needs a rewrite: Buxom Is Better

No I think he means Split Big Breasts Big Deal into 4 tropes. (which I 100% agree with.) then merge Type 4 with Buxom Is Better As type 4 is just the person who has them thinks Buxom Is Better and loves showing them off mostly in outfits that do just that.

Yes to split but iffy on the merge. (Big Breasts Big Deal is really really lacking in usage for how big it should be.)

Sparkling and glittering! Jan-Ken-Pon!

I don't think there is enough usage or examples of Big Breasts Big Deal to justify a split. Also, every type of Big Breasts Big Deal can, and especially the case with type 1&2, often do overlap with Buxom Is Better. I don't think merging Buxom Is Better with type 4 is good idea.

edited 19th Sep '11 8:40:48 PM by captainpat

If the name didn't sound like type 3 only and the fact that its really lacking in use I might agree with ya. (hell the entire time we had the last debate I was arguing that we needed a super trope to all of the big breasted fan service tropes which would of been type 4 just a tiny bit broader into their choice of outfits was the big sign. I had no idea the trope existed.)

Big Breasts Big Deal really comes off as sarcasm without any punctuation.

Sparkling and glittering! Jan-Ken-Pon!

It's not lacking in use. People just aren't misusing it like they are the other breast tropes. If they weren't being misused, they'd probably have about the same number of wiks.

Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick

Good point. Though those type 3 examples need to be cleaned, There's a huge difference between a character express indifference towards her bustsize, and her opinion never comming up in the story.

Anyways, Big Breasts Big Deal is fine as it is right now, and has nothing to do with this issues with this trope. The issues with this trope are the same problem we had with Most Common Super Power and still have with, least with the wicks, with Boobs Of Steel. Unclear clear trope descriptions where the only thing, clear detail that's able to be parsed out is that the character has big breasts, and a egregious sink holes and misusage on the wicks.

I'm cleaning the wicks now, but the description needs something a lot clearer and more direct that what we have now. So, does anyone have any objections to just cutting the description down to the bare essentials?

Fine by me.

Agreeing with whoever said those redirects need to go, by the way. They could hardly be any more misleading.

Cutlisted all three.

Which three? I don't remember anyone proposing cutlisting anything.

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.

The redirects, sorry. Should have clarified. They're misleading at best and wrong at worst.

Most of the re-directs have been cut. Right now, I'm trying to come up with a shorter trope description.

If the trope is that bigger breasts equals hotter, then why doesn't it apply in almost all trope descriptions of big breasts? If their breasts are noticeably big, and the woman is treated as attractive because of it, then it fits the trope as written. If she is not considered attractive because of them, then likely another trope is being used. Just giving someone noticeably big breasts for no reason does not happen often.

Big breasts are as much a trope as eyes, feet, legs, butts, etc. They aren't tropes in and of themselves, but, if they have a purpose, then they are tropes. Buxom Is Better is the main one about boobs. It's a story telling device to tell us that someone is hot by giving them big boobs. And if that story device is being used on a character, then potholing that trope is as appropriate as every other pothole.

I'm just concerned that you guys are focusing too much on big boobs not being a trope in and of itself, and thus removing potholes just because they are breasts. I just got through dealing with a removal that acted like no breast trope would fit.

Everyone Has An Important Job To Do

Not sure I understand what you're getting at. There are a lot of things in fiction that happen for a reason doesn't make them tropes. If a character has large breasts and they have no bearing on how the other characters feel about her, then there's no other trope being used, she just has large breasts.

Also this trope is not using big breasts as short hand hand for attractiveness for the audiences. This trope is about a character being attractive to other characters because she has large breasts. The fact that said character has large breasts and the reaction from other characters are both important for this trope to be in effect.

No, Big T, has the right of it. It is a trope, because it has a storytelling purpose (big breasts as an easy shorthand for attractiveness) The problem is that "bigger breasts = hotter girl" is such a ridiculously omnipresent trope in fiction that if we try to collect every example...well, we end up with a list of every girl with big breasts. Like we have now. Which is why I say cut it down to subversions, exaggerations, and lampshade hangings.

edited 24th Sep '11 8:24:49 AM by Discar

Unless the work makes note of the fact that a female character is attractive because of her large breasts then it's not a shorthand, it's just a girl with large breasts. Also how is "bigger breasts = hotter girl" an omnipresent trope? Just because a female character has larger breasts than the rest of the female characters in a work doesn't mean the author is signifying that she's the most attractive character of the bunch

edited 24th Sep '11 8:40:41 AM by captainpat

Agreed. A lot times there are many girls that are explicitly hotter than the woman with the largest rack in the work. Whoever is the main Love Interest is generally In-Universe hotter than the woman with the largest rack. That's far more common a trope than by breast size.

Especially with Live Action works where women that actually have decent chests tend to be Hollywood Pudgy and thus explicitly to be considered ugly in universe.

Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick

If it's not explicitly clear within the story that other characters find a female character attractive because of her breasts, then it's not this trope.

So, does anyone have any ideas for a shorter descriptions?

As far as a description, here's sort of a draft. Any suggestions where this could go?

---

Draft description

A female character is seen as attractive by other characters because of her large breasts or her breasts are larger than characters. Male characters often gawk at her breasts and are highly persuasible if said female character faults her breasts. Female characters, especially flat chested ones are often prone to jealously and yearning for larger breasts.

Depending on how said female character feels about her breasts the extra can be good or bad thing.

edited 25th Sep '11 1:37:18 PM by captainpat

@captainpat: sounds good! Perhaps it'd go well in a whole new page with its own name that serves as the breasts counterpart to Baby Got Back. Though a little more should be added to it to better mirror Baby Got Back, in my opinion. It'd make it look nicer, hehe.

edited 26th Oct '11 2:30:19 PM by TEspeon

Wow, but Baby Got Back's really a terrible description, isn't it? There's an opening quote featuring a bunch of sinkholes that are genuinely funny but objectively bad. Then the first few sentences catalog parts of the female body, as though setting this page up as a haven for one brand of female admirers. Then, the description has to struggle and backpedal to try to guard against gushing lustful entries.

Well, it does seem a bit like its for pointing out a character has a large butt, but its to make the page more fun to read (and isn't that what tvtropes is about? describing tropes in a fun-to-read way?) Perhaps adding in a "if a character benefits from this, its this trope. Otherwise, its a part thats just there". But thats probably something for a trope repair discussion on its own page :P

And now that I think about it, the only change the Buxom Is Better page needs to make it less confusing, narrowing it down a bit to be closer to the laconic page.

BIB is fine as a trope by our definition, so there really is no need to remove the page from the site. :/

@captainpat: if the draft is for replacing the description the page already has, may I add to it? I think I can make it a bit more fun-to-read and informative by doing that :)

All right, that might be slightly offtopic, but "subversions and deconstructions"? How does one deconstruct that trope? I don't think that's a correct use of this word.

"This must be Thursday," said Arthur to himself, sinking low over his beer, "I never could get the hang of Thursdays."

Easy: Show the girl having real-life consequences (mostly back problems).