Twilight VS. Harry potter discussion
Character Discussions
>
Ok.. how did Edward Cullen get Bella pregnant when he has no blood?
date
newest »


If you're squeamish, you may want to skip over this.... In reproduction, semen isn't what makes a baby. It's the sperm in the semen. Sperm are living cells. Edward is dead - his cells have been burned and crystallized by venom, as described by Stephenie Meyer herself. Therefore his sex cells (sperm) are also dead. Dead cells aren't functional. His sperm couldn't pass on DNA and fertilize an egg. So no, it really shouldn't be possible for him to get Bella pregnant.
And if she's brave enough to put sex in her books (which younger audiences read), I don't see why she couldn't use the word "semen."
However, because this is a fictional book, I am perfectly happy to accept the excuse "magic." :)

Yeah, I just went and read her explanation on her website. I don't really agree with it (specialized semen-venom is NOT a replacement for a living cell needed to reproduce with a human) but since it is her book, I'll ignore it and give her the benefit of the doubt.
I suppose there aren't any scenes, but even "implied" would make it PG-13 if it were a movie.
Yeah, in all fantasy books there's going to be something unrealistic that doesn't make sense in real life. So maybe I just won't say anymore. :)

Aha. I didnt know Stephenie had a explanation ! Thanks for that ! i just , dont get the concept of dead cells (inside a vampire, which is dead) ,and dead special vampire semen having the ability (when inside a woman) to help create a baby . When the venom or semen , is actually dead.
I dunno. Im a bit confused.

But yeah... since it's her book and she admits it's not really possible, like I said, I'll be satisfied. I just don't like how she seems to think it's a logical scientific explanation when it's NOT. And I like when authors can find a way to make fantasy seem possible, which she really doesn't.
See? This was an error.