fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2616 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2616 ⌋

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, 063 secrets from Secret Submission Post #374.
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

Oh god, so many things. That these things are not real:

* astrology/horoscopes - The response is usually a lot of shrieky outrage about how people are just doing for FUN, omg you killjoy.

* vaccines don't cause autisim - and that there's no proof that it's "safer" to have a delayed vaccination schedule, because even people who think the anti-vax people are nuts frequently still think there's some benefit to spreading out the vaccinations over a longer period of time.

* tarot cards/fortune telling is just cold reading/guessing or straight up lying - because pieces of cardboard do not know your future. Really. I promise.

While the anti-vaccers are indeed ten kinds of ignorant and crazy, I don't know a single person who doesn't do horoscopes/tarot just for fun and knows full well that they're bunk. Who is taking them seriously? Crazy cat ladies?

People often say they know it's BS when they're pressed about it. But when you ask people, "So what are you, a Libra?" or say things like, "I do XZY, but then I'm a typical Virgo", that rather indicates that they actually do think that personality is predicted by date/time of birth.

I don't believe that aliens built the Pyramids. Which is why I don't ask people stuff about what extra-terrestrial construction method aliens used or what purpose they think the aliens had in building them. If you think something isn't real, you don't behave like it is.

From a psychological/sociological point of view, though, they're right. If they're aware of the stereotypes of astrological signs in their culture (or, say, the stereotypes associated with blood types in Japanese culture) they will often - subconsciously or otherwise - start to behave more in line with those stereotypes.

Studies found that, for example, women actually do tend to behave in line with the stereotype for their hair colour (blondes are fun, redheads are feisty, brunettes are serious and intellectual) and in fact women would alter their behaviour within days of dyeing their hair to conform.

See also: people with "intellectual-sounding" names being more likely to end up in intellectual professions, regardless of their upbringing or socioeconomic status, girls with boyish names being more likely to end up working in STEM regardless of their parents views, boys with girlish names in care/teaching, etc.

If society says "Libras do ____" and you're steeped in that culture, Libras probably do tend to do ____ more than others. They're not wrong. Nobody (aside from loons) really thinks the stars affect your personality, but your culture sure as shit pressures you to conform to its expectations.

I understand what you're saying, but you're operating with a different definition of "right" than I am. One's birth date/time doesn't predict one's personality. It just doesn't. Even if people start to behave like the stereotypes they believe in, it still doesn't mean they're correct in thinking that birth date/times predict personalities. It still doesn't. The force responsible for horoscopes and personalities matching up is people behaving in predictable ways, not any supernatural elements.

The effect is still the same, though. Libras will tend to act like ____, and ____ will be a stereotypical "Virgo" trait. Because we tell ourselves it's true.

I think the only thing we actually disagree about is whether or not people truly believe the stars determine our personalities. I've never met someone who genuinely thought that - fringe kooks aside it's just for fun, it's a social game, and it has some basis in reality because we tell ourselves it does.

But when you ask people, "So what are you, a Libra?" or say things like, "I do XZY, but then I'm a typical Virgo", that rather indicates that they actually do think that personality is predicted by date/time of birth.

Or it means they're joking or having fun.

What I'm surprised isn't common knowledge is that most people who like to talk about astrology and stuff don't seriously believe it. I think that's why people get defensive when they get sneered at and told condescendingly that it's not ~real~~ Because they think it's obvious that they're just doing it for fun.

Then a lot of people have a very odd idea of what a joke is. It's rather an elaborate set-up, don't you think? Going around behaving as if they believe in astrology when secretly they don't, because everyone knows that'd be hilarious...?

Sorry. I think it's far more likely that people kinda sorta believe, but haven't really given much thought about how or why they believe. Horoscopes and zodiac signs sound semi-plausible as personality predictors because they're so general they'll apply to nearly everyone. Quite a few people are taken in by this simply because it looks like an impossible trick on the surface. I mean, how could they know I'm sometimes social, but often need my own space??

So when something they take as a casual belief is challenged, their first reaction is to get defensive because someone is questioning a belief they've never bothered to question for themselves. That isn't a nice feeling. Neither is the suspicion that maybe you've come off as rather gullible at best, ignorant at worst. So the usual way of handling it?

Oh, it's all a joke, they were just having fun. You silly thing. :)

You... don't have a very good sense of humour, do you?

Nonny I think you have much stronger feelings about astrology than the average person reading horoscopes.

I had a friend who once insisted with all seriousness that astrology and tarot were real because they had to do with the actual physical effect of stars and planets on people (infinitesimally minor gravitational pulls affect your personality and job/romance prospects differently than they affect those things for other people, I guess?) and astrology today was the culmination of millennia of people observing these minor affects that are only discernible in aggregate. Or something.

We were in high school, so you can chalk it up to that, I guess.

I had friends who believed they could move objects with their minds and see auras in high school.

Teenagers are really, really stupid sometimes.

you'd be surprised how many people take that nonsense very seriously.

Argh, anti-vaxers.

This isn't an un/common knowledge thing just a gripe related to anti-vaxers; any time I talk about my dream job in southern Oregon, my sister (who is a sensible human being and has vaccinated her daughter, and also works in child-care) for some reason always jumps to bring up this grievance that there are are apparently a lot of anti-vaxers in that area. And okay, that's shitty but I got it the first dozen times; it's like it's the only other thing she knows about the area other than that I want to work there in the future. And it also pisses me off because according to sources like this one, it's actually way more of an issue in the Bay Area where SHE lives and works with children and their parents.

[ SECRET POST #2616 ]

Re: Things you thought were common knowledge, but aren't?

Re: Things you thought were common knowledge, but aren't?

Re: Things you thought were common knowledge, but aren't?

Re: Things you thought were common knowledge, but aren't?

Re: Things you thought were common knowledge, but aren't?

Re: Things you thought were common knowledge, but aren't?

Re: Things you thought were common knowledge, but aren't?

Re: Things you thought were common knowledge, but aren't?

Re: Things you thought were common knowledge, but aren't?

Re: Things you thought were common knowledge, but aren't?

Re: Things you thought were common knowledge, but aren't?

Re: Things you thought were common knowledge, but aren't?

Re: Things you thought were common knowledge, but aren't?

Re: Things you thought were common knowledge, but aren't?