Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Manchu wrote:
The metal pecs or the metal abs?

The big uniboob.

 Manchu wrote:
Are you saying strength is not a sexually desirable trait in men?

Yes. Yes, I am saying strength is not inherently sexual. Why, does that surprise you?

 Manchu wrote:
And that is exactly why straight men want to be like James Bond -- so straight ladies will want to be with them.

I wonder how Black Window would be perceived if she had half as much sex with half as many partners as James Bond…

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I wonder how Black Window would be perceived if she had half as much sex with half as many partners as James Bond…

Now you are getting into some interesting territory and this kind of double-standard is exactly why I think we should keep in mind that there is nothing wrong with being sexy for men or women. Sometimes, the response to feminist critiques is wanting to throw blankets over women to "protect" them from sexism when that itself is just more sexism. It is okay for women to be sexy. It is not okay for women to be treated or depicted as objects or dehumanized (called sluts or skanks) because they are sexy.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Yes. Yes, I am saying strength is not inherently sexual. Why, does that surprise you?

Come on man, the bloke on the cover of Mens Health appeals to the vast majority of gay men/straight women more than some 90lb weakling, were evolved apes, there is a perfectly logical and natural reason for this, and there is no reason we have to feel guilty about it either.

 mattyrm wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Yes. Yes, I am saying strength is not inherently sexual. Why, does that surprise you?

Come on man, the bloke on the cover of Mens Health appeals to the vast majority of gay men/straight women more than some 90lb weakling, were evolved apes, there is a perfectly logical and natural reason for this, and there is no reason we have to feel guilty about it either.

I love the fact this is true.

 mattyrm wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Yes. Yes, I am saying strength is not inherently sexual. Why, does that surprise you?

Come on man, the bloke on the cover of Mens Health appeals to the vast majority of gay men/straight women more than some 90lb weakling, were evolved apes, there is a perfectly logical and natural reason for this, and there is no reason we have to feel guilty about it either.

That said, valuing strength over virtue, justice, and so on can easily lead to some very, very bad decisions and objectionable things in a story that give a lot of unfortunate implications which aren't always really based in fact. And a lot of media seems to do this.

 mattyrm wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Yes. Yes, I am saying strength is not inherently sexual. Why, does that surprise you?

Come on man, the bloke on the cover of Mens Health appeals to the vast majority of gay men/straight women more than some 90lb weakling, were evolved apes, there is a perfectly logical and natural reason for this, and there is no reason we have to feel guilty about it either.

For what it's worth, a lot of straight woman and gay men I know definitely go for the slim pretty-boy look. Almost all of them, now that I think of it. I can only think of one person I've met that I'm aware actively prefers big/strong to slim/toned.

 Chongara wrote:

 mattyrm wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Yes. Yes, I am saying strength is not inherently sexual. Why, does that surprise you?

Come on man, the bloke on the cover of Mens Health appeals to the vast majority of gay men/straight women more than some 90lb weakling, were evolved apes, there is a perfectly logical and natural reason for this, and there is no reason we have to feel guilty about it either.

For what it's worth, a lot of straight woman and gay men I know definitely go for the slim pretty-boy look. Almost all of them, now that I think of it. I can only think of one person I've met that I'm aware actively prefers big/strong to slim/toned.

Oh yeah, too big is definitely not preferable, probably for the same reason, I suppose the ape in us thinks that anything too large (say like Arnold) looks a little freakish and wouldnt be able to run down a deer or escape from a predator. I suppose that explains the common aversion to the obese as well. But "slim pretty boy" is also "pretty" so thats hardly an argument against is it? Plus, slim is not skinny. Slim is healthy, too skinny, is too skinny.

And I said Mens Health because generally they look actually healthy, not stupidly muscular. Someone like Cristiano Ronaldo or Beckham for example, really are "slim and pretty" they arent fething beasts.

 Melissia wrote:
That said, valuing strength over virtue, justice, and so on can easily lead to some very, very bad decisions and objectionable things in a story that give a lot of unfortunate implications which aren't always really based in fact. And a lot of media seems to do this

Absolutely, but that's precisely because we ARE stupid chimps. We always judge people by how they look, even though we know its preposterous and the most evil person ever can have a pretty face. Or as Frodo put it, "I think a servant of the Enemy would look fairer and feel fouler."

 Chongara wrote:
For what it's worth, a lot of straight woman and gay men I know definitely go for the slim pretty-boy look.

Also FWIW my argument was that big muscles on a male character generates sex appeal for a straight male target demographic.

 Manchu wrote:

 Chongara wrote:
For what it's worth, a lot of straight woman and gay men I know definitely go for the slim pretty-boy look.

Also FWIW my argument was that big muscles on a male character generates sex appeal for a straight male target demographic.

Well, I was more addressing the specific comment I was quoting than anything it was referencing from earlier up-thread. I'd probably tend to agree with this statement depending on how we define "sex appeal". Honestly though I'd be willing to bet we're not quite working from the same definition, as I think our views on how to frame all this are a fair bit different.

That said, I'm not sure that analyzing how straight men perceive and relate to depictions of other straight men as a matter of their sexuality is the best thing to focus on in a thread about the perceptions of women.

 Manchu wrote:
It is okay for women to be sexy.

Yeah. And it is okay for men too. But just like you would not do it all the time for men, you should not do it all the time with women. I think basically, if you are not discriminating on gender, it means somehow you are doing better than if you were.

 mattyrm wrote:
Come on man, the bloke on the cover of Mens Health appeals to the vast majority of gay men/straight women more than some 90lb weakling

Yes. And still, it is George Clooney rather than Arnold Schwarzenneger who is considered one of the sexiest men. And then, actual weight-lifter like this:


Sexy? Who are you kidding?
It is rather a question of being fit than being strong.

 Chongara wrote:
For what it's worth, a lot of straight woman and gay men I know definitely go for the slim pretty-boy look. Almost all of them, now that I think of it.

My Iranian friend told me they have an expression with her sister for very muscled men that translate roughly to vase. And they do not like that. They find that they look ridiculous. I remember her commenting that way about some guy at the pool .


Really, I think the idea that male super hero are sexualized because they are strong is just based on a misconception from men what their power fantasy is what women find attractive. It is not.

 Chongara wrote:

 Manchu wrote:

 Chongara wrote:
For what it's worth, a lot of straight woman and gay men I know definitely go for the slim pretty-boy look.

Also FWIW my argument was that big muscles on a male character generates sex appeal for a straight male target demographic.

Well, I was more addressing the specific comment I was quoting than anything it was referencing from earlier up-thread. I'd probably tend to agree with this statement depending on how we define "sex appeal". Honestly though I'd be willing to bet we're not quite working from the same definition, as I think our views on how to frame all this are a fair bit different.

That said, I'm not sure that analyzing how straight men perceive and relate to depictions of other straight men as a matter of their sexuality is the best thing to focus on in a thread about the perceptions of women.

I think its very relevant really, I think that as always we wind up casting people into certain bands or parties for ease of debate but its a very complex question because ultimately everyone is different and has wildly differing tastes. Its relevant because some men like playing as ridiculous big ass ultra-men and some like playing as very normal looking guys, its all shapes and sizes and colors, so why not the same with how women are represented?

Some men like women in their games to look very regular and plain like the OC in Space Marine, others like highly sexualized, kinky looking ones. There is no easy answer to the question because we all have very different tastes.

Some women like playing as super sexy women, some like playing as men, some like playing as creatures, the members of my wow guild attest to that. Lots of the women like playing as sexy Night-Elves though, its escapism after all.

So I suppose its all down to personal preference. Personally I think I prefer playing as men, but have little issue with playing as a woman as long as it isn't over the top kinky. I suppose its because that's the way I've always been, In Iraq two Page 3 girls visited the camp and I ran off to the gym and managed to completely avoid them, I didn't like seeing pretty women 4 months into a tour, especially when all I will get is a peck on the cheek. The same went for Christmas decorations, I always liked the complete isolation method of dealing with a tour of duty, each to their own.

