Azor Ahai
I don't know if I should take it out yet or not, but I have some real issues with the Death Note example (the first one). It seems sort of off to consider Misa the abusive partner, since Light constantly manipulates her, including into trading away most of her life.
More importantly, I don't know if I necessarily see the "ok because it's female" idea here. It's a case where a calculating villain has a Loony Fan who will do their bidding, but the villain is annoyed by them. Now it may be the case that usually the smart villain is male and the Loony Fan is female, but that arrangement itself doesn't seem inherently based on gender.
As a final note, I figured that Light having a Wouldn't Hit a Girl attitude was kind of a joke given that by time he meet's Misa he's probably killed thousands of people with that magic notebook of his, and presumably some of those people were female.
Hodor Hide / Show Replies
Yes, their relationship is REALLY screwed up but Light is often just labeled an abuser while many devoted fanboys overlook that Misa is just as manipulative and emotionally abusive because she's cute and find the whole situation funny or that Light is "lucky" because Misa is hot but the situation wouldn't be seen as funny if the gender roles were reversed:
Imagine if it was a man that crept around, stalking the protagonist, showing up on her doorstep late at night barely decent, demanding that she be his girlfriend and threatens to kill any other guy she talks to and she has NO SAY IN THIS because even if he doesn't kill her his Shinigami friend will kill her if she doesn't "make him happy."
Also in the manga Misa says she's more than willing to kill Light if he says no.
If the female protagonist was like Light, a sociopathic mass murderer, I think it would similarly be considered as somewhat deserved to be stuck with their loony Poisonous Friend.
Hodor
So villains deserved to be raped? That definitely falls under Unfortunate Implications.
Edited by feral
Not deserved to be rape. More that if a villain is going to benefit from a totally loyal, easily manipulated supporter, they don't deserve sympathy if that supporter happens to be annoying (I know, Misa is a lot more than annoying- I didn't remember the part about her threatening to kill him if he didn't have sex with her- was that in the anime? I didn't really mind her threats to kill him in themselves since he planned from day one to kill her when she outlived her usefulness)
I was thinking more about the example today. You know, I think it's probably true that the series does treat Misa as pretty harmless because she's ditzy and female (IMO the series as a whole tends to portray the female characters as not too bright). It's also probably true that if Light was a normal person and Misa acted more or less the same but was saner, that the series would still treat her behavior as ok.
Still, it's just kind of bizarre though that the example describes everything that's bad about the relationship from Misa's side (which is true) but if you didn't know about the series, you might get the impression from the example that Light is a stand-up guy.
Hodor
I would like to state that the above is exaggerated. When they first met, Misa didn't say anything about sex, not in the manga or the anime. She NEVER said that she would kill Light if he didn't go out on dates with her.
And Light isn't completely innocent, here, either.
You watch me, just watch me. I'm calling- I'm calling. And one day all will know...
why did we change the names of some tropes to Double Standard:insert title? i don't like this Snowclone
Edited by captainsandwich Hide / Show Replies
Because A) They aren't snowclones any more than the original trope names were, and B) The old titles (X Is Okay When Its...) made it sound like we were saying X was okay, which clearly we weren't. See the Rape Trope Renames
thread.
would i be overreacting if I declared this to be Political Correctness Gone Mad?
I remember some flame wars breaking out in Troper Tales and other more personal areas in the site where people honestly thought the trope was implying female-on-male violence was OK, and used to defend themselves in arguments.
I think as long as there are idiots in the world, we'll have to keep the rename.
This has got to be like the 5,000th time I forgot my email or password...
And as long as people tailor what they do to suit idiots, there will be an ever-increasing percentage of idiots in the world.
There is no proof of that at all.
Anyhow, the rename was to some degree a goodwill gesture to Google during the The Second Google Incident.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
I love too easily, and yet, not easily enough.
"Zig-zagged in FoxTrot. Paige often gets away with beating up her little brother Jason. However, there are times where she gets punished for it. And, in her defense, Jason is often deliberately aggravating her- destroying her belongings, making copies of her diary, drawing her as a Ferrengi, and much, much more."
