Sexy sexism talk
-
WAR ON WOMEN
-
Always fun to see my country make international news -_-
-
That just means that an action movie can have the guys show up at a strip joint, then have one guy sneak backstage and listen to a conversation, showing two naked chicks talking about how a new herbal tea is making their boobs bigger.
Passed the test.
Ironic.
-
Which is why it's important to stress that the test itself says nothing about a particular movie. It's a test in the sense that it checks whether a movie meets certain conditions.
It's unfortunate that "passing a test" has positive connotations. In this context that connotation simply leads to people reading more into the test than is there, which leads to some trying to dismiss any analysis done using the test by pointing out how easy it is to subvert, or how movies with strong female characters can fail it.
-
But these things ARE important.
How much of this false positives and false negatives are there.
Enough percent of them, and they invalidate the test.
I'm seeing more and more content in movies and videogames present strong female roles and leads and having a greater sense of balance. But when I point to these things, I get dismissed.
Because the notion that there is this gender inequality is heavily based on emotion and subjectivity.
But none of this diversity has been driven by social justice camps, but rather the maturing of the groups that this material targets. Basically what the gaming market of customers wants has changed. The businesses will only react to culture, not change it.
For example, most people feel that expendables is cheesy right?
That's because it's entirely based on the tropes and style of 30 year old action flicks.
-
Because the notion that there is this gender inequality is heavily based on emotion and subjectivity.
Not to mention that it's a primary tenet of their religion. Also, they've discodefined Equality in a way that guarantees that it can never be achieved.
-
I did not say they weren't important. I said that the Bechdel test is not meant to address specific movies, but to identify trends. What may be fine in moderation could be harmful in excess, and you can't tell whether something exists in excess by identifying individual samples.
-
Honestly I think its subconscious.
And I think this plays out in a lot of social justice groups.
Look, I know that there is some racism, some sexism, some of these negative things.
I also know that there is just a clichish nature to society. People prefer seeing people like themselves. Isn't it ironic that raceX people complain about not seeing more raceX in movies because they identify more with raceX characters? How can it be natural for them, but racist for anyone else? That's not an argument against diversity, but an argument against demonizing the majority group only for doing what the minority group would do.
And that's what I'm getting to. Feminists don't strive to promote women, they strive to promote feminists. Hell, they even give out the token "We don't want discrimination against men either".
To admit that equality exists, is to admit that you no longer need feminism.
Then their cliche would die, and their purpose would die, and they wouldn't feel the sense of belonging to something that they get from holding onto that identity.
Social justice arguments divide society because they create clichish subcultures that only promote themselves and not the target group they say that promote.
-
Social justice arguments divide society because they create clichish subcultures that only promote themselves and not the target group they say that promote.
Politics, at least here in the U.S., is a big game of "Let's you and him fight", and the social justice thing is a prominent component of that.
-
That's not an argument against diversity, but an argument against demonizing the majority group only for doing what the minority group would do.
The fact that you think men are the majority is exactly why pointing things like this out is important. Men are not the majority. There's a pretty even split between men and women. Media, however, over-represents men to the point that you've convinced yourself that you're just in the majority.
Cries for more even representation in media is not the minority complaining that the majority is doing the same they would do. It's pointing out that one group has managed to hog the spotlight (for diverse reasons) and they want their share back. For example, the US Army Demographic's report for 2013 (http://www.armyg1.army.mil/hr/docs/demographics/FinalFY13Army ProfileReport.pdf) shows that nearly a fourth of the enlisted are black, nearly two thirds white, and the rest hispanic and other. But if you look at movies, the army appears to be almost exclusively white, with a few token blacks and no other demographics. Take this group shot: http://www.tfw2005.com/transformers-news/attach/4/0/5/9/7/transformers-military_1267988007.jpg
There's some eleven dudes there, but only one is black.If you followed the army's demographics you'd expect at least one hispanic, and a couple more black extras. But maybe they didn't bother with research. Statistics tells us that if race was orthogonal to the casting call, we could expect to find the same racial distribution of the group they were chosen from. Since this shot doesn't match the US demographics either, the conclusion is that race is not orthogonal to the casting call.
If race isn't orthogonal, then there must be some kind of selection pressure that favors white people. Maybe the pool of actors is overwhelmingly white? Then we might wonder why that is. Maybe the casting directors favor white actors? Then we might wonder why that is.
What doesn't seem reasonable is to say "Yes, there is a problem. But it's been getting better, so we should all stop complaining about the problem." Maybe there is more than coincidental correlation between people complaining and the problem slowly being fixed?
-
The fact that you think men are the majority
...shows that you didn't read his comment very closely.
-
I also know that there is just a clichish nature to society. People prefer seeing people like themselves.
[...]
@xaade said:To admit that equality exists, is to admit that you no longer need feminism.
Maybe I shouldn't be making inferences, but it read as if he was suggesting that the reason that many movies fail the Bechdel test (and other hypothetical tests for other demographics) is demographic distribution.
-
People prefer seeing people like themselves.
People often subconsciously assume that their own biases and preferences are universal. One interesting game to play while reading comment threads is to mentally substitute the use of the word "everyone" with "me/myself".
