This is discussion archived from a time before the current discussion method was installed.
new items at the bottom, please
Devil's Advocate: I deleted the movie examples since a) we have plenty of TV examples, and b) the ones that were listed (The Princess Bride, Bring It On) don't seem particularly notable as far as non-TV examples go.
Ununnilium: ...should we list things that have zero canon evidence? Else I can list pretty much any random pair of characters from any random TV show based on Fan Fic.
Ununnilium: Since nobody responded to the above, taking this out:
- Spongebob and Patrick in Spongebob Squarepants, although this is never implied or hinted at in the series.
Rogue 7: You must be watching a different show than the rest of us. What about the time they raised a scallop together? Or various other scenes- I'm sure they're there.
Looney Toons: Actually, Seth, Dr. Fredric Wertham's 1954 anti-comic polemic Seduction of the Innocent
(which was directly responsible for the creation of the Comics Code) made the explicit claim that a homosexual relationship between Batman and Robin was an intentional subtext in the original comic books.
Seth: But didn't most people think he was just trying to shock people. His basis was asking gay men if they identified with two rich guys who dressed in tight clothing. While there were joking undertones and more double entendres than is logically safe it seems no different from someone saying someone who dresses in black must be a witch (and both had relationships with the opposite sex). Also Robin's tight clothing and shorts were designed to emulate the "Boys troop" (Cadet's over here, i don't remember what the American name is, the male version of brownies) style that was popular when he was designed. He was just a Media Watchdog trying to get attention by saying something that would piss the (non-gay) fans off and get attention from the moral right. Like they all do.
Well that's how i interpreted it, i haven't read the book just overviews/reviews so i could be off base.
Looney Toons: No, Seth — Wertham [i]wasn't[/i] just trying to shock people. He honestly believed the crap he spouted, no matter how crazy it got, and sadly, so did a lot of other people.
Ununnilium: Indeed. You'd be surprised how often these people really believe their crap.
Is this what puts it under The Oldest Ones In The Book? If so, maybe the summary should mention that. Still, it seems like the cutoff for being Oldest ought to be earlier than 1954 - is there a formally established one? —Document N
Lale: Nothing personal to this trope, but assumptions like that "ridiculously touchy-feely" line bug me. Why do we assume if anybody ever outwardly shows great affection for someone of the same gender that they must be homosexual? You don't have to be in love to care about someone. If you ask me, friends or family are supposed to be even closer than lovers, and friendship is supposed to be even sweeter than romance because there's no jealousy or hormones or strung nerves involved. Is this strictly an American thing, that the only acceptable form of love for men to feel must be sexual?
Morgan Wick: What country are you from? Just about everything about that paragraph would be very foreign to Americans.
Lale: Good then, but not from what I've seen.
Ununnilium: Basically, yes, in American culture, initimacy is very often confused with sexuality. Annoying, I know.
Also, how's that edit?
Jealousy and strung nerves are par for the course in any relationship, sexual, romantic or otherwise. I wouldn't rule out hormones either. But people speculate about secret homosexual relationships because said relationships are not totally allowed to be expressed openly. This is something that is steadily improving, but still. When they are always acknowledged openly, there will be less speculation over ambiguous cases. Then you'll be left with people who ship because they find their ship hot, and don't care how canon compatible it is.
G - Consider male/female friendships in most media. Or just male and female characters in general, friends or not. A lot of shows treat basically all heterosexual combinations as plausible and/or possible. Batman had friendly female love interests and foe love interests with nearly the entire female cast. Even with Harry and Hermione, as much as it's fairly obvious that they're strictly platonic through the series, occurred to Jo as potentially going that way (According to some interview after book 7. Heck, you could say the same for Luna and Neville). Never mind being touchy feely, men and women can't be in the same series without being a potential couple. Slashers simply see that free-for-all chemistry going on between same sex characters.
And mind that while there are definitely slashers who like going after every last inexplicable pairing, most only go for a handful. Some slashers only see the Ho Yay in a single show/book/whatever.
Citizen: Hmmm?
◊
Meocross: hahahaha im sure its just a sad parody..
Fly: Whenever I attempt to edit this page, it always, always gets cut off! I'll try and restore it to its former glory, but can someone else add:
- There's a very strong Les Yay element to the relationship between Shion and KOS-MOS in the Xenosaga series - no doubt intentional.
