What's the difference from Straw Traitor?: Category Traitor

So Category Traitor just got launched.

In the YKTTW discussion I pointed out that the description of Straw Traitor seemed to make it about the same thing. The launcher took the position that Straw Traitor has decayed, and the examples are not traitors.

Well, I don't particularly see that, but it seems to me that if that is the case then the solution would be to clean up and fix Straw Traitor, not create a new trope.

Maybe I'm just not seeing the tropes right. Can anyone here tell me exactly what the difference is between Category Traitor and Straw Traitor?

Hmmm. Straw Traitor is all kinds of screwed up.

• It's using a naming convention that indicates one thing (the character is set up simply to be knocked down) to mean exactly the opposite ("Unlike the other tropes in The War On Straw, the 'straw' in Straw Traitor refers to the larger rhetorical device and not a specific type of character; it is usually the person making the accusation of "treason" that is being set up as a strawman).
• The definition isn't made clear at any point, instead the description section wanders around talking about acceptable targets, and authorial intent, and Strawman Political.
• The page quote doesn't help any — which character is supposed to be the Straw Traitor?

Category Traitor, on the other hand is clearly defined (Character A is accused by Character B of being a traitor to a group because B considers A a member of the group and assumes that all members want the same things or are the same.) The examples are also clean.

I'd say that Straw Traitor should be cut or massively reworked, if only to bring it into line with the other "straw" tropes. The name is actively misleading.

edited 9th Apr '11 9:08:45 PM by Madrugada

Huh. Yeah, Straw Traitor is the problem here, not Category Traitor, as far I can tell. Not sure what to do about it, though.

I think the straw here is that some assumes that X category equals certain positions, when it does not follow.

For example, a Christian might be reasonably expected to believe in the divinity of Christ. So a nominal christian denying Christ could be considered a "traitor".

However, assuming that all Christians are Republicans is a straw argument. It's based on having a straw concept of the Christian category, and therefor when someone betrays that straw concept, they are labeled a traitor.

Category Traitor describes it from the straight perspective.

Alice think that category A believes X, even though it does not follow. Then Bob, who is category A, rejects X. Alice calls Bob a traitor.

Straw Traitor approaches it from the perspective of the idea that Alice herself is a strawman.

They are obviously related tropes. Is Category Traitor the better name for the trope currently named that? Or should that be called Straw Traitor on the grounds that the "treason" is based on a straw argument, while what is currently Straw Traitor should be tightened up and named Straw Traitor Accuser?

edited 9th Apr '11 9:23:55 PM by Sackett

The actual description refers to it repeatedly as "Straw Treason". I kind of like that, but it doesn't fit with all of our other strawmen tropes, which refer to individuals and not ideas (Straw Civilian, Straw Feminist, etc.) and might be confusing if we rename Category Traitor to Straw Traitor.

I'm not sure we should do that, though - some of what's already on the War On Straw index doesn't really qualify as strawmanning, most notably Straw Hypocrite, which I've never seen used to attack something in real life*

edited 9th Apr '11 9:32:51 PM by nrjxll

I cut the Category Traitor. Straw Traitor may need work, that doesn't mean we need a whole new trope.

Kinda like building a new wall when the old one just needs some paint.

Shit. Category Traitor has been cut already.

^ Ok, that explains it.

But why should we keep the one that's misnamed, confusingly defined, unclear, and loaded with questionable examples; over the one that has a clear name, a clear definition, and good examples?

edited 9th Apr '11 9:48:46 PM by Madrugada

Woah...

I just wanted some discussion of the thing.

Is there anyway to grab the Category Traitor description and examples. Perhaps to merge with a revised Straw Traitor?

Also, I like the idea of the title Straw Treason- it would make the concept more clear I think.

Straw Treason makes a lot of sense to me as a trope.

I think we should have two separate tropes: Category Traitor the way it is, ehr, was, while Straw Traitor goes more clearly into straw territory.

