#hes the vampire who inverts all the usual vampire tropes like i was talking about in that ask......lol.......

[sporesgalaxy]

as time goes on i have less and less reason to deny that Addie King is just a really weird vampire

[gayregis]

I've listened to the part where Geralt talks with a very ill Cahir about Ciri and vengeance... it was one of the most emotional parts of the book by itself but also thanks to your take about the lost innocence of Ciri ! I felt it thrice hard in the feelings! Also, do you have thoughts on the declared love of Cahir for Ciri? Personally I see it as disturbingly romantic, let's say. Thank you for your commitment to the books and sorry to bother you

omg thank you for the ask. first of all i have to say you’re not bothering me!! tbh i have been loving getting asks because it gives me an opportunity to like bring more discussion to the witcher community... 

i feel like although reblogging pretty gifs of characters/landscapes from tw3 and any good fanart i can find is nice, my FAVORITE thing to do is write or read a really long textpost about the witcher books, i really like the discussion aspect of fandoms where people post their reactions and opinions to the content they like, because you get a bunch of shared reactions and differing opinions.

so no this is NOT a bother at all, and its nice especially to get asks about topics that i have strong feelings about but have not made posts about yet, like this one

ok, as for the actual topic: i hate forced heterosexuality, so you KNOW i hate that canon cahiri! it was out of line from sapkowski and imo, it came out of absolutely nowhere in tower of the swallow, it wasn’t something built up to or foreshadowed at all, so it felt not only weird in context but weird for sapkowski as an author.

my main problem with canon cahiri: i think it’s super creepy!

first of all, let’s discuss the age difference. cahir in baptism of fire is estimated to be “not over 25,” which i see as putting him around 20 to 25 years old, and i usually take the median of this which is around 23. while this “not over 25″ comment is said in the context of the hansa to remark upon how young cahir is (i believe it’s thought of by either geralt or dandelion, and geralt is around 60 years old and as a witcher he looks 45, and dandelion is 38 in tower of the swallow), and how cahir is described as a young man in time of contempt to illustrate that he has a sense of innocence to him as ciri cuts him down, his age gap with ciri is super innappropriate for anything to occur between them, since she is 10 or 11 during the massacre of cintra (as stated by geralt in something more), so she would be around 14 at thanedd, and 15-16 during baptism of fire to lady of the lake. so sapkowski deemed it fit to pair a 23 year old man with a 16 year old girl. this isn’t the first time he’s done something like this, what with essi being “not over 18″ and shani also bein around 18 / college age, and yennefer canonically looking around 20. listen, the man has some messed up values when it comes to women’s ages. we have to take it upon ourselves as people who like the not-weird parts of canon to understand how worldviews and personal biases affect one’s writing, and change it for ourselves to make it right so we can continue interacting with it, if we so choose (tldr: retcon some shit when it’s fucked up in canon).

now, before someone argues that “it’s fantasy medieval world, medieval relationships between men and women were just like that,” believe me, i am aware. i study ancient greece/rome and men who were in their 30s were most often paired with women in their teens as part of their arranged marriages. that is how their ancient societies functioned more than 2000 years ago. the issue is that this is a fantasy world, in which societal norms and laws do not have to conform to real-life earth history, and this is the work of a modern writer writing in the 1990s. it’s not “just how the times were,” it’s deliberately choosing to include an age gap like that to be something canonically acceptable by their society/ies.

also, one could argue that the age gap would be fine once they are older, like, when ciri becomes an adult she is already medievally-style betrothed to cahir so they start dating when she’s like 20 and he’s like 27. eh... that’s still an uncomfortable age gap, at least for when they’re in their 20s. people in their older 20s have more life experience than people in their younger 20s. but at least it wouldn’t land cahir in modern-day jail.

it’s still just an uncomfortably large age gap, and if you think about it, it’s even creepier considering that cahir met ciri when she was a helpless child around 10 - 11 and it just makes the bathing scene excruciatingly creepy too if you put it in the context that he eventually would fall in love with her. it even begins to not be about strictly age, but about life experience, development, and power imbalance within the relationship. i mean, he did literally kidnap her.

cahir in tos calls ciri a “woman” when she is like, 15 or 16 (with the rose tattoo) (to anyone reading, please don’t come at me with that “the age of consent is 15 in poland, just because it’s 18 in the US doesn’t mean your laws and culture apply to everyone” ... please do not try and justify this with laws, legality is not morality. only saying this because i’ve seen it in other posts). like.... hm! don’t like that! she is a teenager... he is in his 20s... this should not be occuring.

sorry for the loooong explanation, but every time someone brings up the subject of age gaps on tumblr it turns into crazy discourse with everyone trying to justify it.

but yeah, CANONICALLY cahir would have been 16-21 (median 18) when he met ciri at 10-11, and 20-25 (median 23) when he declares his love for her at 15-16. that’s ... not good ... to put it more into perspective, these are their ages on a traditional school system path: a 18 year old is a high school senior, an 11 year old is a 6th grader. a 23 year old has been out of college for 2 years, a 16 year old is a high school sophomore. ITS NOT GOOD

my other problem with canon cahiri: it’s boring and contradicts sapkowski at his own game.

all of the witcher is about taking fantasy tropes and inverting them, like you can’t have some random peasant kill a dragon, you’d need a professional, and also guess what, the dragon isn’t evil but a dad trying to protect his wife and child.

all of the characters in the hansa (as well as the four main characters of geralt, yennefer, ciri, and dandelion) are inversions of the tropes they represent. for some examples, milva’s trope is something like the hot action girl who only exists to be the only girl in the company and to be sexy eye candy. instead of falling into this, she is actually an action girl, not bothering with sexiness and appeal to the gaze of a male audience but a “get shit done” type, who also dresses and acts “like a man.” regis’ trope is all vampire tropes ever. he/vampires in the witcher doesn’t/don’t fall into any of the traditional european vampire myths like burning in sunlight, needing to drink blood to stay alive, being disdainful of humanity, having aversions to garlic, belonging to a super-secret orderful society that lurks in the shadows and controls everything like puppetmasters, etc... instead, he is the epitome of redemption arcs and overall “goody-goodiness,” understands humanity perfectly and does things out of his good nature. i already talk about regis too much, so i’ll quit it. 

cahir is an inversion of every knight trope ever, particularly the evil knight. he scars ciri’s memory as a night terror, but actually is not ... a bad person. he’s just some guy, pressured by his family and his society to do what he saw as an assignment like a college kid might see their final essay assignment posted on canvas. except you know. the final exam was to kidnap a girl. and he got an F on that and failed the course (ie got thrown in prison). ANYWAYS, cahir is meant to be this inversion of the knight tropes, so WHY, WHY, WHY make him become the knight trope of being the one to romance and to save a hapless princess? if we’ve learned anything about ciri, it’s that she’s the inversion of the princess trope! she KILLS PEOPLE. she ALMOST KILLED CAHIR. she can defend herself and kill for herself, she doesn’t need the knight trope going to protect her! 

heterosexual romance as the Big Reason and Motivation behind all of a character’s actions is tiring, annoying, boring, and not well-thought out. it’s so base and not unique, it doesn’t fit in with everything else about the witcher.

how i would fix it: not make them fall in love.

cahir already HAS a motivation to find ciri and to help her. he needs to APOLOGIZE. he needs to say, hey, i’m sorry i kidnapped you and ruined your life, i made peace with your dad, he doesn’t wanna kill me anymore, i can only hope that you can forgive me too after i SET THINGS RIGHT. 

as opposed to regis’s arc (i swear i am not playing favorites with regis, i just tend to compare and contrast regis and cahir’s redemptions because they are quite different yet they join the hansa side by side so they’re bound to be compared), cahir actually can find the one (not many) people he wronged, and set things right on his own accord, not go forth with a larger mission to assist all humanity, or whatever.

i think cahir also had this WONDERFULLY UNDERUTILIZED anti-imperialist message as part of his character that pains me to see being swept under the rug for some cheap lame romance story. sapkowski already created some anti-war sentiments with the battle of the bridge in baptism of fire, and he tried to create anti-racism sentiments throughout the book/at the end of lady of the lake. anti-imperialism fits with the rest of the saga as a message.

the fact that cahir was instructed by his family to hate the northern kingdoms, despite the fact that they were related to northerners, is really profound as something to happen to a character, and holds a lot of meaning in today’s society. the fact that he broke, finally, after he lost ciri, just completely lost his mind and had to be restrained because he was wailing so hard, because of the pressure that this society put him under to succeed and achieve pride for his family, is such a great example of the tragedies of society. then he speaks out against his leader and is jailed... and yet, after this, he gets to learn from his mistakes and redeem himself as a good person, and his character has developed SO much. he is not doing what his country wants him to do, he is not doing what his family wants him to do. he is doing what he wants to do because it is the RIGHT thing to do. that already is such a powerful message, he doesn’t need anymore character motivation!

so yep that’s my thoughts on why cahir is a good character asides from all that forced romance biz

[izzyspussy]

ALL 50 QUESTIONS BITCH

HECK

1: Age Group   For fic tbh whatever, I know a lot of people in fandom are underage and are exploring and figuring out what they like, etc. Plus not all my stuff is explicit, and some of the stuff that is still isn’t porn so. As for original stuff that will likely all be explicit as well, so an adult market audience.

