Case (
case) wrote in
fandomsecrets2013-12-22 03:41 pm
[ SECRET POST #2546 ]
⌈ Secret Post #2546 ⌋
Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.
01.

__________________________________________________
02.

__________________________________________________
03.

__________________________________________________
04.

__________________________________________________
05.

__________________________________________________
06.

__________________________________________________
07.

__________________________________________________
08.

__________________________________________________
09.

__________________________________________________
10.

__________________________________________________
11.

Notes:
Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 054 secrets from Secret Submission Post #363.
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.

no subject
(Anonymous) 2013-12-22 09:40 pm (UTC)(link)Personally, I'm a little more sick of the "If you don't ship X, you're Y!" - but that might be because I've seen that happen in a fandom that was very quick to do that about certain het ships.
no subject
I am sometimes a little suspicious of those complaints though. I've seen a reasonable post about how female characters tend to be held to higher standards than male ones (both due to sexism and as a result of some kinds of feminism) so a lot of people will like very similar male characters but not the female ones. These posts will often acknowledge that there are valid reasons to dislike these characters and they are not saying that every person who doesn't like them is sexist. This gets interpreted by some overly defensive people as "if you don't like this particular character I happened to mention then you are a terrible sexist and I hate you!". I realize that there are also people who say that too, so to some extent I understand the people who read it that way, but it annoys me that it's so hard to talk about the high standards placed on female characters because of the people simplifying the issue and the people being too defensive in response.
That's just one example too. It happens with discussions of how homophobia affects the way people respond to gay people, etc.
tl;dr: "if you don't ship x, you're y!" does happen (and other related arguments like the example I used before), but I've also seen things that only have a passing resemblance to that get dismissed as that
Sorry for rambling on about this. I find it an interesting subject.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2013-12-22 11:40 pm (UTC)(link)Oh no, it's all good - and you're right there are times when that is the case [people claiming that valid, reasonable posts are over-defensive.]
The situation I was talking about was people actively claiming that in response to people not liking a female character who openly abused the one of the two people she's shipped with, and said character is obviously worried enough about it that just the threat of abuse from her makes him react strongly in a way that's obviously scared of her. That turned a lot of people off the ship, and a character as a whole because...well. Abuse. Plus that abusive trait was something that tended to get played up about the character in fandom works, albeit as a joke. But a ton of people loved the character and ship [and, in fairness, the character was an otherwise fun character] and bunch of those people started claiming/attacking anyone who admitted to not shipping it as sexist even though the majority of people's reasoning was related to the abuse.
Now, while I'm sure some people didn't like because of sexist reasoning, the fact the first response for a lot of people was "You're sexist!" was...not okay, and I've seen the same thing to varying degrees in other fandoms - though those times are usually on tumblr*, so I tend to take it with a grain of salt.
*Original fandom I mentioned was all on livejournal at the time
no subject
(Anonymous) 2013-12-22 11:46 pm (UTC)(link)no subject