This is the official thread for Values Dissonance, Deliberate Values Dissonance, Fair for Its Day, and Values Resonance. A 20-year waiting period has been placed on the “values” tropes, due to various misuse and shoehorning.
Edited by GastonRabbit on Jan 5th 2023 at 9:07:15 AM
I just looked into it. The first episode was posted in 2003.
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper WallPlus that word is unfortunately still common within "edgy" Internet circles, and I'm pretty sure that's the demographic of the original show.
I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.- Values Dissonance:
- The whole initial meeting with Zhora reeks of this, as it's treated as an I Know You Know I Know, with Deckard asking if she was asked to do anything unsavory to get her job as a stripper, and the unsavory nature of her job in general making such questions a joke. In the 21st century the view of sex workers has changed enough that such questions would actually be quite normal, making sure her consent was never violated.
- To a modern audience, the Forceful Kiss from Deckard to Rachael has overtones of Date Rape, but at the time apparently nobody complained. Ultimately there is still the context of Rachael not being an actual human and thus having zero knowledge of how to be physically intimate with someone, so Deckard has to teach her as they go along.
- The LAPD's treatment of the replicants, where they regularly refer to them by a slur and hunt them down in cold blood, now that police brutality against ethnic minorities has become a major political issue in the United States via the Black Lives Matter movement. Even before then, this trope started popping up within a decade of the film's release as the LAPD specifically got embroiled in the Rodney King and C.R.A.S.H controversies.
Isn't the last thing supposed to be wrong even then though ?
"That's right mortal. By channeling my divine rage into power, I have forged a new instrument in which to destroy you."I've only read the source material, but I'm pretty sure that the treatment of the replicants is meant to be seen as bad.
I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.Plus the LAPD being corrupt and/or racist is like something that people have known about for decades. Not sure why its being treated some like some shocking twits. L.A. Confidential used that idea in 1990.
"That's right mortal. By channeling my divine rage into power, I have forged a new instrument in which to destroy you."From The Grapes of Wrath
- Values Resonance: Written in 1939.
Now farming became industry, and the owners followed Rome, although they did not know it. They imported slaves, although they did not call them slaves: Chinese, Japanese, Mexicans, Filipinos. They live on rice and beans, the business men said. They don't need much. They wouldn't know what to do with good wages. Why, look how they live. Why, look what they eat. And if they get funny—deport them.
Seems like a ZCE. No explanation is given why there is a resonance.
I assume the point is that immigrant working conditions and deportation are more hot button topics today?
I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.
, ![]()
I commented that out (along with a few others) due to being Zero-Context Example entries.
Yakuza 3 has the following example:
- Values Resonance: There is a substory in which Kiryu has a heart-to-heart talk with a masseuse named Ayaka, who reveals herself to be transgender but is hesitant to reveal it to someone whom she has feelings for, out of fear of rejection. Kiryu reassures her by saying that if their relationship does not work out, she shouldn't blame herself for it and that they were simply incompatible and that she will one day find someone who will accept her. Luckily for Ayaka, her romantic interest accepts her and they begin dating. This substory becomes all the more meaningful once you realise that this game was released in 2009, when such representation was still a touchy subject back in the day.
I think it's a pretty good example, but it hasn't been 20 years since the game came out.
At the same time, the sidequest has gotten a great deal of praise from trans gamers in the current day for its sensitivity towards the subject, especially in contrast to another, less tasteful sidequest chain regarding a crossdresser named Michiru that was removed out of later releases because of its tastelessness.
So I'm wondering if we should lock up that example for another eight years, or if we can talk about both entries under Fair for Its Day (that it had some tasteless sidequests regarding trans people, but also some incredibly tasteful ones as well).
From YMMV.Robotboy
- Values Resonance: The show was made in 2005, and features Lola and Moshimo as positive, non-stereotypical representations of non-white characters, about a decade before the issue of PoC representation became more important in entertainment, especially children's television (which is the first form of media that young children are usually exposed to and can have an important effect on how they view themselves).