Basically what I'm saying is that I don't like seeing it because I dont want to start thinking about sex unless I am going to be having sex. My wife says I'm very stereotypical British because she has to pester me about it..... I never would have saw that coming when I was 18

I take it as a compliment. I don't like to see tits and ass when I'm trying to solve puzzles, so I prefer women to look like normal everyday women, and I like Victoria Miniatures female guard much more than many of the slutty models with no clothes on for the same reason, but I suppose I can conceive why people of both genders feel differently.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Yes. And still, it is George Clooney rather than Arnold Schwarzenneger who is considered one of the sexiest men.

Of course, I agree, but you didn't say that, you said "strength is not inherently attractive" and it is. George Clooney doesn't look weak.

I specifically picked Mens Health because they are almost always below 200lbs, not Arnold or Lou Ferigno or some hulking 320lb muscle head for that reason, you want a weight lifting magazine for that kind of thing. People like lithe and toned and strong because it harks back to when we had to run away from wolves regularly.. Massive and muscular is about the same as obese and fat it seems, both are rarely considered attractive. I never, and wouldn't, say that women like massive muscly blokes, because they don't.

They DO like strong though. Show any straight woman or gay man Brad Pitt with his shirt off in fight club and they almost always go "phwoar!" he doesn't look "weak" does he? He looks strong and fit, just not stupidly massive like a bodybuilder.

And that is pretty much the generic desirable male for most people, slim and lithe, but definitely strong, and sensibly sized.

- Write message
- Get into a Strife game
- Post message
- Read thread
Damn! Message completely out of date!

 mattyrm wrote:
Of course, I agree, but you didn't say that, you said "strength is not inherently attractive" and it is.

Well, being fit is inherently attractive, that I can support. But saying that Hulk is sexualized because he looks strong, that is not something I would agree with, and from what you wrote, I think you agree with that. Remember, I was writing this in a context. And I wrote taht strength is not inherently sexual .

 Manchu wrote:
Also FWIW my argument was that big muscles on a male character generates sex appeal for a straight male target demographic.

I am not very sure what you mean by sex appeal, given that by definition this demographic is not sexually attracted to male characters. They do like them as a power fantasy, and because they do like them, they tend to assume women would like them to. That is about it.

 Chongara wrote:
I'm not sure that analyzing how straight men perceive and relate to depictions of other straight men as a matter of their sexuality is the best thing to focus on in a thread about the perceptions of women.

It's not that I want to focus on it. I've had to go through this hullabaloo to demonstrate a point about sexualization.

To summarize, using sexualization as a synonym for dehumanization or objectification can and does result in confusing sexiness/sex appeal/sexual attractiveness (whatever those terms might mean) with sexism/marginalization. A more nuanced understanding of sexualization is necessary to avoid the endless red herring arguments about high heel height, bra size, and square inches of bare skin as well as the overarching "sexy must be bad" conclusion. The "throw a blanket over her" solution (so-called), whether deployed sincerely or in bad faith, is not only sex-negative but also downright sexist.

Furthermore, grounding sexualization in an uncritical concept like "sexual attractiveness" ignores that the concept hinges on intersubjectivity. That a given person does not find the Hulk sexually attractive in the sense of having sexual fantasies about the Hulk does not mean the Hulk is not sexualized. Once we can admit that both characters are indeed sexualized, we can continue with a more informed investigation of how their sexualization differs and why.

 Manchu wrote:

 Chongara wrote:
I'm not sure that analyzing how straight men perceive and relate to depictions of other straight men as a matter of their sexuality is the best thing to focus on in a thread about the perceptions of women.

It's not that I want to focus on it. I've had to go through this hullabaloo to demonstrate a point about sexualization.

To summarize, using sexualization as a synonym for dehumanization or objectification can and does result in confusing sexiness/sex appeal/sexual attractiveness (whatever those terms might mean) with sexism/marginalization. A more nuanced understanding of sexualization is necessary to avoid the endless red herring arguments about high heel height, bra size, and square inches of bare skin as well as the overarching "sexy must be bad" conclusion. The "throw a blanket over her" solution (so-called), whether deployed sincerely or in bad faith, is not only sex-negative but also downright sexist.

