Needs Help: Bury Your Gays

upvote for all, especially for clarification, though I'd be interested to know how many Kick The Gay examples there are that aren't basically Jerkass Is Unsurprisingly Homophobic

OH MY GOD; MY PARENTS ARE GARDENIIIIINNNNGGGGG!!!!!

I forgot to include:

• Out Of The Closet And Into The Line Of Fire: when an LGBT character comes out of the closet and gets killed or harmed because of it (via a character or the narrative itself). That isn't exactly BYG because it could be used as part of a Very Special Episode or it could be used to shame gay people, etc.

Look at all that shiny stuff ain't they pretty

I kind of disagree because I think that criteria STILL makes it the trope and leaves to much room for subjective assumptions.

What qualifies as disproportionately violent?

What if the gay character dies first by happenstance than straight characters die later? Do we remove the entry on ongoing works or claim Author's Saving Throw to keep it on the page?

Does a character being killed for being LGBT still count if it's show as a moral event horizon for a bigot and portrayed as wrong by the plot?

This isn't a YMMV trope so we need more clearly defined, narrow and objective criteria because that still leaves to much room for someone argue every gay character death as counting.

edited 21st Jan '18 9:34:19 PM by shoboni

All of it still amounts to ‘a gay guy died’ which is not a trope. Prove malicious intent and you might have a trope but otherwise it’s still chairs.

After reading comment #53, I realized I forgot to mention something important. My comment in #50 is a bit confusing on the whole. I meant my suggested definition to include the requirement "at least two of these three must be present."

The comment about "only needs to hit one" was more about the comment in #41. So it isn't just "In-Universe case where character is killed because they are LGBT." My bad.

RE 53:

I'm not sure I follow how any of those three criteria is a "subjective assumption." One is literally a ratio of deaths in the work. Another is "disproportionately violent," and I suppose that could be taken as subjective, so let me elaborate.

"Disproportionately violent" would be something like: we get a Gory Discretion Shot when the straight woman dies but we see the blade go in, the turn of the knife, and the painful expression on the face of the lesbian as she dies. Or the straight man gets poisoned while the lesbian gets axed to death.

Another example of something being "disproportionately violent" would be, say, a movie where there are two women and five men and they're all being killed off one by one. The men die from booby traps that shoot or slash them, a few are electrocuted or crushed. But one of the women smokes an acid-laced cigarette and ends up melting her lungs and suffocating to death. What would make this more violent than the other deaths is if we see her face on-screen from the first puff to when she collapses. Seeing her as she realizes she's dying a slow, painful death. It'd be a little sadistic on the director's part. That would be an example of something being disproportionately violent because nearly all of the other deaths would be similar to each other ("proportional" to each other) and "humane" and fast (less violent than her death).

The third requirement could be alternatively stated as "homophobic character kills the LGBT character," but it could also be "homophobic character coerces or tricks another character to kill the LGBT character." So even if that were the only requirement, it still would not be just "a gay guy dies."

Concerning the Moral Event Horizon issue, that is another "Kick The Gay" (which probably would fold into Kick the Dog). The gay character is used to show how bad the other character is, or to have a Very Special Episode.

---

RE 54:

Actually, they aren't chairs. You could probably make a case for one or two fo them, but not all of them. The Torturous Gay A Fterlife one in particular is not "just 'a gay guy died.'" You seem to be shifting the burden of proof.

Would you also require us to "prove intent" for every Author Tract example or do you think the content in the works themselves give enough proof? Because the works themselves give enough proof, too, for Bury Your Gays, Writer on Board, Poke the Poodle, and other objective tropes.

You seem to be working under the assumption that there's no reason for LGBT characters to be treated and handled differently by creators. There's a long history of homophobia and transphobia that justifies the existence of the article (this is a "number of examples shows the pattern" argument). It's clearly an established pattern in media.

Long story short, you're the one with the abnormal opinion in this situation, so you have to show how it's actually chairs if you think it is.

edited 22nd Jan '18 6:16:56 AM by WaterBlap

Look at all that shiny stuff ain't they pretty

I explained why it leaves so much subjective room for argument.

You've just proved my point further on the violence one because in a horror setting I'd consider someone suffocating from poisoning no less graphic than being impaled, hacked-open, fried, or crushed.

Maybe LESS so depending on how the shots are framed and how much Gorn is involved in the SFX for the other deaths.

I agree with memers that unless we have some criteria to reasonably argue there was malicious or problematic intent this trope going to keep being a catch-all for "every time a non-straight character dies"

edited 22nd Jan '18 12:06:55 PM by shoboni

No, actually I did not prove your point. It's relative to the other deaths in the work. I can't recall which film it was but that was an actual thing, but whether it is or not shouldn't matter since there's no reason to say "relative to other works in the genre."