- Later Final Fantasy games play up the Ho Yay as a form of Fanservice to the female fanbase.
What about Anne and Diana from Anne of Green Gables?
Primarily used for male/male relationships and seemingly based on the depressing and insulting idea that men are incapable of having close friendships with each other based on something other than sex.
Steel Beast 6Beets: Haha, bitter much?
Alania: Hmmm, yeah. Actually, I think it has more to do with female fen being unable to care about relationships that don't involve sex.
Twin Bird: I took out "Mikuru's hilarious sexual abuse by Haruhi" because it's an openly bisexual girl using her for what she admits is her own gratification; there's no ambiguity to it.
Maureen Mac Donald: I'm adding in a theater section simply so I can include my example. Please add others so it doesn't look so unnecessary.
Looney Toons: In re:
- Not to mention one recent revival played up the homoerotic tension between Jesus and Judas deliberately and all the Apostles looked and acted as though they had just come straight from a gay club.
Can you come straight from a gay club? <grin>
That Other 1 Dude: I moved the one about Clark and Lex to Foe Yay
RB 3: In the UFC, they use the martial art, Brazilian Jujitsu, which, well, is very gay... See for yourself: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpceOOk2zog
Since it's a sport, I don't know where to add this.
Zeke: God, what an awful term this is. What was wrong with "subtext"?
Big T: It covers 500 million other things besides homoeroticism? (If sex has totally rotted your brain and you don't get that, have a look at subtext.)
Zeke: Of course the word has other meanings. It's still usually clear from context, and when it isn't, "gay subtext" or "slash subtext" works fine. This is beside the point, however. If Ho Yay were the only possible term for the concept it describes, it would still sound incredibly dumb. (See also Squee, which unfortunately doesn't have any equivalent sometimes.)
Spider: While I won't argue that Sam and Dean Winchester of Supernatural have probably earned a place on this page, the explanation given in the wiki referring to the attitude of Television Without Pity recappers hasn't been true since the show's first season (two years ago).
ILP: I don't really understand what this trope is all about. Maybe it should be rephrased slightly/completely rewritten for the benefit of those of us who don't immediately agree that Naruto and Sasuke fancy each other etc. etc. What is the purpose of this page? Is it some titanic index of all the popular homosexual shipping targets that are floating around in the internet fanfiction department? Is it some kind of free-for-all article where people can describe the invariably incorrect relationships they inferred from watching their favourite programmes? I really can't tell. Going by the first paragraph, every single example (that comes from something I've seen, of course) is simply wrong. Wishful thinking doesn't cut it! Now, the fifth paragraph of the trope description adds a little "disclaimer" but it doesn't really help overall. If someone who actually knows what's going on here would be kind enough to clarify this topic, I would be most grateful.
tl;dr - The current description is confusing.
Jester - This 'trope' is ridiculously badly defined, which is what has led to the gigantic confusing list of random things. At the moment, people are listing:
- Any moment of canon homosexual subtext,
- Any canon homosexual relationship (patently ridiculous unless you're going to start a 'two people are in a romantic relationship' trope for the straights as well),
- Any two people who get shipped in fanfic.
To me the term 'Ho!Yay' is inherantly disapproving and therefore shouldn't be used where homosexual subtext or text is intended, unless it's done for purely fanservicey reasons, in which case, well done, it's Fanservice.
I would split this into two tropes:
Possibly 'Ho!Yay': Where there are two people of the same gender who are believed to be a couple/fancy each other (or there are persistant jokes to that effect) in fandom, when the source material doesn't explicitly say so or it's not intended by the writers. eg: Aubrey and Morturin from Master And Commander
One for gay subtext (particularly as a running joke) between two apparently straight characters or a character everyone in the show seems to think is gay, generally played for laughs. eg: JD and Turk from Scrubs
Cannonical gay relationships aren't really a trope, unless it's the one where every show has to have romance subplots, but the fact that they're gay is beside the point.
That Other 1 Dude: I'm sorry, I totally fail to understand what that Buffy quote has to do with this.
Tabby: It makes quite a bit of sense in context, which doesn't mean it belongs here. Especially since context is a bit of a large spoiler.
Cassius335: @That: In context, it's hilarious. Go read the damn comic. @Tabby: You have a better place?
That Other 1 Dude: Then that just makes it esoteric and spoilery for someone who anyone planning to read it.
