• Women in movies
    113 replies, posted
[MEDIA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLF6sAAMb4s[/MEDIA] this video has likes and comments disabled hmm I wonder why.
Not this bitch again.
you fool you're going to summon him! [img]http://tartandsoul.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/frenchman.jpg?w=226&h=339[/img] [i]~la merde ex mod de culpabilité masculine~[/i] [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Trolling" - Craptasket))[/highlight]
Why is this specific to movies? Could it not be used as a general test for all pieces of media? Also I like how Reservoir Dogs was used despite the fact it's supposed to be about a group of thieves who get fucked over. Does it seriously matter if they were men or women, would it have any effect on the story at all if they were? No. Implying that it would be pretty much implying women would naturally function differently from men which pretty much contradicts the whole aim to attain fair and equal portrayal of women in media. Just like in her other videos if you actually go into some depth with these issues, it's not just clean cut as she's portraying it.
[QUOTE=spekter;44480471]Why is this specific to movies? Could it not be used as a general test for all pieces of media? Also I like how Reservoir Dogs was used despite the fact it's supposed to be about a group of thieves who get fucked over. Just like in her other videos if you actually go into some depth with these issues, it's not just clean cut as she's portraying it.[/QUOTE] Why do you think she blocks comments and likes? She doesn't want anyone refuting her "researched" arguments, this way anyone on youtube can't directly call her out without making a video and looking like an ass because nine times out of ten they'll be raving maniacs instead of calm voiced, its the same sort of tactic she did with funding. Please someone do call me out how I'm not allowed to have an opinion on this because I didn't fund her.
[QUOTE=Mr.95;44480453]you fool you're going to summon him! [img]http://tartandsoul.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/frenchman.jpg?w=226&h=339[/img] [i]~la merde ex mod de culpabilité masculine~[/i][/QUOTE] I hear if you turn off the lights in the bathroom and repeat "hon hon hon baguette" 3 times into the mirror he appears and bans you from real life
no please please mods take this thread away and banish it please for the love of everything.
Is she seriously criticizing UP for not having more than 2 named female characters.
As soon as I saw the title I said "Oh here we go again..."
[QUOTE=spekter;44480471]Why is this specific to movies? Could it not be used as a general test for all pieces of media? Also I like how Reservoir Dogs was used despite the fact it's supposed to be about a group of thieves who get fucked over. Does it seriously matter if they were men or women, would it have any effect on the story at all if they were? No. Implying that it would be pretty much implying women would naturally function differently from men which pretty much contradicts the whole aim to attain fair and equal portrayal of women in media. Just like in her other videos if you actually go into some depth with these issues, it's not just clean cut as she's portraying it.[/QUOTE] Statistic based test anyway. Doesn't say much about the actual content.
It irks me because people are genuinely starting to care more about gender ratios than what actually constitutes as good writing. If you have well written characters then you wouldn't have to worry about that ratio, a story can be good and enjoyable and not require you to directly relate to X character purely based off of their gender. This whole topic just ends up with one party trying to convert everyone into thinking gender ratio matters most, even if those characters are badly written and shoehorned into the story. I related to and really liked Jade in Beyond Good and Evil because my needs to uncover the truth, keep the home shields up and work with Peyj was also her needs as well as the fact she was an honest character who interacted with everyone as I'd want to. If Jade was turned into a male character it wouldn't have swayed me into liking the game more. Most importantly it was how everyone else acted and how well they operated in the world. The same can apply for movies, Kill Bill being a prime example. If the Bride was the Groom instead, personally, I wouldn't have cared either way. It was a colourful character brought to life by a great actor, great dialogue, a well written/thought-out past and great action. Everything BUT the gender mattered to me in that movie just like any other piece of media.
Oh let's just forget all the movies that you know pass this test Movies don't do this because there's some weird male agenda, it all has to do with the plot Seriously like in a movie like braveheart there are women, boohoo they never talk to each other because that wouldn't make sense to the plot
All movies must have two women with names and they must talk to each other and they must not talk about men. Edit: Video games need at-least two dogs, they must not eat human food, and they have to bark at-least three times. If the video games doesn't have this then there is no animal representation in it.
