[ SECRET POST #6234 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #6234 ⌋

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


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.
[Cyberpunk 2077]



































Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 20 secrets from Secret Submission Post #891.
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

Re: Live Action ATLA

[nanslice]

What's the wank about Sokka? I was in ATLA fandom for a long time when it was originally airing, but I can't remember this.

Re: Live Action ATLA

[(Anonymous)]

Not ayrt, but prob the misogynistic comments etc and the subsequent character arc Sokka goes through. Apparently the live action is getting rid of 'problematic' behaviours and that means not having that character development at all.

Not sure if the potential fandom wank is cause of Sokka being misogynistic in the show or rather the upset about not even seeing him develop as a person.

Re: Live Action ATLA

[(Anonymous)]

The original show was so tame with Sokka's misogyny though, removing it would hardly change anything and would be an improvement because it wouldn't give him the flaw of misogyny to get over unrealistically quickly. In the cartoon it only took being beaten in a match by Suki once halfway through the episode to change his entire view of women's skills. Better to just leave out that "character development," and not because it's problematic for a good guy to be misogynistic.

Re: Live Action ATLA

[(Anonymous)]

Sokka having to get over himself wasn’t the point. It was setup for the confrontation with Pakku and the Northern Water Tribe later on.

Re: Live Action ATLA

[ariakas]

to get over unrealistically quickly

Ehhh to be fair fighting is the one thing misogynistic guys really cling to as the one thing a woman could never beat them at because it's so fundamental to hegemonic masculinity to be the Protector and Warrior, ime. If a woman beat them at something else masculine-associated like a math test they could simply shrug it off as "she's the exception (that proves the rule) (and other men are better than her)" but losing a fight, specifically, might just rock their entire world and cause an identity crisis on the spot.

Re: Live Action ATLA

[(Anonymous)]

Getting rid of problematic things - my god, did someone working on the show actually say it like that? I hope not - will probably mean Iroh never did war crimes and Zuko was secretly a thought-rebel against the Fire Nation's imperialist teachings ever since he was born, because if they're getting redeemed then they aren't allowed to have done or thought anything that bad to begin with.

Re: Live Action ATLA

[(Anonymous)]

The other wank about Sokka is that the live-action actor is a race-faker. (He really is part-Asian, but he is not part-Cherokee).

Re: Live Action ATLA

[(Anonymous)]

Eh, I looked this up and the answer is murky. I mean it's quite possible he does have native American ancestry but his family isn't registered under an official group. It's not impossible or uncommon for that to be a thing.

It's one of those things where it's extremely hard to prove either way, purely on basis of skin tone especially for ppl of mixed heritage.

Re: Live Action ATLA

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT It’s the accusations of race faking. In a black and white world, he lied to get the part. In reality, it isn’t so simple as that. He’s claimed Cherokee ancestry but isn’t registered with any of the recognized tribes. And to some, including some in those tribes, that means he doesn’t have any Cherokee ancestry. For others, it just means he isn’t registered with one of the three (? I think it was three) tribes recognized by the US government but could still be directly descended from someone who is/was part of one of the (apparently many) other Cherokee tribes that either still exists without recognition or was absorbed into a larger one or simply erased from existence either directly or indirectly (residential schools, resettlement, etc).
I personally think they should have chosen someone else for the role based on the inability to verify his claim. There was never any chance this wasn’t going to be a big deal for this adaptation. OTOH, he nails the character in the trailer and it’s easy to see why they chose him.