I should probably note at some point, since there was no room for it in the strip itself, that the “Bechdel Test” was popularized by Alison Bechdel’s comic strip Dykes to Watch Out For. Bechdel’s friend Liz Wallace actually came up with the test, but, uh, whoops! Sometimes names happen that way.
Loading ...
i agree with walky
It would technically pass the Bechdel test…
Think I’m with Joe on this one.
They should talk about Joe’s McNuggets.
…and his penis.
The sad thing is, they were both probably talking about application of sweat and sour sauce…
sweet*
Applying “sweat and sour sauce” would just be disgusting.
Heh, midnight typo was horrible, yet it somehow still works for Joe.
LOL! Totally! Disgusting, but still totally.
HAHA, wowwww. Nice one Walkerton.
We know this comic passes both tests. Ruth and Billie have had conversations about her cheerleader outfit.
see avatar for this being a good idea.
now that you’r emidn is totally under “McControl”, I order you to bring me Mcnuggets! MWHAHAH!
thank god you’re under McControl, or else you would have seen that typo…
it’s beautiful
“So, Joe, you’re saying that your life may not pass the “reverse” Bechdel Test?”
This chapter isn’t nearly meta enough yet.
Shoot, the Sal avatar made it look like I meant that sarcastically. I meant that seriously.
Yeah, uh, I kind of set that up on purpose. That’s half the reason that McNuggets strip exists, so this one could bank on it later.
I always assumed the first McNuggets strup was drawn from real life. I mean, that’s what happened to me – I first heard about the promo whens omebody wandered up to me, wall-eyed, mouth open, and said:
“McDonald’s now sells fifty McNuggets. Fifty McNuggets.”
he had the look of a religious zealot who just spoke with God, played a game of Parcheesi, and won.
Well, see, that was the other half.
Understand, I ended up doing the same thing, too. To the cashier. And telling from his reaction, this was not an uncommon occurance.
“Fifty mcnuggets… fifty…mcnuggets…”
I think you mean “wide-eyed” wall-eyed is a type of fish in the past tense.
He resembled a fish. Even had the mouth movements.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strabismus#Signs_and_symptoms
MCDONALD’S CAUSES STRABISMUS
It also says citation needed.
Can I cite the character in the movie “Hot Shots” who was called “Wall-eye” because his eyes did that?
meh, I’ve either never heard it that way, or never heard it clearly enough for me to translate it properly in my mind.
Ooh, Hot Shots Part Deux is a good example. It passes the test with a squeak thanks to one double entendre conversation that turns out to be about bungee jumping. In case people were still wondering if most movies are mostly about guys.
I remember beating God at a game, with the universe as stakes. Then He came back for a rematch.
A feverish fortnight without sleep is not on my list of recommended experiences.
I love that: “he had the look of a religious zealot who just spoke with God, played a game of Parcheesi, and won.”
Amazing how seriously some people take their junk food.
“McDonald’s now sells fifty McNuggets. Fifty McNuggets.” That’s as many as five tens. And that’s just awesome.
OH GOD YOU’RE RIGHT
…Willis, I have a new level of respect for you.
Women should only talk about McNuggets, ever.
Suddenly, Walky’s secret plan for world domination becomes clear.
*Slaps forhead* oy vey.
And that answers everything.
The solution to all our debates about feminism/misandrism/bechdel test/abuse/equality/politics?
A box of fifty McNuggets per person will end all conflict. I endorse this!
I’ve noticed that there aren’t too many movies I’ve watched with more than one female character or female characters who talk with each other. I think it’s mainly due to the fact that in order for that to happen in a film, the movie typically has to be about women in general or have a female lead. Other films don’t have the space or opportunity for something like two women talking with each other to happen because the plot really doesn’t call for it. And if the plot does call for it, it’s usually due to the fact that they are talking about another character, who is probably male because the other main characters are male.
