[ SECRET POST #2324 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4324 ⌋

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

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________


03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.









Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 25 secrets from Secret Submission Post #619.
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)]

"Sure it's a stereotype but there's truth to it" is kind of a dangerous road to go down, because everyone that uses stereotypes does so because they think there's some truth to them. And the problem with using stereotypes, even if it's not innately a negative stereotype that you're using, is because it's reductionist, it simplifies a culture to the outsider perspective of that culture while ignoring the internal parts of it. It's outsiders claiming a truth about a culture without having any insight into that truth, assuming that their own experiences are more important in how to present a culture than that of someone from a culture. (Not saying that it's consciously the goal or idea, but rather that there's a subtext there whenever a presentation leans on stereotypes.)

Easy example: creating a work with a single East Asian character, and having their most prominent characteristics be that they're really polite and good at math, is still bad even if those are erstwhile positive characteristics in the abstract. Because the portrayal is still founded in how people outside the East Asian culture view East Asians rather than how East Asians view East Asians; it's still based in reducing them to how others see them. And while acknowledging the external view can be important, it shouldn't be done in a way that dismisses the internal view, because that's essentially communicating that the culture is only valuable in a given work in terms of what outsiders get from it, that the actual internal truth is irrelevant. That it's only being used in your work in so much as people can react to it; using the culture as a prop.

That's why it's different when, for example, someone within a culture is commenting on their own culture in generalities; because at least in that case, it's coming from an internal perspective rather than an external one, it's still coming from the voice of a member of that culture. (Even that can be questionable and potentially inauthentic, of course, but it's at least a step.)

A stereotypical portrayal doesn't have to be explicitly insulting or bigoted against the culture to be bad, it doesn't even necessarily have to be untrue, because what makes stereotypical portrayals bad isn't (entirely) the quality of accuracy of what stereotype you're presenting, but the fact that stereotypes are innately reductionist and external. It almost doesn't matter if many convenience store clerks actually are South Asian, because even if it is true, it's still oversimplifying things to lean on that. Simplifying is fine, but oversimplifying is the problem. And even just including a single Indian voice in writing Apu would help, because then you could get authentic humor coming from both the external and the internal. Simplifying things down in a way that doesn't exclude the internal, but allows it to complement the external instead.

[(Anonymous)]

I’d say less that they relate and more that they miss the point. Tyler Durden (and by extension the narrator), Patrick Bateman, and Alex are supposed to be horrible people that the books point out you are NOT supposed to idolize. Then the movies come along and glorify these monsters and you end up with a generation of idiots who can’t think critically for five seconds about what the text was trying to say or take the movies at face value. It’s the Walter White problem tbh.

Re: What did you do today, FS?

[philstar22]

Because being okay with sexual assault doesn't aline with my views. And, IMHO, it says a lot about his views of women, which would most likely play out in his court.

[(Anonymous)]

It seemed like therre was a time when Netflix first started doing original shows, that all of them were outstanding. Now, there are so many and I feel like the quality has dropped.

Re: What triggers your anxiety?

[(Anonymous)]

- Crowds and lines
- Emotional intimacy
- Long personal conversations with people I don't know well
- Being by myself in public places I haven't been before, and especially having to wait and sit around by myself in public places I haven't been before and where I don't have a specific, obvious purpose. Going to, like, a bar to meet up with people and getting there early and having to wait by myself is probably the most consistent way to trigger my anxiety.
- Financial insecurity (this is probably more normal and less a crippling emotional issue)
- Having to ask for help
- Unfamiliar upcoming situations

[(Anonymous)]

I assume that what it solves is the "paying for all the stuff on Netflix that you don't watch" problem

[(Anonymous)]

They do?

well, I don't know em personally so I'll take your word for it

Re: Based on 1

[(Anonymous)]

Stranger Things!

[(Anonymous)]

Wow, people are still telling actors this? That's really sucky.

[(Anonymous)]

Fantastic post! Great stuff. Really great.

Re: What did you do today, FS?

[(Anonymous)]

Got into my first car accident today on the way to work, showed up to work & was told I was 2 hours early. Was given the go-ahead to leave around 11:40, drove home, bothered my cats, slept. Had hotdogs for dinner, went into D.C. to see my friend's podcast perform live, bought merch, stayed afterwards to see my friend because I hadn't seen them since 2015. Now I'm on my way home.

So, the day is ending much better than it started, to be sure.

Re: What did you do today, FS?

[(Anonymous)]

Comfy!

Re: What did you do today, FS?

[(Anonymous)]

What did you read?

Re: Based on 1

[syncing_feeling]

I finished Haunting of Hill House the other week and was not prepared for how good it was going to be. I was ready for a light, binge-able horror romp but got completely sucked in by it.

Re: Do you enjoy schadenfreude?

[(Anonymous)]

They annouced a shitty pay to win mobile game that fans are upset about. Dunno why that'd be schadenfreude though.

[rosehiptea]

Very well put.

Re: What triggers your anxiety?

[(Anonymous)]

- Raised voices, or sudden loud noises (loud noises in general I don't like)
- Angry arguments and just angry peeps in general
- If someone comes to the house that I'm not expecting, or I'm suddenly at an event that I didn't prepare for. I'm good with people and parties, but I need time to prepare for them otherwise I'm an anxious mess!

[(Anonymous)]

Oh god, this. I was scrolling through new releases or whatever and thinking holy crap, why so many Adam Sandler movies? Who needs this?

[(Anonymous)]

One of my frustrations is that Netflix's summaries are so bad, it's hard to get a good idea of what a show's really about and whether or not it's something I'll be interested in. I usually have to watch the trailer, if there is one. Sometimes there only have this... preview set to music and that's so goddamn unhelpful.

[(Anonymous)]

NGL, I only watched this movie because people said it was cool and one of my heroes loved the book. It was... eh. Like I don't feel I've wasted my life, but I'm definitely not going to watch it again.

[(Anonymous)]

"Even if you change the way that the character functions in future episodes, he's still affected by the ~20 years of episodes where his accent was a punchline, isn't he?"

Characters can develop and change over time, if the people writing them wish them to do so. I'm also not sure about the logic of this, because it almost sounds like you're implying there's no point in changing anything even if you have good reason to... and that's pretty silly. It does not apply to TV shows, which make plenty of changes all the time.

[(Anonymous)]

I don't remember when it occurs, but I'm pretty sure there's a time when Polgara flutters her eyelashes at Durnik to win an argument... just like every female character does at one time or another when they're arguing with men. Eddings thinks this is cute.

[(Anonymous)]

It annoys me when people bring this up as a defense for the crappy female characters in the series... as if a woman co-writer couldn't possibly have anything to do with tired stereotypes about women.

[(Anonymous)]

I can't really comment on Sweeny, but I'm glad at least that someone else knows of Life on Mars. It was a good show, and I enjoyed learning a bit of 70s British culture.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, that was messed up. The book sort of acknowledged it, but in a way that really glossed over the issue of marital rape. In hindsight, it was also a little icky how often Ce'Nedra was described as both looking physically child-like AND as a saucy temptress. There's a theme of young-looking-for-their-age female characters who are romantically and sexually forward toward male characters in Eddings' work and it feels a touch creepy.