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.
You have to remember that not everybody even cares about a given page, so it's perfectly possible for a problematic page to pass under the radar for years before it's cleaned up. I myself have seen many subpar pages that have been abandoned or are in rarely read namespaces, etc.
My point is that the Double Standard you are seeing may simply be imagined. Remember that "double standard" is... y'know kind of insulting to accuse people of having. I think having a dedicated short-term clean-up thread for the various Acceptable Targets tropes would have value, especially since it would allow people to discuss particular examples. Ask The Tropers isn't exactly the best place for that.
Edited by WaterBlap Look at all that shiny stuff ain't they prettyI will respond to your points in the Discussion page for Acceptable Religious Targets.
Suffice it to say, I disagree with everything you mentioned above...and I think it's Dramatically Missing the Point.
It seems to me the sections have enough detail. Christianity, being the world's largest religion and biggest in the West (where all the media examples come from) gets more attention no matter what. However, even assuming it's a Double Standard, I'd say the solution would be to trim the Christianity section, rather than adding things to the Jews and Atheists sections.
Edited by FirebloodTo me the whole idea of Double Standard is Shifting the Burden of Proof...Skid Troper has not demonstrated the existence of said double standard, and he's making it our job to pre-emptively defend ourselves.
His argument as I mentioned in the Discussion, and I reiterate here...is a Golden Mean Fallacy, assuming that the media representations and clout of all religions is equal or fair...and it is also I think visibly obvious that his argument is very Christocentric. It's about making sure that Christianity fares well in comparison compared to other Abrahamic religions (and only Abrahamic faiths, Buddhism and Hinduism, both of whom are bigger than Judaism in adherents, need not apply). And furthermore, I think the trope page is very fair to Christianity, by emphasizing that the Pope and other Christian artists have themselves criticized it and so on. Proving that not all Christians are like that.
But you know maybe it's not a bad idea to lock the thread for good. Inevitably I think that's going to happen.
Edited by JulianLapostatAs they say, it's impossible to prove a negative (except in science), and that's what's being asked here
Every religion that ever existed on the planet, and atheism, have skeletons on the paths they've treaded. It's not This Wiki's job to detail real life events or disasters; the representation of such in media is the concern, and any real life details are to: 1) aid in understanding that representation and 2) provide a resource so future depictions are reasonably accurate or start Playing With from a solid base (ie, Useful Notes).
And Rule Of Cautious Editing Judgrment always takes precedence.
Coming back to where you started is not the same as never leaving. -Terry PratchettJulian, I also disagree with you, suspect you are deliberately ignoring what I'm saying, suspect you may only be suggesting an edit lock in an attempt to silence me and will take this to the discussion page for Acceptable Religious Targets.
Fireblood, do you have any suggestions on how to trim the Christianity folder, please message me.
Water Blap I am trying to clean up that folder, but it looks like doing so steps on the toes of some Tropers who want to keep it as is for various reasons. I would be happy to hear any feedback from you.
Candi, that's what I was tryin to do about Judaism; the stereotype of Jewish people being greedy has appeared in the media, thus (deplorable as it is) it is relevant to the article, but simply MENTIONING it got me an edit ban for some reason. Also the violent persecution of religions by atheist regimes has likely factored into the negative portrayals of atheists in media (as well as communists); as you said "Every religion that ever existed on the planet, and atheism, have skeletons on the paths they've treaded." The double standard is that only some groups are getting their skeletons trotted out but not others.
Hi everyone.I shouldn't have to defend myself from your insinuations, but let me state that I am a fellow troper such as yourself. I neither have, nor do I want any authority whatsoever, believing myself incapable to do so.
None of that however should matter...what matters is the nature of the content and topic at hand.
Acceptable Religious Targets has always been a contentious page and you are neither the first, nor do I expect, the last to make edits of your like and nature again and raise issues.
Until you arrived recently with your edits, that page was actually quiet for a good few months suggesting that consensus had been attained. And to maintain that, and prevent further such issues and ensure that future edits happen with sincere intentions and actual issues, I think an edit lock would serve, but this is of course not the place to suggest or recommend it, and I am merely considering it, not proposing or anything.
