>how will we ever have fun? At first I thought I was imagining

>>29890996
It was a meta joke.

>>29891006
>ponk's noises in E1 ending with a "pop" and "right there"
>no wrong way to fantasize
hmm

>>29890996
Putting the focus on to these two (instead of the Mane 6) changed the show. It's not the same ride we got on at all. The Mane 6 were all somewhat pure in their intentions - for all their flaws they were fundamentally good characters whose self interest sometimes causes them to act against the greater good, but they always defer to the greater good in the end. Not so with Trixie and Glimglam. Both have embraced a more sociopathic stance. Trixie especially mocks innocent allegiance to the greater good - being oblivious to it and acting without regard for it is part of her character. And her love is something Glimglam values. Meanwhile Glimglam's past and anger issues make her a far darker character than any of the Mane 6.

So we've gone from a show that focused on six flawed but fundamentally good characters to two morally ambiguous characters who have to be reminded they're supposed to be good, and even (in Trixie's case) sometimes scoff at the idea. That lack of innocence coupled with the use of the word "love" in S7 E2 makes a sexual read on their relationship much easier. They have become codependent.

The only other time we've seen the combination of codependence and moral ambiguity between two ponies was between Lyra and Bon Bon in E100, which was a blatant shout out to fandom shipping. Even popular ships involving the Mane 6 could be dismissed simply because the characters are so relentlessly innocent to romance (with the exception of Rarity). Trixie and Glimglam are anything but innocent, which makes a sexual read on their increasingly codependent relationship very easy. The show won't go there of course, But enough has changed that they might leave the suggestion open.

>>29890996
all I see is 2 steaming piles of shit, one pink and one blue

>>29891841
Tl Dr
>>29892189
>Trixie
>Shit

>>29891841
Is this some new autistic copypasta?

>>29890996
dem eyes

>>29892277
I know I'm can't be the only one who gets this reference.

>>29892298
I don't get it.
What is it referencing?

>>29892277
>They think we are doing it
>Yeah then why won't we do it?
>Oh sure

>>29892210
It's just the thoughts I was left with after S7E2.

File: b35.jpg (18KB, 353x334px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 353x334px

>>29892339

>>29892298
well enlighten us than
>inb4 some borderline retarded joke of some youtube celeb

>>29893125
>>29892319
Roseanne

>>29890996
>making the ponies more sexual.

"There is no wrong way to fantasize."

>>29892339
I liked your post, anon

>>29891841
Something something innocent girls grew up during the seven years of the show and turned into bitchy teens and they want characters who represent them.

>>29893152
this

>>29891006
Agreed.

I am still convinced the stuff about the cake twins was a meta joke rather then an adultry joke as well.

>>29891006
Meta how?

>>29893301
Thanks, Anon.
>>29893381
I kind of doubt it. Teen girls watching the show was a thing during S2 and S3, but most teen girls I know who watch cartoons are watching Rick and Morty now. Teenagers are very fickle, and few of them hang onto the shit they loved as children, because they're much more interested in things that seem more adult to them.

>>29892189
Starlight's not pink, she's lilac