TL;DR Films fail the bechdel test because the film probably needs a female lead to get to the point where it has two women in it talking to each other about something other than a man, because plot wise, that scenario doesn’t come up otherwise.
How about a male lead, but all the other characters mostly female and they have issues that don’t relate the male character, but the male character has to deal with?
But also not stupid female issues either. Like maybe there’s a war going on, or famine, disease, or maybe the antagonist is a female and she’s telling another female her evil plan or whatever.
Basically, just like a movie with a female lead, but a mainly male cast, or an all male cast, that has to deal with things that don’t have to do with women or romance, except simply switch the gender. (Think Jack Sparrow in Pirates. While Elizabeth and Will only talk about each other, he’s the one focused on his ship. Now replace Sparrow’s type of character with a female. It wouldn’t really change much, would it?)
That would be a mostly female oriented film. If there are two ancillary characters talking to each other, they are probably going to be talking about the lead or another character. As such, if you get to the point where two females are talking to each other, and the lead or other character they are talking about is also female, you probably have a female oriented film.
After reading your comment, I think I finally understood and grasped Feminism because this was the first thought I had….
Why does it have to be a female oriented movie? In other words, why does the gender have to play such a big part? Can’t the story rely more on what they are doing, what their goals are, and whether they are male or female has little to do with it?
If you switched the genders of a good movie, I don’t think it would make much of a difference.
Basically what I’m trying to say is…
I think men and women can have the same type of goals and talk about the same type of things.
That’s largely nonsense. The plot doesn’t call for it? What was there about the plot of e.g. the Matrix that required Neo to be male, Morpheus to be male, Agent Smith to be male, and the vast majority of other random characters to be male?
Films fail the Bechdel test usually because they treat “male” as the default gender. They have their characters be male *unless* there’s a specific reason for them to be female.
This is true.
And usually the specific reason is romance related. It’s as if females have no other goal or dream in life than to fall in love and have a great romantic story with a guy. Guys are the center of their world!
This isn’t true for all movies. But for like 99% of the mainstream ones.
*actually has a story in mind to make this point and turn it on its head*
Am I the only one who sees a connection between this strip+comments and today’s Shortpacked?
http://www.shortpacked.com/2011/comic/book-13/01-daddy-issues/sake/#comment
Wow, its almost like they were written by the same person…
😉
Male being treated as the default gender is funny from a biological stand point. Actually, female is the default gender until enough testosterone is introduced to the developing human that it becomes male.
Yeah… so when we try to compensate for this natural imbalance, we’re pigs.
Um. No. It’s considered male if there’s a Y chromosome regardless of how much testosterone there is. Otherwise, you start getting into genetic disorders.
The problem is that it doesn’t differentiate between cases where it fails it for the (says you) usual reason, and cases where it fails because there is only one speaking character, or only two (one of each gender), or because all dialogue takes place in mixed groups. There’s no obvious reason why a movie that fails for any of those reasons should be tarred with the same brush as one with no female characters, or where the women never talk about anything but the lead male.
The other problem is, “failure” is often presented as something that should ideally be _eliminated_ – i.e. in a perfect world ALL movies pass the Bechdel test. What in the plot of The Matrix calls for _any_ two or more characters to have _any_ conversation that isn’t about or with Neo? Sure, nothing in the plot calls for him to be male, but are you saying you want a world where no movie ever has a male lead?
“The sheer number … is a symptom of a greater problem” – is it still a problem if it’s 50%? 10%? No-one’s said that here [so far as I know…], but just framing it as a “test” that a movie can “fail” [and therefore is an individually worse movie for it] kind of implies it
You *really* don’t get this whole thing. A lot of you don’t. It’s not about every movie should have this. It’s not a scientific method. It first appeared in a comic strip. It’s just to get you thinking about how movies are male dominated. It has nothing to do with a perfect world consisting of movies where two women have conversations not about men. It’s not that freakin’ complicated.
