[ SECRET POST #4718 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4718 ⌋

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

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________















05. [SPOILERS for season 3 of Stranger Things]



__________________________________________________



06. [SPOILERS for Frozen 2]




__________________________________________________



07. [WARNING for discussion of slavery, non-con drug use]

[Far Cry 5]











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #675.
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

[fscom]

04. https://i.imgur.com/JbbDKht.png?1

Transcript by OP

[fscom]

His age is a bit off, IMHO. If Yoda died in his 900s, then his species ages about a human year for every ten. So a 50-year-old would be more like a 5-year-old than an infant.

[(Anonymous)]

No reason to assume yodas age at the same rate as humans

[(Anonymous)]

That would be if his species have the same kind of life stages. They could have a really long infancy stage.

[(Anonymous)]

MTE. It's not like there seem to be a lot of his species; a hugely long infancy stage could help to explain part of why there aren't more.

Like, I have a friend who is annoyed by baby Yoda being 50 because "it's inconsistent with canon," and I get where he's coming from. But come on. This is Star Wars. The amount of wild imagination that goes into this universe is bananas, yet you won't give an inch to the idea that maybe Yoda's species doesn't age like humans do? It's such a minor thing; it's really not hard to imagine an explanation for it!

[(Anonymous)]

+1

[dancingmouse]

When people say Baby Yoda, I'm pretty sure they mean Baby Whatever Yoda is, not that they actually think that's actually Baby Yoda.

I mean, I'm pretty sure the species is just known as "Yoda" by now.

??

[(Anonymous)]

The secret isn't saying this character is Yoda - it doesn't even mention Baby Yoda as a name - it is saying that it doesn't make sense for this character to be an infant using Yoda as a exemplar of how the species ages in comparison to human. But I'm not really sure about the comparison - it seems like a big assumption to make that the stages of development would be a linear thing.

Re: ??

[dancingmouse]

I misread. My bad.

In that case, I agree.

[(Anonymous)]

I wish there was an adblock feature that would make disappear every single possible instance of Baby Yoda, I'm so tired of seeing its face everywhere.

[(Anonymous)]

Kind of like how some people got tired of seeing MLP everywhere?

[(Anonymous)]

That assumes that Yoda's species passes through its life stages at a rate that's equivalent to human aging, which is not necessarily the case. They could have bursts of rapid maturation followed by long plateaus. They could have an extremely protracted youth and prime, followed by a relatively short period of senescence. There's really no reason for their aging to follow a human model.

[litalex]

Maybe their years are of different lengths from ours?