case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2008-12-08 05:00 pm

[ SECRET POST #703 ]


⌈ Secret Post #703 ⌋

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

101.


__________________________________________________



102.


__________________________________________________



103.
[Madman]


__________________________________________________



104.


__________________________________________________



105. [repeat]


__________________________________________________



106.


__________________________________________________



107.


__________________________________________________



108.
[FFVII]


__________________________________________________



109.
[Soul Eater]


__________________________________________________



110.
[Psych]


__________________________________________________



111. [attack]


__________________________________________________



112.


__________________________________________________



113.


__________________________________________________



114.


__________________________________________________



115.


__________________________________________________



116.


__________________________________________________



117.


__________________________________________________



118.


__________________________________________________



119.


__________________________________________________



120.


__________________________________________________



121.


__________________________________________________



122.


__________________________________________________



123.


__________________________________________________



124.


__________________________________________________



125.
[xxxholic]


__________________________________________________



126.


__________________________________________________



127.


__________________________________________________



128.


__________________________________________________



129.


__________________________________________________



130.


__________________________________________________



131.


__________________________________________________



132.


__________________________________________________



133.
[Abe Sapien]


__________________________________________________



134.


__________________________________________________



135.


__________________________________________________



136.


__________________________________________________



137.


__________________________________________________



138.


__________________________________________________



139.


__________________________________________________



140.


__________________________________________________



141.


__________________________________________________



142.


__________________________________________________



143.


__________________________________________________



144.


__________________________________________________



145.


__________________________________________________



146.


__________________________________________________



147.


__________________________________________________



148.


__________________________________________________



149.


__________________________________________________



150.


__________________________________________________



151.


__________________________________________________



152.


__________________________________________________



153.


__________________________________________________



154.


__________________________________________________



155.


__________________________________________________



156.


__________________________________________________



157.


__________________________________________________



158.


__________________________________________________



159.


__________________________________________________



160.


__________________________________________________



161.


__________________________________________________



162.


__________________________________________________



163.


__________________________________________________



164.


__________________________________________________



165.


__________________________________________________



166. [repeat]


__________________________________________________



167.


__________________________________________________



168.


__________________________________________________



169.


__________________________________________________



170.


__________________________________________________



171.


__________________________________________________



172.


__________________________________________________



173.


__________________________________________________



174.



Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 13 pages, 314 secrets from Secret Submission Post #100.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 1 2 3 - broken links ], [ 1 2 3 - not!secrets ], [ 1 - not!fandom ], [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 - too big ], [ 1 2 3 - repeat ], [ 1 - personal attack ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

[identity profile] paperclipchains.livejournal.com 2008-12-08 10:29 pm (UTC)(link)
104. ... It's really, really hard not to say "Well, duh." They're... they're not canon. I mean... Why do people always pick the non-canon couples for their sappy X-to-my-Y, taught me to believe in love secrests?

108. Generally speaking, sanity and stability > interesting.

115. NOTHING? Come on, really? What about the minestrone soup? That's pretty normal. What about the thanksgiving challenge, would you have eaten any of that? There has to be SOMETHING!

128. No one derides male characters for being a generic badass, last time I checked.

I also hate people who say stupid stuff like this - "Oh, well nobody would like that character if she was a girl from a different era!"

YOU MEAN CONTEXT MATTERS TO PEOPLE?! HOLY SHIT!

134. I like that art, what's wrong with it?

149. Have you considered that maybe you have shitty, sexist reasons for hating the female characters you do hate?

154. It's okay. I think Colbert is an overblown hack who is rarely funny and that Jon is actually funny and intelligent, so I feel you on not wanting them lumped together.

161. If you bitch so much about fanfic that you cannot tolerate a simple spelling error, and it gets to the point where you have to make a fandom secret or post to a snark community because OMG YOU FOUND SPELLING MISTAKES IN HOBBY WRITING, I assume you're too boring to have anything better to do with your time.

Is it that hard to let tiny little shit like this go?

166. Fucking agreed.

172. I think that's sort of hilarious, and I sympathize.
ext_50: Amrita Rao (animanga: yuuko)

[identity profile] plazmah.livejournal.com 2008-12-08 10:32 pm (UTC)(link)
YOU MEAN CONTEXT MATTERS TO PEOPLE?! HOLY SHIT!

Seriously. LOL!
(deleted comment)

[identity profile] paperclipchains.livejournal.com 2008-12-08 11:31 pm (UTC)(link)
Oh, for sure, it's definitely overdone, but... I don't think "lol generic" is really... derision.

[identity profile] zorktroid.livejournal.com 2008-12-09 03:48 am (UTC)(link)
...why did I have think of Samus with a 'tache? Why, brain, why? All it did was remind me of the last panel of this comic page: http://cnn.captainn.net/scans/cn5-19.jpg

brb, bleaching brain by looking at 169.

149.

(Anonymous) 2008-12-08 11:47 pm (UTC)(link)
I think this is what the secret op is talking about.

They say they don't automatically like every single female character, and you immediately think they "have shitty, sexist reasons for hating" them.

