Follow TV Tropes
Can't we remove the real life exemples like for Straight Gay ?
When did Raven Symone come out?
There's no "official" word on that - the rumor mill started saying back in May 2012 that she had a girlfriend, but Raven herself won't say anything about it.
I have never thought of Melissa Etheridge as a lipstick lesbian. Should she be on the page?
Actually, lipstick lesbians do exist. My girlfriend and I appreciate beauty. I am only speaking for myself when I say this, but in order for a female to be attracted to another female I would expect her to be just as beautiful.
Also, if you don't already know of Amber Heard, you should really look her up and see that her girlfriend is also quite attractive. Not all lesbians like dyke or butch. It's the beauty that stuns the eye.. in the "lipstick lesbian world" that is.
Okay, good for you. Where were we saying they didn't exist?
Why do lesbians keep their nails short? Just Bugs Me.
To put this as tidily as possible... because lesbian sex tends to involve fingers in tender places. Long nails would hurt.
There are a couple of mentions of Lipstick Bisexuals. I was just wondering if anyone else finds that a little odd? After all, the whole point of this trope is that it's an aversion of the stereotypical Butch Lesbian, and the stereotypes associated with bisexuality in real life are completely unrelated to femininity.
Of course, YMMV, because female bisexuals are going to be in a lesbian relationship at some point, but it just seems a bit strange to talk about bisexual women's femininity when that's not really the playing-against-stereotype aspect. Should bisexual examples not go in Bi the Way?
Yes, yes they should.
Hm. Well, IMO, it depends. My impression was that Lipstick Lesbians aren't just playing against the butch stereotype; they're a stereotype in and of themselves, that is, hyper-feminine lesbians. For instance, a lesbian who really doesn't seem to fall anywhere on the masculine/feminine scale and doesn't act like a stereotypical man or woman, wouldn't be listed as either. She'd just be a character who happened to be a lesbian. As they're astereotypical, I like these types best.
Anyways. About bisexuals. Say Alice is a lesbian and Brenda is bi. If Alice is a neo-conservative Goth who dresses like a metalhead, volunteers at an animal shelter every Friday, and likes to paint, she's not butch, lipstick, or chapstick, and won't be listed as such. She's lesbian, but she's not a type. But if Brenda is on the cheerleading squad, is obsessed with clothes and makeup, and acts like a very feminine, very straight girl, with the exception of the "he"s in her romantic gushing being "she"s half the time, it would make sense for her to be indexed as such because she's a non-straight character who acts in a very gendered way.
Or at least, that's what I think. I could be wrong, though.
I have a problem with this line:
"Note that Lipstick Lesbians do exist, making this a case of Truth In Television to a degree. They just aren't nearly as large a proportion of the real lesbian population as the fictional one. Keep dreaming, straight boys."
Because it implies that the majority (possibly even vast majority) of Lesbians fall into strict Butch/Femme roles, which is just not true. The 'to an extent' line in particular makes it sound like the Lipstick Lesbian is a rare beast akin to the tasmanian tiger. Could we get it replaced with something a little less generalizing? Something like this, maybe:
"Note that Lipstick Lesbians do exist, making this a case of Truth in Television. However, in the world of fiction, virtually every lesbian not played for laughs falls into this trope. Keep dreaming, boys."
Community Showcase More
How well does it match the trope?