TV Tropes meme
Jun. 23rd, 2008 10:29 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
meganbmoore"I put on the boots and kicked some monster ass. I dropped the ghoul, and I'm the one who rammed a chainsaw through the head of that plant monster thing. Crippled the ogre too. What did you do? You threw a can of Sterno at him. That's barely an assist."
-Detective Lieutenant Karrin Murphy, The Dresden Files.
redbrunja is doing this meme thingie where you comment and she gives you 3 tropes from TV Tropes Wiki to either write fic or meta about. All these are things you could probably set me off big time on, so I'll keep it brief.
redbrunja is doing this meme thingie where you comment and she gives you 3 tropes from TV Tropes Wiki to either write fic or meta about. All these are things you could probably set me off big time on, so I'll keep it brief.#1: The Action Girl
The Action Girl is, essentially, Badassitude molded into a sleek female frame: a female character who is spunky, agile, and can take you down with an array of kicks. Or punches. Or guns. Or anything else in her arsenal if she has to. Note that she is not The Chick. She doesn't sit around waiting to be rescued. She's got moves of her own to make.
I'm going to ignore the passive implication here that non-Action Girls are useless, ok?Actually, it really isn't even passive.
I love action girls. I resent the idea so much of fandom and fiction seems to have that a girl can only be strong if she kicks ass. I ESPECIALLY dislike the fact that so much of it seems to take the form of "a strong woman is a man with boobs," to the point where I sometimes hate myself for having an instinctive "hell no!" reaction to some such characters. An action heroine is an awesome thing a lot of the time, but the character type tends to get ruined when it's clear she's only like that because you "have" to be an action heroine to be a "strong female character," and when THAT'S ALL THERE IS. Unfortunately, I don't see fandom or fiction realizing you don't have to kick butt to be a worthwhile female character, and that there's nothing wrong with traditional femininity.
Also, I feel a compulsion to add about 50 names to those lists.
#2 Murder the Hypotenuse
Love Triangles are tricky business. Trust us, we've already done the math.
*ahem*
90% of the time, I despise love triangles with every fiber of my being.
There are some good, well done love triangles out there. Complex ones built of respect, deep feelings, and complicated relationships. They are a rarity.
I find most love triangles to be cheap grabs at "conflict" and "angst" and "complexity." It's a default conflict that often makes me disinclined to like ANYONE involved, and I do not remotely see the appeal of "oh, I can't decide who I love, let me fret about it and be torn between them for ages." Blech. Most of the time, I feel like the writer went "Man...things are going too well between these two...I need CONFLICT! Screw lifestyle, family, choices with what to do with your life, difficult decisions, or anything that requires actual depth or plot, I'll just write in a third party in love with one of them and it'll provide all the angst and conflict I need!" The fact that most triangles make the second male oh-so-appealing-and-likable and the second female oh-so-petty-andevil-and-grasping-and-manipulative doesn't help. The inherent misogyny in most triangles moves the trope from something that alienates me to something that inspires unholy rage.
#3 My Girl Is Not A Slut
"A woman wants one man to attend to her every need. A man wants every woman to attend to his one need."
I assume that anyone who's known me for even a few weeks can guess my opinion of this mindset. For the record, one of my most despised tropes is the "manslut because of his deep romantic angst and loss." It's disgustingly disrespectful to the lost love and the flings, and by default, the characters usually don't respect the people they sleep with, so why people are obsessed with having those characters sleep with other characters they supposedly like is something I will never understand. But that's another rant, aside from the fact that almost any female character to pull that act would be despised and probably die messily for it, after being endlessly punished by the canon, and the fandom would cheer. Wait, maybe the topic was more on topic than I thought.
This whole trope seems to be tied into the idea that males are more interesting and deserving of love, sex and attention than females, and that, while it's only natural to want the male to get romance and/or sex, it's "wrong" to apply the same standard to female characters. It's like how 90% of fandom's shipping seems to be focused on the male, while there's no need to pair the female. It's like being shipped is a reward for the male, while not being shipped (or "accepted, but only because I have to...this one would be better!") is a reward for the female. (See one of the many reasons I dislike fanon shipping.)
Fiction and fandom both seem obsessed with with male secuality, but scared of female sexuality, and it seems that female sexuality is focused on just the male, allowing male sexuality to define female sexuality. It's why the "I slash/fanon ship because I believe one deserves better" thing bugs me so much BECAUSE NO MATTER WHO "deserves better" THE ANSWER IS TO GIVE THE MALE ROMANCE MOST OF THE TIME. The male's sex/romantic life being viewed as more important or worthy or interesting with the implication that the female should be happy to be tolerated or single(and no, I am NOT saying girls need romance to be happy, I'm talking about the automatic seeking of partners for male characters without giving the females the same consideration.)
