[ SECRET POST #2767 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2767 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04. [broken]


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.



__________________________________________________



10.













Notes:

Work. Again. Sorry if response time is slow. :(

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 011 secrets from Secret Submission Post #394.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 1 - too big (also random unsubstantiated claims about famous people) ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Irrational annoyances

[(Anonymous)]

So, this has been bugging me for a few hours, and I told myself that if I were still thinking about it now, I'd post about it. But it's really irrational, so thread.

I saw someone refer to Cupid in the SPN episode My Bloody Valentine as being queer-coded, and he didn't appreciate the baiting. I disagree, but that he sees it that way is not terribly surprising or bothersome.

The irritating part is the commenter who said they "never noticed the queer-coding." The. Not "any - THE. And I just can't shake my annoyance at this "so you have said it, so it must be" attitude. Ugh.

Re: Irrational annoyances

[fingalsanteater]

Just because disagree with that person's interpretation doesn't mean the commenter should too. Maybe they agreed once it was pointed out what queer-coding is?

Re: Irrational annoyances

[(Anonymous)]

That attitude annoys me because "coding" implies that it's done on purpose when they have no idea that it was. Most writers don't even think about queerness as much as their fandoms. It's just as likely that they're being derivative with traits that commonly show up in the same type of character. Same with people who think some characters are "coded" as being on the autism spectrum. Do you really think most writers even know what that means? They don't.

Re: Irrational annoyances

[(Anonymous)]

I tell you, I'd have more sympathy for claims of queerbaiting if 99% of complaints about it weren't stuff like this.

IT IS NOT SOMEONE ELSE'S FAULT THAT YOUR SLASH GOGGLES ARE WELDED TO YOUR FACE.

Re: Irrational annoyances

[(Anonymous)]

STFU, my welding was forced upon me.

Re: Irrational annoyances

[(Anonymous)]

Damn that patriarchy!