Furthermore, grounding sexualization in an uncritical concept like "sexual attractiveness" ignores that the concept hinges on intersubjectivity. That a given person does not find the Hulk sexually attractive in the sense of having sexual fantasies about the Hulk does not mean the Hulk is not sexualized. Once we can admit that both characters are indeed sexualized, we can continue with a more informed investigation of how their sexualization differs and why.

Thing is, I've never really seen the word "Sexualization" used as you're using it here. The dictionary definitions available are nebulous at best and the only definition cited so far: from Hybrid's wikipedia link, certainly isn't in-line with the way you're using. The definitions I've seen are usually much closer to the one hybrid cited, if not so inherently negative. It's very hard to get on board with your terminology because I suspect it's not how most of us have learned to use the language.

I mean I think I can kind of digest your points here, I'm pretty sure I understand what you're saying. However, I can't be certain I'm reading you correctly because you're using these terms so differently than I'm used to. If accept your premise I (and I suspect others), won't be able to continue the discussion effectively because I won't have the proper reference points.

 Manchu wrote:
A more nuanced understanding of sexualization is necessary to avoid the endless red herring arguments about high heel height, bra size, and square inches of bare skin as well as the overarching "sexy must be bad" conclusion. The "throw a blanket over her" solution (so-called), whether deployed sincerely or in bad faith, is not only sex-negative but also downright sexist.

Has anyone here actually argued that “sexy must be bad”?

 Manchu wrote:
Furthermore, grounding sexualization in an uncritical concept like "sexual attractiveness" ignores that the concept hinges on intersubjectivity. That a given person does not find the Hulk sexually attractive in the sense of having sexual fantasies about the Hulk does not mean the Hulk is not sexualized. Once we can admit that both characters are indeed sexualized, we can continue with a more informed investigation of how their sexualization differs and why.

But the Hulk is not sexualized. On the other hand, androgynous characters can be sexualized, and sometime are sexualized (many examples in manga). At least with the usual definition. If you want to use an alternate definition, please just define a new word. Call it sexualized2, or revisilatation, or anything else that will avoid confusion with the pre-existing definition, so we can have a chance to understand you.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
A more nuanced understanding of sexualization is necessary to avoid the endless red herring arguments about high heel height, bra size, and square inches of bare skin as well as the overarching "sexy must be bad" conclusion. The "throw a blanket over her" solution (so-called), whether deployed sincerely or in bad faith, is not only sex-negative but also downright sexist.

Has anyone here actually argued that “sexy must be bad”?

I was about ready to talk about how I kind of want to see more sexy characters that are actually sexual creatures. As in they like sex. You really don't see that. Games have a lot of titillation and characters who look sexy, but not many characters who like sex. It's often the trope that a character dresses very sexy well being almost violently opposed to actually having sex. (Actually movie bob had a little video where he talked about bayonetta being one of the few female characters that wants sex.)

nomotog wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
A more nuanced understanding of sexualization is necessary to avoid the endless red herring arguments about high heel height, bra size, and square inches of bare skin as well as the overarching "sexy must be bad" conclusion. The "throw a blanket over her" solution (so-called), whether deployed sincerely or in bad faith, is not only sex-negative but also downright sexist.

Has anyone here actually argued that “sexy must be bad”?

I was about ready to talk about how I kind of want to see more sexy characters that are actually sexual creatures. As in they like sex. You really don't see that. Games have a lot of titillation and characters who look sexy, but not many characters who like sex. It's often the trope that a character dresses very sexy well being almost violently opposed to actually having sex. (Actually movie bob had a little video where he talked about bayonetta being one of the few female characters that wants sex.)

Seriously that's weird mate.

nomotog wrote:
I was about ready to talk about how I kind of want to see more sexy characters that are actually sexual creatures. As in they like sex. You really don't see that. Games have a lot of titillation and characters who look sexy, but not many characters who like sex. It's often the trope that a character dresses very sexy well being almost violently opposed to actually having sex. (Actually movie bob had a little video where he talked about bayonetta being one of the few female characters that wants sex.)

