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.
Ask the Tropers is for:
- General questions about the wiki, how it works, and how to do things.
- Reports of problems with wiki articles, or requests for help with wiki articles.
- Reports of misbehavior or abuse by other tropers.
Ask the Tropers is not for:
- Help identifying a trope. See TropeFinder.
- Help identifying a work. See MediaFinder.
- Asking if a trope example is valid. See the Trope Talk forum.
- Proposing new tropes. See TropeLaunchPad.
- Making bug reports. See QueryBugs.
- Asking for new wiki features. See QueryWishlist.
- Chatting with other tropers. See our forums.
- Reporting problems with advertisements. See this forum topic.
- Reporting issues on the forums. Send a Holler instead.
Ask the Tropers:
openUnjustified edit and edit war on Transgender Fetishization
On Transgender Fetishization, Tropers.Wowowow removed an example
for Kaine from NieR for the reason: "Kaine isn’t transgender. She was born as a woman with both male and female genitals."
This is despite (1) the entry itself acknowledges that she's intersex, and (2) the trope description is very clear that "For this trope, 'Transgender' is being used as a catch-all for many different forms of gender-nonconformity, such as Crossdresser, Ambiguous Gender, Ambiguous Gender Identity, Sex Shifter or others."
When I added the example back citing that the description states this, they then removed the example again with no edit reason.
Edited by NubianSatyressopen Troper seems to have a problem with "bashing" Fairy Tail.
A troper by the name of Zero Hunter
seems to have a Single-Issue Wonk when it comes to the series Fairy Tail. They appear to be going on to random pages and deleting examples that they believe are "bashing" the series.
I'm sure this would be fine, but I feel a problem arrises when their edit reason only consist of the phrase "Getting rid of pointless bashing." and nothing else, leaving no actual reason as to how these examples are bashing the series. Some examples include this edit
for Ms. Fanservice (which also turned two examples into Zero-Context Examples), outright deleting several tropes
from the series' YMMV page (which have since been restored), and editing other tropers
predictions on the series' WMG page (which, as far as I'm aware, isn't against the rules, but is considered extremely rude), among many other edits.
Basically, I feel this troper may be a problem and should probably be discussed.
Edit: After looking through their edit history a bit more, I've also noticed that Zero seems to do the same with EDENS ZERO (a manga by the same author of Fairy Tail), as seen with their edits
to one of the series' character pages.
Also, while I've tried to avoid being rude in this post, after looking through their edits, I feel at this point I should say this: It seems that Zero's definition of "bashing" is actually "anything I perceive as slightly negative to these series" (even when the trope itself isn't negative in nature).
Edited by lpk675openRude self-recommender.
I caught Bearquarter2008
(also known as Mitchell Movie Productions
) anonymously self-recommending his own fics again on FanficRecs.Dexters Laboratory. When I deleted the fic and sent him a PM telling him he wasn't allowed to recommend his own fics on Fanfic Recs pages (specifically directing him to use the forum thread
linked to on Fanfic Recommendations instead), he responded with a short, rude message.
openConcerning Troper
I have some concerns about Maddoxsort and I unfortunately do not know how to approach them.
- The moderators and administrators are to be viewed as apathetic Hanging Judge types. They will not sympathize, only criticize. They will not just micromanage, they will cauterize you like a viral infection. They are relentlessly predatory and will immediately gobble up anybody who causes a negative commotion on the wiki in the slightest. It will always be a Hopeless Boss Fight against them, and the sooner you admit this, the better off you'll be.
And this:
- Overall, this wiki is exacting as heck. Every time you make an edit, it must be useful. If there's no practical reason to add something and you do so anyway, it's already wrong. Like that image you wanted to add on a recap page? Forget it- it's in the way. (Or at least wait a few years until the opposition clears out) If it so much as smells like it's politically charged, it's a full-on declaration of war. If you add content with personal bias or sexually suggestive undertones, it's gonna get swabbed away. And if someone can find a reason to dispute one edit, they find reason to dispute them all. Which leads to a waste of time you could be spending more constructively. And it often leaves me wondering, "Why do I even bother?"Exactly. They say they want you to edit, when in reality, you're just some cog in a machine that you don't get to run. A cog who just contributes a waste of time. And that's just sad.Look, but don't touch.
