Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Neonivek]

Because it's completely impossible for two women to talk about the actions that they plan to take to sneak into the enemy bunker. That would just be silly.

Why the world would a movie just halt to have two women talk about this plan when they could have it at a large table?

That sounds like something you involve all the characters in.

Ohh that is right... to pay lip service to the Bechdel test.

My opinion to writers out there is to ignore the Bechdel test outright and judge your own work by its own merits.

[Willfor]

Goddammit, I don't have the energy to deal with you tonight.

[Neonivek]

Goddammit, I don't have the energy to deal with you tonight.

I already supported my ideas.

The point is this "Easy to pass" test is only easy if you don't have a head for how things play out overall or if your plot isn't really about anything in particular.

It becomes "hard" because the biggest trope is the main character. It also becomes hard because characters also are often meant to play off of each other, which has issues onto themselves (mostly because woman is considered a character onto itself).

Yet it doesn't really matter because ultimately you use your head when using the Bechdel test. If something fails because, for example, it is about Talking furniture then obviously it isn't included. Then when you take a step back and apply it to the medium as a whole it must be done with the same sort of understanding.

It is why I consider it more of a mental exercise or quick look. Since no matter what do you with... it isn't accurate even at a distance. You are going to have to fill in the gaps and details yourself and you are going to have to actually analyze the information.

"50% of all films in 2006 fail the Bechdel test" for example... What does it mean? The Bechdel test doesn't fill in that information. It isn't a Geiger counter.

It is why I thought up the Neutral Bechdel Test and the Amended Bechdel Test, to see how much movies and films even have the quality of script to honestly pass it.

[Willfor]

Alright, for the rest of the thread we'll all just assume Neonivek is thinking of the Bachdel test as a mental exercise, and we'll just roll with it.

[Pnx]

So if I'm reading you correctly, what you're trying to get at is that the reason most movie's don't pass the Bechdel test, is because they're very character centric by nature?

Also with this neutral bechdel test, how related to the main plot does something have to be before it fails to qualify? I mean I'm pretty sure that virtually every movie I've seen that I can think of off the top of my head actually contains at least one scene where the characters talk about something not directly plot/character related... at least if we're not taking the definitions too extreme. Most of the ones that come to mind are about food actually.

[Neonivek]

what you're trying to get at is that the reason most movie's don't pass the Bechdel test, is because they're very character centric by nature?

Well just as an aside, I do believe most movies don't pass because they honestly don't give their movies gender diversity in both role and character amount. A large amount of movies have the one token female character or women only exist to play off of the men.

I just don't think it is as much of a "easy pass" to pass the Bechdel test because of the character centric nature of movies. It does take effort to isolate only women for a non-main character based conversation without hurting the flow of the story.

And HECK even the ones who do manage that do it by simply using the same stereotypes... Using the "Mom" character is a common one.

(For anime I like to use my "Competency and relevancy" test... Does the female character remain both competent and relevant to the story and solves her own plotline? Which excludes animes with female leads and animes with 50%+ female characters... By the by most animes fail this period)

I mean I'm pretty sure that virtually every movie I've seen that I can think of off the top of my head actually contains at least one scene where the characters talk about something not directly plot/character related

Aren't they talking about how another character's food is delicious or using the food as a leeway into another conversation OR using is as a symbol for what is going on?

"Mmmm your Apple Brown Betty sure is delicious"

The official Bechdel Test though isn't clear about your question either though. It is actually one of the major criticisms about the test. Would a conversation where a woman as an aside says "These dishes aren't clean" to another woman count as a conversation not about men?

[Pnx]

what you're trying to get at is that the reason most movie's don't pass the Bechdel test, is because they're very character centric by nature?

Well just as an aside, I do believe most movies don't pass because they honestly don't give their movies gender diversity in both role and character amount. A large amount of movies have the one token female character.

I just don't think it is as much of a "easy pass" to pass the Bechdel test because of the character centric nature of movies. It does take effort to isolate only women for a non-main character based conversation without hurting the flow of the story...

And HECK even the ones who do manage that do it by simply using the same stereotypes... Using the "Mom" character is a common one.

And I think you've pretty much hit the nail on the head with that one. Almost every movie only has one major female character, and that character is almost always the love interest. When there are two female characters, they're almost always competing love interests. The reason so many movies have trouble passing the Bechdel test is because they seem to have a lot of trouble having two female characters whose roll does not revolve around a main male character. Or heck, even just one female character that fits that description.

I mean I'm pretty sure that virtually every movie I've seen that I can think of off the top of my head actually contains at least one scene where the characters talk about something not directly plot/character related

Aren't they talking about how another character's food is delicious or using the food as a leeway into another conversation OR using is as a symbol for what is going on?

"Mmmm your Apple Brown Betty sure is delicious"

No, they're pretty much always talking about food, or what food they like, or what food they want to have. But honestly that seems like it's about as far away from not talking about characters you're going to get. It also seriously happens at least once in every movie I can think of. Maybe just because food is easy to relate to (I mean everybody eats right?).

