[ SECRET POST #2976 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2976 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.
[Homestuck]


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.
[NCIS: Los Angeles/Hawaii Five-0]


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.
[Left Shark (Katy Perry? Super Bowl?) and Bad-Dragon .com]


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.


__________________________________________________



14.
[hindsight]









Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 016 secrets from Secret Submission Post #425.
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.

Comments

[darkmanifest]

I agree that choosing no side can often mean choosing the status quo, but I do think there's a difference between the position of "It doesn't matter" and "It doesn't matter to me personally, but it's still an important issue and it matters". I don't know who among the "I don't care" people fall under which category, because most don't specify, but yeah, indifference on a subjective level doesn't mean indifference on an objective one.

[(Anonymous)]

Speaking personally, I think representation does matter. But I probably tend to disagree with many parts of the conversation around it. I probably think of it as a less serious problem than other people and I probably am more skeptical about how much effect we can have or how much we should be expected to do about it.

[darkmanifest]

I feel like that's a different tier of the debate - not remotely an irrelevant one, still worth getting into, but those of us who agree that it matters can't all be expected to have similar stakes in the issue or apply the exact same importance to it (even when we're minorities ourselves), and getting laser-focused on "You're not upset enough about this!" just leads to a lot of ineffectual bitchiness, IMO.

[(Anonymous)]

Sure. I agree with that (although to be clear, I would say I am on the more moderate side, not the side that's angry at people for not being laser-focused). Which is why I don't get involved in the conversation much. Partly because of what you say there. Partly because the conversation mostly seems to operate on the basis of different assumptions than my own. And partly because they're just frustrating conversations in general. So mostly I just watch what seems interesting to me. And a lot of that does end up being what you would call diverse.

[meadowphoenix]

I can't agree with this. At no point can you exempt yourself or your actions from the whole. "It doesn't matter to me personally," when you as a person live with everyone else? You contribute. I contribute (both my action and inaction).

Again, it's fine to express priorities, which is what I think you're getting at. Lord knows I have shows which matter emotionally enough to me to watch despite abysmal representation (*cough* spn *cough*). But I'm also not pretending that I'm not contributing to the problem with my acceptance.

Besides which some things do have to matter to everyone personally. The ethical treatment of human beings, and how that is expressed from macro to micro is one of them for me. And if you're not watching anything with diverse representation, but you don't "care," yeah, that says something about your worldview.

[darkmanifest]

Yes, that's what I meant, not "it doesn't affect me personally" but "it's not a major priority for me", excuse me for not wording that better. As you said, this is an issue that ultimately affects us all. But I do disagree with the idea that simply liking something that lacks diversity contributes to the problem. That suggests that it's impossible to consume media with a critical eye, and that doing so doesn't contribute to future diversity. I've definitely encountered people who'd rather consume uncritically, but I don't consider meaningful criticism and enjoyment to be mutually exclusive.

[meadowphoenix]

If you are critiquing, then you're saying you do care. I consider critique a form of care.

Also, I think I am speaking from a sense of capitialism, which does exclude countries/entertainment which don't work from the same principal, so excuse me for that. Unfortunately, I don't have a say in creator politics except by quantity (creators can listen but they don't have to; most things are encouraged to be profitable and profitability is judged many ways but always by quantity [in tv by ads which are valued by how many people see them, in books/music by how many are sold, in plays by full houses, etc]). So yes, continuing to watch something is encouragement of that thing and more of that thing (especially in key demographics which do seem to hinge on oppressive lines), despite any relevant critiques.

In other words, if critiques are ignored by the creator, if the tone is "it has problems but keep consuming", how is diversity furthered by consumption?