-
Maybe I shouldn't be making inferences, but it read as if he was suggesting that the reason that many movies fail the Bechdel test (and other hypothetical tests for other demographics) is demographic distribution.
You're looking at the wrong distribution. First, he started generalizing. Then, he used minority/majority in terms of what you see in the movies, not the population at large, though he's also sort of talking about racial minorities in the population at large. And using the racial aspect as analogous to feminist stuff.
It's a little bit complicated, but I don't think a fair reading says that he thinks men are a majority of the population.
-
It's a little bit complicated, but I don't think a fair reading says that he thinks men are a majority of the population.
Ok, yeah. Perhaps not an entirely fair interpretation. Still, if not the majority, it highlights that he believes one group is the 'default', so to speak. Which is kind of the problem of over-representation. It makes it seem as if introducing characters of other ethnicities is a concession and not what would be normal absent a selection pressure.
-
Yeah, as I read him, he's just saying that if one group doesn't do it, the other will, given the opportunity.
As a white male, I'm plenty represented (though as a heterosexual, I'm technically under represented). However, it's rare to watch stuff that doesn't make fun of my beliefs, and I've stopped watching shows or movies when things got too egregious. So I'm not completely unsympathetic to this line of reasoning, though this thing I'm complaining about is a whole different level, since it's intentional and you can't really ignore it (though if it confirms your own beliefs, you might not notice that it's going on).
-
boomzilla read me right.
-
I did not say they weren't important. I said that the Bechdel test is not meant to address specific movies, but to identify trends. What may be fine in moderation could be harmful in excess, and you can't tell whether something exists in excess by identifying individual samples.
Strictly, if you're going to do it right then you've also got to collect the reverse statistics, the number of movies that pass the anti-Bechdel test (i.e., that have two men talking to each other about something other than a woman). Otherwise you're comparing a count of the items that satisfy a restrictive condition with the bulk of items that satisfy the complement; comparing with the inverse is more relevant.
If we assume that characters in movies have conversations with each other randomly (not true, though it sometimes feels like it) and that one of the most common topics is “relationships”, though not exclusively, then the expected ratio of Bechdel/anti-Bechdel should be close to one to one, moderated by the gross balance of female and male actors across the whole industry. (That last part might be largely ignorable if there's not too much difference there.) If there's a gross deviation from that, it points to some sort of systematic problem existing, though it doesn't actually allow you to work out what that problem is. You can probably narrow it down to areas like the systematic bias in the producers, casting directors and scriptwriters, together with whatever inherent differences there are due to the relative size of pools of actors, but the test I describe above won't help you a lot with puzzling out. It detects issues, but doesn't diagnose.
-
it points to some sort of systematic problem existing,
I'd say it points to a selection pressure existing, not necessarily a problem. Whether that selection pressure is a problem would require, as you say, an analysis of the situation that is beyond the Bechdel test itself.
Aside from that, yeah, I agree completely. I just didn't feel it was necessary to point out that very few movies fail the reverse test. I can't think of any off the top of my mind. So the poor performance with regards to the Bechdel test itself indicates that the ratio isn't one to one.
-
I like to point out that 100% of Xena Warrior Princess, possibly the trashiest show ever, passes the test.
-
I like to point out that 100% of Xena Warrior Princess, possibly the trashiest show ever, passes the test.
Xena was trashy, but can't hold a candle to Lost Girl. At least not the original Canadian seasons. The Syfy stuff has lost some of the trashiness. I think every episode of Lost Girl would probably pass the test.
-
I care not for Canadians.
Come to think of it, Cleopatra 2525 was more trashy than Xena (probably-- tough call!), and also passed the test in every episode.
-
-
That is very possibly the worst dialog I have ever read.
Then be thankful you never watched Freddie Got Fingered.
-
Aside from that, yeah, I agree completely. I just didn't feel it was necessary to point out that very few movies fail the reverse test. I can't think of any off the top of my mind. So the poor performance with regards to the Bechdel test itself indicates that the ratio isn't one to one.
The point of the reverse test is to allow us to ignore movies that don't involve any dialogue at all, or that only have one character who talks to himself/herself in a bare room. (That would be art house cinema.) If there was no systematic gender imbalance, you'd expect the Bechdel/anti-B ratio to be fairly close to 1:1, as that would indicate that you've got no particular bias in the nature of roles in cinema along gender lines.
I don't know this for sure, but I suspect that the ratio is a long way from 1:1. This indicates that there are whole categories of roles that are simply not going to female actors. Is that a problem? I don't know. Maybe it's better stated that it indicates that there's an opportunity for more variation in how things are cast, and that this might improve sales?
Tokenism would be wrong. What's desired is that the movie industry doesn't constrain actors of a particular gender to particular classes of roles.
The test (or variations of it) could also be applied to other entertainment media too, such as music or novels. You could also use a similar approach when looking for racial or sexual orientation bias, though the basic tests would be different as would the expected ratios. And yet again, the test doesn't tell you what is right or what is wrong. As with any large-scale statistical measure, it's very hard to work that sort of thing out. Even harder as we don't have proper controls…
-
And it amuses me immensely that a test that was original making a form of radical feminist point (and a joke) can be taken and used to learn something of real value.
