Bechdelenalia

[andrewducker]

If you have an interest in The Bechdel Test (which a piece of media passes if it contains:
1) At least two women.
2) Who talk to each other
3) About something besides a man
)
then you might be interested in these two blogs:
http://thebechdeltest.blogspot.com/
http://bechdel-test.dreamwidth.org/

It's fascinating how much discussion is about whether a movie just about scrapes by...

(thanks to purpletigron for pointing me that way)

Comments

[andrewducker]

Even stuff which isn't first-person from a man's point of view, if the main character is male then the plot/most conversation is going to revolve around them, and most conversation will either involve them or be about them.

I was just reading a review of The Graveyard Book, and while there may be female-female conversation that's not about the main character I certainly can't recall any. Similarly with Coraline, except with the gender roles reversed.

I think the Bechdel test is useful, insofar as it makes people think about gender roles and their portrayal in the media, but I'm not convinced that all action movies (for instance) need to be pushed into passing it.

[purpletigron.livejournal.com]

Just so you know, I'm very under the weather at the moment, so I'm struggling to order my thoughts now ... but ...

I think we are mostly agreeing here.

I see the Bechdel Test as black comedy. As you know, real women talk to one another all the time about every subject. But you wouldn't know that from a statistical analysis of mainstream media.

I am not objecting to media which look at the situations where women in reality rarely interact, or where their interactions are necessarily peripheral to the main story.

Female people will be naturally woven into most real circumstances, and can be naturally part of many or most fictional circumstances too. That might be as 50% or so of the people involved, or c. 10% if you're doing a historically accurate portrayal of women astrophysics students etc. That includes action movies, and without necessarily being forced into a Sarah Connor or a Ripley stereotype (much as I love those characters!) or a screaming victim stereotype.

Most of the limits are in the minds of the authors - women as well as men - rather than in the range of real experience, I think.

[andrewducker]

The thing I find is that most people in action movies are stereotypes. And that people like it that way - they watch action movies for big dumb explosion and stereotypes spouting one-liners. Spending the time to draw detailed characters leaves less screen time for the explosions and one-liners.

Notice, for instance, the praise heaped on the Bourne movies and the Bond relaunch, for having more depth of character, when the characters in them are only even barely 3-dimensional by comparison to other action movies.

I'm certainly fine with there being more female characters in action movies - but I think the chances of you getting away from them being stereotypes, when stereotypes are what those movies are there for.

[purpletigron.livejournal.com]

In that case, no reason not to make half the dumb jock action heroes female?

[andrewducker]

Absolutely. But you wanted to avoid the Ripley/Sarah Connor stereotypes - and that's pretty much what those are.

Well, it's either that or the Lara Croft look.

[purpletigron.livejournal.com]

What I meant was, equality in stereotypes.

If the star role stereotypes are randomly assigned male or female sex, that's equal :-)