[ SECRET POST #3183 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3183 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.



__________________________________________________



11.











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 047 secrets from Secret Submission Post #455.
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)]

... How does being interested in having a relationship make someone 'defined by a man'? Everyone else in the group except Steve is *in a relationship*, and it's *Natasha* that is defined by wanting to have something normal and sweet to come home to after a day of ass-kicking?

I think there's an unconscious tendency in feminism where a (correct) structural understanding of the existence of patriarchy and male privilege leads to certain (not always correct) implicit biases and... weightings. Particularly in regard to judgments about men and about hetero relationships. And I think this is one of those instances, where people are more likely to view this kind of relationship trope in a weirdly negative light because of those pre-existing unconscious assumptions. Where there's an underlying bias towards the idea that a hetero relationship is going to lessen the woman involved, or that a man's behavior is going to stem from some sort of privilege or prejudice.

I want to be clear that I think this is a natural thing, not really a morally bad thing or anything like that. It's just the way that people work; it's not unique, it's not a deeply harmful issue, feminism is still basically right, etc. But I think it exists, and sometimes it shows up.

Now, Bruce's assumption that no woman would want to be with him because he can't breed I view as anti-feminist. And hurtful to people who have non-gamma problems conceiving.

And this is maybe another example. To me, his assumption is perhaps drawing from ideas that are patriarchal and inconsistent with feminism. I have difficulty viewing it as 'anti-feminist' and I think it is something people can be empathetic about, even if it is a mistaken view. It is certainly understandable how it could emerge, to me.

[(Anonymous)]

I'm sorry, I don't think I was very clear about that last part. He seemed dismissive of Natasha's right to make that choice, which is what I viewed as anti-feminist. If he'd said it in a way that implied 'I want you to make a choice with all the details', that would be different. Even feeling like it would likely be a deal-breaker would be understandable, and I empathize with that. It's how he phrased it that bothered me, not the idea itself.

As for the rest... I do understand that, but I feel an action movie is perhaps not the best place to explore that. I also don't like the implication that men are allowed to want a family, but that it's unfeminist for a woman to want the same. Every other character besides Hill, and possibly Fury, is either in a relationship or wants one. Even the doctor. But Natasha's the only one that's weak for it? Oh, and the twins. They're not looking for love. They do have a family, though, so the same thing sort of applies.

[(Anonymous)]

Fair enough, really.

I also don't like the implication that men are allowed to want a family, but that it's unfeminist for a woman to want the same.

I profoundly agree with this statement & apologize if I implied anything else.

[(Anonymous)]

No, you didn't. I was simply clarifying my own position there. It's my main argument against people describing Natasha as anti-feminist. I understand the weighting, I do, but... That's just a little too far, and I get rant-y sometimes.