I agree, most examples seem to thing that a bi character has to have a relationship with equal amounts of male and female characters when that's not how bisexuality works. This page needs a hell of a clean-up at least.
Previous Trope Repair Shop thread: Snowclone
, started by MegaJ on Oct 6th 2019 at 7:44:27 PM
Previous Trope Repair Shop thread: Not Tropeworthy, started by DesertDragon on May 19th 2020 at 9:51:07 PM
The Elder of Dreams
What if the bisexual in question is married to someone in a monogamous relationship? I mean, does it still fit this trope??
Hide / Show Replies
I think that it might, especially in cases where flashbacks are shown and stories told of lovers of only the gender of their husband/wife.
Edited by pikachu17 17 pikachus all in a row.
Little question: say there's a fantasy setting where Everyone Is Bi because Gender Is No Object - like, the people there have absolutely no concept of doing anything with exclusively males or females - sexual, romantic, political, fashion, or otherwise (there are reasons gender distinctions never developed in their culture, because of their magic. This is the only setting for the story, so that culture isn't seen as weird, the story is told from the perspective of that culture. They're also a Perfect Pacifist People.). Only one couple is shown in the story (male/male). Does that make it this trope?
I made this Idolized Julius Kingsley icon back when Akito first came out, and now that the crossover is actually happening, I don't care.
from dreams
What is this trope trying to say exactly? That many bisexuals are hetero- or homoromantic? That actually sounds realistic. The description seems to imply that every bisexual in fiction should follow a 50/50 quota of men and women that they date, but bisexuality is almost never that clean-cut. Maybe I'm limited in exposure, but only a few bisexuals I know are the "It's not the sex, it's the person" variety. I think it's unfair and a tad ignorant to claim that they're "more" bi than those who lean a certain way.
I plan on taking this to the Trope Repair Shop once the forum's own issues are straightened out, but I still wanted to get people's opinions on this.
Edited by DesertDragon ...Because Jeb Bush is all in my house with disease. Hide / Show Replies
It's not about how Bisexuals should be, it's about the writing. Of course bisexual people in real life has preferences, just like some gay people are wary of PDA. But I think you'd be hard pressed to find bisexual people who want their same sex attraction to be treated as titillation or a joke to everyone else, and that's often what's happening here. Secondly, these characters aren't real people, they are created for an audience and it shows. The bisxual woman who always seem to end up with a man is one of the most common complaints from bi people about the media (well, after the fact they're invisible of course). In short, it's a good thing that you think about bisexual people in real life, but most writers don't. Wether it's concious or not, most bisexual character end up having their sexuality exploited and tailored to be devices for making an inoffensive queer character, an exotic character, a funny character or what have you. Maybe you think it's realistic, but I won't identify with these characters anytime soon.
Edited by Mimimurlough
@Desert Dragon: I found this trope a bit confusing myself, and I AM bi (heteroromantic). I suppose it's a matter of the writer's purpose and intent of having such characters and how they are handled rather than different "flavors" of bisexuals simply existing in a work of fiction; this needs to happen and be addressed more often, since bisexuals are arguably even less visible than homosexuals in fiction. Now, I do have to say it's a bit unfair when viewers blow the PC whistle when only one type of bisexual is featured in a work, since the writer of said work could very well be that exact type of bisexual and thus he/she feels uncomfortable with putting other "flavors" since he/she hasn't experienced it; after all, trying to write about something one has little experience with tends to be the breeding ground for Unfortunate Implications in fiction. The best said writer can do is encourage others to step up to the plate and get in the entertainment business themselves to fill in this "gap" with their own experiences. I admit that I would have a difficult time writing about a homoromantic bisexual and keeping it as authentic as possible, so I'd rather avoid that and get someone who actually does fit this criteria to do it instead.
Edited by xPixelxDustx
Well, you might call it a PC whistle, but obviously heteroromantic bisexuals are only one part of the bisexual spectrum, but one that is overrepresented to the exclusion of all else. And as I'vementioned before, even then even the heteroromantic bisexuals aren't really treated seriously, for example Thirteen's sexuality was pretty much fanservice both in and out of universe until her very last episode. I suppose the description could be tightened a bit to be more inclusive though
The complaint is more than anything else is that this trope is when bisexual characters get treated like they're in a No Bisexuals work—the difference being more than anything else that we're told they're bisexuals.
This is also where the Unfortunate Implications come from, since it's basically saying that bisexuals don't really exist by treating the bisexual characters' bisexuality as a joke or a source for Fanservice, as opposed to a legitimate orientation.
Yeah, that is the trope. Someone is said to be bisexual but is only ever shown with just one gender. It exists because of still-existing anti-bisexual prejudices. We can expect it to become more uncommon in places where bisexuality becomes more socially acceptable, but in others (and works made before bisexuality becomes fully socially acceptable) it still exists.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
How is this related to Acceptable Feminine Goals?
Hide / Show Replies
Usually especially female characters get their attraction to women treated like it's less healthy or less seious. They may be fooling around with other women, but it is mord or less expected that their end goal isn't to end up with a woman, but in a traditional nuclear family with an same sex attraction forgotten.
This entire page is a huge mess.
Even if there is some merit in the "trope" itself, the examples are just showing a huge amount of biphobia.
For instance, Joe Mac Millan from Halt and Catch Fire? Seriously? He is not bi enough even though we see him have sex with a man, make out with another man (in a little fourway with his wife and another man and woman, heck, they even did that and it's not bi enough apparently), we meet his former boyfriend he had real feelings for, we learn of his later other relationships with men, he talks about his sexuality multiple times (including empathizing and bonding with other queer people) - but apparently he is "not bi enough" because his main love interest is a woman (and he married another woman when there was a love triangle storyline going on which otherwise would not have made any sense, since it takes place in 1985).
Why not just say that the only way a character is "bi enough" is if they are constantly involved with two people of different genders and they're having threesomes in every episode?
Hide / Show Replies