Talk:Damsel in distress

"almost always have more than a whiff of BDSM fantasy". I think I'd like to see that justified; 'almost always' is pretty strong. Firstly if this is the case, why does the hero always untie the damsel as soon as he gets the chance? Secondly lots of the damsels quoted in the article aren't 'tied up' at all, especially the modern ones. Isn't it more likely that the situation appeals to the normal male desire of wanting to be the strong rescuer? DJ Clayworth 14:33, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Good question, but it's kind of hard to prove/justify that, no? :) Of course, unless it's a porn movie, the hero has to untie the damsel as soon as he gets a chance to, cause the movie makers have no more excuse for him to keep her tied up, or else they'd make the hero look evil. Well I don't think there's a way to prove that anyway.

Another question: In what part exactly is Cinderella a damsel in distress?--Mithcoriel 22:09, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. I've taken the liberty of editing Cinderella out. Wisco 23:37, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd have to nonconcur with the inclusion of Raiders Marion Ravenwood. She was hardly helpless. On the contrary, she's quite defiant and feisty. Remember in the "Indy gets his ass kicked by the big German mechanic" scene, where she is inadvertently trapped inside the tail gunner turret on the plane? Does she start screaming and beating on the canopy? Hell no! She cocks the machine gun and begins mowing down the villains like a Weed Eater! Or when they're tossed into the cave, she's bellowing "I'll get you for this you bastard!!" If she could get her hands on him, she'd have torn off his face and pissed on his brain. And of course, she does her part by keeping the asps at bay with a torch while Indy tries to leverage an opening.Scott S 22:03, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The entire article has a confrontational tone that I can't quite put my finger on. To me, it seems as if it condescends to writers, etc. who've used the character...as if the whole idea of a damsel in distress is something to be laughed at. KyleGarvey 21:44, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't it?

But seriously, while it may have been written, in some ways, with a more..."moderate" outlook, I don't think any one edit meant to mislead the reader or misresent the facts. Honestly, the damsel in distress is pretty hard to take seriously, especially in today's stories. Still, Looking at it again, perhaps a better writer than I could make it a bit more objective. Ace Class Shadow 22:55, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When you are writing about a stock character — in other words, about a stereotype from popular entertainment — NPOV is almost by necessity going to be hard to pin down. Commenting on the cliché'd nature of the stereotypes is almost always done by people who are either hostile to the stock character because it is a "stereotype" and therefore felt as an implied insult to Womanhood or some such; or else by people who are playing it camp style and rejoice in its perceived excess. Not sure exactly what a remedy might be. — Smerdis of Tlön 00:00, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense. I think my main problem was with the first paragraph, but now (after I saw it was made redundant by a much better intro) I edited it out, and I think it's much better. Sorry for the trouble - I'll take the template down. KyleGarvey 21:15, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia articles don't begin with quotes. This will have to be moved to contextualize it.--Eloquence * 04:23, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This one does. Unless there is a Wikipedia policy that states articles must not begin with a quote, I don't see any reason to remove or reposition the opening quote. -- Steven 210.84.14.149 15:18, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The relevant style guide is Wikipedia:Lead section. Because the section before the first heading is meant to be a concise summary of the article itself, putting a quote there is inappropriate. In fact, there are plans to compile a concise encyclopedia only from the lead sections of Wikipedia articles. This obviously doesn't work when the lead is a quote.--Eloquence * 01:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The damsel in distress is a popular stock character in fiction. They are females who have been put into a dangerous situation by an outside force and require assistance to get out of it. - Ok, so who was the moron that put James Ryan from Saving Private Ryan in the example section? --VTEX 19:30, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK - I didn't even see Willard Whyte (the "rare male example") - This doesn't make sense. By definition a damsel is female, not male. Males in distress should be under a different heading. If you want this article to include males it should be called "characters in distress" --VTEX 19:39, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]