What is the commonly used trope that irks you the most?

[pink_silk_glove]

Wouldn't you need two? Or did she have a sore ear?

A mate was cloned from a rib. And if you believe that ...

 

[Kelliezgirl]

I know I'm a terrible person, but this thread has me cooking up story ideas. So many bears to poke, so little time.

I think we're going to see a new version of Girl Cum.
#devintner

 

[XerXesXu]

I'm not a biologist, just a lay person interested in the subject, but my understanding is that modern evolutionary theory is that every single person on the planet traces ancestry back to a single common ancestor. How could it be otherwise?

Because it always takes two.

 

[Bramblethorn]

In Shakespeare’s defense, he was creating a villain. Writers sometimes have to put themselves in a disturbing position to do that. I remember when I had to get into the mind of my Erotic Horror FMC. Ugh.

On that particular occasion he was, but Shakespeare also put racism in the mouths of non-villainous characters. For instance, in Much Ado About Nothing, a repentant Claudio agrees to an arranged marriage with an unknown woman "were she an Ethiope" (i.e. "even if she were black").

 

[alohadave]

When pornstars do that, it’s urination.

That's why squirting videos are so weird. Like I'm watching someone piss all over the furniture.

I'm not kink-shaming watersports, it's just strange to me.

 

[Bramblethorn]

I'm not a biologist, just a lay person interested in the subject, but my understanding is that modern evolutionary theory is that every single person on the planet traces ancestry back to a single common ancestor. How could it be otherwise?

To "a common ancestor", yes. To a unique common ancestor (or even a unique couple), not to my knowledge, unless you're going all the way back to the origins of sexual reproduction long before hominids.

The "mitochondrial Eve" thing often gets misunderstood. Think of it like this:
Suppose Mr and Mrs Smith, and Mr and Mrs Baker, and Mr and Mrs Jones, and Mr and Mrs Brown, and Mr and Mrs [various other medieval surnames] get together and found a town, a long way from anywhere else. Over time they have kids, and the kids marry one another, and every time a couple marry the kids take the father's surname.

By chance, Mr and Mrs Jones have five daughters and no sons. All their daughters marry the sons of other families, and have kids - but the Jones surname is gone forever.

In a small town, that sort of chance event is going to happen once in a while. Every time it does, one surname is lost, and they don't create new surnames. Eventually, if it keeps going on long enough, everybody in the town will have the same surname. (By now, surnames probably aren't very useful, but never mind that.)

When an anthropologist comes along and finds this town where every single person has the surname "Smith", they can apply the rules of inheritance and figure out that once upon a time there was a single Mr Smith, and everybody in this town is descended from him down the male line. The original Mr Smith is a common ancestor of everybody in this village.

But that doesn't mean all the other lineages died out. It's quite likely that everybody in the village is also descended from the original Mr and Mrs Jones, and from almost anybody else in that initial population. It's their surnames that have been lost, not their entire lineages.

This is approximately how mitochondria works, except that it's passed down the female line. From studying mitochondrial DNA, we can conclude that we all had a common ancestor along the female line somewhere around 150,000 years ago, but that doesn't mean she's the only common ancestor we had at that time, or even the most recent - only that she's the one who happens to be in everybody's female lines.

 

[mirafrida]

No particular trope annoys me - i like exploring some, and others don't do it for me but that's fine. What annoys me are boring stories that are difficult to distinguish from dozens of others. And, going hard at a particular trope probably does put a story more at risk of going down that path.

 

[XerXesXu]

To "a common ancestor", yes. To a unique common ancestor (or even a unique couple), not to my knowledge, unless you're going all the way back to the origins of sexual reproduction long before hominids.

The "mitochondrial Eve" thing often gets misunderstood. Think of it like this:
Suppose Mr and Mrs Smith, and Mr and Mrs Baker, and Mr and Mrs Jones, and Mr and Mrs Brown, and Mr and Mrs [various other medieval surnames] get together and found a town, a long way from anywhere else. Over time they have kids, and the kids marry one another, and every time a couple marry the kids take the father's surname.

By chance, Mr and Mrs Jones have five daughters and no sons. All their daughters marry the sons of other families, and have kids - but the Jones surname is gone forever.

