TV Tropes Org

Forums

search forum titles
google site search
Kickstarter Message
TV Tropes Needs Your Help
X
Big things are happening on TV Tropes! New admins, new designs, fewer ads, mobile versions, beta testing opportunities, thematic discovery engine, fun trope tools and toys, and much more - Learn how to help here and discuss here.
View Kickstarter Project
Total posts: [25]
1

Define, move examples into appropriate existing tropes: Heterosexual Life Partners get usage counts

What do you think Heterosexual Life-Partners is about? Whatever your answer, many disagree with you.

Some think it means "best friends, both male or both female." Like Abbott and Costello, two characters from A Clockwork Orange or Archie and Jughead. Scores, maybe hundreds of examples on the main page assume this definition.

Others interpret the title ironically. They think that we call the characters heterosexuals, and they are, but they're practically a romantic couple. This latter definition actually seems to be the primary meaning, and the trope even has Bromance as a redirect.

(The intentionally ambiguous laconic, "Really close same-sex friends, " offers no help at all.)

As a result of the different interpretations, examples cover a spectrum of tropes. For instance, from The Simpsons, we have:

  1. Bart and Milhouse. These are two straight 10-year-old boys and best friends.
  2. Lou and Chief Wiggum. These are straight men, partners on the job, whose relationship sometimes mirrors a romantic one.
  3. Lenny and Carl. For a while, their relationship saw humor similar to Lou and Wiggum's. But they have also sometimes been directly implied to have an actual romantic relationship.
  4. Smithers and Burns. Smithers is an openly gay man who fantasizes sexually about his boss, who considers him his best friend.

The one interpretation no one takes on is the literal one. You know. Life partners who share a heterosexual relationship.

Inexplicably, Platonic Life Partners is the "opposite sex" version of this trope, according to both pages. Someone thought that "platonic" implies opposite sex while "heterosexual" implies same-sex.

I suggest we:

This leaves many examples of same-sex best friends. We don't seem to have a Best Friends trope. We can put one through YKTTW. It may be a viable trope, or a supertrope, or too broad to be useful.

They think that we call the characters heterosexuals, and they are, but they're practically a romantic couple.

I believe it's this. However, they are explicitly not a couple, and this is just as important to the trope.

 3 lebrel, Tue, 10th Jan '12 1:26:06 PM from Basement, Ivory Tower
Tsundere pet.
"What do you think Heterosexual Life Partners is about?"

What Arha said. Two people of the same sex who are like a couple, but not a couple. Doesn't require any Ship Tease or Homoerotic Subtext, but it may get some.

"Inexplicably, Platonic Life Partners is the "opposite sex" version of this trope, according to both pages. Someone thought that "platonic" implies opposite sex while "heterosexual" implies same-sex."

Not seeing the problem here. The point of Heterosexual Life-Partners is that there's a) two people, of the same sex, who are pretty much Life Partners, but b) they're both heterosexual, so there's no actual romantic/sexual relationship there. In modern pop culture, "platonic", despite the original Greek connotations, usually refers to a pair of people of opposite sexes, who might otherwise make a couple, but aren't romantically/sexually interested in each other. The names fit fine.
Calling someone a pedant is an automatic Insult Backfire. Real pedants will be flattered.
Two people of the same sex who are like a couple, but not a couple
.

If so, the trope has at least 50 percent misuse on its own main page.

That's also the exact definition of Homoerotic Subtext, which was launched as an objective alternative to Ho Yay.

 5 lebrel, Tue, 10th Jan '12 1:38:49 PM from Basement, Ivory Tower
Tsundere pet.
"If so, the trope has at least 50 percent misuse on its own main page."

Yes, it needs a cleanup. That's not the same as saying it needs to go away.

"That's also the exact definition of Homoerotic Subtext, which was launched as an objective alternative to Ho Yay."

Um, no, if I understand the new Homoerotic Subtext trope appropriately, that is "creators add elements that would suggest a romantic/sexual relationship if it weren't clearly established that the characters are straight, usually for comedy or fanservice", which potentially overlaps but isn't the same thing (you can have Homoerotic Subtext between characters that aren't closely attached to each other, and you can have Heterosexual Life-Partners that never get Homoerotic Subtext).
Calling someone a pedant is an automatic Insult Backfire. Real pedants will be flattered.
Could you mention an example that would go on Heterosexual Life-Partners but not Homoerotic Subtext?

 7 lebrel, Tue, 10th Jan '12 1:47:19 PM from Basement, Ivory Tower
Tsundere pet.
Jeeves and Wooster, Holmes and Watson (original book version in both cases; later adaptations tend to play up the Homoerotic Subtext). Lots of others.
Calling someone a pedant is an automatic Insult Backfire. Real pedants will be flattered.
What defines the difference between this and "best friend"?

Best friends may be of opposite genders, and that is played differently.
Becky: Who are you? The Mysterious Stranger: An angel.
Huck: What's your name? The Mysterious Stranger: Satan.
 10 shimaspawn, Tue, 10th Jan '12 5:26:42 PM from Here and Now Relationship Status: In your bunk
And there's a difference between your best friend who is a confident but not closer than any romantic interest, and your Heterosexual Life Partner who is even closer than your wife or husband.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.