2: Genre   Usually fantasy, sometimes science fiction.

3: Big Idea or Detail Oriented Outlining   binch i cant outline for absolute shit. I guess big picture but like…. ?? the biggest possible picture, almost to the point of being useless lmfao. someone help me.

4: Line Editing or Plot Revision   I prefer line editing for fics because I’m lazy and it’s for free, but overhaul type revision results in a better finished product so I use that for original stuff (and commissions).

5: With or Without Deadlines    With deadlines, definitely. I can crank out 1k in an hour if I have a deadline, but without one it can take me 2 years to write just as much (see: Zwangsneurose, started the second I got home from seeing The Winter Soldier, still not finished, word count at ~800 lmfao).

6: The Biggest Compliment   I love it when people mention details that they noticed! Or if god forbid I was funny once.

7: Current WIP Length   I have 12 fic WIPs right now and the longest one is 7.7k. I have 4 original WIPs right now, but they are all in development stages, with no word count yet.

8: Author Comparison Goal   @neil-gaiman 110%. He is my ultimate goals and a huge inspiration, not to mention just a plain cool guy. I also would love to be compared to Rick Riordan or Gillian Flynn.

9: Biggest Struggle   Foreshadowing probably. I sort of wing it as I’m writing, and I can’t do a very good outline like I said, so it’s tough to get good hints and clues as to what’s coming. That’s part of the reason my originals are taking so much development (not just because I have to fill in all the worldbuilding that is already mostly done for fic).

10: Brainstorming With Others or Alone     I like to do a bit of both. I really appreciate input, plus talking things out can really get the creative ball rolling. But I like to get into Deep Shit on my own too, especially with worldbuilding. I’ll always share with others though, even the stuff I wanted to come up with all on my lonesome.

11: Characters Based on Real People     I’m sure there are aspects of people I know, and of myself, in every character I create, and likely even in characters that have already been created. What you know will always leak into your writing. However, I don’t usually base a character fully (or purposefully) around one real person. I do namesakes though, but they’re almost never modeled after that person, it’s just a shoutout to someone I find inspiring in some way.

12: Writing Space Clean or Cluttered     cluttered af binch u been here & seen it smh make me drag myself in front of everyone……

13: Character Driven or Plot Driven     Always character driven!! what kinda question

14: Favorite Writing Related Quote     “Stories may well be lies, but they are good lies that say true things, and which sometimes pay the rent.” - guess who lmao

15: My Characters in Someone Else’s World     I would transport my characters into (brace yourselves for a shock lol jk) American Gods, primarily so that they could get some good old fashioned “help” from the Big Guys.

16: Movie or TV Show     Well two of them have pretty finite endings. The romance legend could be a tv show but with a limited amount of renewal, ala A:TLA (but I’d like it better as a graphic novel). The vampire tragedy has a very finite ending so that would make a better movie. And the witch noir and girl gang are both a bit neverending-WIP-ish so they’d make pretty good shows.

17: Soundtracks     Yes! They help keep me focused and writing in a cohesive tone when I have to leave and come back. Y’all can listen to the playlist I have for witch noir here. Eventually I’ll split it up for character and/or scene mood, and I might add some scene suitable ambient noise tracks too.

18: One Song to Sum It Up    witch noir - Temptress, S.J. Tucker    romance legend - Take Me to Church, Neon Jungle    vampire tragedy - Bodies, Celia Pavey    girl gang - Weapon, Bastille & Angel Haze & FUGZ & Braque

19: Me There or Characters Here     …me there, I guess? In the romance legend, vampire tragedy, and girl gang not anything would really be different, but in the witch noir I’d probably have inherited some sweet powers. Not many of my characters are very friendly tho lmao.

20: Most Wanted Adaptation     Probably (a piece of) the witch noir. It’d be neat to actually see all those neat film noir lighting tricks.

21: Finish     Uh. I finish one shot porn a lot? lmao. Other than that, damn… no.

22: Made Myself Cry     lol yah

23: Proud or Anxious     usually I’m more proud, but sometimes when it’s something that’s very deeply personal or controversial I can get anxious.

