Those examples I gave was videogame related because of the discussion, but we could easily just keep pulling examples from TV shows, movies, cartoon, books, musicals etc. Everything in those are created by someone because they wanted to show, say, explain something and so on. If the characters themselves in all these mediums doesn't really do anything by "themselves", then what is the point of telling stories with characters?
Bayonetta was created by some people and doesn't really exist, that is true, but what people interpret the character as, how they perceive the character is real though. While you may have seen Bayonetta as something scandalous, many others seem to have perceived her as something else, something positive, both men and women, surely that must mean something at least?
I mean that video games are different in a sense that whatever they show must be created from scratch. Same goes to cartoons (which video game cutscenes are). All the crotch shots and stuff like that are the way they are because it was deliberately done so. In movies for example a lot of the end result is dependable on how the performers portray what they are told to do. Much of subtlety comes from the performers and that can affect on the outcome greatly, whereas in video games it's all more deliberate. Sure, there is very advanced motion capture in video games but that is still all something that can and will be digitally altered.
However, as you said, the same things apply also to other medium as well. In the end, the end product is what the project director more or less wanted it to be. It's not an impossibility for a movie to have a character who is supposed to be all empowered and whatever else, yet the movie could have scenes that contradict that. It's all what the creator chooses to show. Sometimes the creators have some sexist, racist or whatever else -isms in themselves so that it will creep in their works in a way or another.
And sometimes the character personalities are just an excuse to have something "controversial" in the product. Exploitation movie makers used that all the time. They'd write a certain type of character so that they could use those character traits to explain why there is a boob or a butt shot here and there. Or they would fit in a boob or a butt shot because that character has that trait. Traits were sometimes created for boobs and sometimes traits were used to show boobs. Sure it all could be explained or "explained", but in a way or another they used the storytelling system for their own amusement and to sell the product.
I personally don't view Bayonetta as scandalous at all. But yeah, you are right that people can and will perceive things differently. I can ignore a sexist (or any other -ism that work might have) part in a work of fiction and see the other qualities in it. I can ignore the other qualities in a work of fiction and see the sexism in it. Or I can see both the sexist parts and the other qualities in it, and either accept it for what it is or reject it.
You wrote:
"While you may have seen Bayonetta as something scandalous, many others seem to have perceived her as something else, something positive, both men and women, surely that must mean something at least?"
Yes, that's very true, but doesn't that go both ways though? Couldn't that be said for both sides?
If you can see something positive in something, more power to you. It's a good thing. But when that work contains something that can be seen as something opposite, it's good to be prepared to hear that called out. Same goes to the other side too, of course.
Well... I guess I just think that we should perhaps accept that sometimes we like things that are sexist. We might not like the sexism in it but we like the product. Or sometimes we like the sexism too. For myself I can say that in Bayonetta's case I don't like the games themselves but if something attracts me in those games is the things could be interpreted as sexist. And the religious and spirituality based names of the enemies are great too (like, really, there are enemies called Belief and Worship - that's nearly idiotic yet very ingenious!). It almost has this "sacred and profane" art thing going on.
(oh dear, I turned this reply into a rambling one again. Don't know if I really answered your questions or if I just made all even more confusing. Oh well...)
