[ SECRET POST #2614 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2614 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.
[The Americans]


__________________________________________________



04. http://oi58.tinypic.com/2a5hg1g.jpg
[underage nudity, fanart stuff, harry potter]


__________________________________________________



05. http://abload.de/img/blue1iqs99.png
[porny, liveaction]


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07. http://oi57.tinypic.com/2ednvhc.jpg
[underage nudity, lolicon stuff]


__________________________________________________




















[ ----- SPOILERY SECRETS AHEAD ----- ]
























08. [SPOILERS for Thor: The Dark World]



__________________________________________________



09. [SPOILERS for True Blood]



__________________________________________________



10. [SPOILERS for Kill la Kill]



__________________________________________________



11. [SPOILERS for Sons of Anarchy]



__________________________________________________



12. [SPOILERS for the Lego Movie]



__________________________________________________






















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
























13. [WARNING for incest]

[How I Live Now]


__________________________________________________



14. [WARNING for suicide]

[Robert E. Howard]

















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 000 secrets from Secret Submission Post #372.
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.

Comments

[fscom]

12. [SPOILERS for the Lego Movie]
http://oi57.tinypic.com/2bzh8k.jpg

[sarillia]

I wish the pink legos had been advertised for everyone. I'm not especially fond of pink but I hate seeing people look down on it because it's associated with girls. But I also don't like to see it pushed on girls who don't like it. We need to make it more acceptable for boys to like "girl things" instead of treating them as inferior.

And now I'll shut up because no one asked for me to go on this tangent.

[(Anonymous)]

I agree 100%!

[diet_poison]

no but you pretty much have it right. the fact that there's a subset of Legos ~just for girls!!!~ is a problem in and of itself (it implies that regular Legos Aren't For Girls, and that the ones that are, are secondary). Why not just make a range of things that might be appealing to a variety of people and market them for everyone?

[kathkin]

Yes this.

I loved my girly lego when I was a kid. I loved my 'neutral' lego as well. :P

[(Anonymous)]

uh.

pretty sure the ending wasn't about a girl but about a toddler?

sure, could have been his little brother instead of his little sister and someday nobody will care which one it is. But I'm pretty sure the joke was intended to poke fun at a toddler bringing their beginner baby blocks to the table.

[(Anonymous)]

I agree, that's how I took that scene as well. The Duplo pieces are more weird in comparison to the 'regular' Lego than the Friends stuff, so the have a more 'alien' look to the Lego world. It wasn't anything to do with the sibling's gender, just their age.

[mekkio]

Yeah, those were Duplo blocks. Aimed at the 1 1/2 - 4 year olds set.

The fact that OP missed that and Princess Unikitty makes me wonder if he/she even saw the movie.

[(Anonymous)]

Now that you mention it, I'm glad the baby sibling was a sister. If it was a brother, it would have excluded real-life girls from being mentioned at all. At least it's implied that the girl will play with the same toys as her dad and brother when she's old enough.

[mekkio]

Did you forget Princess Unikitty?

I knew she wore a pretty good disguise at one point but c'mon.

[(Anonymous)]

Probably because they were the dad's collection and a grown man probably wouldn't be collecting a relatively new subset made for girls that's not popular with most classic Lego fans and collectors. And baby blocks make funnier and less problematic last-minute new-threat-appears bad guys than the girly set would've.

At least there was Princess Unikitty!

[estamir]

I see a fair number of AFOLs buying Friends sets just to get the colors, since many of them are rare to nonexistent in the other themes. Not just the pink and purple, mind, but there's that pale yellow, and that really pretty azure blue, and whatnot.

But yeah, they're not as popular with the collector crowd based on what they are - some just pick them up for the brick variety to use in their own creations.

[purityandlight]

Going from the voice, she probably didn't have the Friends blocks because she would eat them.

(Also, I'm pretty sure that if they had finished it with Friends blocks, there would be a lot more outcry for the implied joke of 'HORROR, SHE'LL RUIN THE FUN BECAUSE SHE IS A GIRL WITH GIRL BLOCKS' as opposed to the joke of letting a toddler/younger sibling drool on your good things, which is something girls and boys alike can emphasize with.)

