TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

Misused: You Know What You Did

Go To

Deadlock Clock: Feb 1st 2017 at 11:59:00 PM
sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#1: Jan 1st 2016 at 6:13:36 PM

As I understand the trope, You Know What You Did refers to a situation where one half of a couple assumes the worst of their significant other based on information that is at best flimsy and at worst comes from a known untrustworthy source. They then go on to not elaborate to their partner because they assume they already know the situation.

Due to what I suspect to be a case of I Thought It Meant, a large number of entries and decent number of wicks list the trope as if its definition were a more general "I'm angry at you and refuse to explain why." I confess I made that same error myself, which is what brought this to my attention.

Examples of misuse on the page itself include the entirety of the Western Animation and Stand-Up Folders.

On other pages, misuse can be seen on:

edited 1st Jan '16 6:18:14 PM by sgamer82

shimaspawn from Here and Now Since: May, 2010 Relationship Status: In your bunk
#2: Jan 1st 2016 at 6:36:38 PM

Looks like we have a bit of a mess on our hands then.

Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#3: Jan 1st 2016 at 7:53:23 PM

I'm not sure what the best recourse would be. Should we broaden the definition to include the "I'm angry and won't explain" examples? Split into two tropes? (If we do that I'd say keep You Know What You Did for the "won't explain anger" version) just clean up improper wicks?

shimaspawn from Here and Now Since: May, 2010 Relationship Status: In your bunk
#4: Jan 1st 2016 at 8:05:33 PM

There's also the Trope Transplant option where we keep the won't explain version as this trope and move the current definition elsewhere. The won't explain bit is very much a trope in it's own right.

Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#5: Jan 1st 2016 at 8:11:56 PM

Definitely, and its association with the phrase is likely the cause of much of the misuse.

phoenix Since: Oct, 2012 Relationship Status: Yes, I'm alone, but I'm alone and free
#6: Jan 1st 2016 at 8:12:28 PM

[up][up] I like the transplant option. The misuse is a better fit for this name.

edited 1st Jan '16 8:12:59 PM by phoenix

eyebones Since: Apr, 2004
#7: Jan 1st 2016 at 9:10:28 PM

Good chance to cut a low-value (79 wicks) page with a dialog-style name.

For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. — H.L. Mencken
sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#8: Jan 2nd 2016 at 1:31:49 AM

Well, very least if we create a new trope anywhere in the process it'll be subject to No New Stock Phrases.

edited 2nd Jan '16 1:32:49 AM by sgamer82

eyebones Since: Apr, 2004
#9: Jan 2nd 2016 at 5:00:55 AM

[tup]

For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. — H.L. Mencken
sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#10: Jan 5th 2016 at 6:30:56 PM

My own personal opinion is that if we do a Transplant we should do it for the soap opera/romantic version of the trope. Either that or expand the definition to general "angry without explanation", which I think would cover most soap examples anyway.

sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#11: Jan 26th 2016 at 11:12:15 AM

Just giving this one a bump after realizing there hasn't been much activity in it for a few weeks.

Does a Trope Transplant seem like a good option, or will just a description tweak do the job?

crazysamaritan NaNo 4328 / 50,000 from Lupin III Since: Apr, 2010
NaNo 4328 / 50,000
#12: Jan 26th 2016 at 11:51:43 AM

The soap opera definition is pretty Example as a Thesis, which contributes to the shoehorn. I think the most common usage of the Stock Phrase is a specific version of Poor Communications Kills for relationships. The soap opera definition seems to build off of that and allow easy manipulation of the angry character.

I'm okay with changing the current page's definition to match misuse, but the old definition needs to revisit YKTTW for a proper history and the misuse needs a proper definition written.

Link to TRS threads in project mode here.
TheOneWhoTropes Dread Sorcerer of Auchtermuchty from Newton-le-willows, quaint town Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: With my statistically significant other
Dread Sorcerer of Auchtermuchty
#13: Apr 30th 2016 at 6:33:20 AM

[up]Its Poor Communication Kills, so that people don't think the trope has been deleted.

Keeper of The Celestial Flame
sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#14: Jul 13th 2016 at 2:56:30 PM

I regret I hadn't kept very close track of this thread. I was wondering if any action had been taken like the option of a YKTTW had been truth when I wasn't paying attention.

Prfnoff Since: Jan, 2001
#15: Jul 14th 2016 at 7:27:48 PM

At least the definition should be broadened to include scenarios where the accusation of infidelity is truthful but the wronged party stops short of specifying the shameful facts since keeping quiet about exactly what she knows gives her a better position to bargain for favors. This occurs in Atlas Shrugged, with the subversion that The Mistress has no shame about the affair and much prefers to discuss it openly.

eroock Since: Sep, 2012
#16: Jul 19th 2016 at 5:23:02 AM

^ I think being Wrongfully Accused is a big part of this trope and taking this away is too much of a watering down.

sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#17: Jul 19th 2016 at 6:07:16 AM

The main definition of the trtropis that a person is Wrongfully Accused of something without being aware of what they're being accused of.

