case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2012-10-13 03:21 pm

[ SECRET POST #2111 ]


⌈ Secret Post #2111 ⌋

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.


__________________________________________________



21.


__________________________________________________



22.


__________________________________________________















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 05 pages, 124 secrets from Secret Submission Post #301.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 1 - repeat ], [ 1 - posted twice ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

(Anonymous) 2012-10-13 07:53 pm (UTC)(link)
Yeah, *intense* -- as in his eyes make him look like a freaking serial killer.

But hey, to each their own, I personally prefer a person's inner beauty to their being a mysogonistic, Republican, walking, talking asshole.

(Anonymous) 2012-10-13 10:20 pm (UTC)(link)
What the fuck does being Republican have to do with it? All Republicans are misogynistic assholes?
avatarmn: (Default)

[personal profile] avatarmn 2012-10-14 06:34 am (UTC)(link)
Hi. Welcome to our planet.

(Anonymous) 2012-10-14 07:32 am (UTC)(link)
Your responses in this thread are excellent. I like you. ^_^

(Anonymous) 2012-10-14 12:17 am (UTC)(link)
Why on earth do you think he is misogynistic? I haven't been following him in interviews, but I never got the impression that he hates women. Unless you believe that because he's anti-abortion (except in cases of rape, incest, and health reasons) he suddenly despises every woman, which of course is ridiculous.

(Anonymous) 2012-10-14 01:09 am (UTC)(link)
If you're anti-choice, you're anti-women. It's really just that simple.

(Anonymous) 2012-10-14 01:47 am (UTC)(link)
No, it's really not.

(Anonymous) 2012-10-14 02:19 am (UTC)(link)
+1
Hold your ground.

(Anonymous) 2012-10-14 02:31 am (UTC)(link)
It means you think that women should have less sovereignty over their own bodies than corpses do. You have to explicitly opt-in to be an organ donor after you die. Anti-choicers don't think that women should be able to opt-out of allowing a fetus to use their organs and tissues to sustain its life.

So yeah, thinking women should have less agency over their bodies than dead people is anti-woman.

(Anonymous) 2012-10-14 02:47 am (UTC)(link)
The key difference in your little analogy is that the corpse isn't harboring a life inside of it. If you view having agency to be more important than preserving life, then that's your prerogative. I don't see the fact that one is concerned for the lives of unborn men

continued

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 02:49 (UTC) - Expand

Re: continued

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 02:59 (UTC) - Expand

Re: continued

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 03:24 (UTC) - Expand

Re: continued

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 04:07 (UTC) - Expand

Re: continued

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 04:13 (UTC) - Expand

Re: continued

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 04:19 (UTC) - Expand

Re: continued

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 05:10 (UTC) - Expand

Re: continued

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 07:30 (UTC) - Expand

Re: continued

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 19:48 (UTC) - Expand

Re: continued

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 19:57 (UTC) - Expand

Re: continued

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-15 06:07 (UTC) - Expand

Re: continued

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-15 00:31 (UTC) - Expand

Re: continued

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-15 06:04 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 02:51 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 03:27 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 04:55 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 05:02 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 09:00 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 02:57 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 03:40 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 04:17 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 05:01 (UTC) - Expand

da

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 05:16 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 05:25 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 08:42 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 09:04 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 15:48 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 16:52 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-15 00:43 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-15 06:52 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-15 18:47 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-15 20:43 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 07:08 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] avatarmn - 2012-10-14 06:47 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) 2012-10-14 03:36 am (UTC)(link)
Yes, it really is actually.

(Anonymous) 2012-10-14 05:26 am (UTC)(link)
Yeah, it is. If you're anti-choice you're saying you're fine with going back to the days of women dying in back-alley abortions because all the safe, clean, licensed doctors won't legally be allowed to perform the procedure anymore. Abortions will happen, the choice is about whether they'll be safe and legal or dangerous and illegal.
By all means, say you yourself won't have an abortion. It's your right. But ignoring the ramifications of outlawing abortion is just frighteningly ignorant.

(Anonymous) 2012-10-14 01:40 am (UTC)(link)
He was one of a hundred or so people who signed a bill to define what a 'legitimate rape' is. He felt it was okay to say if a woman is drugged and wakes up in a strange place it's not a 'legitimate' rape. If a thirteen year old girl is taken advantage of by a teacher, it's not 'legitimate' rape. He agrees that a 'legitimate' rape is only 'legitimate' if physical force is implied. Fucking scumbag.