-
I don't know this for sure
This site suggests it's 57% that pass.
-
Interesting that 1917 is the second most successful point.
-
writers default to guys because that's what they're used to
Also, because it's damn hard to write a female character without someone getting offended. You can't just go and put a female kicking asses and chewing bubblegum, or you'll get a crowd with pitchforks yelling at you that you're pandering to males and objectifying women.
Have John Rambo making a shooting gallery out of girls and you'll end up with a pitchfork up your ass and "rape culture" smeared over your house in bold letters.
So writers default to men because it's easier, since nobody really cares what happens to them over the course of your film. And reach for women mostly when they need them - either to stir up romance, or to prove some point.
Having good female characters doesn't seem to be much of an impediment to box office success.
That's the point. It doesn't really matter fuck-all, it's just that people are used to the fact that when the gender doesn't matter, writers reach for males. If you could show me a movie that would actually be better with a female character, by all means, go for it. I suppose there would be quite a few. But last time I checked, feminism was all about having people not care about your gender when dealing with you - and it seems the SJWs are the only people who actually care.
They and a guy who made a comic 30 years ago for sake of a joke and probably doesn't even remember it.
But I honestly don't see how someone can look at the sentence "half of movies made do not have two female characters talk to each other about not a guy" and think "yes, that is a natural and right state of the world."
Since when do movies represent "natural state of the world"? Movies are all about conservation of detail. One of those details, for better or for worse, is that when you have a female around, it's important that she's a she.
That's fine by me. I wouldn't care if it was the other way either. Nobody cares, except for those SJWs who truly believe they need to fill a magical women quota in each and every part of life.
-
-
-
-
I bet a similar percentage of movies with female main characters fail the test if you reverse the genders. It's because movies tend to be about their main character. Nothing sexist about that.
-
If you could show me a movie that would actually be better with a female character, by all means, go for it. I suppose there would be quite a few.
This! Every once in a while you'll hear people say "it's time for a female Doctor Who!"
Why? Don't do it for the sake of doing it--do it for a reason that makes sense in-context! The latter would probably garner much more support than doing it for the sake of doing it, which I think, on balance, the recent reintroduction of the Master was. It was funny, and frankly I liked how the character came out[1], but they probably did it mostly so people would stop complaining, and also so they could make a Crying Game joke or two.
[1] Missy oozed genteel thuggishness like the classic Masters, and was completely and delightfully unlike the previous, buffoonish role.
-
I think for the next Halloween party I get dragged to, I'm either going to go as:
- A Member of the Patriarchy (probably with question marks all over the costume to indicate how nebulous the idea is, or as a scarecrow to represent the inherent straw man)
- A Shitlord (because it's an excuse to carry around a brown lightsaber)
-
-
ONEBOXFAIL.
-
Huh. Really? Working for me on Android... @discoursebot?
EDIT: is it working now? I <img src="">ed it
-
@tar - Days Since Last Discourse Bug: 0
-
EDIT: is it working now? I <img src="">ed it
Tripod won't allow hotlinking, how about a link to the page?
-
I uploaded it now?
-
It converted to a "don't hotlink us bro" to the picture as I watched. Nice. (Yes, I know it's supposed to work that way, but you don't see actually it happen very often, and I don't think I ever saw an image change out from under me like that before, just text.)
-
And presumably because I had it in cache, I just saw my local copy of it instead of the hotlink fail?
-
That's been my experience, yeah.
If you think it might happen, open the link in a different browser.
-
That might do, plus a monocle and/or a fedora.
-
-
Playing GTA.
Run over woman: Did you see that was a woman??? See I told you, women are just used as funiture. Oh and look it dropped money. Just a means to an end.
Run over man: ... There was an NPC there? All I saw was gold coins.
Woman in refrigerator? Just a plot device to give the man a story.
Watchmen starts with "a man in a refrigerator"? He's a hero who was using his death to inform people there was a problem.
-
Watchmen starts with "a man in a refrigerator"? He's a hero who was using his death to inform people there was a problem.
Sounds like a bit of a comedian to me…
-
See, even a fat comedian gets more respect than a sexy woman?
Oh wait.... I committed another misogynist sin.
Crap, I can't even complain about sexism, without saying something sexist.
Guess the definition isn't so useful then.
Oh, when in the world did it ever amount to valid debate?
Wait.... are you hearing voices too?
-
@EvanED said in Sexy sexism talk:
I could imagine the one where Wash and Mal are captured might not.
Anyway, back ontopic, here's a couple of sexy ladies... on the one hand, feminists are blasting the people who covered her up; on the other, they're blasting her for not being covered up:
KTLA meteorologist forced to cover up with a grey cardigan live ON-AIR
Liberte Chan was delivering the 8am weather report on Saturday when she was handed the cardigan by anchor Chris Burrous. She was visibly unhappy, saying 'I look like a librarian'.
Calvin Klein's latest underwear ad featuring an upskirt shot of Danish actress Klara Kiristen, 22, has been blasted on social media as being 'creepy' and has been likened to pornography.
Latino | Fox News
