[ SECRET POST #2727 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2727 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 04 pages, 082 secrets from Secret Submission Post #390.
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.

Comments

[fscom]

05. http://i59.tinypic.com/2n0stit.jpg

[(Anonymous)]

I really hate that people are linking SJW with being for social justice. (Nothing against you OP, just a general statement - I think that's WHY you're concerned, though.)

I have a friend I would call a SJW. The thing with her is that while I think deep down she does care about the issues, mostly she wants to be right, and for people to agree with her. She doesn't want to hear any other side, just her own, which is generally what people against crappy, overbearing regimes are against. Although yes, you do get extreme versions of people like her in those scenarios, except often they'll end up being portrayed as just as bad, or at the very least, irrational and a problem for the cause.

[(Anonymous)]

SA. To elaborate, this friend will also shoot down anything that comes close to disagreeing with her side. If I mostly agree with her but have some other view as well, nope, I may as well be for The Man and hate all things justice.

[fauxkaren]

I've definitely seen people bully others in the name of social justice. That is what I would call being a SJW.

But really at this point, people just use it to mean 'anyone who cares about social justice'.

Which... rme.

[insanenoodlyguy]

Like any other label, some folks started taking it as a matter of pride irregardless of original intents.

[(Anonymous)]

some people say sji, and then link to Monty Python. in the face of that it is hard to show pride.

("NO ONE EXPECTS THE FANIISH INQUISITION!!")

[(Anonymous)]

Some people do link it, yeah, but I've seen more people behave like SJWs [acting like your friend or, sadly, worse] than I have people who legitly care about social justice and falsely get called that.

Also, as much as I hate to point this out, SJWs are the ones who are linking themselves to social justice by claiming to care about it. It's not something other people are linking to social justice randomly.

[comradesmiler]

Not to worry, OP. Your fictional preferences aren't really an indicator of SJW-ness.

[cushlamochree]

No. It doesn't. It doesn't have to be a political thing to like a certain kind of story. Stories about revolutions aren't necessarily related to their political implications - you can find those stories fascinating because they are and because there's lots of potential for great character drama without really being political at all. And even if you did want to be political about it, not all revolutions are really SJW-fodder and even if they were, as long as you were not ridiculous about it, you would not be an SJW. What does SJW even mean if liking certain kinds of stories means that you're tainted by the essence of SJW or whatever we're talking about here

I've always loved stories about revolutions too, that doesn't mean that I agree with all of them. There's just something fascinating about them.

[insanenoodlyguy]

Nah. It's the causes you fight for that define you.

[quirkytizzy]

I really like this. That's really profound.

[insanenoodlyguy]

I'm so deeeeeep lol.

[quirkytizzy]

Cool picture. Cool and GROSS, but cool picture.

But also - yeah. Deep.

[(Anonymous)]

That would be a pretty big leap.

[visp]

Considering that most of those "revolutions" ended up being orgies of murder, torture, betrayal, and zealous brutality, I'd say you're safe.

[mekkio]

As an American every time I read or see an revolution that ends that way usually with the new regime being worse than the old, I thank my lucky stars that we had the people we had when we did our revolution. They were right people at the right time. A generation earlier or a generation later with a whole different set of people, I don't know if we would have had an American still around.

[visp]

True. I mean, say what you will about us, we didn't have a guillotine party, or start hunting out "counter-revolutionaries."

[mekkio]

America is really an odd duck when it comes to things like that. Like take our civil war and compare it to other civil wars. In the history of other civil wars the winning side gathers up the losing side's leaders and executes them. And often punishes the losing side by making them second class citizens or worse. Not so in the American Civil War. When asked what to do with the losing side, Lincoln told them to release them and let them go home. That there had been enough blood shed and it was time for the nation to heal. And to us, as Americans, that makes total sense. But this is unheard of in almost every other part of the world. It would be considered madness.

I think that's why the rest of world find Americans so hard to understand. We don't follow the usual pattern of how things are done. We haven't since the beginning and we aren't going to start now.

[(Anonymous)]

If you could find another civil war where both sides were more or less the same ethnicity, class, and religion, you would probably find more examples. That's the distinct thing with the American Civil War more than the American spirit probably.

Regarding the American Revolution, there's a strong argument that one of the main distinguishing characteristics between the American Revolution and the French and other European revolutions was poverty. IE, poverty was MUCH more entrenched and wretched and dehumanizing in Europe than in America, where the relatively recent settlement and the conditions of relative plenty in terms of land and resources largely ameliorated it. And so poverty took on a much more central stage in European revolutions, leading to increased factionalism and radicalism driven by attempts to eliminate it and by the immediacy of the demands of the poor.

[(Anonymous)]

All three of the English Civil Wars went this way, with a few executions at the top (or none in the case of Stephen and Matilda) and everyone else being sent home. The Meiji Restoration - where the opposing samurai were then trained as the new police force - is another example.

[visp]

The Blue and the Gray

[(Anonymous)]

Nah. Comrades in arms has always been one of my hardcore narrative kinks, and revolutions specifically could add any number of narrative elements that might be appealing to you.

Revolutions have connotations of zeal, courage, chaos, anarchy, the element of betrayal on one or more sides that's inherent in striking out against the authority that's supposed to support you/that you're supposed to support, the idea of brother vs brother that comes from fighting within your own state, a strong underdog element from a more ragtag group going up against the established state/military, some of the darker elements that are inherent in coups and assassinations, the danger of civil war, the concept of cyclical vengeance, the value of a regime born in violence, the idea of the doomed victor and/or the doomed but valiant stand, the risks of sliding away from justified revolution and into terrorist agitators (also the POVs that will paint you as such either way, and whether or not they're right), conflicts within the group as different people come down on various sides of any of the above issues, the danger of the revolution disintegrating from volatile and passionate people vs the more monolithic and regulated state forces opposing them, the sense of fragility, passion, conflict, darkness and moral extremism ...

There's a bunch of thematic and interpersonal implications to a revolutionary setting, any of which might appeal to you, especially since a comrades in arms relationship, in this specific context, often becomes a lot more fraught. Social justice, though an element, is possibly the least of it. For human relationships, a revolution is one of the more volatile and fascinating settings to view them in.

Well. Provided it's fictional, or a ways back in time. Less so to live through one, I'd imagine.

[(Anonymous)]

Why would it?

[tenlittlebullets]

Being into social justice doesn't make you a SJW, being an asshole about social justice makes you a SJW. Do you think the cause gives you carte blanche to be an asshole? Nope? Chances are you're fine.

(Icon not directed at OP, but at everyone I've ever wished would stop being on my side because they were making my side look like dumbfuck jerks. It's a long list. Thanks, Les Mis fandom.)