-Philip K. Dick
Jeeves and Wooster, original Holmes and Watson? In that case, the trope is about their closeness as people, and their being jokingly portrayed like a romantic couple is irrelevant. So the other near 50 percent of the main page is misuse.

edited 10th Jan '12 5:44:59 PM by Routerie

 12 shimaspawn, Tue, 10th Jan '12 6:12:02 PM from Here and Now Relationship Status: In your bunk
[up] No, it's correct, it's just that Heterosexual Life-Partners has a high incidence of being combined with Homoerotic Subtext. Just because the two tropes intersect frequently doesn't make them the same trope.

A Super Hero almost always has a Secret Identity. That doesn't mean that they're the same thing. Some tropes just tend to occur together a lot.

edited 10th Jan '12 6:13:09 PM by shimaspawn

Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.

-Philip K. Dick
Yes, they may be correct examples, but in adding them, people misuse the term, showing they misunderstand the definition.

If the point of Heterosexual Life-Partners is the characters' close platonic relationship, not the way it's played up as romantic, then editors are wrong to add "Heck, one of the series' oldest running gags is that the two are gay for each other" to the Scrubs example. Editors are wrong to add "Not that there's anything wrong with that!" to the Seinfeld example. Editors are wrong to say this exists "some might say exclusively" in the 2009 Sherlock Holmes adaptation.

It's like if our article for "superhero" were called In And Out Fighter Man, and examples read "Superman spends half his time working as a reporter" and "That playboy at Wayne Industries? He's Batman." Yeah, those are examples of superheroes, but the phrasing indicates that editors think this trope has to do with Secret Identity. And to make matters wore, Secret Identity is a redirect.

edited 10th Jan '12 6:25:29 PM by Routerie

 14 nrjxll, Tue, 10th Jan '12 6:25:31 PM Relationship Status: Not war
Given the distinctive tone of Conversation in the Main Page that those have, I'd say editors would be wrong to add that regardless of the definition...

Heh, there's that too.

We need a proper wick check of course, but people use often Heterosexual Life-Partners as a synonym for Ho Yay. Even though it has the word "heterosexual" in it. Perhaps because it does - they consider it sarcastic, or just pick up on the "sexual" part. And, well, if we switched the two pages' images, some might not even notice...

edited 10th Jan '12 6:32:23 PM by Routerie

All right, here we go with a wick check. Taken randomly from the trope's 2, 309 wicks.

edited 11th Jan '12 12:43:05 PM by Routerie

 17 lebrel, Wed, 11th Jan '12 12:55:57 PM from Basement, Ivory Tower
Tsundere pet.
I don't know most of those series enough to comment, but having Homoerotic Subtext does not automatically disqualify characters from being Heterosexual Life-Partners (and neither does being a threesome rather than a couple); being Heterosexual Life-Partners is almost always going to bring on the shippers, and nowadays many creators/producers will play to that. So I'd say that, for example, the Undying Loyalty pothole is correct; Kirk and Spock are Heterosexual Life-Partners, and they also (famously) have lots and lots of Ho Yay.
Calling someone a pedant is an automatic Insult Backfire. Real pedants will be flattered.
Yes, Kirk and Spock are heterosexual life partners, who incidentally have homoerotic subtext, but if you pothole them to Heterosexual Life-Partners to indicate their Homoerotic Subtext, you are misusing the term.

 19 lebrel, Wed, 11th Jan '12 1:15:22 PM from Basement, Ivory Tower
Tsundere pet.
Since the example in question is doing a compare/contrast between three sets of characters, I think the two potholes are to indicate that both "A and B apply", not necessarily that "A applies and therefore also B".

I think several of the wicks you have labelled as "misuse" are plausibly correct; e.g., the The Big Bang Theory example is a two-part pothole for "Ersatz Homosexual Relationship"; i.e., the editor is not implying the characters are actually gay because of it. Another problem is that many of the wicks you have checked are fanfic, which is a prime vehicle for shipping and always going to be messy; the The Wario Barker Collection wick, for example, describes two women who are plausibly Heterosexual Life-Partners in Canon but often reinterpreted as lesbians in Fanon.

Again, I agree that Heterosexual Life-Partners needs a cleanup, but that doesn't mean the trope itself is broken.
Calling someone a pedant is an automatic Insult Backfire. Real pedants will be flattered.
All right, you've convinced me that I've overstated the trope's problems.

But do I have the go ahead to clean up the page and description? Explicitly saying that the trope isn't about romantic subtext (though such subtext may exist) and directing people elsewhere as necessary.

Batman
[up] It's fine by me, I don't think we need a crowner for some clean up.
There are no heroes left in Man.
 22 lebrel, Thu, 12th Jan '12 6:12:40 AM from Basement, Ivory Tower
Tsundere pet.
Cleanup Is A Free Action. Go right ahead. :)
Calling someone a pedant is an automatic Insult Backfire. Real pedants will be flattered.
All right... but should I cut No Content Examples? That may mean cutting more examples than not.

It could do with more cleanup than I've given it, but my original point's no longer an issue, so let's close this thread.

 25 Best Of, Mon, 16th Jan '12 4:31:12 AM from Finland Relationship Status: Falling within your bell curve
With Mod Hat On
Locking
Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.
The system doesn't know you right now, so no post button for you.
You need to Get Known to get one of those.
Total posts: 25
1


TV Tropes by TV Tropes Foundation, LLC is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available from thestaff@tvtropes.org.
Privacy Policy