“It’s not about every movie should have this. It’s not a scientific method. It first appeared in a comic strip.”
_I know that_. The problem is all the people who _don’t_ know it.
The funny thing is, it does exist! There are plenty of movies that not only pass the test, but where gender isn’t a factor at all. So it’s not that big of a deal. It’s not a crisis. Males haven’t 100% dominated movies and books and taken over the world.
A manga/comic I really loved that did the perfect job of using female characters without using stereotypes and have both important female and male characters play throughout was Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind by Hayao Miyazaki. The females were still female, but also had their own ideals (they also kicked ass without being bongoy). I wouldn’t call it a female oriented movie. They talked about men, and they talked about women, and they talked about the situation they had to face.
Okay, true, this isn’t a movie, but I the same thing can be used for movies and they do exist (Miyazaki’s movies for one).
But I don’t think they should stop making male dominated movies. I think they should keep them. But I also think more female dominated movies should pop up more, not to even the scales, but simply because it would be entertaining to see something new.
Shoulds or shouldnts. Ethics, morals, fair play…
I think people forget the REASON we do the things we do. Because it makes life more fun. Not simply because we “should” or “have to” or “it’s only fair” etc.
If this is a “problem” it’s a problem easily fixed.
Exactly. A film probably isn’t going to pass a Bechdel test if the lead isn’t female, based on the way films are structured. Unless the lead is female, or most of the cast is female, it’s pretty difficult for a film to pass the Bechdel test.
I think that’s it though.
The number of movies with a male lead and mostly male characters vastly outnumber the movies with a mostly female cast and a female lead. That’s why it’s difficult for movies that are *already made* to pass the test.
But it’s not difficult to pass the test. It’s easy. It’s difficult if all the movies have mostly male casts. It’s difficult if you cut out the female lead movies and mostly female cast movies out. If there were only 4 types of movies: mostly male, male lead, mostly female, female lead, you just cut out half of that.
So if movies MUST be mostly male and/or a male lead, yes it is difficult to pass the test.
But you want to pass the test? Easy. Make a movie with girls in them. No difficulty there.
Does that make it a better world? Hell no. Look at Twilight XD.
Dude, Another Thin Man passes the test and it’s a murder movie from the forties.
This reminds me of that study that was run a while back, with a filmed scene of a meeting where the women and men had the exact same amount of lines, and people insisted that the women dominated it after viewing.
They’ve done extensive studies about that, with real life conversations and everything. Statistically, people find that if women talk more than 5-10% of the time then they’re dominating the conversation. That is the extent to which we are conditioned to value men over women.
The reason is that a lot of movies people wont believe that a female character would do the same things as a man character. While I do believe that the characters in the Matrix could have been switched, having some characters do things as a different character would be outside of usual gender rolls therefore would typically need explanation in the movie.
For example…
Morpheus’ main role is to teach Neo how to Kick peoples ass. Most women do not go out of their way to learn to be violent or teach people how to be violent so it would not seam natural for Morpheus to be female without explanation.
The Oracle is in the opposite direction, she was more of a nurturing character. Again not that men can not be nurturing, but we are more used to seeing that side of women then men.
Neo and Trinity I’m going to put together here because really their dynamic is why I feel they need to stay the same gender, and I’m going to put aside same sex relationships here for the obvious reason that the general public isn’t comfortable with same sex relationships in their main characters without even more explanation then gender switching. If Neo was a girl and part of the story is a relationship with one of her mentors (of which there are two main mentors Trinity and Morpheus) then it becomes a story of two strong men protecting a girl until she can hold her own. My main feeling there is that it becomes an even more male oriented story because it says no girl can hold their own without male protection. By making Trinity a female and Neo a male, you now have a strong female character from the get go protecting a male character which I feel weakens some of the gender bias.
As I go through some of the movies that I like and apply this test I’ve found that most of them that fail fall into this same type of dynamic.
