fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2122 ]

[ SECRET POST #2122 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2122 ⌋

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.

__________________________________________________

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 034 secrets from Secret Submission Post #303.
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

I don't know that I completely buy that. I don't exactly know what Derek's done to deserve Scott's treatment of him. I'm not saying Derek's an angel - he's not. And I don't agree with all the stuff he did this season. But I have a really hard time with what Scott did to him. After Derek risked his life to save Scott and earned the wrath of the Argents for it (and never even got a thank you that we saw), I don't understand why Scott is still all "Derek evil".

Derek stalks, harasses, and assaults Scott, and his friends. He tries to kill his friends on several occasions. Breaks into their houses. And is a general asshole who keeps information to himself and is not willing to work with others/do things any way but his way 99% of the time.

Scott's father was abusive toward him (this is stated in the On Fire book) so....I think it's pretty easy to see why he would not want to align himself with someone who is an abuser.

I don't hate Derek, and in fact I like the ship Derek/Scott. But there is really no excuse for how Derek acts toward him.

Whoa, where are you getting Derek being an abuser from?

umm the fact that he has physically assaulted stiles, jackson, and scott on multiple occasions (possibly others i am forgetting?) going so far as to BREAK SCOTT'S HAND just to make a point. i would also consider him at times emotionally abusive/manipulative the way he tries to convince scott that he is the only one he can depend on or can help him. the scene where he forces scott to watch a werewolf be cut in half despite the fact that scott clearly does not want to see it comes to mind. also when he breaks into scott's house, waits for him in the dark, and then yet again assaults him and orders him around.

even if he thinks 'it's for your own good' the things derek does are still gross and disturbing.

I'm not going to argue that these events didn't occur, but I don't see them as abusive. Maybe this is subjective. The violence didn't happen in the context of an intimate relationship, a screwed-up power dynamic, or to break the victim down; it wasn't ongoing, it didn't fall into a pattern of behavior that defined the nature of their relationship. Derek is a dude with piss-poor people skills, and he expresses anger with inappropriate physical force and violence. He intimidates rather than persuades, and runs his pack on authority rather than love. And that's all messed up, but it really does not strike me as abuse.

you don't think there is a screwed up power dynamic between derek and any human on the show? or even derek vs his betas?

you don't think derek tries to break scott down in order to have scott join his pack?

and what the hell, i didn't know there were only a few categories that could classify something as 'abuse'. that is very strange and honestly your whole reply makes me feel uncomfortable.

Yeah, trying to quantify what is and isn't abuse makes me uncomfortable too. I'm not attempting to convince you that Derek isn't abusive, I'm more like trying to sort out why I don't get the gross feelings that abuse gives me from anything he does.

I don't think Derek is in charge of any human on the show, and everybody knows it. In other words, he may smack Stiles' head against the steering wheel, but he's not ripping the brakes out of his Jeep so he can't visit any of his friends. As for the betas -- Derek is a very poor alpha, but mostly what I saw in his relationship with them was bad attempts at training them. When Boyd and Erica wanted to leave, they were able to.

I think Derek tries to persuade Scott to join his pack. I've never seen him do something like undermine Scott's sense of self-worth so he'll feel dependent on Derek.

Like, in real life, if my friends were going out on madcap adventures with a guy who was as prone to violence as Derek, I'd hate him and I'd be afraid of him and I'd warn them to stay away from him. But I have a different set of responses for fiction, and I think in fiction violence and power have to be coupled more thoroughly for something to register as abusive (to me). In a show that tosses violence around as casually as TW does, I just don't get worked up about it, you know? Scott, Stiles, Lydia, Jackson and Allison suffered no psychological harm when they lit a dude on fire and then watched Derek rip his throat out. If the show brushes that kind of violence away as consequence-free, then I find it hard to take it seriously when Derek crowds someone against a wall.

i....really don't know what to say to this, and your reply only made me more uncomfortable, honestly. so let's just agree to disagree on the topic cause i think we are viewing it in totally different ways.

That's fine! Have a nice rest of your whatever time it is

If the show brushes that kind of violence away as consequence-free, then I find it hard to take it seriously when Derek crowds someone against a wall.

