[ SECRET POST #4053 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4053 ⌋

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

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 16 secrets from Secret Submission Post #580.
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

Re: OP

[cbrachyrhynchos]

Yeah, it was definitely spun as "talented filmmaker victimized by witch hunt."

But, putting your name on a petition because all of your friends are doing strikes me as a minimal-effort political action, along with shooting your mouth off about a political issue on social media. It was wrong and stupid, but everyone has at least one wrong and stupid opinion in their history. I'm not convinced that slacktivism against other people's slacktivism really does anything.

Re: OP

[(Anonymous)]

ayrt

Yes, there was spin involved.

Your definition and my definition of slacktivism are different. It's not the most high effort action, but it is action. One that I find meaningful because when you vote, your name is not supposed to be attached to that particular ballot, just that you are eligible to fill out that ballot, and when you sign a petition, you're telling people that you believe in it enough to attach your name to it. And regular petitions can gain notice for a particular subject or even get something on a ballot. But this was a very public petition, meant to get the notice of the world and authorities, it was meant to influence, and since the people signing it are known, they were sort of putting their reputations to it. Did some sign it thoughtlessly? Probably. Did some do it because others were doing it and they thought it would help their reputations? Probably. Should they have done their damn homework and looked up the actual crime? Definitely. But, like you wrote, people can easily make stupid and wrong decisions because they don't know any better. But, for me, signing a petition is activism, it's not a protest, but it's something that is meant to cause change, even if it doesn't actually cause change.

Re: OP

[(Anonymous)]

So why did Streep side with Polanski (consistently, as you've said)? She's been on the right side of other situations involving rape and harassment (i.e, Weinstein), so a particular blind spot for her here is bizarre.

Re: OP

[(Anonymous)]

ayrt

I don't know. I don't know that's been consistent. The only way to know is for someone to ask and for her to answer. So, ping reporters - she's will be interviewed, she's up for an Oscar. Start a twitter campaign to get the attention of the news media, so they'll start asking people.

Re: OP

[cbrachyrhynchos]

Regardless, signing a petition is in the realm of "I think you're wrong" and not something that's personal blacklist worthy on its own.