Just take a look at this mess. : Real Women Never Wear Dresses

I thought they're called Wicks because they're named after Morgan Wick.

Rhymes with "Protracted."

Speak of the Devil... *

Why were crosslinked examples brought up again? To raise the question of whether to remove examples from work pages, I'm guessing?

Works pages, other tropes' pages, etc... wherever else Real Women Never Wear Dresses gets mentioned.

edited 6th Nov '11 10:44:20 PM by HiddenFacedMatt

"The Daily Show has to be right 100% of the time; FOX News only has to be right once." - Jon Stewart

Well, I suppose there's a bigger chance of a civilised conversation on works pages, but considering that this trope is almost exclusively used for conflict within fandoms...

edited 7th Nov '11 7:54:18 AM by Mimimurlough

Deleting all of the examples in the anime page from one day to another isn't the way to start a clean-up, actually. This comes from the person who came up with the original trope to start with (as "You say girl like a bad thing" and a reaction to the massive flamwar that took part in Chickification).

I do agree with the possible issues and how it'd be hard for everyone to reach agreements, but could we have other options? People equalling femininity with weakness (and sometimes while referring to themselves as "feminists", thus bringing up all kinds of misconceptions about feminism as a whole) IS a very real issue, after all, not just born from Complaining About Shows You Dont Like: I keep seeing it in Real Life, going from some people merely scoffing at skirts and make-up without real reason to slutshaming as well as demeaning women who aren't "strong" (re: housewives, or having "feminine" professions like teachers, nurses, etc.) It IS a pretty complex deal as a whole, so I don't know.

To be honest, simply deleting the examples like this won't work since fandom does hold female characters up to impossibly high standards and constantly bashes them, therefore fandom examples are needed to show fellow tropers how badly female characters are treated. I do agree about the neutrality policies and keeping them, since admittedly this is a touchy subject that should be handled with more care.

Phew! That took a while to write. Anyway, these are my two cents by now.

edited 7th Nov '11 5:18:38 AM by Orihime

Hmm? Just because they call themselves feminists when doing so, doesn't mean they claim to speak for all feminists. If others jump to that conclusion that is their problem.

In any case, as far as sources of misunderstandings about feminism go... this site can only be a small fraction of the problem, at worst. These misunderstandings are really much more likely to originate from other sources.

That isn't necessarily about seeing femininity as weakness; it could simply be at a perception of such things as skanky and/or vain. (See also Light Feminine and Dark Feminine.)

edited 7th Nov '11 5:40:17 AM by HiddenFacedMatt

"The Daily Show has to be right 100% of the time; FOX News only has to be right once." - Jon Stewart

Well, I didn't delete all of them, the in universe examples were moved to another place. I'm not going to argue that there sometimes is a real issue here, but it says quite a lot that of all the examples in the Anime/manga section, the examples that didn't involve bashing of the fandom made up less than half a page.

Edit: in any case, the presence of tropes like Acceptable Feminine Goals and The Male Gaze makes it more than a little problematic to call "mad feminist" whenever a female character is disected which, make no mistake, is what the trope is most commonly used for.

edited 7th Nov '11 5:53:04 AM by Mimimurlough

Wait, you moved the good examples? If you're doing that, put a note on the trope page saying

Or some such. Otherwise, people will think it's vandalism.

Fight smart, not fair.

Allright, sorry. Putting up the link as soon as possible

edit: Wouldn't make a difference since the examples are back. For future reference though, the in universe stuff was moved to Real Women Never Wear Dresses In Work Examples.

edited 7th Nov '11 9:30:14 AM by Mimimurlough

Sorry, work got crazy. But here's my two cents.

This trope is worthless and Orihime, you've read the page at least as much as I have so you should know that it's a giant pile of fan wars and natter and absolutely no worthy trope material anymore. Hell, I came back to this thread because I saw yet ANOTHER horrid natter pile get thrust into the namespace.

Wiki-wide, fandom tropes have been getting zapped because there is no way to bring them up without people simply dropping any attempt to discuss a trope in a logical manner and instead drag all of their web drama over.

