>>

I do declare Furrynomous 2017/10/18 00:09:26 No. 2017/10/18 00:09:26 No. 1335174 >>1334835



>You want fact specific? It makes no sense for Nick to be gay let alone for him to enjoy being held down and used as a fucktoy by males larger than him.



It makes no sense for Nick to be gay? What, do you think that there's a list of prerequisites a guy has to check off to be into men? Should every gay guy be walking around sashaying his hips wearing belly shirts and assless chaps? Don't be absurd. There is exactly zero evidence that points to Nick's sexual orientation in the movie. He's a blank slate, baby. Tabula rasa.



Actually, now that I think about it, there *was* a character that Nick kissed. Finnick. A DUDE.



Suck it, Nick confirmed ass bandit.



>If anything it should trigger his flashback of the time he was bullied as a kid, held down and betrayed by the boys he thought are his friends. This is a fact because we SEE in the movie that after 20 years he still have negative feelings about this, he still sees this as an unpleasent memory, he is not over it.



And now I know that you know nothing about how fetishes work. Gee, I wonder why all this cuckold porn exists if your partner cheating on you is supposed to be such a traumatic event. It's almost like some people react to traumatic experiences by forming paraphilia or put on a mask of confidence to hide the fact that they're insecure inside, and that's just a single, believable possibility. Anybody with even a little bit of imagination can reconcile Nick's established persona with this comic because not a single thing he does in it is out of character. Now, if he was portrayed as a demure, blushing virgin *then* there would be a disconnect between the two, but he's not. He acts just how a cock sucking, dick loving version of Nick would act.



>While Nick is not the most masculine character, it is a dominant, controlling one who outsmarts others. Except for Judy, as his adventure with her is that teaches him to be more humble. Seeing him being a bottom bitch on the recieving end justs weirds me out.

>justs weirds me out.

>weirds me out.



So we finally arrive at what your actual issue with the comic is: It makes you feel icky. Can you really not see how none of the shit you said even remotely discredits this comic's interpretation of the character's sexuality? You started from the conclusion that "this is wrong" and built your argument from there and it shows.



Do you seriously think that a sly, cocksure rogue can't like taking it in the ass? You seem to have some strange preconceptions about what a bottom should act like. Considering the theme of Nick and Judy's character development was CHALLENGING THEIR OWN BIASES and you seem to have such a hard on for the pair you'd think that you'd be a little bit more aware of your own assumptions. Leave it to a fan to fail to critically evaluate the subject of their worship.



>When he was called out on this on FA he said, that it's his headcanon that Nick's mom died leaving him on the streets.



>Despite that basically the directors confirmed that "Nick's mom is alive, living in the same apartment where she raised Nick and she is waiting for grandkits." Zaush did ZERO reserach for his work. He is not a fan of Zootopia, he's just using it's imagry.



This is pretty much just grasping for straws at this point. Nowhere in the comic was it stated, explicitly or otherwise, that Nick's mom had died and left him out on the streets, so even if that's true then it's a moot point. It has no impact on the content of the comic.



Dumbledore isn't gay just because J.K. Rowling said so after the fact. You have to show that shit in the medium or else it's just pointless backstage fluff. Ironically, that makes the revelation that "Nick's mom is alive, living in the same apartment where she raised Nick and she is waiting for grandkits" NON CANON.



Your disdain for Zaush for is lack of "reserach" is pretty telling, however. Why should you give a shit about whether or not Zaush is a super fan of Zootopia? This pretty much just reaffirms the idea that you don't actually care about any of the shit you used to justify your dislike of the comic, you're just peeved that someone had the gall to represent characters in a way that clashes with your own canon. Just own it.

It makes no sense for Nick to be gay? What, do you think that there's a list of prerequisites a guy has to check off to be into men? Should every gay guy be walking around sashaying his hips wearing belly shirts and assless chaps? Don't be absurd. There is exactly zero evidence that points to Nick's sexual orientation in the movie. He's a blank slate, baby. Tabula rasa.Actually, now that I think about it, there *was* a character that Nick kissed. Finnick. A DUDE.Suck it, Nick confirmed ass bandit.And now I know that you know nothing about how fetishes work. Gee, I wonder why all this cuckold porn exists if your partner cheating on you is supposed to be such a traumatic event. It's almost like some people react to traumatic experiences by forming paraphilia or put on a mask of confidence to hide the fact that they're insecure inside, and that's just a single, believable possibility. Anybody with even a little bit of imagination can reconcile Nick's established persona with this comic because not a single thing he does in it is out of character. Now, if he was portrayed as a demure, blushing virgin *then* there would be a disconnect between the two, but he's not. He acts just how a cock sucking, dick loving version of Nick would act.So we finally arrive at what your actual issue with the comic is: It makes you feel icky. Can you really not see how none of the shit you said even remotely discredits this comic's interpretation of the character's sexuality? You started from the conclusion that "this is wrong" and built your argument from there and it shows.Do you seriously think that a sly, cocksure rogue can't like taking it in the ass? You seem to have some strange preconceptions about what a bottom should act like. Considering the theme of Nick and Judy's character development was CHALLENGING THEIR OWN BIASES and you seem to have such a hard on for the pair you'd think that you'd be a little bit more aware of your own assumptions. Leave it to a fan to fail to critically evaluate the subject of their worship.This is pretty much just grasping for straws at this point. Nowhere in the comic was it stated, explicitly or otherwise, that Nick's mom had died and left him out on the streets, so even if that's true then it's a moot point. It has no impact on the content of the comic.Dumbledore isn't gay just because J.K. Rowling said so after the fact. You have to show that shit in the medium or else it's just pointless backstage fluff. Ironically, that makes the revelation that "Nick's mom is alive, living in the same apartment where she raised Nick and she is waiting for grandkits" NON CANON.Your disdain for Zaush for is lack of "reserach" is pretty telling, however. Why should you give a shit about whether or not Zaush is a super fan of Zootopia? This pretty much just reaffirms the idea that you don't actually care about any of the shit you used to justify your dislike of the comic, you're just peeved that someone had the gall to represent characters in a way that clashes with your own canon. Just own it.