[ SECRET POST #4592 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4592 ⌋

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

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.
[Wonderfalls]







Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #657.
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)]

Angels canonically don't have sex unless they "make an effort" and the author has stated that reading them as ace is a valid interpretation.

What is it with you ignoring canon to force your own interpretation on the story? Do you always do it or just when it gives you an excuse to imply ace people are homophobic?

[(Anonymous)]

https://neil-gaiman.tumblr.com/post/182624902971/in-good-omens-book-its-mentioned-that-angels-are

[(Anonymous)]

https://66.media.tumblr.com/908ab830631dcf51042a1ee9a8fed0b1/5f4cf172b4890fc3-05/s640x960/43c1a5aefd06c8ed2aa86a0ce41496d1fcbc605e.jpg

[(Anonymous)]

https://neil-gaiman.tumblr.com/post/181036314591/hey-sorry-to-bother-you-with-an-ask-like-this-but

[(Anonymous)]

Which two of the impressions people formed about Aziraphale were wrong, then, according to the source text? That he's English, and...?

Gaiman backpedaling like crazy doesn't erase the actual text is clear that the line is in reference to Aziraphale's sexuality.

[(Anonymous)]

'two of the impressions people formed about Aziraphale were wrong'

Aziraphale is clearly shown as being intelligent throughout the book so that would suggest that peoples impression of his sexuality was also wrong. Either he was not gay or just sexless as the next line states.

[(Anonymous)]

I'll just point out the irony in trying to do a fundamentalist debate about canon for a book that's explicitly anti-fundamentalist and argues for embracing multiple perspectives?

Maybe Aziraphale's sexuality and gender are ineffable? I mean, how can you really know?

[(Anonymous)]

We don't know what sexuality Aziraphale is, but we definitely know what he sexuality he is not - gay. The text is clear on that. You're free to reject the Death of the Author principle yourself, but don't argue that it's the one true way of interpreting literary fiction.

[(Anonymous)]

If you're going to invoke Death of the Author, then you really have no leg to stand on being such an asshole about other people's headcanons.

[(Anonymous)]

I'm not an asshole about people's headcanons. I'm opposed to people being assholes to those who don't share their headcanons.

[(Anonymous)]

This entire thread has been dunking on LGBTQ headcanons.