fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #6849 ]

[ SECRET POST #6849 ]

⌈ Secret Post #6849 ⌋

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

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 31 secrets from Secret Submission Post #978.
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.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I wish I could say I have ever seen anyone going "warn for your ~~slash~~ trans!" has ever said "also tag your cis so I can find your cis because I actually do treat tagging equally across the board" but I have never seen that.

Because it's dumb. Most characters are canonically cis. So tagging every canon trait would be superfluous.

Eh, I don't think that's true in fandoms where trans fic is popular enough to the point where many people are complaining about it. Clearly there's enough volume in those places to merit tags.

Yes. For the characters that aren't originally trans.

Tgas are overly bloated as is, we don't need MORE superfluous tags.

Nope, friendly reminder that no character is canonically cis unless:

A. They say so in canon.

B. Canon shows their birth and someone says "It's a (gender-the-character-is-in-canon)."

C. Canon shows their genitals and they align with a cis person with whatever they have.

I know you don't think every character is canonically straight when it's not explicit one way or the other, but guess what, fandom used to think that. This secret is about getting away from default mentality, and here you are doing it.

Bullshit. Sorry but that's just bullshit. Every character is canonically the norm/default unless OTHERWISE stated, not the other way around. Trans people are such a tiny minority so no, a character is not potentially trans until explicitely stated to be cis. That's like saying just because it's not explicitely stated in canon that a character is human, they could just as well be an android.

Every character in literature is white unless the narration describes their skin like food.

If we are talking about a novel set in 19th century Russia, probably yeah, they are.
Also context clues are such a great thing: someone called Ndung’u most likely isn't white.

Milk-white is pretty common, cry about it. Not anyone's fault not a lot of foods are white and food items as descriptors are the more flattering way to describe brown tones.

What are you reading that milk-white is common???

DA

You've never seen A League of Their Own?

What are you reading that you've never come across it. And again, most foods just aren't white. If they were, you'd have more food descriptors for pale skin as well.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2025-10-07 18:56 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2025-10-07 19:21 (UTC) - Expand

Written in England about Victorian England? Yeah, gonna assume they're white until otherwise stated. Written in China about the Warring States Period? Gonna assume they're Asian until stated otherwise. Written about the Hausa expansion? Gonna assume they're black until stated otherwise.

In all of these cases, that's what greater than 98% of the population is.

That's how context works.

Heck, you don't even need specific real-world context to make inferences. A story about a fictional desert-dwelling people in a fantasy world? They're likely going to have darker skin.

No, surely there's no connection between things like environment/location and skin color! It's all totally random!

Friendly reminder that no character is canonically human unless:

A. They say so in canon.

B. Canon shows their birth and someone says "It's a human!"

C. Canon shows that they're absolutely not a lizard in a human suit, with a complete absence of weird tech, or any alien that looks human but is biologically not, or an elf that had surgery done on the ears, or or or

I know you don't think ever character is canonically human when it's not explicitly stated one way or the other, but guess what, fandoms still thinks that. This secret is about getting away from default mentality, and here you are doing it.

nice comparison 👍️ trans people are exactly the same as lizards in human suits

Yes, all trans people are Jewish, I am glad you've learned

It's not confirmed in ANY tv show that they're NOT lizards in human suits, so I need to you tag that they're human in your fic. You just assume that they're all human with NO confirmation, and that's just, like, your opinion, man.

No, but trans people are a tiny percentage of the population. Any given fictional character (and any given real world person, for that matter) is far, far more likely to be cis than trans.

This is a basic fact of reality. It does no one any good to pretend that it isn't.

As a queer agender person, this argument is a huge cope. There's nothing wrong with transcanons, but they often are literally adding onto or changing what we assume a character is.

If a character is a girl, and I headcanon her as a trans girl, I'm going to gave to tag my fic with [trans!character] because it's my transformative interpretation. I can claim that we never saw her as a child or nude as proof she's a canon trans girl all I want, but that doesn't change most creators write cis-as-default and she is not stated to be a trsns girl. My headcanon is still valid since it's not explicitly denied, but that doesn't make it textual.

This.

Most characters are canonically implied to be cis. Most characters are not canonically confirmed to be cis.

Same difference in practise. Also: most characters are not at all implied to be trans, let alone canonically stated to be.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only