What I am more concerned of, though, is that Maddoxsort admits on their Troper page to being the creator of Eureka Seven: Paradox Makers—or at the very least, very closely involved in the creation of it. They're pretty much the only Troper to have edited the page, which in and of itself is fine. As we've discussed on ATT before, creators may edit pages for their work. Some of their edits have issues like ZCE and trope misuse, but my main concern is that they are Auto-Erotic Troping on the YMMV page. Maddoxsort has added Author's Saving Throw, Adorkable, Holy Shit Quotient, and Fanon, and in pretty...self-congratulatory ways.
- Holy Shit Quotient: Claire bumps into Gidget by accident. Just seeing one of the most lovable Gekkostate alumni doing great is a really pleasant experience.
- Fanon: This story is basically an expansion pack to the Eureka Seven history tailored for the fandom based on feedback. It's not pandering because the writer has a clear vision of what they want to portray and they aren't wavering from that path.
What brought my attention to this Troper was the edit of another one, Robert TYL, who could also use a talking-to about using YMMV pages to mock works. All their edits under Narm are links to pages from the Webcomic with descriptors like "Here be an action-packed human vs. mecha battle as sketched by an 8 year-old with an aneurysm" and "illustrated by a toddler who found out a ballpoint pen can, in fact, be used for art." Maddoxsort has deleted two so far, with the reason "The jokes are not appreciated, you asshole. At least now I know which ones to redo."
I am unsure of how to broach this situation. I see rudeness in the Troper page and Auto-Erotic Troping, but also Robert TYL breaking the "don't be a dick" rule.
openOn Scorpider77 Videogame
Scorpider77 seems like a good troper in all respects, except one; he seems to have this wonk over Mario and Luigi: Paper Jam 2 and keeps talking about how everyone is clamoring for it and linking to its page.
There's just one problem: the game doesn't exist. While his non Mario edits are fine, anything pertaining to Mario (Bowser Jr.'s Journey, Mario & Luigi: Paper Jam and YMMV.Mario And Luigi Paper Jam, and YMMV.Mario Plus Rabbids Sparks Of Hope, among others) keeps having him throw in references to this nonexistent game, culminating in him making a since-cut page for it on the 11th of this month.
He also DMed me a link to a tweet that allegedly shows the proof of this clamoring (along with saying the game exists and Nintendo hasn't found the time to reveal it, stated with no proof whatsoever), except it's an analytics link - which can only be seen by the person who made the tweet. So he's shilling both himself and a nonexistent game to the detriment of factual information.
open Odd deletions and edit reasons. Live Action TV
So the troper Pikachu 4 Prezident
Has made some deletions with some concerning edit reasons.
- Here.
They deleted a Values Resonance entry I think (I don't know where it was) with an edit reason that states this And as a final point, the whole "men in miniskirts" thing was stupid-looming back then and it still very much looks dumb now. I don't get why everyone feels the need to inject current year politics into their edits...
Theirs also this one.
- where tbf
the entry itself might be kinda a stretch. But his actual edit reason is strange.
There seems to be an agenda here....
Edited by miraculousopenTroper causing a bit of trouble
Troper Lea17 is causing a bit of trouble.
- They created the page Ghoul Detective Series, and have put a lot of zero-context examples on it.
- Most of the examples are written in the past tense despite taking place in the story's present, as far as I can tell.
- They created a Ghoul Detective Series funny moments page despite being told, in an earlier ATT, that this isn't allowed, what with them being the story's writer. (I cutlisted it already.)
- There's some bad grammar. This sentence is an example: "It tells a story where Ken Kaneki, a young half-ghoul who was adopted by Morofushi brothers."
- There was this huge section they added about the trope Tarot Motifs, but the actual trope isn't used in the story itself as far as I can determine. Only in the guide to the story. (To be fair, that guide is a published work too, so it's fine if you disagree with me and add it back.)
- The quotes are super long. I deleted a massive one.
- There's a lot of Word Cruft, with phrasings like "[name] is this."
- Examples often use the phrasing "[name] is this too," even though examples shouldn't refer to other examples.
