Unfortunate Implications Citation Discussion

I mentioned this earlier on this page (this is a slow moving thread so it was a while ago). The point of the citation rule is to show that it's not just some random person who's getting offended by something. If the writers themselves acknowledge the issue and apologize, that's a good sign that there is some legitimacy to the example, so it should be OK.

EDIT: So I'm the page topper. By "earlier on this page" I meant the previous page.

Edited by Zuxtron on Aug 23rd 2019 at 7:47:37 AM

Edited by romanarmy4 on Aug 29th 2019 at 2:36:05 AM

Does this entry on YMMV.Unshaved Mouse meet the "more than one person's thought" requirement?

• One of the biggest criticisms he has with the Ant-Man movies, especially the first one, is that the only non-Caucasian members of the cast are outlandish comic relief who exist mainly to be put in their place by the white main characters.

Edited by dsneybuf on Sep 6th 2019 at 11:53:02 AM

If I understand this trope correctly, that would be an in-universe example as the page is for a personal blog as The Unshaved Mouse is stating their opinion of the Antman Movie. Thus does it even qualify as YMMV? It's not really something up for debate or interpretation, it's their stated opinion.

In fact, does it even qualify for this trope? As the Unfortunate Implicaitons aren't on the page's work (the blog by the Unshaved Mouse) but on another piece of media (the Antman movie).

But it can't be added to the Antman movie YMMV page because it is a single opinion from a blog, thus would need more credibility.

Edited by Stage7-4 on Sep 9th 2019 at 12:38:12 PM

YMMV.Unshaved Mouse seems to consist mostly of the reviews' own opinions, including some that readers might disagree with.

A lot of those could be moved to the main page as in-universe tropes. I'm sure it's alright to list YMMV tropes on the main page if it's a critic discussing their feelings on a work in-universe.

The entries I think can stay on the YMMV page include:

• Acceptable Targets
• Broken Base
• Critical Dissonance (maybe?)
• Critical Research Failure
• Hilarious in Hindsight
• Memetic Mutation
• What Do You Mean, It's Not Political? (maybe? I don't know if it's invoked going by the entry itself)

Edited by chasemaddigan on Sep 12th 2019 at 10:16:55 AM

Actually, Critical Research Failure should be cut, too, since this isn't a matter of basic knowledge.

Question; would you consider PopMatters a citeable source for Unfortunate Implications?

For additional context, the question stems from this query in Ask The Tropers concerning a UI entry in YMMV.Steven Universe.

While I normally don't like credential checking, the author of that Pop Matters article (Joshua Adams) is a published english and philosophy professor at the University of Louisville.

However he's also a white male writing an article about race, female empowerment, and lesbian themes in Steven Universe so I'm uncomfortable saying he has authority in any of those subjects. He might be LGBT but I cannot confirm it from his university profile.

Edited by Stage7-4 on Oct 26th 2019 at 10:16:55 AM

It also doesn't really matter, since the article doesn't talk about anything written in the actual Unfortunate Implications example.

That said, I don't like the idea of judging sources based primarily on their writers, since the important thing is that the source is trustworthy and factual, and if a person is pointing out poor implications, if those implications ring true, it shouldn't matter if the person saying them is white or black. I mean, it's something to take into consideration I guess, but it shouldn't be the end-all-be-all when we look at sources over the content of the article itself.

For what it's worth, I rewrote the example to be about what the article actually says, which is that some aspects of Garnet's design and characterization are reminiscent of Black stereotypes.

As a YMMV trope, my understanding is that it's not particularly important whether we think that a reading of the work that includes troubling implications is actually valid. The citation requirement is there to provide some support for the idea that it's a view that is held by more than the person writing the entry and a couple of their friends. The person being cited doesn't need to have a PhD in film theory or gender studies or whatever, they just need to be writing for an outlet more established than some wonk's Twitter feed or personal blog.

Even if it seems less likely, it's still possible for a non-LGBTQ person to have a good understanding of LGBTQ topics. We shouldn't dismiss someone's opinion solely on that basis.

https://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/the-berenstain-bears-get-an-app-and-find-god

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/YMMV/TheBerenstainBears

For the Unfortunate Implications section Bernstein Bears, they claim from an article that the newer religious based books soured the theme of the bears doing good for decency sake. Ironically, I feel that article itself has some unfortunate implications, since a lot of people are influenced morally by religion and it comes off as simplistically chiding people for having their morals be influenced by religious beliefs.

Found on Digimon Adventure: Last Evolution Kizuna

• Unfortunate Implications:
  • With the main plot being around how the group will need to come to terms with the thought of losing their Digimon, more than a few can't help but point out it gives an 'adults aren't allowed to like things from their childhood when they grow up and must move on from it' message. Considering the target audience is those who grew up with the original Adventure anime, more than a few can't help but point out the irony in it.
  • In some cases, people feel that it also verges a bit too uncomfortably close to a conformity message, something Japan, while lessened greatly in recent years, still tries to promote even to this day.

No citation sourced.

EDIT: Done and done.

Edited by Siegfried1337 on Dec 21st 2019 at 6:17:40 AM

Delete for no citation.

Found this at YMMV.The Rise Of Skywalker

• Unfortunate Implications:
  • Quite a few people noted how Rose being sidelined in this movie after the previous one was clearly building up to something with her feels uncomfortably like Disney bowing to the whims of the openly racist attacks on her very existence that pushed Kelly Marie Tran off social media.
  • Some have noted that the movie's retcon of Rey's parentage, namely turning her from the child of nobody scrappers who was just Randomly Gifted into saying that she's actually the granddaughter of Emperor Palpatine, very much undermines the inclusionary idea put forth in The Last Jedi that someone gifted with the Force could be anyone from anywhere.
  • others have noted that Finn, the original male lead and a black man, has also been sidelined into an explicit Decoy Protagonist in favor of Poe and Kylo, which rather horribly mirrors the desires of racists “fans” who tried to boycott The Force Awakens.

The first two sources work, but the last one looks like a blog.

Yeah it's a fan blog which we don't allow

Is that second one Unfortunate Implications? I mean yes, it definitely undermines the theme, but that feels like a different trope than Unfortunate Implications.

I agree.

It seems like more of a Broken Aesop.

Guys, I would like to discuss the case with the unfortunate implications page I brought up. Because it really seems to be based on the opinion that have religious influences in your moral system is a bad thing.

So i found all this on the Saw 3d/VII YMMV page:

There's no link to back this all up, so cut?

Edited by ScarletNebula on Dec 29th 2019 at 10:35:03 AM

Cut.