fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2249 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2249 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

[Otoyomegatari]

__________________________________________________

03.

[Girls und Panzer]

__________________________________________________

04.

[My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic]

__________________________________________________

05.

[Monster High]

__________________________________________________

06.

[My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic]

__________________________________________________

07.

[Jackass 3D]

__________________________________________________

08.

[Paranatural]

__________________________________________________

09.

[Angelina Jolie]

__________________________________________________

10.

[Der Ring des Nibelungen]

__________________________________________________

11.

[Mary Shelley's Frankenhole]

__________________________________________________

12.

[Medium]

__________________________________________________

13.

[The Americans]

__________________________________________________

14.

[The Mindy Project]

__________________________________________________

15.

[5Dolls, T-ARA]

__________________________________________________

16.

[A Good Day To Die Hard]

__________________________________________________

17.

[Harry Potter]

__________________________________________________

18. http://i45.tinypic.com/2v0bjpd.jpg
[linked for porn, Spartacus: Vengeance]

__________________________________________________

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 019 secrets from Secret Submission Post #321.
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.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I'm skeptical about this secret because according to my understanding, the moe genre is (putting on my judgmental hat) a fanservicy jigglefest for people who can't get enough animated boobs and asses, with maybe a guy in there to be surrounded by heaving boobs and asses.

(Assuming all men are interested in unlimited animated boobs and asses would be misandry.)

No, no, moe isn't the thing with massive animated boobs and asses, moe is the thing where the girls are really cute and precious and incompetent and don't have massive animated boobs and asses while guys pretend they just want to protect them or think they're totally adorable while actually secretly totally wanting to bone them.

Assuming all men are interested in boobs and asses wouldn't be misandrist

it would be a) homophobic

and b) silly

not misandrist

because misandry does not exist

Are you saying women who hate men don't exist? Or do they simply not deserve a lable to call their own? I'm sure that's either very sexist och very misogynistic of you.

Women who hate men exist. They're very few in number and have little to no societal power or privilege to hurt men beyond hurting their pwecious feelings. So no, it doesn't deserve a label. Calling it "misandry" equates it naturally with "misogyny" and the two don't even remotely add up.

A few men having their feelings hurt versus the massive societal, institutional discrimination against and rape and murder of women GEE I DON'T THINK THOSE ARE THE SAME

...I will never understand the logic behind "giving this phenomenon a name is the same as declaring it above this other thing which our society rightfully puts a lot of money towards preventing. We should just totally ignore it unless it causes more than one thousand victims or lasts for more than one hundred years in society"

I mean I believe more in society learning from it's mistakes , and looking back on the ugly history of women hate and subjugation and going "oh hey this was really shitty of us, let's not do it again" rather than. "the male gender is obviously to blame for this so let's show them what it's like"

The latter only results in perpetuating and endless cycle of revenge and turning the tides of sexism over and over again.

It would indeed be silly, and I'll agree with you on homophobic because that's the standard term for prejudice against homosexuality although there doesn't seem to be any phobia involved.

Is "being interested in unlimited animated boobs and asses" a negative quality? I would say yes. (Others might argue, but let's set that aside for the sake of this discussion.)

Is assuming something negative about an entire gender sex discrimination? Yes. It's practically in the definition. (Assuming something positive would also be sex discrimination.)

It is, therefore, negative sexism directed at men. I consider this to fall under the heading of "misandry". What do you think misandry is supposed to be? Because "negative opinions about all men (and only men)" exists, and I'm not sure how you can argue it doesn't.

Misandry isn't a thing that exists. At all.

See, the thing is? You're right, there are people who have negative opinions about men! But they don't have, y'know, the societal power or privilege to actually hurt men beyond hurting their feelings. So I wouldn't even start to call "misandry" a real thing that happens. Men still hold pretty much all the societal power and privilege (almost all people in positions of power are men; men have enormous social power and privilege with which to hurt women; when a man hurts a woman, even just socially [i.e. saying she's lying about being raped, or that she's a "slut"], it goes FAR BEYOND just hurting her feelings and into the realm of where it is actually physically dangerous for the woman - WALKING DOWN THE STREET is dangerous for women because of men, so no, that isn't comparable AT ALL to a man having his feelings hurt because he doesn't understand that women who say "I hate men" have a really goddamn good reason for doing so).

Also, "being interested in unlimited boobs and asses" is not widely considered a bad thing (whether they're animated or not doesn't matter). Men aren't shamed for expressing their sexuality like women are. While a few people might think it's gross (mostly women because, GASP, dehumanizing and objectifying women to use as fap material is actually NOT OKAY and really sexist [so basically you are saying it's sexist to be grossed out by sexism lol okay]), by and large society does not give a shit. Men are ENCOURAGED to be loud and proud about their sexuality - people just lol and shrug if a guy watched a lot of porn, guys are encouraged to sleep with a lot of women, and so on. It's societally okay if a man sleeps with a lot of women, or if he just sleeps with one or two women - he doesn't suffer discrimination because of it.

On the other hand, if a woman were interested in images of hot guys, she's shamed for it. (Let's not even get started on how women who are interested in "unlimited boobs and asses" are treated because that's a whole new ballpark of sexism and homophobia.) When women express their sexuality, it's considered shameful, gross, "oversharing" and they're discriminated against for it. If a woman watches porn, she's a pervert, she's gross, she's a slut. If a woman sleeps with a lot of guys (or just a couple of guys!), she's a slut, a whore, she's ostracized and has an increased risk of being raped or harmed. If a woman sleeps with no guys, or just a few guys, she's a prude, she needs to "loosen up," and she's... at an increased risk of rape. Basically women get it coming and going, no matter what - there's no winning.

So yeah, I wouldn't actually compare the two at all, and to say that misandry exists in any form is just completely wrong. Especially when all the shit y'all complain about either is the effect on men of misogyny or, y'know, just some white straight cis dude getting his feelings hurt because women don't love and trust him automatically.

I think we're having a argument of definitions. I believe that something can have a word that describes it even if it is not a significant force or major concern; I conclude you do not? I suppose I can understand your argument that applying the word misandry inflates a minor problem to a significance it does not deserve, but I feel that the battle should be over the significance of the word, not its existence, because negative sex discrimination against men does exist, and claiming it doesn't makes you sound silly.

We don't say that a disease doesn't deserve a name because it's too rare. It doesn't mean E. Henry Thripshaw's disease should get the same amount of research funding and awareness and testing and everything else we give to diseases that kill millions every year, but being rare and globally unimportant doesn't make it not exist.

And I do judge -- in a "I am weirded out" way -- people who are interested in unlimited animated boobs and asses, because I'm not as open to others' kinks as I should be.

Ah then I understand, that does make sense. I don't watch a lot of anime outside of the series' I'm into.

[ SECRET POST #2249 ]

Re: inb4 "DIE SCUM DIE"

Re: inb4 "DIE SCUM DIE"

Re: inb4 "DIE SCUM DIE"

Re: inb4 "DIE SCUM DIE"

Re: inb4 "DIE SCUM DIE"

Logic...whut?

Re: inb4 "DIE SCUM DIE"

Re: inb4 "DIE SCUM DIE"

Re: inb4 "DIE SCUM DIE"

Re: inb4 "DIE SCUM DIE"