Discussion Characters / InAnotherWorldWithMySmartphoneMainCharacters

Disproportionate Retribution Played for Laughs.

I added Paralyzing Fear of Sexuality and Principles Zealot, which cover his demeanor. I had once added Heteronormative Crusader due his negative reactions to gay and lesbian innuendo, but it was argued that he isn't crusader-y enough for that.

In general, Touya is characterized as being so staunchly ingrained in Japanese social mores that he still practices those principles in an entirely new world with different moral codes.

Whether or not they were in danger isn't the point. To quote the page itself: "This trope is not about anger in response to something that would reasonably enrage someone, like being hurt or threatened, having a loved one hurt or threatened, being seriously insulted and disrespected, etc — anger in those situations is a reasonable response."

Actual insults and disrespect are considered "serious" enough to disqualify examples for the trope.

Also, being angry because someone threatened a person he cared it about is TOTALLY in-character for Touya. Beware the Nice Ones is a consistent character trait of Touya; he's ONLY forgiving of people who WANT to be forgiven, like God. If they're actively being dicks, Touya will put a stop to it quick. I don't recall ever reading a point where Touya said his grandfather told him to turn the other cheek when someone is actively being a dirtbag.

But anyway, the example just flat away does not qualify.

Would Papa Wolf fit then? He is EXTREMELY protective toward his girls after all. He humiliated two large parties of thugs to the point where they couldn't even stand to remain in the same town or together as a party just because he thought they might otherwise come back and go for his then friends. Since then it's been the same, one bit of derision directed toward one of them or suggestion of a threat against them is enough to make him go all out in their defense.

Papa Wolf is specifically about fathers, though. Touya isn't a dad (yet), so that doesn't fit.

Maybe Protectorate would qualify.

After a very long time looking around, I'd say that the trope needs a VERY thorough cleaning, since looking around I find a ton of references where the same thing applies: a guy is normal and calm and polite, but if you even say one word against those important to him you'll suffer greatly.

“That just makes you a person whose opinions on the matter differ from the modern norm.”

I’d like to point out that, in said modern norm, saying homosexuality isn’t normal makes you a bigot.

That being said, I think Yumina is a weak example, but the page never states that actual crusading/violence is necessary. It mentions being a Moral Guardian as a valid example.

Fact of the matter is though, even if some people find it bigoted just to have different opinions on matters, being of a different opinion does not make you a "crusader" or anything. There are plenty of people who consider homosexuality to be outside the norm or even immoral or improper who don't actually have any problem with homosexuals themselves. Sort of like there are people who would say that it's improper or immoral to have sex outside marriage or to do any number of sexual acts but would still not go out of their way to condemn people for being like that and in fact maintain happy, friendly relationships with people they know are doing something they feel to be improper. Frankly, it's the people who call simply, quietly having this opinion bigoted who are actually being bigots. I can hold opinions on whether something is moral or proper and still be very tolerant and respectful of others' rights to have their own ideology and lifestyle. Condemning someone for having an opinion that differs from your own or refusing to accept, respect and tolerate it on the other hand is the very definition of bigotry. I'm not saying that I'm on either side, as my opinion frankly is irrelevant.

But back to the topic, actually the page DOES make it clear that the Heteronormative Crusader has as a part of their character a desire to suppress it, something Yumina is not described as doing. And frankly, even calling her a "Moral Guardian" is a big stretch here. A Moral Guardian is driven to censor a particular concept. Saying that a girl is a Moral Guardian because she tells her friend "that's not proper" when dealing with a particular subject is a stretch, and going so far as to use that to make her a CRUSADER is frankly no more than absurdity and almost feels like an attempt to denounce the "bigotry" of making a comment someone doesn't like. Also, it doesn't help matters that she's apparently a personal friend of a woman who's the very opposite: a rabid homosexual crusader who is delighted to grab at anything she can interpret as gay and start to fantasize about it (leaving the victim with the very real fear that this published author would soon have a lurid and explicit gay porn novel out centered on him).

Okay, reading through all that, I think there's some political motivations for the arguments you're making, and I'm not touching that with a ten-foot pole. There's a lot of false-equivocating there and "I'm not the bigot, YOU'RE the real bigot" arguments.

Going strictly by the reading of the trope, it only requires a character "suppress homosexual expression", which is by definition what Yumina does when she flat out tells Sue that a relationship with women wouldn't be proper.

