Follow TV Tropes

Discussion Main / SocietyMarchesOn

Go To

Dec 1st 2018 at 2:16:47 PM •••

Deleted this paragraph on The Simpsons. At worst, calling a parent by their first name was considered disrespectful. It hadn’t been “utterly shocking” since the 1970s at least.

  • When the show first came out, the idea of Bart calling Homer by his first name was utterly shocking. While it\'s still not exactly a popular idea nowadays — just ask any dad what he thinks about it — it\'s far less shocking than it once was.

Apr 6th 2015 at 12:54:25 AM •••

Removed the following page quote, since it had nothing to do with this trope. This trope is about outdated societal norms in old media depictions of the future. Disney's Cinderella (which is humorously criticized in the quote) wasn't an attempt to depict the future. note 

The quote:

"If you're so adored
Where's
your Academy Award?
I'm the smart female heroine
That can't be ignored
The moral of the quarrel
And why I've got you beat:
It's what's
inside that matters
Not the size of yo' feet"

Now this page needs a new page quote.

Edited by Rjinswand
May 5th 2014 at 5:57:17 AM •••

Have removed the mention of Gundam Wing in the Animaniacs example as it wasn't the first anime adaptation in America where death was a major issue. Robotech was already doing this back in the 1980s- there are numerous cases where major characters such as Roy Fokker, Ben Dixon and implicitly most of the SDF-1 bridge crew die, as well as most of the population of Earth getting wiped out by the Zendraedi loyal to Dolza... and that's just the Macross Saga.

Hide/Show Replies
May 11th 2014 at 7:47:55 AM •••

Although in fairness a lot of other anime adaptations aimed at the kids' TV market both then and since were enforcing the Never Say "Die".

Aug 12th 2012 at 2:37:50 PM •••

I would claim that the Music, Tom Lehrer example is not an example of this trope. The song is not about how things would be in the future, but about how things were right there and then. The pedagogical trend was called "New Math", and it's still called that, even though it (like for example Modernism) isn't very much associated with the future anymore. "New" need not imply future tense.

Also, for what it's worth, one of the greatest flaws of the New Math was sloppy execution on the part of textbook authors. Many of the new ideas introduced, such as performing arithmetic in other bases than ten as described in the song, were intended primarily as a means for educating the teachers in how math worked, so that they would have a deeper understanding of it (rather than merely know which sequence of operations would produce the right answer), and thus be better prepared to themselves teach it their pupils. This was flanderized into assuming that the same new material also should be taught to the pupils themselves, often with a focus on form (e.g. the answer to 2+2 would not be 4, but the singleton set {4} whose only element is the number 4, because for an equation with multiple solutions the correct answer should be phrased as the set of all those solutions) rather than content. Schoolteachers still learn how to do arithmetic in bases other than ten, because this is enlightning (just like learning another language can help you understand the point of grammar), but the textbooks of their pupils no longer has exercises on the topic. (Except, I believe, some US curricula have introduced base eight and base twelve arithmetic as a method of dealing with some aspects of the antiquated non-decimal systems of measurment that Americans insist on using.)

Aug 9th 2012 at 9:05:41 PM •••

Do things like the Jetsons or Looney Tunes really count? They're Played for Laughs, not seriously predicting that the future will be just like the present. (This is especially obvious for the Jetsons when you remember that it's a counterpoint show to the Flintstones, which similarly projected 50's culture onto the cartoon version of the ancient past for the purposes of humor.)

Jul 30th 2012 at 1:05:08 PM •••

I've noticed in some old Literature, like Roald Dahl, the idea that TV kills the brain or make people stupid. That made sense back in the 50s and the 60s when TV was mostly stupid variety shows and sitcoms. Nowadays, while most of TV is still stupid, we have more complex, thought provoking, and even some downright mindscrewing shows, so the critic feels a bit snobbish.

Anyway, my point is: is this change in attitude examples of this Trope?

Feb 1st 2012 at 5:40:12 PM •••

Is it just me, or should this trope focus exclusively on examples set in the present? It's impossible to say whether, say, a sexist society with advanced space travel is realistic simply because we don't know whether or not social values will have regressed by that point.

Hide/Show Replies
May 5th 2014 at 5:44:58 AM •••

I'll tend to agree with certain caveats. The fact is we do not know how the development of social mores will alter over time in our own future. My first caveat is this trope could still be said to apply after a fashion if it is blatently clear the creators are holding to their own era's social mores without contemplating the *possibility* of them changing. The second caveat is that what we, or at least the social consnsus deems "progress" and "regress" (in terms of "things getting better") need not be, or at least we can't simply say that a change in social mores which might look regressive in fact are. There might be hidden reasons we can't think of why a thing like an all-male starship crew might exist.

Sep 23rd 2011 at 12:29:16 PM •••

Uhhh...

"In Omnivore, most of the melodrama pivots on Aquilon being torn between her feelings for Cal and Veg, her colleagues on a far-future space mission. It's blatantly obvious that Polyamory would be an acceptable solution for all three of them, yet she's too afraid of looking like a slut to become sexually involved with either man, let alone both. Maybe that's how scifi readers felt about things in 1968, but now it just seems like prudish Wangst."

What society did the writer of this example live in in which polyamory is considered acceptable?

This isn't exactly an example because the social mores haven't changed.

Edited by PataHikari Hide/Show Replies
Jul 30th 2012 at 1:14:42 PM •••

I think they're talking about the being afraid of loosing her reputation for having sex thing. Women who have more than one sexual partner are still judged harshly, but the idea that a woman will be considered a slut for having sex is outdated.

I agree with the polyamory part though

Jun 17th 2011 at 8:36:10 PM •••

A Lovecraft story about the evils of alcohol? HUH? Can anyone provide a title for this? If not, I think the example should be deleted because I suspect the poster was confusing Lovecraft with some other writer.

Hide/Show Replies
Nov 17th 2010 at 10:49:58 AM •••

So, why were all those Asimov examples deleted?

Mar 30th 2010 at 3:10:31 AM •••

Im not sure that this is Did Not Do The Research. while you can make educated guesses there's no way to know what the future will hold. Also like Politically Correct History most writers are more interested in conforming modern day viewers than honestly predict what tomorrow's society would be like.

Edited by joeyjojo
Type the word in the image. This goes away if you get known.
If you can't read this one, hit reload for the page.
The next one might be easier to see.
Top

How well does it match the trope?

Example of:

/

Media sources:

/

Report