Talk:Damsel in distress

Misc old discussions

Who put "Pvt. James Ryan from Saving Private Ryan" on the movie list? Not only is he male (which would probably need a seperate article anyway - the beginning of this article states that all damsels in distress are female), but he isn't exactly helpless during the final battle scene in Saving Private Ryan.

--88.108.41.204 14:56, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

"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)

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

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)

Likewise Leia Organa from the Star Wars movie trilogy. She does need help to escape early on, but for crying out loud, the Death Star constitutes a supermax security prison facility! Throughout the entire rest of the trilogy, she proves to be a competent and freedom fighter. She no more belongs on that list than Ravenwood does.--Peter Knutsen 01:48, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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

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)

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)

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)

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)

Stock Character?

Is the damsel in distress merely a 'stock character'? Often she is the heroine of the story. 'Stock character' implies that she has a walk-on part only and that she is not to be taken seriously. Creative artists have lavished great care on the psychology of the damsel in distress and she is the title character of Richardson's 'Clarissa', one of the first novels. Arguably the damsel-in-distress character is symbolic of women's oppression in life generally.....Colin4C 10:05, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I think that maybe the damsel in distress BECAME a stock character with Victorian melodrama which vulgarised a previous more tragic conception (such as Margarite in Faust for example). The melodramatic tradition was then continued in the silent films in such features as 'The Perils of Pauline' which reduced the character to the camp cliche she is today....Colin4C 14:16, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

The question of stock character has nothing to do with how prominent a role is. Stock characters are archetypal, recurring roles. A particular exemplar could be prominent, pivotal, or simply cameo dressing. They could be fully fleshed-out, well rounded characters, or completely one-dimensional with no detail. None of that figures into the question of stock character - a damsel in distress is unquestionably a regularly recurring stock character / archetype. Rifter0x0000 (talk) 16:13, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Mary Jane Watson

I removed the Spider-Man character Mary Jane Watson from the comics section, because almost every time she's ever been in danger, she's rescued herself or at least very nearly done so. She might play the role sometimes, but I think she's a weak example of the stereotype. In fact, she seems more like a reaction against it sometimes. (Left her in the movies section though. She doesn't beat anyone up with pool cues in the movies.) - HKMARKS 04:19, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

List a bit long.

I think the current list is a bit too long; do we really need so many examples? Especially considering the subjective nature of the issue, only characters who really fit the stereotype to a T should probably be added. I think some hacking could definitely be done. SnowFire 07:21, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, some of the examples look really dubious or of marginal relevence to me: 'Co-co Bandicoot' from 'Crash Bandicoot'??? Please....Colin4C 10:16, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Kagome Higurashi

I would like to know if Kagome Higurashi from the InuYasha animé series, A damsel in distress. If Kagome Higurashi a notable damsel in distress character. Please add the character Kagome Higurashi on to the "notable damsel in distress" characters and Category:Damsels in distress. I found a notable damsel in distress. So, let all the users know about Kagome Higurashi. Thank You. Steam5 06:21, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

She's a heroine, not a damsel in distress. She does sometimes get captured and need rescuing, but so do many heroes. Rifter0x0000 (talk) 16:17, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Christine Daae

I've removed Christine from the opera list...The Phantom of the Opera is not an opera. It's a musical. I have, however, added her to the novel list.63.228.234.239 22:10, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

The New Section

The new section provided some excellent material. However, a lot of it was a reprise of info in the History section. To avoid redundancy I have therefore incorporated it into that section. Hope that is OK with everyone. Colin4C 16:45, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Looks good to me. Goldfritha 18:57, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Colin4C 19:03, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Perils of Pauline

I think there's a real question as to whether the cliche scenes with the damsel tied to a railroad track or in peril at a sawmill were ever a part of the original 1914 version of The Perils of Pauline. I don't dispute that these plot devices were seen in a number of silent movies at around that time, nor do I dispute that Perils of Pauline was a suspense melodrama where the heroine was put in "damsel-in-distess" situations in the broader sense. But the harder I look the more it seems there is a distinct lack of solid evidence that these particular threats were among the various perils Pearl White's character faced. It seems there's a strong chance we've got an urban myth on our hands here. I've posted a longer piece about this on the talk page for the Perils of Pauline article. Unless and until there is some citable proof that those scenes were in the movie I think we should avoid wording that implies something which is questionable and unproven, eg:

"Such melodrama influenced the silent cinema, where the damsel in distress makes a dramatic debut, tied to a railway track by a sleazy villain with trademark waxed curly moustache, in The Perils of Pauline."

I'll change this to something that doesn't make specific reference to that movie. Circusandmagicfan 15:54, 11 May 2007 (UTC)Circusandmagicfan

Taming of the Shrew analogy

I'm dubious about the following sentence that's recently been added into the "Critical and Theoretical Responses" section.

These remakes often attempted to portray the concept of women's rights as a one-way road to trouble, not unike William Shakespeare's play, The Taming of the Shrew.