The stereotype about that is racist today, has always been racist across history, and will remain racist tomorrow. And in any case, that is an ethnic stereotype, not a religious stereotype. Religious stereotypes used to be "blood libel" and other ghastly lies which justified pogroms across history, as well as killing jesus which you absolutely did mention in your edits, and which is absolutely anti-semitic.
The article absolutely mentions Communist regimes persecuting religion, Stalin, Communist China and so on. Do you want a martyrology or something...please go elsewhere and do that.
And in any case you are missing the point: 'people don't atheists because of communism, they hate communism because it is atheistic. Not the other way around. People hated atheism before Communism, and it was because communists proclaimed themselves openly atheistic and secular, that the Cold War campaign used that as part of its propaganda. And they did it hypocritically...how do you explain the fact that Ayn Rand who was the most important anti-communist was herself an atheist?
Negative portrayals of atheism existed before Communism came into being and they continue even after communism is dead.
My feedback — since I was explicitly asked for it — would be:
- Don't take these things personally. Even if you aren't, it sounds like you are, especially with rhetoric like "attempt to silence me." Read and then re-read the Rule Of Cautious Editing Judgment page. Maybe take a day or two to reflect on what it says there. (I also think Julian is unnecessarily charged for some reason, as though this is being taken personally.)
- Having a dedicated clean-up thread for the Acceptable Targets tropes may be beneficial. IMO, it's easier to coordinate and to give (and get) feedback on changes that way. Maybe even having a dedicated Sandbox/ page would be helpful. That said, Septimus mentioned making a TRS thread for Acceptable Religious Targets.
- I think that if we are making the claim that "These are how religious groups are depicted qua acceptable targets," then I think we ought to include at least some mention of anti-Semitic portrayals. We are not saying "This is how these groups actually are," and if the page does not clearly or explicitly make this distinction, then I think we have a problem.
To Walter Blap...I agree with points 1 and 2, and thank you for it. With regards to point 3...
The problem is that Skid Troper is becoming a revisionist. He's acting as if his original edits were unproblematic. In the history of the trope page he mentions this. His first big edit is this:
Being an ancient religion, and like beliefs (including unbelief) Judaism has had unsavory adherents and members involved in questionable and even violent events. A few of the most prominent reasons include the involvement of Jews in the execution of Jesus Christ, denying Muhammad's prophethood and involvement in his death, and some blame Jews for the assassination of Tsar Alexander II. Cases such as these has led to all Jews getting smeared by association.
He is saying that some Jewish people did bad stuff and lists that bad stuff as killing Jesus and so on, and presents it as valid reasons for people to dislike Jews. That is anti-semitic and bigoted plain and simple — "Blood Libel" as it used to be called — and now he's acting as if he didn't say that. Because Jewish people didn't kill Jesus and the Prophet, and so on, and that was used as real-world excuses to commit pogroms and massacres against them and including this in a page about "Acceptable Religious Targets" is I would argue Dangerously Missing the Point. He somehow thinks including this balances the supposed negativity on the Christianity page. As such I don't think we should support any of Skid Troper's suggestions on this front, as I think it would set a dangerous precedent and normalize stuff that shouldn't be considered. And as far as the trope page is considered, most media doesn't actually show this anymore because obviously it is an Once Acceptable Target.
And you know Skid Troper's real objection is that he doesn't like the fact that it is obviously true as I mentioned succinctly "It's been noted, with only marginal hyperbole, that one could count on one hand for positive depictions of Jewish culture and Jewish people before the 20th Century."
He was already banned for those edits and the mods cleared him for editing. It seems unfair to use those edits against him when he is doing what the mods told him to do, namely to bring it to discussion if he thinks "there's unreasonable bias on an article." Again, quoting directly now, "Ninety-nine percent of the wiki are not looking for a fight."