How is that a "defense" ... ?
If a 14-year-old boy beat up his 10-year-old sister, would anybody even think of suggesting that the fact that she was antagonizing him was somehow a mitigating factor?
How very ironic that on a page devoted to discussion of a double standard, we see posters actually succumbing themselves to said double standard.
Hide / Show Replies
Has anyone stated that?
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
^ Yeah, it's right there on the page. And I'm going to delete that line if there are no objections, since @KatieinSerenity is absolutely right, it's a clear Justifying Edit and example of Victim Blaming. It's also by no means a Zig Zag (as it's currently listed), but a straight example: a girl inflicting physical harm on a boy being Played for Laughs in a way that would be much darker if the genders were reversed.
Edited by 159.233.220.86
I love too easily, and yet, not easily enough.
I find it interesting (and sad) how often writers will depict this trope without even realizing it. Or better yet, when they actually think that they are averting it.
In the Charmed episode "Battle of the Hexes," a spell goes awry and causes the girls in a class to attack the boys. Billie, the Straw Feminist, is alarmed by this and says it isn't right.
If the writers had just stopped there, then the episode would have qualified to be an aversion. Unfortunately, they just had to have Phoebe and Piper making light of the situation (which they certainly wouldn't do if it was the boys attacking the girls) in a subsequent scene, which reduced the episode to a mere subversion.
This episode did say that female-on-male violence is wrong, yes. But that scene with Phoebe and Piper took us, at least in part, right back where we started - with the idea that female-on-male violence doesn't need to be taken seriously, which has always been one of the most persistent obstacles that male victims of violence face.
The irony here is that the writers probably never even realized that that later scene would have this effect. If anything, the writers probably believed that they had created an episode with a clear, unequivocal Aesop that female-on-male violence is wrong, and it never even occurred to them that said Aesop was partly broken by their failure to take it consistently seriously.
Ano Sa
Quote: "It's surprising how often the author won't think to have the man under attack perform some legsweep or judo move on the woman and then just run away, thus never putting his hands on the woman and sparing them both the humiliation."
I'm pretty certain this line in the trope description is falling prey to some of the issues involved, especially since it at best would be loophole abuse—not to mention most judo moves would involve touching the person with your hands, especially if you're actually trying to minimize damage.
Plus, most guys simply aren't going to get much help from others when running from a woman, even when it's painfully clear that he needs it and the only way to claim he deserves it is what this trope's about.
Hide / Show Replies
I remember I wrote something like this in a story I wrote, it had EVERY cliché in the world: The almost naked girl, the guy just passing by: When the moment comes, the girl tries to PUNCH him, not some sissy ass slap, however, the guy dodges it and says why will you want to punch him anyways? She replies him that what he did, it's what she expected of him. And told him that girls that punch a guy, over an accident, and use violence towards boys or girls before hear his reasons (i.e. he trip, he apologized), are basically psychos. So, tl;dr: Abuse is wrong, in either sex.
Is it just me or are some people thinking that the acceptance of woman physically abusing men is somehow REALLY sexism against women, as it's men assuming woman are weak and can't hurt men, rather than the "men deserve it" angle.
Hide / Show Replies
Nope, it's not just you. There was a news special a while back where they had a woman yelling at and slapping a man and inquired of the passersby why they did what they did and what they thought. They ranged from doing nothing to cheering at the woman because, "He probably did something to deserve it." There was one person that went to call the police and one officer showed up and said he wouldn't have done anything any way.
Edited by 216.99.32.43
I think it's mainly because most people's go-to argument to justify this Double Standard is by saying women are weaker (same thing with the Wouldn't Hit a Girl double standard). But I can see that playing a role though because usually when they have this trope played straight, it's often played as "Oh, she's pissed off because he did something wrong." It's probably both.
