[ SECRET POST #780 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #780 ⌋

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

101.
[Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure]


__________________________________________________



102.


__________________________________________________



103.


__________________________________________________



104.


__________________________________________________



105.


__________________________________________________



106.


__________________________________________________



107.


__________________________________________________



108.


__________________________________________________



109.


__________________________________________________



110.


__________________________________________________



111.


__________________________________________________



112.


__________________________________________________



113.
[ShakespeaRetold; The Taming of the Shrew]


__________________________________________________



114.
[Bones]


__________________________________________________



115.


__________________________________________________



116.


__________________________________________________



117.


__________________________________________________



118.
[Torchwood]


__________________________________________________



119.
[Skins, Freddie]


__________________________________________________



120.
[resized]


__________________________________________________



121.


__________________________________________________



122.
[Nintendo Power, Nester comic]


__________________________________________________



123.


__________________________________________________



124.
[the lonely island, jorma/andy]


__________________________________________________



125.
[Are You Afraid of the Dark?]


__________________________________________________



126.


__________________________________________________



127.


__________________________________________________



128.


__________________________________________________



129.


__________________________________________________



130.
[Bill Hicks]


__________________________________________________



131.
[Dollhouse]


__________________________________________________



132.
[Dr. Horrible]


__________________________________________________



133.
[Merlin]


__________________________________________________



134.
[Pride and Prejudice]


__________________________________________________



135.


__________________________________________________



136.


__________________________________________________



137.
[Roger Bart]


__________________________________________________



138.
[Demon Knight]


__________________________________________________



139.


__________________________________________________



140.


__________________________________________________



141.


__________________________________________________



142.


__________________________________________________



143.


__________________________________________________



144.
[Candy]


__________________________________________________



145.
[Knights of the Old Republic]


__________________________________________________



146.
[Dr. Who]


__________________________________________________



147.


__________________________________________________



148.


__________________________________________________



149.


__________________________________________________



150.


__________________________________________________



151.
[Rockers]


__________________________________________________



152.
[Soul Eater]


__________________________________________________



153.
[Scrap Heaven]


__________________________________________________



154.


__________________________________________________



155.
[Avatar]


__________________________________________________



156.
[Erin Kelly, Loving Annabelle]


__________________________________________________



157.


__________________________________________________



158.


__________________________________________________



159.
[Joe Biden]


__________________________________________________



160.


__________________________________________________



161.
[Bleach]


__________________________________________________



162.


__________________________________________________



163.


__________________________________________________



164.


__________________________________________________



165.


__________________________________________________



166.


__________________________________________________



167.


__________________________________________________



168.


__________________________________________________



169.


__________________________________________________



170.


__________________________________________________



171.


__________________________________________________



172.


__________________________________________________



173.


__________________________________________________



174.


__________________________________________________



175.



Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 13 pages, 320 secrets from Secret Submission Post #112.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 2 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 - doing it wrong ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

127

[(Anonymous)]

Okay, somebody answer this for me, because I seriously do not get this.

The fact that men have "male privilege" has been offered up repeatedly as a justification for why female-created, female-centric yaoi porn involving two men in seme/uke roles is morally acceptable. Women need places where they can fetishize men in the same way that women are fetishized by men, etc. I guess I get that.

This raises two questions for me:

1. A clarifying question: since women do not have "female privilege" in the same way that men have "male privilege," is typical male-created, male-centric pornography of fetishized lesbians more morally wrong than yaoi?

2. How does the fact that gay men have "male privilege" somehow beat out the fact that they do not have "heterosexual privilege"? Since when did it get decided in the Oppression Olympics that straight women have it worse than gay men? In fetishizing gay men, why is it more important that they are men than that they are homosexual?

*presents credentials from the university of my ass*

[seiberwing.livejournal.com]

I've never bought that excuse, if only because it seems to be putting far too much thought into the matter. A better one might be that it's women idealizing (a specific form of) the male body where previously they weren't allowed to do so before--it's not so much a reaction to male privilege as a result of the lessening of it to the point where we can actually do this stuff.

And while I can't speak for yaoi, the vast majority of slash uses men who were not presented as homosexual in canon. That might be what they're picking up on there.

