[ SECRET POST #5229 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5229 ⌋

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


01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________


03. https://i.imgur.com/uhxEF9T.jpg
[OP warned for NSFW image, illustrated sexual positions]


__________________________________________________

















04. [WARNING for discussion of abuse]



__________________________________________________



05. [WARNING for discussion of rape]



__________________________________________________



06. [WARNING for discussion of abuse]

[Persona 5 Strikers]


















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #748.
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)]

Setting aside the historical element, one thing I am really not sure about is the use of migratory slash fandom here

Because I feel like it's much less a characteristic of migratory slash fandom - to whatever extent that even still exists - and much more a characteristic of queer people in fandom generally

[(Anonymous)]

This. The OP makes lot of very good points that echo things that have bothered me and still do about the way the left treats anthropology (and literary analysis, though I've seen less of that), but using the term "migratory slash fandom" rubs me the wrong way because people who do it tend to be dismissive and ignorant about the reasons most people who ship slash have.

[(Anonymous)]

This might come as a surprise to you, but lots of queer people don't like seeing historians and academia deny the existence of historical queer people. It's not a conspiracy theory, and it's not amusing.

a characteristic of queer people in fandom generally

Nice generalization. Homophobic much?

[(Anonymous)]

But the thing is, queer people who think historians in general do that are misinformed, and it harms us more to have lies spread about historians saying it's a routine thing in their field to deny our existence. It's you who thinks there's some big conspiracy, in that field (i.e. to cover up our existence). We shouldn't be told to feel like we're being attacked and hated by historians when that's simply not the case. It causes hurt for nothing.

Similarly, that you think it's homophobic to make the very neutral observation that queer people in fandom IN GENERAL like to seek out slash speaks volumes about how you view slash and its fandom. It's only homophobic if you think slash is bad. Slash isn't bad, and it's a fact that it is more the realm of queer people of all genders than the imaginary straight-girl-who-fetishizes-gay-men bogeyman.

[(Anonymous)]

There are very few people who believe in a "big conspiracy", that is such a straw man.
Yeah, it's not a conspiracy, but historians have, historically, rubbed their biases all over their findings, because they were not aware of them. That doesn't mean secret cabals of historians evilly planning to erase queer people, that means heterosexual people trying to find heterosexual explanations for gay things, because it doesn't occur to them.

I hope this explanation helps you understand.

[(Anonymous)]

Yes, I've never seen it presented as a big conspiracie either. It's much more often about giving an explanation, sometimes very obvious to a queer person, that heterosexual historians might not have think about simply due to seeing the world through their own experience. History is a very interesting discipline from an epistemological point of view: based on facts but still very much depending on a subjective interpretation of those facts.

[(Anonymous)]

Considering that queer studies has been around for 50 years now (full departments for 35), treating gay Achilles as some radical and heterodox idea that can't be spoken of in class seems rather odd.

[(Anonymous)]

I just read, Feinberg's exasperated "But they had slaves!" from 1998 in response to LGBTQ worship of Classical Greek culture. (I think zie might have even cited Achilles as one of many heroes who had a cross-dressing episode.)

[(Anonymous)]

I think there's a certain set of slash fandom that loves tinfoil hats. And sometimes that's appropriate because industry self-censorship is a thing when it comes to genres like TV animation and MCU. It's less credible applied to things like Classical Greek scholarship, which is possibly over-explored by queer studies.