This is one of the biggest problems with the show and fandom, that fans will explain away Derek's actions as abusive or controlling, then turn around and fetishize it in fiction so him 'barely' hurting Stiles is an act of twu wuv. Rape becomes fetishized in Sterek, along with dubcon and knotting and physical violence. It's all okay if it's love, right? I am so fearful for TW fandom, mostly because it's made of impressionable kids who think this crap is how love works. Sadly, it's obvious from the fiction that a lot of it is written by kids who have never had sex, but are already thinking this is what's hot. I guess we can all thank Twilight for manufacturing so many Bellas, and making our everything about the big, strong men who own, dominate, and control us. Thanks, Twilight.

Sadly, romanticizing of rape and domestic violence isn't really something that's exclusive to Teen Wolf fandom or even younger fans. I actually personally have no problem with kinks dealing with power and control and violence, and I even enjoy fic involving some of them on occasion. But the fact that large parts of fandom (as in all fandoms in general) don't want to take the time to stop and recognize that, while it's okay to write about and even enjoy taboo and/or problematic subjects in fiction and to have kinks that involve things like non-con, there at least needs to be a bit of recognition that those things are not romantic or the equivalent of love or something that you actually want to be a part of your relationships in real life (outside of consensual role play with clearly established rules and boundaries, of course). There are a lot of people (and they're not all young) who read those things and, after seeing them over and over and over, internalize them. It happens outside of fandom and in media in general, too, which is part of the reason why things like rape culture and slut shaming and victim blaming are so pervasive. So, the subjects themselves aren't what's so bad, but it's the trying to pass them off or down play them as signs of "true love", like you said. (Sorry, that was basically just a long-ass way for me to pretty much agree with you. I just have a lot of feelings on the matter.)

As an aside, as much as I dislike Twilight and think it's chock full of terrible messages and problematic elements, I don't think that you can set the blame for the emphasis in a lot of media and fiction on women wanting men who are big and strong to dominate and control them squarely on the shoulders of Bella and Edward. The series definitely contributed to some of the recent fervor around supernaturally-themed love stories and further romanticized the idea of the controlling, stalkery love interest, but those basic ideas and tropes have existed for a really, really long time, and have been a pretty pervasive part of Western culture and literature for centuries, if not longer. Twilight definitely hasn't done anyone any favors in that area, but it's not the sole source of the problem, either.

Derek is a problematic character. He has a loaded backstory which basically led to him getting his entire family killed - leading to the death of his sister by his uncle's hand. He then had to kill his uncle. And become alpha. All because he's a werewolf.

I think the show occasionally forgets what a heavy and traumatizing backstory this is.

And sometimes I think they use it as a driving force for Derek - which is why he uses poor means to get what he feels needs to be done. But they also use it as an excuse for him to be a dick. Which he honestly might have - but not to so many other people.

Note - I am not, in any way shape or form trying to woobify Derek or saying we need to forgive him for all of shit he did. I do think Scott has a good reason not to trust him.

That said- Derek also has a lot of serious issues that are driving him.

I'm not saying forgive Derek for the questionable things he's done. He was a terrible Alpha. There were a lot of problematic things about his treatment of his pack. So I'm not saying don't recognize the issues. And to be honest, I guess my issue is not so much with Scott as it is with my confusion about how the show wants us to see Derek. Do they want us to see him as the bad guy? Or are we supposed to be sympathetic? Is the show planning on working Derek toward redemption, or is he always going to be positioned as Scott's antagonist? The "good" Alpha vs the "bad" Alpha?

Some of the frustration I think comes because we as the audience know things about Derek that Scott doesn't necessarily know. We know that he had a relationship with Kate that she used to murder his family. We know that she tortured and sexually assaulted him after capturing him in S1 (during which btw he still refused to give up information about Scott). We know that Deaton is supposed to have been a friend of the Hales, yet never bothered to give Derek a clue about that until Peter's resurrection threatened his and Scott's plan to take out Gerard.

So I think there's somewhat of a disconnect there. Because of all the stuff Derek's been through, the audience might be inclined to view him more sympathetically, but Scott doesn't necessarily have the benefit of that knowledge. But since Scott's supposed to be the hero of the story, are we supposed to be on Scott's side (i.e. Derek is bad), or are we supposed to be rooting for him to find some redemption?

I don't know if that makes any sense....just rambling here.

Yeah, my comment was definitely rambly and not really aimed at anyone in particular - I just have a lot FEELINGS both good and bad towards Derek as a character.

