On: The Bechdel Test
5:33 PM
Gifs via satcgifs
For those of you who do not have a background in film and/or cinema studies, the Bechdel-Wallace Test is a measure of:
1. At least two [named] women
2. Who must talk to each other
3. About something besides a man
Now, to me, it initially seemed like a trivial and petty manner in which to ascertain the legitimacy of 'strong women' and gender equality in media, but upon further inspection, I think it's actually fairly smart.
So I'm going to apply it to my daily life.
But like, in all ways.
If we speak, our subject matter can no longer solely fall under the discussion of men, women or whomever falls under your scope of sexual attraction and/or romantic interest.
Let's get it straight, I'm not saying you are a weak person if your chatter centers those whom you are sexually attracted to, but if we are conversing, I'd genuinely appreciate it if such weren't the case...consistently.
And if it is, because I am a fairly nice person, all I ask is that you please add some nuance, cause I'm not trying to talk about the same topic without variaton ten times over.
As my Aunties say: It's not everyday chattah, na!
Listen, I can't even flex, I too suffer from this same issue of always talking about the same three topics (men, sex and food), but after listening to myself and others drone on and on, ad nauseam, without variance has made me so, so tired.
It's quite boring, and it's too simple.
Much like the characters on television shows or film, if my existence is centered solely upon the superficial, my story becomes trite. There is nothing interesting about living to worry about the existence of others - that is a complete and voluntary sacrifice of anything which has made me compelling.
And I believe myself to be quite a compelling person, honestly.
I don't want the depth of my conversations and the range of my concerns to be perceived as being limited to the opposite sex or my sexual attractions.
This is, of course, my own view, but it is something I've noticed is far too commonplace.
We've got to do better.
Now, to me, it initially seemed like a trivial and petty manner in which to ascertain the legitimacy of 'strong women' and gender equality in media, but upon further inspection, I think it's actually fairly smart.
So I'm going to apply it to my daily life.
But like, in all ways.
If we speak, our subject matter can no longer solely fall under the discussion of men, women or whomever falls under your scope of sexual attraction and/or romantic interest.
Let's get it straight, I'm not saying you are a weak person if your chatter centers those whom you are sexually attracted to, but if we are conversing, I'd genuinely appreciate it if such weren't the case...consistently.
And if it is, because I am a fairly nice person, all I ask is that you please add some nuance, cause I'm not trying to talk about the same topic without variaton ten times over.
As my Aunties say: It's not everyday chattah, na!
Listen, I can't even flex, I too suffer from this same issue of always talking about the same three topics (men, sex and food), but after listening to myself and others drone on and on, ad nauseam, without variance has made me so, so tired.
It's quite boring, and it's too simple.
Much like the characters on television shows or film, if my existence is centered solely upon the superficial, my story becomes trite. There is nothing interesting about living to worry about the existence of others - that is a complete and voluntary sacrifice of anything which has made me compelling.
And I believe myself to be quite a compelling person, honestly.
I don't want the depth of my conversations and the range of my concerns to be perceived as being limited to the opposite sex or my sexual attractions.
This is, of course, my own view, but it is something I've noticed is far too commonplace.
We've got to do better.
0 comments