He's also for getting rid of planned parenthood. Being 'anti-abortion' hits more than just abortion, it also hits other contraceptives women use. Some of which do more for them than just 'stopping pregnancy', or god forbid, sex before marriage!

I'd say he's pretty damn misogynistic.

(Anonymous) 2012-10-14 01:58 am (UTC)(link)
I'd like to see sources for these claims, since this is the first I'm hearing of this.

And does being anti-abortion equate to anti-contraceptive, really? I'm not too familiar with American laws but they seem like two entirely separate issues. While the majority who are against abortion may very well be against contraceptive use, legally it should be an entirely different issue. I mean, sheesh, if you want to put all these anti-abortion laws into effect you would think that there would be MORE promotion of contraceptives.

I just have a problem whenever I hear someone personally attacking anyone, whether they be a politician, actor, writer, etc. You can find some of Ryan's policies disgusting, but you don't know the man personally. While they project a public image, they are also people with families, friends, parents. Ryan has very young children, and it would bother me if the kids heard on the news or just walking down the street about a bunch of people talking about how their father is a "misogynistic scumbag." It's the same thing with Sarah Palin; you don't know how many times I've heard the whole family called a bunch of rednecks, or backwards. And poor Bristol gets slutshamed and called "trash" for daring to get pregnant. I just really feel for these families.
yeahscience: ([1-3] facepalm #2)

[personal profile] yeahscience 2012-10-14 02:07 am (UTC)(link)
These are all easily googleable, as they are in fact part of his public voting record. Do your own research if you're so skeptical.

In your research, you might also learn that many Republicans are also anti-contraceptive these days because it gets them points with conservative Christians.

I don't understand what on earth is supposed to separate a man's policies from his person, incidentally. He's voted against fair pay for women. He's voted against basic healthcare for women. He literally does not want women to be equal. Yes, that absolutely makes him a misogynist.

(Anonymous) 2012-10-14 02:36 am (UTC)(link)
Re: The Palins vs. Paul Ryan

One of these things is not like the other. Shaming or insulting someone for how they live their own lives is awful. Shaming or insulting someone for advocating and advancing policies that seek to strip others of their rights is A-OK. They should be ashamed of attacking the rights of others. If he doesn't want his kids to hear him being called a misogynistic scumbag, then it's his responsibility not to BE one.

And yeah, conservatives in the US have decided that most forms of contraception actually are abortion somehow, so that's how they link the two issues. That, and they're both excuses for them to promote their version of "sexual morality."

(Anonymous) 2012-10-14 03:05 am (UTC)(link)
I just feel that NO child should hear their mother or father be called something so horrible. It harms the child due to a flaw in his or her parents. He may be called a "misogynistic scumbag" but he's still a man who loves his family dearly. I also would not call him a "scumbag" since that really is a personal attack (how can a man who loves his family so much be scum?), but "misogynistic" could definitely apply since he endorses many misogynistic policies.

What an odd way for conservatives to think! It appears so counterproductive to me. And it's very odd since in American media everyone seems to be so sexualized, yet they have this concern for "sexual morality."

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 04:03 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 05:30 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 05:47 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 20:26 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-15 00:49 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) 2012-10-14 02:46 am (UTC)(link)
The first you're hearing of 'legitimate rape'? I seriously doubt this, as that has been talked about in a ton of different places. But here you go.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/08/19/712251/how-todd-akin-and-paul-ryan-partnered-to-redefine-rape/?mobile=nc

(Anonymous) 2012-10-14 02:50 am (UTC)(link)
I heard of the "legitimate rape," but it's the first i heard that Ryan supports it. I don't keep up to date with American politics.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 02:52 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 05:08 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 05:12 (UTC) - Expand
avatarmn: (Default)

[personal profile] avatarmn 2012-10-14 06:52 am (UTC)(link)
Yeah, Google "forcible rape" for that sad story, adding Ryan's name to confirm his vote on that bill. And the contraceptive thing refers to "personhood amendments", Google that. A constitutional amendment to define an unborn fetus as a person, which would make abortion murder. And in addition to leaving miscarriages open to homicide investigations and all kinds of other icky stuff, personhood would make hormonal birth control like "the pill" and IUDs illegal. They usually prevent fertilization, but when they don't prevent fertilization they prevent the embryo from implanting in the womb, and let it be flushed out with the woman's period. That would be murder, making hormonal contraception illegal.
yeahscience: ([4-5] rage)

[personal profile] yeahscience 2012-10-14 01:57 am (UTC)(link)
Paul Ryan is actually not in favor of abortion exceptions -- he's tempered his position for the VP run, but as Biden himself pointed out in the debate, up until very recently he was anti-abortion in any instance. He voted against the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, has voted multiple times to defund Planned Parenthood, supports the Personhood Amendment, and opposes mandatory insurance coverage for birth control.

