't see why a person COULDN'T like a non-human with the right qualities. In fact, I don't think I myself would see species as a necessarily crucial factor on its own, overlooking whatever practical drawbacks (or advantages, who knows?) sucha relation would have and how social pressures would influence my decision.

      And the world of Zootopia is a world where there exists creatures of different species who have comparable neurological capacities and all that jazz, so even IF you could make an argument why Wildehopps being a thing would be a bad idea or whatever else, I don't see on what grounds you could claim that attraction simply couldn't happen between them.

        Loading editor
    • I've read about ten such cases, thank you very much.

        Loading editor
    • Users who don't understand what I mean, listen to me. I am saying that I want WildeHopps to happen. It's happened all over the Internet on Fanfiction and Deviantart, and although all you users have me millions of excuses of why WildeHopps can't happen, I'm gunna say this again, when it comes to making great sequels and stories on Fanfiction, what the filmmakers or author can do is toss reality out the window, or in other words, forget reality because I have seen in a lot of movies things that are not possible in real life, and yes, it wouldn't make sense for a fox and a bunny to have romance in the real world, but Zootopia is a fictional universe, and they can have romance if they want. I don't care if Nick and Judy are different species. Nick and Judy have similar sizes. And most films and stories like Zootopia are designed for entertainment, not science and reality. And if the filmmakers can make the impossible nonsense possible if they want because filmmakers do what they want in their films. If any more of you users out there still have any more excuses about WildeHopps, I'd be interested in talking to you.

        Loading editor
    • Rouhad wrote:

      Wolf 91 wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Aramirtheranger wrote:

      Jonah.pietila wrote:
      I would like to say that the Relationship between Nick and Judy is canon. because I have seen artwork of them Getting Married and having a Family. and Rich Moore did say that the shipping name Wilde Hopps is canon. so then I do ship it. and Judy might have a Crush on Nick in my opinion. because Nick said: You know you love me. then Judy said: Do I know that? Yes! Yes I do. also I would like to state that there could be a possiblity where Nick and Judy end up getting Married in the Sequel. so Rich Moore should get an idea from the fans on how to make a Zootopia Sequel. well let me know what you think about this topic! be sure to post your comments down below! 
      Platonic love I'm fine with, romantic love between two completely different species isn't exactly... you know... possible.
      Well, Zootopia is a fictional universe, and as I said before, although it's not possible in the real world for two different species to be in love, that can be possible in the fictional world of Zootopia because if great films want to be made, the filmmakers can throw reality out the window if they want.

      Actually Aramirtheranger is right. It just would't be right nor would it make sense for romantic love to happen between to charecters who are of diffrent species.

      We ALREADY got the point. THANK YOU -_- 😑😑👏🏻👏🏻

      Did you get my point?

        Loading editor
    • Yeah, I'm leaving this while I still can...

        Loading editor
    • Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Rouhad wrote:

      Wolf 91 wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Aramirtheranger wrote:

      Jonah.pietila wrote:
      I would like to say that the Relationship between Nick and Judy is canon. because I have seen artwork of them Getting Married and having a Family. and Rich Moore did say that the shipping name Wilde Hopps is canon. so then I do ship it. and Judy might have a Crush on Nick in my opinion. because Nick said: You know you love me. then Judy said: Do I know that? Yes! Yes I do. also I would like to state that there could be a possiblity where Nick and Judy end up getting Married in the Sequel. so Rich Moore should get an idea from the fans on how to make a Zootopia Sequel. well let me know what you think about this topic! be sure to post your comments down below! 
      Platonic love I'm fine with, romantic love between two completely different species isn't exactly... you know... possible.
      Well, Zootopia is a fictional universe, and as I said before, although it's not possible in the real world for two different species to be in love, that can be possible in the fictional world of Zootopia because if great films want to be made, the filmmakers can throw reality out the window if they want.

      Actually Aramirtheranger is right. It just would't be right nor would it make sense for romantic love to happen between to charecters who are of diffrent species.

      We ALREADY got the point. THANK YOU -_- 😑😑👏🏻👏🏻

      Did you get my point?

      I was talking to Wolf 91 who keeps repeating one single point instead of making a real argument -_-

        Loading editor
    • Rouhad wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Rouhad wrote:

      Wolf 91 wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Aramirtheranger wrote:

      Jonah.pietila wrote:
      I would like to say that the Relationship between Nick and Judy is canon. because I have seen artwork of them Getting Married and having a Family. and Rich Moore did say that the shipping name Wilde Hopps is canon. so then I do ship it. and Judy might have a Crush on Nick in my opinion. because Nick said: You know you love me. then Judy said: Do I know that? Yes! Yes I do. also I would like to state that there could be a possiblity where Nick and Judy end up getting Married in the Sequel. so Rich Moore should get an idea from the fans on how to make a Zootopia Sequel. well let me know what you think about this topic! be sure to post your comments down below! 
      Platonic love I'm fine with, romantic love between two completely different species isn't exactly... you know... possible.
      Well, Zootopia is a fictional universe, and as I said before, although it's not possible in the real world for two different species to be in love, that can be possible in the fictional world of Zootopia because if great films want to be made, the filmmakers can throw reality out the window if they want.

      Actually Aramirtheranger is right. It just would't be right nor would it make sense for romantic love to happen between to charecters who are of diffrent species.

      We ALREADY got the point. THANK YOU -_- 😑😑👏🏻👏🏻

      Did you get my point?

      I was talking to Wolf 91 who keeps repeating one single point instead of making a real argument -_-

      I see. And if any more of you guys still have any more excuses of why WildeHopps can't happen, I'd be interested in talking to you.

        Loading editor
    • Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Rouhad wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Rouhad wrote:

      Wolf 91 wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Aramirtheranger wrote:


      Jonah.pietila wrote:
      I would like to say that the Relationship between Nick and Judy is canon. because I have seen artwork of them Getting Married and having a Family. and Rich Moore did say that the shipping name Wilde Hopps is canon. so then I do ship it. and Judy might have a Crush on Nick in my opinion. because Nick said: You know you love me. then Judy said: Do I know that? Yes! Yes I do. also I would like to state that there could be a possiblity where Nick and Judy end up getting Married in the Sequel. so Rich Moore should get an idea from the fans on how to make a Zootopia Sequel. well let me know what you think about this topic! be sure to post your comments down below! 
      Platonic love I'm fine with, romantic love between two completely different species isn't exactly... you know... possible.
      Well, Zootopia is a fictional universe, and as I said before, although it's not possible in the real world for two different species to be in love, that can be possible in the fictional world of Zootopia because if great films want to be made, the filmmakers can throw reality out the window if they want.
      Actually Aramirtheranger is right. It just would't be right nor would it make sense for romantic love to happen between to charecters who are of diffrent species.
      We ALREADY got the point. THANK YOU -_- 😑😑👏🏻👏🏻
      Did you get my point?
      I was talking to Wolf 91 who keeps repeating one single point instead of making a real argument -_-
      I see. And if any more of you guys still have any more excuses of why WildeHopps can't happen, I'd be interested in talking to you.

      Their not excuses, we were just using logic.

        Loading editor
    • Wolf 91 wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Rouhad wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Rouhad wrote:

      Wolf 91 wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Aramirtheranger wrote:


      Jonah.pietila wrote:
      I would like to say that the Relationship between Nick and Judy is canon. because I have seen artwork of them Getting Married and having a Family. and Rich Moore did say that the shipping name Wilde Hopps is canon. so then I do ship it. and Judy might have a Crush on Nick in my opinion. because Nick said: You know you love me. then Judy said: Do I know that? Yes! Yes I do. also I would like to state that there could be a possiblity where Nick and Judy end up getting Married in the Sequel. so Rich Moore should get an idea from the fans on how to make a Zootopia Sequel. well let me know what you think about this topic! be sure to post your comments down below! 
      Platonic love I'm fine with, romantic love between two completely different species isn't exactly... you know... possible.
      Well, Zootopia is a fictional universe, and as I said before, although it's not possible in the real world for two different species to be in love, that can be possible in the fictional world of Zootopia because if great films want to be made, the filmmakers can throw reality out the window if they want.
      Actually Aramirtheranger is right. It just would't be right nor would it make sense for romantic love to happen between to charecters who are of diffrent species.
      We ALREADY got the point. THANK YOU -_- 😑😑👏🏻👏🏻
      Did you get my point?
      I was talking to Wolf 91 who keeps repeating one single point instead of making a real argument -_-
      I see. And if any more of you guys still have any more excuses of why WildeHopps can't happen, I'd be interested in talking to you.

      Their not excuses, we were just using logic.

      Logic, huh? Okay. I see what you are saying. But here's one thing that could surprise a lot of you guys. What if I told you that Rich Moore and Byron Howard said a Zootopian rabbit/fox hybrid was possible? Because I'm gunna make this as Crystal clear as I can make it. Rich Moore and Byron Howard, who created Zootopia, said a rabbit/fox hybrid was possible in a video I found on Deviantart. If you want me to prove it, I can give you the link.

