Forum › It's a Secret, Shirotae-sama discussion

joined Oct 12, 2017

Ooohhhh… setting up the drama between the two protagonists. As Utao grows more fond of Shirotae this is a probably going to get more tense.

But I was still hoping for more of a mystery. XD That kinda resolved itself instantaneously.

Kuroko-railgun
joined Jul 21, 2024

The reveal and ending of this chapter gave me those classic 2010s mystery series cliffhanger vibes, but honestly, the whole thing felt subtle.

Internet_lied
joined Jul 15, 2016

I am reading strong Nasuverse inspirations from this world-building... Progenitors = True Ancestors, Servants = Dead Apostles, Wanderers = Dead/Ghouls...

Sena
joined Jun 27, 2017

Sure, nearly murdering someone and the consequences are expulsion ... oh, and our heroine once again shown she's jumped into the situation with absolutely no knowledge, then didn't learn anything for months and months, and now for readers' convenience gets a bit of lore dumped onto her.

It all just feels kinda sloppy.

Hanasakukawaii_small
joined Mar 20, 2014

I think right now it's clear that Utao's goal should be to find a way to eradicate vampires once and for all.

joined Sep 1, 2021

I think right now it's clear that Utao's goal should be to find a way to eradicate vampires once and for all.

bro tf?
should we have eradicated men just because ra- *violence was common in the past?
MC has the duty of feminism, getting vamps to see humans as people, not food.
^this could be applied to anything btw
progress doesnt happen with genocide
what happened to understanding and education?

last edited at Nov 8, 2025 10:15AM

Nyarin
joined Mar 20, 2012

This is like saying we should eradicate bears because they eat humans. Vampires have a right to live like any other species, and them being the natural predators of humans doesn't make them inherently evil. That's not how it works.
Unlike bears vampires can be communicated and reasoned with, which can help establish an arrangement that can protect both human and vampire rights. That's the entire premise of the story.

Pinekon
joined Jan 10, 2022

It's chapter 3, and we're already getting dry-form informational dumps of lore. I never understood that. Do we need it? Does it change anything right now? Can't we learn about those in some organic way? Like, I believe that the blonde chick is some super important and powerful vampire, and the rest of them are basically peasant type. We learned that if they drink blood from humans, it's kind of addictive for them, or potent or whatever you wanna call it, hence why they all get bloodbags to prevent that. See how easy that was, and we didn't need to waste an entire chapter on the protagonist reading books to us.

Especially since so far, the protag could be a cardboard cutout. I get that characters are at first reactive and later they turn proactive, but I'd rather see her interact in different situations, learn about her, and so on.

Nerukill
joined Aug 2, 2023

@ninryu

This is like saying we should eradicate bears because they eat humans. Vampires have a right to live like any other species, and them being the natural predators of humans doesn't make them inherently evil. That's not how it works.

Being active in wildlife management and preservation there are two things I need to correct. First the minor nitpick: Bears don't eat humans. In fact, predators usually don't eat other predators (there's a reason humans don't eat falcons, wolves, foxes, badgers, et cetera). That said, bears might still attack other predators (incl. people) in self-defence or to eliminate competition.

Second: if vampires first appeared in the 17th Century, they're a neozoon. And invasive species are absolutely subject to targeted containment and eradication in their new habitats (although success varies), because the needs of the many outweighs the needs of the few.

That said, acknowledging that vampires can be reasoned with, let's paint them in the light of a civilization: A thoroughly stratified society with expansionist tendencies which relies on the exploitation of an out-group to sustain themselves, aggressively pushing to absorb others into either becoming (second-class) citizens or part of the exploited majority.

Those vampires are imperialists. And your mileage on imperialism may vary, but historically, the only diplomacy it understood were rebellion, insurgency, and open warfare. I for one am not ashamed to not recognize other's right to tangibly threaten the life of mine and the people I care about.


@PineconeJuice

It's chapter 3, and we're already getting dry-form informational dumps of lore. I never understood that. Do we need it? Does it change anything right now? Can't we learn about those in some organic way?

I don't get it. Even disregarding that it's a max. 2½ pages, isn't a signature of the 4th highest grossing media franchise worldwide to start with minutes of a slowly scrolling wall of text to set the scene? Sometimes the fastest, most economical and best way is to simply tell the reader, especially in a medium as pressed for space as manga.

And this series absolutely has some strong flaws, but with Utao having distinctiveness of a background character, the dumb cliffhanger take back, and the overall setting requiring your disbelief launched into GEO, this seems like an odd priority.

Nyarin
joined Mar 20, 2012

predators don't eat other predators

They do. Cats, snakes, hedgehogs, small dogs, etc get eaten by bigger predators all the time.

And the imperialism claim makes no sense. Vampires are a different species, their attitude towards humans isn't because of racism, it's because humans are literally their prey. I know it's hard to warp your head around because in reality Homo Sapiens is the only ""advanced"" species so there isn't really a good analogue to draw from.

Nerukill
joined Aug 2, 2023

[To other readers: gay vampire-related commentary is only in the second half.]

They do. Cats, snakes, hedgehogs, small dogs, etc get eaten by bigger predators all the time.

No, they don't. But since I started this, I'll be a good sport about it:

First we should get terminology in order: whilst in some academic contexts animals feeding on another animals counts as "predation", the term predator is usually not equivalent with simply being (hyper)carnivorous. (Perhaps english hunting jargon has equivalent terms for the german Beutegreifer or Raubwild.) Unless you specifically include moles, frogs, pangolins and even blue whales under "predators", they're not. Ditto hedgehogs.

Next, no animals habitually prey on cats or small dogs. The only ones who reasonably could are large raptors (eagles or big owls), but only when desperate and given a good opportunity. Stories of them attacking cats, dogs, or even small children are often sensationalized and slander the reputation of already endangered species. Why would they bother with increased risk (being Grifftöter, they kill with their claws instead of neck pecks) from the victim fighting back, for inferior meat quality?

The snakes you mentioned are the only real exception (smaller snakes are often insectivores and ovivores). I have to own up to that. They're not relevant in the alpine/hercynian regions I tend to, so I forgot. The other exception are probably invertebrates; the creepy crawlies seem to have a free-for-all down there. (I'm unsure on the maritime situation.)


And the imperialism claim makes no sense. Vampires are a different species, their attitude towards humans isn't because of racism, it's because humans are literally their prey.

All but the progenitors and servant-children are explicitly stated to be originally humans.

I'm not sure why turning into a vampire would matter here; if anything, knowingly turning into somebody who needs to prey on humans, when there's an obvious moral alternative, is even more reprehensible. "Being prey" is wholly irrelevant to civic ethics. Your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins, and it is generally agreed that somebody's right to existence may not impede another's. (Outside of China, we don't kill people for donor organs.)

To pick up omermia's point of comparing the vampiric urge with transgressive male sexuality (and I am aware their stance is opposed to mine): is some male's deplorable attitude towards females excusable, just because sex happens to be a natural "need" [insert dismissive asexual laughter] of theirs?

Vampire society in this manga is thoroughly messed up, and their alibi-attempts at "diplomacy" nearly cost a girl's life. I sway towards motormind's take, but pointing out that eradicating a disease can be achieved through cure.

last edited at Nov 12, 2025 1:19PM

To reply you must either login or sign up.