Yeah, that’s why The Cosby Show was a huge failure, since it depicted an upper class black family. It just wouldn’t seem natural without explanation!
This has been my daily seething sarcasm.
I totally disagree with this. There are women who know how to fight and love to fight and even are not violent, but use it as a way for self-defense and the defense of their loved ones, which is a very female thing. We girls also like to empower other girls. It could work. And with Neo and Morpheus being girls, you wouldn’t have the problem of a girl being taken cared of by men.
But then again, the Matrix is like the absolute male film. In that movie, it fits best that there are mostly males in that movie (why Neo and Trinity are white while the majority of the characters in the story of some other descent, does not).
I think the big reason why its hard to picture is because females that are independent, strong and completely not thinking or caring about men (and not looking sexy) not only turns men off, it also intimidates them.
Men like to be needed by women. Switch the roles around and you turn off a large percentage of the audience.
I now have a mental picture of the Matrix with Neo being a black female character and Trinity a white guy, with Morpheus being a woman too (probably still black cause that character rocks as a black person, I don’t know why XD).
I really like this picture…XD Especially the interracial romance and the girls being the leader and the one to save the world.
You would NEVER see this in a sci-fi movie in theaters. *writes the idea down*
I’m sorry, I saw “McNugget” and now I’m ravenously hungry. What was this strip about again?
I want some McNuggets now and I don’t like McDonalds anymore
I’m sorry, I saw “McNugget” and now I’m experiencing perverse sexual lust. What was this comment about again?
It’s about Quackerjack’s McNuggets.
holy crap, wow. I almost made a teeeeeeeeerrrrrrrible typo there, since “u” is next to “i” and “t” is next to “r.”
So glad I looked over my post before hitting Submit.
That took me longer to figure out than it should have. I kept trying to figure out why Qiaketjack would be a terrible typo(would just be weird).
<_<
I never thought I would make a typo worse than that time I meant to type “Everybody duck!” and it went horribly, horribly wrong.
I corrected this one, but I still made the mistake in the first place!
“C” and “X” have no right to be next to each other. I type “one sec” so often…yeah it’s a harsh typo.
i bet that gets the ladies all riled up.
I do that one all the time.
Just last Monday I was talking about how many movies wouldn’t pass a reverse Bechdel test because of this comic. Thanks for reading my mind.
Yeah, I was wondering the same. I mean, I watch very few movies, and they’re typically “guy movies”: kung fu, action sort of thing. Among the 6-8 lines of speech in the movies, there isn’t much room for girls talking to girls about (a) the hero, or (b) the villain. Those are usually guys, with few exceptions. Noted. Guys like this kind of movie, and like to identify with the hero.
But what about chick flicks? Do they have usually have guys talking to eachother about something other than girls? In the one that I can recall seeing, I remember there being one significant male role, the father, whose sole interaction was with the main character.
MCNUGGETS!!!!
I saw your avatar with your comment and burst out laughing. Not sure if you meant for me to read it as Sal being angry at McNuggets, but that’s how I read it.
I’m reading it as Sal angry at someone for withholding McNuggets. Potentially Danny based off your gravatar.
Wow, it’s not every day you see someone you know from a completely unrelated website.
*ahem*
I’m reading it as Sal angrily demanding McNuggets, possibly with the unspoken threat of grievous bodily harm if they are not delivered.
Haha hey, how about that. Hi!
Yeah. I thought the unspoken threat was a given. This is Sal we’re talking about, after all.
YOU ARE BOTH CORRECT 8D
Kind of like with Walky and his Nachitos in the previous walkyverse…..
Zactly! =D
Sal is craving McNuggest, ya’ll B )
*McNuggets.
DAMN TYPOS!!!
I like the term “McNuggest”. It sounds like a measurement of how much like ideal McNugget something is. The McNuggest would be the best McNugget ever.
YES.
