case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2015-02-02 06:49 pm
  • Add Memory
  • Share This Entry

[ SECRET POST #2952 ]


⌈ Secret Post #2952 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.
[Tales of Zestiria]


__________________________________________________



03.
[Strange Magic]


__________________________________________________



04.
[Sleepy Hollow]


__________________________________________________



05.
[Star Trek: TNG]


__________________________________________________



06.
[Person of Interest]


__________________________________________________



07.
(Dangan Ronpa)


__________________________________________________



08.
(Splash, Daryl Hannah)


__________________________________________________



09.
[Once Upon a Time]


__________________________________________________



10.
[VH1's Hindsight]













Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 044 secrets from Secret Submission Post #422.
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

[personal profile] fscom 2015-02-02 11:53 pm (UTC)(link)
06. http://i.imgur.com/PSOYIqn.png
[Person of Interest]

(Anonymous) 2015-02-03 12:02 am (UTC)(link)
Shaw isn't attracted to Root in that way. (She doesn't feel that way for anyone.) But it's canon that Root is in love with Shaw. They even kissed.

Don't you watch the show?

(Anonymous) 2015-02-03 03:09 am (UTC)(link)
Shaw definitely seemed physically attracted to the Chinese gymnast lady in Season 3, though, so I wouldn't say that Shaw's physical attraction to women was out of the blue, even if her emotions haven't really caught up.

(Anonymous) 2015-02-03 03:09 am (UTC)(link)
I do. I'm even bisexual **GASP** if you need the Internet cred points for me to prove I know what I'm talking about.

Making the subtext text doesn't stop a show from being queerbaity, especially if there are canonical elements that doom a relationship (like gee, a conveniently timed separation from Team Machine).

(Anonymous) 2015-02-03 03:50 am (UTC)(link)
I don't think you understand what queerbaiting is.

(Anonymous) 2015-02-03 03:51 am (UTC)(link)
da

to be fair, though, they did the exact same thing with a straight pairing when Reese kissed Carter right before she...well, you know. I think the only reason either pairing became canon (if you can call one kiss becoming canon) was because the writers knew they would not have to follow up on it.
belacqua: (Default)

[personal profile] belacqua 2015-02-03 03:17 pm (UTC)(link)
For what it's worth, the Reese/Carter kiss was improvised. I get what you're saying, this show doesn't do romance, but idk, because the show isn't in a vacuum and all that, I wish they'd at least made Root/Shaw canon (even if they were just hooking up) more than five seconds before Shaw left.

(Anonymous) 2015-02-03 04:18 pm (UTC)(link)
agreed

like, there are two significant canon romantic storylines in the show, and they're played almost exactly the same way, despite the fact that one is gay and one is straight

i'm honestly baffled how someone can consider that queerbaiting

(Anonymous) 2015-02-03 03:54 am (UTC)(link)
I don't understand that logic. If it's canon that Root is in love with Shaw (or it's mutual, or whatever), but canonical elements doom the relationship, that doesn't make it 'baiting'.

Canonical elements doom relationships all the time. Het too. It's nothing new or specific to just queer relationships. It all the het relationships 'lived happily ever after' and all the queer ones got doomed then maybe I could understand feeling baited (though I'm still not sure that word works), but it happens to a lot or relationships.

(Anonymous) 2015-02-03 04:55 am (UTC)(link)
That's not what queerbaiting is though? Queerbaiting is dangling the possibility of a canon same-sex relationship and then going "BUT REALLY GUYS, NO HOMO." Having a canon same-sex relationship that gets fucked up due to other things in the narrative is just...treating a same-sex relationship the same way TV treats a lot of het relationships.

(Anonymous) 2015-02-03 12:05 am (UTC)(link)
I'm not sure how much there is to wonder, given that the people involved in making the show were like "Yeah, they're totally into each other", and also given the, you know, massive kissing. Even if their behavior on screen wasn't obviously flirting, I would think that the time that they kissed would kind of put that question to bed.

but maybe this is some definition of queerbaiting that I'm not familiar with

(Anonymous) 2015-02-03 12:08 am (UTC)(link)
shouldn't you be on tumblr?

(Anonymous) 2015-02-03 12:16 am (UTC)(link)
Have you caught up on the latest season?

...'cause you might want to do that.

OP here

(Anonymous) 2015-02-03 03:07 am (UTC)(link)
GOSH NO SHUCKY DARN *slaps cheeks* I TOTALLY DIDN'T WATCH THE ****spoiler****.

Oh wait. I did. Just because there's a big damn ****spoiler**** right before the wham ending for that mini-arc, that can still be queerbaity.

Re: OP here

(Anonymous) 2015-02-03 03:09 am (UTC)(link)
na

Wow, you're a dick. And no, the show isn't "queerbaity"

Re: OP here

(Anonymous) 2015-02-03 04:16 am (UTC)(link)
lmao why on earth are you being such an asshole

Re: OP here

(Anonymous) 2015-02-03 05:00 am (UTC)(link)
Holy shit, what is with you and that other anon thinking queerbaiting means something totally different from what it actually means?

Sherlock/John on Sherlock? THAT'S queerbaiting. Having lots of people mistake them for gay, making a joke out of it, and having the narrative be like "hahahahaha noooo they're straight, ofc." Having two woman characters actually be interested in each other and express that interest? Yeah, that ain't baiting, unless you think anything other than Happily Ever After with No Problems and No Angst counts as baiting.

Re: OP here

(Anonymous) 2015-02-03 05:31 am (UTC)(link)
One: Chill

Two: If you did watch the "****spoiler****" then you know that it is CANNON! ergo, by definition NOT queerbating.

Re: OP here

(Anonymous) - 2015-02-03 05:32 (UTC) - Expand

Re: OP here

(Anonymous) - 2015-02-03 06:09 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) 2015-02-03 12:41 am (UTC)(link)
I need to catch up. I shipped Finch/Reese like crazy when I first started watching and I got behind in viewing for reasons too stupid to get into and while I really disliked the one actress pictured here in a movie I saw once, I'm really interested in this premise.

Transcript

(Anonymous) 2015-02-03 02:29 am (UTC)(link)
Image: Root and Shaw outside on the street, looking at each other in a way that might possibly not be 100% heterosexual.

Text: I have to wonder how much of this ship is queerbaiting and how much of it is a legitimate in-verse recognition of a same-sex attraction between Root and Shaw.

Re: Transcript

(Anonymous) 2015-02-03 02:56 am (UTC)(link)
That's an adorable characterisation.

(Anonymous) 2015-02-03 04:19 am (UTC)(link)
Yeah, I'm pretty sure they passed subtext a while ago and have fully entered textville.

(Anonymous) 2015-02-03 05:01 am (UTC)(link)
OP said upthread that it's still baiting for...who even knows why or how.

(Anonymous) 2015-02-03 04:54 am (UTC)(link)
So queerbaiting means "my pet ship is canon, but might not get a happy ending" now?

(Anonymous) 2015-02-03 05:01 am (UTC)(link)
Apparently.

OP is seriously bitter. I mean, I ship Root/Shaw like there's no tomorrow, but damn.

(I'd also like to point out that we don't technically know that Shaw's DEAD dead. Not like Carter. There's been hints she could be brought back>)
Flat | Top-Level Comments Only