You make an excellent point that while we know a lot of the horrible shit that has gone down with Derek - no one else does. So it makes it easier for us to sympathize with him, but the others not so much. He definitely just comes off as a douche.

I feel like the writers are rather unsure what they want Derek to be too. I would rather him get a redemptive arch - mostly because if he dies or doesn't get one it will be really sad to me because I am a sucker for the 'last of my family' tropes. I do like that they haven't made him a 'knows everything about werewolves - kinda Scott's Yoda' and instead made him a horrible alpha because that never stops being funny to me.

The Peter stuff could BE SO INTERESTING. But I am afraid they are going to blow it by stuff that Deaton said in one of the last episodes (He told Derek not to trust Peter - because he was gonna make it seem like they would have to follow Peter in order to kill the kanima and they didn't have to) But Derek totally did start relying on Peter.

Peter - who killed Derek's sister - who he obviously had a close bond with. Peter who Derek killed to avenge said sister's death. Peter who is Derek's LAST SURVIVING family member. I mean I know I would be utterly confused and it could make for a really interesting relationship dynamic. But do I want Peter to be redeemed? God I have no idea.

And the Deaton stuff. Derek was running around ruining lives and now you decide to step in. Get your head our of your ass. And Deaton loves Scott and just said "Derek you have to trust him," Why should Derek just randomly trust you dude?

So. Yeah. I find Derek an incredibly grey character - though not morally grey if that makes sense. I think he's trying really really hard to be a good person and a good leader, but he just can't because of issues. But I have no idea how they are going to develop his character fully, because he has a ridiculously dark backstory for a teen show that show tends to use for drama, but then drop when they want funny scenes.

I have lots of Derek feels. And while I haven't seen it much yet - he definitely has a possibility to get into poor woob territory.

Personally I would like to see Derek get some redemption, some healing(emotionally). I'd like to see him learn to be a good Alpha. I'd like to see him and Scott learn to work together instead of against each other. I....don't know if the show will go there or not. *shrugs*

(He told Derek not to trust Peter - because he was gonna make it seem like they would have to follow Peter in order to kill the kanima and they didn't have to) But Derek totally did start relying on Peter.

Did he? I admit I was confused about what exactly happened there. Because I know they were talking and researching together, but then ultimately Derek ignored Peter when Peter tried to tell him that they needed Lydia and ran off and tried to kill Jackson on his own, which backfired on him. But then they worked together at the end after he started changing, and I still don't understand what was going on there. Were they really trying to kill him (if so why? Fear of the next stage of the kanima or something?), or did they just know from their research that Jackson had to die and be "reborn" in order to activate the werewolf and completely eradicate the kanima? I didn't really know how to interpret that scene.

Derek was running around ruining lives and now you decide to step in.

Yes, Deaton's actions in S1 don't make a lot of sense in light of that little revelation. What possible reason could he have had to not just tell Derek the truth when Derek came and asked him about the Alpha and the revenge symbol on the deer? Why not give him some help instead of letting him run around clueless and half-crazed? (Granted, that doesn't excuse Derek trying to bash his head in, although I think Derek really did believe he was the Alpha at that point.)

It's called BAD WRITING. There's a reason those writers are on MTV and not getting paid the big bucks elsewhere.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #2122 ]

Re: COMPLETELY SERIOUS QUESTIONS

Re: COMPLETELY SERIOUS QUESTIONS

Re: COMPLETELY SERIOUS QUESTIONS

Re: COMPLETELY SERIOUS QUESTIONS

Re: COMPLETELY SERIOUS QUESTIONS

Re: COMPLETELY SERIOUS QUESTIONS

Re: COMPLETELY SERIOUS QUESTIONS

Re: COMPLETELY SERIOUS QUESTIONS

Re: COMPLETELY SERIOUS QUESTIONS

Re: COMPLETELY SERIOUS QUESTIONS

Re: COMPLETELY SERIOUS QUESTIONS

Re: COMPLETELY SERIOUS QUESTIONS

Re: COMPLETELY SERIOUS QUESTIONS

Re: COMPLETELY SERIOUS QUESTIONS

Re: COMPLETELY SERIOUS QUESTIONS

Re: COMPLETELY SERIOUS QUESTIONS