Case (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
case) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
fandomsecrets2009-01-31 05:08 pm
case) wrote in fandomsecrets2009-01-31 05:08 pm
[ SECRET POST #757 ]
⌈ Secret Post #757 ⌋
Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.
101.
__________________________________________________
102.
__________________________________________________
103.
__________________________________________________
104.
__________________________________________________
105.
__________________________________________________
106.
__________________________________________________
107.
[Higurashi]
__________________________________________________
108.
__________________________________________________
109.
__________________________________________________
110.
[Higurashi, Miyo Takano]
__________________________________________________
111.
[Spider-Girl]
__________________________________________________
112.
[Onyanko Club]
__________________________________________________
113.
[Chowder]
__________________________________________________
114.
__________________________________________________
115.
__________________________________________________
116.
[School Days]
__________________________________________________
117.
__________________________________________________
118.
__________________________________________________
119.
__________________________________________________
120.
__________________________________________________
121.
[Skins]
__________________________________________________
122.
__________________________________________________
123.
[Demons, Ruby/Rupert]
__________________________________________________
124.
__________________________________________________
125.
__________________________________________________
126.
[Ayreon, Magali Luyten]
__________________________________________________
127.
__________________________________________________
128.
[Gurren Lagann]
__________________________________________________
129.
__________________________________________________
130.
__________________________________________________
131.
__________________________________________________
132.
__________________________________________________
133.
__________________________________________________
134.
__________________________________________________
135.
__________________________________________________
136.
__________________________________________________
137.
__________________________________________________
138.
__________________________________________________
139.
__________________________________________________
140.
__________________________________________________
141.
__________________________________________________
142.
__________________________________________________
143.
__________________________________________________
144.
__________________________________________________
145.
[Heroes]
__________________________________________________
146.
__________________________________________________
147.
__________________________________________________
148.
__________________________________________________
149.
__________________________________________________
150.
__________________________________________________
151.
__________________________________________________
152.
__________________________________________________
153.
__________________________________________________
154.
__________________________________________________
155.
__________________________________________________
156.
[Barney Stinson, How I Met Your Mother]
__________________________________________________
157.
[Supernatural]
__________________________________________________
158.
__________________________________________________
159.
__________________________________________________
160.
__________________________________________________
161.
__________________________________________________
162.
__________________________________________________
163.
__________________________________________________
164.
[Gundam Wing]
__________________________________________________
165.
__________________________________________________
166.
__________________________________________________
167. [repeat]
__________________________________________________
168.
__________________________________________________
169.
__________________________________________________
170.
__________________________________________________
171.
__________________________________________________
172.
__________________________________________________
173.
__________________________________________________
174.
__________________________________________________
175. [repeat]
__________________________________________________
176.
__________________________________________________
177.
__________________________________________________
178.
__________________________________________________
179.
__________________________________________________
180.
Notes:
Secrets Left to Post: 21 pages, 525 secrets from Secret Submission Post #109.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 1 - broken links ], [ 1 2 3 4 - not!secrets ], [ 1 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 1 2 3 - repeat ], [ 1 2 - posted twice ], [ 1 2 - doing it wrong ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.
Re: 166.
(Anonymous) 2009-02-02 12:41 am (UTC)(link)What does caring about the characters as people (as opposed to what, a set of traits?) have to do with it? How do you judge whether someone cares about the characters as people by whether they "fetishize" them or not? Do you mean by that that someone who enjoys PWP of their favorite characters, or is sexually attracted to certain characters or certain situations involving them, doesn't care about them as people? If so, there are plenty of people who do support gay marriage that fetishize the characters they like, and therefore don't care about them as people. A homosexuality fetish is still a homosexuality fetish, whether the person who has it cares about gaining rights for real-life gay people or not.
Okay. Think less of me for believing apathy is acceptable. I think less of you for believing that it's wrong for somebody not to care about the same things you do, or -gasp- have different opinions about them entirely. Good luck trying to convince other people to support your cause when you look down on them for not already supporting it.
Re: 166.
Um. Yes it is?
What does caring about the characters as people (as opposed to what, a set of traits?) have to do with it?
The OP claimed that they cared about their ships because of the traits of the characters, not because of 'teh ghey'. But it's impossible to claim this and then refuse to treat the characters as if they're human beings in the context of whatever world they live in.
