[ SECRET POST #6270 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #6270 ⌋

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


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



































Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 13 secrets from Secret Submission Post #896.
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)]

Meh, any author can warn for whatever they want on their story, warranted or not.

Beyond that, drawing any sweeping conclusions as to whether "society" has gone too far with content-warnings based on one book/author/warning you thought erred too far on the side of caution is pretty obvious troll bait.

[(Anonymous)]

Yes, we are all aware authors can do whatever they want with their stories. But readers are also allowed to say "I don't like this"

Tbh your comment reads more like troll bait than the secret.

[(Anonymous)]

I mean, read the last line of the secret again and if you still think that... you're probably OP, lol.

[(Anonymous)]

I don't think it's fair to assume that someone is trolling for tying something they've seen, experienced, or noticed to "society" more broadly. Even if you don't agree with the connection being made, it's a fairly common thing for people to do.

[(Anonymous)]

The alternative is, as you said, assuming they took one data point then decided there's a fair probability that all of society is exactly like that point and... I'm not sure that's actually less insulting?

[(Anonymous)]

I think it's usually less insulting to assume someone is speaking in good faith, even if they've said something that seems dumb, then to assume they're lying or being deliberately antagonistic.

[(Anonymous)]

I'd find it more insulting if someone assumed I was genuinely going "have trigger warnings have gone too far??? (heavily implied yes)" over a single warning in a single book, but we can agree to disagree, I guess.

[(Anonymous)]

+1