Trope simultaneously moral and only about conservatives?: Moral Guardians

On the Manly Gay article, I wanted to link the mention of GLAAD (Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) under Moral Guardians — they believe in their ethics, and they want to safeguard gay rights. But when I read Moral Guardians, I saw that its description and examples were purely about conservatives. Seeing that I'm a liberal and I have my ethics, I didn't think it was appropriate to describe GLAAD as if it were a conservative reactionary group, but it is still an ethics-oriented group that takes issue with media insensitive to gay people.

It seemed like a daunting task to repair it, so I started a new page, Ethical Guardians, which is about social justice, human rights, humanism, dignity, things like that. I could think of some examples here and there, but I couldn't think of how to write them yet, so I left it with just a description.

And it was almost immediately cutlisted, as not being different enough from Moral Guardians. But this raises the dilemma — can a trope intrinsically relate morals/ethics-related organizations with conservatism and still be an objective trope? Or can be it repaired to describe the broad spectrum including left, right and center? And if it can't be repaired as such (too much association with the right), then wouldn't Ethical Guardians have been a reasonable left alternative?

Now I don't want to raise topics too polemic. But the Moral Guardians trope already existed, and I wanted to fill a legitimate descriptive need.

edited 15th Feb '11 6:29:04 PM by Gilgameshkun

The answer is simple: that's not part of the trope at all. It's a throwaway line in the description about the stereotype associated with Moral Guardians.

So Moral Guardians is a caricature trope and not actually played straight? If so, that needs to be more clear, because I thought it was about complainants that actually regard themselves as having moral high ground. It didn't really occur to me that invocation of the trope necessarily has to be caricaturized, especially for Real Life examples. If it's a stereotype, why is it being objectively applied to real groups mentioned throughout the article?

edited 15th Feb '11 6:36:48 PM by Gilgameshkun

Laconic: "Viewers that morally object to certain types of work and wish to see it restricted or banned."

Well, that would seem to describe GLAAD complaining about WWE's insensitive handling of gay marriage. Wouldn't that apply afterall? The article seems to imply it's only about conservative complaints.

It is confusing.

edited 15th Feb '11 6:57:17 PM by Gilgameshkun

I don't know when the OP read the Moral Guardians entry (since Wiki Magic can change things so fast), but the current entry is explicitly about both liberals and conservatives. A lot of its mentions elsewhere on the Wiki are about both as well. For instance, there are several mentions that Barbie is disliked by liberal Moral Guardians for being an unrealistic body image for young girls.

The Moral Guardians entry is generally hostile to its subject, but that's because this is a wiki that instinctively roots for the artists (with a few exceptions like Protection from Editors).

@Gilga: If GLAAD did indeed do what you said in your latest post, that would be an example of Moral Guardians, but you don't put organizations that are only moral on Moral Guardians. In fact, Moral Guardians are very rarely actually moral.

What makes a group Moral Guardians isn't whether they are moral or not. It's whether they claim to be acting out of moral concerns.

they are more like moralising than actual moral. The reason why it is mostly conservatives on the page is that it is mostly conservative groups that get het up about how other people live their lives.

edited 17th Feb '11 6:14:49 PM by CrypticMirror

Does this mean Ethical Guardians (Moral Guardians... but liberal!) can be cut?

I'd think so—it's a duplicate based on a misunderstanding of Moral Guardians.

Are you using a Sock Puppet ? Or it's a coicofence you guys have the same avatar?