Follow TV Tropes
I wonder why Scar from Fullmetal Alchemist is not put in the examples. He has many character tropes that encourage this trope, such as Anti-Villain, Dark and Troubled Past, Freudian Excuse, Jerkass Woobie, and Woobie, Destroyer of Worlds.
Am I the only one who thinks of it as a shallow fantasy? The I-can-change-him and beauty-makes-up things always disgust me, with the former reminding me of something horrible.
I agree it is a Shallow fantasy. I can't believe some people go around and take horrible people who have no problem doing disgusting things in canon and then write stories where they are good people just misunderstood. They treat these people as if they had more redeemable qualities then they actually do.
I conpletely agree with you. I think that this trope carries the risk of objectifying the villain in question, and that his/her evil deeds and/or redemption arc should be treated carefully.
Can this apply to a good guy? I've seen a fic when a girl who is canonically sympathetic Nice Girl, but also a Pragmatic Antihero with small graveyard of dogs shot being presented as Actual Pacifist who wouldn't hurt a fly. Would it still fit?
On the page image's "Fanon" panel, try pretending that his blushing cheecks are red eyes, and his eyes are Big Ol' Eyebrows.
Does anyone else find the name for this trope misleading? I think it sounds more like an alternate name for Evil Is Sexy personally. Why not something like "Draco's Just Misunderstood", or if this site's gonna do away with media-specific names in favor of more generic ones (e.g. "Dropped A Bridget On Him" becoming Unsettling Gender Reveal), why not change it to "The Villain's The Real Hero"?
This name's got far too entrenched to be changed, I suspect.
I think we have a rule against re-naming tropes that are well known outside the wiki, even if they violate new trope-name guidelines.
It's the reason things like The Worf Effect are left as is even though they violate the rule of not referencing the trope namer in the title.
That wasn't my complaint though. My complaint was that the trope is about fans interpreting a villain to be way more sympathetic than they really are, but the name makes it sound like they perceive villain as more Fanservice-y.
Is it wrong for me to think of Dark Helmet as this? Then again, he is a comedic version of Darth Vader, who is already on the Film page for this trope...
Are there any female "Draco In Leather Pants"?
Sure there are.
What if there is a fan who decided that instead of putting Draco in Leather Pants, they put Draco through hell in their fanfic, and the events of the story help to bring about a change in his character for the better? Is there a trope for that? I mean, the trope itself is named for the resident Jerkass in Harry Potter, but tends to apply more to characters like Voldemort. I mean, if it's a For Want of a Nail fanfic, and the plot revolves around bringing about Character Development for "Draco" so he'll Take A Level In Kindness (though still reverting to his usual Jerkass behavior so we know "Yeah, it's still Draco," is probably wise), does it really still count as this trope?
Tropes Are Flexible so i'd say yes. If there is an in-universe reason for change then i'd say it's Justified Trope.
Does it count as Draco in Leather Pants if a fic gives a character some sympathetic qualities, but still maintains their negative qualities?
Draco In Leather Pants is more about the Audience Reactions as opposed to the canon. Though if the fandom acknowledges his/her/it's villainy, cruelty, and/or rudeness while sympathizing with them; it's not this trope.
This was on the page:
NOTE: Trope being reconfigured into pure fanfic-only trope as per Trope Repair Shop. Existing fandom misinterpretation examples here and formerly from Ron the Death Eater to be moved to Misaimed Fandom.
Amusingly, Fast Eddie removed it for being an editor note basically the same moment I decided to ask about it, but that is niether here nor there. My question is, did this redefine/clean up ever actually happen? I was doing some indentation fixing and I do ot want to waste a bunch of time cleaning examples that do not even belong here, but it does not look like it was cleaned to fit the new definition at all.
Yeah, it was a crowner decided by the few people who voted on it. Wasn't even sure how many people on the whole consented to the redefinition of RTDE in the first place.
Also, I don't see how much it helps to make notes visible only within the source. Shouldn't they serve as warnings to ALL would be editors? Because otherwise you have people not realizing until they already clicked the edit button (if at all: they might miss the text within the source), by which point the page has been already been locked down for the next 20 minutes for naught.
I added Eddy from Ed, Edd n Eddy because although his Freudian Excuse is understandable, fans also tend to ignore the things he does that are his fault, without any influence from anyone.
A common Mary Sue trait is everybody loving and worshiping them and the few people who don't are sooooo bad because of it. Therefore a lot of fans tend to love that character, often because they're the only ones who say what the fans are thinking. Would that be this trope? Or is it Rooting for the Empire or Unintentionally Sympathetic? Or does it depend on what the Mary Sue type character is like?
I think it would depend on what the Sue is like, if the Sue is a legitimately unsympathetic character it's just Alternate Character Interpretation.
