So what? Some kind of MRA shite about how people don't care about men being abused?
Have a sense of perspective, ffs.
Emma Watson on Feminism
- Thread starter rcoobc
- Start date
Have a sense of perspective, ffs.
See? You lot can't even read!. Get back in the kitchen right this instant!
Insert non-white white text for the triply confused.
I didnt know what to write so just went with "sooooooo..."
It's interesting. My feminist friend had this to say:
TBF to Walt, that's pretty much one of the worst/most counterproductive/useless videos one could have posted in a thread like this.
It's the intellectual equivalent of the verbal statement "The color yellow is yellow."
It's the intellectual equivalent of the verbal statement "The color yellow is yellow."
True. I remember seeing one of my friends getting absolutely layed into by his girlfriend on a night out. If he had hit her we'd have killed him but when it's the other way around you just feel like you'd embarrass him by stepping in. Very awkward situation. As has been pointed out in this thread, sexism works both ways.
In theory feminism should help prevent that sort of thing though so I really wouldn't be comfortable throwing that example up as some kind of argument against it, which is the line a lot of people seem to take.
I think it's simply a strength thing isn't it? For some reason we don't feel the need to help someone out who we think is the stronger one in a confrontation. We somehow assume they will be able to handle it on their own. Which of course is stupid since not everyone who is strong is also capable of defending himself properly and not everyone who seems weak is incapable of causing damage.
So in that sense I don't really feel this is a gender issue. For example if you see a small kid hitting a teenager who is one or two heads taller you probably wouldn't react the same way as if it was the other way around.
What could be considered sexist though is probably the assumption that women are always the weaker ones in a confrontation. While on average women are physically weaker there might very well be situations where this isn't the case.
So in that sense I don't really feel this is a gender issue. For example if you see a small kid hitting a teenager who is one or two heads taller you probably wouldn't react the same way as if it was the other way around.
What could be considered sexist though is probably the assumption that women are always the weaker ones in a confrontation. While on average women are physically weaker there might very well be situations where this isn't the case.
I think it is a massive sexism thing. Those men were laughing and filming that girl beating up the guy.
A sense of perspective about what? It's a valid claim that many people have made. I'm not sure what MRAs have to do with it.
A sense of perspective regarding the brutal misogyny prolific in the world today.
As for the rest, you're supposed to know it fecking all. fecking know it then, don't bother asking me.
Found this today, it's quite interesting. Has anyone else heard of the Bechdel test before?
It's amazing how many films don't pass this test.
http://bechdeltest.com/
It's amazing how many films don't pass this test.
http://bechdeltest.com/
The way women are used in almost all forms of entertainment is pretty shocking tbh. They are almost always there as part of some blokes story rather than an independent character.
Yeah the Bechdel test is fairly well known, or at least I think it is. It's a good tool to have to highlight the broad range of the problem, and will hopefully lead to more conscious screen writing, but it shouldn't be used as a marking system. It's still flawed. You can pass by having two minor stereotyped characters talk about shoes for 10 seconds but fail in a two hander with a strong nuanced female lead.
I've noticed the Gamer Gate nonsense has reared it's head again today btw.
I've noticed the Gamer Gate nonsense has reared it's head again today btw.
They should make film directors wear oestrogen patches.
Feck off with the oestrogen patches
They'd all quit their jobs and stay at home watching Made in Chelsea.
Feck off with any foilhatter-biologism.
Is that like Mourinho making flower centrepieces and Terry baking cupcakes with Nigella?
Everyone on that show needs putting down.
Damn, that chick is hot! No wonder nobody stops her when she's being all heated up and sweaty like that
Gamer gate, 'fear the nerds who haven't got laid'
Yeah, its obviously not a 100% brilliant test, but as a quick tool to highlight a problem its great.
Zero Dark Thirty for example, fails the test, despite a strong, confident, independent women being the main character. Its not perfect, its not meant to be.
It highlights a problem, that may or may not br obvious.
I agreed with you, ade!Me? What did I do (say)?