The page itself says that the trope can be "a diverse lot" and even states that a Principles Zealot qualifies—which is what Yumina is LITERALLY being when she tells Sushie the aforementioned statement. That being said, as I mentioned before, she's a rather weak example.

And I'm leaving my hat there. Any further argument should be taken to Ask The Tropers.

I'm sorry for the parts that sounded political, though I meant them more to be a matter of addressing how it felt like the labeling itself was demonstrating a political agenda. I don't generally sit on either side of the fence on many issues. Frankly, I'm disgusted with both sides, and BOTH sides tend to come in saying things like "if you disagree with me then you're a bigot" and then use such terms to dismiss those they disagree with and refuse to tolerate their opposing ideas, which is the dictionary definition of bigotry.

I honestly do not know whether Yumina could qualify as a "crusader". I haven't made it that far in the novels. However, my point was that the description given feels like a crazy stretch, a stretch long enough to seem like it was not so much the intent to note a quality of the character as to label anyone who says one thing against homosexuality as a homophobic Knight Templar. At the very least, a better description is needed to make it clear why it is that her single statement was firm enough and adamant enough for this trope.

Also, Principles Zealot, like Knight Templar, seems to be exaggerated here in your statement. Expressing your opinion, even if your opinion is offensive, does not go to the level of "caring too much about your principles, to the point of not caring enough about their own actions and raising it to uncomfortable levels". All of the related tropes given in the Heteronormative Crusader trope are at least one level above what is described, so again either it's a stretch to call Yumina this or the description needs to be worked on.

I'm sorry for being so long-winded, I'm very poor at being succinct, especially when dealing with sensitive matters or with people who tell me that simply having an opinion is "bigoted".

So to start with, here's the problem with the beliefs you've touted here:

1. If anyone who expresses intolerance for other opinions other than their owns is a "bigot", then you're basically fitting your own description by showing no tolerance for "both sides". That's why that definition of "bigot" really doesn't help in any conversation.
2. The term "heteronormative" was specifically coined to describe an attitude that marginalizes, stigmatizes, or discriminates against LGBTQ persons and activity by saying it isn't "normal". Which, by your own definition, means heteronormativity describes a specific type of bigotry^note Intolerance for opinions/beliefs/etc. aside from your own.. Whether you agree with it or not, that's what the term means; I, for one, find the term "cuckold" to be utterly stupid and pointless, but it still has a meaning whether I like it or not.
3. Dictionary definitions are useful, but never set in stone. For example, the original dictionary definition of "heterosexual" was "morbid sexual passion for one of the opposite sex", a definition it held for three decades until being changed in 1934.

So, to summarize: trying to figure out who the "real bigots" are is pointless because, the term heteronormativity describes an action which is a specific form of bigotry, and dictionary-thumping rarely results in productive conversation.

That being said, what Yumina said was definitely "heteronormativity", so the real question is whether or not she qualifies as a "crusader". And to be honest, I have a problem looking at Yumina's reaction to Sue in isolation from the rest of the text. Touya constantly reacts to homosexuality with revulsion and stigmatization, and other characters (especially in the main group) do as well. Yumina, however, is the ONLY character to admonish a proposed homosexual action because it's not "proper".

For that reason, I originally let the example stand as a Downplayed Trope, because yes it was only one instance, but it's also one of the strongest instances in a story full of them.

I was not trying to point out the "real bigots". I was only noting that both sides are bigoted. And noting bigotry in a person's position is not itself bigotry, it's just a recognition that the position refuses to accept another.

Anyway, I'm cutting out for now. I haven't made it to this one infamous scene. Once I reach it I may have more to say. If her statement is clear, undeniable "heteronormativity" then I'll probably come in to suggest that the item be reworded to make it more clear. If on the other hand it is entirely no more than what's shown, then I will probably again be questioning why the trope is being stretched so absurdly far that a statement so innocuous and vague qualifies to be put on a level suggesting an active desire to suppress any instance of homosexuality.

We usually use the names from the most official English source, which as far as I know, is the Crunchyroll sub in this case.

If, say, an art book from Hobby Japan is released, will that be more official or less official? I'm not too clued in on how TV Tropes handle conflicting names so pardon the questions.

TV Tropes' official stance is that this is an English-speaking site, so the localization of any work supercedes the original text. And whatever localization is the most official and current supercedes all others.

In other words, the art book wouldn't be the translation we'd be expected to use, unless an official localization (not a fan-made one) was made for it.