What does /tv/ think of the fucking bullshit known as the bechdel test?
>>63618517
that OP is a fag
It's bullshit, as you said. There isn't much more to say. Do you want a 350 post-long thread to fuel your rageboner?
I love it because of how many video nasties and exploitation films pass it with flying colors.
I think it was a good comic strip. The point is that the one character is being irrational because she lives in comic strip land. It was never intended to be a serious metric for films. It's like if businesses took Dilbert comics seriously.
Has the author responded? What does she think of the whole phenomenon?
For it go have any meaning at all, it should be modified so that instead of the condition being "talking about a man", it's " talking about a man romantically". Because guess what, most conversations involve people, and lots of people are male.
Most women don't pass that test on a daily basis
it's funny because of how basic it is and how so many films don't pass it
>>63618752
>I think it was a good comic strip. The point is that the one character is being irrational because she lives in comic strip land. It was never intended to be a serious metric for films.
Jesus Christ, this. It was just a one-off joke observation about characters in movies.
>>63618752
The author is a radical feminist lesbian. The strip was a joke but made a valid point - why do we accept this so much from movies when we wouldn't if the reverse were true? what is up with that?
Of course the mundane explanation is that most movies have male protagonists, and most conversations in any work of fiction will either include the protagonist as a participant or revolve around the protagonist in some way.
>>63619258
because FILLER is garbage. every point of a movie should be to forward the plot.
>>63619258
It's a good point applied to existing movies, but it's not a standard movies should now be held to. It's just some funny observational comedy, you know?
It's like if businesses started taking Dilbert comics seriously. "Oh shit, we gotta start applying the Dilbert principle!"
The 'not about a man' qualifier is such arbitrary bullshit
I'm pretty sure Bechdel herself hates what it's become, and some of her favorite films don't pass it. The fictional character who came up with it was also a comedic stereotype trying to get out of taking her girlfriend on a movie-date.
Most"conversation scenes" have to do with actions of other characters to begin with, and when a movie's script is so streamlined to begin with, there's not much of a wealth of characters to begin: most movies can be summarized with only three completely necessary characters, so if the two female characters are talking, the last crucial character is likely male, unless it's an all-female cast.
>feminism
You feel that movies don't suit your taste
Do you:
1. Write a unique and compelling script and create movies that follow the female perspective in insightful ways that appeal to broad audiences
2. Complain and make a "test" that can mean just about whatever you want to so that someone somewhere might make movies more female friendly.
there are entire genres where the bechdel test isn't even applicable, it's fucking ridiculous
>>63619258
She's stated in her Anthology that writing the strip actually made her less and less radical as she thought more and more about the issues.
She's also always hated tons of radical dogmas, specifically that lesbianism is "applied feminism."
Its meaningless, pointless, and irrational on the end of the viewer to hold up movies to any sort of standard like this.
Just flip the test around.
How many films feature at least two male characters, who have a conversation with each other, that isn't about a female character?
Can you think of a film that doesn't pass this test?
>>63620139
Criticism usually has to exist before action on said criticism does. Before somebody wrote on the working class, somebody was saying, "someone should write about the working class". Sometimes its the author who did both but it's rare.
To DuBois's credit when he said there should be more black voices in American lit, he tried to be one of them. But he was always a better essayist than author, and it was the people who listened to him that made a real change. Effectively his complaints actually did more than his art did.
There are way too many people stuck in 2, but 2 always precedes 1, they are inherently linked.
It was a one off joke in a web comic whose name would offend most of the idiots who take the test oh so seriously.
Hell, I think even the author or someone said that the test was best to gauge the movie industry as a whole than to gauge single films.
>>63620578
I'd like to see a lot more of number 1.
>>63618517
women don't ever have anything interesting to say in real life so why would there be a movie about it?
they made two sex in the city movies and guess what all they talk about is men because thats what women are interested in.
cock and dolling themselves up for cock.
no matter what any women says they are all the same. 99% of women don't have hobbies or interests outside of trying to get the attention of a man. they don't think logically and they are incapable of paying attention outside of their own interest.
simply a film about a woman not chasing a man would be a film about nothing. it is literally impossible.
>>63618873
Well, that's the whole point of the bechdel test.
Women in real life talk about far more inane shit really. It would be more accurate to make half of all female-female conversations about some celebrity
I prefer the Zyklon Ben Test. Films only pass the Z.B Test if there is a scene where a white man brutally murders a non-white in retribution for his holy viking ancestors with a smile on his face. It's utterly shocking how few films pass the Z.B test these days. Almost scandalous.
>>63618517
As a "test", it's got a lot of problems - its criteria are odd, and don't really say much about female representation in film (a film could have any number of incredible and important female characters who, for reasons of plot construction, never cross paths, and thus fail the test), and a film can pass in technicality but fail in spirit. The best possible use for the Bechdel Test is simply to make you (as a filmmaker, writer, or simply a viewer) stop and think for a minute about how women are utilized in films.
An example: The Man from UNCLE. It technically passes the test because Elizabeth Debicki's character has a brief conversation with an Italian noblewoman (about jewelry, as it happens). But that conversation is basically just fluff and, in a more important way, the movie fails because when Alicia Vikander's character is brought before Debicki's, an odd thing happens: They're not allowed to speak directly to one another, Debicki speak's at Vikander's character's father, who expresses his daughter's will for her. That's the sort of thing that the Bechdel test ideally exists to make you aware of as a viewer. Is that too radical for you?
