fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2713 ]

[ SECRET POST #2713 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2713 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

__________________________________________________

12.

__________________________________________________

13.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 04 pages, 084 secrets from Secret Submission Post #388.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

11. http://i.imgur.com/zMJKHT8.jpg?2?8122

I think it's usually A most of the time. Like thinking Dean is secretly gay, after the actor/an Ex. Producer said he was neither gay nor bi many times before. SPN is not a ground breaking show about sexuality, it's a c-list urban fantasy show about dudebros. You're really looking in the wrong place for anything progressive here, folks.

Well, I'd argue that there can be a difference between personal character interpretation and what the writers/actors intend. I don't see a contradiction between saying that the writers and Jensen do not intend for Dean to be bi and still say that his reactions to Dr. Sexy and other things mean that a bi interpretation of the character works.

But I agree that SPN is never going to be groundbreaking on sexuality and that the writers do not at all intend for Dean to be bi.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2014-06-07 20:44 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2014-06-07 20:47 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2014-06-07 20:58 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

philstar22 - 2014-06-07 21:01 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2014-06-07 21:07 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2014-06-08 02:00 (UTC) - Expand

I think this is a common opinion, OP.

(Not OP) IDK, I remember that 'Jasmine is a trans' debacle a while ago and a lot of people agreed with the 'trans until proven otherwise' thing. How does a character prove that they are cis, exactly? Especially in children media?

(no subject)

forgottenjester - 2014-06-07 21:44 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2014-06-08 00:49 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

forgottenjester - 2014-06-08 01:14 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

kallanda_lee - 2014-06-07 22:19 (UTC) - Expand

What if the actor portraying them and/or someone on the writing staff has stated that it was their intention, but the network or director didn't allow them to state it in the show?

Bering & Wells?

Well, that's clearly different. In those cases, the actor/writer in question has typically made some kind of reference in the show to the character's intended sexuality.

Agreed. I don't care how valid any of the identities chosen actually are, seeing any of the social justice buzzwords makes me automatically backbutton away. I will just never see it as interesting or good characterization.

Why's it have to be either/or? I suspect a lot of the time it's both.

I sort of agree, though some fandoms do have more subtext than others (and I think some writers intentionally queerbait).

And I tend to agree with my one exception being Bubblegum and Marceline from Adventure Time. I think the writer's have been putting hints into the show because the network won't let them be gay. Does this make me a tin hatter?

I mean there was a picture of Bubblegum and Marceline in the closet how else am I supposed to take that?

That one of them wanted to get something out of the closet?

wait a minute.

Doesn't one of them have a torture chamber in her closet?

...I think context is an issue here.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2014-06-07 23:04 (UTC) - Expand

how else am I supposed to take that? There was a Tornado.

Seriously though the way some people obsess over femslash "It must be true love" moments makes me awkward about how me and my best friend acted. Apparently we were super closed gay.

Amen.

You're always safe with going closeted bi!

I can't stand this in real life either, actually. Guys who have been married to women for years and sire 10 kids and then suddenly up and declare themselves gay. Puhleeze, just another closeted bisexual.

Are you.... are you joking? I can't tell.

Yes, thank you.

Subtext interpretation is completely subjective. People can interpret/imagine/etc whatever they want. It's fun to imagine and wish and speculate and create, but once they cross the line into "tinhatting" and thinking it's true/the writers intended whatever subtext they imagined then they need to back the fuck up for real. :/

But subtext is not completely subjective. At least, it's not a lot of the time. Subtext CAN be "canon".

What constitutes "obviously not the case" to you? Everyone has their own perceptions, and what may seem obvious to you might not be so obvious to someone else or vice versa.

OP:

(Anonymous) - 2014-06-08 00:25 (UTC) - Expand

Re: OP:

(Anonymous) - 2014-06-08 02:04 (UTC) - Expand

Re: OP:

(Anonymous) - 2014-06-08 05:19 (UTC) - Expand

Re: OP:

(Anonymous) - 2014-06-08 13:48 (UTC) - Expand

Re: OP:

(Anonymous) - 2014-06-08 18:15 (UTC) - Expand

Re: OP:

(Anonymous) - 2014-06-09 02:15 (UTC) - Expand

Funny how Dean Winchester is the first name that comes to mind upon seeing this secret.

Seriously though, ship what you wanna ship but stop trying to force the showrunners to make it happen. It's a really shitty thing to do & it makes you all look stupid and needy.

Yes. There's a difference between "one can write plausible slash about this character" versus people who are fixated on their interpretation either being canon or becoming canon.

I don't care that my slash OTP isn't canon. There's something annoying and creepy about people who willfully and consciously misinterpret what is shown on the screen.

There's a line where wishful thinking crosses over into self-delusion, and while I can't quite describe it, I know it when I see it.

Just write whatever you want and ship whatever you want, but insisting that it's canon makes you look dumb, childish, and not all there.

I love reading/writing my slash ship, but this ship was jossed years ago, in terms of canon, and that doesn't stop me from enjoying it or shipping it.

I side-eye the people who are like "X/Y is totes gonna happen for real!!!" about their clearly-not-canonical ships, even while the evidence against this prediction keeps on mounting. It makes you look irrational.

I recognize that my ship is not canon. I just slap an AU on my fic and write whatever I want. There's something teenager-ish and off-putting about this giddy, starry-eyed, "Totes gonna be canon!!!" attitude.

I hate that everyone becomes bi because people can't deal with not shipping slash. Especially if the characters are in relationships that they choose to break up.

An actor claiming a certain character is not gay/bi is meaningless - an actor just portrays the character, doesn't write it.

Frankly, in general, I'm of the opinion that only the canon is, well, canon. I think once a work is out there, even the writer's opinion is not god. I'm not talking exclusively about sexuality here, but just in general. I wholly believe that writers are capable of messing up characters and making them OOC, etc.

But anyway. While I don't think anyone should claim that a character is canon gay unless explicitly stated in the canon, I think that goes the other way. Unless explicitly stated in canon, characters aren't canon straight, either.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only