24: When Did I Become a Writer     tbh sometimes I think I came out the womb that way. I don’t remember not being a writer, and I know I had legit novel ideas as early as like 3rd grade, and was making shit up with pretty words even earlier.

25: Must Reads in My Genre     three guesses what i’m bout to say y’all. Literally anything by Gaiman. Cornelia Funke’s Inkheart series. Any Pratchett. Donna Gillespe fucked me up with The Light Bearer. Bear Daughter by Judith Berman (although that is kind of a tough read, so I wouldn’t necessarily recommend it for everyone).

26: My Genre Needs More…     Diversity in general, specifically more people of color, queer people, and people with disabilities (that aren’t magically erased). Also in my opinion there needs to be more things in between grimdark and go-lucky fairytale.

27: Inspiration Source     History, anthropology, and pseudoscience.

28: Character Naming Stress from 1-10     Probably about a 2 or a 3. I use behindthename.com which can be searched for meanings, sound patterns, usage, and origin, and has a handy “name themes” search algorithm. I also recently found the legit U.S. census thanks to @peppersandcats helping me out with search terms, and that can be sorted by ethnicity, gender, time period, and geographical location. So I’ve got names pretty well covered!

29: Underwrite or Overwrite First Drafts     It could go either way, but generally speaking unless I have a word limit I usually like to add more during editing. Except when something is confusing or too complicated, then I’ll cut it.

30: Calming or Stressing      Not really either tbh. I enjoy it a lot, but it’s mostly exciting! Not calming or stressful, but either a fun adventure or a challenging puzzle.

31: Favorite Trope     Tough to pick just one tbh. I love tropes when they are done “right”. Even tropes done classically can be great (as long as they’re not -phobic of some sort), but I especially love when they are done satirically or inverted.

32: Backstories for Side Characters     Guilty af. Even characters that might not even make it into the finished book have backstories, personalities, and quirks.

33: Characterize Before Writing or Develop with The Story     A little bit of both. I like to have a solid character to work with at the beginning, but for in-text character development I like to let that unfold with the plot and the other characters.

34: Old Writing in One Word     Prolific

35: Villains or Heroes     I like them both pretty well, but my favorite characters of all time are always a little ambiguous so if I had to pick just one kind that’s what I’d go with.

36: B&W Morality     No way! I live in the gray area.

37: Advice     Have fun! Be proud of yourself for what you come up with and celebrate your creativity even if you think it doesn’t compare with other writers. The happier you are to create, the more creative you’ll get. Also, like with any other kind of art, pick a couple role models to emulate and that will help you develop your own solid style.

38: Advice I Fail At     The first draft doesn’t have to be perfect. I spend too long line editing while I’m writing my first draft and that makes it a lot harder to finish anything.

39: Importance of Positive Reinforcement     I’d say reasonably important. Definitely helpful. But I know I’ll keep writing even without it.

40: Question for Favorite Author     How much difference is there between how his creation is in his head versus how it came out in the words, and does he ever think about rewriting things that are long finished?

41: Distracting to Read While Writing     Actually, no. Reading other comparable works helps keep me motivated, inspired, and focused.

42: Motivated or Discouraged by Critiques     Tbh I don’t think I have ever received a real in-depth critique so I’m not certain? I’ve had idle “I liked this, but I didn’t like/understand that” type of feedback, and that has usually been pretty helpful and appreciated. If nothing else it lets me know what parts of the story might not be as accessible to an audience.

43: Protagonists in My Likeness     Yes, there’s a little of me in very many of my protagonists, and often even in fic characters that I write. But, like with other real people, they’re not usually modeled after me, we just have some stuff in common because I leak over into them (and sometimes they leak over into me) when I’m writing them.

44: Choosing An Idea      This is something I struggle with, really. My process is usually to try writing a bit of it, and if I hate it it’s probably not viable.

45: Harder or Easier While Stressed      It’s usually a harder to write when I’m stressed, and what I do manage to write doesn’t have as much quality.

46: Sort Protagonists      !!! There are too many!! these are just the Big Ones (so far) in witch noir      Gryffindor - toots, eddie, maddie, anca, seth      Hufflepuff - lily, charisma, s.j., angel, iris      Ravenclaw - fred, ariel, dido, father piero      Slytherin - evelyn, jessica, sloan, clara-claudia, aixa

47: Five Year Goal     Hopefully I will have fucking finished something. Maybe published? Or maybe getting my manuscript looked at. (I have a humble-ish time frame, I think. Writing is a lot of work, and five years is a lot less time than it sounds like.)