Its the McNuggetiest McNugget you ever McNuggeted in your McNugget, McNugget.
this is how walky looks when someone denies him the McNuggets
Apparently my mission tonight is to point out other people’s typos…
I love this mission.
need.. nuggets…
…isn’t that kind of part of the problem? That while in real life, men get together and talk about nothing but women, whereas women get together and talk about anything but men, in movies it’s the opposite?
Women still get together and talk about men.
Only boring men talk exclusively about women. The topic may be explored if it becomes relevant. Otherwise any man who has even a single grain of personality will have more interesting things to talk about than women.
In point of fact, that’s a good way of telling if you as a man have nothing in common with another man. If the topic can’t progress past women it means there’s just no legitimate common ground on which to build a conversation.
Don’t get me wrong, there are men who only talk about women. They’re the same kinds of people as the women who talk only about men. Either just plain dull and empty headed, or pure unrestrained libido, neither of which make for someone you’d ever seek out conversation with.
Actually when men get together, they usually talk about sports.
Or McNuggets.
If I exclude the obligatory “how’s the family?” question I can’t think of the last conversation I had with my male friends that was about women.
Recently it seems to be all about Burn Notice, PGCE applications and the 40k scale Dalek army I’m building at my work bench… so probably still counts as boring to a lot of folk but it passes the reverse test. 😉
See? This is because you and your friends have fully formed personalities, and thus are possessed of interests beyond a basic instinctive drive for food and sex. Congratulations 😀
Willis, you are going to make me hungry for McNuggets again.
I think everyone in the comments section passes the McNugget Bechdel test.
Men get together and talk? I’d guess that more than 90% of my boyfriend’s conversations are either about music or video games (also true of my conversations). Basically, people will talk about whatever’s interesting. I’d be more concerned by the portrayal of women in ads than in movies. My ass will never be that glorious. too many mcnuggz.
I’m just waiting for a Hamburglar cameo for Amazi-gurl to have a real villain.
Does it count if the man they’re talking about was murdered, and they’re trying to catch his killer?
if (topic = male)
pass = 0;
Or, in other (actual) words, no matter what the situation is, if a male is mentioned then that conversation will not pass the Bechdel Test. Even if the fact that the subject is male is irrelevant. Although, I think it may be “man” rather than “male”, so presumably male animals don’t fail the test. Yet; now that I’ve posted this glaring oversight, someone out there is going to want to revise the Test again.
that would set topic to male and always be a true condition (or compiler error) 🙂
One could argue that if the dialogue is so sparse that the characters _never_ talk about anything “off-topic” to the main plot [the murder case, in this instance], then it’s a writing quality problem, irregardless of any gender bias. In that sense, in its original practical context as “a rule by which to refuse to watch a movie” it still works, although it’s less focused in the role the test has later been adapted to.
It is _incredibly_ weird to get the same avatar as someone else who responded to the same post that I did.
Same here. Let’s drag this out as long as we can; I think we have differing opinions on the Bechdel Test too, so we can look psychotic or something if we try hard enough.
Sequential art, such as tv shows and comics, tend to pass the Bechdel Test far more easily as there is just more time for them to do so. In a movie, in order to fit everything in around 2 hours, every character, action, and piece of dialogue has to contribute to the plot; whereas on a tv show, if there are two female characters, they will talk at some point, simply because there’s so many plots a tv show or comic has to cycle through and it gets boring if it’s all just about a guy.
I could go for some tasty chicken breast nuggets right about now.
Honestly, McDonalds needs to start paying Willis. Every time mcnuggets have been mentioned I’ve had to run to McDonalds and buy some.
MMMMMMMM Nuggets.
That’s some good advice, Walky. Thanks for that.
and suddenly the sound of screenwriters typing furiously can be heard in the hollywood hills, finally an alternative to comic book themed movies… now its the season of the nugget.
Chicken McNougat?
0_0
That is just wrong- but I want a taste first to be sure.
