fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3342 ]

⌈ 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.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

even if it's autobiographical, it's not really harming anyone

imo it's kinda like rpf or sex fantasties about real people, kinda creepy if the person in question knows about it, but doesn't do any damage if they're kept outta the loop

it's a fucked up way to think whether or not it harms anyone. i'm not saying that we should make it illegal, but it's not the right way to think.

How so?

Trans women characters aren't men and their relationships aren't M/M relationships.

I agree with that trans women aren't men and this relationship isn't M/M, but what's harmful about it if the person acknowledges it's a fantasy?

If they acknowledge it's a fantasy, I don't have a problem. OP didn't.

DA you seem to be the only one in this thread that read it the way you did. Everyone else read it as OP insisting on their particular headcanon in contradiction of stated canon?

Well, I can't speak as to why everyone else is misinterpreting it.

I mean OP is obviously aware of the disconnect and said "trans characters" instead of trans people, so yeah I'm not really reading it that way.

AYRT intentionally misreading intentional misreading, can we go deeper?!

Shit, I replied to wrong post. I thought this a reply to the post before the previous one

AYRT I was talking about the anon you were replying to, it was a joke :)

Aware of the disconnect is not necessarily the same as understanding it's wrong

and like I said above I get that they're talking about characters and not real people

DA I think they get its wrong. Why else would they sound like a pre-teen saying as many slurs as they can, because they can? They know it's wrong, they're just not regretful about it. I don't think it's worth your time to rail at the OP because they clearly don't care.

They know it's wrong, they're just not regretful about it.

That is also my interpretation of it, but apparently not most other people's.

I don't think it's worth your time to rail at the OP because they clearly don't care.

Yeah I know, that's exactly what I said in my first post. Most of the rest of this thread has been talking with other people about whether or not what OP said is wrong or not.

AYRT People are saying they are wrong though? They're arguing about your interpretation of the secret which is different from all of ours. I don't know, it's not worth arguing with you about, I'm going to take a nap.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-27 21:49 (UTC) - Expand

It's probably better that we don't get into thoughtcrime territory. If you start going "that's not the right way to think" that gets a little creepy for my taste.

OP can fap to what they want to and they can think of it however they want to. As long as they're keeping it in their own head it's really not anyone's business (and yeah, I realize they made a secret and put it here, but it's all anon and they're not saying it as themselves, so I don't have so much of a problem with it).

I see where people are coming from though - thinking "this trans man is actually a woman" has a tendency to bleed over into how they treat actual people. Just knowing people have that attitude about them can be really hurtful.

I certainly wouldn't advocate calling it "thought crime" but I don't think that's really what's going on in this thread?

but it's not the right way to think.

That's really the part I was objecting to. I have a really strong aversion to telling people "don't think that," it comes off as creepy and controlling to me.

Well, it's wrong, you shouldn't think things are wrong. I don't think you should think that the moon is made of cheese, either. Sorry if this comes off as controlling.

Eh. A friend of mine doesn't believe any of the gender stuff (his argument generally boils down to "what makes a man a man, or a woman a woman?" and he's basically never gotten a straight answer), so by proxy doesn't really believe that transgenderism is a thing, but he still treats people with respect and uses whatever pronouns they want and stuff. You can have your beliefs and not be an asshole. They're not mutually exclusive.

If there's no good answer to "what makes a man a man, or a woman a woman?" then cis gender is also not a thing and your friend is not a real man either, on accoutn of there being nothing that makes him one.

"Gender"-wise, yes, that's exactly the point. He's no more a "man" than I am a "woman" based on interests or how we feel, so it makes the most sense to him to get rid of the entire concept and just stick to biological sex. I'm not saying he's right, but it is how he feels-- but again, he treats everyone with respect and uses the pronouns they prefer, even when bringing them up in conversation they're not there for. Let me say it again louder for the people in the back: you can have your beliefs and not be an asshole. Shocking concept, I know.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y36x3YKH7gY

Marc Almond singing "What Makes A Man A Man" by Charles Aznavour.

that feels really different to me though than what's going on in the secret.