What's the line between a sex object and a sexual/sexy character?

[Hectix777]

Before I begin: Please, let's keep this discussion civil; this has much more to do with writing and design then it will with a character's appearance ("then why is design there?" I dunno)

TL;DR What separates a sex object from a sexual character?

I know this sounds like a really bad thing to discuss in the midst of GamerGate and everything else in the industry but I believe the topic does deserve exploration, we can't just ignore it and we can't just talk about it violently. So let's do this as composed as we possibly can.

Okay, so now that Bayonetta has been released I've been sort of forced to ask myself ,"What exactly makes someone 'sexy'?". I know this seems like a stupid question to ask because it has a fairly straightforward answer, but I feel like there's more that needs to be asked. The best comparison I can offer to illustrate my confusion though would be, well, Bayonetta against someone like Kasumi from DOAX.

A long time ago I would have called Kasumi sexy because she wandered around on an island with almost nothing on. Now, I sort of feel insulted in a way when I look back at that game. DOAX (I know it's spin-off to a fighting game) is basically built from the ground up for male gratification, just about every character is put on display for the viewer and nothing else. It's just throwing out what we want to see and hoping it gets buyers.

With Bayonetta though, it's almost the same but entirely different. Bayonetta was designed to be over the top sexually, in fights, in appearance, in everything. She's the personification of the dial turned up to 11. More importantly, her outfit is a skin tight suit made of her own hair, that vanishes- leaving her exposed- in order to do crazy attacks. As the Gametrailer review of it puts her,"she flaunts it," and never once does it seem sort of like "we're doing this because this is what all the guys want to see." She attacks with incredibly sensual movements and is just reveling in it. Bayonetta comes off as a much more attractive and appealing character in most in this sense, this leaves me asking why?

This doesn't go for just someone like Bayonetta, but also characters like Lust from FMA, Catwoman from DC, June from Avatar, hell Jessica-FREAKING-Rabbit! Even in male characters too: Bruce Wayne, Chris Redfield(?), James Bond, Nathan Drake, and even Dio Brando!

I'm sorry I don't have more examples, but these women and men somehow manage to be more appealing than any character who just exposes it all for free. Why? The most concise answer I've been given so far is that it relates to the idea of "show don't tell" but that's still vague in a sense for me. So what do you think? What exactly separates someone who was created to be eye candy from someone who is much more than that?

 

[Terminal Blue]

I don't think there is a particularly firm line. It's up to us where we want to put that line, and we can certainly have a lot of fun having a discussion about it.

But one thing I will say is to remember that these are fictional characters. They did not choose to be sexy. They are not empowered by being sexy. They are a commercial product created for you, the consumer, to enjoy. What's interesting about these characters is the precise dynamics of the fantasy they provide. To put it quite simplistically, what kind of real world interactions are they simulating with the player?

I think what you've identified is an important difference though, because it strikes me that it's about the line between a character who is simply there for their sexual attributes and a character whose sexual attributes are mediated by their fictional personality.

Let me illustrate this with a real world example. Guys (and sometimes girls) go to strip clubs to see good looking women getting paid to take their clothes off and dance. Now, you could say that this, like all sex work, is about the commodification of women's (or very occasionally men's) bodies, and I agree with that, but I think within that commodification there's a lot of confusion over what exactly the power dynamic of sex work is.

True, women (I'll stick with the most common gender dynamic here for simplicity) who engage in sex work are there because they need to make money, but there's also (I think) a flipside to that, in that the guys are only allowed to be there because they pay money. They are buying the illusion that they are buying these women, when in fact what they are buying is a service. Once your money is gone, you have to leave.

Now, some (by no means all) guys, weirdly including many guys who are regular clients of sex workers, seem to find this very threatening. They assume that as men they should have a certain power, that when they buy access to a woman's body they are buying a whole person and are therefore entitled to more than what is contractually arranged. I suspect this is part of why violence and denigration against sex workers is so common, because sex work (outside of trafficking and coercion, both of which are serious problems which I'm not trying to minimize) both puts men in a position of power but also makes that power highly contingent, and this kind of reveals to us the degree to which all power over another person's sexuality is contingent, even if the script some people are still reading from sometimes seems to imply that it shouldn't be.

