Do we really need examples?: Panty Shot

I don't see the point in splitting the trope though. Panty Shot the audience sees isn't that different from Panty Shot the characters see, and without a split there's no point in trying to rename this trope from what it's universally known as.

We don't inherently split tropes based on "It happens In-Universe many times" criteria, it has to be a key thematic difference that is used differently between "for the audience" and "for the characters." For example Ensemble Dark Horse has several examples of it happening in a Show Within a Show, but how the characters react to it is no different than how the audience reacts. On the other hand Ms. Fanservice is a character type who generally wears fanservice-y clothing and caught in titulating predicaments (sometimes a Panty Shot), while the Hello Nurse is someone whose sex appeal doesn't have to come from fanservice but otherwise causes the characters to stumble over themselves (which I doubt happens to the audience with regards to a Ms. Fanservice).

Yeah, there's a difference. If we cut Panty Shot, all the examples where the audience sees the character in underwear will go to fanservice. The ones where characters see the sexiness but the audience doesn't? That'd go somewhere else. Distracted by the Sexy, or Show Some Leg or something.

"Both involve panties" isn't a good standard for a trope.

While I don't see a glaring need to cut this, I don't think anyone has answered the OP's question: do we need examples?

I certainly don't think so.

Looking over the example, there seem to be enough invoked and otherwise played with examples that a complete Example Sectionectomy seems unwarrented(not that I see a reason to cut the straight examples, either).

edited 27th Oct '11 5:32:17 PM by 20LogRoot10

They need a bit of clean up, but there's no reason to axe them completely. "Creepiness" doesn't determine whether we have examples or not; we'd have to cut examples for all Fanservice tropes on that basis.

As is, we just need to tighten the definition of this trope and I See London, and then trim all the non-examples.

This trope would be "a character's underwear is shown for fanservice purposes", while I See London (or whatever we rename it to) would be Played for Laughs.

Also, I don't think we really need to split it into in-universe and out of universe examples. Tropes show up In-Universe all the time without getting spun off into separate tropes. I don't think it's necessary in this case.

edited 27th Oct '11 10:02:24 PM by JapaneseTeeth

A Panty Shot is not just any underwear shown for fanservice. The standard definition requires a skirt that flips in some way to reveal panties while the character remains fully dressed. A long shirt or tunic could also work. But it's not just any sexy underwear.

True. Either way, we need to clarify the description and go over the examples to make sure that they fits. No need to axe them completely.

Agreed. Tightening the definitions on both tropes would be a good thing.

I know it's been a while, but here's how I see it:

I See London: Showing Underwear for Comedic purposes (only)
Panty Shot: Showing a woman's underwear for Male Gaze-type Fanservice (Exempting examples which fall under Vapor Wear)

If a shot of a guy in underwear is being used for Female Gaze-type Fanservice, that falls under Walking Shirtless Scene.

edited 6th Dec '11 12:01:07 PM by DonaldthePotholer

@ Donald The Potholer:

Nah, guys can do Panty Shot fanservice. Especially crossdressers. For guys who aren't crossdressed, it's usually a cute young Uke type, and it's not common, but it happens.

Add me to the people who think I See London is a) primarily comedic and b) requires the other characters to see the undies in question, whereas Panty Shot is a) exclusively Fanservice and b) requires the audience to see the undies.

I think fanservice is the wrong word to use here. There are In-Universe Panty Shots that are treated as entirely erotic even if the audience can't see them. They're still the same trope. It's more comedy vs. titillation.

@Raso About Pretty Cure:

Magic Skirt: Textbook example, except for one shot which would imply that Blossom takes fashion tips from Amulet Heart. Panty Shot: Episode 19 provides a blink-and-you'll-miss-it look up both girls skirts. And Cure Sunshine has a split-second one when she debuts. In the movie, it is revealed that they have colored bicycle shorts underneath their flower skirt

So no, not even Pretty Cure is safe from perverts.

Honestly I don't see why this trope NEEDS examples at all. I'd vote in favor of axing them, myself.

I don't get it either. It only serves to make us all look like perverts, to be honest.

Well Modesty Shorts exempt people from this trope and take away the need for Magic Skirt.

edited 15th Jan '12 5:28:16 PM by Raso

I vote to cut the examples.

I'd support cutting examples.

Heck, if I thought there were a chance at it, I'd vote for making it a redirect to Fanservice.

Very much disagree about cutting the trope and alot of the examples are specific uses of this in different ways such as Lampshading, Conversational Troping, plot important ones, Unprovoked Pervert Payback, Extreme embarrassment, Intended ones, Members of the Genre around this, Accidental Pervert's reaction, etc.

I could see cutting or elaborating the ones that are X Does this.

edited 15th Jan '12 6:00:28 PM by Raso

Definitely agree with cutting examples.

Redirect to Fanservice? Dunno... kind of feels like a legit sub-trope of that... but if the examples are cut, what's left is a short four-sentence article.

@Raso

So what? That Trope does not really contribute to anything worth mentioning at all. Plot important? Examples, please.

And again, it makes us all look like a bunch of perverts.

edited 15th Jan '12 6:02:47 PM by kay4today

I think we spend a disproportionate amount of our time worrying about the sex tropes as it is, but nobody is going to let us (rightfully) cut the majority of them, so leaving them exampleless and basically objective is the next best thing.

How about we keep the Trope, but axe all of the examples?

Because seriously... "There are many panty shots in random anime Nr 5123." is just unnecessary. At least for me.