I don't see how is presence of women important to movies about men fighting men (Home Alone, Braveheart). Hell, even when the protagonist is a female the movie is going to fail the test if she fights men (Tomb Raider). If the movie would be focused on a male protagonist and wouldn't get into any detail about supporting characters, it would fail the test even if most of the supporting characters would be female. I guess we should make a subplot about women talking about something other than men in Saving Private Ryan then. If the issue is that that there isn't enough movies with female protagonist or female supporting characters then I agree fully but the way this was presented is really dumb because that argument was never really made and the vid was focused on some arbitrary test instead on the actual issue. Assuming that was her point, she would get that point across way better if she didn't complicate things with the test and focus so much on it. Why not just go: look how many movies are from the male perspective and how many are from the female perspective, look how many movies have women with names in supporting roles and how many of those roles are there per movie and make people realize that it's nowhere near 50-50 but they have never noticed it because it was always there and they've never questioned it.
[QUOTE=JoelDJr;44480803]All movies must have two women with names and they must talk to each other and they must not talk about men.[/QUOTE] And then they both get brutally murdered and shamed and the movie ends with a song called "patriarchy rules" but its OK because thank God the movie passed the Bechdel test.
That's so fucking stupid, well obviously they don't pass the test because the main characters of all those movies are men? Also why did this scam artist whore disable comments?
[QUOTE=theLazyLion;44480842]That's so fucking stupid, well obviously they don't pass the test because the main characters of all those movies are men? Also why did this scam artist whore disable comments?[/QUOTE] She may be a scam artist, but whore? Settle down now, you're just giving her ammo. Edit: Disabling the comments just makes the opposition more angry, which she uses as proof to her claims; which is stupid because it's youtube angst, it's not hatred towards women, it's hatred towards everything.
I don't think any of you seem to actually understand why the Bechdel "test" exists, it's not to name and shame films for being "anti-feminist" or whatever bizzare shit you seem to think it is. It's a metric literally just to quantify meaningful female representation in film. having female characters for the sake of them is called out by most people who understand this test, having male characters in the place of the female (so, a few unnamed guys who just talk about women) is called out, etc. It's not used to say "this film sucks hard", most of the better films we know fail the test. It's just there to point out "hey, maybe you guys should consider adding stronger female characters where possible?" [editline]7th April 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=theLazyLion;44480842]That's so fucking stupid, well obviously they don't pass the test because the main characters of all those movies are men? Also why did this scam artist whore disable comments?[/QUOTE] gw proving the point of many feminists. Rather than actually putting effort into your insult, you flew straight for the gendered slur.
[QUOTE=spekter;44480682]It irks me because people are genuinely starting to care more about gender ratios than what actually constitutes as good writing. If you have well written characters then you wouldn't have to worry about that ratio, a story can be good and enjoyable and not require you to directly relate to X character purely based off of their gender. This whole topic just ends up with one party trying to convert everyone into thinking gender ratio matters most, even if those characters are badly written and shoehorned into the story. I related to and really liked Jade in Beyond Good and Evil because my needs to uncover the truth, keep the home shields up and work with Peyj was also her needs as well as the fact she was an honest character who interacted with everyone as I'd want to. If Jade was turned into a male character it wouldn't have swayed me into liking the game more. Most importantly it was how everyone else acted and how well they operated in the world. The same can apply for movies, Kill Bill being a prime example. If the Bride was the Groom instead, personally, I wouldn't have cared either way. It was a colourful character brought to life by a great actor, great dialogue, a well written/thought-out past and great action. Everything BUT the gender mattered to me in that movie just like any other piece of media.[/QUOTE] She says herself it's not a matter of whether or not it makes the film feminist or misogynist, it's about the fact that, statistically, the film industry is dominated by male-centric stories. It shouldn't come at the expense of good writing, but it shouldn't have to. There's just no reason for this level of marginalization. [editline]7th April 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=JoelDJr;44480803]All movies must have two women with names and they must talk to each other and they must not talk about men. Edit: Video games need at-least two dogs, they must not eat human food, and they have to bark at-least three times. If the video games doesn't have this then there is no animal representation in it.[/QUOTE] please god tell me Poe's law is in effect here I mean, she didn't examine the topic at depth, but is this really so hard to understand?
