case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2014-12-08 06:53 pm

[ SECRET POST #2897 ]


⌈ Secret Post #2897 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.



__________________________________________________



09.











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 041 secrets from Secret Submission Post #414.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 1 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 1 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

(Anonymous) 2014-12-09 12:23 am (UTC)(link)
Sorry that the truth bores you.

(Anonymous) 2014-12-09 12:36 am (UTC)(link)
The holier than thou preachiness of your sermon bores me, heard it so often that it has long since failed to have meaning and frankly the tone makes me want to root for the Reggie fans just on general principle that they are getting under your skin.

(Anonymous) 2014-12-09 12:44 am (UTC)(link)
Facts are preachy?

(Anonymous) 2014-12-09 12:46 am (UTC)(link)
DA

That is one interpretation of the facts. Another interpretation is that it was a legal adoption.

I'm not sure which I think myself. Because I think that IRL your interpretation makes more sense, but I also think the showrunners intended for it to be a legal adoption.

(Anonymous) 2014-12-09 12:50 am (UTC)(link)
Really? I thought the showrunners went out of their way to show that it wasn't legal. Isn't it funny how we can interpret these things so differently (I'm being serious, not sarcastic)? The world would be a lot more boring if that wasn't the case, but there would certainly be less fandom wank!

(Anonymous) 2014-12-09 12:54 am (UTC)(link)
Exactly. Different perspectives are what make things interesting. But that's the thing. It bugs me when people state their interpretations as fact and are condescending to people who interpret things differently.
kallanda_lee: (Default)

[personal profile] kallanda_lee 2014-12-09 01:03 am (UTC)(link)
But, there's no way it was a legal adoption, not with what we know of it basically being one of Gold's deals - in the very, very best scenario, you might argue that Regina actually didn't know that fact, and that it's legal to her knowledge.

But really, given that they could not have actually left Storybrooke, and the child was somehow delivered there, it sounds to me more like a case of "being willfully ignorant to the fact it might be shady as long as it gets her a kid".
ozaline: (Default)

[personal profile] ozaline 2014-12-09 04:59 am (UTC)(link)
Except she did leave Storybrooke, apparantly that part of the curse did not apply to her at that time, in the Neverland arc they show her at the adoption agency both picking up Henry, and almost returning him when she realized he was the savior's son (then she removes her own memory of that fact, because she loves him too much to let him go).

Gold manipulated the system, but the system was used.
Edited (typo) 2014-12-09 04:59 (UTC)