Case (
case) wrote in
fandomsecrets2013-02-20 06:47 pm
[ SECRET POST #2241 ]
⌈ Secret Post #2241 ⌋
Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.
01.

__________________________________________________
02.

__________________________________________________
03.

__________________________________________________
04.

__________________________________________________
05.

__________________________________________________
06.

__________________________________________________
07.

__________________________________________________
08. removed!
__________________________________________________
09.

__________________________________________________
10.

__________________________________________________
11.

__________________________________________________
12.

__________________________________________________
13.

__________________________________________________
14.

__________________________________________________
15.

__________________________________________________
16.

__________________________________________________
Notes:
Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 042 secrets from Secret Submission Post #320.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 (minorly sexual, illustrated) - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

no subject
[ 1 (minorly sexual, illustrated) - not!secrets ]
no subject
Anyway, lol what a shitty opinion.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2013-02-21 12:34 am (UTC)(link)no subject
(Anonymous) 2013-02-23 03:59 am (UTC)(link)NS
Re: NS
Re: NS
Re: NS
(Anonymous) 2013-02-21 12:27 am (UTC)(link)Granted I don't know this stuff but I'm willing to learn
Re: NS
(Anonymous) - 2013-02-21 00:36 (UTC) - ExpandRe: NS
Re: NS
Re: NS
Re: NS
Re: NS
Re: NS
(Anonymous) - 2013-02-21 00:52 (UTC) - ExpandRe: NS
Re: NS
(Anonymous) - 2013-02-21 14:21 (UTC) - ExpandRe: NS
(Anonymous) - 2013-02-21 03:14 (UTC) - ExpandRe: NS
(Anonymous) - 2013-02-21 03:31 (UTC) - ExpandRe: NS
no subject
no subject
(Anonymous) 2013-02-21 12:06 am (UTC)(link)(no subject)
Re: NS
Re: NS
(Anonymous) - 2013-02-21 02:54 (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
(Anonymous) - 2013-02-21 02:53 (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
(no subject)
(Anonymous) - 2013-02-21 23:16 (UTC) - Expandno subject
(no subject)
(Anonymous) - 2013-02-21 00:45 (UTC) - Expandno subject
no subject
(Anonymous) 2013-02-21 12:22 am (UTC)(link)no subject
(Anonymous) 2013-02-21 12:40 am (UTC)(link)no subject
(Anonymous) 2013-02-21 12:42 am (UTC)(link)no subject
Fizzled
no subject
(Anonymous) 2013-02-21 01:10 am (UTC)(link)And all the people I know who insist "OT3s solve everything" or "Just have a threesome" are usually only into it for the kink and think they're more "open minded" than people who only have OTPs :/
(no subject)
(Anonymous) - 2013-02-21 02:40 (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
(Anonymous) - 2013-02-21 02:42 (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
(Anonymous) - 2013-02-21 21:55 (UTC) - Expandno subject
(First canon, longstanding, functional three-way relationship between main characters I could think of, I'm sure there's others.)
(no subject)
(Anonymous) - 2013-02-21 02:59 (UTC) - Expandno subject
(Anonymous) 2013-02-21 02:47 am (UTC)(link)As for in relation to fandom, I agree that OT3's are just pretty much there to fulfill a sexual kink. Most people figure, "I like this pairing and this pairing, so why don't I just combine them into an OT3 and make them have kinky sex!" It's just... Ugh. OT3's are usually pretty OOC and once again, just there for fap material for horny fangirls.
I agree with the patronizing comments too. Some people who prefer OT3's seem to be kind of condescending in thinking that they're above the average shipper because they're more 'open-minded.' It's a bunch of bullshit.
(no subject)
(Anonymous) - 2013-02-21 08:21 (UTC) - ExpandOkay no, fuck you.
(Anonymous) 2013-02-21 02:57 am (UTC)(link)We are by NO MEANS unique, either. Tilda Swinton is a good example; she's got a husband and another man she maintains a relationship with, and it's a situation they're comfortable with.
I agree with you that "lol just have them all fuck" isn't a solution that works. That isn't how it is in the real world. But to hell with you if you're going to patronize my relationship and minimize it to just ~lol sex.~
Re: Okay no, fuck you.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2013-02-21 03:23 am (UTC)(link)no subject
(Anonymous) 2013-02-21 09:43 am (UTC)(link)no subject
(Anonymous) 2013-02-22 05:13 am (UTC)(link)no subject
(Anonymous) 2013-02-24 06:36 pm (UTC)(link)And if you're a troll, you also fail- especially since there are simple guidelines that could've gotten this one into the main post if read and followed.
(no subject)
(Anonymous) - 2013-02-24 18:38 (UTC) - Expand