Nobody is going to like every character in everything ever, and some of those disliked characters are bound to be female (or male, or asexual aliens, etc). That doesn't mean they dislike them because they're female (or male or a tree or whatever).

Re: 149.

[identity profile] ryuutchi.livejournal.com 2008-12-09 12:06 am (UTC)(link)
But people tend to have unreasonably high standards for female characters as opposed to male characters.

Yes, in the course of enjoying a show you may dislike characters of al genders, races and creeds, but when a particular person or a fandom in general overwhelmingly dislikes all, or almost all, of the female characters, you can probably say with a degree of certainty that there's a sexist pattern.

Re: 149.

[identity profile] continuum.livejournal.com 2008-12-09 12:27 am (UTC)(link)
I don't think it's about unreasonably high standards; I find that a lot of female characters just aren't written well or are written flatly/not given that much attention, and that makes it hard to like them. And thus, there's a disproportionate number of female characters being hated on compared to male characters.

So...I mean, I don't hate a female character insomuch as I just hate they way they're being written? A lot of them have potential, but then they come off on screen as...just "Augh, why! T__T" or sometimes they even start off really good, and then...somehow, the writing just takes them downhill. It sucks.

I guess I'm just drawing on my time in the BtVS/AtS fandom where people called misogyny because there were those who found her annoying. But the truth is, she did get annoying as a character later on in the series. Ditto for Dawn. By contrast, I didn't find a lot of character hate* for females that remained well-written: Fred, for one. Faith, Cordelia, Drusilla, Darla. Even in Firefly, there's generally been love for Zoe, Kaylee, River, who're also all quite well-written.

Don't get me wrong, I do agree that sometimes, people can set unreasonably high standards and that does get somewhat irritating. It's like, if she gets angry and yells, she's a bitch, etc, etc, and don't get me started on the people who hate on women for getting in between their slash 'ships or something.

But I also don't think the above is the sole cause or even the major cause of fandom female hate. There's a legitimate reason behind it, too, which lies in the actual writing of female characters.

*This is drawing entirely upon my own experience, so it is possible that I just wasn't looking in the right corners of fandom and missed some of the hate.

Re: 149.

[identity profile] continuum.livejournal.com 2008-12-09 12:31 am (UTC)(link)
Don't get me wrong, I do agree that sometimes, people can set unreasonably high standards and that does get somewhat irritating. It's like, if she gets angry and yells, she's a bitch, etc, etc, and don't get me started on the people who hate on women for getting in between their slash 'ships or something.

But I also don't think the above is the sole cause


Yes.

And you caught me before I could edit out "major cause" because what I meant by "not major cause" is that they are both equally responsible but that didn't quite come across the way I wanted. DX;;

Re: 149.

[identity profile] ryuutchi.livejournal.com 2008-12-09 01:47 am (UTC)(link)
I'm sure that sometimes that's it. But often the male characters are written just as badly and aren't hated on anywhere near as much (and when they are, it's usually in the form of "oh, isn't it so cute?")

Re: 149.

(Anonymous) 2008-12-09 12:32 am (UTC)(link)
So? The secret op wasn't talking about disliking all or most female characters. They were saying that not loving every female character is not the same thing as hating characters just because they're female, and that some people act like they don't realize that.

And I agree with the secret op on this complaint. When you say you dislike a female character, regardless of who the character is or why you dislike them, people tend to automatically jump on the assumption "you hate her because she's female! you're a mysogynist!"

Treating female characters like they can't possibly be hated or have bad character traits or simply be unlikable simply because they're female is just the flip side of the coin as treating female characters like they're ALWAYS hatable and unlikable simply because they're female.

Re: 149.

[identity profile] bamf-girl.livejournal.com 2008-12-09 01:16 am (UTC)(link)
This, man. Seriously. A couple days ago everyone was jumping down my throat because omg, I don't like Ginny from Harry Potter? MISOGYNIST. Despite the fact that I had a valid reason and explained that I set the same standards for both males and females, OMG MISOGYNIST. YOU DISLIKE EVEN A SINGLE FEMALE CHARACTER, SO THEREFORE YOU MUST DISLIKE ALL OF THEM.

I wish I knew who the secret op was, I'd send them some money. XP

Re: 149.

[identity profile] paperclipchains.livejournal.com 2008-12-09 04:24 am (UTC)(link)
Weren't you the one who was like "I hate Ginny because she's a slut?" Haha, yeah, that's a totally valid reason!

Re: 149.

[identity profile] bamf-girl.livejournal.com - 2008-12-09 04:32 (UTC) - Expand

Re: 149.

[identity profile] baranohanayome.livejournal.com - 2008-12-09 04:44 (UTC) - Expand

Re: 149.

[identity profile] bamf-girl.livejournal.com - 2008-12-09 06:10 (UTC) - Expand

Re: 149.

(Anonymous) - 2008-12-09 08:58 (UTC) - Expand

Re: 149.

[identity profile] bamf-girl.livejournal.com - 2008-12-09 16:18 (UTC) - Expand

Re: 149.