(And as I seem to be ranting on the subject: I'd just like to mention again that I don't remotely see why it always has to boil down to sex/shipping with so much of fandom, and really just dislike the mass shipping mindset in general, especially as most of it's ire is taken out on female characters, in my experience.)
All that said: I couldn't get into BSG. I do, however, find it interesting that the fandom essentially reverses this trope, with Starbuck as the angsty woobie who can sleep around all she wants because of her issues, with Lee and Anders as the critically viewed love interests.
The Action Girl is, essentially, Badassitude molded into a sleek female frame: a female character who is spunky, agile, and can take you down with an array of kicks. Or punches. Or guns. Or anything else in her arsenal if she has to. Note that she is not The Chick. She doesn't sit around waiting to be rescued. She's got moves of her own to make.
I'm going to ignore the passive implication here that non-Action Girls are useless, ok?
I love action girls. I resent the idea so much of fandom and fiction seems to have that a girl can only be strong if she kicks ass. I ESPECIALLY dislike the fact that so much of it seems to take the form of "a strong woman is a man with boobs," to the point where I sometimes hate myself for having an instinctive "hell no!" reaction to some such characters. An action heroine is an awesome thing a lot of the time, but the character type tends to get ruined when it's clear she's only like that because you "have" to be an action heroine to be a "strong female character," and when THAT'S ALL THERE IS. Unfortunately, I don't see fandom or fiction realizing you don't have to kick butt to be a worthwhile female character, and that there's nothing wrong with traditional femininity.
Also, I feel a compulsion to add about 50 names to those lists.
#2 Murder the Hypotenuse
Love Triangles are tricky business. Trust us, we've already done the math.
It can get particularly twisted when some sides of the triangle are completely one-sided. Andy may be in love with Blair, but Blair not only fails to realize it, but may be in love, or already in a relationship, with Chris. This is a classic recipe for drama (or humor), but sometimes, it goes too far.
Sometimes, somehow, Andy gets the idea that Chris is the one in the way of Andy's happiness with Blair, and if Chris were to somehow have an "accident", then surely Blair would come to love Andy instead. It's true -- Love Makes You Evil.
*ahem*
90% of the time, I despise love triangles with every fiber of my being.
There are some good, well done love triangles out there. Complex ones built of respect, deep feelings, and complicated relationships. They are a rarity.
I find most love triangles to be cheap grabs at "conflict" and "angst" and "complexity." It's a default conflict that often makes me disinclined to like ANYONE involved, and I do not remotely see the appeal of "oh, I can't decide who I love, let me fret about it and be torn between them for ages." Blech. Most of the time, I feel like the writer went "Man...things are going too well between these two...I need CONFLICT! Screw lifestyle, family, choices with what to do with your life, difficult decisions, or anything that requires actual depth or plot, I'll just write in a third party in love with one of them and it'll provide all the angst and conflict I need!" The fact that most triangles make the second male oh-so-appealing-and-likable and the second female oh-so-petty-andevil-and-grasping-and-manipulative doesn't help. The inherent misogyny in most triangles moves the trope from something that alienates me to something that inspires unholy rage.
#3 My Girl Is Not A Slut
"A woman wants one man to attend to her every need. A man wants every woman to attend to his one need."
A sexually active man is a stud, a real man, a jack-the-lad, a playa.
A sexually active woman is a slut, a slag, a skank, a tramp, a whore (or 'ho', if you insist on trendy pseudo-ethnic jargon).
For a man, the loss of his virginity is an achievement. For a woman, it is a surrender.
I assume that anyone who's known me for even a few weeks can guess my opinion of this mindset. For the record, one of my most despised tropes is the "manslut because of his deep romantic angst and loss." It's disgustingly disrespectful to the lost love and the flings, and by default, the characters usually don't respect the people they sleep with, so why people are obsessed with having those characters sleep with other characters they supposedly like is something I will never understand. But that's another rant, aside from the fact that almost any female character to pull that act would be despised and probably die messily for it, after being endlessly punished by the canon, and the fandom would cheer. Wait, maybe the topic was more on topic than I thought.
This whole trope seems to be tied into the idea that males are more interesting and deserving of love, sex and attention than females, and that, while it's only natural to want the male to get romance and/or sex, it's "wrong" to apply the same standard to female characters. It's like how 90% of fandom's shipping seems to be focused on the male, while there's no need to pair the female. It's like being shipped is a reward for the male, while not being shipped (or "accepted, but only because I have to...this one would be better!") is a reward for the female. (See one of the many reasons I dislike fanon shipping.)