Look at all that shiny stuff ain't they prettyJust because he was punished already doesn't mean history was erased. And there are countless examples of tropers who, even after being disciplined, continued to pursue an agenda, even unintentionally.
Also, you're taking that 99 percent figure too literally. No one actually measured the statistics.
Edited by NubianSatyressYou are assuming I'm taking the statistic literally. You're misrepresenting what I said in order to support your point. That's what we call manipulative.
I'm not saying he is not pursuing an agenda. I'm saying the baby is being thrown out with the bathwater. He actually has a fair point about the flaws of Acceptable Religious Targets, regardless of where that point is coming from.
Look at all that shiny stuff ain't they prettyI'm familiar with how you "argue," so I'm not even going to ask what you think your point was. You misrepresented what I was saying, and you're asserting that I missed your point when I clearly addressed what you said.
EDIT: To respond to your (yet again manipulative) question: you consistently misrepresent what people say, and I don't have to take it when you do it (since nobody has to). Be honest and I won't point out your dishonesty. It's nothing personal.
Edited by WaterBlap Look at all that shiny stuff ain't they prettyIn the Discussion page
for Acceptable Religious Targets he mentions stuff like this on the Discussion Page:
I know that Greedy Jew is a fundamentally antisemitic stereotype, but that has been portrayed in alot of media (Merchant of Venice was the first one that came to mind). On that note, I resent your remark about me; I know it is an anti-semitic play - a negative portrayal of Jews in the media (Tv Tropes deals in literature and theater) hence the reference. The only comparison I was making was that Christians being stereotyped as hypocrites has come up often in media and is a well-known negative stereotype, just as Jewish people are stereotyped. I'm not playing oppression Olympics or pretending that Christians have been oppressed just as much as Jewish people; I am saying both Christianity and Judaism have a popular negative stereotype of character quality associated with each one.
Then he also mentions at the end of this post: In closing, I would like to discuss some examples of how Judaism has been portrayed in the media rather than that generic "the positive portrayals of Judaism can be counted on one hand" . The point that Jews have only been recently portrayed positively is not generic at all.
He's acting as if his original edits focused on this when the actual examples are "blood libel". And as for Jewish greed, his example in his original edits was
:
The actions of some prominent Jews (such as the Biblical Pharisees) and the prominent success of Jewish people in certain fields... just as the most touted criticism of Christians is hypocrisy, the most touted criticism of Jews is greed.
There was no mention of the Jewish Moneylender trope or Shylock in the original, what he mentions are Pharisees, blood libel, and not "Jewish greed" but "Jewish success"...and needless to say success is not the same thing as greed. He's basically denying the gravity of what he did by Moving the Goalposts and Shifting the Burden of Proof.
None of his suggestions have demonstrated any visible anti-Christian or anti-religious intent on the page, he's calling for a balance based on Golden Mean Fallacy, and his demonstrations of why there should be examples on the Judaism page include stuff from Once Acceptable Targets Acceptable Ethnic Targets (in which Greedy Jew falls) and the examples he demonstrates are plainly "blood libel" Conspiracy Theory, and his example of Jewish greed is mostly dog whistle anti-semitism.
Yeah, we get it. He has said anti-Semitic stuff. Since you keep asserting various logical fallacies, I would like to point you to Argumentum Ad Nauseam. You can argue about what he said or how he said it until the cows come home. That doesn't mean everything you say is right or everything he said is wrong.
Moreover, see Fallacy Fallacy. Just because he has used fallacies, or said shitty things, does not mean everything he has said is wrong.
How does what you're saying, Julian, address the issue that Acceptable Religious Targets has?
Look at all that shiny stuff ain't they prettyI think a mention of the "greedy Jew" stereotype on the Acceptable Religious Targets page makes sense. This was a very popular stereotype throughout much of european history. its no longer acceptable to use but it should still be mentioned, maybe with a link to Once Acceptable Targets
It addresses the issue by noting that Skid Troper's point about mentioning some of the stuff to include about anti-semitism for the sake of "balance" is disingenuous and not the real problem of the trope. Because fundamentally Acceptable Religious Targets is about media representations and in that category pretending that everything is the same or equivalent is not correct.
