Also, if bikinis double as undergarments, which is your argument, then arguing that only mentioning undergarments excludes bikinis from the trope is broken logic.
First, allow me to rephrase myself so as to clarify what I really meant: bikinis, which are normally used as "outergarments" (with or without
undergarments; see sports bikinis), can be repurposed
as undergarments, making them a form
Secondly, leaving the definition at just "undergarments" risks misunderstanding by tropers/viewers who either subscribe to literal interpretation of the trope title and definition, or assume that it is the case unless said otherwise. To avoid this, there should be at least a passing mention of "yes, make-shift underwear can substitute for actual underwear" *
Does the character have to reveal herself to another character, or just the audience? Is the use of lingerie solely a means of avoiding an R Rating
is audience-directed, thus technically Shirtless Scene
and Lingerie Scene
need only to have the audience as... well, audience. (Is this Captain Obvious
or Redundancy Department of Redundancy
?) And yes, the lingerie is
there only to avoid an R rating; R- and NC 17
-rated works obviously have no reason to shy away from complete female toplessness if they want to include it.
Which brings me to this proposal (spurred by Fast Eddie
's suggestion here
): Following Applied Phlebotinum
's example, we make an examplelss Super Trope
has to be one of the Sub Tropes
. My first draft for this suggestion:
(Yes, undress has
a noun sense) - A male or
female character removes/opens up/unbuttons/unzips (or is forced to do so) their outerwear (or either top or bottom part of it) for Fanservice
, typically in a way that is normally inappropiate in public. This can take one of several forms
(all of which have to be played for fanservice
at least partially
- Underwear Scene / Speedo Scene / Lingerie Scene - The character is wearing undergarments. Note that...
- This trope can be either for top underwear or bottom underwear.
- "Make-shift" underwear / underwear substitutes such as bikinis, sarashi, tropical tree leaves made into bikini-like outfits, skimpily skintight and/or sheer bodysuits and bodystockings, etc. are valid.
- While normal modern women's undergarments are fanservicey on their own, regular male underwear and a lot of now outdated female underwear (e.g. petticoats) aren't usually considered fanservice material. Speedos on the other hand... (I don't know of any male under-tops that are designed to be fanservicey, to be honest.)
- Swimsuit Scene / Beachwear Scene / Bikini Scene - The character is wearing a (typically fanservicey, notwithstanding subversions) swimsuit. Note that...
- It is either logically preceded by a Denuding Scene (on-screen or off-screen), or involves wearing the swimsuit instead of actual underwear. In the latter case, it's differeniated from a swimsuit/bikini-based Underwear Scene in the intent - here, the swimsuit is worn with the purpose of saving the time wasted in changing outfits, rather than make-shift underwear.
- And as you should know, not all swimsuits are bikinis.
- Shirtless Scene / Topless Scene / Bare Chest Scene - The character is either completely topless or just barechested (i.e. open-front shirt); note that...
- It does not always include shirts, hence the alternative titles.
- Males can get away with a PG-13 rating, but due to Double Standard and Nipple and Dimed, females going topless automatically warrants an R-rating.
- Bottomless Scene - The character is completely bottomless. This is distinct from either Going Commando or Vapor Wear in that those are about not wearing underwear, where as this trope is about revealing the lack of underwear. (Do We Have This One??)
- Denuding Scene - The character strips (or is forcibly stripped) down to their birthday suit. Note that...
General note: The removal part can be implicit/off-screen.
Additions are welcome.
EDIT: Added Swimsuit Scene
, included proper credit to Fast Eddie
, and fixed some issues pointed out below.
edited 12th Oct '10 10:02:29 AM by MarqFJA