[ SECRET POST #4400 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4400 ⌋

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

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 31 secrets from Secret Submission Post #630.
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

[fscom]

05. https://i.imgur.com/h8t8yHy.png

[(Anonymous)]

Is this really a thing? I guess I'm lucky to not have encountered such idiocy.

[tabaqui]

That's a thing? The 'don't wish harm' thing. I mean, I know about taping fireworks to action figures.
*cough*

[(Anonymous)]

Tbh, as soon as someone uses the phrase "virtue-signalling" I stop reading, because 9/10 times it means someone was chided and can't think of a better comeback or justification than insulting the integrity of whoever did the chiding. Life's too short.

[(Anonymous)]

I was wondering when these sorts of comments were going to come back. It used to be you couldn't use the phrase at all on this community without getting heat for it, and lately it seems like it's become a common phrase.

[(Anonymous)]

NAYRT but just want to agree with them, it's a silly phrase and concept that people shouldn't use.

[(Anonymous)]

I think people use it because they don't understand why someone would be an insufferably sanctimonious scold unless they were doing it to make themselves look good by comparison - i.e., signal their virtue.

[(Anonymous)]

In general, I think it makes more sense to consider whether or not someone is acting like a dick separately from whether they're sincere and whether the views they're espousing are correct. And the problem with 'virtue signaling' as a concept is that it conflates those three things in a really frustrating way. It's a tactic to dismiss the entirety of what they're saying.

If you think that someone is acting sanctimonious, just say that, instead of making assumptions about their motivation for doing so, and dismissing the entirety of their statement based on those grounds. That's how I personally happen to see it, anyway.

[(Anonymous)]

I mean... if someone scolds me, I'm going to automatically dismiss anything they have to say because scolding is such off-putting behavior. It's one of the most ineffective ways to try to persuade someone.

But sure, I for one will make a point of just calling it "scolding" in the future rather than "virtue-signalling" because I see your point.

[(Anonymous)]

da

I've used the term in reference to people who like and reblog anti hate about [X] and then never mention [X] on their Tumblr again.

[(Anonymous)]

Isn't that pretty much the definition of virtue-signalling, anyway? Pretending to care about an issue just to get attention or brownie points?

[(Anonymous)]

Picked a bad example - it just makes me think of Toy Story... I know that's silly though.

[nightscale]

Honestly... I've known real people I'd like to put into a blender so fictional characters aren't safe from those kinds of feelings either.

*Somebody* didn't watch Toy Story.

[(Anonymous)]

Kidding. Though, I always thought the kids that were overly destructive with their toys (that their parents bought them) rather than just playing rough were kind of callous.

[(Anonymous)]

On the one hand, I agree that throwing a fit because someone wished harm on a fictional character is idiotic.

On the other hand, anyone who uses the phrase "virtue signalling" deserves a punch in the junk.

[(Anonymous)]

That whole attitude in general is so bizarre to me, and it seems to go hand in hand with the hate villains get just for being villains. Villains are bad guys, they do bad things and if they didn't, they wouldn't be villains! And it's totally okay to hate them and even wish them ill will because they do bad things! Lately it's like there can't be ANY sort of fiction content that someone might deem problematic because ~reasons~. Like okay, Sharon, get the fuck out of my dark!fic and go fucking read Pat The Bunny or something.

[(Anonymous)]

I mean, I agree generally, but I'm still gonna distance myself from a fan who hopes that some minority character they don't like gets raped, contracts AIDS and dies, etc.

[(Anonymous)]

There are people who say it's always wrong to write about characters getting raped, though, and that's also dumb. There's gratuitous rape and sometimes there are people who like seeing it happen to a character they hate, but there are good reasons to write about it that aren't to torture the character out of hatred.

[(Anonymous)]

Seconding this and hard.

On the one hand there's wishing pain, misery, and death on a character in a general way, or in an absurd and OTT way. On the other, there's wishing the character was brutally victimized in a very realistic way that is distinctly tailored to their gender/sexuality/race. The latter really bothers me when I see it (with some exceptions, such as wishing eye-for-an-eye justice upon a character).

I'm not going to send anyone hate or start wank over it. But I'd probably unfollow someone who went there.

[(Anonymous)]

Agreed completely.

(For some reason I keep mentally substituting Ms Nesbit for the Stormtrooper.)

[(Anonymous)]

Jfc I never want to read the phrase virtue-signaling ever again; it’s the modern right wing’s answer to P.C., only even more annoying.

I get it, people are never genuinely hurt by racist/sexist/homophobic words or actions, and are never genuinely sympathetic to others who are hurt by the same bullshit, they only object because they want to show off how enlightened they are. Just like common decency and politeness was somehow “politically correct” when there started to be negative consequences for calling people slurs. Fuck off.

That said, the only time I would hesitate to say “I wish character X would step on broken glass and pitch headlong into a woodchipper” would be to fans of Character X.

[(Anonymous)]

Exactly, using the phrase "virtue signaling" for one thing means you believe all expressions of hurt or anger are virtue signaling. You are so right. I bet they go to funerals and complain the whole time about all the virtue signaling there, too.

[(Anonymous)]

I agree that people should be able to wish harm on fictional characters without getting dogpiled as though the character were a real person.

However, if someone posts about how they wish a female character would get raped or they wish a gay character would get aids or something, then no, I'm not going to spam their inbox with angry messages, but I definitely am going to unfollow them and not want much to do with them in the future.

[(Anonymous)]

Completely unrelated, but some of the comments keep mentioning it and I fucking miss AIDS crisis fics. ;~; It's like ever since Team America lampooned the craze over Rent I can't have AIDS fics, despite it still being an issue in the queer community

[stelleappese]

Same.
Some people have a hard time separating reality from fiction. Or just understanding the concept of catharsis, I guess.