fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #4910 ]

[ SECRET POST #4910 ]

⌈ Secret Post #4910 ⌋

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

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

[Avenue 5]

__________________________________________________

03.

[Monster Girl Quest]

__________________________________________________

04.

[Peter Serafinowicz and Mark Heap as Crowley and Aziraphale]

__________________________________________________

05.

[Criminal Minds]

__________________________________________________

06.

[Dramatical Murder]

__________________________________________________

07.

[YouTuber Omocha Crush]

__________________________________________________

08.

[Emma 2020]

__________________________________________________

09.

[Legend of the White Snake]

__________________________________________________

10.

[Vampire: The Masquerade]

__________________________________________________

11.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 34 secrets from Secret Submission Post #703.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 1 - too big ], [ 1 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

NS, NF, etc.

I think the reason people complain about Rowling more than Dahl is because Dahl's dead and not posting problematic stuff on his Twitter.

Hmmmmmmm.... you criticize JK Rowling and yet you don't say ANYTHING about the medieval French poet Francois Villon even though he was an ACTUAL MURDERER... hypocritical much?!?!?!

actual irl lol

Lol...

Seriously.

Also people are allowed to have done nice things and still be a problematic product of their era by modern standards. Holding historical people up to modern standards will never not be stupid.

Rowling is saying bad shit in 2020. She doesn't have the excuse.

+1, I feel really differently about how I engage with dead creators than living ones, mostly because living ones directly benefit from me buying their work or giving them a larger platform. It's not like I don't criticize dead creators, or like their bigotry has no impact today, but it's not really the same to me in terms of like... the immediate relevancy of a famous living creator posting stuff on twitter. Neither Dahl nor JKR are favorite authors of mine, so I don't intend to compare them or anything, but I can definitely see why JKR's recent comments are provoking a lot of responses.

I feel like the Rowling thing has become low-hanging fruit because it's easy to have a response to a celebrity saying something stupid on the internet, but it's harder to deal with things like workplace or healthcare discrimination.

At the end of the day, she's still filthy rich, and trans people here still struggle to find healthcare providers. So nothing has really changed.

Except that we do say "people with penises" because some women have penises. Christ, the victim mentality is genuinely staggering. There is not, has never been, will never be some nonsense wave of boogeymen (emphasis on men, apparently) who will push their way into women's restrooms and spaces and demand to be catered to. And before you come at me with that one time in your college GSA club when a transgirl absolutely lost her fucking mind because a cisgirl mentioned her period, be clear that you have met one single asshole in that exact scenario and it does not in any way, shape, or form paint the entirety of the transwoman population in the same brush.

Transwomen are not disrupting women's spaces because they are women. They belong in women's spaces! I can't fucking believe we're still having this argument in the year of our lord Twenty-fucking-Twenty!

plus, like... cis dudes won't fucking wear a goddamn face mask to save their lives because they think it undermines their masculinity. terfs really think some dude's gonna put on a damn dress to go creep in the ladies loo? lol no

oop

Look, I absolutely don't think painting all trans women as potential predators is right but you are still really underestimating the effort dudes will put into creeping on women.

Fucking this.

"some women have penises"

no they don't

"people who menstruate" is a useful term when discussing problems related to menstruation. for example, if you are a global development non-profit that works to provide health needs including menstruation materials, "people who menstruate" is a useful and precise term in a way that saying "women" is not. and this is the precise context in which it was being used when Rowling objected to it.

When talking about menstruation as it relates to health and hygiene, addressing 'people who menstruate' is exactly the term you want to use. They do not mean all women, they mean people who menstruate, which includes some transmen, some intersex people, some women, and some girls. This is why when JK Rowling tried to equate women with 'people who menstruate' was wrong.

This. I started menstruating when I was 11, when I was most definitely not a woman. And I guess JK thinks that once menopause hits those people are not women anymore.

Oh! I didn't know what she was referring to when she was going on about "people who menstruate." I'm as cis as they come: AFAB, chromosome XX, born with and still got all my parts... but I don't menstruate (thank you Mirena IUD). As abhorrent as I find her views, I also found it a little funny that she seemed to exclude me from her gotcha!definition of a woman when I'm pretty well 100% what she's talking about when SHE considers "women."

One's sex and biology are definitely intertwined, but whenever people try to conflate "people who X" with "women" or "men," you're always going to leave out many cis people. But the opposite, describing "people who X" when X is the topic at hand, you're always going to be inclusive.

Only biological females can menstruate. That is a fact.

You are quibbling over 'women' and 'girl' and the consequences of birth control (and given time I'm sure you'll quibble over hysterectomies and unusual disorders), but all of that is besides the point.

No man will EVER menstruate. None of them. Ever. The entire CLASS of BIOLOGICAL MALE will never menstruate. Therefore, it is ridiculous to assert that trans women menstruate or that there are any non-female people who menstruate. Biological facts do not change based on your self perception. They just don't. It's called REALITY.

The obsession progressives have with denying biological realities is incredible.

Just to make it extra clear for the morons out there:

Not all women (=biolgoical females) menstruate. But ONLY biological females CAN menstruate. Therefore, 'people who menstruate' is ridiculous.

Re: Too big.

(Anonymous) - 2020-06-16 05:54 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Too big.

(Anonymous) - 2020-06-16 14:57 (UTC) - Expand

The category of "women" includes both cis women, for whom menstruation is basically biologically normative, and trans women, for whom it is biologically not. The category of "men" includes both cis men, for whom menstruation is not biologically normative, and trans men.

Saying that there are women who do not menstruate, and men who do menstruate, is not in any contradicting the general observation that menstruation is biologically associated with being female (obviously with various exceptions, as you say in your post). It's talking about "man" and "woman" as socialized gender identities, not as biological categories, and that's pretty common usage. No one is asserting that trans women menstruate; in fact, the opposite. They are pointing out that trans women are women who do not menstruate. The point is that "women" and "people who menstruate" are distinct groups, contrary to JKR's argument that they're identical.

And, as AYRT points out, talking about "people who menstruate" is obviously the clearest and most precise terminology to use when you are specifically talking about sanitary needs associated with menstruation, which was the original context.

Trans men, who are in fact men, may menstruate, so you are in fact wrong.

Re: Too big.

(Anonymous) - 2020-06-16 09:09 (UTC) - Expand

Do you know what the original title of Agatha Christie's 'And Then There Were None' was?

Why are dead authors, who have been dead for decades, not getting called out with the same fervor as live ones, who are commenting in a time where people are now being called out with regularity for their bigotry and prejudice? Let's think about that.

warms my heart to see people still falling for bait

Haha it’s so funny how people still care about stuff, teehee. What naive doofuses. They should be more like me and point and laugh at these ridiculous people with their stupid functioning consciences.

You may be actively working against transphobia and transphobes in real life, or volunteer at a soup kitchen, or attend BLM protests, or donate substantial chunks of income to charity, or whatever. But mocking people for rejecting bigoted bullshit online still makes you an asshole. People caring about stuff, especially real life stuff that affects them or their friends and family or just vulnerable people, doesn’t make them worthy of mockery. You want to troll people about stupid shit, start an argument about which Marvel movie is the best or something.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2020-06-16 23:33 (UTC) - Expand

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #4910 ]

no subject

no subject

+1

Re: +1

Re: +1

no subject

no subject

no subject

too big

Re: too big

Re: too big

Re: too big

Re: too big

Re: too big

no subject

Too big.

Re: Too big.

Re: Too big.

Re: Too big.

Re: Too big.

Re: Too big.

Re: Too big.

Re: Too big.

Re: Too big.

Re: Too big.

n!s

no subject

no subject

(no subject)