- The indentation is often done poorly.
resolved Velma YMMV and the Alt-Right Accusation
Hello, everyone. I was browsing through "Ask the Tropers," and I see that a troper called "Neverwood" tried to report me for spreading "Alt-right" messages on the Velma YMMV page
, and I'm having trouble moving forward from the accusation. I know this accusation was 2 years ago, but it's still a jarring thing to see considering it's visible to the public. Because I wasn't tagged in the conversation or notified of it when it came out, I wasn't given a chance to explain myself. I am aware of the misfortune and ramifications of posting this on April Fool's Day. I assure you, this is not a joke; I truly wanted to address this with sincerity.
I know it's pointless talking about it now, considering it's been almost two years since the accusation, and this post would only bring attention to it. I want to get this off my chest and clear things up, even if it doesn't matter anymore, because this is a serious accusation from my point of view. The edits I made on Velma YMMV page were caused by a lot of anxiety and stress. For clarity, I was never trying to spread an "alt-right" agenda, and I would never endorse those beliefs.
- In Neverwood's complaint, they accused me of posting "alt-right nonsense" and that I was claiming how "Velma is racist against whites". Although I did describe Velma's behavior as racially motivated in previous entries, it's too strong a description, and I should have used the terms "biased" or "wary" because they align more with the creator's intent behind these remarks. To explain the difference, "bias" is used to describe a mistrust or wariness, whereas racism implies the speaker believes in superiority over another race or ethnicity. I interpreted these actions as racist or racially motivated because I have read reviews and seen reaction videos that called Velma's actions bigoted, hypocritical, and racist for her comments about Fred's race. I understand that Velma was referring to the system, not Fred's race. Because of these reviews, I mistakenly thought it was the consensus towards the character. I was being literal-minded when I interpreted her comments, not that it excuses my actions. This misunderstanding and misinterpretation of Velma's comments are what led to these statements. That said, I'm aware this isn't the place to discuss what constitutes racism.
- Regarding my comments on the "social commentary", I sincerely believed that was the creator's intent when they made the show. Despite Neverwood's accusations that I claimed "it's the reason why most people hate the show", I never said social commentary was the thing that ruined the show or the reason why so many people hated it; all I said was that the social commentary could have been done better. I wasn't complaining or criticizing the message; I was criticizing and referring to the methods used by Velma, which were over-aggressive and heavy-handed. I never said she was right or wrong either; that isn't my place to say, I just said these themes and messages were done better in other movies and shows. The point of my argument was that bringing identity politics into the story doesn't automatically make a character compelling or deep. I believe in Show, Don't Tell. Social commentary is a delicate and complex topic that must be done in an engaging, entertaining, and thought-provoking way. To reiterate, I was not trying to spread or push an alt-right agenda by criticising the show's methods in providing social commentary. I supported the message the series tried to convey, even if I doubted and disliked its presentation and heavy-handed, over-aggressive approach.
- Finally, when I deleted the social commentary edit, I genuinely didn't know about Neverwood's complaint. It was already a point of contention on the page, and I thought I was doing the right thing to stop more complaints and edits. When I brought up the show's social commentary again, I tried to provide a calm and rational explanation to avoid causing more arguments, not knowing the matter was already resolved. I tried to explain how the show was full of identity politics and socio-political commentary, I felt it was something that had to be addressed because it was a component of the show. However, my edits had problems of their own: Firstly, whether you agree with the show or not, it's hard to talk about these issues without making the edits sound like a massive, over-aggressive rant. And secondly, despite my attempts at damage control, it unintentionally came across as flame bait. I stopped because it wasn't worth it in the end, and I haven't been on the YMMV page since 2023.
Anyway, I think I've explained everything. I am truly sorry for what happened and for causing this much drama. I can't apologise enough for my actions; it was foolish and a product of stress mismanagement. I have no excuse for my actions because I know I should have known better. I sincerely know now how my actions can upset others. I will be more careful and mindful in how I phrase my entries in the future.
Edited by BuckopenQuestion on what Useful Notes are supposed to cover.
So, if I'm not mistaken, Useful Notes are supposed to be about explaining complicated real world topics to help media consumers understand context when they see them in works and for writers to help them write difficult topics better. A while ago I came across UsefulNotes.Cult, and the last half of the page is entirely dedicated to offsite resources for more on cults, often about how to recognize real cults and how to avoid joining them. Many of the books referenced are out of print and/or expensive, and many of the links to websites are dead or the sites are inactive, but right now I'm more worried about the "largely for helping people avoid joining cults IRL" angle, because I looked through some of the other Psychology UN pages, and there's others that have problems too. From least concerning to most concerning:
- UsefulNotes.Alcoholism And Alcohol Abuse - This page is entirely written as a help page, but I'm torn on what to do on it because alcoholism is almost never portrayed correctly in media and thus is one of the more warranted UN pages. You could also argue that it's closer to the illness pages like UsefulNotes.Depression or UsefulNotes.Personality Disorders (which I think in general are written much better than the other ones I've listed) and thus has merit to stay as is or close to as is.
