[ SECRET POST #5467 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5467 ⌋

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


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________































06. [SPOILERS for Plebs]



__________________________________________________



07. [WARNING for discussion of sexualization of minors]


























Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #782.
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)]

Do you mind elaborating? This was on my to-watch list but I don't really like fanservicey stuff even when it is focused on adults. :/

[(Anonymous)]

It's a very good series just on a story level but there are many moments where you find yourself thinking 'this author has a fetish and is very bad at hiding it.' Adding to what above anon said, for example there's a part where a character in extreme pain pees herself. Medically that makes sense and it isn't at all portrayed like it's intended to be sexy (I hate even having to type that, but I have also seen anime try to portray peeing oneself that way), it's very matter of fact, but...why is it there and why does it have to be mentioned. The main girl also comments on the main boy's penis a few times, again in a very 'kids playing doctor' manner versus how that sort of thing would be portrayed in a fanservice anime, but it still doesn't need to be there. The show isn't really what I would consider openly fanservicely but you can absolutely see the author has some gross fetishes and it's a shame because the actual meat of the series is very good.

DA

[(Anonymous)]

So basically the only reason you think it's a fetish is because it doesn't need to be there. Sorry but that's... weird? A lot of stories leave out gross details of life like characters needing to use the bathroom, and sometimes if you look at it one way this can seem too unrealistically sanitized, so a work will choose to put those things in instead for realism's sake. It sounds like this story just might be putting normal things that happen but don't often get written about because it's "improper."

Maybe it is a fetish. On the same token, maybe me writing a story and mentioning that a character's shoes have yellow laces means I have a yellow shoelace fetish because after all, I didn't HAVE to talk about what kind of shoelaces they had. But what a weirdly suspicious way to look at it

[(Anonymous)]

NAYRT

You seem really hung up about how OP chose to word things. For those of us who've seen an author showing off their fetishes to the detriment of their narrative, it makes sense. Sorry not sorry if my explanation isn't read any sort of charity from you too.

Re: DA

[(Anonymous)]

really standing up for the "wants to read about children peeing themselves and talking about genitals" crowd, you go stake out that hill nonny

Re: DA

[(Anonymous)]

You haven’t even seen or read it, much less researched it. So why are you so hung up and defensive about this?

Re: DA

[(Anonymous)]

Are you that weird anon with the underage kink, who is always projecting as hell every time someone expresses a personal opinion about the sexual depiction of a minor character that isn't 100% positive? Because I swear this happens every time, and I find it hard to believe that there's multiple people like this here. You sound like one of those men, who insist that there's nothing inherently fetishistic about portraying female characters getting raped all the time, because "realism".

Re: DA

[(Anonymous)]

It definitely seems to be that anon. They sound just like the person who made a big deal about it in the original comment thread too. And I believe that was the thread where they also brought up the legality of loli even though nobody had said anything about whether it was legal or not at that time. Every time someone is squicked by this kind of thing, this anon gets defensive and brings up the fact that it’s legal and that they’re not real children. Which, duh. But why shouldn’t people be allowed to question or why some creators feel the need to add potentially fetishized things involving underage characters into media without some anon getting upset and acting like they themselves are being put on blast or kinkshamed? Questioning creator’s intent shouldn’t always warrant this anon’s hissy fit.

Re: DA

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, and even if it's a matter of legality to them, there's a difference between saying "x thing should be legal to be portrayed in fiction despite some people not liking it" and trying to gaslight someone that a scene, which multiple people read as sexual in nature, is not actually sexual in nature, and anyone personally put off by it is morally bankrupt. People are allowed to express negative opinions about tropes or kinks they personally don't like and don't enjoy encountering in a canon they're fans of. After all, entire community is built on people complaining about the things they don't like in canons they're fans of, and sometimes even in popular fanworks.

Re: DA

[(Anonymous)]

I completely agree.

Re: DA

[(Anonymous)]

I don't mind most weird shit, but I agree. It's not wrong to question things. Sometimes there's a reason for that weird shit.