[ SECRET POST #6302 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #6302 ⌋

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


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



































Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 33 secrets from Secret Submission Post #901.
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'd say "true crime" is a fandom, sure. "I'm fascinated by serial killers like I'm fascinated by train wrecks, and consume a lot of content about unsolved mysteries and criminal investigations and related processes" is a common enough thing.

"I am a legit fan of some person that murdered a bunch of people IRL and write real people letters in prison and shit" is a whole other thing, which exists too, but not exactly a fandom per se.

[(Anonymous)]

How does once decide what is and is not a fandom, then? Is it defined by the behavior of the people who are interested and engaged in a specific form of media or person?

[(Anonymous)]

I don't think any "one" does decide that. Do enough people, with their varying personal definitions of fandom, within the true crime fandom and outside of the true crime fandom recognize it as a fandom? Then sure. To me it seems that enough people do that.

It's the same as art, do enough people, with their varying personal definitions of art, consider something art? It becomes art then.

Anyway, I don't think everything that has fans is a fandom. Jeffrey Dahmer has fans and people who obsess with him, but I wouldn't say he has an overall fandom, just like that one girl Becky in your high school had some people who crushed on her, but there was no generally recognized Becky fandom.

[(Anonymous)]

The Jeffrey Dahmer vs. Becky issue is one where matter of degree seems applicable. Dahmer has far more fans, plus media created about him, and no doubt, fanfiction. I would not be surprised to learn there are Dahmer-focused gatherings at conventions where true crime is the main topic. This is not to say that he deserves that level of attention or fame, but there's no question it exists. It's more than just a dozen people crushing on a serial killer.

[(Anonymous)]

Nah, degree is not applicable. I wouldn't call Nazis a Hitler fandom, even if you could argue they are, because the world generally does not consider them so.

[(Anonymous)]

DA

Not an applicable comparison.

[(Anonymous)]

Care to explain why?

[(Anonymous)]

People don't become nazis because they're fans of Hitler. People become nazis because they're fascist racists. They're fans of Hitler because he too was a fascist racist. It's the same with Trump. People aren't bigoted assholes because they just really like Trump. They like Trump because he validates them being bigoted assholes. As soon as he stops doing that, they will drop him like a hot potato.

Unlike fandom, where, for example, no one hates the MCU more than people who are fans of the MCU.

[(Anonymous)]

...oh, when I said "Nazis" as in "actual 1939 Nazis who were, literally, fans of Hitler" did you think I meant "neo-Nazis in 2024"?

[(Anonymous)]

No. Same thing in 1939. People were upset and angry about the fallout from WW1. Hitler validated their anger. They didn't like Hitler qua Hitler. They liked his validation and the power he gave them.

No one would say that MCU is giving the fans what they want and validating their emotions. But people keep going to the movies, keep making fic and art and vids. Because fandom is about the community of people.

Nazism is explicitly NOT about the community. It's very exclusionary. It doesn't stem from the same impulse of liking something that fandom does.

Fandom comes from shared enjoyment stemming from within the individual person. Nazism, as with all fascism, comes from hatred of others, often stemming from outside pressures. They're almost complete opposites, though as with many things, sometimes the side effects can be similar.

[(Anonymous)]

I'm confused what you're arguing about because I'm comparing Hitler to Dahmer to Becky who are all real people who don't give the people anything. We seem to be in agreement that people who claim to be fans of them are not considered a fandom, generally, by the world.

Where did MCU come in? Are we arguing just to argue? lol

[(Anonymous)]

No, we're arguing because you think that fandom depends on other people agreeing that it's a fandom. I think it has an actual definition and even if no one else thinks so, things can be a fandom. People in the fandom can also think they're not in a fandom and be wrong. True crime is a fandom. Nazism is not. Not because the world doesn't think they're a fandom, but because the fandom mechanism is not there.

[(Anonymous)]

Oh, okay, so you're... arguing that your personal definition of fandom is the only correct definition of fandom. Just like every other anon in this thread, only about their personal definitions which aren't exactly yours.

Well, good luck with that! Add your vote to the pile of everyone else who thinks that with a slightly different definition to you, I suppose. I'll be chilling over there seeing which side wins in the end.

You must realize this is futile, right?

[(Anonymous)]

I was just explaining why I think you're wrong. That's... that's what discussion is. You're the one who declared by fiat. I explained why I thought you were wrong, and then you asked why we were arguing. So...yeah, I know you won't be swayed by debate because you just want to go with the majority and have answers handed to you, even if they're wrong.

Your definition is way too arbitrary, based on the opinions of others, to give you any kind of foundation for debate. So I'm mostly talking to the people who are reading this, to make sure they don't just wait for a poll to come out telling them what they think.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, sure. Define art for us next. :)

[(Anonymous)]

A diverse range of human activity and its resulting product that involves creative or imaginative talent generally expressive of technical proficiency, beauty, emotional power, or conceptual ideas.

[(Anonymous)]

The funny part here is instead of your own individual definition, you copy pasted that from Wikipedia, which is a definition literally based on the collective, agreed-upon, opinion of the masses.

Thanks for... proving my point?

[(Anonymous)]

Yet you live in society I am very smart.

[(Anonymous)]

Nope. You just let the point fly right past you and didn't even notice it. Wow.

[(Anonymous)]

SA

Nor would I call Christians the Jesus fandom, et cetera. It's not about morality or scale, but "is it generally viewed as this?"

And sometimes the answer is "no, if you're in love with Jeffery Dahmer most people just think you're weird or nuts."

[(Anonymous)]

Just so you know, when people talk about being fans of true crime or even having a deep interest in Jeffrey Dahmer, they're not exclusively talking about women who write to him (or other serial killers) in prison professing their love, etc. There's plenty of unsavory fan activity done by straight men that doesn't involve direction communication with the person, or romantic/sexual interest.

[(Anonymous)]

Sure, that was just an example. Do people generally consider themselves to be a fandom? Do outside groups consider them to be a fandom? Do they call themselves Dahmer fanboys? Do other people call them that? Is that a generally recognized thing in a way that emulating/mythologizing/copycatting, say, any old school shooter isn't?

The answer to all those is no, as far as I have seen. But like I said, anyone can argue that it is a fandom. It's a matter of getting everyone else to agree.

[(Anonymous)]

DA

The fandom is the community aspect. As far as I know, there isn't a community of people who meet up to discuss how much they stan Jeffrey. There are true crime conventions and blogs and discords, etc etc. There's a true crime community. That's what makes it a fandom.

[(Anonymous)]

This is the most compelling argument to me - that there's a sense of community and interaction that goes beyond just reading a book about crime or listening to a podcast. I think the "it's not a fandom!" reaction comes from two things: not realizing just how deep the interest goes, and how it manifests in very fandom-like stuff like conventions, discussion, investigation (like websleuths and other communities), written media, etc. etc. and secondly... people just don't like the idea, and the "not fandom" comes from a "I find this repellent/uninteresting so it's not fandom to me". It does feel like hair splitting, IMO.