Different media lean toward different demographics. Movie audiences skew young and male, and movies are produced according to what studios think will appeal to them. That’s why you never hear of a Bechdel test for TV or books; the audiences for those media skew female and their content reflects that.
A movie passes the “Doom Shepherd Test” if:
1 There are at least two spaceships in it.
2 They appear in the same shot.
3 At least one of them explodes.
Well the reason the test fails often is … not enough females get their movies/television shows made. I wish more did because I really enjoy seeing things from another perspective. When I need to write/create a female character I tend to ask my wife a bunch of questions to understand the woman from a woman’s perspective … which is not something that many writers bother to do or think will matter.
I mean I “get” women from my side of things but I’ll never know what is going on in their mind before they act. Just like women will never fully know exactly what goes through a guy’s mind in certain situations. You may think you do, but you don’t, no matter how many stand-up comics try to explain it to you.
So basically, male writers know they can’t write a convincing woman, as they aren’t one, so they produce second hand ones in small numbers and hope nobody notices.
The main reason I have read the full collection of what Mr. Willis has created is that his characters don’t feel fake. They are all able to be defined in simple “one dimensional” categories but they are deeper than that without doing the tired “oh that person is totally acting opposite of the stereotype!” They are exaggerated personalities, but nonetheless normal people.
I find when I write, that I come up with a lot of female characters because that’s what I know. In fact, I tend to have the opposite problem found in most fiction: my default characters are female unless they have to be male for a particular reason. If I really want to get inside the male brain, I have to talk with my husband, and even then I don’t know what it’s really like, first hand, to be male. And I’ll never know because I doubt I’ll ever suddenly become one.
I think you’re right: most male writers don’t do the prep work, so they just create a few female characters and hope no one notices how unconvincing they are.
When I write characters of either gender, I just kind of write them like people. I try to avoid the trappings of gender based characters as a rule. Nothing drives me crazy quite as much as a badass female warrior where the emphasis is on the fact that a female is doing the feats of awesomeness rather than the feats themselves. Similarly a male warrior who has to be badass and protective because that’s what men do is pretty far from compelling or interesting and equally abrasive to the first example.
The male warrior thing you cite is sometimes awesome when he find out the ‘what men do’ thing is bullshit – see The Incredibles, which makes me cry.
True, there are always exceptions. Using faulty attitudes to explore why they’re false is actually an excellent means of exploring the issue. And you’re right, if it’s used as a starting grounds for character growth, or other well thought out plans for the character, it can actually be quite compelling and moving.
There was not a single member of the Incredibles who’s growth did not interest me, but you’re right. The father in particular was noteworthy and exceptionally moving.
As a side note, that movie is a fantastic example of fantasy done right. A fantastic setting and circumstance should never preclude the presence of real issues that one could relate to or understand. Ideally in fact the fantasy itself would serve as a means of exploring those issues much as they were in The Incredibles.
I haven’t seen the Incredibles in a good while (since just after it came out on DVD)…can you explain what you mean?
That’s funny because I’ve found gender to be irrelvant when I write, or of so little importance to the characters overall personality.
Personally if you’re worrying too much about a characters gender when you write them you might want to have another look at the character. I ussually end up with an even split of male and female characters.
Once I have the basic framework, the characters kinda write themselves. Then again, I’ve never really been one to get much out of the gender roles we’re supposed to expect.
My advice is stop worrying about gender so much, it’s only a tiny thing really. You can have really macho women and extremely feminine men and they’d be realistic. I ussually base their personalities on a mixture of different people I’ve met, I’ve added traits from women I know to male characters and vice versa. Though they ussually end up with a blend from both.
Normally I split them exactly fifty-fifty, cause I’m usually writing a cheesy fantasy and I want everybody to identify with one person at least. Though the latest thing I’m fiddling with somehow had three females and one dude somehow.
In a recent project of mine to write a 80 chapter book I can sorta understand this. Though I have made more male characters, and the females only have a small amount of dialogue with each other.
