[ SECRET POST #2552 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2552 ⌋

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: 04 pages, 077 secrets from Secret Submission Post #364.
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.

Comments

Ugh

[(Anonymous)]

Please stop Anon. Pretty please. Pretty please with a cherry on top. I am begging you. Please stop. You are only hurting your cause. Assuming your cause is promoting feminism.

Re: Ugh

[(Anonymous)]

I don't think it is...

Re: Ugh

[(Anonymous)]

I think if it was, OP wouldn't have started with Andrea Dworkin on day one (although I admire her in some ways, she's the most controversial feminist, period) and gone to the Nazi well on day two.

Re: Ugh

[(Anonymous)]

1. I like and respect Dworkin and think any good discussion on feminism should start with her.
2. I wasn't planning on attacking playboy today, I just thought it was a good quote that I quite agree with.
3. Who would you like to see tomorrow then? Is there any feminist you do want to see discussed, or will every woman I bring up just be me trolling? because it sure sounds like your problem is with any feminist topic.

I appreciate it

[insanenoodlyguy]

Rad!fem stepping up their game shows they really do care about us. Mostly me of course.

Edit: They didn't quit while ahead, I take this back. 0/10 now.

Re: Ugh

[(Anonymous)]

It's not. This is just Trollina trying to flag a dead horse that died a few years back. I just sort of pity her now, she must have an awful life if this is what she spends her time doing, ya' know?

Re: Ugh

[(Anonymous)]

Plot twist! Maybe it's a he not a she! Trying to further the "crazy feminazi" stereotype and generate anger. Maybe it's MRA troll back and trying a new angle!

Re: Ugh

[(Anonymous)]

I severely doubt it's a guy, personally. My guess: Female, mid to late twenties. Not too thin, maybe a little out of shape. Probably waits for hours refreshing the page hoping to see the day's post. Stays in a lot, possibly lives off of their parent(s)' kindness.

Re: Ugh

[(Anonymous)]

To be honest, I wouldn't be surprised. That kind of tactic has been used before by the more harmful trolls who are trying to deliberately undermine a movement.

Re: Ugh

[(Anonymous)]

That's misandry! How do you know that it's not a female MRA dipshit, huh? HUH?

Re: Ugh

[(Anonymous)]

I think it's just to generate discussion.

Re: Ugh

[fingalsanteater]

No one wants to discuss it.

Re: Ugh

[(Anonymous)]

I do.

It's hilarious.

Re: Ugh

[(Anonymous)]

Obviously people do.
True, I'm very disappointed that there aren't as many people agreeing with the quote as there are people dismissing the quote, but I didn't plan on this being a hive-mind thread, so either way it is being discussed and I'm happy.

Re: Ugh

[(Anonymous)]

+1

Re: Ugh

[(Anonymous)]

I what way is this harming the promotion of feminism? These women basically created modern feminism.

In relation to this specific quote there are a lot of people trying to declare feminism as "Pro-porn" and you know, whatever, but there are a lot of us out there who don't think magazines like playboy are particularly empowering. Is it as bad as the holocaust? No of course not, but it's a valid analogy of the oppressed people supporting a tool of the oppression.

Re: Ugh

[(Anonymous)]

It is not a valid analogy. It actually is an awful analogy because it completely belittles and ruins the whole point by exaggerating it to a point where nobody is ever going to take it seriously. It's the opposite of a valid analogy.

Re: Ugh

[(Anonymous)]

I agree that most porn is for men and therefore not empowering, but being anti-porn usually ties into sex-negative feminism. Sex-negative feminism is the most depressing thing to come out of the feminism movement.

Re: Ugh

[(Anonymous)]

I'd argue that TERF's are a little more depressing, but otherwise I agree with your point.

Re: Ugh

[(Anonymous)]

Yes. A valid analogy. Remember when Hugh Hefner rounded up a bunch of women in camps and killed them all. That was a crazy week.

Re: Ugh

[starphotographs]

And he did it all in nothing but slippers and a smoking jacket.

Re: Ugh

[(Anonymous)]

Women who can't understand why a woman would read Playboy: your straight privilege is showing.

Re: Ugh

[(Anonymous)]

No, I understand. I just don't think any woman should be supporting Hefner. Surly there are alternatives.

Re: Ugh

[greenvelvetcake]

My thoughts are that no one should be trying to get rid of porn altogether, because that battle is long lost. I prefer the approach that makes the porn industry safer for all participants and more appealing to more demographics.

Re: Ugh

[intrigueing]

I salute Ms. Steinem for helping develop modern feminism.

Her doing that, however, does not in any way mean views of hers, such as this one, are not utterly fucking disgusting, offensive, stupid, nonsensical, and utterly, completely outdated. Doing some things that turned out to be positive does not automatically mean that everything that comes out of your mouth magically becomes true even if it's patently, fundamentally, transparently wrong. A statement that is wrong does not become right just because it was uttered by a influential figure. That is not how logic works.

And no, it's not a valid analogy. Nazism and the patriarchy can both be described with the adjectives "bad" and "oppressive", but that's where the similarities end. The most basic difference being that Playboy is not propaganda for a political cause. Playboy is about selling magazines to a readership.