Live Action TV: Secret Of Crinkley Hall Heroine fights back against the bully and the school authorities take the bully's side.
Doe this count as an example of Draco ILP? Or is the DILP trope specifically defined as the Author of the Fic taking the bully's side?
Well Draco In Leather Pants is where the fandom goes out of their way to paint a villain as a hero. If the episode expected us to side with the bully, then that would fall under designatedhero. However, the situation you discribed sounds more like adultsareuseless.
Hey, just out of curiosity, but is there ever a time when Draco in Leather Pants might not necessarily be considered bad? After all, Tropes Are Not Bad, or at least they're not supposed to be, yet this one seems to be considered universally bad.
For example, I wrote an Assassins Creed fan-fic that could be considered Draco in Leather Pants in that it features two of the Multiplayer characters (who are Templar assassins) as the main characters and portrays them in a sympathetic light, but I also took steps to make it seem less like the work of a Misaimed Fandom. Namely, I went ahead and gave them sympathetic backstories, since neither character's backstory was ever given in any way, shape, or form, I emphasized that the Templars are still bad and that they were on the wrong side, and do not give the Assassins a Ron the Death Eater treatment. So my questions are as follows: 1, Could my story, which can be read here: http://www.fanfiction.net/s/7632402/1/Smugglers-Redemption be considered a case of Draco in Leather Pants? If yes, then could it at least be considered a well-done case, or does such a thing not exist? Is Draco in Leather Pants ever not the work of an unprofessional writer or Misaimed Fandom?
Of course - you have to tread this trope very, very carefully though. The best way I can think of it is in a For Want of a Nail fanfic where different events shape the Character Development of a would-be villain so that they aren't nearly as evil (but it has to be believable too - not simply "he took one look into Mary Sue's/his beloved rival The Hero's lovely eyes and POOF!...A villain was he no more!"). Alternatively, if the character isn't a Complete Monster, they might be put in a Peggy Sue story and shown trying to make amends however they can, if at all.
I think the leather pants thing has to do with the fangirls squeeing over images of Draco wearing leather pants and not caring about the type of guy he is.
That's the idea - it's almost Beauty = Goodness - the meta edition! People seem to think it's either "bad guy has fangirls", or "bad guy with some sympathetic traits has fangirls who notice said traits but still acknowledge he's a bad guy". The title! It tells all! Okay kind of.
What in the seven levels of hell does leather pants have to do with anything?! Ron the Death Eater makes sense since Death Eaters are these horrific abominations IIRC, but leather pants doesn't tell me that the trope means "an antagonist whose villainous acts are downplayed by his/her fans."
The trope name itself seems to be confusing a couple of editors, who mistake this trope for Cry for the Devil* even in cases where the evil actions of the character are not commended or even Evil Is Sexy. However, Evil Is Sexy often leads many a fangirl into this trope. He's hot, therefore, your argument is invalid.
Putting this out here right now in lieu of a TRS thread (currently at 500 limit). Troper troacctid made a change to Ron the Death Eater, erasing all examples not having to do with fanfic, because "they weren't sourced", and apparently to him, it's a fanfic-only trope. I was wondering what the rest of you thought, since DILP still has fandom reaction examples, which is as it should IMO.
I vote for a rename on the grounds that neither I nor anyone else who has not read Harry Potter knows what the HELL this trope is about based on the title. Who the hell is Draco? Why are leather pants important?
Draco is a major d-bag from HP that a HUGE number of fangirls defend, your guess is as good as mine as to what leather pants has to do with anything.
I'm not too familiar with the HP series, but on the general whole I know at least that Draco is an asshole. However, he's also a cute blond boy (apparently) so the fangirls forget about the asshole part.
I turn your attention to the following lyrics from Boney M's Rasputin
Most people looked at him with terror and with fear
But to Moscow chicks he was such a lovely dear
Good page quote perhaps?
I think the current quotes are just fine. You can put that on quotes if you like.
Should this be a YMMV trope? I mean, it is based on fan reaction, but also relies on a quantifiable extent.
This page is too long.
The list of examples give very detailed explainations for each character, so the explaination of the trope at the top of the page doesn't need to be that long. If I am not familiar with this trope and see it referenced on another page, I want a short explaination that gets to the point, so I can decide if I want to read the examples or if it's something I don't care for.
But this trope page is waaay too long. It should be cropped down to at least one half of the length, or even one third.
No way knight templars are prone to this trope.
A little late to replying to this, but they can be, when fans excuse their actions, as per this trope.
Removed Affably Evil and Anti-Villain from the list. I am not too sure people necessarily think Affably Evil characters are necessarily good people, and I am sure there are more Anti Villains who are liked because of the fact they are morally ambiguous instead of having their actions whitewashed or otherwise
I would keep Affably Evil at least. Tarquin in Order Of The Stick is certainly that and he's acquired a quite durable pair of leather pants among some fans of the comic. Although the DILP is often not all that affable, being Troubled, but Cute, they are in some instances.
