case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2017-02-22 06:37 pm

[ SECRET POST #3703 ]


⌈ Secret Post #3703 ⌋

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

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.












Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 14 secrets from Secret Submission Post #529.
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.

(Anonymous) 2017-02-22 11:58 pm (UTC)(link)
If OP meant to say that, they did a shitty job. But you can't say a person's life is built around X criteria but X criteria has no bearing on their life.

(Anonymous) 2017-02-23 12:01 am (UTC)(link)
You lost me too, sorry. I don't think they said the character's life was built around being fat and bearded?

(Anonymous) 2017-02-23 12:05 am (UTC)(link)
But being a fat nerdy neckbeard is A PART OF THEIR LIFE. By definition, things that are part of our lives affect our lives.

(Anonymous) 2017-02-23 12:07 am (UTC)(link)
But OP never once said the character "is a fat neckbeard"? They consistently use like, "happens to be fat and happens to have a neckbeard" as in he has the physical traits but is not someone that would be all the meaning associated with that term as a social label?? I thought that was the entire idea.

(Anonymous) 2017-02-23 12:08 am (UTC)(link)
But do they define the entirety of our lives? Cuz that's what you seem to be saying

(Anonymous) 2017-02-23 12:09 am (UTC)(link)
SA
It's semantic bitching on my part, sure. But since semantics play a big role in understanding language...