And this strikes me as quite indicative of the difference between a sexy character and a sex object. When you consume media about sexuality you are always in a position of control, right? You're buying the unrestricted right to consume representations of something you find enjoyable or pleasurable, those fictional characters don't get to watch you back or negotiate consent with you because they don't exist. But by giving them developed personalities, we can simulate the contingencies on which access to sex depends without simply indulging a fantasy of absolute control.

I'm not 100% sure that's enough, precisely because it is just an illusion. As I said, I think it's something we can and should talk about and argue, but I do think it's a significant line.

 

[Grizzly_Bear_1]

I think Gamergate is a perfect time to discuss such things.

My serious answer is, a sex object in a game is not how much or little clothes a character wears, but if he/she is unwillingly submissive and there is little to no emotional attachment to that person.

I guess I'm coming from how the story in the game interacts with the character, not how the individual player interprets the characters. I really have no idea where to draw the line, or if there is even a point in trying to. Many people believe in the saying that, what two people do in their own private time is their own business. I, on a personal level, have a big problem with that, if one person is being emotionally manipulated.

 

[LaoJim]

I know this sounds like a really bad thing to discuss in the midst of GamerGate and everything else in the industry but I believe the topic does deserve exploration, we can't just ignore it and we can't just talk about it violently. So let's do this as composed as we possibly can.

Okay, so now that Bayonetta has been released I've been sort of forced to ask myself ,"What exactly makes someone 'sexy'?". I know this seems like a stupid question to ask because it has a fairly straightforward answer, but I feel like there's more that needs to be asked. The best comparison I can offer to illustrate my confusion though would be, well, Bayonetta against someone like Kasumi from DOAX.

You're in luck. Anita is going to explain it to us all in her next video, entitled "Fighting Fuck Toys"

Spoiler

Apparently she's not a Bayonetta fan.

Sarcasm aside, I'm actually quite looking forward to this. Hopefully she will actually engage with those who think that (rightly or wrongly) that Bayonetta is a progressive character rather than just say "OMG her hair flies off when she does a finishing move".

Spoiler: (see MovieBob's analysis here for example)

Anyway the (or rather my) short answer is I think is that a sex object is valued only for the sexual services she/he can provide for others whereas a sexual character is one who is confident enough to find gratification through sex themselves. It all gets rather abstract because a sex object will often be forced (programmed in this case) to pretend to be enjoying sex. With fictional characters it is thus impossible to truly say whether they are sex objects or sexual beings but well-written believable characters are likely to be sexual whereas sex objects will not have their own motivations for seeking sex spelled out much since it is not necessary for the players gratification.

One acid test might be "does this characters actions seem to be in line with how a real person of this gender/sexuality/culture would behave in this situation?" Since everything about Bayonetta is over-the-top she'd likely fail this test. I haven't played Dead or Alive Extreme, but

Spoiler: consider this Antarctic scene from Dead or Alive 5 (sorry ignore the voice over guy) paying particular attention to the young lady's clothing

We could change this a little to "is it believable that a character would find enjoyment in behaving in the way they do?" Here Bayonetta scores highly as she always seems to be having a whale of time and she is generally so powerful and outside of human society that there are few consequences for her to behave however she wants.

Another test might be "does the characters situation and choices seems to be too conveniently arranged for the player's own gratification?" One could argue that while it might be a reasonable story conceit that Bayonetta's power derives from her hair, most people who found they needed to use this power to fight off giant multi-headed angels on a regular basis might choose to wear normal clothes (maybe underneath the 'shield' layer that the hair normally provides), so they don't need to get naked every time they use a finishing move. If people object that "It's okay because Bayonetta is so sexually liberated that she doesn't mind getting naked", the answer is, "well, how convenient for (male) viewer".

All of this assumes that having characters who are to some degree sex objects is a bad thing. A gamer criticized for playing such games would be well within their rights to say "Go away. I like looking at sexy women/men, I know she's not real, it's not hurting anyone."

 

[Rayce Archer]

I think Gamergate is a perfect time to discuss such things.

My serious answer is, a sex object in a game is not how much or little clothes a character wears, but if he/she is unwillingly submissive and there is little to no emotional attachment to that person.

