Might be misremembering but I'm pretty sure I read that somewhere. *shrug*
Actually, from what I remember, Alien was the only movie from when this damn thing was made that it could pass.
Barely.
Useless or not, the Bechdel Test is interesting. And anyway, the main reason I brought it up was to say that Captain Marvel is actively trying not to be a standard girl comic where she keeps thinking about boys. That she is actually a fully-fleshed, independent individual who has no problem with guys, but who doesn't feel any particular need for a man in order to make her feel fulfilled. That's always refreshing.
X-Men X-Pert, my blog where I talk about X-Men comics.It's not a low as you think.
It doesn't discriminate which tone "talking about a man" actually is.
He could be a side character or an antagonist making the live of those two women a living hell, but if the conversation ever gets at the topic of him, bam, it's sexist.
![]()
What a shame that her book is so completely dull.
edited 27th Jan '13 2:00:40 PM by fakeangelbr
Donate money to Skullgirls, get a sweet poster.Does anyone know if there's any source that can tell us how many films actually pass or fail this damn thing—besides Bechdeltest.com, with its absurdly small sample size and amendment of the rule? Because I mentioned this to my roommate, and he brought up a good point—we just kind of assume the majority of works fail this thing. We don't have hard data.
edited 27th Jan '13 2:24:39 PM by Wackd
Maybe you'd be less disappointed if you stopped expecting things to be Carmen Sandiego movies."it's sexist"
No. No, that's not it at all.
The Bechdel Test is less about specific works, more about overall trends. That trend being that women in fiction exist only in relation to men. Two women complaining about a man who's pissing them off is still two women talking about a man. It doesn't mean the scene or movie is sexist. It's simply an unfortunate truth about fiction that women always have their lives revolve around men. If you want to watch a movie where the women aren't particularly concerned about men either way, you end up needing to watch lesbian porn. Which, you know, sure, I don't mind watching lesbian porn. I'll watch as much lesbian porn as it takes to get Hollywood to make movies about women whose lives don't revolve around men. That's a sacrifice I'm willing to make, even if it means chafing.
But the point isn't really about the sexism of specific works. It's the sexism of trends.
And to get this back around to comics, I have to say, I'm thrilled at the direction Marvel's been going lately. Captain Marvel, Journey Into Mystery, Red She-Hulk, Uncanny X-Force, All-New X-Men, adjectiveless X-Men - Marvel is really trying very, very hard to move away from the exploitative treatment of women. X-Men, in particular, is an amazing move. Even a couple years ago, Marvel would've treated it as a gimmick. They would've called it "X-Women," had cheesecake-filled covers, marketed it with comments about "sexy" and "sassy" and shit like that. But they didn't do any of that shit. They gave it a simple, straightforward and respectful title - these ladies are X-Men, and have been for a long, long time. So giving the book the title of X-Men sends a strong message. The book was given A-list talent in Brian Wood - who's an awesome writer who already did a fantastic job with his earlier run on X-Men - and Oliver Coipel, an artist who draws women who are attractive but not objects. He doesn't put them in unnatural positions to show their tits and asses, or anything like that. The marketing of the book has been straightforward. The promos don't make a big deal about it being a team of women, only that it's a team of badasses. I am so psyched for that book.
X-Men X-Pert, my blog where I talk about X-Men comics.For God's sake, the explanation is right on the trope page:
This is because the Bechdel Test is not meant to give a scorecard of a work's overall level of feminism. It is entirely possible for a film to pass without having overt feminist themes — in fact, the original example of a movie that passes is Alien, which, while it has feminist subtexts, is mostly just a sci-fi/action/horror flick. A movie can easily pass the Bechdel Test and still be incredibly misogynistic. Conversely, it's also possible for a story to fail the test and still be strongly feminist in other ways, and there's nothing necessarily wrong with that. What's a problem is that it becomes a pattern — when so many movies fail the test, while very few show male characters whose lives seem to revolve around women, that says uncomfortable things about the way Hollywood handles gender. There are also lesser-known variations of the rule, such as the Race Bechdel Test, in which two characters of colour talk about anything other than the white leads and the Reverse Bechdel Test, with the roles of men and women swapped.
Respect the Red Right Hand
Amusing bit—the issue of World's Finest with the first-ever meeting of Supergirl and Batgirl, titled "The Supergirl-Batgirl Plot!" doesn't pass the Bechdel Test, not because the girls only talk about their male counterparts, but They never talk to each other on panel at all! The Supergirl and Batgirl we see talking to each other are actually Mr. Mxyzptlk and Bat-Mite in disguise.
![]()
No. A reverse-Bechdel Test would presumably be about men talking to each other. And it's quite common for men in fiction to talk about things unrelated to women. You can get a scene of two guys talking about the joys of bacon, why Batman is better than Superman, what's on the other side of a black hole - anything. Guys in fiction can and will talk about anything. Women will talk about men.
Not to mention that Cracked.com actually provided a which flat out stated
that the Bechdel test is discouraged in Hollywood, due to the presumption that it's boring to male audiences.
