[ SECRET POST #5857 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5857 ⌋

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


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.



__________________________________________________



08.

















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 16 secrets from Secret Submission Post #838.
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 would argue that it is when it's someone you've never met in your life and have only seen through the lens of what they show the public. You don't even know if that's what they're actually like or if it's just a persona they put on for public presentation!

[(Anonymous)]

It might be wrong and misguided for those reasons, but I don't think it's invasive

[(Anonymous)]

NAYRT but... is invasive the right term for a thought you have that doesn't make it to the person you're thinking about, nor does it impact that person's life in any way?

That would be like me thinking, "Oh this person I work with might be on the spectrum, they do a lot of the things I do." and... that's as far as it goes, an internal musing.

Said person doesn't know I've had the thought, nor does it colour how I interact with them.

[(Anonymous)]

NA

I would call it more presumptuous than invasive. If they were to present their speculation and/or "evidence" to the famous person or on a public forum with the person's name attached, I would consider that invasive.

[(Anonymous)]

This is giving me vibes of "Having a crush on someone without their consent is creepy."

[(Anonymous)]

If you can't see the difference between thinking someone is attractive and assigning them a medical diagnosis when a) you've never interacted in person, and b) you're not a professional who is qualified to be doing that in the first place, IDK what to tell you.

[(Anonymous)]

They are not assigning, they are speculating. And I am going to assign you "thought crime disease"

[(Anonymous)]

"There is a famous person who I am 110% sure is on the spectrum."

OP's own words. That's assigning. Speculating would be "I think they might be on the spectrum."

[(Anonymous)]

It's still speculating, because OP has no power to actually make someone be on the autism spectrum, and we know that, and so does everyone else.

"110% sure" is just an emphatic statement of the strength of their belief that it's a fact.