The Wolf Who Cried Boy

[DismaiNaim]

Let's hear it.

 

[Bald-san]

They might have pretty big tearducts to be able to cry boy

 

[NotaNuffian]

Why do I think of a Dommy Mommy Furry Wolf x a shota?

 

[BearlyAlive]

Why do I think of a Dommy Mommy Furry Wolf x a shota?

"Ara ara, red riding hood-kun. All alone in the forest?"

 

[AliceMoonvale]

Why do I think of a Dommy Mommy Furry Wolf x a shota?

I dunno, why are you thinking of an adult monster with a child?

 

[TinaMigarlo]

I'm slowly picking up vocabulary words.
Isekai was my first. Cool.
Futa, I could have lived not knowing that one.
I just learned "Yandere" and I really liked that one.
I'm about to learn the new vocabulary word "shota".
these definitions are always such a mixed bag.
my fingers tremble, as I hover over depressing the "return" key on the google search.
It could be anything.
my emotions a mix of fear and anticipation, mixed through in a base of nervous.
F*ck it... nothing ventured, nothing gained...

hmm.
not as bad as futa.
not nearly as cool as yandere was.
on the meter... more towards futa than to the yandere side.
I guess that explains the predilection for all the pretty sissy boys on all the covers, though.

some of these covers and illustrations drive me nuts, and not in a good way.
one cover? its held out to be "the most handsome prince ever".
Its a girl. I guess that's a shota-prince stereotype.

just not my thing.

 

[AliceMoonvale]

hmm.
not as bad as futa.

It's worse, actually.

For the people in the back to hear.
It's children.

 

[BearlyAlive]

It's worse, actually.

View attachment 47711

For the people in the back to hear.
It's children.

Depends. If googling "futa" shows a girl with (normally) giant dong, then shota is less of a shock. I mean, sure, the implication is way worse, but women grooming men is, for some reason, more socially acceptable than the other way around. Not as bad as loli, though both shota and loli are descriptions of body types first and foremost, rather than tags for certain sites.

 

[AliceMoonvale]

Depends. If googling "futa" shows a girl with (normally) giant dong, then shota is less of a shock. I mean, sure, the implication is way worse, but women grooming men is, for some reason, more socially acceptable than the other way around. Not as bad as loli, though both shota and loli are descriptions of body types first and foremost, rather than tags for certain sites.

I'm not sure why you're trying to turn this into a debate. It doesn't 'depend'.
Please do not normalize harmful content just because of something you deem 'socially acceptable'.
Loli and Shota is the sexualization of minors, first and foremost. Both are equally terrible.

Futa is an adult fetish, less terrible and more ethical. Thank you~

 

[BearlyAlive]

I'm not sure why you're trying to turn this into a debate. It doesn't 'depend'.
Please do not normalize harmful content just because of something you deem 'socially acceptable'.
Loli and Shota is the sexualization of minors, first and foremost. Both are equally terrible.

Futa is an adult fetish, less terrible and more ethical. Thank you~

Guess I worded that way too wrong. But looking those things up leads to drawn pics of anime children, while Futa leads directly to fetish fuel. If you're unprepared, then seeing chicks with dicks hits worse than just seeing cuutesy kids. That was my whole point. Everything else was, as I see now, easily misinterpretable information to prevent overly clouded judgment. Loli and Shota are as sexualized as Yandere or any tag applicable to a personality or body type, really.

Sadly, everything can and will be sexualized on the internet...

And I agree that sexualization of minors is terrible, and that grooming, no matter how "accepted" is a crime. Just so we're all clear here.

 

[TinaMigarlo]

WhIle I don't like many things?
I can't bring myself to go into *hysterics* over what is essentially a cartoon character.

get a grip.

just what this world needed.
another panty wetting pearl clutcher, gasping in (totally performative) horror.

 

[AliceMoonvale]

Guess I worded that way too wrong. But looking those things up leads to drawn pics of anime children, while Futa leads directly to fetish fuel. If you're unprepared, then seeing chicks with dicks hits worse than just seeing cuutesy kids. That was my whole point. Everything else was, as I see now, easily misinterpretable information to prevent overly clouded judgment. Loli and Shota are as sexualized as Yandere or any tag applicable to a personality or body type, really.

