Page Restoration Petitions

Okay, now that that's settled, is there a way to bring back the "Naughty Tentacles" trope (sanitized, given a less offensive name, locked, just a description of the term bare minimum) so we actually have a term to describe its use as allusion, parody, or reference in a SFW media, or is it a lost cause and hence we tropers who noticed an instance of this trope being used as stated above will have no way to articulate what happened when describing the media conventions?

I ask because, to use an example from Bleach, in regards to the anime episode where some tentacle monster parodies do a SFW mimicry of the NSFW variety and one of the characters lampshades it, what term do we have to describe the use of a writing convention, which, for good or ill, has become such a recurring element in allegory or parody (of what was originally a hentai specific trope) in mainstream genres that not describing it would leave no feasible way to articulate a particular plot device.

I merely ask because it seems to me that arbitrarily murdering tropes that sound dodgy or pornographic, while well intentioned, almost certainly undercuts the site's aims if the trope can be used to describe something used in a work the site can cover, and simply trying to ignore things like someone in TV show alluding to a Mother-Daughter Threesome or a video game parodying Naughty Tentacles is intellectually dishonest.

Agreed, cutting works devoted to these materials is a minefield and since it often causes way too much grief (and almost all of it is irredeemable pornography), I can understand why works built on these tropes can't be covered, but the terms should exist in some fashion since they have entered mainstream, acceptable use in trope eytmology.

Again, they should be exampleless or at least the examples should be strictly regulated on top of given a sanitized description of the trope history and general usage, but these terms need to exist in some way, if only in the interest of SFW media that reference them.

edited 26th May '12 11:06:56 PM by Rpgingmaster

Is it really that important to specify every single occurance of memetic tentacles? When it's almost always a rape joke anyway, even in SFW media?

My proposal extends to ALL tropes with dodgy names (like Mother-Daughter Threesome) that have made appearances in SFW media.

To pretend none of these things exist goes against the idea of the site: to categorize the tropes and writing devices of all media and their usage and document them (within the limits of SFW media).

Besides, we have a page that explains what "Hentai" and "Bara" are and what their importance to media is (even if they have no examples listed) and that's what I'm suggesting.

In fact, "Naughty Tentacles" exist because it was a stand in for male genitalia in Japanese pornography as a means of sidestepping censorship, and many American works (mostly monster movies), while usage of the trope is less common, have portrayed beings whose appendages have been or could be unsavory ends either used, alluded to, or parodied.

That said, Parody is a trope with its own subtropes and genres, as shown here:

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Parody

In short, it's used for parody, and since we recognize parody as legitimate, it's only natural to acknowledge all forms of parody and their context, if only in passing mention.

At the very least, if we know it exists as a legitimate writing device, it at least deserves a page like one for the Hentai genre, like so:

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Hentai

It gives a definition of the use of the term and its importance to media without being crude or tasteless, and it gives a excellent enough description of the term no examples need be given, and since we can't pretend dodgy tropes don't exist, the least TV Tropes can do, in order to honor its aims, is to at least provide a definition of the trope and leave it at that.

And yes, even if the use of "Naughty Tentacles" in SFW media is generally for parody, it's still a legitimate use of a recognized trope, hence it at least deserves a description of some form if nothing else.

P.S. - Frankly, I'm not suggesting the trope be revived (even as a locked stub example) for prurient reasons. I just happen to have taken the site goal (of cataloging tropes and their uses) seriously enough that trying to pretend a trope doesn't exist at all is intellectually dishonest, and considering there are no other terms sufficient at present to describe the same trope, we at least need something to fill in the hole left in the troper jargon to address this problem.

Honestly, if the page came back in some form, I'd hope it remain free of examples and about as dry and sanitized as a "The Other Wiki" article, but if something exists pertaining to writing, and we can cover it in just enough detail to describe what it is without offending Google (and we can, otherwise other dodgy sounding tropes like the ones mentioned above wouldn't even be allowed in the first place), then in the interest of preserving trope knowledge this needs to be addressed.

Of course, if a moderator tells me to shut up and leave this issue alone, I will do so immediately, as I don't wish to cause trouble.

edited 27th May '12 2:00:43 AM by Rpgingmaster

Personally, I wouldn't mind to see it brought back under a different name.

The problem with that is that while P5 exists as an internal solution to undesirable material on the wiki. Naughty Tentacles was cut because of external issues, with Google. I don't think changing the name and keeping it clean is going to earn us any sympathy with them.

Yeah I don't fell comfortable weighing in on Naughty Tentacles unless we get an explicit go ahead from The Fast One (or a mod speaking on his behalf). There's no point spinning our wheels on it if it's something he wants to remain cut regardless.

edited 27th May '12 7:56:00 AM by Meeble

Google's problem was actually the large amount of external links from Naughty Tentacles. Even if it was brought back, it's never getting unlocked.

