case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2012-01-15 04:09 pm

[ SECRET POST #1839 ]

⌈ Secret Post #1839 ⌋


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


01.



__________________________________________________

02.


__________________________________________________

03.


__________________________________________________

04.


__________________________________________________

05.


__________________________________________________

06. [repeat]


__________________________________________________

07.


__________________________________________________

08.


__________________________________________________

09.


__________________________________________________

10.


__________________________________________________

11.


__________________________________________________

12.


__________________________________________________

13.


__________________________________________________

14.


__________________________________________________

15.


__________________________________________________

16.


__________________________________________________

17.


__________________________________________________

18.


__________________________________________________

19.


__________________________________________________

20.


__________________________________________________

21.


__________________________________________________

22.



Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 07 pages, 156 secrets from Secret Submission Post #263.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 1 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeats ]
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments and concerns should go here.

(Anonymous) 2012-01-17 09:12 am (UTC)(link)
You might have a point if, you know, Noir was like 8-9 years old now? Plus, it was popular back then anyway. But Noir suffered from being a Bee Train anime: it was extremely slow paced and it dragged on. IMO, it was the only decent production Bee Train made to this day.

And quit it with 'if it was M/M....' Not every series like that blows up big enough for an active fandom. See No. 6.

(Anonymous) 2012-01-17 09:38 am (UTC)(link)
+1 for rationality.

(Anonymous) 2012-01-17 10:15 am (UTC)(link)
Ugh, I hate how the first word's out of everyone's mouth is "omg new Lola is SO UGLY!"

I know the character designs for the show are bad, but WOW, talk about freaking Shallow.

I also know that the crazy/psycho girlfriend cliche is dumb, but I didn't think the sultry-sexy-token-female-bunny-boobies-"don't call me doll" thing is any better. That's judging by looks too, but guess what? Old Lola wasn't even Funny. (She didn't even have a personality! She was just a walking female stereotype)

How can you have an un-funny Loony Toon?!

Also, New Lola is hilarious (and that's pretty hard to pull off, given the rest of the new show's bad jokes)


TL;DR- If you're gonna Hate New Lola, do it for a reason other than "ew so ugly!", Okay? Okay.

(Anonymous) 2012-01-17 10:28 am (UTC)(link)
We can discount theories, for starters. Moffat isn't clever enough, nor would he portray a partnership like that.

I disagree that the emotions = weak fallacy was disproven. How? It's hardly clear that Sherlock has particularly strong feelings for John in the first place. Sherlock was clearly portrayed as having 'won' his battle with Irene because of his ~masterful control~ of his feelings; I think the fact it was written so poorly is evident by the fact you have to make up a theory to explain it.
When there is so little portrayal of strong, clever women, not to mention strong, clever lesbian women it's a little trite to haul out the 'fluid sexuality' explanation when Moffat has such a shitty history writing female sexuality. Those camera angles were not made via the female gaze. It was the old 'a man clever enough to turn even a lesbian' trope.

I didn't like the slaughterhouse scene at all, but no, it didn't render particularly sexual for me. Sure, it was your traditional damsel in distress saved by the big strong men but it didn't ring as awfully for me because 1.) it's Hollywood, and I don't expect a thing whereas a BBC TV show has more scope to explore complex themes 2.) Irene didn't trade on her sexuality. BBC Irene pranced around with her mouth just as poutily parted; worse, we had to listen to her breathy orgasm tone every five minutes just to remind us she was a sex object.

[identity profile] broadwaybabe11.livejournal.com 2012-01-17 04:14 pm (UTC)(link)
The characters were annoying and it was kind of boring. It was an ok book, not so bad that I don't have hope for the future ones to be better, but it was not as great as VA.

(Anonymous) 2012-01-17 10:24 pm (UTC)(link)
Every time I see a secret about a broken friendship I worry it's about me, ugh. Even though this one probably isn't because the characters don't really suit our personalities (imo, anyway, though I suppose I am the cold, stubborn one) and iirc we had our falling-out before that movie came out so we didn't share the fandom, though I'm certain she'll have seen the movie, squee'd over it, and would know that I've seen it and squee'd over it. Well, if it is directed towards me...

I'm not mad, and I'd be willing to be friends again if you would grow the hell up. I know you think I've ~betrayed~ you but I think you made a mountain out of a molehill. My molehill: you're immature and it drives me crazy (x1000 when I was living with you). Basically, call me when you move out of your parents' basement and/or get a life outside of fandom.

