fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2652 ]

[ SECRET POST #2652 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2652 ⌋

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

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 041 secrets from Secret Submission Post #379.
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

If every woman were coffee anon, it would also undo decades of women fighting to be seen as people who are as logical, responsible, and capable of rational leadership as men. It would become the norm to fear and hate "hysterical" "emotional" "over-reactive" women and what they could do. We would certainly never have female World Leaders - what if they start wars or launch nukes for someone daring to post their head on a porn star's body?

Come on, troll harder. Don't be silly.

I disagree, personally

Convincing argument.

DA
It wasn't an argument it was a personal statement.

Okay. Personal statement with no justification or rationale, noted and filed away with all due respect.

Present an argument, anon.

I guess from a literal perspective every woman everywhere suddenly assaulting all men with burning hot coffee would be suboptimal. So that is true.

But on the most basic level, the fact that men fight a bunch hasn't caused them to be regarded in that way, so I see no reason it should be that way for women. If someone wants to treat it differently and ascribe those tendencies to all women, that's their own problem and they can spin on it. I don't agree that women can or should be expected to meet some massively high standard in order to help out the side or whatever.

I also have problems with it b/c... I mean, there are women who fight and do dirt. It happens. This is a thing that exists already. Human beings are human beings and reducing them to something else on the basis of gender is not something that I'm super happy about. And I also probably do not have as much of a problem with violence in general as a lot of people on here, honestly, so that's part of it (even though I know it's going to get me shouted down).

OP of thread

The men that attack others just for looking at them mostly are regarded as unstable assholes. Men, however, don't already start from a position where they're regarded as hysterical and emotional by the system. You cannot compare the reaction of society to men and women because women start with this "emotional" bullshit baggage to begin with.

I acknowledge that it is the reaction for some people, but I think it's a patently irrational and wrong reaction and I don't think it's sufficient reason to try and say people aren't allowed to act like human beings.

If you want to say that violence is always wrong, that's one thing, but I'm just uncomfortable with this kind of "letting the side down" argument in general.

I agree it's a patently wrong and irrational reaction. I am also saying it's the one that would happen.

Should POC be held to a higher standard than white people? No. But if POC started being violent and reactionary enough to blind people for looking at them funny, you can bet your ass there'd be a huge racist backlash.

Violence is always wrong, but in this particular case, women are going to be judged much more harshly for it because of a history of sexism.

Hm, yeah, that's interesting. I guess part of it does come down to the sad truth that we have to be a certain way so people don't shout down our already tenuous credibility.

On the other hand? Men do not literally throw hot coffee at every woman who looks at them the wrong way. That kind of reaction is very extreme and if it were commonplace it would get a lot of grief, for good reason. The majority of men are not terribly violent, and most people know this. If the majority of women or men were this violent, it would throw credibility on their whole gender, for good reason.

And, yeah, being ok with violence is going to detract from your credibility here. I think in general the kind of world most of us want to see does not feature commonplace violence.

Yeah, I think I'm definitely talking about it in way more general terms than the comment I was responding to, which is probably a mistake on my part. So that's absolutely true. You're absolutely right on that.

As for the rest... fair enough! Like I said, I didn't expect it to be an popular opinion (although I don't think I would endorse commonplace violence as necessarily a good thing, either - I think I just have less of an objection to it).

I don't object to people using violence to defend themselves/defend others. It's just that a) ideally, there wouldn't be anything to defend from, and b) in this case there was zero threat at all, just someone (possibly) looking at her. And don't get me wrong, I would have been creeped out too, had he been leering, just...it's not a direct threat.

(no subject)

elialshadowpine - 2014-04-08 05:44 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

diet_poison - 2014-04-08 12:55 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

elialshadowpine - 2014-04-08 13:20 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

diet_poison - 2014-04-08 13:24 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

elialshadowpine - 2014-04-08 13:27 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

diet_poison - 2014-04-08 21:56 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

elialshadowpine - 2014-04-09 16:49 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

diet_poison - 2014-04-09 19:56 (UTC) - Expand

Sure it has. Men of color who aren't members of a "model minority" and any man who is visibly of a lower socioeconomic class are considered unstable and violent until proven otherwise.

Oh, NOW I remember who coffee!anon is! Thanks!

DA

Why should they? Can people not just leave their opinions or thoughts on this site now? Must we all be arguing something?

I'm not other anon, but sometimes I leave a comment agreeing with a secret or just putting my opinion on a secret and I have lately been getting a lot of "state your argument/proof" type comments. I'm not here to argue (today being the exception I suppose), and I find it silly that people assume you can't ever comment without it being an argument statement.

Why should anyone leave a statement like that alone? This person has as much right to question their statement as the anon has to state it. Must we accept everything everyone says without question?

Sometimes I like to ask why people make statements that they do. If I want to debate them on a point or opinion they hold, I find it silly that people assume and expect that something they state on the internet shouldn't be questioned at all.

Of course you can leave a comment stating your opinion without actually stating why you hold that opinion.

But then, someone else can come along and ask you to explain why you feel the way you to. And the fact that they can do this does not in any way prevent you from stating opinions without giving a reason why.

And people have a right to ask for justification...and you're not obligated to respond.

This sort of thing gets really circular really fast if people are trying to police what kinds of comments other are/aren't allowed to leave. Nothing about my comment implied that anon I replied to didn't have the right to make their comment.

Often people state things as fact that the general lexicon of knowledge disagrees with. when this happens those of us with access to that lexicon wish for citations that lend validity to these contrary truths.

In short, links or it didn't happen sir. Do not invoke my hot chocolate wrath (The men will claim all other hot drinks)

I'm not sure what you're saying here. Are you saying that men will claim all other hot drinks after you have used hot chocolate on this fool, thus rendering beverages such as tea and coffee inaccessible to women, or are you saying that men already claim hot drinks that are not hot chocolate, and that your use of hot chocolate on this poor fool is indicative of his or her lack of masculinity?

Alternatively, are you implying that you are black?

The second one. Since all women are crazy motherfuckers who attack you with Coffee, we must take our own measures! And being male, females get one thing, we get everything else.

IN THE AGE OF HOT LIQUID COMBAT THE POWER REMAINS IN THE CARDBOARD INSULATED HANDS OF THE PATRIARCHY

Damn it!!! I don't drink coffee. I could have gone for the hot chocolate, but I guess I can claim the carbonated fizzy drinks (with sharp ice cubes!) instead.

(no subject)

insanenoodlyguy - 2014-04-08 02:04 (UTC) - Expand

I hadn't even thought of that, but now that you've mentioned it, I could totally see that kind of culture forming...

There's enough bullshit about ~hysterial women ~overreacting to stuff already. Everyone tossing hot coffee and blinding people for looking at their boobs is going to make everything 100x worse.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only