[ SECRET POST #3141 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3141 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.


__________________________________________________



14.


__________________________________________________



15.













Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 066 secrets from Secret Submission Post #449.
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

Re: Why

[(Anonymous)]

It's difficult to see why it's harmful.

If you think that it's okay to find people attractive, and if you think that you can consider one person more attractive than another, I'm not sure how a rating scale is that different from those things.

Of course you can use it to be an ass, but that doesn't make it wrong.

Re: Why

[(Anonymous)]

It's difficult to see why it's harmful.

AYRT

I'm not sure it's actively harmful to the "target," so to speak. But I'm not sure it's not, to be honest. Reducing a human being to a number is just gross to me. Saying I find someone attractive really isn't the same thing. I can find person A attractive because of their personality, person B attractive because of a damn fine ass, person C attractive because of a combination of factors...reducing it to a number seems so icky and objectifying to me.

So that's why I can't understand how people are defensive about it. I just don't get it. On the other hand, I'm close to 40 years old, so it may well just be a generation gap.

Re: Why

[(Anonymous)]

nayrt

I guess it's because the rater doesn't, uh, show their work getting the number.

I just care how they get the number, and how seriously they take their calculation. If they just use it as a ranking thing, e.g., 5 is average among people I've considered, 9 is a pleasant surprise, I let it slide. But if they think hmm, I'll rate everyone, adjusting each score as they age or as I see hotter people, with ass counting for 25% of the total, and this number will be my main consideration for their worth, then ew.

Re: Why

[(Anonymous)]

But it's not reducing a human being to a number. It's reducing their attractiveness to a number. That's a significant difference to me. Because a person is, obviously, so much more than their attractiveness. It's assigning a number to your, completely subjective, feelings about another person.

I'm not especially defensive about it, I don't think - it's not like it's something that I actively do. I just don't see any good argument for why it's wrong.

I do agree that anyone treating it like any objective social fact is an idiot and an ass. But that's a much more specific thing.

Re: Why

[(Anonymous)]

Re: why people are defensive. you call it "objectifying", that's the kind of accusation people want to defend against. you say this is an objectifying practice and that it's icky, people who do it (a. don't take it seriously enough to actually consider the people as nothing more than a number, and (b. don't feel they deserve the accusation of objectification and ickyness (and the connected implication of misogyny) for expressing their relative attraction in numerical form.

Also, there's always the feeling that the people criticizing the practice don't really get it. Like the constant argument is that "Attractiveness is subjective, so a numbers scale doesn't work" like people don't already know that attractiveness is subjective but can you think of a better way to express relative attraction? Would colours be better? "I think Mickey Rourke is a blue and Michael Fassbender is a Red?".

TLDR, it's just a harmless dumb thing people do and people don't like being told they're bad people for doing their dumb harmless stuff.

Re: Why

[(Anonymous)]

Question: Do you find rating a person's intelligence as a number equally dehumanising?

Re: Why

[(Anonymous)]

If you're talking about IQ, I think it's a worthless scale, and yes, dehumanizing in a sense. There are so many different types of intelligence - IQ measures one particular type, and is essentially meaningless. The fact that people hang so much importance on it has caused a lot of damage.