48: Co-Writing     I’m a huge control freak, so probably not. At least not with original characters. Maybe for fic tho, because that can be much lower stakes lmao.

49: Fast or Slow     When I’m in The Zone I speed thru, but it can take me a while to get started and I come up on blocks pretty often so I’m a slow finisher.

50: Worldbuilding or Characters     Shit man, that’s a tough choice. I guess characters? I don’t know.

[travllingbunny]

What even is a Draco in Leather Pants?

Look, I really like the Television Tropes website. It’s fun and you can spend a lot of time reading it. The tropes it has formulated are, for the most part, the tropes you can actually discern and find quite often in fictional works, and the descriptions are usually quite witty and well supported. The examples and their justifications can be...questionable, since anyone can provide them, and may lead to a debate between contributors (i.e. anyone who has bothered to register and post), but still, usually the majority of examples make sense and more or less fit with the description provided at the top of the page. 

But not always.

There’s supposed to be a trope called Draco in Leather Pants, which I had been vaguely aware for a while (basically, that it had something to do with people in the Harry Potter fandom stanning the character of Draco Malfoy and thinking he’s hot), and have been recently reminded because I’ve recently seen at least a couple of mentions of “leather pantsing”in various comments in fandom discussions, or links to the Television Trope page for said trope (for instance, a link to that page was provided in a page of a podcast about Jaime Lannister... who isn’t even among the examples listed on that page, BTW). So, it seems that this is supposed to be an actual trope and that people know what it’s supposed to be about.

Well, since I’ve actually looked at the above mentioned page, read the description and looked through the list of examples from various media given on that page, I understand even less what it’s supposed to be about. If anyone has a better understanding of it, please help me.

So, here’s the description from the Television Tropes page called Draco in Leather Pants:

”A form of Misaimed Fandom, when a fandom takes a controversial or downright villainous character and downplays his/her flaws, often turning him/her into an object of desire and/or a victim in the process. This can cause conflicts if the writers are not willing to retool the character to fit this demand.”

Then the text proceeds to talk about how such a character is treated in fanfiction, why this happens, and finally explains the origin of the term:

“ Named for a term in the Harry Potter fandom, for the mostly sympathetic Fan Fic portrayals of Draco Malfoy, who, in Canon, is a petty, smug, elitist Spoiled Brat. (The term originated in Hurt/Comfort Fics, where Draco was the comforter and Ron was the abuser, usually with Hermione being the victim. Not coincidentally, the Inverted Trope Ron the Death Eater also originated from such fics.) “

I have never read any of the Harry Potter books, and have only seen a couple of early movies on TV, so I’m largely unfamiliar with this entire franchise. But from what I gather, the point is Draco Malfoy is supposed to be merely an antagonistic bully and not a particularly sympathetic character or a sex symbol in canon, but fanon and/or fanfiction made him into both these things? Right? 

However, the description is both highly specific, because it includes several different things that don’t necessarily have to go together, but at the same time strangely vague and wide:

The character in question has to be “controversial or downright villainous”. What exactly does this mean? Does it have to be a villainous character, or a controversial one? Many characters are both of these things at the same time, but a villainous character does not need to be controversial (if almost everyone agrees they’re awful and almost nobody likes them, there’s no controversy there), and there are plenty of controversial characters that aren’t villainous. Controversial merely means that there are very strong and very different and polarizing opinions about something or someone, with opposing views being both shared by a significant number of people. Heroic characters or characters meant to be sympathetic can be very controversial.

The “fandom” takes this character and “downplays his.her flaws”. What exactly does this mean? What is meant by “fandom”? It’s really unlikely that it means “literally everyone who’s a fan of that franchise”, since it’s extremely unlikely that 100% of any group of people feel the same about something, so what percentage are we talking about? 90%? 75%? Two thirds? Over 50%? At least 20%? A vocal minority? A reviewer/blogger or two? Anyone who writes a fanfic or posts a Youtube fanvideo? Someone you’ve just argued with online? What is the cutoff?

 ...” often turning him/her into an object of desire and/or a victim in the process”. So, apparently the fandom, whatever that means, does not necessarily have to turn this character into an object of desire and/or victim, but what I gather from this must be a character who is not presented as an object of desire in canon, and is not presented as a victim in canon. At least not intentionally,  by the creators of said media. 

OK, now we’re getting somewhere. This is pretty specific. The character may or may not be a villain, but absolutely must not be presented in canon as either 1) sexy/desirable or as 2) victimized/suffering in any notable way? Got it. 

