[ SECRET POST #3277 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3277 ⌋

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

01.
[Leonardo DiCaprio]



__________________________________________________



02.
[John Barrowman]


__________________________________________________



03.
[Jurassic Park III, Alan/Billy]


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 018 secrets from Secret Submission Post #468.
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)]

I'm kind of uncomfortable with the line of argument in the first paragraph, in the sense that... I mean, yes, obviously there's a difference between the idealized version and the reality, but it still is an idealization of that thing. That's the whole point.

The second one is trickier ground - why are some idealizations of bad things allowable, and others not? I would say perhaps the reason is because, like, pedophilia is so completely and totally wrong and unjustifiable. There are just no circumstances where it's okay. That mode of attraction is always, always wrong. But I think the answer there needs work.

[(Anonymous)]

how do you feel about rape or incest kinks then? they're very popular (iirc 1 out of 3 people have a noncon/rape kink), but are morally wrong by current us standards at least.

[(Anonymous)]

getting into depth on that would take a lot more time than i have right now, but i would say that rape / non-con kinks is very much distinct from actual rape. it's a power kink, and it makes sense that it exists because sex is intimately tied up with power and relationships. i think the proper comparison to rape is age play, not shota / loli, and those are very different things. and i don't have any objections to age play.

the other thing i want to say is that my view here is heavily shaped by, like - in my experience there really hasn't been a huge divide between being into shota / loli & being someone who actually sexualizes children. those two things seem to go together. like, a lot. so i'm just kind of skeptical of the idea that there is, in practice, some huge divide between them.

[(Anonymous)]

I dunno. I have seen a lot of discussions where people actually don't get into the head of the adult person, but the underage one?
Like how people with a rape kink often like to get into the head of the 'victim'.
From what I've seen of Kuroshitsuji I definitely do get the appeal of Sebastian/Ciel for example. They're definitely my fav relationship even if I don't "ship" it in that way.

Idk, I think I mostly just roll my eyes when it's about shipping teenagers with each other. Like, I started shipping Takeru and Hikari from Digimon, when I was a child/teenager myself and I still ship them (fingers crossed for Digimon Tri) and I've legit seen people shout "pedo!!!1!" at those kind of ships especially regarding fanarts of them kissing (Just kissing idek if there is a lot of smut around where they're not aged up. Never seen any personally)

[(Anonymous)]

Phone posting but I mostly agree with the second paragraph fwiw

[(Anonymous)]

I like non-explicit loli... I don't get off on it, but there's something about the trope of the young and precious girl aggressively going after an older man I really like. But like... I'm the kind of person who enjoys Kodomo no Jikan. I don't seek out porn, but I find the sexual edge appealing, if you know what I mean. I have to wonder if there are others in my category... I feel like a lot of Seb/Ciel shippers have a certain thing for the dynamic and aren't specifically into sexualization of a minor per se. I'd say the same thing about Loveless and other similar titles... I don't think they're necessarily attracting pedos. At least, I like Loveless and I'm not at all interested in real life children.

[(Anonymous)]

I'm kind of uncomfortable with the line of argument in the first paragraph, in the sense that... I mean, yes, obviously there's a difference between the idealized version and the reality, but it still is an idealization of that thing. That's the whole point.

We idealize tons of shit that we wouldn't want to do/wouldn't want done to us in reality though. That's kind of the nature of like half the fantasies people have. That's the entire point of the argument. So far you really sound like one of those "well it's just bad BECAUSE, ew gross" type people. And yet there are plenty of people who think games like God Of War or whatever are absolutely disgusting and yet I don't see people branding people who enjoy the game as sadists and killers.

The second one is trickier ground - why are some idealizations of bad things allowable, and others not? I would say perhaps the reason is because, like, pedophilia is so completely and totally wrong and unjustifiable. There are just no circumstances where it's okay. That mode of attraction is always, always wrong. But I think the answer there needs work.

...Your second argument makes absolutely no sense. Are you trying to tell me that there is a time when blowing up hookers and disemboweling people is okay? The point is that both things are utterly wrong when brought into reality, and yet we'll gleefully rip the guts out of someone in Mortal Kombat or blow off people's heads in GTA and no one calls us serial killers or pyschopaths, but the moment someone mentions they think Medoka/Homura is cute/sexy we brand them a pedophile. Why? It all sounds very hypocritical to me and kind of dumb that we think hyper-violence can be handled maturely and loli/shota can't.