        Loading editor
    • Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Wolf 91 wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Rouhad wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Rouhad wrote:

      Wolf 91 wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Aramirtheranger wrote:


      Jonah.pietila wrote:
      I would like to say that the Relationship between Nick and Judy is canon. because I have seen artwork of them Getting Married and having a Family. and Rich Moore did say that the shipping name Wilde Hopps is canon. so then I do ship it. and Judy might have a Crush on Nick in my opinion. because Nick said: You know you love me. then Judy said: Do I know that? Yes! Yes I do. also I would like to state that there could be a possiblity where Nick and Judy end up getting Married in the Sequel. so Rich Moore should get an idea from the fans on how to make a Zootopia Sequel. well let me know what you think about this topic! be sure to post your comments down below! 
      Platonic love I'm fine with, romantic love between two completely different species isn't exactly... you know... possible.
      Well, Zootopia is a fictional universe, and as I said before, although it's not possible in the real world for two different species to be in love, that can be possible in the fictional world of Zootopia because if great films want to be made, the filmmakers can throw reality out the window if they want.
      Actually Aramirtheranger is right. It just would't be right nor would it make sense for romantic love to happen between to charecters who are of diffrent species.
      We ALREADY got the point. THANK YOU -_- 😑😑👏🏻👏🏻
      Did you get my point?
      I was talking to Wolf 91 who keeps repeating one single point instead of making a real argument -_-
      I see. And if any more of you guys still have any more excuses of why WildeHopps can't happen, I'd be interested in talking to you.

      Their not excuses, we were just using logic.

      Logic, huh? Okay. I see what you are saying. But here's one thing that could surprise a lot of you guys. What if I told you that Rich Moore and Byron Howard said a Zootopian rabbit/fox hybrid was possible? Because I'm gunna make this as Crystal clear as I can make it. Rich Moore and Byron Howard, who created Zootopia, said a rabbit/fox hybrid was possible in a video I found on Deviantart. If you want me to prove it, I can give you the link.

      As much as I ship them, I don't want a rabbit/fox hybrid.

        Loading editor
    • Rouhad wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Wolf 91 wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Rouhad wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Rouhad wrote:

      Wolf 91 wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Aramirtheranger wrote:


      Jonah.pietila wrote:
      I would like to say that the Relationship between Nick and Judy is canon. because I have seen artwork of them Getting Married and having a Family. and Rich Moore did say that the shipping name Wilde Hopps is canon. so then I do ship it. and Judy might have a Crush on Nick in my opinion. because Nick said: You know you love me. then Judy said: Do I know that? Yes! Yes I do. also I would like to state that there could be a possiblity where Nick and Judy end up getting Married in the Sequel. so Rich Moore should get an idea from the fans on how to make a Zootopia Sequel. well let me know what you think about this topic! be sure to post your comments down below! 
      Platonic love I'm fine with, romantic love between two completely different species isn't exactly... you know... possible.
      Well, Zootopia is a fictional universe, and as I said before, although it's not possible in the real world for two different species to be in love, that can be possible in the fictional world of Zootopia because if great films want to be made, the filmmakers can throw reality out the window if they want.
      Actually Aramirtheranger is right. It just would't be right nor would it make sense for romantic love to happen between to charecters who are of diffrent species.
      We ALREADY got the point. THANK YOU -_- 😑😑👏🏻👏🏻
      Did you get my point?
      I was talking to Wolf 91 who keeps repeating one single point instead of making a real argument -_-
      I see. And if any more of you guys still have any more excuses of why WildeHopps can't happen, I'd be interested in talking to you.

      Their not excuses, we were just using logic.

      Logic, huh? Okay. I see what you are saying. But here's one thing that could surprise a lot of you guys. What if I told you that Rich Moore and Byron Howard said a Zootopian rabbit/fox hybrid was possible? Because I'm gunna make this as Crystal clear as I can make it. Rich Moore and Byron Howard, who created Zootopia, said a rabbit/fox hybrid was possible in a video I found on Deviantart. If you want me to prove it, I can give you the link.

      As much as I ship them, I don't want a rabbit/fox hybrid.

      I know, but their children can still be like that. And also, Rich Moore and Byron Howard will make up their mind what will happen next, because they created Zootopia. And Nick and Judy having romance in a possible sequel would be even better. Now, I know that wouldn't make sense in the real world, but, in movies, you can forget reality and make the real life and impossible nonsense possible.

        Loading editor
    • Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Rouhad wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Wolf 91 wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Rouhad wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Rouhad wrote:

      Wolf 91 wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Aramirtheranger wrote:


      Jonah.pietila wrote:
      I would like to say that the Relationship between Nick and Judy is canon. because I have seen artwork of them Getting Married and having a Family. and Rich Moore did say that the shipping name Wilde Hopps is canon. so then I do ship it. and Judy might have a Crush on Nick in my opinion. because Nick said: You know you love me. then Judy said: Do I know that? Yes! Yes I do. also I would like to state that there could be a possiblity where Nick and Judy end up getting Married in the Sequel. so Rich Moore should get an idea from the fans on how to make a Zootopia Sequel. well let me know what you think about this topic! be sure to post your comments down below! 
      Platonic love I'm fine with, romantic love between two completely different species isn't exactly... you know... possible.
      Well, Zootopia is a fictional universe, and as I said before, although it's not possible in the real world for two different species to be in love, that can be possible in the fictional world of Zootopia because if great films want to be made, the filmmakers can throw reality out the window if they want.
      Actually Aramirtheranger is right. It just would't be right nor would it make sense for romantic love to happen between to charecters who are of diffrent species.
      We ALREADY got the point. THANK YOU -_- 😑😑👏🏻👏🏻
      Did you get my point?
      I was talking to Wolf 91 who keeps repeating one single point instead of making a real argument -_-
      I see. And if any more of you guys still have any more excuses of why WildeHopps can't happen, I'd be interested in talking to you.

      Their not excuses, we were just using logic.

      Logic, huh? Okay. I see what you are saying. But here's one thing that could surprise a lot of you guys. What if I told you that Rich Moore and Byron Howard said a Zootopian rabbit/fox hybrid was possible? Because I'm gunna make this as Crystal clear as I can make it. Rich Moore and Byron Howard, who created Zootopia, said a rabbit/fox hybrid was possible in a video I found on Deviantart. If you want me to prove it, I can give you the link.

      As much as I ship them, I don't want a rabbit/fox hybrid.

      I know, but their children can still be like that. And also, Rich Moore and Byron Howard will make up their mind what will happen next, because they created Zootopia. And Nick and Judy having romance in a possible sequel would be even better. Now, I know that wouldn't make sense in the real world, but, in movies, you can forget reality and make the real life and impossible nonsense possible.

      I know. I refuse a hybrid not because it can't happen in real life, but beacuse it will ruin the film for a lot of people.

      Many are already saying that kind of 'mutant' will ruin Zootopia for them. And to be honest, I don't think it will be really 'nice looking'. If they ever marry, and want kids, let them adopt. It will be better for a lot of people, for the film's results and critical response, and it will avoid ALOT of controversy.

        Loading editor
    • Rouhad wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Rouhad wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Wolf 91 wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Rouhad wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Rouhad wrote:

      Wolf 91 wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Aramirtheranger wrote:


      Jonah.pietila wrote:
      I would like to say that the Relationship between Nick and Judy is canon. because I have seen artwork of them Getting Married and having a Family. and Rich Moore did say that the shipping name Wilde Hopps is canon. so then I do ship it. and Judy might have a Crush on Nick in my opinion. because Nick said: You know you love me. then Judy said: Do I know that? Yes! Yes I do. also I would like to state that there could be a possiblity where Nick and Judy end up getting Married in the Sequel. so Rich Moore should get an idea from the fans on how to make a Zootopia Sequel. well let me know what you think about this topic! be sure to post your comments down below! 
      Platonic love I'm fine with, romantic love between two completely different species isn't exactly... you know... possible.
      Well, Zootopia is a fictional universe, and as I said before, although it's not possible in the real world for two different species to be in love, that can be possible in the fictional world of Zootopia because if great films want to be made, the filmmakers can throw reality out the window if they want.
      Actually Aramirtheranger is right. It just would't be right nor would it make sense for romantic love to happen between to charecters who are of diffrent species.
      We ALREADY got the point. THANK YOU -_- 😑😑👏🏻👏🏻
      Did you get my point?
      I was talking to Wolf 91 who keeps repeating one single point instead of making a real argument -_-
      I see. And if any more of you guys still have any more excuses of why WildeHopps can't happen, I'd be interested in talking to you.

      Their not excuses, we were just using logic.

      Logic, huh? Okay. I see what you are saying. But here's one thing that could surprise a lot of you guys. What if I told you that Rich Moore and Byron Howard said a Zootopian rabbit/fox hybrid was possible? Because I'm gunna make this as Crystal clear as I can make it. Rich Moore and Byron Howard, who created Zootopia, said a rabbit/fox hybrid was possible in a video I found on Deviantart. If you want me to prove it, I can give you the link.

