[ SECRET POST #6002 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #6002 ⌋

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


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.
[Identity V]



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.
























Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 31 secrets from Secret Submission Post #858.
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)]

They're sitting in a car, but they're not driving anywhere. How is "in an unmoving car" literally obscuring anything???

The only people not picking up on it are deep in denial and even kissing or declarations of love wouldn't get through to them. You holding them as the bar is disingenuous and makes you very much the "only making out on screen counts" kinda person.

[(Anonymous)]

"They're sitting in a car, but they're not driving anywhere. How is "in an unmoving car" literally obscuring anything???"

I imagine this sounds like a really powerful argument to you that nobody in their right mind could ever interpret it as being about driving (in the car they're both sitting in) after Crowley offers Aziraphale a lift (as in, a ride in the car they're both sitting in) but... I'm not really sure it's as convincing as you seem to think. The point of plausible deniability isn't to obscure (this is your word, not mine, a recurring pattern with you), it's to offer a plausible degree of deniability. Which is what that scene is. It means that to some viewers, it's obviously about more than a ride in a car, it's about the speed/intimacy of Crowley and Aziraphale's relationship. Which is how I and many others saw it. To other viewers, it could very plausibly be just what it seems at face value - a man offering a ride in a car to another man, and the second man declining and getting out of the car in question. So even if it's not about a casual offer of carpooling, it could be, because the context is there and available to be interpreted that way. Not everyone picks up on undercurrents and metaphors, even if they're heavy handed ones, and I wouldn't call that scene heavy handed at all. I think it was poignant and wonderfully done.

"The only people not picking up on it are deep in denial and even kissing or declarations of love wouldn't get through to them. You holding them as the bar is disingenuous and makes you very much the "only making out on screen counts" kinda person."

Nope, it doesn't. Like I said several times, I picked up on it very easily. But to say that it's so obvious that everyone would do the same unless they're in denial is a bit silly. Lots of people watch media and fail to pick up on plot points and character relationships of every kind, romantic or platonic. It's because people are human, and quite frequently they will not "get" everything there is to get about a piece of media even if it seems very obvious.

I mentioned The Untamed as an earlier example. It, too, is fairly obvious to me and many others that it's a romance between two men, Wei Wuxian and Lan Wanji. But because it was made in China, where censors dictate that m/m romances are NOT to be portrayed in media, the people who made the show had to be somewhat discreet. There is no kissing, or sex. There are no declarations of love. There is, not unlike Good Omens, a lot of meaningful glances, playful banter, declarations of deep friendship and undying loyalty, there's romantic music and a lot of things that strongly signal what the show cannot come out and say - that two men are in deeply in love, will fight side by side with one another, defy authority for one another and even suffer and die for one another if necessary. And yet... not everyone got it. Because that's life, and human beings miss the point of things all the time.

And you're still trying very, very hard to put words into my mouth that I never said. And it seems to be upsetting you greatly that I'm not making those arguments you want me to make, which is peculiar. Remember - I am not the one saying that Good Omens isn't gay. I've never claimed that. I said that fandom's buzz and enthusiasm rather inflated my expectations of how gay it would be, and I found it to be less so than anticipated. I'm not saying it was a bad show. I said I enjoyed it, particularly Crowley and Aziraphale's parts. But I think fandom oversold it to me a little and for some reason, that really offends some people.

[(Anonymous)]

DA

You know you're arguing with at least two different people here, right? I'm the anon who made the comment about aiming stuff at the dumbest possible audience member one or two comments up.

But I'm not the person who made the comment you're ranting about here, that's someone else who made related but different points entirely. This is just starting to sound like you can't handle people disagreeing with you, and you're doing as much putting words in other peoples' mouths as you think others are doing to you. Calm down.

[(Anonymous)]

I'm afraid I don't have the ability to differentiate anons without them stating upfront they're not the same person. I apologize if you're a different anon and retract my remark about a recurring pattern of you putting words into my mouth. I guess the recurring pattern is that two different anons seem to be structuring their arguments around things they believe I said, but that I didn't actually say. Which is very strange.

It's also strange you're reading my words as a rant. It's just a response to a comment that was addressed to me, and it's quite civil and calm.

