Needs Help: Ho Yay

In practice I don't actually see much misuse where it's confused it for a separate trope. While there's a few stragglers, most cases where the two exist on the same page are old, and most cases where only Les Yay exists without Ho Yay use the trope as well as Ho Yay does. So I don't think we need to go as far as merging the tropes altogether, as it's grandfathered itself in enough that it's more work to go and change them than to leave them alone if misuse isn't going on. Just clean up residual dual usage.

Edited by AlleyOop on Feb 19th 2020 at 5:21:02 AM

I'm not proposing merging anything, as Ho Yay and Les Yay are already the same trope.

My thinking is this: the general purpose of gendered redirects is for tropes with names that sound gendered, but are actually gender neutral i.e. First Girl Wins has the redirect First Guy Wins. This helps avoid confusion from people thinking that the trope is gendered when it isn't.

Ho Yay, however, is not a gendered name. "Homoeroticism" is a concept that applies to women just as much as men. So Les Yay is a pointless female-only subtype of a nongendered trope. Like if The Captain had the redirect "The Female Captain". Les Yay has no actual utility outside of confusing people.

Edited by TheMountainKing on Feb 19th 2020 at 5:32:03 AM

I don't particularly care, except that a lot of wicks will need to be changed if we get rid of Les Yay, which isn't an argument against the idea of cutting it- just something to note.

In the Early Days, Les Yay did have its own article before it was decided, "Why is there a separate article?" and made a redirect to Ho Yay. Yes, there were actually users arguing that "Ho" Yay could only apply to men.

That's true, though a lot of those are misuse that we should clean up anyway. Just with a brief look in the last few minutes, a ton of the links are potholes referencing scenes of explicit lesbian sex.

So the article was cut, but instead of deleting/rewriting the wicks it was made a redirect? That explains a lot, certainly why so many entries treat it as a seperate trope.

Edited by TheMountainKing on Feb 19th 2020 at 6:09:02 AM

I believe so, and I think the redirect was made (in part) to make less work for wick migration. And possibly easier to swallow. The page history isn't there, so I cannot refer to it. Also, Ho Yay/Les Yay used to be objective, requiring obviousness/creator intent, so if the examples you encountered are very old, that might be the reason.

While going through Ship Tease, I've noticed many examples pothole Ho Yay. For example:

• Also in Best Wishes, there was some shipping between Ash and Trip going on. Trip seems to have the same personality like Paul...until BW022 when you realize he's a full blown Ice King but this attitude is limited to Ash only. In that episode the minute Ash tries to praise him, Trip avoids eye contact which is a huge sign of Sugar And Ice. Later appearances drop the Jerkass side completely.^note Though that could be due to the sequel games upsetting the apple cart as much as anything. And when does any of Ash's rivals actually help him out concerning one of his Pokémon? Trip would be the first if you don't count Gary after he Took a Level in Kindness.

I think we need a crowner about Les Yay, so I made one.

Downvoted; neutral on merging examples, no on cutting the redirect.

I mean, if we cut the redirect we'd have to merge which is why I put both in the same single-question crowner. One is required if we do the other.

Merging is required if we cut the redirect, but not vice versa.

I mean...then we'd just have a useless, lonely redirect with no valid examples, right? Why would we keep it, for inbounds? People would just keep using it. If the issue is big enough for us to "merge" examples, cutting is only the next logical step.

Redirects see use outside of being listed as examples. And anyways, use of the term goes far beyond TV Tropes.

Alright, point taken, here's the crowner Version 2.0.

What does "merge examples" mean? Isn't that what we already have? Les Yay is not a trope with its own page, it's already just a redirect.

Edited by TheMountainKing on Feb 24th 2020 at 2:42:05 PM

We mean to move every example back to the original Ho Yay but keep Les Yay as the redirect that it is. Basically the idea would be to leave Les Yay completely exampleless.

Edited by WarJay77 on Feb 24th 2020 at 2:42:39 PM

Examples from where? There is no Les Yay page.

Works' YMMV pages.

The wicks around the wiki. We'd go through the Les Yay wicks and move them all back to the main Ho Yay page.

Edited by WarJay77 on Feb 24th 2020 at 2:46:56 PM

You mean changing Les Yay example wicks to Ho Yay example wicks?

Yes.

I think we should just leave it alone. I mean redirects are there to be used when they arent being kept for inbounds because the page was renamed. I never seen anyone treat Les Yay and Ho Yay as two different tropes on ymmv pages recently but if so we can just safely merge them with Ho Yay instead of cutting Les Yay

Edited by MacronNotes on Feb 24th 2020 at 3:54:56 PM

I'm starting to lean towards "keep as-is". If it's not causing problems, I don't think it's worth all the effort of changing.

It should be treated like any of the other Distaff Counterpart redirects we already use regularly; for people who have already heard of the term, it'll still take them where they need to go.

Edited by AlleyOop on Feb 24th 2020 at 5:22:20 AM