While studying Oedipus Complex, one may apply it and think that boys are easily interested in someone who act like their moms than those who don't: buggy, hassy, easily annoyed over things, whatever. This is applied to both in-media characters and audiences. Of course, if this is the case, Hot-Blooded and Jerkass characters will not hesitate in countering the girls' rages, because, well, they're not their moms.
part of this no doubt comes from early puberty actions where (at least back in the day) they start to have feelings that they are not used to, so they don't know how to express them, this leads to the tugging of pigtails or straight up teasing to avoid the implication of feelings when friends might still fear cooties
This Troper believes that tropes in this site are generally made of something that are being used commonly in media. Whatever you say about fighting couple is the matter of author's favor and people's taste, especially on shipping, really. Fighting man and woman DOES NOT have to love each other in canon. But since there're so many Belligerent Sexual Tension cases in the media and Fanon, people considers it cliche and misunderstands that arguing people will have higher chance to get together, let alone those who loves this trope.
Yeah, I meant more in the direction of "if they hate each other, that means they MUST secretly love each other!" Which is rarely the case.
Am I the only one annoyed when someone use an argument like "The opposite of love is not hate but indifference" as a method to support a "BST" pairing that otherwise just looks like "Girl, insults, taunts and beats the shit out of Guy repeatedly" (usually with a huge heaping of "She's just secretly in love with him"?) Indifference isn't the opposite of anything. I'm basically indifferent to say, a random invented 25 year old named Francois Frenchlastname who lives in Toulouse, but I'm sure as hell he'd prefer me being indifferent to me rather than myself deciding I hate him, flying over to his house in France and beating him to death because I hate him.
Technically it is the opposite though. Both hate and love are emotions or "feelings." Now apathy is the state of not being emotionally moved by or "feeling" anything. Apathy is technically the opposite of all emotions. As for the first part while some people do get carried away it does seem to happen in real life occasionally. Now as for the violent girl part...there's always Kuudere I guess.
By that logic, the opposite of a positive/negative charge is the lack of charge, not a negative/positive charge. Since "they're both charges".
You're misunderstanding my terminology. On the scale of feeling a certain way towards a person you have two extremes, utter apathy or indifference and obsession. You could be obsessed with hating a person or so madly in love you can't think straight when you're around them. The opposite of this would be not feeling anything when around them. As for your analogy technically there are two things that could be the right answer. If we're talking about positive/negative charges than they're still opposites because they're types of charges that oppose one another. But if we're just talking about having a charge then no charge is the opposite because...well the opposite of something existing is it not existing.
Apathty/Indifference is only a scale of interest. Not what the interest revolves around.
The way I see it (which may be the same way as "Apathy/Indifference is only a scale of interest..." above), you've got a slightly warped two-part scale... Or rather, one scale which encompasses another scale. Hatred is the opposite of Love on the scale of positive versus negative feelings, but they're both on the same end of the obsession/reaction/not-necessarily-sexual-lust versus apathy scale. This is one of those scales which is difficult to display unless you imagine it as, say, a trident: When looking at it from its end, it's a straight line between Love and Hatred, but when looking at it from above it's a single-curve line between love and hatred, plus a straight through that toward apathy, where the middle of the love/hatred line is nearer apathy than the ends.
Why do people do this. Seriously. It's either this or unresolved. Try being honest about your feelings, just once....nah *In a real male sounding voice*
Something called "shyness" wants to introduce itself to you. As you can see, some people around this tropes are extremely shy when it comes to romance and lovey-dovey emotions. They are only good at barking, biting and not good at showing any romance at all. When the couple seems to be at their peace states, something will eventually trigger their Auto Furious mode, and the cycle of love-hate won't end. Cultural values helps too, like women have a feeling that men must the ones who confess them love, and men have their prides and will not simply confess their loves to girls because they think they'll become their friends' teasing toys or they'll lose their faces in a case of being rejected.
This troper can attest to this. Seriously, it's one of those, "Can't stand 'em, can't live without 'em" things going on here, most of the time. Some of you guys seem to be taking this too ridiculously seriously- in the case of Zutara, as mentioned above, that is not this. Like, at all. Because there were no feelings of love there. Whereas with this, there is love, just one of the pair puts their foot in their mouth a lot, or the other doesn't know how to deal with their feelings... You get the picture. Often when this is resolved, they either stop hitting each other/ whatever, or when they are belligerent, they know not to take it at face value.
This troper has been known to get involved in these and can attest that it all stems back to not knowing how to (or just plain being too shy or awkward to) deal properly with one's feelings. However, sometimes, the "not-a-couple" involved think of bickering/picking on each other as just another form of flirting. Not to mention that Snark-to-Snark Combat can get quite amusing and intellectually stimulating, haha.
This trope confuses me to no end. Unless you're a masochist, why would you even want to be around someone who treats you like dirt, let alone in a relationship with that person? I don't care how hot you think they are or how in love you are with them. It's not worth the abuse. To me, being with someone who treats you like crap is saying you're desperate, whether you're a man or woman. If that person can and will change, then maybe, but if they're always going to be an abusive jerk, go find someone else.
Either from a part of Author Appeal or that most protagonists of this tropes have different interests and fetishes from people in real life. Real life's value is only an extra element in fictions. Some authors don't even bother with it.
What's so appealing about this trope? Most people would stay far, far away from anyone who treats them this way.
Belligerent Sexual Tension is one of the easiest ways to create a comedy genre while still maintaining a romance genre. Being "treated like dirt" in media is mostly used for a comedic purpose. In real life, nobody wants to be treated badly. However, it's another story in fictions. Some people tend to have different mindset when they're reading or watching media i.e. they don't mind seeing people get hurt or treated badly because 1) they're not real, and 2) they satisfy audiences' needs, like making them laugh. For some people, the highlight of this trope doesn't come from seeing couples arguing, but it's from how the couples are surprisingly well put in a relation during their dere moments or during the time they work together as a team. Other than that, it's most likely a case of personal interest.
It somewhat bugs me to see this constantly being used as a reason to ship two people that fight a lot, hate each other(or at least one-sided hate) when there's, arguably, no "sexual tension" at all, no moments where they're shown to actually like each other. Just dislike. People can ship what they want (since I don't ship, I don't feel like I have too much of a say here) but it's annoying to see hate automatically, always, being seen as "they're just hiding their feelings for each other!" when it's clear that no "hidden feelings" are involved, and if two (somewhat attractive) characters fight/argue a lot, they will be shipped, and usually quite a popular couple too. (I also have a bit of a problem with this for personal reasons that I don't care to explain right now) Isn't there such a thing as actual hate anymore?
Shipping attracts sentimental people, and lots of sentimentality is about sugar-coating conflict. That's really all there is to it.
Most of the discussion above me seems to be missing the point. Someone abusing someone else who remains in love with them anyway is an entirely different trope. BST based on banter, or to the extreme, fighting. The opposites are equally matched, and this is based on them continuously proving themselves to one another, i.e. Alice feels flustered around Bob so she talks down to him to show him, and herself, that she is still in control and will not be swayed by him. Bob is now challenged, but instead of walking away, he retorts because he feels the same way. It's about not accepting one's own feelings about the other person, not about overcoming their adversity to the other person. If the two sides are not equally matched, if it is real hate and not a front to cover up true emotions, it's not BST, and doesn't belong on this page.