[ SECRET POST #4277 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4277 ⌋

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

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________


03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.














Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 12 secrets from Secret Submission Post #612.
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)]

90% of the time people complain about historical accuracy, it's because some minority got to be the lead or even exist, or women weren't oppressed enough. That is where I see 90% of the complaints about "historical accuracy." That a black character dared to exist in lily white Europe as something other than the help or a slave, that gays dared to exist in this show, that women weren't just wives and childbearers and illiterate and pretty.

There's sometimes other complaints, but they're so rare, so sorry I'm no too goddamn charitable when most of the whining about historical accuracy tends to be that things aren't straight, white and male enough.

[(Anonymous)]

wat

I see people complain all the time about things that have nothing to do with any of that. Wardrobe/hygiene, food, weaponry, technology, architecture, medicine, etc.

[(Anonymous)]

And how many of those wardrobe complaints are that a woman isn't wearing a corset or the outfit isn't constricting enough etc?

[(Anonymous)]

More like "That type of sleeve wasn't worn in that time period" and "I can clearly see a zipper, those didn't exist in 1560!"

[(Anonymous)]

I have a bunch of friends who are really into historical costuming (for re-enactments and fun, not professionally) and it drives me nuts when they let wardrobe be the entire determining factor in whether historical fiction is good, e.g. "The style of this one dress is off, therefore this movie is bad."

[(Anonymous)]

There's a comment in this very secret thread about how people have complained about period inaccurate pants on a man.

[(Anonymous)]

I'm sorry, but it sounds to me like you're getting all your critiques of historical inaccuracies via tumblr or other sites that are approaching it from a social justice standpoint. And they're correct, it's silly to act as though minorities didn't exist in ye olden times. But the point is, you're suffering from confirmation bias. Plenty of people criticize aspects of historical media such as wardrobe (this is a big one), weapons, and other anachronisms. People kicked up a fuss when the LOTR films showed the hobbits walking through a field of corn and eating tomatoes, for pete's sake. This is really, really common and if you haven't seen it, then it's because you missed it. Not because it doesn't exist.

At any rate, you're leaping to conclusions, because the secret says absolutely nothing about the nature of the complains OP has, much less that they're about historical media not being "straight, white and male enough".

[(Anonymous)]

I've literally seen it here, in that "Oh, but that lady's wardrobe isn't constricting enough! How dare she go out without a corset!" and things like that (how dare a woman know even the basics of using a sword!). The complaints about wardrobe are often in the sexist vein, I've found. So no, it's not confirmation bias, IMO, it's that people are complacent because they don't care enough to look at the why people care so much that a girl isn't wearing a corset when there's all kinds of magic going on around her, or why gay couples might exist in a world with fucking dragons.

So spare me tbh. I've seen "historical accuracy" used as a bludgeoning tool way too often, and if anyone's showing confirmation bias, it's you.

[(Anonymous)]

If that was the controversy over Emma Watson and Beauty and the Beast, you're badly misrepresenting it. Literally nobody was saying that her corset wasn't constricting enough. In fact, several people pointed out that it was a misconception to think that all corsets were like Victorian tight-lacing corsets, and that the early corsets were basically supportive garments.

You seem to have a pretty large chip on your shoulder where this topic is concerned, and you seem really, really determined to tar all complaints about historical inaccuracy with the "people being bigots" brush. I'm not saying those types of "critiques" don't exist, I'm saying that there are plenty of critiques that don't fit that description. I'm not sure you quite grasp what confirmation bias is.