Poll: Bayonetta Sexist?

[jamesworkshop]

and what did you say earlier about every male + games + internet

you gave me all the ammo i need, you told me your presumtions quite openly

you are bigoted, self rightous and self pitying

not an attractive combination

While Othello's post was not terribly well phrased, you know as well as I do that it's a general rule that men do not see male privilege. Why would they? Male privilege is normal.. it's not noticeable unless you're excluded from it.

As someone who has 'trained' to be able to identify gender privilege and other such things, I can safely that being a man is a pretty massive disadvantage in being able to see these things. There is such an intense oversaturation and overfocus on catering to men in visual media that it's not even obvious. It's more obvious when it doesn't happen or when something contradictory happens than when it does.

This is particularly true in the games industry, which until very recently has always tended to assume a white (or Japanese in this case) male, heterosexual audience in all cases everywhere. As men (men who sleep with women, specifically) we can always count on having easy access to compliant sexual fantasies (pornography, sexually suggestive films or games, etc). This is so normal we (perhaps rightly) consider it an intrinsic right, but unlike other rights its hardly universal.

It is very tempting when someone says something like 'men don't see privilege' to a) take it as a universal, which clearly isn't true, and b) to overreact and get defensive. Actually, there's a grain of truth there which needs to be pulled out and examined.

that maybe the case i'm not denying privilage exists although personally I think it's a fairly bad word to described what is being asserted anyone male or female that is heterosexual has no worries of finding media representation but the issue here is I don't see the relevance.
I happen to be literate but I would not described the fact that 90% of every individual adult I meet is also going to be and assumed by me to also be literate adults because 99% of them are is not something I would define as privilage or discuss it in an air of it must be wrong to be literate or that somehow people that are literate are somehow unable to recognise that when someone is illiterate because I myself know how to read might find themselves faced with an uphill struggle to get on in life.

the idea that bayonetta, a light hearted "rule of cool" spectacle cannot be anything other than either sexist or empowering (must be one or the other) is a silly dichotomy, one of his links carried the implication that questioning that meant I was inflicting suffering of millions of people, clearly proving my point that people are taking the idea far too seriously in reguards to the lens of judging the game Bayonetta.

Bayonetta maybe be female but in context she is not a human or even a human woman, I do find it slightly odd that with things like say Buffy from the generally very good TV show, are talked about in context of female empowerment or feminism when they clearly possess supernatural abilites and thus are not really suitable because their nature removes them from the topic as non-entities as they clearly are not subjected to the same rules, it's odd to me to suggest women characters are only of worth due to the very things that make them nolonger women, human or even mortal in some cases.

It's a bit like the anime media representing swords as valid weapon in a modern mechanised projectile/balistic weaponry based army and then have to overcome the shortcomming by making the individual brandishing the swords as being 5x stronger, faster and more agile than any human has the capability of doing.

Swords being brilliant as long as the owner can deflect/dodge 320 m/s speeding bullets

 

[ZephrC]

ZOMG! She's a woman AND ATTRACTIVE! That's TOTALLY SEXIST! Real women are never attractive! Men who like seeing attractive women in entertainment are all filthy pigs, and women who like seeing attractive women must be lesbians or something, because it's not like normal women prefer characters that are attractive to ones that aren't.

http://idiotduck.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/adriana-lima-doutzen-kroes-supermodel-obsession.jpg [Example 1]

http://topnews.in/light/files/danielle-l.jpg [Example 2]

Do you see the difference?

Nope. Well, they're different people in different poses. Assuming you weren't trying to send me to a 404 error page and actually meant to do the URLs and the text the other way around that is. Even then I don't think that's what you mean though.

Maybe you're referring to the second one's pose being more sexy? I dunno. All I see is a couple half naked women being pretty for the camera. Do you really believe they're that different? Do you think there's something wrong with a sexy pose perhaps? That good women don't do that?, That women should always be chaste and never tempt men with their filthy, filthy bodies?

 

[Terminal Blue]

Maybe you're referring to the second one's pose being more sexy? I dunno. All I see is a couple half naked women being pretty for the camera. Do you really believe they're that different? Do you think there's something wrong with a sexy pose perhaps? That good women don't do that?, That women should always be chaste and never tempt men with their filthy, filthy bodies?

Link fixed.

They are fundamentally different genres. They were produced for very different purposes. My feeling on it isn't the issue.

One is a fashion shot designed to appeal primarily to female identification.

The other is a glamour shot designed to appeal primarily to a male libido.