Edited by 216.99.32.43
Well, some things are like that. For example I find modern hardcore feminism to be far more insulting to women than it is to men, because the rationale appears to be "Get revenge on men who have oppressed you by being...exactly like men?" Because apparently being feminine isn't good enough. Great job with that equality of the sexes, people. This, however, is not that. This is straight-up prejudice against men. Yes, the idea that physically, most women would not be able to beat up most men has some truth to it, more or less. Males are designed to be able take more straight-up damage than females. It's their job. But for that very reason, most men aren't going to defend themselves physically against a woman, simply because of instinct and fear of harming her. And also, these days, fear of being treated as a horrible person for beating up a woman. But this isn't seeing women as too weak to hurt a man badly, not really. This is simply the same double standard of "why would the audience (or anybody in real life) care about men? They're all evil" that I see in a lot of fiction, and that makes me loathe all of these kinds of tropes with every fiber of my being. Sexism against men does exist. Somebody's going to have to realize that...
By the way hi everybody. I'm new here.
@Kestrellius I agree. Sexism against men is a huge problem. Also just because someone's weaker than you doesn't change the fact that they're trying to hurt someone else. If someone tried to kill you and failed, you'd still deem them as untrustworthy no matter how much of a fail it was.
Also just because your average woman is weaker than your average male, doesn't mean a female can't be stronger than your average man. Also as a female, I can tell you Women Are Wiser is a load of crap. When did we decide not to judge people on individual merit as opposed as gender? I know we're getting there, but it seems like we still have a long way to go before we have gender equality.
Edited by 216.99.32.43
Yeah...I'm a complementarian, myself, so I think that the genders have different, but equally important, roles. Ultimately, the 'man of the house' generally belongs in the position of authority there, with the other members, particularly the wife/mother, in a strong advisory position (but the male's authority applies only within that one family; this does not extend to other women). Trouble was people sort of took that and ran with it.
And yeah seconded. The generalization of demographics as thinking alike is a huge insult to basically everybody.
It's not an either/or proposition. It's entirely possible for the same trope to be sexist against both men and women in different ways.
I think all kind of abuse are wrong, no matter who's on who.
This is just an opinion of mine... If I'm wrong then feel free to correct it.
Hide / Show Replies
This might be covered under another trope I just haven't found yet, but what about a boy/girl relationship (could be BF/GF, or siblings, or just friends) who are comically abusive to each other (smacks upside the head when they say something stupid, punches to an arm when they're rude, etc), but never to the point where it becomes dark, and both parties give as good as they get. Having a hard time thinking of a good example, but I've seen it in some anime before. What form of playing with the trope would that fall under? Or would that really fall under the trope at all?
Who cares? The discussion page is for discussing examples on the page, not tangents about what some blogger might think of it.
Troll post gone, making my comment irrelevant!
Edited by 75.51.144.9
No, but it is up to the mods, which is why you got banned before and are about five seconds away from getting banned again.
Don't respond to troll posts, guys. Just report and ignore.
That was the amazing part. Things just keep going.
I'm sure they do have other ways to portray them, but hey, woman abusing men is funny apparently.
Teen Titans & "Teen Titans Trouble In Tokyo" :Raven's frequent smacking of Beast Boy, either physically or telekinetically, is almost always played for laughs on the show due to the cartoonish style of the series. Surprisingly, Starfire and Robin, on the other hand, subvert this trope: you would expect a naive alien girl with super-strenght to be a perfect opportunity for this trope, but Starfire only hit Robin in the pilot, which wasn't played for laughs. For the remaining of the show, she acts actually extremely nice toward him and never abuse him, despite being obviously the strongest of the two.
How about when people think it's okay (or even sexy) when it's abuse by a female on another female? I couldn't find a page for that.
Hide / Show Replies
There is an example I would like to add, but I'm not sure if it goes here or under 'Unprovoked Pervert Payback' or both. I'm also concerned my bias on the matter will color the entry, so I'd like some help from fellow Tropers if you guys are willing.
Namely, I'd like to add the relationship between Kirino Kousaka and her brother from Ore no Imōto ga Konna ni Kawaii Wake ga Nai. Namely, that she delivers a profound amount of abuse on her brother, physically and verbally, when in 90% of the circumstances its completely uncalled for and unjustified, and is never punished or called out for her behavior.
