[004]
VVK
Current Version
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Correct me if I\'m wrong, but I don\'t see how this is a subtrope of ImagineSpot as opposed to the more general FantasySequence -- see those tropes and the Trope Repair Shop discussion for ImagineSpot. So I changed that part of the description.
to:
Correct me if I\\\'m wrong, but I don\\\'t see how this is a subtrope of ImagineSpot as opposed to the more general FantasySequence -- see those tropes and the Trope Repair Shop discussion for ImagineSpot. (People have been using ImagineSpot as if it means FantasySequence, even though that\\\'s not what the description says, and I just recently added FantasySequence as a MissingSupertrope.) So I changed that part of the description.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Correct me if I\'m wrong, but I don\'t see how this is a subtrope of ImagineSpot as opposed to the more general FantasySequence -- see those tropes and the Trope Repair Shop discussion for ImagineSpot. So I changed that.
to:
Correct me if I\\\'m wrong, but I don\\\'t see how this is a subtrope of ImagineSpot as opposed to the more general FantasySequence -- see those tropes and the Trope Repair Shop discussion for ImagineSpot. So I changed that part of the description.
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
To circle back to the beginning, that problem goes back to the name of the trope. If it were just an observation about women not being allowed into the show without a male companion, we could just spout off lists of women all day and everyone could agree with the empirical observations being made. But the title takes us straight into a discussion of how and why, and that leads to debates about whether a woman\'s relationship is more definitive than any other function she has in the plot.
to:
To circle back to the beginning, that problem goes back to the name of the trope. If it were just an observation about women not being allowed into a work without a male companion, we could just spout off lists of women all day and everyone could agree with the empirical observations being made. But the title takes us straight into a discussion of how and why, and that leads to debates about whether a woman\\\'s relationship is more definitive than any other function she has in the plot.
Changed line(s) 5 from:
n
\
to:
\\\"Peggy Carter is a love interest and the only woman in the movie.\\\" Yep, that sure is true.
\\\"Peggy Carter is the only woman in the movie and her function as a romantic figure is more important than any other role she serves.\\\" That\\\'s where we suddenly have a problem, and an argument, and an edit war.
With the current title and current scope, that\\\'s a problem the trope is never going to shake.
\\\"Peggy Carter is the only woman in the movie and her function as a romantic figure is more important than any other role she serves.\\\" That\\\'s where we suddenly have a problem, and an argument, and an edit war.
With the current title and current scope, that\\\'s a problem the trope is never going to shake.
