Created By: helterskelter on March 21, 2013 Last Edited By: SpiderRider3 on July 3, 2014
Troped

The Gentleman Or The Scoundrel

A love triangle with two men: one a safe choice, one a dangerous choice.

Name Space:
Main
Page Type:
Trope
The male choices in female-centered love triangle usually comes with two archetypes: the kind-hearted, safe Gentleman and the edgy, dangerous Scoundrel. The Gentleman is a good guy: honest, upright, and noble. The Scoundrel is an outsider to the heroine's world (most of the time), dangerous and wild. It is a love triangle between a heroine and Noble Male, Roguish Male: a man who is safe versus a man who is dangerous.

The Gentleman is likely someone the heroine has known previously, the kind of man who represents the safety of her youth and home. The Scoundrel has a dangerous spark that attracts her into his world. That kind of danger is usually emotional in nature—the heroine risks a wild and unstable relationship with him, especially in contrast to the relative dependability of the Gentleman. Parents will favor the Gentleman and discourage dalliance with the Scoundrel, regardless of personality.

A discretionary angle features the heroine committing to a lifestyle via a man: choosing traditionalism vs passion or lasting happiness vs transient excitement. In these cases, one of the two men will almost always have a clearly undesirable personality. If the poorer character seems to fit the patterns of Gentleman better (or vice versa), the trope is Rich Suitor, Poor Suitor.

Unlike with Betty and Veronica, the heroine often chooses early or midway into the story, and who she ends up with is usually dependent on the length of the work and how early she made a choice. If a choice is made very early, the heroine is more likely to end up with with that first choice after agonizing UST and Will They or Won't They? with the other man. If the choice is made mid-way, then it was the Wrong Guy First.

Bear in mind that not every love triangle with two men is going to fit.

Spear Counterpart to Betty and Veronica. Compare Noble Male, Roguish Male, All Girls Want Bad Boys and Single Woman Seeks Good Man. See Rich Suitor, Poor Suitor.

Examples:

Anime and Manga
  • In Naruto, there's Sakura who seems to be choosing between Naruto (the Gentleman) and Sasuke (the Scoundrel).
  • Gakuen Alice: Mikan has Ruka (the Gentleman) and Natsume (the Scoundrel).
  • Shugo Chara!: Amu has Tadase (the Gentleman) and Ikuto (the Scoundrel).
  • Fruits Basket: Tohru has Yuki, a stoic princely type who is always polite to Tohru, and Kyo, a hotblooded delinquent who tends to insult Tohru. She only meets Yuki a short time before Kyo.
  • Cardcaptor Sakura: Sakura has Yukito (the Gentleman) and Syaoran (the Scoundrel). Played with in the end: Yukito ended up with Sakura's brother, and by the time Sakura fell for Syaoran, he was far more of a Gentleman than a Bad Boy.
    • In the anime, Syaoran has Sakura (Gentleman) and Meiling (Scoundrel). Again, Sakura and Syaoran get together, and shortly before that Meiling says "I Want My Beloved to Be Happy!".
  • Kitchen Princess: Najika has Sora (the Gentleman) and Daichi (the Scoundrel).
  • Vampire Knight: Yuuki has Kaname (the Gentleman) and Zero (the Scoundrel). However, the roles could potentially be switched. Zero is her "safe, comfortable friend", while Kaname is the exotic one that she believes she literally can't have.
  • Prétear seems to set this up between Himeno, Sasame (a good listener, explains things to Himeno) and Hayate (troubled, acts like a jerk who wants nothing to do with Himeno), especially in the manga. The anime is more... complicated. Note that she meets them both at the same time, and that in the manga they are presented as equal candidates. In the anime, well. Again, it's complicated.
  • In Peach Girl, Momo spent years with a crush on the chivalrous and polite Toji, until she finally gets him. They guy helping her out on the way is Kairi, a lecherous, school-skipping bad boy she discovers she now has feelings for. Throughout the series she bounces back and forth between them, until finally she ends up with Kairi.
  • Princess Tutu plays with this trope in a way that approaches Cyclical Trope levels. First, we have Fakir (the Tsundere Scoundrel) and Mytho (the Gentleman) for Ahiru. However , their roles are subverted in the second season with Fakir as the the Gentleman to the Raven Prince Mytho's Scoundrel. On the other hand, while Ahiru seems The Betty to Rue's Veronica... Rue's certainly The Betty to Princess Tutu's Veronica for Mytho. And if we bring Princess Kraehe in this, this starts all over again. Plus, Autor could be the Gentleman for Rue while Mytho is the Scoundrel.
  • The one-episode Love Triangle from Kaleido Star had Sarah choosing between Kalos as the Gentleman, and Andy as the Scoundrel. Sarah chooses Kalos — in fact, she had chosen him quite a while before and that's why she had stayed in the Stage in the first place. Andy never really stood a chance, and he immediately acknowledges it.
  • Another genderflipped example: In Eden of the East, Osugi (Betty) and Takizawa (Scoundrel) to Saki's Archie.
  • Blue Exorcist; Shiemi appears to be liked by both the lead protaganist Rin, a Delinquent Hot-Blooded Anti Anti Christ, and his twin brother Yukio, an absurdly young, very polite teacher who has known Shiemi for many years.

Comic Books
  • X-Men:
    • One example was a long-running Love Triangle with Jean Grey, Cyclops (the Gentleman), and Wolverine (the Scoundrel). Cyclops was the square-jawed, righteous leader of the team who had been with Jean since the beginning. Wolverine was the short, hairy Anti-Hero who had a smoking, drinking, and killing problem.
    • The love triangle between Havok, Polaris, and Iceman has Havok as the Scoundrel and Iceman as the Gentleman. Havok and Polaris have been through hell and back together since the earliest days of the comic.
    • For a brief time, Rogue, she had the polite and sincere Magneto clone, Joseph, as the Gentleman and the dangerous charming thief Gambit as the Scoundrel. Eventually, she then she has Gambit as the Gentleman, who was the traditional choice that had a lasting love for her, and Magneto, the Scoundrel, former super villain.