I guess I'm coming from how the story in the game interacts with the character, not how the individual player interprets the characters. I really have no idea where to draw the line, or if there is even a point in trying to. Many people believe in the saying that, what two people do in their own private time is their own business. I, on a personal level, have a big problem with that, if one person is being emotionally manipulated.

Bang on. The DOA girls are just there as fodder for the libidos of the sexually retarded adult men teen boys playing the game. Bayonetta is a comedy badass who takes off her clothes because it's funny.

 

[DrOswald]

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 and 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 through 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.

 

[Hectix777]

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 and 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 through 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.

By the sound of it, there should be some kind of chart where sex appeal is the x-axis and its existence as a factor running along the y-axis. To be honest that in itself sounds like a pretty good reference in literary exercise and critique.

But on point here, the main things that allows Bayonetta to stand out is the fact that her sexuality empower her, she just doesn't give a damn and is gonna dress how she wants. To be honest if I were in her shoes I'd probably go around in a monokini with baby guy out.

But I do get something from this, more so that DOA girls are the foils to which most female characters must be held. But a lot more finding a balance between sexuality enhancing someone and it sort of being all they are or are known for.

 

[Fieldy409_v1legacy]

True, women (I'll stick with the most common gender dynamic here for simplicity) who engage in sex work are there because they need to make money, but there's also (I think) a flipside to that, in that the guys are only allowed to be there because they pay money. They are buying the illusion that they are buying these women, when in fact what they are buying is a service. Once your money is gone, you have to leave.

Its not always about having to make money, you can read about pornstars who have degrees if you go looking. Some women enjoy sex work or stripping, feel a thrill out of being worshipped as a sex godess and feel sexual thrill out of exposing themselves and knowing that they gratify people. Its not always about the money, they can find it fun. Its the same reason some people do webcam shows for free. Or, if you are enjoying it, might as well make some money while doing it if you can.

 

[Riotguards]

easy sex objects have no qualities about them but only engage as eye toys

take "ride to hell" for the best example of sex objects

a sexual character is where a character is written to be strongly provocative with sexual passes while never revealing anything

they're often written as strong independent people whom are often in control of what they do

i can name a few being, bayonetta, tomb raider, Samus (to a degree), Cortana and a good few others

 

[Rebel_Raven]

I'd put the line right about here:
1: Are they there to get banged, stared at, and offer little else? Sex object.

2: Do they have a point other than stated in point 1, but are still created to be attractive?

Of course there's a prism, here. I'm kinda pointing at extremes, yet not far from the line.

A sexy character has something of a role in the game aside from being a shop vendor, or there.

A sex object is basically an NPC that exists solely for the pleasure of the person interacting.

Edit: You kinda point it out in your question, OP. A Character will have, well, character. An object doesn't really have character, it just is.

 

[Morti]

Very little I'm afraid. A sexual character would, by definition, have to distinuish herself from the crowd with her sexuality. When the crowd is pointlessly sexualised as well, she no longer stands out.

Further compounded by how characters are not real people, their actions and appearance are not theirs to choose, they are a product of their creator. Take Bayonetta for instance: if this were a real story about a real woman, yes, she would be empowered and taking charge of he own sexuality, but once you realise she's just Hideki Kamiyas fap material and the the sexist bull* that he based his decisions on... not so much.

 

[crypticracer]

Very little I'm afraid. A sexual character would, by definition, have to distinuish herself from the crowd with her sexuality. When the crowd is pointlessly sexualised as well, she no longer stands out.

Further compounded by how characters are not real people, their actions and appearance are not theirs to choose, they are a product of their creator. Take Bayonetta for instance: if this were a real story about a real woman, yes, she would be empowered and taking charge of he own sexuality, but once you realise she's just Hideki Kamiyas fap material and the the sexist bull* that he based his decisions on... not so much.

This makes sense. But the problem is that we cannot always know a creators intention. In this case we have a well known director who has stated his purpose in designing her.

And yes, these are fictional characters. At best they can have only an illusion of agency. A Bayonetta wearing a parka has no more agency than a Bayonetta wearing her... hair.

