[ SECRET POST #3053 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3053 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.
[The Kid (Charlie Chaplin)/Starsky & Hutch ("Gillian")]


__________________________________________________



03.
[Network]


__________________________________________________



04.
[Sci-Fi/Fantasy]


__________________________________________________



05.
[In Plain Sight]


__________________________________________________



06.
[Captain America: Civil War]


__________________________________________________



07.
[Samurai Warriors]


__________________________________________________



08. https://i.imgur.com/Tr3NZUD.jpg
[NSFW image (shirtless 16 year old? girl), discussion of underage sexuality]


__________________________________________________



09.
[Joss Whedon]
















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 011 secrets from Secret Submission Post #436.
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)]

Well, that's how they want to paint it.

And then they spend thousands of words talking about how unfair it is that the book might not tell you every theme in the book in case they disagree with one. They ignorantly (or disingenuously) pretend the books they like have no themes whatsoever and are just "neutral" while books with an anti-capitalist bent or strong women or, heaven help us, gay people is all message-y and horrible. *automatically*.

And instead of just saying it's not to their taste - the way most people do - they do their best to vilify those works and the people who read them and try to paint them as "ruining" instead of expanding the genre. They don't just dislike reading these books, they clearly dislike the fact that they exist and other people like them. They insist people don't *actually* like them and only laud them for, I guess, SJW points?

If the sum of what they did was to suggest books they liked, fine, I'm all for that. But they're actively trying to put down and belittle not only the books they don't like and the people who like them. Is it as bad as rabids? No. But it's sure as hell a far sight from "trying to get a seat at the table."