Forgotten Trope, really? This still exists and abundant in modern media and anything with a large amount of fanservice. Just look
, and it's even larger than All Women Are Prudes, which is merely discredited.
I personally disagree with a lot of the examples chosen for "All Women Are Lustful", just wanting to sleep with ONE guy and no one else should not qualify. The female character in question must be willing to sleep with any man at any time for it to qualify, I say. And that would very much empty the pool of choices.
All Women Wanting One Man should be its own trope if it's not already (which I think it is, I just don't know the name of it.)
Can someone please clean up this example a little?
- The Big Bang Theory seems to be heading this way. Amy Farrah Fowler was introduced as Sheldon's Distaff Counterpart, right down to the Asexuality - until she, Penny, and Bernadette went out to a bar and she saw a hot guy, in which case she was flustered by her own reactions to said man. So men are capable of being totally asexual, yet women who seem to be are simply waiting for the right man to turn them on, whether or not he has any redeeming qualities aside from his looks?
- Well, Leonard's mother still prides herself on only having sex to reproduce.
- Except that when Penny got her drunk, she lusted after several men, and kissed Sheldon. She liked it; [[{{Asexuality he didn't.}}]]
- Well, Leonard's mother still prides herself on only having sex to reproduce.
A Man Is Not A Virgin, Nerds Are Virgins and similar tropes that correlate manliness with sexual success, are still in effect, so no, TBBT is very definitely not an example of AWAL. Instead it's going towards Everybody Has Lots of Sex ...
Edited by Dab I pretend to be a troll because it makes it easier for you to dismiss my opinion.
"No woman keeps her hands off of James Bond for very long. It helps that James Bond is practically a canon Memetic Sex God."
- Is the trope still in play if all the women only want to sleep with a certain guy as opposed to just sex in general?
I'm just curious, but I don't get why both All Men Are Perverts and All Women Are Lustful can exist together. Over three quarters of the All Women Are Lustful page have All Men Are Perverts, and similarly, just as much of the All Men Are Perverts have All Women Are Lustful, or at the very least avert All Women Are Prudes. Why does there seem to be a complaint, that neither trope can both exist.
Hide / Show Replies
Because "people in general are lustful" is a distinct, and much more common, attitude from "women (in contrast to men) are lustful".
And I think most of the examples here are inappropriate. I've started writing a submission for cleanup, but I'm pretty busy with university now.
Tropes Are Not Bad.
What's the ratio of vapid slutty female to more chaste females in The Bible? I haven't read it end to end, but I didn't really get the idea that all women are portrayed in such a way.
Edited by Peteman Hide / Show Replies
I agree, I have read the Bible from end to end. I do think that this example should me more substantiated than it is here. I will say that within the Hebrew scriptures that being married is a very important part of life, for men and women.
This is an explicit command or direction to the first humans found in Genesis 1:28: "Further, God blessed them and God said to them: “<b>Be fruitful and become many and fill the earth</b> and subdue it, and have in subjection the fish of the sea and the flying creatures of the heavens and every living creature that is moving upon the earth.”"
Though I have read the Bible from end to end, I am in no way implying that I know everything! Regards, A new troper
Nope, the bible really is like that. It's not about bible bashing, it's about demonstrating where the medieval european attitude towards women came from. (Renaissance and later is just as influenced by the greek)
I pretend to be a troll because it makes it easier for you to dismiss my opinion.
To Dab:
Sure, but what examples can you give with what you said? The bible didn't just have an extremely heavy influence in the last 2000 years, but it itself was written from starting in around 1500 BC-100 AD by 40 different writers from fully varying backgrounds (shepherds, priests, 'lawyers', doctors, kings, etc.).
I can say comfortably (provided I understand the trope correctly) that there are lots of examples of women who lived back then whose lives are written about that are not 'lustful.'
just to be clear I didn't take it as Bible Bashing. If the shoe fits, ykwim.
Edited by 70.78.197.169
Yeah, I don't really think the Bible falls into this at all. People like St. Augustine and other Medieval theologians could be fairly misogynistic, but I think a lot of that came from Aristotle.
Hodor
Ok, chapter one. (or three, actually) We have Adam & Eve frolicking through paradise. Then Eve snatches the forbidden fruit because a snake tempted her to do so. What else would she do for that snake? In this case the sexual imagery may not be entirely clear, still it's the woman that is presented as being airheaded and oblivious to consequences when it comes to stuffing things into her orifices to satisfy her carnal needs. Whatever you think, it's clear that women are presented as the opposite of Closer to Earth. And Closer to Earth is in turn only a consequence of the modern idea that women have weaker baser drives than men do.
I pretend to be a troll because it makes it easier for you to dismiss my opinion.
... And then a whole lot of other stuff happens, most of which doesn't really fit this trope. Such as Adam eating the fruit without even having to be talked into it (the snake did have to talk Eve into eating the fruit). And, you know, the whole rest of the book.
AFAIR, this belief was especially strong during the Medieval times, and at the very end of antiquity. St. Jerome, in one of his works advised marriage- which he (and not only he) considered impure- only to restrain the "innate" lustfulness of women. This opinion was then held by many Church authorities like Johannes Scotus Eriugena, saint Bernard and so on. Even more so, in the X Ith century, it was widely accepted that even if a man would commit an act of adultery, it was the women involved who seduced him, to the point that in one of the stories of that time, a noble-women who got raped by a cunning knight got prosecuted for the adultery, for it clearly the fault of her lustful nature.
Above is based on "The Knight, The Lady, and the Priest, marriage in the medieval France X-XII century" by Georges Duby, but my memory is faulty, so I am kinda sure that I have made some mistakes.
Cliché
Dab: Noooo where's the discussion gone! To give you an impression of "All Women Are Succubi" being in effect, in german countries of the 1500s, witch hunting became quite a popular sport, and the "Hexenhammer" (1487) is credited as being the bible of witch-hunting. Here's what it had to say:
- ,Alles geschieht aus fleischlicher Begierde, die bei ihnen unersättlich ist.. Darum haben sie auch mit den Dämonen zu schaffen, um ihre Begierden zu stillen... Es [ist] kein Wunder, wenn von der Ketzerei der Hexer mehr Weiber als Männer besudelt werden. Daher ist auch folgerichtig die Ketzerei nicht zu nennen die der Hexer, sondern der Hexen.“
- All [of this witchcraft] occurs because of carnal desires, which is insatiable with them [witches]. That is why they deal with the demon, to satisfy their lust. It is thus no miracle that the heresy that is witchcraft taints more women than men. Consequently the heresy is not to be called as that of the warlocks [Hexer = Male form of witch] but that of the [Hexe] witch.
Oh, and before any Straw Feminist adds a patently false spin on that, let me just say that the Hexenhammer was outlawed by the catholic church as a heretic work itself. The catholic church for the most part didn't believe in witchcraft and figured this was a bunch of peasants drunk out of their noggins.
Edited by Dab I pretend to be a troll because it makes it easier for you to dismiss my opinion. Hide / Show Replies
Mmmffff... Shouldn't the pic be some kind of group shot? An illustrative one? Not pornographic, but you get the idea.
Proud member of the IAA What's the point of being grown up if you can't act childish?
Dab: the old discussion is linked just underneath the "back to Main" button in the top right of this page.
Linking to a past Trope Repair Shop thread that dealt with this page: Misused
, started by kuyanJ on Apr 11th 2012 at 3:31:40 PM
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman