Linking to a past Trope Repair Shop thread that dealt with this page: Seems to cover two concepts
, started by shigmiya64 on May 11th 2011 at 10:21:06 AM
Previous Trope Repair Shop thread: Needs Help, started by MagBas on Jun 3rd 2016 at 1:27:58 AM
Previous Trope Repair Shop thread: Needs Help, started by MagBas on Mar 14th 2017 at 4:08:25 AM
Previous Trope Repair Shop thread: Misused, started by zer0h on Dec 4th 2017 at 4:07:13 PM
This trope is not simply about age of consent laws; it's about waiting for them to count down:
- Jail Bait Wait: Thanks to fiction, most US citizens believe that 18 is the age of consent for the entire country. In reality, that's not even close to the truth. Each state has its own age of consent, and only eleven of them have it at 18, California being one of them. It's 16 in most of them (thirty) and 17 in the others. Also, most states have exceptions if both participants are younger than the age of consent, or one is at it but the other is slightly belownote ; California, however, has no close-in-age exemptions at all.
In the Aristocats example, it's not actually even impossible for the kittens to have those colors even if they all had the same father. Duchess would just have to be heterozygous for the white gene (which is dominant and masks other colors) and genetically tortoiseshell underneath the white. The male kittens can only get or not get a red gene from the mother, so if one inherits the red half of tortoiseshell and one inherits black, it is completely plausible that one could be orange and one could be black. Since their mother is heterozygous for white, the kittens may either be white or not white (as long as the father isn't homozygous white). So all three are plausible even if they have the same father.
Looking at the page for said fanfic, it seems that what they were trying to explain is how a purebred cat with a controlled pedigree could produce such different looking kittens, not how any cat at all could produce those kittens.
Edited by molokai198
Imperial Court Mage
Ummm not that we shouldn't call out the faults of the Yaoi Genre ,but is it really necessary to put it here. By that logic we should be putting every trope in the Homophobia Index on here. And let's face it while having a better track record, Yuri isn't always most 100% realistic wither especially ones by straight men for straight men.
"Life's like a movie, write your own ending. Keep believing, keep pretending."-Jim Henson
Now that Unexpected character has been made YMMV, what about this trope, which is all about audience reaction to what they find unrealistic, despite it happening in real life.
I just realized the premise of the trope (it seems unrealistic, but...) sounds similar to a Justifying Edit. I'd, say more reason to make it YMMV.
Anyone for/against?
Hide / Show Replies
To be frank, I've never really understood the distinction between this and Aluminum Christmas Trees.
Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them.
Are in-universe examples fair game? I just watched an episode of Burn Notice, where Fiona's brother (who is Irish) thinks Michael's (under cover as Irish) American accent is "a bit dodgy" despite the fact that it's his natural speaking voice. I thought of this trope.
Hide / Show Replies
I am not sure if that fits the trope.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Would it fit a different one? It's not listed anywhere on the Burn Notice pages, and I feel like it's gotta be *something*.
Might want to ask in the Trope Finder.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
- In an episode of American Dad!, Klaus makes a joke about black Germans as though they're an entirely fictitious thing. In real life, there have been black people in Germany for centuries. Like many other European countries, Germany's history of Colonialism means that there are many descendants of slaves and African immigrants still living there.
Germany does have people descended from black immigrants, and also had colonialism. But it didn't have slavery of blacks from their colonies in the way the US had. We did not bring black people here, so we don't have people descended from former slaves the way the US does. In fact, they forbade the ownership and trade of slave for Germans in the colonies too.
HOWEVER, there was a complicated system that basically was slavery involving the Germans in the colonies themselves, but it never brought slaves to Germany itself (at least not on a large scale. I am sure someone might have brought some black guy home with them at some point. I don't know if he would still be a slave, or not once he came to Germany.). It was basically that the local tribes in West Africa were allowed to continue their tradition to keep slaves, and their children would still be considered slave, as was tradition too. BUT the Germans established a system that allowed a person that was a slave to buy its freedom for a set price. There was a certificate of freemdom that could be bought even by Germans. So if you wanted a slave, you went and bought some from a local tribe. You got their certificates of freedom, and held onto it and let them work until you did no longer need them/they were no longer useful to you. Then you gave them their certificate, and they were regular Africans, no longer slaves.
This is, of course, slavery too. The government did not approve of actual slavery, but this system was tolerated.
Oh, as for slavery in general, I guess the feudal system way back is a way of slavery. Of course, you can discuss when Germany (or any country in Europe) became its current form, and stopped being their historical version (like the Holy Roman Empire of German Nations, which actually included large parts of what is today Austria, all of Switzerland, large parts of Northern Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxemburg, and the area along the Rhine river in France.), but still, the middle ages had what can be considered slavery in that you are working land that belongs to someone else, and you have to give some of it to the owner of the land. It's still in practice (farmers still loan land from owners sometimes, though not always), but that's something you choose to do these days. Back then you did not usually have much choice.