Re: *presents credentials from the university of my ass*

[(Anonymous)]

I guess my issue is that, at least as I see it, the prototypical image of the yaoi fan—a straight, white (maybe Asian) girl fetishizing the sexual activities of the gay man—is just another iteration of a power holder fetishizing the minority for her own amusement. Which feels really gross to me.

I don't see how the fact that the holder of power in this instance is a member of a group, that, in another situation, would be downtrodden, makes the act of fetishization (and thus dehumanization) morally okay.

I get that it is quite fun and sexy and all for women to reverse the paradigm that traps and dehumanizes them, but it has this undercurrent of hypocrisy that makes me really uncomfortable.

Re: *presents credentials from the university of my ass*

[seiberwing.livejournal.com]

I've never seen it as a fetishization of gay people so much as the fetishization of attractive men having gay sex. It doesn't seem to be spreading broad misinformation about the way that real gay men act, at least not to the extent of lesbians in Western male-directed pornography.

I may need to do research on this.

Re: *presents credentials from the university of my ass*

[(Anonymous)]

To be honest, I've never really gotten the impression that most real men believed lesbian porn to be like lesbian reality. As far as I know, I was under the impression that most men who have had sex at all realize that real sex is nothing like the fantasy world of pornography, whether straight or lesbian. (Then again, who knows. My impressions are not backed up by statistics, and perhaps I have too much faith in other people. I grew up in a comparatively liberal environment, where the white men were generally willing to treat women as equals and where people actual knew real-life lesbians.)

Similarly, I realize that most (sane) yaoi fans don't really believe that actual gay men act the way characters act in yaoi. At least, I have to. For my own sanity.

My concerns with yaoi/lesbian live-action porn are mostly about abstractions and power differentials, not the way that yaoi/lesbian live-action porn consumers interact with real-life homosexuals. Though the latter is a problem, certainly, it's not as insidious and morally troubling, to me, as unchecked psychological privilege.

Re: *presents credentials from the university of my ass*

[seiberwing.livejournal.com]

What exactly would "Unchecked psychological privilege" be, and why is it worse than what happens in real life?

Re: *presents credentials from the university of my ass*

[(Anonymous)]

I guess I'm just curious (not the anon from this thread, but the anon the other anon has been talking to on the other reply branch) but why do you care what the fangirls think as long as they act respectful to other people? Unchecked psychological privilege? Are you saying that it's really important how other people view the world, independently of how they act?

That's creepy. Fandom shouldn't be the thought police, I had hoped we were better than that.

Re: *presents credentials from the university of my ass*

[seiberwing.livejournal.com]

Er...did you mean to post this to me? I don't even know what unchecked psychological privilege is.

Re: *presents credentials from the university of my ass*

[(Anonymous)]

Original anon.

Why do I care what other people think? Because thought influences our interactions with other people. People should be questioning what they think, if what they think is dehumanizing and fetishistic.

Are you saying that it's really important how other people view the world, independently of how they act?

This is a misleading question. I do not think that you can separate one's worldview from one's actions. But even if you could, it is really fair to say that right views + right actions are somehow exactly equal to wrong views + right actions? I personally reject this utilitarian view of human interaction.

And I'm not "being the thought police." I'm not actively persecuting people for their opinions, I'm debating with them.

Re: *presents credentials from the university of my ass*

[(Anonymous)]

I'm very utilitarian, and I agree that people should question their views. And I'm still up to debate that dehumanizing and fetishistic are NOT the same thing. Being sexually attracted to a person or by something they do isn't mutually exclusive with seeing their humanity.

Right views + right actions is equal to wrong views + right actions, from the perspective of anyone else. Assuming psychics don't exist, there's no way to tell what the hell anyone else is thinking. They could be valuing someone as a beautiful, unique snowflake, or seeking if they can get away with looking down that person's shirt without getting caught. Your question is misleading, too, I suppose- I really don't think sexual attraction is the wrong views!

You're trying to imply that there's a right and a wrong way to think, when thought itself isn't entirely voluntary. To me, right = respectful of one's self and others, and wrong = harmful to one's self and others. Thought itself doesn't do that.

Re: *presents credentials from the university of my ass*

[(Anonymous)]

It is what happens in real life, just on a macro level, and over time. I'm more concerned with the big picture of the kyriarchy than with small-scale, individual events of discrimination and dehumanization.