Think less of me for believing apathy is acceptable. I think less of you for believing that it's wrong for somebody not to care about the same things you do, or -gasp- have different opinions about them entirely.
If you're going to oppose my opinion, form a fucking argument about the issue. Being apathetic about it doesn't make it any less of an issue--shutting oneself into their safety bubble and ignoring the world around them is pathetic.
Re: 166.
(Anonymous) 2009-02-02 02:55 am (UTC)(link)Caring about the traits of the characters =/= seeing them as people. Hypothetically, someone could like pairings between a submissive character and a dominant character, for example, regardless of who's what gender. That doesn't mean that those characters are really viewed as human- even if in canon they have well-developed personalities, they could just be viewed as stereotypes of a dominant and a submissive character to the reader. Interest in character traits can be as shallow as interest in character gender. Also, the context of whatever world the characters live in doesn't always include the potential for gay marriage. Not every culture views sexuality the same way.
I haven't read every single comment to this post, but you're the one telling me to come up with an argument when all you've done is swear and throw around insults?
Fine. Say you want something to gain a certain amount of support (in this case, gay marriage, and getting enough support to be legalized.) Say that the amount of support it already has isn't sufficient, and that in order to meet the goal, it needs more supporters. Now, where are those supporters going to come from? If most people already know about the issue, then there are two places these new supporters can come from, the opposition, and people who are undecided or apathetic. Given that the opposition already has strong opinions on the matter, it's probably going to be easiest to draw the undecided or apathetic to your side.
What's the best way to convince those people? One method is shaming them into it. You could insult them, or treat them like they're stupid and don't know what they're talking about, and act like they're socially unacceptable. Usually, that works better if there's enough pressure on them to be acceptable to you- either there's enough benefits of being accepted by you, or enough consequences of not being accepted by you. There's not a unified movement to shun people who aren't actively supporting gay marriage, though, so maybe you'll be able to influence some people, but you won't be able to influence everyone. People have a certain way of getting defensive when they're criticized, and you'll likely drive as many people away from potentially becoming part of the gay rights movement as you attract to it.
Think of it like PETA. They encourage people to go completely vegan or vegetarian, often in stupid ways, and they've lost a lot of their credibility- not always because their methods are silly, but because people are annoyed at being told that they need to give up animal products completely and encourage others to do so. Imagine if people were encouraged instead to eat less meat, instead of none (arguments such as the environment, health, etc could be used). A less extreme commitment would attract a much greater number of people, and a large number of people putting in some effort generally yields a greater result than a very small group of people putting in a lot of effort: in this case, less animals would be eaten.
Don't you think you might get more people to support gay marriage if you gave them good reasons to do so, reward them with support for being an active participant rather than with shunning for being apathetic or part of the opposition, and allow people to help a litle rather than being rude to them for not helping at all? Sure, the people out there campaigning are helping the most, but the people who vote pro-gay rights are also helping too. Whatever strategy you take, you'll probably attract the passionate people who get out there and work for gay rights, but the people who'd help a little bit probably get repelled by a "my way or the highway" type of attitude (sorry to be trite.) I guess I'm arguing from a more utilitarian perspective than you are, but whether or not it's moral to be a non-supporter or to approve of non-supporters, it's ultimately better for your movement not to bash anyone who doesn't participate.
Re: 166.
You implied that I wouldn't be able to handle arguments differing from mine on the gay marriage issue. This isn't true, and this is what I was addressing when I challenged anybody (not you specifically) who doesn't agree with me on it to formulate an argument against me. (Hell, I welcome it--it's such an easy argument to win.) The OP actively refuses to formulate an argument.
Do you see? I'm attacking apathy again. When a person is confronted with an issue, they have to either gain knowledge and take a stand, or they have to admit their refusal to take part in the debate. This second option, ignorance and apathy, is never, ever something to be proud of. Right, yeah, we can't all have opinions on every issue affecting society because nobody is going to be able to gain the all of knowledge needed to form constructive ones, but when we can't/won't take part in the resolution of a problem, we shouldn't act as if this is the proper position to take.
