[ SECRET POST #5141 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5141 ⌋

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


01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________


03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.














Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 27 secrets from Secret Submission Post #736.
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)]

Interesting and sympathetic? Idk about that. Your own creation is basically helpless, it cannot call you on anything or challenge you in any way you don't want to be challenged, and requests nothing from you in terms of time, attention, responsibility, effort, or maturity. I'd have a hard time being sympathetic to someone who finds nothing at all wrong with calling this love, or interested in any way in their particular interactions

[(Anonymous)]

I think that "love" is a notoriously tricky and ambiguous and multivalent word, and I am not particularly interested in working up an objection to someone using it in this context. I think it's more interesting to ask what love means in this context and what it consists of.

Also, the idea that a fictional construct is "helpless" seems pretty bizarre

[(Anonymous)]

In the context of actual real life love generally being between equals, and a fictional character being able to change itself into whatever you want it to be on a whim and not having any set character, it's a point worth making lol

Perfect Love Interests are just Mary Sue self inserts from the opposite angle

[(Anonymous)]

NAYRT - "Helpless" is an odd way to put it, but I'm guessing that what they were going for was closer to "intrinsically without agency." A fictional construct doesn't need agency, since it's basically a mop with googly eyes on it that OP is pretending is their SO. But it does make their love for their googly mop shallow, at best.

[(Anonymous)]

Huh. I agree with both of you. I agree with AYRT that the kind of love between a person and their agency-less creation is inherently shallow when measured on a scale designed to measure human/human love. But I also agree with you that the nature of love is extremely multivalent, and the only time I'm overly interested in gatekeeping the concept of love is when someone is using it to excuse, normalize, or venerate behavior that is demonstrably harmful.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, this. I feel like OP's love for their own creation is most likely (but not guaranteed) to harm OP rather than others unless OP either starts treating RL SOs as inferior to their fictional character or gets Anne Rice level famous for their OC and then attacks anyone who dislikes them.

[(Anonymous)]

Personally, I'm just fundamentally uninterested in questions like "what is the true meaning of love in the first place".

"Love" is an arbitrary word anyway (like all words). So whether some concept or experience 'counts' as love - I just think it's fundamentally an uninteresting conversation. I think it's more interesting to try to understand those concepts and experiences.

[(Anonymous)]

Personally, I'm just fundamentally uninterested in questions like "what is the true meaning of love in the first place".

I think it's more interesting to try to understand those concepts and experiences.

So you're not interested in exploring the concept of love, you're just interested in exploring love as a concept? Cool.

[(Anonymous)]

You might say I am interested in the concepts and experiences that people call "love", but not in the abstract concept of "love" as such, if that helps

[(Anonymous)]

Sounds like you've never read a book or watched a show/movie that had a character that challenged you in a way that you didn't want to be challenged. If you consume things outside your comfort zone it happens all the time.

As for "requesting nothing of you," plenty of garbage human beings give nothing to the people they love. Just because a person is bad at loving, doesn't mean they don't feel the emotion "love."

[(Anonymous)]

But the characters in those books/shows/movies are not your own creations. They belong to someone else and that someone is challenging you through the characters they created. That's a completely different situation.

[(Anonymous)]

I see you've never read fanfiction.

[(Anonymous)]

I've read plenty of fanfics. I have no idea what that has to do with my comment. Unless you think that fic writers somehow own the characters that they write about, cause if you do, I (and the law) have got some news for you. They may do whatever they want with those characters but the original character design is still not their own.

[(Anonymous)]

Fic writers write a version of the characters that appeals to them most, it doesn't necessarily have to be 100% IC with the canon version. The original author doesn't come to your house to write the parts with the character for your fic, to make sure that there is zero of your own input in the characters thoughts and behavior.

[(Anonymous)]

... then they aren't writing fanfic, they're writing original fic with the same names as the canon characters.

[(Anonymous)]

This comment is missing the context so wildly it's hard to respond

[(Anonymous)]

Wowwwww. Reading comprehension fail.