      As much as I ship them, I don't want a rabbit/fox hybrid.

      I know, but their children can still be like that. And also, Rich Moore and Byron Howard will make up their mind what will happen next, because they created Zootopia. And Nick and Judy having romance in a possible sequel would be even better. Now, I know that wouldn't make sense in the real world, but, in movies, you can forget reality and make the real life and impossible nonsense possible.

      I know. I refuse a hybrid not because it can't happen in real life, but beacuse it will ruin the film for a lot of people.

      Many are already saying that kind of 'mutant' will ruin Zootopia for them. And to be honest, I don't think it will be really 'nice looking'. If they ever marry, and want kids, let them adopt. It will be better for a lot of people, for the film's results and critical response, and it will avoid ALOT of controversy.

      I know. And I don't care if their children are hybrids or not. More users I met said that would make it better more than ruin Zootopia. And whatever happens in the possible sequel happens. I still like them having children, even if they are just bunnies and foxes. But whatever happens, if they do have hybrids, you and those other users who don't like the idea are gunna have it accept it. When it comes to choosing between whether Nick and Judy will have hybrids or not, I will except either of them. But whatever happens, happens. And if it's the idea you and those other people didn't like, the best thing you are gunna have to do is accept it.

        Loading editor
    • Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Rouhad wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Rouhad wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Wolf 91 wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Rouhad wrote:


      Ethan3111678 wrote:


      Rouhad wrote:


      Wolf 91 wrote:


      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Aramirtheranger wrote:


      Jonah.pietila wrote:
      I would like to say that the Relationship between Nick and Judy is canon. because I have seen artwork of them Getting Married and having a Family. and Rich Moore did say that the shipping name Wilde Hopps is canon. so then I do ship it. and Judy might have a Crush on Nick in my opinion. because Nick said: You know you love me. then Judy said: Do I know that? Yes! Yes I do. also I would like to state that there could be a possiblity where Nick and Judy end up getting Married in the Sequel. so Rich Moore should get an idea from the fans on how to make a Zootopia Sequel. well let me know what you think about this topic! be sure to post your comments down below! 
      Platonic love I'm fine with, romantic love between two completely different species isn't exactly... you know... possible.
      Well, Zootopia is a fictional universe, and as I said before, although it's not possible in the real world for two different species to be in love, that can be possible in the fictional world of Zootopia because if great films want to be made, the filmmakers can throw reality out the window if they want.
      Actually Aramirtheranger is right. It just would't be right nor would it make sense for romantic love to happen between to charecters who are of diffrent species.
      We ALREADY got the point. THANK YOU -_- 😑😑👏🏻👏🏻
      Did you get my point?
      I was talking to Wolf 91 who keeps repeating one single point instead of making a real argument -_-
      I see. And if any more of you guys still have any more excuses of why WildeHopps can't happen, I'd be interested in talking to you.
      Their not excuses, we were just using logic.
      Logic, huh? Okay. I see what you are saying. But here's one thing that could surprise a lot of you guys. What if I told you that Rich Moore and Byron Howard said a Zootopian rabbit/fox hybrid was possible? Because I'm gunna make this as Crystal clear as I can make it. Rich Moore and Byron Howard, who created Zootopia, said a rabbit/fox hybrid was possible in a video I found on Deviantart. If you want me to prove it, I can give you the link.
      As much as I ship them, I don't want a rabbit/fox hybrid.
      I know, but their children can still be like that. And also, Rich Moore and Byron Howard will make up their mind what will happen next, because they created Zootopia. And Nick and Judy having romance in a possible sequel would be even better. Now, I know that wouldn't make sense in the real world, but, in movies, you can forget reality and make the real life and impossible nonsense possible.
      I know. I refuse a hybrid not because it can't happen in real life, but beacuse it will ruin the film for a lot of people.

      Many are already saying that kind of 'mutant' will ruin Zootopia for them. And to be honest, I don't think it will be really 'nice looking'. If they ever marry, and want kids, let them adopt. It will be better for a lot of people, for the film's results and critical response, and it will avoid ALOT of controversy.

      I know. And I don't care if their children are hybrids or not. More users I met said that would make it better more than ruin Zootopia. And whatever happens in the possible sequel happens. I still like them having children, even if they are just bunnies and foxes. But whatever happens, if they do have hybrids, you and those other users who don't like the idea are gunna have it accept it. When it comes to choosing between whether Nick and Judy will have hybrids or not, I will except either of them. But whatever happens, happens. And if it's the idea you and those other people didn't like, the best thing you are gunna have to do is accept it.

      "Gunna have it accept"? XD

        Loading editor
    • The Timeless Hero wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Rouhad wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Rouhad wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Wolf 91 wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Rouhad wrote:


      Ethan3111678 wrote:


      Rouhad wrote:


      Wolf 91 wrote:


      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Aramirtheranger wrote:


      Jonah.pietila wrote:
      I would like to say that the Relationship between Nick and Judy is canon. because I have seen artwork of them Getting Married and having a Family. and Rich Moore did say that the shipping name Wilde Hopps is canon. so then I do ship it. and Judy might have a Crush on Nick in my opinion. because Nick said: You know you love me. then Judy said: Do I know that? Yes! Yes I do. also I would like to state that there could be a possiblity where Nick and Judy end up getting Married in the Sequel. so Rich Moore should get an idea from the fans on how to make a Zootopia Sequel. well let me know what you think about this topic! be sure to post your comments down below! 
      Platonic love I'm fine with, romantic love between two completely different species isn't exactly... you know... possible.
      Well, Zootopia is a fictional universe, and as I said before, although it's not possible in the real world for two different species to be in love, that can be possible in the fictional world of Zootopia because if great films want to be made, the filmmakers can throw reality out the window if they want.
      Actually Aramirtheranger is right. It just would't be right nor would it make sense for romantic love to happen between to charecters who are of diffrent species.
      We ALREADY got the point. THANK YOU -_- 😑😑👏🏻👏🏻
      Did you get my point?
      I was talking to Wolf 91 who keeps repeating one single point instead of making a real argument -_-
      I see. And if any more of you guys still have any more excuses of why WildeHopps can't happen, I'd be interested in talking to you.
      Their not excuses, we were just using logic.
      Logic, huh? Okay. I see what you are saying. But here's one thing that could surprise a lot of you guys. What if I told you that Rich Moore and Byron Howard said a Zootopian rabbit/fox hybrid was possible? Because I'm gunna make this as Crystal clear as I can make it. Rich Moore and Byron Howard, who created Zootopia, said a rabbit/fox hybrid was possible in a video I found on Deviantart. If you want me to prove it, I can give you the link.
      As much as I ship them, I don't want a rabbit/fox hybrid.
      I know, but their children can still be like that. And also, Rich Moore and Byron Howard will make up their mind what will happen next, because they created Zootopia. And Nick and Judy having romance in a possible sequel would be even better. Now, I know that wouldn't make sense in the real world, but, in movies, you can forget reality and make the real life and impossible nonsense possible.
      I know. I refuse a hybrid not because it can't happen in real life, but beacuse it will ruin the film for a lot of people.

      Many are already saying that kind of 'mutant' will ruin Zootopia for them. And to be honest, I don't think it will be really 'nice looking'. If they ever marry, and want kids, let them adopt. It will be better for a lot of people, for the film's results and critical response, and it will avoid ALOT of controversy.

      I know. And I don't care if their children are hybrids or not. More users I met said that would make it better more than ruin Zootopia. And whatever happens in the possible sequel happens. I still like them having children, even if they are just bunnies and foxes. But whatever happens, if they do have hybrids, you and those other users who don't like the idea are gunna have it accept it. When it comes to choosing between whether Nick and Judy will have hybrids or not, I will except either of them. But whatever happens, happens. And if it's the idea you and those other people didn't like, the best thing you are gunna have to do is accept it.

      "Gunna have it accept"? XD

      Yep.

