8bitOwl said:
DrOswald said:
And how does that nullify the progressiveness of the character? People who find women sexually attractive, a group primarily consisting of men, are supposed to drool over her. That is an absolutely critical prerequisite to the progressiveness of the character. The fact that Bayonetta was made sexy for real people instead of some fictional character drives the point home. Bayonetta puts forward the radical notion that a woman need not be ashamed of reveling in her own sexuality and gaining pleasure by revealing it for others to see. There absolutely must be others to see or the entire point is lost.
Bayonetta could not be a progressive character in the way she is if she was not designed to be drooled over. That is the entire point.
And the idea that a progressive female character will be popular among women is just wrong. Some progressive female characters will be popular with women, but many will not. A progressive notion challenges our assumptions about what can and should be, often through extreme imagery. This will make people uncomfortable. Some people will hate the character. Some people will hate the message on a visceral level, ashamed by the deeply rooted cultural notions of what is right and wrong. Others will be disgusted by the imagery, especially if it is sexual imagery that does not appeal to them. That doesn't make them any less progressive.
Bayonetta challenges the notion that it is wrong for a woman to seek gratification from sexual gaze by being a character that unashamedly attracts sexual gaze. It radically challenges the assumption that being a "slut" is bad, one of our most deeply rooted cultural beliefs. To do this she must unashamedly attract sexual gaze. She must be a slut. What she does not have to do is appeal to women.
I misunderstood, then: by "progressive female character" I assumed it was a character that a female gamer could appreciate. Probably because it's just what -I- personally look in a progressive female character, tho!
Completely understandable. In fact, I think that might be exactly what the OP meant by progressive female character. It usually is. I just felt like pointing out that is not an all encompassing definition of a progressive female character.
You're right, and your explanation is pretty accurate. In this regard, I see Bayonetta as a progressive character too.
But let's consider one thing: she's a sexy female character who uses her sexuality for the benefit of the viewing audience. So how is she any different from the classical, overused stereotype? Black Widow, Ivy, the protagonist of Fear Effect, at least half of the female characters in videogames or movies represent the same identical trope of Bayonetta: sexy female character who's not afraid to show it off.
So, in this regard, I don't think Bayonetta is progressive, she's just the same classical sexy chick trope. The difference being in the classy, artistical and over-the-top style of her presentation.
I agree that being a character that merely shows off her body is not enough and is not inherently progressive. I am a programmer, not a writer, so I am not sure if I am up to explaining the difference as I see it between Bayonetta and the typical sexy woman character, but I'll give it a try.
I would say we can classify sexy female characters into 4 broad categories:
The first two are female sexy characters which are, in theory, not defined by their sexiness.
1. Character Sexy - These are the sexy female characters that are not particularly bad or good in relation to their sexiness. I would probably classify Samus (except in other M) in this category and probably Black Widow of the Marvel movies. These are characters who are undeniably sexy and their sexiness may even get plenty of screen time, but their sexiness is only one aspect of their character and almost never the most important part. These are female characters, good or bad, that happen to be sexy, which is neither inherently good or inherently bad.
2. Pandering - These are sexy female characters that are inappropriately sexy. Sexiness does not necessarily define them, but their sexiness is excessive to the point of distraction or an active detriment to the character or the work at large. For example, Other M Samus fits neatly into this category.
The other two categories are characters who are largely defined by their sexiness. These are characters who have something to say about sexuality, for good or ill. The primary defining aspect of these character is their sexual appeal. There may be other aspects to the character but they are relatively minor. The difference is what the character does with that defining sexuality.
3. Sex object - These are characters who exist to be used for their sexuality. The DOA girls come to mind. There is a little extra to each of their personalities, but these character details are lost in breast physics and ass shots. There is very little person there, it is completely buried by the sex doll aspect of the character. It is possible to play every single DOA game though and know nothing about the female cast of DOA except that they look fantastic in fetish wear.
4. Sexually empowered - This is a female character who uses their sexuality in contrast to those who are used for their sexuality. Sexuality is her defining trait but it is sexuality that enhances the person. Everything about Bayonetta's sexuality defines and enhances that character of Bayonetta. It is impossible to play though Bayonetta and miss her character. Hell, it is difficult to just drool over her though in game content and miss her character. Her character and sexuality go hand in hand, each playing off of the other and enhanced by the other.
I'll be the first to admit that the difference between these categories is very difficult to define and might be the result of a failure of expression. A person might set out to make a sexually empowered character and end up making a sex object.
DrOswald said:
A male character that acts like Bayonetta does and was not mocked for it or played as a joke character would certainly be a progressive character. Sexually overt men are a joke in our culture. A man might brag of his sexual conquests but a man who actually shows off his sexuality in an overt manner? They are most often portrayed as a joke, disgusting, horrifying, or pathetic. It is telling that the mocking negative stereotype applied to gay men for many years has been nothing more than an overtly sexual man.
Such a character would certainly be progressive. But I am not going to pretend that I would care to play as that character.
And yet, a lot of people bought JoJo's All Stars Battle! I think JoJo's characters are the closest we get to a male version of Bayonetta. Bayonetta is more sexually explicit than any JoJo character, and JoJo characters can appeal to a male audience more easily than how Bayonetta could appeal to ladies, but there's some similarities.
Ha! I completely forgot about JoJo's. I guess it is possible I would like such a character after all. Good point.
Last of all, I really want to thank you for being so civil in this discussion. It is nice to have a good conversation with someone about this issue without the nearly inevitable insults.
If I ever found a woman like her, I'd drool enough to drown Alice in the Drink Me room before she ever had a chance to start crying. Nothing wrong with kinky either... I used to do BDSM modeling so I'd have no quarrels with her "interests."