Do your research before you post something like this. Paul Ryan is notoriously anti-women in his record.

(Anonymous) 2012-10-14 02:14 am (UTC)(link)
American politics is not exactly at the forefront of my mind, so no, I don't feel I have to do in-depth research on an American politician before I post a question on fucking fandomsecrets. This place clearly has a left-wing slant, so I (correctly) assumed I would have more than enough people here to fill me on on the basics.

Like he said in the debate, regardless of circumstances a life is being taken away, so that's why he thinks the circumstances don't matter. Even in a situation like rape, the baby is not the one at fault. But because this is such an emotional, complicated issue he is willing to temper his position for the sake of the American people, even if he personally disagrees. I don't think the fact that he's personally anti-abortion in any instance (except for the life of the mother? maybe? idk) is proof of HATRED for women; it's proof that he values the life of unborn men and women. And I don't see how The Personhood Ammendment is proof of hatred either. I think it's a bit silly for them to count as "people" once fertilized (if anything, wait until it has a heartbeat!), but again, not hatred.

What are his reasons for defunding planned parenthood?

The Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act thing was news to me. I don't know how anyone in their right mind would vote against it.
yeahscience: ([1-3] wtf)

[personal profile] yeahscience 2012-10-14 02:19 am (UTC)(link)
Uh, except that posting "why on earth... I never got the impression... unless you believe [blah blah] which of course is ridiculous" makes you sound openly combative. If you don't know something, there are ways to ask it that aren't LIBERAL MORONS ON FANDOMSECRETS, DEFEND YOUR VIEWS. You sounded both ignorant and belligerent. Which is especially silly on an issue that can literally be researched by typing these three words into google: "Paul Ryan women." If you want to be genuinely educated, don't fucking start it by trying to fight the people you want to educate you.

His reasons for defunding Planned Parenthood are that Republicans have ignorantly and incorrectly painted the organization as an abortion provider, even though that's an incredibly small fraction of the health services they actually provide to women, in particular low-income women.

He also, by the way, is part of a group that has been stalling the passage of the Violence Against Women Act. Thanks, Republican Congressmen!

(Anonymous) 2012-10-14 02:41 am (UTC)(link)
Holy shit.

It might be that the internet can't convey tone well, or it might be because English is not my first language, but I am not trying to "combat" anyone. I made it very clear to say "I" never got that impression. Not that he's not, necessarily, but it would come as a surprise for me from what I have seen of him. And I don't know why the heck you think I hate liberals or think they are morons, I just know that many here are up-to-date on these issues and hate Ryan. I am not "belligerent" or trying to fight anyone. You may believe me or not; it is none of my concern. And I do admit I am ignorant in some regards to American politics because I have other things much closer at home to worry about. I know the basics but I do not know about things that are generally not spoken about a lot or not on the television. If you believe I am combative because of the "ridiculous" part of my comment, I should hope that most people are sensible enough to assume that not wanting abortions does not mean he or she "hates all women." It's a lot more of a complicated issue than that. No one should take offense to that because I believe most people are intelligent enough to see the gray here, even if they don't agree with it.

(no subject)

[personal profile] yeahscience - 2012-10-14 02:46 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 02:53 (UTC) - Expand

continued, accidentally hit "enter" key

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 02:58 (UTC) - Expand

Re: continued, accidentally hit "enter" key

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 03:02 (UTC) - Expand

Re: continued, accidentally hit "enter" key

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 03:43 (UTC) - Expand

Re: continued, accidentally hit "enter" key

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 04:24 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] yeahscience - 2012-10-14 03:11 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 03:53 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) 2012-10-14 02:41 am (UTC)(link)
I don't think the fact that he's personally anti-abortion in any instance (except for the life of the mother? maybe? idk) is proof of HATRED for women; it's proof that he values the life of unborn men and women more than he values the right of born women to refuse to incubate them.

That's the problem. He can "value" the lives of fetuses all he wants, until he starts trying to force women to gestate them against their will. That's when it becomes hatred for women.

What are his reasons for defunding planned parenthood?

Because PP provides abortion services (though they are forbidden from using government money for abortions), which in his mind makes them completely evil and so they shouldn't get any funding to help low-income women get contraception or pap spears or mammograms or prenatal care

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 04:31 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 05:20 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 05:32 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 07:25 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 16:02 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-14 19:28 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-10-15 01:06 (UTC) - Expand