[ SECRET POST #5748 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5748 ⌋

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


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.



__________________________________________________



08.













Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 56 secrets from Secret Submission Post #823.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 1 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: I'm going to disagree.

[(Anonymous)]

You can certainly disagree, but the eye injury is documented fact. The heterochromia is something people came up with based on the same ultra-scientific approach you took, i.e. squinting at photographs to compare colors that may well be a product of post processing.

Re: I'm going to disagree.

[(Anonymous)]

ayrt

The injury being documented has nothing to do with what I wrote. The injury is there, that does not mean he doesn't have the heterochromia I was talking about, where areas of the same iris contain two different colors. Honestly, though, is there another way to figure out if someone who is gone has different colors in their iris than looking at photos?

Re: I'm going to disagree.

[(Anonymous)]

He doesn't have heterochromia, though. And the way you figure it out is by accepting the (again) documented, factual story that is the explanation for why his eyes look different colors. Because if he had heterochromia, the story would be "I had an eye injury and also I have heterochromia". This is not rocket science?

Re: I'm going to disagree.

[(Anonymous)]

NAYRT

This approach falsely supposes that heterochromia only has one cause, and/or that it can only occur naturally from birth. To have heterochromia is to have two different colored eyes. Whether this comes about through genetics or trauma doesn't make a difference. It's not a medical condition, it's a variation on the norm.

Like, if someone has a crooked nose, does it not count as crooked if it became that way after being broken, or does the person with the crooked nose need to be born with it crooked for it to "count"?

Re: I'm going to disagree.

[(Anonymous)]

ayrt

Alright, I'm going to try this again. There are several different types of heterochromia. Complete heterochromia is where one iris is differently colored from the other. Partial (sectoral or central) heterochromia means that portions of the iris in one eye are differently colored from other portions in the same iris. It looks to me like he has partial heterochromia.

I'm saying that his eyes before the injury were basically the same color as each other, blue with some green, though in different places maybe different proportions. Thus, when he was asked if he had two differently colored eyes, the answer would have been no. And I don't think he would have been fussed to explain the exact composition of colors in his eye - a lot of people's eyes are not uniform in color, and they pick the predominant one to describe them. Here's the thing though, given the dilation and that green becomes the more predominant color in the portion that can be seen, the appearance of his eyes is functionally that of complete heterochromia.

But I will admit that perception of color is not absolute - I still see a white and gold dress, not a blue and black one.

Re: I'm going to disagree.

[(Anonymous)]

I agree with you. He may not actually have heterochromia, but his eyes absolutely do appear to be different colors--even factoring for the anisocoria. He gives the impression of having both heterochromia and anisocoria. I'm not going to go around saying he had heterchromia, but it feels unnecessarily pedantic to be bothered by this misapprehension in others and insist upon correcting them.