My story fails the bechdel test. At least so far. Im only on chapter 14.
But generally I only have their gender as a small part of them. Rarely a huge impact on the story. Unless absolutely neccecary.
If everyone just talked about McNuggest, the world would be a happier place.
Except for that guy who ate too many of them and got sick…
He’d still be pretty happy 😉
Vegetarians wouldn’t be happy in this McNugget Utopia, but fuck them.
Cool, my Grav’s the second eaton
Somehow, I could see “Sex and Soy Beans” becoming a best-seller. Likewise a similar book that took the alliteration into the v range.
Just as long as you don’t typo McNuggers in a WORSE way.
“You know, you can buy fifty McNuggets for about ten bucks now” could go horribly, horribly wrong.
I notice tv shows seem to do a heck of a lot better then films on the “Bechdel Test” – any idea why this is 😕 Are tv shows (relatively) more gender neutral/evolved then films?
The more time it runs for the greater chance of a non-man conversation occuring. 2 hours is static, but for a tv show that runs even just one season that’s still about six hours in which for this single conversation necessary to pass the test to occur. Right off the bat there’s a bare minimum of 3x the odds in a film. 2 seasons is now twelve hours, 6x the odds. Every successive episode increases the odds of the conversation occurring once in the series.
I meant within an eppisode.
Also, there tends to be more than one writer on a tv series, which increases the chance that one of them will be interested in female conversations.
That might well be it, however.
I just think of a lot of shows I watch (Fringe,HIMYM,Chuck, V ) and a lot of shows I used to watch (Farscape,TheMiddleman,Futurama,Lost, Sarah Connor)….and while its hardly completely balanced it seems a heck of a lot better then films. Hell, even female leads seem more common ( V, Fringe, Sarah Connor….also Sarah Jane for that matter :p)
Of couse I’m not even mentioning Weadons work here either.
A TV series is a different kind of animal than a movie. In a movie, you have to introduce your characters, set up the setting, and establish the plot and resolve everything in two hours or less. Any opportunity to tell the audience more about your characters (male and female) has to be done in that two hour span, and unfortunately when it comes to editing scenes with character development are going to be the first cut to work within the constraints of your time. Series can afford to have an ‘off’ episode, one devoted less to big plot developments and more to filling in the characters. While technically an episode works within its own time constraints, you are still working with the same characters for 24 episodes and can afford to devote more time to developing them.
no..not at all.
You could take any eppisode…the pilot even…from any of those shows and they would still have a better gender balance.
I dont see how running length has anything to do with it seeing as plot based dialogue can be between any gender just like character development can.
alternatively, you could limit yourself to self-contained epps or shows and it would still be true and that would be less running time then a film. (hell, futurama and himym are just 20minutes)
I wouldn’t bet on that. there are plenty of eps of futurama where the female characters don’t talk, or only talk about men (or manbots). And other shows get worse.
I’m sure theres some epps like that but not an average.
Unless I’m being very accidently selective in my tv watching there seems an order of magnatude more femalefemale dialogue in tv shows then films….and possibly an even greater difference in female leads.
I’m sure theres plenty of “noise” between epp and other shows can clearly be mostly male based (Prison Break), but the average show….per unit time…seems less gender bias then films.
They should be talking more about how flawed the Bechdel test is instead of which movies pass it.
It’s only flawed if you *don’t understand it.*
For the record, “Suckerpunch” passes with flying colors. Multiple female-female conversations about things other than men. Unfortunately, it doesn’t pass the “This movie makes any sense” test.
Gunnerkrigg Court nearly fails the reverse Bechdel test. I remember towards the start, all the males were basically minor characters that occasionally served as love interests. I got all excited when this one boy started to become a main-ish character, then he turned into a bird and flew away one chapter later.
I wonder how many female targeted movies pass the reverse test… In an ideal world feminists would also find issue with that too.