Unless this has been brought up before... This trope is on the series' TV Tropes page, but it doesn't really highlight just how bad it really is.
Edited by Drakedragon
Quote: If the guy GENUINELY deserved being bitchslapped or humiliated because he's been a complete and utter Jerkass to the girl or because he's being a Complete Monster, this trope doesn't apply.
Is it just me or is this sentence directly invoking this trope? Switching the genders in the situation would make it sound horrible, is it right to have this here?
If the girl really is asking to get slapped or humiliated because she's acting like a total jerkass or a complete monster, it's fine bro!
Or am I just being a white-knighting PC totally overreading it?
Hide / Show Replies
I think you are. I mean, I see why you might misinterpret that statement, but that's exactly what your reaction is - a misinterpretation.
If a guy was a total asshole and got bitchslapped by the Hero, nobody would have any problem with it. Hermione slapping Draco Malfoy was Laser-Guided Karma, not abuse, and Eowyn killing The Witch King was a C Mo A. If we removed that sentence, every single Action Girl fighting a bad guy becomes an abuser.
To put it in simple terms; the trope refers to an unprovoked act of abuse from a female to a male. Or an unleashing of Disproportionate Retribution on the poor fella. Hitting back if you get hit or defending yourself doesn't count, hence the addendum.
Quote: If the girl really is asking to get slapped or humiliated because she's acting like a total jerkass or a complete monster, it's fine bro!
We have that one under Would Hit a Girl.
Edited by Darkmane Tyler Durden is my bitch.
It could do with rewording, the Jerkass clause is too vague. I'd suggest something like "say by throwing her food on the floor or kicking her dog..." - being a jerk does not justify violence.
I also thought this sentence was in pretty stark contrast to the rest of the article. In a gender-reversed situation you wouldn't get away with just saying "She deserved it", you'd have to be very, very specific.
I'd suggest changing the "abuses" to "hits" or "attacks" or something in the sentance "Tropes Are Tools and this is not a hammer to use whenever a woman abuses a man regardless the reasons."
Personally I'd change the whole thing to something like; "Be careful though. Tropes Are Tools and this is not a hammer to use whenever a woman hits a man regardless the reasons. This trope is invoked whenever a violent scene wouldn't fly if genders were reversed. Not, say, as soon as Wonder Woman punches the Hulk."
Maybe it needs a better example. I just wanted to point out that the current wording really does come off as an example of the trope itself.
How about this? "Be careful though. Tropes Are Tools and this is not a hammer to use whenever a woman hits a man regardless the reasons. This trope is invoked whenever a violent scene wouldn't fly if genders were reversed. Not if for example the Heroine kills the male Big Bad in defense of others.
Edited by KSonik
I have a lot of praise for TV Tropes for making this page and being so frank and honest with the examples. However, if I have one criticism, it's to do with the same point Samwise210 takes issue with; this trope can be considered Justified if the man is an asshole but reverse the sexes and it wouldn't fly.
Let's take Darkmane's example of Hermione hitting Draco. Reverse the sexes and there'd be an uproar. If Ron Weasley clocked Pansy Parkinson, it wouldn't be accepted. So I think Samwise210 and the person who left their IP address are correct. Even if the guy is unpleasant — whether they're just a garden variety Jerkass to a world-destroying Big Bad — it should matter if the abuse wouldn't be accept if he was female.
This is important because of one very distinct example I can think of that deserves to be put in but, under these limitations, can't be. The Big Bad of the video game Heavenly Sword — a good Level 6 on the Sliding Scale of Gender Inequality as it is — receives a very disturbing Groin Attack in the final Quick Time Event of the game. One that would be considered horrific if a male did it to a female. If you're interested, it starts at 7:10 of this Youtube video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vm9X7rKMCm4
- Teen Titans Trouble In Tokyo: From beginning to end, Raven mostly abuses Beast Boy.