[identity profile] borg-princess.livejournal.com 2012-01-17 11:05 pm (UTC)(link)
Thanks for the heads up. It's a shame the characters were the issue- I can deal with plot issues, but if I can't invest in characters... :/

(Anonymous) 2012-01-18 12:48 am (UTC)(link)
Being forced to allow another person the use of your body without your consent is being a brood-mare for the state. The state cannot force you to donate blood or bone marrow to save the life of your own 10-year-old child, but it can force you to undergo an even more dangerous and intrusive experience to save the life of a "child" whose cells haven't even differentiated into different tissues yet? No.

Consent to sex =/= consent to pregnancy. The "you were responsible for creating that child" argument is nothing more than an attempt to shame women for having sex.

[identity profile] broadwaybabe11.livejournal.com 2012-01-18 03:45 am (UTC)(link)
Sydney and Jill >.

(Anonymous) 2012-01-18 05:17 am (UTC)(link)
I know how you feel, OP. I'm so sorry.

(Anonymous) 2012-01-18 06:18 am (UTC)(link)
Can we drop this now? We've all heard this argument before, and Kribban isn't even pro-life.

[identity profile] kribban.livejournal.com 2012-01-18 07:55 pm (UTC)(link)
No it's not. It's hyperbolic rhretoric. "Being a brood-mare for the state" would be accurate if you were punished if you didn't give birth a certain number of children (Romania in the 1980s) or if you were forcibly inseminated by the state.

Pregnancy is also different from organ donation in that you are not being asked to do something that is out of bounds for your body to do. The uterus has evolved to nourish and shelter embryos, that is it's normal function.

The only valid argument for legal abortion is that pregnancy always comes with a medical risk, and that no person should be required to risk their life for someone else, even if that someone is their own off-spring.

The "you were responsible for creating that child" argument is nothing more than an attempt to shame women for having sex.

There is no birth control method that has a 100 % success rate. That means that every single time you consent to intercourse (not sex, intercourse) you are taking the risk of getting pregnant. There is no getting around this.

In the "sickly violinist"-example that I'm sure you're thinking of, the narrator had been kidnapped at while she was asleep. Aborting an offspring - child - that you willingly conceived would be akin to her hunting down the violinist and performing a procedure that had a 10% chance of hooking him up to her.
Edited 2012-01-18 20:01 (UTC)

[identity profile] typhlogirl.livejournal.com 2012-01-19 11:26 am (UTC)(link)
I may be a little late but I really wanted to respond to your comment as I rarely get the chance to debate with pro-lifers who are actually coherent:

The only valid argument for legal abortion is that pregnancy always comes with a medical risk, and that no person should be required to risk their life for someone else, even if that someone is their own off-spring.

This sort of justification makes me rather uncomfortable. There are plenty of perfectly valid legal arguments for abortion that aren't just related to the physical capacity of the woman in question. What about in cases of rape or incest? Surely you wouldn't want to doom a rape victim into having her rapist's baby, even if she was perfectly capable of carrying the baby to term? It just seems completely inhumane. No woman should have to suffer that.

Aborting an offspring - child - that you willingly conceived

I wouldn't call falling pregnant after intercourse 'willing conception' unless the intercourse was strictly for the purpose of such. It seems...I don't know, strange to me. Most people don't have sex for the purpose of procreation, I'd say.

I personally find the thought of having to have a baby I don't want quite horrifying. I don't think it's unreasonable to be able to abort an unwanted pregnancy. This whole 'you had sex now you're pregnant too bad deal with it' thing seems so middle-ages to me.

[identity profile] phaethon.livejournal.com 2012-01-19 06:01 pm (UTC)(link)
Yes.

I will add that Noir did have a pretty active fandom when it was current, and though it wasn't a huge one, it produced a lot of awesome fic. I think because it was more of a cult classic, that's primarily why there isn't a fandom around anymore.

Nonetheless, I very much agree with your overall point. I doubt some segments of the fandom would have bickered so much about Mireille/Kirika if they had been male (or even male/female).
Edited 2012-01-19 18:05 (UTC)

(Anonymous) 2012-01-19 08:08 pm (UTC)(link)
IAWTC
kitty_fic: (Default)

[personal profile] kitty_fic 2012-01-20 07:02 am (UTC)(link)
Me too! So much!

(Anonymous) 2012-01-22 09:23 am (UTC)(link)
Erm, it's a cartoon. Character design and appeal is an integral part of it. If he producers make an unappealing character (which they have) it is a big deal, and they've really fucked up.

This is just assuming that a show begins and ends on TV, but let's be realistic, it goes beyond that because you know they want to sell shit with the characters on it.

Also, since when is judging art by its appearance a bad thing? I'm pretty sure that's the point. It's like judging a musical because the songs suck.

[identity profile] blackjackrocket.livejournal.com 2012-01-23 05:05 pm (UTC)(link)
Well if it helps, the manga Pokemon Adventures has Lyra and Crys as the same person. She just got a new outfit.

Page 31 of 31