[ SECRET POST #3468 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3468 ⌋

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

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.














Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 51 secrets from Secret Submission Post #496.
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.

Comments

[blitzwing]

For the record, this is a really frustrating post to write because of the sheer number of lines of argument that I have to reconstruct in the face of your unwillingness or inability to follow through a line of argument, or use an agreed-upon set of words and symbols to stand in for mutually understood meanings, IE language. It's a bit of a hassle.

I'm not the one using poetry to answer, bro.

Hollywood system

You mentioned fandom as one of those areas where it's "important to recognize serious issues with representation". If your criticism only applies to Hollywood, then you should have said that and not brought fandom into it, because while you could say similar pressures exist in the publishing world or other media production outlets, fandom is definitely not subject to the same pressures and controls.

You even make the claim that "it's also something that exists in every aspect of society." when it doesn't. WLW might be done VERY badly by Hollywood, but that's not a claim you can make about all forms of media, especially when you've made a point of including fandom in that, which treats its WLW in fic pretty damn good in my experience.

but it's not an intellectual weakpoint of people who care about social justice.

What does that even mean? "we don't intend for our actions to have these consequences, so those consequences are irrelevant and we don't have to consider them".

Wow, I can tell you really care about people and helping them. /s

I would also point out, again, that how good we are at talking about problematic issues is a different line of argument from how important it is to talk about problematic issues.

Not true in the slightest. The impact of our actions helps determine how important something is. If an activist action has little to no effect for a cause, then it is typically not an action much importance is placed on.

I don't know what you consider evidence or argumentation then.

Actual evidence or a logical point supporting your claims, not "It just does not do that." and then a flipflop to admit that yeah, it kinda does do that. You have to backpeddle on what yoú've said so frequently because you're not articulating any real reasons.

You haven't made a single strong argument point supporting the idea that it's important to criticize works on representation. Ketita has done a better job of selling parts of your stance and I don't even think she agrees with you.

For that matter, I haven't seen you post any rebuttals to her denial of the importance of dragging individual media works. If you don't think you can expect me to have a "have a reasonable response" why don't you try convincing her? She seems eminently reasonable. Or is it just that you have no real arguments in favor your position, and are just responding to me out of defensiveness/unable to admit the weakness of your position?

[(Anonymous)]

If your criticism only applies to Hollywood, then you should have said that and not brought fandom into it, because while you could say similar pressures exist in the publishing world or other media production outlets, fandom is definitely not subject to the same pressures and controls.

As I said, these are broad social issues, and so similar problems exist (mutatis mutandis) with other systems for producing media. I apologize if you using the specific word "Hollywood" made that unclear to you.

Not true in the slightest. The impact of our actions helps determine how important something is. If an activist action has little to no effect for a cause, then it is typically not an action much importance is placed on.

This is, like, just fundamentally not true. The importance of a cause is distinct from the efficacy of our attempts to address it.

You haven't made a single strong argument point supporting the idea that it's important to criticize works on representation.

I said that it's important because it leads to better representation which leads to a better, more meaningfully tolerant society, and I outlined the way in which understanding specific narratives and tropes, and the way that they reproduce shitty ideas present in society, allows us to tell better stories.

On the other hand you haven't made a single argument about why it's not important. You've made lots of arguments about why you think the conversation is bad, but you haven't said anything about why it's not an important cause. Which - I say again - is a real and meaningful distinction. You say I've flip flopped. I haven't. I've acknowledged that sometimes the conversation is bad. I've never said it's not important.

I didn't read the Ketita subthread, I'll go look at what she said if it's important to you.