• Category Traitor: Bob is accused of betraying a group that he (is claimed to) belong to.
• Straw Traitor: ranfom accusations of treason.

As Madrugada pointed out, an example in a strawman trope ought to include some straw. Thus, if we go with having only one trope, I prefer it to not have Straw in the title.

The YKTTW is still in the first post of the thread for reference.

If we create a new trope after we've fixed Straw Traitor, we can create a new YKTTW for it.

Sackett,

I know you didn't mean for Fast Eddie to just go in and cut the trope. Still, I really think you totally misrepresented my position in the YKTTW thread. Ands I would mot have appreciated that even if it wouldn't have had consequences.

First of all, I did NOT agree that the tropes are the same thing. On the contrary, I argued that they are different enough to deserve to exist as separate tropes.

Second, I did not claim that Straw Traitor has decayed, much less did I claim that such decay is reason to replace it.

Third, my very first post points out that the main distinction between the two tropes is that Straw Traitor is about straw, while Category Traitor is not. Noone ever dispute this claim, and I never take it back. The following discussion on whether or not Straw Traitor is really about treason, that's a separate issue.

Anyway, The YKTTW thread can be found here. Your last post was made as I was launching, I didn't see it until now.

It seems that Sackett, assuming you had seen it, took "Straw Traitor is about straw" to mean "Straw Traitor has decayed into being about straw" even if you never used the word "decay". From there, "this trope doesn't overlap Straw Traitor" becomes "this trope overlaps the original definition of Straw Traitor, but it doesn't overlap the new definition". But that's just the most reasonable theory I can come up with...

edited 10th Apr '11 1:18:44 AM by MorganWick

Morgan Wick,

There's a HUGE difference between "I think X might have believed" and "X said".

As for my actual opinion, I don't have a belief that Straw Traitor has decayed. And I don't think it matters whether it has decayed or not.

Right now, Straw Traitor is a mix of two things:

1. Straw Treason, with at least one Strawman Political being involved.
2. Straw-shooting-yourself-in-the-foot-by-working-against-your-own-interests.

I think the trope should keep both these concepts. And ideally, it should be reflected by the trope name. Straw Treason is the best we have so far, but maybe we can find something even better.

edited 10th Apr '11 1:33:40 AM by Xzenu

Morgan Wick (new version),

I don't like Sackett's way of second-guessing me, and I don't want to try to second-guess him either. And I'm not very interested in his reasons for misrepresenting me in his original post. He misrepresented me, period.

One final word on this: The Strawman Political version of me that Sackett made has two aspects: The smaller part is the argument he incorrectly put in my mouth, while the bigger part is that he totally leave out all of my real arguments. Your attempt at explaining him only cover the smaller part, not the bigger part.

Now plz lets move on.

edited 10th Apr '11 1:39:07 AM by Xzenu

I edited that post many, many times. At first I was neutrally defending him in a devil's advocate argument, then I switched to suggesting you should have completely rewritten the post, then I switched to mildly scratching my head along with you, all as my thinking evolved (and I eventually read the YKTTW).

I'll just say that I was attempting to explain his idea of your position as an extreme Flanderization and distortion of your real arguments into a fake argument. But I'll just stay out of this and let Sackett defend and respond himself.

Hmm, maybe Straw Affiliation?

Bob is X, and this make people assume that he is Y.

As in, "Bob is black and/or gay, and is thus assumed to be a democrat".

Or as in "Bob Al is holding a speach where he defend homophobes without agreeing with them, and is thus assumed to be a homophobe."

Okay, I started two threads on YKTTW for this.

• Category Traitor
• Straw Affiliation

Modified the old Category Traitor description a little bit. Made a description for Straw Affiliation, and with a few exceptions kept the examples from Straw Traitor there. The changes are:

• Removed one example (the manga one) since the description isn't very clear on what's really going on.
• Moved one example (Coupling) and one aversion (The Boondocks) to Category Traitor.
• Slightly rephrased one example (the Huckelberry Finn one) and copied it. It's currently the only example that overlap between the two tropes.