In a small town, that sort of chance event is going to happen once in a while. Every time it does, one surname is lost, and they don't create new surnames. Eventually, if it keeps going on long enough, everybody in the town will have the same surname. (By now, surnames probably aren't very useful, but never mind that.)

When an anthropologist comes along and finds this town where every single person has the surname "Smith", they can apply the rules of inheritance and figure out that once upon a time there was a single Mr Smith, and everybody in this town is descended from him down the male line. The original Mr Smith is a common ancestor of everybody in this village.

But that doesn't mean all the other lineages died out. It's quite likely that everybody in the village is also descended from the original Mr and Mrs Jones, and from almost anybody else in that initial population. It's their surnames that have been lost, not their entire lineages.

This is approximately how mitochondria works, except that it's passed down the female line. From studying mitochondrial DNA, we can conclude that we all had a common ancestor along the female line somewhere around 150,000 years ago, but that doesn't mean she's the only common ancestor we had at that time, or even the most recent - only that she's the one who happens to be in everybody's female lines.

Look up the 'Braided River' hypothesis, which is the currently accepted explanation of our evolution. Recently they've unearthed Denisovan remains in Oz.

 

[SimonDoom]

Wouldn't you need two? Or did she have a sore ear?

Again, with the caveat that I'm not a biologist, and others with more knowledge might make short work of my logic:

Suppose at some point X in the past a female primate is born that is essentially "human," whatever that means, in terms of her genetic makeup, the first homo sapiens.

She mates with several males who are not quite human, but close enough that mating is possible. She produces offspring from the union with these various males.

Her offspring mate with other members of the community that are "pre-human" but close enough to mate. I confess to not being mathematically sophisticated enough to know if this is right (I'm sure Bramblethorn will tell me soon enough) but it seems possible to me that the ultimate "human" population that results will all be descended from her ("Eve") but not necessarily all from any one of the multiple Adams with whom she produces offspring.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

I'm then curious as to how the trope is so common, I mean, aside from all those terribly racist White men.

The same reason that any shitty porn is popular. It's porn. It's the straightest line between A and kink.

 

[mildlyaroused]

Again, with the caveat that I'm not a biologist, and others with more knowledge might make short work of my logic:

Suppose at some point X in the past a female primate is born that is essentially "human," whatever that means, in terms of her genetic makeup, the first homo sapiens.

She mates with several males who are not quite human, but close enough that mating is possible. She produces offspring from the union with these various males.

Her offspring mate with other members of the community that are "pre-human" but close enough to mate. I confess to not being mathematically sophisticated enough to know if this is right (I'm sure Bramblethorn will tell me soon enough) but it seems possible to me that the ultimate "human" population that results will all be descended from her ("Eve") but not necessarily all from any one of the multiple Adams with whom she produces offspring.

It's difficult because there is no line to humanity. Any line you draw to say this one is human, her mum was not is arbitrary.

And evolution is so slow that an Eve would not exist in the same population as males who are only "pre-human." The transition to homo sapiens would have been slow and on a macro, population level.

A theory of Mitochondrial Eve does exist. But that's different, it's specifically about mtDNA.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Has this thread been hijacked or just genetically engineered?

 

[SimonDoom]

It's difficult because there is no line to humanity. Any line you draw to say this one is human, her mum was not is arbitrary.

And evolution is so slow that an Eve would not exist in the same population as males who are only "pre-human." The transition to homo sapiens would have been slow and on a macro, population level.

A theory of Mitochondrial Eve does exist. But that's different, it's specifically about mtDNA.

I think the kerfuffle arises because when I said that we're all descended from one person it wasn't clear whether I meant that we're all descended from AT LEAST one person or that we're all descended from NO MORE than one person.

I meant the former. I think that's what's interesting, and kind of beautiful -- the idea of common descent, of everything being related and all of us being bound together, at some unknown point in the past, by at least one common ancestor.

Any takers on how to make this a fun erotica trope?

 

[Kelliezgirl]

I'm then curious as to how the trope is so common, I mean, aside from all those terribly racist White men.

