fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3987 ]

[ SECRET POST #3987 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3987 ⌋

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

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

[Yuri on Ice]

__________________________________________________

03.

[Book Series: The Temeraire Novels by Naomi Novik]

__________________________________________________

04.

[Orphan Black]

__________________________________________________

05.

[South Park]

__________________________________________________

06.

[Stranger Things]

__________________________________________________

07.

[Smallville]

__________________________________________________

08.

[Iron Fist, Joy/Danny]

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 43 secrets from Secret Submission Post #571.
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.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

But there are also people IRL (myself included) who prefer to not use labels for themselves, when possible. I don't mind when characters *do* label themselves. That's fine. But it doesn't *need* to happen in order for me to still feel "represented."

I can see that. I don't think that sexuality needs to be explicitly stated, and using 20th century language is the wrong way to go about it for many stories.

But, there's something of an epidemic right now of writers being vague about character sexuality in primary text. And it's not because they want to represent people who prefer not to use labels, it's because being vague throws crumbs to LGBTQ fans and allies while flying under the radar of cultural conservative boycotts or international censorship.

I'm personally fine with that sort of thing. I's it ideal? No. But if it has to happen, these "crumbs" as you call them are still awesome for existing at all. To me, any little canon or implied femslash is great, and should be celebrated (preferably by writing lots of porn) :)

It doesn't have to happen. And big-media creators are getting far too much credit for delivering 1950s innuendo entirely on the basis of "word of god" interviews.

Possibly. But I just don't believe in being rude and demanding of other people, when it comes to "Writing things that personally please me on every level." I'd rather just be kind to people, and happy for what we do get.

There's so much good LGBTQ-inclusive and LGBTQ-centric work out there, that we don't have to give Patty Jenkins, James Gunn, and Taika Waititi cookies for characters that are LGBTQ safely off the screen.

And doing criticism, (and does it really need to be said that criticism is "this is interesting, let's talk about it" and not "this is bad, and you're bad for making it") of mass-media work isn't being "rude and demanding."

Edited 2017-12-04 18:10 (UTC)

Oh, this is about superhero media. Yeah, not a topic I have the first desire to get into a Wank fight on the internet, about.

It's about media in general, I just happened to have three examples from the past year close at hand.

To go further into this - personally, I often find labels to be divisive. People get a whole attitude about how they're better than this or that group, with these other labels. Also, people tend to have strict ideals about what each label entails. See: people freaking out whenever a bisexual character doesn't fancy people in the precise gender ratio the fandom believes should exist. Not to mention, the stereotypes associated with each label - right down to fashion sense, mannerisms, and values. Labels can work for some people, but they can also be more trouble than they're worth - especially when you don't "fit into" your given label very well, and have no desire to hold your label up as a thing that makes you better than some other label.

We use labels when we can't point at something and grunt. They're called nouns and adjectives. Saying that I'm "bisexual" is much easier than giving people too much information about my sexual history and behavior. While that says that I'm attracted to more than one gender or sex, and implies that I have some common ground with other people who experience biphobia, it says nothing about my fashion sense, mannerisms, or values (beyond a dislike of biphobia).

Being a person who "doesn't like labels" isn't going to get you off the hook in terms of stereotyping these days, or the attitude for that matter.

I think it's lucky you haven't spent enough time on Tumblr to be aware of the whole host of criteria a person has to fit in order to be a "proper bisexual" beyond simply being attracted to both men and women.

Why are you getting your information from that hellsite?

I'm terribly unconvinced that saying, "I'm not __ because I don't fit the __ stereotype" really does much to expose those stereotypes as bad generalizations.

Edited 2017-12-04 19:13 (UTC)

Especially since, all of the following are stereotypes regarding bi people (depending on what the person wants to say at any point in time):

* We stick to "safe" relationships.
* We're sluts.
* We won't fuck trans people.
* We fetishize trans people.
* We're greedy for attention.
* We're not out enough.

I'm more concerned with the "we all love/hate this particular show" stuff. Or "we all do the 'finger guns' thing." Or "we all like putting ugly photoshops of bi characters in front of bi flags on our blogs." That kind of stuff.

People on bumblr exaggerate and self-promote to a great deal. It really doesn't mean much of anything outside of that person's bumblr clique.

Edited 2017-12-04 19:59 (UTC)

Every internet medium has its own flavor of shitposting chainmail. No reason to take it seriously.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #3987 ]

Re: fandom confessions

Re: fandom confessions

Re: fandom confessions

Re: fandom confessions

Re: fandom confessions

Re: fandom confessions

Re: fandom confessions

Re: fandom confessions

Re: fandom confessions

Re: fandom confessions

Re: fandom confessions

Re: fandom confessions

Re: fandom confessions

Re: fandom confessions

Re: fandom confessions

Re: fandom confessions