Bun bun's Topics (101)

i think its for respect or something

Fr like it really does annoy me like what the hell why so suddenly??it doesn't make sense at all

Honestly I think it does make sense. Old Xian has been working on this for over a decade now. She's in her thirties now and you have to understand that the artist grows with their story. This is just my guess but I suppose that after ten years she started to identify - or at least became more interested - in Mos and He Tians relationship. I understand that on a professional level it doesn't really make much sense to turn the story and focus like she did but this comic has been published for free and Old Xian doesn't seem to have much restrictions. Therefore she does what she wants with it, even if it's hurting the story. Just my take on it. Author grew older and simultaneously grew out of Jians and Xixis relationship..?

Fr fr. Happy that He Tian and Mo stans get to see their couple, and maybe Old Xian prefers them and that's completely fair since she is the creator, but the first pairing will forever be in my heart!
I love a good slowburn angsty childhood friends to lovers and the first pairing hit all the boxes for me when I read this yeaaars ago

same. one with them and one with tianshan so ppl can finally stop fucking complaining non stop and i get to eat both up

YESS!!! then make it smut or light so I can see lil mo GETTING IT day and night ლ(´ڡ`ლ)

Was about to say cause it’s nighttime and we lurk at night (it’s 10:11pm here) but I forgot about different time zones

This uke is implied to be young, I can't tell exactly but its possible he is just underaged? Also his character design- how he looks are all meant to reflect him and his naivety. Really the "don't read it then" is simple the only reply in this case as some people simply don't mind the character design or the story even if he is under aged they're just fictional after all. If its not for you then there is no answer that will satisfy you. Especially because manga designs are so simplified, there really isn't that big of a line between a childs design and a feminine or youthful character. Theres only so many nuances you can convey with a cartoon character without doing a more intensive art style. If its too close to uncomfortable for you perhaps its best to just tap out. Even the dynamic between the two hinges on the naive uke and the knowing seme although i will say there is a fun undercurrent of the seme being naive and the uke mature emotionally in relationships that is really fun. But it still is a relationship dynamic with troupes and appeals that aren't for you.

Telling me to 'read something else' misses the point entirely. The issue isn't my personal preference, it's the fact that this content is being normalized and defended under the guise of artistic expression. When we treat alarming themes as mere stylistic choices, we strip away the accountability for what those images actually represent.

The 'it’s just a drawing/art style' excuse is exactly how predatory tropes get normalized. And you defending that is very disgusting and questionable... BECAUSE when you combine childlike features with sexual situations, you are training the brain to associate vulnerability and prepubescence with sexual desire. To be simplified, reducing a childlike design to 'simplified art' or 'youthful appeal' makes it ignore the reality that these visuals are being paired with EXPLICIT sexual acts, and questionable people are still devouring it, yikes....

And defending this as 'style'
is an attempt to silence criticism, so you’re actively normalizing the harmful themes behind it rather than addressing why the content is harmful in the first place, this is exactly how problematic tropes become standard.

