[ SECRET POST #2431 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2431 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.













Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 015 secrets from Secret Submission Post #347.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 1 2 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 2 - sjw trolls ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: ayrt

[comma_chameleon]

I guess I just can't see dragging someone to a movie you know they're not going to enjoy at all, and then expecting them to pay for it on top of that.

Both of us being sort of happy, or content seems like a better compromise to me than one person being happy and the other wondering how long they can spend in the bathroom before someone gets suspicious, because if they spend five more minutes watching a film they loathe they might commit friendicide.

Re: ayrt

[(Anonymous)]

wow, you are ridiculously overdramatic. it's just a movie. it's not going to kill you to watch it even if you think it's dumb.

no wonder so many people these days are completely socially inept, they're spoiled children who expect everyone else to cater to them.

Re: ayrt

[comma_chameleon]

*snort* It's overly dramatic for me to decide that I don't want to spend money on something I think is dumb and won't enjoy? And yet compromising to see a movie that both (or a group) might enjoy is stupid to you?

Sorry, but I'm not shelling out my limited 'entertainment' funds in order to spend two hours sitting uncomfortably (most likely in pain) and not even remotely enjoy the film I'm spending money on.

I have no problem with compromise, but it's not social ineptitude or being spoiled to expect that everyone who goes out as a group enjoys themselves just a little bit.

I bet if your friend was a vegan or vegetarian you'd insist on going to a steakhouse and tell them that they're being whiny and spoiled by expecting a compromise so that they also can find something more than a garden salad to eat for dinner.

Re: ayrt

[(Anonymous)]

Comma's idea makes more sense that you, you sound dramatic for deciding people are somehow spoiled for compromising on finding something both parties will enjoy

you need to grow up anon, you sound an awful lot like one of those socially, inept, spoiled people who want to be catered to

[(Anonymous)]

Where is everyone getting this idea that the only kind of compromise is finding something that both people are sort of okay with? Saying "we'll see your movie this week and mine next week" IS compromise. It just isn't instant gratification compromise, which is what everyone here seems to expect.

[comma_chameleon]

But the issue behind that is now I'm (hypothetically speaking of course) spending twice the amount of money as before and one of us is going to be miserable on each of those outings. What's enjoyable about that?