fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2577 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2577 ⌋

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

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

[Theresa Lopez-Fitzgerald-Crane, from the soap opera Passions]

__________________________________________________

03.

[BBC Sherlock]

__________________________________________________

04.

[Nobunaga the Fool]

__________________________________________________

05.

[Carrie Fisher as Princess Leia from Star Wars]

__________________________________________________

06.

[The Quick and the Dead]

__________________________________________________

07.

[Nathan Fillion]

__________________________________________________

08.

[Warehouse 13]

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 030 secrets from Secret Submission Post #368.
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.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I only knew anybody considered women inherently unfunny when I hit the internet. I laugh at women's stuff as much as men's, whether it's in writing, movies, or professional comedy, so...I don't understand that perception? At all?

It's ironic that Cracked would publish an article like that, since what I'm pretty sure was one of their first (outwardly) female writers, Christina H, got so much shit on every one of her articles, like each one there would be an argument in the comments over whether she was entertaining or not. Other writers with female names came along afterwards and got much better reception, and I still don't know if it's because she really wrote bad articles, or because she paved the way and any woman who came afterwards would be liked just for not being her. This article just reminded me of all that.

Cracked is interesting in that respect. There have been a few articles that kind of go into sexist issues, though I can't remember every single one. There's a few here(http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-reasons-your-online-dating-profile-isnt-working/), here (http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-responses-to-sexism-that-just-make-everything-worse/), and here (http://www.cracked.com/blog/4-ways-to-have-more-sex-right-now21-today21/). However, articles talking about sexism or misogyny tend to get the most vitriol thrown at them in the comments below. The same goes for articles that talk about racism.

So it's like, most of the Cracked Staff is for equality and being a decent person, where as a lot of the readers are the opposite. :/

I've noticed that trend, too. It makes me feel better that the bigoted comments on those types of articles get downvoted all to hell while the egalitarian ones get pushed up, which I like to think is part of why Cracked keep publishing them (the main reason being controversial clickbait). The readership isn't perfect, but it's not a cesspool where assholery automatically gets backpats like some internet forums.

I don't read Cracked much, but I get the feeling that the writers have a higher average maturity level than some of the readership because I've run across a number of articles written by men that basically amount to "Guys, you need to get your shit together and stop acting like childish douchecanoes. You'll be a lot happier and people will want to date you." I never read the comments, but presumably no one would write these things if they didn't think anyone needed to hear it.

I think it was both that Christina H was a woman, and that her articles just weren't that good. I don't pay attention to the by-line so I never know who wrote the article I'm reading, but I could always tell her articles from the introduction alone. I'm not surprised that most people didn't find her funny. And yet, the shit she got in the comments was due to misogyny and nothing will convince me otherwise. During the time Christina H was at her most prolific there was some other writer (Sean something? Or something with R? I'm bad with names) and his articles were a lot worse than Christina H's, but the even the comments pointing out how shit the articles were were a lot more polite and less RAEG than the one on her articles.

And the guy had the worst stans, I swear to god. If his articles weren't reason enough to detest him his stans would have been. Loki stans are a pure joy to be around compared to that group of people.

[ SECRET POST #2577 ]

Re: The stereotype that "women aren't funny".

Re: The stereotype that "women aren't funny".

Re: The stereotype that "women aren't funny".

Re: The stereotype that "women aren't funny".

Re: The stereotype that "women aren't funny".