Needs Help: Unfortunate Implications

If you use that example with two unrelated works, the scope is just that, unrelated works. Within that we have The Cosby Show, The Matrix, The Phantom, and many others that contradict that specific Unfortunate Implication.

If you really are using that scope, you'll have to do a study spanning enough material to get a representative sample, in which (this specific) case you're not dealing with Unfortunate Implications, but with Racism in media.

edited 25th Jun '12 10:07:21 AM by Feather7603

nrjxll: I'm as sick as anyone of these angry activists who latch on to social justices causes to make them feel superior, and angrily condemn everything instead of trying to explain what is wrong. But the pages in question are merely for informative functions. That alone can help simply because most of these cases are unintentional, and attracting attention to them should stop them. But we do need some sort of limiting factor.

And it should be clear: as a trope wiki, we are not doing this because it's offending someone somewhere, but because it leads to bad fiction.

No, we are not implementing such guidelines. It will only get messy. The best we can hope for is citations.

But my thing is, maybe there should be a warning about using a reputable site. So we won't have people cherry picking some conspiracy theory site to support their opinion.

It's an audience reaction, the point is to make sure that an audience that reacted actually exists.

Deciding whether it's reputable or not is beside the point. If some conspiracy site finds unfortunate implications in a work, then they do—that's still an example. We shouldn't try to figure out that the audience is being correct.

If you use that example with two unrelated works

I'm not saying we should use unrelated works. We shouldn't. I'm just pointing out that that's what's been happening.

Made the crowner

Come Out, Come Out, Wherever You Are little crowner~

why is the "add a citation standard" thing in two separate options?

Because the two separate options are two different options?

Really though. One is saying JUST add the citations, and the other suggests making the page into an index as well.

Isn't that one also about making it an index for tropes, which means no examples? Or am I reading that wrong?

edited 26th Jun '12 10:09:45 PM by Feather7603

No, a page can both have examples and an index.

That was my suggestion a couple of pages back, the crowner has both parts to gauge opinion.

I'm leaning toward making this an index only. Shouldn't single-work examples be under Family-Unfriendly Aesop?

I have no idea where you get that idea from. Family-Unfriendly Aesop requires an aesop. It's not about Unfortunate Implications, which is about offensiveness.

Concerning the Flame Bait thing, I was suggesting it because it is often misused to complain about works you don't like, because most of the wicks I have seen are no better than the on-page examples and because people got banned over edit wars surrounding wicks to Unfortunate Implications.

Why would they be that? That's about jarring or almost wrong morals being presented as the moral of a story. This is about unintentional unfortunate slip-ups in the way things are presented.

aaaand ninja'd by Septimus.

edited 27th Jun '12 1:34:28 AM by battosaijoe

So Family-Unfriendly Aesop can't be a lesson not intended by the author? That seems to be what most of the examples are right now.

edited 27th Jun '12 4:14:58 AM by AceOfSevens

No, it can't. Those examples are misuse.

What we mean by Unfortunate Implications is like say. some author writes a story about how black folks were all happy slaving away on plantations. Due to historical factors, you're pinging folks racism sensors like woah. or Bury Your Gays in the story, it might not be *meant* as anti gay, but you get enough stories about the tragic lesbian Driven to Suicide and it ends up being anti gay, you see?

A Family-Unfriendly Aesop is the whole point of the story, but Unfortunate Implications tend to not be. The point of the black folks happy on the planation story might be the romance between Mighty Whitey and the Southern Belle but someone like me won't be able to finish the story without fists of rage.

edited 27th Jun '12 4:26:44 AM by animeg3282

So ideally, what's the distinction? I think I'm hearing one theory that Family-Unfriendly Aesop is on purpose and Unfortunate Implications is accidental and one that Family-Unfriendly Aesop is a lesson drawn from how the story turns out and Unfortunate Implications is background assumptions that form the premise.

For starters, Family-Unfriendly Aesop is an Aesop. Black People Are Scary or whatever isn't.

I could just see it now: Black Folks are All Thugs! And Knowing Is Half the Battle! O...hey? why is everyone pulling my sponsors? That's not racist! It's POLITICALCORRECTNESSGONEMAD! Mad! I tell you!

edited 27th Jun '12 6:21:45 AM by animeg3282

Haha... that would be a valid Family-Unfriendly Aesop indeed.

(And it wouldn't be Unfortunate Implications, would it, if the message is so explicit?)

I think the best distinction is: Family-Unfriendly Aesop is intentional (even if you may think the author has not thought things through well). Any unintentional examples are misuses and should be moved to either Unfortunate Implications or Accidental Aesop.

And Unfortunate Implications is unintentional; it does not apply to an openly racist author like H P Lovecraft. They come out of clumsiness, differing interpretations and/or the author's myopia about the subject matter.

That makes sense, but we need a serious clean-up on Family-Unfriendly Aesop in that case.