case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2022-03-18 07:49 pm

[ SECRET POST #5551 ]


⌈ Secret Post #5551 ⌋

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


01.
[Iron Widow, by Xiran Jay Zhao]



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.
[Venom]


__________________________________________________



04. https://i.imgur.com/M0aDyxc.png
[OP warned for NSFW image]


__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________
















06. [SPOILERS for In Sound Mind]
























Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #794.
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.
feotakahari: (Default)

[personal profile] feotakahari 2022-03-20 12:32 am (UTC)(link)
"If half-naked women are equivalent to any of those things not human-shaped things, but not men or non-half naked women that's good information. Like...you understand that right?"

No, I didn't know that the study in question looked at men or fully clothed women. I still don't know what study it is.

Also, I feel weirdly horrified that you somehow got "you don't like science" from anything I said. I keep trying to write an explanation of my thoughts, and I keep running up against the fact that you somehow came up with "you don't like science." If you could get THAT out of what I said, then I have no idea how to progress without further misunderstandings.
meadowphoenix: (Default)

[personal profile] meadowphoenix 2022-03-20 02:00 am (UTC)(link)
No, I didn't know that the study in question looked at men or fully clothed women. I still don't know what study it is.
You know, trying to say something about the efficacy of neuroimaging that implicates literally all data analysis when you haven't looked at or asked for the study and don't know what it's saying does not scream "likes science" to me. My other comments in this thread have several studies.

Also, I feel weirdly horrified that you somehow got "you don't like science" from anything I said.
I think I've been clear how I got there. But to wit, I don't think people who profess skepticism of scientific techniques in a way that implicates all scientific techniques like science. "You have to make choices and use machines therefore the conclusions are unreliable" is a concern with all of science, including chemistry and physics. And people who think they're saying something significant as if efficacy isn't constantly re-adjusted and re-looked and challenged within the field don't really like the idea of science as it exists.

(Anonymous) 2022-03-20 07:17 am (UTC)(link)
Meadowphoenix does this kind of thing. Extrapolating wild shit from nowhere when they don’t have any real counter argument, and running with it. Then condescending you when you respond that that’s obviously not what you meant. Sometimes they’ll even go the full mile and try to gaslight. They can be extremely unpleasant and ridiculous at the drop of a hat. Don’t worry, it’s perfectly clear that you neither said or meant you don’t like science to everyone else.