Now, I’m not sure why exactly this description suggests that it’s necessary to downplay someone’s flaws in order for that someone to be an object of desire or for that someone to be a victim. I mean, these are clearly three different concepts:

(relatively) flawless person

object of desire

victim

Of course, a real person or a fictional character can be two or all three at the same time, but that’s not at all necessary. They may be just one or those things, or two of these things, but not the third. They may be a character or characters who are none of the three in canon but are all three in fanon/fanfics - I’ll trust the Television Tropes page that Draco Malfoy is all of these things. But I’m not sure how many other fictional characters there actually are that fit that entire description. I can’t think of many.

But since the term “leather pants” is in the title, this should suggest that it’s the sex symbol status that’s the emphasis of this trope, right? Not downplaying of flaws or victimization? Because I really don’t see the connection between people wearing leather pants and people being victims or not having notable flaws. 

So, I guess we could say that Ramsay Bolton in his Villain Sue version in the TV show Game of Thrones is a Draco In Leather Pants, if we treat GoT as a fanfic, taking the canon Ramsay Bolton from George R R Martin’s A Song of Ice and Fire, who’s described as a very ugly, fleshy dude with no appealing qualities, with a certain low cunning but no great intelligence or skill or courage, who’s not considered as sexy by anyone in universe (and has no consensual sexual relationship with anyone, instead only being interested in raping and torturing people) and turning him into a cute, frequently shirtless Rambo-style fighter with a loving girlfriend who even finds himself as an apex of a love triangle of sorts (even if it’s a one-sided triangle, in that the abused but smitten girlfriend is jealous of the hot new wife Ramsay will get to rape). This fits the trope pretty closely, no? 

However, Ramsay is not in the list of examples on the page. Here are, instead, some of the characters listed by various contributors as examples of this trope. These are about 90% of all character listed that I’m familiar with:

Film:

Jareth the Goblin King (David Bowie) from Labyrinth

Captain Jack Sparrow (Johnny Depp) from Pirates of the Caribbean

Riddick (Van Diesel)

Frank N Furter from The Rocky Horror Picture Show

Tony Montana from Scarface

Hannibal Lecter from The Silence of the Lambs

Darth Vader from the Star Wars saga

Stanley Kowalski from A Streetcar Named Desire (as played by Marlon Brando)

Arnold Schwarzenegger's Terminator from The Terminator (it's actually mentioned that he literally wears leather pants in the movie)

Sarah Connor (specifically in Terminator II: Judgment Day)

Harry Lime (Orson Welles) from The Third Man (it's actually acknowledged that he's that "both Out and In-Universe)

Loki from MCU

Tony Stark from MCU, called an "Odd heroic variation"

Magneto from X-Men:First Class

Literature:

Hannibal Lecter (again) from Thomas Harris' novels (The Silence of the Lambs and Hanibal Rising are specifically mentioned)

Sandor Clegane from A Song of Ice and Fire

Heathcliff from Wuthering Heights

Mr Darcy from Pride and Prejudice (called "an unusual example of this trope”)

Live-Action TV:

Grant Ward from Agents of SHIELD

Dandy Mott from American Horror Story: Freak Show

Spike from Buffy the Vampire Slayer/Angel

Faith from Buffy the Vampire Slayer/Angel

The Master from Dr Who ("particularly in his Athony Ainley and John Simm incarnations")

The Tenth Doctor

Ianto from Torchwood (called "an odd heroic version")

Gaius Baltar from Battlestar Galactica

Alex Krycek from The X-Files

Sylar from Heroes

Noah Bennet from Heroes

Cole Turner from Charmed

Phoebe from Charmed

Scorpius from Farscape

Eric Northman from True Blood

Lex Luthor from Smallville

Furio from The Sopranos

Ben Linus from Lost

Gene Hunt from Life on Mars and Ashes to Ashes

Alex from Dark Angel ("somewhat. While he's a good guy by the end..." starts the description)

Khal Drogo from Game of Thrones

Dr Gregory House 

Barney from How I Met Your Mother

Tate Langdon from American Horror Story: Murder House

Regina Mills from Once Upon a Time

Rumpelstilskin from OUAT

Jefferson from OUAT

Captain Hook/Killian Jones from OUAT

Tony DiNozzo from NCIS (the description actually says "He's good person deep down (...) and isn't by definition an actual villain" before going into why he's supposedly a Draco In Leather Pants)

Walter White from Breaking Bad

Damon Salvatore from The Vampire Diaries

Klaus from The Vampire Diaries/The Originals

Now, hold on. After going through this list, I’m even more confused. Either the above description of the trope is incorrect or really poorly worded, or most of the people who have posted supposed examples have no idea what that trope is supposed to be about.