Good god, just look at how bad the Film page is right now. There's massive piles of natter, Conversation In The Main Page, and most importantly, there's no real rhyme or reason to prove that these are legit examples.

Do I think this happens in fandom? Yea.

Do I think fandom wars need to be a part of TV Tropes? Hell no. Unfortunately, most pages like this devolve in it. This one is less and less a trope page and more of an excuse for people to rant.

Adding yet another page to the namespace is just exacerbating the problem.

edited 12th Nov '11 8:25:22 PM by Rebochan

I agree for most part, and I think the fan wars are flamey enough that we need to do something about it soon. However, there is still a point in keeping the in universe examples. My suggestion is to pick up the good eggs and fill the sandbox before nuking the sub pages. I've a strong feeling tyat they won't be needed.

I find myself actually agreeing with Orihime here. OTOH, while the intention of keeping the examples is good, it's obviously leading to flamebait.

I propose making the page example-less.

edited 13th Nov '11 2:25:52 PM by Rynnec

So what do we do?

Would that include scrapping crosswicked examples as well?

"The Daily Show has to be right 100% of the time; FOX News only has to be right once." - Jon Stewart

Well, a quick glance at the wicks shows that there are at least some crosswicked examples that are in univerase, and some are fan warring to a varying degree. I suppose we could get rid of those and keep the ones in universe?

I think we should just cut all examples, like what was done for Bechdel Test. I think it's a valid trope, it just needs to have the definition edited and examples cut.

edited 18th Nov '11 2:07:20 PM by wuggles

Okay, the idea behind this is basically "some people think empowering females and treating them as equal means completely eschewing traits that could be considered traditionally feminine, which is counter to traditional feminism and its assertion that true equality means the freedom to choose whatever you want to be without being immediately berated for it, be it dresses, monster trucks, or dresses AND monster trucks"? If so, I don't see how this is a trope and not an audience reaction.

Avatar art by Lorna-Ka.

We already had it as an audience reaction trope, and honestly, I agree with Orihime at the top. Such stuff exists by the bucketload, and I think it's important to show just how badly they're being bashed needlessly.

Hell, I never knew that Orihime was as reviled as she is until I read about this page. I think we should keep it as an audience reaction trope.

In RWBY, every girl is Best Girl.

Reviled is a strong word. We are just disagreeing strongly with your points. Have you looked at the examples? 90% are fan warring, pure and simple, and most of them are effectively bashing any scrutiny of a character, wether the scrutiny in itself is sexist or not - no discussion about problematic arguments, just "fangirls/feminists be crazy" over and over again. Flames and flamebait, that is what this is, and frankly I'm tempted to call cutlist on this thing because it's that offensive. If you have a suggestion to salvage it, you're more than welcome to pitch in, however "leave as is" is not going to work in my book.

TV Tropes is not a soapbox or a platform for advocacy. It's a collection of tropes in media, period.

Just turn the thing into a trope for fictional examples only. Then turn the description into something unbiased, by which I mean 'genuinely unbiased' and not 'pretending to be unbiased'. No describing specific views as 'outdated' or 'progress', no suggestion that something is acceptable or unacceptable, and no jabs at any groups.

This is a real issue—I agree with Orihime about that—and I wish it could be shown with examples, but examples that lead to a page turning into an unreadable pile of natter are no use to anyone. It's better to just say it's a thing and it exists and leave it at that.

How much do in-universe examples overlap with Straw Feminist, btw?

Not much at all, I would say. Feminsts are few and far between in fiction land, and most examples seems to fall into the "omg, you are a girly girl and yet competent" category

^ Is that last bit a problem?

Honestly, even if we chop out the natter, we're still going to have someone come by and bitch about this trope, and then people bitching about those someone (recursive!).

Cut out all non-in-universe examples, get a lock on this page and stick a warning to ask a mod for permission to edit on top.

Won't work. This is mostly an audience reaction (which is tropable by the way) so of course most examples come from Fan Dumb going overboard. Not saying it should remain as it is but it doesn't need locking. It just needs a good cleanup and a warning to not start Natter like it's been done on Abuse Is Okay When It Is Female on Male.