fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3355 ]

[ SECRET POST #3355 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3355 ⌋

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

01.

[The Lord of the Rings]

__________________________________________________

02.

[Digimon Story: Cyber Sleuth]

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

[Partners in Crime]

__________________________________________________

05.

[The 100]

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08. [SPOILERS for Undertale]

__________________________________________________

09. [SPOILERS for The 100]

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 000 secrets from Secret Submission Post #479.
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.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

What do you expect us to do?

That's not really relevant to my question. I asked what you think? I don't mean by my standards, I mean by yours.

It's perfectly relevant to your question, because I don't believe that any answer any of us could give would satisfy you.

Well that would relate more to your belief about me than my question, wouldn't it? I can be held accountable only for my question, and as I say, my opinions are not relevant to the question.

What you say and what the reality is are two different things.

This can be true. But in this case what I say is related only to the reality as I created it. The question is on my intentions and in that, I am the only person qualified to talk.

Now you're just babbling. It's easy for us to infer your intentions because in the current environment there is no safe way to answer that question. Anyone would be suspicious, especially when you have so far refused to elaborate on what you personally think is "enough."

If you've inferred that my intention is to attack people, you have inferred incorrectly. And I agree that assumption is a problem with F!S as it stands, too often that inference would be correct. Not here, though.

And I suppose I agree, suspicion is appropriate, but it shouldn't be. But giving my opinion would defeat my question, which was intended to be a "Your actions VS your values". Introducing my values as a counterpoint would have turned it into a "Your actions VS My values" question.

suspicion is appropriate, but it shouldn't be

So what do you plan to do about it?

Re: Men of F!S

(Anonymous) - 2016-03-12 01:36 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Men of F!S

(Anonymous) - 2016-03-12 01:38 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Men of F!S

(Anonymous) - 2016-03-12 01:49 (UTC) - Expand

I don't think the question can really be made sense of without the idea of judgment.

Because like everyone here is going to say yes (except the one dude anon who has a guilt complex) because of course we do. If we thought we should do more we'd be doing more, that's how having a conscience works. So the only point where it's a conversation is where you tell us we're shitty for not doing enough and then we have to stammeringly list everything we do to justify ourselves.

I don't think the question can really be made sense of without the idea of judgment.

I would agree with that but I did try to phrase the question with the emphasis being on self judgment, not on me trying to judge.

If we thought we should do more we'd be doing more, that's how having a conscience works.

I don't know if I agree there. I know I should be doing more for the homeless population, but I'm not. I know why I'm not and I have my justifications but I'm still not doing all that I could.

Actually, the point is in part my own curiosity, but even then that's not the 'only' point as you say. I think self reflection on this is a good thing.

I would agree with that but I did try to phrase the question with the emphasis being on self judgment, not on me trying to judge.

You failed. Good job.

I don't know if I agree there. I know I should be doing more for the homeless population, but I'm not. I know why I'm not and I have my justifications but I'm still not doing all that I could.

Why aren't you?

I don't see how I could have phrased the question with less focus on my opinions?

And ok, it would be unfair of me to not answer your question.

The reasons I give myself are that I lack the time, I lack the energy and I lack the resources. Which is all true to some extent, but if I were completely honest with myself I'm worried that I do have more time than I tell myself I have, that I do have more energy than I tell myself I have, and that I do have more resources than I tell myself I have, and that the real reason is I just don't care enough.

So you don't care about homeless people then?

I don't know. It's a concern for me that maybe I don't care about them as much as I should.

Concern is nothing without action.

I do try to be self reflective and engage with this dialogue. I don't think that requires me to lineup to get personally yelled at. I certainly don't think that'd be healthy for me.

The other dynamic here, I think, is that there is - from the point of view of a motivated critique - no thing that could ever be enough. You can always find some flaw or think of some other mode of structural oppression. Which I think is kind of an accurate attitude, derived from the fact that structural oppression is super human - that is to say it is historic and systemic and massive in scope. But we still have to live as human beings, you know? So it just feels like a very self defeating thing to try to talk about whether your own practice matches up to the scale of the thing.

I don't think that requires me to lineup to get personally yelled at. I certainly don't think that'd be healthy for me.

Why are you so defensive? Nobody is yelling at you. I'm not yelling at you.

So it just feels like a very self defeating thing to try to talk about whether your own practice matches up to the scale of the thing.

So your solution is... to do as little as possible?

Why are you so defensive? Nobody is yelling at you. I'm not yelling at you.

Because there is one way this conversation has ever gone on the Internet.

So your solution is... to do as little as possible?

No, I try to do what I can. I try to be mindful about my own practices and life choices and behavior (which I think is a moral requirement) and I try to support pro-woman policies and be aware and listen as much as possible and all of that But my point is that from a certain point of view nothing could ever be enough, and I have my own personal limitations as a person. So no matter what I did someone could always come along and yell at me for not doing enough.

OP here. I think someone is imitating me in an attempt to make this seem like I'm a crazy asshole. Sorry.

Re: Men of F!S

(Anonymous) - 2016-03-12 01:08 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Men of F!S

(Anonymous) - 2016-03-12 01:38 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Men of F!S

(Anonymous) - 2016-03-12 01:50 (UTC) - Expand

I'd agree, so to a degree I can understand why people might be hesitant to answer the thread. I'm trying to put people at ease as best I can (now. I did slip up and accuse someone of being defensive why they may not have been. Oops.) but Yeah, I suppose people are going to be nervouse about talking openly about this.

The second part of that comment is remarkably well thought out. I kind of agree, and I thank you for sharing your thoughts.

The question as you wrote it came off as suspiciously loaded. The use of the word "enough" implies a subjective limit, as someone downthread posited. This is why people don't want to answer it.

F!S has dealt with radfem trolls for a number of years and questions worded exactly like this are basically traps set by trolls so they can yell at someone for giving a "wrong" answer -- and all the answers are wrong. Instead of getting defensive (while accusing others of being defensive and aggressive) and insisting that the question wasn't loaded, you could actually explain what the fuck you were trying to get at when you asked that question.

I did respond below to that, but let me reiterate. "Enough" related to the question of whether people meet their own subjective limit.

I am aware of our history with the more ... forceful people here. I am not one of them, as demonstrated by the fact that I have shown no judgement or lack of respect to the few people who did answer my question. And saving that one slip up, which I point out again, I apologised for, I have been as respectful as possible to everyone.

What I was trying to get at has been explained already: I wanted to know if people lived up to their own ideas in this matter, and where those ideals sit. I insist the question wasn't loaded because it wasn't and that is what people keep throwing at me.

Re: Men of F!S

(Anonymous) - 2016-03-12 01:38 (UTC) - Expand

AYRT

Yeah, I get where you were coming from now, and I apologize for being snappish, it's been a long day. And it is... extremely, extremely loaded territory, you know? So anyway, yeah, sorry about that.

Don't worry about it.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only