Opened.
Looking at it, I wonder if it can be saved at all...
she/her | TRS needs your help! | Contributor of Trope ReportMy idea is to treat this like All Jews Are Ashkenazi or All Muslims Are Arab: cover examples where a work of fiction strongly implies that this is the case or the idea is brought up in-universe.
Issue is, if the wick check is representative, that's not a whole lot of usable examples to sort into the new definition. (15% of 248 is only 37)
I wouldn't be opposed to this if we can make it work, but if not, we need a second plan.
Edited by WarJay77 on Mar 18th 2020 at 12:00:50 PM
Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure PurenessTo me, the only tropeworthy thing about this is the Phenotype Stereotype that all Latinos are dark-skinned (I would consider 1 and 2 in the wick check to fall under this). And if that's redundant with Phenotype Stereotype, then I don't see anything worth saving.
Edited by naturalironist on Mar 18th 2020 at 12:12:26 PM
"It's just a show; I should really just relax"I can support a pivot to All Latinos Are Brown, but the All X are Y tropes have a tendency to decay into “an X that is Y” — so , I’d consider 1 to be examples and 2 to be decay. The work has to explicitly reference the belief or it has to be very present in the work (like All Men Are Perverts).
Cutting and starting from scratch may be the best way to do that though.
Edited by Synchronicity on Mar 18th 2020 at 1:01:21 PM
If there's a sterotype about X, and the only member of X in that work fits the stereotype, I would consider that an example of the stereotype in action, and I think that applies here. When a person/character is tokenized, they're expected to represent their entire group. So I don't think #2 is problematic instance of Trope Decay.
The big problems I see with the trope are the meaningless aversions for a non-omnipresent trope, and the fact that the underlying concept is just Phenotype Stereotype.
"It's just a show; I should really just relax"However, that only applies to tokens, who are in the story specifically because of their minority status. If there's a character who just so happens to be a brown skinned latino, that's not the same thing.
Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure PurenessI personally have never seen tokens as supposed to represent their entire group — Token Minority only mentions it as a possibility. How does one draw the line between "the single Latino character has brown skin" and "this single Latino character with brown skin represents all Latinos"?
I personally see it less as "the token represents the rest of their group" but more "if they specifically chose their token latino character to have brown skin, that's what they consider obviously latino" because obviously a token should be easy to identify if possible.
Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure PurenessListing any Latino character who happens to have brown skin, even if they're the only Latino in the work, strikes me as Chairs.
All Latinos Are Mestizo? To imply a homogeneous ethnic and cultural background as well?
Edited by Synchronicity on Mar 20th 2020 at 9:44:24 AM
FTR, that's why I keep specifying "token", as someone being a Token is much different than just being the only minority in a work by coincidence; if nothing is made of the character's race, they're not a token and shouldn't qualify for this trope. But if their race is important to the story and they're the only latino character in the work, them having brown skin is more important as an identifier.
I like it.
Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure PurenessHm. Maybe something like Identical-Looking Asians might be a better template? That requires In-Universe expression, but there’s not a whole lot of examples to move over.
Edited by Synchronicity on Mar 21st 2020 at 7:44:10 AM
I like All Latinos Are Mestizo.
Patiently awaiting the release of Paper Luigi and the Marvelous Compass.Agreed. that is a good rename option.
I have no idea what Mestizo means.
Literally, "mixed-race", specifically, coming from mixed Hispanic and Indigenous American heritage, now colloquially used for 'mainstream' Latino populations. The Phenotype Stereotype for it is the aforementioned brown skin and black hair.
I'm not outright suggesting a rename to All Latinos Are Mestizo, rather that as a direction for this trope to go in — they all have the same ethnic and cultural background. They look mestizo, have a Hispanic name, are probably Christian, etc. Unless Latin Land itself can cover this? But that's a setting, while this is for characters...
(FWIW, I didn't know what "Ashkenazi" was specifically before reading All Jews Are Ashkenazi, but I thought it was clear that it was a subset of Jews. Assuming the same here.)
Sounds reasonable to me.
Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure PurenessSeeing two options from discussion:
- Cut, move applicable examples to Phenotype Stereotype
- Retool to "all Latinos have the same racial and cultural background"
These might not be mutually exclusive, if we start the retooled trope from scratch and move single-character examples to Phenotype Stereotype. IMO, token minority examples fit better there, analogous to how a Token White or a But Not Too Foreign character in an Asian setting would have blonde hair and blue eyes 80% of the time.
Edited by Synchronicity on Apr 2nd 2020 at 9:50:18 AM
If I can nitpick on this, the correct term would be "Mestizos", not "Mestizo", due to the number agreement rule.
Edited by FernandoLemon on Apr 2nd 2020 at 12:10:36 PM
I'd like to apologize for all this.Sure, I grew up using mestizo as descriptive so my instinct was to use the singular. Mestizos works as well.
I prefer the latter option of retooling this trope.
It's been a couple of weeks since the thread was opened, so I made a Page Action crowner.
Noting that I put "Move single character examples to Phenotype Stereotype" as a separate option from retooling or keeping as-is because there was discussion on what to do with Token Minority examples.
I'm not sure if we should have an option to address all the aversions on the page.
I looked at some of the aversions and the ones I saw all look like "non-Mestizo Latinos exist". I also spotted a "played straight and subverted" example.
I'm starting to lean more toward merging with Phenotype Stereotype.
Edited by GastonRabbit on Apr 6th 2020 at 1:27:44 PM
Patiently awaiting the release of Paper Luigi and the Marvelous Compass.
Crown Description:
What would be the best way to fix the page?
Latino Is Brown first came to my attention when I noticed how many aversions were on the page. As this is clearly not an Omnipresent Trope, I wondered why so many aversions would coexist alongside 'straight' examples — specifically, what is being averted? Hence this Trope Talk query. I did a wick check (below) and figured it was worth bringing to TRS vs starting a cleanup because I find the scope of the trope confusing.
I think the first post of that Trope Talk thread sums it up:
When sorting examples, I used five criteria:
Here is a selection of examples from the page of each:
Examples of "All Latinos are tanned" or the belief thereof
Examples of "A Latino fits the Phenotype Stereotype":
Examples of "A Latino does not fit the Phenotype Stereotype"
Examples of "Latinos within the work have varying skintones"
Examples of changes to character or actor design involving the phenotype (Brownface, Race Lift etc) — these are all in the realm of trivia and probably shouldn't be on the page
And here is the wick check:
All Latinos in the setting have have brown skin, which usually goes hand in hand with dark hair. Included here is the expressed belief that all Latinos look like this, whether or not it is true for the work.
A Latino (or a character implied to be/of an ethnicity equivalent to Latinos) has this Phenotype Stereotype to distinguish him from non-Latino characters
Specific character/actor aversions: Latinos who do not fit this Phenotype Stereotype, without the In-Universe belief that they do
Setting or cast-wide aversions/zigzags/mixed examples: Some Latino characters look like that, some don't, often compared to the real-life diversity of Latinos
Lacking context/misuse
Results:
What to do with the aversions, then? I think that aversions and zigzags (where single characters don't look "Latino" and when Latinos within the work are portrayed as multiracial), should at least be removed per Averted Trope, unless the stereotypical Latino "look" is brought up in reference to them (eg. "You don't look like you're from Mexico" or like in One Day at a Time (2017) where a fair-skinned Latina despairs when she realizes she's white-passing and her family is not).
What to do with references to the out-of-universe belief that all Latinos look like this, like "Ben Affleck doesn't look Latino enough to play one although he darkened his hair" or "Cameron Diaz usually plays white women as a result of this"? Although it affects casting or character design, it is certainly not what we would consider a trope. I think these examples should be removed unless the creators themselves discuss it.
In addition, it seems the most common use of the trope is "Latino characters have the olive brown skin/dark hair Phenotype Stereotype, or this is discussed". However, the trope is not a subtrope of Phenotype Stereotype: just "related". I think that "The work's token Latinos have dark skin and black hair" is misuse and should be under Phenotype Stereotype, and this trope's examples should be cleaned to be about the belief, and its description made clear.
Note that the page has 248 wicks, not a particularly huge number.
But that's just me. Thoughts?
Edited by Synchronicity on Mar 17th 2020 at 3:35:57 AM