Someone has bangs. They're blinding.
I don't see why this would need to be explained for every single character. It's a pretty simple concept.
There are different a number hairstyles that can give a character Blinding Bangs and it's often used to convey other traits about the character (shyness, aloofness, mysteriousness). It's not a feature a character has just because.
The argument goes that if the trope carries no meaning but is just a particular hairstyle, then it's not really a trope. If, on the other hand, it does reflect some element of characterization or even is Played for Laughs, then it merits more than a Zero Context Example.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Ideally, for something like a hairstyle, there would be a link to a picture of the character in the example. Just the name alone doesn't mean anything to anyone who doesn't already know the work. And considering that Blinding Bangs can be used as shorthand for "dumb", "shy", or "stoic", it's certainly worth indicating which one (or ones) apply.
edited 22nd Mar '12 9:59:08 AM by Madrugada
...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.Hmm. It also appears that there's some Trope Decay going on, with a number of examples that are not "a mop of hair, including bangs that completely cover the characters eye" but instead are "heavy eyebrows" or "the character's eye are somehow obscured". I'd say those are misuse.
edited 22nd Mar '12 10:03:18 AM by Madrugada
...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.
I moved a bunch Zero Context Examples on Blinding Bangs to the discussion page but the were moved back by troper St Fan. We can't seem to come of with an agreement for whether or not the examples should stay so getting other tropers opinions on how to handle the example section for this page would be helpful.