        Loading editor
    • Ethan3111678 wrote:

      The Timeless Hero wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Rouhad wrote:


      Ethan3111678 wrote:


      Rouhad wrote:


      Ethan3111678 wrote:


      Wolf 91 wrote:


      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Rouhad wrote:


      Ethan3111678 wrote:


      Rouhad wrote:


      Wolf 91 wrote:


      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Aramirtheranger wrote:



      Jonah.pietila wrote:
      I would like to say that the Relationship between Nick and Judy is canon. because I have seen artwork of them Getting Married and having a Family. and Rich Moore did say that the shipping name Wilde Hopps is canon. so then I do ship it. and Judy might have a Crush on Nick in my opinion. because Nick said: You know you love me. then Judy said: Do I know that? Yes! Yes I do. also I would like to state that there could be a possiblity where Nick and Judy end up getting Married in the Sequel. so Rich Moore should get an idea from the fans on how to make a Zootopia Sequel. well let me know what you think about this topic! be sure to post your comments down below! 
      Platonic love I'm fine with, romantic love between two completely different species isn't exactly... you know... possible.
      Well, Zootopia is a fictional universe, and as I said before, although it's not possible in the real world for two different species to be in love, that can be possible in the fictional world of Zootopia because if great films want to be made, the filmmakers can throw reality out the window if they want.
      Actually Aramirtheranger is right. It just would't be right nor would it make sense for romantic love to happen between to charecters who are of diffrent species.
      We ALREADY got the point. THANK YOU -_- 😑😑👏🏻👏🏻
      Did you get my point?
      I was talking to Wolf 91 who keeps repeating one single point instead of making a real argument -_-
      I see. And if any more of you guys still have any more excuses of why WildeHopps can't happen, I'd be interested in talking to you.
      Their not excuses, we were just using logic.
      Logic, huh? Okay. I see what you are saying. But here's one thing that could surprise a lot of you guys. What if I told you that Rich Moore and Byron Howard said a Zootopian rabbit/fox hybrid was possible? Because I'm gunna make this as Crystal clear as I can make it. Rich Moore and Byron Howard, who created Zootopia, said a rabbit/fox hybrid was possible in a video I found on Deviantart. If you want me to prove it, I can give you the link.
      As much as I ship them, I don't want a rabbit/fox hybrid.
      I know, but their children can still be like that. And also, Rich Moore and Byron Howard will make up their mind what will happen next, because they created Zootopia. And Nick and Judy having romance in a possible sequel would be even better. Now, I know that wouldn't make sense in the real world, but, in movies, you can forget reality and make the real life and impossible nonsense possible.
      I know. I refuse a hybrid not because it can't happen in real life, but beacuse it will ruin the film for a lot of people.

      Many are already saying that kind of 'mutant' will ruin Zootopia for them. And to be honest, I don't think it will be really 'nice looking'. If they ever marry, and want kids, let them adopt. It will be better for a lot of people, for the film's results and critical response, and it will avoid ALOT of controversy.

      I know. And I don't care if their children are hybrids or not. More users I met said that would make it better more than ruin Zootopia. And whatever happens in the possible sequel happens. I still like them having children, even if they are just bunnies and foxes. But whatever happens, if they do have hybrids, you and those other users who don't like the idea are gunna have it accept it. When it comes to choosing between whether Nick and Judy will have hybrids or not, I will except either of them. But whatever happens, happens. And if it's the idea you and those other people didn't like, the best thing you are gunna have to do is accept it.
      "Gunna have it accept"? XD
      Yep.

      If the creators make Nick and Judy a couple, then they will completly ruin Zootopia.

        Loading editor
    • Wolf 91 wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      The Timeless Hero wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Rouhad wrote:


      Ethan3111678 wrote:


      Rouhad wrote:


      Ethan3111678 wrote:


      Wolf 91 wrote:


      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Rouhad wrote:


      Ethan3111678 wrote:


      Rouhad wrote:


      Wolf 91 wrote:


      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Aramirtheranger wrote:



      Jonah.pietila wrote:
      I would like to say that the Relationship between Nick and Judy is canon. because I have seen artwork of them Getting Married and having a Family. and Rich Moore did say that the shipping name Wilde Hopps is canon. so then I do ship it. and Judy might have a Crush on Nick in my opinion. because Nick said: You know you love me. then Judy said: Do I know that? Yes! Yes I do. also I would like to state that there could be a possiblity where Nick and Judy end up getting Married in the Sequel. so Rich Moore should get an idea from the fans on how to make a Zootopia Sequel. well let me know what you think about this topic! be sure to post your comments down below! 
      Platonic love I'm fine with, romantic love between two completely different species isn't exactly... you know... possible.
      Well, Zootopia is a fictional universe, and as I said before, although it's not possible in the real world for two different species to be in love, that can be possible in the fictional world of Zootopia because if great films want to be made, the filmmakers can throw reality out the window if they want.
      Actually Aramirtheranger is right. It just would't be right nor would it make sense for romantic love to happen between to charecters who are of diffrent species.
      We ALREADY got the point. THANK YOU -_- 😑😑👏🏻👏🏻
      Did you get my point?
      I was talking to Wolf 91 who keeps repeating one single point instead of making a real argument -_-
      I see. And if any more of you guys still have any more excuses of why WildeHopps can't happen, I'd be interested in talking to you.
      Their not excuses, we were just using logic.
      Logic, huh? Okay. I see what you are saying. But here's one thing that could surprise a lot of you guys. What if I told you that Rich Moore and Byron Howard said a Zootopian rabbit/fox hybrid was possible? Because I'm gunna make this as Crystal clear as I can make it. Rich Moore and Byron Howard, who created Zootopia, said a rabbit/fox hybrid was possible in a video I found on Deviantart. If you want me to prove it, I can give you the link.
      As much as I ship them, I don't want a rabbit/fox hybrid.
      I know, but their children can still be like that. And also, Rich Moore and Byron Howard will make up their mind what will happen next, because they created Zootopia. And Nick and Judy having romance in a possible sequel would be even better. Now, I know that wouldn't make sense in the real world, but, in movies, you can forget reality and make the real life and impossible nonsense possible.
      I know. I refuse a hybrid not because it can't happen in real life, but beacuse it will ruin the film for a lot of people.

      Many are already saying that kind of 'mutant' will ruin Zootopia for them. And to be honest, I don't think it will be really 'nice looking'. If they ever marry, and want kids, let them adopt. It will be better for a lot of people, for the film's results and critical response, and it will avoid ALOT of controversy.

      I know. And I don't care if their children are hybrids or not. More users I met said that would make it better more than ruin Zootopia. And whatever happens in the possible sequel happens. I still like them having children, even if they are just bunnies and foxes. But whatever happens, if they do have hybrids, you and those other users who don't like the idea are gunna have it accept it. When it comes to choosing between whether Nick and Judy will have hybrids or not, I will except either of them. But whatever happens, happens. And if it's the idea you and those other people didn't like, the best thing you are gunna have to do is accept it.
      "Gunna have it accept"? XD
      Yep.

      If the creators make Nick and Judy a couple, then they will completly ruin Zootopia.

      To you, it does. But if it does, you'll have to accept it. And even if none of this WildeHopps does not happen, I'll accept it too. Besides, the people who do ship them are beyond the people who don't. Also, as I said before, movies are made for entertainment, not science and reality. Rich Moore and Byron Howard will make up their minds what will happen in a possible sequel. My feelings might come true, but they might not. Whatever we see in the possible sequel is what we get. And if we don't see what we want, we can only accept that it happened. So to end this massive debate, I have one request to everyone here...we don't always get what we want. And even if we do, that would be unlikely. But the best thing to do now to end all of these endless debates is to do one thing...............Let it go.

        Loading editor
    • Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Wolf 91 wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      The Timeless Hero wrote:


      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Rouhad wrote:


      Ethan3111678 wrote:


      Rouhad wrote:


      Ethan3111678 wrote:


      Wolf 91 wrote:


      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Rouhad wrote:



      Ethan3111678 wrote:



      Rouhad wrote:



      Wolf 91 wrote:



      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Aramirtheranger wrote:



      Jonah.pietila wrote:
      I would like to say that the Relationship between Nick and Judy is canon. because I have seen artwork of them Getting Married and having a Family. and Rich Moore did say that the shipping name Wilde Hopps is canon. so then I do ship it. and Judy might have a Crush on Nick in my opinion. because Nick said: You know you love me. then Judy said: Do I know that? Yes! Yes I do. also I would like to state that there could be a possiblity where Nick and Judy end up getting Married in the Sequel. so Rich Moore should get an idea from the fans on how to make a Zootopia Sequel. well let me know what you think about this topic! be sure to post your comments down below! 
      Platonic love I'm fine with, romantic love between two completely different species isn't exactly... you know... possible.
      Well, Zootopia is a fictional universe, and as I said before, although it's not possible in the real world for two different species to be in love, that can be possible in the fictional world of Zootopia because if great films want to be made, the filmmakers can throw reality out the window if they want.
      Actually Aramirtheranger is right. It just would't be right nor would it make sense for romantic love to happen between to charecters who are of diffrent species.
      We ALREADY got the point. THANK YOU -_- 😑😑👏🏻👏🏻
      Did you get my point?
      I was talking to Wolf 91 who keeps repeating one single point instead of making a real argument -_-
      I see. And if any more of you guys still have any more excuses of why WildeHopps can't happen, I'd be interested in talking to you.
      Their not excuses, we were just using logic.
      Logic, huh? Okay. I see what you are saying. But here's one thing that could surprise a lot of you guys. What if I told you that Rich Moore and Byron Howard said a Zootopian rabbit/fox hybrid was possible? Because I'm gunna make this as Crystal clear as I can make it. Rich Moore and Byron Howard, who created Zootopia, said a rabbit/fox hybrid was possible in a video I found on Deviantart. If you want me to prove it, I can give you the link.
      As much as I ship them, I don't want a rabbit/fox hybrid.
      I know, but their children can still be like that. And also, Rich Moore and Byron Howard will make up their mind what will happen next, because they created Zootopia. And Nick and Judy having romance in a possible sequel would be even better. Now, I know that wouldn't make sense in the real world, but, in movies, you can forget reality and make the real life and impossible nonsense possible.
      I know. I refuse a hybrid not because it can't happen in real life, but beacuse it will ruin the film for a lot of people.

