What's needed and what isn't.: Hollywood Sex

So me and another troper have reached an impasse on this page. I thought the BDSM bullet list was redundant like so many other entries (Did we really need 3 points saying "people fart during sex"?), so I reduced it to a single bullet point saying, "BDSM as a whole tends to be clumsily handled. While real-life BDSM practitioners include people from all walks of life with varied sexual interests, fictional ones are stereotyped as Freaks of the Week with no regard for communication, physical safety, sanitation, discretion in partners, or other precautions."

I thought that was all that was needed to be said. A subtrope or Useful Notes page could be written if more is needed, otherwise the Hollywood Sex page could end up a mile long.

edited 7th Jun '11 6:19:41 AM by DesertDragon

Ehr. Lets start with a recap of what we are talking about.

The page Hollywood Sex is currently divided into three parts:

1. Description, explaining that the trope is about sexuality being misportrayed in media.
2. Misconception list, detailing how (the actual and symbolic) Hollywood tend to get it wrong.
3. Media example list.

Currently, the misconception list is divided into vanilla sex (that is, intercourse and making out) and BDSM, while the media example list is divided by media type as usual. Both lists have their sub-lists folderized.

So, this discussion is about the second of the three parts: The misconception list.

Real quick, I'm also not crazy about the implication that sex is only vanilla or all-out BDSM. Just sounds limiting and doesn't allow for the full range of non-mainstream interests.

edited 7th Jun '11 7:02:32 AM by DesertDragon

So, should we keep the misconceptions list on the Trope Page, or should we make it an Useful Notes page or something instead. I currently think we should keep it, since I find it funny, informative, good for cross-reference with media examples, good as a checklist for writers (Just like the Common Mary Sue Traits list), and most importantly it's a list rather than a block of text. This last part is important because it makes for neat little folders. The misconceptions list doesn't take any room that the reader doesn't chose to give it.

If we make the misconceptions list a separate page, I think we should do it like the Common Mary Sue Traits page rather than an Useful Notes page. More importantly, I'm totally against splitting it by type of sexuality. The vanilla list and the BDSM list should be on the same page, and if someone want to add a third sub-category to the misconceptions list then that list should go on the same page as well. Lets not have separate pages for separate sexualities here.

Also, lets keep in mind that the entire Hollywood X line of tropes have the problem of not being regular tropes as much as people pointing out Acceptable (or otherwise) Breaks From Reality.

Finally, while we are at it. It seems that the You Fail Sex Ed Forever page has been merged into the Hollywood Sex page, but someone on the discussion page complained that this merger was botched and a lot of information was lost. Hmm.

edited 7th Jun '11 7:17:18 AM by Xzenu

Regardless of whether we keep it as folders on the main page or as a separate page: What categories would you like to include? As far as I'm concerned, there's definitely room for more. :-)

edited 7th Jun '11 7:14:35 AM by Xzenu

Yes the merger was both unneeded and botched. Badly. At least IMO. I don't even think it was ever discussed before it happened. The reason I have a lot of edits on the page is because I was putting things back that were lost in the transition (oral sex, improbable lube, elusive female orgasms, all gay men liking anal, etc.)

edited 7th Jun '11 7:19:18 AM by DesertDragon

Ah, great: That problem is already being solved then.

I'm of the opinion that you can dump the misconception list on either a Useful Notes or an Analysis page. Misconception lists are not tropes.

Useful Notes about sex.

Yep, don't see any way this could go wrong.

This is all yet another case of TV Tropes not understanding the concept of "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." You Fail Sex Ed Forever was perfectly fine before all the mergers, bloating, etc. Sometimes the best answer is the simple one.

I've been meaning to write UsefulNotes.BDSM but I haven't gotten around to it (I welcome PMs on the subject, and of course I'll leave room for Wiki Magic). I'm pretty sure we have an index — the name Xzenu comes to mind in this regard — and that should be linked at the very least.

edited 7th Jun '11 9:53:57 PM by HersheleOstropoler

They actually had both Hollywood Sex and You Fail Sex Ed Forever.

Making a Useful Notes page on BDSM could be fun and informative. Lets do it together. You, me, Desert Dragon, and whoever else interested. I started a workspace for us.

Anyway, an optimal Useful Notes page about BDSM is an Useful Notes page about BDSM. We should not try to move half the list of medial misconceptions there. The list should either stay on the Hollywood Sex main page or be made into a page of it's own like the Common Mary Sue Traits list page. Personally I prefer to keep it on the main page. Because it's fine the way it is, and also because I'd get annoyed if we spend time and energy on splitting it off and setting up the new page and then one day it is suddenly cut or merged without discussion. Just like You Fail Sex Ed Forever and Hollywood Masochism was, and also like the index you're referring to.

For eight months or something like that we had an index called "This Index Is Kinky", but one day it was suddenly cut with no discussion except a simple "no thanks" note from Fast Eddie. I think this happened around the time an advertiser freaked out at TV Tropes for including too much sexual stuff or something like that, so I never really bothered to ask or ponder whether the index was cut for that reason or because it included too much stuff that belonged there or not depending on the individual example. Bound and Gagged, for example. For the same reasons I wasn't surprised or annoyed when the index was suddenly cut, although I do miss it a bit.

