[ SECRET POST #7102 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #7102 ⌋

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


01.




__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.





























Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 15 secrets from Secret Submission Post #1014.
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)]

If they're only saying that it gave the commenter secondhand embarrassment then a thing could never be cringe. I rarely hear anyone say "this made me cringe" or "this gave me the cringes." I hear "This is cringey" a lot which makes the cringe a property held by the object, not an emotion felt by the commenter.

[(Anonymous)]

...why can't a thing give someone secondhand embarrassment?

I think Kash Patel's childrens' books are considered universally cringe. Why can't they be?

[(Anonymous)]

Things can give someone second hand embarrassment. The thing is not inherently embarrassing. And thus the person who made it is not embarrassing. By attaching cringe to the thing, the onus of the embarrassment is being shifted from the person feeling it to the creator of the thing. Otherwise why would OP be afraid of being cringe? If they create what they want, why would that be embarrassing? Why care about making something "cringe" unless the people who find it so are shifting that emotion onto the maker?

[(Anonymous)]

No