Linking to a past Trope Repair Shop thread that dealt with this page: description and requirements need to be rework
, started by captainpat on Dec 20th 2010 at 6:10:31 PM
Previous Trope Repair Shop thread: Misused, started by MsCC93 on Sep 10th 2017 at 12:18:17 AM
The article states again and again in the examples section that hips "as wide as shoulders" are unrealistic. But judging by both my RL observations and all those anatomy guides, the hips being roughly the same width as the shoulders (Or just slightly less) is actually pretty common type of female figure, if not the default one, is it not?
Knows-Many-Things
Okay, I have to call out the fact that there are "Other" examples. We all know that's just another way of saying Real Life.
Find the Light in the Dark
Why are people arguing about Real Life examples for Harman Hips...it's impossible because it's animated only and plus our bodies weren't created with small shoulders and unusually wide hips, so it's pointless arguing about it.
Hide / Show Replies
Maybe because there are real women who do have such features. Two prime examples; Laura and Vanessa Marano.
This lady?
◊ The one on the left?
◊ That's not Hartman Hips. Her hips are not sudden massive things preceded by a pinched waist and far larger than her chest and shoulders.
Actually they both are. I can't believe you can't see that. Vanessa's chest is a little more prominent, but you can't convince me they don't both have unbelievable booties.
Measured across the screen, both of them have hips roughly the breadth of their shoulders. Their hips are of fairly average dimensions, particularly for women of their height and weight (basically, someone with a defined waist, I guess). Certainly not unbelievable in the sense of "essentially physically impossible", which is the trope; possibly not unbelievable in the sense of "no person can be this hot", which is not the trope.
That was the amazing part. Things just keep going.
While I accept the application of this trope to animation only, for personal interest, and... er... SCIENCE! model Laura Dore comes close, (likey through combinations of camera work, lighting, posture, and photoshop) but still, damn.
However, Mal Malloy qualifies, in this troper's opinion, despite her bust.
Edited by 172.15.204.163
I think adding Cherry, the singer of the animated band Studio Killers, would be a good example. She does have a large chest, but still has a pear-shaped figure since they're more triangle shaped and jut out rather than make her figure more of an hourglass. Any objections?
I'm not seeing how the entry regarding http://akaichounokoe.deviantart.com/ under Web Original is relevant to this topic.
This trope has 501 wicks, even after the trope repair, and a couple of the latest examples seem a little more fit for Hourglass Hottie. I think some pruning is in order.
Hide / Show Replies
And now we're down to 390. There's a decent amount of misusage but I say it's a pretty average amount for a trope. Not saying misusages are acceptable, but at the very least we're at a point where it would be really hard to misuse this trope.
Important note: Just because a character with large breasts was miss-tagged with Hartman Hips does not mean mean she is an Hourglass Hottie. Right now there's a TRS discussion on the trope, deciding whether or not to broaden it's horizon, feel free to give input. However until that issue get resolved do not add characters with realistic or plausible hourglass figures.
The examples from Pokemon don't seem to fit here, seeing how their waists and hips are not exaggeratedly large, at least not to the scale of the caption pic.
Why are there no real life examples of this? It is truuth in television as Women have wider pelvises than men for child birth and that means most women have hartman hips.
Hide / Show Replies
All that means is that women, as a whole, have wider hips than men. "Hartman Hips" is taking proportionally wide hips to an unrealistic degree in the name of stylized, frequently cartoonish attractiveness. In fairness, whatever one editor to the introduction may have had to say, I wouldn't be surprised to see some debatable cases in real life, but it certainly doesn't apply to "most women".
OBJECTION! This woman, Cathie Jung, has a case of Real Life Hartman Hips. Not to mention that this was caused by corsets, meaning that, technically, all humans are capable of Hartman Hips.
The trope says exaggerated pear shaped figure not hourglass like Cathie Jung. Also the character's in this trope have natural figures and are not help by a corsets or other methods
I thought there was already a discussion here... anyway, the trope specifically describes very exaggerated hips. If most women had "Hartman Hips", it wouldn't be a trope.
I can understand not citing people in real life, but I don't know if it's fair to categorically state that "real life women cannot have Hartman Hips".
I don't think it's fair either. There are medical conditions which cause a disproportionate accumulation of adipose tissue in the hips and thighs, and we're talking "exaggerated Stone Age goddess figurine" level here, not just someone having a big booty. Lipodystrophy is one of these. Here's an image of a real person suffering from it, from Gary Taubes' Why We Get Fat (on a chapter of hormone-regulated/misregulated distribution of bodily fat).
http://tinypic.com/r/35hl1z4/5
This is more common than people think, but definitely proves real women can have Hartman Hips.
Edited by safed_sher
The "doesn't happen in real life" has been proven untrue. There is no requirement of Word of God to demonstrate a character is intended to be "mature". Why is this trope still No Real Life Examples ?
Link to TRS threads in project mode here.
I think Birdy from Birdy The Mighty Decode has Hartman Hips.
Hide / Show Replies
This isn't the first time deltanine has tried adding her to this page if you review the edit history. Both times I explained the bust <<<<<<<< hips requirement.
"Someone mind explaining how a robot — modeled after a mermaid, of all creatures — could have hips of this caliber?"
Because Doctor Wily is a pervert.
Hide / Show Replies
What is this in the article history? A dude deleted the caption. Fine with me. But the reason was "Terrible caption shows us how it's done." Nothing wrong with him thinking the caption's terrible. But "shows us how it's done" just...uh...what? What exactly is the caption showing us? How what's done?
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
This line in the conditions: "The character is not meant to be objectified but the designer wants to make sure that she's seen as mature both mentally and physically."
Um, not to disrespect the intelligence of the one who put that there or look stupid, but how can one tell that without explicit Word of God?
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus. Hide / Show Replies
I think someone's assuming a bit too much. It is something of a trend I've seen among such characters, but it's nowhere near universal to the trope.
Is this trope necessarily Always Female? I've seen it referred to as such a few times on the site as a justification for deleting it off of entries describing male characters but, it seems to me like just because most of the examples for the trope describe female characters, it shouldn't be a hard & fast rule for it to be strictly female-specific. I think, for example, if you look at anime or manga there are plenty of examples of male characters who pass for girls and this trope is an aspect of that - should characters like that not count just because they're stated to be male, even though they fit the physical criteria?