If we can come up with a decent page, we can direct people from Hollywood Sex to it to address misconceptions about BDSM. Hollywood Sex should stick with listing misconceptions that aren't widespread enough for their own trope page. That's been my argument this whole time. We can keep the page free enough of gory details that it shouldn't create an issue with advertisers.

edited 8th Jun '11 11:56:50 AM by DesertDragon

Splitting the misconceptions list into separate pages for separate sexualities is still a bad idea for at least four reasons.

1. The focus should be on misconceptions in media: Splitting it into separate pages turns the focus to the sexuality itself.
2. Hollywood Sex and Hollywood Masochism was decided a long time ago to not be separate tropes. And with good reason: It's the same thing, the word "sex" in a wide sense include BDSM. For a little while, Hollywood Masochism was a subtrope with a page of it's own, but it was merged into Hollywood Sex just like You Fail Sex Ed Forever.
3. What you are proposing is not to re-split them proper, but to re-split them halfway. This structure is weird, impractical, and it's also excluding in a way I find offensive. To keep the vanilla part of the list on the main page while exiling the BDSM part of the list sends a Unfortunate Implications heteronormative* message that vanilla sex is "real" sex while other sexual practices is "something else" - something that's by definition less real, less valuable and less "interesting".
4. Like I said before, the misconception list have room for more sub-lists in the future. This becomes much easier if it's all on the same page, instead of having people adding yet more pages.

Aside from these three reasons, we also have the fact I previously pointed out, that an Useful Notes page about BDSM ought to be about BDSM. Dumping the misconceptions into that format would be a BAD idea. Again fro several reasons. I actually explored that avenue once, but quickly reached the conclusion that it sucked. We don't need the Hollywood X line of tropes to get it's own line of Useful Notes pages. Useful Notes are about reality rather than media. The misconception list is done in, and should remain in, a format that doesn't fit the useful notes format. We don't need to explain why these misconceptions are wrong, that would just become longwinded, boring and preachy. In it's current format, the misconceptions list can be fun as well as useful as a checklist for amateur writers. We should keep it that way.

( * = With heteronormative, I mean the word in the wide sense, not the narrow sense. In the wide sense, heteronormativity is about the dogma that sexuality is all about about the gender of yourself and your partner. The added dogma that these genders ought to be opposite rather than the same is merely a side-effect.)

edited 8th Jun '11 2:19:22 PM by Xzenu

You third point is useless if it buggers up the page length.

The Hollywood Tropes are not pages to list misconceptions, they're pages to list consistent fictional properties of something that actually exists. What really is true can go on the page if it's not the bulk of the description, as we're not here to educate people on sex ed. If it takes more than a paragraph to mention the misconceptions, use a Useful Notes. Or possibly an Analysis.

The vanilla part oft the list is huge. Keeping or moving the BDSM part makes no difference. If we move the list, we should move the entire list to the same place.

• Since the list is folderized, I don't think it takes up much space as it is.

• I don't think Useful Notes is a viable option, for the reasons I explained above.

• The analysis namespace, on the other hand, could work.

• Giving the list a name of it's own might be even better, however. I'd like a name along the same line as Common Mary Sue Traits. Hmm... Common Hollywood Sex Traits ?

As long as we avoid the word "misconceptions". I hate seeing a good trope description get bogged down in ways things get misunderstood.

Awright, you convinced me. Started the page my moving the list and writing a brief introduction. And I took your advice to avoid negative words such as "misconceptions".

The current description reads simply:

"In fiction, sexual activities does not have to be realistic. They are not there to educate. Instead the authors tend to run on a mix of Rule of Fun, Rule of Sexy, They Just Didn't Care and lets-not-squick -people-out. With or without Lampshade Hanging. Thus, welcome to the wonderful world of Hollywood Sex, where sexuality often work like... this:"

Sounds like a plan to me.

edited 8th Jun '11 5:58:29 PM by DesertDragon

I like to think of the Hollywood Tropes as being like Hollywood Acid (last time I saw it). The trope is "green and bubbling fluids in a glass beaker that melts things to the bone (real acid properties are discussed on UsefulNotes.Acid if you're curious)" not "acids aren't green and bubbly and the writers are idiots who don't do research!". The first is a trope, the second is bitching about inaccuracies, despite being based on the same thing.

edited 8th Jun '11 7:22:45 PM by Deboss

lol you do realize you just linked a blank page right? But otherwise, I agree. I tried to cut down some of the bitching in the new Common Hollywood Sex Traits page, to stick to media stereotyping. I'm trying to tell Xzenu that it's not our job to educate people, just point out the things in fiction that don't work in real life.

edited 8th Jun '11 7:48:59 PM by DesertDragon

I couldn't remember if we made that or not. It got TRS'd for having a three paragraph rant about how acids actually work. My default for repairing that is to dump the factual tangent on a Useful Notes.

Yeah, we're here to educate people on the existence and usage of tropes, not on reality.

Am I the only one who thinks making this useful notes page is a bad idea? Because I just have to say, I think this is a bad idea.

Don't worry, we have already agreed to avoid the "Useful Notes" path. And yes, I do agree with you that it would have been a bad idea. :-)