fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3033 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3033 ⌋

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

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

[Kushiel's Legacy]

__________________________________________________

03.

[The Young Sherlock Holmes]

__________________________________________________

04.

[Blake's 7]

__________________________________________________

05.

[Doc Martin]

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07. http://i.imgur.com/XWQxPJy.jpg?2
[linked for close up shot of naked butt]

__________________________________________________

08.

[Disney]

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

[Phantom of the Opera/Twilight]

__________________________________________________

11.

[Captain America]

__________________________________________________

12.

[Spec Ops: The Line]

__________________________________________________

13. [SPOILERS for Final Fantasy XIV - A Realm Reborn]

__________________________________________________

14. [SPOILERS for Star Wars: The Force Awakens (Episode VII)]

__________________________________________________

15. [WARNING for incest]

[Folgers Coffee Commercial]

__________________________________________________

16. [WARNING for suicide, emotional abuse]

__________________________________________________

17. [WARNING for suicide]

__________________________________________________

18. [WARNING for abusive parenting, domestic abuse]

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 000 secrets from Secret Submission Post #433.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 1 - 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 was not impressed by Renner's "apology" which was shit. At least Evans seemed to get it in his though. I suppose picking up that kind of language and attitude is probably inevitable if you are on a Whedon production for any length of time. They really need to Clarkson that guy.

I highly doubt both sincerely meant their apologies. Most people (women and men included) don't care. The actors don't really care either. But, it pleases the vocal minority to look into a camera and go, "sorry."

That still means something. Most people would defend themselves to a ridiculous degree and tell the vocal minority to stop being so sensitive. Because you know they'd still get more support than hate if they did that.

No they wouldn't. They have literally nothing to lose by going, "Sorry"

Aside from dignity?

Why would Renner apology over insulting a FICTIONAL CHARACTER? That's probably why his apology is half hearted. Because he's probably thinking, "Really? I have to apology because I insulted a comic character?"

How many times has someone called Howard Stark a "man-slut?" (Even Peggy was cracking jokes about his sexual exploits on the show.) Google "Nightwing is a" and the fourth answer down is "a manwhore." Yet, everyone laughs at that. Why? Because they are fictional characters and not real people.

... you don't think it has anything to do with the fact that society lauds men who have many sexual partners vs. castigating women who do the same thing? And therefore implying that a guy is a whore is considered comic because it's not as loaded as implying a woman is a whore?

IT'S A FICTIONAL CHARACTER FOR CHRIST'S SAKE!

No one real was hurt. Natasha Romanov isn't somewhere crying her eyes out or sharpening a blade in revenge.

And how many jokes are made at James. T. Kirk's sluttage? The biggest whore in any gender in any universe. He will sleep with anything that moves. Literally. Even if he doesn't know where to stick it, you know he will try.

I'm not saying Natasha was hurt or that we should take the feelings of fictional characters into consideration. I'm saying that there might be a good reason for Renner to apologize for implying that when a woman has many partners, that makes her a slut.

"And how many jokes are made at James. T. Kirk's sluttage? The biggest whore in any gender in any universe. He will sleep with anything that moves. Literally. Even if he doesn't know where to stick it, you know he will try."

I don't think I said that men weren't made fun of for being sexually active, only that it's not as loaded a term when applied to a man.

It's not about offending Natasha Romanov.

It's about the fact that it was considered okay to call the only woman in a cast a slut/whore because she dared to interact with the rest of the cast, and that this was said in a published interview.

Like, the problem is really obvious, and saying "But she's a fictional character~!" is really derailing the issue.

But it's the interviewer who brought it up first. Were Renner and Evans supposed to step on their soapboxes and rant about slutshaming and how no one asked Gwyneth Paltrow how she felt when Tony Stark flirted with undercover!Natasha?

It was a stupid joke that was prompted by a stupid question. Why do Renner and Evans get so much flack when it was the interviewer who brought the topic up? (And expected a response along these lines, let's be honest. The interviewer didn't want the two of them to go "*shrug* whatever.")

I don't laugh at 'man-slut' jokes or the phrase 'manwhore' and personally don't like or use them, in the same vein I'd rather not hear female characters being called sluts either. That being said I was not up in arms over the response, I just thought it was a bit of a poorly thought out comment.

Okay, there seems to be a bit of a logic fail going on here.

* BUT THEY'RE FICTIONAL.

Literally nobody is arguing that we should care about fictional people being insulted. You're missing the bigger picture: people are upset because Renner and Evans implied that a woman who is sexually promiscuous is a slut. They (and you) are failing to see that their specific example can be and often is applied to the female population at large in very ugly, discriminatory ways, which is why it would've been a good idea not to mention it at all.

* But calling Nick Fury "nigger" isn't the same as calling Natasha a slut!

That's beside the point. Your argument was that there's no harm, no foul because a fictional character is involved. If you then try to argue that racist slurs are somehow different or worse than sexual slurs, you've taken yourself out of your original argument and are now arguing about about the qualitative content of the slur itself. By your own reasoning, it shouldn't matter if it's being applied to a fictional character. So in that sense, the example is an apt one.

* But men are sometimes called sluts too Captain Kirk blah blah blah!"

Yep. We shouldn't call anyone sluts based on their sexual activity, but there really is no denying that there is far greater stigma for women than for men. Society often speaks of a man's sexual conquests (very telling term!) if he has many partners, but when a woman has many partners, she's spoken of as disloyal, so driven by her lusts that she's unable to discriminate, out to lead men on, etc. In fact, it's a bit weird you felt the need to bring it up. It's like when people have having a discussion about how badly African Americans were treated during slavery and the civil rights movement and there's that one person who has to headbutt their way into the thread to complain that white people have it bad too so therefore nobody should be upset.

Look, I don't know you. I don't know if this is a case of you really, really not getting this at all, or if you're deliberately trying to reduce this to an absurd strawman (wharrgarbl fictional people it's fiction whaarrrghh!) to dismiss the objections people have to women being called sluts. I guess the former is slightly better than the latter, but it's still really odd this is eluding you.

Are you mad because he was so nonchalant over your fictional characters? Awwwwwwww.

[ SECRET POST #3033 ]

Re: AOU interviews

Re: AOU interviews

Re: AOU interviews

Re: AOU interviews

Re: AOU interviews

Re: AOU interviews

Re: AOU interviews

Re: AOU interviews

Re: AOU interviews

Re: AOU interviews

Re: AOU interviews

Re: AOU interviews

Re: AOU interviews

Re: AOU interviews