Because, while quite a few of these characters - but not all! - are villains/antagonists or were villains at some point, many (in fact, the majority) of these characters are actually sexualized and presented as objects of desire in canon, by actual creators of the media in question. Now, I’m not sure if the writers, producers and directors of The Silence of the Lambs initially intended to make Anthony Hopkins’ Hannibal Lecter a sex symbol (unlike Mads Mikkelsen’s Hanibal Lecter from the TV show, who clearly was intentionally presented that way and treated as such in-universe) - but I’m pretty sure they always meant for him to be fascinating and strangely appealing while also being super-evil and scary - the way they clearly did not portray Buffalo Bill, or even Chilton, who’s not really a villain but is clearly intentionally portrayed as annoying and hateful. However, I really want to know if someone is seriously going to argue that David Bowie’s extremely tight pants in The Labyrinth happened because the costuming department just couldn’t find anything bigger and looser for him to wear, or that characters such as (among others) Faith, Spike, Damon Salvatore, Klaus, Eric Northman, Grant Ward or Captain Hook from OUAT were not intended to be objects of desire, and that it was somehow the fandom that “turned” them into sex symbols, totally unprovoked, to the total shock and horror of the creators of these shows, who refused to “retool” these characters that were totally not meant to be sexy, no sir! I don’t think that anyone is going to argue that, and if they did, they either did not watch these shows at all, or are being completely dishonest.

What are we even talking about here? It’s really strange if not downright hypocritical to complain about the “fandom” putting certain characters in “leather pants”, when the canon has already put them in (metaphorical and in some cases also literal) leather pants to begin with. That’s not “Misaimed Fandom”. That’s the opposite of it - the showrunners were aiming for it and hit the target, intentionally playing up the actors’/characters’ sex appeal, often in really obvious ways. Unless I’m supposed to believe that things like frequent shirtless or nude scenes, tight/leather clothes, female gazey/male gazey (whichever applies) camera shots, and other fanservicey moments are there for no plot-related reason, just happened by accident, and that the writers wrote these characters as sexy and desirable in-universe with a bunch of other characters commenting on or falling for their charms, not to mention blatant ship teases or actual romantic/sexual relationships with protagonists - but somehow expected the audience to not see them as desirable, at all.

Which, BTW, does not necessarily have anything to do with downplaying a character’s flaws, or to what extent they are portrayed sympathetically. Many of the characters on the list are both given some sympathetic qualities and complexity and intentionally presented as desirable, but you can have one without the other. Case in point: Dandy Mott from AHS:FS - totally evil, no redeeming qualities, not sympathetic at all, but Finn Wittrock sure did not have all the nude scenes because the plot demanded it.

Furthermore, on the second point: most (actually, the majority, although there are some exceptions) of these characters were actually given tragic backstories and/or had terrible things happen to them in canon in scenes that were supposed to be dramatic and tragic and were clearly intended to elicit at least some degree of sympathy or empathy. For instance, you may argue how bad or evil or good Sandor Clegane is, but can anyone deny that he’s canonically a victim of horrible abuse by his brother, which has left him physically scarred and disfigured for life, and left even an harsher psychological and emotional trauma that’s defined his life? No. You can’t deny that. And some of the other above mentioned characters have had entire episodes and storyarcs or, heck, even entire movies devoted to their tragic backstories. It doesn’t make sense to accuse the fandom of “turning (x) into a victim”, when that character is already portrayed as a victim (among other things, and at least at some point in their arc or their backstory) in canon, intentionally, by the actual creators of said media. 

Which, BTW, has absolutely nothing to do with downplaying a characters’ flaws or the villain/hero status in the narrative. You don’t have to be a flawless person or even a good person in order to be or have been a victim (of abuse, rape, torture, murder etc.) and being a bad person or doing bad things does not disqualify you from the victim status. Conversely, being victimized at some point in your life does not automatically make you a good person or a hero, and does not preclude you from doing evil things and/or being a perpetrator of crime/abuse. I shouldn’t really need to explain this, it’s pretty obvious and basic.

In short, there is no reason why villainous, semi-villainous, anti-heroic or super flawed characters can’t canonically be objects of desire, victims, or both. Many, in fact, are.

So then, maybe half of the description of this trope should really be scrapped, and it’s all just about downplaying the flaws of villainous characters?

