(x3) Actually, it is characterization-related, given Wouldn't Hit a Girl exists for a reason. P.S. I'm a girl.

Edited by RandomTroper123 on Aug 31st 2022 at 5:25:40 AM

Right, but that's the current definition. And it's not a tropeworthy one.

Current Project: Incorruptible Pure Pureness

Requiring narrative significance is the point currently.

Edited by Amonimus on Jul 12th 2022 at 11:33:53 AM

TroperWall / WikiMagic Cleanup

Just come across this. I've voted to clean up the trope definition because it's definitely a problem for works where there's no narrative significance to an opponent's gender, so redefining it to address that makes sense. Even though the current trope is supposed to have characterisation significance, it's such a messy, sprawling description that it's easy to see why people might miss that, so the description is an issue even if a redefinition tweak wasn't on the cards.

I've also voted in favour of merging the trope with the aversion category of Wouldn't Hit a Girl as two are naturally intertwined, and the proposed redefinition practically makes that link a default. I think working that into the trope will help focus the new definition and help make it clear when the trope should be used and when it shouldn't (since examples will need to be indicating that this trope is in play to prevent the other trope functioning).

I've down-voted the rename because I don't think that's necessary. The problem isn't the name, it's the definition; the proposed definition change actually makes the current name more appropriate, not less.

Edited by Wyldchyld on Jul 13th 2022 at 10:49:50 AM

If my post doesn't mention a giant flying sperm whale with oversized teeth and lionfish fins for flippers, it just isn't worth reading.

If the discussion is still open, I'm in favour of rewriting it. I agree that it shouldn't be any instance of a man physically attacking a woman or whatnot. To summarize my own thoughts and what I've gathered from reading this thread, the contexts that are allowed for this trope are:
1. If chivalry or the value of not hitting a woman is expected in the setting or at least discussed/mentioned in the scene, or
2. If the act of attacking a woman considered a Kick the Dog moment or otherwise a step too far, with implicit double standards. (raised by amathieu13)
On how to demonstrate this in examples, I'll use entries from the Literature folder for reference:
1. Harry Potter, Prisoner of Azkaban:

By the standards set above, this example can stay because the value of chivalry is discussed (#1).
2. The Hunger Games: For this example, the setting doesn't establish hitting a woman/girl specifically to be a heinous act. Heck, in the setting, tributes are expected to harm or kill competitors no matter their gender to win the Games. Since it doesn't fulfill either #1 or #2 of the criteria above, this example should go. (For context, Marvel killing Rue falls under Would Hurt a Child due to Rue being aged 12 - youngest eligible age to be Reaped - to Marvel's older-teens, while Thresh killing Clove isn't seen as a villainous act from Katniss' POV, AKA the only POV we know of in the book.)
I think this sort of reasoning for the criteria makes the most sense.
P.S. In response to Amonimus: I think these examples can stay under the criteria, since the '"you wouldn't hit a Dark Chick dontcha" card' part falls under criterion #1 of discussion of chivalry as a value.

Edited by AquaEclipse on Aug 7th 2022 at 12:29:30 AM

they/she; editor of Minecraft SMPs; I no longer fear God because I know their eyes are on me

Discussion isn't still open, but we did vote in favor of rewriting it. Since you were in favor of that anyway, you're free to rewrite it yourself if you want to.

You can't always get what you want.

I'd rather this trope not exist at all. It is implying women who are clearly adults are as innocent as children. In other words, it's sexist.

Female here. I don't the trope itself is sexist as it's relating to the fact that many cultures in Real Life consider men harming women shitty. Additionally, the main page (currently) states it can apply to male characters attacking villainesses.

Double Standard is a thing. It may not be in the distant future, but if authors use it, it's a trope that exists. And we've decided to keep the description of it (also it still pending the rewrite sandbox), so this remark doesn't sound relevant to the TRS.

Edited by Amonimus on Aug 24th 2022 at 2:52:07 PM

TroperWall / WikiMagic Cleanup

Yeah, I'm aware of Double Standards and the fact this will get rewritten (eventually), I was just responding to someone making a comment. And, there's nothing stating someone can't do that, unless it's popcorning or rude or something.

( I wasn't responding to your post and got )

Edited by Amonimus on Aug 24th 2022 at 2:54:52 PM

TroperWall / WikiMagic Cleanup

Ok, whoops.

I personally feel like the trope should be both renamed and redefined, so that it sounds less offensive.

Renaming got 0:11 votes. Redefining (may not be what you've intended) got 31:1 votes. You can feel many things, but please notice the discussion has already moved on over a month ago.

Are you at going to help with new definition at least?

---

Anyway, I've started Sandbox.Would Hit A Girl, but I'm not motivated enough today to finish it.

Edited by Amonimus on Aug 28th 2022 at 10:00:46 PM

TroperWall / WikiMagic Cleanup

Just want to note that Scarlet was already suspended once for removing references to a trope they found sexist... so while they haven't done any edits like that since they seem to be hung up on the idea that our documentation of tropes like this is problematic, and it may not be worth trying to engage here.

Sandbox looks fine so far, I'll come back tomorrow to see if I can help at all. Too tired tonight.

Edited by WarJay77 on Aug 28th 2022 at 1:39:42 PM

Current Project: Incorruptible Pure Pureness

I'm not going to hook any more crowners for this thread. I'd rather see cleanup and rewriting get done (unless the latter has already been done, in which case only the former would be left).

And either way, Scarlet's not currently suspended.

You can't always get what you want.

To clarify, I was talking about an old suspension for removing entries of The Ditz.

Current Project: Incorruptible Pure Pureness

Wait, so should we change Would Harm a Senior and Would Hurt a Child as well to be consistent?

CM Dates; CM Pending; CM Drafts

They're not in this thread's scope and I wouldn't lump them without a wick check.

TroperWall / WikiMagic Cleanup

(x2) I honestly don't feel that's necessary. EDIT: Unless you want to do a Wiki Check or something.

Edited by RandomTroper123 on Aug 30th 2022 at 4:04:49 AM

This, except I'd like to add that even if a wick check showed problems, I wouldn't approve of expanding this thread's scope to include them, and would only approve of taking them to a new thread.

Edited by GastonRabbit on Aug 30th 2022 at 5:02:21 AM

You can't always get what you want.

Bumping. How's progress so far?

TRS Queue | Works That Require Cleanup of Complaining | Troper Wall

I pinned a to-do list and made Sandbox.Would Clean Wicks to use once Sandbox.Would Hit A Girl is moved into place. The former's text is kind of a placeholder until the finalized description is moved into place.

Edited by GastonRabbit on Oct 7th 2022 at 10:12:16 AM

You can't always get what you want.

So for the rewrite all we need is:

• Hitting a female character is considered particularly bad in-universe
• The hitter doesn't have to be evil—-applies to anybody morally questionable.

For now, all I did was tweak the first sentence to this:

and then I condensed the description by leaving off paragraphs I didn't think were needed (I could be wrong though).

Macron's notes