• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Was there implied rape in Bayonetta 1 and 2? *spoilers*

Mistouze

user-friendly man-cashews
If you follow Kamiya's twitter, you know he's a direct person. If the attack was a rape joke I'd expect him to tell people not to take it seriously instead of denying the intended implication.
I follow Kamiya's twitter and to be frank I'm really debating between "he put a rape implication in it and is totally oblivious to it cause he's to busy retweeting and drooling over pics of that model chick" and "he's avoiding a shit storm".

I've defended Bayonetta as an interesting female character before but I've never imagined Kamiya as a particularly progressive person on those matter. Just watch the documentary included inside the Eyes Of Bayo artbook or read interviews, Bayonetta is just his "fantasy woman". He never came out as really informed on those subjects. Remember the "I'm a bald but I'm not gay comments".
 

Jackson

Member
If you follow Kamiya's twitter, you know he's a direct person. If the attack was a rape joke I'd expect him to tell people not to take it seriously instead of denying what it is.

For someone whom I've always found to be very intelligent you seem to be blinded by fanboyism to the Nth degree.

Really? Game creator is going to tweet "nah bro it was a rape joke. funny rite?" in the industry's current climate? Yeah... no.

You calling Bayonetta 2 the best action game of the generation pretty much tells me you're going to defend this regardless of what the truth is.
 

Resilient

Member
we don't need to interpret kamiya's words. we have eyes. it's a rape reference. I don't even know what to say to you guys anymore.

I'm not even that upset about the rape reference. I think it's over the line and should be discussed and internalized -- what's getting me worked up is that most poeple in this thread can't even agree on what we're all seeing with our eyes. I'm shocked at you guys.

Oh ffs. Eyes is one part here when it's way more complicated than that. There are other ways to interpret this. The main being the CONTEXT. these two are FRIENDS. They share a relationship through the entire first game and the second. Why would they continue being friends if Rodin has raped her in Bayo 1? Dont you think that it is way more messed up?
 

sploatee

formerly Oynox Slider
Well this thread is interesting. I'll expect a Polygon article and change of their review score in the morning.

Not to troll (especially in a thread that's in the midst of exploding) but I thought they already took this into account (to a degree at least)?

Bayonetta 2 is my favourite game this year, but I still enjoyed reading Arthur Gies' review. Just because I really enjoy the game doesn't mean I can't listen to and understand opposing views on it.
 
I just hate how the word "rape" is being thrown around nowadays. All this will lead to is that people will have a watered-down perception of what rape actually is and people will start to associate "images of the naked female body" with "images of implied rape".

Drugging a woman, then having sex with her in your hotel room while she's unconscious?

Rape.

A woman who uses her hair as clothing and her power, lying naked on the floor?

Not rape.
 

RM8

Member
You realize Bayonetta 2 has way less sexual content than the original game right? I think you're uninformed if you're going to skip the best action game of the generation based on a sketchy and apparently inaccurate idea of Bayonetta 2's problematic elements.
I admitted ignorance, and the series being seemingly tasteless (from my outsider perspective) is just one of many reasons why I'm not itching to play it. I'm not even tired of TW101 yet which is infinitely more my style!
 

GamerJM

Banned
Okay, so people here are debating whether or not it's rape. But let's step back for a second and all assume it is rape. What is there really to discuss here? That's not a rhetorical question by the way, I'd like to see where the discussion of having a rape scene like this in a game like Bayonetta goes beyond this debate of whether or not it actually is rape. I think (most of us) can agree that it's fairly tasteless and doesn't really do anything to add to the game. That being said I don't think having a scene like this would really make me think much lesser of all of the positive female empowerment themes that a game like Bayonetta can be interpreted to (or not to) have.
 

Dahbomb

Member
That scene taken out of context is heavily suggestive of sex/rape.

However within the game, Bayonetta losing hair is related to her power and Rodin is almost never seen not smoking. So while it's highly suggestive, it's probably not intended.

That said when I saw it for the first time I assumed something sexual went down. It's honestly ambiguous enough that you can go either way on this.


This kinda reminds me of the RE5 racism issue. Not developer intent but the imagery used was so blatant that it was hard not to see it that way.
 
I would if I knew how to link tweets haha.
Sure. Hair's symbol of power RT @NarettRoman really need to lose her clothes in these attacks? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6e1H8M8cgg … http://gfycat.com/SoreGiantBubblefish …
She'll lose it after being dragged into Under world. RT @NarettRoman So how come she doesn't lose hair/clothes when about to die? also she's
That's Rodin's lethal blow, so Bayo loses all her power temporarily. Nothing's weird. RT @NarettRoman

https://twitter.com/PG_kamiya/status/539689955937624064
https://twitter.com/PG_kamiya/status/539690919964835841
https://twitter.com/PG_kamiya/status/539690919964835841
 
That scene taken out of context is heavily suggestive of sex/rape.

However within the game, Bayonetta losing hair is related to her power and Rodin is almost never seen not smoking. So while it's highly suggestive, it's probably not intended.

That said when I saw it for the first time I assumed something sexual went down. It's honestly ambiguous enough that you can go either way on this.

Luckily, context helps us to resolve ambiguity.
 

Jobbs

Banned
You can interpret something anyway you like, doesn't mean your 100% right.

Kamiya has ruled on it, and given the limited context I think calling it rape might be projecting a little when there are plenty of other explanations you can run with as well

except that I am 100% right. it's not a rorshack test. there's nothing ambiguous about it. she's grabbed, we fastforward to the aftermath and she's lying on the ground, naked, covering her rear defensively, while the attacker who grabbed her is smoking a cigarette (do you guys seriously not know that cigarette is shorthand for post coitus?).

img_0679.jpg


if I told you the artist intended for this to be a depiction of a polar bear in the snow, you wouldn't say "oh, that's right, my bad". you'd say "no, it's a bunny. it's furry, it's got a round little tail, long ears, and adorable beady eyes. these are the components that make it a bunny. I know what I am seeing."

enough already.
 

Raggie

Member
Dunno if it was intentional or not, but it does look like rape to me. Either way, they probably should have put more thought into that scene, I could see why some would find it highly disturbing.
 

enzo_gt

tagged by Blackace
Seems pretty blatant. Can't believe to big the defense force is
I think the worrying thing about the defense for is the desperate need to find contextual cues that could mean maybe it wasn't rape, as opposed to acknowledging that those same cues are also associated with rape. Like you know, nude poses implicating vulnerability and intercourse and a smug dominant figure smoking to his spoils in a violent scenario. Maybe consensual sex. Maybe rape. But let's just choose to singularly construe it as sex and deny alternative interpretations that use the same lines of reasoning.

I don't even want to dip deep into this when the first page has a bunch of "but they're friends!" arguments. Actually that might be the scariest thing in this entire thread.
 
Okay, so people here are debating whether or not it's rape. But let's step back for a second and all assume it is rape. What is there really to discuss here? That's not a rhetorical question by the way, I'd like to see where the discussion of having a rape scene like this in a game like Bayonetta goes beyond this debate of whether or not it actually is rape. I think (most of us) can agree that it's fairly tasteless and doesn't really do anything to add to the game. That being said I don't think having a scene like this would really make me think much lesser of all of the positive female empowerment themes that a game like Bayonetta can be interpreted to (or not to) have.
I would say, if it was the case, it's a method of making (Bayo and) the player subject to the same sexually-infused devastating attacks they dole out throughout the games. It's role reversal for one attack.

Many people would criticize this for being wholly tasteless and something that's disgusting when those who've deal with rape try to cope with it in their own lives. That this is a trigger for those very negative emotions and feelings.

That said, I feel I need to state again I don't really agree that it's the case. I just see simple power imbalance.
 

striferser

Huge Nickleback Fan
we don't need to interpret kamiya's words. we have eyes. it's a rape reference. I don't even know what to say to you guys anymore.

I'm not even that upset about the rape reference. I think it's over the line and should be discussed and internalized -- what's getting me worked up is that most poeple in this thread can't even agree on what we're all seeing with our eyes. I'm shocked at you guys.

Sex joke? Definitely
Rape joke? Nope
It take more than an eye to interpret scene.
 

unround

Member
There it is folks. The first "the creator is wrong" of the thread.

Seriously, you should start believing it. Maybe it's people with your opinions who are so far off base here to just instantly assume it's rape.

The creator loses all authority regarding interpretations and understanding of a work the moment it is released. I'm not interested in what they claim it to be, I'm interested in figuring out what it actually is, and to me, this pretty clearly reads as implied rape.
 

Nozem

Member
Yup, that is definitely a sex/rape joke.

I also think it's pretty funny, in a rediculous over the top kind of way.
 
except that I am 100% right. it's not a rorshack test. there's nothing ambiguous about it. she's grabbed, we fastforward to the aftermath and she's lying on the ground, naked, covering her rear defensively, while the attacker who grabbed her is smoking a cigarette (do you guys seriously not know that cigarette is shorthand for post coitus?).

img_0679.jpg


if I told you the author intended for this to be a depiction of a polar bear in the snow, you wouldn't say "oh, that's right, my bad". you'd say "no, it's a bunny. it has furry skin, a round little tail, long ears, and adorable beady eyes. these are the components that make it a bunny. I know what I am seeing."

enough already.
except you arent 100% right. You are going based off your opinion and beliefs of what you see. Dev spoke what he meant it to be. His words is basically fact since he made the game and essentially oversaw every aspect. Others gave their opinions as well.

You are entitled to your own opinion based on your beliefs, but dont say its 100% fact because it truly is not.

Hell the first thing I saw was this matched what Kamiya tweeted before I even read the tweet. You speak as if you never played bayonetta before.
 

Mistouze

user-friendly man-cashews
Oh ffs. Eyes is one part here when it's way more complicated than that. There are other ways to interpret this. The main being the CONTEXT. these two are FRIENDS. They share a relationship through the entire first game and the second. Why would they continue being friends if Rodin has raped her in Bayo 1? Dont you think that it is way more messed up?
You do understand we are talking about fictionnal characters with no real agency of their own? Bad characterization straight up exists and lays on the creators.

This is a nasty stain on an otherwise stellar game.
 

Resilient

Member
except that I am 100% right. it's not a rorshack test. there's nothing ambiguous about it. she's grabbed, we fastforward to the aftermath and she's lying on the ground, naked, covering her rear defensively, while the attacker who grabbed her is smoking a cigarette (do you guys seriously not know that cigarette is shorthand for post coitus?).

img_0679.jpg


if I told you the artist intended for this to be a depiction of a polar bear in the snow, you wouldn't say "oh, that's right, my bad". you'd say "no, it's a bunny. it's furry, it's got a round little tail, long ears, and adorable beady eyes. these are the components that make it a bunny. I know what I am seeing."

enough already.

Yeah okay. You're 100% right. Let's all keep blocking our ears.
 

Dahbomb

Member
Luckily, context helps us to resolve ambiguity.
It kinda doesn't. I would've bought it if Rodin wasn't posing on the ground too. Rodin "won the fight", clearly not severely harmed because he is relaxing with a cig... but why is he lying on the ground too?

Like I said, this sort of things happen a lot even when it's not intended ie. implied rascism in RE5..
 

Jackson

Member
She'll lose it after being dragged into Under world. RT @NarettRoman So how come she doesn't lose hair/clothes when about to die? also she's

This doesn't make sense to me. But I didn't beat either Bayonettas. So I could be missing something.

She loses her clothes when being dragged into the underworld. But in this attack animation she's not being dragged into the underworld. She's lying on the ground grabbing her butt. So this is the only scene outside of the underworld where she loses her clothes right? So the only reason for her to lose her clothes is to make the sex joke... If that's true his answer is utter bs. But I'll defer until someone rebuts my point with more info...
 

IcyStorm

Member
Oh ffs. Eyes is one part here when it's way more complicated than that. There are other ways to interpret this. The main being the CONTEXT. these two are FRIENDS. They share a relationship through the entire first game and the second. Why would they continue being friends if Rodin has raped her in Bayo 1? Dont you think that it is way more messed up?

1) Being friends doesn't mean that one friend cannot rape the other. Do you think most sexual assaults happen between complete strangers?

2) Assuming, for the sake of argument, we agree that Rodin's attack and the subsequent animations do imply rape, then it probably would be thought that in terms of Bayonetta's canon, she would have never been victim to this attack and thus would have not been raped (in either game).

3) We don't know how Bayonetta would deal with rape. People cope differently. I wouldn't imagine Bayonetta staying friends with him, but I don't think Platinum would have gone to the trouble of cutting off Bayonetta's connection with him no matter what the "correct" interpretation is. That would be a lot of work for a secret boss.
 

Afrocious

Member
Well I gotta go to bed. I updated the OP with the tweets.

Though I still stand by that these scenes have no place in either game, I'm glad we had this discussion. Some folks on GAF kinda ran to the Akuma thing too fast which kinda makes me feel sad that folks see some sort of equivalence between his super and Rodin's attack when Akuma's enemies aren't naked and him not smoking.

Also Kamiya is a cool guy, but I do think this needs more discussing.
 
except that I am 100% right. it's not a rorshack test. there's nothing ambiguous about it. she's grabbed, we fastforward to the aftermath and she's lying on the ground, naked, covering her rear defensively, while the attacker who grabbed her is smoking a cigarette (do you guys seriously not know that cigarette is shorthand for post coitus?).

img_0679.jpg


if I told you the artist intended for this to be a depiction of a polar bear in the snow, you wouldn't say "oh, that's right, my bad". you'd say "no, it's a bunny. it's furry, it's got a round little tail, long ears, and adorable beady eyes. these are the components that make it a bunny. I know what I am seeing."

enough already.
Your only point is that you're saying you visually interpret the scene differently, despite what the creator says. That's fine. Nice opinion, but that's nowhere near conclusive for anyone but yourself.
 

Jobbs

Banned
Oh ffs. Eyes is one part here when it's way more complicated than that. There are other ways to interpret this. The main being the CONTEXT. these two are FRIENDS. They share a relationship through the entire first game and the second. Why would they continue being friends if Rodin has raped her in Bayo 1? Dont you think that it is way more messed up?

it's a short "silly" sketch. it's a lighthearted rape reference, like a joke. that's part of the complaint, that rape is being depicted so lightly.

I was more inclined to believe he spanked her numerous times, considering what comes before that

so after spanking someone and not blowing your load, you go unwind with a cigarette?

again, do you guys not know that a cigarette is shorthand for "I just had sex"? do you guys actually not know this?
 

soy.

Banned
mother of fucking gods...

why are you fucking people gotta go social issues and psychological and religion and gender and races about mother fucking video fucking games....? video, fucking, games, why fucking people.....?

fucking enlighten me, why.....?

this is a game, where the whole goddamn IP, started with a nun, a motherfucking nun, ladies and gentlemen, in a totally inappropriate wardrobe if i might add, brutally killing mother fucking angels, with blood squirting and gushing everyfuckingwhere. angels from heaven btw. which spoiler alert here: she fucking sucker punch god herself, on her fucking face, the one entity that have created us all, and send her burnin on the sun, like a goddam bitch

i mean u wanna talk about rape?? rape??? she tortured female fucking angels with a goddamn spanish donkey. historically, that's probably 100 times fucking worse than rape. that shit was so immoral, we stop using it somewhere in the timeline of our history.

and let's all just sit back and fucking think, when rodin hit that home run on that motherfucking prologue chapter, with the old school baseball and crowd sound effects and glitters and glorious funky confetti flying around, U ARE STILL TRYING TO TAKE THIS GAME SERIOUSLY?!?!?!


u ask this very question to kamiya, most probably he will laugh and answer with some bullshit unsatisfying out of context answer.

the devs are joking when they make this game. they are having crazy fun.
they are fucking with you









geez... pardon me there, i got emotional
now that i've calmed down...

S . E . R . I . O . U . S . L . Y

u guys have gone way overboard with taking issues from games and implement it in your real life. i'm looking at you NA...
as far as i see it, EU and JP regions doesn't have similar problems.

each and every one of you who made critical analysis about their positions, etc should take a step backwards and breathe. accept it, probably the dev's intention are indeed: sex / rape

BUT NONE OF IT REALLY MATTERS.

why? cuz it's nothing in this game matters, this whole game is a huge joke that's out of contexts.
that move, are an easter egg tribute to akuma's at best... and that's it. this game is an easter egg fiesta.

seriously, if the skinshow disturbs your weak souls so much, wear an alternate costumes. that'll cover her up.
if u can't even understand the very humor that's surrounding this whole game, just go back to cod. u don't deserve this.
 

Crossing Eden

Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
Dunno if it was intentional or not, but it does look like rape to me. Either way, they probably should have put more thought into that scene, I could see why some would find it highly disturbing.
It is very close to an image portraying rape. I'm almost inclined to not take Kamiya's words as anything more than off the cuff answers for this particular scene. Her HP reaching zero has never resulted in loss of clothing in any other instance of the games. She also doesn't appear to be dead. So the loss of power thing certainly can raise an eyebrow.
 

Kuja9001

Banned
The creator loses all authority regarding interpretations and understanding of a work the moment it is released. I'm not interested in what they claim it to be, I'm interested in figuring out what it actually is, and to me, this pretty clearly reads as implied rape.

Seriously?
 

Jobbs

Banned
My wife smokes often and i can promise you my butthole is intact.

Also post coitus is not post rape.

so after you two have sex, one lies defeated, defensively guarding their privates while the other relaxes and smokes triumphantly?
 

23qwerty

Member
mother of fucking gods...

why are you fucking people gotta go social issues and psychological and religion and gender and races about mother fucking video fucking games....? video, fucking, games, why fucking people.....?

fucking enlighten me, why.....?

this is a game, where the whole goddamn IP, started with a nun, a motherfucking nun, ladies and gentlemen, in a totally inappropriate wardrobe if i might add, brutally killing mother fucking angels, with blood squirting and gushing everyfuckingwhere. angels from heaven btw. which spoiler alert here: she fucking sucker punch god herself, on her fucking face, the one entity that have created us all, and send her burnin on the sun, like a goddam bitch

and let's all just sit back and fucking think, when rodin hit that home run on that motherfucking prologue chapter, with the old school baseball and crowd sound effects and glitters and glorious funky confetti flying around, U ARE STILL TRYING TO TAKE THIS GAME SERIOUSLY?!?!?!


u ask this very question to kamiya, most probably he will laugh and answer with some bullshit unsatisfying out of context answer.

the devs are joking when they make this game. they are having crazy fun.
they are fucking with you









geez... pardon me there, i got emotional
now that i've calmed down...

S . E . R . I . O . U . S . L . Y

u guys have gone way overboard with taking issues from games and implement it in your real life. i'm looking at you NA...
as far as i see it, EU and JP regions doesn't have similar problems.

each and every one of you who made critical analysis about their positions, etc should take a step backwards and breathe. accept it, probably the dev's intention are indeed: sex / rape

BUT NONE OF IT REALLY MATTERS.

why? cuz it's nothing in this game matters, this whole game is a huge joke that's out of contexts.
that move, are an easter egg tribute to akuma's at best... and that's it. this game is an easter egg fiesta.

seriously, if the skinshow disturbs your weak souls so much, wear an alternate costumes. that'll cover her up.
if u can't even understand the very humor that's surrounding this whole game, just go back to cod. u don't deserve this.
another one bites the dust
 

spekkeh

Banned
It's definitely implying some sexual humiliation.

As, you know, the entire game is.

But I guess it's all fun when Bayonetta does it.
 
again, do you guys not know that a cigarette is shorthand for "I just had sex"? do you guys actually not know this?


Again, do you not know that Rodin smokes in his very first scene in Bayo 1 and then throughout the entirety of both games? Or are we just going to keep ignoring that?
 

MormaPope

Banned
As for the cigarette smoking, Rodin could be taking pride in beating Bayonetta down, as in the effort he needed to exert to do that to Bayonetta is exhausting and pleasurable. Throughout Bayo 1 and/or Bayo 2 Bayonetta's hair will be frayed after boss fights, and she'll pop a lollipop, akin to smoking after a intense battle or sexual encounters. Perhaps taking away Bayonetta's power is that pleasurable for Rodin? I mean, he does give her items and weapons throughout the game, being a good dude and supporting somebody only to whoop their ass fits with the S&M nature of the series.
 

Enilced2

Member
except that I am 100% right. it's not a rorshack test. there's nothing ambiguous about it. she's grabbed, we fastforward to the aftermath and she's lying on the ground, naked, covering her rear defensively, while the attacker who grabbed her is smoking a cigarette (do you guys seriously not know that cigarette is shorthand for post coitus?).

img_0679.jpg


if I told you the artist intended for this to be a depiction of a polar bear in the snow, you wouldn't say "oh, that's right, my bad". you'd say "no, it's a bunny. it's furry, it's got a round little tail, long ears, and adorable beady eyes. these are the components that make it a bunny. I know what I am seeing."

enough already.

Yea not really the same thing. The ambiguity lies in that you don't see what happens during the fade to white and the symbolism that generally is associated with a high powered fast paced attack. But sorry my bad I forgot people only ever smoke after sex
 
Top Bottom