Case (
case) wrote in
fandomsecrets2016-02-02 06:51 pm
[ SECRET POST #3317 ]
⌈ Secret Post #3317 ⌋
Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.
01.

__________________________________________________
02.

__________________________________________________
03.

__________________________________________________
04.

__________________________________________________
05.

[D.Gray-man - Miranda Lotto]
__________________________________________________
06.

[The Thick of It]
__________________________________________________
07.

[Golden Kamui]
__________________________________________________
08.

(The Lost Boys)
__________________________________________________
09.

[Marble Hornets/troyhasacamera]
__________________________________________________
10.

__________________________________________________
11.

[@midnight with Chris Hardwick]
Notes:
Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 037 secrets from Secret Submission Post #474.
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.

Re: Is this for Real
(Anonymous) 2016-02-03 03:17 am (UTC)(link)Re: Is this for Real
(Anonymous) 2016-02-03 03:19 am (UTC)(link)Re: Is this for Real
(Anonymous) 2016-02-03 04:56 am (UTC)(link)Like, even if you set aside the specific proposal for legalizing rape, what's the point of the piece? Presumably, as a criticism of the idea of 'rape culture' as a concept. But, like... his specific objection to the concept seems to be that it's women's responsibility not to get raped, and that rape is easily prevented in the majority of cases. Which is more or less the same point that he was driving at when he proposed making rape legal. So... even if you take him as being satirical about the thing about making it legal, he still holds all the beliefs that lead up to that argument? Which are just as objectionable?
And it's just so confusing to me because, like, this is literally what the piece textually says! Explicitly! Saying that it's fine because it's satirical is just a mind-boggling amount of evil, lunatic nonsense to me. It is just so blatantly untrue.