case: ([ Ryohei; DINOSAURS. ])
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2008-05-04 05:29 pm

[ SECRET POST #485 ]


⌈ Secret Post #485 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.


__________________________________________________



14.


__________________________________________________



15.


__________________________________________________



16.


__________________________________________________



17.


__________________________________________________



18.


__________________________________________________



19.


__________________________________________________



20.


__________________________________________________



21.


__________________________________________________



22.


__________________________________________________



23.


__________________________________________________



24.


__________________________________________________



25.


__________________________________________________



26.


__________________________________________________



27.


__________________________________________________



28.


__________________________________________________



29.


__________________________________________________



30.


__________________________________________________



31.


__________________________________________________



32.


__________________________________________________



33. [ repeat ]


__________________________________________________



34.


__________________________________________________



35.


__________________________________________________



36.


__________________________________________________



37.


__________________________________________________



38.


__________________________________________________



39.


__________________________________________________



40.


__________________________________________________



41.


__________________________________________________



42.


__________________________________________________



43.


__________________________________________________



44.


__________________________________________________



45.


__________________________________________________



46.


__________________________________________________



47.


__________________________________________________



48.


__________________________________________________



49.


__________________________________________________



50.


__________________________________________________



51.


__________________________________________________



52.


__________________________________________________



53.


__________________________________________________



54.


__________________________________________________



55.


__________________________________________________



56.


__________________________________________________



57.


__________________________________________________



58.


__________________________________________________



59.


__________________________________________________



60.


__________________________________________________



61.


__________________________________________________



62.


__________________________________________________



63.



Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 15 pages, 366 secrets from Secret Submission Post #070.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 1 - broken links ], [ 1 2 3 4 5 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 1 2 3 - too big ], [ 1 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Re: 59 - the first anon

(Anonymous) 2008-05-05 12:54 am (UTC)(link)
Then honestly, why are you still arguing it?

The fact of the matter is, that that's not the point. The fact of the matter is, after I explained that you what I can only describe as 'tried to dig yourself out' which you haven't done very well, tbh. And we've both agreed that the full quote is very much different from the secret poster has implied, therefore rendering your earlier statement, well, irrelevant.

Re: 59 - the first anon

[identity profile] likespring.livejournal.com 2008-05-05 12:42 pm (UTC)(link)
Let me try to explain this one last time in a way that will hopefully, finally, be understood.

This discussion has never, at least form me, been about whether or not John Barrowman actually did what the OP of the secret said. I said that two or three comments into the thread above this one. The issue has been if someone had done exactly what the secret OP is upset by. And, for the record, no one needs to have in-depth knowledge of the fandom to discuss that.

Your original reply, the very first comment, simply said "Get over it. He's not doing it to you." You did not, for someone who is so insistent that John Barrowman Would Not Do That And It's All Out of Context, mention in the original comment that that's not really what he did, the quote is out of context, etc. By not doing so, you accepted the premise of the secret. You cannot seriously expect everyone to know that "Get over it. He's not doing it to you" actually means "That is not what John Barrowman does, he actually jokes around with his castmates and they're fine with it, and since it doesn't bother them you shouldn't worry yourself about it."

To anyone else -- certainly myself and a number of other people who have commented -- because you accepted the premise of the secret without mentioning anything else, it appeared as though you were saying "Get over it" to the fact that someone makes unwanted sexual contact with other people. It may not be what you meant, but that is how your original reply was worded. Do you understand why people would be upset at that?

Re: 59 - the first anon

(Anonymous) 2008-05-05 01:05 pm (UTC)(link)
*sighs* And let me explain why your comment irritated me in the first place. Firstly you jumped in with the assumption of that was what I meant, the response was to the OP not you, after explaining in my second comment that I was talking about John Barrowman, and not who ever had forced themselves upon the unfortunate poster. You continued to argue that the behaviour was unacceptable, which of course it is, but even after pointing out that your original assumption was wrong, you did actually turn it into a personal attack which I didn't really appreciate.

The fact of the matter is the quote is taken out of context, my reply is like the poster itself - I'm assuming the poster has read the autobiography or if not knows the rest of that quote, it's not directed at you. But as you can see, when quotes or sentences are taken out of context people tend to get the wrong opinion.

Hence forth proving my point, I'm going to assume the OP knows what I'm talking about, which is my main point. By jumping in and defending the OP-er I was also assuming you knew what you were talking about which is why the comment about JB how should I say, sexually harassing anyone confused me, until I realized you didn't actually know anything the subject matter at all. When that became apparent there really wasn't much point in arguing after that - the comment is directed at the OP whom I assume knows what I am talking about.

Is what I meant, but seeing as how the original OP decided not to explain the whole premise of the truth anyway I don't see why should either. I'm sorry you got the wrong end of the stick, but the fact still remains I think this is an unfair quote and misleading.



Re: 59 - the first anon

[identity profile] likespring.livejournal.com 2008-05-05 02:01 pm (UTC)(link)
Is what I meant, but seeing as how the original OP decided not to explain the whole premise of the truth anyway I don't see why should either.

If someone took something out of context and I knew it, I would correct that, I wouldn't accept the premise of the out-of-context quote. At the very least, if you don't correct it in your response, you can't get upset when people take your response at its face.

In any case, I think we were having two separate arguments, and so it's probably best if we just realize that and let it go.

Re: 59 - the first anon

(Anonymous) 2008-05-05 02:13 pm (UTC)(link)


Well unfortunately under these circumstances I didn't see why the OP-er should benefit from that, I wasn't upset with the face value response, it was simply the after I had explained I was really talking about the OP response to JB we continue to argue over it. I am arguing that I think the quote is misleading - which is why I was angry about it, nothing more.

I most certainly wouldn't endorse this behaviour outright, but the OP clearly gave YOU the impression that the actor was sexually harassing people.

Unfortunately I answer a OP with a like answer, which in hindsight had I not been so irritated by it I probably wouldn't have done. In all honesty I respect where you're coming from, but I still disagree with this secret for it's wording.