case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2013-09-13 07:00 pm

[ SECRET POST #2446 ]


⌈ Secret Post #2446 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________

















[ ----- TRIGGERY SECRETS AHEAD ----- ]




















04. [WARNING for gore, blood, etc]

[How To Train Your Dragon]


__________________________________________________



05. [WARNING for child abuse]



__________________________________________________



06. [WARNING for rape]



__________________________________________________



07. [WARNING for rape]



__________________________________________________



08. [WARNING for torture]

[Fall Out Boy's "The Phoenix"]


__________________________________________________



09. [WARNING for underage]

[pokemon conquest]


















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 000 secrets from Secret Submission Post #349.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 1 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

(Anonymous) 2013-09-14 04:28 am (UTC)(link)
This also infuriates me. Take Riddick, for example. The only female character, Dahl, spends most of the movie sitting stoically (or aggressively) through sexual harassment, sexism, and homophobia. It's boring, it's cliché, and it's insulting, frankly. You know what I don't want to see? The only female character (except the other one who was apparently raped multiple times and then shot in the back, but was only in the movie for about 2 minutes) spend most of the movie stewing in an ugly broth of sexual violence. Aside from the other things I mention, why make me, as a viewer, sit through that? In this case, it added nothing to the story. We also knew the rapey character was an asshole. Not only that, but what Riddick did, with the nipples comment (which was gross and out of place and just fucked up the tone of the whole scene) was make him look like a sexual predator. One of the things I really appreciated about the first movie was the Riddick got on with the business of working with (or subverting or betraying) Fry without getting all rapey with her. Sure, there's that one scene where he cuts a lock of hair without her knowledge, but that's more about setting up how he's a master of being inches away and still invisible.

It's not high art by any means, but I would have thoroughly enjoyed Riddick without the aforementioned bullshit. Now, I doubt I'll watch it again and I doubt I'll watch any additional movies. It's just kind of exhausting to see female character after female character in danger of sexual violence. On the other hand, I think it's kind of hilarious that in all of those dance movies, the male character doesn't want to dance anymore because it's something he did with his brother, who was murdered. It's just a lack of imagination and originality that just so happens to play out in a way that's actually really uncomfortable for a lot of women to watch - the sexual violence. I mean, look at the stats. A significant proportion of women have been raped or know someone who's been raped. I don't think any of us can say that our mother or girlfriend was killed by a demon who was grooming us to be a vessel.
chardmonster: (Default)

[personal profile] chardmonster 2013-09-14 05:34 am (UTC)(link)
You know Riddick isn't a good guy, right? He's the protagonist, but he's not a hero.
Edited 2013-09-14 05:35 (UTC)

(Anonymous) 2013-09-14 06:27 am (UTC)(link)
The nipples comment didn't fit with any of his previous treatment of women. Spying on her naked? Letting her know he saw her? Totally would have fit, especially pointing out he caught her in a vulnerable moment but didn't abuse it in the worst way available. Commenting on the color of her nipples was crude and didn't screw with her head in the way he classically does.

(Anonymous) 2013-09-14 10:20 pm (UTC)(link)
No, really? Wow, I must have really fucked up then. I thought he was a knight in shining armor. The epitome of heroic manliness, even. Not a good guy, you say! The blasphemy.

What he has not previously been shown to be is a sexual predator, and I preferred my entertaining villain as violent, but not as a sexually violent creep.