[(Anonymous)]

"I guess the recurring pattern is that two different anons seem to be structuring their arguments around things they believe I said, but that I didn't actually say."

Well, that might be because you're not actually that good at expressing what you meant to say, clearly.

[(Anonymous)]

That's possible, but I don't think I'm responsible for the miscommunication. When someone says I'm one of those "only making out on screen counts" people and I point out that I never said that... that's fairly cut and dried, I think. My comments made it clear that I view Crowley and Aziraphale to be in a romantic relationship, as portrayed by the show. I didn't say anything about the romance not "counting" unless there was an explicit kiss.

I think there's at least one anon who'd like to be able to accuse me of saying this or that unreasonable thing], which is a bit silly because all anyone has to do is look back over the discussion and see that I didn't. It's a bit puzzling that they're so insistent on trying to attach to me opinions that they disagree with so strongly, opinions that I don't actually hold. It's as if they're determined to have this fight with someone, and even though I'm not the right opponent, they're trying it anyway? Very odd.

[(Anonymous)]

You don't have to say it, it's called reading what you said and not taking it as the only thing you're saying because I've had this argument a dozen times with concern trolls. "All this evidence that would count for a straight couple but magically doesn't count for the gay couple because it's not smooching and otherwise it's just plausible deniability waaah waaaah woe is me what will the HOMOPHOBES THINK" when... The homophobes deny it even WHEN characters use romantic sayings or kiss or things. Believe me, I've seen a thing where a couple explicitly uses "aishiteru" and kiss and shit and people STILL try to argue they're "just sisterly." Fuck off with this totally disaffected bullshit, you troll.

[(Anonymous)]

I think the fact that you've had this argument dozens of times (and are clearly angry and frustrated by it) is likely coloring your perceptions of what I did and did not say. I'm sorry you've had negative interactions with people on this subject before, but I don't think it justifies how you're conducting yourself in a discussion where the person you're talking to is behaving civilly, without resorting to name calling and other nasty remarks. I hope you come to a place where you realize that people who see things exactly the same way you see them aren't personally attacking you, because this seems really unhealthy.

[(Anonymous)]

I am going to structure it so you can understand. NAYRT. Completely different anon. And I don't care how many of you are trying to defend your favorite show by putting words in other people's mouths. You. Are. Annoying. As fuck

SA

[(Anonymous)]

Oh, and I forgot - in the The Untamed, the director, writer and actors all knew they were playing a gay love story. That's how it was filmed, that's how the actors were instructed to approach the relationship because the story is based on a novel where the m/m is explicit. The TV show could not be explicit, due to government censorship, otherwise the show would not be made or aired. But they tried very, very hard to get their point across anyway, and IMO they succeeded as best as they could under those difficult circumstances.

And yet... not everyone picked up on it. For some people, it was too subtle, maybe. But for whatever reason, the romance that was obvious to many was not obvious to all.

[(Anonymous)]

Just gonna say, you come across as a whiny bitch who feels above everyone with all of this. Like the most blatant caricature of how people view autistic people in media. Shut down your superiority complex and maybe take a few edibles to relax about what the homophobes might think of the gay angels.

[(Anonymous)]

DA

This is an incredibly harsh and unnecessarily rude response to a post that's pretty reasonable in how it discusses the issue even if I don't agree with the conclusions

[(Anonymous)]

Are you the same anon who advised me to calm down? It'd be funny if you were, but even if you weren't, it's not bad advice if you feel so moved by discussion as to call people names just because they said something you disagreed with.

[(Anonymous)]

No, I'm the one who advised you to calm down and I'm not AYRT

[(Anonymous)]

This person is awful, absolutely not down with the misogynist and ableist name-calling.

[(Anonymous)]

But they ARE acting like a caricature of someone autistic. I say this as someone who is autistic. The overly analytical super detached everything screams "I'm trolling but in a way where I act fake-autistic so no one calls me on it."

[(Anonymous)]

What are you on about?
All types of people talk with detachment.

[(Anonymous)]

Ah, I see. I'm still unsure what about my comment wasn't calm, but maybe there's some confusion due to all of the anons.