Bjorn

Baby Got Backstory - A trope creation thread

Recommended Posts

Oh we're DEFINITELY coming back to it later. ):<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh, I still think it's worth talking about because I think the nuances of the idea will come out of specific examples/counterexamples but I'll agree to table it.

 

I agree in principle, but I've also seen way to many conversations or meetings stall out because people became focused on a single point or example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"It doesn't explain away with a weak rationalization" is a judgment of the justification. You're right that the problem isn't with whether or not the justification is good. The fact that it IS a justification is all that matters. The second we start judging which ones are worthy justifications - ones that earn their place - and which ones aren't is the second we get hung up on examples like this one. The facts are: It is a justification. Well, I guess that's just a fact. Singular.

 

That said, Bjorn is right, I guess. Not worth arguing about something SO INCREDIBLY BRAINMELTINGLY OBVIOUS when we have so few examples as is GET YOUR ACT TOGETHER PEOPLE.

 

I agree it's a justification, my point was just that it was a subversion, or lampshade hanging otherwise put. It should be included as an example, just with a caveat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree it's a justification, my point was just that it was a subversion, or lampshade hanging otherwise put. It should be included as an example, just with a caveat.

Okay, I misunderstood you, then. Sorry! (I also think you misunderstood me, originally, then. I was never arguing about how we should qualify it - only that we should classify it as falling under this trope.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Her sexiness isn't simply there to titilate and explained with a handwave. Jessica Rabbit being a sexy dame femme not-fatal in a noir parody is her entire role. Maybe the secondary signifiers they chose to mark her as such are problematic and are worth discussing, but if she wasn't a smoldering sex pot her character and the movie are different.

She doesn't fit the trope.

Case closed.

*bangs gavel I brought from home*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CollegeBaby, get off my side! It's not a justification, that's my point! It's not there to explain why they decided to hypersexualise her character - their reasoning for that is evident throughout the story. That line is not there to justify her hypersexualised design - it doesn't do that, it doesn't try to do that. And it's not a backstory!

 

I'm glad that Twig thinks Bjorn, who falls on the side of her not being part of the trope, is right. Glad you saw the light, buddy.

 

Having got the final word in, I will also now agree to table it :D

 

EDIT: oops, sorry Reyturner, simulpost! Case super-closed *bangs Reyturner's gavel*  :innocent:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That line is not there to justify her hypersexualised design - it doesn't do that

Well, except for the part where it does literally exactly that, I think you've finally got this down!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Twig, the case got super-closed. You're out of order, mister.

 

Anyway, I have a fucking brilliant example - Seven Of Nine! Her sexy one-of-a-kind boob-hugging Starfleet costume design is given some bullshit tech explanation.

 

Seven Of Nine's uniform is fucking ridiculous, whatever exoplating excuses they want to come up with ("you're used to having big clunky armour on, so you'll probably be most comfortable getting sewn into a skintight one-piece"). Her tits take over every scene she's in, it's really distracting and feels pretty seedy.

 

EDIT: just realised, this isn't exactly her backstory, but it involves it very strongly. It counts, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a weird pull but Mokoto Aramaki in the Ghost in the Shell 2.0 manga is the head of security for a floating private city state and wears a micro-mini skirt to take advantage of "eye-pull" in negotiations and combat.

Then she's totally bare ass naked for like 100 pages because she's hacking.

For that matter, in the Ghost in the Shell movie, there's a 40' octotank and a guy in a parka that turn invisible. Why does the Major need to be naked again?

Wtf Masamune Shiro.

Actually nevermind, I've seen Gal Grease. I know wtf.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ob...Objection?! Is that how this works??

 

(I'd also like to take this opportunity to remind everyone of Reyturner's JoJo's Bizarre Adventure example of Male Baby Got Backstory because it's a good one. People might have forgotten it in their brief stint of insanity or whatever is going on with you weirdo anti-Jessica Rabbit freaks.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Twig, the case got super-closed. You're out of order, mister.

 

Anyway, I have a fucking brilliant example - Seven Of Nine! Her sexy one-of-a-kind boob-hugging Starfleet costume design is given some bullshit tech explanation.

 

 

 

EDIT: just realised, this isn't exactly her backstory, but it involves it very strongly. It counts, right?

 

Yes. I vote that this counts. :tup:

 

EDIT: I also think the Jessica Rabbit thing comes down to whether or not you think the characters of the fictional world of Roger Rabbit actually come to life via drawing. I don't recall the fiction ever suggesting that they were drawn to life, if you will, so one could argue that "I'm just drawn that way" is just a joke she makes, not an actual backstory, therefore not actually a justification. :tdown:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, I have a fucking brilliant example - Seven Of Nine! Her sexy one-of-a-kind boob-hugging Starfleet costume design is given some bullshit tech explanation.

 

In contrast, I don't think Deanna Troi's similarly non-standard-issue form-fitting one-piece costume is ever explained. As far as I can tell, anyway. Then one episode somebody essentially goes "why are you wearing that?", no answer is given, and from then on she wears a Starfleet uniform like everyone else.

 

So not this trope, is what I'm saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In contrast, I don't think Deanna Troi's similarly non-standard-issue form-fitting one-piece costume is ever explained. As far as I can tell, anyway. Then one episode somebody essentially goes "why are you wearing that?", no answer is given, and from then on she wears a Starfleet uniform like everyone else.