- UsefulNotes.Trigger - Most of this is pretty alright, and it has merit to be a UN page as it is technically fanspeak, but it definitely gets a little... heated - "Due to the seriousness of this trigger, it is good Netiquette and being a decent human being to offer at least some warning of suicide, of ruminations on suicide and suicidality, or on things that are guaranteed to be severely depressing and bring out such emotions." This kind of language shows up a couple of times here and other similar pages. Notably, this kinda conflicts with the message we have at the top of this page that says don't add trigger warningsnote and the "guaranteed to be severely depressing and bring out such emotions" part conflicts with what we say later that not all people who are suicidal will be triggered by depictions of suicide. Are we not decent human beings anymore?
- UsefulNotes.Victim Blaming - This page says it's about trying to prevent victim blaming in fiction, but is that really a problem? How often do people unintentionally blame victims in their writing? This is just self-help (and possibly soapboxing) disguised as writing advice. Much of it is just a list of examples of victim blaming, and aside from the weird ones (how is blaming a child for wetting the bed "victim blaming", wetting the bed is a victimless non-crime), I think all of these are fairly obvious from explaining the concept. Also, both this page and the next are very vague on who in situations are "victims" and who are "perpetrators"note for instance, if a car hits and injures a jaywalker they had no chance to avoid, who is the victim? Failure to prevent isn't always a fallacy., and that's confusing at best and a problem at worst.
- UsefulNotes.Abuse - This page doesn't even pretend it's connected to anything related to works of fiction. It's largely about telling abuse victims it's not their fault and how to help yourself/friends get out of abusive situations. There's also this very concerning section in Disability Is An Excuse For Jerkassery: "Furthermore, it is not bigoted or ableist to say that there are certain disorders (primarily Cluster B personality disorders and certain types of bipolar disorder) that should absolutely bar you from dating unless they are properly managed, which means sticking to all prescribed medications and therapy regimens without deviation. Again (because this cannot be stated enough), if you have a disorder that has an extremely high correlation with being toxic or abusive and you are not taking the proper steps to manage it, you have no business being in a relationship." Uh, no, this is actually ableist as hell. This perpetuates the stereotype that the mentally ill (especially people with the "scary" mental illnesses) are a danger to society unless they're sedated into submissionnote not to mention how, especially to someone who, oh, I don't know, is bipolar in a depressive phase, this section might come off as saying that they should avoid any relationships, with anyone, altogether - don't forget that the page isn't just about abuse between romantic/sexual partners, but also toxic friendships, toxic family dynamics, child abuse, elder abuse... this can absolutely send the message that people with mental illnesses should just entirely isolate themselves to avoid their inherent nature to abuse others, and, I'm no expert, but I think that's not a good message?.
We Permanent Red Link Club'ed Useful Notes Suicide Prevention because we decided we weren't qualified to give medical advicenote and because most of the suicide hotlines we were linking to were country-locked, it wasn't fair to visitors who lived in countries where we couldn't find an active suicide hotline. UsefulNotes.Suicide, for what it's worth, is in pretty good shape following its cleanup and locking.. What is our stance on giving self-help on UN pages?
Edited by MissConductopenVery poor quality edits from Tropers/SubZero008
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Characters/EldenRingDemigodsTwins
They changed the Full-Circle Revolution entry from this,
"Somewhat Downplayed in that his Age of Compassion is halted before it comes to fruition, but Miquella has always sought to end the oppression of the Golden Order and made the Haligtree as a sanctuary for the shunned. Shadow of the Erdtree sees him attempt apotheosis to bring a more peaceful world, yet in doing so, he leaves the fate of the Haligtree uncertain by using Mohg to get him out and let him enter the Land of Shadow. Along his journey, he sets aside everything that he has, including his restraints and capacity to love, which is dangerous when combined with his ability to hypnotically convert others. If St. Trina and both Soreseal descriptions are to be believed, in that becoming a god would only be a guilded cage, Miquella's goals would leave him in a similar state to that of Marika in the Erdtree. Furthermore, it's implied that anyone who would oppose him (like the Tarnished during phase 2 of the Final Boss) would be forced into cooperation via his powers. The Circlet Of Light he leaves is described as the "foundation" of his Age Of Compassion, and a symbol resembling it will appear above anyone caught by the Promised Consort's heart-stealing grab. With a loyal musclebound champion at his side to reinforce his all-controlling era, as both Godfrey and Radagon did for Marika, Miquella offers a system that's just as uncaring and with as many flaws as the original Golden Order he sought to supplant."
To this
"Averted. Despite the absurd conflating from tropers who fundamentally misunderstand the most basic moral dilemnas whenever a story writes a conflict or dilemna that doesn't easily fit into existing tropes or isn't constantly recycled over and over in popular media...Marika's order was founded on and repeatedly enacted genocide for cultural, religious, personal, or even purely racist grounds. Constantly saying Miquella is "just as bad" or "will be just as bad" or "was just as cruel" or all that other idiotic nonsence that blatantly disregards the actual writing in the game is unbelievably wrong. It's like trying to teach three-year old children out of black and white thinking. Miquella spent the vast majority of his life and career trying to directly address the consequences of the multiple genocides and literal world-destroying wars his mother AND his fellow siblings waged - and because he used immoral tactics or used violence as a tool himself, he's suddenly conflated as being "just as bad" as his mother? It's amazing to see how Ranni is being worshipped as a "good counterpart" to Miquella on this website despite literally causing the entire war with no regrets, motivated solely by her personal liberation, and Radahn is likewise worshipped as being a "heroic" lover of war who also enacted mass violence (including flame weapons and torture machines) to pursue his personal goals, and Mesmer who LITERALLY ENACTED GENOCIDE is mourned as a "tragic villain" who "didn't really want to do it"...yet Miquella ALSO using violence for a benevolent end goal is condemned as being the worst of them all? What a fucking joke"
It's not being done on a YMMV page, but the character page. Barring its general inflammatory nature, the spelling mistakes, and the fact they use a lot of unnecessary capital words and swearing, I feel like it just reads like a rant. Should I revert the edit back to the original.
openPossibly disruptive user
On Characters.The Amazing Digital Circus Players, WELLBEBACK 7653 has made 3 edits changing the label of the hidden spoiler image in Kaufmo's folder to "NO WAY OUT", except that label only makes sense if you've already watched The Amazing Digital Circus, so the phrase by itself is a revealing spoiler. I'm asking if anyone can revert that change.
I'm aware that there's a previous ATT query
about this troper, so we may need to check their other edits.
openHeavy case of AutoEroticTroping Webcomic
Nixvir is a webcomic created by Aeneas 1 with, to date, a whopping 1162 "related" pages
. Taking a look at them, so far, all the wicks I've seen have been created by the author. To give credit where it's due, the page itself has been edited by other tropers, but is still mainly the work of Aeneas 1. That includes the following very gushy sentence from the description: "What begins as a wacky, childish High Concept becomes an epic story to contend with the likes of Homer and Virgil, a tale of love, religious fanaticism, masculinity and good versus evil..."
Now, obviously there's nothing wrong with making a page for your own work and crosswicking it; however, of the wicks I've looked at, quite a few are shoehorn-y, with a tendency towards using Not a Subversion to get something that's plainly a non-example on the page:
- Subverted in Nixvir where Zanuba instead has a bird with the head of a gnome as her familiar. None of the other witches are depicted as using familiars, anyway.
- Subverted with Lady Metre in Nixvir who wears a sheaf of wheat in her hair, symbolising her role as the goddess of the harvest. In fact, none of the female characters are depicted as wearing flowers in their hair. I guess this might be a straight example, but it's definitely not a subversion, and the last sentence isn't needed.
- The actual year in which Nixvir takes place is never directly given. That is Ambiguous Time Period, not this trope.
Trademark Favorite Food.Webcomics:
- Subverted in Nixvir; Erik is unable to eat, being a snowman, and thus he can never have a favourite food. Mind you, he does have a tolerance for alcohol, but he is never seen favouring it above all other drinks. Justified, in that perhaps favourite food or drink, even if he were able to eat, would not be a priority for him. So... it's an aversion, then.