I just don't want breasts
The Bechdel Test is flawed, but it certainly shows that most movies have a rather male-centric narrative. The interesting question would then be: why? I only have a minor in Media Science, so I'm in no way an expert on this. But in one of my courses I remember reading one particular thing that I found very interesting. I don't remember the exact quote, so I'm gonna have to paraphrase a bit:
"The demographic that watches the least TV, are men aged 18 to 36. This demographic is very selective and critical. Because of this, they also become the most important demographic to please. That is why TV networks invests more money in programs and TV series that are intended to draw this demographic to the TV screen. As most women and old people will watch TV anyways, the networks need to find a way to get men aged 18-36 to watch their channel, to tip the ratings in their favor. Another bi-effect is that the women in the lives of these men will join in. HBO's exisistence is based on the success of attracting this demographic."
Now this is TV, but I don't think it's unfair to say that the movie industry probably follows the same strategy. It's much harder to get a man to watch a typical "chick flick" than the other way around. And well, many men find it easier to follow a narrative where the protagonist is a man. It's just more relatable for them. And when the protagonist is a man, you're already well on your way to failing to Bechdel test. Especially seeing as the average movie watcher isn't overly fond of complex stories and character development.
TLDR; since young men are the most important demographic and the average movie watcher is a moron, many movies will wind up failing the Bechdel Test. There's certainly some "sexism" in the picture, seeing as the average male movie watcher apparently finds it hard to relate to female characters. But overall, I think the Bechdel Test is highly overrated as an argument for feminism.
Last edited:
Oh of course, I'm not saying it should be looked at on a film by film basis but it's still a very interesting indicator when you look at a large number of films that something isn't quite right.
I wonder what would happen if you applied this same test but looking whether two men talk about something that isn't women. How many films would fail? Probably hardly any.
I think a lot of rom-coms with female protagonists would fail that test.
I suppose that quote makes a lot of sense, and thinking about it - in advertising where the key demographic that is being targeted is often female, we find adverts where you've got the dopy husband and problem solving wife a lot. Although (I could be wrong but) I've noticed a lot less of these recently. Might be because I've stopped watching TV for the most part.
I'd still be interested to see if a large proportion of chick flicks would fail a reverse Bechdel test.
I'm not sure they would personally but I'd be interested to see.
@Mad Winger you're on the right track target audience has a lot to do with what gets produced for TV and the silver screen.
But there is also another reason. The movie industry is still largely dominated by men in all decision making positions, script writer, directors and producers are almost all men in Hollywood. It looks better in the indy film industry but even there you will find mainly male film makers that end up getting any attention.
But there is also another reason. The movie industry is still largely dominated by men in all decision making positions, script writer, directors and producers are almost all men in Hollywood. It looks better in the indy film industry but even there you will find mainly male film makers that end up getting any attention.
You're probably right to a certain degree, but you have to keep in mind that it's still a business. Failure to attract men aged 18-36 also means that you've failed to make a lot of money. Some "chick flicks" end up being big box office hits, but it's much more of a gamble.
Yes I agree that's the main reason for making male-centric movies. Hollywood has always done what they thought would bring in the most money and it will most likely be their main reason to make any future decisions.
Don't even mention it, ade!Oh, right
Have had 2 hrs of sleep in the past 24 hrs
I'm like a moth to a flame with these threads.
I'm not sure there are ANY (other than little independent near all-fame cast ones).
Actually that might not be quite true, but its certainly magnitudes lower in percentage terms
It does seem to be that. Though obviously everyone gets very angry at that suggestion. Like a teenage nerd who hadn't got laid probably would. But I can't believe it is. It just seems too obvious and too bonkers an explanation for an entire crusade. I tried to look into it for this very reason, and the best I found was "we're campaigning for fairer game reviews"....Which is easily the stupidest reason for misogyny I've ever heard.
Wouldn't a lot of chick flicks fail the test because the women spend a lot of time in them talking about men?
Chick flicks are made by men.
They're so cute!
...we're campaigning for fairer game reviews...
"Yeah we sent this woman death threats, rape threats and called in bomb threats to her public speaking engagements, but, but...she misrepresented video games!!!"
Really doing a lot for the stereotype there.