Film
  • In Pirates of the Caribbean Elizabeth must choose between Jack as the Scoundrel and Will as the Gentleman. Since Elizabeth chooses Will early, she ends up with him after some amount of flirtation with Jack.
  • Star Wars: Princess Leia Organa has a brief love triangle with good-hearted, loyal, and friendly farmboy/Jedi Luke Skywalker as the Gentleman. Roguish, rough, and experienced Han Solo is the Scoundrel. Rather luckily (given the later revelation that she was Luke's Long Lost Sibling), she chose Han.
  • Subverted in Not Another Teen Movie, where Janey, having to choose between Jake (The Jock who dates her only because of a bet with his Jerk Jock buddy) and Ricky (the annoying, whiny loser of a "friend"), chooses the former, causing him to have a change of heart, while the latter remains an annoying whiny loser.
  • Bram Stoker's Dracula has (although Bram Stoker's Dracula does not) a version with Mina chooses between Dracula as the Scoundrel and her much more average fiance Jonathan as the Gentleman. Dracula dies, but it is not made entirely certain that Mina goes back to Jonathan.
  • The 2010 Rupert Grint movie Cherrybomb, with Michelle having to choose between the (relatively) safe and dependable Malachy (Gentleman) and the rebellious, dashing Luke (Scoundrel).
  • In The Notebook Allie has to choose between Lon Hammond Jr., a dashing young lawyer who is funny, charming, sophisticated, and comes from old Southern Money or the local country boy Noah Calhoun who threatens to jump off of the Ferris wheel if she doesn't go on a date with him and constantly fights fights with her.

Literature
  • This is a common theme throughout the novels of Jane Austen, of the heroine being torn between a dependable, caring man and a libertinish cad. She will always choose the former, but Austen will keep you guessing as to who it is.
    • Sense and Sensibility: With Marianne choosing between Brandon the Gentleman and Willoughby, the Scoundrel.
    • Pride and Prejudice: With Elizabeth, Darcy is the Gentleman and Wickham is the Scoundrel.
    • Mansfield Park: With Fanny, Edmund is the Gentleman and Henry is the Scoundrel.
    • Emma: With Emma, George Knightley is the Gentleman and Frank Churchill is the Scoundrel.
  • In Harry Potter, the trope is played with in the Lily/Snape/James triangle. From Snape's perspective, he was always the Gentleman: the childhood friend who dearly loved the gentle Lily despite of her heritage, and James was the Scoundrel, an arrogant bully only interested in Lily for her looks. While Lily sees James this way at first, his treatment of her personally and Snape's treatment eventually ends up with James as the Gentleman, and Snape as the Scoundrel.
  • In Stephanie Meyer's Twilight saga, Edward is the Scoundrel, and Jacob is the Gentleman. While Jacob is more forceful and direct than the well-mannered Edward, Edward's life invited danger and death into her life, and was the choice her parents couldn't stand, while Jacob is the old friend boy-next-door who dependably offers Bella emotional support.
  • Bridget Jones's Diary plays this fairly straight between Mark Darcy (Gentleman) and Daniel Cleaver (Scoundrel). The film version even describes them as "too good to be true" and "so wrong he might just be right", respectively. By the end of the books, Mark has won, although when Helen Fielding continued the column, apparently Bridget was still torn between them and even ends up having Daniel's baby. Sigh.
  • In the Stephanie Plum series, the protagonist of the same name is caught in a love triangle between her childhood friend Joe Morelli and the more mysterious Ranger.
  • In The Hunger Games, Katniss' original choice was not between a Gentleman and a Scoundrel, as they were both dependable people. However, as the series progresses, Peeta reveals himself as the Gentleman who cares deeply for Katniss and desires her safety, and Gale the Scoundrel revolutionist who desires to entangle Katniss in that world.
  • Wuthering Heights has this as a central theme. Catherine must decide between Heathcliff and Edgar Linton— one a childhood friend with whom she shares a relationship approaching siblinghood, the other the eldest son of a neighboring wealthy family. While Catherine repeatedly asserts that she and Heathcliff are one, her family believes marrying Linton will bring them more prestige, and this is her ultimate choice. Arguably, it is this decision that ultimately kills her, as after a prolonged separation from Heathcliff, seeing him again throws her into a fatal coma presumably from sheer excitement.
  • Conversational Troping in Wintersmith, when Tiffany reads a romance novel in which the heroine must choose if she wants to marry William, an honest man with two and a half cows, or Roger, who rides a black stallion and calls her "My proud beauty". Tiffany isn't sure why the character needs to marry either of them.

Live-Action TV
  • From Buffy the Vampire Slayer:
    • Early seasons also have Buffy's friend Xander as the Gentleman and the vampire Angel as the Scoundrel.
    • While both relatively dangerous, Angel is the original man who ultimately tries to do good and be a good choice for Buffy, and Spike is the dangerous and deadly killer who was fairly remorseless through most of the series.
  • Angel example: Fred had to choose between the tough, street-smart former gang leader Gunn (Scoundrel) and the bookish, nerdy Smart Guy Wes (Gentleman). (Ironically in Season 5 these roles are reversed, due to Wesley taking a level in badass and Gunn getting a brain implant). Eventually, she chose her Scoundrel, then broke up with him, turned to her Gentleman, died, became an ancient goddess, nearly killed both of them (one inadvertently), and then Wes died.
  • In Veronica Mars, there's several instances of this throughout the entire series. Duncan, the Gentleman, and Logan, the Scoundrel. Piz (Gentleman)-Veronica-Logan (Scoundrel).
  • Doctor Who has (or had) Amy between childhood friend and eternally devoted Rory (Gentleman) and the adventurous Doctor (Scoundrel).
  • From Lost, Kate must choose between noble doctor Jack, the Gentleman, and Southern con-artist Sawyer, as the Scoundrel.

Theatre
  • The Phantom of the Opera has Christine choose between her childhood sweetheart and general Knight in Shining Armor Raoul and the insane, brooding, but more passionate Phantom. Although Word of God says that Christine loves The Phantom the most, in the end she chooses the Safe Option, Raoul.
  • Romeo and Juliet: Juliet's decision between her two suitors. Paris courts her in the "proper" way, by asking her father's permission. Romeo falls in love with her, marries her in secret and even kills a beloved family member.

Video Games
  • BioWare is particularly fond of this trope whenever a female has more than one love interest:
    • In Dragon Age: Origins, Alistair is the sweet-hearted, noble Gentleman and Zevran the sex-crazy assassin Scoundrel.
    • In Mass Effect 2: Garrus and Jacob are both steady, reliable people (and Garrus is an old friend), while Thane is a dark, mysterious, broody assassin.
    • In Dragon Age II, Anders and Fenris are both broody, mysterious, and lead dangerous lives, while Sebastian is a chaste Chantry boy.
  • From Knights of the Old Republic II: The Sith Lords, the quiet medic and old acquaintance Mical is the gentleman, and Atton Rand is the Han Solo like Scoundrel smuggler.

Web Comics
  • In Penny and Aggie. Although Penny has dated both Badass Biker Rich and Nice Guy Duane, she finds that she genuinely loves only the former. Thus, when one of her hypothetical future selves urges her to use "common sense" in deciding whether to run away with Rich, this is her sarcastic response:
Ooh, what if he doesn't make six figures? Ooh, what if I want kids and he doesn't? Whiiiine I better hook up with the nice class president!

