Case (
case) wrote in
fandomsecrets2019-05-24 06:12 pm
[ SECRET POST #4522 ]
⌈ Secret Post #4522 ⌋
Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.
01.

__________________________________________________
02.

[The Matrix]
__________________________________________________
03.

[Mr Meaty]
__________________________________________________
04.

[Roxanne from A Goofy Movie]
__________________________________________________
05. [SPOILERS for Game of Thrones]

__________________________________________________
06. [SPOILERS for Game of Thrones]

[Arya/Gendry]
__________________________________________________
07. [SPOILERS for Game of Thrones]

__________________________________________________
08. [SPOILERS for Avengers Endgame]

__________________________________________________
09. [SPOILERS for Avengers Endgame]

__________________________________________________
10. [SPOILERS for Dawson's Creek]

__________________________________________________
11. [WARNING for abuse, etc.]

[ProJared]
Notes:
Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #647.
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.

Re: What's your opinion on casual misandry?
I do not believe any single of sexism is better or worse depending on the gender of the agressor or the victim. Making a distinction that "some men have more power so we're more ok to do this thing to this one man" is the very definition of injustice.
I would say that a hatred of men is misandry even if you are right that the fact it's less common means it's not a big deal.
Re: What's your opinion on casual misandry?
(Anonymous) 2019-05-25 04:22 pm (UTC)(link)You can call hatred of men misandry if you want, but that doesn't make misandry a credible social issue.
Re: What's your opinion on casual misandry?
"Kings murder paupers much more often than paupers murder kings, so we don't really need to care if a paupers kills a king" is bullshit. the frequency of the evil, or the people involved in the evil does not lessen the evil. I'm trying to assume good faith here, but this flipping it from individuals being harmed to "No, it should only be about people as statistics, and as statistics men being harmed doesn't matter" is such monumental goalpost shifting... "No, we don't actually care about people being hurt after all, we care about the identity or the class being hurt, that's all that matters" I mean... It's getting hard to not see that as just shifting the focus from protecting people to pushing only one side because you only care about one side.
Re: What's your opinion on casual misandry?
And frankly I can't tell which option I have a bigger problem with.