It's also a case of a character just not meshing with their visual design. If you're character is in an outfit held together by wishful thinking, it gets really awkward when she gets upset about people noticing. It's a pretty sure sign "this character was designed to give you a boner and nothing else about her is going to matter in this story." EDIT: And oh god does this get cliche really fast in anime and manga.

And yes, Bayonetta was a great break from this. I think one of our own posters once said in another thread on this subject something like "Yeah she wants it, but you're sure as hell not good enough to give it to her" and that just seems so accurate now that I've played the game.

 LordofHats wrote:

nomotog wrote:
I was about ready to talk about how I kind of want to see more sexy characters that are actually sexual creatures. As in they like sex. You really don't see that. Games have a lot of titillation and characters who look sexy, but not many characters who like sex. It's often the trope that a character dresses very sexy well being almost violently opposed to actually having sex. (Actually movie bob had a little video where he talked about bayonetta being one of the few female characters that wants sex.)

It's also a case of a character just not meshing with their visual design. If you're character is in an outfit held together by wishful thinking, it gets really awkward when she gets upset about people noticing. It's a pretty sure sign "this character was designed to give you a boner and nothing else about her is going to matter in this story." EDIT: And oh god does this get cliche really fast in anime and manga.

And yes, Bayonetta was a great break from this. I think one of our own posters once said in another thread on this subject something like "Yeah she wants it, but you're sure as hell not good enough to give it to her" and that just seems so accurate now that I've played the game.

That was a quote form the moviebob video

Well good lines do spread

 Chongara wrote:
I won't have the proper reference points

It is up to us to establish them.

The social phenomenon we are talking about are very well entrenched in our culture but talking about them critically is relatively novel. The terminology is understandably clumsy, not least of all because it is so burdened by the near invisible bonds of ideology. A concept like "sexual attractiveness" is bound up with a specific point of view. One thing we are beginning to understand is that we cannot take a given point of view for granted and measure everything else by it.

But there is wide consensus in our culture that adults are the proper subjects of sexual behavior. And sexually speaking, adults differ from children in terms of the development of secondary sexual characteristics. Unsurprisingly, contemplation of these characteristics is a prominent aspect of appraising sexual appeal. Analyzing the way they are depicted, especially in the absence of non-visual elements of characterization, is therefore clearly a useful basis for discussing _____.

I would put the term "sexualization" in that blank space. But others would object because "sexualization" can only signify something inherently negative. If you agree with that perspective, I welcome any suggestions for an alternative term. As I have already explained, I picked the term "sexualization" precisely to rehabilitate it -- to liberate it from the kind of sex-negative usage that you claim is the standard.

 mattyrm wrote:

nomotog wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
A more nuanced understanding of sexualization is necessary to avoid the endless red herring arguments about high heel height, bra size, and square inches of bare skin as well as the overarching "sexy must be bad" conclusion. The "throw a blanket over her" solution (so-called), whether deployed sincerely or in bad faith, is not only sex-negative but also downright sexist.

Has anyone here actually argued that “sexy must be bad”?

I was about ready to talk about how I kind of want to see more sexy characters that are actually sexual creatures. As in they like sex. You really don't see that. Games have a lot of titillation and characters who look sexy, but not many characters who like sex. It's often the trope that a character dresses very sexy well being almost violently opposed to actually having sex. (Actually movie bob had a little video where he talked about bayonetta being one of the few female characters that wants sex.)

Seriously that's weird mate.

I mentioned the V-W dichotomy in my PM to you, this is probably as good an example of the weird effects it has on media as I can get without putting forth any effort of my own (which, I think you'll agree, is a preferable situation for me )

 Melissia wrote:
I mentioned the V-W dichotomy in my PM to you, this is probably as good an example of the weird effects it has on media as I can get without putting forth any effort of my own (which, I think you'll agree, is a preferable situation for me )

Oh I understand the concept, I'm just saying I personally think its weird because I don't play games in any way, shape, or form to get aroused, so I'm not really bothered about the women present looking very sexy, let alone actually adding the whole aggressive flirtation or sexual arousal deal into the game, it just.. doesn't really concern me. I mean, admittedly I did get pretty in to Mass Effect, but the whole romance thing was about 1% of it, I spent waaaay more time chasing the fething resources around the galaxy with that cool yet somewhat annoying blippy scanner mini-game (I forget which ME game that was) than I did chatting to the women. In fact, I used to skip the chatter and keep tapping the mouse to flick through it all.

 mattyrm wrote:
So I suppose its all down to personal preference. Personally I think I prefer playing as men, but have little issue with playing as a woman as long as it isn't over the top kinky. I suppose its because that's the way I've always been, In Iraq two Page 3 girls visited the camp and I ran off to the gym and managed to completely avoid them, I didn't like seeing pretty women 4 months into a tour, especially when all I will get is a peck on the cheek. The same went for Christmas decorations, I always liked the complete isolation method of dealing with a tour of duty, each to their own.

You got Page 3 girls? The carrier got Ben Affleck. Nice guy, fun to smoke with, interested as hell in everything, but I'd still have opted for Page 3 girls.

 Melissia wrote:
I mentioned the V-W dichotomy in my PM to you

What is this?

nomotog wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
A more nuanced understanding of sexualization is necessary to avoid the endless red herring arguments about high heel height, bra size, and square inches of bare skin as well as the overarching "sexy must be bad" conclusion. The "throw a blanket over her" solution (so-called), whether deployed sincerely or in bad faith, is not only sex-negative but also downright sexist.

Has anyone here actually argued that “sexy must be bad”?

I was about ready to talk about how I kind of want to see more sexy characters that are actually sexual creatures. As in they like sex. You really don't see that. Games have a lot of titillation and characters who look sexy, but not many characters who like sex. It's often the trope that a character dresses very sexy well being almost violently opposed to actually having sex. (Actually movie bob had a little video where he talked about bayonetta being one of the few female characters that wants sex.)

Oddly, apart from outliers like Kinzie from Saints Row (where her sexuality is played for laughs a bit), the only real example of a female video game character who enjoys sex that I can think of is Morinth from Mass Effect 2, and in her case her enjoyment of sex meant that she was a villain. Part of this might be because I generally enjoy more lighthearted games more than super serious games, but still, I'm surprised that I really can't think of any.

Virgin-whore dichotomy. When a woman is suppose to be innocent and pure yet sexy and available.

A virgin is good, loved, and pure, a whore is evil, hated, and impure, and each woman must be classified as one or the other.

As a result of this viewpoint being quite widespread, the view by many devs appears to be female character must be sexy, but not like sex, because then the assertion is that the player wouldn't like her because she'd be W of the V-W dichotomy.

 Goliath wrote:

nomotog wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
A more nuanced understanding of sexualization is necessary to avoid the endless red herring arguments about high heel height, bra size, and square inches of bare skin as well as the overarching "sexy must be bad" conclusion. The "throw a blanket over her" solution (so-called), whether deployed sincerely or in bad faith, is not only sex-negative but also downright sexist.

Has anyone here actually argued that “sexy must be bad”?

I was about ready to talk about how I kind of want to see more sexy characters that are actually sexual creatures. As in they like sex. You really don't see that. Games have a lot of titillation and characters who look sexy, but not many characters who like sex. It's often the trope that a character dresses very sexy well being almost violently opposed to actually having sex. (Actually movie bob had a little video where he talked about bayonetta being one of the few female characters that wants sex.)

Oddly, apart from outliers like Kinzie from Saints Row (where her sexuality is played for laughs a bit), the only real example of a female video game character who enjoys sex that I can think of is Morinth from Mass Effect 2, and in her case her enjoyment of sex meant that she was a villain. Part of this might be because I generally enjoy more lighthearted games more than super serious games, but still, I'm surprised that I really can't think of any.

Isabella from the Dragon Age series comes to mind.
She is very...adventurous when it comes to that sort of thing.
She is also not a villain.

Yup. Female characters who enjoy sex usually are villains in games. It's annoying and reminds me back to the days when movies used sexual "deviancy" as a shorthand for "this guy is a bad guy."

And Bayonetta rocks!