[002]
PikaBot
Current Version
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
\
to:
\\\"Note that Lipstick Lesbians do exist, making this a case of Truth In Television to a degree. They just aren\\\'t nearly as large a proportion of the real lesbian population as the fictional one. Keep dreaming, straight boys.\\\"
Because it implies that the majority (possibly even vast majority) of Lesbians fall into strict Butch/Femme roles, which is just not true. The \\\'to an extent\\\' line in particular makes it sound like the LipstickLesbian is a rare beast akin to the tasmanian tiger. Could we get it replaced with something a little less generalizing? Something like this, maybe:
\\\"Note that LipstickLesbians do exist, making this a case of TruthInTelevision. However, in the world of fiction, virtually \\\'\\\'every\\\'\\\' lesbian not played for laughs falls into this trope. Keep dreaming, boys.\\\"
Because it implies that the majority (possibly even vast majority) of Lesbians fall into strict Butch/Femme roles, which is just not true. The \\\'to an extent\\\' line in particular makes it sound like the LipstickLesbian is a rare beast akin to the tasmanian tiger. Could we get it replaced with something a little less generalizing? Something like this, maybe:
\\\"Note that LipstickLesbians do exist, making this a case of TruthInTelevision. However, in the world of fiction, virtually \\\'\\\'every\\\'\\\' lesbian not played for laughs falls into this trope. Keep dreaming, boys.\\\"
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
\
to:
\\\"Note that Lipstick Lesbians do exist, making this a case of Truth In Television to a degree. They just aren\\\'t nearly as large a proportion of the real lesbian population as the fictional one. Keep dreaming, straight boys.\\\"
Because it implies that the majority (possibly even vast majority) of Lesbians fall into strict Butch/Femme roles, which is just not true. The \\\'to an extent\\\' line in particular makes it sound like the LipstickLesbian is a rare beast akin to the tasmanian tiger. Could we get it replaced with something a little less generalizing? Something like this, maybe:
\\\"Note that LipstickLesbians do exist, making this a case of TruthInTelevision. However, in the world of fiction, virtually \\\'\\\'every\\\'\\\' lesbian falls into this trope. Keep dreaming, boys.\\\"
Because it implies that the majority (possibly even vast majority) of Lesbians fall into strict Butch/Femme roles, which is just not true. The \\\'to an extent\\\' line in particular makes it sound like the LipstickLesbian is a rare beast akin to the tasmanian tiger. Could we get it replaced with something a little less generalizing? Something like this, maybe:
\\\"Note that LipstickLesbians do exist, making this a case of TruthInTelevision. However, in the world of fiction, virtually \\\'\\\'every\\\'\\\' lesbian falls into this trope. Keep dreaming, boys.\\\"
