[ SECRET POST #3497 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3497 ⌋

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

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 40 secrets from Secret Submission Post #500.
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

[sarillia]

It's weird to me when people talk about something being feminist and the main thing they say is that it's woman-centered, like here where "all the characters who matter are women". (I acknowledge that there were other things mentioned in this case; my mind is just going off on a tangent) It's like some people think something can only be feminist if men aren't really involved. I mean, sometimes that helps to even the scales since there are so many more things where women aren't really involved, but I think the goal is to move toward both men and women being important.

Just a random thought.

I might check out this show. I do like this kind of historical stuff.

[(Anonymous)]

Not OP, but a fan of the show and wanted to add before you dive into it: it's VERY much a CW show, but I find the way it plays around with history a lot more fun/enjoyable than other "more serious" historical shows. There was an episode early on where they almost execute an English ambassador and then it gets resolved and they said "Haha, we'll just never mention this to the English government and it'll almost be like it never happened!" It knows what it is, which I enjoy.

[(Anonymous)]

For someone not familiar with the CW, what does being very much a CW show entail?

[(Anonymous)]

Focused on relationships, fair amount of people killed off, AMAZING clothes, plots move very quickly, lots of shirtless dudes.

[(Anonymous)]

So fanservice basically? lol

[(Anonymous)]

Yes and no? They'll do away with favorite characters due to budget reasons a lot. And, props to Reign in particular, they did kill off Francois as required by history.

[(Anonymous)]

Unless it's Supernatural, where the dudes resolutely keep their shirts on 99% of the time (to the point where the wiki actually has a list of the shirtless scenes: http://www.supernaturalwiki.com/index.php?title=Shirtless_Scenes).

[(Anonymous)]

A small caveat it to Reign's clothes: they are much less concerned with period dress than, say, The Tudors.

So if it bothers you to see characters who are standing together wearing dresses from completely different centuries, this may not be the show for you.

[sarillia]

Good to know. I'm like you. I like when they're aware of what kind of show they are too, and I can enjoy a lack of seriousness if it's not trying to brag about how accurate it is.

[ninety6tears]

It's good to make people question by contrast how much more common it is for men to take over the main roles, but I think the expectation that feminist=only about women goes towards placing more of the onus on women to break out of their oppressive stereotypes than on men to do literally anything different other than be conveniently out of the picture.

[sarillia]

That's an interesting point. There are definitely things that can't be fixed just by getting rid of male characters.

[(Anonymous)]

Oh noes, we wouldn't want poor, weak, helpless women to have the onus on them! That would be terrible indeed.

[ninety6tears]

So men should remain entitled violent and emotionally stifled messes because sexism is entirely a woman's problem (invented by us, many would say) and women need to constantly prove how badass they can be to get respect? Cause that's all I hear when people default to emphasizing that women and woman characters need to be different in order to change anything.

[lb_lee]

Not only that, but I mean, I want to see guys writing about breaking out of bullshit gender roles and having more honest relationships too, you know? I mean, sometimes, I get really fucking sick of the whole 'bromance' thing where two guys make jokes about how gay they must be because they're friends. I want to shout, "JUST OWN IT, GUYS. You don't have to make uncomfortable giggly remarks about how gay it must be, being actual friends who TALK about things of substance, JUST HAVE A GODDAMN FRIEND FOR CHRISSAKE."

I mean, GOD. I don't have a clue how straight men act, being trans and gay, but if having any sort of emotional closeness or friendship is 'gay', I seriously don't know how they have any sort of social lives at all! (Though it gives me a crushingly depressing insight to my poor younger brother's behavior... yeesh.)

[(Anonymous)]

I think for me it is more that there are characters who matter and they are women, as there are so many shows where the primary focus is male characters. I mean, looking at the CW, there is Supernatural, Flash, and Arrow, which are very much about the guys. And even iZombie, which has the female as a lead, has pretty much every other character that matters being a guy. It's not that I need everyone to be a girl, but having girls make up a huge chunk of people who are impactful on a show is definitely a positive. Maybe someday when it is more balanced, I won't feel like something like this is a selling point. But right now it is to me. I need more show to balance out the guy-heavy shows in my life. (Like look at procedural where the formula seems to be that you can have one girl for every two guys. Don't you even dare consider having the ratio reversed.) I haven't seen Reign, as I don't tend to care for the more relationship-based rather than plot-based shows, but I might have to give it a try.

[sarillia]

I completely understand why it's a selling point. It just occurred me that I don't see a lot of things being described as feminist because of the way the male and female characters interact or anything like that. It's usually the lack of men. It's not that it's not positive in the context of all the other movies out there that are male-dominated, it's that there are other positives that I don't feel like I hear about as much.

[(Anonymous)]

I do hear about positive male/female interactions making for a feminist show on occasion. Such as with shows like The 100. When that started, I heard a lot about how the male and female characters seemed to be of equal agency and interacted well. But, again, we first need plenty of shows where the male and female characters are of equal agency and interact well. And that usually isn't the case. In the vast majority of shows out there, the male characters have much more agency. Just look how in fandom spaces the bromances and male slash ships are so celebrated. And that is a common complaint from people in fandom. That they can't ship female characters because there just aren't enough of them in most shows and movies.

I would love for a day when for every male-dominated show, there was a female-dominated one, and for there to be tons of shows like BSG, and The 100, and Warehouse 13 where the male and the female characters were of equal interest and agency. Instead I see a lot more Flashes, and Supernaturals, and Arrows, and Avengers, and Star Treks, and etc. etc. etc. continuing in the future, such that the shows with strong/predominant female characters are considered noteworthy and feminist.

[sarillia]

I hadn't heard that about The 100. I should probably put it higher up on my To-Watch list.