fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2860 ]

[ SECRET POST #2860 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2860 ⌋

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

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 062 secrets from Secret Submission Post #409.
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

I once had a reviewer imply a main character was a slut for sleeping with her in-fic husband, because the husband wasn't the end-game love-interest. I had several other people express their disappointment that the character had slept with people before she even fell for or even *liked* the other main character. It startled me how many people thought that a woman is a "slut" or "unfaithful" because she has sex with anyone aside from her One True Love, even if neither of the characters care for each other yet. I try to comfort myself with the idea that because it's fandom, people want their OTP together and don't like "interference", but that in real life, they'd be more understanding. I hope that's true anyway.

I wish "slut" was reclaimed and redefined like the above reply said. I think for a lot of people though, there's still a huge emphasis on a woman's purity.

...wow.

I hate to, uh, throw a wrench in the spokes of your comfort, but that's the exact attitude that one finds in purity-focused, fundamentalist religious circles. There are girls and boys who are actually raised with the notion that, if they have sex before marriage (or, in some cases, even have feelings for someone other than their future spouse before marriage), then they've been unfaithful.

It's really bizarre to me that there are people in fandom who think that way. I thought it was a bit more a fringe belief than that. :-/

Because people in fandom only come from proper progressive upbringings and been educated at approved liberal universities.

Newsflash: people in fandom come from all demographics and walks of life.

Obviously. However, even in conservative circles, the idea that you can pre-emptively cheat on your future spouse by simply dating is not generally widespread.

Of course it's a fringe idea. But in case you haven't noticed, fandom is chock a block with fringe thinkers of all stripes.

True. I just wouldn't expect to see people from these sorts of circles hanging around in fandom (and especially shippy corners of fandom), because that doesn't fit in with the sorts of activities that tend to be approved.

Not saying it can't happen (because clearly it can, or we wouldn't be having this conversation), or even that these sorts of ideas wouldn't spill over into less-fringey communities. It just strikes as being unusual, you know?

Not really. It's forbidden fruit. The temptation to look and be shocked by it is too great to ignore.

(no subject)

a_potato - 2014-11-01 22:50 (UTC) - Expand

or, in some cases, even have feelings for someone other than their future spouse before marriage

How are people supposed to control that...?

NAYRT

This is hardcore fundie Christianity, my friend. Logic has no place here. Especially when it gets in the way of more potential sex-is-wrong shaming.

Wellllllll. Here's the usual recipe, from what I've seen:

+interact with members of the opposite sex as little as possible (there is no room for same-sex attraction in this equation, because that's not godly)

+if you find yourself attracted to a member of the opposite sex...
-...and you're a girl, tell your father about it so that he can determine whether or not this boy might be a good match for you. If he determines that the boy is a good match, then he will approach the boy and the boy's parents. If not, then he will help you overcome your attraction
-...and you're a boy who isn't at the age of majority, tell your parents about it so that they can determine whether or not this girl might be a good match for you, etc. If you're at or over the age of majority, approach the girl's father and express your interest, so that he can decide whether you're a good match for her.

+once your parents approve a match for you, "court" that person with the intent to marry. It's really, really important that you marry this person, because otherwise, you may have given away a piece of your heart

Edited (had to edit bullets) 2014-11-01 21:47 (UTC)

eeesh. so when you say hardcore fundie, you mean like, QF brand of crazy.

o___O

Yes. Ooooh yes.

There's more of them than you think (and they aren't even all QF)!

(no subject)

diet_poison - 2014-11-02 00:48 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

a_potato - 2014-11-02 01:22 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

diet_poison - 2014-11-02 05:33 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

a_potato - 2014-11-02 21:19 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

diet_poison - 2014-11-08 21:06 (UTC) - Expand

oh my fucking god
what year is this, 1714? because I could swear it was 2014 and that kind of thinking went the way of witch hunting.

In 1714 they at least had bundling.

From what I know, I'm not sure they were doing this even in 1714. It's a really, really weird way of reading the Bible that seems to have started popping up in the '70s.

There are times when I seriously think that M. Night Shyamalan wrote "The Village" after encountering these types of people.

Yeah, I should have used "disheartened" rather than "startled", because honestly, I wasn't as surprised as I wish I could be. I live in the American South, so I'm well acquainted with these notions about purity. Perhaps it's wrong of me (judge not and all that), but I felt bad for the people sending me those puritanical reviews.

I will give credit where it's due - when the male character had a sexual relationship with someone other than the female lead, I got outraged reviews then too, lol.

That's not surprising. If you'll notice, it's a common trope in romance novels, where the heroine is a virgin but the heroe's slept around lots. Like a_potato said, it's also an attitude reflected in many conservative religions.

Common trope in regency romance novels and Christian-themed romance novels, you mean. I have rarely seen that show up in a modern era romance novel without some other plot point attached to it; you think we'd have grown out of the obsession with virginity by now, especially since romance novels have certainly been trying.

Purity is attractive to have and to be taken, so get over yourself.
Also lol romance novel were a thing in thr 70's, bow they've become a dead genre besides Twilight and FSOG, but for some reason you people refuse to accept those because women can't like what they like.

Oh, honey. Walk into a bookstore and go to the "Romance" section. It's anything but a dead genre, trust me.

It was quite the dead genre before getting revived by Twilight and 5SOG, honey.

(no subject)

purpleseas - 2014-11-02 20:25 (UTC) - Expand

What shit are you on?

Learn about the market.

In fairness, I got reviews expressing outrage when the male character had a sexual relationship with someone other than his One True Love too. But none of them called him a slut or anything like that.

I have close familiarity with people from conservative religions who shame all sexual behavior outside of marriage, so I guess "disheartened" would be a better word for what I felt. I think some people want the One True Love trope to be real, sometimes regardless of religion - you and your soulmate are for each other and perfect and for no one else. Like I said, I'm just hoping some of the judgement comes from this being fandom and the wish to idealize it. Real life is often too difficult to put those lofty expectations like that on ourselves, after all.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only