Tropes Are Not Bad Rewrite Needed: Reptiles Are Abhorrent

Stereotypes, for better or worse, are tropes.

It's not "No trope is a stereotype". It's "Not all Stereotypes are tropes". Same for cliches. Just because it's a cliche, doesn't mean it is automatically a trope. Just because it is a trope doesn't mean that it can't also be a cliche.

They're intersecting sets, not wholly-contained subsets.

bump

I'm going to cut the entire Real Life section. It is nothing more that "Look, look, here is an article about warm cuddly cute reptiles!"

Go for it.

What about cutting all the "aversions" and "subversions" that are nothing more that "This character is reptilian, but not evil"?

Is this a common enough trope anywhere that aversions/subversions are worth noting?

If not (which I strongly suspect is the case), cut away.

Some of these are listing turtles displayed positively as aversions or subversion. Turtles don't even have that bad of a reputation, compared to things such as snakes and crocodiles. If anything, they are one of the more popularly positively portrayed reptiles.

Those entries should definitely be cut, considering that we have a trope for them already.

True subversion can stay, "Aversions" and aversions that are labeled as subversions should go.

33 uses of the word "averted" before I start snipping. We might as well list every black character that is not a Magical Negro.

If there are any examples of poisonous snakes or crocs being portrayed positively, I might keep them. But turtles, garden snakes, chameleons and the like? Those are generally regard as harmless.

I'm also moving some of the Wall of Text in the description to the Analysis page, cutting the first person, and a few other things.

edited 13th Oct '11 7:35:43 PM by Auxdarastrix

This has been reasonably well scrubbed. I don't think we need to do anything more here. I'm calling to close this.