[ SECRET POST #5208 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5208 ⌋

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


01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________


03.
[Shoot 'Em Up (resized)]


__________________________________________________



04.
[Banana Fish]


__________________________________________________















05. [SPOILERS for Kids Baking Championship]



__________________________________________________



06. [SPOILERS for Big Little Lies S2]
[WARNING for discussion of rape]



__________________________________________________



07. [WARNING for discussion of suicide]

[ID: Invaded]


__________________________________________________



08. [WARNING for discussion of rape]



__________________________________________________



09. [WARNING for discussion of noncon (probably?)]
https://i.imgur.com/qhjWFCS.png
[image linked for above warning]























Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #745.
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)]

~Child coding~ is an absolute fucking bullshit concept. Infantilization is real (and gross), but it is not the same thing as ~child coding.~ If the term was EXCLUSIVELY used to refer to the stupid "she looks 12 but is really a 600 year old dragon so it's okay to sexualize the shit out of her" stuff, I might feel that the people who use it have a point, but I have seen you folks use it for practically every character, including CANONICALLY FULLY MATURE ADULTS, that you don't want shipped with another character, with the most transparently fake excuses, purely as an excuse to call your NOTPs problematic, and I am just over it.

[(Anonymous)]

+1, it is not a real thing. No one has ever been able to point out a real example of the ~child-coding~ of a grown-ass character that doesn't dangerously dip into "anyone that shows any sign of neurodivergence is childlike," which like... bruh.

[(Anonymous)]

Just to be clear, though, it is absolutely okay to sexualize the shit out of a 600 year old dragon who looks like a 12 year old girl if she's a cartoon character. It's also absolutely okay to sexualize the shit out of a 12 year old girl if she's a cartoon character. It's okay to sexualize the shit out of actual SHIT. It's okay to sexualize anything that doesn't have feelings.

[(Anonymous)]

I've seen some people unironically make the argument of, "If this character were real, they wouldn't want you sexualizing them!"

I mean... uh... good thing they're not real, then?

[(Anonymous)]

What I don't get is how this damages you - IA that child-coded should refer to 600 year old dragons in the body of 8 year old girls but.

[feotakahari]

I disagree, because child coding isn't always a sex thing. Look at Spongebob Squarepants--sometimes he's implied to be a child in order to make a particular joke, and sometimes he's implied to be an adult in order to make a different joke. He can be coded one way or another, but he can't explicitly be one or the other, because that would cut off possible jokes.