I am a little more familiar with dialogue on racism, so I'm going to try and substitute (perhaps inappropriately) my understanding of race relations.

Suppose you have a white, male cop. He sees a black male with some of his friends driving past. He suspects they may be "up to no good." He stops them, searches the car, and discovers that they are transporting crack cocaine. The case goes to court. The men are jailed for the maximal time allowable.

I don't really care that, in this particular instance or that particular instance, this particular person arrested that particular person. The white cop may be have perfectly innocent relations with minorities the rest of the time. He may be married to a black woman, even, and have children. He may find the use of the word "nigger" horrifying. In my opinion, none of this really matters. I don't care.

So, what do I care about? I care about the fact that in this instance, none of the people in positions of power are going to have their latent privileges questioned and checked.

Is the cop going to consider: Why did I decide to pull over this group of individuals, and not a group of white individuals who may have been acting in a similarly non-suspicious manner? Does it matter that, in this instance, the individuals in the car were male as opposed to female? Why were these individuals transporting crack cocaine in the first place? What conditions in society had to be present for these individuals to resort to doing this illegal activity?

Is the judge going to consider: Why are the legal restrictions on crack cocaine so much harsher, comparatively, than those on powder cocaine? Why are more black men arrested for drug possession than white men? Why are black men more likely to get maximal sentencing time than white men? Why are there more whites on juries that are ostensibly supposed to be "juries of peers"?

Maybe these doubts and questions will crop up, once or twice. But 99% of the time, probably not. THAT is what worries me. It disturbs me to no end when people do not think about the implications of their actions in larger society.

Likewise, while it disgusts me when yaoi fangirls treat real-life gay men as cute little puppets for their fantasies, it doesn't disturb me half as much as the fact that these fangirls aren't going to ever think about and question the origins of their actions, why they are harmful, and how they should change them. "Unchecked psychological privilege," in my view, is the ability to avoid having to confront the nastier and more insidious aspects of the assumptions and views we hold.

Does that answer your question? It is too early in the morning for me to be doing this...

Re: *presents credentials from the university of my ass*

[seiberwing.livejournal.com]

A cop, a man with personal power as well as majority power, stopping a group of black people is far different from a woman getting off on homosexual sex between fictional, idealized images of men. The latter's actions harm no one and don't need to be changed in order to better society.

They don't need to confront their nastier aspects because there ARE NONE. It's porn, and for that matter it's porn free of the degradation and health risks that come with much of the live action porn industry.

Re: *presents credentials from the university of my ass*

[(Anonymous)]

Thank you. You're doing better arguing this that I am. ^^

Re: *presents credentials from the university of my ass*

[seiberwing.livejournal.com]

It happens when I'm bored. :p

Re: *presents credentials from the university of my ass*

[(Anonymous)]

Just because something is porn doesn't give it a free pass to not be critiqued. That yaoi is free of degradation is debatable, and just because some kinds of porn are objectively worse for certain people's health is not a good enough excuse, at least for me, for why people shouldn't criticize yaoi.

Okay. I did warn you that my simile might have been inappropriate. Let's ignore it, then. I still think that heterosexual women do have a position of institutional power over homosexual men (though not in all instances), and that to deny this is willful blindness.

Re: *presents credentials from the university of my ass*

[(Anonymous)]

You know what? I give up. I think porn enjoyed by a majority group that specifically involves members of a minority group as its primary fetishistic draw is harmful and creepy. You do not. We have reached an impasse. This really boils down to the fact that I think thought and action are intimately linked. You seem to think that they are not. I guess this is argument is absolutely pointless. I doubt I can convince anybody else of my position: English is not my first language, rhetoric is not really my thing, and I have an unpopular opinion. Considering that the vast majority of people here would agree with you anyway, I suppose you have won the internet argument already. Smile! Feel superior. Bask in the glory.

Re: 127

[(Anonymous)]

How about this:
If a woman enjoys yaoi, but can separate it from reality and doesn't project porn stereotypes onto actual (gay) men, then that's perfectly fine.
If a man enjoys lesbian porn or yuri, but can separate it from reality and doesn't project porn stereotypes onto actual lesbians or women in general, it's perfectly fine.
If anyone's enjoyment of porn gets in the way of their ability to see other human beings as individuals and not stereotypes or objects of pleasure, and to treat other human beings as individuals and not stereotypes or objects... then hey, there's a problem here.

