Unfortunate Implications examples require specific citations. However, many tropers have difficulties distinguishing if a citation fits the criteria needed. That is where this thread thread comes into play.
Confused about whether a citation is legit enough? Ask here then.
07/24/2022 Update: Per this TRS thread
, Unfortunate Implications is now Flame Bait, so wicks on non-Flame Bait pages need to be either removed or moved to Unfortunate Implications subpages; the cleanup work has been deferred to this thread.
Edited by GastonRabbit on Jul 24th 2022 at 4:07:46 AM
Like I said in my previous post, I think if there's multiple places to point to for citations, it shouldn't matter how "credible" they are. It shows multiple people having an issue as opposed to a single troper's, or even a single critic's, opinion. You're not bound to get a New York Times article for a moderately-sized YouTube channel, but that doesn't mean we can't record the reactions from the fandom it does have.
Edited by mightymewtron on Oct 29th 2020 at 8:44:32 AM
I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.Makes sense.
Page was made btw at 7-Second Riddles.
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper Wall![]()
![]()
![]()
Who cares what progressive sites think of us.
EDIT: Wait what exactly happened there? I wasn't around there.
Edited by PlasmaPower on Oct 29th 2020 at 7:42:32 AM
Thomas fans needed! Come join me in the the show's cleanup thread!What "progressive sites" out there are going up to bat for hentai and pedoshit? (Frankly, I don't think I want to know.)
Edited by mightymewtron on Oct 29th 2020 at 6:42:48 AM
I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.
Just speaking tautologically, none, since if they have a problem with that, the sure don't fit my definition of progressive sites.
Eh, in general, they're the sort of people whose opinions we shouldn't care about one way or another- sounds like the sort of people who left the site for the copycat wikis just because we couldn't let them gush about boobs anymore.
We really shouldn't be concerned about them.
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper WallBasically I wasn't talking about that. Some blogs (such as The Mary Sue) didn't like how we deleted the tropes now at Double Standard Rape because the concepts there were worth documenting, despite the lewd titles they had at the time.
It's on our Wikipedia article
.
Edited by ccorb on Oct 29th 2020 at 7:05:57 AM
Rock'n'roll never dies!But...we didn't delete them though? We just renamed them. Right?
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper Wall![]()
What do they mean "deleted"? There might be individual tropes in that set that were deleted, though I'm not aware of any, but we still have pages for many of them.
edit:
Edited by ShinyCottonCandy on Oct 29th 2020 at 7:07:12 AM
My musician pageHere's the article I was talking about
. I wasn't here during that, so can someone elaborate? Anyway, we're getting off-topic.
Whatever happened back then, it was temporary if it even happened at all, as we definitely still have those tropes.
We may have temporarily removed the tropes prior to renaming them. IDK, I wasn't there. But that seems like a whole different issue than what we're discussing here. Obviously we should record instances of Double Standard tropes, nobody's debating that anymore. The issue is whether multiple small blogs picking up on the same double standard should have the same weight as one major publication discussing the issue.
(Sidenote, reading our Wikipedia page is so deeply fascinating. They break down our organization so professionally it feels foreign.)
Edited by mightymewtron on Oct 29th 2020 at 7:11:52 AM
I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.
I agree that we should have some way to count smaller sources when nothing major picks up on the controversy, or worse as is the case with the work that started the whole discussion, have something that is approved of by the major sources when the actual demographic unfairly depicted can point out the problems but can't get into the mainstream. If we need two or three just to prove the weight is there, it's better than not being able to mention it at all.
How about this: the notability standard isn't enforced if you can cite at least three separate sources, maybe restrict it further to come from different websites (i.e. three Tumblr blogs wouldn't cut it). At the very least they should obviously be distinct sources and not a friend group hive mind.
Edited by mightymewtron on Oct 29th 2020 at 7:28:36 AM
I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.Here’s something a bit easier to deal with:
- The movie Christmas with the Kranks has the protagonists decide not to celebrate Christmas. The reaction this gets is pretty insane, to say the least, with the neighbors harassing the Kranks endlessly to celebrate it and put up decorations like the rest of the neighborhood. They finally give in when their young adult daughter decides to come home to visit. The very fact that not celebrating Christmas is seen to be some kind of unforgivable sin is bad enough, but then the film hammers home the idea that fighting against the established conformity — no matter how much you disagree with it — will get you nowhere and you should never do otherwise. Roger Ebert noticed
.
https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/christmas-with-the-kranks-2004
Here's a link that I assume is where that same review is now posted. I do see it making the same point about the film's anti-nonconformity stance.
Berserk Button: misusing Nightmare Fuel
Deleted this from YMMV.Mortal Kombat 11 for lacking a citation:
- Unfortunate Implications: While it’s entirely possible this is unintentional, quite a few fans have pointed out how the game (and Nether Realm Studios) seems to have an “anti-sex” agenda with how it portrays female sexuality and how it seems to insult the fans who like the old fanservice (and to an extent, other fighting games who still use female fanservice with no shame):
- Kano’s ending has him forcing mother and daughter Sonya and Cassie to wear what’s basically lingerie with jewelry, like a rather crude parody of what most of the women wore in the older games, to fight for his own sick amusement.
- Sindel’s retcon that turned her into a gold-digging woman who was evil all along and doesn’t care about her family, has also turned into the only female character with a costume more or less in line with the older ones but also a rather horny personality bordering on molest-y at times (her portrayal in the story mode DLC doesn’t help).
- The game retcons Sheeva wearing her old slimpy outfit from something one would assume she’d wear to show how she’s a proud Amazon-like warrior woman into something Shao Kahn, who’s shown to be a misogynist pervert, FORCED her to wear. To drive the point home, Sheeva’s “Klassic Outfit” now covers her entire torso as opposed to being a sling-bikini like it’s been since MK 3.
- And of course, there’s the double standard of the men being able to show a lot of skin and the fact that despite NRS’s attempts to be more feminist, this is still a game where you can kill women (some of them are good people, including mothers, daughters and friends… and sometimes they can KILL EACH OTHER too with no remorse) in disturbingly gory ways, even more than the previous game.
Obviously, you should only be allowed to murder ''men'' in killing games. That's not sexist at all.
But seriously. Nonsense argument is nonsense.
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper WallThis is on Eloise:
Unfortunate Implications: Some view Eloise as a negative role model amongst young girls, as what some
reviews
show. Fans of the series refute this, however, considering the title character being generous towards her friends and the less fortunate, in spite of her knack for reckless mischief. It didn't help that mischief.
I don't think "she's a bad role model because she acts up and gets away with it" qualifies as Unfortunate Implications...

I'm considering making a work page for the YouTube channel Seven Second Riddles, which employs a bunch of narrative tropes to tell the riddles.
Thing is, the channel has been criticized for certain tropes it uses. For example, the riddles have been accused of transphobia. A fair share of them revolve around spotting the "fake" woman or man based on things like anatomy and clothing, which is generally a problematic claim at best and outright trans erasure at worst. The issue with this is that the critical channels are just normal YouTubers, not people trusted as media critics to any real degree. I'm wondering if the amount of the criticism is in itself enough to validate the citations, or if the criticisms still need to come from people with more qualifications than, say, LaurenZSide.
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper Wall