Main Double Standard Discussion

Collapse/Expand Topics

09:58:40 AM Dec 17th 2015
edited by MaximRukov
I feel like I'm going to be sick reading this. A full list (with individual pages!) of MRA bullshit about how men are 'sooooo oppressed'.
01:24:10 PM Dec 17th 2015
Then don't read it.
03:46:34 PM Dec 13th 2015
There's a bit of Linking to an Article Within the Article on the page, but I can't remove it since it's locked.
11:28:07 PM Dec 13th 2015
Took it all out.
03:29:20 PM Aug 26th 2015
There are some entries that seem to be in the wrong places. I'd edit it myself but the page is locked.

Beauty Is Never Tarnished should be in 'sexist against either' seeing as the Beauty Is Never Tarnished page outright states that the implication is that women must be hot. Also all the entry on this page says is that it "goes hand in hand with Men Are The More Expendable Gender" but doesn't elaborate how. A better explanation of how it's sexist against men should be written.

Never a Self-Made Woman should be in 'sexist against women' and not 'sexist against either' seeing as the entry doesn't give a single reason as to how it's offensive to men.

Also Defiled Forever should go in 'sexist against women' as a counterpart to the Rape Is a Special Kind of Evil in the male entry. Eg. Men are never harmed by sex (not even rape), and women are forever ruined by sex (especially rape).
03:38:18 PM Aug 26th 2015
Also how is The Dulcinea Effect sexist against men? The entry on this page doesn't give a reason, and the The Dulcinea Effect page itself says nothing about how it's offensive to men. I think it should be removed.

The A Man Is Always Eager entry should also be moved to 'sexist against either' seeing as it goes hand in hand with All Men Are Perverts and is a pretty big problem when it comes to male rape victims: "you didn't want sex, what are you gay?"

04:13:04 PM Aug 26th 2015
edited by Larkmarn
Honestly, Beauty Is Never Tarnished should be taken out. It applies to both genders.

Agreed with Self-Made Woman and Defiled Forever.

The Dulcinea Effect is sexist against men because it represents a man inexplicably deciding to risk life and limb for a random chick, and implies his life is less valuable than hers (because men inherently want to risk their lives to save a woman).

Not sure what your point on A Man Is Always Eager is, to be honest.
03:54:53 AM Aug 28th 2015
Edit requests should be filed in the edit requests thread, for the record.
01:55:38 PM Aug 28th 2015
edited by Clanger00
Larkman. I was trying to say that A Man Is Always Eager says that a man would never refuse sex, so if he is raped people wont believe him or will mock him because what kind of man refuses sex- they should always be eager. The A Man Is Always Eager page itself talks about this:

"This is also one if not the defining factor of Double Standard: Rape, Female on Male; the idea that men cannot be raped by women because no man could ever be unwilling to have sex."

Septimus Heap. Thanks. Will do.

Larkman, I paraphrased what you said about the Dulcinea Effect and requested it be added to this page as an explanation of how it's sexist against men. I hope that's OK.
12:28:27 PM May 19th 2015
edited by CabbitGirlEmi
Is it considered a Double Standard if one says that women cry more than men? I most definitely think so, even though it's half-true in my case. Also, are there tropes on this topic that relate to crying?
01:11:28 PM May 19th 2015
It wouldn't be a double standard to say that. It would be a double standard to say "women are allowed to cry, men are not."
07:57:37 AM May 18th 2015
I feel like "No Bisexuals" is pretty sexist against both females and males, just in different ways. I'm not going to expand on how it's sexist against men because the example already does that, however, in the main page, it says that if a female character likes both females and males, then it means that she's "kinky". I don't see how that's a positive/accepting example. It's not only pretty skeevy, but it also implies that she doesn't like both genders because... that's just what her sexuality is. It's because it's "hot".
07:55:58 AM Apr 26th 2015
"A Man Is Not a Virgin: Or if he is, he's inappropriate and pathetic."

That's not what the trope is about. It's not man vs woman, it's man vs boy. It still fits here, but should say something like "A Man Is Not a Virgin: if they are male and a virgin, they are still boys.
09:04:29 AM Apr 26th 2015
You can ask for an edit here.
08:28:10 PM Dec 28th 2014
Please, could anyone edit this nonsense? "does not a sexist trope make". I think, it's supposed to be "does not make a sexist trope". I have no right to do so. Thanks in advance!
01:26:48 AM Dec 29th 2014
It's a somewhat poetic language, but definitively not "nonsense".
11:38:15 AM Dec 8th 2014
I would like to suggest that Macho Disaster Expedition be moved from "Sexist Against Men" to "Sexist Against Either." Yes, the trope does make men all look like morons, but it also inherently implies that Women Are Wiser, and that a woman's place is in the kitchen, even if it's on a camping trip in the middle of nowhere.
12:58:22 PM Dec 8th 2014
Eh, that seems to be readint too much into it.
01:18:40 PM Dec 8th 2014
And is just plain inaccurate. The things that women are shown to be good at in that trope tend to be everything but "kitchen" things.
10:35:58 AM Jul 31st 2014
edited by
"Sexist Against Men" needs to be changed. You cannot be sexist against men. You can be BIASED against men, but to be sexist requires the other genders to be in a position of power over males, and per 1,000s of years of patriarchal domination, men have held the dominant social position.
10:53:44 AM Jul 31st 2014
edited by
From The Other Wiki: "Sexism or gender discrimination is prejudice or discrimination based on a person's sex or gender."