Fetishization is NOT opression. Someone can have a kink for two guys going at it and then still treat gay men with compassion and respect and open-mindedness in real life. Why don't we stop playing the Oppression Olympics, and concentrate on stopping what actually harms people? If a gay man feels uncomfortable around a lot of squeeing fangirls that treat him like their yaoi pet, then yeah, they're being insensitive, and should save that kind of talk for when he's not around. If a lesbian couple gets weird propositions from some guy that watched Girls Gone Wild and thinks they really just need a man, that is just not okay and he should educate himself better.

But treating people better based on a scale of how oppressed they are? That really doesn't seem okay to me. Everyone has the right to be treated like a human being, but nobody has the right to not have to play by the same rules just because society is messed up.

Re: 127

[(Anonymous)]

Fetishization is NOT opression.

I guess we're going to have to agree to disagree here. I sincerely feel that fetishization by the power-holder of a comparatively powerless minority is an inherently dehumanizing practice. I understand that it may be involuntary, but, at the same time, that doesn't really make it okay.

But treating people better based on a scale of how oppressed they are? That really doesn't seem okay to me. Everyone has the right to be treated like a human being, but nobody has the right to not have to play by the same rules just because society is messed up.

I can't tell if you're accusing me of doing this. If so, please, inform me where I am doing so? Otherwise, I completely agree with you. My second question was somewhat sarcastic. I don't think that women should somehow get a free pass to fetishize another minority simply because it is socially acceptable for men to fetishize a male-constructed image of "lesbianism."

Re: 127

[(Anonymous)]

But fetishization isn't inherently related to being a minority. A member of [insert minority group here] could have a kink for [insert power-holding group here], even though it's less heard of. I agree that fetishizing someone to the point of dehumanization isn't good, but I don't think that's the way it has to be. It might require some actual thought put in that your fantasy isn't real, and the real people in that situation are, you know, real people. How does it harm me if someone finds me sexually attractive, as long as they treat me like a person, too? It's a squicky thing to find out about, but if they're being respectful about it, you don't find out. I don't think it's too much to ask people to think and to have some basic impulse control, and honestly? That's a way better idea than blaming them for being attracted to what they're attracted to. Dealing with people as they are to minimize harm >>> setting rules for people as if they were perfect.

I wasn't necessarily accusing you of doing this (I was more responding to the things you had suggested, because I've heard of several incidences where yaoi fangirls really did overstep their boundaries when it came to real gay men), but yes, I think you are treating people differently if they're oppressed. I'm pretty sure you wouldn't have a problem with women fetishizing straight men, like in Playgirl or something (and if you think that anyone having a kink for anything is bad, there really isn't a middle ground we can come to). But because homosexuals are an oppressed group, you're acting like some girl looking up her fanfic is contributing to homophobia in society today. (In fact, one good thing you can say about yaoi fangirls is that a lot of them really do care about gay people getting better treatment by society. Try approaching one and saying that you really didn't care about proposition 8.) Women don't get a free pass to make gay men any men feel sexually harrassed simply because male privilege exists. Neither do oppressed groups get a free pass out of people being sexually attracted to them, as long as those attracted are respectful and NOT CREEPY about it. That's why we have things like "Warning: yaoi/slash" or "Warning: [insert character/same-gender-character pairing here" or "This convention event is for the 18+ crowd and may contain adult themes". Nobody's hurt by girls liking yaoi, or girls sharing yaoi with people who have similar interests. People get hurt when those stupid yaoi paddles come out and anyone thinks it's okay to treat people like their sex objects.

I don't really mind being offended (I think more people should learn to deal with it better), but both the "girls can do anything they want in fandom because it's their sexual space" and "having a thing for yaoi means you treat gay men like objects" points of view really fucking bother me.

Re: 127

[(Anonymous)]

Also, what about the yuri fangirls? Are they oppressing themselves?

Re: 127

[(Anonymous)]

And nobody really answered my questions, in the end. Sigh.