Western Animation
  • Disney's Pocahontas presents a lifestyle choice with the steady home-building Kocuom, choice of her father, as the Gentleman, and the Native killing foreigner John Smith as the Scoundrel. She does not end up with either, as Kocoum dies and John Smith must go back to England, but her choice lies with John.
  • In King of the Hill, Nancy Hicks-Gribble has been carrying on an affair with the Scoundrel, John Redcorn, while married to her Crazy Survivalist husband Dale (the Gentleman).
  • In Thundercats 2011: Lion-O (Gentleman) has a crush on Cheetara which makes Tygra (Scoundrel) jealous. She chooses Tygra.
Community Feedback Replies: 82
  • March 21, 2013
    lexicon
    This looks like Noble Male Roguish Male.
  • March 21, 2013
    Chernoskill
    Western Animation

    • The Rescuers Down Under has a triangle between the rather uptight Bernard, Miss Bianca and Jake the smooth-talking, suave outdoors expert.
  • March 21, 2013
    randomsurfer
    Referenced in an episode of The Simpsons when Homer gets an above-average IQ. He goes to a Julia Roberts movie and can tell that she's going to end up with Richard Gere, not Bill Pullman (who he can tell apart from Bill Paxton). Since we don't see the film we don't know which is the Gentleman and which the Scoundrel (although Pullman's character is described as "that rich snob").
  • March 22, 2013
    Koveras
    I also immediately thought of Noble Male Roguish Male.
  • March 22, 2013
    helterskelter
    I don't think it is--this is Spear Counterpart to Betty And Veronica, while Noble Male Roguish Male is Spear Counterpart to Light Feminine Dark Feminine. It bears the same relation to Light Feminine Dark Feminine bears to Betty And Veronica.

    That is, Noble Male Roguish Male is not about a love triangle.
  • March 22, 2013
    lexicon
    The name should be something distinctly different from Noble Male Roguish Male if they're not the same thing. There are a lot of nice example here but I wouldn't say that Betty is comparable to a gentleman.
  • March 22, 2013
    thewriter
  • March 22, 2013
    helterskelter
    ^^ It was simply the name suggested at the time, which I haven't changed. :) The reason this Spear Counterpart was suggested in the first place was because a gentleman is not Betty. Because the Spear Counterpart had male versions of those kinds of characters, and 'gentleman' was the best word we could think of to encompass that. I can't think of any other names that aren't very wordy...

    ^ Those are about two unrelated characters. Besides, there's no one single example of this trope memorable enough to immediately get the idea across.
  • March 22, 2013
    thewriter
    I actually like the title as is.
  • March 22, 2013
    helterskelter
    @randomsurfer: I don't know if that really counts. It doesn't have any of the elements of this trope besides a love triangle.
  • March 22, 2013
    MorganWick
    I'd rather rename Noble Male Roguish Male myself.
  • March 23, 2013
    helterskelter
    Perhaps, but Light Feminine And Dark Feminine still exists, despite Betty And Veronica. I think they're both tropes. It's true that we often see foils of this nature in fiction where there is no romance. If you replace that trope with this one, it excludes all examples where there is no romance.

    If you abandon this trope in favor of that one, you miss the element of a love triangle and all aspects therein which are mentioned in the description.

    I'd also mention that Noble Male Roguish Male bears an important relationship with Sensitive Guy And Manly Man--the latter trope is about a man with masculine traits and a man with feminine traits. Noble Male Roguish Male is when they are both masculine, but in the two ways men are portrayed as masculine when they are foils to each other.
  • March 23, 2013
    lexicon
    The title doesn't work as is. The best example is probably Twilight. It fits the Betty And Veronica kind of thing with one guy being the easy to talk to boy-next-door and the other one being new and dangerous but the word 'gentleman' would much better fit with the new and dangerous Edward. He tells her that in his era he would have courted her, taken chaperoned strolls, and asked her father's permission to kiss her. Calling someone a gentleman implies high class, not Boy Next Door.

    Noble Male Roguish Male has already been renamed from it's original Light Masculine And Dark Masculine.
  • March 23, 2013
    blueflame724
    Medaka Box: The titular character with Zenkichi and Kumagawa. Medaka and Zenkichi are childhood friends who have done nearly everything together with Zenkichi being a loyal and upright friend. Kumagawa comes into the story as a twisted loser, but his opposition to Medaka fascinates her, since she values her enemies.
  • March 23, 2013
    thewriter
    How about Good Guy Bad Boy?
  • March 23, 2013
    AliceMacher
    Defied in Penny And Aggie. Although Penny has dated both Badass Biker Rich and Nice Guy Duane, she finds that she genuinely loves only the former. Thus, when one of her hypothetical future selves urges her to use "common sense" in deciding whether to run away with Rich, this is her sarcastic response:
    Ooh, what if he doesn't make six figures? Ooh, what if I want kids and he doesn't? Whiiiine I better hook up with the nice class president!
  • March 23, 2013
    MissKitten
    I think the name is fine.
  • March 24, 2013
    Arivne
    The "and" in the title should be changed to an "or", since the woman is making a choice between them.
  • March 24, 2013
    helterskelter
    @lexicon: I disagree that any single named example is clear enough to anyone. I think it's better to name archetypes. And I'm not sure what your point about the rename is. I agree that "Gentleman" might cause some confusion, but it's still the best word I can think of and it applies to most cases.

    @Alice Macher: That's not defied, it's just an example. This trope is not about how the Gentleman is the better choice. I think that defies Single Woman Seeks Good Man, perhaps?

    @Arivne: Excellent, that is better.
  • March 25, 2013
    nitrokitty
    How is this any different from Noble Male Roguish Male or Betty And Veronica?
  • March 25, 2013
    helterskelter
    I'll point out first that the differences between Noble Male Roguish Male have already been addressed in the comments. Please make sure you read them and address any counterarguments you have to the points already made.

    And the differences between this and Betty And Veronica are addressed at the top of the page in that TRS. This is a Spear Counterpart. They share similarities, but the way the love triangle with different gender arrangements has different patterns and tropes associated with it.
  • March 28, 2013
    helterskelter
    Bumpity.
  • April 1, 2013
    helterskelter
    Any additional ideas for names?
  • April 1, 2013
    Irrisia
    The odd thing is, there was a spear counterpart trope launched, at one point, that then got folded into Betty And Veronica. All those examples halfway down the Manga/Anime section that describe the male characters as (prince) or (bad boy) came off that trope, so they can probably be wholesaled over to this trope with a little re-describing.
  • April 2, 2013
    Arivne
    The title would be easier to use in a sentence if it were Gentleman Or Scoundrel.
  • April 2, 2013
    helterskelter
    ^^ Which ones, specifically? I didn't add tropes from works I was unfamiliar with.

