While the Values Dissonance is worth putting in, we shoudln't replace it for the current decription. Fact is, it is this sort of narrative the reproduces people who are convinced tha they know what's best for their love interest or think of themselves as "deserving" it, without regard for their feelings. How about a more neutral description with a warning tag at the end?
But does it really matter what sort of people it may or may not reproduce? The trope, in its objective core, should be "Bob confesses to Alice, gets turned down, but keeps trying until he "wins".".
The current description sounds pretty much like: "Caroll, the writer, inserts himself into a story as Bob, a stalking Abhorrent Admirer, (probably because himself has an unhealthy fixation on a woman). Report Siht reads this, probably because he is also a jerk."
If anything, the unfortunate implications should go to a smaller warning tag, and not a warning like "don't worry, in special cases of Values Dissonance, maybe your favorite author, character, and yourself are not actually misogynist jerks"
I will post a new description draft here in a few hours.
Y'know, at first I was gonna say that it's probably fine how it is...then I actually read it. It definitely needs to be made more neutral. All that stuff about "Oh, this happened to the author so this is why he does this trope" should be cut out. The two "Types" are pretty much okay.
They lost me. Forgot me. Made you from parts of me. If you're the One, my father's son, what am I supposed to be?The idea of the two types is OK, but their description also confuses me.
I would assume that overt attempts at "winning the girl" are more likely to be portrayed as negatively stalkerish, or at least egoistic, while those who become Just Friend and patiently wait, at least attempt to be gallant and have an I Want My Beloved to Be Happy solution, even if they eventually get together, because it's a romantic story.
Instead, it is worded as if the first one would be default Hollywood Romance, and the latter gives all sorts of intentions into Bob's mind as if it would be based on XKCD's deconstruction (as seen in the examples list).
My proposed draft will include this minor change.
Here it is:
This is when Bob (this character is usually male, although female examples do exist) is madly in love with Alice. Alice doesn't seem too interested, so Bob keeps trying, hoping that she will change her mind.
This can play out in one of two ways:
- 1. The Conqueror: If Bob and Alice are strangers or distant acquaintances when he falls for her, after the first confession that was turned down, he will to show his affection in more and more spectacular ways, to prove his serious intentions. Sometimes, the people around them will expect that Bob will eventually get together with Alice. Once Bob's displays of affection convince Alice to date him, either from the exhaustion of being pursued or genuinely changing her mind about him, the two will be portrayed as a normal couple. This is frequently used by romantic comedies or other shows/movies where they want to keep the audience asking Will They or Won't They?.
- 2. The Patient Friend: If Bob and Alice are either long time friends, or strangers who just got into a Just Friends relationship, Bob will doggedly avoid acting on his interest in Alice. At first, he will imply, if not openly admit that he has his hopes for a more serious relationship, and he will be there for Alice once she starts to think the same way, but for the time being, he is content with staying Just Friends. Alice might refuse the Relationship Text Upgrade because she doesn't want to ruin this friendship, and believe that Bob just has a schoolboy crush he'll get over. If Alice has other relationship, Bob might try to accept them for Alice's sake, or eventually stop being in denial, and accept the challenge.
In fiction, as long as Bob is honestly nice, or at least a decent guy, either of these two attitudes can be expected to result in success: due to the Rule of Romantic, Alice will realize that she really happens to love him back.
In Real Life, both of these would have the potential to backfire spectacularly: The Conqueror would have to realize that if she wasn't moved from getting a bouquet of flowers, giving her another hundred flowers made her annoyed, and another thousand made her worried that a crazy Stalker with a Crush is harrassing her, ten thousand flowers probably won't do the trick, love doesn't work that way.
And The Patient Friend would have to learn, that while his love interest might really need only time to admit her own feelings, it is also possible that she really wants to stay Just Friends, or even finds him sexually and physically unattractive.
See also The Urkel, Just Friends, I Want My Beloved to Be Happy, and Romantic Runner-Up. Compare with the less sympathetic Stalker with a Crush, Mad Love, and Abhorrent Admirer. Contrast Cannot Spit It Out, where the person is incapable of expressing their romantic interest even once, let alone over and over again.
If you have a great personal story that falls along the lines of this trope, bring it over to Troper Tales. If you have an example of someone in real life examining or playing with this trope, put it in the Real Life section of this trope.
edited 12th Oct '10 2:25:59 PM by EternalSeptember
So cut it. This is a TV Tropes site, not a Real Life Tropes Site. Real Life is all well and good, but it doesn't belong in the description of a trope.
How it operates in real life, and how is it different in fiction, defines why it isn't just People Sitting On Chairs.
For example, Instant Death Bullet isn't just Standard Firefight, because a certain, possible event is made obligatory, with the intention of making the action more dramatic (Rule of Drama / Rule of Cool).
In the same way, Dogged Nice Guy isn' just Standard Romance, because it is shown as a failsafe method that always works, to make the drama more romantic]] (Rule Of Romantic).
Besides, read the original description in the edit histories. This is why I opene this thread, it was full of cheap shots against everything about the trope. Just look at the two paragraphs in question (that were three back then):
These courses of action do not work in Real Life. This is probably because most of the actions typical of this trope are actually disturbingly stalkerish if you think about them. If they are not actively creepy in practice, they come off as thoughtless by treating affection like a Plot Coupon, where more "nice" gestures equals more sexual attraction. In Real Life, sexual attraction doesn't necessarily come with friendly feelings for another person, ranging in reasons from simple Values Dissonance to finding the other Mirror-Cracking Ugly.
This trope likely occurs due to a combination of Most Writers Are Male and Writer on Board. Said writer probably had an unrequited crush they never really got over, thus feeling the need to portray a fantasy wherein their Author Avatar manages to win the girl of his dreams simply by virtue of having an unhealthy fixation on her. This is also an easy devise to keep Unresolved Sexual Tension going indefinitely in a TV series without a definite end or planned-in-advance master Story Arc.
This also has appeal as there is a part of audience demographic that consists of guys who believe they are doggedly nice. Since the actions of the Dogged Nice Guy don't really come across as nice in the real world, a member of this demographic is usually the only one who thinks they are nice. This can then become Fanservice of the non-sexy kind: these guys can see their moves working they way they believe that they should.

We have precisely the same problem that we had with Manic Pixie Dream Girl a few months ago.
The description seems to be written by someone who hates the trope, ranting about how it wouldn't work in real life, practically calls the writers delusional losers with "an unhealthy fixation", the character is compared to stalkers, and so is the target audience itself, even potholed to Bitch in Sheep's Clothing.
I disagree with all of it.
edited 10th Oct '10 7:38:09 AM by EternalSeptember