[ SECRET POST #4915 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4915 ⌋

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


01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________


03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 62 secrets from Secret Submission Post #704.
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)]

Problematic??? It's a doll, not a person.

[(Anonymous)]

Are you new to fandom? People cry "problematic" over fictional characters all the time.

[(Anonymous)]

And nor is it unreasonable to do so, given the current conventionally understood meaning of 'problematic'.

In fact, calling a doll or a fictional character problematic is much more straightforward and sensible than calling a real person problematic.

[(Anonymous)]

Serious question, could you explain why, please? How is a doll more problematic than a real person?

[(Anonymous)]

I don't think "problematic" just means "worse than".

If you say a doll is problematic, for instance, what that means is generally that something about the doll and its cultural meaning contributes to systemic discrimination in some way. Something about the doll poses a problem because it conflicts with the way that we interact with the world. There's an inconsistency, a contradiction that demands to be resolved - in other words, a problem.

On the other hand, it doesn't generally make as much sense to ascribe it to a person, because people are moral agents and the decision to say something, or take an action, is a moral choice that is right or wrong. A person can say something that's problematic - their statement can pose a problem, considered as a statement - but the person themselves is a moral agent who made a choice, not a contradiction that has to be resolved.

And that's why IME you usually see "problematic" describing, like, works of media, or things like dolls, rather than people. And also, like, it has a long history as a technical term in literary criticism way back before any of this for talking about unresolved ambiguities in novels and things.

[(Anonymous)]

Ok, I do understand now. Thanks for the explanation, I was just a bit confused by your initial comment.