You have been given "criteria to reasonably argue there was malicious or problematic intent" but you insist that such criteria does not do that.

edited 22nd Jan '18 12:20:48 PM by WaterBlap

Look at all that shiny stuff ain't they pretty

Because little of what you've given meets that criteria, criteria for that would be:

1)Work by someone known to be bigoted or could at least by suspected of it (ie: a conservative Christian production company) kills off a gay character

2)The narrative treats them being gay as bad/sinful and their death as karmic justice of some kind.

3)Word of God admits something like they did it because they didn't want a gay character around

4)There's an afterlife in the work and they explicitly get damned for being gay upon death.

Yours includes some stuff like that, but also more vague bullet-points like "disproportionately violent" or "gay dude dies first"

Chiming in to say that I am in agreement with Water Blap.

The comment above this raises some valid points, though I think that Gay Dude Dies First is equally applicable as Black Dude Dies First and ties in on that side, and that disproportionately violent will be one of those where it isn't a YMMV thing but the examples must contain sufficient context and if they are questioned must be taken to discussion and defended.

OH MY GOD; MY PARENTS ARE GARDENIIIIINNNNGGGGG!!!!!

Discussion seems to be eliminating the "end up miserable" part of the definition.

Link to TRS threads in project mode here.

Now I can get behind The Gay Guy Dies First as an aggregate trope if enough examples exist to prove the pattern, it is specific and malicious enough to be a trope.

Any other pattern specific tropes could work too. A general trope though just does not work, 'a gay guy dies' is literal chairs. Find the pattern and YKTTW the tropes, for now this trope should be cut for being chairs.

edited 22nd Jan '18 4:20:35 PM by Memers

If nothing else, it at least gets stay for now because of Grandfather Clause.

Also suggesting the examples of when it happens due to a gay character who could have left the story just by being Put on a Bus and it would have had the same effect, but instead they were killed to both definitively end and damn the character. This could be a condition added to the main trope, or perhaps something like Meaningless Gay Character Death?

We could also make something like Old Gay Suicide as a retroactive trope about historical uses of the trope (originally to deliberately point out how shitty life was for gay people, and then because content codes only allowed gay characters in films if they offed themselves at the end); it would be an ending trope and limited to examples pre-about 1970.

OH MY GOD; MY PARENTS ARE GARDENIIIIINNNNGGGGG!!!!!

None of that really exists in the examples though. You got stuff like

And thats just cherry picking the anime section. It gets worse....

edited 22nd Jan '18 7:40:44 PM by Memers

Well I’m not saying there aren’t shoehorned examples.

If multiple people really think that drafting subtropes and setting criteria won’t kill the bad entries, then we’d probably have to follow the precedent of Complete Monster etc. by locking the page and having a dedicated thread for example discussion. I don’t think it should (or needs to) go that far, but with the current media presence and discussion of the trope it does want to be one of the cleanest most un-arguable pages.

OH MY GOD; MY PARENTS ARE GARDENIIIIINNNNGGGGG!!!!!

I mean many in the live action section are from shows like NCIS where all love interests and non-love interests die for drama, in the 10 years of the show the body count is easily close to 100... one happened to be gay.

Or shows have actors leave the show and Put on a Bus isn't an option so they die, things like this happen no matter what orientation they are.

Or series like Mass Effect which have multiple gay characters and even some you explicitly have sex with yet a lesbian in the game died... example!

People also keep claiming this kind of thing is old fashion and something in the 70s and the like clearly have not looked at the examples, there are shoehorns in there from any time period.

As it is it is just Not A Trope and really needs to be cut in favor specific tropes.

edited 22nd Jan '18 7:53:20 PM by Memers

You keep saying that without giving any evidence but bad examples.

In it’s simplest form, the death of a gay character no longer has to hold any meaning and, as long as there was no good independent reason for the character as either character or device to die, could very easily be argued to qualify on these grounds: the trope held meaning once, in that values of the time meant the gay guy had to die. It became so prevalent in popular culture and media knowledge that it may have lost meaning over time but still prevails as “that’s a thing that we’ve always done in media” to the point that its such a convention in itself it doesn’t necessarily always need a deeper meaning.

Of course, examples where there is otherwise a good reason for the character to die are obviously not examples. However, we all understand this, and since it’s the only thing you’re choosing to contribute whilst inarguably disagreeing with everyone else, please leave the conversation: you’re being quite unproductive in discussion, ignoring everything to demand deletion.

OH MY GOD; MY PARENTS ARE GARDENIIIIINNNNGGGGG!!!!!

There is no reason in the trope itself, which is the problem that is systemic. It needs to be replaced with tropes that do have reasons built in.

If a gay character's death is made as an example that homosexuality is bad, that is a trope. If a gay character is killed off to prevent them getting in the way of a heterosexual character, that is a trope. If a gay character is killed off to enforce a Class S ending of 'no permanent relationships', that is a trope. etc.

However as it stands the amalgam of all that and more is just not trope worthy.

edited 22nd Jan '18 8:16:30 PM by Memers

Are you suggesting Example Sectionectomy or just Super Trope Syndrome?

