well the test is also about the spirit of the rules you could also for example have dialogue between named women and not about men that is clearly there only for the purposes of objectifying women
they accidentally made a lesbian dating sim in like 2003, wonder if that has anything to do with why so many of the fighting game players are queer.
It was an original part of the test though - I'm pretty sure she said "named" in the comic.
That is something I like about the test, it isn't meant to damn any particular movie, but Hollywood as a whole. Q movie can be quite feminist and not pass the test, but the fact that very few movies pass is insane and shows how rotten western media is to women.
It's 'hard' for them because in pop cuture, male is the default, so anything that isn't women talking exclusively about boys and make up is is considered 'talking like a guy' instead of 'talking like a person'
I wish we could kill prestige TV. There's nothing it can say about white men getting angry, doing drugs, and feeling empty that American psycho didn't do better and faster. As for every show not about that specifically, like succession or euphoria or game of thrones, there's an episode of star trek that does whatever is does better on a budget of loose change. Or an anime with a more exciting approach to the topic.
Euphoria is an American teen drama television series created and principally written by Sam Levinson for HBO and based on the Israeli miniseries of the same name
:wtyp:
Drake helped direct this didn't he?
Makes all those scenes seem much worse now
:epstein:
wdym women are angelic creatures who exclusively eat salad and would only go to the bathroom for a light tinkle
See the problem is this is really unrealistic. Women never have conversations like this because they cease to exist when there are no men around.
The age old question: is it solipsism or a lack of object permanence?
or a lack of object permanence?
My 3 year old brain: dammit! I thought we had this figured out already
Getting two woman characters on the screen.
Giving them speaking roles.
Directed at each other.
And it can't be about the Main Character (obviously a man)?
That's nearly impossible.
Slightly off topic but I've never seen wojaks be normal people before, the ones I've seen have always been white
Implying white people are not normal :soviet-hmm:
There are regular, normal, default humans, and then there are :lmayo:
I thought the conversation had to be of a certain length to pass the bechdel test
Infact no. That is part of the joke. It is fantastically easy to pass and yet so little media does
no the real thing I failed to do here was give both women names.
(I have decided that they are both named wojak)
this concept has done uncalculable harm to feminist criticism of film. what began as a good point about the poor overall representation of women in film (and especially it's implications for lesbian representation) turned into the first thing we use to determine whether a given film is feminist.
I sure hope nobody actually thinks it's a good measuring stick for whether something's feminist or not. I see it more often used as a "wow, look at this really low bar and most things don't even graze it."