^ Yes, the problem seems to be that we had an error in the coding that had the page set up improperly combined with the creepy gushing and outbound links stuff we've been trying to deal with. If those things are resolved then it seems like that would take care of most of the problems.

edited 27th May '12 8:02:55 AM by Arha

I just don't get all the sperging over Naughty Tentacles.

It seems the choices are keep it as a locked stub because it is a trope referenced in other media and has undergone Memetic Mutation, or Kill It with Fire because it's a form of Black Comedy Rape at best.

See? Concise is definitely better here than a wall of spergy text about how important tentacle rape is to Japanese media.

edited 27th May '12 10:03:19 AM by AGroupie

Stop saying "sperg". It's a disgusting term.

If by "sperging", you mean "focus", then it's because it was a valid trope marred by poor editing from overly prurient users.

Some of us are inclined to get offended by that term.

Indeed.

Also "sperg"? Pleases keep something awful on something awful.

edited 27th May '12 10:13:19 AM by Shadis

@1159 Dude. At least try to be civil.

Please. While I may personally disagree with the term, it's certainly not a term limited to SA. (Please also note that despite certain goons' antipathy toward this site, there is a fairly decent membership overlap between this one and that one. Tread lightly.)

Also, yes, your wording was a bit impolitic, Groupie.

edited 27th May '12 10:24:32 AM by JHM

Sorry about that then. I was trying to make the point that a wall o' text about Naughty Tentacles is kind of unnecessary, and I went too far. My apologies

It is understandable.

I would personally be for a reinstatement of the article on fairly strict terms due to its nature as one of those massive cases of Memetic Mutation for which not having an article would be a bit silly, but I can also very well understand the concern about the creepy gushing. (I mean, yes, I get the "different strokes for different folks" thing, but there is a bright line between having a weird interest and using an ostensibly objective article on said interest as a soapbox for your bizarre fantasies. Seriously, don't these people ever step back for a moment and think, "What does this make me look like...?")

well at this point I think we are waiting for the fast one to way in one way or he other.

On a related note is it worth trying to bring back ghastly's ghastly comic?

I know it has a lot of sex but its all played for laughs.

edited 27th May '12 1:51:26 PM by Shadis

Frankly, until The Fast One weighs in, I agree, we might as well wait for his opinion, but you brought up a good point about works pages I'd like to point out.

In truth, (presuming I was in a position of authority, which I'm not) if I had a choice between taking down every work and trope page or just saving the trope pages, I'd pick the latter in a heartbeat.

Works are media that use, extrapolate, and expand upon the concept of tropes, much like how everything humans have built are based on things found on Earth that have been turned into construction material.

Tropes are everything that make up the planet itself. Some of them may be undesirable, dodgy sounding, or unpleasant (like Nausea Fuel), but to remove any of them not only goes against the very principal of the site and its aims, but it's like killing off whole species and destroying entire biomes of the planet because you don't like what they are or what they resemble, and in both my example and in reference to the site, both would suffer in catastrophic ways in both the short and long run.

In short, unless we have no other option, I feel it would be ideal to allow all tropes to remain in some form, since the effects of their removal have far graver consequences for TV Tropes.

Of course, I'm not in a position to decide these things, but I do respectfully ask this be taken into consideration.

What does sperg mean? And the nature of the internet is that people feel less constrained by social norms.

It means something to the effect of obsessing over something in a generally unreasonable manner.

Many Unfortunate Implications are had from the fact that the term is derived from Asperger's Syndrome, which some people on the internet use as an excuse for offensive and antisocial behavior. People who actually have the condition and who know that it's not an excuse are... less than thrilled at this.

I'm just wanting people to be more aware of what they look like when they post. PLEASE think of how defending, in many many words, a Rape Trope born from anime and manga, makes anyone who makes such an unqualified defense (and the rest of us) look to sane, normal people. This is how our internal shit ends up on Youtube. Making us all look bad and all look like we need to get out more.

Same goes for any post anyone makes: before you hit the send button, PLEASE think of what it makes you (and others posting along with you) look like. This goes for defending ''Pedoshit no Kiddyfxxk,'' it goes for arguing as to why we need tropes on mother daughter threesomes and tentacle rape, it goes for Walls of Text about essentially unimportant things, it goes for anything.

edited 28th May '12 11:11:09 AM by AGroupie

The 'people make us look bad on youtube for this' defense has never been openly accepted, I believe. This isn't about how we look to people that want to make us look like creeps no matter what we do.

I agree, but see my edit above. I think everyone can benefit from a bit of proper reputation management (hell, I know I have needed to at many times in my life ;) ) and maybe all some people need to do is think a bit about "what would someone reading this think about me and about who I'm talking with" before posting

If people want to think I look like a massive leering pervert for defending something, fine. I know I'm not and the people I interact with regularly know it as well. As noted, if pages like these are restored they're going to get big 'Don't be a creep' banners at the top of the edit box, so genuine creeps will hopefully keep their gushing to themselves. If they don't, well, we'll soon be short one creepy editor.