But that doesn’t fit either, because quite a few of the characters listed on this page either did not remain villains and eventually became heroes (Faith and Spike, for instance - and heck, even Darth Vader got last minute redemption) or simply aren’t and have never been villains. In fact, several of these - such as the Doctor, Sarah Connor or MCU Tony Stark - are definitely heroes and protagonists of their stories. Flawed heroes are still heroes. RDJ’s Tony Stark is clearly meant to be super flawed and occasionally annoying, but still likable, and certainly heroic. Others aren’t heroic, but are clearly not meant to be disliked by the audience, in spite of their shitty behavior (e.g. Barney from HIMYM). 

In fact, people who wrote some of these entries even admit that the character they think is a Draco in Leather Pants is “a heroic example” or “a good person deep down” - which contradicts what the trope is supposed to be about. Some entries are even complaining about the treatment of said characters not by fandom, but in the actual canon - which, again, completely contradicts what the description says the trope is all about (Misaimed Fandom).

OK, maybe listing heroic or other non-villainous characters does not contradict the description - because it says “controversial or downright villainous character”? But a controversial character is simply one that polarizes opinions. It’s usually pretty clear which characters are supposed to be villainous, but any character can be controversial. For instance, someone has listed Sarah Connor and said that people see her as “flawless icon of feminism” and then proceeded to criticize her character flaws - but someone else replied that many people may actually see the character as feminist exactly because she’s a heroine who is flawed and complex, rather than a flawless paragon of anything, and that it’s great to see female characters allowed to be flawed heroes, just like male characters so often are.

How do you actually separate the controversial from the non-controversial characters? If a bunch of people think a character is smart and awesome, and a bunch of others think the same character is stupid and annoying, that’s a controversial character. But do these groups have to be roughly the same in size for a character to be controversial? How many people in fandom need to hold one or the other opinion? Is Dawn from Buffy the Vampire Slayer a controversial character, or just an unpopular one? Many people often go about how hated she was, but I know quite a few BtVS fans who love Dawn.

And even if we agree on that, well - whether people are “downplaying” a character’s flaws is pretty debatable in itself, isn’t it? Yes, sometimes people ignore canon flaws or bad actions of their faves in fanfiction or fandom debates. But what if some fans acknowledge that their faves are flawed and have done shitty things, but insist that they also have good traits and the bad doesn’t outweigh the good, or even simply that they still like them in spite of all? Someone else who hates that character and thinks that they’re the Worst Ever and pretty much the closest thing to Antichrist may say that they are “downplaying their flaws”. But the other party may reply that it’s in fact the hater who’s overplaying their flaws. It’s not really an exact science - and that’s exactly what makes a character controversial. 

And, well, if the point of the trope is to complain that there are different and opposing opinions about controversial characters, in other words, that there’s controversy about controversial characters... well, duh? 

So, at the end of this analysis that’s probably way too long... I’m even more confused than I was at the beginning. I’d really appreciate it if someone would help me understand what this trope is about, if it’s even a trope, and why it’s called what it’s called. Is it supposed to be about:

complaining about characters that aren’t supposed to be sexy /desirable/ appealing in canon, but some rather sizable portion of the fandom treats them as if they were? (Which would be the one explanation that would fit the name of the trope.)

complaining about characters that aren’t victimized/don’t suffer in canon, but some reasonably large portion of the fandom treats them as if they are?

complaining about characters that fit both of the above, at the same time?

complaining about characters that are villainous, but a lot of people like them and sympathize with them anyway (regardless of whether the canon offers them material for that)?

complaining about the fact that authors of some canon works like to make their villains complex and somewhat sympathetic or give them heartbreaking moments and tragic backstories?

not being upset with canon for giving villains heartbreaking moments and  tragic backstories, but complaining anyway about the fact that a lot of fans sympathize with them, because you think that fandom should be stronger than that and bravely resist the authors’ attempts to elicit sympathy for bad people?

complaining about the fact that authors of some canon works portray their villains/antagonists as desirable and try to make them into sex symbols?

complaining about the fact that they’ve actually succeeded in that, which upsets you because you think that fans should all be morally stronger and be able to resists for the authors’ blatant fanservice and sexualization of morally corrupt characters?

just an umbrella term for people’s tendency to downplay or ignore their favorite characters’ flaws (which may apply to not just to villains, but to any character who has any flaws or has done something wrong or morally dubious)?

merely an excuse to bitch about the fact that, shockingly, there are some fans who have a different opinion than you and like a character that you strongly dislike?