[ SECRET POST #4188 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4188 ⌋

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

01. https://s33.postimg.cc/hv89rrhqn/s22.jpg
[OP wanted a warning for spiders, also everything below is spoilers and etc.]




__________________________________________________



02. https://s33.postimg.cc/olor17zrj/s21.jpg
[OP warned for gore/death]


__________________________________________________





















03. [SPOILERS for Hereditary]


__________________________________________________



04. [SPOILERS for Hogwarts Mystery]



__________________________________________________



05. [SPOILERS for Vampyr]



__________________________________________________



06. [SPOILERS for Digimon Adventure Tri]



__________________________________________________



07. [SPOILERS for Blue Exorcist]



__________________________________________________



08. [SPOILERS for Solo]



__________________________________________________



09. [SPOILERS for Solo]



__________________________________________________



10. [SPOILERS for Solo]




__________________________________________________



11. [WARNING for discussion of suicide]



__________________________________________________



12. [WARNING for discussion of suicide]




__________________________________________________



13. [WARNING for discussion of suicide]




__________________________________________________



14. [WARNING for discussion of child porn]



__________________________________________________



15. [WARNING for discussion of sexual abuse]

















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #599.
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)]

NAYRT

This is a terrible argument. We are talking about authorial intent in depicting a scene, not the kind of intent that exists in real life interactions.

[(Anonymous)]

Saying "Rowling didn't intend for sexual assault to be sexual so it's not sexual assault" is a terrible argument.

[(Anonymous)]

It doesn't prove anything on its own, of course. but it's one important factor to consider as a guideline for interpretation, for figuring out how best to read the scene.

[(Anonymous)]

Under that logic, we'd never be able to enjoy anything. Writers are not pure moral templates and we sometimes have to separate the character from their miscommunicated parts in order to enjoy them the way they were intended. If it leaves too big a smudge to be overlooked, that's fine, but the next person doesn't have to feel the same way.

[(Anonymous)]

The way it was intended was for Harry to be shocked and disgusted at how his father tormented Snape.

[(Anonymous)]

Yes. Tormented Snape by bullying him, not by sexually assaulting him.

[(Anonymous)]

And the tormenting went both ways, too. Multiple parties confirmed as much. We literally saw that scene from Snape's perspective, so it in no way conveyed the entire situation.

[(Anonymous)]

"And the tormenting went both ways, too. Multiple parties confirmed as much."

The people who confirmed as such were James' best friends who participated in the tormenting of Snape.

The stuff Snape did was stuff like "sneaking around and trying to get them in trouble". There was nothing in the actual canon that suggested that he ever held down James and exposed his underwear against his will.

"We literally saw that scene from Snape's perspective, so it in no way conveyed the entire situation."

Except as Rowling has CONFIRMED memories in the Pensieve are objective recollections of what actually happened.

[(Anonymous)]

Stuff Snape did included "hanging around with magical nazis" and "literally coming up with brutal spells designed to slash someone to death", so try again.

And sure, fine, it was an objective recollection...of exactly one incident, from Snape's perspective, that was still not in any way a representative snapshot of their entire seven years of school, just one memory that Snape hated. Such evidence.

[(Anonymous)]

Did you not read the 'Prince's Tale' chapter? We saw a pretty comprehensive depiction of Snape. He wasn't some popular Malfoy kid he was a loner who had maybe one good friend who eventually fell in with the wrong crowd because he had no one else.

[(Anonymous)]

I did read the Prince's Tale, aka the story of a sad lonely kid later trying to justify why he joined up with nazis and became an abusive asshole to his "one good friend" to the point where she couldn't stand to be around him anymore. Snape is and was a shithead and a sad backstory doesn't erase that.

[(Anonymous)]

He called her a name once. He never abused her. Wtf are you reading?

[(Anonymous)]

He called her an extremely offensive name and hung out with people who actively wanted to kill people like her and later absolutely did. What the hell are YOU reading?

[(Anonymous)]

We do also know that Snape bullied kids that he was supposed to be teaching when he was a teacher

But I'm sure he was pure as the driven snow as a teen

[(Anonymous)]

Not pure as driven snow but he wasn't sexually assaulting people.

[(Anonymous)]

Neither was James

and so... we return once more to the beginning

[(Anonymous)]

Holding someone in place and exposing their underwear against their will is a form of sexual assault.

[(Anonymous)]

Except we saw him as a kid. He was a bullied loner. You don’t have to guess what he was like because Rowling showed us.

[(Anonymous)]

Even if we accept that as true: where do you get the idea that being a bullied loner and being a total dickhead asshole are mutually exclusive things?

[(Anonymous)]

He was both bullied and bully. It was a mutual hate that one of them grew out of and the other did not. Guess which.

[(Anonymous)]

James died a few years after that incident so you’re assuming at this point.

[thewakokid]

Kinda yeah. Like, lets beef up the situation to something more obviously not ok. Say Rowling wrote James shoving a bottle up Snape. But Rowling doesn't believe that men can be raped, or that it wouldn't count as rape because it's not a penis, or any of the other arguments actual real life people have for why male rape isn't really rape.

Say she genuinely doesn't feel she's writing a rape scene. Does that mean her intent counteracts the fact that it is a rape?

[(Anonymous)]

Except she didn't write that. She wrote a scene in which someone is pantsed. Stop with the hyperbole.

[(Anonymous)]

I'm beginning to suspect you don't know what pantsing actually is.

[thewakokid]

Right. theres a possibility you don't see what I'm getting at and it's totally an accident that you missed the point. I'll focus on that possibility for the time being and ask: If a she had written that scene, would her intentions have made a blind bit of difference t how you read it? Would you have been of the same opinion that "That's not what she meant by it, so it's not rape"?

For the record the purpose of panting is sexual humiliation. Holding someone against their will to sexually humiliate them is still sexual assault, even if it doesn't give you sexual feelings. If a gay man takes up-skirt shots of women is that NOT sexual harassment because it doesn't get him hard?

So yeah, two questions there: Is the writers intention all that matters even in cases of rape and does the perpetrator need to have sexual motivations for it to be sexual assault.