On TV Tropes, it's very common for editors to misuse appearance tropes, as well as tropes whose names make them sound like they could be appearance tropes.
Meaningful Appearance tropes are often misused in ways that overlook the "Meaningful" aspect, resulting in Zero Context Examples and misuse in the form of examples that have no meaning even if the tropes themselves are not People Sit on Chairs.
The Appearance Tropes Cleanup sandbox covers tropes with potential issues. Tropes that simply require cleanup will go through this thread, while tropes that require more significant action will have to go through the Trope Repair Shop.
April 2, 2023 update: This thread is no longer for making changes to tropes, and was brought back from the Projects Morgue solely for cleanup. Making changes to tropes is still a job for the Trope Repair Shop.
Edited by GastonRabbit on Apr 2nd 2023 at 9:18:26 AM
I think Thigh High Boots are usually a reference to dominatrixes, but the reference can be used to meet different ends. It might be used to indicate general sexiness, sexual aggressiveness, or a domineering personality. Even children's shows occasionally slap a pair on a woman as shorthand for an aggressive, controlling personality. It is sort of a sexual reference via the backdoor, the character herself might not be sexual but the boots have the connotation they have because of dominatrixes.
Also, generally action girls are given sexualized costumes even when the narrative doesn't specifically sexualize them because they're meant to appeal to a male audience as all mainstream media must. This is an entirely separate, but none the less annoying issue. But it does mean that just because something is common on action girls doesn't mean that it's core message isn't to sexualize.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
I agree 100% with this. Also, in anything approximating Real Life, thigh-high boots would be pretty bad for fighting or other strenuous physical activity.
I don't understand how this "trope" got out of the YKTTW. Before all this started it was just "character wears thigh high boots for fetish fuel" which is only marginally better than "character sits on a chair for resting". Then Fast Eddie rewrote it to its current form, and a number of people are not happy with it or its name or both.
My problem is the name; It sounds like it's "just boots" which leads to Zero Context Examples. It should change but in order to do that we have to pin something down beyond "just boots".
1. This trope is just for out-of-universe Fetish Fuel
2. We shouldn't create our own meanings for something that already has meaning. This point is combined with point number 1 as the "real" meaning.
3. The current definition of "aggressive" is a neuturing definition.
4. In real life, these would be hard to walk in, much less fight in.
5. This trope adds to characterization depending on other tropes: tough, fashion, sexual, etc
6. The character types brought up in can all be brought under the common theme of "Agressive".
7. This trope should not be a supertrope. It should be focused on "aggression" and/or "overt sexuality"
Did I miss anything?
edited 15th Apr '14 7:13:20 AM by ChaoticNovelist
Not that I remember.
Regarding point 4 - not having ever worn them myself, is that the case for all thigh boots, or just the many that have heels?
ERROR: The current state of the world is unacceptable. Save anyway? YES/NO1. This trope is just for out-of-universe Fetish Fuel
No, it's not. That's mostly what it is now, but it's broken now.
2. We shouldn't create our own meanings for something that already has meaning. This point is combined with point number 1 as the "real" meaning.
YES. But Thigh-high boots already have a meaning.
No. The "real" meaning is "Thigh high boots used to indicate overt sexuality, aggressiveness, or sexual initiative".
3. The current definition of "aggressive" is a neuturing definition.
What do you mean "neutering"?
4. In real life, these would be hard to walk in, much less fight in.
No, see my previous post.
5. This trope adds to characterization depending on other tropes: tough, fashion, sexual, etc
Yes.
6. The character types brought up in can all be brought under the common theme of "Agressive".
If "aggressive" is used in a broader sense than "physically aggressive" or "kicks ass", Yes. If "aggressive" is being used to mean "fights a lot" then No.
7. This trope should not be a supertrope. It should be focused on "aggression" and/or "overt sexuality"
Yes and No. If we want to include both, then it needs to be made a supertrope with appropriate subtropes for "aggression" and "overt sexuality", or it's two completely different tropes mashed together, which is what we're trying to get rid of.
edited 15th Apr '14 9:09:03 AM by Madrugada
Perhaps go the way of Blue Eyes and other similar Eye Tropes, where we're not supposed to link to the supertrope (which has a very broad name) but to its various subtropes... unless we're faced with the rare case of a character qualifying for most if not all of its subtropes (i.e. the eye color shifts between the subtropes' typical shades, and the character himself/herself fits all of the subtropes' other criteria).
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.![]()
That's what I had in mind too. I should've put that more clearly in my previous post.
Do thigh boots signify aggressiveness in a different way from any other kind of boot?
ERROR: The current state of the world is unacceptable. Save anyway? YES/NOhow about we go the Hand Hiding Sleeves Route? Internal Subtropes, i mean.
Is dast der Zerstorer? Odar die Schopfer?

They all seem aggressive to me. The chic girl might not have the attitude but it seems like a "you can't touch this" look. The whore is sexually aggressive and the Action Girl is physically aggressive.