case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2017-03-18 04:08 pm

[ SECRET POST #3727 ]


⌈ Secret Post #3727 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.








Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 55 secrets from Secret Submission Post #533.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.
feotakahari: (Default)

[personal profile] feotakahari 2017-03-18 10:41 pm (UTC)(link)
If a character is coded as a child, then shouldn't the creepiness of putting them in a sexual relationship be irrelevant to whether they're the top or not? (I'm thinking of "loli" characters in anime.)

(Anonymous) 2017-03-18 10:44 pm (UTC)(link)
above OP says they've seen posts about this in relation to John/Sherlock (?!?!?!?) so I think it's more about catching the sneaky/imaginary pedos than addressing actual abuse or creepiness.

(Anonymous) 2017-03-18 11:14 pm (UTC)(link)
It's just shipping nonsense. Apart from a few (mostly anime) characters that can be used as examples, they just apply it to whatever shipping preference they don't like.