[ SECRET POST #2650 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2650 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.













Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 062 secrets from Secret Submission Post #379.
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

Re: Possible wank inducer? Still "interesting" though

[(Anonymous)]

I clicked the link and checked out the title/summary etc but did not go further. It does look like a heavily feminist approach. Though use of the word patriarchy is not "extreme" and is a valid term when talking about certain examinations of society. Not sure what you meant when you said that it was extreme or what you're reacting to, exactly.

Also teachers do not only assign articles they agree with. Sometimes it's important to look at all the extremes or sides of a topic and also it's an excellent way to facilitate discussion in the classroom. So just because your teacher assigned this doesn't mean she endorses that kind of thinking.

Re: Possible wank inducer? Still "interesting" though

[(Anonymous)]

Well later on the article is talking about Ted Bundy, and this crops up "After his first escape, the male identification was with Bundy as an outlaw rebel-hero. But subsequently, Bundy did the supremely unmanly thing of getting caught; moreover, at the last moment he confessed to his crimes and manifested fear of death. No longer qualifying as hero, Bundy was now cast into the alternate role of scapegoats"

Then there's a part about Jack the Ripper where it says this, "Patriarchal culture has enshrined "Jack the Ripper" as a mythic hero; he commonly appears as an immortal figure in literature, film, television, jokes, and other cultural products. The function of such mythiciza-tion is twofold: to terrorize women and to empower and inspire men."

And the last sentence of the article says "Vast numbers of women are now suffering and dying from various forms of hate crime worldwide, including neglect, infanticide, genital mutilation, battering, rape, and murder. What men might call "peacetime," researcher Lori Heise (1989) truthfully names a "global war on women."

It all just seems a little off, and the article for the most part didn't start out with these kinds of statements either. I mean, yeah, some of these things have merit, like the last sentence about what's happening to women all over the world, but just the way the author says it seems to me like scare tactics or something.

Re: Possible wank inducer? Still "interesting" though

[(Anonymous)]

That first part about Bundy seems so poorly written. Like something a high-schooler would write in an essay. I see what you're saying now, though, about the overall tone being a little off. It's like it has okay basic points but the way they try and get them across just seems...sensationalist? Immature? Not-quite-right? Idk.

If I were you I'd actually bring this up in class (if it's the type of class that likes these kinds of open discussion on readings). If you can articulate a little better what exactly you feel to be wrong about it, it could lead to a really good discussion.