[ SECRET POST #3159 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3159 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.
[Knights Errant]


__________________________________________________



03.
[HeadOn]


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06. [SPOILERS for Tales of the Abyss]



__________________________________________________



07. [WARNING for rape]



__________________________________________________



08. [WARNING for sexual assault/harassment]



__________________________________________________



09. [WARNING for child sexual abuse]


















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 000 secrets from Secret Submission Post #451.
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.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

But a decision is no more informed if the information is coming without context. Two teens send sexts to each other can be charged with distributing child open and labeled sex offenders, for instance. Does that mean thwy're horrible people? No. But if all anyone ever says is "don't like them, they're kiddie porn sex offenders" they're missing a giant piece of context.