Posts about the Bechdel test are going round on metafandom. I feel compelled to give a Bechdel test primer because there seems to be a lot of misunderstanding of the test.

Course, this is just how I get value from the test. I'm not making any assumptions about the originator's intentions. But it is a useful tool, and here's why.

What is it?

It's from a comic strip called "Dykes to Watch Out For". Wikipedia has a handy section on it. For the Wiki-allergic, here's a summary:

One of the characters in the comic states that she only watches a movie if it...

1. Has at least two women in it
2. Who talk to each other
3. About something besides a man.

Do note! This is not saying that such a work is feminist. This is a bare-minimum standard for watchable movies.

Edit: Also, thinking on it, there are very slight, non-plot spoilers for the new Star Trek movie. Very very slight spoilers. Very. But I don't wanna ruin anyone's viewing experience so here, have a disclaimer.



Okay, and...?

The heart of the Bechdel test is an unfortunate truth: our media has the assumption that men are not interested in women except as they relate to men. It is thought that a conversation between two women that isn't about a man could not possibly interest men.

This is probably not actually true. The problem is that the media believes it and they're the producers. They work with "target audiences" and "marketability". The media is, by it's nature, non-progressive as it spends so much time seeking marketability with what it feels is the masses: the traditionalists.

So we get movies with a few token women who only exist to bolster the menfolk.

A movie that passes the Bechdel test, by showing the women completely independent of the men, has a stronger chance of having well-developed female characters.

What about TV shows?

It's difficult to apply the test to TV shows because it's just not as useful. A TV show has more of a likelihood of passing the Bechdel test at some point just by leiu of the fact that there's more air time. A more useful measure is how frequently a TV show passes. Every season? Every episode? Multiple times an episode?

But I can think of plenty of movies that pass! What's the deal?

Yes, there are plenty of movies that pass. "Chick flicks".

The Bechdel test is most usefully applied to movies targeted to men: action, sci-fi, genre, suspense, etc etc.

Go back to the "heart" of the test, as I stated above. Women know that women are interesting people and that we talk about stuff other than guys. It's no big task to have a Bechdel-approved scene in a movie targeted toward women. For a movie that's made for men, it is very, very rare to have them recognize that women are interesting in their own right.

Here's a movie list about movies that pass and movies that fail. Very interesting list.

You're just wanting one scene? That's a bit meager, isn't it?

Yes. Yes, it is. Yet, it's apparently a tall order for genre movies. Hell, it's apparently a tall order to have more than one woman.

If I had my happy way with the world, action movies would have fully-fleshed out females in the cast. They may not even be the love interest. Hell, some may even be the leads.

Again, the Bechdel test isn't a feminist test. It just does what it says on the tin. And a movie that passes the test has better odds of having a good female character or two.

Of course I want more. I want a movie that passes the Bechdel test multiple times. With many different female characters. I want a movie with the chick rescuing the guy. Hell, I want a movie where the chick's love interest is another chick.

These aren't very easy to find because there's a simple, painful false truth in the media:

Action movies are for men --> Men aren't interested in women except as pretty sex toys --> We will provide one female per movie to hang off the lead in order to keep the boys entertained

Yes, the thinking is flawed from the get-go. Action and genre movies aren't only for men. Women enjoy then. Women would probably enjoy them more if we got better female characters from them.

That's the nature of the society we live in.

Say something controversial!

Okay. The Star Trek movie, much as I loved it, didn't pass the Bechdel test.

Wha? But there was that scene! With Uhura and her green roommate! They talked!

Yes, they did. They talked, all the while Kirk was hiding under the roommate's bed. What was the point of the scene?

The point was that Kirk is a womanizer and he has a thing for Uhura.

Did the scene show us that these female characters have interests outside men? Well, with one girl distracted by the guy hiding under her bed, it's kinda hard to judge it as a shining example of "Women are interesting without men!"

But! It revealed that Uhura intercepted the Klingon message! Plot point!

Yay. I still fail to see how that portrays women as independent of any menfolk. We knew Uhura was a communications genius. We knew because her boyfriend, Spock, told us so.

Oh, yeah, what was that? Uhura got relegated to the Love Interest in the movie? Well, damn.

What's the big deal if a movie doesn't pass? It's just a movie.

Because *deep breath* media affects the world. Because it's important to show female characters doing something other than accessorize a guy. Because I'm damn tired of watching boys have all the fun in movies, and I wanna see chicks blowing shit up once in a while.

Does Buffy pass the test?

You bet your ass it does! Multiple times in every episode. That's why I love the show so much.