Trope Description Improvement Drive

I wonder if that sort of page really needs examples added.

The general examples should stay, I think, as it helps understand the trope. I vote to cut the inversions and "specific" examples, though. As far as the description goes... I support the parts about sexuality and gender roles behind the reasons the trope exist to be moved to the analysis tab, though I would like to edit and revise it. There are some contradicting statements such as how this is the embodiment of sexuality while "attractive" males (classified as Pretty Boys) are "seen as weak, less than a man, or suspected of being gay."

I think the last four paragraphs are fine with the stipulation that they be reworded (given the large cut above them). The compare/contrast section should also be revised (i.e. to avoid the Zero Context Examples statuses of Dirt Forcefield, Beauty Is Never Tarnished, Hollywood Homely, and Non-Action Guy).

Certain ideals of sexuality and gender roles are expected to be embodied by males and females in fiction in order for the characters to be attractive to audience members of the opposite sex. This is a consequence of Men Act, Women Are applied to sex appeal. That is, a man's attractiveness is a result of his behavior, while a woman's is due to her passive physical attributes. Sexy women are physically desirable; sexy men are physically strong and protective.

For male characters, strength and acting dynamically is "beauty." Passivity is ugly. Facially ugly yet dynamically active male characters are more attractive than their physically weak yet facially pretty counterparts. To be sure, dynamic, evil men are more likely to be attractive than their static and kind counterparts.

For female characters, passivity is "beauty." In extreme cases, female characters who are very active will be undesirable or will be shown to only love a man stronger than themselves. Alternatively, a physically unattractive woman will always be unattractive regardless of how proactive she is—her personality will always be outweighed by her looks.

Essentially, physical attractiveness only ever adds to a woman's sex appeal, while being active may detract from said appeal. Whereas a proactive personality only ever adds to a man's sex appeal, while being facially pretty may detract from his desirability.

These different standards lead to the genders being held to equally-damaging (though different) standards of attractiveness. As expected with a name like this, this trope leads to numerous Unfortunate Implications.

edited 1st Jun '13 5:00:39 PM by DunDun

That looks good.

If we want to cut the specific examples, we'd have to run it through TRS, I think.

Mon's description starts off in a way that looks quite unrelated to the trope. Is this a hallucination of mine?

It's a long, almost Example As Thesis introduction. If you want to trim it, I have no objections.

I would cut at least the first paragraph and the following sentence, but I do not know how to start the description then.

After putting the edit in the Analysis page, I realize that the only paragraphs in Men Are Strong, Women Are Pretty that is about the actual trope are the last two... The first five paragraphs were edited by me and added to the Analysis page. Paragraphs 6, 7, and 8 are about the Unfortunate Implications of the trope. Cut that? I'm unsure what it would even add to the Analysis page.

Uh... The first paragraph is rather important... That's where the actual trope definition is.

But I would agree that the Unfortunate Implications bit could probably be axed.

@Septimus: How's this for a description? Note that I cut out the stuff about Mons Series, as that is a separate page, and Mon, as far as I can tell, is supposed to be about the creatures themselves.

edited 2nd Jun '13 5:37:49 PM by Nocturna

What are we trying to fix about the main page description, exactly? I don't see that there's anything wrong with it.

I like 758.

Fan Dumb has the longest description I've ever seen.

I think that only the first five paragraphs should stay.

Anybody think they can add anything to Introduction by Hookup?

Wheelchair Antics does not actually have a description.

Holy . . . that one needs a YCRS.

edited 4th Jun '13 1:27:28 PM by Stratadrake

I messaged the creating troper, anyhow.

Classical Mythology description is way too long,and the bold text..

We don't have an agreement about whether the various Mythology pages are Useful Notes or a kind of works, but in any case they aren't tropes. I suppose they can be as long as necessary.

edited 10th Jun '13 1:15:32 PM by LordGro

Locked in the Dungeon sounds like a name for a plot, but the description is more about the location than the plot. Is the trope title wrong, or is it the description?

Yo Yo Plot Point's description is way too long and complainy. It is an unintentionally self-demonstrating example, given that it keeps rehashing the same explanation paragraph after paragraph.

Edit: I took a hacksaw to it, chopping out several paragraphs and reorganizing the premise.

edited 11th Jun '13 8:59:46 PM by Fighteer

^^ According to the YKTTW for it, it is about literal dungeons, as opposed to all sorts of places that you can go Dungeon Crawling in.

edited 12th Jun '13 6:21:30 AM by Stratadrake

Yes, but is the trope about said literal dungeons themselves, or about being locked in said literal dungeons?

I seem to recall that we don't want "done well/done badly" analysis in trope descriptions, and I think I've even written out that sort of stuff before. Yet I just found some more on The Heckler.

What the frell is this?

From the description, it looks exactly like The Un-Twist, except limited, listing examples, and inexplicably non-YMMV. Some of the examples, meanwhile, seem to be Parodied Trope of The Reveal.

Rules of Orphan Economics has a long Example as a Thesis that is completely obscuring the definition for me.