I think I see some of your point now: the current page is trying to encompass every possible example, outcome, and reason, which is just too broad to not get messy.

edited 22nd Jan '18 8:23:21 PM by lakingsif

OH MY GOD; MY PARENTS ARE GARDENIIIIINNNNGGGGG!!!!!

Like, this really just hammering home what I've been saying.

Much like Stuffed in the Fridge has become a catch-all for "anytime a woman dies a plot important death", this is becoming "any time a non-straight character dies" because nobody wants to enforce strict criteria to combat the Trope Decay.

Breaking it off into several other tropes dealing the deaths LGBT characters that can actually be spefitic things like Gay Guy Dies First or Kick The Gay would combat that a LOT.

edited 22nd Jan '18 8:34:38 PM by shoboni

Well two ways really.

Get rid of all examples on page and make it an index of aggregate tropes for the specific reasons and ways that it is done. Make it clear too that not all examples of x are inherently bad, some might just be coincidence or be used for positive reasons, especially if there are other gay people in the work. Also make sure inversions and aversions do not count for those.

Or wipe the trope entirely and start from scratch, make a thread for each submitted entry with evidence that there was malicious intent in each example.

Either works for me and I agree if we're going to keep this as an actual trope instead of an index it's going to have to become a community discussion driven one with approved examples like Complete Monster.

edited 22nd Jan '18 8:42:54 PM by shoboni

Well, I think we should wait on other tropers for their input.

Perhaps a plan outline for everyone to consider:

1. finish creating a reasonable strict criteria for Bury Your Gays trope page
2. decide on what aspects should be given separate sub tropes, likely by greater meaning and prevalence, and YKTTW them
3. bring all current examples to this thread in order to vote on legitimacy and where they are most appropriate
4. add a Super-Trope index list to BYG
5. potentially lock Bury Your Gays and start the example suggestion thread, which I would personally be happy to monitor as I assume others (Water Blap?) would, too

edited 22nd Jan '18 9:00:38 PM by lakingsif

OH MY GOD; MY PARENTS ARE GARDENIIIIINNNNGGGGG!!!!!

I still hold by what I said in the beginning of the thread: "An example should be able to point out why the character being gay has to do with the character not getting a happy ending."

1. Are gay characters disproportionately targeted? We had a discussion about exact numbers, but the important part is to be able to show that in the example. It can also be about how violently they're killed, but again, you need to be able to show the disproportion in the example.
2. Failing the above, are they targeted specifically because they're gay? This means there aren't other valid reasons for why the character is targeted. There are tons of reasons for letting those things happen to characters, and if you can reasonably explain why there are such reasons, it's not an example.

Check out my fanfiction!

RE 58:

• You're first point shouldn't be a requirement. It can help inform the intent of the creator, but it's also more of a trivia item than an actual trope. "The creator is a bigot" isn't itself a trope. And obviously, stereotyping people into being "bigoted" can't be an option here.
• Your second point, as with crazysamaritan's point, is valid. I didn't include anything about misery or taking away the character's chances at happiness. That should be included.
• Your third point doesn't seem to need to be included. If Word of God says they played a trope intentionally, it generally is counted as being in play some way. It doesn't need saying.
• Your fourth point — as has been discussed in this thread — is not this trope. That's something else, possibly a subtrope or sister trope. Hence my inclusion of a Torturous Gay Afterlife trope suggestion.

RE 61: I think we're mostly talking past each other. I'm not seeing how Bury Your Gays is a general trope. I'm talking about the solution, that is, rather than the current state of the wicks. You seem to be talking about the problem... and your solution is to totally eradicate the problem as opposed to solving it.

RE 62: That first suggestion seems like either just Put on a Bus or Bus Crash but for LGBT characters. I don't think it needs its own trope. It could be discussed in a separate thread for POAB to expand it, maybe (if it doesn't already handle that). For Old Gay Suicide, I'm not sure how that would work out. Tropes are sort of "out-of" time and not exactly recent, and if it's already a Dead Horse Trope then I'm not sure how helpful it'd actually be...?

---

That is this trope.

That's what we're trying to do, but for some reason you and Memers keep insisting that nobody is doing that.

There have been plenty of other suggestions that you seem to be intentionally ignoring. There are more options than "Example Sectionectomy or bust."

---

I believe that option was put out there by people who want this trope to be cut and I believe they know how much work such a thread would take. Obviously such a thread, and such a project, would not have the manpower to be sustainable.

I am wholeheartily against that option because it is a straw option that was suggested by people who just want and only want to cut the trope outright.

Agreed.

For points three and four in 72, I don't think those are necessary. Not until we have agreed on the criteria for Bury Your Gays.

edited 23rd Jan '18 5:50:46 AM by WaterBlap

Look at all that shiny stuff ain't they pretty

thanks for the input, as I personally am all for the least laborious method of preventing misuse, I'm on board

OH MY GOD; MY PARENTS ARE GARDENIIIIINNNNGGGGG!!!!!