[ SECRET POST #5257 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5257 ⌋

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


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________


03.



__________________________________________________


04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________


06.



__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.
[The Green Knight (2021)]


__________________________________________________



09.



__________________________________________________




















10. [WARNING for discussion of child abuse]



__________________________________________________



11. [WARNING for mention of rape and genital mutilation]























Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 31 secrets from Secret Submission Post #752.
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 think both can be true, fwiw. If Rapunzel had happened to be the type to never go against Gothel's interests and been a docile pet bunny, it's possible they'd have had a nice and comfy life. Abusers aren't monsters that never love anyone. It's that they never care about anyone more than themselves or their own interests. If abusers were monsters incapable of love it'd be a lot easier to deal with

[(Anonymous)]

Someone can love you and still be abusive, but if that’s what you’re looking for in your Rapunzel witch, try Sondheim. Goethel was always a bad example of that. Her cycles of abuse and affection were far too calculated.

[(Anonymous)]

I'm not arguing that Gothel loved Rapunzel as an equal or a child, hence the pet bunny comparison. *If* any love existed there, which again I didn't claim there was, it'd be an unequal one like toward a pet animal. I'm saying this is why people get confused about it, because they - especially kids - aren't used to seeing abusers depicted like that in fiction

[(Anonymous)]

I'd say that monsters can be capable of love, and that abusers are monsters regardless. Especially child abusers.

[(Anonymous)]

Sure, exactly. What I said was "abusers aren't monsters-that-never-love-anyone." Monsters can love and still be monsters, and that confuses people, especially children like OP, a lot. Because they think it has to be one or the other.

[(Anonymous)]

Okay it was how you worded it that confused me lol

[(Anonymous)]

"If Rapunzel had never made Gothel upset/annoyed, they would have been fine"

Are you serious?

[(Anonymous)]

LOL that's how you read that? Wow! Talk about reading things the worst way!

No, to your question, that's obviously not what that meant. The actual point which you missed was that abusers value themselves and their interests above anyone and anything else. If Rapunzel had coincidentally, magically aligned entirely with Gothel's interests, Gothel is the type that could have enjoyed having Rapunzel as a *pet*, hence the animal comparison. And that sort of feeling is what makes people think, did Gothel love Rapunzel? and thinking there was some kind of equal as humans love there. There wasn't.

Don't be intentionally obtuse, anon

NAYRT

[(Anonymous)]

"If Rapunzel had happened to be the type to never go against Gothel's interests and been a docile pet bunny, it's possible they'd have had a nice and comfy life."

This is what you said, and it's functionally the same sentence as "If Rapunzel never made Gothel upset/annoyed, they probably would have been fine.

Don't act like AYRT was misreading you, and don't try to walk back your own words. You're the one who explained the point you were trying to make so badly that it could easily be read that way. I get that's not what you meant, but acting defensive behind a "lol learn to read" veneer isn't helping anything.

[(Anonymous)]

Your definition of nice and comfy life requires that Rapunzel be held hostage, even down to her own wants and needs, so I'm not sure how that works. And I seriously doubt Gothel will chill out once Rapunzel does everything Gothel wants. People like Gothel will always find something to take issue with, because they are incapable of being happy or satisfied with their lives as is. (Unless you mean Rapunzel being showered in luxury but inwardly miserable and unfulfilled while Gothel does what she wants, then sure, I guess.)

On that second point, I'd say if you mainly abuse and don't change, that you aren't capable of love. Abuse is not love. Abusive people can show affection, give gifts, have sex, etc. The "nice" parts don't cancel out the abuse, because the abuse will inevitably start up again. Yes, sometimes regular people do abusive things, even if they don't realize it, but if they're capable of love, they will realize the thing they're doing is abusive and make an effort to stop doing it.