About something other than a man<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Now let\u2019s face it, this shouldn\u2019t be difficult. It actually
doesn\u2019t go very far – it’s entirely possible to write a
movie which passes but is in no way “feminist”, or is even
actively misogynist. It’s very important not to overestimate
Bechdel. It tells you nothing about the tone, content or values of a
film.<\/p>\n
But it does prove that there are two women, and they talk about something
other than men. That has value, in an industry where the pass rate for
movies is truly pathetic.<\/p>\n
Some of the reasons for this low pass rate are actually more about lazy
narrative structure than lazy sexism. Far too often if a conversation
between two women happens, it still fails because it is only about the
lead character, who is a man. In order to maximise tension and pace, all
small talk not relating to explosions or imminent danger is cut from the
script. (Sadly it\u2019s more often replaced with \u201cI hope hero-man X
can save us!\u201d. Even today, it\u2019s ridiculous how much this
happens.)<\/p>\n
Network TV suffers from this more than cinema because in most television
the lead character MUST, MUST be a white male. Must. No negotiation. Must.
If you deviate from this, you are
That Brave Show with the Alternative Lead<\/em>, and some other stuff
that no-one pays as much attention to as the fact you have an
Alternative Lead. Some movies are pushing the boundaries, but the US
networks generally refuse to.<\/p>\n
So I\u2019m going to talk briefly about TV shows instead of the usual
movies. TV science-fiction is a genre which usually scores
pathetically badly in particular, so let\u2019s take a series from
there which Does It Right:<\/p>\n
Fringe. <\/strong>(Minor spoilers to follow!)<\/p>\n
Olivia Dunham, a female FBI agent, investigates paranormal events
with the aid of a genius, his insane father, another female FBI
agent and occasionally some very recognisable beloved genre
actors.<\/p>\n
Even here there are problems. The biggest one is that she\u2019s
arguably not the main character anymore: the show provided such a
rich story for the insane father (and to be fair, an absolutely
astonishing actor) that he’s nearer the centre of the
show.<\/p>\n
But it certainly does pass the Bechdel test. Olivia frequently
speaks to her female colleague, her sister and various others on
work and personal matters. Although she\u2019s quite unemotional
about many things (due to trust issues and a twisted childhood), a
lot of the screen time is on her experience as a woman in her
role. The character is sympathetic and far from
two-dimensional.<\/p>\n
Much more impressive (and one point which really raised the
series) is the episode where she is kidnapped and the male leads
are racing to save her from several armed thugs.<\/p>\n
But they don\u2019t need to, because
she\u2019s an FBI agent<\/em> – she promptly frees
herself and beats the living crap out of everyone nearby,
escapes and phones it in. Because female agents are armed and
trained professionals, not princesses in a tower.<\/p>\n
True, it\u2019s another case of a woman excelling by acting in
ways traditionally associated with male aggression. Proving
they can punch people in the face as hard as men can is NOT
the same as depicting realistic female lives on TV. Similarly
in politics, being more aggressive, intolerant and eager for
war than the male Hawks isn\u2019t the way to be an
inspiration for women – it just means there\u2019s
another right-wing patriarchal asshole in the room, and the
world has enough of those. But in this case, Dunham\u2019s
principles are so strong and her courage so constant that the
show is very clearly about her being a competent agent and a
woman in the FBI… without her gender ever marking her
out as special. She isn’t cut any slack by her bosses,
and isn’t expected to react differently under pressure.
Olivia naturally starts as the focus and no-one ever reacts to
it as being unusual.<\/p>\n
Female leads in action movies are still a hot issue. Elsewhere
on the site we’ve had a blogpost on the movie
“Salt”, which got made because Angelina Jolie can
do
anything the hell she wants<\/em> in Hollywood, and
they\u2019re already reassured that she can handle guns and
car chases. But the press were astonished at the idea of a
woman playing a role which had been written for a male
spy.<\/p>\n
I would dearly love to see something that has a truly
interchangeable lead. A fully-rounded character with
opinions and instincts, but one which could be equally
played by a man or a woman. What would be really
interesting is \u201cPerson X has a love interest Y, and
doesn\u2019t get on with their ex, Z\u201d. Now roll some
dice to decide which gender everyone is.<\/p>\n
For me, Bechdel isn’t the point. It proves itself,
and is therefore a useful barometer for how female roles
are being treated across the industry, but it
doesn’t tell you about the movie or show. Fringe
goes way beyond it, and the interesting parts about Fringe
aren’t described by the pass\/fail: the female
characters are SO strong that it’s the struggle of
wills between Olivia and Nina that is really behind the
drive to reveal or cover the truth, not the men.<\/p>\n
For example, another TV show which passes the test (but
this time just barely) is the unashamedly cowboy-centred
modern police story Justified<\/strong><\/a>.\u00a0 At one point it has the
main character\u2019s current lover and ex-wife talk to
each other, but naturally includes him as a subject of
the conversation. Given their romantic connection to him
and the tension between them right at that moment which
comes from it, it\u2019s not an ignorant fail on the
part of the writers. It would be bizarre for him
not<\/em> to be a topic of conversation… but
this example is typical of the few times that two
women talk to each other in a lot of movies and
TV.<\/p>\n
In this case the lead is once again a white male,
but the show\u2019s entire existence is due to the
actor playing a Sheriff in (the excellent)
Deadwood<\/strong>, so we can forgive it White
Male syndrome a little. (Incidentally, HBO are
responsible for
Deadwood<\/strong>,
The Wire<\/strong>,
Rome<\/strong>,
True Blood<\/strong> etc, all of which
are
phenomenally<\/em> good at passing the
Bechdel test.)<\/p>\n
It\u2019s the other conversation which
is missing. Conversation about\u2026
anything except the male lead. Studio
execs seem to think this must be women
talking about Women\u2019s Things, and
that male viewers will vomit
themselves into a coma after being
exposed to anything more than 5
seconds of it. (This is actually true
for Grey\u2019s Anatomy, but then it
had that effect on EVERYONE after the
first couple of series.) What never
seems to get answered on the internet
is…
what would that conversation be
about? <\/strong>Do men get
equivalent conversation screentime,
or is it that they just don’t
talk as much about anything except
the task at hand?<\/p>\n
So here\u2019s what I\u2019d like
to do: as well as suggesting what
the Bechdel time should be spent
on, I\u2019d like the commenters
to answer a modified version of
the Bechdel Test for TV, as
below.<\/p>\n
Does the TV series feature at
least two
named <\/em>female
characters…<\/p>\n
\n
-
Who talk to each
other<\/li>\n
-
About something other than
1) a man or 2) the immediate
danger they themselves are
in<\/li>\n
-
And does it do this
at least once every 5
episodes<\/em>?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
(One occurrence in a
23-ep run or over
several series does not
deserve to pass the
test, frankly.)<\/p>\n
Are there any good shows
out there? Any absolute
stinkers? Is the action
\/ tension so constant
and high in modern tv
that characters MUST
talk about the male lead
all the time, because
all other spare time
involves dodging
explosions?<\/p>\n