[(Anonymous)]

See, I got the 'HORROR, SHE'LL RUIN THE FUN BECAUSE SHE IS A GIRL WITH GIRL BLOCKS' message a lot louder than I got the "kid sister will drool on good things", because if she's so young that her main toys are the baby blocks, then she's really too young to be in the basement and risk trying to eat/choke on the tinier legos. Until we heard her voice, I assumed she was a little older and had just grown out of those toys, which is why they were laying around and the brother decided to use some of them in his creation.

[thelonebamf]

Err... I think it was a good thing that they didn't lay it out as though "Hey, boys get the color legos and girls get the pink ones" in the movie. I mean, if you don't like the pink legos- why would you want to reiterate the idea that those are the ones girls can/get to play with? I think it was a way more positive message to see that anyone could build anything and was only limited by their own imagination. Would you have wanted to see Wild Style needing to build a jetpack, but being unable to do so because there weren't any pink bricks around? And as people have said, Princess Unikitty made it clear that it's fine for boys to pick up the pink and purple bricks if that's what they want to build with.

Also- just saying, I loved the Duplo bit. The aliens were goofy and "off" looking, which gave me a good laugh because growing up I always considered Duplos do be a let down- say at the doctor's office etc. Not as bad as Megablox, of course...

[ex_mek82]

Ummm... I think with the Duplo blocks at the end, you might have missed the point b/c the voice clearly suggested that the little sister was a toddler. Like someone else above said, the sister would have eaten the Lego Friends stuff instead. Also, the chunky awkwardness of the Duplo made the scene funnier (and much less problematic than it would have been had they used the Lego Friends stuff).

Though there is going to be a sequel in a couple years, so... there's always that opportunity?

[(Anonymous)]

If they'd included the Lego Friends, a certain section of the feminist world would have flipped out. I guarantee it. Better that they ignore Lego Friends. Better that Lego just forget Friends was ever made and instead starts including girls into the rest of the Lego world. I've never understood why Legos are sectioned off as only-for-boys. Same thing goes with Easy Bake Ovens. Gender has nothing to do with the enjoyment of tasty cake.

[(Anonymous)]

I would say it is parents. They weren't buying LEGOs for girls so LEGO made "LEGOS for girls" so the parents would buy their girls LEGOS.

[(Anonymous)]

'A certain section of the feminist world'? Yeah, cos only those crazee hairy legged radfems would ever critcize something like that.

SIGH

[(Anonymous)]

Might be a country difference, but Legos in Poland are considered as universal toys. And we didn't get any pink blocks :O . We had Duplos though.

Yep, didn't see that film ;) . Just wondering about Lego differences.

Anyone remember the Bionic sets? Just recently heard they were marketed towards boys in US.

[(Anonymous)]

Your argument makes no sense in the face of Cloud Cookooland, an entire realm of pink and sparkly with rainbows and girly stereotypes, which was as much about embracing feminine side of pretend-time as it did the whimsical nonsense. Especially given how Princess Unikitty was a major character.

[illiadandoddity]

But Princess Unikitty tho...

I mean, they may not have had the specifically "for girls" Lego sets in the film, but the cutesy, girly side of creativity was totally represented - and a major character, even!

[(Anonymous)]

I wish the writers had gone one step further and made the son a daughter instead. There was 100% zero reason whatsoever that it couldn't have been a girl who wanted to bond with her dad over their shared LEGO love, and then swap out a baby brother with the Duplos. It was a missed opportunity from the filmmakers to make playing with LEGO the genderless activity it should be, and still is in many parts of the world.

[(Anonymous)]

Considering the whole live-action bit is a spoiler, you may have a point. They didn't have much to lose in ticket sales if they made the kid a girl.

I wasn't aware that Lego had become so much of a gendered toy in America. Even though there is Lego Friends, I thought it was still normal for girls to play with other Lego toys too. I mean, I didn't think it's the kind of toy a typical parent would say no to giving a daughter because it's "boys only."

[(Anonymous)]

Lego Friends remind me a lot of Polly Pockets and littlest Pet shop (the original stuff, not the re-imaginings.) That's why I want them a lot. Even even has my name, for once, but she doesn't look like me in the slightest.

It's weird thinking back I didn't have a lot of toys and a lot of my stuff was pretty neutral as a kid so now I'm hardcore into girly toys. I have more dolls now than I did back then.