In the US version of Shameless this trope is played straight. After Steve pulls a terribly stupid prank Fiona actually punches him in the face, knocking him down. Because the prank was stupid, it's treated as though he deserved the beating and at no point does she apologize (he in fact must apologize to her for the prank with the physical abuse a non-issue.
Hayleychaotix
I've got something but I'm not sure if it's an example. A Wizards of Waverly Place episode involves Maxine (a Gender Bendered Max) beating the crap out of Justin on two seperate occasions. Both of these occasions happen in a karate class, but he's forced into it both times and when he fights back he's yelled at for beating up a little girl. A running gag throughout the episode is also how cute "A little girl kicking butt" is. Is that an example of this?
Edited by 24.115.228.81
Face me now, Bitch!
So, did anyone else find out why the Troper Tales page fro this trope was deleted?
Watch Symphogear Hide / Show Replies
For "complaining/sympathy-baiting".
I cut up one dozen new men and you will die somewhat, again and again.
I don't think it's a matter of women being weak; in fact, when the woman beating on the man is clearly causing serious harm, it's still either 'funny' or 'he probably deserved it.' The truth is, men are traditionally seen as the brawlers, and women are veiwed more as peacemakers. When a girl takes a beating from a guy, she's usually put in a sympathetic light, or at least, it would be extremely difficult not to have her come off as such. Men on the other hand...yeah. I'm trying to write a fiction where one of the main characters happens to be a girl. She's also the Buttmonkey. The hard part for me is figuring out a way to pass off male on female abuse as funny. If you were horrified by that sentence, you see what I'm dealing with.
Hide / Show Replies
"I don't think it's a matter of women being weak;"
It's hard to convey certain hypocrisies of society. I think what it is is that women are seen as ineffectual and men as always responsible. So if a woman does any damage it's really the man's fault for being damaged. But that's an utterly absurd, illogical position to take, thus people laugh.
The laughter is a reaction to the contradiction between a belief system and reality: on the one hand the damage the woman is doing is obvious and obviously her fault, on the other hand men must be always responsible and completely invulnerable to women. So it's funny, because it's confusing.
To the topic creator Ju:
I plan on making a controversial fiction too. But instead of portraying male-on-female violence as funny like you plan to, I will portray virtually ALL female characters as Complete Monsters, and ALL male characters as Incorruptible Pure Pureness. And in the end, the men will destroy the women with holy magic. Seeing as in my fiction's world, Homosexual Reproduction is possible, men believe Women Are The Expendable Gender.
It'll be a vicious deconstruction of this trope.
Edited by CosmosAndChaos One of the over 40 party members from Chrono Cross. And a canon mother to celebrate the upcoming Mother's Day(05/12).
Mr Death: Turns out I can't just blank this, though rest assured a total void is worth more than the dopey trolling that was here.
Edited by MrDeath
- Ranma ½: Ranma Wouldn't Hit A Girl because of these assumptions and thus never hits Akane, even in his girl form. However, Akane always pummels him with an Armor Piercing Slap or a full-blown low-altitude kick and it's Played for Laughs. Unfortunately, this is done so much that other Ranma fans no longer find this funny and see this as just plain unjustified abuse. Of course, the ONE time Akane fought Ranma for real, with actual intent to harm, the only reason she even scored a hit on him was because he was only trying to disable the Powered Armor that was making her unnaturally powerful.
People seem to forget that many times, when Akane beats up Ranma, it's after HE abuses her verbally/psychologically. Because really, he calls her "ugly", "bitch", "flat-chested", "failure at femininity", etc. in a regular basis, or compares her negatively to the other fiancées - and he perfectly knows that such comments are her Berserk Button. so I'm placing this here for the time being, since I would like the Ranma example to be rewritten without the passive-aggressive Akane bashing: Akane may be a physical abuser, but Ranma is abusive to her as well.
Hide / Show Replies
Again, reverse the situation: would you accept a man beating up a women because she called him "ugly", "manwhore", "mini-dick", "failure at masculinity"? If not, the example is fully valid.