Xzenu,

Morgan Wick's first post pretty much summed up my reasoning. I often feel that we are talking past each other. Which is why I presented my interpretation of what you were saying, in the full expectation that you would come back and correct my understanding.

Perhaps I should have pointed that out better.

I would like to say that posting the way that I did provoked a response from others that gave me a better understanding of the differences you intended. In fact that was my main hope in posting here was that someone other than you could explain it to me- as I think we often come from such different perspectives that we seem to understand each other better when there is someone to interpret for us.

I would also say that from the discussion before Eddie cut Category Traitor I had moved from my original position of thinking that a merge might be needed to thinking that they are indeed separate tropes, and that we needed to figure out exactly how they fit into our existing Straw tropes.

As I still feel Category Traitor is about straw, although Straw Treason is probably a better descriptive title then Straw Traitor.

I could even be persuaded that Category Traitor should be the main name with perhaps Straw Treason as a redirect.

I think the two of us sometimes suffer when we get into a discussion with out third parties to mediate, since we often don't understand each other. In the YKTTW we never really had the chance to interact beyond a few comments at the end because you were already at the launching stage when I discovered the YKTTW and made a comment.

That is regrettable, but not really either your or my fault. I f I had known my OP would generate such a swift move to the cut stage, I would have worded it more carefully to make it more clear that I was presenting my interpretation and that I wanted others opinions so I could better understand the disagreement.

I apologize for not being more careful. I will also support a split from Straw Traitor along the lines of Category Traitor. Although I think in deference to Fast Eddie we probably ought to try and fix Straw Traitor up first, so that way the differences are more clear. (Not that the confusion is your fault Xzenu, as Madrugada pointed out the main problem is that Straw Traitor was confusing, and so led me to think that it covered your trope as well).

edited 10th Apr '11 11:01:17 AM by Sackett

Mistakes happens, no problem.

And yes, we need to fix Straw Traitor. And now that I do have ideas for how to fix it, I don't mind. :-)

Category Traitor and Straw Affiliation as per my current YKTTW:s are quite different tropes. And I think these concepts will work quite fine.

When I made Category Traitor the first time, I saw the same thing in it as I do now. While all I really saw in Straw Traitor was what is now in Straw Affiliation, plus some random mess and fuzziness. A fuzzy mess that I really didn't want on my table then.

However, looking back at the old version of the Straw Traitor trope, I see embryos of both tropes, so to say. The old (okay, current) version of Straw Traitor is really a proto-version of Straw Affiliation mixed with a Proto-version of Category Traitor. And I think that having these two proto-versions mixed with each other have held them both back: People have been reluctant to add Straw Affiliation examples, because they are not about treason, and they have also been reluctant to add Category Traitor examples because these examples doesn't fit with the straw.

As for titles, I think Straw Treason could make a good redirect/Internal Subtrope for certain kinds of Category Traitor.

Main trope: Bob consider Alice to be a traitor against a certain category of people. Whether Bob is justified or bigoted (or a bit of both) may be clear from the narrative (and the audience may or may not agree) or be left for the audience to decide for themselves.

Straw Treason Internal Subtrope: This accusation of treason falls squarely within strawman territory, within the context of the work.

Incidentially, I felt my second post was too negative and possibly insulting, so I was pleasantly surprised to see Sackett try his hardest to be civil in dealing with Xzenu, citing my first post complimentarily.

(Although, I do wonder if Xzenu knows what the pencil button does.)

edited 11th Apr '11 1:35:15 AM by MorganWick

Let's focus on the tropes. They are doing quite well on ykttw thanks to valuable input from Sackett, Madrugada and others. But surely there is more to do with them.

BUMP.

The tropes are pretty solid now.

Anyone got any input, extra examples, constructive criticism or whatever before we move to the next step? :-)