Source:
http://www.city-data.com/forum/history/1485198-did-germans-ever-have-black-slaves.html
Black people in Germany were killed in the Holocaust. I would imagine that means that there is a lot less black people in Germany then most colonial powers.
What about the "strobe effect" of aircraft propellers, which is an artifact of frame rate and never seen in reality, yet movies with CGI aircraft often put the effect back in because without it the spinning prop doesn't look "realistic."
I'm not sure the example from XKCD is right. While the page image is from that comic, the rest of the strip it's taken from implies that the character knows the sabre is real and is being difficult on purpose because he thinks it's fun.
Edited by 24.93.232.216
Sophie Wilder
" Cheese is actually bad for mice http://www.fancymice.info/feeding3.htm "
Since the cheese is in a *mousetrap*, this line is a little pointless.
Should this be considered Trivia, and not on the main page of works? I don't know if there are any pages where this is particularly cluttering, but it still seems as though it's less of a "Media convention" and more of a "Factoid about the real life repercussions of such conventions."
Cut this:
- * When non-immigrant people in US shows (excluding those in New Mexico and parts of Arizona) are shown eating "Mexican food", it will almost always be Tex-Mex food, with many of the dishes (like fajitas) completely invented and developed in the US but loosely based on Mexican food, rather than merely Americanized-Mexican food like with most other foreign cuisines.
Is there a trope about shooting/stabbing that always leave blood stains IMMEDIATLY after the shoot/stab ? Like in a movie, if someone get stab in the stomach, there will always have immediatly blood on the clothes, or even blood pouring. If there's not, it'd seems unrealistic, but IRL, if you are stabbed in place like stomach with no veins cut, there will be hardly any blood coming out, or really just a few. It will be internal bleeding for the most.
Crazyrabbits
Took this out:
- Royce from Predators quickly deduces that they are on an alien planet, which would confuse many viewers because it's so obviously a tropical area. Anyone familiar with survival checklists, which Royce would be as a former soldier turned mercenary, would come to the same conclusion he did.
I'm sorry, but I don't understand what this example is supposed to mean. What does it mean, "Anyone familiar with survival checklists...would come to the same conclusion (that they're on an alien planet)". Have you been to an alien planet? How does being a survivalist give you the ability to qualify whether or not you're on Earth? As far as anyone knows, no human has ever been on an alien tropical planet. The example doesn't make any sense.
Hide / Show Replies
While I'm not familiar with survival checklists, I don't see how it's that unfeasable to draw the conclusion. If you run through a checklist, and the results don't add up as you'd expect them to in a tropical area on Earth, is it that great a leap to assume that you're on another world? After all, despite being an apparent tropical forest, there didn't seem to be any wildlife (unless I misremember the film). Besides, are you familiar with survival checklists? If not, how do you know they couldn't point to that conclusion?
The female sniper goes over at least some of the points when they all first meet up: It's tropical, yes, but the weather's wrong for most of the tropical areas she can name at the time of year, and the topography is all wrong. Later on, Royce points out that the sun hasn't moved in several hours, which would be a big tip off that something isn't right. Then, she shows him that a compass needle just spins around which doesn't happen on Earth for the most part.
If all you're getting is contradictory evidence, things blatantly out of place, and other things that just shouldn't be happening on Earth, then it's not really a leap of faith to figure out you're not on Earth.
Both of the above posts are all well and good, but what basis does the claim have in reality, and what frame of reference is this supposed to be exaggerating, that is causing people to accept that it's the real truth?
Simply saying that the weather and topography in an area is "wrong" doesn't mean anything in and of itself - the compass is a slightly more believable example, but I don't think a character would chalk "compass needle spins around" to "holy crap, I'm on an entirely different planet!"
I'm sorry, but if the real Statue of Liberty's head is smaller than the car-sized prop in Cloverfield, how do crowds of people stand around inside her crown and look out through the slats?
Re: accents.
Just because the actor is from the same country as the character, it doesn't mean that the accent is genuine. It is perfectly reasonable, for example, to criticise an Australian actor whose natural accent is a cultured one for overdoing a "bogan" accent when playing such a character. It's always puzzled me why it is that Americans refer to "British" accents. English, Scottish, Welsh, and Northern Irish accents (yes, NI isn't part of Britain but it is part of the UK, so its people have British nationality) are very different from each other. The Yanks can't narrow it down to one of those? And there are numerous and very different accents in each of those places. It's perfectly reasonable to criticise an actor who'se natural accent is south London for badly faking a south Yorshire accent (both of which are English accents). Hence the criticism of the Sherlock Holmes performances for fake "British" accents is not necessarily invalid.
A minor one: Conversational sound mixing. In works of fiction—especially in videogames and in dubbed movies/shows—people talking over or interrupting eachother is often viewed as bad sound editing... But in real life, people talk over and interrupt eachother all of the time; it's not very polite, and sometimes it makes it nearly impossible for less vocally confident individuals to get a word in edge-wise, but it does still happen.