[ SECRET POST #2074 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2074 ⌋

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.
[Sam Winchester, Young Hercules]


__________________________________________________



16.
[La Pucelle: Tactics]


__________________________________________________














Notes:

Important: I'm really sorry about this, but I accidentally misclicked and deleted the submission post from last week instead of saving it. Managed to save the first page (25) of secrets, but the rest (about 100 or so) are gone.

If you submitted something last week (Aug 26-Sept 1), please resubmit it here.

The submissions post for next week is below as usual.

Secrets Left to Post: ?? pages, ??? secrets from Secret Submission Post #296.
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

[ariakas]

It wasn't "risky" it was sexist as fuck. Sure, plenty of men have a hard time making ends meet in this economy, and many of them wouldn't be able to make rent without their girlfriend's/wife's income.

OH NOES THEY GOLDDIGGAS WHO NEED A WOMAN TO "VALIDATE" THEM, WHY CAN'T G PAY HIS OWN RENT???

That's bullshit. "Most" women have jobs, and do the best they can to survive. So do "most" men. Pink can kindly fuck off forever.

[(Anonymous)]

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ld7t3jPGH81qco9mio1_400.gif

[(Anonymous)]

snsd! <3

[(Anonymous)]

Soooo... you're saying it's wrong for her to sing about a girl making her own way and supporting herself when women are typically stereotyped as weak stay-at-home moms who rely on their husband's income just to live?

... What?

[ariakas]

That isn't what the song is about. At all. She is stereotyping women as weak and incapable of staking care of themselves. She literally says that being financially independent and not being out for money > love makes her not like "every" girl. Ergo, "every" other girl is a dumb, weak, goldigger. Hell, the title of the song states that, at the very least, "most" are like that (and Pink is not).

Fuck you, female doctors! And lawyers! And servicewomen! You're all stupid goldigging whores and this popstar isn't like you!

[(Anonymous)]

Sounds like you're reading too far into it, tbh. I took it more as addressing the stereotype and then smacking the girls that buy into the gold-digger ideal in the face with a little wake-up call telling them to be independent and not rely on other people just to get by. I don't think she was trying to say "fuck you" to anybody. :\

[darkmanifest]

The song is addressing the R&B/urban stereotype about women bragging about landing dudes who are paid as a form of validation. This is what "most girls" means, and it's true that even as women make money of our own, straight women are still much more heavily pressured to care about her partner's cash flow than straight men are ever expected to care about their girlfriends' income.

Regardless, I know a few women who survive/have survived via honest money and gifts from men (child support, exotic dancing, marriages of convenience), so I'm more offended by YOUR characterization of such women as gold-digging vultures, stupid, weak, and incapable. These are all YOUR words that don't come up in the song. A lot of woman don't have to option to be picky about what they do to get out of poverty in a sexist world intent on keeping women and children disadvantaged. You sound really condescending and doing more to come down on women than the song ever did.

[ariakas]

Regardless, I know a few women who survive/have survived via honest money and gifts from men (child support, exotic dancing, marriages of convenience), so I'm more offended by YOUR characterization of such women as gold-digging vultures, stupid, weak, and incapable.

Except, that's, like, literally the opposite of what I said. Literally. That is exactly the sentiment that I was deriding the song for having. Here are words that I actually typed, rather than made up ones:

It wasn't "risky" it was sexist as fuck. Sure, plenty of men have a hard time making ends meet in this economy, and many of them wouldn't be able to make rent without their girlfriend's/wife's income.

OH NOES THEY GOLDDIGGAS WHO NEED A WOMAN TO "VALIDATE" THEM, WHY CAN'T G PAY HIS OWN RENT???

I.e. criticizing women for relying on men's financial assistance when men frequently do the same is sexist bullshit.

Also, fuck you feminine girls and stay-at-home-moms! You're dumb whores who rely on men! What's that, you're raising five children? Pshaw! Why aren't you paying your own rent?

