I just ran across a review of yet another YA book where the Feisty Heroine really just yearns for an Alpha Dude to totally disregard her boundaries and force a kiss on her until she starts liking it. That’s near the top of my list of book/TV/movie tropes that should die a quick, messy death and never come back, not even “ironically.” And while I’m at it, I have a few more.
But first, a word from our sponsor!
Here at Top Comments we welcome longtime as well as brand new Daily Kos readers to join us at 10 pm Eastern. We strive to nourish community by rounding up some of the site's best, funniest, most mojo'd & most informative commentary, and we depend on your help!! If you see a comment by another Kossack that deserves wider recognition, please send it either to topcomments at gmail or to the Top Comments group mailbox by 9:30 pm Eastern. Please please please include a few words about why you sent it in as well as your user name (even if you think we know it already :-)), so we can credit you with the find!
Other tropes that should go the way of the VHS player:
The screaming argument that leads to sex. Yeah, I get it, fiction thrives on conflict. But this one always feels so fake, and we always see it coming a mile off. Always feels like the writer is reliving their last breakup, except this time the ex is inexplicably turned on by being screamed at. Bonus “ugh” points if the argument is about his condescending or otherwise misogynist treatment of her.
The karmic price of being queer. This one has mostly faded away. But up through about the 90’s, any sympathetic portrayal of a gay or lesbian character (forget bi or trans, they were invisible) required that one of them die by the end of the story. And it couldn’t be a death from some random cause; it had to be directly traceable to their being queer. For women it was suicide; for men, gay-bashing or AIDS. Desert Hearts was something of a milestone, just because it ended like any other romance movie.
The “loveable” jerk. I admit, I never got the appeal of Archie Bunker. Or the general notion of characters who treat other people badly, but we’re supposed to like them because they’re “really a good person.” Yes yes, people are complicated, but in my experience most of us prefer not to be around people who treat us with contempt. ER may have reached the pinnacle of this trope with Frank, a character who constantly said racist stuff that should have landed his butt in front of HR. Then one day he brought his disabled daughter in, and his wife gushed to the co-workers about how he always speaks so highly of all of them. So….he’s horrible to their faces, but says nice things about them behind their backs? Who does that?
The BFF with no life. If there’s only one character of color in story, it’s pretty much guaranteed to be this one. They never have anything to do except listen to the white character’s problems, or drop everything to help them out. These favors never need to be returned, because the BFF has no problems or interests of their own, and may possibly live in a box in the white character’s attic.
I’m sure I’ve forgotten some egregious ones. What are your least favorite tropes?
On to Top Comments!
From scyellowdogdem:
I nominate this comment from Front Towards Enemy.
From peregrine kate:
I actually have two (so far).
One is by a2nite, as an observation that is spot-on in the excellent post by Reasonabill.
One is by judgek, who reinforces the point made by ian douglas rushlau in his post.
How much stronger and more resilient our country would be if both commenters' insights were widely shared. They're that key.
From evcoren:
The following comment by bernin perfectly captured one of the top problems facing the Democratic Party.
From Black Sheep 1:
To this intensely dishonest diary [Calling for Nancy Pelosi to resign is pragmatism not sexism], do not miss this excellent response from DocDawg.
From EDebbs:
I want to recommend a comment from Bring the Lions regarding whether negative and panicked emails are hurting Democratic campaigns. there's been a lot of discussion lately about whether these emails do more harm than good. Although we all hate receiving them, there hasn't been much talk about why the candidates are so dedicated to them. I feel like Bring the Lions brought out some points that are correct. First, the professionals clearly have data showing that negative emails raise more money. Second, he notes that these emails probably work better for Republicans. And third, Democrats don't have that much money to give and that works against us.
To me this third point is arguably the most important one. While I love the energy and passion that the small donations bring to the Party, I do not believe the Bernie model is sustainable for hundreds if not thousands of local, state and federal races. It's almost impossible for a candidate to attract enough national support to get that jolt of money. And getting on our high horse about the DNC courting too many rich people seems misguided, since we still have to compete with what the other side is going to do, and that's raise tons of cash to go with their already-dominant media.
But this commenter said all of that in fewer words and more elegantly and for that, deserves a place at top comments.
Highlighted by Lava20:
This comment by Greasy Grant in pollwatcher’s diary Ossoff moved the bar 19.6% toward the blue, here are the Republican seats within that range.
From your humble (if antisocial) diarist:
Since there were so many thoughtful, substantive comments tonight, I thought I’d end on a lighter note. BFSkinner posted one of his many fun community diaries, this one asking for the most annoying song ever recorded. My own suggestion, “Diary” by Bread, brought this hilarious response from roberb7, who posted a video by comedian/motivational speaker Bill Stainton. It’s out of recommendation, but trust me, if you’ve ever wondered how this guy “found her diary underneath the tree,” you must see this.
Top mojo, courtesy of mik:
Picture quilt, courtesy of jotter: