Interested in advertising on Derpibooru? Click here for information!
Help fund the $15 daily operational cost of Derpibooru - support us financially!
Description
No description provided.
Help fund the $15 daily operational cost of Derpibooru - support us financially!
No description provided.
…I, guess that’s… wacky? Not creepy at all? Well, as long as it’s not what I first mistook it for, it’s still far less disturbing than I initially thought. I think.
It’s from another piece where every conceivable MLP character is being turned into babies against their will. This is just a small part of it.
It’s weird to think they might be children when they’re drawn to resemble children, is it? Your own reasoning could use some work.
@Background Pony #F3C2
This makes a lot more sense, but it’s not something I saw any indication to in the image or tags, so I wouldn’t have guessed it. It does clear things up a lot though, thank you.
I’m not sure how I’m expected to connect invisible dots on these things, but if there are no tags to explain things to the unfamiliar (though I guess Wacky Situation Robot might not have its own tag, and I don’t care enough to enforce one), confusion seems pretty reasonable over just automatically knowing.
No, they are not infants, I will tell you straight forward. This is an animated piece of a larger image that basically takes concepts from old school cartoons where because of dumb robots, characters would end up in whacky situations. Such as getting their haircut and diapers put on them, spanked like in the practical pig or house hunting mice, or even that one time with Donald Duck and that mechanical barber chair.
On one note to you sir, there is a plethora of people that think making an adult to look like an infant, diapers and everything, is sexy. I am not one, but they are everywhere. On another note, the sexualization of infant ponies is called Foalcon and unfortunately is a thing as well, but considering said tag is not on this? You should be able to put two and two together here and assume it’s the former, not the latter.
I hope that clears things up for ya.
Edited
Ooh, that reminds me of an I.M. Weasel episode that I found hysterical. X3
>So, putting two and two together… Is this sexualized infants?
if this your thought process ?
Then you shouldn’t be around children. and you need to stop exposing yourself to cartoons/anime
If the 70’s sitcom formula was to fetishize toddlers, then yes, I’d be very confused.
The ’70s sitcom formula likely confuses you. <3<
The use of restraints (you don’t discipline children with braces on their necks), along with a camera angle that shows their behinds and pained expressions, tells me this is meant to be sexual in some way.
That they have such short hair and seem to be stuck in baby chairs tells me they’re infants.
So, putting two and two together… Is this sexualized infants? If so, I’m sincerely trying not to judge, and I’m sorry if it comes off that way, but Jesus…