This is my problem with the OP. Like it or not, her views on slash are part of society's greater views on homosexuality, because she is a part of society. Therefore, the gay marriage issue is a pretty direct consequence and affects her, and probably many people she knows, pretty directly. The fact that she's acting like it doesn't is what makes her a hypocrite, or at least in denial. Her pride in refusing to be part of a resolution is what makes her pathetic. A person can't be proud of doing nothing.
You take issue with the language I've used in my comments, saying that it isn't constructive towards pulling people to my side of the argument. What I say to that is, arguing for gay marriage is not what this particular debate has been about, and also, when I do argue that issue seriously in a different context, I handle myself differently. The OP, in this case, has specifically chosen a forum in which she isn't to be reasoned with. Until she finds the wherewithal to defend her position, I don't particularly feel like paying her the lip service.
Re: 166.
(Anonymous) 2009-02-02 05:31 am (UTC)(link)What happens when someone gets informed, or is presented with information, and after getting informed feels like they cannot take a side? What happens when there's a conflict of interest (say, somebody's a devout Catholic, but also knows gay people that he doesn't feel should be discriminated against?) and someone feels the only thing they can do is NOT to take a side?
I agree with you that uninformed apathy is something to be avoided, even if people don't want to become activists. But there are reasons that people have for not taking a side that aren't based in ignorance. Someone might just not be able to decide. I'd have to say I respect someone who's informed, but indecisive much better than someone who's got an opinion, but isn't informed. (A lot of the people I went to high school with who claimed to hate the former President, but never gave any justification as to why, come to mind.)
I'm not pro-apathy as much as I'm anti targeting apathetic people. I think someone can opt out of an issue if they want to, and it's not really good but they shouldn't be harrassed over it. Forced participation ("you're with us, or you're against us" type attitudes) also give causes a bad reputation, and although I'm not involved with the gay rights movement, I do want to see legalized marriage, or damn good civil unions happen. I think it'll undo some of the progress that people have made in society seeing gay people as someone who could be their neighbor instead of some sick deviant, if suddenly you're a homophobe for not participating with the cause. Apathy is a step above contempt.
I don't have a problem with swearing. Mostly, it was that I thought you were being aggressive and intimidating rather than using superior facts and debating skills. And arguing for gay marriage wasn't what this debate was about, but what would have been wrong with attempting to convince her to get involved instead of hanging around insulting her?
Re: 166.
The OP here represents the kind of active refusal to gain information on an issue that is the real and far more common problem.
I think it'll undo some of the progress that people have made... if suddenly you're a homophobe for not participating with the cause. Apathy is a step above contempt.
This, certainly, but that isn't exactly the issue that arose here. Most of the time, when does one even get the opportunity to 'target' apathetic people? In being apathetic they become pretty hard to spot. If one does happen to end up in a conversation with someone like this, well. I wasn't advocating targeting anyone. Since you're referring to the way I handled the OP in particular, I'll say that I based my behavior on my reaction towards hers.
what would have been wrong with attempting to convince her to get involved instead of hanging around insulting her?
It's not how I'd handle myself in every situation, no, but at the same time I'm not particularly inclined to apologize for how I handled myself here. This is what I mean by basing my behavior off of the OPs--she made a statement in a manner that pretty much shuts her off from all reasoned debate, so I didn't feel like paying her the lip service.
If I felt like I could change her mind, maybe, but her behavior makes it seem pretty much shut.
Re: 166.
(Anonymous) 2009-02-02 08:00 am (UTC)(link)I know a different anon suggested that the OP was the one girl with the 13 (I think?) icon, but did she ever admit it, or was it somebody else? Or does your assessment of her behavior come from the original post?
Apathetic people are as easy to spot as anyone else- most pro gay-rights people aren't wearing rainbows, and most anti gay rights people aren't wearing "Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve" buttons. Most of the time it just comes up in conversation. "Grrr! I'm so angry about Proposition 8!" "Um... I don't really care about that stuff."
I don't think you need to apologize. We probably just have different strategies for handling this kind of thing.
Re: 166.
Most of the time it just comes up in conversation. "Grrr! I'm so angry about Proposition 8!" "Um... I don't really care about that stuff."
That's exactly what I mean. It's not something I'm too comfortable generalizing a strategy for--if I came across this, I'd have a different conversation with every person.