[ SECRET POST #3015 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3015 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.
[Puzzle & Dragons (Japanese Mobile Phone game)]


__________________________________________________



03.
[Thunderbirds]


__________________________________________________



04.
[Avenged Sevenfold]


__________________________________________________



05.
[Umineko no Naku Koro ni]


__________________________________________________



06.
(Donald Tusk, President Of The European Council)


__________________________________________________



07.
[The Hobbit]


__________________________________________________



08.
[Nicholas Lea]


__________________________________________________



09.
[Vocaloid]


__________________________________________________



10.
[Grimm/Angel]


__________________________________________________



11.
(the Tale of the Princess Kaguya)


__________________________________________________



12.
[Jimmy Carr and Sarah Millican]


__________________________________________________



13.
[The Phantom of the Opera]


__________________________________________________



14.
[How to get away with murder/Liza Weil]


__________________________________________________



15.
[Once Upon a Time]


__________________________________________________



16.
[Inazuma Eleven]


__________________________________________________



17.
(Aiden Turner in Poldark)


__________________________________________________



18.
[Star Trek: Into Darkness]


__________________________________________________



19.
[Nathan Fillion]


__________________________________________________



20.
[Harry Potter]


__________________________________________________



21.
[Sherlock]


__________________________________________________



22.
[MCU/The Avengers (film series)]


__________________________________________________



23.
[Gillian Anderson]









Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 05 pages, 106 secrets from Secret Submission Post #431.
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

[(Anonymous)]

So now you not only know what the character is despite the creator explicitly saying otherwise, you know what the creator knows about everything.

Wow, you're really something all right.

[blitzwing]

So now you not only know what the character is despite the creator explicitly saying otherwis

I don't watch the show, so I couldn't make a death-of-the-author statement one way or the other. I have no opinions as to Sherlock's sexual orientation.

you know what the creator knows about everything.

In what way do I imply that? If you are knowledgeable about something, and you see someone getting basic information about that thing wrong, I think it's logical for you to infer that that person is not well-informed about that thing.

Wow, you're really something all right.

Don't puff me up, I have an ego problem.

[(Anonymous)]

Because you're making the erroneous assumption from the beginning that there's something to GET wrong.

If Moffat isn't portraying Sherlock as asexual -- which he's stated he isn't -- then he isn't getting anything wrong. The only way he'd be "wrong" is if there was any intent to portray him that way in the first place, which there isn't. There's only interpretation, which is a very different thing, though it's hardly a shock that fandom can't differentiate between their opinions and objective facts.

Only an ego problem? Don't talk yourself down, you've got way more than that.

[blitzwing]

If Moffat isn't portraying Sherlock as asexual -- which he's stated he isn't -- then he isn't getting anything wrong.

That's illogical. A writer can argue that a character is something on false grounds. Example: "My character John cannot be queer. He slept with a woman."

Right there, the writer is making an argument on false grounds. Sleeping with women does not mean someone isn't queer. In that way, the author has shown they have incorrect or incomplete knowledge about how sexual orientations work, and specifically, how being queer works.

Only an ego problem? Don't talk yourself down, you've got way more than that.

Specificity is helpful.

[(Anonymous)]

Oh dear god, you're pulling the false grounds argument now, are you THAT desperate to be right? (Let's add "deeply painfully insecure to the point where I need to be pathologically right even when I'm laughably making a fool of myself just to validate my hollow existence" to your list of problems, shall we? Specific enough for ya?)

That isn't what Moffat is saying. He's saying the possibility exists for Sherlock to have relationships, intimacy, sexual desire etc. That it hasn't happened yet isn't down to asexuality, it's down to a choice made for whatever reason. Or are you suggesting asexuality is a choice, rather than a way someone's biologically wired? Because in the real world, the choice not to have sex is, as Moffat calls it monk-like, celibacy and not asexuality.

Your extremely black and white argument isn't what he's saying at all.

[(Anonymous)]

LOL, and now you apparently know how being queer works. As in, in general. For every single queer person, ever.

I have never laughed so hard at anyone in my life. Keep on keepin' on, honey. You're priceless.

[blitzwing]

I take it you have no actual disagreement or criticism to offer for what I said?

[(Anonymous)]

You do realize I'm not the anon you were talking to, and that there's a comment before mine, right?

Or do you just have no actual disagreement or criticism to offer for what they said?

[blitzwing]

You do realize I'm not the anon you were talking to, and that there's a comment before mine, right?

Did you intend to reply to that anon? Because you replied to my comment. You can parent up from it to see.

[(Anonymous)]

How obtuse can you get?

Apparently that obtuse.

[(Anonymous)]

I think that, unfortunately, your acerbic manner has come back to bite you in the ass, as now people are just seeing your user name rather than your argument.

[blitzwing]

Nah, it's not that I was bad and now I'm paying for it. It's that I said I'd try to be good, and to a certain type of people, they see that as carte blanche to attack a me, thinking that either:

A. I'll live up to my word, meaning the anon's won't get the blasting from me they would have gotten before

or

B. I'll snark at them and they can gleefully point out my failure and say I'm an irredeemable asshole

I think they're just deliberately trying to goad me. Though I'm pretty sure snarking at people that are insulting you and mocking you doesn't fall under "assholish behavior" so...

[(Anonymous)]

Oh, so now we're moving on to whether or not John is queer?

Someone get me some popcorn, this is going to be GOOD.

[blitzwing]

LOL, I forgot that the other main character for that series is called John. I was just trying to pick a common name. The quoted text was definitely not from Moffat about his character John.

[(Anonymous)]

This, seriously. Why doesn't Blitzwing just do it all since they know literally everything?

[(Anonymous)]

lol