We honest to God have to be careful not to make this whole main page sound like "if you're disabled, and are also inspiring, then you're automatically a glurge-inducing disgrace to your stereotype". Without meaning to insult anyone in particular, there seems to be some venom aimed at people who don't like being outdone by those with a disability, particularly with the line:
- these are characters with disabilities shown as going above and beyond the level of even non-disabled people in spite of their disabilities.
Why does "inspirationally disabled" now redirect to "inspirationall disadvantaged?" I distinctly remember this not being the case just a few days ago, and "disadvantaged" is confusing because there are a ton of disadvantages aside from disability. AFAIK this page is still about disability and it's still under the category "Disability Tropes," sooo... what gives? Did "disabled" become offensive while I wasn't looking?
Why does this have a Real Life folder when it's in the No Real Life Examples Please index?
Hide / Show Replies
Probably an oversight of the editor that added it to the index. Deleted.
Let's just say and leave it at that.
NerdsAreSexy.. sometimes
Too many of the examples are "disable character who happens to be competent regardless". It's getting offensive in the opposite direction now, where any well-adjusted and independent person with a disability gets lumped under this trope for being "unrealistic".
This has got to be like the 5,000th time I forgot my email or password... Hide / Show Replies
And I thought that post was me. Yes, seriously people, this is isn't fair at all - not to mention the fact that about half these "examples" are more aimed at trying to inspire other disabled people, not "normal" folks who don't have disabilities.
I think this just needs to be said: Tropes Are Not Bad. Yes, this trope is very prone to being a source of Glurge most of the time, but that's not to say it can't be played in a non-condescending, and perhaps truly inspiring manner. First, we have to admit that there are some disabled people who would have a hard time doing what regular people take for granted. Second, perhaps if it were played in such a way that a character's disability (no matter how severe or mild) does not solely define the character, and rather than just being a cheap tug at the heartstrings, it could be truly inspiring, maybe, just maybe, it wouldn't be the much-hated glurge-machine that it is with a majority of tropers.
In addition, it seems just about anyone who is disabled and achieved something awesome in life falls under this trope; even people who aren't oozing glurge, like Temple Grandin, Ludwig Van Beethoven, and Stephen Hawking. So are they all just a bunch of glurgetastic caricatures of every other disabled person out there, simply for falling into this trope? I really really hope no one would say yes. So case in point; like I said, Tropes Are Not Bad.
Seriously, I think we should consider a laconic for this, because it seems like people are shoehorning anything and everything into this trope. This is not simply "person with disability is good at something, and it's made a big deal of," but it's specifically "person has X disability, and can do Y mundane task which is not hindered by X. Said doing is overblown in a manner that implies X-person doing Y-task is nigh-miraculous.
Turning Beethoven into an example of the trope is making the page/the troper who inserted it into an example of the trope - he never used is as a "source of being inspirationally disadvantaged".
Hide / Show Replies
he was Disadvantaged and Inspired people, what's your problem?
Edited by joeyjojo hashtagsarestupid
he was Disadvantaged and Inspired people, what's your problem?
Edited by joeyjojo hashtagsarestupid
The problem is that this trope isn't 'disadvantaged and inspires people', it's mundane things becoming apparently inspiring because a disabled person is doing it. Beethoven's talent is far from mundane, deaf or not. Plus, as the original person said, he never used it as a "source of being inspirationall disadvantaged".
A few examples on the page seem to be missing the point completely though, perhaps it's time for a Laconic page?
Ness, Ness, Ness, Ness, Ness, Ness, Ness, Ness, Ness, Ness, Ness, Ness
Why does Ray Charles count? Not everyone can play the piano with sight, so it's not like what he did was a "mundane" thing.
I seriously think this is getting out of hand here; it's starting to turn into Complaining About Shows You Dont Like; the speds edition! For instance, a paraplegic hiking up Mount Everest wouldn't be this trope, since such a feat would be spectacular even for the average Joe; but if someone with Aspergers Syndrome graduates from high school (which is something Aspies are capable of doing), and this is sensationalized as something miraculous, then it would be this trope.
Edited by Stoogebie
Batgirl "did more good from a wheelchair and a computer than she ever could have done on the streets?" What is the evidence behind this claim and why is it part of the trope example?
Hide / Show Replies
I thought "inspirationally disadvantaged" was a negative trope described to badly portrayed disabled people in fiction. I remember this quote where a very sarcastic person in a wheelchair snarks, "I'm courageous in the struggle of everyday life, so I'd better get some kind of damn reward for this!" Which I think describes this trope very well.
Also, the Batgirl example bothers me a lot. She always kicked ass. That example makes it sound like shes a good/even better superhero DESPITE being disabled. It should be said that Barbara Gordon is an effective superhero because thats just who she is, an overall awesome person, before and after her being in a wheelchair. She's not inspirationally disadvantaged, shes BATGIRL!/ORACLE!
Edited by paperstreetsoapcompany
This entire page is just full of lousy examples that read like TV Tropes circa 2007. Perhaps it's not even worth trying to fix, but maybe someone who actually cares about this page should take a look at it.
Edited by brc2000