In the article, “Swedish cinema’s use of the Bechdel test is a provocation that works,” authors Anu Koivunen, Ingrid Ryberg and Laura Horak defend the moral grounds on which the Bechdel test stands in movie-culture. The Bechdel test is composed of three main components to decide if a film adequately represents women in films: that there are at least two named women in the film, that they talk to each other, and that their conversation consists of something other than men. Although Koivunen, Ryberg, and Horak provide a detailed background and attempt to persuade those who are against the test, their overall argument fails to persuade due to their lack of facts to support their claims, their non-aggressive tone, and their main-focus on the cons of the test, which they poorly try to invalidate.…show more content… The authors make bold claims such as “This rejection [of the Bechdel test] is too hasty, disregarding crucial dimensions,” (Koivunen, Ryberg, and Horak, 4) but fail to mention these “crucial dimensions” of the films throughout the article. One of the first examples of any genuine support for their thesis is when they mention the “movies featuring women interacting with each other... [which yielded a] great fan base” (Koivunen, Ryberg, and Horak, 8) and name a few notable films with a female-dominance in the cast. The successfulness of these films is never properly referenced though and the authors never touch upon the ratings and earnings of each film to prove its overall significance. Any readers who are unaware of these films cannot locate these film’s true importance to the film-culture, thus nullifying the mention of them. The authors reduce their argument by not providing facts, and make it seem widely opinion