      Many are already saying that kind of 'mutant' will ruin Zootopia for them. And to be honest, I don't think it will be really 'nice looking'. If they ever marry, and want kids, let them adopt. It will be better for a lot of people, for the film's results and critical response, and it will avoid ALOT of controversy.

      I know. And I don't care if their children are hybrids or not. More users I met said that would make it better more than ruin Zootopia. And whatever happens in the possible sequel happens. I still like them having children, even if they are just bunnies and foxes. But whatever happens, if they do have hybrids, you and those other users who don't like the idea are gunna have it accept it. When it comes to choosing between whether Nick and Judy will have hybrids or not, I will except either of them. But whatever happens, happens. And if it's the idea you and those other people didn't like, the best thing you are gunna have to do is accept it.
      "Gunna have it accept"? XD
      Yep.
      If the creators make Nick and Judy a couple, then they will completly ruin Zootopia.
      To you, it does. But if it does, you'll have to accept it. And even if none of this WildeHopps does not happen, I'll accept it too. Besides, the people who do ship them are beyond the people who don't. Also, as I said before, movies are made for entertainment, not science and reality. Rich Moore and Byron Howard will make up their minds what will happen in a possible sequel. My feelings might come true, but they might not. Whatever we see in the possible sequel is what we get. And if we don't see what we want, we can only accept that it happened. So to end this massive debate, I have one request to everyone here...we don't always get what we want. And even if we do, that would be unlikely. But the best thing to do now to end all of these endless debates is to do one thing...............Let it go.

      Dude calm down and relax.

        Loading editor
    • Wolf 91 wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Wolf 91 wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      The Timeless Hero wrote:


      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Rouhad wrote:


      Ethan3111678 wrote:


      Rouhad wrote:


      Ethan3111678 wrote:


      Wolf 91 wrote:


      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Rouhad wrote:



      Ethan3111678 wrote:



      Rouhad wrote:



      Wolf 91 wrote:



      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Aramirtheranger wrote:



      Jonah.pietila wrote:
      I would like to say that the Relationship between Nick and Judy is canon. because I have seen artwork of them Getting Married and having a Family. and Rich Moore did say that the shipping name Wilde Hopps is canon. so then I do ship it. and Judy might have a Crush on Nick in my opinion. because Nick said: You know you love me. then Judy said: Do I know that? Yes! Yes I do. also I would like to state that there could be a possiblity where Nick and Judy end up getting Married in the Sequel. so Rich Moore should get an idea from the fans on how to make a Zootopia Sequel. well let me know what you think about this topic! be sure to post your comments down below! 
      Platonic love I'm fine with, romantic love between two completely different species isn't exactly... you know... possible.
      Well, Zootopia is a fictional universe, and as I said before, although it's not possible in the real world for two different species to be in love, that can be possible in the fictional world of Zootopia because if great films want to be made, the filmmakers can throw reality out the window if they want.
      Actually Aramirtheranger is right. It just would't be right nor would it make sense for romantic love to happen between to charecters who are of diffrent species.
      We ALREADY got the point. THANK YOU -_- 😑😑👏🏻👏🏻
      Did you get my point?
      I was talking to Wolf 91 who keeps repeating one single point instead of making a real argument -_-
      I see. And if any more of you guys still have any more excuses of why WildeHopps can't happen, I'd be interested in talking to you.
      Their not excuses, we were just using logic.
      Logic, huh? Okay. I see what you are saying. But here's one thing that could surprise a lot of you guys. What if I told you that Rich Moore and Byron Howard said a Zootopian rabbit/fox hybrid was possible? Because I'm gunna make this as Crystal clear as I can make it. Rich Moore and Byron Howard, who created Zootopia, said a rabbit/fox hybrid was possible in a video I found on Deviantart. If you want me to prove it, I can give you the link.
      As much as I ship them, I don't want a rabbit/fox hybrid.
      I know, but their children can still be like that. And also, Rich Moore and Byron Howard will make up their mind what will happen next, because they created Zootopia. And Nick and Judy having romance in a possible sequel would be even better. Now, I know that wouldn't make sense in the real world, but, in movies, you can forget reality and make the real life and impossible nonsense possible.
      I know. I refuse a hybrid not because it can't happen in real life, but beacuse it will ruin the film for a lot of people.

      Many are already saying that kind of 'mutant' will ruin Zootopia for them. And to be honest, I don't think it will be really 'nice looking'. If they ever marry, and want kids, let them adopt. It will be better for a lot of people, for the film's results and critical response, and it will avoid ALOT of controversy.

      I know. And I don't care if their children are hybrids or not. More users I met said that would make it better more than ruin Zootopia. And whatever happens in the possible sequel happens. I still like them having children, even if they are just bunnies and foxes. But whatever happens, if they do have hybrids, you and those other users who don't like the idea are gunna have it accept it. When it comes to choosing between whether Nick and Judy will have hybrids or not, I will except either of them. But whatever happens, happens. And if it's the idea you and those other people didn't like, the best thing you are gunna have to do is accept it.
      "Gunna have it accept"? XD
      Yep.
      If the creators make Nick and Judy a couple, then they will completly ruin Zootopia.
      To you, it does. But if it does, you'll have to accept it. And even if none of this WildeHopps does not happen, I'll accept it too. Besides, the people who do ship them are beyond the people who don't. Also, as I said before, movies are made for entertainment, not science and reality. Rich Moore and Byron Howard will make up their minds what will happen in a possible sequel. My feelings might come true, but they might not. Whatever we see in the possible sequel is what we get. And if we don't see what we want, we can only accept that it happened. So to end this massive debate, I have one request to everyone here...we don't always get what we want. And even if we do, that would be unlikely. But the best thing to do now to end all of these endless debates is to do one thing...............Let it go.

      Dude calm down and relax.

      Okay, okay. All I was trying to do is end this pointless debate we've been having. Let's just let it go and end this debate and be okay with whatever happens in the future, okay?

        Loading editor
    • A tip to everyone here, when you quote a comment, remember to erase all the quoted comments that aren't directly necessary for you to respond to, usually the only comment you need to include in the quote is the one you're directly responding to, just so people know what you're talking about, otherwise you're gonna end needlessly including a dussin comment previous comments and it just takes up unnecessary space.

        Loading editor
    • Lazy Skeptic wrote: A tip to everyone here, when you quote a comment, remember to erase all the quoted comments that aren't directly necessary for you to respond to, usually the only comment you need to include in the quote is the one you're directly responding to, just so people know what you're talking about, otherwise you're gonna end needlessly including a dussin comment previous comments and it just takes up unnecessary space.

      That would be way more appropriate, yeah.

        Loading editor
    • Okay everyone, can we have a truce and end this debate we've been having?

        Loading editor
    • Ethan3111678 wrote:
      Okay everyone, can we have a truce and end this debate we've been having?

      I don't know. All I know is that I would never ship Nick and Judy as a romantic couple. The best ship for those two is friendship.

        Loading editor
    • Zootopialover45 wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:
      Okay everyone, can we have a truce and end this debate we've been having?

      I don't know. All I know is that I would never ship Nick and Judy as a romantic couple. The best ship for those two is friendship.

      Okay. But we're gunna have to accept whatever happens in the future.

        Loading editor
    • Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Zootopialover45 wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:
      Okay everyone, can we have a truce and end this debate we've been having?
      I don't know. All I know is that I would never ship Nick and Judy as a romantic couple. The best ship for those two is friendship.
      Okay. But we're gunna have to accept whatever happens in the future.

      Yea, you are right. I will accept if the two are together.  Lol the truth is I am starting to ship them

        Loading editor
    • Zootopialover45 wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Zootopialover45 wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:
      Okay everyone, can we have a truce and end this debate we've been having?
      I don't know. All I know is that I would never ship Nick and Judy as a romantic couple. The best ship for those two is friendship.
      Okay. But we're gunna have to accept whatever happens in the future.

      Yea, you are right. I will accept if the two are together.  Lol the truth is I am starting to ship them

      Well, we will find out if that happens later if a sequel happens.

        Loading editor
    • Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Zootopialover45 wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Zootopialover45 wrote:


      Ethan3111678 wrote:
      Okay everyone, can we have a truce and end this debate we've been having?
      I don't know. All I know is that I would never ship Nick and Judy as a romantic couple. The best ship for those two is friendship.
      Okay. But we're gunna have to accept whatever happens in the future.
      Yea, you are right. I will accept if the two are together.  Lol the truth is I am starting to ship them
      Well, we will find out if that happens later if a sequel happens.

