My Little Pony: The Invasion MK II, Seventh Edition.

I just noticed that this is called the Sixth Edition, the last was also the Sixth Edition. We may have an issue with numbering.

Fixed

Kaizy wrote:

Fixed

Thank you Kaizy, my OCD is in check again.

Lucan wrote:

1- Yes.

2- Why is the normal pony in the last frame somehow more terrifying than the Silence ponies?

3- I bet Lyra gets really excited when she sees them (on account of the fingers), and then she forgets immediately, but she's really happy for the whole rest of the day and doesn't know why.

8-bit wrote:

People can have these types of relationships and still be mentally healthy.

Maybe so, but not RD. I can't help but put her personality on her body (it is hers, after all) and at that point the only logical conclusion is that she's a sex-slave.



McCarthyBot is broken again...

Riv wrote:

8-bit wrote:

People can have these types of relationships and still be mentally healthy.

Maybe so, but not RD. I can't help but put her personality on her body (it is hers, after all) and at that point the only logical conclusion is that she's a sex-slave.

That not true. Just because someone is submissive to sombody, doesn't mean they're submissive to everybody. I know it looks really fucked up, but trust me that it isn't. She can be 's' to one person, and even then it could vary between just in the bedroom to being submissive. The 'D' isn't some moustache-twirling villain, either. He or she won't just mercilessly beat on them.


So yeah.

Riv, ponies literally doing anything sexual is of COURSE out of character and canon. That's the whole point of rule 34.
Fine I'll change my avi if it really bothers people

8-bit wrote:

Riv wrote:

8-bit wrote:

People can have these types of relationships and still be mentally healthy.

Maybe so, but not RD. I can't help but put her personality on her body (it is hers, after all) and at that point the only logical conclusion is that she's a sex-slave.

That not true. Just because someone is submissive to sombody, doesn't mean they're submissive to everybody. I know it looks really fucked up, but trust me that it isn't. She can be 's' to one person, and even then it could vary between just in the bedroom to being submissive. The 'D' isn't some moustache-twirling villain, either. He or she won't just mercilessly beat on them.


So yeah.

Some of the shit I saw on that tumblr would have caused her a nuclear emotional meltdown. Regardless of what you want to think she's like behind closed doors, public humiliation is not something she tolerates well, and her character seems quite aware of the fact that the Tumblr is seen by many. Your interpretation doesn't fit together logically.

greg-the-fox wrote:

Riv, ponies literally doing anything sexual is of COURSE out of character and canon. That's the whole point of rule 34.

No, it isn't. They reproduce sexually like any other mammal. Just because it's not portrayed in the program doesn't mean it isn't true.

My point is not that sex itself is outside of canon, but that Rainbow Dash enjoying that kind of relationship is so far outside of canon that the only logical conclusion is that she has been abused to the point that she's dead inside.

But it's fiction
The SHOW is fiction

I love ponies but I don't have this irrational attachment to fictional characters like a lot of Bronies have.

greg-the-fox wrote:

But it's fiction
The SHOW is fiction

I love ponies but I don't have this irrational attachment to fictional characters like a lot of Bronies have.

Enjoying a depiction of torture is fucked up whether it's fiction or not.

but it's NOT
fsafgdsdfjkf

This is sadder than watching two paraplegics fighting over a wheel chair... why am I laughing?

greg-the-fox wrote:

but it's NOT
fsafgdsdfjkf

If you assume the author got her character right, it is.

If you assume the author got her character wrong, fuck that guy with a cactus. Don't slap someone else's face over your crappy OC.

Rule 34 has always been about making a character do stuff that they would never do in canon. That's kind of the whole point of it. And this kind of stuff has been going on with fans of fiction for decades if not centuries.

greg-the-fox wrote:

Rule 34 has always been about making a character do stuff that they would never do in canon. That's kind of the whole point of it.

... It's impossible for it to become canon because it's sex, not because it's completely incompatible with the character's personality.

1

Bloodshot_Eyes wrote:

1

7

Riv wrote:

Bloodshot_Eyes wrote:

1

7

A billion.

Tank Abuse wrote:

Riv wrote:

Bloodshot_Eyes wrote:

1

7

A billion.

Fuck your shit. Ten-trillion.

Fine, I changed my avi. Are you happy?

greg-the-fox wrote:

Fine, I changed my avi. Are you happy?

It's hilarious and doesn't remind me of pony rape.

I never even watched that movie

And the faggotry lives on...

Tank Abuse wrote:

Riv wrote:

Tank Abuse wrote:

Riv wrote:

Bloodshot_Eyes wrote:

1

7

A billion.

Fuck your shit. Ten-trillion.

∞

lim f(x)=∞/x

as x->0

Monochrome Kanon wrote:

I never even watched that movie

Every furry watched that movie!

(neither did I...)

Riv wrote:

Tank Abuse wrote:

Riv wrote:

Tank Abuse wrote:

Riv wrote:

Bloodshot_Eyes wrote:

1

7

A billion.

Fuck your shit. Ten-trillion.

∞

lim f(x)=∞/x

as x->0

Get your funny hieroglyphics out of here.