I'll admit that the theme interests me. I do find the contrasting skin tones quite attractive, but there would have to be a lot more substance to any attraction I may have than skin color alone. That being said, I suppose I'm in the minority, ie; needing a physical attraction before there can be a possibility of a mental, or emotional attraction.

Same reason the incest stuff is now so popular. At one point it was taboo, which adds a kink for some people. Now that the percentage of people who consider it taboo is vanishingly small we've moved onto other taboos for our kinks.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Her offspring mate with other members of the community that are "pre-human" but close enough to mate. I confess to not being mathematically sophisticated enough to know if this is right (I'm sure Bramblethorn will tell me soon enough) but it seems possible to me that the ultimate "human" population that results will all be descended from her ("Eve") but not necessarily all from any one of the multiple Adams with whom she produces offspring.

I agree, that quirky permutation that gave that first Eve some little edge, some extra pull on us men.

They've still got it, women, whatever it is that pulls on us. Damned if I know what it is, but I'll follow .

 

[Smuttyandfun]

I think the kerfuffle arises because when I said that we're all descended from one person it wasn't clear whether I meant that we're all descended from AT LEAST one person or that we're all descended from NO MORE than one person.

I meant the former. I think that's what's interesting, and kind of beautiful -- the idea of common descent, of everything being related and all of us being bound together, at some unknown point in the past, by at least one common ancestor.

Any takers on how to make this a fun erotica trope?

Eve had the first harem?

 

[mildlyaroused]

Any takers on how to make this a fun erotica trope?

Every story must now be put in I/T?

And as for the common ancestor, the AT LEAST one person is actually probably true, you're right. And sort of sweet.

It's essentially what Mitochondrial Eve is. mtDNA is inherited exclusively through the mother. Mutations create variation. ncBy analysing differees in peoples' mtDNA we can estimate when the last common human ancestor was.

Our good lady Eve.

 

[ElectricBlue]

I meant the former. I think that's what's interesting, and kind of beautiful -- the idea of common descent, of everything being related and all of us being bound together, at some unknown point in the past, by at least one common ancestor.

Wait, what? That means you're my brother? Bloody hell, Simon, this lot ain't ready for that, not in a million years.

You gotta think about that, though: 1,002,024 CE, Laurel has been cloned a thousand times, the Shady Pines Nursing Home still has squabbles about who gets the sunny window, and they've still not fixed the scoring.

 

[XerXesXu]

I confess to not being mathematically sophisticated enough to know if this is right (I'm sure Bramblethorn will tell me soon enough) but it seems possible to me that the ultimate "human" population that results will all be descended from her ("Eve") but not necessarily all from any one of the multiple Adams with whom she produces offspring.

Eve refers only to mitochondrial DNA, not the genome at large.

There may well be problems with your maths, but it's your naive belief that only women fuck around that leads you into error; men do too.

I'm more Neanderthal than my wife, she's more Denisovan than me. Were both less African and much taller than the Atae hunter-gathers we pushed up onto the marginal slopes of Pinatubo, nonetheless we're all homo sapiens, and the differences in our genomes are small but detectable.

Our languages are different. Mine's Indo-European, my wife's is Austronesian, the Atae's is different again. I speak Tagalog, with English grammar, my wife speaks English with Malay grammar. My son, who went to school with the Atae kids can manage a few words in their language. Language evolves in the same way as our genes. If this interests you, Google 'The End of Anthropology'.

 

[alohadave]

Every story must now be put in I/T?

Go back far enough and everyone on the planet are cousins. Look at George W and Obama, 10th cousins once removed, and that only goes back 400 years.

 

[SimonDoom]

but it's your naive belief that only women fuck around that leads you into error; men do too.

Woah. I'm not sure where you got that from what I wrote, but that's not what I said or meant. It was a hypothetical for explanatory purposes.

 

[SimonDoom]

Every story must now be put in I/T?

I think the sizzle is entirely gone once one gets to fifth cousins.

 

[TarnishedPenny]

How about cousins bringing fifths?

 

[SimonDoom]

How about cousins bringing fifths?

I always like the way you think.

 

[Zootonius]

Now that we've established these tropes that irk people, how many of you authors are guilty of using one or more of them?