Some people think that sexism only applies against females, much like some people think that racism only applies to majorities. But that arbitrary definition is simply not the one that this site uses.
12:19:33 PM Jul 30th 2014
Many of these examples should really be edited to be less rant-y. Additionally, there are tons of examples in "Sexist Against Men/Women" that are then described as "Sexist Against Either", and should be re-categorized as such.
08:46:22 AM Jul 29th 2014
This entry needs to be rewritten to deal with the strident tone and the sub-bulleted part.

09:29:45 AM Jul 29th 2014
I would use the following:
  • Moe: Characters described as this are frequently portrayed as stupid, clumsy or naive when female.
11:49:44 AM Jul 29th 2014
Good enough; it's swapped in.
08:55:54 PM Jul 25th 2014
Shouldn't Rape Is a Special Kind of Evil be moved to the 'Frequently sexist in execution or delivery, but not sexist in nature" folder instead of the "Sexist Against Men" one? Unless it specifically states that the trope doesn't apply to male victims, it's not sexist on its own.
02:50:08 AM Jul 26th 2014
While I don't know all the rape associations well, at first glance it doesn't belong there.
02:32:34 PM Jun 24th 2014
Can somebody with the authority to work around the lock do something about the All Men Are Perverts example under 'Sexist against Men'? Even if the ideas are somehow sacrosanct, the grammar and the confusion between 'then' and 'than' is irksome. Cooling the rant-like quality off a little would be nice, but I'm not insisting.
11:07:13 PM Jun 24th 2014
We have an edit requests thread here, for the record.
02:07:14 AM Nov 29th 2013
Is there a Double Standard trope for when no one bats an eye at all the human bloodshed they're laughing at, but when the dog or cat gets hurt, the line has been crossed & the mood goes down?
07:43:49 AM May 10th 2014
That's more about Humas Are Bastards or general misanthropy.
12:01:08 PM Jul 30th 2014
07:06:43 PM Nov 15th 2013
Wouldn't Hit a Girl should be under "Sexist Against Either", since part of the trope is that women are exempt from violence because they're weak. I'd move it myself, but the page is locked.
12:07:52 PM Nov 17th 2013
10:32:29 AM Oct 22nd 2013
edited by
I know this sounds like a rant, but it seems like there are a few double standards on This Very Wiki. For instance, a lot of people seem to be under the impression that this refers only to tropes that are sexist, and furthermore, specifically sexist against women. About half the tropes listed on the page seem to get a lot less of a negative response in different places (it seems like pages like this mention Ms. Fanservice or the camera's near-constant focus on her assets, And That's Terrible. But look for this trope under a character page that mentions said character being Ms. Fanservice...and that's awesome! Hypocrites much? Don't try to tell me it's because the editor on the latter was "obviously" a male, either). Second, this doesn't just apply to sexism; one case that seems to bug me is a lot of people on this site's attitude toward some supposedly non-Acceptable Targets in the religious realm. If there are cases where religious nutjobs make the whole sect look bad, they may be admitted as such, but are still considered "real" cases. Contrast this with militant atheists who openly bash religion to the point of Kick the Dog, so much so that even other atheists don't like them, but these are treated as Hollywood Atheists (read: not "real" atheists) or just trolls trying to make non-believers look bad.

Am I wrong to feel like someone's getting jipped here? I don't mean to offend anyone (though I'm sure I already have), but I'm just saying.
05:17:44 PM Nov 7th 2013
You do realize that tv tropes are not written by one person,right?
01:00:44 AM Nov 8th 2013
edited by
Indeed, LC speaks truth. Hard to pin down what a thousand different editors are doing. Instead of complaining, open a forum thread.
05:45:41 PM Nov 28th 2013
Fair enough.
04:50:48 AM Mar 21st 2014
The reference to When Harry Met Sally... under All Men Are Perverts is red, I think it's misspelt. The fact that it's in the description means it deserves attention.
Collapse/Expand Topics