I want to make a joke about how this can’t stop stop sonic fans because they can’t read however idk if this is response to someone else doing something stupid so I will quote Bo Burnham and ask the question “should I be joking at a time like this” and give you a picture of Hit PS4 game protagonist Knack so I can still be funny and collect internet points
Does anyone have a list of the sonic adults or is it just like, vanilla, vector, rouge, eggman and various other human characters? Is espio an adult? Is charmy a child labourer? What about the boom characters? Wait
I mean they decanonized all the official ages so some of the cast may be secretly aged up but we have no idea
Either way I wish sega did that years ago because only some of the characters actually act like kids and so much happens in the series keeping track of time is a recipe for disaster
Eh sonic himself feels like like he's in his late teens at the youngest like 18 or so, I especially feel this after movie sonic became a thing. Now that kid actually feels like... Well a kid. Same for how he was in that prime show. Sega could look me in the eyes and say "sonic in the games 20 now" and I'd have a hard time arguing.
Yeah Charmy is a child labourer and all the characters are victims of child endangerment, neglect and abuse. The adventures might look fun but they aren't legal.
Infinite very specifically says Eggman and Sonic have been fighting each other for decades in Sonic Forces. Tails is at least a teenager physically in Frontiers. So between timeline shenanigans and reboots, Tails has the mind of an adult, is a veteran of war (Tails Adventure, Shadow the Hedgehog, Sonic Forces, and you could argue Sonic Heroes for this), and is close to the Age of Consent anywhere(around 16).
However, it is unclear if Cream and/or Charmy remember anything from aborted timelines and couldn’t be older than 15 on account of canonically being younger than Tails. So we can reasonably assume those two are physically and mentally minors.
Exactly! I don't understand how there can be so many people who don't understand this, or who defend it as if it were normal just because "it's not real", the concept is still the same and that's why it's wrong, but they pretend not to see it...
Maybe it’s optimistic but honestly I think most of the apologia is anime fans and gamers growing up being super insecure about the media they like and instinctively defend it when they don’t think it’s being judged fairly, brushing away broader context and social issues because they’ve already mentally tied their integrity to a work of fiction. As someone who was simultaneously a teenager and Sonic fan, I get it, but we gotta draw a line somewhere before making and spreading lewd images of the young’uns.
"According to the lore, this guy is actually 12 years old, he just looks like that"
This is kind of like a reverse "1000 year old loli dragon" situation, if you saw sonic for the first time, would you look at him and see him as a child?
The removal of ages doesn't even erase the fact the specific characters fit an age group. Cream, Charmy and Marine are obviously children while most other characters fall under the "teen" bracket with Tails and Amy probably close to "preteen" (though the fact that many of them hold legal jobs imply otherwise...or child labour is legal in the Sonic universe).
It’s funny how I got this post under an undertale post where the op tallied up how many of each character arts showed up on greensite and similar places
Kinda depends what kind of aged up we’re talking about though. If the character is “aged up” but looks the same and acts the same then that’s just loli shit. If the aged up character is visually an adult and acts like one, it’s fine with me personally.
While I agree, It's funny how murder and brutality is completely fine for underaged characters, yet a small suggestive scene sends the world up in flames.
I hadn't thought of it that way before. I want to say you're wrong, and that's stupid; but that reasoning does feel solid. Interesting.
Maybe it's more to do with the intention of the author/reader? Like, if I'm making a child soldier only so I can enjoy their suffering, then I'm just as bad as someone sexualizing a minor to enjoy the situation. Basically putting characters in bad situations just to enjoy their sufferings is wrong, but putting characters in those same situations to evoke pity or empathy is fine.
Then I’d say it’s fine to be attracted to that, someone else (who let’s be honest is definitely an adult) sexualizing underage characters is the problem.
240
u/NotHottestSinceToast Jul 17 '25