Fiction and fandom both seem obsessed with with male secuality, but scared of female sexuality, and it seems that female sexuality is focused on just the male, allowing male sexuality to define female sexuality. It's why the "I slash/fanon ship because I believe one deserves better" thing bugs me so much BECAUSE NO MATTER WHO "deserves better" THE ANSWER IS TO GIVE THE MALE ROMANCE MOST OF THE TIME. The male's sex/romantic life being viewed as more important or worthy or interesting with the implication that the female should be happy to be tolerated or single(and no, I am NOT saying girls need romance to be happy, I'm talking about the automatic seeking of partners for male characters without giving the females the same consideration.)
(And as I seem to be ranting on the subject: I'd just like to mention again that I don't remotely see why it always has to boil down to sex/shipping with so much of fandom, and really just dislike the mass shipping mindset in general, especially as most of it's ire is taken out on female characters, in my experience.)
All that said: I couldn't get into BSG. I do, however, find it interesting that the fandom essentially reverses this trope, with Starbuck as the angsty woobie who can sleep around all she wants because of her issues, with Lee and Anders as the critically viewed love interests.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-06-24 04:52 am (UTC)That right there is one of my favorite quirks of BSG fandom. As sad as it is that Lee gets bashed so much and for such pointless and stupid reasons, it's a relief to see the male characters taking the heat for once.
I'll do the meme!
no subject
Date: 2008-06-24 04:54 am (UTC)I shall ponder your tropes.
no subject
Date: 2008-06-24 03:52 pm (UTC)http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ShipTease
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HeterosexualLifePartners
no subject
Date: 2008-06-24 04:53 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-06-24 05:01 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-06-24 05:02 am (UTC)The only thing they're good for is genderfucks that mock the entire concept.
no subject
Date: 2008-06-24 05:23 am (UTC)Yes.
I actually had a period a few months back where I was really pissed off for a month or so and kept ranting about this and it's offshoots, but someone pointed out that some of it could be taken personally (esp. since the subject tends to be closely tied to slash) and I snapped out of it. (Really, I don't like being in a ranty mode and would rather just squee and/or snark, it's just hard to get out of it sometimes.
no subject
Date: 2008-06-24 07:20 am (UTC)We get the f/m/f love triangle, likely, from canon's obsession with the Madonna/Whore duality and the Light/Dark heroine thing where the conflict is that the hero is divided between a Good girl (who is the perfect girl to marry but he's not into her sexually) and the Bad girl (who is sexually appealing). And thinking of the love triangles we see on TV, there's that rage-inspiring tendency to often make the Other woman the sexually appealing but morally deprived one. I, of course, react to this by totally fall in love with the morally deprived ones just because I know the canon doesn't want me to.
While in the Gothic genre, there's a strong sense of the girl needing qualities of both the Light Male and the Shadow Male, with the f/m/f triangle, in canon texts, it's usually a test for the hero to be successful in resisting the Dark heroine. And really? That probably also gets into the issues with the fear of female sexuality. Because, you know, a sexually active woman must be evilish and resisting her is an accomplishment worthy of being sung in epic poetry. Because, again, men are totally hypersexual and can never, ever resist sex.
no subject
Date: 2008-06-24 07:41 am (UTC)One other factor is that the m/f/m triangle seems designed to make you think she gets to "choose" her mate from 2 appealing choices, while the f/m/f triangle is about "winning" him from someone else. That's kind of the whole issue I have with triangles underneath all the sex stuff: at its root, a love triangle is about someone "winning" happiness at the expense of the other. Does that happen in real life, that when two people get together, another watches someone else get what they want? Yes. Do I want to be told that the only way these two people can be happy is at someone else's expense in fiction, and to root for that? No. I don't want to read "romances" with cheating, abuse, or rape either. Happiness at the expense of another when that's all centered around "Who does s/he like in the end?" isn't my thing.
no subject
Date: 2008-06-24 02:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-06-24 03:38 pm (UTC)http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MyGirlIsNotASlut
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BadassNormal
I vote the meta, myself...
no subject
Date: 2008-06-25 04:39 am (UTC)I have to say, while I agree with you about the different ways to be strong, nothing will piss me off more than NOT having an action girl when there is an action guy. Basically, I need the action chick to feel that the non action chick is strong because of the writer's choice.
Basically, that's one reason why Inara (typically female) is my favorite character on Firefly, which has military girl and crazy assassin girl and girly girl in masculine profession, but what's her name is SDK is not a fighter and made me trope that manga.
no subject
Date: 2008-06-25 04:47 am (UTC)The problem I have with the "has to be an action girl" is that most seem to automatically assume that if both are there, the action girl is the better one, and barring that automatic assumption, there's the "better/worse" based on which one it is.
For example, in SDK, there are other girls who are action girls, and they're supposedly better characters because of that.
Zoe is actually my favorite in Firefly, but that's because of her demeanor, and the way she manages her relationship and is completely in control even when following orders.