Beyond the Bechdel Test

 In reading and thinking about gender and feminism and fiction, one is bound to find serious discussions of the Bechdel test. To pass the test, a story must have:·      2 or more female characters;·      Those characters having a conversation (with no non-females present);·      The conversation cannot be about men (ANY men)Now, in some ways, this is an interesting way to frame the portrayal of women in a particular piece, and highlights a major issue in fiction—namely, the female characters seem to talk exclusively about their (usually heterosexual) love lives. The first, and most obvious issue, that I have with this test is that it doesn’t exclude women having vapid, stereotype-ridden conversations. The female characters could have zero development in the story beyond being shoe-obsessed or getting into catfights over who is stealing whose (presumably lesbian) wedding ideas, and it would still pass.The second, and more annoying issue, is that it equates feminist content with the exclusion of men. As it stands, men are 50% of the human population, so if your story is not set in a nunnery or women’s football team or whatever, there will be dudes. Women have coworkers and brothers and nephews and sons and fathers and friends who are guys, and talking about these people doesn’t mean the female characters’ lives are meaningless without men. It just means their world has a typical gender ratio.This also quietly says that men, by their existence, mess up feminist dialogue. In reality, of course, there are lots of feminist guys (and non-binary or non-gendered people), and some of them even have interesting insights on gender dynamics. If gender is a source of conflict or a plot shaping element in your story, it will naturally become part of the story. [image error]