[001]
69.172.221.8
Current Version
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
I also agree that this trope\'s premise is flawed and its title is unsettlingly sexist. Where is the line drawn to mark an \
to:
I also agree that this trope\\\'s premise is flawed and its title is unsettlingly sexist. Where is the line drawn to mark an \\\"improbable\\\" ratio of women in the cast of a story? Why is this nebulous concept of \\\"too many\\\" women something that needs to be called out as a trope?
For that matter, are we next going to create a Sister Trope called ImprobablyMaleCast and start filling it up with all the stories that didn\\\'t bother including any significant female characters in situations that realistically would include at least a few? I call that a Herculean and ultimately pointless task, not to mention dangerously close to a PeopleSitOnChairs situation - as is this trope.
If smaller, more identifiable tropes can be found within it, break the entries up into those categories, but we really ought to get rid of this vague and awkward category.
For that matter, are we next going to create a Sister Trope called ImprobablyMaleCast and start filling it up with all the stories that didn\\\'t bother including any significant female characters in situations that realistically would include at least a few? I call that a Herculean and ultimately pointless task, not to mention dangerously close to a PeopleSitOnChairs situation - as is this trope.
If smaller, more identifiable tropes can be found within it, break the entries up into those categories, but we really ought to get rid of this vague and awkward category.
