fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #1900 ]

⌈ Secret Post #1900 ⌋

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

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

[The Rap Critic]

__________________________________________________

03.

[Hanna is Not a Boy's Name]

__________________________________________________

04.

[Ricky Gervais]

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

[Upstairs, Downstairs]

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

__________________________________________________

12.

__________________________________________________

13.

__________________________________________________

14.

[Alex Trebek]

__________________________________________________

15.

__________________________________________________

16.

__________________________________________________

17.

__________________________________________________

18.

[Quantic Dreams / Playstation 3 tech]

__________________________________________________

19.

[misfits]

__________________________________________________

20.

__________________________________________________

21.

[Pretty in Pink]

__________________________________________________

22.

[Castleville]

__________________________________________________

23.

[Castleville]

__________________________________________________

24.

[Jak and Daxter ]

__________________________________________________

25.

[Team Fortress 2]

__________________________________________________

26.

__________________________________________________

27.

__________________________________________________

28.

[The Vampire Diaries]

__________________________________________________

29.

[House of Five Leaves/Sarai-ya Goyou]

__________________________________________________

30.

[New Mutants]

__________________________________________________

[ ----- SPOILERY SECRETS AHEAD ----- ]

31. [SPOILERS for Death Note]

__________________________________________________

32. [SPOILERS for Supernatural]

__________________________________________________

33. [SPOILERS for Skins Gen 3]

__________________________________________________

34. [SPOILERS for Skins Season 2]

__________________________________________________

[ ----- TRIGGERY SECRETS AHEAD ----- ]

35. [TRIGGER WARNING for abuse]

__________________________________________________

36. [TRIGGER WARNING for rape]

__________________________________________________

37. [TRIGGER WARNING for rape]

[House MD]

__________________________________________________

38. [TRIGGER WARNING for rape]

[spartacus]

__________________________________________________

39. [TRIGGER WARNING for abuse]

[Unrelated]

__________________________________________________

Notes:

Anon meme tomorrow (Saturday), Y/N?

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 000 secrets from Secret Submission Post #271.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 1 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

May I ask, and I'm aware this will start a shitstorm, but why would you find people who believe that they are really cats trapped in a human body laughable, and yet take people who believe that they are really men trapped in a female body completely at face value?

I'm not looking for an emotional "how dare you" or "gross" or that sort of thing. I believe all such people are sincere, and I believe that everyone should be treated with respect, but I don't see why one should be treated as "just how humanity is, and you should constantly consider it a possibility in everyone you meet" while the other is "gross, how disturbing".

I've wondered this since the South Park episode with the guy who believes he is really a dolphin, and the way people talked about it here. What is the actual, factual, logical difference?

Eh, it doesn't even have to be that literal. Someone could just identify strongly with an animal or feel like they have the spirit of one... or they were a cat in a past life, if they believe in reincarnation, and are now human with an affinity for cats... or it could even just be metaphorical.

Lots of people have strange beliefs. It's not necessary for you to believe that somebody who identifies as cat-kin really has a cat's spirit or whatever, but it should be enough to live and let live, as long as their beliefs aren't harmful to you or anyone else, right?

Well yes, as I say, I believe such people are sincere, and everyone should be respected. What I don't understand is why this is considered completely different from being (for example) transgender or genderqueer, which people around here go so far as to say everyone should expect in everyone they meet. The same people make mocking comments about otherkin, and clearly consider it something completely different.

Oh, I suppose it's because different sexes and genders are still within the realm of human experience, whereas otherkin step out of that boundary to include identifying as non-human. People can understand different sexes and genders, because it's still a human thing. People know male and female, because it's something physical (if we're talking about sex or how one presents as one gender or another) or something they feel (when it comes to just the concept of feeling to be one gender or the other or neither or both or whatever).
But animals or even strange creatures not everyone believes in?
This is so far removed from most humans' understanding that they see it as disturbing or worthy of derision and mockery.

... aaaaand I suppose it just sounds funny to someone, when they hear it for the first time, that "so-and-so believes he's a cat in human body."

Otherwise, I suppose some trans folks worry about otherkin trying to claim something that isn't theirs, because they're not oppressed in the same nature. Unless you crawl around on all fours barking at people all the time (which most dog-kin don't do, actually-- most can behave in a socially acceptable human manner just fine), nobody can tell you identify as a dog and treat you badly because of it... some might have their suspicions, but they can't prove it just by looking at you unless you choose to make it visible. For trans folks, this is more difficult. People can tell more easily just by looking at you that you're trans, particularly if you fail to pass, so trans folks suffer more oppression that's much harder to escape.

That and queer folks have managed to convince more people that they're not mentally ill. If you claim to identify as an animal, you're probably still going to be thought to be a raving lunatic by most people, before you even have the chance to explain that, no, you're fully aware that you're physically human, and so on.

... just my (TL;DR) thoughts on the subject. ^^;

OMG GOOD POINT!!! And what's the difference between being homosexual and being attracted to animals?? Why is one acceptable and the other isn't???? PLEASE EXPLAIN THIS TO ME OH WISE BASTION OF INTELLIGENT DISCOURSE

But in this case I can say that acting on one can involve both partners meaningfully consenting, whereas acting on the other cannot. Hence, one clearly cannot be acted on without nonconsensual sex resulting, and so they are not equivalent. That's not a reason to be unkind to someone who happens to be attracted to animals, but it does means there should be laws against them ever acting on that attraction, even if it means they never have sex.

This difference does not exist with otherkin and transgender people. Or are you suggesting that otherkin are automatically into bestiality? That strikes me as wildly ignorant, and unhelpful.

Or are you simply suggesting that you have an automatic "ew" reaction to otherkin, so will assume it is as bad as bestiality? That certainly doesn't constitute a logical and consistent worldview.

uh, how about no. none of the above. stop getting hung up on the metaphor. i know it makes it way harder to dodge my argument, but please. this is just sad.

my actual point was that equating being transgender with being INHUMAN is bad. can you see how that is bad? 30 seconds. i'll wait.

not to mention all of the bullshit where otherkin try to co-opt the struggle for transgender rights even though they are not the same thing in any way, at all. at all. i would take the time to explain to you all of the things that are so incredibly wrong with this but i'm afraid i'd die at my keyboard.

also, i don't really give a fuck if my worldviews are "logical and consistent." i'm illogical because im

(gasp)

A HUMAN!

this thread is over. everyone go home.

[ SECRET POST #1900 ]

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject