[ SECRET POST #5560 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5560 ⌋

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


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.

















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 39 secrets from Secret Submission Post #797.
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

[fscom]

07. https://i.imgur.com/ZNt6m08.png

[(Anonymous)]

I think what works for me is that most, if not all, of these tweets mention the men but none directly tag them

[(Anonymous)]

Men are usually physically stronger. That's what it comes down to. Men posting this stuff about women always has a vague rapey threatening edge to it because of it. Something that's lacking from the examples above.

[(Anonymous)]

That, and also the tweets about the men tend to be "I'd like him to do [thing] to me," whereas the tweets about women tend to be "I'd like to do [thing] to her," and [thing] in relation to the women tends to be a lot more overtly violent in tone. Like, male celebrities get tweets that are raunchy and dirty; female celebrities sometimes get tweets that are baldly stated actual rape threats (and then they're dismissed as overreacting if they point out that those are rape threats and that they don't like it)

[(Anonymous)]

Considering all the "hurr Battinson is such a cute little breedable sub just waiting to get pegged" going on lately this obviously isn't always true.

[(Anonymous)]

Heh, I just made a similar point below, before clicking back and seeing yours. But pretty much all this, yep!

[(Anonymous)]

I'm kinda curious how you feel about the "I want her to step on me" types of thirst tweets in this context

[(Anonymous)]

OP - This is a very good point. I definitely do think the question of "how threatening is this likely to feel to the subject?" is what a lot of it hinges on. The way the tweets are phrased, and also the society we exist in, makes it a lot less likely that they will make the male celebs feel genuinely uneasy or potentially unsafe.

And the fact that they've agreed to do the bit in the first place strongly suggests that any discomfort they may feel while reading the tweets is something they're okay with. Which is important. If some talkshow host were just out there springing these tweets on them to get an "authentic" reaction, that would be very much not okay, IMO.

[(Anonymous)]

This is a shitty toxic attitude that can fuck right off though.

[(Anonymous)]

This.

To the point that two out of the three of the examples cited above focus on what the (presumably female) thirster wants these men to do to them (whereas, when men post about female celebs they thirst after, it's about what they, the thirster, would do to the celeb). The power in (most) male-celeb cases is implictly kept in the hands of the men, which (hypothetically) makes it less uncomfortable.

(I personally do still find it uncomfortable even with male celebs and female thirsters, so YMMV. But there's definitely logic behind why it hits very very differently when you flip the genders).

[meadowphoenix]

I mean, if you're asking whether you should still like it, these men a) almost certainly have been told the tenor of these tweets, b) have consented to a much higher degree than if they were getting these in their dms or mentions, and c) are literally using these to promote themselves and their projects. They're fun, OP, they're meant to be. Please don't feel guilty for enjoying it.

If you're asking whether if you are contributing to the growth of some sort of social monster of rampant indiscriminate objectification? Honestly, maybe? That's just kind of existence tho. Watching or not watching likely isn't going to improve the state of female objectification, and most of these tweets are specifically about male prowess which is already a part of the gender objectification dynamic that is meant to value masculinity as a sign of power, so the monster's already been here a while.

[(Anonymous)]

I don't get what's so bad about the John Stamos one. It's not really sexual/dirty.

[(Anonymous)]

It's definitely tame and I wouldn't call it "dirty", but there is a sexual implication to describing someone as "delicious", I think.

[dancingmouse]

There's a "Tossed salad" implication in there somewhere.

[(Anonymous)]

I liked that one.

[(Anonymous)]

The bad part about that one is that it involves John Stamos

[(Anonymous)]

OP - Honestly, all three of these are on the tame-to-moderate side for the kinds of tweets they often get, with the John Stamos one being ultra tame. I appreciate the hell out of the secret maker for making it for me, though! <3 <3 <3

His was pretty tame.