They also have some wicks that, while not factually inaccurate, are wildly gushy, for example the entry on ShownTheirWork.Web Comics (not going to quote it here for length, but it contains phrases like "is very well researched" and "The author studied Classical Studies and English Literature at King's College London [...], and it shows".) Remember, this entry was made by the comic's creator.
They have also been linking their comic in a bunch of Quotes pages, image links pages, and Referenced by….
They have two other webcomics on the wiki, Ragnar: The Prelude to Nixvir and Perekrin Penkrin A Day In The Life. The latter hardly has any wicks so far, but I checked a couple of the wicks of the first one, and it seems to have a similar problem of shoehorned examples.
Edited by DoktorvonEurotrashresolved Agenda Based Editing on pages for Code Geass. Anime
Reddish Guy 1 is once again
conducting agenda based editing
for Code Geass, depicting the Britannian Characters as if they were solely black in terms of morality and changing things to reflect that including removing sympathetic tropes from several characters, while adding YMMV entries suggesting opinion for Noble Demon characters being unsympathetic is widespread despite there be little indication of this outside of the Base-Breaking Character Cornelia. What's more, they attempt to justify this by claiming this site thinks the series is Black-and-Gray Morality, but if the series itself is said to be Grey-and-Gray Morality, then that is what is supposed to be troped, with the idea its not that falling under Unintentionally tropes and Misaimed Fandom. And yes, it is meant to be seen as Grey-and-Gray Morality since the showrunners and even the actors have said as much, with them going on record as stating Cornelia and Suzaku are two of the most moral characters in the show, and they consider Lelouch to be irredeemable. For objective troping, authorial intent is important to note. Whether it worked or not would be covered in YMMV. I've sent them a notifier directing them to this thread, but this needs to be addressed as this is the second time now this situation has needed to be brought up to ATT.
resolved Preventing edit war from continuing Film
The troper ~Remnant 43 has been repeatedly adding Not-So-Well-Intentioned Extremist to the villain Remmick's character sheet on Sinners (2025). They first did so here
, giving an edit reason. I disagree with the use of the trope and others did too as another troper, ~Wet Flannels altered the trope back to Well-Intentioned Extremist here
. Remnant altered it back once again here
with a frankly rude and accusatory edit reason this time.
This feels rather like the issue we ran into with one troper insisting Charles zi Britannia from Code Geass was a Not-So-Well-Intentioned Extremist based on the work's protagonist's line about him being selfish. A villain can be selfish and have a god complex. Well-Intentioned Extremist just requires they believe in what they're saying and this applies to Remmick. He's absorbing people in his vampire Hive Mind and wants to recreate his lost culture but he repeatedly states it will be a happy world, he believes in equality and Remnant's arguments hit of trying to play up the fact he has negative traits to allege his good intentions are wholly shut down, which isn't the case.
That's my stance at least, the much bigger problem is Remnant continually re-adding the trope and their attitude given in their latest edit reason.
Thoughts?
Edited by PassingThroughopen SkidTroper and The Red Pill
Skid Troper unilaterally created a page about The Red Pill documentary, a highly contentious work about the Men's Rights Movement. Skid Troper has, on multiple occasions, been questioned for his edits adding an overly-conservative and pro-Christian bias to the site. Particularly on the Mass Effect: Andromeda and Acceptable Religious Targets pages, so his decision to do this makes me a little nervous.
Particularly because of a few edits he's made on the Red Pill pages as well as others.
On UsefulNotes.Feminism, he added:
- Further events, such as several feminists scathingly one-sided criticisms of the documentary "The Red Pill", have only added fuel to the fire.
- Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics: Cassie discusses how domestic abuse statistics are often applied in ways that lead to the persecution of men, mainly in men being singled out for persecution in domestic abuse cases. In addition, the omission of homosexual couples domestic violence statistics from the legal system's enforcement of laws is also lampshaded. The misreading of statistics to support the Wage Gap is also explored.
- Men Are the Expendable Gender: One of the prominent female privileges discussed in the film is women's exemption from the draft. Even as a feminist, this was something Jaye herself conceded and was a prominent talking point with Paul Elam. This is also discussed as a possible reason why society at large sidelines or suppresses men's issues.
From YMMV.The Red Pill:
- Strawman Has a Point: Cassie originally planned to criticize the Men's Rights Movement as a hate group. She then learned about their actual causes and their history, making her believe that they are largely correct.
