[ SECRET POST #6490 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #6490 ⌋

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


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.
[Dilbert]



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.
[Deltarune, Big Shot]



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 38 secrets from Secret Submission Post #928.
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)]

Hmm... the secret would be a pretty roundabout way of wording that sentiment. Plus just because people are calling them ugly doesn't mean the celebrity suddenly ceases to be conventionally attractive in real life.

Maybe OP will drop in and clarify.

[(Anonymous)]

DA
Calling someone you dislike physically ugly even if they are pretty is still wrong. Because it's drawing parallel non-attractive = morally wrong.

[(Anonymous)]

Sorry, I really don't see where the "A, therefore B" or "A = B" claim is being made. People can be coincidentally two things at once without there being causality or the two things being linked, and the comments seem to just be noting that.

I wrote it below, but those comments read to me: "oh, so this celebrity who was of not much value to me as a consumer product because I didn't find them attractive, turned out to be an asshole and therefore even less value to me as a consumer product." or "The fact that they're a dick IRL confirms that this person has no value to me."

Are they nice comments? No, and I'm not arguing they are, but they also aren't saying ugly people are morally bad, or that morally bad people are ugly, or that the two things have any inherent connection.

2nd DA

[(Anonymous)]

I always found them ugly anyway = It's not a big deal that they're a horrible person, because they're ugly which is what matters to the speaker.

Not only does it prioritize looks over personality, it also states that the speaker thinks that people who are ugly are literally worth less as people regardless of their morals or skills or personality. Just because they're talking about a celebrity doesn't mean that they also don't employ this in their own life with regular people, which is what people around them who think of themselves as ugly are going to hear. It's like when people criticize a politician by calling them fat bastards. The fat people around them hear this talk and know that the person considers being fat to be a legitimate criticism on them as a person.

Re: 2nd DA

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, that is totally not how I'd read that, so we'll just have to disagree. When it comes to celebs in particular, where "whether they're attractive to you or not" is the entire purpose of the celeb and their brand in like 99/100 times, it means something different than when it's about average people who have far more to offer, and are more to you, than the brand they're selling you from afar.