[ SECRET POST #4925 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4925 ⌋

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


01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________


03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.




















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 31 secrets from Secret Submission Post #705.
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)]

I'm a woman who wears plain clothes and I literally don't see why simply making female characters look sexy for men is even bad lmao. If they're written terribly that's a problem that often comes with the territory, but if the character is written realistically and it could be conceived that a feminist wrote her, it doesn't matter if it was actually a man who wanted to make the girl look hot.

[(Anonymous)]

Because it's practically all there fucking is, you fucking cactus-for-brains. All women are hot in media. For men, they come in a variety from hot to ugly to plain.

[(Anonymous)]

+1

[(Anonymous)]

Anyways, it literally doesn't matter who designed the character.

[(Anonymous)]

if the character is written realistically and it could be conceived that a feminist wrote her, it doesn't matter if it was actually a man who wanted to make the girl look hot.

As an individual incidence? No, I don't think it does matter. A well-written female character is a well-written female character. If she also gives the writer pants feelings, I have zero problem with that.

The beef I have is with society/the entertainment industry for basically giving us nothing but good looking female characters, and thus blatantly perpetuating the toxic preconception that unless a woman is good looking she's not worth being the focus of a story--not worth being the focus of our attention, interest, and respect.

[(Anonymous)]

A well-written female character is a well-written female character.

In my experience "gratuitously sexualized" and "well-written" rarely happens outside of sex-positive queer erotica. Hence the "think of horses, not zebras." Usually pornface is exactly what it looks like, and part of treating a genre as a vehicle for fap material for lads.

[(Anonymous)]

SA: And it's not a surprise to me that the genres and media with the highest investment in women-as-cheescake seem to have big problems with sexual harassment and gatekeeping of women as both professionals and fans.

[(Anonymous)]

Usually pornface is exactly what it looks like,

I don't think the anon I replied to was talking about "pornface" and nor was I. That's talking things to the extreme. In reality, most good looking female characters do not look like they're from porn. Hot does not automatically equal "porn doll." I can think of an almost endless list of good looking live action female characters and I can think of almost none who have the look you are describing.

I'm talking about characters like Buffy Summers. She's a good character. I don't remotely care if Joss Whedon finds her drool-worthy.