    ^ Yes, but that suggests a trope where it's a single male character who might either be a gentleman or a scoundrel, like say Rhett Butler.
  • April 2, 2013
    xanderiskander
    ^If you read the description Betty And Veronica includes some details about the spear counterpart that was merged with it. So it's not just the examples. Specifically this part:

    "Don't let the pronouns fool you. By no means is this trope limited to women or hetero relationships. If the two love interests are male, they are often characterized as the kind-hearted, polite Nice Guy and the edgy, bad boy."
  • April 2, 2013
    Nocturna
    This has a major problem with Zero Context Examples. The examples need to (briefly) explain how we know who's the scoundrel and who's the gentleman, not just say that Guy A is the scoundrel and Guy B the gentleman.
  • April 2, 2013
    Irrisia
    • Gakuen Alice: Mikan has Ruka (The Prince) and Natsume (The Bad Boy).
    • Shugo Chara: Amu has Tadase (the Prince) and Ikuto (the Bad Boy).
    • Fruits Basket: Tohru has Yuki, a stoic princely type who is always polite to Tohru, and Kyo, a hotblooded delinquent who tends to insult Tohru. She only meets Yuki a short time before Kyo.
    • Cardcaptor Sakura: Sakura has Yukito (the Prince) and Syaoran (the Bad Boy). Played with in the end: Yukito ended up with Sakura's brother, and by the time Sakura fell for Syaoran, he was far more of The Prince than the Bad Boy.
      • In the anime, Syaoran has Sakura (Betty) and Meiling (Veronica). Again, Sakura and Syaoran get together, and shortly before that Meiling says "I Want My Beloved To Be Happy!".
    • Kitchen Princess: Najika has Sora (the prince) and Daichi (the bad boy).
    • Vampire Knight: Yuuki has Kaname (The Prince) and Zero (The Bad Boy).
      • However, the roles could potentially be switched. Zero is her "safe, comfortable friend", while Kaname is the exotic one that she believes she literally can't have.
    • Pretear seems to set this up between Himeno, Sasame (a good listener, explains things to Himeno) and Hayate (troubled, acts like a jerk who wants nothing to do with Himeno), especially in the manga. The anime is more... complicated. Note that she meets them both at the same time, and that in the manga they are presented as equal candidates. In the anime, well. Again, it's complicated.
    • In Peach Girl, Momo spent years with a crush on the chivalrous and polite Toji, until she finally gets him. They guy helping her out on the way is Kairi, a lecherous, school-skipping bad boy she discovers she now has feelings for. Throughout the series she bounces back and forth between them, until finally she ends up with Kairi.
    • Princess Tutu plays with this trope in a way that approaches Cyclical Trope levels. First, we have Fakir (the Tsundere Bad Boy) and Mytho (the Prince) for Ahiru. However , their roles are subverted in the second season with Fakir as the the Betty to the Raven Prince Mytho's Veronica. On the other hand, while Ahiru seems The Betty to Rue's Veronica... Rue's certainly The Betty to Princess Tutu's Veronica for Mytho. And if we bring Princess Kraehe in this, this starts all over again. Plus, Autor could be the Betty for Rue while Mytho is The Veronica.
    • An odd instance of this happens in Sakende Yaruze, where the Betty is a disillusioned, embittered 35 year old man and the Veronica is a younger male Vamp.
    • The one-episode Love Triangle from Kaleido Star had Sarah as Archie, Kalos as Betty, and Andy as Veronica. Sarah chooses Kalos -- in fact, she had chosen him quite a while before and that's why she had stayed in the Stage in the first place. Andy never really stood a chance, and he immediately acknowledges it.
    • Another genderflipped example: In Eden Of The East, Osugi (Betty) and Takizawa (Veronica) to Saki's Archie.

    A lot of it is zero context, alas (and I haven't read/watched some of these canons myself) . But, if it helps, you can also have an example:

  • April 3, 2013
    helterskelter
    ^ Appreciated.

    ^^ As I mentioned up top, most of this was pulled from examples I was familiar enough with to be assured they counted. That said, most of them are not ZCEs. Most of them have at least one personality identifier, like "noble doctor Gentleman" or "broody, mysterious", etc. That is more than enough to disqualify from ZCEs.

    There's also something I should make clear: it is possible that there can be female version of this trope that isn't Betty And Veronica. The main difference between these two is that the Scoundrel is more dangerous, and it's a lot of safe vs danger, as opposed to safe vs exotic. As such, I didn't include the seme/uke example from Sakende Yaruze--that one seems to describe a male Betty And Veronica instead.
  • April 9, 2013
    lexicon
    You should make it clear in the description how this is about safe vs dangerous while Betty And Veronica is about safe vs exotic.

    The last line in the second paragraph, "It is a love triangle between a heroine and a Noble Male Roguish Male," is really confusing because it makes them sound like the exact same thing. With similar names we need a way to contrast them.
  • April 9, 2013
    helterskelter
    It basically is the same thing, but with a love triangle. In the same way that Light Feminine And Dark Feminine is basically the same archetypes you always see in Betty And Veronica. But it has a love triangle.
  • April 10, 2013
    acrobox
    Even further than 'safe and dangerous' vs 'safe and exotic' this is about gender based Double Standards and mating strategies.

    If the woman is caught in the middle, who she chooses determines her lifestyle. i. e. would you rather have a working man that can give you financial support and a stable household down the line, or a wild man that takes you on all kinds of crazy adventures.

    in betty and veronica the male still has primacy. So would you rather go on your adventures with a woman who supports you emotionally, or go on adventures with a woman that challenges you (and is more stereotypically sexy)
  • April 10, 2013
    raithe
    If this is 'safe vs. dangerous' to Betty And Veronica 's "familiar vs. exotic', it doesn't read that way. For one thing, the actual traits of the gentleman and scoundrel don't matter in this case. Take a woman who will only be supported by her family if she marries their choice, a rich and exciting man who broods, jet sets around the world, and doesn't seem to care about her at all. The woman loves a young, low-class, all around safe servant who she's known from childhood and who dotes on her. Obviously, the former is Veronica to the latter's Betty, but its less obvious who the Scoundrel and Gentleman are. The current definition says this is more of a choice between lifestyles, so that would make the rich man the gentleman and the servant the scoundrel, but this completely inverts the characteristics defined for the gentleman and scoundrel. The description even flat-out says that the people don't matter: "Often the choice is one-sided, where the main dilemma is not who she ends up with, but what lifestyle", which implies that the woman couldn't care less about the suitor's personalities, but only how she will live, which carries some heavy Unfortunate Implications. This also brings up the question, what kind of danger are we talking about here? Would a choice between two men who can support her easily, but one will take her on adventures and the other would have her be a stay at home mom count? Which one is which if the rich "Gentleman" will abuse her, and the scoundrel will not?

