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.

















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.

(Anonymous) 2017-03-18 09:30 pm (UTC)(link)
People say a million different things, and we look at it and combine it all into "social justice warriors hate freedom" or something.

What 'child-coded' is supposed to mean is that a character has a bunch of characteristics and traits that are strongly associated with children regardless of their actual age - to give the standard example, when you have a 3000 year old vampire who happens to look and behave exactly like a 12 year old. That shouldn't apply to any fandom but people sometimes lose the nuance. Especially in anime fandom I guess.

(Anonymous) 2017-03-18 09:55 pm (UTC)(link)
That's ridiculous. Adults can have child-like habits and characteristics, but they're still adults.

(Anonymous) 2017-03-18 09:56 pm (UTC)(link)
It's a slippery slope and I think in 90% of cases it's not something to worry about but I don't think it's intrinsically incorrect either.

(Anonymous) 2017-03-18 10:02 pm (UTC)(link)
Maybe I just don't get it. But it seems weird to me. Say I like to color, I like board games and video games, I like toys. But I am an adult, I am not "child-coded" or a child. I would be so annoyed if someone were to treat me as one.

I think anon is talking about cases like this:

(Anonymous) 2017-03-19 12:28 am (UTC)(link)
While this doesn't bother me personally (I don't get the hand-wringing over loli and shota, I think the style is like a more extreme version of "moe" and these characters don't really bear any resemblance to real life children in my opinion, they seem more about the fantasy of youth), there's stuff like this: (NSFW, half naked loli, aftermath of her vampire bite)

Mina Tepes is an ancient vampire queen who happens to have been turned when she was 13 or so, and has never grown up physically. The show is [i]not[/i] shy about using her for fanservice, and it's even part of her character, it bothers her intended romantic partner at first that she acts like a very dominant, predatory grown up woman while she looks like a child.

I think that's what people tend to mean when they talk about stuff like this. I don't care personally, but lots of people do. I don't think it justifies the internet doxxing hatemobs at all though, those people are more gross than this kind of stuff could ever be in my opinion.

Re: I think anon is talking about cases like this:

(Anonymous) 2017-03-19 12:30 am (UTC)(link)
Same anon

Hah, I've done that accidental wrong HTML tag twice now tonight on here. Another website I use has the html tags set as [], and this one uses <>.

Re: I think anon is talking about cases like this:

(Anonymous) 2017-03-19 02:16 am (UTC)(link)
I think -coded is the sort of thing where there's examples the majority of people would agree they are X-coded, examples the majority of people would not agree that they're X-coded, and plenty of examples where people will nitpick and fight over if they're X-coded or not.

Like I wasn't really in the MLP fandom, but I know there were discussions about...
Most people would agree that even if they're candy colored ponies, the Cutie Mark Crusaders and their classmates were child-coded, they're intended to be kids.
Most people would agree that characters like Princess Celestia were adult-coded.
People would happily fight over if the main six ponies were adult or not. They're the same size as the other adult ponies and Rarity owns her own business, but Twilight is still a student. So with no canon ages given, what's the right interpretation?

It ends up messily trying to guess the person's reasoning for shipping a pairing, and there's no faster way to start wank on the internet than by guessing why someone likes something either with build-in moralizing or by attaching one. ( "Girls only watch Doctor Who because they think the Doctor is hot." )

(Anonymous) 2017-03-18 11:07 pm (UTC)(link)
There is no slippery slope. Any adult character's quirks, social roles, behaviour patterns or looks cannot justify this child-coded nonsense.
The only reason I can think for that is an adult character being absolutely certainly mentally ill (say, it shows as childishness)and not responsible for their actions, but even then, it would just be a mental illness, which has nothing to do with children.

(Anonymous) 2017-03-19 03:46 am (UTC)(link)
Honestly, the only examples where I think it's justifiable are all sci-fi/fantasy examples. So, for example, a wizard turned a year-old Labrador Retriever into an adult human. Sure, they're physically adult, but they've only been sapient for, like, a week, and they're still trying to get the hang of that whole "don't have to come when called" thing. They're not mentally challenged, but they're not mentally mature yet either. Depending on how the story's written, that character might be child-coded.

Height and hobbies don't code squat.

(Anonymous) 2017-03-19 05:53 pm (UTC)(link)
In any case, that's a thing so narrow and obscure it doesn't deserve any special fucking trope. Children on tumblr probably don't really know what being an adult _is_, so they can't distinguish an actual child from a non-standard version of adult they're imagining, whatever that shit is.

(Anonymous) 2017-03-18 11:12 pm (UTC)(link)
Yes, but they mostly don't apply it to 3000 year old vampires that look like children. They apply it to a short 30-year-old. Or a small-breasted adult woman. Or (ridiculously) John from BBC Sherlock for some unknown reason. It's just another stupid shipwar tactic.

(Anonymous) 2017-03-19 06:13 pm (UTC)(link)
I don't think this is quite right, at least if I was going to use this phrase.

I think it makes more sense to apply it to characters where no explicit age is given (whether because it's a kids show or because there just isn't enough content).

The 3000 year old anime vampire isn't in "code". If you want to argue someone is a pedo you can just say "you're using her fictional age as an excuse because her canonical appearance turns you on".

As with many phrases adopted by these people, it's not a useless concept they're just abusing it.