      Tuscany wait yay

        Loading editor
    • Zootopialover45 wrote:
      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Zootopialover45 wrote:


      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Zootopialover45 wrote:


      Ethan3111678 wrote:
      Okay everyone, can we have a truce and end this debate we've been having?
      I don't know. All I know is that I would never ship Nick and Judy as a romantic couple. The best ship for those two is friendship.
      Okay. But we're gunna have to accept whatever happens in the future.
      Yea, you are right. I will accept if the two are together.  Lol the truth is I am starting to ship them
      Well, we will find out if that happens later if a sequel happens.
      Tuscany wait yay

      Lol I meant yea can't wait yay. When I type as word wrong it corrects it for me. It's stupid. Lol

        Loading editor
    • Zootopialover45 wrote:

      Zootopialover45 wrote:
      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Zootopialover45 wrote:


      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Zootopialover45 wrote:


      Ethan3111678 wrote:
      Okay everyone, can we have a truce and end this debate we've been having?
      I don't know. All I know is that I would never ship Nick and Judy as a romantic couple. The best ship for those two is friendship.
      Okay. But we're gunna have to accept whatever happens in the future.
      Yea, you are right. I will accept if the two are together.  Lol the truth is I am starting to ship them
      Well, we will find out if that happens later if a sequel happens.
      Tuscany wait yay

      Lol I meant yea can't wait yay. When I type as word wrong it corrects it for me. It's stupid. Lol

      Well, a lot of online people get words wrong a lot.

        Loading editor
    • Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Zootopialover45 wrote:

      Zootopialover45 wrote:
      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Zootopialover45 wrote:


      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Zootopialover45 wrote:



      Ethan3111678 wrote:
      Okay everyone, can we have a truce and end this debate we've been having?
      I don't know. All I know is that I would never ship Nick and Judy as a romantic couple. The best ship for those two is friendship.
      Okay. But we're gunna have to accept whatever happens in the future.
      Yea, you are right. I will accept if the two are together.  Lol the truth is I am starting to ship them
      Well, we will find out if that happens later if a sequel happens.
      Tuscany wait yay
      Lol I meant yea can't wait yay. When I type as word wrong it corrects it for me. It's stupid. Lol
      Well, a lot of online people get words wrong a lot.

      Yea I know. My iPad has auto correct which I hate.

        Loading editor
    • Zootopialover45 wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Zootopialover45 wrote:

      Zootopialover45 wrote:
      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Zootopialover45 wrote:


      Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Zootopialover45 wrote:



      Ethan3111678 wrote:
      Okay everyone, can we have a truce and end this debate we've been having?
      I don't know. All I know is that I would never ship Nick and Judy as a romantic couple. The best ship for those two is friendship.
      Okay. But we're gunna have to accept whatever happens in the future.
      Yea, you are right. I will accept if the two are together.  Lol the truth is I am starting to ship them
      Well, we will find out if that happens later if a sequel happens.
      Tuscany wait yay
      Lol I meant yea can't wait yay. When I type as word wrong it corrects it for me. It's stupid. Lol
      Well, a lot of online people get words wrong a lot.

      Yea I know. My iPad has auto correct which I hate.

      Same here.

        Loading editor
    • My opinion:

      Shipping Nick & Judy is like shipping a coyote with a pigeon. About the coyote and pigeon:

      Isn't it weird? Coyotes are mammals, part of the canine family. Pigeons are birds. I wonder what their children would look like. Maybe beige-colored pigeons with coyote ears and paws?

      Seriously, if you shipped a fox and a rabbit...uh...I wonder what their children would look like. Maybe orange-colored bunnies with fox ears and paws?

      If there's ever a sequel, I don't think they should be a couple and I think that 'Rich Moore confirming WildeHopps' is all just a rumor and it's just not true. If it was true...what the heck?

      If YOU were a coyote and your girlfriend/boyfriend was a pigeon, what would you do?

      A: Just make it happen; your marriage to the pigeon.

      B: Shrug her/him off by saying 'I never loved you. I lied to you' to her/him and run away.

      C: Once you find out that you're a canine and she/he is a pigeon, forget her/him and date another coyote.

      D: Still be in love with the pigeon, but refuse to actually marry her/him.

      E: None of the above.

      I'm leaning towards C.

      Back to Nick and Judy:

      I don't know...Nick is Disney's Fantastic Mr. Fox, and Judy just came naturally to everyone. If you ship Nick & Judy, but not with WildeHopps (Nicudy, Judick, the list goes on) would you dare say 'I also ship a coyote and a pigeon' in this discussion?

      I see them as having some 'brother-sister relationship' and Nick & Judy only love each other in a sibling-type of way. Had I been an amphomorphic animal, this would all be such a dramatic, jaw-dropping, heart-stopping news if they fell in love, am I right?

      Oh, also, Nick is just a shortened version of 'Nicholas' and Judy is a shortened 'Judith' but we all call them 'Nick' and 'Judy' eh?

      One more thing: OK! Isn't it weird that you're shipping them, yet you didn't understand the whole 'shipping a fox and a bunny is like shipping a coyote and a pigeon' thing? If the answer is 'yes' this is another dramatic, jaw-dropping, heart-stopping news. Think about it. If you made a movie about a fox and a bunny solving a case together, would you dare have them fall in love? I wouldn't. What about you?

      PS: I can't predict what a fox-bunny hybrid or a coyote-pigeon hybrid would look like. What do YOU think?

        Loading editor
    • Penelope The Shih Tzu wrote: My opinion:

      Shipping Nick & Judy is like shipping a coyote with a pigeon. About the coyote and pigeon:

      Isn't it weird? Coyotes are mammals, part of the canine family. Pigeons are birds. I wonder what their children would look like. Maybe beige-colored pigeons with coyote ears and paws?

      Seriously, if you shipped a fox and a rabbit...uh...I wonder what their children would look like. Maybe orange-colored bunnies with fox ears and paws?

      If there's ever a sequel, I don't think they should be a couple and I think that 'Rich Moore confirming WildeHopps' is all just a rumor and it's just not true. If it was true...what the heck?

      If YOU were a coyote and your girlfriend/boyfriend was a pigeon, what would you do?

      A: Just make it happen; your marriage to the pigeon.

      B: Shrug her/him off by saying 'I never loved you. I lied to you' to her/him and run away.

      C: Once you find out that you're a canine and she/he is a pigeon, forget her/him and date another coyote.

      D: Still be in love with the pigeon, but refuse to actually marry her/him.

      E: None of the above.

      I'm leaning towards C.

      Back to Nick and Judy:

      I don't know...Nick is Disney's Fantastic Mr. Fox, and Judy just came naturally to everyone. If you ship Nick & Judy, but not with WildeHopps (Nicudy, Judick, the list goes on) would you dare say 'I also ship a coyote and a pigeon' in this discussion?

      I see them as having some 'brother-sister relationship' and Nick & Judy only love each other in a sibling-type of way. Had I been an amphomorphic animal, this would all be such a dramatic, jaw-dropping, heart-stopping news if they fell in love, am I right?

      Oh, also, Nick is just a shortened version of 'Nicholas' and Judy is a shortened 'Judith' but we all call them 'Nick' and 'Judy' eh?

      One more thing: OK! Isn't it weird that you're shipping them, yet you didn't understand the whole 'shipping a fox and a bunny is like shipping a coyote and a pigeon' thing? If the answer is 'yes' this is another dramatic, jaw-dropping, heart-stopping news. Think about it. If you made a movie about a fox and a bunny solving a case together, would you dare have them fall in love? I wouldn't. What about you?

      PS: I can't predict what a fox-bunny hybrid for a coyote-pigeon hybrid would look like. What do YOU think?

      I hope you don't mind, but I want to end this debate. This WildeHopps and Rich Moore and Bryan Howard confirming WildeHopps arguement of whether it's true or not has been lasting for a long, long time. And I want the debate to come to an end. If WildeHopps isn't confirmed, it isn't confirmed. Also, A coyote is a mammal and a pigeon is a bird. Nick and Judy are both mammals. And I'm fine with whatever happens, but I'm a heavy hardcore WildeHopps shipper, and I will support WildeHopps because even though it doesn't make sense in the real world for a fox and a bunny to have romance, you can forget reality and make that possible in fictional universes like Zootopia. But whatever's gunna happen if there is a sequel is gunna happen. It may be what some people want, or it may be what they don't want. The point is, whatever happens if there is a sequel, me and you all are gunna have to be okay with it. We don't always get what we want, and that's the case with me a lot of times. I want WildeHopps to happen, but I probably won't, or it probably will. So I request to everyone to just let it go. Okay? Let's have a truce end this debate and be okay with whatever happens in the future. Truce?

        Loading editor
    • Ethan3111678 wrote:

      Penelope The Shih Tzu wrote: My opinion:

      Shipping Nick & Judy is like shipping a coyote with a pigeon. About the coyote and pigeon:

      Isn't it weird? Coyotes are mammals, part of the canine family. Pigeons are birds. I wonder what their children would look like. Maybe beige-colored pigeons with coyote ears and paws?

