bruh chill

Grooming describes the preparatory (or ‘lead up’) stage of child sexual abuse that offenders use to gain the trust and compliance of the child or young person (and those around them) and to establish secrecy and silence to avoid disclosure.

still very fucking weird

Yeah I agree, not grooming. We don’t know exactly when he grew feelings for MC…still not fucking with him though cause I love the ML too much XD

Yeah HELL NAH still fucking weird bro

yo i didn’t say it wasn’t! i just don’t think throwing around big words like “grooming” would be suitable. we are enjoying fictional content, maybe let things unroll before overreacting

haha u get me

Bro i really didn’t say it wasn’t honestly you should have been expecting weird stuff in fictional content no? i’m talking about the issue of basically throwing out big terms and overreacting when the character in question showed no indication or past attempts in pursuing a romantic relationship yet. i think readers can chill and see how it goes before the reactions, no?

People throwing big terms at an illegal site full of disturbing stories is really something mann

Ain't no way the hand shading and sole focus on that scene didn't ring your BL rings either you're js not observant or you didn't read it good enough I've read enough BLs to CLEARLY understand that bruh

Also I'm not trynna be defensive it's js mad weird to me how clueless some fujoshis are I really don't mean to come off head strong girlie

i respectfully disagree… and at the same time my whole issue lies in how people would casually throw out terms like “grooming” == the “grabbing waist” you’re referring to? this is literally only how we know he has romantic feelings for TG lol hoping he sorts it out soon! this still doesn’t imply he did anything in the past

i meant YW*

Honestly I still stand by what I said. Having read BL for over 12 years I get the gist of it But if you'll need proof for his feelings we'll get that further in the story. For me personally, grooming= becoming suddenly interested in the child you helped raise after they're legal NOT the waist grabbing but you'll get what I mean after further advancing the story lol

i’m sticking to the real definition of “grooming” because i do not believe these terms should be thrown around casually. i have also been reading BL for a very long amount of time LOL no i dont need proof i know he’s romantically interested! i’m just talking about advances

the major point is that no way i’m suggesting that TG helped raise YW because he wanted to groom him, which is what a lot of comments are suggesting! now THAT would be weird af

Idk what others are saying but making advances on a child you helped raise until he's an adult is called grooming. It's in the dictionary. Search it up if you want. Grooming is not a black and white situation that only occurs when the victim is a child, it's subjective. The statement I said, it's clearly a form of grooming. So you're saying raising a child without any attraction towards him and then suddenly being attracted to him after he's an adult is not grooming? It is. That's IS the "real defination" of grooming. Don't believe me? Search up "is making advances a child you helped raise after he's an adult considered grooming?" Maybe then You'll know the REAL meaning of grooming then, cuz you don't seem to rn. Also idk why you refuse to believe that TG is INDEED in fact interested in YW. The hand in the cover of the manga is literally TG's what more proof could you POSSIBLY need?

? reading comprehension where to be found ??? i said it a few times i do believe TG is romantically interested. goddamn what’s with the overreaction??? this is definitely a grey area and the only issue i have with the comments is how readers tend to not be able to comprehend fictional characters have dimensions and nothing is black and white as you said. you are entitled to your own opinion as i am to mine, but some of yall calling TG a literal groomer is fucking insane. also it literally isnt. Sexual grooming is the action or behavior used to establish an emotional connection with a vulnerable person – generally a minor under the age of consent[1][2] – and sometimes the victim's family,[3] to lower their inhibitions with the objective of sexual abuse.[4][5] It can occur in various settings, including online, in person, and through other means of communication.[6] Children who are groomed may experience mental health issues, including "anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress, and suicidal thoughts".[5] WHERE THE HELL DID THEY SHOW TG HAD THE MOTIVE OR INTENTION OR OBJECTIVE???? so rude and wrong?

asked grok for u!
No, this scenario does not meet the definition of grooming, and A would not be considered a groomer based on the provided details. Grooming involves intentional manipulation or exploitation, typically with ulterior motives, such as establishing a relationship with a minor for inappropriate purposes. Here, A’s initial support was described as genuine, without ulterior motives, and focused on helping B escape an abusive situation. The fact that A developed feelings for B years later, when B was an adult (between 18-25), does not retroactively make A’s earlier actions grooming, as there’s no indication of predatory intent or manipulation during B’s minor years. A’s financial help was altruistic, and the absence of blackmail or demands for repayment further supports this.
Yes, A can make advances on B when B is 25 without being considered a groomer, provided the advances are respectful, consensual, and not manipulative. Grooming specifically involves intentional manipulation or exploitation, typically of a minor, with predatory intent. In this scenario, A’s feelings developed when B was an adult (between 18-25), and there’s no indication that A’s earlier support when B was 15 was motivated by anything other than genuine help. As long as A’s actions now, with B as a 25-year-old adult, respect B’s autonomy and boundaries, they would not constitute grooming.
The power dynamic from A’s role as a supporter when B was a minor could raise concerns about influence, but this alone doesn’t equate to grooming without evidence of manipulation or coercion.

Based on the scenario, it would be inaccurate and unfair to call A a groomer. Grooming involves deliberate manipulation or exploitation of a minor with predatory intent, typically to establish an inappropriate relationship.
Labeling A a groomer would be wrong absent evidence of exploitation when B was a minor. The power dynamic from past support and age difference might raise perceptual concerns, but this doesn’t equate to grooming.

last!
The claim that “A practically helped raise B” might stem from A’s significant supportive role during B’s formative years, which could create a perception of a parental or mentor-like dynamic. This perception could raise ethical or social concerns about the power dynamic, especially given the age difference and A’s advances at 25. However, without evidence of manipulation or predatory intent when B was a minor, A’s actions do not meet the definition of grooming.