Re: 127

[tsukinofaerii.livejournal.com]

I'll take a shot at it.

1) Personally, I don't think so. Not any more than the treatment of women as sex-toys in heterosexual porn (which is generally by men, for men) is morally wrong. They all have the potential to be skeevy for misogyny and gender issues, but none of them are inherently "wrong".

I've seen your responses, and I tend to disagree on the issue of fetishization. Part of the reason why pure porn (that is, porn separated from more plot than it takes to get the clothes off) works is because it's simple. This is most easily accomplished by using stereotypes. The goal of porn is to arouse the viewer, and it accomplishes that goal. Real-life issues, characterization and more than a sketch of a plot would detract from that goal, so they're ignored. It doesn't matter whether the porn is lesbian, gay or heterosexual: there is fetishization of the human body and stereotyping of almost everything occurring. One type is not inherently worse than another type. The damage begins when that fetishization and stereotyping extends beyond the goal of the work into life.

To state a very personal opinion, I rather feel sorry for the treatment of heterosexual males in porn. According to (American, at least) porn, they're all strong, rugged, "manly men" who dominate in the bedroom and have 13" penises. How is that less demeaning than the weepy, submissive female stereotype?

2) I don't play the Oppression Olympics. Privilege is privilege, and oppression is oppression. One is not somehow "better" or "worse" than the other. Actions based on those views can be, but in and of themselves they're equal.

For your last question... I believe it has to do with the goal of pornography. I think one of the big questions of yaoi/shounen ai/slash is that its point is completely misconstrued. (In this case, I believe they all have the same issue, btw; I don't think they're all the same thing.)

These forms of entertainment are aimed at primarily heterosexual women. This audience is interested in watching/fantasizing about/fetishizing a male body. But because women tend to enjoy plot and romance with their porn (thus why Harlequin is often thought of as the female equivalent of porno), this generally requires another player/character. And as with all things, if one (male body) is good, two should be better, right? A female could be used, but a female body isn't what the audience wants. That can be gotten off of any bookshelf. So the story becomes about two men. Homosexuality is often thrown in as a given, because under these circumstances it's unavoidable. But that's not what it's about.

The plot is what causes things to get complicated. Part of the point of a story is to identify with one of the characters and to "live the story" through them. Most romance manages this via the main female lead, but we've already decided that we can't have a female in the romance for this part. So one of the male characters becomes a reader stand-in, and might become stereotypically feminine in the process because that's what the reader has been trained to expect by society. (Which raises entirely new points of misogyny that I'll skip.) Some works don't have that issue, but Sturgeons Law comes into effect and it's much easier to write a stereotype than a character.

That's why it's more important that they're men than that they're gay. One of they giant peeves for a lot of people is the characterization "he's not gay, he just loves [insert character]". Another is the "everyone's gay" issue. They're both horrible writing and insulting to actual gay people, but they're examples of how yaoi/slash/shounen ai aren't about gay men.

LOL, I ran out of space! Continued below.

Re: 127

[tsukinofaerii.livejournal.com]

This wasn't part of your question, but I'm rambling. Sorry!

Part of the reason why (again, I think!) yaoi/slash/shounen ai fans get up in arms about it is because they are predominately women in a heterosexual male society. Not only do they have to deal with the still painfully prevalent idea that women aren't or shouldn't be sexual beings, but their chosen entertainment presses so many panic buttons for the dominate class (who feel threatened by female sexuality/empowerment and homosexuality both) that there's this... feeling that everyone "else" outside this group thinks you're wrong. That there is something sick and disgusting about you because you enjoy this, and you should be ashamed. So it's hidden away and talked about anonymously or among very close friends. It becomes "us" versus "them", because no one wants to be told they should be ashamed of something. But that means when someone comes up and wants to know what it's all about, even innocently, the first reaction is closer to "RAWR" than anything rational.

It's a messy, complex subject that I'm sure is being studied by a lot of people who are smarter and more educated than I am. But that's pretty much what it boils down to for me.

Re: 127

[(Anonymous)]

*none of the anons above*

I love you. I'll have your children, if you'd let me. give you anything you want because your answer is made of win and awesome. especially the second to last paragraph.

Re: 127

[tsukinofaerii.livejournal.com]

<3 Thank you. ^^;