[ SECRET POST #2105 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2105 ⌋

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: 05 pages, 107 secrets from Secret Submission Post #301.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 1 2 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[fscom]

19. http://i.imgur.com/c2liB.jpg

[(Anonymous)]

Thank you, OP. You just pinpointed MY reason to love that pairing!

[(Anonymous)]

...is this for Tony/Bruce or Tony/Hulk? It's hard to tell from the secret + picture.

[(Anonymous)]

tony/hulk

[(Anonymous)]

So... it's misogynistic to dislike pairings that are stereotypical and full of unfortunate implications re: gender roles?

You're gonna have to explain that logic to me, because I'm just not getting it.

[(Anonymous)]

There's a common argument that slash-shippers are misogynists because they don't like having women in their stories/relationships. Replacing a female character (one of the few in th'avengers) with a male character could be read as misogynist. I don't agree, but hay.

[(Anonymous)]

that can be read as misogynistic, yes, but it would seem to me absurd to call it misogynistic when someone has a well-formed, coherent reason for replacing a woman with a man which is not "fuck girls, men are rad"

[intrigueing]

That's not misogynistic, it's just being sick of a stereotype. I mean, if you think that the concept of a woman accepting a monstrous male character is ew, but a man accepting a monstrous male character is fine, then yeah that's kind of iffy. But there's nothing wrong with not liking the narrative trope and being sick of those kinds of stories because seriously -- SO overdone, and so often done shittily with tired gender-role bullshit attached to it (even though I personally do like some male/female pairings of this type).

Also, for this pairing the accepting character is actually given development and a character-driven reason for why he's the type of person to accept and encourage and be empathetic towards someone who is feared and branded as a monster, it's not like those "oh yeah, this random nice girl accepts him because of, uh, her nurturing maternal vagina or something, just trust us go with it" stories.

[(Anonymous)]

Yes. I kind of wish there was something where a man accepts a monstrous female character, but it's always female human/male monster. Yeah, tired of it.

[handicaper]

that's one of my favorite non-exist ant tropes and i wish there were more (any, really) comic/stories/whatever around this premise

and i mean a lady that was genuinely monstrous all the time, not one that was a blonde bombshell with a ~*DARK SECRET*~ that she could turn into a wolf or had vampire teeth or was part dragon or something

the closest thing i've found is the monster girl.. uh.. fandom? genre? but it's mostly hentai-esque things

[lotesse]

driveby rec: Lois McMaster Bujold's novella "Labyrinth," from her Vorkosigan Saga but can be read as a oneoff. Diminutive disabled genius hero rescues/empowers/has sex with enormous human-animal hybrid female supersoldier.

[forgottenjester]

You know, that reminds me of a conversation I had with a friend of mine the other day. A commercial came on while we were watching TV and apparently they're rebooting Beauty and the Beast. I turned to her and said, "You know what would be really cool? If Beauty was the dude and Beast was the chick." She answered, "Yeah, I would like that. But this is more traditional." We looked at the rest of the commercial and agreed that both of us were completely uninterested.

It seems that in a lot of stories it's always the perfectly beautiful and dutiful woman who must look past the beastliness of the man. When I say beastliness I don't even just mean the outside either. It's the personality too.

You could argue a lot of things as to why this is bad but I think that its worst crime is that it's boring.

[(Anonymous)]

Well, of course, Forget monsetrous, I can barely find any attractive men/less attractive woman couple in any visual medium.

[sensualcoco.livejournal.com]

That was one of my exact thoughts when I saw the preview for the show. I was thinking, 'man, I wish they could have switch the gender roles around for once then maybe I'd be interested.'

Then later I heard a little more about it and apparently they're making the Beast a jerk in personality too. Great. If she just loves him enough she can change him. That doesn't sound like an abusive relationship at all.

[streetcake]

The beauty and the beast type pairings mostly have women as the former and men as the latter, which is problematic. You're not the misogynistic one here.

That's the reason I ship Calliope/Roxy in Homestuck, because it's probably the only time I've seen the girl being the beastly one in the relationship. Or at least the only time where she doesn't have the ability to transform into a cute girl as a disguise, boo. >:[

[(Anonymous)]

Playing with stereotypical gender roles is fun, especially with attractive men. Nothing to worry about. Have fun and send us links!

[(Anonymous)]

There's nothing sexist about liking an usually sexist trope played out by a couple of the same sex (or reverse roles) because it loses a lot of why such a trope is problematic in the first place.

A Beauty/Beast dichotomy between a same sex couple/pairing is not going have the same issues. What makes Beauty and the Beast trope sexist is that there is an expectation of girls should stick to their guy who makes how he looks and/or acts because there is a reward for them if they persevere and getting caught up in looks is very superficial. Especially when the fairytale was written for girls to make them accept their lot in life with the man her family chose for her with no complaints.

Nevermind that this will never apply to men because men are caught to aim above their station when it comes to women (and the numerous amount of male-orientated media where the less-attractive guy always get the beautiful girl reinforces that), while women are that they shouldn't be so picky and lower their expectations (and are often awarded with true love in media doing so).

But a Beauty and the Beast between same sex erases a lot of that, even if the writer shoehorns heteronormativity into it, it won't be as bad as if it was with Female Beauty and the Male Beast (and that heteronormativity is something you can avoid as well).

I discovered myself that I like a few originally problematic tropes when it's gender role switched or same sex for that reason. There's nothing sexist about flipping a normally sexist trope on its head.

[(Anonymous)]

All of this!

[velvet_mace]

Maybe you just identify more with women, so when it's a guy in the position you can enjoy it better without coloring the situation with the way you would react and feel if you were him. I don't see that as misogynistic at all.

OP

[(Anonymous)]

Actually I kind of feel the opposite, now that I've thought about it a bit. I identify strongly with Tony, and what intrigueing said about him being an actual developed character with a reason to feel that way about Bruce/the Hulk makes sense, because I think that in a lot of Beauty-and-the-Beast examples, it seems like the girl accepts the guy because...she's a woman? She's the love interest? Because he needs someone and for some reason she's supposed to do what he wants? So I *can't* relate to her or understand why she feels that way, whereas with Tony I can.

Maybe it's not as closely related to gender roles as I thought, maybe it's more because "woman" tends to correlate with "poorly developed character"...

[truxillogical]

A) That's an interesting point that I never thought of before, and it kind of makes me like this pairing even more.

B) I like that fanart. Who is it from?

[simplyirenic]

Fanart is by Feriowind!

[ariakas]

Definitely doesn't make you misogynist in the slightest, OP. I'm sure there are traditionally male tropes that you'd like a whole lot more if they were performed by female characters, too. I know there sure is for me (ugh, if... Naruto and Sasuke were girls, and Sakura a boy? Would have been amazing).

[(Anonymous)]

This is exactly why I ship Asbel/Richard from Tales of Graces so hard despite normally disliking the knight in shining armor/princess-type pairings when it's male/female. It's really interesting to see a guy in the damsel-in-distress role for a change because while there's still protection involved, they come across much more as equals otherwise and I like that a lot better.

[micromyni]

Science buddies, plus the Hulk likes/tolerates Tony. That's enough for me, but the subversion of traditional cliches just cinches it for me.