fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2609 ]

[ SECRET POST #2609 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2609 ⌋

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

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

__________________________________________________

12.

__________________________________________________

13.

__________________________________________________

14.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 04 pages, 076 secrets from Secret Submission Post #372.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 1 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Name the fandom. And repeats, etc.

Can I ask why "omg this person is soooo ugly you guys" secrets continue to not get put in the failbar where they belong? I'm sick to death of seeing them, half of them seem to be deliberate troll secrets, and anyway I don't see why one person's subjective (and shallow!) opinion of a celebrity's appearance counts as a secret.

I agree.

Could we put this to a vote, case?

On what basis should they be banned that can't also be applied to others? What about #5 - what makes someone's subjective judgment of a (possible) relationship any more valid? Or someone preferring Little Women to other books? Or watching HIMYM for the angst?

You're drawing a false equivalence here. A preference for one book over another is not the same thing as thinking an actress is SO UGLY. One is based in personal preference on an object, not a person, the other is a shallow insult against a real person and IMO qualifies as a personal attack even if they'll never see it.

They don't have to be equivalent, but the rules have to apply to every secret equally!

That addresses the book one, but what about the one about Miley Cyrus and Jared Leto? Isn't that also an insult and a personal attack?

I don't really see it as such? There's a lot to be said about an individual's behaviour, which they can (usually) control. Their appearance, though? They're just as God made them, as Paul Benedict once said.

To be fair, if they're in the acting business, their appearance can change pretty drastically from role to role.

And while they might not be nice secrets - and I don't think they are - I don't think I can ban them for the reason of "not being secrets," since it's been proven pretty much over and over again that if someone mentions that they think a popular actor is ugly, fans will judge the hell out of them for it. (While I'm sure they also have people they think are ugly, too.)

If there's some huge influx of "omg so ugly" secrets soon or something, then sure, it might be ugly-anon trolling - but it's just one today. I'll keep an eye out, anyway.

Wait, don't we already throw "ship it" secrets into the failbar? Shipping culture can get ridiculous and I know a lot of people would get in trouble because they ship a particular pairing, and yet those aren't considered secrets. So why is "omg so ugly" considered a secret?

I really don't think hatefully judging someone by their physical appearance is really something we should be enabling. Judge their actions, their poor choices in partners, their style of dress, anything they have control over, but shitting on someone for how they look is unsporting at best.

Yup! Secrets that say "I ship it" and literally nothing else with no context or reason why it's a secret, get failbarred. That rule was made because people were spamming FS by sticking any two random characters together and slapping I SHIP IT across them.

#2 today has more than "SO UGLY" though, so that rule even analogy-wise, doesn't really apply.

And I don't think we have leg to stand on re: the "enabling" argument, considering what gets posted here on Fridays...

I only brought it up today because I was tired of seeing it at all.

I don't get it -- we make a big deal about personal attacks over in general comments and in secret threads but we're perfectly fine with these shallow, hurtful secrets?

Whatever, maybe I'll just shut up.

(no subject)

case - 2014-02-23 22:15 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2014-02-23 22:24 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

dethtoll - 2014-02-23 22:26 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

case - 2014-02-23 22:32 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

dethtoll - 2014-02-23 22:33 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

case - 2014-02-23 22:38 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2014-02-23 23:27 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

case - 2014-02-23 23:29 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

juliet316 - 2014-02-23 22:52 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

case - 2014-02-23 22:54 (UTC) - Expand

If the secret boils down to THEY ARE SO UGLY I agree we should put them in the fail bar. Those aren't really even secrets anymore, their just ugly anon screaming about how ugly people they don't like are.

But how do you phrase a rule to capture only those secrets and no others?

Is it just "no secrets with negative attacks on someone's appearance"?

Like the "I ship it" secrets.

But "I ship it" is for secrets where that's ALL a secret is saying.

So if this new rule was analogous to the "I ship it" rule, the secret today would still be posted!

ayrt

How about something like "X's [body part]/X is ugly" or whatever?

I mean it doesn't cover today's secret, but I can get behind if there looks to be a reason why they mention they're ugly, but simply saying they're ugly doesn't promote discussion.

There's more than that in #2 even today, though.

OP tried to like her and couldn't.
OP thinks she's untalented as an actress.
OP thinks lesser of people who like her.
OP's flist is Doctor Who fans so they can't say this to anyone.

How true any of that is, I can't tell you, but there is more than "she's so ugly omg."

Most of the secret is just 'she is ugly' though. It's pretty clear the other stuff was thrown in so it wouldn't get fail bared.

Sure? And secrets about shipping also add more context so they don't get failbarred. If a secret is about shipping something but they add stuff like why it'd be perceived as weird or bad, or why they're keeping it a secret, they get posted.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2014-02-23 23:44 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2014-02-24 02:52 (UTC) - Expand

Literally 99% of the complaint is, "OMG SHE'S SO UGLY!!!! SHE'S SO UGLY UGLY UGLY UGLY AND I JUDGE PEOPLE FOR LIKING THIS UGLY PERSON" and reads as someone shallow and bitter.

You're going to need to check your percentages and what literally means again, I think.

I totally agree. I tried to find something else besides the "her face is ugly" argument, but is all the same concept with slightly different wording.

(Of course you can't say it to your DW fandom friends, OP; you don't even have a fair argument other than 'i can't stand her ugly face and I loathe her because of it' and that is just childish. There's not much to discuss about.)

Am I the only one who can't see secrets 3, 4, and 10?

I can't either :( I miss transcriptanon.

Edited (spelling) 2014-02-24 10:44 (UTC)

Looks like they were removed by imgur.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only