[(Anonymous)]

I mean, it started with 'uncle jesse from full house was 100% my first crush', but there was one: 'John Stamos is the hottest fucking man on earth. I'd let him scrub my face against hot asphalt if it meant I could even be in his presence.' And I've found that generally there are a few in each video that are kind of violent, directed toward the tweeter's self from the object of their, uh, affection - 'Gerard Bulter could punch me in the face and i would still say "thanks daddy"', 'daddy!!!!! Use my face as a trampoline', 'I want shawn mendes to light me on fire.', 'i would let beck from victorious break MY back like a glowstick'

I like the sweet or funny ones myself - 'Daniel Radcliff. I would totally let him slytherin.', 'My ideal weight is Taron Egerton on top of me', 'William Jackson Harper shirtless is how I know I'm not in The Bad Place'

[erinptah]

Presumably the guys in these videos are aware of what they're getting into, and have agreed to it, and would be allowed to skip or edit out anything they found genuinely upsetting? Doesn't seem like you need to get worried on their behalf, here.

I suspect it wouldn't be as fun with celebrity women because their reactions would be less "gosh, I had no idea people were saying such lewd things about me, this is embarrassing but also a little flattering" and more "ugh, more of this? I already know people have graphic fantasies, they send the descriptions to my inbox every day, this is boring and also exhausting."

(Would you still enjoy a man-reads-his-thirst-tweets video if the man was obviously having that second reaction? Pretty sure I wouldn't.)

[(Anonymous)]

It's another difficult thing...I think men in general don't feel unsafe or like they are only valued for their looks/literal body only when people place focus on their looks or objectify them. Male public figures usually don't get objectified as their main selling point or their "claim to fame", it's usually something that comes along when they choose to start displaying a more sexual side to their public personality...like, I think for the most part male celebs/public figures can feel like they can control the "sexual/objectified" side of their fame/image to the point that it doesn't disrupt/sidetrack from their career or that it's not going to be the main/only selling point to their image. Whereas with women and female public figures, it can often be the only thing that people will focus on. There's more hostility too when women express discomfort at being objectified or to even wholly embrace it. Like, with women, I think there is a lot more thought that needs to go into the "sexual" image when it comes to female public figures/celebs because the control of that image is so delicate and way easier to be taken away by the celeb than their male counterparts.

Not to say that men should just accept being objectified and laugh it off it makes them feel uncomfortable!! Of course, there are male public figures who have been objectified and it was obvious it was the fans/media/public that drove the "sexy" narrative more than the male celeb and those situations are not OK either.
Because it's so easy to exploit others, especially when it comes to the more sexual/primal stuff, I think we have to be mindful of how the person who is being objectified feels and that they consented to it (like if a male celeb thought they could handle reading the thirst tweets but decided they didn't want to anymore I would hope Buzzfeed wouldn't use any material filmed without that celeb's consent).

[iff_and_xor]

I think this is quite well put and sums up many of my own less articulate thoughts on the subject.

+1

[(Anonymous)]

This.

[(Anonymous)]

Great points.

[(Anonymous)]

JEFF

His video was so fun...

Really, for me, it's just so different because in a broad, general sense... like, men enjoy this in a way women don't?? It's not just the work that would go into curating thirst tweets for a lady celeb that weren't gross or violent, it's that male sexual attention from randos puts women on edge and is processed in relation to every bad experience with every other unsolicited bit of male sexual attention that a woman has had in her life.

Men tend to not have a lifetime of negative experiences with being sexually objectified. Granted, handsome actor men get validated on their attractiveness-- regular guys often find it difficult to imagine being upset by someone expressing attraction because they don't have that experience and think of it as something flattering rather than something dehumanizing. And on the other hand, my mom finds it mind-boggling that a man could be pleased rather than upset to have a stranger make flirtatious comments.

So, basically... for these guys, it's a sometimes-flustering/embarrassing-but-ultimately-all-in-good-fun experience rather than harassment.

OP

[(Anonymous)]

This is a really solid comment section full of excellent points! I appreciate you all, thank you. :)