fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2815 ]

[ SECRET POST #2815 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2815 ⌋

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

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

[John Green]

__________________________________________________

04.

(Hemlock Grove)

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07. [posted twice]

__________________________________________________

08.

[Russell Edwards' Naming Jack the Ripper]

__________________________________________________

09.

[Coronation Street]

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 020 secrets from Secret Submission Post #402.
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

People will often say that "a person shouldn't be stigmatized forever because of a mistake."

I believe that some mistakes aren't reflective of your essential character, but some mistakes are exactly--they reveal you for what you are. Sometimes you're put to a test of character, and you either pass or fail; if you fail, then yes, you are wanting in some way.

But is there a good way to tell which kind of mistake it is?

Could you give us an example, that would, for me, be a bit easier to answer. Generally, I think that it depends on how much they could have done to stop it and if and how capable they were to not make the mistake. Though keep in mind that a lot of what we do and how we act are based on environmental factors currently or recently; if I made a mistake because I was upset because of something earlier but you didn't know that you could think that it was a mistake that revealed my character that I would have not made given any other circumstances.

Okay, here's the example; it comes from EtiquetteHell and like a lot of things at that site, it's about a wedding.

This couple are getting married. The groom's sister is one of the bridesmaids.

The groom's sister was born with the lower half of one arm absent below the elbow. Growing up, she had a series of prosthetic arms, but none of them was particularly functional, and all of them were uncomfortable or downright painful to wear. As an adult, she wore her last prosthesis less and less until she finally dispensed with them altogether, and managed more or less well one-handed.

The bride chooses dresses with a low-cut bodice and a halter top for the other bridesmaids, but wants to put the groom's sister in a high-necked dress with long sleeves. Because she wants the prosthetic arm hidden.

The groom's sister explains that she never wears the prosthetic arm anymore and wasn't planning on wearing it at the wedding, and she would like to wear the same dress the other bridesmaids are wearing. The bride absolutely insists: if the groom's sister won't wear the prosthetic arm and the long-sleeved dress to cover it, the bride doesn't want her in the wedding party. In fact, if she doesn't wear the prosthetic arm, the bride makes it clear that she doesn't want her at the wedding. The groom's sister refuses, and the bride promptly un-invites her. She tells the groom that she and his sister had a spat over the bridesmaids' dresses, but not why.

So is this a mistake on the bride's part, or is it a sign that the bride is shallow and selfish--not to mention ableist? Of course, she could learn that her behavior was unacceptable. But I think it would take a lot more than this to make her less shallow.

Things like bullshit tests of character are stupid because they give people no reason to learn from their mistakes. If you hold out that mistakes are something you can learn from and move past then you end up with a society more open to compromise and consensus, because people have an incentive to take part. If you say things like test of character-failed, then you just get a load of unrepentant assholes. In fact I think that is the reason unrepentant assholes come up with that bullshit, it excuses them from having to accept their own mistakes.

Yeah this. It also allows the mindset that someone cannot be excused from any mistake, even if the person who made the mistake learned from it or never make one like that again. Whether that mistake was from a moment of stupidity or having a bad day. It's dangerous for someone's own health to hold people accountable for a mistake that happened months or even years ago, since that type of anger held at someone else causes health problems in the long run like heart disease.

So you feel that there's no such thing as, say, a selfish or cruel person--only people who now and then do something selfish or cruel, but it has nothing to do with their nature.

Yep. You've nailed it. We are all capable of change, and our natures are not fixed. the fixed nature is just something that assholes come up with to justify being assholes because they are being too lazy to not be assholes right now. Change, man.

I think this is utter crap, tbqh, and that with some people, the likelihood that they will ever change is so remote that their nature might as well be considered fixed. If a person consistently behaves selfishly for long enough, I have no problem whatever with concluding that they are selfish.

For the most part, it's not the "kind" of mistake.

It's whether or not the person is willing to take responsibility for that mistake, and never again repeat it (or do their damnedest to not repeat it).

Getting into some way too sensitive shit here, but if, say, a parent was so tired, they didn't properly set the safety on their handgun, and left it out on the table where their toddler could get it. They take a nap, and toddler ends up shooting himself. IMO that's a mistake. A terrible, horrible mistake, but one that does happen. I still don't think the parent should be spit on forever until the end of the time. Not because they will probably be doing that themselves, but it was not intentional. It was still a mistake. If they go on to do it again and again, then yeah, that would tell me they're either dangerously incompetent or a horrible monster.

There's a difference between a person exercising poor judgment in the moment, and someone who just doesn't care.

In that situation, the parent will probably never forgive themselves anyway.

In the case of a less fatal mistake, I would judge their character based on whether they are genuinely remorseful and take responsibility.

If you've ever known someone who cheated on their partner and blamed them/had a bunch of "reasons" when their partner didn't do anything? Yeah, that kind of thing.

Well, for a cheater who blames their partner for their weakness, yeah.

But if someone cheats because their partner just quit being affectionate, or is withholding sex for long periods of time, or if they're separated for many months at a time, or even if the partner experiences a horrible accident/disease that reverts their mind back to childhood or makes them a permanent unresponsive vegetable or whatever, I don't think I could put the blame entirely on the cheater. I think in many cases, cheating is not the problem, but rather, a symptom of the problem.

Guy getting pressured to settle down and ends up cheating on his wife repeatedly? In this case, I would blame the guy, but I wouldn't say the problem is cheating. I'd say the problem is that he lacks the courage to live his life honestly, and be honest with the ones he's close to. Unfortunately, an innocent woman (and possibly more than one) get hurt by this. And he has no right to blame his partner when he's the one who misled her.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #2815 ]

A psychology question...or maybe an ethics question. Or both.

Re: A psychology question...or maybe an ethics question. Or both.

Re: A psychology question...or maybe an ethics question. Or both.

Re: A psychology question...or maybe an ethics question. Or both.

Re: A psychology question...or maybe an ethics question. Or both.

Re: A psychology question...or maybe an ethics question. Or both.

Re: A psychology question...or maybe an ethics question. Or both.

Re: A psychology question...or maybe an ethics question. Or both.

Re: A psychology question...or maybe an ethics question. Or both.

Re: A psychology question...or maybe an ethics question. Or both.

Re: A psychology question...or maybe an ethics question. Or both.