The problem with the trope is that it deals with stuff that a lot of people are emotionally invested in and that everyone has an opinion on, and for the sake of balance, there is a risk, in the interests of concord and compromise, to harmonize everything when that is not what is needed or required. That's all.
I concede your points about Argument Ad Nauseam, and I'll avoid repeating further...
To Pistols-At-Dawn...
The greed trope or the Shylock trope, falls into Acceptable Ethnic Targets as I mentioned above. Jewishness as an ethnic and social identity is separate from Judaism as a religion. Jewish people being supposedly greedy a la the Merchant of Venice and so on deals with the Moneylender or pawnshop owner or usurer stereotype and that has to do with society, jobs, and race, rather than religion. So in either case it has no place here on Acceptable Religious Targets.
In the case of Acceptable Religious Targets, the stereotypes about Jews in popular media, pertaining to its religious dimension is stuff like Rabbinical discourse or how Talmudic arguments are complex and so on. The stuff that Skid Troper mentions that actually deal with stereotypes about religion in his original edits are stuff that are discredited and vile Conspiracy Theory (blood libel) and have no place in a simple short survey about Judaism as a religious target.
This latter I will maintain if I do have to Argumentum Ad Nauseam.
Edited by JulianLapostatHonestly, the "balance" issue is not justifiable enough to spend so much time harping on it. I see what you're saying what the problem is. I'd also add that the descriptions seem to focus heavily on the real world rather than how media portrays these religious groups. Also, it doesn't help that Once Acceptable Targets and Unacceptable Targets are not included in the description at the top of the page. Also the fact this allows any real life examples at all seems to be contrary to the idea that this is about "the groups' portrayals in media." There's mixed messages on the page that could be ironed out.
I'd totally be in favor of shipping this to TRS. Or at least locking it for now until we can get it through TRS.
Edited by WaterBlap Look at all that shiny stuff ain't they pretty

It looks like a Double Standard is at work here from where I'm standing, and the page's opening Warts and All is only applied to some beliefs and not others on that page. The article seems to tip-toe around some beliefs (such as Judaism, atheism and Scientology; of course there may a level of real-life You Wanna Get Sued? making people tip-toe around Scientology), but go all out on others (such as Christianity and Islam) on that page; otherwise why is it acceptable for the page to say, and I quote "the defining criticism of Christianity is hypocrisy" (though it does state that hypocrisy is not limited to Christianity or the religious) and criticize Christianity's anti-LBGT stance (while it does mention homophobia existing in Buddhism) but not mention the negative stereotype about Judaism (the prejudiced stereotype of Jews being greedy, one example of such is Shylock from Shakespeare's "The Merchant of Venice")? That would be a textbook example of discrimination, prejudice and a Double Standard.
I do not say, think, or believe that all Jews are greedy (every creed has some greedy members anyway). I made edits to the Christianity folder to try and make it smaller, more compact, while still keeping the grievances mentioned. My goal here is to make the Christianity folder more compact while keeping the facts mentioned, list some of the discrimination and negative stereotypes Jewish people have faced and describe some of the details of anti-religious discrimination in the atheism section ([[several https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/archives/anti.html
]] examples
can
be seen
in these links
(I list them because the nature of anti-religious discrimination by atheist regimes seems to be an obscure fact).
I listed reasons that had been given for Antisemitism (similar to how how the Christianity sections lists at length the various grievances people have with Christianity and the Islam section below Judaism lists the various grievances people have with Islam). I don't have grievances with Judaism itself, though I am not Jewish. As for the atheism section it's a fact that several atheist regimes have been responsible for violent persecution of the religious (I added the example of North Korea killing people for having Bibles because it's the most egregious example of anti-religious prejudice that I know. Several more
examples
can
be seen
in these links
).
So how can these points raised be addressed? (It would be disingenuous to sweep them under the rug or whitewash them)
Edited by SkidTroper