There are many sexy villains. That is a standard Trope.
dlp is a non-sexy villain about whom Fangirls squee.
Movie Draco and Snape are beautiful and evil because Hollywood needs eye-candy. In the books, they are ugly and evil.
Fangirls squeeing at sexy villains is standard.
dlp = fangirls insisting that Draco being evil prooves that he is beautiful AND that his beauty prooves that he is good.
Loveable Rogue seems to be suffering from a hole in the categorization. Some folks at Sliding Scale Of Anti Heroes (and some of the description in the page) insist a Loveable Rogue does not really count as a Type II antihero (which I rather think it does — Type II or Type IV) but it's not listed here either. Is that because Draco in Leather Pants is strictly defined as a character you're supposed to dislike, whereas Loveable Rogue is a character you're supposed to like even when he commits crimes? Should this definitional distinction be mentioned on this page, or has the issue been covered somewhere?
Based in the edit reasons in the Sliding Scale Of Anti Heroes this is not dracoinleatherpantsing- K Sonik"I kinda doubt thieves are really qualified for type II." Cclospina" Most lovable rogues are chaotic neutral, Generally are Type III Or IV."
This trope have a bigger risk of be a Ron the Death Eater than Draco in Leather Pants.
That is something I truly agree with
It's more like the inverse of this trope; in other words, "the character is a giant jerkass, but the author completely excuses their actions,"
I just looked up the Pantheons and I think the term Unreasonably Liked Villain might be the better title. I mean, come on, Draco In Leather Pants, not only I hate the character, it doesn't make any sense.
because this isn't just about a villain that you like very much this is about a villain that you try to rationalize
Why is villain is (sometimes unreasonably) rationalized? Because they are unreasonably liked. Well, I never seen anyone trying to justify Light for one thing, although Eastern and Western fandom might have different views on such character.
So? I still personally think the name should stay as draco is the poster boy for this trope. Also the are many liked villains that don't suffer this like Xykon from Order of the Stick
Poster boy? Nah, that would be The 2008 Joker. Well, D is the most famous example, no doubt bout that.
Also, it's my opinion that when people see a trope, they shouldn't be saying 'what the hell is that supposed to mean?'. Simplicity and comprehensibility is the virtue, ya know.
You got a point you know. But maybe instead of changing the title to be Unreasonably Liked villain we should change it to Rationalized Villain
Keep in mind that Draco ultimately turned out not to be a villain. A rename is in order.
Just because it turned out he wasn't EEEEEEEEEVIL doesn't mean he's not still the trope namer. He's someone who we're intended to hate because, while not evil, he's still bad, and the fandom overlook this entirely because his actor's pretty, so he's still a perfect example of the trope.
Yeah, but the trops generally applies to genuinely evil characters.
So? Being "genuinely evil" isn't a requirement at all. The trope is described thusly, "When a fandom takes a controversial or downright villainous character and downplays his flaws, often turning him into an object of desire in the process."
Note it says "or downright villainous". So the trope boils down to two criteria:
1. We're supposed to not like the character. 2. Fangirls/boys like him/her anyway and excuse his faults.
Whether or not someone is really "evil" has absolutely no baring on the trope listing. Draco Malfoy, if not evil, is supposed to be a sniveling little toad that we're supposed to hate, and fangirls turn him into a misunderstood bishi. That's as clear an example of the trope as you can get.
Draco might not be a villain, but he's still a Jerkass. Also, "leather-pantsing" is a fan-speak term for this sort of thing after The Draco Trilogy. Everything You Wanted To Know About Changing Names says not to rename if it's a term already in use in the world.
What's with the new picture? The old one at least featured the Trope Namer, this is yet another example of Just A Face And A Caption.
Zapped it. Pictures are too much of a hassle on this one.
Ah, yeah. Sorry about that, I'm the one who posted the picture, and I thought most people recognize the guy and caption would explain it all. Fan Myopia, I guess.
At the very least, I "moved" the picture to the video game section of Draco In Leather Pants. Seeing that the video game section now has an image of Sephiroth, should the other sections also have a picture? Or are they too much of a hassle and the one in the video game section should be zapped as well?
A picture of the Trope Namer can still be JAFAAC. As for the current picture, even if you don't know who the character is, I would think you can still tell what the trope is about.
If anyone wants to put a Trope Namer pic, at least have a fanon/canon contrast between Canon!Draco kicking a dog and Fanon!Draco as a big, doe-eyed moe-blob. If anyone finds that, by all means, put it up there!
I misposted. Please ignore it.
Community Showcase More
How well does it match the trope?