 

[mecegirl]

I think it would be easier to tell if male characters were given the same treatment and if "sexy" wasn't limited to looks alone. As far as looks go. Men exist in the real world that don't mind showing off and dressing provocatively. But, we rarely see that within mainstream video games. Also, most women,although they may dress nicely, don't dress in sexually provocative ways unless they are going out for the weekend. That doesn't mean that millions of everyday women are sexually repressed just because they aren't always wearing their sexuality on their sleeves. There is literally no way to know what the average female office worker gets up to when she wants to get down based on how she looks during the week. But that's because as human beings women have complex lives that don't always center around sex. Why can't the same thing be done with video game characters? Why is Miranda from Mass effect necessarily more sexually liberated than Elena Fisher from Uncharted?

Being sexually liberated has little to do with looking overtly sexual, its about having confidence in, and control over, one's sex life. A lot of female characters(and by characters I mean the main protag or a supporting chracter) either have no romantic life to speak of, are the love interest for the main male protagonist, or are an option for the dateing sim like portion of an rpg. It creates a situation where the female character, and her "sexuality", is always on display for the player. If the female character actually had a significant other, that wasn't the male protagonist, there would be little way for the player to insert themselves into the character's sex lives. That's not to say that all female characters should never be a love interest for the main male character, but that writers need to mix things up a bit. I mean, does no one find it odd that we're never given a hint to how many notches Bayonetta has on her bedpost? Even Kratos(as visually unappealing as he is) gets to show how much of a stud he's supposed to be. Not saying that Bayonetta needs a sex mini game. It's just odd how a male character might get scene or two implying that he actually has sex, even if it just a scene post coitus. But for all her supposed sexuality Bayonneta does nothing but put on a show for the players with hers.

 

[nomotog_v1legacy]

One rule guild line eyeballing it thing you can use is to ask why such a character is sexy. Why are they wearing a shirt two sizes too small and black paint for pants. If you can't think of a reason for them to be like that, then they might be a sex object.

 

[zumbledum]

TL;DR What separates a sex object from a sexual character?

answers in the TL:dr! , whats the difference between an object and a character?

one has rights, opinions, desires, motivation, agency yada yada yada. the other one doesnt

 

[Itdoesthatsometimes]

To whoever next brings up DEAD or Alive and claims you can tell nothing about the Characters.
I have some pictures for you.

Wrester Tina Armstrong with real life Wrestlers Paige and Mickie James

Helena and real life Opera Singer Deboara

Mila a female MMA fighter Gina Carano former MMA fighter (Soon to be Wonder woman on the big screen)

So yeh, not that bad for Dead or Alive right ?
Or are people still going to claim you totally can't tell anything about their character from looking ?
Seriously people need to learn to look at something beyond the boobs.

I think if I just posted a picture of my penis, the viewer would have learned more about me than these pictures say for the DOA characters.

What was it exactly that those pictures were suppose to prove?

 

[Itdoesthatsometimes]

I think if I just posted a picture of my penis, the viewer would have learned more about me than these pictures say for the DOA characters.

What was it exactly that those pictures were suppose to prove?

Really did you just see boobs get a boner then your brain stopped working ?

One of the major claims is that it's impossible to tell anything about female characters while male characters are often distinct in saying about their career etc.

If you really can't see the similarities between the real world women and the game characters in terms of attire then I think you might have a far bigger problem.

If you think that showing a real life oper singer wears similar clothing while preforming, to the opera singer in DOA says something about her character...

Maybe, I'm going about this wrong. When I ask what does any of this say about her character, I am speaking of her personality. My mistake, I now see how speaking of a character's character can be confusing when taking about the line between sex object and sexy character. After all, if this topic was called, What is the line between a sex object and a sexual sexy personality, it would answer itself, wouldn't it?

 

[briankoontz]

It's about motivation. If the purpose of the character is to titillate consumers, it's a sex object. If the purpose is to have part of the game's construct or narrative feature a woman behaving sexily for her own reasons, it's a full character who just happens to be (temporarily) sexy.

When an artist creates a work, he needs to listen not to consumers, but to his own characters. Artists need to please their own characters moreso than any audience.

The vast majority of sexy female characters in gaming are sex objects - it's incredibly rare for a game developer to treat their characters as more important than their audience, with the entire artistic project suffering as a result. Turning women into sex objects is just one aspect of the failure of artistic corruption.