Twin Bird: Apparently, this comes after finding out that Buffy has a girlfriend. But I thought Ho Yay, at least the TWP usage of it, was where homoeroticism was easily read into two characters' relationship, and either unintentional or not intended to go any further. So Buffy going bi isn't really an example.
Also, I'd say between Buffy, Willow, Inara, and no non-straight non-vampire men whatsoever, I nominate Joss Whedon for an entry under Yuri Fanboy.
Cassius335: In reverse order;-
1) "Angel and I were never intimate, apart from that one time."
2) #13 backpedals somewhat, saying that Buffy is a straight girl who just happened to have a one-night-stand with a girl, so we may have our "not intended to go any further" requirement. Depends on future issues. Besides, not my fault there's no "Ho Shit" page... :p
3) Dude, you might have had a point if those two lines by themselves had any hope in hell of saying who they're refferring to, but they don't. How can that spoil anything?
EDIT: Hmm, now that I think about it...
Twin Bird: The question isn't whether they're spoilers, it's whether they have any place here. And by "any further," I kind of meant "into the bedroom," which is exactly where this went. (Also, there's a reason I specified "non-vampire"...Word of God is that all vamps are bi.)
bluepenguin: Is it just me, or is the wording of the description overly negative? I mean, I'm all for being snarky, and I know fandom is overly obsessed with making every relationship sexual, but I feel like the article as it's currently written is a little too mean (I know, I know, lol sensitive). And it's sort of jarring compared with the way the examples are worded, since they're mostly neutral-to-positive.
Ross N: Actually I'm not sure it is negative enough. I think this has been a pretty damaging trope in real life by making close friendships between guys difficult.
Jester: Whether it's negative enough depends on what definition of trope we're using. See my edit above.
Patsy: @Ross N- Amen, brother.
bluepenguin: @Jester: True. This page badly needs sorting out. I, however, will be shutting up now and leaving this whole mess alone, because I don't feel I can argue my point without coming off as an annoying slash fangirl (and I'm not even all that into slash, oddly).
Thenakedcat: Well, I decided to step into the fray and replace the huge rant on how Ho Yay is complete bullshit with something that was less homophobic but still acknowledged that this was about rampant fan appropriation. (I also replaced the deprecated term "Eastern" with "Asian"; in this context it's considerably more accurate.)
Also, @Ross N, are you saying that gay fanfiction ruined male intimate friendship? I'm sorry, but homophobia did that long before slash-and-burn fangirls. (Speaking as a homosexual woman, here.)
MercuryinRetrograde: "@Ross N, are you saying that gay fanfiction ruined male intimate friendship? I'm sorry, but homophobia did that long before slash-and-burn fangirls. (Speaking as a homosexual woman, here.)"
Also, Les Yay has hardly ruined female friendships so there must be a different dynamics at work here then that.
Patsy:Also, who in Watchmen is allegedly in a gay relationship with Hooded justice? did I miss something?
fleb: It's Captain Metropolis, and I have no idea where that factoid comes from, either, but it's everywhere on the Internet. I picked up that Hooded Justice was gay with someone else on the Minutemen from the text pretty easily, but... So Yeah.
mr_rubino: How precisely is Big Boss and Revolver Ocelot "canon"? Did Kojima actually say that Ocelot had a gay crush on Snake? It would seem that it's hard to canonize something that happens only in subtext.
Lucy Z: Confirmed by Kojima in the Japanese commentary reel for MGS 3.
Aeiouna: Should probably make "Les Yay" not a wiki word in the description. It just redirects back to the main Ho Yay article, or am I being nitpicky?
SteveMB: Have we reached the point where it makes sense to create separate subpages for the various media?
Fast Eddie: too many quotes
Cassius335: That's no reason to nuke all of 'em. I've put the Phoenix Wright one back. Think I'll stick my Buffy one in the Quote Bin. Hopefully someone will find it a home.
Sean Tucker: Can this trope be played straight?
L Guardinal: Owww, my sense of humor. And that was my good one! Hmm, but what I meant to say is that the fact that this trope had to be split into multiple parts makes me warm in my heart.
Trogga: How is this a Subjective Trope?
Raekuul: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/HoYay.jpg [[caption-width:750:Brock and Ash]]
I'm running this by the Discussion first, see if it works better than the Star Trek one...
