[ SECRET POST #3216 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3216 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.
(The Blacklist)


__________________________________________________



03.
[The Sum Of Us/Russell Crowe]


__________________________________________________



04.
[Dan and Phil]


__________________________________________________



05.
[Tokyo Ghoul:re]


__________________________________________________



06.
[dick grayson]


__________________________________________________



07.
[Scandinavia and the World]


__________________________________________________



08.
[Doctor Who]


__________________________________________________



09.
[One Piece]


__________________________________________________



10.
[Lost Dimension]


__________________________________________________



11.
[Sleepy Hollow]










Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 075 secrets from Secret Submission Post #460.
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)]

Honestly, I... generally wouldn't? Mostly because I don't think in terms of "ostensibly" xyz gender. If it isn't confirmed by word of god or by the narrative, it's up in the air and open to pretty much anything.

Well, there is one exception. In Knights of the Old Republic II, I would probably make Visas Marr (and Atton Rand) the bi romance routes. Mostly because A) it's Bioware, and B) I want my female Exile to be able to date Visas, dammit. She's the best.

Character-wise, I'm pretty sure it makes sense - Visas' personality is very open to single-target sexuality, and Atton's the other character who gets *really* close to the Exile either way.

On the other hand: I don't like how so many people seem to only want to make xyz character LGBT+ because it would make other people angry, or as some kind of political figurehead. Isn't that just using LGBT+ people as ammunition, and basically just tokenism? I'm sorry, but that sounds immature at best and outright exploitative at worst.