Little Layton Problems
Submission!

Submission!

This is getting out of hand…

A few people seem very up in arms over this whole “Legal Luke” thing.  Apparently, some people think the name is a pedophilia joke and are of the opinion that I should get rid of the tag.  I don’t want to keep reblogging posts and replying to Asks repeating the same stuff over and over, so I’m compiling a reply to all the stuff people have been saying.

I will not change the tag.  I have added the “Future Luke” tag, but I will not get rid of the other one, for reasons I will go into further along.  I’ve been using this tag for over a year now, and most of the fandom has been referring to Clive as “Legal”  for even longer.  It’s a bit ridiculous that only now is it suddenly being called out as something offensive.

"Legal" is not a pedophilia joke.  Some do view the nickname as a joke, but not of that nature.  People have been trying to tell me that it’s a big deal because this "Legal Luke" allows LayLuke shippers to legally ship them.  

…Why is this a problem?

Legal Luke is NOT the same as the Luke who follows the Professor around, and I’m not talking about the whole Clive thing.  He’s an adult, not an innocent child, living in an apocalyptic future.  If anything, shouldn’t his existence make those disgusted by the LayLuke ship happy?  This Luke has a completely different personality and is older.  If he is a consenting adult, shipping him with an equally-consenting Layton should not be a problem.  I mean, it’s not like we’re talking about a situation where the younger Luke gets magically transformed into an adult, as in that scenario, he would still be a child.

Long story short, you don’t have to like the name, but don’t insist that those who use it are disgusting or even LayLuke shippers.  I don’t ship them.  I started using the nickname “Legal” before the US even got Unwound Future, simply because I actually thought that was his name.

The legal luke term was brought around cause of people who ship Layluke(Layton/Luke) due the fact Clive was 18+. It is supporting that behavior. Again, I know there's many people who use the tag "Future Luke", but there's no need to change for me.
Anonymous

No, it really isn’t.  There is nothing wrong with shipping Layton and Luke in a scenario where Luke is of-age.  And in the case of the “Legal Luke” term, you could make the argument that a future version of Luke is a completely different character than the young Luke who is the professor’s apprentice.  The most I can do for you is add a “Future Luke” tag.

could you stop using the tag "legal Luke" when you tag things with Clive in them? It really supports pedophillac patterns and all. perhaps the tag "future Luke" instead?
Anonymous

I use that tag because it’s still how a lot of people refer to that character.  Personally, I don’t think it in any way supports pedophilia, as even if he had really been Luke, he would still have been an adult.

Reworded submission!

Reworded submission!

Some shameless advertising!

Well, LittleLaytonProblems is a year old now, and we’ve got over 700 followers!  On top of posting a new submission, I hope you guys don’t mind a little bit of advertising.  When I’m not working on this blog, I’m working on my stories, which I hope to someday get published.  But getting reviews is near impossible these days, so I’m hoping this will finally get some people reviewing, because I need some real feedback.

image

https://www.fictionpress.com/s/3199684/1/Promise-of-the-Rose-Rewrite

Inspired by the PS2 game “Rule of Rose”, it’s a story about a teenage girl who finds herself drawn to an orphanage dominated by some pretty devious kids.  I really hope some people will read and review on the site there—you don’t need an account!

Sorry for the shameless advertising, and thanks for all your support, everyone!

Reworded submission!

Reworded submission!

Another altered submission!

Another altered submission!

A slightly-altered submission!

A slightly-altered submission!

A submission!

A submission!