![]()
You are correct. I remember American children's cartoons in the 1990s were aggressively, ham-fistedly diverse. Robotboy was just part of a trend that already existed.
Found this on The Proud Family's.
- While the show is still popular, viewers have noted that certain aspects have not aged well. Penny, who has light skin and a thin build, is portrayed as pretty and desirable compared to Dijonay, who's darker, plump and a gossipy backstabber. It doesn't help that she was originally named "Delinquetta". The Gross Sisters are portrayed as blue-skinned because they're ashy, and the Chang Triplets are stereotypical Asian and Nerdy characters. Fans hope that these aspects will be retooled for the revival.
- There is also how the parents handle their kids politely refusing to do chores unless they get an increase in their allowance: kicking them out to the curb. Penny takes it in stride, encouraging her friends to become self-sufficient, but her friends bail when they see their parents hired other kids to do their chores and pay them for it. Oscar is the only parent who compromised by treating Penny to gumbo as an Apology Gift, carried her home since she was marching all day, and doubling her allowance. It's meant to be an analogy for strikebreakers but looks like blatant child abuse instead. In the 2020s, the television journalist would probably be making a discreet call to Child Protective Services while covering the "strike".
It's only a few months before it's 20 years old since the show premiered in September 2001. Should the examples remain?
Edited by mrSonic056 on May 23rd 2021 at 1:18:06 AM
Tremarious Walters-ThomasRegarding the second The Crown (2016) example here:
- One of the plots in Season 2 involves Mike Parker's wife requiring proof of his adultery in order to sue him for divorce, something that seems extremely unreasonable for people living in places with no-fault divorce
, where neither party has to prove any wrongdoing on the part of their spouse in order to successfully get a divorce. Many countries enacted this reform in the second half of the 20th century, though the UK notably has not. It must be noted that even 30 years after the Parkers' divorce that Diana was urged to turn a blind eye to Charles's indiscretions.
This is talking about dissonance between the US and UK, so it's valid even though the series isn't 20 years old.
Keet cleanup![]()
The second example is bad. Yes, if real parents did this it would be abuse, but the episode is such an on the nose metaphor for labor politics that reading it literally is being willfully obtuse. Also, even if we ignore the extremely obvious metaphor, that behavior was not acceptable in 2001. Do people really think it was socially acceptable to make your kids homeless for asking for more allowance in the 2000s?
Edited by TheMountainKing on May 23rd 2021 at 8:45:57 AM
Literature/Flatland
- Values Dissonance:
- A 3-D sphere tells the hero, a 2-D square, that in his world, men and women are equals. The square finds this unbelievable. The author might have been hinting that in a more advanced world, the sexes would in fact be more equal than in his time.
- The epilogue in later editions of the book would seem to indicate that people found it sexist at the time.
- As well, later editions rewrote it so that the square admits how bad women have it, noting that the only "consolation" is that they can't remember all the injustices they suffer.
- We might be dealing with an Unreliable Narrator as to how poor women's memories are. The square's wife comes across as sort of, well, ditzy, but she seems to remember things longer than he claims women do. (He does say she's smarter than most, but if women generally were as dumb as he claimed, they'd never remember where they lived or that they had families if they left the house. Or all the laws they have to follow).
I did some research on the other wiki
and apparently the book is supposed to be satire of Victorian values and that the main character A. Square who is also the narrator, is supposed to be a strawman who's sexism we're SUPPOSED to be questioning.
As the article says. Many reader did accuse the author of misogyny, which is why he released a second addition to explain that A. Squares views don't represent is own.
what I'm trying to say is. This sounds more like Unfortunate Implications or Misaimed Fandom then real Values Dissonance.
Sounds like Misaimed Fandom to me.
I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.I made the edit. I don't know if this is right. Here's the link.

From YMMV.Retarded Animal Babies.
I don't know exactly when RAB first aired, but I doubt it's twenty years old.