[QUOTE=hexpunK;44480866]I don't think any of you seem to actually understand why the Bechdel "test" exists, it's not to name and shame films for being "anti-feminist" or whatever bizzare shit you seem to think it is. It's a metric literally just to quantify meaningful female representation in film. having female characters for the sake of them is called out by most people who understand this test, having male characters in the place of the female (so, a few unnamed guys who just talk about women) is called out, etc. It's not used to say "this film sucks hard", most of the better films we know fail the test. It's just there to point out "hey, maybe you guys should consider adding stronger female characters where possible?" [editline]7th April 2014[/editline] gw proving the point of many feminists. Rather than actually putting effort into your insult, you flew straight for the gendered slur.[/QUOTE] No-one here has said anything about this test trying to shame "anti-feminist" films. Idk what agenda you think we are part of. If everything you say is true then surely that nullifies the point of the test. Also way to go with first saying that its a metric (which is true, it's literally jsut a statistic to see IF a certain condition is true), and then that its there to point out "needs stronger female characters", because that definition is wide as fuck. If people already have the sense to call out badly written characters then this test has no point in existing.
[QUOTE=spekter;44480682]It irks me because people are genuinely starting to care more about gender ratios than what actually constitutes as good writing. [/QUOTE] I have an ideea! Movies wich star shemales.That makes it fair and square.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;44480866]I don't think any of you seem to actually understand why the Bechdel "test" exists, it's not to name and shame films for being "anti-feminist" or whatever bizzare shit you seem to think it is.[/QUOTE] I don't think you've ever made a post that wasn't condescending and/or didn't contain a strawman.
This is from 2009 [IMG]http://puu.sh/7ZYnV/aea150cb40.png[/IMG]
ITT almost everyone misunderstands the point of the Bechdel Test. (Except you, hexpunK! <3) The whole point of the test is gender symmetry. Consider the opposite test: 1. Has at least two named male characters 2. They talk to each other 3. About something other than a woman It sounds so simple, doesn't it? It's quite hard to find a movie that doesn't pass this test. So why are movies that pass the Bechdel test so few? The problem is [i]systemic[/i] i.e. movies in general. Picking out a specific movie she lists and claiming "OH SHE HATES ___! WHAT A BITCH" is entirely missing the point.
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;44480973]I don't think you've ever made a post that wasn't condescending and/or didn't contain a strawman.[/QUOTE] Then you're clearly not stalking me enough. This isn't mass debate, I don't have to cater to anything but the normal forum rules. I'm able to generalise and shit here, besides, going by the normal posts I see floating around this section whenever any feminist media is posted (of any form, not just Sarkesian (who I don't particularly tolerate to be honest)). I think the generalisation is relatively sound. But please, continue the persecution complex, it's really making me feel just terrible about myself for a few seconds at a time.
it's not like she doesn't have a point, the issue here is that she acts like the movies are the problem, while they're more of a consequence
[QUOTE=Larikang;44481021]ITT almost everyone misunderstands the point of the Bechdel Test. (Except you, hexpunK! <3) The whole point of the test is gender symmetry. Consider the opposite test: 1. Has at least two named male characters 2. They talk to each other 3. About something other than a woman It sounds so simple, doesn't it? It's quite hard to find a movie that doesn't pass this test. So why are movies that pass the Bechdel test so few? The problem is [i]systemic[/i] i.e. movies in general. Picking out a specific movie she lists and claiming "OH SHE HATES ___! WHAT A BITCH" is entirely missing the point.[/QUOTE] If it's systemic, what's the point in her going after singular movies then?
[QUOTE=hexpunK;44481060]I'm able to generalise and shit here But please, continue the persecution complex[/QUOTE] You come here and say that nobody understood what she said and how we think that the test is to point the "anti-feminist" movies or whatever you've made up and then you say I have a persecution complex because I called you out on spewing idiotic generalizations that hold no base in reality which you've even admitted to. Nobody did what you said we all did. You're not the only one who got her point. Get off your high horse. Stop spewing generalizations without reading the thread and shitting up the thread with replies to nonexisting posts.
[QUOTE=JoelDJr;44480865]She may be a scam artist, but whore? Settle down now, you're just giving her ammo. Edit: Disabling the comments just makes the opposition more angry, which she uses as proof to her claims; which is stupid because it's youtube angst, it's not hatred towards women, it's hatred towards everything.[/QUOTE] I could use any means of insult towards her and it wouldn't be a sexist one, I hate her for who she is as a person and not for being a woman, can insult men by calling them a whore too, both are just insults. I'm insulting this scam artist for raking in thousands of dollars off of gullible people, and doing nothing with it other than a few 2-5 minute videos released a year.
Isn't this one of her really old videos? I actually think her latest one was much better and well researched.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.