[ SECRET POST #3342 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3342 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.














Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 04 pages, 081 secrets from Secret Submission Post #478.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 - random meme ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

Not really. They're saying that trans stories aren't trans stories, they're actually gay stories. That's pretty incontrovertibly fucked up to me whatever else they do.

Like, it's not even presented as a headcanon - it doesn't even have that shred of justification - it's just "trans people don't exist."

[(Anonymous)]

Well... no. They're saying they are personally incapable of seeing trans stories as trans stories, while acknowledging that they are meant to be trans stories. That's bad, I'm not disagreeing with you there, but to say OP is claiming real trans people don't exist is a stretch.

[(Anonymous)]

That is like... the most generous reading possible. like, generous to a degree that i just find it completely implausible.

like, if nothing else, there's nothing in the secret that really speaks to the idea that they're meant to be trans stories, or to the idea that OP considers their incapability as a bad thing.

[(Anonymous)]

" there's nothing in the secret that really speaks to the idea that they're meant to be trans stories"

But OP calls them "trans characters" and "trans women". OP is acknowledging the author's intent.

"there's nothing in the secret that really speaks to... the idea that OP considers their incapability as a bad thing"

Yeah. That's the bad part. They gleefully ignore the author's intent. But making that out to be OP claiming that real trans people don't exist is like saying someone gleefully choosing to read a gay character as straight is claiming that "real gay people" don't exist.

It's bad, but it's not quite the same, and saying it's something other than it is dilutes the argument.

[(Anonymous)]

Well, I didn't say (or didn't mean to say) that they were denying trans people exist. I meant to say that they were denying that trans characters exist. Which I think is the effect of what they're saying and doing, even if it's not something that they would explicitly say. And I do think that if you follow the logic of what they're saying and thinking, that is the path you are going to be lead down.

[(Anonymous)]

Maybe I'm more familiar with the behavior of intentfully misreading canons, idk. I see this happen all the time with people willfully misreading sexualities because they don't like the idea of certain characters being gay or prefer "straight versions" of them and while yeah, it's homophobic, I wouldn't call it erasing real people or denying they exist, unless they're going around insisting that their version is canon and other people should agree. Which I have also seen.

OP isn't doing that. They're doing the lesser evil of choosing to interpret things their own transphobic way.