I chose ambiguous examples of both genres because I wanted to break it down to the most fundamental elements of how the models are styled and posed and how the shots are composed and produced, but you've clearly missed it altogether.

There is a difference between representing beauty and sexuality and doing pornography (pornography in the broad sense, not the generic sense). To deliberately appeal on that level is not representing or celebrating beauty or sexuality, it's reducing bodies (female bodies, almost always) to simplistic tropes and one dimensional images in order to provide fantasy material to an assumed male audience.

But again, you probably don't see the difference.. Just remember that your privilege is your ability to differentiate yourself from those bodies which you consume. Some people aren't so lucky.

Also, you've never met that woman. She's not tempting you. In fact she probably doesn't give a shit about anything you might feel or have to say. She didn't naturally throw herself there because she's wanton and sexually available for you, she's been paid to sit in that position in order that you can get off pretending that there's some kind of interaction there. Choosing to see that does not make me a sex-negative reactionary, choosing not to see it does not make you a champion of sexual liberation.

snip

Well said. I agree with most that.

For the record, I think you both have points worth making, it just seemed you were bouncing off each other quite badly.

 

[ZephrC]

Maybe you're referring to the second one's pose being more sexy? I dunno. All I see is a couple half naked women being pretty for the camera. Do you really believe they're that different? Do you think there's something wrong with a sexy pose perhaps? That good women don't do that?, That women should always be chaste and never tempt men with their filthy, filthy bodies?

Link fixed.

They are fundamentally different genres. They were produced for very different purposes. My feeling on it isn't the issue.

One is a fashion shot designed to appeal primarily to female identification.

The other is a glamour shot designed to appeal primarily to a male libido.

I chose ambiguous examples of both genres because I wanted to break it down to the most fundamental elements of how the models are styled and posed and how the shots are composed and produced, but you've clearly missed it altogether.

There is a difference between representing beauty and sexuality and doing pornography (pornography in the broad sense, not the generic sense). To deliberately appeal on that level is not representing or celebrating beauty or sexuality, it's reducing bodies (female bodies, almost always) to simplistic tropes and one dimensional images in order to provide fantasy material to an assumed male audience.

But again, you probably don't see the difference.. Just remember that your privilege is your ability to differentiate yourself from those bodies which you consume. Some people aren't so lucky.

Also, you've never met that woman. She's not tempting you. In fact she probably doesn't give a shit about anything you might feel or have to say. She didn't naturally throw herself there because she's wanton and sexually available for you, she's been paid to sit in that position in order that you can get off pretending that there's some kind of interaction there. Choosing to see that does not make me a sex-negative reactionary, choosing not to see it does not make you a champion of sexual liberation.

Well no shit she got paid to do that. News flash! The model in the first picture was being paid as well! They're both being paid to be pretty for the camera. Is it really so horrible that a different audience's idea of pretty is being used for the different pictures?

Besides, plenty of women enjoy behaving like that, because they enjoy the reactions of the men around them. Do I believe for a second that they give a shit about me? Hell no. Does that make them bad? No. No, it doesn't.

Also, I would find hilarious that you seem to be under the impression that the fashion industry is somehow good for women if it weren't so pathetically, dangerously wrong.

I hope someday you can realize that perhaps there's more to this than simply saying that everything women like is super cool and everything men like is naughty and wrong. It is certainly my privilege to live in a society that knows what I like. How about instead of trying futilely to take that away from me, you work on extending that same benefit to women as well? Hell, for the right money I'd be just as willing to pretend to fulfill a million random women's desires that I don't really care about as the women in the second photograph you provided was willing to pretend to fulfill mine. It probably wouldn't have anything to do with prancing around in my underwear, but hell, I'd even do that if you paid me enough. And let me tell you, she probably got paid enough.

 

[Belgian_Waffles]

I'll take it sure is and who the hell cares for 500 Trebek.

 

[LiquidGrape]

I'm usually one to shout "foul!" in these things, but in the case of Bayonetta, I wouldn't say so.
Bayonetta is sexual, absolutely, but her sexuality is enforced by the character herself, and not by some external force attempting to undermine her integrity.

Rachel from Ninja Gaiden would be a textbook example of the latter.
Now THAT is sexist.

 

[Terminal Blue]

Snip

You really like making assumptions about people don't you. Go back through your post and cross out everything you've said about me which I haven't explicitly said myself, then start again from the beginning.

Seriously. If you're going to argue with me, stop projecting. Noone is 'futiley trying to take [the right to have easy access to pictures of compliant boobies] away from you'. Asking you to think about something does not equate to taking it away, unless thinking about it makes you not want it any more (which I can't blame you for).

