The real reason some men still can't handle the all-female Ghostbusters
Joyce Park stashed this in Feminism
This article is far less fluffy than it first appears. It's about male versus female perception of what gender parity looks like in real life. Basically men have been so conditioned to think that the norm is OVERWHELMINGLY male, that they are not able to objectively count things any more!
Davis cited a recent study that examined the ratio of men and women in groups, explaining that researchers “found that if there's 17 percent women, the men in the group think it's 50-50. And if there's 33 percent women, the men perceive that as there being more women in the room than men.”
Sounds like that cognitive bias is unintentional but it explains how so many men have been conditioned to think that one woman in a group means the group is half women. Example: the Avengers movies.
Sounds like Davis sampled a bunch of near-men, not-quite-men or non-men male outliers, academics or corporate eunuchs: clearly he never sampled guys in college – we NEVER thought there were enough women around... and the reported student body ratio was pretty good at Florida back in the day.
I'm damn sure we thought there were only 17 percent women on campus at any given time.
That may be, but the cognitive biases still exist.
Women were only one-third of the speaking parts in the 700 most recent top movies:
Women only directed 1.9 percent of those movies:
Those two facts seem connected.
Well, that means women are only 1/3rd responsible for the horrible acting we have to suffer through onscreen – you know, where the guys just show up and play who they think they are in real life. And that also means women are only 1.9% responsible for directing those piece of shit product placement commercials that Hollywood sends up to the big screen at 90 minutes plus.
I consider that an honorable statistic for any demographic in general. But then again, I'm not trying to sell my soul and my ass for some shekels in Hollywood either.
Yes, I'm about equality for women and men. I'm especially about equality for all in the pursuit of filthy lucre and all the dire consequences that such headlong ambition inherits, such as heart disease, cancer before 50 and the many other medical malaises of pursuing economic equality that's measured by people always trying to keep up with the Jones'es in the first world.
Funny how we always pursue equality discussions as "freedom to" have or do something more that somebody else already has and can do – more or bigger assets. And that's fine. I agree with that.
I also agree it would be interesting and perhaps even more equitable to apply double entry principles and then see where all these demographic dizzy dances would go if we were to also hold ourselves accountable for the other side of each others' aggregate balance sheet... you know, in terms of "freedom from" liabilities in life.
Perhaps if more women were directing and more women had onscreen lines the quality of the movies would be better.
... without a doubt.
Wikipedia entry on the Bechdel Test:
The Bechdel test (/ˈbɛkdəl/ bek-dəl) asks if a work of fiction features at least two women who talk to each other about something other than a man. The requirement that the two women must be named is sometimes added.
Only about half of all films meet these requirements. The test is used as an indicator for the active presence of women in films and other fiction, and to call attention to gender inequality in fiction due to sexism.
The Bechdel test is named for the American cartoonist Alison Bechdel, in whose comic strip Dykes to Watch Out For it first appeared in 1985. Bechdel credited the idea to a friend, Liz Wallace, and to the writings of Virginia Woolf. After the test became more widely discussed in the 2000s, a number of variants and tests inspired by it have been introduced.
Disney's Frozen passed the Bechdel test:
So does Game of Thrones: