[ SECRET POST #2297 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2297 ⌋

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.


__________________________________________________



















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 038 secrets from Secret Submission Post #328.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[wldcatsprstr_14]

I know people would immediately jump to 'transphobe!' if someone said that a trans* person was unattractive, especially if they were referring to a transwoman, and no matter how sincerely the person just meant 'they aren't attractive to me,' you couldn't convince them it was the truth. So aesthetics does factor into the label being thrown around.

[(Anonymous)]

And if that's the case, it automatically renders the label moot.

[(Anonymous)]

I would it it poses a risk of rendering the label moot. A word doesn't lose meaning just because some people misuse it sometimes. If most people misuse it most of the time, then it's not very useful or it starts to mean something else, but some people overapplying it doesn't make the concept worthless.

[sugar_spun]

Something being moot is not something being pointless. It means that it makes it up for debate. I don't know if the other anon meant it the right way, but still.

[(Anonymous)]

Eh, I think there's a difference between saying you think someone is unattractive/that you're not attracted to them and saying you think they're grotesque. They're both subjective aesthetic judgements, but one is a lot more loaded than the other.