I'm also not sure that a neutral Bechdel test has much relevance to the argument honestly, I mean you can argue for the rights of furniture, and their ability to see stories about them in their media, but I'm not sure many people will be with you on that one. :p

The official Bechdel Test though isn't clear about your question either though. It is actually one of the major criticisms about the test. Would a conversation where a woman as an aside says "These dishes aren't clean" to another woman count as a conversation not about men?

I'm not entirely sure, it might depend on your standards, but if it's just an offhand comment rather than a deeper discussion on washing dishes it might not count.


Honestly I think applying the Bechdel test to media is the same as looking at how much employers pay black employees versus their white counterparts. It may not indicate any fault on an individual basis, but it is a good way to show there's an endemic problem.

[Neonivek]

When there are two female characters, they're almost always competing love interests

I would actually like to test this though. To me they tend to make one entirely irrelevant.

Though really romantic subplots are often so unimportant I wouldn't be surprised if I entirely tuned it out. (though looking at the Disney collection... They tend not to be... Also wow are there a lot of female villains that run the entire gambit... Well except I guess an outright female warrior villain)

I'm also not sure that a neutral Bechdel test has much relevance to the argument honestly, I mean you can argue for the rights of furniture, and their ability to see stories about them in their media, but I'm not sure many people will be with you on that one

The Neutral test is more of a test on... Conversation diversity.

Honestly I think applying the Bechdel test to media is the same as looking at how much employers pay black employees versus their white counterparts. It may not indicate any fault on an individual basis, but it is a good way to show there's an endemic problem

The problem with that is that a pay gap is a very visible indicator of a pay gap. The Bechdel Test ratios though are not.

It is more a more murky view and should be done with a grain of salt. Which don't get me wrong, I don't consider it a criticism of the test but more that is how I feel its true application lies.

[Putnam]

So what you're suggesting is for the ratio between the neutral and female bechdel tests for indication?

[Neonivek]

So what you're suggesting is for the ratio between the neutral and female bechdel tests for indication?

No, not really... I originally just brought it up as an interesting idea to see if there are movies and shows that can just outright fail at talking about something that isn't another character.

Though I guess since people hate it when I call the Bechdel Test a "Mental Exercise" I found a proper way to say it.

I find the Bechdel Test to be inductive reasoning. It cannot be deductive reasoning because it doesn't support deductive conclusions.

A Wage gap between two racial groups can be deductively reasoned especially as you partition. A Bechdel Test ratio doesn't come up with deductive conclusions but inductive ones.

The Bechdel Test is an inductive test.

[Pnx]

I'm also not sure that a neutral Bechdel test has much relevance to the argument honestly, I mean you can argue for the rights of furniture, and their ability to see stories about them in their media, but I'm not sure many people will be with you on that one

The Neutral test is more of a test on... Conversation diversity.

To put in a less facetious tone, fiction is mostly about characters, and I don't really feel that's a bad thing, we have something for objects, it's called non-fiction. I don't mind it's non-presence in fiction.

The problem with that is that a pay gap is a very visible indicator of a pay gap. The Bechdel Test ratios though are not.

It is more a more murky view and should be done with a grain of salt. Which don't get me wrong, I don't consider it a criticism of the test but more that is how I feel its true application lies.

I'm not sure I agree with that one, I mean the reverse Bechdel test is often true, so I think in the same way a pay gap is a visible indication of a pay gap, a lack of screen time conversation for female characters is indicative of a lack of screen time conversation for female characters. Especially when male characters are getting it.

[Neonivek]

It is more PNX since I edited what I said like crazy.

That the Bechdel Test is more of an inductive test. As in the conclusion you come up with is "The ratio of passes and fails indictates a strong possibility of sexism" But it will never say "The ratio of passes and fails indicates sexism".

It doesn't possess the accuracy in my mind for a deductive conclusion, while possessing more then enough for an inductive one.

Since the easiest way to show the wage gaps to show outright racism is simply to show them doing the same amount of work and their pay.

[Vector]

Would a conversation where a woman as an aside says "These dishes aren't clean" to another woman count as a conversation not about men?

It does, actually.  That's why it's so scary that the Bechdel test is seldom passed.

[Neonivek]

Would a conversation where a woman as an aside says "These dishes aren't clean" to another woman count as a conversation not about men?

It does, actually.  That's why it's so scary that the Bechdel test is seldom passed.

But the conversation isn't about the dishes. That is an aside.

Heck "Lay off him" isn't about "him" it is about her.

This is especially evident since "Sex in the City" is considered to "fail" the Bechdel test... But watch it... they talk about things that aren't about men all the time. SURE the conversation is about men and really it is just a lead in to men... but still

[Putnam]

It becomes a conversation when someone replies "yeah?".