    Also, why does the man have to be "very" feminine?

    (Incidentally, there is already a Spear Counterpart listed for Betty and Veronica: Cock Fight)
  • April 10, 2013
    helterskelter
    The description even flat-out says that the people don't matter: "Often the choice is one-sided, where the main dilemma is not who she ends up with, but what lifestyle"

    It does say often. Often it is about this lifestyles when it comes to female-led love triangles. Not always, and you'll always have exceptions.

    Also, why does the man have to be "very" feminine?

    What it actually says:

    "A good rule of thumb is whether the man seems very feminine "

    Rule of thumb definition. It is a good rule of thumb. I'm thinking of works like Grease 2 which (while I don't think actually had a love triangle, and isn't this trope) had a more traditionally female role given to the guy, and his love interest was actually a dangerous lady in the same way Danny Zuko was a dangerous guy. She's not just "exotic".

    The thing is, you are assuming literally every love triangle with two guys is this trope. That there's actually no exception. But if they don't fit the trope, then they aren't the trope. This is a problem Betty And Veronica suffers from, actually. It should go through TRS to deal with that.

    In this case: "so that would make the rich man the gentleman and the servant the scoundrel" would be Rich Suitor Poor Suitor. It wouldn't be this trope. I can add something warning people not to simply add every love triangle they can think of.

    (Incidentally, there is already a Spear Counterpart listed for Betty and Veronica: Cock Fight)

    Which anyone is free to edit, regardless of what the pages say. It was in fact added long after both pages had launched. It is not a Spear Counterpart. I can see why it was added, but it's simply a related trope.

    @acrobox: Perhaps. It's hard to say--after all, an important part of this choice is that in Betty And Veronica both choices are actually relatively safe. One is just more exotic and has sex appeal. The reason this often becomes about lifestyles seems to be because women often have a 'dangerous' suitor instead. So I'm not sure what the Double Standard would be in this case. Women have dangerous love interests?
  • April 10, 2013
    raithe
    I didn't mean to suggest that I was assuming literally every love triangle with two guys was this trope. I was using the Rich Suitor Poor Suitor example to ask what happens when the personality traits aren't linked to the lifestyles. Thank you for clearing that up. I do wonder if this is too similar to Rich Suitor Poor Suitor with the lifestyles part.

    The point about the lifestyles mattering more than the person should not have been so far-reaching, but I think it is still a valid point that this brings up Unfortunate Implications if the personalities don't matter. As written, the trope suggests that the woman will often weigh pros and cons based solely on the lifestyles, not the people involved in each. That says to me that she is something of a gold digger. Another way to put it might be something along the lines of the lifestyle being one of a number of factors, which is not usually true in Betty And Veronica.

    I still think this needs a better definition of danger. Is it is not solely about the lifestyle (calm and protected vs. wild and dangerous), then what defines "safe vs. danger"? EDIT: Does dangerous mean the guy is a badass? That the heroine picking him will put her in danger, from him or from his enemies or career path? Is a guy more "dangerous" if he challenges her preconceived notions about, say, his species?

    A man being feminine may be a good rule of thumb if this trope applies in Yaoi, but it is not clear to me that this trope will only have male examples in Yaoi works. That was more what the question was getting at. EDIT: Reread and realized I was unclear. What I mean was why does the man being more feminine make this trope more likely. See the edit above, as regards danger.

    I only mentioned Cock Fight because if this trope goes through, Cock Fight should be removed from the list in Spear Counterpart and possibly updated so it does not compare itself to Betty And Veronica.

    Also, Wrong Guy First may be useful as shorthand in there somewhere
  • April 10, 2013
    helterskelter
    I do wonder if this is too similar to Rich Suitor Poor Suitor with the lifestyles part.

    Good point, but it does tend to factor pretty largely into what the overall themes behind works that feature a love triangle like this are actually purporting. Films like The Graduate or Pocahontas, for instance, which are expressly about lifestyle choices with this sort of love triangle in play. Perhaps I should simply reduce the paragraph, so the emphasis doesn't seem so strongly focused on that aspect of this trope.

    but I think it is still a valid point that this brings up Unfortunate Implications if the personalities don't matter.

    Not so much--I do clarify what kind of guys follow what sort of patterns in this case. It's not that his personality doesn't matter, but that his personality is defined on what he represents for her. He has a personality, but it's actually deliberately invoking this trope: either he is safe and preferable or he is dangerous and preferable.

    EDIT: Does dangerous mean the guy...

    Well, I don't see why it can't mean all of those. In fact, that's why I left it kind of vague. Dangerous is relative to the story in question. I hate to bring up Twilight, but both guys in the picture are relatively "dangerous". One is a werewolf, the other is a vampire. The vampire, however, is trying to resist the urge to bloodily murder the girl whenever they meet, and is constantly linking her to danger. He is technically more old school and polite than the other guy, but he definitely represents danger, where the other guy is a childhood friend whom her family approves of and she could lead a relatively normal life with.

    mean was why does the man being more feminine make this trope more likely.

    Ahh, I see the issue. The logic was that a more feminine guy meant the trope would have more masculine love interests, but it'd probably be better not to complicate the issue.

    Also, Wrong Guy First may be useful as shorthand in there somewhere

    Maybe the trope is being needlessly specific, but it reads that it's about two love interests where the first one wins because he, on the surface, seems to be superior to the other guy in looks, money, etc. The other guy seems like a 'lesser' version because she's not looking closely enough. It's related as a love triangle trope, but I don't think it really has much relation in general.
  • April 10, 2013
    raithe
    The wording "where the main dilemma is not who she ends up with, but what lifestyle" seems more like it is about the lifestyle, regardless of the man, than that the man represents the lifestyle, at least to me. Word choice might help.

    I think there may be a problem if dangerous is vague. Betty And Veronica, when mentioning the male version, already has the Veronica as an "edgy bad boy". Since Betty and the Gentleman parts are already very similar, this feels to me a lot like The Same But More of Veronica. Additionally, while we have been characterizing Betty And Veronica as "safe vs. exotic", it actually mentions that Veronica can be "edgy". Unless there is a qualitative difference between an edgy character and a dangerous one, there is going to be major difficulty in deciding when this trope applies over Ba V, unless you play up the lifestyle, which makes it really just a mix of Poor Suitor Rich Suitor and Betty And Veronica. Take the Twilight example. If both guys are dangerous, then why is it not simply a Ba V scenario? Saying that one is more dangerous than the other is already covered in Ba V, if dangerous is just basically an extension of edgy. What makes it not an extension of edgy?