It looks a bit like "original research" and, more troublingly, I'm not sure it's entirely true. I don't want to be too aggresive on this because I still need to dig out proper citations for some parts of the preceeding text. I think the rest of the paragraph is broadly speaking true and is worded to avoid sweeping assertions that go beyond the sources. But the sentence I've picked on makes some assertions that seem open to challenge whilst also being a little vague. I presume it's talking about remakes of The Perils of Pauline but that's not absolutely clear. My main difficulty is to do with the wording "...these remakes often attempted...". What is meant by "often"? Does it mean the majority of the remakes conveyed an "anti- womens' rights" message? Or does it mean such a message occurred many times within individual films? There were three "remakes": the 1934 serial, the 1947 feature film and the 1967 feature film (although the last was more a biopic of Pearl White than a remake of the original Perils..). Which of these were "anti-rights" and what sources can be referenced to support the claim? Also, I think the word "attempted" is a bit contentious because it suggests that any "anti-rights" message was deliberately inserted by the film makers rather than being something that has been read into the story by audiences or critics. Perhaps film makers half a century ago thought that, by the standards of the time, they were making movies which promoted the idea of strong independent women and it's only when you look back at it from a later context that you read the the "shrew" message into it. There's good evidence that the black and white serial queen melodramas were marketed at female audiences as much as at men and that the original Perils of Pauline portrayed its liberated central character as heroic. So it would've entailed some significant changes to remake it as an anti-emancipation story. Is there a citable source that spells out such changes or is was this sentence a matter of personal observation? Circusandmagicfan 17:10, 28 June 2007 (UTC)Circusandmagicfan

As there has been no response to the above I'm editing out the sentence in question. Seems reasonable in the absence of citation of a source.Circusandmagicfan 16:17, 5 October 2007 (UTC)Circusandmagicfan

Didcaps re-titled to Fetish

"Didcaps" is a specialist term within a special interest field. I don't think it warrants a specific section here. If it is to be mentioned then it needs to be within a section that presents it in context. I have done that by editing and re-titling the section to explain that the damsel in distress is, for some people, a fetish image. Within that it is mentioned that "Didcap" has been coined as a term to describe a particular type of image. Also, the previous text was rather labouring the point in explaining what these images are - it needed to be shorter and to the point. Circusandmagicfan 21:01, 11 October 2007 (UTC)Circusandmagicfan

boobi is a idiot —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.56.121.153 (talk) 20:57, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Wrong Gender

There is a picture of Apoolo and Hyacinth (mythology) in the 18th and 19th Century sections. It depicts the God Apollo with a young man, not a woman...

What the deuce?!?

I know Wikipedia isn't censored, but could we please not have a nude pic at the top of the article? --Luigifan (talk) 23:14, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree that the image in question isn't necessarily the best choice to represent this whole topic. However I see no problem with having a Rembrant painting in a Wiki article. I've re-arranged the pictures a little as an experiment. Let's see what people think. Maybe you could could come up with some new images that better represent the concept of a damsel in distress.Circusandmagicfan (talk) 13:44, 22 May 2008 (UTC)Circusandmagicfan

Sub-topics within the Fetish section

Female Masochists

On a politically incorrect note I am fairly certain that the damsel in distress scenario is a fantasy which appeals to female masochists or 'subs'. Possibly worth looking further into the literature on this subject...Colin4C (talk) 10:51, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Male Damsel in Distress in Fetishism

I am wondering, is there such a thing as males wishing to be the woman as a damsel in distress and if so, should this be added to the article? For example, some guys might want to be a woman, just for being a damsel in distress. Not so much for the rescue, but for the kidnapping or whatever. Of course this might also appear to certain homosexual relationships.--4.233.17.170 (talk) 07:36, 8 September 2008 (UTC)Anonymous

Males who want to be saved don’t necessarily want to be women or saved by another man, but most choose to remain male and be saved by a female.

Too much detail

I think the two items above ("Female masochists" and "male damsel in distress...") are probably too specialised to warrant extensive text within this article. This is a very broad article about the damsel-in-distress icon/character/stereotype/cliche in all incarnations and contexts. There is a limit to how much detail is sensible or appropriate within any specific section. If a particular section or sub-topic really is worthy of extensive coverage in its own right then (as per Wikipedia guidelines) it should be broken out into its own article - this article should then have a summarised version of the material with a link to the break out article at its head.

At best the topic of female masochists might warrant a sentence or sub-clause noting that the types fetishists who enjoy damsel-in-distress imagery include women with masochistic desires or fantasies. I don't know where you'd find a reliable source for that though.

As for "Male damsel in distress fetishism" I'm at a loss for words. My first reaction was that its an oxymoron because damsels are female by definition. However I don't want to be homophobic, so if anyone can find a reliable, third-party published source which identifies male homosexual empathy with damsels-in-distress as an established fetish then I guess it could have a passing mention.

