[ SECRET POST #3885 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3885 ⌋

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

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03. [repeat]


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.










Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 24 secrets from Secret Submission Post #555.
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

[(Anonymous)]

Actual grooming or these two characters with an age gap happened to share a roof once when the younger one was underage grooming?

[(Anonymous)]

Why do you jump to assuming that it must be fine actually?

OP didn't even mention the fandom and they still got people justifying it somehow

[(Anonymous)]

DA but when you make a big fuss about how you're not mentioning the fandom because the community is full of roaming "dipshits" waiting to tell you that you're wrong... it kind of gets people wondering what the fandom is.

[(Anonymous)]

DA. Honestly this is a valid question imho. A lot of people seem to take the second one as being grooming these days which is pretty bleh since it's really not.

[(Anonymous)]

we have no information about the actual ship in question. And I guess from my point of view it doesn't matter that much either way because the point is that it's a squick for OP and they don't want to deal with it either way.

It's just frustrating to see people leaping to conclusions. It feels like people have an ax to grind.

[(Anonymous)]

Or that they have seen this kind of pearl clutching WAY too often and so seldom justified.

[ninety6tears]

Hah. They could very well be talking about a very unhealthy pairing but it makes it hard to read it in good faith when they're implying that "Power imbalances and child abuse are just fine!" is actually a prevalent attitude in fandom rather than "Yeah, some ships are fucked up but fanfic is not endorsement," and assuming right off the bat that people will debate the particular case.

[(Anonymous)]

Assuming right off the bat that people will debate the particular case seems objectively correct. Certainly this thread isn't providing much of a counterexample.

And it doesn't have to be a question of morality. If the ship squicks OP out, it seems kind of reasonable not to want to have people coming in and talking about how actually the ship is fine and OP is responding to it incorrectly. That does not seem like an unreasonable thing to want to avoid.

[(Anonymous)]

OP purposefully brings up morality, though. They never said that they're simply squicked by the ship.

[(Anonymous)]

"having to even catch a glimpse of that shit makes me physically ill" sounds like a squick to me

[(Anonymous)]

Reread the part where they say they didn't want someone arguing not that they were wrong for thinking the ship is squicky, but that they were wrong for thinking that real world atrocities are fucked up.

[(Anonymous)]

bleh

well, but I think that's also about not wanting to get into a long shipwar argument about the ship that makes them physically ill, and have to go into detail about what makes them dislike it, and then have people respond saying those things are all fine

which I think is reasonable. and it doesn't have to be a disagreement about the moral wrongness of grooming; it's much more likely to be a disagreement about whether canon actually involves grooming, which is a debate that can have two sides.

[(Anonymous)]

What you're saying is reasonable, but that is not what OP said. Maybe they meant that, but all we have to go on is what they actually said.

I wouldn't be surprised if the secret was deliberately worded this way in order to start drama.

[(Anonymous)]

Sure. I'm giving OP the benefit of the doubt, because the secret comes down on this particular side, and no one else is. And if the secret came down on the other side, all of you would be giving OP the benefit of the doubt, and I would be the one saying, you know, hang on a second.

Which is all fine. Just the way it goes. That's entertainment.

[(Anonymous)]

Because actual grooming is very very rare in media and it's usually very creepy and not very shippy friendly. Plus grooming is misused a lot in fandom these days. I just wanted to be sure that it was the actual thing.

[(Anonymous)]

Agreed. I've seen "grooming" applied to ships where there was just slightly more than normal age difference, but both people were adults, there was no power differential in their respective positions, and they never lived under one roof.

So, yeah, "grooming" gets thrown around a lot in fandom when it comes to ship wars.

I'm not saying that's the case here, but the only time I've ever seen some kind of grooming in Western media (I'm specifying because I honestly don't know otherwise) is either L&O:SVU, one-off "very special episodes," or one of those Lifetime-style movies.

Grooming as an actual running plotline in an actual series? Not so much.