    As it stands, I don't think this is qualitatively different from Ba V. Ba V is not just exotic, so unless we redefine it to be so, it already fills this trope. If you think it should only be exotic, then use TRS to split it.

    I don't think you read Wrong Guy First all the way trough. While the first guy wins at first, he eventually loses to the second, like how you mentioned that if the choice is made half-way through, then the guy not chosen will probably be the winner.
  • April 10, 2013
    lexicon
    If I understand this now it's really the parental choice love interest vs the one her parents want her to stay away from. If that's the case I have an example that will fit nicely and just so happens to also be a Rich Suitor Poor Suitor.

    • In The Notebook Allie has to choose between Lon Hammond Jr., a dashing young lawyer who is funny, charming, sophisticated, and comes from old Southern Money or the local country boy Noah Calhoun who threatens to jump off of the Ferris wheel if she doesn't go on a date with him and constantly fights fights with her.
  • April 10, 2013
    raithe
    ^I don't think the parental choice is the sole, or even primary, characteristic as written. The parents choice factors in, but it doesn't define the trope.
  • April 11, 2013
    helterskelter
    ^^ I'm not sure what your point is. Betty And Veronica is currently written in mind that there is no Spear Counterpart, so it includes the definition of its Spear Counterpart within it.

    I honestly don't really see what your problem is--the Betty And Veronica trope is clearly different. The point of counterpart tropes is there are often male and female patterned ways to go about doing almost the same thing. Case in point, Mr Fanservice and Ms Fanservice. They technically fulfill the same requirements--characters meant for fanservice. The difference being that there are often different ways to go about each based on gender. Ms Fanservice has a lot to do with showing off skin, acting sultry, etc; Mr Fanservice is often broody and dark. This is not the requirement for those tropes--a Mr Fanservice can be a charming gentleman, too. A Ms Fanservice can be a peppy cheerleader. The point is that female love triangles and male love triangles play out differently. Of course there is some overlap, otherwise they wouldn't be counterparts.

    The main differences are several things: this trope often focuses on their choice in lifestyles (whereas Betty And Veronica are both actually relatively safe), this trope often sees a preference friends and family have for the Gentleman, this trope usually has a much more dangerous bad boy kind of character, instead of a Vamp, whose not dangerous, just sexy and exotic.

    I don't think there's anything about the definition that makes it unclear that this is the case. There is a clear divide about how Betty And Veronica are usually handled and portrayed, and how this is. Yes, you might find some examples that don't seem that way, but, well, misuse. As far as edginess goes, edginess means "having a bold, provocative, or unconventional quality", which describes both characters, hence they're counterparts. But as stated, Veronica is more about exoticism and a Scoundrel is more about dangerousness.

    For instance the Twilight example--first, because Betty And Veronica are almost never actually dangerous. When a guy has a love triangle, he is never helpless. The element of danger is present in both guys, but as I explained, one is a lot more dangerous and fulfills the patterns of a Scoundrel a lot more than the other does.

    And, no, I didn't read it all the way through. Normally at trope doesn't actually need seven paragraphs to get to the point of the trope. It should be rewritten.
  • April 11, 2013
    raithe
    The problem is I don't see Betty And Veronica as clearly different. While I agree with Spear Counterpart / Distaff Counterpart being about male and female patterns of doing things, I'm not seeing enough of a difference here, especially since the tropes we're considering are not strictly defined along gender. You said this trope could apply to men, and Betty And Veronica to women. Mr Fanservice and Ms Fanservice also aren't what you think they are, they are specifically about physical things, not the personalities involved.

    I've looked through the Spear Counterpart list. I don't see any pair of tropes where either trope could apply to a gender. For example, Mama Bear would never be confused with Papa Wolf, because the defining difference is gender. You will never have a male Mama Bear, but under the proposed trope, you could have a male Gentleman Or Scoundrel. That just seems to me to be rather risky.

    As to the main differences: the lifestyles focus seems to just be a combination of Rich Suitor Poor Suitor and Betty And Veronica to me, and that usually isn't recommended. The preference for the Gentleman thing seems like The Same But More Specific, and it is already mentioned under Betty in Betty And Veronica. And, most importantly, how do you define the difference between edgy and dangerous? This is especially uncertain if the gender lines are not the clear distinction between the tropes, and because there is no clear definition of dangerous to fall back on.

    You seem to be suggesting that the female person choosing in this trope is usually helpless and the females being chosen in Betty And Veronica. Not only do several of your examples contradict this (Buffy, Pirates), but with your unclear definition of dangerous, I would argue that many Betty and Veronicas are dangerous.

    Also, in the Twilight example, not only do the two love interests seem to split your characterizations of the gentleman and scoundrel, but Jacob is just as dangerous as Edward. Remember when the pack leader almost killed his fiance?
  • April 11, 2013
    lexicon
    I don't think the OP means that the scoundrel is physically dangerous, but emotionally dangerous. The female character's family believes that the gentleman will be good to her and fit into their lifestyle. That fits where the description says,"The Scoundrel is... an outsider to the heroine's world (most of the time)." and "Parents will favor the Gentleman and discourage dalliance with the Scoundrel regardless of personality." The examples where I see this applying are Twilight, Romeo And Juliet, Pocahontas, and The Notebook.
  • April 12, 2013
    helterskelter
    "You seem to be suggesting that the female person choosing in this trope is usually helpless and the females being chosen in Betty And Veronica. Not only do several of your examples contradict this (Buffy, Pirates), but with your unclear definition of dangerous, I would argue that many Betty and Veronicas are dangerous."

    I'm really not. In all honestly, nothing about my description implies this. I don't know what to tell you; almost all of the arguments you've made thus far have been about deliberately ignoring things I've said. For instance, the lifestyle thing. I've said I think three times that it is not required, but is rather a common pattern in this trope. In the same way a Significant Green Eyed Redhead tends to be a love interest to the hero--that is not required, it's just a very regular pattern.

    The same thing applies here. Often a woman is picking between lifestyles that the two men embody. I have no idea how you got helplessness from that. Or the edginess thing--I just said what edginess means and it's not the same thing as dangerous. This is getting very frustrating.

    In any case, actually, as I pointed out, this was a TRS thing. It was decided that Betty And Veronica should have a Spear Counterpart.

