[ SECRET POST #2016 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2016 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.


__________________________________________________



14.


__________________________________________________



15.


__________________________________________________



16.


__________________________________________________



17.


__________________________________________________



18.


__________________________________________________



19.


__________________________________________________



20.


__________________________________________________








Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 065 secrets from Secret Submission Post #288.
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

[sandor051.livejournal.com]

Men who are obsessed with things are portrayed as dangerous, pathetic, failures of men.

Women who're obsessed are portrayed in a mocking light sure, but it lacks that certain undercurrent you get with the reverse. It's 'oh those silly wymnz what are they like' but doesn't fundamentally undermine the patriarchal role enforced upon them - whereas a nerdy guy really into gaming or whatever is seen as lacking the very qualities needed to fulfil the gender role enforced upon him.

Like maybe this is one of those weird cultural quirks, but I'm reminded very of seeing arguments like 'oh men get away with crying in the workplace more then women!' that make me wonder.

[meadowphoenix]

Wait, I'm confused as to what you're saying. The patriarchal role enforced upon women being undermined is a good thing. However, "Oh those silly women" is a reinforcement of patriarchal roles, which is a terrible thing. I agree with you that "nerds" are said to lack some gender qualities, primarily masculinity. But the presumption is always that those nerds can gain those gender qualities they lack by some action (which I do think is harmful, but noting that manly qualities are proven by action is important). Reinforcement of gender roles for women mean that society will see those qualities as inherent. Such gender roles are harmful to the spectrum of both genders, but it's much harder to argue against something society thinks is inherent.

Nerds are still valuable assets in entertainment and business, in controlling positions like director/producer/CEO. How many crazy bitches are considered valuable?

[sandor051.livejournal.com]

I'm saying that obsession in men is seen in a more negative light then in women.

Within the boundaries of the patriarchy each gender is defined by the extent to which they conform to the gendered expectations placed upon them.

In women obsessions like this are seen as tertiary and not detracting from that, whereas in men these obsessions are seen to directly work against the expectations set out for them.

Whether this should be the case (obviously I would disagree with this state of affairs) is irrelevant to the question of how they are.

"Nerds are still valuable assets in entertainment and business, in controlling positions like director/producer/CEO. How many crazy bitches are considered valuable?"

This doesn't really follow does it? Many women succeed in modelling, or otherwise celebrity related fields but this doesn't say anything about how they are perceived in general and what we prescribe to them no? Unless you're making a point about the men as actors women as acted upon approach to the portrayal of these obsessions, in which case that'd be an interesting avenue for discussion I suppose.

[meadowphoenix]

To me it's the difference between a socially aberrant trait for men and a socially inherent trait for women, in how obsession is seen, and I think you and I are saying the same thing there.

However the negative effects of that portrayal do not effect men in success as much as they affect women. Being perceived as a nerd, even a hard-core one, is not something that socially discourages you from most professions, and such nerds are revered in entertainment. That simply isn't the case with "crazy bitches," not even in modelling. It's probably more accurate to say that nerds don't have the same drag as crazy bitches.

That's specifically for nerd/crazy. However socially aberrant behavior in men doesn't have a more prohibitive value than the same behavior considered socially inherent in women necessarily or even usually. Moreover, if the "negative" behavior isn't immediately evident, a woman will automatically be assumed to have the negative behavior and judged accordingly and a man will not, since it is aberrant for him.

[loki]

Men who are obsessed with things are portrayed as dangerous, pathetic, failures of men.

Like football, or breasts - ?