Have a question about how the TVTropes wiki works? No one knows this community better than the people in it, so ask away! Ask the Tropers is the page you come to when you have a question burning in your brain and the support pages didn't help.
It's not for everything, though. For a list of all the resources for your questions, click here. You can also go to this Directory thread
for ongoing cleanup projects.
They also removed
this entry from WTH, Costuming Department?
- The Native American getup worn by Knowles' and Cooper's newscaster characters, aside from being blatantly racist, are also very strange and lack visual cohesion. In the trailer, Cooper wears blonde cornrows that look very fake and were easily mistaken for a headdress, before the final film made it clear that it was supposed to be her hair (and as seen above, her "normal" hair is just as unconvincing).
with the edit reason: "the native American clothing was part of a running gag, and probably intended to be 'not coordinated'"
I don't know the validity of this one though, so you make your own conclusions.
Edited by AudioSpeaks2 Art Museum Curator and frequent helper of the Web Original deprecation project
Oh yeah. I smell agenda as hell here
Oh hi. Welcome to my page. Uh, I am a nice polite ND Canadian, and not a rabbit who has stolen a laptop I swear. Did you bring any carrots?
They also made an edit on the main page here, specifically changing the wording to remove the fact that the cis male athletes are pretending to be trans women. No edit reason, but it feels weird to downplay that part of the premise in tandem with the other things.
It seems rather blatant.
Alright, so keeping in mind that Broken Aesop is extremely tenuous as is and is currently TRS-iceboxed (An Aesop TRS underway), I think the original entry was sketchy as is because Broken Aesop ostensibly requires a few bars to clear: 1) that the movie is itself presenting a specific moral, and 2) the moral is being deliberately preached (ie not just something reached outside analysis), and 3) the movie does something that outright contradicts that message. My problem with the entry has to do with trying to approach Broken Aesop backwards: starts off by describing how transphobic it is (without explaining how), leading to how it goes against a goal to "protect women's spaces" (without explaining why that is) and then going into how misogynistic it is (which also doesn't go into detail with). That I feel is the issue that warrants removal, also because it just feels kind of complain-y.
HOWEVER, definitely getting weird vibes from Madarosh's edit reasons and behavior, which at best approach the subject as "nuh uh your analysis is wrong because I say so" (kind of a demonstration of why Broken Aesop is in need of help), at worst come off as transphobic apologia. The removal of the WTH, Costuming Department? also doesn't make sense — if being outlandish and dumb oversteps the purpose of being a joke, it should take some level of prescedent, especially if the "WTH" factor comes nothing from the joke itself (which again, Madarosh does not contextualize).
Thanks for playing Kings Quest V!
Agreed, contextualizing whatever the running gag is supposed to be might help, but going "It's probably supposed to look bad" without a statement from the creators to cite isn't sufficient reasoning for removal to me. (As an aside, their removing just the one bullet point from that entry left it with incorrect indentation as well.)
agree that the Broken Aesop entry was a stretch— is the Aesop here supposed to be "men should not be allowed in women's spaces"? because if so, "Men are inherently better at sports" does not break that message, or even really relate to it directly. That may be kind of a shitty and untrue message to put in your work, but it doesn't seem internally inconsistent. If someone who has seen the movie wants to rephrase it to more clearly show the inconsistency between the moral message and the plot then maybe it would make more sense
(But yes, clearly an agenda on the part of the person who removed it initially)
Edited by Tremmor19
Not sure what this adds, but the Broken Aesop entry was initially an Unfortunate Implications entry, the trope was changed to Broken Aesop by the same troper who added it, but it was moved to the main page by another troper because it's not a YMMV trope.
We don't do Unfortunate Implications entries on YMMV pages anymore precisely because it's often just a channel for unconstructive complaining about political implications. That original poster probably didn't understand the necessary parameters for either it or Broken Aesop and just wanted to complain, and that alone was a reason to be removed, unless they actually were able to explain more in detail and with proper context how the they're applicable to the film. The film more than likely does have very crappy opinions but trope requirements are trope requirements.
Thanks for playing Kings Quest V!
Whatever the case, should madorosh be sent a notifier or something?
Edited by AudioSpeaks2 Art Museum Curator and frequent helper of the Web Original deprecation project
Madorosh has been suspended. We agreed that that edit reason alone is pretty sus.
If you can't decide if the example itself is valid, it might be best to take it to the "is this an example" thread.
Alright, I guess we can just close this then and move discussion to that thread.
Art Museum Curator and frequent helper of the Web Original deprecation project
madorosh removed
this example from Lady Ballers
with the edit reason: "doesn't make sense, the characters in the film mention the biological fact that men have specific advantages over women, which in general is true. Not sure what 'transphobia' is being displayed - everything in the film is played for laughs"
I don't wanna cause an edit war, but the example was valid. The film tries to present itself as pro-women but the film very much plays on the supposed belief that men, even the weakest men apparently who are out of shape and washed out and haven't exercised in years, are more physically abled and skilled at sports than the most trained female athletes. Which very much does go against the film's supposed "feminist" message.
Again, I want to cause no edit war so I brought it here.
Edited by AudioSpeaks2