Dentaku: Wow, that's one damn big picture. Can't you reduce its size before you post it in the discussion? Also, one guy grabbing another from behind does not immediately establish Ho Yay. They could just be fighting, for all we know. Ho Yay is more about homo-erotic subtext when characters of the same gender interact. Besides, I don't like those "motivational-poster-parodies" that much myself. It's just so 2007.
I took the liberty to place another picture, being a moment between Miyako and Yuno from the Hidamari Sketch manga. I think it's a nice example, although it's between two girls instead of guys.
fleb: In a weird bit of synchronicity, someone called OotS Fan cut the Star Trek pic and opened the way for the Hidamari Sketch one. Just for posterity, pasting here from the history:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/kirkspock.jpg [[caption-width:282: Kirk and Spock are '[[DoubleEntendre firm believers]]' in water conservation; it's only logical.]]
Dentaku: The main problem with the Star Trek picture is that it is clearly fan work and not part of canon. Ho Yay is about homo-erotic tension as it appears in original works.
fleb: Yeah. What about Citizens' Lampshade Hanging picture◊ from further up?
Dentaku: The problem with those pics is just that they are so totally obvious and clearly used for comedic purpose. Ho Yay is generally a lot more subtle and hidden in dialogue more than sexual situations. I had a hard time to find that pic ;)
Frank75: I wonder whether we should do the most obvious thing and split Ho Yay - i.e. making a separate page for Les Yay instead of a redirect and move all lesbian examples there.
Fast Eddie: Not really. Ho Yay is a section index. Are there really enough lesbian examples to support an entire section, or enough of a distinction to make a difference? Not so much. It's the same trope, only differing by gender.
Lale: Keep it lumped, please. The descriptions would be the same; the redirect we have right now is fine.
Spiritsunami: How about just giving them equal billing and retitle the page "Les Yay"? Equal opportunity, right?
Les Yay shouldn't redirect here. It should have it's own page.
fleb: If you want to get specific, Ho Yay stands for "Homoeroticism, Yay!" and lesbian subtext is a kind of homoeroticism. There's just no male-specific term for it. Keep 'em merged.
Great Pikmin Fan: What's the "strait" version of this?
Ship Tease, maybe?
fleb: So are we keeping the series-specific subpages or not? First I thought examples were just being deleted, then I saw the new pages, so I added links to them from the medium-specific page, but they were deleted from there because they're linked from here, and now the links are deleted from the main Ho Yay page and the examples are pasted back? What happen?
Zerah92: Those that are deleted have THEIR OWN pages. Don't write them back because you'll just fill inutile space.
Dentaku: I know you're an admin, Fast Eddie, but I tink the picture your chose for the main page is really quite stupid. Bert and Ernie? C'mon, don't be silly.
Fast Eddie: The silly is the good part. The idea is that people see hoyay everywhere if they are inclined to do so. Also, that image you keep trying? I can't tell if they're even the same gender, whoever they are. Asking pretty. Please leave the image.
Dentaku: The silly part is that Ho Yay is supposed to be a deliberate decision by the creators and not based on fan shipping. There was never any official indication that Ernie and Bert had any more happen between them than friendship. Also, a lot of tropers felt that he picture of Miyako and Yuno was appropriate. But hey, have it your way. Just don't wave your "admin card" anymore—I find it highly inappropriate and borderline infuriating.
lebrel: "Ho Yay is supposed to be a deliberate decision by the creators" - say what? Spotting suggestiveness where none has been intended is practically the slash fandom national sport.
Dentaku: Yeah, I realize that mob rule and quality control don't match very well, so I bow out of this one. I'll just make sure not to put any links to this page myself anymore.
Fast Eddie: Waving the admin card — great phrase, by the way — only happens when it seems like it will help bring an end to an edit war. The present image was installed after some discussion in the forum. I happen to agree that it sells the main point humorously.
Dentaku: Why would you discuss this in the forum, when you actually have a discussion page in the wiki itself? I hardly ever read the forums myself, for one.
G - When the writer/producing team do intentional subtext, it's Word of God, Fanservice or a bit of humor, yes? Bert and Ernie are perfect for Ho Yay - they're not canon, but lots of people can easily picture them as an old married couple. The silliness they bring is great too. You can't look at them and not smile!
Woolie Wool: Does anyone have the original picture? Just for curiosity's sake.