I really can't be bothered with this. When you can string together a post which isn't just assumptions and projection, I'll respond to it. But I'm not wasting my time disabusing you of notions which I honestly can't see the source of beyond insecure and reactionary masculinity.

 

[ZephrC]

Snip

You really like making assumptions about people don't you. Go back through your post and cross out everything you've said about me which I haven't explicitly said myself, then start again from the beginning.

Seriously. If you're going to argue with me, stop projecting. Noone is 'futiley trying to take [the right to have easy access to pictures of compliant boobies] away from you'. Asking you to think about something does not equate to taking it away, unless thinking about it makes you not want it any more (which I can't blame you for).

I really can't be bothered with this. When you can string together a post which isn't just assumptions and projection, I'll respond to it. But I'm not wasting my time disabusing you of notions which I honestly can't see the source of. I can't be arsed playing straw man to your insecure masculinity.

Did you even read what I wrote? Because you certainly didn't reply to it.

Seriously. I've certainly been unnecessarily snarky, but you obviously haven't paid attention to a word I've said if you're dismissing me as being insecure and projecting.

HA! Projecting! There's a word that just screams "I'm not nearly half as smart as I think I am!"

That's alright though, this is really a win for both of us. You get to run off feeling all smugly superior, and I get to know you'll grow out of it one day.

 

[Dense_Electric]

To deliberately appeal on that level is not representing or celebrating beauty or sexuality, it's reducing bodies (female bodies, almost always) to simplistic tropes and one dimensional images

O [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kratos_%28God_of_War%29]h [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Gears_of_War_characters#Marcus_Fenix] r [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dante%27s_Inferno_%28video_game%29]e [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke_Nukem_%28character%29]a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathan_Drake_%28character%29]l [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryu_Hayabusa]l [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goro_%28Mortal_Kombat%29]y [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zangief]? [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_Snake]

Reading this topic you'd almost think men somehow had it any better than women...

 

[EllEzDee]

If "sexist" is synonymous with "a pile of shit" then i'd have to agree.

 

[Terminal Blue]

Did you even read what I wrote? Because you certainly didn't reply to it.

I read it. I noted your constant misrepresentation and utter refusal to engage with anything I'd actually said, I chose not to credit it with a response.

But since you asked, and I have the time..

Well no shit she got paid to do that. News flash! The model in the first picture was being paid as well!

I really don't care. You've missed the point.

You can represent beauty and/or sexuality without adopting a pornographic gaze, or at least by adopting a less pornographic gaze. You don't seem to be able to tell the difference.

They're both being paid to be pretty for the camera. Is it really so horrible that a different audience's idea of pretty is being used for the different pictures?

See above.

Visual images do not just exist, they reference other visual images and concepts. This is how genres exist. There are consistent tropes which appear within visual media which provide identifiable reference points.

Pornography is not just 'what men find pretty'. You don't need me to explain that, right? It entails a particular form of docility and accessibility on the part of the image which is distinct from other forms of visual media.

Besides, plenty of women enjoy behaving like that, because they enjoy the reactions of the men around them. Do I believe for a second that they give a shit about me? Hell no. Does that make them bad? No. No, it doesn't.

Don't take that at face value, interrogate it. Assuming some women do 'enjoy' (complicated word in this context) being the object of a pornographic male gaze, does that come from nowhere? What are the conditions under which that enjoyment takes place? How are those conditions produced?

Does it not strike you as odd that women require the public approval (reaction, if you want to call it that) of men specifically for their appearance and performance of docile, accessible sexuality? Why would a society place such a high value on such a performance? What are its affects on real relationships and real people.

I don't care who is 'bad'. You mentioned it, not me. To say that imbalanced distributions of power or fantasies which promote such exist in particular situations does not imply that anyone involved in that situation is 'bad'. Considering we're talking about a video game character who isn't real, I'm really not sure how 'bad' even comes into it.

Also, I would find hilarious that you seem to be under the impression that the fashion industry is somehow good for women if it weren't so pathetically, dangerously wrong.

Yeah, I'd find it hilarious too if I'd said it.

I used a fashion image because it's based on identification fantasies. It is an example of using 'beauty' in a non-pornographic way. I genuinely don't know where you got this thing that I somehow think that's good, as opposed to just 'not pornographic'.

Heck, you think I'd say all those generic macho space marines which form the default male character in every game are 'good for men' because they're identification fantasies?