- Values Resonance: The message remains relevant in The New '10s, with further feminist movements and social media campaigns by feminist celebrities (many of which are controversial, some even straying into misandry), such as the movements #Me Too! and Time's Up. There is also the continuing trouble passing laws that are fair to both genders, particularly in divorce court, sexually-based offences and the handling of domestic abuse.
- Writer on Board: Cassie Jaye went to great lengths to avert this, also because she started making the film as a feminist and the research she did throughout convinced her to stop being a feminist, which altered the final product.
openBanned troper has resurfaced.
Suicidedogavi is the new handle of an old, banned user who earned their ban for Single-Issue Wonk and later tried to evade it. I knew who it was the minute I saw their edits. Someone care to deal with them? Like, based on their edits, it's 100% bornofself/janegotagun/any number of other ban-evading handles.
Edited by HasturHasturHasturopenWayyyy too many empty lines (yes, pun intended)
Wayyyy has sorted examples in sevaral pages, which by itself is a great contribution to the wiki.
However, there's a major issue that comes along with this sorting, and it's that examples are now spaced out by empty lines. I replied them asking them not to add these lines, but they refused to do so, arguing that it makes the examples "easier to read". These spaces are making the trope pages too awkward-looking and large, and the fact the troper won't stop doing this comes off as disruptive.

I know Draco in Leather Pants is in need of TRS; probably there are inconsistencies in its definition and use. Still, I'm pretty sure the proper context for any trope entry needs to say how all of the requirements of the trope are met. For DILP, one of such requirements seems to be that the character in question is a jerk and/or a villain; consequently, I think a DILP entry needs to mention their bad actions. Also, I don't think a DILP entry should actually argue in their favor.
So, on YMMV.Wanda Vision, a Draco in Leather Pants entry saw a series of suspicious tweaks.
Then, Tropers/rva98014 edited
the entry with the edit reason, "Hayward did not plan to use the anomaly from the start to animate White Vision. He discovered Wanda's residual energy would work as a power source and used it." I don't think this explains the removal of the point about Hayward's disinterest in rescuing the townsfolk. Also, I feel that "he is quite willing to ensure Wanda is killed" is quite downplaying the fact that Hayward attempts to murder her by firing a missile at her. (In another reason for deletion
, the same troper cited "generalizations without providing real specifics.")
I edited the entry
to (hopefully) accurately describe Hayward endangering and attacking the kids. I mentioned the speculation about them being hex creations - well, I thought this was interesting; I think the show's final scene implies they are real but saying so in a trope entry would verge on Speculative Troping, so I wrote that this is left ambiguous in the show, erring on the side of caution. I'm sorry about my grumpy edit reason.
Then, Tropers/rva98014 edited
the entry again with the edit reason, "Draco In Leather Pants which is the situation where the fandom takes a controversial or downright villainous character and downplays his/her flaws. An example of this trope simply has to point out how this is occurring. It's not necessary to argue whether the "downplaying" is justified or not." I don't get how the edit reason goes with the edit itself because it removes the part pointing out Hayward's villainous actions but keeps the part that allegedly justifies him.
Then, Tropers/rva98014 made another little edit
with the reason, "I think the "apparently" is needed. Yes he did disregard Vision's will but the story is unclear if he had done this without approval. It would not be the first time that a will was overridden nor were his actions particularly clandestine making it hard to justify "project cataract" was a top secret project no one but he knew about." This doesn't bring any proof from the show proper to back up this speculation. The speculation that shifts the blame from Hayward.
Also, Tropers/rva98014 edited
another entry saying in their edit reason, "Agatha was not running the entire show, she just kept introducing elements of chaos into the scenarios because she was trying to get Wanda out of her pretend world. Sparky was never a real dog either and Agatha knew that she was only "killing" a prop." While the part about Agatha not running the entire show is true, the rest sounds like justifying her, too, and decisively calls Sparky "a prop." IIRC, the show doesn't indicate he isn't a real dog.
There's a mod note on top of the page saying that the guy is "an antagonist meant to be seen as an antagonist," and you should not whitewash him. From these edits, I get the feeling the Draco in Leather Pants entry about him is gradually turning into a self-demonstrating one, what's with cutting bits about his bad actions, downplaying, and justifying them. Should something be done?