    I'll take out the mention that you can have a male/female inverse--which was only there to help stave off misuse of people trying to shoehorn in every single possible love triangle as they do with Betty And Veronica.

    Let me put it this way: You will never see a Veronica challenging Archie's lifestyle. She will never be a threat to disinheriting him or force him to abandon his home. Veronica is just exotic. She's different, but in an acceptable way to most of society, to Archie's friends and family. If there's exceptions to this, I can't think of them.

    As far as the Betty and Gentleman go, again, this is about male vs female patterns, something you keep ignoring. This is like you saying that The All American Boy and Girl Next Door shouldn't be two separate tropes. They are simply patterned differently. Same with things like Princely Young Man and Ojou--they share many similar qualities, but they're simply patterned differently. Male love interests are patterned in ways that appeal to women, female love interests are patterned in ways that appeal to men. They're always different.
  • April 12, 2013
    lexicon
    What about my comment? It is more of an emotional danger than a physical one, right? Edward keeps leaving Bella in Twilight, Noah keeps fighting with Allie in The Notebook, Romeo is from an enemy family, and John Smith is from an enemy people.
  • April 12, 2013
    helterskelter
    ^ Ah, yes. :) Physical danger can be present too, of course (and Veronicas never physically endanger a guy--probably because that would make the guy seem "weak"), but it's more about the emotional danger. The threat on your place in the world, your home, society's outlook on you, etc. If not that, he is more emotionally tumultuous and risks a wild and unstable relationship.

    I'm sure someone is going to bring up the Double Standard here, and, as I said up there: there is one, but it's hard to categorize for whom and why, so I won't list all the different ways there's a double standard and what they could mean.
  • April 13, 2013
    lexicon
    Good. I'm understanding this now then. I'd ask that the description specify that it's more about the emotional danger and paste those last two sentences about 'threat on your place in the world' and 'risks a wild and unstable relationship' as well as ask that the description stress how important the parents' approval is since any decent parent wants someone who will make his daughter happy in a stable relationship.

    Also I'd like to point out that in Pirates the least threatening love interest for Elizabeth is Commodore Norrington who her father calls a fine gentleman and tells her that Norrington fancies her.
  • April 13, 2013
    helterskelter
    Makes sense. I'll rephrase, tell me what you think. EDIT: I do want to avoid stressing the lifestyle aspect too much, though, as that's caused some confusion about what examples count.

    As for the last, that seems more Rich Suitor Poor Suitor in this case. They're both good guys, and bizarrely enough for most stories like this, Will never actually threatens her place in the world, he's just beneath her. They are free to get married and be happy and maintain their place in society well enough. Even her father accepts it.

    EDIT: Also, how does the image work?
  • April 14, 2013
    lexicon
    The parents' approval (lifestyle) is what cleared up my confusion.

    Will isn't strongly a scoundrel like the other examples but he is compared to Norrington so I would mention Norrington and say that Will changes from scoundrel to gentleman between the first two movies because at first first the choice is between two law abiding men and after the first movie it's between two pirates.

    The picture makes it clear who's who but it makes the scoundrel look all bad instead of making it look like a choice between the two.
  • April 14, 2013
    helterskelter
    ^ Yes, but that's only a common aspect of an overall trope. There isn't actually anything wrong with Will: nothing dangerous, nothing life-changing. She's not attracted to him for being broody or dark--quite the opposite. Elizabeth doesn't even have to give anything up to be with her. This seems a lot more like like a classic Rich Suitor Poor Suitor than this trope, because there's nothing Scoundrel-y about Will--especially since he patterns a Gentleman a bit better in that she's known him for a long time, and Norrington would represent more of a change in lifestyle than he does: she'd have to be high society wife.

    True, which is what I was worried about. There's this one. Possibly this one.
  • April 14, 2013
    raithe
    @helterskelter

    "I'm really not. In all honestly, nothing about my description implies this. I don't know what to tell you; almost all of the arguments you've made thus far have been about deliberately ignoring things I've said. For instance, the lifestyle thing. I've said I think three times that it is not required, but is rather a common pattern in this trope. In the same way a Significant Green Eyed Redhead tends to be a love interest to the hero--that is not required, it's just a very regular pattern."

    I wasn't referring to the description in this case. I was referring to your previous remarks "For instance the Twilight example--first, because Betty And Veronica are almost never actually dangerous. When a guy has a love triangle, he is never helpless. The element of danger is present in both guys, but as I explained, one is a lot more dangerous and fulfills the patterns of a Scoundrel a lot more than the other does."

    I apologize for missing your definition of edgy, and I think that you have now defined dangerous: "more about the emotional danger. The threat on your place in the world, your home, society's outlook on you, etc. If not that, he is more emotionally tumultuous and risks a wild and unstable relationship." Having a definition of dangerous was more what I was trying to get at.

    I apologize for frustrating you. That was not my intent. I was trying to get a better definition between this trope and Betty And Veronica, and I obviously was not doing very well.

    Just so I am sure I understand it, let me reiterate your proposed distinctions between this trope and Betty And Veronica.

    1. The lifestyle of the chooser after the choice figures into it more prominently in this trope, especially with the scoundrel being a threat to that lifestyle, unlike the Veronica. 2. The gentleman will be the preference of friends and family, while the Betty, while not disliked, will not be preferred over the Veronica. 3. Most importantly, the Scoundrel threatens the chooser's current position. If he is chosen, then the chooser will be treated differently by society/or she will be in a much less stable relationship. An Archie, however, will likely not be treated particularly differently, nor will he have to change much about his lifestyle.

    If there is anything that I was wrong about or missed, please correct me.

    Related to the Norrington/Will example, does this trope cover a situation equivalent to, for example, Cinderella, such that one of the two love interests offers an improvement in society, or only ones that would be a loss for the heroine?

    Can we come up with a name or shorthand for the female choosing in this scenario, similar to the Archie for Betty And Veronica?

    Is there still intention to make this like Betty And Veronica in that it can apply to both genders, or has that been discarded? If so, should we make the same change to Betty And Veronica?
  • April 14, 2013
    helterskelter
    "I apologize for frustrating you"

    Don't apologize. I didn't realize the emotionally dangerous thing wasn't intrinsically understood. :) I thought of it as a no-brainer after referencing a bunch of love triangles, but I realize that the word usually implies physical danger.

    All three of those points are true--however...The reason I don't call the lifestyle part of the trope necessary is precisely because the Scoundrel doesn't always threaten the chooser. It's incredibly common that he does, but that's not always the case. It's simply a point in society that male and female characters, even when given the same roles, and portrayed differently. In the case of "edgy love interest", a Scoundrel can be a rogue, lecherous, defiant, a rebel, etc. Veronicas usually aren't. A Veronica can be sassy, sexy, sultry, Tsundere. It's simply the way men and women are treated in a work, which is the basis for this trope. A Betty is demure, a Gentleman never is. If he's shy, it's in a goofy, lovable way, as opposed to the quiet, cute way. Do you see what I mean? This is something that's hard for me to express in the trope itself because it requires me giving a lot of examples of how they're different.

    "for example, Cinderella, such that one of the two love interests offers an improvement in society, or only ones that would be a loss for the heroine?"

    Hm...good question. Honestly, I think if it starts getting complicated, and roles seem to be switched up, we're not looking at this trope in the first place, but Rich Suitor Poor Suitor. Perhaps I should add some emphasis, since there seems to be a good trend with examples that start getting confusing because they belong there, not here.

    "Is there still intention to make this like Betty And Veronica in that it can apply to both genders, or has that been discarded? If so, should we make the same change to Betty And Veronica?"

    I'm thinking now it won't actually help discourage misuse, which was why I suggested it in the first place. Betty And Veronica currently includes all genders, but it's problem is that someone always tries to identify a Betty and a Veronica, even where none exist. I was hoping to dissuade people from shoehorning every love triangle into this trope.
  • April 14, 2013
    lexicon
    The first of those pictures isn't coming up and the second is just three people who don't tell me anything. I'd go with no picture on this. Emotionally dangerous is very difficult to see.
  • April 14, 2013
    Paradisesnake
    I think the current picture is perfect. You can see instantly who's supposed to fill which role, and it doesn't leave much room for misinterpreting what this trope is about.
  • April 15, 2013
    helterskelter
    ^^ Yes, but the current image does convey one is a cad and one is a gentleman. It could be improved, but I don't feel like it would lead to misuse. I think the only misuse the image might incur is people not understanding this is a love triangle, but I don't think that will happen either way. Meaning, I don't think the image is bad, but it could be improved upon. It conveys parts of the trope. Image Pickin' policy is to keep images like that unless a better one is suggested.
  • April 18, 2013
    lexicon
    If this was going to have a title of characters like Betty And Veronica (maybe as a redirect?) then it should be Edward And Jacob. Both are well known with a following for each character. The current picture makes the scoundrel look like a pervert with him lifting her skirt. Jacob protecting Bella from Edward makes it look less sexual.
  • April 18, 2013
    helterskelter
    It was decided in that original TRS that it would not be named after particular people, in fact this name was chosen there; Edward And Jacob is only recognizable to a small population and says nothing about the archetypes, and neither does the image, unfortunately. I think I will keep the current if I can't find anything better. I'd be happy to see a better alternative, though. I agree the Scoundrel is the weak point.
  • April 30, 2013
    helterskelter
  • May 19, 2013
    helterskelter
    It's been a month since anyone other than me had something to say. Any thoughts at all?
  • October 18, 2013
    helterskelter
    Man, this has been awhile. Well, any new thoughts?
  • October 18, 2013
    qazwsx
    The Legend Of Korra example doesn't fit. While Bolin has some elements of the Gentleman, Mako doesn't fit the Scoundrel. For one thing, he's not exactly "dangerous and exciting"; he has pretty much the same lifestyle a Bolin. There is no traditionalism vs passion or lasting happiness vs transient excitement.

  • October 19, 2013
    TonyG
    On Just Shoot Me, Nina falls in love with both an escaped convict and the straight-arrow policeman tracking him down. Maya explicitly states that she is choosing between good and evil, although Nina still can't decide which. She eventually chooses both at once, but that becomes a moot point when she introduces them to each other and the con is taken into custody.
  • October 19, 2013
    DAN004
    Regardless of how this should go into Betty And Veronica or not, doesn't that trope already list male examples?

    @ Edward And Jacob thing: Even the Twilight example is already in Betty And Veronica.
  • October 19, 2013
    helterskelter
    It was decided a long time ago the differences between Betty And Veronica for males and for females was pretty distinct.
  • October 20, 2013
    DAN004
  • October 25, 2013
    helterskelter
  • October 26, 2013
    DAN004
    ^ That doesn't explain anything.
  • October 28, 2013
    helterskelter
    ? It was decided in TRS that this trope would be made. I'm not sure what that doesn't explain. You're contesting that it's not already apart of the TV Trope's lexicon, well...why would it be? It took awhile to go through YKTTW. Of course Betty And Veronica contains male examples. This trope doesn't exist for them to go anywhere.
  • October 28, 2013
    DAN004
    Sigh... You didn't get what I mean by the pothole Canonical List Of Subtle Trope Distinctions, do you?

    If the difference is merely gender then... I wonder how this is splittable.
  • October 28, 2013
    helterskelter
    ...Once again. The thread explains. The way male Bettys and Veronicas are portrayed in fiction is pretty distinct from how female ones are.

    In the same vein that "mean popular person in high school" is Alpha Bitch if female, and Jerk Jock if male. Yes, it's not 100% required, but simply when creators choose to make that kind of character, the gender line is so distinct that they start to write themselves in a particular way based on gender.

    It's being split based on the fact that even though the total narrative role they fill is more or less the same (that is, love triangle), the individual roles of all three are different.
  • October 29, 2013
    DAN004
    Okay I see. =P
  • November 23, 2013
    acrobox
    So is this clear to launch?
  • June 22, 2014
    Hero_Gal_2347
    Bump.
  • June 23, 2014
    aurora369
    Daenerys Targaryen from A Song Of Ice And Fire chooses from two men after she becomes a widow: the loyal knight Jorah Mormont and the roguish mercenary Daario Naharis. Of course, she chooses Daario and banishes Jorah.
  • June 23, 2014
    KingZeal
  • July 2, 2014
    Hero_Gal_2347
    Launching?
  • July 2, 2014
    DAN004
    ^ I don't see why not.
  • July 2, 2014
    Hero_Gal_2347
    Is this yours?
  • July 3, 2014
    DAN004
    ^ nope, but it looks like it's Up For Grabs.
  • July 3, 2014
    Arivne
    ^^ The OP helterskelter last posted here in October 2013, so this became Up For Grabs in December 2013, more than six months ago.
  • July 3, 2014
    DAN004
    Who wanna launch this?
  • July 3, 2014
    DaibhidC
    • Conversational Troping in Wintersmith, when Tiffany reads a romance novel in which the heroine must choose if she wants to marry William, an honest man with two and a half cows, or Roger, who rides a black stallion and calls her "My proud beauty". Tiffany isn't sure why the character needs to marry either of them.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/discussion.php?id=p0wwvy1ky59bmw0mi93fkafg&trope=TheGentlemanOrTheScoundrel