And to go one step further and say I think the fashion industry is good for women, as if my comparing two images somehow equates to a blanket support of the entire industry which produced the one I was least offended by. Honestly, I have no idea how you got to that one. You're arguing with a position no-one has taken.

I hope someday you can realize that perhaps there's more to this than simply saying that everything women like is super cool and everything men like is naughty and wrong.

If you ever find someone who has said that, then let me know. I'll hope along with you.

I'm a man. I have sex with women. I like the kind of female bodies which get shown in some kinds of pornographic media. I have many fantasies and fetishes which are in many ways quite conventional and well-represented in pornographic tropes. What I refuse to do is to accept that women have a responsibility to be passive objects of my fantasies, or that visual media should reflect that.

It is certainly my privilege to live in a society that knows what I like. How about instead of trying futilely to take that away from me, you work on extending that same benefit to women as well?

Privilege isn't benefit.

Society shaped your desires from the day you were born, that's why it 'knows what you like'. Your mistake is to assume that your position is so natural and so desirable it would be impossible for anyone in their right mind to want anything different.

I mean, who wouldn't want to sit around pretending that people you will never meet or speak to are actually accessible to you, that they can be 'bought' for the price of a magazine or a game or a movie. I can genuinely think of no more satisfying or less depressing way of expressing your sexuality.

I'll get right to work on extending those 'benefits' to women. Maybe along the way I'll actually interact with women on a basic human level as well.

HA! Projecting! There's a word that just screams "I'm not nearly half as smart as I think I am!"

Only if I was using it incorrectly.

That's alright though, this is really a win for both of us. You get to run off feeling all smugly superior, and I get to know you'll grow out of it one day.

If you say so.

Maybe one day you'll grow out of assuming you understand people well enough to tell them what they think. I hope it's not too painful.

 

[xdom125x]

No, Bayonetta isn't sexist.
I don't quite understand why her being hot or aware of sexuality or being made by women can play a factor in determining if this game is sexist.

 

[ZephrC]

snip

Pfft. I don't even accept that your ridiculously broad definition of pornography is all bad. You just don't seem to get it, do you? Reality is not this neat little thing where you can make everyone want the same things you want. For instance, sure you're right that some women do want to please men because they grew up in a skewed society. Some just like the control it gives them over men. And some honestly just think it's fun. If you try to paint it all as porn and horrible you're completely missing the point. Also abusing the crap out of the word pornography in ways it was never intended.

You will never end that kind of behavior. It will be around for longer than anything we would recognize as humanity. If you hate it so much, well, that's your privilege. I'd rather recognize humanity for the bizarre, interesting creature it is. There's nothing wrong with wanting to improve humanity, of course, but if you think men and women will ever stop trying to manipulate each other, or that we will ever stop using sex in our efforts to do so, you are sadly mistaken.

You keep going off on me for making assumptions about you, but the assumptions you make about me are far worse, and far less grounded in reality. However, this is an internet argument. There's no point in taking this shit seriously. If you want to believe that I just lay around jerking off to underwear models on the internet feel free. I wouldn't stop you even if I could. Really though, that's getting into why I don't take the internet seriously anymore, which is a whole different discussion.

 

[TiefBlau]

It's not necessarily sexist, but it's definitely not empowering.

 

[LittleBlondeGoth]

Frankly I was too busy going "what the ****, this is absolutely mental" to be worrying about whether the character design was sexist. Which, upon reflection, I don't think it is.

Lots of people have said it already, but it bears repeating - she's sexy, but that's not all there is to her. She's not a helpless damsel in distress, getting into a jam and waiting for a big strong man to save her whilst showing off her tattybojangles. She gets on and saves herself. And gets a cool outfit and gun shoes into the bargain not to mention summoning creatures made of hair. As an aside, where can I get me a pair of those heels, they're bloody awesome...

There's plenty of game leads who are fine specimins of the male form (Dante, Vincent, I'm looking at you. Um. A lot). Why get worked up over one that happens to be female and attractive?

 

[AngloDoom]

I've not played the game the whole way through, so my opinion is going to be based solely off my first few levels playthrough of the game.

My question is: are there reasons behind why she moans like she's having an orgasm during combat and cutscenes? Are there reasons why the character seems to sexualise everything around her?
She's most certainly sexulised and since I haven't played the game through I don't know if this is a necessary part of her character so I'll naturally have to lean more toward 'sexist', because the message so far seems to be "women can be powerful if they're sexy."

 

[Vault101]

hmmm it seems to be a hard question

well since I havnt played Im not goign to go out and call her sexist

however I wont be putting her on my "top female game portagonist" of all time list