      Seriously, if you shipped a fox and a rabbit...uh...I wonder what their children would look like. Maybe orange-colored bunnies with fox ears and paws?

      If there's ever a sequel, I don't think they should be a couple and I think that 'Rich Moore confirming WildeHopps' is all just a rumor and it's just not true. If it was true...what the heck?

      If YOU were a coyote and your girlfriend/boyfriend was a pigeon, what would you do?

      A: Just make it happen; your marriage to the pigeon.

      B: Shrug her/him off by saying 'I never loved you. I lied to you' to her/him and run away.

      C: Once you find out that you're a canine and she/he is a pigeon, forget her/him and date another coyote.

      D: Still be in love with the pigeon, but refuse to actually marry her/him.

      E: None of the above.

      I'm leaning towards C.

      Back to Nick and Judy:

      I don't know...Nick is Disney's Fantastic Mr. Fox, and Judy just came naturally to everyone. If you ship Nick & Judy, but not with WildeHopps (Nicudy, Judick, the list goes on) would you dare say 'I also ship a coyote and a pigeon' in this discussion?

      I see them as having some 'brother-sister relationship' and Nick & Judy only love each other in a sibling-type of way. Had I been an amphomorphic animal, this would all be such a dramatic, jaw-dropping, heart-stopping news if they fell in love, am I right?

      Oh, also, Nick is just a shortened version of 'Nicholas' and Judy is a shortened 'Judith' but we all call them 'Nick' and 'Judy' eh?

      One more thing: OK! Isn't it weird that you're shipping them, yet you didn't understand the whole 'shipping a fox and a bunny is like shipping a coyote and a pigeon' thing? If the answer is 'yes' this is another dramatic, jaw-dropping, heart-stopping news. Think about it. If you made a movie about a fox and a bunny solving a case together, would you dare have them fall in love? I wouldn't. What about you?

      PS: I can't predict what a fox-bunny hybrid for a coyote-pigeon hybrid would look like. What do YOU think?

      I hope you don't mind, but I want to end this debate. This WildeHopps and Rich Moore and Bryan Howard confirming WildeHopps arguement of whether it's true or not has been lasting for a long, long time. And I want the debate to come to an end. If WildeHopps isn't confirmed, it isn't confirmed. Also, A coyote is a mammal and a pigeon is a bird. Nick and Judy are both mammals. And I'm fine with whatever happens, but I'm a heavy hardcore WildeHopps shipper, and I will support WildeHopps because even though it doesn't make sense in the real world for a fox and a bunny to have romance, you can forget reality and make that possible in fictional universes like Zootopia. But whatever's gunna happen if there is a sequel is gunna happen. It may be what some people want, or it may be what they don't want. The point is, whatever happens if there is a sequel, me and you all are gunna have to be okay with it. We don't always get what we want, and that's the case with me a lot of times. I want WildeHopps to happen, but I probably won't, or it probably will. So I request to everyone to just let it go. Okay? Let's have a truce end this debate and be okay with whatever happens in the future. Truce?

      Truce.

        Loading editor
    • Penelope The Shih Tzu wrote:
      My opinion:

      Shipping Nick & Judy is like shipping a coyote with a pigeon. About the coyote and pigeon:

      Isn't it weird? Coyotes are mammals, part of the canine family. Pigeons are birds. I wonder what their children would look like. Maybe beige-colored pigeons with coyote ears and paws?

      Seriously, if you shipped a fox and a rabbit...uh...I wonder what their children would look like. Maybe orange-colored bunnies with fox ears and paws?

      If there's ever a sequel, I don't think they should be a couple and I think that 'Rich Moore confirming WildeHopps' is all just a rumor and it's just not true. If it was true...what the heck?

      If YOU were a coyote and your girlfriend/boyfriend was a pigeon, what would you do?

      A: Just make it happen; your marriage to the pigeon.

      B: Shrug her/him off by saying 'I never loved you. I lied to you' to her/him and run away.

      C: Once you find out that you're a canine and she/he is a pigeon, forget her/him and date another coyote.

      D: Still be in love with the pigeon, but refuse to actually marry her/him.

      E: None of the above.

      I'm leaning towards C.

      Back to Nick and Judy:

      I don't know...Nick is Disney's Fantastic Mr. Fox, and Judy just came naturally to everyone. If you ship Nick & Judy, but not with WildeHopps (Nicudy, Judick, the list goes on) would you dare say 'I also ship a coyote and a pigeon' in this discussion?

      I see them as having some 'brother-sister relationship' and Nick & Judy only love each other in a sibling-type of way. Had I been an amphomorphic animal, this would all be such a dramatic, jaw-dropping, heart-stopping news if they fell in love, am I right?

      Oh, also, Nick is just a shortened version of 'Nicholas' and Judy is a shortened 'Judith' but we all call them 'Nick' and 'Judy' eh?

      One more thing: OK! Isn't it weird that you're shipping them, yet you didn't understand the whole 'shipping a fox and a bunny is like shipping a coyote and a pigeon' thing? If the answer is 'yes' this is another dramatic, jaw-dropping, heart-stopping news. Think about it. If you made a movie about a fox and a bunny solving a case together, would you dare have them fall in love? I wouldn't. What about you?

      PS: I can't predict what a fox-bunny hybrid or a coyote-pigeon hybrid would look like. What do YOU think?

      I could't agree with you more.

        Loading editor
    • Since someone had a truce with me about ending this debate, here's what I want to say to the people who are still continuing the debate: I know I've argued a lot about what's better and what's not, but this debate has proved many, many points. And I'd like this debate to end because there are people who do and don't ship this couple. And since we aren't gunna know what happens in the future if there's a sequel, and if you all aren't shippers to this couple, you might as well just forget about it because I'm not trying to convince you to ship them, I'm trying to stop this endless debate with a truce (even though I already had one with Peneolope The Shih Tzu) and a message to just let it go.

        Loading editor
    • How else can I end this debate? Well that'll be answered in the next comment.

        Loading editor
    • There was something that I could've said much, much, much earlier that could've ended this debate a lot sooner, and it was: "I am a hardcore WildeHopps shipper and I have high belief of it happening in a sequel. Now a lot of users like me want that to happen, and I also know some who don't. But frankly, if any of you guys out there are gunna get upset about WildeHopps happening, maybe I shouldn't say this, even though I feel uncomfortable saying it, maybe Zootopia isn't the film for you."

        Loading editor
    • Ethan3111678 wrote:
      There was something that I could've said much, much, much earlier that could've ended this debate a lot sooner, and it was: "I am a hardcore WildeHopps shipper and I have high belief of it happening in a sequel. Now a lot of users like me want that to happen, and I also know some who don't. But frankly, if any of you guys out there are gunna get upset about WildeHopps happening, maybe I shouldn't say this, even though I feel uncomfortable saying it, maybe Zootopia isn't the film for you."

      I ship Judy and Nick too. and yes Zootopia is a Film for me 

        Loading editor
    • Jonah.pietila wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:
      There was something that I could've said much, much, much earlier that could've ended this debate a lot sooner, and it was: "I am a hardcore WildeHopps shipper and I have high belief of it happening in a sequel. Now a lot of users like me want that to happen, and I also know some who don't. But frankly, if any of you guys out there are gunna get upset about WildeHopps happening, maybe I shouldn't say this, even though I feel uncomfortable saying it, maybe Zootopia isn't the film for you."

      I ship Judy and Nick too. and yes Zootopia is a Film for me 

      I know you do, but there are some users who also don't want this to happen. I said that so I could persuade them to see what I mean.

        Loading editor
    • So, Zootopia is not a film for anyone who doesn't approve this forced shipping?



      HAHAHAHAAHAHAHA!

        Loading editor
    • TRIMC 95 wrote: So, Zootopia is not a film for anyone who doesn't approve this forced shipping?



      HAHAHAHAAHAHAHA!

      Look, I'm not forcing them to ship Judy and Nick. I'm just saying that if anyone is gunna get upset about WildeHopps happening (even though there's a great chance it might), maybe it's not something they'd like. So let's just let it go.

        Loading editor
    • I like Zootopia and I'm not even having second thoughts about shipping this pair. Because, canonically, it's not a romantic pair at all. Maybe it's you, who needs to let it go and accept that, at the end of the day, Nick and Judy are not a pair whatsoever. Only working partners/friends, nothing more.

        Loading editor
    • TRIMC 95 wrote: I like Zootopia and I'm not even having second thoughts about shipping this pair. Because, canonically, it's not a romantic pair at all. Maybe it's you, who needs to let it go and accept that, at the end of the day, Nick and Judy are not a pair whatsoever. Only working partners/friends, nothing more.

      I see and you are correct when you are talking about what we know so far in the Zootopia canon. I know the two aren't more than partners and friends, but whatever else happened after that, we don't know yet.