That gives it value right there.
edited 27th Jan '13 6:05:23 PM by KingZeal
(It took me way too long to dig this up)
edited 27th Jan '13 6:09:05 PM by Wackd
Maybe you'd be less disappointed if you stopped expecting things to be Carmen Sandiego movies.![]()
Yeah yeah, but the point is valid. Hollywood doesn't want to produce movies that include female characters who carry on conversations about anything other than men. Mainstream movies always need to have the lives of female characters revolve around male characters. That's why, even in romantic comedies, the driven, successful female characters just aren't complete without a man.
That would actually be a huge improvement in terms of the representation of women in mainstream cinema. Also, Mc Nuggets are awesome.
edited 27th Jan '13 6:12:43 PM by Tiamatty
X-Men X-Pert, my blog where I talk about X-Men comics.
Given that the goal of a romantic comedy is to pair people up in whimsical and amusing ways, it's really the nature of the genre for any unpaired individual, regardless of their level of success and personal confidence, to at least secret desire a significant other.
Here's a question: is the need for characters to desire a partner more dependent on the genre of the film in question than it is upon the gender of the lead? I'm pretty sure there are action films, for instance, with female leads where the heroine doesn't spend her time mooning about boys (Kill Bill, for instance). If you're talking about romantic comedy, I'm pretty sure you're going to have to expect people to moon after the opposite sex. I think you just see more female leads in romantic comedies than you do in, say, action films.
Respect the Red Right Hand
Would Sucker Punch count as a pass, since they talk about escape? Or since escape is linked to, well, the guys running the asylum, is it still technically about guys?
We're not going to get anywhere unless we establish what "talking about guys" mean. I'm not sure what Bechdel meant exactly, but let's establish ground rules when talking about it here.
Here's my proposal:
"Talking About Men describes a scene in which a woman speaks of a male character (or more) whereas their needs, desires, goals, actions, idiosyncracies, and faults are the focal topics of a woman's conversation, and the same conversation would likely not take place if you simply swapped the gender of the man. Men which are incidental (for example, a woman mentions a specific police officer, who happens to be male) normally do not count, unless he is the central character in an event that drives the plot while she has little ability or opportunity to do so herself (a woman comments that a police officer, who happens to be the male lead, defeated the drug cartel), or unless the story relates to gender-related abuse, sexual assault, or harrassment."
edited 28th Jan '13 9:06:25 AM by KingZeal
![]()
![]()
The Bride spends the entirety of Kill Bill thinking about a man. One she was previously romantically involved with, to boot. So, maybe not the best example. (That said, Kill Bill was fucking awesome, and The Bride was a good, strong female lead.
![]()
I think Sucker Punch is given a pass.
The Bechdel Test is what it says: Women talking about men. Context is irrelevant as far as the test goes. A scene of a woman talking about a cop who happens to be male doesn't allow the movie to pass the test. There can be a more specific debate over whether that individual movie is good in terms of feminism. But the test is more about overall trends, and so keeping the definition very tight works better.
I think the idea is less that the women's conversations about men are sexist in of themselves and more a demonstration that men are dominating the plot such that there aren't any conversations that aren't about them.
It's less about the female characters themselves and more about who/what the plot is focusing on.
The Bechdel Test is only a yes/no indicator; it does what it is meant to do in that regard.
But it gets more interesting if you ask why a particular work "fails" the test.
1) It's based on actual events where there were no or only one woman to begin with. The Shackleton Expedition to Antarctica, for example. The most plausible reason, as inserting one or two women just to pass Bechdel would be silly.
2) The story is specifically about a male character and is told from a tight perspective. In "The Adventures of Bob Troper", all the scenes are centered around Bob or setting up his next challenge. Conservation of detail means that any conversation between women that does not involve Bob in some way is irrelevant and can be cut. The action genre gets a lot of these.
3: The Smurfette Principle is in full swing. The female character is there to be The Chick or the love interest, or the Distressed Damsel, so there's no reason the writer can think of to have more than one woman on screen at any given time. This reason is in decline in recent years, as writers have become more comfortable with having multiple relevant women in the same story.
4: It's a romantic comedy, and the writer has chosen to emphasize the female lead's relationships with the men in her life. Her relationships with other women are (conservation of detail again) considered irrelevant except as they involve talking about the men in their lives.
5: The writer just forgot to have the female characters talk to each other onscreen. You know they must have talked offscreen, because things get done, but you couldn't tell from what's written in the script.
It's generally easier for long-form works to pass the Bechdel Test, as the longer a story goes, the more likely it is for two female characters will meet onscreen and have a conversation about something other than a man; and it gets more glaringly obvious when that doesn't happen despite multiple opportunities.
Whether an individual work passes or fails the Bechdel test might be interesting, but doesn't necessarily mean anything (though it could). However, the aggregate failure rate of comics in general is so overwhelming that it's genuinely suggestive, and the test becomes far more useful.
edited 29th Jan '13 8:52:59 AM by Jhimmibhob

I'm pretty sure Ripley and Lambert exchange a few words, and if you consider Mother a character...
What's precedent ever done for us?