[ SECRET POST #4113 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4113 ⌋

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

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.








Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 55 secrets from Secret Submission Post #589.
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)]

Yeah, no. You don't drop a kid off alone at a bar because a band they like is playing there and expect drunk strangers to watch out for them, and you don't give them unrestricted access to the internet with no supervision and expect the anonymous fandom hordes to even recognize that little starfirespacehugs7 is a 12-yo, let alone have her back. Children have guardians for a reason. Fandom has age-appropriate outlets. If a child is posting their art somewhere where people are going to accuse them of being a pedophile, then the adults in that child's off-line life have failed them.

[(Anonymous)]

i agree with you 100% but at the same time i'm thinking how in the world do you keep a 12 year old out of these sites? i feel like kids will definitely find ways of getting into a blocked website if they really wanted to. it just makes me really glad i don't have kids and that the internet wasn't as big as it was when i was that age.

[(Anonymous)]

You can't expect drunk strangers to watch out for a kid at a bar, but if one of those drunk strangers verbally abuses the kid, or hauls off and punches them, or whatever, that is still the drunk stranger's fault. They're still responsible for their actions. There might be some measure of responsibility that falls on the parents, but "well, they shouldn't have been there in the first place!" isn't actually a valid excuse for attacking someone.

The same goes for shrieking internet bullies. They shouldn't be harassing people, period. They are the bad actors here - the fact that the victim was 12 in this case means it has more weight in public perception, but they're the ones in the wrong, and they would be just as in the wrong if their victim had been 16, or 22, or 82.

[raspberryrain]

Congratulations! You've manage to out-troll the "Han Solo is overrated" secret.