Case (
case) wrote in
fandomsecrets2016-06-24 06:50 pm
[ SECRET POST #3460 ]
⌈ Secret Post #3460 ⌋
Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.
01.

__________________________________________________
02.

[Lucifer]
__________________________________________________
03.

[The Librarians]
__________________________________________________
04.

[American Psycho]
__________________________________________________
05.

__________________________________________________
06.

__________________________________________________
07.

__________________________________________________
08.

__________________________________________________
09.

[Gargoyles]
__________________________________________________
10.

__________________________________________________
11.

[mcu and x-men movieverse]
__________________________________________________
12.

__________________________________________________
13.

__________________________________________________
14.

[Chicago Med]
__________________________________________________
15. [SPOILERS for Sei Sou Tsui Dan Sha]
[WARNING for discussion of rape/incest]

__________________________________________________
16. [WARNING for discussion of rape]

__________________________________________________
17. [WARNING for discussion of rape]

[Gahkthun of the Golden Lightning]
__________________________________________________
18. [WARNING for non-con]

[Miraculous: Tales of Ladybug & Cat Noir]
__________________________________________________
19. http://i.imgur.com/5u17vcb.jpg
[Watchmen, OP wanted a warning for sex/nudity, movie sex scene]
__________________________________________________
20. [WARNING for discussion of rape]

__________________________________________________
21. [WARNING for discussion of rape]

[The Mighty Boosh]
Notes:
Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #494.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 1 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

no subject
no subject
(Anonymous) 2016-06-25 07:27 am (UTC)(link)no subject
(Anonymous) 2016-06-25 10:04 am (UTC)(link)And note how that article's author outright admits she doesn't watch the show. But still, somehow, feels qualified to take part of an episode and pass judgment on it without context? Um, no.
no subject
SA
(Anonymous) 2016-06-25 05:39 pm (UTC)(link)It's like a movie or book review going, "Well I haven't actually [read this book / seen this movie], but I've heard it says such and such and [read two paragraphs / seen the trailer], and I'm seriously disappointed and I think it should've done something different instead. Can you guys who've actually [read / seen] it comment?"
At best it's sensationalism and clickbait, at worst it's deliberate deception to push an agenda. Why is this an okay thing to do? (Hint: it's not.)
no subject