Sadly, everything can and will be sexualized on the internet...

And I agree that sexualization of minors is terrible, and that grooming, no matter how "accepted" is a crime. Just so we're all clear here.

WhIle Idon't like it?
I can't bring myself to go into *hysterics* over what is essentially a cartoon character.

get a grip.

I'll just say one last thing as a teacher of young children who has seen horrible things over the years.

It's a bit insensitive to compare adult fetishes to the sexualization of minors, as one involves consenting adults, while the other depicts the exploitation of children. Please avoid using semantics to avoid or strip the reality that content like this is inherently harmful and predatory. Casting it aside as "body type" or "a cartoon" isn't quite right. Thanks for understanding~

 

[TinaMigarlo]

I'll just say one last thing as a teacher of young children who has seen horrible things over the years.

It's a bit insensitive to compare adult fetishes to the sexualization of minors, as one involves consenting adults, while the other depicts the exploitation of children. Please avoid using semantics to avoid or strip the reality that content like this is inherently harmful and predatory. Casting it aside as "body type" or "a cartoon" isn't quite right. Thanks for understanding~

Gee.
thanks for telling me exactly how I'm allowed to think.

i'm not some little kid in your classroom.
I don't have to think the way you tell me to think.
i don't have to be horrified, by what you demand I be horrified by.

thanks for understanding.

 

[AliceMoonvale]

thanks for understanding.

I understand very well. I see the intended theme of your response.
Using an ad hominem to be antagonistic and contrarian.

So you're welcome, anytime~

 

[Bimbanana]

So... is this thread still about the wolf who cried boy?

 

[Anonjohn20]

Futa, I could have lived not knowing that one.

I just learned "Yandere" and I really liked that one.

What? A person with both genders is bad for you, but a literal psychopath lover is something you like? Someone lock Tina up in a mental hospital.

hmm.
not as bad as futa.

You don't like a person with two genders, but smut with children is okay? Someone arrest this person.

I scroll down and see this got pretty serious. I probably should delete my comment after the serious discussion, but I already typed it out, so... Keep in mind I typed this out in a more lighthearted fashion.

 

[Juia_Darkcrest]

 

[TinaMigarlo]

I understand very well. I see the intended theme of your response.
Using an ad hominem to be antagonistic and contrarian.

So you're welcome, anytime~

Alice? I might agree with you. in part, and perhaps even in whole. who knows.
what I strongly disagree with, however...

taking a tone.
lecturing, as if to children, in a school marm posturing fashion.
no asking. no persuading. no convincing.
the thank you in advance for your cooperation vibe.

now, since you invoked logical fallacies, that pandora's box is now fair game.

--- by invoking logical fallacies, you are implying Socratic debate rules.
--- you cannot selectively pick out ad hominem as your "zinger".
--- you have to take the entire ball of wax, that is socratic.

and here is *your* biggest logical fallacy.
'forceful pronouncement from a perceived position of authority'.
this logical fallacy works on the young children in your classroom.
it has no effect on the world at large around you. not unless the onlooker *chooses* to allow you this privilege.

but we have more socratic rules broken.

in socratic debate, all terms used, must be agreed upon by both sides.
you don't.
you simply invoke dramatic sounding terms and phrases...
"sexualization of minors"
"depicts the exploitation of children"

and "we" don't get to all decide if these terms aren't just a bit overly dramatic.
cartoon characters and drawings, HAVE no age.
no "children" are being exploited.

but wait, there's more!
you fail to lay out ANY case for cause and effect.
children suffered these horrific attacks and exploitations, since time immemorial.
LONG before any of these cartoon characters and drawings were ever once dreamed up.
clearly, there's zero cause and effect established.

again.
I *might* even agree with you? in part or perhaps in whole.
but shaking your finger and ordering everyone how its going to be...

nope.
your argument, isn't.
your source? "trust me, bro."

 

[Bimbanana]

In my imagination, i can see four wolves arguing all the things above when they're about to decide how should they dress up and disguise themselves as a boy

 

[Anonjohn20]

In my imagination, i can see four wolves debating all the things above when they're about to dress up and disguise themselves as a boy

I'm too old to be a boy, but I'll dress up in a school uniform if a futa wolfkin asks me to.