[identity profile] paperclipchains.livejournal.com - 2008-12-09 09:08 (UTC) - Expand

Re: 149.

[identity profile] bamf-girl.livejournal.com - 2008-12-09 16:15 (UTC) - Expand

Re: 149.

[identity profile] paperclipchains.livejournal.com - 2008-12-09 21:27 (UTC) - Expand

Re: 149.

[identity profile] geministar01.livejournal.com 2008-12-09 01:39 am (UTC)(link)
I gotta agree. There's a big difference between hating certain characters who are female and hating certain characters *becasue* they are female. I wish more people would figure that out.

Re: 149.

[identity profile] paperclipchains.livejournal.com 2008-12-09 09:34 am (UTC)(link)
Of course, but there's also a big difference between hating a character for valid reasons and hating a character for sexist tropes that have been culturally ingrained as reasons to hate women that don't really stand up to scrutiny.

Re: 149.

[identity profile] paperclipchains.livejournal.com 2008-12-09 12:17 am (UTC)(link)
Nope, not at all. The OP is complaining that s/he was called a misogynist. I don't know why I should give him/her the benefit of the doubt over the person who made the allegation in the first place.

Re: 149.

[identity profile] geministar01.livejournal.com 2008-12-09 01:36 am (UTC)(link)
Call me biased, but having been in the same boat, I tend to give the person being accused more of a benefit of the doubt than the person doing the name calling.

WAY too many people throw 'misogynist' around in the defense of their favorite female characters. Most of them really DON'T seem to know what the term means. To be perfectly honest, I've gotten to the point where I can't take anybody in fandom who uses the term seriously, because so many people misuse it.

Re: 149.

[identity profile] paperclipchains.livejournal.com 2008-12-09 04:25 am (UTC)(link)
Call me biased, but I tend to favour the person making the "misogyny" accusation. Sure, people throw the word around WAY too much, but the people they throw it at are usually the ones who wonder why "I hate her because she's a slut" is sexist.

Re: 149.

(Anonymous) 2008-12-09 04:56 am (UTC)(link)
Is it still sexist if I dislike promiscuous male characters too? If I say I dislike a female character for a certain trait, should I also explain I dislike male characters with the same trait? If I said I disliked a male character for a certain trait, I doubt you would require me to explain why I also dislike female characters with that trait.

You're pretty much showing to be the exact kind of person the secret is complaining about. Assuming a person's dislike for a female character stems from the "being female" aspect of the character and not from any actual negative character traits the character has. Like if a promiscuous female character was a promiscuous male character instead, they suddenly wouldn't mind.

That's an ignorant and frankly insulting assumption to make. So, rather than automatically just assume mysogyny or sexism, why not accept that not every character is going to be liked by everyone.

Re: 149.

[identity profile] lanjelin.livejournal.com - 2008-12-09 08:56 (UTC) - Expand

Re: 149.

[identity profile] paperclipchains.livejournal.com - 2008-12-09 09:11 (UTC) - Expand

Re: 149.

(Anonymous) - 2008-12-09 13:40 (UTC) - Expand

Re: 149.

(Anonymous) - 2008-12-10 05:39 (UTC) - Expand

Re: 149.

[identity profile] geministar01.livejournal.com - 2008-12-09 05:03 (UTC) - Expand

Re: 149.

[identity profile] paperclipchains.livejournal.com - 2008-12-09 09:11 (UTC) - Expand

104

(Anonymous) 2008-12-09 12:07 am (UTC)(link)
For once I have to agree with you. I just wanted to write exactly the same. The pairing is nice, I also like slash, but why choose couples that just aren't canon for secrets like that?!
But I think I dislike secrets like that in general.

Re: 104

(Anonymous) 2008-12-09 01:20 am (UTC)(link)
Im the poster of that secret, and I think you guys are being rude. I didnt mean exactly LOVE one another...maybe it was unclear...but I just talking about the kind of love that would make someone sacrafice themselves for another person. Just love, not romantic love.
aquila_black: Harry Potter is unconscious. His outstretched hand holds the Philosopher's Stone. Caption: Immortality. (Default)

Re: 104

[personal profile] aquila_black 2008-12-19 09:52 pm (UTC)(link)
Okay ... this kind of secret confuses me. You love someone, with an intensity that they *searching for the right term* currently do not return. Right? How does this negate the existence of love?

Re: 108

[identity profile] baranohanayome.livejournal.com 2008-12-09 03:00 am (UTC)(link)
I've got to agree with you there. I like Sephiroth as a character, but I would not want to meet anyone as "interesting" as he is in real life. Batshit insanity and homocidal tendencies don't make for desireable traits in friends/casual acquaintances. I have to feel kind of sorry for the OP if (s)he can't see that. =X

128

[identity profile] lanjelin.livejournal.com 2008-12-09 08:59 am (UTC)(link)
I also hate people who say stupid stuff like this - "Oh, well nobody would like that character if she was a girl from a different era!"

YOU MEAN CONTEXT MATTERS TO PEOPLE?! HOLY SHIT!


THIS. How can people not see the logical flaw in that sort of statement?