![DTWOF[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/RD3DAyY.jpg "DTWOF[1].jpg")
>>63620740
>It was a one off joke in a web comic
>web comic
>1988
>>63619258
Directors are free to make movies about women talking to each other about women things (which they already do) and I'm free to not watch those movies (which is already my inclination).
>>63618517
It's great. Porn for straight men passes it with ease.
People don't get that it's not actually a test regarding any quality valuation. It's just a means to point out how dude-centric hollywood stuff is.
>>63618517
It would make much more sense if it was only for conversations about the dependence on or superiority of men, if films with female characters who don't believe or need that is the goal of the test.
>>63619258
> why do we accept this so much from movies when we wouldn't if the reverse were true?
I would not and do not give a fuck if a male character is not prominent in a movie. I would care if they shoehorn a conversation into a movie to feel better about its representation.
>>63620791
That's what feminism wants to change. It wants women to have identity outside of men. I.e. it wants men to be left the fuck alone by women, which, when you're not a fat ass neck beard like most of /tv/ is actually a fucking blessing because they cannot function without a man to tell them what to do, which, after the initial sex and fun wears off, makes relationships die quickly because men are independant and don't want to be fucking babysitters to grown ass adults.
>>63618517
Every Andy Sidaris film.
>>63618517
>I can't get a Japanese girlfriend because of feminism
>>63618517
The creator admitted it's ultimately a shitty test because it excludes many of the critically agreed upon greatest movies of all time.
so in that new tangerine transgender oscargrab movie does it pass ?
>>63618873
What's funny is that so many trashy anime pass it that it proves how bullshit it is.
Queen's Blade, for instance.
Lesbian pornography passes.
>>63620345
Inside Out.
>>63618517
What's wrong with it?
>>63620345
Sixteen Candles
>>63618517
I only watch movies that fail it
>>63618517
Its a stupid way to judge a movie.
Take Master and Commander: Far side of the World, for example, a movie about a 17th century british naval crew fighting and adventuring on the high seas.
Versimiltude states that at that time women were considered bad luck on ships, and that there really wasn't a place for them on it.
As a result, the film fails the test due to the presence of no women, and thus that the movie is bad as a result according to feminist critique.
However, it ISN'T a bad movie in any technical or narrative capacity.
Its simply a sausage fest with big guys, and in this day and age (I mean, its 2015, comon) there's no place for media exclusive to men.
>>63618517
Alien passes that test.
Its literally a arbitrary test to manufacture outrage.
>>63623859
Kinda funny they say that but can't keep men out of their mouth physically and verbally.
>>63623399
And if audiences cared, then you'd be able to make a killing by making a movie that passes it. Is there any correlation between movies that pass the Bechdel test and movies that are popular? My guess would be no.
As someone said above, most movie main characters are male, and most movie conversations either involve or are about the main character. Why are most main characters male? Maybe because movies are typically about people doing exciting things, and women care whether men do exciting things in their assessment of a man's attractiveness and value much more than men do for women. A man doing something awesome makes all the women swoon, while a woman doesn't need to do something awesome, men will swoon over her just for being pretty.
>>63623859
The claim that feminism is for men's benefit, to get us a bit of peace, is one I've not heard before.
>>63619258
Bc its a bullshit test. Take zero dark thirty - stars a woman, directed by a woman, produced by a woman. But every conversation is about bin laden or his goons so it fails? Bullshit.
>>63618802
This, just like the turing-test they fail this one too.
Fun Fact: 2 Girls 1 Cup passes the Bechdel test.
I hate when films go out of their way to satisfy it.
>>63618517
Seems like the test was invented by a dyke.
Actual women talk about men all the time.
Even most female attempts at philosophy are mostly about gender.
>>63620139
For females with borderline personality disorder, nearly everything is a shit test.
>>63618517
Most women's lives don't pass the bechdel test
>>63620791
underrated post
Have two women ever talked about something other than a man in real life though?
>>63619359
>what is characterization?
>>63618517
It's extremely prejudiced against the blind-deaf-mute community. Ableist really.
It's arguably a challenge to women to do something else with their lives.
>>63623859
>it wants men to be left the fuck alone by women
not true about feminism at all.
the campaign against sex robots was started by a feminist woman.
and identity is a myth.
>>63618653
this. there's no content evaluation other than "is it about a man"
the test is about as shallow as the individuals who made it and believe in it
>>63623859
>It wants women to have identity outside of men.
But undercuts that completely by claiming complete helplessness to be anything other than what men make them.
>I.e. it wants men to be left the fuck alone by women
I would like to see some evidence that any feminists want this.
Every lesbian porn passes it
>>63626117
How about:
1. Two women
2. In conversation
3. Not about outrage
>>63618517
people take it very seriously and get turbo mad as if it's some sort of law but its just to demonstrate how most female characters are usually underwritten and just a side character to a male character
>>63618517
Something this faggot would follow
>>63619258
>accept
What do you mean 'accept'
What would we do? Push the no more films button?
Nuke HollyWood?
>>63628732
wot, like half the lesbian porn i've seen is about seducing a women from her man or talking about how men just aren't working out for her.
they fail the bechdel test harder then normal porn
Better test:
- Two women in conversation
- Manage to say something profound or interesting
>>63624753
Cross Ange and Queens Blade are both very empowering works you shitlord
I think it's a pretty interesting way to show how underrepresented women are in movies, but only when applied to the entire industry and compared to a male version of the test.
As people have already said, it's garbage for judging individual movies and not something anyone should go out of their way to fulfill.
>>63620757
Which I agree to and admitted that there was way too much of 2. Don't be so confrontational when someone conditionally agrees with you.
