[ 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

[feotakahari]

Honestly, I think it would be more productive for you to read up a little on feminist theory. It's like trying to argue religion--even if I don't believe in that religion, I need to study its assumptions in order to argue with it effectively and not take forever just laying groundwork.

[blitzwing]

Honestly, I think it would be more productive for you to read up a little on feminist theory.

What makes you think I'm not well-versed in feminist bullshit? I've even had formal education in it, via Women's Studies classes (puke). I used to be a feminist, after all.

You shouldn't assume people are ignorant of something just because they disagree with it.

But that aside I don't see why you think knowledge of feminist theory (or lack of it) would have changed anything in today's conversations, when we were focused on importance ranking, which is a philosophical topic, not an ideological or political one.

[feotakahari]

"But that aside I don't see why you think knowledge of feminist theory (or lack of it) would have changed anything in today's conversations, when we were focused on importance ranking, which is a philosophical topic, not an ideological or political one."

Honestly, that was pretty much just you talking about "importance ranking." The anon upthread was doing everything they could not to talk about it, because it wasn't relevant to what they were saying. I wouldn't say it had anything to do with what I was talking about, either. (I deliberately avoid all forms of philosophy other than ethics.)

Not gonna lie; there have been several times today when I've thought "No one can be this obtuse, can they?" It's one thing to disagree, but you keep not getting where people are coming from and making them explain, and apart from the poetry anon, I don't think any of us were especially unclear. I'm still not sure if I said anything today you fully understood, let alone agreed or disagreed with. It makes me feel stupid, because if I were smart, I'd be able to explain it all in a way you'd understand.

[blitzwing]

Honestly, that was pretty much just you talking about "importance ranking."

My initial comment was literally "I don't see why it's important." If you weren't talking about importance ranking, then you basically hijacked my subthread to talk about something unrelated to what I was saying. Which is kinda rude. It would be like if I went up to DT when he's talking about the glories of atheism and got pissed at him for not talking about tamales.


The anon upthread was doing everything they could not to talk about it

That's kind of a weird assumption to make about their motives, especially since their initial responses to *were* very importance-ranking pertinent. Are you the OP?

It's one thing to disagree, but you keep not getting where people are coming from and making them explain

If you understand your position, it shouldn't be hard to explain. I never have any problems explaining the basis of my beliefs/assertions. Unless I'm wrong, in which case being challenged makes me realize that the foundations I'd built my beliefs on were false or poorly constructed.

I'm still not sure if I said anything today you fully understood, let alone agreed or disagreed with. It makes me feel stupid, because if I were smart, I'd be able to explain it all in a way you'd understand.

Nothing you've said has been especially complex; most of it has been quite simple if anything. I don't know why you'd think I didn't understand it, other than a condescending "If they absorbed the same facts I did, of course they'd agree with me!" attitude. An attitude you've shown--even blatantly spelling it out with "you don't agree with me on importance ranking for X, so clearly you're ignorant about basic feminism!"

(Even though they're not especially related in anyway and you have yet to explain why *anything* I've said would indicate an unfamiliarity with feminist theory. I am really very curious what motivated you to assume such a thing.)

I think maybe you're failing to understand something, you missed something somewhere but you think I'm the one that did. The only way I can see how feminist theory would be relevant to this discussion would be if you were fighting a straw man of your own construction this whole time without realizing it.

For the record: not once in this entire thread have I argued that increasing diversity in media is not important. What I have asked is why criticizing individual works should be considered important in relation to achieving that goal.