fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #4635 ]

[ SECRET POST #4635 ]

⌈ Secret Post #4635 ⌋

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

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 37 secrets from Secret Submission Post #663.
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.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

If Peter Parker as a teen was pursued by an older man who 'falls in love' with him, he'd put him in prison, not only for his personal safety, but for others' safety as well.

Not sure why you felt the need to post this here, but okay.

nobody's writing guilt-soaked songs about falling in love with a barely-legal teen they're supposed to care about platonically.

Wow, you must be exhausted from dragging that anti bullshit all the way over here!

I think you missed the part where "barely legal" means legal!

Also, who said anything about tony pursuing anyone? You seem to be making a lot of incorrect assumptions here, nonny.

"Barely legal" is still illegal.

Not only is this "problematic" but also a gross perversion of a formulaic father/son or mentor/mentee dynamic.

I mean, you're not wrong, but it's really weird you're using this thread as a soapbox.

If you don't like somebody's kink or OTP, that's fine. But lecturing them personally about it in a thread where they haven't in any way claimed the OTP wasn't problematic (at least OP hasn't, idk about ayrt, or if ayrt is OP or not) is a little rude and intrusive.

IMO, you should probably save your argument for another day and another thread.

I would agree with you about not 'liking' someone's kink, but when someone's kink in question legitimately crosses the line, it shouldn't be surprising if another person expresses their criticism of a problematic kink or trope.

Not the OP, but this kink doesn't "cross the line." OP specifically indicates that the character, as OP ships them, is of age. If there's a "line," the age of consent would certainly be it. Otherwise you're just criticizing someone for shipping something in fiction that is legal in most first world countries, simply because you find it creepy.

The word "squick" exists for a reason. OP's ship squicks you out. That's all it is.

Yes, except “barely legal” is still not legal, hence the line has been crossed. That’s all.

I'm not sure how on earth you've managed to misunderstand what "barely legal" means, but I can assure you, it does in fact mean "legal by a small margin."

Maybe learn what terms mean before trying to support your holier than thou opinions with them. "Barely legal" means "just over the threshold of legal age", not "not yet legal".

"it shouldn't be surprising" that someone objects to you puking your morals all over a thread that wasn't about claiming anything moral about the original topic.

I was trying to be nice, but you seriously need to get a grip. If you were half this persistent in objecting to something IRL, I bet you could actually get something done.

There is a time and place for everything. In regards to your argument, this isn't it.

"Barely legal" is still illegal.

...are you trying to make antis look bad? Or, well, worse?

a gross perversion of a formulaic father/son or mentor/mentee dynamic.

It squicks you out, and that's ok. When I found out about Buffy/Giles it totally sqicked me out, because to me they had a parent/child dynamic, and I didnt want to imagine it as anything else. But the fact is, there's nothing inherently gross or perverse about either of these ships;they are not related to each other genetically or through upbringing. Two people of legal age (buffy as of s3 and peter as of now) can love each other and fuck each other however they want to, as long as it's safe, sane, and consensual.

The potential for relationships similar to these to become abusive or simply unhealthy in real life is high. But in fiction the creator gets to shape the relationship, and if the creator writes it as healthy and loving then that's what it is.

Barely legal" is still illegal.

I mean, factually that is incorrect, so.

There's also an argument to be made for whether it matters at all if a ship is "gross and perverse," given that it's just fiction. But I'm not really interested in having that argument atm, so.

But the fact is, there's nothing inherently gross or perverse about either of these ships;they are not related to each other genetically or through upbringing.

What about the power imbalance or the older person taking advantage of the younger person due to inexperience? Those things do not remove the inherent creepiness.

But in fiction the creator gets to shape the relationship, and if the creator writes it as healthy and loving then that's what it is.

Well, it depends on how they write the relationship. Otherwise, people can, and will be critical of certain tropes. They have the right to express their criticisms.

I understand what you're trying to do, bring nuance into this discussion, but it keeps going back and forth.

What about the power imbalance or the older person taking advantage of the younger person due to inexperience?

Sure, those things can be issues. But they can also be issues with any relationship.

Those things do not remove the inherent creepiness.

To you, there's an inherent creepiness. But that's not universal. Personally I find relationships with extreme age gaps questionable, but not necessarily creep, as long as the individuals involved are of legal age and what I witness of the relationship does not strike me as abusive or unhealthy. Often, yes, I find them creepy, but not always.

They have the right to express their criticisms.

People have the right to express their criticism. I have the right to roll my eyes and criticize them right back, when their criticism is presumptive, off base, and disconnected from reality.

Agree to disagree on some parts, but would you roll your eyes at someone who had traumatic experiences, in which certain tropes may be triggering?

If I had failed to tag my stuff appropriately, I'd sincerely apologize. But if they were just criticizing me for my ship, or coming into my space to criticize my ship, then yeah, I'd roll my eyes. And they'd be lucky if they didn't get an "oh piss off" from me while I was at it.

No, you idiot, it means "legal but only just".
If I say, "I barely made it to the train in time," that doesn't mean I missed the train.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #4635 ]

Re: Secrets you can't be bothered making a post for

nayrt

Re: Secrets you can't be bothered making a post for

Re: Secrets you can't be bothered making a post for

da

no subject

no subject

no subject

jesus christ

no subject

ayrt

Re: Secrets you can't be bothered making a post for

ayrt

SA

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

Re: Secrets you can't be bothered making a post for