The Place for Purging Porn and Pedo-Pandering (AKA P5 flag evaluations)

Reverted Krazy Kopter's edits in Film.A Clockwork Orange, Film.The Generals Daughter and Radar.Teen Titans.

I was going to reverse the edits myself by I got locked out. I can see why though.

No problem. Carry on.

Yeah, I'm inclined to wait and see what's up in more detail.

For one thing, I'd be astonished if this was really what it looks like: however horrifying the crime of rape is, it's been a significant plot device since the invention of writing. You'd have to remove/lock/purge/bowdlerize so many instances in so many classic books, movies, plays, poems, and shows that it boggles the mind. Furthermore, removing mention of such an immemorial trope-fountain strikes at the foundations of the wiki's entire reason for existence.

For those reasons, I suspect that things aren't quite what those particular posts are making it seem. Shall stay tuned.

edited 6th Jun '12 1:01:10 PM by Jhimmibhob

4440:

I think we can now say slippery slope is not a fallacy as applied to this.

I mean, if we say "if you can't make a page on this work without mentioning porn tropes, we can't have a page on it," I don't think we lose anything important. That mostly affects things like Big Butts And Hot Sluts 36. But "if you can't make a page on this work without mentioning rape, we can't have a page on it" hits, like, actual works. I can't tell you which ones because the pages listing them have been replaced with banners saying "what's wrong with you, you sick fuck, we don't want your kind here."

I realize "art" is a word perverts use to defend their filth, but I think this is against the wiki's stated mission.

That's not quite what FE, though I don't agree with this move. FE said we won't have tropes about rape. Presumably we're supposed to simply not mention that anymore.

Is it really more offensive to have a trope about rape or to talk about major works without addressing such an important element? With a few sad exceptions if a rape appears in a work it's a major plot point. Can we really talk about Watchmen without talking about the Comedian's attempted rape of the first Silk Spectre? Should we pretend that the heroes of Greek Mythology weren't born of Zeus raping mortal women? It actually seems more insensitive to me to neglect to mention rape, tactfully, where it's present.

But even if the tropes have been cut, are we not allowed to discuss fictional rape as it appears in fiction? Talking about rape without "validating" it as a trope is possible, after all. Of course, it is less likely to come up in the articles when we can not peg it to a trope, but then the articles are not meant to be a 100% complete description of the work.

But people were sorting out the "endorsement" problem by giving them new names and erasing the creepy.

There are tropes about Racism, tropes about genocide, and none of them are "validating" their subject matter. If it's a problem with the editors it calls for a lock, not a cut.

Folks, can we please wait until better info? Also, on the past page I linked this post: It didn't work. There is no explanation needed beyond the fact that the topic is a pain in the ass to keep clean and it endangers the wiki's revenues. We just won't have articles about rape. Super easy. No big loss.

...I should have worded myself differently, I notice. That was meant to be an honest question, not a suggestion to how to adapt to the change.

Seriously, with the new rule; are we allowed to discuss fictional rape in the article pages? Like, at all?

Which is too vague and very much arguable, especially the "no explanation needed beyond (...)" part.

edited 6th Jun '12 1:23:49 PM by MarqFJA

Edit: Self thump

edited 7th Jun '12 4:54:35 AM by Catbert

Leaving aside the unfortunate implications of wiping out mentions of rape, there were tropes on that index that weren't about rape. Mind Rape, for starters.

@Septimus: The problem with that is that it actually kinda is a big loss in the context of analytical discussion and such, but I guess that just depends on your perspective of what the site's good for.

edited 6th Jun '12 1:35:58 PM by RocketDude

Asking doesn't hurt, and being nebulous won't stop people from asking. I'd be interested to know if the decision was prompted by complaints from Google or something else.

edited 6th Jun '12 1:37:04 PM by GendoIkari

It is worth noting that every page with "Rape" as its own word (thankfully) in it has the curtain automatically up. For example, our page on The Rape of the Lock is now gone. (I can tell it existed because it has inbounds.) There's no getting around that that work has "Rape" in the title, so I'm not sure if we will be able to have an article.

No, I'm not doomsaying, nor saying that I'm definitely right. I don't care one way or the other, honestly. I just thought it was worth pointing out.

To be exact, only Victim Falls For Rapist was actually cut. Everything else is hidden behind the curtain, and that one is a) case-sensitive and b) doesn't cover source or edit pages.

Edit: Self thump

edited 7th Jun '12 4:54:56 AM by Catbert

Okay, I was planning on taking a sabbatical from troping or posting, but this is insane.

I won't belabor why, as I think everyone else has covered that, but that also means all tropes that mention pedophilia (or any other sexual act with rape connotations) will need to die as well.

Judging by what Fast Eddie said while I'm not sure he really disagrees with the idea too strenuously the issue sounds like it might be because Google did say no to what we were doing and that we had to get rid of them. I don't know why they would have said that, but that's how it sounds.

@Mazz: So, serious question: what would these underlying problems be? I do know that fandoms — and some fans within fandoms — tend to get a mite creepy at times, especially when it comes to things sexual, and that we, above anything else, are fans of fictional works. I know that many of us love to go into detail about stuff, and we have quite the habit of Accentuating the Negative. So when does attention to detail and Accentuating the Negative become gushing and creepiness?

edited 6th Jun '12 2:18:06 PM by TwoGunAngel

A key plot element in Back to the Future is an attempted rape. Flag it? No great loss, after all.

Obviously we can't flag it because it's rated too low, but try describing the movie without acknowledging the existence of rape. And I don't think anyone who wants to talk about it is automatically a naughty person doing naughty things.

And all because an effort to solve the problem — with minimal participation, because not only can headlines not be used when there's a problem to be solved, they can't be used to recruit people to help implement the solution — was not demonstrably successful before it was even completed.

edited 6th Jun '12 2:19:51 PM by HersheleOstropoler