[ SECRET POST #4314 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4314 ⌋

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

01.



__________________________________________________



02.
[Murdoch Mysteries, William Murdoch/James Gillies, Batman/Joker]


__________________________________________________


03. https://i.imgur.com/rP9Xyvd.png
[Embrace of the Vampire, link for on-screen sex/nudity]


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.
[JD and Dr. Cox from Scrubs]


__________________________________________________

























07. [WARNING for discussion of rape/Bill Cosby]



__________________________________________________



08. [WARNING for discussion of rape]




__________________________________________________



09. [WARNING for discussion of rape/abuse/etc]














Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #617.
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)]

Here's the actual video itself.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxV8gAGmbtk

It's not really talking about a Watsonian vs. Doylist thing, because it's not approaching it from a fandom perspective at all. Watsonian vs. Doylist is addressing how one engages with a fictional universe and answering questions about things within that universe, but in both cases both sides would still agree that it's a fictional universe. The Thermian Argument (not paradox) is addressing the fact that when authors or readers give in-universe justifications for offensive material, that isn't really a justification with regard to the work's place in reality, because the author's choices still drove the inclusion of that material, and the author always could have rewritten things such that the material wasn't included.

This doesn't bar the existence of other valid justifications, of course; it's just pointing out that that specific variety of justification doesn't actually hold up.