B&
"Well, if you consider that you can break a person's bone just by squeezing their arm to hard and that it's only slightly more difficult to crush a human skull with your bare hands than a watermelon...and the fact that women have no rules of combat. Men are taught from an early age that there are certain things you just don't do in a fight that women will go for every time. Groin attacks only being one thing on that short list."
Must be a new troper that hasn't seen the Made of Plasticine article. Or maybe being sarcastic, but it's hard to tell on the internet.
Edited by loracarol
Not sure if Tiger is a fitting counterpoint to Rihanna. He did get caught cheating.
Edited by azul120 Hide / Show Replies
It's not about the cheating. If Rhianna got caught cheating, and she was beaten with a golf club by her husband and needed to be hospitalized for it, do you really think Saturday Night Live would be making jokes about it?
That's not the only way this is an inaccurate comparison. Far more people are familiar with the Tiger Woods incident than the Rihanna incident, and this image is Just Two Faces And A Caption.
I've removed the image for this reason. You can appeal to the Image Pickin' forum, but I'm sure they'd tell you the exact same thing.
As for a good image on this page...whatever happened to that shot of Louise beating Saito with her whip from Zero No Tsukaima? Now that was a demonstration of the trope, albeit perhaps a NSFW one.
Edited by SomeGuy See you in the discussion pages.
Cut from Harry Potter -
- Considering that Rowling has highlighted double standards elsewhere in the series—such as having Merope Gaunt use the love potions as date rape drugs, which is often done by girls in the HP universe—it's likely deliberate. Remember, Hermione attacked Ron after he deliberately snogged Lavender in front of her to make her jealous. The fact that she snapped is entirely understandable, and she tries Operation: Jealousy on him shortly thereafter. Their daughter wasn't born for another eight years, giving them plenty of time to mend fences.
- The phrase "the fact that she snapped is entirely understandable" is a perfect example of this trope. Almost nowhere would be it considered "understable" for a man to physically abuse a woman because she tried to make him jealous.
- Considering that Rowling has highlighted double standards elsewhere in the series—such as having Merope Gaunt use the love potions as date rape drugs, which is often done by girls in the HP universe—it's likely deliberate. Remember, Hermione attacked Ron after he deliberately snogged Lavender in front of her to make her jealous. The fact that she snapped is entirely understandable, and she tries Operation: Jealousy on him shortly thereafter. Their daughter wasn't born for another eight years, giving them plenty of time to mend fences.
As the final justifier says "completely understandable" is exactly what this trope is about.
And from Everybody Loves Raymond -
- To be fair, Debra made sure to apologize after calming down.
- If Raymond was beating up Debra, course everything would be fine if he just apologized afterward.
- To be fair, Debra made sure to apologize after calming down.
Same as above, and the justifier below these elaborate on Debra's sociopathy.
UnreliableNarrator
I took these two examples off the trope because I agree they're a satire of something, but I don't know quite which trope they do belong on. So here they are:
- Played infuriatingly straight on Threes Company. Jack is sexually harassed by his female boss and when he tries to press charges, his female lawyer does the same thing. Then the female judge tells Jack he should expect that kind of response when he wears clothes that show off his chest hair and muscles and wears cologne. Although, that might be more of a case of Rape Is Ok When Its Female On Male.
- Or it might be satire — taking problems that women often have to deal with (such as claims that women bring harassment upon themselves by wearing revealing clothes, etc.) and making their unfairness more obvious by putting a man in that situation instead.
- Married With Children does a similar satire of this. When Al Bundy goes to a bar to apply for a job, the female club owner blatantly leers at his crotch, leading a genuinely upset Al to angrily demand that she look at his face when she talk to him, a complete reversal of the typical scenario of harassment. Interesting, considering how much of a lecher Al usually is.
That honestly seems closer to Rape is Ok When it's female on male/ Rape As Comedy.
"The Rape of Mr. Smith" parodies the treatment of female rape victims.
I'm curious. How do you parody the treatment of female rape victims when the treatment of male rape victims is so much worse? It doesn't even parse.
Should Titus be considered on this page? The point of the joke isn't 'I got beat up by a girl' but 'why the Hell didn't I leave her sooner?' Does that count here?