[ SECRET POST #3154 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3154 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 050 secrets from Secret Submission Post #451.
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)]

I'm annoyed that people on Tumblr are misidentifying people. Several of the "transwomen" they are mentioning were actually drag queens. Drag queens are not trans.

[(Anonymous)]

I wouldn't get on your high horse too quickly. Take it from someone who lived through those times, trans and drag were often used interchangeably since for most trans people actual transition and full time identification was not something that was in any way socially accepted. A lot of people who we would call trans today chose to use the drag label just to allow them some sort of self-expression. It was not a tightly defined term, nor a time period that leant itself to modern definitions.

[(Anonymous)]

DA

But how does that make it right to assume drag = trans? It would be right to assume drag doesn't necessarily mean not trans, but to claim them as transwomen is a step too far, no?

[(Anonymous)]

It was impossible to tell, in many cases, which of the drag queens of the time were what we would call drag queens now and who we would call trans. Trans and drag went by the same label in many cases then.

[(Anonymous)]

I understood that the first time. But I'm pointing out that when there's uncertainty, it's just as wrong to assume and claim people for one group as it is to assume and claim people for the other.

Like, I'm anon. You don't know for sure whether I'm hispanic or black. Insisting I am either one and claiming me for that group is assuming things you don't know, and neither is more correct.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, those fucking trannies ought to shut up. Buncha perverts, we know they didn't exist and oughta stop claiming trannies did used to exist too.

[(Anonymous)]

NAYRT-- well, this is an assumption, but presumably at least some of the drag queens who were present then are either still alive, or lived long enough to see more of a demarcation line between trans and drag communities. And those who died while those lines were still being drawn presumably had friends and acquaintances who would know them well enough to say they might have been what today would be considered trans.

Also, I think some of the criticism is valid in that the film apparently focuses on the experience of fictional cis white queer men, rather than the actual people, including trans WOC, cis queer men, lesbians, and drag queens that were actually there. It's weird and I can't think of any reason to tell the story that way that doesn't boil down to a marketing ploy.

[(Anonymous)]

So? They were not trans. There WERE trans people during the protests. But some were drag queens. Maybe today they would be trans, but they did not identify as such at the time. You can't just assume someone was something they are not.

[(Anonymous)]

NO such thing as trans, they was men in drag there. Perverts, but not as big a pervert as those men who claim they are women. I am so glad someone is calling them on their bullshit.

[dethtoll]

You seem lost.

[(Anonymous)]

Trufax

[(Anonymous)]

You can't retroactively reassign people based on current thinking. Maybe some of those guys did want to be women, maybe they didn't. Even if you are an age contemporary, it's not for you to decide.

[(Anonymous)]

There's been a thing going around claiming a POC person is being played by a white male when two seconds on IMDb would show that allegation is false.

[(Anonymous)]

Fact checking is hard.

[(Anonymous)]

Yes. The white character is a new character and simply replaces the POC in role. I don't see how that could be seen as offfensive. It is a seperate character they created to take place of the historical figure for story telling reasons.

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

Still kind of a dick move to put a white (presumably cis) male front and center when the actual narrative involves leading people who are decidedly not white, at least.

[(Anonymous)]

There weren't any leaders in the riot.

[(Anonymous)]

And some of the people claiming credit for kicking things off weren't even there according to people who were, so there's that to consider.

[erinptah]

You don't see how it would be offensive to create a fictional white guy and then make him look more heroic by pilfering the actions of real live non-white people to paste into his narrative?

I mean, c'mon, if there was a movie version of the Montgomery bus boycotts that started with a fictional dude refusing to go to the back of the bus, people would boggle. Why would you do that? It's not a ~storytelling choice~, it's just bizarre.

[(Anonymous)]

It has to be relateable to normal people not just pressure groups and historians, I've no problem subbing characters in to make that happen.

[(Anonymous)]

Excep t there WERE actually people who were white in the riots.

[(Anonymous)]

Whose actions are they pilfering?

[(Anonymous)]

They're not replacing any POC,

[(Anonymous)]

This. From what I've read, this movie is not unlike Titanic; it tells the story of the boat sinking, but it uses fictional characters and their story, to draw the audience in.

It also sounds like there's a fair amount of knicker twisting going on over nothing. If you want historical accuracy go watch a documentary, this isn't one.

[(Anonymous)]

You know your shit is wrong when even IMDB gets something right.