[ SECRET POST #6935 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #6935 ⌋

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


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.



__________________________________________________



08.



__________________________________________________



09.



__________________________________________________



10.



__________________________________________________



11.
























Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 23 secrets from Secret Submission Post #990.
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

[fscom]

10. https://cdn.imgchest.com/files/3d7d2901e5f2.png

Transcript by OP

[fscom]

I'm getting really tired of people being unable to comprehend that saying a villain's actions were understandable =/= saying they were acceptable.

There are lots of villains who do the things they do for reasons that make perfect sense. Those reasons are also wrong or misguided. Both things can be true at the same time, and IMO a villain who does things for understandable but incorrect or unacceptable reasons is a far more compelling character than a villain who is just evil for the sake of evil or for their own personal benefit.

[(Anonymous)]

It really depends on the villain, though overall it's just a problem of critical thinking. People don't want to admit that their favs do shitty things and they judge those that can go 'okay, cool motive, still murder' while also going 'but, hey, your villain origin story is actually sad and traumatic AF and that sucks for you'.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, for real. I love Ardyn from FFXV and it's so tiring seeing people judge fans who're like "he's been through a LOT" but also the way fans of him then get really defensive about it?? IDK it's just not a good scene for anyone.

[(Anonymous)]

IME the second one usually comes about as a result of the first: people get lambasted for daring to say that a villain is sympathetic in the sense of having had truly horrible experiences that shaped them into the villain they are in canon, and so they wind up becoming overly defensive as a result.

[philstar22]

Yup. Or people who can't understand that liking a villain isn't the same as thinking they are actually a good person or justifying their actions. of course, woobifying is a thing that happens, though I'd still argue that if someone wants to do that, let them do it as it is just a fictional character. But not everyone who likes villains thinks they are good people. Villains are fun, especially when they are really evil.

[(Anonymous)]

Absolutely. When I say I prefer villains who aren't just evil for the sake of it, I don't mean that they need a tragic, sympathetic backstory. I hate that some people set it up like those are the only two options.

When I say that, I mean that I like a character whose motivations I can try to understand. I like a villain who has a particular goal or set of values or whatever, letting me see the world from their perspective, as misguided or despicable as it may be.

[(Anonymous)]

I think this is an extension of the lack of critical thinking/reading comprehension these days. To be able to work through problems or understand other people's thought processes you have to be able to hold contradictory information in the forefront of your mind, which seems to be an impossibility for a large portion of today's media consumers. Any character who has ever done anything wrong is forever and always irredeemable and if you like that character you MUST be a person who supports such actions IN REAL LIFE, you murderer. It's impossible to like a character who does Horrible Thing A and not want to do Horrible Thing A yourself! (Because why would you like such a thing in fiction unless you want to do it??? Check and mate!)

They think that everyone has the same limited point of view as themselves and are unable to understand that other people can think in ways completely different to them.... such as being empathetic and understanding how a villain got to be that way but also not condoning their actions.

[(Anonymous)]

Sad but true. And you see it sometimes when people discuss RL people/celebrities too. If someone made one off-color remark on Twitter 15 years ago when they were a teenager, some people will hold that against them forever and treat them like they're an irredeemable garbage human being, forever deserving of contempt.

[(Anonymous)]

It's horribly self reinforcing. People will come at you for not having the same viewpoints and you argue your side and whatever, that's always how it worked. But in the purity culture of once-problematic-always-problematic, if you are persuaded that you were wrong about anything and admit to it, you'll be shamed for ever having been wrong in the first place and now you get it from both sides. This leads people to double and triple down on being wrong because the other option is a high chance of abuse for owning up to it and growing as a person.

[(Anonymous)]

To be able to work through problems or understand other people's thought processes you have to be able to hold contradictory information in the forefront of your mind, which seems to be an impossibility for a large portion of today's media consumers.

I dunno, your average Republican seems pretty good at doublethink... or are you describing something else?

[(Anonymous)]

OK, this is implied in the "forefront of your mind" part but:

You have to be able to hold contradictory information in the forefront of your mind knowing, understanding, and recognizing that it is contradictory information.

I don't think republicans have a forefront of their minds; they swap out their contradictory thoughts second by second whenever it's the most advantageous and, if you ever get them to think both at the same time, their brains shut down rather than try to square that circle. You can see it happen in real time in a lot of man-on-the-street interviews.

[(Anonymous)]

Some folks believe everything should be wrapped up in a neat little package. No nuance, no context, no multiple truths. It makes their lives easier and makes them feel better about the way they see the world.

Granted, I'd rather see them apply this to fiction than to the real world, but I get the impression that most folks who do this don't stop at the fiction.

[bannedbookweek]

A little Column A, a little Column B. Like I was in FFXIV fandom when Shadowbringers came out and Emet Selch was the new sexyman. His actions were always understandable but I was really disappointed in the number of fans who passionately argued that him committing genocide was a good thing and how cool the scenario writer was for writing a character who "made you reconsider the ethics of genocide" and gosh maybe the heroes were the real monsters all along.

Emet Selch is a cool character and a tragic one and his actions are completely understandable but I've never forgotten the fact that those types of fans were hanging around justifying a video game character like that. It didn't die down until the Israel-Palestine war started up again and then a real genocide taking place made everyone keep that opinion to themselves.

[(Anonymous)]

This! I love Emet-Selch as a villain, he's a great character, he was very clearly in the wrong haha.

[(Anonymous)]

When I see things like this I'm glad that the game-story discussion was with my group of friends who basically had the same thoughts as you: understandable from his perspective but ultimately wrong and he needed to go because he would not stop. I love a villain with utter conviction in their goals but that doesn't make them right.

[(Anonymous)]

That's one of my favorite Spock lines from A Taste of Armageddon. "I do not approve. I understand." I love a villain, and I understand many of them, but that doesn't mean I approve of them

[(Anonymous)]

HONESTLY. You're right and you should say it. Like, I want to be able to understand a villain, that doesn't mean I agree with them! Once in a while I even like to be able to say 'that guy had a point', and it still doesn't mean I think he had a good reason to poison the water supply or whatever, it just means I think there's a depth and tragedy that you don't get with a villain who just poisons people for funsies, you know?