 

So not this trope, is what I'm saying.

 

Completely off topic but I have to answer this because I'm a dork.

When Picard is temporarily relieved of command (Chain of Command) his replacement tells Troi that while Picard let her wear casual attire, he prefers a standard uniform and tells her to change.  Later in the show she's promoted to the rank of Commander and becomes a Bridge Officer so her wearing the uniform is more consistent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on SAM, weigh in on 7of9! Just because one of the other characters doesn't have it, doesn't mean she can't right? Besides she's just wearing a skirt. Loads of people in Trek wear skirts, including that one guy in TNG!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know the case is closed, but...

 

I think Jessica Rabbit fails the test because it's fundamentally about offering a non-sexual explanation for sexualizing a character. Jessica Rabbit offers an explicitly sexualized explanation for sexualizing the character.

 

Similarly, if the Big Boss dictator man makes his female uniforms bikinis because he enjoys looking at breasts, it doesn't count. It counts if they're bikinis because the women have magic that makes them overheat and also cloth is really scarce in their planet and also it's based on their traditional tribal uniform.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey guys are we talking about Jessica Rabbit in here because I have fanfict--

 

ow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we're gonna talk about male examples I think we have to look primarily to media designed for female consumption. This maybe a weak example because I'm not too familiar with the source material, but what about the sparkling vampires in Twilight? Out of universe they only sparkle because it's a sexy image of a shirtless guy covered in glitter, but they seem to give some in universe justification. I could also ask why the werewolves are shirtless so often. Maybe somebody who's read these could give more insight.

Another (female) example that might be a little different is the Confessors in the Sword of Truth series. My only exposure was that, honestly, pretty lame TV show from a while back, but they give a convoluted in universe explanation for their chastity. Obviously this is in contrast to all the hypersexualization examples but it's pretty undeniable that the show at least used her chastity to give her an unattainable quality and make her more attractive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AFAIK, Twilight doesn't actually give an in-universe justification for anything. It's just the way vampires are in their world, and even that is maddeningly inconsistent, there's no meaningful attempts at lore in general. It's also not really used as an excuse for sexualization since the vampires don't really hang around shirtless.

 

The Twilight werewolves, are closer. They hang around shirtless because turning into wolves shreds their clothes, and in the films they're treated more with a sexualized "female gaze". Even then, it's a little tenuous because there's a direct logical connection (clothes are physically destroyed, because of normal physics) rather than a back-story derived one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose the werewolves make sense. Doesn't explain why they don't take off their pants though. :P

I think the sparkling might still apply, just cause it doesn't seem to serve any purpose other than to be sexy and has the flimsy explanation of "that's how vampires work".

Also, there's probably a lot of overlap between this trope and the Rule of Sexy trope. This one is a lot more pointed and interesting IMO but it might be a good place to hunt for examples. http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RuleOfSexy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just gonna copy some paragraphs from various Chainmail Bikini examples that I think might apply here.

- Lampshaded in John Ringo's There Will Be Dragons where Bast the Wood Elf, asked why she runs around in a Fur Bikini, asks "Do you know how many men I've killed who froze looking at my tits?" The character in a later novel wears a skin-tight suit of "carbon nanotube", effectively impenetrable, and effectively transparent.

 

- Azure Bonds subverted this somewhat. At times the heroine wore a suit of chain mail that exposed her cleavage. However when an enemy went to attack it they found out that it was enchanted chain mail that projected a force field over the 'exposed' area. Not too surprising, as this piece was provided by a Vain Sorceress who just could not resist flaunting the body that resembled her own so much.

- The River of Dancing Gods trilogy by Jack L. Chalker literally has a magically-enforced law that "weather and climate permitting, all beautiful young women must be scantily clad".

- Nerdcore: The Core Wars explains that the Geneva Conventions "made it a war crime to injure a female anthropoid in the area of the cleavage, stomach, or thighs. Thereby making it unnecessary for women to cover those areas in armor."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the "That's just how it is" type explanation can't be eligible otherwise this applies to everything ever. The whole point is that the creators make an attempt to wallpaper over gratuitous sexualization with lore. If there's no lore, it doesn't work. I also feel the explanation itself has to be a little gratuitous.

Baywatch doesn't count because while there is a justification (theyre lifeguards), them being lifeguards is integral to the identity of the show.

The actual explanation (as I recall from an interview) is that Stephanie Meyer had literally no idea how vampires worked. She knew they weren't supposed to go into the sun, but didn't know why, so she concocted sparkling. There wasn't any attempt to sexualize them, really, just poor understanding of Vampire lore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- Nerdcore: The Core Wars explains that the Geneva Conventions "made it a war crime to injure a female anthropoid in the area of the cleavage, stomach, or thighs. Thereby making it unnecessary for women to cover those areas in armor."

 

Wow, that's...some justification there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It may be rooted in ignorance but it's still an arbitrary bit of world building used to handwave a sexy character trait. It's not "just how it is" in the way *sigh* Jessica Rabbit just happens to be attractive. It's a mechanic of the fictional universe that exists solely to support a sexy physical trait.

Also, back on the subject of the Asari, I remember some incidental dialogue that implies they appear differently to each species as to always look like an attractive female. I think this strengthens their candidacy. They're hot women because they're evolved to be a hot woman to anyone who looks at them regardless of species.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now