Here I am, directly criticizing the song for criticizing women who don't make their own money, directly implying that that criticism is wrong and that these women do have value.

Use your reading skills. I am saying the opposite of what you're saying I'm saying. Directly. And literally. This isn't hard.

[darkmanifest]

You're also saying the exact opposite of anything the song was saying, IMO, so I admit I was under the impression all those derogatory words were your opinion because it didn't have any other source I could see - my apologies for that. The song neither says nor implies any of this except by the most loose interpretation. (Criticizing other women? The song's narrator says that she herself used to be "a girl about the floss/It was all about the cost, how much he spent on me" before the standards she has now - she's not coming down on "most girls", she's saying what's considered popular in mainstream sexist culture is no longer for her. If you can point out where she makes an actual value judgment against "most girls", I would appreciate it). So I wonder how much of your rage extends from what you read and what you thought you read.

[ariakas]

she's not coming down on "most girls"

Most girls want a man with the bling-bling
Got my own thing, got the ching-ching
I just want real love
Most girls want a man with the mean green

Yes, yes she is. She literally is. She is literally saying that "most girls" are money-grubbers who prioritize a man's finances over "real love".

In fact, she's saying every girl (who is not her) is like this:

Getting paid was everything

But I'm not every girl
And I don't need that world to validate me

Seek for a man who gots the means
To be giving you diamond rings
It's what every fly girl
Could want or even dream

But I'm not every girl
And I don't need no g to take care of me

Whereas she, the superior one, can "pay her own rent" (as opposed to "every" and "most" girls, who cannot) and "doesn't want to dance if it's not in (her) heart" (as opposed to "most" or "every" girl who, as we saw above, just wants to fuck a man with the "mean green").

No, that is exactly what I thought I read. What I literally read. Her words.

[(Anonymous)]

The lyrics literally say that most girls care about money. Is this untrue? Caring about money is not necessarily a bad thing unless you're already reading it that way.

[(Anonymous)]

I dunno you guys... I think they should make out.

( http://fuckyeahcreamsicle.tumblr.com/ )

[(Anonymous)]

The thing is that Pink continues the trend of making it us vs. them; that there's a certain way to be a strong woman, when there's really many different ones. That it's ok to antagonize women of a certain kind because, hey, there's no hope for them! We shouldn't bother to give them the benefit of the doubt, we should just mock them to make ourselves look better.

Haven't seen/heard Most Girls, but my beef started with Stupid Girls (and really it's worrying that there are TWO similar songs about this subject?). I can't take you seriously if you make fun of Bulimia or tell me that to be a strong girl you should play 'boy' games and think that dolls are stupid. If I could I would hulk-smash any person who told me that playing with dolls makes girls stupid or weak. From that video to her punk image, what I gather is that femininity should be eschewed in order to be a valid woman and no. I will not, Pink.

[ariakas]

Oh god, this. This, exactly. You've put it much more cogently than I, anon. (Possibly because Pink's bullshit makes me so angry I can hardly see straight.)

If I ever magically became a music video producer, and a female popstar in my employ came out with a song about how she was ~~sooo empowered~~ (unlike all other women, who are dumb bitches and whores) I'd have her makeup-slathered, barely-dressed form swaying and grinding on APCs while the servicewomen working on the engine stared quizzically; next to an ambulance whilst female paramedics had to step around her, rushing to save someone; in the middle of the House while a female MP was trying to read a new law to parliament; etc. Fuck you, whores! Only Pink makes her own money, the rest of y'all have little dogs and rely on men to buy you things! Pink is where the real feminist change is at!

Also, fuck you feminine girls and stay-at-home-moms! You're dumb whores who rely on men! What's that, you're raising five children? Pshaw! Why aren't you paying your own rent? Models? Pfft, that's not work, lip synching to an autotuner is work! OWNING SMALL DOGS MEANS YOU'RE STUPID AND WILL NEVER BE PRESIDENT. (Aw shit, somebody better tell Hillary.)

I hate Pink, and other "us versus them" divisive feminist so, so much I'm choking on my own rage here.

[(Anonymous)]

hahahaha oh wow

go on

will there be a segment where the makeup-slathered, barely-dressed pop starlet dances uselessly while real useful women make angry comments on the internet too?

[ariakas]

Durr hurr criticism of flawed social commentary is a waste of time, durr hurr hurr.

u mad?

[(Anonymous)]

You sound like the mad one who doesn't realize what she sounds like and is refusing to listen to multiple people who got the same interpretation of the words you said.

[ariakas]

Yes, that would be why I responded to and clarified my statements for those who had evidently misunderstood them.

Because I am "refusing to listen".

Hurr hurr hurr.

Hurr hurr.

Hurr.

[(Anonymous)]

...dude your us vs them mentality sounds just as bad. Women are only useful and worthy if they do practical, useful things, right? They don't have any intrinsic worth as people and you'd have them barely clad and with makeup on and grinding on things unless they can perform some function you deem useful and something like singing clearly isn't one of them.

Dude. :\

[ariakas]

What the ever fucking fuck? You saw that I listed models as part of the group that Pink here is slamming that really do their own hard work and have value to society? Demonstrating how ironic it is that she would call them out for mockery when she herself has what many consider a vapid, useless occupation that has an enormous amount of value placed on looks is setting up an "us versus them" mentality? How?

Literally the only "type" of woman I critcized in the above paragraph is one who'd use her fame to hypocritically devalue the worth of other women because she is a) the only one who makes her own money and stands up for herself (hence, the example of female professionals like paramedics) and b) she thinks women who rely on men or looks are shallow gold-diggers (hence, stay-at-home moms and models, who do those things, respectively, but have just as much worth as she does). I mentioned "makeup slathered" because in Pink's song she critcized, ironically and hypocritically, women for vanity, when it's pretty damn clear Pink herself cares a shitton about that, too.

So, how is this "us versus them", again?

[checkerblob.livejournal.com]

How the fuck did you get that from that comment

[darkmanifest]

Maybe your anger really is affecting how you type, because you come off as exactly as divisive as anything Pink has done. It's hard to tell whether you're coming down on certain women, like make-up slathered pop stars for example, or supporting them all without judgement, or what. I want to give you the benefit of the doubt, but I keep seeing "bitches and whores" thrown around and it's tough.

[ariakas]

http://fandomsecrets.dreamwidth.org/669601.html?thread=581058209#cmt581058209

seeing "bitches and whores" thrown around and it's tough

"Bitches and whores" being, rather transparently, the honest interpretation of what Pink is really saying about the women she devalues for relying on men for money rather than love, and being willing to trade love and sex for it.

That's what she's really saying, let's face it. That she's "above" women who do that and, moreover, believes her financial independence makes her superior to them. That is what I'm criticizing.

Given that that's pretty fucking obvious, though, and your comment above states that I said the exact opposite of what I said, I don't for a second believe you're giving me "the benefit of the doubt".

[darkmanifest]

Given that that's pretty fucking obvious, though, and your comment above states that I said the exact opposite of what I said, I don't for a second believe you're giving me "the benefit of the doubt".

Oh, no, I'm giving the benefit of the doubt to your intentions (which at this point I think are probably positive with some iffy expression). Your insistence that your personal interpretation of vague pop song lyrics is unassailable, though ("fucking obvious", "transparently", "honest interpretation", really?), that I have no doubt is ridiculous.

[ariakas]

"fucking obvious", "transparently", "honest interpretation", really?), that I have no doubt is ridiculous

Yes, directly quoting the singer is ridiculous! I mean, who does that. That would be silly. They're vague pop song lyrics and it does not matter what literal words they use, it's all up in the air for interpretation.