Circusandmagicfan (talk) 11:23, 8 September 2008 (UTC)Circusandmagicfan

All I know was that there were some males that would like to be in the damsel in distress role. Go browse AnonTalk, that is where I found out. I only said that this might be a fetish in male homosexuality. Which may involve crossdressing. But I could see how this would fit into the forced feminization fetish where straight males rather be in the damsel role, while the female is in control. Perhaps they rather just be held captive by a female, what is the opposite of a damsel for a male? Is it called a hostage? --72.67.244.179 (talk) 08:46, 9 September 2008 (UTC)Anonymous

I just think that's too much detail on a sub-topic that is, at best, peripheral to the main subject of this article. If you want to write about that sort of stuff then it's probably better to see if you can contribute to specialised articles on fetishism.Circusandmagicfan (talk) 08:05, 10 September 2008 (UTC)Circusandmagicfan

Correct name for Male Damsel in distress

Gentlemen, we need to come up with the correct name for Male Damsel in distress. I know it's not Dork in distress. Jidanni (talk) 20:17, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

A Male Damsel in Distress would be a Dude in Distress. It's pretty much a guy who is put in danger, often but not always involving bondage. Steven Trevor from Wonder Women would probably be a good example. There are a number of people into it, not al of them gay men. While Pics of Damsels in Distress are called DID Caps, thier male Counterparts are called DUD Caps. Yeah I know the acronym doesn't work (though some say Dude Under Duress) . It can also be seen asa sub fetish for male bondage in general. However, the only citation I know of are web sites, forums on the subject. 70.238.153.224 (talk) 10:25, 27 February 2009 (UTC) Anon

OK, but what is the real male equivalent of "damsel".? Jidanni (talk) 20:17, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Perilsofnyoka.JPG

The image Image:Perilsofnyoka.JPG is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --07:15, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Hopefully now addressed by the addition of a rationale to the image's description page.Circusandmagicfan (talk) 09:23, 1 October 2008 (UTC)Circusandmagicfan

Critical and theoretical responses

Reads more like a laundry list of examples than an examination of critical and theoretical responses. Dlabtot (talk) 23:36, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Almost 5 years since this editor has written this, the issue has not been corrected. Furthermore, except for the first paragraph in this really long section, there are absolutely no citations. -Xcuref1endx (talk) 04:49, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Samus Aran

Should we include Samus Aran from Metroid? Because every story they make for her, her character takes a step backwards from a super heroine to a damsel in distress. It wouldn't surprise me if the next game of her will be the last, because the ratings will drop so low that the franchise will likely be stabbed in the back in the near future. --203.206.73.28 (talk) 11:10, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

WP:NOTAFORUM, seriously. And I'm not sure of including Samus in an article... -- Hounder4 (T) (C) 11:13, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Go on the site http://second-truth.blogspot.com/2010/09/samus-is-slowly-shrinking.html and see why she has gradually become just another Damsel in Distress before the plug of the Metroid franchise is pulled altogether.‎ --203.206.73.28 (talk) 11:10, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

That site is a blog with personal opinions, which is not a reliable source by Wikipedia's standards, thus it cannot be used for sourcing — in that case, we're not including her here. Hounder4 (Talk) 15:05, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

They are not personal opinions of her but general opinions both from the writers and the viewers perspectives so she needs to be included in the article. --203.206.73.28 (talk) 11:10, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Anita Sarkeesian

Was wondering if, since that "Tropes Vs. Women In Games" video about this topic got so much heat around it, Anita Sarkessian's video and the controversy that came from it should be included in some way. If it does, it needs to be made sure that it's not vandalized in any way by either side. One side has the whole vitriol thing of wanting her to be killed/raped/pillaged, while the other side might white knight the video and her. It needs to provide a fair representation of what she created and what happened as a result. Darkpower (talk) 22:23, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

I am wondering too, that Anita Sarkeesian is not mentioned in this article. Why? --Lkl ★ 18:47, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Sarkeesian is not a notable critic or theorist. Her notability generally stems from being center of the gamergate controversy. It would give Sarkeesian undue weight to mention her in this article. Until there is a sizable amount of reliable secondary literature dedicated to her thought, there should be no reason why she should be included. -Xcuref1endx (talk) 04:51, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

• Regardless of what anyone thinks of Sarkeesian (and to say that she isn't notable is a tad daft; she was notable long before the Gamergate stuff), she isn't a "damsel in distress" at all. Not even close. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 12:43, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

No she wasn't. Either way, she doesn't belong in the article. -Xcuref1endx (talk) 00:29, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

The king's daughter

The claim that Hebrew references to 'the king's daughter' make her a damsel in distress is not proven by the quotation given from Tikunei haZohar 29b. There she is plainly the reward of the dragon-slayer, not the dragon's victim. I am therefore deleting this passage and making a direct link to the Kabbalah commentary, which is more convincing. Mzilikazi1939 (talk) 20:43, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

"Empowered damsel"

IMO this section is greatly off-topic and full of original research. Unless there are sources which specifically discuss role reversal, this section is to trimmed mercilessly.

By the way the term "ED" itself IMO has insufficient scholarsip. From what I briefly see in the internets, the term is used in two senses:

• "empowered damsel-in-distress": an originally damselly-damsel falls into a distress to emerge victorious
• powerhouse damsel like Xena or, the mostest recentest example, Wonder Woman

Are there any really reliable sources about this kind of stock character(s)? Staszek Lem (talk) 23:22, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Damsel in Distress (disambiguation) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 19:18, 18 June 2019 (UTC)