The big issue of misuse is the description focuses on a romantic/couples version while numerous entries focus on any situation where that applies

A possible title for the soap opera definition came to mind just now: Believing The Worst From The Worst

edited 19th Jul '16 6:30:44 AM by sgamer82

crazysamaritan NaNo 4328 / 50,000 from Lupin III Since: Apr, 2010
NaNo 4328 / 50,000
#18: Dec 28th 2016 at 6:46:37 PM

    New definition 
...and until you apologize I'm not talking to you! Phew; the character is in trouble and, despite what the other character says, isn't aware of the problem. Often this is because of the characters misreading behavioral cues, but a culture clash or misunderstanding are also likely.

A Soap Opera style plot will often have the issue specifically occur because of a third party that is trying to drive a wedge in a relationship so they break up. Usually only hearing One Side of the Story, the angry character won't explain why to the victim. The poor victim is unable to defend themselves since they don't even understand where the attack is coming from.

Subtrope of Poor Communication Kills because if the characters actually talked out the problem, there wouldn't be one.

I'm wondering how much of a difference there really is between this and Bewildering Punishment.

Link to TRS threads in project mode here.
sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#19: Dec 28th 2016 at 10:02:43 PM

Seems like a solid combo of the definitions and misuse to. I confess I'd rather forgotten about this topic.

The difference at first glance seems to be the difference of "I'm angry and I won't tell you why" and "I'm being actively punished and nobody will tell me why".

The first doesn't necessarily require any action on the part of the angered party while the latter doesn't necessarily require actual anger towards the one being made to suffer.

edited 28th Dec '16 10:09:17 PM by sgamer82

crazysamaritan NaNo 4328 / 50,000 from Lupin III Since: Apr, 2010
NaNo 4328 / 50,000
#20: Dec 28th 2016 at 10:52:51 PM

We have a term for the "not any action" you claim the angered party takes. It's called "in the doghouse". That is, merely by being angry, they are actively putting the other person "in the doghouse", even if they don't resort to physical punishments.

Link to TRS threads in project mode here.
Xtifr World's Toughest Milkman Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Having tea with Cthulhu
World's Toughest Milkman
#21: Dec 29th 2016 at 9:46:22 AM

[up] That seems like a bit of a stretch. But if pressed, I might be willing to see this as a relationship-specific subtrope of Bewildering Punishment. It's a whole lot different from the sort of thing you see in the works of Kafka, though.

Speaking words of fandom: let it squee, let it squee.
crazysamaritan NaNo 4328 / 50,000 from Lupin III Since: Apr, 2010
NaNo 4328 / 50,000
#22: Dec 29th 2016 at 10:19:27 AM

I wasn't thinking in terms of subtropes; that approach would dissolve my issue. New definition ...and until you apologize I'm not talking to you! Phew; the character is in trouble and, despite what the other character says, isn't aware of the problem. Often this is because of the characters misreading behavioral cues, but a culture clash or misunderstanding are also likely.

A Soap Opera style plot will often have the issue specifically occur because of a third party that is trying to drive a wedge in a relationship so they break up. After only hearing One Side of the Story, the angry character has decided on a course of action, and refuses to explain their motives to their victim. The poor victim is unable to defend themselves since they don't even understand where the attack is coming from.

Subtrope of Poor Communication Kills because if the characters actually talked out the problem, there wouldn't be one. Also a subtrope to Bewildering Punishment because the character getting "punished" is "in the doghouse" until they can convince the other character (who probably isn't listening) to forgive them.


If we do draft the subtrope, it can start with the second paragraph and add details from there.

edited 29th Jan '17 1:52:37 PM by crazysamaritan

Link to TRS threads in project mode here.
SeptimusHeap MOD from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#23: Jan 29th 2017 at 1:45:58 AM

Clock is ticking.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#24: Jan 29th 2017 at 7:09:58 AM

[up][up] I think that works, personally. It does make the trope more in line with the name so it takes care of the I Thought It Meant problem. Using the soap opera as part of the description means those entries remain valid too.

Xtifr World's Toughest Milkman Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Having tea with Cthulhu
World's Toughest Milkman
#25: Jan 29th 2017 at 11:39:00 AM

Am I missing something? The folder in Crazysamaritan's last post seems to be empty? (Previous folder is working fine, though.)

I hate to agree to something blind, but I think we're pretty close to agreement here.

Speaking words of fandom: let it squee, let it squee.

Total posts: 30
Top