No its not a bigger issue and yes it is just essentially window dressing. Most of these more taboo subjects in literature are added for theme or to represent a more abstract concept. Its a little backwards to think that the adults reading this take it as 1 for 1. If you read a furry comic or develop a crush on simba while watching the lion king you are not preparing yourself to become attracted to animals. As they are so abstracted and humanized away from the real thing that what you are connecting with isn't the thing in of itself. Same thing here, the thing people are connecting with is the knowledge gap, someone who knows alot and someone who is naive and there are character designs that illustrate that. Maybe even the corruption of innocence. Something more abstract that many people can relate to.
Whether a cannibal likes hannibal is kind of besides the point when the cannibalism in hannibal is a stand in for love and loving someone so wholly you literally consume them (among other things but cannibalism between hannibal and will) the fact that hannibal is a serial killer and cannibal is just window dressing for the gothic themes and the type of love being conveyed. It would be surface level to say hannibal is looking to comment on cannibalism as a real world concept. Age gaps and the art style here are similar they are the means through which the themes and the taboos of this story are conveyed.
We don't actually have evidence to suggest that something like themes or art style or even the fictionalized portrayal itself causes people to become attracted to children. Most of this stuff is aimed at women anyways the demographic who are least likely to abuse and rape, while men who for the most part don't read these type of stories are the perpetrators 90% of the time. There isn't normalization going on here there is at most a common experience shared by alot of women who can relate to and enjoys the themes associated with corruption of innocence. Or a adjacent theme. Its kind of jumping to unsupported conclusions that don't make sense with the demographics who consume this kind of stuff to say it is going to cause any kind of harm or to suggest that something like attraction to children will come out of reading this. Its a bit ridiculous when you have more nuanced and better fitting conclusions you could come to.
I'm not silencing criticism either. You're just engaging with the text on a really surface level of analysis. Mind you its just a manwha so im not expecting much! Its not interesting to say "I don't like the character designs they make me uncomfortable". Maybe if you had a problem with the direction of the narrative or something? Maybe suggested an improvement? As it stands all your comment really is is saying this thing that i can tell by looking at the cover is not for me ... Is not for me. And then you're drawing some pretty unfounded conclusions about the readers of this from that aswell. I have things i don't like, when i see from a glance its not for me i tend to just ... Not interact with it. You asked for an explanation as to why people view this and i provided you with one.

You’re working overtime to intellectualize something that is, at its core, just the sexualization of childlike features. Comparing this to 'Simba' or 'Hannibal' is a massive reach. We aren't here to talk about talking lions or metaphors for love, we are talking about the literal visual pairing of prepubescent aesthetics with explicit sexual acts. Experts in child protection have noted that even if a character is "canonically" an adult, using a "childlike art style" to depict sexual acts provides a loophole for people hat consumes this type of media to engage with pedophilic aesthetics under the guise of legal fiction. Thus, creates a market for visuals that rely on prepubescent cues to generate arousal. (Media Psychology - Research on the desensitization effect of repetitive media tropes)
While it is argued that fiction doesn't cause immediate behavior changes, studies on media normalization suggest that repeated exposure to certain tropes (like the "corruption of innocence") desensitizes the audience to the severity of those issues in reality. When these visuals are treated as "just a style," it lowers the collective social barrier against content that mimics child sexual abuse material. (Child Protection International - Reports on the intersection of stylized media and grooming patterns)

Calling it 'window dressing' is just a fancy way of dodging accountability. The media doesn’t exist in a vacuum. When you constantly consume content where 'physical Innocent' is represented by a childlike physical design being 'corrupted' for pleasure, you aren’t just engaging with an abstract theme—you are validating a visual shorthand that connects vulnerability to sexual appeal. The 'it’s aimed at women' defense is also irrelevant. Harmful tropes don't become magically harmless just because of the demographic consuming them. Normalizing the idea that sexual attraction is heightened by a 'knowledge gap' or physical disparity in maturity is exactly how predatory grooming behaviors are romanticized in the real world. You can wrap it in as much 'literary analysis' as you want, but defending the sexualization of childlike designs isn't a 'nuanced conclusion'—it’s just an excuse for a very clear, very documented problem. I also didn't ask for an explanation because the distinction is already clear, there is a massive line between a 'twink' and a character intentionally designed with the features of a child. It’s bold of you to demand a 'solution' from me when I’m simply pointing out a documented problem. My goal isn’t to fix your preferred art style, it’s to raise awareness that normalizing child-like imagery in sexual contexts is psychologically harmful and warps an audience perspective. If you're more concerned with defending the 'style' than acknowledging the impact of the content, you’re proving exactly why this conversation needs to happen.

Omg friend, most likely using ai to translate the chapters they uploading. They steal and uplaod so many series everyday.

They MTL not Translators. ┗( T﹏T )┛

Taking and wasting clean drinkable water for kids for bad translation is insane.