[ SECRET POST #4225 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4225 ⌋

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

01. [SPOILERS for Voltron?]




__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________


03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.








Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 35 secrets from Secret Submission Post #605.
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

[kaijinscendre]

Who cares? I have never cared why someone is doing something good. "Oh, this person is only donating a million dollars to ________ for the publicity." Good. You think the people being helped by that money/time/awareness is going to go, "Well, we refuse this money because you only want attention!" If it makes more rich people help others, I will pat them on the back and buy them a cookie.

[(Anonymous)]

It's an issue if they're only helping in a really superficial way, or distracting attention from more sustained or meaningful or helpful engagement. But yeah, IA that it's not really bad in itself.

It's like a lot of those "breast cancer awareness" foundations - yes, breast cancer is a serious issue, and cancer research is important, but many of those groups don't actually contribute much money or progress towards actual breast cancer research, and instead spend the money on "awareness" and publicity and stuff like that.

[kaijinscendre]

I can't really blame a celebrity for going with the wrong group (like Susan Komen). Plenty of non-celebrities do it as well.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, I'm not saying that it would be the celebrities' fault on an individual level, but it is a bad thing overall that it's good to be aware of and criticize

[(Anonymous)]

I agree... ultimately, if it isn't hurting anyone, who cares? Regardless of who the person is or their reasons for doing something, it shouldn't take away from the message or act.

[(Anonymous)]

What if the reason that someone is doing charity IS to hurt other people

[(Anonymous)]

Then clearly, it is not a charity.

[(Anonymous)]

OK, say some neo-Nazis are giving a bunch of money to charity so that they can go around saying "see, we give a bunch of money to charity, so we can't be that bad, you should listen to what we have to say"

[(Anonymous)]

I never said that giving to charity makes someone a good person. Are you seriously unable to separate the person from the act? If a bunch of Nazis want to give to charity, then that's their business. That doesn't mean the rest of the world should stop giving to charity because of a few unsavory people.

[(Anonymous)]

My point is that who the person is and what their reasons are for doing it - the fact that they're Nazis and they're using the charity for political purposes - actually should take away from the message and from the act.

[(Anonymous)]

By that logic, you should always refuse the help of the only person qualified to help you because they might be a Nazi.

I am not talking about someone whose "charity" is actively causing harm to someone else. My original words, since you seem to be deliberately ignoring them: ultimately, if it isn't hurting anyone, who cares?

[(Anonymous)]

I agree with that, most of the time.