        Loading editor
    • As far as we know in the Zootopia canon, Nick and Judy aren't a couple. They are just friends and partners. I will accept and be okay with whatever happens in a possible sequel. It's just that...a lot of times, we don't always get what we want, and that's been the case with me plenty of times throughout my life. And whatever happens in the future, it's not only me who has to let it go and accept it. That thing goes to everyone. I've been going back and forth finding users saying that they want the pairing to happen and some who don't want the pairing to happen. And so far in the canon, Nick and Judy are only partners and friends, and not having not having romance or love. But whatever happens will happen. And it is obviously true that rabbits and foxes don't get along or have romance in reality, but in fictional universes like Zootopia, they can forget reality and make that happen because most films themselves are mainly designed for entertainment, not science. But whatever is gunna happen or be confirmed in a possible sequel is gunna happen. So why don't I do a truce with you and stop this endless and millions of points made debate?

        Loading editor
    • "...but whatever else happened after that, we don't know yet."

      Whatever else happened after that is only your imagination. Or anyone's imagination for that matter. Hypotheses on a possible sequel are pointless and unfruitful. They bring no evidence to the table and exist solely to please anyone's headcanon. Who says there's ever gonna be a sequel after all? And why would there be a sequel? It's completely pointless. The first movie is fine just the way it is. It doesn't need a sequel.

        Loading editor
    • TRIMC 95 wrote: "...but whatever else happened after that, we don't know yet."

      Whatever else happened after that is only your imagination. Or anyone's imagination for that matter. Hypotheses on a possible sequel are pointless and unfruitful. They bring no evidence to the table and exist solely to please anyone's headcanon. Who says there's ever gonna be a sequel after all? And why would there be a sequel? It's completely pointless. The first movie is fine just the way it is. It doesn't need a sequel.

      I see...well, not all films have sequels, and there's probably gunna be some better films in the future, so, let's end this debate here. We might as well just forget about it.

        Loading editor
    • Pokemonmastercb
      Pokemonmastercb removed this reply because:
      removed
      23:08, January 5, 2017
      This reply has been removed
    • Guys, it's time for us to stop this debate. This debate has been lasting for a long time, and I'm tired of it. I want us to stop this debate. We cannot spend the rest of our lives debating about a single pairing. One, because it can make people like supporters and non-supporters of this mad. And two, it is not heathly. I mean, there are gunna be other films in the future that could raise more money and could be better than Zootopia. I know I'm a hardcore supporter, but I have to let this go. We all have to let it go. Please, guys? Can we please not debate about this anymore? 

        Loading editor
    • Ethan3111678 wrote:
      Guys, it's time for us to stop this debate. This debate has been lasting for a long time, and I'm tired of it. I want us to stop this debate. We cannot spend the rest of our lives debating about a single pairing. One, because it can make people like supporters and non-supporters of this mad. And two, it is not heathly. I mean, there are gunna be other films in the future that could raise more money and could be better than Zootopia. I know I'm a hardcore supporter, but I have to let this go. We all have to let it go. Please, guys? Can we please not debate about this anymore? 

      I am not a supporter of the pairing but I can let this debat go.

        Loading editor
    • Jonah.pietila wrote:
      I would like to say that the Relationship between Nick and Judy is canon. because I have seen artwork of them Getting Married and having a Family. and Rich Moore did say that the shipping name Wilde Hopps is canon. so then I do ship it. and Judy might have a Crush on Nick in my opinion. because Nick said: You know you love me. then Judy said: Do I know that? Yes! Yes I do. also I would like to state that there could be a possiblity where Nick and Judy end up getting Married in the Sequel. so Rich Moore should get an idea from the fans on how to make a Zootopia Sequel. well let me know what you think about this topic! be sure to post your comments down below! 

      Well true, they're not Branch and Poppy, but they're still a cute couple. And since they didn't get together at the end of the 1st one, maybe she'll kiss him at the end of the 2nd one! Who knows? I just hope the idea of Judy and Nick as BF/GF doesn't get thown into the airlock like Dorlin (Dory X Marlin) did. If Wilde Hopps DOES happen, though, it should be a hug and kiss, rather than a "Judy, will you marry me?" cliche.

        Loading editor
    • Wolf 91 wrote:
      Ethan3111678 wrote:
      Guys, it's time for us to stop this debate. This debate has been lasting for a long time, and I'm tired of it. I want us to stop this debate. We cannot spend the rest of our lives debating about a single pairing. One, because it can make people like supporters and non-supporters of this mad. And two, it is not heathly. I mean, there are gunna be other films in the future that could raise more money and could be better than Zootopia. I know I'm a hardcore supporter, but I have to let this go. We all have to let it go. Please, guys? Can we please not debate about this anymore? 
      I am not a supporter of the pairing but I can let this debat go.

      Thanks. Truce?

        Loading editor
    • Guys...this is ZOOTOPIA. Zootopia is a movie about a fox and a bunny solving a case together, not a romance story about two dogs falling in love

      Okay?

        Loading editor
    • Penelope The Shih Tzu wrote:
      Guys...this is ZOOTOPIA. Zootopia is a movie about a fox and a bunny solving a case together, not a romance story about two dogs falling in love

      Okay?

      Really?

        Loading editor
    • Just going to be a buzzkill for my adoring fans, Carrots and I are just friends. Logically and physically, an inter-species relationship just wouldn't work.

        Loading editor
    • Im opposing romance between them because it would ruin their dynamic and this buddy cop thing. They can flirt and even have some kind of romance but definatly no marriage and kids.

        Loading editor
    • Well, this debate will stop when it stops. I'm gunna leave this debate for good now because I have a new favorite film and a new favorite pairing that is 100% much closer to true love than this.

        Loading editor
    • Ethan3111678 wrote:
      Well, this debate will stop when it stops. I'm gunna leave this debate for good now because I have a new favorite film and a new favorite pairing that is 100% much closer to true love than this.

      I agree with you 

        Loading editor
    • Jonah.pietila wrote:

      Ethan3111678 wrote:
      Well, this debate will stop when it stops. I'm gunna leave this debate for good now because I have a new favorite film and a new favorite pairing that is 100% much closer to true love than this.

      I agree with you 

      Well, guys, I know some of you out there lack support of WildeHopps while some do, and I'm sorry I made all you non supporters mad, and I'm sorry. I'm now officially retiring from the debate for good. Bye everyone.

        Loading editor
    • Well, you know what they say about Disney with all their confusing, mythical interferences with real life science.

      So, whether or not Wilde Hopps will truly become canon in the sequel that follows Zootopia, our patience is the cost of it.

        Loading editor
    • The reason why I think WildeHopps should happen is to continue the ‘educating’ aspect of the film.

      So many children are taught from a young age to gravitate towards toys and characters that only resemble them physically. And if they don’t they’re reprimanded for it or their interest ends up getting taken as them not loving themselves. This will show children that it is okay to like-like someone who doesn’t look like you and that, as corny as sounds; you’re supposed to like someone for who they are on the inside, not what they look like on the outside. And just because they like someone who looks different, doesn’t mean they don’t appreciate their own physical attributes any less. 

      And although I’m for the romantic aspect, marriage and kids is just taking it too far. And those that are arguing that they’re different species and that’s why it wouldn’t work, this is a kids movie, so whether they’d fit together or not physically is irrelevant. I hold the same view on marriage and kids, it’s too intimate for this particular universe.   

      I’d be satisfied if the relationship was ‘I like you, you like me, share a glance, a nervous chuckle, a blush or whatever’ without dating, you know like Beast Boy and Raven from the Teen Titans. In fact, in my opinion, this would be the best approach.  

        Loading editor
    • User Wolf91  this pairing one kind of an animals with another doesn't feel that strange when know secret symbols, spirit beliefs, creation stories that worship animals instead, the number of old legends that already have animals paired whether friends or mates. Plus if you're able the discover the similar hidden qualities of a unusual couple like how much both a swallow and a wolf both want you to know self very well. 


      Swallow Question, Did I Say Too Much 

      Wolf Question, Am I Being Loyal To Myself

        Loading editor
    • Jonah.pietila - UGH... NO!! - IT'S NOT CANON... sick of people assuming it is canon, stop being delusional.. it was confimed that there was no romance... and that you know you love me scene? - thats friendly banter, it doesn't mean anything all this getting married and having kids ughh it's not cute or whatever it is cringe worthy and it is just plain wrong..... Nick and Judy are FRIENDS and they are better off that way'This weird ship nonsense is disgusting and should remain to fan fictions or whatever as it will ruin a sequel 'Wildehopps sucks.....

        Loading editor
    • They don't need to be married to do hugging or kissing, that happens when people don't feel lonely anylonger, when people think something miraculous happened, or even when people have a firm feeling of joy thanks to a true friend. And it's clear Nick Wilde doesn't joke about his friendship with Judy.


      These two characters share a few of the same value opinions Solution and Possibilities these two focus on for sure but together they do their best to be cautious, they also do their best to see enough of what someone did so they aren't too confused when they're carefully reporting truthful news.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor